Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

This forum is to discuss general things concerning TSOI.
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

Police break up crowds enjoying last night in London before Tier 2 restrictions are enforced


Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

Melbourne lockdown protest signs removed but rallies ‘no longer unlawful’

10/22/20 ... ef056254fd

Victoria Police say protests are no longer unlawful but banners hung above major roads in Melbourne promoting an anti-lockdown rally at the Shrine of Remembrance have been removed.

The Department of Transport quickly removed two banners attached to pedestrian overpasses above Dandenong Road at St Kilda East on Thursday morning.

Another banner found hanging above Bell Street at Preston in the city’s inner north was also taken down.

The banners were removed because they were erected on public infrastructure and could become a distraction for motorists.

They read “Rally at the Shrine!! October 23rd”.

The event, also promoted on Facebook, has at least 1300 people interested in attending.

Victoria Police Assistant Commissioner Luke Cornelius said protesting was no longer unlawful under Melbourne’s coronavirus restrictions.

“It’s a human right and we’re now operating in a context where the chief health officer directions do allow people to leave home for recreation and for socialising, and people can choose if they want to, while they’re doing that, to also voice protest,” he said.

“But whether you’re protesting at home, whether you're protesting down at your local park, whether you’re protesting at the shrine, you must comply with the chief health officer directions about public gatherings.

“The public gathering rules are very clear in Melbourne metro, including the shrine.

“That is groups of no more than 10, comprised of no more than two households, socially distanced, 1.5m within the group, wearing a mask if you’re not eating or drinking or you have a medical exemption for not having a mask, and no further than 25km from your home.”

Assistant Commissioner Cornelius said anyone who turned up at the shrine, or any other location to protest, and was in breach of the rules should expect to be fined.

“Whether you’re protesting, whether you’re just going for a jog or whether you’re having a picnic, make sure you comply with the chief health officer directions,” he said.

“Because if you don’t, and we observe you in breach, we will hold you to account.”

Organisers said the aim of the protest was to end Melbourne’s lockdown and force Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews to resign.

“Restore our freedoms now,” the event website says.

“Stick to the plan Dan: Delays, empty promises and another week (or more) of heartbreak for small businesses. The restrictions easing are a joke.”

But RSL Victoria has urged people not to protest at the shrine.

“It is RSL Victoria’s position that Melbourne’s Shrine of Remembrance is a sacred place, of critical importance to the current and ex-service members of our community, for commemorating service and for the remembrance of those who have died performing their patriotic duty,” it said in a statement.

“Under no circumstances, ever, should the shrine be a place of protest.”
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

The Global Rise of Anti-Lockdown Protests—and What to Do About It

10/15/20 ... -worldwide

The wave of anti-government protests that roiled global politics over the past decade initially seemed to be an early casualty of COVID-19. Lockdown measures, especially stay-at-home orders and restrictions on mass gatherings, halted protests almost everywhere. Yet as the pandemic has dragged on, the increasingly strained relationship between governments and citizens in many countries has brought demonstrators back into the streets. While many renewed protests reflect anger over familiar issues like corruption, political repression and economic hardship, a striking new trend is afoot: citizens openly challenging the public health measures governments have taken to slow the spread of the coronavirus.

Since March, more than 30 major protests in 26 countries have targeted coronavirus restrictions. Such demonstrations have emerged in every region of the globe, not only in wealthy countries like Australia, Germany and the United States, but also in poorer ones like Brazil, Mexico and Nigeria. Moreover, anti-lockdown uprisings are occurring in states with very different governance systems—consolidated autocracies and liberal democracies alike. These popular eruptions have generally occurred in two waves: An early one in April and May emerged soon after the virus spread around the world, and an ongoing second one started in early August in reaction to the extension of public health measures. As large demonstrations in the past month across multiple regions have made clear, their tempo is accelerating.

Despite their shared anti-lockdown theme, there is significant diversity among these protests. The composition of each one is unique: Some have attracted wealthy, urban elites, while others comprise mainly the rural poor. They have dealt with issues as wide-ranging as economic hardship from industrywide shutdowns, unequal enforcement of health measures and the right to religious assembly. Their diversity is rooted in local circumstances, since anti-lockdown protests generally reflect the localized nature of public health restrictions.

