Phil Magness is an economic historian and Senior Research Fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research. He’s also a classical liberal and a lockdown sceptic. During the pandemic, he’s written articles about masks, lockdowns, pandemic modelling and the Great Barrington Declaration. I interviewed him via email.
On 28th January, you gave a talk at Hillsdale College titled ‘The Failures of Pandemic Central Planning’. You’ve since written a full-length paper with the same title. Could you briefly summarise your argument?
I argue that the political response to the Covid pandemic is best understood as an exercise in failed central planning. In a sense, it closely parallels the mindset behind mid-20th century economic planning. It’s the mindset that says complex human interactions may be tweaked, corrected, and managed by expert scientists with sophisticated models of the same society-wide systems. If a problem emerges, simply follow the model’s directions and pull the correct policy levers and all will be fixed – or so they claim.
With Covid, most of the world’s governments adopted an aggressive policy response built upon then-untested modelling that advised when and where to impose the ‘non-pharmaceutical interventions’ (NPIs) we’ve all come to know – things like social distancing requirements, school closures, event cancellations, and lockdowns. If an outbreak crosses a threshold, then lock everything down and the outbreak can be managed.
The problem, as we’ve seen time and time again, is that the models guiding the NPI approach were wrong – often catastrophically so. I focus on the Imperial College-London (ICL) model of Neil Ferguson, which had an outsized influence on the adoption of lockdowns and other NPIs. I show that, as of its one year anniversary, ICL’s main model overstated mortality projections in 189 out of 189 countries. It also severely exaggerated the effectiveness of NPIs, and even failed to account for the acute vulnerability of nursing home and old age care facilities.
Combined together, Imperial gave us a roadmap for centralized NPI planning that turned out to be fundamentally unsuited for the Covid pandemic. And yet once we were locked into that policy trajectory, politics intervened and made it nearly impossible to change course, despite mounting evidence that the NPIs were failing to deliver as promised.
You work for the American Institute for Economic Research, which hosted the conference that led to the Great Barrington Declaration – a public statement advocating focused protection. Could you tell us what happened at that conference?
In early October 2020, AIER hosted a small academic conference for the purpose of calling scientific attention to the costs of lockdowns. Up until that point, the media and political figures such as Anthony Fauci had been working to create a false impression of strong scientific consensus behind the lockdown measures – even as they were failing to perform as promised (recall “two weeks to flatten the curve”). This new consensus was an outright falsehood. As recently as 2019, the WHO, leading epidemiology research institutions such as Johns-Hopkins University, and even Fauci himself had gone on record stating that lockdowns would not work in a respiratory pandemic, and should be ruled out as a policy response.
The conference would call attention to the largely ignored harms of lockdowns, while proposing alternative approaches that were in keeping with the pre-2020 public health science. We hosted three eminently qualified scientists from top research institutions, who presented the case against lockdowns in a filmed discussion panel. This was followed by interviews with journalists who specialize in pandemic coverage. On the last day of the conference, the three scientists then drafted a general statement of principles that (1) summarized the case against lockdowns and (2) called for an alternative “focused protection” strategy. They dubbed this the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD), and released it publicly the next morning.
Much to everyone’s surprise, the Declaration went viral. The scientists’ statement had tapped into growing scholarly dissent from the lockdown approach, which had thus far dominated the Covid-19 response, and quickly amassed tens of thousands of signatures from other scientists and medical practitioners.
While we expected some pushback from the pro-lockdown side, we weren’t anticipating the vilification campaign that followed. Instead of engaging the scientists’ arguments as laid out at the conference, the pro-lockdown side went on the political offensive. They made ad hominem attacks, spun together wild conspiracy theories about the GBD’s supposed funding, and falsely claimed that the GBD scientists were guiding U.S. and U.K. policy responses.
For a few weeks after its October 5th publication, some pro-lockdown scientists even claimed the GBD was “arguing with the past” – that the lockdowns were behind us, and that bringing them up again was just a “strawman.” Of course, we all know how that turned out. Within a month, many of those very same scientists endorsed another round of lockdowns. So not only did they refuse to engage in scholarly debate, they engaged in outright duplicity about their own motives – first denying the prospect of more lockdowns, and then embracing a second round as soon as the opportunity presented itself.
