Thoughts on economics and liberty

Category: Science

Further writings by Donald Henderson on spread of viruses

He’s said quite a bit on this issue (see this, this, this).

Some more:

Donald Henderson wrote in 2012:

Life Sciences at a Crossroads: Respiratory Transmissible H5N1
Osterholm, Michael T. ; Henderson, Donald A.
WASHINGTON: American Association for the Advancement of Science
Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science), 2012-02-17, Vol.335 (6070), p.801-802

“Experiences with pandemic H1N1 show the problems of a strategy based on the assumption that an emerging influenza pandemic could be identified quickly in a localized geographic area with no, or very lim¬ited, travel in or out of the pandemic zone. As a result of extensive global travel, influenza A(H1N1)pmd09 infection was already occurring in a number of countries before the first isolate was identified”

 

Henderson in 2007

“Models may have a limited role in deciding appropriate response
actions, but mindless attention to modeled data is counterproductive. Even D.A. Henderson cautions against accepting models without scrutiny because they could ultimately create policies that “take a perfectly manageable epidemic and turn it into a national disaster.” – STANLEY M. LEMON ET AL., ETHICAL AND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS IN MITIGATING PANDEMIC DISEASE 16 (2007).

There is limited empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of social distancing in fighting the spread of infectious disease. … Based on computer simulation models, specific actions that might reduce disease transmission rates include school closures; keeping children and teens at home; voluntary home isolation and quarantine; and using antiviral drugs to treat the ill and providing prophylaxis to their household contacts. As Cetron explained, these measures form part of a much broader, layered approach to behavioral intervention, which extends from individual actions (hand hygiene, cough etiquette) to global efforts (containment at the source, advisories and screening for travelers).

While social distancing measures may help slow the spread of disease, they also pose a number of other potentially far-reaching consequences, and Cetron stressed the importance of anticipating these consequences and adapting the measures accordingly. The issue of school closure is particularly contentious in this regard. While modeling indicates it to be a potent means to reduce disease transmission, its adverse consequences could be so severe and inequitable as to outweigh any benefit. D.A. Henderson of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center cautioned against relying on models that do not take into consideration the adverse effects or practical constraints that such public health interventions would entail. Accepting such models uncritically, he warned, could result in policies that “take a perfectly manageable epidemic and turn it into a national disaster.”  [source]

Continue Reading

Prof. John Ioannidis has personally confirmed that covid is 50-500 times less lethal than the Spanish flu

ADDENDUM 5 MAY 2022

See additional note on Telegram / Twitter / Facebook.

====ORIGINAL POST===

Here’s my recent corro with Prof. Ioannidis . For those who’ve not heard of him, he is perhaps the most cited epidemiologist of all time – with with an h-index of 222 (Nobel Prize winners usually rank between 30 and 60) – here’s his Wikipedia page.

I chanced upon this 2020 article by Prof. Ioannidis : Forecasting for COVID-19 has failed. It said that the Spanish flu had caused >50 million deaths. I’ve been harping on this for quite a while now – and clearly the figure should be 220+ million.

So I wrote to Prof. Ioannidis yesterday:

Dear Prof Ionnidis, I’m a great fan of your work but just a quick comment re: the following sentence.

Early on, experienced modelers drew parallels between COVID-19 and the Spanish flu (https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/covid-19/report-9-impact-of-npis-on-covid-19/. (Accessed 2 June 2020)) that caused >50 million deaths with mean age of death being 28.
This is incorrect. The 50 million figure of 1918 has to be standardised. It should be 220 million people – calculations are available at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Z12go0iqw8zwylzxvkSV4RKGJ4MOLWJy7ujIo-OHojo/edit?usp=sharing

(I had discussed this issue in my book, The Great Hysteria and The Broken State).

Unless your later papers have fixed this issue, could you please clarify this to the world, since it is obviously wrong to use the 50 million figure.

I’m copying xxx and a few others – in case they can help spread this information on social media – that the Spanish flu did not kill 50 million but 220 million people. The media, for instance, gets it wrong 100 per cent of the time.

He has kindly replied:

Dear Sanjeev

thank you for your kind message. You are correct, the 1918 flu was 50-500 times worse than COVID-19 once you adjust for population size and for age distribution. I have highlighted this recently in a paper on the end of the pandemic that includes a detailed table comparing the impact of pandemics versus the seasonal flu. Deaths from SARS-CoV-2 COVID-19 was just 1.5-4 times the equivalent of three seasons of seasonal flu (most likely closer to the 1.5 number actually). Spanish flu was 100-1000 times bigger than 3 seasons of seasonal flu.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13782

Please feel free to circulate this as you see fit, as I don’t have social media.

Best wishes

John

[Screenshot]

This is the most important piece of information regarding the covid pandemic – which has been missed out by the huffing and puffing politicians and “health officers” who can’t do the most elementary arithmetic The lies of Scamo (who has called covid a “once in a hundred year type event”)  have been caught out once again.

