A review of Expired: Covid the untold story by Dr. Clare Craig.
I sincerely hope Clare Craig feels better after writing this book. Frankly, I felt worse. I was left angrier about what had happened to us over 2020 and 2021 and more depressed about the possibility that those responsible will ever be brought to account. All without the guarantee that what happened in 2021 will not happen again. In that sense, the book is brilliant; it did its job.
I was sceptical about Covid from the outset. I was based in Wuhan when it all kicked off and in almost continual contact with colleagues there on return. I knew that people were not dropping dead in the street. In fact, nobody I knew in Wuhan had caught Covid by the end of 2020. So, I have long been on the same side of the ditch as Clare but that has not immunised me from the disappointment I experience when, yet again, I scan the Covid skyline and realise we were right-royally and collectively taken to the epidemiological cleaners in 2020. Even those amongst us who were sceptics.
Dr. Claire Craig is a consultant pathologist and Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists. I wish I could say that alone means she ought to be taken seriously. But when I think how many of her fellow professionals (and mine) mobbed, pilloried and cancelled me on Twitter in early 2020 I realise that medical qualifications and fellowships alone are no protection against abject stupidity and foul-mouthed invective. After all, the author herself fell for the Covid narrative, initially. One wonders how that is possible, until it is recalled the propaganda, fear and peer pressure generated in early 2020.
After all, a degree in biochemistry and a fellowship of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh did not prevent me from seeing the dangers that lurked behind injecting an experimental therapy which made use of the central dogma of genetics to send antigenic spike proteins to the furthest regions of our bodies. I never advocated the vaccines but, then again, for most of late 2020 and early 2021 I never criticised them. The anti-vaxxers and virus sceptics amongst my friends have never forgiven me. Given the vicious treatment meted out to the likes of Dr. John Campbell, Andrew Bridgen, Toby Young and Dr. Aseem Malhotra by comedian and leading Covid commentator Abi Roberts and her ilk, I don’t suppose Clare will ever be forgiven either.
Clare Craig writes with an obvious passion and that passion made this a page turner for me. Forgive the cliché, but it was a journey; a journey through the author’s mind at times and the major impression I got was one of sincerity.
Somewhat smugly, I thought I would have little to learn from Expired. I was wrong. In my own intense reading and writing on face masks I had not encountered so clearly, and in such detail, an explanation of why they don’t work. Covid, like many respiratory viruses, is spread by aerosol, extremely small airborne particles with an almost infinite capacity for spread. These are found atop high mountains and, essentially, anywhere there is atmosphere. Where there is air there are viruses. There is, in fact, very little we can do to combat them and the aerosol theory — with considerable evidence to support it — means all our efforts were in vain: lockdowns, social distancing and face masks.
We were just as likely to catch Covid from the person locked down across the road, with his or her windows wide open as per Government advice, if our windows were likewise open than we were from our spouse. Thus, people locked down in cruise ships and quarantine hotels who never made physical contact or came within proximity spread and caught Covid, seemingly inexplicably. Then, when vaccines, with an absolute risk reduction of approximately 1% proved to be useless, Covid continued to spread. That said, apart from passing and oblique reference to compulsory vaccine mandates, Expired is not about Covid vaccines. That will have to wait.
Having dealt with aerosol spread, naturally the issue of face masks is covered, and it is nothing short of comical to reflect on those heady days of 2020 and further into the prolonged masking on international flights. The author makes frequent reference to ‘Cloud-Covid-Land’, and that just about sums the situation in those days perfectly. It seemed weird enough at the time but, on reflection, it was nothing short of absurd.
The issue of ethics, the ‘inversion of ethical principles’ features in Expired whereby the protection of older people was prioritised over children who, demonstrably, have suffered terribly during Covid restrictions. I was moved to tears at times when I became aware of the effect lockdown and school closures were having on my grandchildren and the pressures it was putting on their parents, one of whom had pre-existing serious mental health problems. Thank you very much Boris Johnson, I will never forgive you, unless you apologise to the British people.
It is crystal clear from Dr. Craig’s book how, on the one hand, the management of Covid was theatre and, on the other hand, how it was utterly incompetent. Craig answered the call to help with the Covid response — and who would not want a consultant pathologist. She heard nothing. Furthermore, there was nobody with her qualifications anywhere across the spectrum of SAGE committees. The emphasis was on epidemiologists whose record of poor modelling and wild catastrophising was plain from previous ‘pandemics’ such as BSE, swine flu and foot and mouth disease. Speaking of epidemiology, I learned something else that should have been obvious: initial estimates of case fatality rates will always exaggerate the severity of an infection as we routinely underestimate the number of infections. We don’t know where all the cases are and that lowers the denominator. Arithmetic!
