By Sue Denim
After Toby published my first and second pieces, Imperial College London (ICL) produced two responses. In this article I will study them. I’ve also written an appendix that provides some notes on the C programming language to address some common confusions observed amongst modellers, which Toby will publish tomorrow.
Attempted replication. On the June 1st ICL published a press release on its website stating that Stephen Eglen, an academic at Cambridge, was able to reproduce the numbers in ICL’s influential Report 9. I was quite interested to see how that was achieved. As a reminder, Imperial College’s Report 9 modelling drove lockdown in many countries.
Unfortunately, this press release continues ICL’s rather worrying practice of making misleading statements about its work. The headline is “Codecheck confirms reproducibility of COVID-19 model results”, and the article highlights this quote:
I was able to reproduce the results… from Report 9.
This is an unambiguous statement. However, the press release quotes the report as saying: “Small variations (mostly under 5%) in the numbers were observed between Report 9 and our runs.”
This is an odd definition of “replicate” for the output of a computer program, but it doesn’t really matter because what ICL doesn’t mention is this: the very next sentence of Eglen’s report says:
I observed 3 significant differences:
1. Table A1: R0=2.2, trigger = 3000, PC_CI_HQ_SDOL70, peak beds (in thousands): 40 vs 30, a 25% decrease.
2. Table 5: on trigger = 300, off trigger = 0.75, PC_CI_HQ_SD, total deaths: 39,000 vs 43,000, a 10% increase.
3. Table 5: on trigger = 400, off trigger = 0.75, CI_HQ_SD, total deaths: 100,000 vs 110,000, a 10% increase.
In other words, he wasn’t able to replicate Report 9. There were multiple “significant differences” between what he got and what the British Government based its decisions on.
How significant? The supposedly minor difference in peak bed demand between his run and Report 9 is 10,000 beds, or roughly the size of the entire UK field hospital deployment. This supports the argument that ICL’s model is unusable for planning purposes, although that’s the entire justification for its existence.
Eglen claims this non-replication is in fact a replication by arguing:
although the absolute values do not match the initial report, the overall trends are consistent with
the original report
A correctly written model will be replicable to the last decimal place. When using the same seeds and same input data the expected variance is zero, not 25%. Stephen Eglen should retract his “code check”, as it’s incorrect to claim a model is replicable when nobody can get it to generate the same outputs that other people saw.
Number of simulation runs. ICL have contradicted themselves about how Report 9 was generated. Their staff previously claimed that, “Many tens of thousands of runs contributed to the spread of results in report 9.” In Eglen’s report we see a very different claim. He explains some of the difference between his results and ICL’s by saying:
These results are the average of NR=10 runs, rather than just one simulation as used in Report 9
Imperial College’s internal controls are so poor they can’t give a straight accounting of how Report 9 was generated.
The point of stochasticity is to estimate confidence bounds. If incorporating random chance into your simulation changes the output only a bit, you assume random chance won’t affect real world outcomes much either and this increases your confidence. Report 9 is notable for not providing any confidence bounds whatsoever. All numbers are given as precise predictions in different scenarios, with no discussion of uncertainty beyond a few possible values of R0. None of the graphs render uncertainty bounds either (unlike e.g. the University of Washington model). The lack of bounds would certainly be explained if the simulation was run only once.
People working on the ICL model have argued the huge variety of bug reports they received don’t matter, because they just run it repeatedly and average the outputs. This argument is nonsense as discussed repeatedly, but if they didn’t actually run it multiple times at all then the argument falls apart on its own terms.
Models vs experiments. The belief that you can just average out model bugs appears to be based on a deep confusion between simulations and reality. A shockingly large number of academics seem to believe that running a program is the same thing as running an experiment, and thus any unexplained variance in output should just be recorded and treated as cosmic uncertainty. However, models aren’t experiments; they are predictions generated by entirely controllable machines. When replicating software-generated predictions, the goal is not to explore the natural world, but to ensure that the program can be correctly tested, and to stop model authors simply cherry-picking outputs to fit their pre-conceived beliefs. As we shall see, that is a vital requirement.
Does replication matter? It does. You don’t have to take my word for it: ask Richard Horton, editor of the Lancet, who in 2015 stated:
The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put it, “poor methods get results”.
Alternatively ask Professor Neil Ferguson, who is a signatory to this open letter to the Lancet requesting retraction of the “hydroxychloroquine is dangerous” paper because of the unreliability of the data it’s based on, supplied by an American health analytics company called Surgisphere. The letter justifies the demand for retraction by saying:
The authors have not adhered to standard practices in the machine learning and statistics community. They have not released their code or data.
ICL should give the authors the benefit of the doubt – maybe Surgisphere just need a couple of months to release their code. They are peer-reviewed experts, after all. And statistics isn’t a sub-field of epidemiology, so according to Imperial College spokespeople that means Ferguson isn’t qualified to criticise it anyway.