This is the Table from his March 2022 paper, which fixes the error:

Recall that John Ioannidis had shown in September 2020 that the IFR of COVID is 0.27% – up to three times that of seasonal flu. But recent data are far more conclusive – it is even lower. And the UK government confirms that the IFR is 0.096% – the SAME as that of seasonal flu.

CAN EVERYONE PLEASE WIDELY SHARE THIS INFORMATION? THE WORLD NEEDS TO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE BEEN MISLED FOR OVER 2 YEARS BY VIRTUALLY EVERYONE WHO HOLDS A POSITION OF AUTHORITY.

Continue Reading

Claim that Vitamin D brought to a halt in the death of Indian doctors in the UK – Dr. David Grimes

ADDENDUM 13 APRIL 2022
Unfortunately, the claim made in this video has only been partially corroborated.

I’ve received a response from BAPIO on behalf of Dr Parag Singhal, Executive Director BAPIO Training Academy (BTA), National Secretary BAPIO:

We issued an advisory to all BAPIO members about the importance of the adequate level of Vit D and how a single large dose of Vit D can bring the level up sooner compared to the recommended dose of 400 IU. This advisory was spread via social media to various groups as mentioned by David Grimes.

I don’t think we can say for definite that our advisory if followed was the sole reason in preventing further deaths. I don’t think we should think of peer review publication as we don’t have the data.

Vit D remains an unanswered question. My personal view is that it is definitely an important factor in reducing the severity of the disease.

MY OBSERVATIONS:
1. The advisory was generic and suggested a single large dose where someone might be Vitamin D deficient. It did not require any follow up or record keeping, so no data was collected on existing Vitamin D levels of BAME doctors and what happened after they received the advice. Did they follow it, for how long, etc.

2. Dr David Grimes’s claim about future deaths being prevented through such Vitamin D supplementation is not testable unless someone (such as BAPIO) conducts a diligent survey to extract such information, along with mortality data on BAME doctors from the NHS.

3. Dr Singhal personally considers Vitamin D to be “definitely” an important factor but overall, he considers that Vitamin D remains an unanswered question.

Since the claim of Dr Grimes has not been proven, it is hard to conclude that Vitamin D has such stark effects on mortality. Back to the drawing board – RCTs and all. I must say I had got into the mode of “believing” this information for a short while – instead of scepticism which is an essential part of all scientific progress. We all want to “believe” in something.

MATERIAL SENT BY DR GRIMES:

This bar chart shows the cluster of deaths of BAME doctors who died at the beginning of the pandemic, and how their deaths stopped a couple of weeks after the email that was sent out by Dr Singhal. Re: the email, Dr Grimes notes: “The email concerning the vital need of vitamin D was sent out by my friend Professor Parag Singhal, who is the national secretary of BAPIO, British Association of Physicians of Indian Origin. I never actually received the email. He sent it not just to his members but also to similar organisations representing a variety of other national or ethnic doctor groups.”

We need confirmation that this was not merely part of the standard pattern of deaths in the UK (see chart below) – i.e. that there were no more deaths of BAME doctors in the second wave in the UK. 
In my view, it is extremely rare in the medical literature to come across anything that has such a start effect on mortality. This deservers investigation and publication in a peer reviewed medical journal.

SOME PIECES OF FURTHER RESEARCH THAT I HAVE CONDUCTED ON THIS MATTER

http://www.drdavidgrimes.com/p/vitamin-d-deficiency-and-covid-19.html

https://www.ypdbooks.com/medical-reference/1761-vitamin-d-deficiency-and-covid-19-its-central-role-in-a-world-pandemic-YPD02514.html

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7687343/

https://issuu.com/buddhdev.pandya/docs/final_swathya_healthcare_journal_vo_1_issue_1__apr/s/10492053

https://paragsinghal.co.uk/#contact

TRANSCRIPT FROM YOUTUBE:

Now I’ll give you an example of how effective Vitamin D can be. Starting on about the 20th of March in 2020, during a period of six weeks, 26 doctors working doctors died in the UK from covid 19.

I’ve got names, photographs of all of them. Of those 26 doctors who died only one was white. All the others were African or South Asian ethnicity. There happened in Stockholm as well – that in general people of African-Asian ethnicity were dying in greater numbers than expected during the first part of the covid 19 pandemic.

It was always put down to socio-economic deprivation. Now the 25 working doctors who died were not socioeconomically deprived. They had good incomes, they had had big houses and no overcrowding no problems at all. They died because their only difference in them and the other doctors were they had dark skins which do not produce much Vitamin D. We know very well that they will have been Vitamin D deficient.

Now I have two friends – a professor Parag Singhal who’s a professor of endocrinology in Western superman near Bristol in England and the other is professor David Anderson now retired former professor of medicine and endocrinology who I’ve known for about 40 years (we worked together about 40 years ago very briefly). Well, we got together knowing about all these doctors dying – these dark-skinned doctors dying. Professor Singhal is the national secretary of the British Association of Doctors of Indian Origin called BAPIO.