When it to comes to testing, Claire Craig is on home territory, and she explains clearly why the PCR tests were next to useless due to their hypersensitivity; on the other hand, the LFTs suffered from extreme specificity. One test (PCR) provides false positives (and how!) and the other (LFT) produces false negatives. Neither situation is ideal; they are reciprocal, and anyone remotely involved in developing screening tests understands this well. But both tests were sold as definitive, suggesting that it is possible to believe two contradictory notions simultaneously. Also, note, they were screening tests; like any screening test, they were not diagnostic – they were not clinically determinative of being ill or infected. Yet, somehow, they were considered diagnostic. All this is nothing less than psychometric insanity, but we were living in insane times.
I highlighted so much on my Kindle that it would take a review of many thousand words to include all the cogent points in Expired. But it is more noble to allow others to find these gems themselves. Before the penultimate chapter there is an admission by the author that she fell for the initial Covid narrative and an apology; I found this quite moving. The penultimate chapter is a letter to her children. Having read Mark Woolhouse’s letter of apology to his daughter at the end of his book The Year the World Went Mad I was prepared to be underwhelmed. I became particularly angry with Woolhouse as, despite what he saw in front of his eyes, he was part of what happened to us and bowed to the pressure to conform, at least initially. None of this from Craig who writes to her children with openness and the sincerity that is the trademark of her style. The message could be distilled as: “Kids, don’t fall for any bullshit, stand up for what is right, play your part in righting wrongs.”
This book deserves to be widely read and copies should be in the hands of every Government cabinet member, SAGE member and all the members of the ongoing COVID-19 Inquiry. The book ends with a summary of some main points and refers, as she does elsewhere, to Craig’s forthcoming book Spiked: a shot in the Covid dark.
Expired: Covid the untold story by Clare Craig (2023) is available on Amazon.
Dr. Roger Watson is Academic Dean of Nursing at Southwest Medical University, China. He has a PhD in biochemistry. He writes in a personal capacity.
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.
‘Speaking of epidemiology…….initial estimates of case fatality rates will always exaggerate the severity of an infection as we routinely underestimate the number of infections.’
Indeed. Quite so. But we were told this regarding the outbreak in China, by a well known coronavirus expert present in China, very early on:
‘People are saying a 2.2 to 2.4% fatality rate total. However recent information is very worthy – if you look at the cases outside of China the mortality rate is <1%. [Only 2 fatalities outside of mainland China]. 2 potential reasons 1) either china’s healthcare isn’t as good – that’s probably not the case 2) What is probably right is that just as with SARS there’s probably much stricter guidelines in mainland China for a case to be considered positive. So the 20,000 cases in China is probably only the severe cases; the folks that actually went to the hospital and got tested. The Chinese healthcare system is very overwhelmed with all the tests going through. So my thinking is this is actually not as severe a disease as is being suggested. The fatality rate is probably only 0.8%-1%. There’s a vast underreporting of cases in China. Compared to Sars and Mers we are talking about a coronavirus that has a mortality rate of 8 to 10 times less deadly to Sars to Mers. So a correct comparison is not Sars or Mers but a severe cold. Basically this is a severe form of the cold.’
Professor John Nicholls, University of Hong Kong 06 Feb 2020
The country was led by a complete nincompoop and the health ministry led by another.
‘“Kids, don’t fall for any bullshit, stand up for what is right, play your part in righting wrongs.”
A great message.
Very well done, Dr Clare Craig. You are an absolute legend.
A British SAS squad and an American Marines squad are together in the middle of a city. The commanding officers of each group are discussing the merits of SAS vs Marines: these officers have reputations for being the strongest, toughest and most feared men in the whole of the armed forces. The American squad leader turns to the British officer and says, “My Marines are so much braver than your SAS.” “I doubt that very much,” says the SAS officer. “They are much braver,” says the American. “Watch this.”
The American squad leader turns to one of his Marines and shouts, “SERGEANT!! Climb to the very top of that building and jump off.” “SIR, YES SIR,” shouts the sergeant. The sergeant runs inside the building, runs to the top and without a second’s thought, jumps off the top of the building and smashes into the ground. He survives, but is very badly injured and gets taken away on a stretcher.
The American leader turns to the SAS officer and says, “Now that’s bravery.” “Yeah? Well watch this,” says the British officer. He turns to his men and bellows at the top of his voice, “YOU, PRIVATE, CLIMB TO THE TOP OF THAT BUILDING AND JUMP OFF.” The private looks at the officer and says, “Sir, go screw yourself.” The Officer turns around to the American and says, “You see? THAT’S bravery.”
Standing up to authority requires real guts and bravery. Clare Craig – I salute you.
True story—-In 1981 as an RAF officer on honeymoon with my wife in Hong Kong, we stayed in the Officers’ married quarters at HMS Tamar with my Royal Marine chum and his wife. We had nearly three weeks there, so he persuaded me to ‘come out with the boys’ (tough RMs) on a night’s exercise to see what their duties entailed. (largely, the prevention of illegal entry to H.K by Chinese via the shallow waters surrounding H-K harbour, Hebe Harbour in particular).
Patrolling the pitch black shallows (approx 3ft deep) in silence in the early hours in a Rigid Raider boat, was a tad unnerving. With about eight of us aboard, my chum, the raiding craft commander spotted a suspicious looking light moving in an area it shouldn’t have been and quickly ordered one of his marines to wade across to the light souce to check it out. On the issue of the order to Marine McDonald (for it was he), McDonald replied to his boss (Major), “Fuck off Sir, there’s spiny Normans in there.” We all fell about laughing.
“Expired is not about Covid vaccines. That will have to wait.”
But in the meantime:
Some people here are brilliant at understanding mathematics and statistics, and some people here have great difficulty. I’m somewhere in the middle. I’ve been trying to understand Professors Norman Fenton and Martin Neil’s claim that the ONS and others have employed a ‘cheap trick’ of a statistical illusion to give the impression that the Covid vaccines are effective, by categorizing those vaccinated up to 2 or 3 weeks as ‘Unvaccinated’ in studies on vaccine efficacy.
I think Professor Fenton is a mathematical genius, and I’m pretty sure he is correct, but I’m trying to understand the ‘cheap trick’ for myself, as I don’t think he is so brilliant at clearly and simply explaining the ‘cheap trick’ to people with limited statistical understanding such as myself.
I understand things better in plain English words than in charts and mathematical language. So here, with the help of some slightly simpler explanation from Mathew Crawford on Substack, is my simple unsophisticated understanding of the ‘cheap trick’.
Please, anyone here who has a better understanding of this than I have, tell me if I’ve got this wildly wrong, or if I’ve got it roughly correct. If it’s not correct, please correct me where I am wrong:
My understanding of the ‘cheap trick’ in 5 sections:
(1)
I’ll call those vaccinated up to 2 or 3 weeks ‘Recently Vaccinated’.
And those vaccinated more than 2 or 3 weeks ‘Totally Vaccinated’.
The ONS, etc, should simply calculate the infection rate for those Vaccinated by dividing the number of Vaccinated by the number of Infected Vaccinated.
For example: 1,000 vaccinated divided by 20 infected = 1 in 50 = 2% Infection Rate.
(2)
But instead, they calculate the infection rate for the Vaccinated by dividing the number of Totally Vaccinated and Recently Vaccinated by the number of Infected Totally Vaccinated only.
i.e. Infection Rate for Vaccinated = [Totally Vaccinated + Recently Vaccinated] divided by Infected Totally Vaccinated only.
This gives a (much) lower rate of infection among the Vaccinated.
For example: Infection Rate for Vaccinated = [900 Totally Vaccinated + 100 Recently Vaccinated] divided by 10 Infected Totally Vaccinated only (i.e. excluding 10 Infected Recently Vaccinated) = 1% Infection Rate.
(3)
Similarly, they should calculate the infection rate for the Unvaccinated simply by dividing the number of Unvaccinated by the number of Infected Unvaccinated.
i.e. Infection Rate for Unvaccinated = number of Truly Unvaccinated divided by number of Infected Truly Unvaccinated.
(4)
Instead, they calculate the infection rate for Unvaccinated by dividing the number of Unvaccinated by the number of Infected Unvaccinated and Infected Recently Vaccinated. This gives a (much) higher rate.
i.e. Infection Rate for Unvaccinated = Number of Unvaccinated divided by [Infected Unvaccinated AND Infected Recently Vaccinated]
= (much) higher rate.
(5) Professors Norman Fenton and Martin Neil et al have proved that this miscategorization of ‘Vaccinated up to 3 weeks’ as ‘Unvaccinated’ will show efficacy even if the ‘vaccine’ is a placebo.
Is this all more or less correct?
Has anyone anywhere refuted this claim by Professors Fenton, Neil, et al?
Why is more not being made of this by other people? Is it because it’s difficult to understand?
Have I understood it approximately properly?
Prof Martin Neil:
“How widespread is the (mal)practice of miscategorising vaccination status? We have uncovered twenty-five papers and official reports where vaccination status was deliberately. miscategorised.”
https://twitter.com/MartinNeil9/status/1685356144246616064
Apart from the statistical shenanigans to do with the usefulness, or not of the “vaccine” product, what concerns me is the risk side of it. In particular, injuries directly caused by it. They appear to be turning a blind eye to a lot of it, but if you look up some of the recent publications by John Campbell, it looks like they are getting away with making use of short-term assessment processes justified by “emergency use authorisation (EUA)”. Whether the emerging heart injuries are restricted to anti-Covid-19 jabs, or a novel risk due to the mRNA delivery process is unclear, but if its the latter it could be bad news financially for some firms, if they are planning to use for a range of other illnesses.
What you say is fine, but the mental gymnastics the zealots make is that to accept the ONS position you have to believe the following:
1. That the first 2 weeks post vaccination is wholly benign.
2. That you are no more likely to get infected than if you hadn’t been vaccinated during this 14 day period.
3. That there are no adverse risks following vaccination.
4. That on day 15 the vaccine starts to work its magic.
My anger will never subside
If you’re not angry, you’re not paying anywhere near enough attention…
Or you don’t have much humanity
(leaving aside any very Zen or forgiving types among our number)
“The anti-vaxxers and virus sceptics amongst my friends have never forgiven me. Given the vicious treatment meted out to the likes of Dr. John Campbell, Andrew Bridgen, Toby Young and Dr. Aseem Malhotra by comedian and leading Covid commentator Abi Roberts and her ilk, I don’t suppose Clare will ever be forgiven either.”
This is one of the biggest problems on our side. The hatred and moral purity shown by the likes of Bob Moran and Abi Roberts is sickening. And it only serves one purpose – to sow division. Although it’s difficult to forgive – particularly the unrepentant, shape-shifting Malhotra – we should recognise the awareness for the cause these people have generated. I can only imagine how pure and virtuous it must feel like to be Bob Moran… although his untainted character doesn’t seem to affect the prices of his prints which are, in all honesty, extortionate. Odd for someone of his self-defined saintly status.
The wonderful Bob Moran will be presenting an Art-Apocalypse show in London on 5 November. He single-handedly proved that his pencils were mightier than the fear-porn of SAGE, which is why they tried to destroy him.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/join-me-in-reflecting-on-our-descent-into-dystopia/
Good review by Dr. Watson.
But I would prefer: –
“copies should be [stuffed up the posteriors] of every Government cabinet member, SAGE member and all the members of the ongoing COVID-19 Inquiry.”
And a hardback copy at that.
Sideways
The issue of tests fascinates me. The whole thing – even now – is based on this useless diagnostic tool and still believed as the absolute truth. This week 3 people have told me they ‘have Covid’ because they have tested for it. Why they continue to do so is beyond me…..
My son came back from a two week residential business course with Covid. Someone on the course felt unwell, took a test and announced they’d tested positive and set the ball rolling. I was astonished and disappointed that my son actually tested himself. Not only that but he tested the three year old who wasn’t feeling well and he’s got Covid too. Apparently it’s what you do in his circle of friends and colleagues, most of whom are professionals with umpteen degrees among them. They even still wear masks… I can’t believe it. The indoctrination is widespread and deep.
“Thank you very much Boris Johnson, I will never forgive you, unless you apologise to the British people.”
I will never forgive him, whether he apologises or not. But it wasn’t just Johnson who deliberately and systematically stripped us of our Civil Rights and imposed the Covid Totalitarianism. The list of culprits is very long:
SAGE
Ferguson/Imperial College
The Quad (Johnson, Handcock, Gove, Sunak)
The so-called Nudge Unit
The Mainstream Media
Many $cientists and almost the entirety of the medical profession
I will never forgive any of them. They wrecked the economy; ruined millions of lives and – since the jabs they imposed/coerced are very obviously NOT safe and effective – have killed and/or injured hundreds of thousands.
I am reading Dr Craig’s book at the moment. It is a very well researched and readable. And yes …thoroughly depressing! well worth getting though. I too was entirely sceptical of the whole covid nonsense right from the start as I have a medical supply background and wouldn’t trust a pharma company as far as I could kick it and as for masks I knew the aerosol theory was being ignored. This book helps enormously in filling in my many knowledge gaps so I can try to explain things to covid cultists.
I am currently reading Claire Craig’s book and it’s as good as Dr Watson describes. It’s up there alongside ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’ in creating anger at the gross mendacity of the government and their fellow travellers in pushing the approved narrative. I’m pleased that my very low level of Biochemistry knowledge, compared to Dr Watson, helped me understand this was a scam from day 1 of the hysteria.
So much for follow the science
Please print and put in your neighbours’ doors