Initial response and the British Computer Society. Via its opinion writers, the Daily Telegraph picked up on my analysis. ICL gave them this statement:
A spokesperson for the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team responded to criticism of its code by saying the Government “has never relied on a single disease model to inform decision-making”.
“Within the Imperial research team we use several models of differing levels of complexity, all of which produce consistent results. We are working with a number of legitimate academic groups and technology companies to develop, test and further document the simulation code referred to. However, we reject the partisan reviews of a few clearly ideologically motivated commentators.“
The first bolded statement is typically misleading. In the SAGE publication from March 9th addressing lockdowns, the British Government was given the conclusions of the SPI-M SAGE subgroup in tables 1 and 2. On page 8, that document states the tables and assumptions are sourced to a single paper from ICL which has never been published, but from the title and content it seems clear that it was an earlier draft of Report 9. There is no evidence of modelling from any other institution contributing to this report, i.e. it doesn’t appear to be true that the Government has “never” relied on a single model – that’s exactly what it was fed by its own advisory panel.
The second bolded statement is merely unfortunate. By ideologically motivated commentators they must have meant the vast array of professional software engineers who posted their reactions on Twitter, on GitHub and on this site. The beliefs of the vast majority in the software industry were summarised by the British Computer Society (BCS), a body that represents people working in computer science in the UK. The BCS stated:
Computer code used to model the spread of diseases including coronavirus “must meet professional standards” … “the quality of the software implementations of scientific models appear to rely too much on the individual coding practices of the scientists who develop them”
Is Imperial College going to argue that the BCS is partisan and ideologically motivated?
On motivations. It’s especially unfortunate when academics defend themselves by claiming their critics – all of them, apparently – are ideological. Observing that coding standards are much higher in the private sector than in the academy isn’t even controversial, let alone ideological, as shown by the numerous responses from academics agreeing with this point, and stressing that they can’t be expected to produce code up to commercial standards. (They “need more funding”, obviously.)
But in recent days people have observed that “for months, health experts told people to stay home. Now, many are encouraging the public to join mass protests.” The world has watched as over 1,200 American epidemiologists, academics and other public health officials published an open letter which said: “[A]s public health advocates, we do not condemn these gatherings as risky for COVID-19 transmission …. this should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay at home orders.”
According to “the science” the danger posed by this virus depends on the ideological views of whoever is protesting. This is clearly nonsense and explains why Imperial College administrators were so quick to accuse others of political bias: they see it everywhere because academia is riven with it.
To rebuild trust in public science will require a firm policy response. As nobody rational will trust the claims of academic epidemiologists again any time soon, as the UK’s public finances are now seriously damaged by furlough and recession, and as professional modelling firms are attempting to develop reliable epidemic models themselves anyway, it’s unclear why this field should continue to receive taxpayer funding. The modellers with better standards can, and should, advise the Government in future.
Appendix: Common errors when working with C/C++. This section is meant only for modellers. Non-modellers or programmers already familiar with these languages should stop reading here.
The C/C++ programming languages are unlike most others. It’s apparent from talking to some modellers that this isn’t sufficiently clear. Some believe that the impact of bugs (any bugs) is always likely to be small relative to errors in assumptions, which isn’t the case. An academic working in molecular biology wrote an open letter in response to my analysis, arguing that the ICL fiasco is the fault of software developers for not putting warning labels on C++:
It’s you, the software engineering community, that is responsible for tools like C++ that look as if they were designed for shooting yourself in the foot. It’s also you, the software engineering community, that has made no effort to warn the non-expert public of the dangers of these tools. Sure, you have been discussing these dangers internally, even a lot. But to outsiders, such as computational scientists looking for implementation tools for their models, these discussions are hard to find and hard to understand.
Blaming professional software engineers for disasters caused by untrained academics is hardly a helpful take, especially given attacks on “armchair epidemiologists“, yet the problem he identifies is clearly a real one. Very few scientists work with C/C++. They mostly prefer to use R or Python. These languages are far better choices and don’t suffer the problems I’m about to outline, but are less efficient than C++. If you want something efficient yet safe, try exploring a more modern language like Kotlin for Data Science.
As these articles have been seen by a lot of scientists, I’ll now provide some quick explanations meant for that audience. If you’re a scientist working with C/C++ be aware of the following things:
- Firstly and most critically, if at all possible don’t use these languages. They are designed for efficiency above all else. The ICL COVID-Sim program has several cases of so-called memory safety errors. Beyond data corruption, memory safety errors can create security vulnerabilities that could lead to your institution getting hacked. Google employs some of the best C++ programmers in the world and has a large industrial infrastructure devoted to catching memory safety errors. Despite that they routinely ship exploitable bugs to the Chrome userbase. To stop this leading to the sort of “code red” security disasters that were routine in the early years of the 20th century, they built a complete firewall around their own code (the “sandbox”) that assumes they have in fact failed and which tries to contain any subsequent attacks. They also moved to silent security upgrades that users cannot control. In this analysis the Chrome engineering team show that around 70% of all Chrome security bugs are related to memory safety and explore moving away from using C++.