Within this wide range of unrest, three sub-types are nevertheless identifiable.

The first and most prevalent strain are anti-authority, “pro-citizen” movements that emphasize individual freedom over restrictive public health measures. These libertarian protests, generally concentrated in developed countries, have sometimes attracted significant press attention and large crowds—especially in the past two months. On Aug. 29, some 38,000 people demonstrated in front of the Reichstag in Berlin, the seat of Germany’s federal parliament. And throughout September, thousands assembled each week in Trafalgar Square, in central London, to complain about the reimposition of restrictions amid a resurgence of COVID-19 in Britain.

These are often “big tent” demonstrations that attract diverse coalitions, sometimes featuring business advocates and religious leaders alongside far-right provocateurs and vaccine skeptics. Troublingly, many of these protests have taken a turn toward violence. At the Berlin gathering in August, which was otherwise peaceful, a small sub-group of several hundred far-right protesters tried to storm the Reichstag. Misinformation has often been a central driver of these demonstrations, especially debunked coronavirus-related conspiracy theories circulating widely on social media. For example, some participants in Italy’s anti-establishment Orange Vest movement—a spinoff of the Yellow Vests in France—allege that a COVID-19 vaccine will be a pretext to inject people with mercury.

Public health restrictions have become the latest contested symbol in broader conversations about how to align citizens’ needs with government action.

A second strain of protests more specifically targets the impacts of lockdowns on people’s livelihoods. This sentiment is particularly acute in developing countries, which have larger informal sectors where economic margins are thinner and remote work is often impossible. In Mzuzu, Malawi, thousands of street vendors protested in mid-April, complaining that they could not sell their wares under lockdown and that “they would rather die of corona than of hunger.” Hospitality and retail workers have also been particularly prone to dissent; in South Africa, Mexico and Belgium, workers in those industries protested against limitations on in-person operations. Economically focused protests have also frequently turned violent. In Vladikavkaz, Russia, for example, police beat many of the 2,000 protesters who were objecting to business closures. In Lagos, Nigeria, a police spokesman said that workers in the Lekki Free Trade Zone had assaulted police, injuring several officers, after being told they could not work due to public health measures.

A third strain of anti-lockdown protests objects to how authorities are implementing health restrictions.
These protests criticize authorities for being harsh or arbitrary in enforcing lockdowns and for misusing the new rules for repressive ends. In Serbia, for example, tens of thousands of protesters gathered in July to condemn President Aleksandr Vucic for reimposing restrictions after a contested election, seeing it as an effort to stifle political dissent. In the Xinjiang region of China, home to most of the country’s heavily persecuted Uighur minority, protests have gone online, with thousands of social media users complaining about harsh conditions and abuse—including being publicly chained to lampposts, being locked inside homes, and being forced to drink from communal medicine vats.

Most anti-lockdown protests have thus far not significantly changed the policies and actions of governments. Nevertheless, some of the larger and more persistent ones, such as those in Germany and the United States, have reverberated in national political life. More broadly, however, each type of anti-lockdown protest embodies at least one of the defining sociopolitical trends of the COVID-19 era: First, with their wariness of science and immersion in misinformation, rapidly expanding libertarian protests highlight the distrust of authority that is coloring so much of global politics today. Their intensity and divisiveness contribute to the severe political polarization that is another defining feature of contemporary politics in many countries. Second, economic protests have underscored how the financial and other devastation wrought by the pandemic will unsettle political life in many parts of the world. Finally, protests against repression show how some opportunistic governments are taking advantage of COVID-19 to clamp down on dissent and advance authoritarian governance.

Although anti-lockdown demonstrations represent a new theme in the wide repertoire of issues underlying the global protest surge, they nevertheless spell continuity more than change in that trend. The explosion in anti-government protests over the past decade reflects a widening gulf between governments and the governed, exacerbated by a feeling that conventional politics is failing to address the major problems facing many societies. That dynamic has not changed during the pandemic. The coronavirus crisis has put crushing demands on the state in virtually every sphere, and in line with the new norms of protest, diverse citizen movements are calling out perceived shortfalls in state responses.

