In a number of Sunday papers:
Scientific advisers said it was “hard to see” when the restrictions would end as new variants continued to emerge, delivering a potentially devastating blow to the travel industry. The prime minister said that after progress with vaccinations...

...”what we don’t want to see is all that work undone by the arrival of a new variant that is vaccine-busting”.
The idea is planted in people’s mind that this virus is mutating in such a way as to evade prior immunity. This is completely unfounded, certainly as regards immunity..

...gained naturally, after repelling the virus (which well around 99.9% of the population do, fewer, obviously in the very elderly & already ill, more in those younger & well). It’s important to appreciate that upon infection, the human immune system cuts up an infectious...

...agent into short pieces. Each of these short pieces of protein are presented to other cells in the immune system, like an identity parade. Our cells have a truly astonishing range of abilities to recognise different protein structures, and there will be some which recognise...

...each of the pieces of the invader. The cells which recognise a piece are instructed to multiply selectively so that, after a few days to a couple of weeks, our bodies contain large numbers of virus piece specific cells. These have a range of functions. Some make antibodies...

https://t.co/xvP6tVlIaE
Quite a surprise. Ferguson isn’t qualified to comment on such things. He lacks understanding of basic biological concepts, partly explaining why his predictions are often so extreme.

That said, I’ll take him as an ally. It’s clear we’re already at herd immunity. How can I be sure? London had a huge peak of excess deaths in spring. The timing of peak deaths showed clearly that the pandemic was self-limiting. Recall much debate about whether the interval...

...between lockdown & peak deaths was long enough for lockdown to have been the cause of reducing deaths? The answer was “no”. But it was close & I can understand people thinking “well, it’s close, so perhaps it was lockdown that did it?”, thereby establishing a foundational...

...myth favoured by those who genuinely believe lockdown saves lives (it clearly doesn’t).
I’ll get to London & here immunity. But those wavering about the evidence about lockdown in spring really will benefit from cogitating on this graph.

In blue are the 30 trusts with the earliest date of peak deaths in spring. In red, the 30 with the latest peak deaths. For me, this is proof that national lockdown, which began Mar 23, played no role whatsoever in turning the pandemic. You’ll see some areas had peak daily...

@DesmondSwayne Sir Desmond is right. SAGE makes mathematical predictions based on flawed models.
I chose to stick my neck out almost 4mo ago here:
https://t.co/b0rT5Lq9HI
I experienced much anxiety doing this, aware that, if I was badly wrong here, I would be destroyed as a contributor.

That said, I thought the immunology so clear that I made three, specific & testable predictions which should apply if I was right.
Please examine them, on the right, under the pie chart:

In particular, I predicted that the epidemic would not reignite in London. Obviously, we have many “cases” but I urge people to disregard these & instead to look at excess deaths, on the principle that a severe (occasionally lethal) respiratory virus would show itself this way.

Here is a chart showing the trend of deaths in London alone over recent years. A prominent peak of deaths is evident as the virus swept through in spring. Also visible the August heatwave. But there are no excess deaths now.
I submit this is a striking example of herd immunity.

I’m still waiting for SAGE or indeed anyone to provide an alternative explanation for the sharp nature of the spring excess deaths peak which doesn’t involve herd immunity or otherwise removing from the pool those vulnerable to lethal outcomes (same result). Given this sharp...

Postcard From Luxembourg: normality is restored prior to vaccination.
I’ve repeatedly said that “test, test, test” is madness, if the tests are unregulated. Why?
‘Because pandemic’, NO PCR mass testing has a declared operational false positive rate.

So we don’t know the oFPR of PCR mass testing in U.K. This is conducted in a small number of private labs, set up at pace in summer, anticipating a ‘2nd wave’ (itself a dubious prediction from the Imperial team who’ve been wrong every time before). You’d assume these “Lighthouse

...Labs are surely regulated, inspected, accredited etc. They’re doing the most impactful medical diagnostic testing which has ever happened in history. But no. None of these are true. ‘Because pandemic’. Now, I don’t know the oFPR either. But we’re paying for it. It is NOT ZERO.

However, the authorities take every positive result as a “confirmed case” (though there’s nothing confirmed). There is no open protocol you can examine & debate. None of the results are available for understanding, thinking & interpretation. Wouldn’t it be important to learn...

...how the distribution of cycle threshold for positives varies through a run of tens of thousands of samples? Or through time? Or across geography? There is no routine evaluation of the characteristics of the test, even though we know the oFPR of complex systems is subject to...

@scottorandojin What if the false diagnosis rate was 90%?
Don’t misunderstand me. I’m a thorough believer in the existence of this virus.

To exemplify: the NHS is under severe winter pressure. Many staff are unavailable, largely due to forced isolation from testing. Also, I’m told the adaptations to the conditions make normal work almost impossible. Trying to keep apart patients in different categories must be...

...incredibly stressful. I doubt I could ever have coped. Add to this the real stream of sick people & it’s a complete nightmare. My sympathies won’t be accepted but I offer them anyway. As to “the deaths”, do you mean the reported count of “covid19 deaths”? Everyone is doing...

...their very best. But as to that count: it’s nothing to do with clinical judgement. A covid19 death is a death from any cause within 28d of a positive test. So once a person is labelled by a positive test, if they then die, they’re a covid19 death. Back to my substantive...

...question: how reliable is that labelling? It’s not a clinical diagnosis. We’re not used to this idea. Never before in medical history has someone had a disease (let alone cause of death) been defined by the result of a single year alone. Yet that’s where we are. I think that..