- A few modellers who commented believed that memory safety errors would surely cause the program to crash, so if it didn’t crash when producing Report 9, any bugs must have been introduced afterwards. This isn’t the case. Crashing is an intentional process started by the operating system when a violation of system rules is detected, indicating internal corruption inside a program. It is a best effort process because the OS cannot detect every possible corruption. If a bug causes a variable to be incorrectly set to zero and you then divide by it, your program will crash because dividing by zero is impossible. If the bug incorrectly sets the variable to anything else the division might succeed and yield an invalid result. Likewise, allocating a list with five elements and trying to read the tenth will reliably crash in almost every language except C and C++, in which the program is not checking list indexes for performance reasons. If you read the 10th element of a 5 element list and the OS doesn’t detect that, your variable will be set to an arbitrary value.
- Memory safety errors do not yield uniformly random values. As I’ve repeatedly stressed, some modellers appeared to believe that memory safety errors don’t matter if you average the results. An out of bounds read like this bug is far more likely to yield some values than others, for example, 0, 1, -1, INT_MAX, INT_MIN and pointers into a heap arena or stack frame. You have no idea what it’ll be and cannot predict it, so don’t try.
- Memory safety errors open up what’s called “undefined behaviour“. The compiler is allowed to assume your program has no memory safety errors in it, even though that may be hard to achieve in practice for large programs. It may change your program in complex ways before you run it, based on that assumption. For example, the compiler may silently delete parts of your code, including important parts like security checks. Obviously if the program you’re actually running silently skips a step in your model the results are scientifically meaningless, even if they may look plausible.
A major understanding gap between the software industry and academic science appears to be caused by this last point. Once your program contains undefined behaviour you cannot reason about what it will do or whether the outputs are correct. Common sense logic like “it looks right to me” means nothing because something as trivial as an overnight operating system update could cause the results to change totally. Any chance of reliably replicating your results goes out the window. To a software engineer, a program with memory safety errors could do literally anything at all, which is why it’s seen as pointless to argue about whether such a bug has a significant effect.
Here are two more issues that can bite you when working with C/C++:
- The default random number generators are often too weak for scientific purposes. COVID-Sim attempted to use its own RNG to solve this, but it was also buggy, so that probably just made things worse. If you need a fast source of pseudo-random numbers for Monte Carlo techniques, use an open source RNG pre-written for you and which has been run against a battery of statistical tests. Mersenne Twisters work if you’re careful but a better algorithm to use is Xorshift+. For example this article gives implementations of xorshift and splitmix. Treat your RNG with care especially when splitting the stream in multi-threaded contexts. If you’re working with something safer like Java or Kotlin on the JVM, SplittableRandom exists to help you.
- When doing floating point calculations in parallel, don’t add the result of each thread to a shared variable at the end of the loop. This can (a) cause lost writes if you forget to use an interlocked exchange and (b) can cause non-deterministic runs due to the non-associativity of floating point arithmetic.
Because so many C/C++ specific bugs are avoidable with experience, if you do decide your research needs the performance C or C++ offers you should attempt to gain funding to hire a software engineer who has worked with these languages for several years. Resist the temptation to go it alone: you risk the reputation of your institution by doing so.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Or perhaps they share an unhealthy lifestyle and are obese. Both my parents, my grandmother and me all had gallstones. Was it an hereditary tendency (my parents were not related to each other) or was it that we grew up on farms and ate full-fat dairy products and fat pork throughout our childhoods and early adulthood?
These appear to be American names. The press here has also carried reports of families who have all died of Covid. Without exception they have all been obese. The ‘anti-vaccine’ thing is coincidental. There is a theory that very fat people’s bodies do not take up the vaccine anyway; it just sits in the fat of their arms!
Also, in the US the Prep Act in practice is very restrictive about what treatments can be given to COVID patients in hospitals, so the standard of care may be extremely poor. In principle the hospitals can ignore the official list of treatments, but it puts them outside the Prep Act’s liability protections, in a very litigious society.
Looking at the list on the website, even some of the slim photos turn out to have been of people who were obese at the time of death.
Obesity has an inflammatory effect from the stored fat toxins and many obese people may well have diabetes, high blood pressure and other obesity related issues. Who could possibly know how these people might have coped with a covid infection had they taken a covid vaccine. This website is a nasty, malicious thing to do. Until there is some kind of acceptance that covid vaccines are not a magical fix all, and that seems a long way off, these articles will continue.
