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..
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...
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..
To mutations & variants. Many viruses are error-prone when they replicate in your cells. They make “typos” so the virus which results is...
Why these incorrect stories are being spun, I’ve no idea, that not being a scientific matter. But spin & completely inappropriate & severe restrictions...
More from Yardley Yeadon
So I wrote back to @lucyfrazermp for another go. Here\u2019s my letter.
— Edmund Fordham (@EdmundFordham) November 28, 2020
They don\u2019t understand how serious this is.
If they can\u2019t tell us the oFPR, our PCR testing is worthless. (thread) pic.twitter.com/zHJ8SJCzf1
Without this information it’s impossible to interpret any result. If the oFPR is 4%, for example, and if the true prevalence is 0.3% (it’s probably less), then for every 10,000 tests, 400 positives would be false & 30 positives would be genuine. So 93% of positives are false.
As Mr Fordham points out, almost all policies pivot on PCR mass testing. Hancock previously admitted on talkRADIO to Julia Hartley-Brewer in late summer that the FPR was “just under 1%”. That was a flat lie (possibly inadvertent but he’s never corrected the record). The reason...
...we are sure Hancock told a lie is that they have never known the FPR. Those including Hancock who believe that the oFPR can be estimated by inspection of the lowest positivity ever recorded, while logical, is completely wrong. Changes in personnel, throughout, testing...
...architecture & the like can radically alter the oFPR. Since Hancock’s remark in late summer, PCR mass testing has moved into the Lighthouse Labs & this creates a new & urgent need to continually assess oFPR. I’ve good reason to believe it’s now VERY much higher now that the...
Ignore ‘cases’, look instead only at excess deaths (per M Levitt’s tweet). Does that look characteristic of an epidemic? It’s completely diff from spring or any winter flu outbreak.
London:
Can anyone explain why there is no ‘2nd wave’ of excess deaths in London, without invoking herd immunity?
It’s not lockdown. See NW England:
This is the largest #SecondaryRipple (which I predicted).
https://t.co/b0rT5Lq9HI
Now check the 3 predictions I made months ago. They’ve all happened. Compare predictions from SAGE’s statements: they’re all wrong.
Even neutrals at this point might ask themselves “if he’s been right on all predictions, maybe he’s correct now?”
I’ve been saying since the Lighthouse Labs got up & running that I’m deeply sceptical about the trustworthiness of their ‘cases’ data. I showed how, at low virus prevalence, the PCR mass testing data was throwing out potentially 90% positives being
https://t.co/t4qQN4rH0u
I got ‘fact checked’ a LOT over that statement. This paper just published, about precisely that time period I speculated about. Turns out that high-80s% of Dr Healy’s positives by PCR were FALSE. This alone is sufficient in my view to throw severe doubt...
More from Science
😭
The new answer to a 77-year-old problem in data analysis, published today in @naturemethods. Instead of significance tests, use estimation graphics. Our software suite DABEST makes it easy for everyone to visualize effect sizes.https://t.co/UzwXJ7EUC5 pic.twitter.com/VtxyY0xaRM
— Adam Claridge-Chang (@adamcchang) June 19, 2019
https://t.co/hm9NoaU4nr
Open letter to journal editors: dynamite plots must die. Dynamite plots, also known as bar and line graphs, hide important information. Editors should require authors to show readers the data and avoid these plots. https://t.co/0GNKEIUCJL pic.twitter.com/OS9ytEFRZN
— Rafael Irizarry (@rafalab) February 22, 2019
https://t.co/8fKDiKjSWc
Couldn't find D3 code for grouped horisontal box plots that show data points so I made this @mbostock @thisisalfie https://t.co/cQjDPhyZdw pic.twitter.com/y6RNmDB2p3
— Ulrik Lyngs (@ulyngs) June 28, 2017
https://t.co/jkaicC1F2x
made a pkg for pirate plots in ggplot: add any of points/means/bars/CIs/violins \u2013 better than ye olde bar/box plotshttps://t.co/Z2m2kW3hsl pic.twitter.com/npAirPQexM
— Mika Braginsky (@mbraginsky) September 28, 2017
https://t.co/PpxWT4Jef4
See the new #PowerBI visual awesomeness for data points & sources, box-&-whisker plots! https://t.co/dOmgoxWfDE pic.twitter.com/HAUOAMJEJW
— Microsoft Power BI (@MSPowerBI) February 1, 2016
It's time, my friends 🤩🤩
[Thread] #ProjectOdin
The Alliance has Project Odin ready to go - the new quantum-based internet. #ElonMusk #QVS #QFS #ProjectOdin
— Der Preu\xdfe Parler: @DerPreusse (@DerPreusse1963) January 12, 2021
https://t.co/fO90N78fta
new quantum-based internet #ElonMusk #QVS #QFS
Political justification ⏬⏬
#ProjectOdin
#ProjectOdin #Starlink #ElonMusk #QuantumInternet
You May Also Like
Unfortunately the "This work includes the identification of viral sequences in bat samples, and has resulted in the isolation of three bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are now used as reagents to test therapeutics and vaccines." were BEFORE the
chimeric infectious clone grants were there.https://t.co/DAArwFkz6v is in 2017, Rs4231.
https://t.co/UgXygDjYbW is in 2016, RsSHC014 and RsWIV16.
https://t.co/krO69CsJ94 is in 2013, RsWIV1. notice that this is before the beginning of the project
starting in 2016. Also remember that they told about only 3 isolates/live viruses. RsSHC014 is a live infectious clone that is just as alive as those other "Isolates".
P.D. somehow is able to use funds that he have yet recieved yet, and send results and sequences from late 2019 back in time into 2015,2013 and 2016!
https://t.co/4wC7k1Lh54 Ref 3: Why ALL your pangolin samples were PCR negative? to avoid deep sequencing and accidentally reveal Paguma Larvata and Oryctolagus Cuniculus?