At the same time, however, the GBD provided something that opponents of lockdowns had thus far lacked – a succinct statement of scientifically grounded principles that challenged the dominant political paradigm. It opened the door for more scientists to speak out against lockdowns, while shattering the media-cultivated myth that lockdowns were backed by an overwhelming scientific consensus.
Some people, such as the U.K. Chancellor Rishi Sunak, have claimed there’s “no trade off” between health and the economy. What do you make of this claim?
The understanding of trade offs is an essential tool of economics itself, so to assert that there is “no trade off” associated with lockdowns is to deny economic reality. I suspect that Sunak was peddling what he believed to be a political talking point, with the aim of rationalising the policy decisions of his government, which were both extreme and unprecedented at that point in history.
We’ve seen very clear evidence that lockdowns and other NPIs impose severe economic harms on society, including its least well-off members, who often do not have the luxury of telecommuting from home. This became apparent once some countries and U.S. states began to reopen in the summer of 2020 after the initial lockdown. Employment typically rebounded in those locations, while remaining high in places that still had lockdowns. At the same time, we’ve seen no conclusive evidence that regions under lockdown performed any better on their covid metrics than regions that reopened, and quite a few examples where they performed worse.
In your paper ‘The Failures of Pandemic Central Planning’, you criticise some of your fellow liberals for supporting lockdown. Likewise, the journalist Freddie Sayers recently asked, “why have the most nominally liberal governments consistently reached for the most illiberal interventions?” How would you answer that question?
There’s no single answer to that question, but much of the illiberalism comes from an unwarranted faith in collective action solutions to the pandemic, particularly technocratic ones. I was surprised early on at how many otherwise sensible people fell captive to the ‘externality’ argument for aggressive NPI regimes. All we heard for months was how the spread of disease created an externality, and that the very existence of this externality somehow necessitated an aggressive policy response. They completely forgot Ronald Coase’s warning about the political difficulties of effective externality correction:
The fact that governmental intervention also has its costs makes it very likely that most “externalities” should be allowed to continue if the value of production is to be maximized. This conclusion is strengthened if we assume that the government is not like Pigou’s ideal but is more like his normal public authority–ignorant, subject to pressure, and corrupt.
Unfortunately, the ICL-Ferguson model presented an extremely appealing set of policy interventions – hit a threshold of X number of cases or Y number of hospitalizations, and all you have to do is pull an NPI lever and cases are supposed to go down. Except it did not work as promised, and it turns out that the model wasn’t even suitable for the characteristics of this disease.
Some of the liberal/libertarian supporters of lockdowns were nonetheless unambiguous in their enthusiasm for what ICL was offering. Tyler Cowen, for example, praised Ferguson’s approach as a model of “good policy design.” However, some of these commentators updated their priors and moved away from lockdowns as evidence amassed that they were not delivering what they promised. But others dug in.
In the paper, I’m very critical of self-described neoliberals like Sam Bowman and the U.K. CovidFAQ website. They started from the same externality position at the beginning of the pandemic, but rather than adjusting to account for evidence that lockdowns were not working as claimed, they doubled down with highly unpersuasive rationalizations. For example, they circulated the heavily criticised pro-lockdown paper by Flaxman et al, and they tried to infer causality by simply eyeballing a time series in post hoc ergo propter hoc fashion.
The result, unfortunately, is that many liberal/libertarian voices have ended up defending some of the most aggressive and far-reaching government intrusions on individual liberty in our lifetimes. People who once argued for open borders worldwide now rationalize multi-year travel bans and quarantine encampments, or they end up praising the alleged lockdown ‘successes’ of monstrously illiberal regimes like China, credulously repeating Covid data that shows clear signs of political manipulation.
According to a tweet sent by Imperial College London’s official Twitter account, “Professor Ferguson and the Imperial COVID-19 response team never estimated 40,000 or 100,000 Swedish deaths”. That isn’t quite true though, is it?
It’s not true at all. First the context.
Back in the Spring of 2020, a separate team of researchers from Uppsala University directly adapted the Ferguson-ICL model (which originally only projected numbers for the U.S. and U.K.) to Sweden. They ran the numbers for Sweden and got catastrophic results – 96,000 dead if Sweden failed to act, and around 40,000 dead if they eschewed lockdowns and went with a lighter touch approach. Well Sweden did not follow the lockdown/NPI strategy that we saw in the rest of Europe, and by the summer of 2020, Sweden had only had a few thousand deaths.
I was one of the first people to notice this aspect of the model’s dismal performance, and called attention to it on April 30, 2020.
In the early summer of 2020, Matt Ridley directly questioned Ferguson about the failure of his model in Sweden during a House of Lords hearing. Ferguson responded by denying that he had ever modelled Sweden, and attempted to blame the wildly inaccurate projections on errors in the Uppsala team’s adaptation of his model. Shortly thereafter, ICL’s media team picked up this talking point, and ever since they’ve been denying any connection to a model for Sweden.
Here’s the problem with Imperial’s PR messaging though. Shortly before the Uppsala team ran its own adaptation of Ferguson’s U.S. and U.K. model, Ferguson’s team at ICL also produced a second report containing a trimmed down version of their model for every country on earth. The data file for that model – released March 26, 2020 – is still downloadable from the ICL website. Imperial College projected up to 90,000 deaths in Sweden without mitigation and up to 42,000 deaths under a social distancing approach – almost the exact same numbers that the Uppsala team came up with.
In short, Sweden presented an embarrassing complication for Ferguson and the ICL team’s model because it showed a real world natural experiment for a country that did not lock down. Rather than address that shortcoming in their model though, Ferguson & ICL decided to mislead the public.
You’re an American. Given what we know now, what should Donald Trump have done in March of 2020?
For starters, he should not have listened to anything Anthony Fauci was feeding him. Nor should any president. I base this judgment on Fauci’s horrific track record during the AIDS crisis. In 1983, Fauci helped to unleash a nationwide panic by making the wildly unfounded speculation that AIDS could transmit through regular household contact. His 40 year career from that time until the present has been a succession of similar missteps, almost always arising from his attempts to build his own political influence.
For specific policy advice in March 2020, I would have urged Trump (and any other leader) to heed the cautions against lockdowns that were openly stated in the respiratory pandemic guidelines the WHO adopted in late 2019. These guidelines specifically warned that the evidence behind lockdowns was shaky, untested, and over-reliant on models such as Ferguson’s ICL team. Similar guidelines from Johns-Hopkins warned that lockdowns were likely to be ineffective and carry extreme social costs. We’d be in a much better place today if policymakers had simply followed their own plans from just a few months before the pandemic.
I also would have advised Trump (or any other leader) to focus his measures on nursing homes and similar facilities with acute vulnerabilities. The first major U.S. outbreak was in a nursing home in Washington state, so we knew about this vulnerability early on. Due to the ICL model and similar missteps though, almost all of our early response efforts were focused away from nursing homes and on hospital capacity. In fact, they were so focused on hospital capacity that some states ended up turning nursing homes into de facto overflow facilities. This is how we got the situation in New York state where Gov. Cuomo ordered nursing homes to take in covid-positive patients, with catastrophic death tolls and an ensuing political coverup.
One idea I first floated back at that time was to subsidize nursing home staffers to reside on site as a way of limiting their contact with the outside world, and thus the chance of carrying the virus into vulnerable facilities. A few private nursing homes did this, with high rates of success – including one that rented RVs on site for their staff. The cost of subsidizing this and even paying staffers a premium to isolate would have been a tiny fraction of the cost of lockdowns. But the ICL model, Fauci and Birx in the U.S., Hancock in the U.K., had already settled on lockdowns, and pursuit of that end became a recurring pattern of sunk cost fallacies overlaid with technocratic hubris.
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.
Dr Tedros must be unbelievably thick if he thinks that vaccinating 70% of the world’s population will end the pandemic. Has nobody told him it doesn’t work, especially against this latest ‘variant’ which could be something quite different anyway?
Not thick, bought.
And signed up to the agenda.
Yes, Gates and GAVI – the long dreamed of Global Mass Vaccination Agenda.
And covering up the role of his CCP masters in giving Wuflu to the world
“Owned”
THICK and Bought
What do you mean by “works”?
There is literally no epidemic right now other than the annual cold season.
They can call this off any time they like.
He’s just dangling a carrot in front of our noses and plenty of gullible slave-drones will believe him.
If there really is a respiratory virus floating round killing less than 0.1% of the population, you wouldn’t inject something into your bloodstream to fight it off.
This is the key argument. Why would we expect it to work? The true purpose of this injection is not to protect people. The people who claim to want to protect us are openly eugenicists with a great desire to reduce global population to a fraction of what it currently is.
We needn’t go further than Pfeffel’s own dad for proof. He’s written one book about ‘The Virus’ many years ago, and another about depopulation. There’s many interviews with him bashfully admitting to having these views as well.
Could have called it off and cried victory when all of the vulnerable were jibjabbed back in Feb. They didn’t.
“The Walrus and the Carpenter” describes the mentality of these people perfectly.
Notwithstanding this little “plandemic” is not the real story.
The so – called vaccines don’t work, well except to kill and maim, so injecting 70% of the world’s population will achieve nothing but more misery.
Interesting that this Tedros bloke is keen on learning lessons so that we can be better prepared “in the future;”got another brew on the go then have we Tedros?
And let’s not forget, the Moronic scariant is nothing but a common cold. It isn’t killing people.
More fear propoganda intended to undermine health.
FO.
He’s obviously not unbelievably thick: This goal can never be achieved, not the least because new people keep getting born all the time. Hence, there isn’t even a need to move this goalpost. Insofer Tedros goes, Chinese-style virus management through population control is here to stay forever. That’s his message.
Who made WHO, WHO? Do you really think anyone needs you?
A useful idiot? A well-paid useful idiot?
Yes, because restrictions have been so effective at ‘halting the spread’ so far, haven’t they? May as well try to stop the tide coming in for all the impact it has. FFS.
Join the dots ….Fauci…..Schwab “Great Reset”…the “New Normal”… “You will own nothing and be happy” …’transhumanism’ …Mass vaccination with an mRNA Gene Therapy with unprecedented levels of side effects and deaths…eugenics and population control ….all revealed in RFK J’s comprehensive, fully documented exploration of 50 years of Fauci’s ‘career’ and his partnership with Bill Gates since 2000 .
“The Real Anthony Fauci” (chilling!)
Who are you? I really wanna know…
Meet the new boss….
Jabbed and it still spreads,” but the symptoms aren’t as bad if you’ve been jabbed”, how do they know that? Last year we had nothing to jab into anyone, this year we have and allegedly the situation is worse. You could almost think it was a plandemic for a reset.
It’s a totally illogical statement. If you have the illness before the jab, you can never say how effective the jab was. If you have the jab before the illness, you’ll never know how your natural immune system would have coped by itself.
Exactly.
The thing about the pharmaceutical industry is that they can be quite effective at reducing the symptoms of something, but are pretty hopeless at actually making you well and preventing disease (and possibly not interested in a completely healthy population). So I am prepared to believe that their new medication reduces symptoms a bit, but at the same time am not surprised by reports that there is “no reliable evidence that the ‘vaccines’ reduce all-cause mortality”.
A relative of mine has been paranoid about catching Covid from the very beginning to the point where her family have feared for her sanity. She has sanitised and disinfected constantly, worn her mask religiously and avoided socialising completely. She had her booster jab last Friday and has now tested positive for Covid !
Ironically excessive sanitising is bad for your immune system (appparently intolerance to milk ihas been rising remorselessly as a result of the pasteurised muck commonly consumed today).
It reminds me of that fable where a couple’s daughter was prophesied to die from a tiger. The poor girl never went outside just in case – and ended up dying after a picture of a tiger fell and cut her, and the wound went bad.
Almost?
Well if we don’t like the way the WHO are governing us we can always just vote them out and elect someone else.
Oh, wait…
Gates wants the WHO to have increased Global Powers to direct all Health policy for all nations.
Worried? We ought to be!
It is a good job they had an effective vaccine for the black death or the human race would not have survived.
Scientists are working hard on a Black Death variant – it should be ready sometime next year…
Yes this is true – now why would anyone want to develop a ‘vaccine’ against a disease that is extremely rare (couple of thousand cases worldwide per year) and that can be successfully treated with antibiotics?
As if anyone with half a brain would follow such nonsensical advice, over Xmas especially! Mind you, the vast majority of the zombie masses have been doing a grand job of complying with any bullshit instructions thrown their way thus far. Nothing surprises me any more!
I would expect BBC interviews over next couple of days with people who are ‘sadly’ following that crap advice to the letter – “just to be safe” – because, after all ‘a cancelled event is better than a cancelled life’. What a soundbite.
He wants to try that line with all the “cancelled lives” of the people whose elderly relatives died in a care home when they weren’t allowed to visit to say goodbye and the people whose relatives died because they didn’t receive the care and treatment they needed for cancer, heart disease etc.
Forget the BBC… watch GB News!
We could say the same for every day of the year because simply being alive puts people at risk.
Every winter past lives have been “cancelled” while everyone just got on with Christmas.
With no real objectives this can never end.
“New year at Trafalgar Square cancelled.”Hardly surprising. But the real test is: how many people will party outside anyway? The police might be able to block off Trafalgar Square, but they can’t block off every open space in the capital, try as they might. If the public feel safe enough to party, they will find a way.
As will the politicians, who are bound to party when they think nobody is looking, as they did last year. I wonder if the government’s indecision is partly because somebody is blackmailing them, about other “events” from last year which have not come to light yet?
It does look as if the government might be trying to persuade people to stay apart, using the tried-and-tested campaign of fear, so they can gleefully say “we didn’t lock down over Christmas”. Perhaps the government knows Omicron isn’t as bad as they are telling us it is; or are they afraid of riots, while using “cabinet revolt” as the reason? Even if they get away with not locking down, people won’t forget how they destroyed the hospitality industry this time round. I don’t know if Saint Boris will ever be able to enter a pub again.
Khan loves nothing more than canceling London two years running – it fits with his wider cultural agenda. Besides, it surely hardly affects his core vote?
Joy is like kryptonite to Marxists.
My dad just said that he’d be dropping his grandkid’s presents off tomorrow, while wearing a mask.
I’ve told him that he’s more than welcome to visit, but not if he’s wearing a muzzle.
We had all that last year with certain family, refusing to come in, refusing to let us in. And they’re doing the same this year! It’s becoming quite a tradition now. However, we’re having some new friends round and we’re having some Yuleride celebrations with all the trimmings. We’re all through with this.
That will be Christmas plans not cancelled then…
he’s also on a list that has, earlier this week, been presented as a complaint at the International Criminal Court on charges of Genocide.
But this site can’t be bothered sourcing stuff like this and maintains its’ managed opposition status
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/the-international-criminal-court-fighting-for-the-people-part-i/
We pretty much all understand this now, we’ve got the agenda, this is boring. I agree with others who have said that the site should stop rounding up and repeating the news of the agenda unless they’re going to analyse it and put it in context.
Many pieces on DS do that, especially Will Jones, and contributors emerging from the dark, limbic depths of the comment section, but we need more rebutting the agenda, more on how to fight the agenda.
Agree 100% this site is losing relevance, becoming obsolete. Let’s focus on prevention of further violations of our inalienable rights, let’s see more moral & legal arguments, fewer charts & statistics.
And what about the Draconian bills being pushed through parliament, Toby ?
Losing relevance is probably inevitable. There are only so many ways that you can say the same thing.
I subscribe to an email from Wattsupwiththat and I have almost stopped reading the website because there’s little that is new, and it’s a voice in the wilderness that is the MSM and academia, it doesn’t matter if the information is valid and correct, the readers know this, but whilst it is difficult to the point of impossibility and hostility from certain people to get published then it’s a battle of attrition.
I can understand TY as an Eton educated establishment man, doesn’t wish to be seen as a “conspiracy theorist” among his peers, so tries to use statistics & academics to defend his scepticism, but it’s now time to provide “expert” legal arguments, & human rights etc.
Science has lost the argument because it was always about politics.
Science hasn’t lost the argument because it was always politics, it has lost the argument because sceptical scientists are incapable of communicating with the general public.
I have banged on about this on WUWT for years now to no avail. Many of the contributors are so up their own arse they don’t know how to speak plain English.
When the site was recently revamped I pleaded that a layman’s section be included so people without a degree in science could pop along for an explanation of what was going on.
There are something less than 10% of the world with a higher education. The left have been effective in communicating their climate hysteria with propaganda to the remaining 90%, each of which have a single vote.
Scientists also have a single vote but these geniuses can’t figure out that if they only persuade themselves climate change is bunk, they are still only persuading 10% of the world, also with one vote each.
Without science we are left in a world of superstition. Most of the world functions on that basis because scientists simply cannot communicate!
The 90% will persuade themselves soon enough when they have to go hungry (or cold) to pay for this nonsense. People in war torn parts of the Ukraine scratch coal from opencast pits to fend off the cold in Winter. I suspect it will be the same everywhere when it comes to it.
Third world countries that go along with it are just hoping for a handout (like the Maldives).
Not Eton
Indeed – the ones planning to kill freedom of speech.
Have to agree with you there, Sandra. As much as I really appreciate all the work that goes into DS daily, some of it is too focussed on mainstream scare stories and propaganda. I always knew this winter was going to be hard, that in the Globalist agenda to thrash everyone soundly, they will commit unbelievable acts against us, and they’ve started. We need more from the resistance front, from maybe from those who are our own “trusted voices” which includes ourselves, of course! To be fair, maybe it is us that should be offering up the articles for publication.
As much as I don’t like saying it.. the only reason this site keeps going and attracts the numbers it does is entirely because of its mainstream focus. Its the commentators that give it an edge and steer the debate, and a vast number of people read the comments. Absolutely they do, and I’ve noticed an increase lately.
We’ve got a highly visited platform for our views, and we mustn’t forget that, even though the articles make us groan and roll our eyes sometimes. Far better to comment here than small focus group sites, there’s a far wider audience..
Yes – my take is never mind the official article being published – if others visit the site and click on the links etc provided by those BTL then they might get an education, in the same way I do.
I just skim the articles. Its BTL comments that I come for
“……DS daily, some of it is too focussed on mainstream scare stories and propaganda.”
Mainstream scare stories are propaganda and the only way to counter that is with propaganda.
The science of any given circumstance is pointless as scientists are the worst communicators on the planet. They operate in an academic bubble, congratulating themselves at how clever they all are.
I think Einstein once said ‘if you can’t explain it to a five year old you don’t understand it yourself’.
DS, Conservative Woman and a few others are basically all we have to counter the propaganda from the government and Toby has been clever by adopting the stance of free speech rather than opposition to the governments policies.
True, more analysis would be good, especially vital legal analysis of avenues for resisting mandates. But also we shouldn’t forget that this site remains a light of sanity and information in the darkness.
And here we all are debating sensibly and rationally about this. With thought processes involved. And this is what can’t be applied to the MSM as a whole, as we know. We have to protect and preserve what we have here at all costs!
So far as I can see, there’s plenty of analysis, plenty of original content, both above and below the line. I think this is just nit picking (if you’re still allowed to say that).
He’s lost the room! Darts fans sing ‘Stand up if you hate Boris’ in unison at the World Championships while football fans chant expletives about him
There could be trouble if Leeds play Millwall…
Wasn’t that darts fan supposed to write “180” there?
Bit rich of Tedros, the CCP stooge and Cover-Up Specialist, to call for China “to be more forthcoming”. It’s a pity he didn’t keep a closer eye on all the “bad actors” in this gain-of-function disaster, including those from the UK, USA and elsewhere, and put a stop to those dangerous games, which have turn3ed the entire world into another Gruinard Island.
Tedros going to limit Ramadan too when it comes?
Didn’t Fauci actively encourage Halloween too, this year?
I don’t have much of a Christmas to cancel but I won’t change my usual plans one iota. Christmas eve a few pubs, a walk, unmasked, spreading the coof. Let’s go Brandon!
Whatever you do, enjoy it, and be at peace with yourself!
Clare Craig is recommending we checkout Real Sage or IRA Sage, whatever they call themselves, Zero Covid Nutters Group, who have posted a guide to enjoying Christmas safely.
It’s wonderful – link on her Twitter feed.
Susan Michie and her demonic ilk are advising us to wear extra layers on Christmas because all the windows will be open while they Zoom call with shivering grannie in her open window flat with gender reassigned second Grannie all at six feet apart around the Christmas table.
If any leading member of this group is seen doing anything else, please post pictures.
And if anyone gets pix of them actually doing it, please post those too.
Won’t they have to turn the heating up? I hope we don’t run out of gas and wind…
Because these vaccines aren’t sterilising, vaccinating 70% of the world’s population won’t stop the spread of coronavirus. It will just result in even faster production of vaccine resistant strains. Which will need more vaccines. So what Dr Tedros is advocating is vaccinating 70% of the world’s population, every year, forever, against a pathogen of no risk to any but a small group of the very elderly and frail – the western elderly and frail, in fact.
Imagine the state violence & oppression & censorship that will be needed to enforce this futile attempt, every year. Imagine the deaths from adverse events from inadequately tested vaccines, scaled up globally. Imagine what will happen to other vaccination programmes- vaccinations that really do make a lifesaving difference to children in developing countries. Imagine the death & devastation this will cause.