Please, please stop assuming that obesity causes type 2 diabetes. There are people who are obese and do not have diabetes and there are lean people who do have diabetes. I can recommend looking at Dr Malcolm Kendrick’s blog. There is a suggestion that type 2 diabetes or insulin resistance precedes weight gain. There is even a suggestion that it could be due to Herpes simplex virus (Sun et al 2005. An Association of Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 Infection With Type 2 Diabetes,). There’s also a strong genetic component as well.
Still, I would suggest that with good diet and lifestyle, diabetes and other Western diseases can always or almost always be avoided.
Except the risk of a 25 year old male from the Indian subcontinent developing diabetes is the same as for a 40 year old Caucasian male.
Yes IMO insulin resistance may cause obesity, or diabetes, or both. Probably leptin is in there too.
I am diabetic, or prediabetic, or not diabetic depending on doctor. I was always skinny until I met a dietitian It’s a genetic thing, runs in one line of my family and involves a lack of Phase 1 insulin but I can still generate plenty of Phase 2.
On the other hand Type 1 (autoimmune) diabetes used to be predominantly a childhood onset disease but in recent years it has become far more common in adults. Lots going on that doesn’t fit the dogma.
“This website is a nasty, malicious thing to do.”
I’ve seen it, and you’re right. But who will find out who’s behind it? A lot of this sort of thing can be made to annoy ‘anti-vaxxers’ when you’ve just had a windfall of $33 billion.
Certainly, some nasty malicious things have been done to people who upset Big Pharma.
Maybe. It reminded me that a certain well known politician who was in hospital in London for a while had his weight “accidentally” published by someone who worked there. The lifestyle of those people is not a good example for most of us, and they are probably more vulnerable to all sorts of problems as a result. Unfortunately they are behind many stupid ideas that affect us all.
The other related problem is that obese people probably have problems with inadequate vitamin D, as it appears that it is fat soluble preferentially, in such a way that it ends being locked in the fat, rather than being available to everything else in us. So they might be taking enough on paper, but not enough for them.
There is a genetic factor but environmental factors drive the gene expression.
Most doctors will tell you gallstones are caused by eating too much fat. Sensible doctors will tell you they are caused by NOT EATING ENOUGH FAT, which reduces the demand for bile, so the gall bladder fails to contract and the bile it contains stagnates and crystallises into stones. After the stones have formed, eating fat is not fun as it causes the stones to be passed down the bile duct, which is excruciating.
Time was when a typical gallstone patient was “fat, fair, female, forties, fertile” ie. likely to eat a low fat diet. When low fat became the default gallstones spread to males and children.
Maybe this explains why Azithromycin was part of the original HCQ Zinc protocol
Are we sure that these people are actually confirmed dead? I looked for an obituary on one of them that looked a bit like someone found on the this person does not exist website: https://thispersondoesnotexist.com/ and couldn’t find an official obituary. I can easily find one from people I know have actually died. Anyway, I smell a hoax website.
It could be real, but it’s definitely been compiled by left-wing activists, and haunted by the same in the comments section, e.g., comments regarding right-wing Laura Loomer:
“I’m afraid it appears from her telegram the bitch has recovered and hadn’t skipped a beat in returning to being a Class A C***”
“I keep checking to see if she is dead yet. Unfortunately for everybody, she is still inhaling oxygen. I am deeply disturbed by Covid’s inability to put her down for good. But keep praying for her death, we might get lucky.”
these are not nice or tolerant people.
Why are any left-wing activists supporting the corona-hoax that is devastating the poor and enriching big business anyway?
Could it be that the medical professionals are more likely to admit unvaxed patients to hospital, where they are more likely to die, and are more likely to resort to intubation, which we know is lethal.
This is interesting regarding the efficacy of ‘the vaccines’.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/johndeealmanac/permalink/1016565055745304/
It’s certainly an interesting suggestion and worth looking into. But it is rather like searching for a needle in a haystack.
Actually Tom the glaring omission from this article is that there is likely a “genetic” marker to outcome. The familial fatality link is a possible clue.
Though for sure a poorer household with one communal bathroom… well its kinda an obvious vector outcome.
However following the science has never been relevant from the very beginning – following the carefully constructed Gates funded narrative has.
For me a turning point was the Lancet fraud, that and secondly the WHO putting Dr. Peter Daszak in charge as the lead boffin into the Wuhan lab investigation. The WHO also criminally redefined herd immunity to only be viable via “vaccines”
This whole coup stinks…
Get yourselves some Ivermectin and HCQ it works – it always has – that and avoid the kill shots, unless absolutely necessary and then take percautions pre/post injection to lessen the adverse outcome.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/
So HCQ worked in 2005 and amazingly has become a killer heart attack drug during 2020?
Pure BS folks…. Look to who pays the piper.