In short, public health lockdowns have become the latest contested symbol in broader conversations about how to align citizens’ needs with government action. As that conversation plays out amid the pandemic, authorities have shown an unfortunate tendency to use COVID-19 as an excuse to restrict liberties in ways that go far beyond reasonable, time-bound public health measures. Even some liberal democracies have reacted to the pandemic by placing restrictions on protests.

A better response would be for governments to spend more energy reassuring their citizens that public health measures, including lockdowns, are put in place for the greater good. States must also ensure that livelihoods and public health policy are not seen as being in opposition to one another. To curb rising anti-lockdown protests, governments will need to respond quickly to disinformation, enact compassionate policies to support the basic needs of their citizens, and enforce public health measures in a reasonable fashion.

Thomas Carothers is senior vice president for studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Benjamin Press is a James C. Gaither junior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

Covid: How to protest during a global pandemic :roll:


Protests happen around the world every year - and 2020 has seen its fair share of high-profile, dramatic demonstrations.

Hundreds of thousands of people have protested against issues ranging from racism and corruption, to disputed exam and election results. But 2020 has also been different from previous years for one obvious reason - the protests have been held at a time of a global pandemic.

In many places, large gatherings, including protests, have been banned and people have been arrested, accused of breaking lockdown rules at demonstrations.

Meanwhile, others have opted not to take part in protests because of fears they could catch or spread coronavirus. We spoke to activists about the ways they have tried to protest responsibly and the difficulties they have faced.

How do you protest safely?

Protests broke out around the world earlier this year after black man George Floyd was killed in police custody. British student Malaika Gangooly, 20, was among those to organise a Black Lives Matter (BLM) rally in the wake of his death.

She said the issue was so important that she felt she had to act, but that she wanted to make the event in Essex, England, in June as safe as possible.

"We were adamant that everyone coming had to come in PPE, and on the day I was handing out extra masks," she said. "We also decided that for the march we would set everyone off in groups of six at 20-second intervals to somewhat stick to governmental guidelines."

Lynn Murphy, 28, has attended numerous protests, including for BLM, in the US state of Virginia in recent months. She said she and those around her have always worn masks, but admits social distancing wasn't always possible.

"For me personally the issues are worth the risk, but I understand not everyone has the same risk assessment for that," she said.

Back in the UK, 18-year-old Stanley Lewis organised a demonstration this summer against algorithm-generated exam results, which critics said penalised students from poorer schools.

It was his first experience of planning a protest, and he said he found it was not possible to convince everyone to follow coronavirus measures.

"I was wearing a mask and I wanted other people to wear a mask and be safe with it. But a lot of people weren't and there wasn't really anything we could do," he said. "I think it was more important to do the protest than not call it and have this injustice done."

Protesters and activists have also faced criticism for gathering during a pandemic, with opponents calling them irresponsible or foolish.

Experts say the more people who come together at big gatherings, and the longer they are together, the higher the risk. If protesters travel from outside the local area, and if people can't socially distance when they are there, that increases the risk further.

Governments around the world have taken different approaches to protests. Following Floyd's death, some UK government and police officials warned people against protesting. Prime Minister Boris Johnson said people had a right to protest, but should do so "in accordance with the rules on social distancing".

In the US, protesters in cities including Washington DC, New York and Boston were urged to seek coronavirus tests. But some countries have taken stricter approaches, with Israel banning mass demonstrations, citing the risk of transmission.

Many protesters around the world are young - and hence less likely to die from Covid-19. But there are fears that they could still infect older, more vulnerable people, particularly if they are asymptomatic.

Saskia Popescu, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at the University of Arizona, said large gatherings always increase the risk of transmission, particularly if people aren't distanced, spend long periods together, and are shouting or chanting as part of the protest.

But she said evidence suggests BLM protests in the US this year did not lead to significant surges in cases. "In general, the outdoor protests, widespread mask usage, distancing, quarantine after protests, and focused communication/testing appears to have helped," she told the BBC by email.

"Any time you have a lot of people coming together there's concern for transmission of a respiratory illness."

Backlash and arguments

Several people told the BBC that their decisions to hold or attend demonstrations had been met with concern from friends and family.

Disha Ravi, a 22-year-old climate activist with Fridays For Future India, said she has attended one physical protest since the pandemic began - the 25 September global day of climate action, which coincided with farmers strikes in the country.

Some of Disha's loved ones "thought it was unsafe and unfair to participate in large gatherings where you could put other people at risk as well as yourself."

"I reassured them that we would be social distancing and taking lots of precautions. But they were initially concerned," she said.

Lynn said her decision to regularly attend demonstrations as a protester and as an "independent reporter", live-tweeting from the scene, has also been met with concern from relatives.

She responded by explaining how important the issues are to her and the measures she has been taking to stay safe.

She said most people in her immediate family now "kind of understand, but I haven't convinced too many people to go out and protest with me".

Malaika said she faced "a lot of backlash" after organising the BLM protest this summer. But while this initially centred on people saying it was dangerous to demonstrate, she said much of the criticism later came from people who opposed the cause itself.

New ways of protesting

The pandemic has led some activists to get creative in finding ways of protesting without the need for social contact.

Indian climate activist Disha said she and fellow campaigners have moved more of their focus online, where they have found that it is easier to mobilise support.

"Normally if there was any law or bill that we objected to that was going to be passed, we would send our objections by post," she said. "But now we've moved to email."

Earlier this year, the group's website was temporarily blocked after activists sent emails en masse to the country's environment minister opposing proposed legislation.

At the protest earlier this year, they encouraged people to make banners and hang them from their houses or along the street so that their messages could be seen without having to attend a gathering.

"Nothing has stopped, we're still continuing our fight, it's just different," Disha explained.

But while there have been positive results, she is missing in-person interactions with fellow activists. Before, she says, "we could sit down and talk about things and debate about things, and make posters together. We can't really do that anymore".

Andrea Venzon, 28, said coronavirus led him to "move protests to the digital world". His group NOW! focuses on global campaigns and issues including climate change, poverty and democracy.

"We still do traditional protests on the street but we also do Facebook lives and stream events for those who cannot come because they are under lockdown or don't feel comfortable," he said.

He adds that "the closer we get to the winter, the more difficult it gets. "In the summer people felt more relaxed and at ease," he says, adding that he believes there is a "fine balance" between protecting public health and freedom of expression.

But with rising infection rates in many countries, where does that leave protesters?

Malika said with rising cases in the UK, coronavirus would "definitely be a factor" in deciding whether she would join a protest now. But she said: "I think as long as people are being as careful as they can then the message is more important."

Ophelia Gregory, 19, who organised a protest over exam results in England this summer, said it's important that people are able to continue holding demonstrations.

"I wouldn't go out to a rave and then go to see my nan. I wouldn't do something like that. But I think it's really important to stand up for what you believe in."
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

Ireland To Impose 6-Week National Lockdown, Estimates 150,000 Job Losses

10/20/20 ... job-losses

Ireland will be the first European country to return to a nationwide shutdown as COVID-19 cases rise, Prime Minister Micheal Martin said Monday.

Nonessential retail businesses are ordered to close. Residents are expected to stay within about 3 miles of their homes, except for work and other essential activities.

The country is entering its highest level of coronavirus restrictions for six weeks, beginning Thursday. The country expects 150,000 people to lose their jobs over the next "couple of days," Deputy Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said.

"We're making a preemptive strike against the virus, acting before it's too late," Varadkar said during a news conference Monday. "Our objective is to change the structure of the virus to flatten the curve again to get it under control."

The government told residents to stay home and exercise only within 5 kilometers (about 3 miles) of their homes. Police will continue to use road checkpoints to deter longer and nonessential journeys.

Varadkar said there will be a penalty for travel beyond that distance, but he added that details are being finalized. There will be exemptions for work and essential purposes.

Ireland has seen some 51,000 confirmed cases and more than 1,850 deaths, according to the nation's Department of Health. The total number of cases in the country has risen by 75% since the beginning of September, and the 14-day infection rate is 261 cases for every 100,000 people.

The country has a population of nearly 5 million.

Bars and restaurants will be allowed to offer only takeout services, but schools and essential stores will remain open.

Martin said some people, including adults living alone and parents who share custody of a child, could "link up" with another household to avoid social isolation.

The government estimates the costs for unemployment benefits and grants to support the economy to be about 200 million euros ($237 million) per week, Varadkar said.

Over six weeks, the estimate is about 1.5 billion euros ($1.77 billion), he said. That's not taking into account the potential drop in tax revenue from business closures.