This is the monster of zero covid, back in another guise. Enforced by an international organisation. It’s not about stopping deaths; that could be achieved by vaccinating the vulnerable. It’s about an attempt to achieve global elimination of a virus of no threat to the vast majority of the world’s population. An attempt that will of course fail- but which will impose an imaginably vast cost of global death, oppression, and suffering. Dr Tedros is a terrifying threat to children, health and freedom across the world. His WHO has become a monster.
Evidently by definition, if the “vaccine” doesn’t prevent infection or transmission it can never achieve herd immunity & therefore it’s irrelevant how many people are vaccinated.
There are unsubstantiated claims it reduces severity of illness, if this is true (i’m sceptical) then as the only at risk groups are individuals suffering from old age or immunosuppressed with comorbidities, there can be no case for mandated vaccines.
You see time and again in the propaganda that the only reason they give for vaccines are emotional blackmail, socialist pressure & subjective immoral, irrational, arguments such as vaccinated people don’t feel safe or confident around the unvaccinated.
Basically they’re trying to craft a narrative there’s only two choices, lockdowns or vaccines, as evidence shows neither work this is clearly coercive control & it’s impossible to see any court support it & yet!
It’s a criminal conspiracy & an abhorrent violation of human rights, led by pseudo communist neoliberals, no cock-up about it, when it’s by design but denied, it is a conspiracy.
“if this is true (i’m sceptical)”
Entirely unprovable. How does anyone know how they’ll react to covid with, or without a clotshot. The concept was only promoted when it was realised the clotshots had failed at their primary function, stopping the virus in vivo and eliminating transmission.
I wasn’t anti-clotshot when all this began, I just wanted to wait and see what would happen, if necessary until 2023 when clinical trials will allegedly be completed.
I’m very glad I did, the whole thing has turned into a monumental medical, social and political shambles. Brexit was a monumental cock up from the day of the vote to leave and this has simply exemplified how incompetent our current government (and the opposition) are.
It’s not about a virus.
As the saying goes, good luck with that …
Nice of Tedros to let us know his personal target given to him by Gates-Davos.
It will be a new global standard for the management of “pandemics”.
New virus – restrictions – roll out vaccine – declare the end when 70% of global population is jabbed.
Except that they’ll get greedy and they’ll want even more next time.
Nothing is ever never enough for these psychos.
You have to wonder how blatant it is possible for lies to get. If you accept what the rulers say about SARSCoV2, then it follows that the fast spread of the omicron variant should be encouraged.
Does someone not like Christmas?
they hate it, you might drink alcohol and say this is all a big fat get rich quick Con trick or similar
If the equivalent of Omricon had happened in 2018 or 2019 would it even have been reported or made the news? Just another winter virus?
Allegra Stratton might have done a piece on ITN at 10pm….
They love names now, maybe they think it gives it all more credibility, naming a windy day, naming a variant, all brainwashing to make it ‘something’ I’ve got ‘omicrom’ they say, even more important than ‘covid’
Isn’t this the same person who implored us to “test, test, test”?
A new ‘common sense’ virus is now spreading rapidly across planet and is predicted by guesswork to be moving faster than experts with computers can generate a graph or any meaningful statistics, large pharma are collaborating to introduce an untested ‘Forgive and Forget’ vaccine which they believe, based on no long term data, will work. Politicians when asked to comment, do not think the public will be taken in quite so easily, one said we need another cheese and wine party before making any further comments.
This member of the public tells the WHO to fuck off, and then fuck off some more.
Oh, WHO you say? Actually, I have something in my pocket for you…
…
Every picture tells a story..
Every picture tells a story..
Those photos are just a cock-up.
Pray tell why oh great one…
Every picture tells a story..
Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure
Later,
Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey
Finally, the last one everyone wants to see…
Bill & Ted Face the Music
The world has already cancelled one Christmas and two Easters over the last two years because we should “save Granny!” Before it was ” until we have a safe and effective ” vaccine. Now we have a number, causing severe harms and death and people are refusing to take it. So here comes the punishment for not being good, obedient citizens and taking your medicine…. However, folks, remember, even in fully vaxxed countries, like Gibraltar they STILL locked everyone down. They’ve changed the language to redefine what “vaccinated” and ” immunity” means. They changed the goalposts and lied and lied and lied, to push the now blatantly obvious Globalist agenda. Now we have that criminal at the top, telling us, like a madman, that we must KEEP doing same thing in order to get a different outcome, which we know is another lie. All based on lies, and
in, 
out modelling to get a REQUIRED outcome! The figures don’t add up and NO ONE is dying!