Jeez there are some morbid people around, collecting such stories. Sad, sad individuals.
Political activists. They’re trying to create a narrative.
Sadly, they’ve largely succeeded.
ONLY if you think they have! This is the depth of how far the evil psychology has worked on people. To compile a list like shows how utterly despicable the programming of the population has been, and how desperate they are to keep the narrative going, by enabling people to think it OKAY to do this! They’re literally making people turn on each other, to do their devil work. Their corruption knows no bounds, and the useful idiots that have compiled this have no idea they’re being played either! I wouldn’t give this site any oxygen at all, apart from being aware it exists. This is what we are up against, this is designed to divide people and depress them – all part of the process to destroy us, but if we don’t rise to it, and stay compassionate, showing empathy and a bit of love, their sanctimony will go nowhere.
Yes, you are quite right but I was referring to the general narrative that still largely prevails supporting lockdown policies, masks and now of course the ‘wonderful’ vaccine.
I know, but keep the faith. I went to a fairly upmarket town yesterday where masks and social distancing were totally the order of the day previously. BUT I was pleasantly surprised to find all of this has been abandoned! All shops, cafes and pubs were operating normally – the odd mask, yes, but everything…normal! It was wonderful. I felt like I’d entered a time warp and gone back to 2019. Maybe I had! People HAVE had enough.
I visited a food fair in a local town last weekend and got a shock when I realised that people were not masked or distancing; it was a shock because I live in Wales where people are still very frightened and fully masked.
But, like you, it felt wonderful and normal.
There are still PCR tests required, and quarantine, to get in/out of the UK. If people have had enough they’d storm the testing centres and smash them to smithereens. About time too.
The sad truth is that as soon as the next Variant-of-Concern is wheeled out and Boris and chums tell people to put their face masks back on… well, guess what.
Deadly Virus. Save the NHS! Works every time. Anyone missed the Whitty fan club?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpCxpmegbnE
Old news.
The first successful treatment by Professor Didier Raoult
Hydroxychloroquine-zinc-Azithromycin (HCQ-AZ)
Suppressed so that we all follow the great God vaccine.
Azithromycin is an antibiotic medication used for the treatment of a number of bacterial infections.
Wikipedia
How damaged as a person do you have to be to compile such a website?
I suppose you have to be politically motivated to want to geT mud to stick on some whilst making out others are angelic heros!
These stories serve their purpose by attempting to scare the non-compliant into fearing not just their own demise but also that of their loved one(s). Why do you believe they’re any more true than any of the other lies we’ve been told? A much more likely explanation and one which is also seen in false flag ops is that they’re crisis actors or not real people at all. Or even, though much more risky and less controllable, that they’re being taken out by being targeted by something else altogether. Going along with the supposed virulence of this so-called disease which targets (or hijacks) elderly people being hastened towards the inevitable does not fit in with the otherwise scarcely believable nonsense we’re being told. The younger victims without co-morbidities are so rare as to be fiction in my opinion.
You’re right, just look at the ages and the photos. They’re highly unlikely to be real.
Laura Loomer is on the list, and she is very much alive but they are implying she might be dead soon. Very sinister and very disappointing that you are trawling such depths for news pieces, Will. So much going on in Australia still not been covered by DS, seems more like controlled opposition every day this site.
The Daily Mail reported that she’d expressed regret for not being vaccinated after she’d contracted covid. She tweeted a reply to them saying they were lying and she’d never said any such thing.
It’s just more covid propaganda, and it’s worth us knowing about it so we don’t get caught out in any debate.
Every unvaxxed person who gets the lurgie is reported as saying they regret not getting the snake oil.
Every jabberoid who gets the lurgie is reported as saying they’d have been a lot iller/deader without the snake oil.
BS both times.
The Mailicious printing lies as well as nasty Mailicious pieces by disgraced former ministers? Dear oh dear.
I’d also like to know a little more about these people. In the first year of this, there were press reports of people who had died ‘who had been previously healthy’. I did try to find out a little more about a couple and found photos of very overweight people. And the rash of middle-aged ‘antivaxxers’ dying recently – leapt upon by the media. I’d like to know whether they were overweight, had smoked, had high cholesterol, etc. A lot of these do die early – a friend of ours died at 60 about three years ago. Pneumonia following a cold. I’m sure lots of people would have described him as ‘healthy’ before that, but he really wasn’t…and so often couples are both overweight, because the follow the same unhealthy lifestyle.
IMO most people labelled as ‘healthy’ in the media probably aren’t, if given a full range of blood tests. In a large survey a few yrs ago, only 20% of US adults in the age range 20-100 were found to be metabolically healthy (!)
A doctor I was aquainted with (age range 60-65) who died of COVID in 2020 was said in the BMJ’s obituary to be ‘healthy’. From what I knew, he was type 2 diabetic, was on multiple medications and ate a fast/junk food diet.
Chris Martenson did a good talk on the CDC’s analysis of the health of people who died of COVID. Unlike some other CDC stuff, he thought that this piece of work was quite well carried out.
Well, 60% of people who died of COVID had six or more comorbidities (!!) 0.9% were said to have no comorbidities at all. But is that because some of them hadn’t been tested recently and didn’t regularly attend a GP? (In the USA you can’t attend a GP unless you pay.)
Similar with people labelled “devout Christians” etc.
“Very overweight” is healthy?
That football manager who got “Covid” (and recovered form it) and is now fronting a “vaccine” campaign – he is in a famously stressful job. And a lot of sportsmen put on weight when they retire. Obesity and stress are of course two big risk factors for “Covid”. I know someone suffering from long term stress who is also having health problems. Stress is one of the biggest killers in general.
Yet more trawling for something to ‘needle’ sceptics; cause controversy, dividing and conquering us.
Seems sceptics being specifically targeted this autumn; more tricks aimed at us.
We need to raise our guard; most dangerous hits will be in places we trust.
Sceptics becoming more numerous but still minority. Majority an ocean that leaves no dry land and whose current drags sceptics with it. It’s the numbers game.
We need to encourage more non-sceptics and wavering to join us.
Many sceptics becoming angry. Fear and anger equally detrimental to health.
Our numbers won’t increase if we get divided. Anger won’t help us stay healthy.
Fear and restrictions hit all; some by fear, others by frustration.
Sceptics don’t succumb to ‘fear’ hit but we’ve the dripping ‘niggles’ to withstand.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qfvOOY0SbyA
Neil Oliver: “Government leaders are frightened of their own people – and there’s a lot of us.”
His last words in this opening monologue were: “Hold the line.”
I hadn’t seen that.
Holding the line is another way of saying what I said.
Yes there are a lot of us. In Britain, numbers have been visibly increasing since end Dec 20.
It’s an increasing minority. A larger minority will tip the balance.
When it looks like a crowd, the majority will jump on our bandwagon.
Increasing targeting of sceptics means government’s increasingly scared because it perceives that we’re winning.
We need to avoid falling at last hurdle.
Government only has given power; it’s weak because it’s totally dependent on us.
Task is to encourage increasing number of wavering to join us and beware ‘niggles’ aimed at us.
i.e. stay obstinate while pulling rug from under government’s feet
Hold the line? How can we not?
By falling into one of the increasing numbers of pit-falls. e.g.
1 Increasing use on non-msm of words and phrases government uses instead of sticking to words like jabs, abnormal, tests. (subliminal slippage)
2 Recent rows between sceptics of different genders. (divide and conquer)
3 Discussions around jabs missing the point – what jabs are is totally irrelevant without informed consent. (government’s superficial diversionary smoke-screens)
4 Increasing number very angry and/or advocating violence. (government’s nudge)
6 Government does not only use fear to ‘nudge’. Many other nudges are now being aimed at sceptics. Many are now wise to original nudges but government is now using more subtle words and phrases to nudge.
7 Complacency that own health is unharmed. (lowered guard)
Unless totally unaffected by restrictions and totally unfearful, our health has been harmed. Number of deaths will escalate in 2 – 5 years as consequence of governments’ actions ever since Feb 2020. The jabs are an ‘add-on’ to what’s already been done but not yet seen.
Hence my warning above: Beware of tricks, niggles
P.S
I’ve just noticed my own numbering. My apologies, I’ve not got a clue what happened to number 5
From what I’ve seen, people are scared of getting fines from the police, and of Mitie marshalls reporting that they are not in quarantine where they’re supposed to be. Also, having your neighbours snitch of you is also a concern.
The Government ‘leaders’ are not at all frightened of the people – they are protected by personal bodyguards, the police, and the military.
This new antivaxxer website has done well with backlinks considering it went online a few days ago…
Told my double jabbed mother it made no difference as to what she did, sooner or later she was going to catch Covid. Was like talking to my dog.
No, no. My collie is interested in everything I tell him.
Thats a very interesting theory, as it would explain the Spanish care home who treated their patients who caught covid with (among other things) antibiotics, and lost not one patient (all elderly with co-morbidities) after they started their regime.
Karl Denninger writes about it here:
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=243683
And the paper writing up the experience is here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7833340/#!po=34.9057
Sorry, William, but basing anything on a site such as this is a pointless pursuit, even if the general speculation is a valid one.
“it seems a very high proportion of the sample”
… because it’s not a ‘sample’ by any known scientific definition – in terms of numbers or selection. It is a not a site that is interested in sampling or data derived therefrom. It’s a propaganda site.
148? Even if you were to accept the selection as a ‘sample’, the numbers make it meaningless.
I’m surprised that so many are treating this seriously.
Does covid-19 have a hidden helper that sometimes makes it deadly?