"To business people, who will have to close their shops, gyms, restaurants and pubs tomorrow, I want you to know that you've done nothing wrong," Varadkar said. "We're going to help you through this by ensuring that there's a weekly grant for every week that you're closed, based on your turnover in 2019."

Ireland is upping its pandemic unemployment checks and is asking for commercial landlords to give their tenants a break, he said. Varadkar also asked that business owners hold off on laying off their staff, adding that the government would provide assistance.

Just over two weeks ago, Ireland's government rejected the recommendation by public health experts to impose this level of a national lockdown, according to the BBC. Instead, the country implemented a limited number of restrictions on gatherings and recommended people work remotely.

Varadkar stressed that the government tried to avoid a national shutdown and said the objective is to flatten the virus's curve.

"Lockdowns save lives, but they also come with huge costs: human, social, economic and psychological," Varadkar said. "We can make sure the second wave is only a ripple, but that depends on all of us."
User avatar
Posts: 482
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 4:36 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by TimGDixon »

Eventually every human on this planet will develop immunity - either by way of a vaccine or by way of natural infection but whether that equates to herd immunity or not - who knows - what a concept... we already have immunity to 380 trillion viri... this isn't the one that wipes out humanity any more than the previous 380 trillion...
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

The end results of a pandemic are ; suffering economies, less socializing with friends and family, and personal wealth destruction for owners of restaurants, bars, and gyms - just to name a few businesses that won't survive.

the underlying issues weigh heavier -imho
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

Wales lockdown: ‘Non-essential’ items covered in shops and English cops set up border checkpoints as ‘firebreak’ begins

10/23/20 ... rce=pushly

SHOPPERS in Wales vented their fury as "non-essential" items were covered up in supermarkets with the nation now beginning its "firebreak" lockdown.

Stores are now unable to sell clothes to customers and staff are being told to prioritise the sale of "important" essential goods during the 17-day lockdown.

Meanwhile, police checkpoints are also being set up on a key section of the Wales-England border, officers in Gloucestershire confirmed.

Gloucestershire Constabulary will stop people travelling into Wales and encourage them to turn around if officers “are not satisfied with their explanation”.

If people do not turn around, the police said it will tell forces in Wales so that they can issue a fine.

Today, a stunned shopper took snaps of a section in a Tesco store being effectively cordoned off, with household items such as duvets shut away.

Staff could be seen covering up aisles and stopping shoppers from accessing the banned items for the next two weeks.

A shocked person commented: "Non-essential items being covered up in supermarkets in Wales. Has it really come to this?"

And another said: "Shops in Wales covering up ‘non-essential items’ ahead of tonight’s lockdown. Not entirely sure I understand the logic."

Another shopper took an image a closed aisle in Lidl, Porthmadog.

Welsh First Minister Mark Drakeford said the rules on what can be sold and what can't will be "made clear" to supermarkets.

But it left businesses with just hours to put together strategies for the lockdown, which will run until November 9.

A confused shopper tweeted a picture of shelves being covered up, adding: "Shops in Wales right now! Unbelievable!"

A Tesco spokesperson said: “Our colleagues across Wales will be working incredibly hard today so we can comply with the Welsh Government’s ban on selling ‘non-essential’ goods to our customers from 6pm this evening.”

There's still no clarification on what counts as essential. However, today items including hairdryers, phone chargers, duvets and sheets were covered up in supermarkets.

Such items remained on sale throughout the first national lockdown.

All non-essential shops, pubs, bars, restaurants and hotels must shut altogether during the restrictions, which come into force today at 6pm.

Food shops, off-licences, pharmacies, banks and post offices are allowed to remain open.

Earlier today, Welsh ministers struggled to defend their "trolley police" rules - as it emerged people will only be able to buy 'essential items' during the 'firebreak' lockdown, which started at 6pm.

Welsh people will be ordered to stay at home unless they're exercising or have vital reasons to leave for the duration of the shutdown.

The new rules for Wales are much harsher than those currently used in England, even for areas in tier three.

Plans for the firebreak lockdown have been criticised as being too heavy-handed, with Tory MPs in Westminster saying the move is a "blunt instrument".

Mr Drakeford denied that asking supermarkets to only sell essential items during the firebreak lockdown because he favours restrictions and regulations.