If ANYONE can’t see NOW what is going on, and they go along with it all, STILL, they deserve all they get.
<insert Kermit the Frog tea-sipping meme here>
…quite.
But modelling shows that in a worst case scenario, everyone who crosses the road will get knocked down, overwhelming the NHS!
I see that Gibraltar reported 59 “cases” yesterday, equivalent to 125,000 in the UK. I know Gibraltar is quite a densely populated country, but even so.
I’d like to cordially invite Dr Tedros to disappear up his own arse.
Plenty of room!
Anyone pushing vaccination to “end” this is a charlatan.
“an event cancelled is better than a life cancelled”
No, all your events cancelled are adding up to our lives cancelled, and we’ve had enough. I’m going to celebrate Christmas with my church family and ignore all of you.
‘A vaccination cancelled is better than a life cancelled”
WHO Tells Public to Cancel Christmas Holiday Plans.The public replies with a most heartfelt apology.
Foxtrot Oscar, Dr Tedros.
i cant wait for the next variant and then the next variant and then the next varainat and then the next variant .My people are morons
In a word or two awwww fuck off.
Is anyone really still listening?
When just when are the British public and Government going to get their backbone back?
Here is my solution, defund the WHO, abolish SAGE, delicence the BBC.
That would make my Christmas very happy.
Life has been cancelled for the best part of two years – what’s he on about?
Up yours Ted Ross
We are carrying on completely as normal. Even better, in fact. In our area, the number of people now openly against all of this BS is growing (even people who have been “vaccinated”), and we’re all visiting each other’s houses between Christmas and New Year. Gonna be a great time!
We must keep our eye on the bigger picture – and be prepared.
The idea for implants for ‘humans-as-livestock’ featured in this 1985 song:
Cathy don’t go to the supermarket https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47TZ9MHI1qg
and was mentioned by film maker Aaron Russo, reminiscing about his friendship with Nick Rockefeller:
Nicholas Rockefeller admitted the elite’s goal is a 100% microchipped and enslaved World population – YouTube
From now on, ask yourself, and others, What have you done today to fight tyrrany?
I don’t know about the WHO’s advice, but I feel very theatened by the photograph. I am visibly and literally shaking.
It is so unlike the images I see of real modern British blended families – the sort of normal scene you see in any television advert or mainstream drama, reflecting the lives of so many of us.
Where are the cuddly old grandparents dandling charmingly-curled ethnically ambiguous children on their knees? Where is the incompetent and selfish cis normative uncle failing to carve the turkey, while a wise, brave and beautiful pans3xual transwoman looks on in wry amusement? Literally none of them have visible accessibility requirements. Where are the yams?
This image has nothing to say about the lived experiences of literally millions of imaginary people in Britain today.
I can only conclude the Daily Sceptic is no longer a safe space and will be reporting it to the appropriate authorities.
…
BTW, very apt band name … THE WHO!
My family ignored Boris the ball bag Johnson last year and we will ignore him this year.
Tedros can Do One.
He doesn’t run my life any more than SAGE and Johnson do.
The WHO will be well pissed off with the logic and common sense coming from South Africa.
Te WHO is funded by Bill Gates and works to his agenda . Tedros was Gates’ choice for the Chris Whitty works for the WHO leadership ….join up the dots anyone?.
Tedros is not a medical doctor – he has never practiced- his PHD was in philosophy and Community Health and he was Gates’ choice from the WHO leadership . He was previously Ethiopian Health Minister and Foreign Minster and suspected of involvement in Human Rights violation ‘aiding genocide ‘ in his home country. He is very close to China. ( Daily Mail/ Sun )
So – anyone got anything nice planned for Christmas?
Yup, big party my place, I reckon about 30 people will turn up, very many households and at least 7 different countries. No masks, no anti-social distancing and an ashtray on every table..If it rains well, we will just have to move indoors.
“an event cancelled is better than a life cancelled”… even if many lives are lost because we have diverted resources away from all other medical conditions
What a tosser
Truly unbelievable!!
They all seem really afraid of it spreading. I wonder why………
Tell the WHO to mind their own effing business and bugger off!!