He therefore had the email addresses of all the doctors of indian origin. But he also could link to people in a similar position to him of other ethnic groups of doctors, like for example the association of doctors of Nigerian origin or Pakistani origin. All these exist.

He sent – Professor Singhal – an email to all his doctors of Indian origin and cascaded that to the other groups so that all doctors of ethnic minorities in this country received an email saying take Vitamin D immediately – otherwise you have a high risk of death from covid19.

I provided the evidence from all the 25 out of 26. He had all the names of the of the doctors and professor David Anderson had a large supply of Vitamin D which he would provided to any doctor who who required it.

Those deaths of Indian doctors stopped about two weeks after the email went out to them all. It stopped abruptly.

Within six weeks 25 doctors dying – doctors of ethnic minority – since then there was one in September 2020 and there was one in in about September of 2021.

That’s all. Brought it to a halt.

 

Continue Reading

Australia’s INFECTION FATALITY RATE FOR COVID IS 0.0935% – exactly as the seasonal flu

Preliminary analysis of 804,104 covid cases from 26 November 2021 to 29 January 2022 in NSW

I’ve been sent this analysis by someone who wishes to remain anonymous: Spreadsheet – XLSX

Source data:

COVID-19 WEEKLY SURVEILLANCE IN NSW, EPIDEMIOLOGICAL WEEK 04 ENDING 29 JANUARY 2022, Published 14 February 2022, viewed 18 February 2022
https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infectious/covid-19/Documents/covid-19-surveillance-report-20220214.pdf

2016 Census QuickStats NSW, People — demographics & education, Age, Published 23 October 2017, viewed 18 February 2022
https://quickstats.censusdata.abs.gov.au/census_services/getproduct/census/2016/quickstat/1

MY COMMENTS AND THE PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS FROM THIS ANALYSIS

This is a VERY LARGE SAMPLE SIZE so its results are likely to be very robust, even though it only reflects a quarter of Australia’s population.

I’ve not had much time to look into this but had a moment to ask a few questions. I’d like those who have the skill and the time, to look into this preliminary analysis and help confirm its accuracy.

Issue 1: I had a question re: the PDF table at page 1 which shows that the total cases between the 26 Nov and 29 Jan are 986,477 – whereas the spreadsheet has 803,104.

Response received:  The 183,373 missing cases were confirmed positives with RATs between 12 – 19th January, demographic data wasn’t available for RATs until 20th January. The report does state that these cases were included in the clinical outcomes data but as you can see from the chart on page 9 of the government report, they weren’t included in the clinical severity by vaccination status which is what I was looking at specifically so I left the cohort out. I can’t see a way to include the group without the clinical outcomes data. That is fine by me.

Issue 2: There was another question I had regarding allocation of the the “unknown status” group.

The analyst has allocatee as per the standardised average of the percentage vaccinated across the vaccinated age groups (95.60%, 83.50%, 45.80%). That’s also fine by me.

Issue 3: My hope for further analysis: It would be great to do this for the entire pandemic period, from January 2020.

Summary results:

1. Overall infection fatality rate is equivalent to seasonal flu

IFR = 0.0935% – this is similar to UK’s calculation of 0.096% – EXACTLY in the range of seasonal flu.

Yes, without the vaccine it would have probably been a little higher, maybe 0.2% – that’s barely in the range of the Asian or Hong Kong flu: nowhere near the Spanish flu that Scamo has claimed.

2. There are MINOR differences in case susceptibility/ hospitalisation/ deaths between vaxxed and unvaxxed

 

See Powerpoint.

If cases and hospitalisation are the issue, then being unvaccinated is probably better than being  vaccinated. This makes a complete mockery of the idea of vaccine mandates.

If deaths are the issue (which it should be) then the vaccinated are definitely better off. [Of course, we will need to discount this benefit with the side-effects and other harms, including deaths, from vaccines.]

Overall, the vaccines have probably saved a few lives in Australia – but the need for any of the totalitarian measures (including vaccine mandates) is refuted by ALL the data and ALL the science. Lockdowns and vaccine mandates are CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. The extra lockdown deaths, the fewer children in Australia, the damage to lifetime earnings of Australia’s children, the mental health harms to millions – all these are CRIMES.

ADDENDUM 22 FEBRUARY 2022

The person who shared the info on NSW’s IFR has also mentioned that “the data also suggests there is zero need for treatments such as ivermectin or HCQ since Australia is by all accounts using neither and the IFR is so low. If the unvaccinated cohort are the control group, even without these therapies, one’s chance of surviving the virus is 99.86%. I wholeheartedly support your view that both sides of this argument appear to have succumbed to fear and hysteria.”
 
There you go. You can do NOTHING and you’ll still likely be fine. If you take the vaccine the you might be slightly better off. But even without IVM and HCQ, there’s no significant adverse effect on the overwhelming majority of the population.
 
The biggest storm in a teacup in the entire human history. But the lockdown harms are/were real and catastrophic.
Continue Reading
Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial