11-19-2020, 10:25 AM
FB POST -
‘Lockdown 1.0 - Following the Science?’
A new BBC documentary which airs on BBC Two tonight at 9pm will show that SAGE did not have a single expert in human coronaviruses or immunology in its ranks in early spring and shockingly reveals that SAGE used WIKIPEDIA in part to model the crisis.
Members ofthe Government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) admitted early virus modelling was based on unverified figures from the online encyclopedia, which can be edited and managed by members of the public.
University students are not even permitted to reference Wikipedia in their essays yet this has been used in part to determine a public health response to a pandemic?
Similarly, before the 1st national lockdown was imposed in March, scientists falsely predicted the peak of the virus in the UK would be June - when in fact it was April.
It is unclear if this data was used as part of Professor Ferguson’s controversial projections which provoked much of the world to enter into lockdown.
The documentary also critically reveals that scientists failed to consider the impact agency workers would have on spreading Covid in care homes by moving between several different sites to work and the impact of moving patients from hospitals to care homes.
It is estimated that there were between 25,000 - 30,000 excess deaths in care homes related to Covid, representing up to 57% of all Covid related mortality across all populations.
This documentary comes after it was recently revealed that 14 out of 20 key advisors have conflicts of interests with companies developing COVID-19 vaccines.
Ministers have repeatedly claimed they were 'following the science', however the fact that scientific advice was not based on robust data and delivered primarily by data modellers and statisticians rather than by experts in the field of human coronaviruses will raise further doubts about how sound the science was.
At the Pandemic Podcast we have already revealed how flawed measurements have led to flawed policy responses with devastating short and long term consequences to public health and people’s livelihoods.
At this point it has become more important than ever that the wider public begin to question the data, evidence and responses to the coronavirus pandemic.
It is possible to have concerns for your own wellbeing and for the vulnerable in the context of the virus AND simultaneously question the very basis of the science that is determining the policy responses to the pandemic.
It is my belief that the time has come to call for an independent enquiry into the U.K governments handling of the pandemic and to demand that an independent SAGE advisory group is formed that is free from political influence and financial conflicts of interest.
For further Pandemic podcast reports please subscribe here:
www.danjgregory.com/pandemic
‘Lockdown 1.0 - Following the Science?’
A new BBC documentary which airs on BBC Two tonight at 9pm will show that SAGE did not have a single expert in human coronaviruses or immunology in its ranks in early spring and shockingly reveals that SAGE used WIKIPEDIA in part to model the crisis.
Members ofthe Government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) admitted early virus modelling was based on unverified figures from the online encyclopedia, which can be edited and managed by members of the public.
University students are not even permitted to reference Wikipedia in their essays yet this has been used in part to determine a public health response to a pandemic?
Similarly, before the 1st national lockdown was imposed in March, scientists falsely predicted the peak of the virus in the UK would be June - when in fact it was April.
It is unclear if this data was used as part of Professor Ferguson’s controversial projections which provoked much of the world to enter into lockdown.
The documentary also critically reveals that scientists failed to consider the impact agency workers would have on spreading Covid in care homes by moving between several different sites to work and the impact of moving patients from hospitals to care homes.
It is estimated that there were between 25,000 - 30,000 excess deaths in care homes related to Covid, representing up to 57% of all Covid related mortality across all populations.
This documentary comes after it was recently revealed that 14 out of 20 key advisors have conflicts of interests with companies developing COVID-19 vaccines.
Ministers have repeatedly claimed they were 'following the science', however the fact that scientific advice was not based on robust data and delivered primarily by data modellers and statisticians rather than by experts in the field of human coronaviruses will raise further doubts about how sound the science was.
At the Pandemic Podcast we have already revealed how flawed measurements have led to flawed policy responses with devastating short and long term consequences to public health and people’s livelihoods.
At this point it has become more important than ever that the wider public begin to question the data, evidence and responses to the coronavirus pandemic.
It is possible to have concerns for your own wellbeing and for the vulnerable in the context of the virus AND simultaneously question the very basis of the science that is determining the policy responses to the pandemic.
It is my belief that the time has come to call for an independent enquiry into the U.K governments handling of the pandemic and to demand that an independent SAGE advisory group is formed that is free from political influence and financial conflicts of interest.
For further Pandemic podcast reports please subscribe here:
www.danjgregory.com/pandemic