It has several – midazolam, remdesevir, ventilators and lockdowns.
To mention a few.
And a programme of fear-based, mind-control, to get the population in line and obedient.
Your posts are usually quite sensible, Helena. I think you are on the right track.
There’s an article dated 24th Sept on daily expose site about American Medical Association’s (AMA) winter 2021 ‘guidance’ for medics that supports that
While the vaccines do appear significantly to reduce risk of serious disease and death….
This is a sweeping statement and it would need robust evidence to support it. Little mention here of vaccine injuries and vaccine related deaths.
ARR for under 50’s for past 12 weeks is a big fat ZERO.
ARR for over 50’s for the past 12 weeks is ~5% so there appears to be a small benefit for old people.
Without more granular data for the over 50’s I’m sceptical age and health conditions are still not the deciding factors.
… and overall ARR was never much more than 1%, even when people were slurping the snake oil as if it were fresh nectar.
Yes – the statement is utter bollocks – double bollocks when the adjective’ ‘significantly’ is inserted (real world significance is not the same as statistical significance).
Indeed – the evidence would seem to suggest quite strongly now that the vaccines do the sum total of bugger all
They do something, it seems the main thing is harm the immune system.
What the vaccines do is to get you registered on the ‘vaccine passport’. Everyone has one now, you know. Just because you haven’t downloaded yours doesn’t mean you don’t have one with your name and National insurance number on it.
Anyone refusing to take the ‘vaccines’ is an enemy of the state. Those who take them are Good Citizens and will be rewarded. With a dog snack.
With a dog snack.
And a premature death.
Yes, we need to do yet another ‘study’ (means speculation on the Internet!) about some mystery thing that helps Covid to target its victims, whilst the government carries on with the ‘vaccination’ and ‘vaccination passport’ programmes.
Looking at one tree whilst the forest burns.
Anyone got any videos of the nanobot ‘aeroplanes’ and ‘engines’ that they are injecting into people? Any nanobot UFOs?
Try this video with Stew Peters and the lovely Dr Jane Ruby. As DS might say, it is well worth watching in full, though it gets more to the point just before the two minute mark, when a vaccine vial contents are looked at under a microscope.
https://www.brighteon.com/4575a453-3f13-4d58-bf40-9beb02b73b39
To put it more simply, are these deaths WITH COVID (mystery causative) rather than OF COVID?
In the under 50’s it’s much more likely to be mislabelling.
None of the statistics from the UK are reliable. Many of the deaths said to be with or of Covid will in fact be caused by vaccine damage, but going down that path may well be a career breaker for hospital doctors and likely most will not be honest or brave enough to go there.
Few things to say about this:
Could we possibly have a list of sportsmen who are confirmed to have died within, say, 14 days of a “vaccination”. I know of one just in Ireland, so I assume there must be others.
1/2
The UK media have been pumping out daily stories of “anti-vaxxers who have died” :
Attahced is screenshot #1 of my bookmarks for the names to search for.
2/2
The UK media have been pumping out daily stories of “anti-vaxxers who have died” :
Attatched is screenshot #1 of my bookmarks for the names to search for.
There is much we still don’t know about viruses in general and COVID-19 in particular. Could there be another microbial agent involved with COVID-19, making the difference between mild and severe cases?
I find that an interesting hypothesis. As I’ve posted here before, I wonder if one of the triggers for infection ‘waves’ could be related to the virus interaction with other viruses, or bacteria for that matter. There is indeed a great deal we don’t know about these viruses, and we should be humble enough to admit it.
This is one of the most red rag articles thus far – who gives a flying fuck about some totally spurious website listing anon people who it claims were sceptics who died – and to throw in a line about vaccine efficacy which is increasingly being questioned – ie Israel showing the uselessness of vaccines re infection from all variants here on in. Every single aspect of this pandemic is spurious – 1. There was no pandemic, 2. The testing is bullshit 3. The death rate is bullshit (hyper inflated) 4. This bad seasonal virus is 1000 times more risky to the old and sick (as say compared to bad flus)..5. The jab is risky for most healthy people and has a 1.2% Absolute Risk (of bad symptoms) Reduction at best . it’s not about sceptic vs non sceptic – it’s about politics and control – brain washing and then dividing and conquering – and this simply adds fuel
This a rather over the top response to an Article which was using that site as a jumping off point to consider secondary infection. What is ‘red flag’ about it? Isn’t it the case that such Articles are too hastily read without trying to understand the points raised? Everything written/ published cannot be seen through the ‘It supports certain perspectives/ doesn’t support’….surely that leads to closing off debate.
Taliban vs Vaccines
“In just over five weeks since assuming control of Afghanistan, the Taliban have clearly demonstrated that they are not serious about protecting or respecting human rights. We have already seen a wave of violations, from reprisal attacks and restrictions on women, to crackdowns on protests, the media and civil society,” said Dinushika Dissanayake, with Amnesty, in a statement.
