Here’s a graph that doesn’t get shown in the mass media, and that I’m sure all those who want you to stay fearful of covid don’t want you to see. It shows the share of the tested population with antibodies to covid in Sweden week by week, beginning in the 28th week of 2020 (the first week for which the Swedish Public Health Authority provides data on the share of tests coming back positive).
It seemed a truth universally acknowledged that the human population had no pre-existing immunity to SARS-CoV-2, but is that actually the case? Peter Doshi explores the emerging research on immunological responses
The lockdown will have caused MORE deaths from Covid-19
The report, analysing the information available to UK policymakers in March, says schools shouldn’t have shut, that only vulnerable groups like the old should have been isolated, & that herd immunity may have been a better route. Continue reading →
Why is the media so fixated on Sweden’s coronavirus policy? What difference does it make?
Sweden settled on a policy that they thought was both sustainable and would save as many lives as possible. They weren’t trying to ‘show anyone up’ or ‘prove how smart they were’. They simply took a more traditionalist approach that avoided a full-scale lockdown. That’s all.
Prof Robert Endres is leader of the biological physics group and the physics of life network at Imperial College London. He sits down with independent journalist Anna Brees to discuss his issues with the Imperial Model.
On March 20th TruePublica published the story about the UK government that ran a national pandemic flu exercise back in 2016. It was codenamed Exercise Cygnus. The report of its findings was not made publicly available as part of the general antipathy towards the NHS in general by the Conservative party. The then chief medical officer Sally Davies, commented on what she had learnt from it in December 2016.
By TruePublica: In the UK, the government response to the Covid-19 outbreak was initially to allow the population to be infected as a means of defence by creating what they termed ‘herd immunity.’ This strategy was met with clear opposition by almost all scientists, health professionals and experts very quickly. Public reaction was muted early on but rapidly turned to anger as the realisation set in that ‘herd immunity’ was a programme that, in the end, encouraged the ‘culling’ of those most vulnerable, such as those with underlying health conditions. For modern societies, this is completely unacceptable. It is immoral on every level no matter what the science or logic points to. For instance, logic tells retired (high risk) medics to stay away, but the human spirit is such that thousands have stepped forward to help complete strangers get through this deadly pandemic.
Health secretary Matt Hancock appeared on ITV‘s Good Morning Britain on 23 March. During the interview, he faced the dressing down of his life over his ‘insulting’ comments on the government’s strategy for handling the new coronavirus (Covid-19).
Some on the political opposition will enjoy watching the government of Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings struggle over the unfolding Covid-19 crisis. Others will profit from it. All the while, the threat of thousands losing their lives early beckons menacingly, when there was always a better plan in plain sight.
The people are ahead of the government in making serious moves to combat the spread of the coronavirus. It is clear the government were pushed by organisations already taking action to close down large events, a move we very much welcome. Where government refuses to act civil society institutions, trade unions, and ordinary citizens are taking matters into their own hands. We reject the ‘herd immunity’ theory that coronavirus can simply be left to rip through society until enough people develop immunity. Not only is there no proof this will happen with this virus, it is the most deadly and careless approach the government could take. The government should be acting on World Health Organisation guidance and learning from those countries it commends for swift and decisive action. Older and vulnerable people matter as much as everyone else. We insist the government alter course immediately and implement the following measures: