Analysis of official data by Professor Anthony Brookes, an expert in genetics and health data at the University of Leicester and a Daily Sceptic contributor, has shown that the risk of death from Covid for over-70s has decreased by tenfold compared to a year ago. Speaking to the Express, Prof Brookes said Covid no longer posed a significant threat to “the vast majority of people”.
We will not be in anything like the same place in January 2022 as we were in January 2021. Infected individuals are at dramatically less risk of becoming seriously ill or dying than a year ago. Over the last month the risk has been dropping further thanks to Omicron now accounting for around 95% of cases in England. Omicron is around four-fold less dangerous – it’s like nature’s vaccine. There has always been over a thousand fold difference in risk of serious illness or death between the old and the young. Currently the risk of death for the population as a whole is no worse than for seasonal influenza. For healthy children the risk is miniscule.
Younger people now have a higher risk of dying from a car crash in a whole year, than they do from COVID-19. Since their serious Covid risk is already very low, it is hard to identify any good reason for imposing or coercing youngsters to take on the known risks of vaccination. COVID-19 is progressively evolving to become another form of the common cold. Omicron takes us further down that path by reducing IFR at least three-fold. Would a normal society undertake mass testing and require isolation for the common cold?
His analysis, based on ONS infection survey data and death data, shows that at the start of the pandemic people over 70 had roughly a 10% risk of dying from COVID-19 if infected, but the infection fatality rate (IFR) has now fallen to 1-2% for this age group. The chart below, which owing to the three-week lag runs to the end of November, so does not cover the Omicron surge, has been supplied to the Daily Sceptic by Prof Brookes.
Professor Paul Hunter, an expert in infectious disease at the University of East Anglia, said:
There is no doubt the illness we are seeing now is less severe than at the start. We are seeing a big shift towards Covid becoming the common cold due to a range of factors including prior infection and vaccines. There is a point where we have to ask why are we testing and isolating people who just have a common cold?
Worth reading in full.
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.
It is a stupid word anyway. The Japanese film director Akira Kurosawa mentioned it in one of his films. A twig is easily broken but many twigs together are hard to break.That is the meaning of the bound branches. Like a family and Japanese ‘fascism’ has always had a family feel. I would rather live under a Shogunate than live under the WEF. Safetyism becomes such a habit. The emasculation of a population is easier then you think because you are pushing at an open door,.If you want to keep a young lad strong and vital then you need to put him through his paces.
Well this ought to please Nazi Faeser. The intimidation appears to be working as not everyone wants to gamble with their family’s safety. Nice bit of projection from the Leftard government and their bitches, the MSM, here too;
”A successful entrepreneur who was running for the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party in district elections says he is withdrawing his candidacy due to serious threats to his family.
The 40-year-old Matthias Beerbaum cited “threats against and danger to” his family, although he did not give specific details surrounding the potential threat. He said the decision was not easy for him, but he did not want to deal with endangering his family.
“This should not happen in a democracy,” he announced in a press release on Thursday evening last week.
The threats against his family come at a time when the media and the government have compared the AfD to the Nazi party and claimed the party is “anti-democratic.” Many within the left-liberal ruling coalition are now calling for a complete ban on the opposition party due to its popularity in the polls. At the same time, the country’s far-left interior minister, Nancy Faeser, has called to shut down bank accounts for those who donate to “extremist” right-wing parties and, in conjunction with the federal police and the Office of the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), plans to initiate a series of new laws to target the opposition.”
https://rmx.news/germany/this-shouldnt-happen-in-a-democracy-afd-politician-withdraws-from-election-race-after-threats-to-his-family/
Filthy communist bitch. Doing her party duty. We arenliving in a re-comnunising Europe. Very dangerous times
Nationalism is a blunt and clumsy tool but given the nastiness of the refinement of the system it is simply the only thing left. We all sit back and experience ourselves growing poorer. We got used to that in 2008 and now we are told to get used to successive waves of it. We have British families who are living on the streets or who can’t afford to live. How much longer do you think that you can keep up the spiel? That we are the country with the best of everything? They always go too far. We are a sick and demoralised population but they are really taking the Mick now and I sense that people are beginning to ken it. Even the huge white clots in the venous and arterial system – this is becoming mainstream.
In the UK I believe we had a coup executed so perfectly that nobody noticed. Kwarteng was removed and Hunt, his economic opposite installed, and then Truss was removed and a WEF puppet moved into place. All carried out by a bit of hedge fund market manipulation.It is beyond me that hardly anbyody bats an eyelid at this.
Eugyppius’s analysis is a good read but it only really holds if you believe that governments and not corporations/banks wield the ultimate control. I’m with Simon Elmer and Agamben. It’s the return of fascism, Mussolini style.
I think this explanatory approach is far too complicated. Faeser’s plans aren’t referred to as fascist by our so-called “anglo-saxon friends & allies” because of something they are but because of something she is, namely, German, be it in name only and probably very much against her will. Everybody who was born after 1945, more so if he was born in global Anglo-Saxia (whatever became of the Normannic conquerors we don’t know) was brought up on a constant ideological and cultural diet of “Nazi Stuff” were evil German Nazis are always getting beaten by the anglo-saxian knights in their shining armour fighting for all that is good, just and beautiful in the world¹. On top of that comes the political sphere where “Nazis” are still everyone’s most beloved universal villain, not the least of a certain state in the middle-east which will take German money with one hand and conduct anti-German propaganda campaigns with the other.
The long and short of that is that, for the typical Anglo-Saxian, Germans simply equals Nazis and things will likely remain in this way for at least some time to come. Hence, when Faeser clumsily imitates the US democrats, eg, believing in the panacea of tightening weapon law to solve all interesting social ills, that’s obviously evil and since she’s German, this proves that she’s Nazi. And that’s all.