He said: "It is a straightforward matter of fairness - we are in this together here in Wales.

"No individual and no organisation is above the effort that we are all required to make.

"That includes people who may believe that they themselves are beyond the law, and includes those organisations that are large and powerful."

He told a press conference in Cardiff that any suggestion that the ban, which was announced on Thursday, was based on his own politics was "nonsensical".

He said: "We are requiring many hundreds of small businesses to close on the high street right across Wales.

"We cannot do that and then allow supermarkets to sell goods that those people are unable to sell.

"And we are looking to minimise the amount of time that people spend out of their homes during this two-week period.

"This is not the time to be browsing around supermarkets looking for non-essential goods."

During an interview with Kay Burley on Sky News, Welsh minister Vaughan Gething tried to justify the decision.

"A supermarket selling clothes isn't essential," he said.

"We are looking to have a grown up understanding with them about what they can do so they go ahead and do that.'

"We don't want to get into a line by line going through thousands of of product items. That would be unusable from their point of view and ours," he said.

People in Wales will now have to:

Follow strict stay at home orders
Pubs, restaurants and all non-essential retail will be closed
No meeting with anyone outside your household
No alcohol sales after 10pm
Leisure centres and services, including gyms, will have to close
Professional sports will be able to continue
Hairdressers and beauty services will have to close
No gatherings will be allowed outdoors including Halloween and fireworks on Bonfire night

Andrew RT Davies, the Conservative shadow health minister, tweeted this week: "The power is going to their heads."

He later added: "Is a flagon of Strongbow deemed essential? What about some much-needed underpants if you're caught short?

"I do hope there is some published guidance on what the Labour commissars deem as essential."

The lockdown falls over the half-term holiday and extend for a week beyond that.

Primary schools will reopen as normal after the break and kids in secondary school in Year 7 and 8 will be able to go to school.

All other students will have to go back to home learning.

Mr Drakeford stressed that children were the "top priority" and childcare centres would be able to stay open throughout.

Under the law, firms conducting a business that provides a mixed set of services will be allowed to open if they cease conducting the service that must close.

James Lowman, chief executive of the Association of Convenience Stores, said: "Retailers must not be forced to stop making products available to customers just because ministers don't think they're essential.

"These regulations are badly thought out, providing little to no notice to retailers, and must be scrapped to avoid chaos in shops across Wales.

"The confusion and confrontations between customers and shopworkers that this rule will trigger will ultimately lead to more contacts and time spent in proximity to other people, which is the exact opposite of what ministers are aiming to achieve."
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

Coronavirus: Anti-lockdown protest erupts in violence | 9 News Australia


Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2020 5:22 am

Re: Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity - Herd Immunity vs. Lockdowns

Post by trader32176 »

Canadian doctor calls out govt, blasts lockdowns: ‘Induce fear, create compliance’
Dr. Stephen Malthouse's letter to British Columbia's provincial health officer doesn't pull any punches.

10/23/20 ... compliance

BRITISH COLUMBIA, October 23, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A Canadian physician practicing family medicine for over 40 years has written to his province’s top doctor to blast the latter’s COVID-19 lockdown policy.

“How is it possible that a doctor with your previous training and experience did not anticipate the collateral damage of your public health policies — the economic disruption, the psychological and physical health consequences, and the deaths from despair?” wrote Dr. Stephen Malthouse in a letter addressed to Dr. Bonnie Henry, British Columbia (B.C.)’s provincial health officer.

“The mainstream media has created a religion out of public health, one based on superstition, not science, with the power to rule over an obedient public. The news channels have raised you to almost saint-like status[.] … Yet, your public directives do not make sense, contradict the research, and are causing people a great deal of harm. As a fellow doctor, I appeal to you to re-examine your policies and change direction before Public Health causes irreparable damage to our province’s health and economic well-being.”

In his letter, Malthouse states that there “appears to be no scientific or medical evidence for” the continuance of lockdowns, face masks, social distancing, the “arbitrary” closing of schools and businesses, and the “the closing down of or restrictions on religious places of worship.”

“According to the CDC Pandemic Severity Index, none of these measures have been warranted. The Great Barrington Declaration, signed by more than 30,000 health scientists and medical doctors from around the world, adds support for this statement,” wrote Malthouse. The Great Barrington Declaration blasts the harm caused by lockdowns.