Me: And those behind vaccines care about human rights:
https://theexpose.uk/2021/09/26/two-top-pathologists-reveal-astonishing-results-of-investigation-into-ten-deaths-linked-to-the-covid-19-vaccines-weve-never-seen-anything-like-it/
https://theexpose.uk/2021/09/13/german-chief-pathologist-sounds-alarm-on-fatal-covid-vaccine-injuries-jab-is-cause-of-death-in-30-40-of-autopsies-of-recently-vaccinated/
Vaccine contents by Dr Young: https://www.drrobertyoung.com/post/transmission-electron-microscopy-reveals-graphene-oxide-in-cov-19-vaccines?postId=611fb76141ab600015b9802a Well worth a read!!
https://drasticresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/09/main-document-preempt-volume-1-no-ess-hr00118s0017-ecohealth-alliance.pdf
Let me tell you my true story and why I am concerned about vaccine shots
Truth be told, 35/40 years ago, I was so mentally destroyed from my last marriage breakdown, the second and last one, that I wanted to commit suicide and as it turns out, I am a jumper from the top of high buildings and on the run in to jumping off and killing myself, just before I launched myself into eternity, I had an out of body experience – for want of a better explanation, a cone of light and silence descended over me and a voice came into my head and said “there is nothing wrong with you physically, this is all financial” and I stopped, turned around and walked away and that is the only reason I am still here today.
15 years ago, roughly, I went with the female friend who I was caring for (part time paid carer), to a convention about fortune telling and other “weird” things that women generally believe in and while I was there we saw a guy doing Aura photos and both my friend and I, had ours done.
Now, everyone has a motivation to their own cause, but I have never explained mine, so here goes.
My Aura photo was 90% Gold and 10% Purple and when I looked at the card which came with my photo, there was nothing about Gold on it, so I had to inquire what Gold meant and I was told that Gold was nearest to perfection – that was 15 years ago.
I decided then, that I wanted to be 100% Gold and I would do everything I could in life, to benefit others, to achieve my 100% Gold rating before I die and that is my motivation to push my free salt water cure for Covid, in the hope that I can save more than I lose, to vaccines.
I have always had an easy connection with all animals, they take to me like, just like that and I personally think that they can see the Aura’s we each give out and determine if we are good or bad instinctively – I am an “animal whisperer”.
So to Covid.
Biden and newspapers have got the majority of you running around in confusion and the more confused you get, the easier it is to control you and have you do their bidding = vaccines.
There is only one issue you should keep in mind to the exclusion of all else and that is Covid and how to avoid getting it – nothing else matters.
Do my free salt water cure, stay on that, don’t get pulled or pushed away from my simple cure and live a long life, without any of the pressures to conform to the majority rule and vaccines – it is as simple as that:
The Achilles Heel of Coronavirus, is while it is still in the developing stage as Coronavirus/Covid in the warm, wet areas inside the nasal passages of your head (nose) and before it gets to become Covid in your head and lungs, 10 to 14 days later.
If Coronavirus is not treated with my free iodine salt clean water cure to flush out your nasal passages, as soon as possible, or during self isolation, it becomes Covid, which is where the money is.
You cannot catch Covid! Always breathe through your nose and keep your mouth shut, because you really don’t want the Coronavirus to seed itself in your lungs!!
My free salt water cure has “absolutely nothing” to do with 40 trillion lipid packages of graphene and mRNA test vaccines you get with one shot.
Treating Coronavirus with my free iodine salt clean water cure, flushes out the nasal cavity and kills Coronavirus, before it gets to be Covid, irrespective of if you have had mRNA vaccines or not.
Mix one heaped teaspoon of iodine salt in a mug of warm or cold clean water, cup a hand and pour some of the solution in, then sniff or snort that mugful up into your nose, spitting out everything which comes down into your mouth, by so doing, you flush out your nasal cavity, where Coronavirus lives.
If you get a burning sensation (which lasts for 2-3 minutes) then you have a Coronavirus infection.
When the soreness goes away, blow out your head with toilet paper and flush away, washing your hands afterwards and continue doing my salt clean water nasal cavity flush cure, morning, noon and night, or more often, if you want, until, when you do my free salt water cure, you don’t experience any soreness at all in your nasal cavity.
While you are at it, swallow a couple of mouthfuls and if you get a burning sensation in your chest, then you are killing the Covid/Bronchitis there too, so keep it up, each time you do a salt water sniffle, until the soreness in your head and lungs goes away – job done.
Assuming that those are Americans then why did they not also note how many people died from the so-called vaccines. I think it is somewhere in the 5000’s. 148 is about 3% of the vaccinated deaths so I would rather take my chances with Covid.