Da drüben hassen sie uns und dagegen gibt es, wenn man nicht verächtlich sein will, nur ein Mittel: Furchtbar zu sein.
[Jünger, „Feuer und Blut“]
¹ This propaganda campaign has been running since 1914, originally using Huns instead of Nazis as the latter term didn’t yet exist at that time. Its substance hasn’t changed.
Boring twaddle.
I’m sorry if I failed to enterain you. This might have been caused by me not trying.
“for the typical Anglo-Saxian, Germans simply equals Nazis” – This is not true.
I don’t know how representative this school of thought is, however, the Mogwai-text above which starts with Nazi Faeser is a nice example of it. Faeser is a SPD-politician, ie, the from the original socialist German party and her political goals are closely aligned with those the US democrats. This means she’s a dedicated antifascist and antinationalist and isn’t exactly friendlyly (?) disposed towards Germans she basically considers the enemy. Yet, she’s being labelled as Nazi. As this certainly cannot be because of her politics, her German heritage would seem to be the reason for it.
Hitler was a leftist, he adhered to 8 out of 10 points of Marx communist manifesto dropping only the property theft and inheritance theft parts of the manifesto. There is no such thing as the far right, this would be a society with no state, rather communism and racism are two sects within the left that seek to entirely dictate citizens lives. Socialists need to own Auschwitz as much they own Stalin’s great terror.
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/hitler-and-the-socialist-dream-1186455.html
Out of my head, I can immediately tell that he also certainly didn’t plan to collectivize farming in order to turn a bunch of family-run, relatively small agricultural businesses into large units of industrialized agricultural production in order to eliminate the difference between urban and rural areas. He was in favour of the exact opposite of that.
In order to address the remainder of this load of tosh (the article, there are some remarkable phantasists on the current political right), it’s sufficient to say that Hitler denounced Marxism in the strongest terms in Mein Kampf as he believed it to be the final stage of the Jewish world conspiracy for total domination of the world by Jews and effective elimination of the German race.
It’s not tosh read the article. You’ve bought a left/right paradigm that makes no sense. If the left see the answer as being the state, and right the answer self reliance. How can far right be the complete control by the state? That’s a philosophical contradiction in terms. The other clue is Hitler called himself a socialist, but according to you apparently he wasn’t.
You are also ignorant as well rude. The Reichsnährstand had legal authority over farming with price controls, and conducted command and control policy over farming determining what seeds were sown, fixing prices, overseeing all production. You know rather like erm a command and control economy. That policy led to food shortages as early as 1936.
The origin of the political terms left and right was the sitting order in revolutionary national assembly of France. On the left sat the people who were in favour of a democractic republic and on the right, the more conservative ones who wanted to keep a constitutional monarchy. 20 century American neoliberals with their weird ideas about ‘statism’ weren’t represented because this ideology didn’t exist yet.
BTW, it’s rude to comment on other people instead of their opinions. The latter is just critcism.
Don’t be so rude then. I’m perfectly aware of the origin of left thanks. In practical terms how left and right manifest themselves is exactly as I describe. It’s perfectly obvious fascism is a leftist philosophy, it’s just communism with slightly less theft of property.
I wasn’t commenting on you. And referring to an article written by someone else which starts with an obviously invented quote — the one about Hitler having learnt a lot by reading Marx which makes no sense at all as Marx published tomes about economic theory and not revolutionary politics, that would have been Lenin – as tosh is entirely appropriate, because it is tosh.
In practical terms, the neoliberals are targetting conservative voters and hence, they seek to label their theories about radical change of society as right and everyone who opposes them as left. This makes no historical sense and hence, it’s best ignored. Especially since it has a decidedly Marxist tinge to it as they’re really aiming for the Marxist Paradise regained! state of a state-less society of autonomous communities.
Communism just with private property is contradictio in adiecto (English contradiction in terms) because the abolishment of private property is the very core principle of communism. Without it, it isn’t communism.
Touching moment not long ago when my new twenty-something son-in-law, who I think is a wonderful boy, reacted to something I mentioned (probably too casually) about Hitler being fundamentally a leftist with “Wait, no that’s wrong – I did this in my A-levels – he was an extreme right-winger.”. Bless.
https://youtu.be/hTXSKaogA2c?si=fKsKfgzTZj1GzTNz
The MET up to no good again with one of their dubious “officers” making up their own laws.
Frightening stuff.
No, no, no. Hitler was a radical Marxist. Nazis were socialists. Its in the darn name of their parry. They didn’t come up with their name as a joke. A true far right would be extreme free enterprise people who would almost want no government interference in anyone’s life at all.
Comkuniam and Nazism were both branches of leftism. Hitler controlled industry and people’s lives by implementing controlling policies and laws. He behaved almost exactly like communists did and do – control people and things by making more and more constricting laws against whatever they do not want or like. This is why the left always throws around their interpretation of the nazis as far right, fascists. To sow confusion in our minds.
See this article from the Independent, back when it was somewhat open minded and unleftist.
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/hitler-and-the-socialist-dream-1186455.html
And this excellent video from Tik
https://youtu.be/0q16cq25SCY?si=Keun2_sxKXDQLzJ0
I generally agree with Eugyppius, but in this case I think he has confused two separate ideas. Perhaps this comes from his German viewpoint.
Fascism is the concept that the State should rule, in cooperation with privately owned and run businesses. Mussolini’s Italy was fascist.
Wartime Germany, on the other hand, was Nazi, or National Socialist. National Socialism is similar to fascism, but not the same.
It seems to me that Nazism is more collectivist than fascism. It desires complete suppression of individuality so that all individuals become part of the State, whereas fascism envisages more a complete cooperation of individuals so that they are all aligned in the same direction.