Malthouse wrote that like most doctors in Canada, he was prepared for a “COVID-19 tsunami,” which he noted never materialized.

“The early intent of mitigation measures to ‘flatten the curve, when we knew very little about SARS-CoV-2, its mode of transmission, and the severity of COVID-19, was reasonable. I believe that most physicians in Canada, myself included, whether active or retired, prepared themselves to take part on the front lines for the expected COVID-19 tsunami,” wrote Malthouse.

“Very soon it was apparent that the expected overwhelming of the hospital system was not going to occur, and now BC physicians have questions about the appropriateness of your public health policies.”

Malthouse has been in the “family medical practice” for over 40 years and has been a member of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of B.C. since 1978. Currently, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia lists Malthouse as an actively practicing family physician in Denman Island.

In his letter to Henry, Malthouse wrote that the “epidemiological evidence clearly shows” that the COVID-19 “pandemic” is indeed over.

“No second wave will follow. The evidence has been available for at least 4–5 months and is irrefutable. Yet, in spite of this substantial body of research, your office is perpetuating the narrative that a pandemic still exists and a second wave is expected,” wrote Malthouse, referencing a report noting a former Chief Science Officer for Pfizer who said, ‘there is no science to suggest a second wave should happen.’”

“This false story is being used to justify public health policies that appear to have no health benefits, have already caused considerable harm, and threaten to create more harm in the future.”

As of today, B.C. lists 254 deaths attributed to COVID-19. On Monday, despite 69 people listed as in hospital and 18 in the ICU due to COVID-19, Henry sounded the alarm that her province is in its “second wave.”

“One can say that we are in our second wave here of our COVID-19 storm in B.C. But we have control over what that wave looks like," said Henry to reporters Monday.

Currently, B.C. is in Phase 3 of its re-opening regime, with restrictions still in place for many businesses such as restaurants and bars, which must close by 11:00 P.M.

Churches and other places of worship are still limited to only 50 attendees, far below the limit in the neighboring province of Alberta, which does not put a limit on how many can attend church.

In his letter to Henry, Malthouse mentioned the nation of Sweden, which did not have extreme lockdown measures, as a place that has “largely escaped” the mess caused by lockdowns.

“As you are aware, Sweden took an entirely different approach … and has also largely escaped the financial ruin and catastrophic mental health problems experienced in other countries, including Canada and the U.S.A,” wrote Malthouse.

Malthouse blasted the fact that promoting the use of vitamins and mineral

“Surprisingly, the recommendation for reducing COVID-19 morbidity and mortality by supplementing with vitamin D, a measure that is supported by high-quality research, has been absent from your frequent public broadcasts and professional bulletins,” wrote Malthouse.

He then said that as far as he was aware, Henry has never noted something “as simple as vitamin D supplements” as a “convenient” way of improving one's immune system, especially for those most vulnerable to COVID-19.

“Optimizing nutrition is a convenient, inexpensive, and safe method of improving immune resistance and has been confirmed through numerous studies for both prevention and treatment of COVID-19,” wrote Malthouse.

In his letter, Malthouse also mentioned the controversy around the accuracy of PCR tests as the method to detect COVID-19, bringing up a New York Times report that concluded that PCR testing can show up to 90% false positives.

“The PCR test was never designed, intended or validated to be used as a diagnostic tool,” wrote Malthouse.s as a way to boost one’s immune system in the fight against sickness has been “absent” from published government information on COVID-19.

Regarding “case counts” of those who show a positive COVID-19 test result, Malthouse wrote that Henry should not use this as a means to cause “panic” in the public.

“The public health definition of a ‘case’ is very broad. As all experienced doctors know, a ‘case’ is a patient with significant symptoms who is often hospitalized. A ‘case’ is not a person who simply has a questionably positive PCR test and presents with no symptoms or an unrelated diagnosis,” wrote Malthouse.

“Nevertheless, your public announcements repeatedly emphasize that the “case” counts are rising and we are in big trouble[.] ... It is your duty as the provincial health officer to provide facts, not propaganda, and make every effort to stop the public panic. The only reason for emphasizing ‘cases’ is to induce more fear and thereby compliance in the name of promised safety.”
Post Reply