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

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...

@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...

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...

#Thread on Tantra

The word ’Tantra’ literally means ‘loom’ in Sanskrit. There are several differing explanations as to what this word means. According to one source, this name is supposed to be a pun, and in order to understand it, one has to first understand the word ‘sutra’.

The key texts of Hinduism are known as sutras, a word which also means ‘formula or thread’. Therefore, if a sutra is a single thread of thought, then Tantra would be the loom that produces these threads of thoughts into a whole system of thoughts.

As a comparison, another source suggests that Tantra is a combination of two words, ‘tattva’ and ‘mantra’, which mean the science of cosmic principles and the science of mystic sound and vibration respectively.

In other words, Tantra may be regarded to be “the application of cosmic sciences with a view to attain spiritual ascendancy.”

In the beginning of Satyuga, Lord Shiva appeared in the form of Swacchandanatha, with his five mukha(mouth), namely Ishana, Tatpurusha, Sadyojata,

Vamadeva & Aghor. These mukhas represent his 5 energies, namely, Consciousness, Bliss, Will, Knowledge & Action. He manifested Tantras through his 5 mukhas (energies), some given by each of his mouth while others recited by him through two or more than two mouths simultaneously.

@sbarnettARK Epigenomic biomarkers are becoming more established for #LiquidBiopsy and #CancerScreening, and we have seen the big players positioning themselves in this #epigenomics race recently.

Catching signs of #cancer early is crucially important to the disease management and survival rates, so the question is: how can we find out if there is something wrong going on early enough?

The first generation of high-throughput technologies was predicated on finding mutated (tumor) DNA in the individual's body (somatic), different from their (normal) DNA. Tumor/Normal (T/N) comparisons of the individual's samples, biopsies or ctDNA will indicate if there

are signs of cancer already underway. So why do we need #epigenomic profiling if we can do all this with the detection of mutations? Well, the argument is that if you can see sufficient mutated copies of DNA, cancer may already have progressed beyond the initial stages.

Then people asked the question: is there an earlier mark that we can detect for earlier stages of cancer before the Tumor/Normal mutations signal amps up? Here is where #epigenomics profiling took hold.

breaking my social media fast, which may or may not exist anymore, to share something i found really really helpful from today's therapy sesh. i figured out why i (we?) have so much trouble celebrating our wins

so ive been in therapy for 100 years. still anxious, but im pretty sure i was born that way so i'll stay that way. still depressed too, which i thought id be cured of by now. aa few sessions ago we talked about what i think a return to health 'should' look like

initially i figured itd look like being the person i was before i got depressed. energetic, not needing pep talks to do shit like go outside, cooking everyday, working out at least 30 mins at least 3 days a week, calling my mom everyday, etc.

that session i realized that im a completely different person than i was before i got depressed. also the world has changed a lot & things are just done differently now. not allowing for those things had me reaching for shit that was impossible.

so i make some concessions but say that i *still* want to be able to do some things that i dont want to do. like i cant just sit on the couch and never move in the name of accepting who i am, which is A Bitch Who Don't Like To Move. i still want to be able to eve if i dont want