Well, it now looks as if the grandees are turning against each other. Rishi Sunak, as we reminded our readers, stated to the Spectator that not even Cabinet Ministers were aware of the rationale for the toxic cocktail of evidence-free restrictions imposed on the nation.
Now, Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser during Covid, is accusing politicians of cherry-picking the science. Apparently, the diary he kept will be produced at the Hallett Enquiry. So, whom do you believe? Sir Patrick used some pretty strong words to describe the former Prime Minister, and incidentally, a registered medical practitioner should not use words such as ‘bipolar’ as an insult. Mental illness is no joke, especially for those whose conditions were caused or triggered by the three Ronnies’s restrictions. So why was Sir Patrick always standing up like a stalwart at the three Ronnies’ show every night? Why did he not resign if the Government was running amok with the advice? Two metres, rule of six, night curfews, see granny in the garden and Christmas parties on balconies and all.
We think the restrictions narrative is now fast unfolding. Unlike the decks of the Titanic, it’s everyone for themselves – I got my damehood/knighthood, my pension, time to move on with my trusted Kevlar armour around me.
One of the reasons why the narrative is unfolding is that SARS-CoV-2 is going up and down regardless of whatever idiocy the Government, the media and the so-called experts dreamed of, which brings us to our thread on the outputs of the UKHSA. On Tuesday we pointed out that the UKHSA has produced a map of what it calls available evidence on the use of what it classifies as non-pharmaceutical interventions – NPIs (the ‘Evidence Gap Map’). Here’s the main screen again:
As we explained, you can click the arrows in the top row and inspect the list of different interventions.
So the map tells us there is a massive dump of models of all kinds, a few other bits and pieces, but nothing strong enough to justify granny in the garden having a conversation through the window or ‘closing the Welsh borders’.
But we are curious, you know us: we ask questions the whole time. So, we have downloaded references numbers 24 to 123, which are the 100 models which form the backbone of the UKHSA dataset (100 out of 151; 66% to be precise).
We have downloaded them, and now we are reading them and asking four straightforward questions about each published or quasi-published model included in the map:
- What is the NPI being assessed (e.g. is it an NPI, and is it defined and described?) and in what setting? (e.g. community, hospital, homes etc.)
- What is the source for the effect estimate? (to model its effects, you need a source of data, i.e., what does it do?).
- What is the size of the effect? (such as risk reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection)
- What is the case definition? (how did they define a case of COVID-19?)
Once we have answered these questions, we will grade the model using the ROBINS I tool. Remember the UKHSA did not assess the risk of bias, it just mapped.
We will then synthesise our findings and reflect on the advisability of relying on the mapped models for introducing restrictions.
To remind readers, we have done a similar exercise with a previous review produced by the UKHSA:
The UK Health Security Agency Review – our Trust the Evidence Critical Appraisal
- U.K. Government Evidence for Mask Mandates – an introduction
- Mystery studies
- Studies with non-representative populations
- Studies with obscure methods
- Studies with no blinding and no protocol
- Office for National Statistics – Part 1
- Office for National Statistics – Part 2
- Studies which shouldn’t have been in the UKHSA review
- Predatory Journals to Inform Mask Policy
- U.K. Government Evidence for Mask Mandates – Main Points
Bear with us as we do this work and present the results. TTE resources are finite: it’s just Tom and Carl.
Dr. Carl Heneghan is the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine and Dr. Tom Jefferson is an epidemiologist based in Rome who works with Professor Heneghan on the Cochrane Collaboration. This article was first published on their Substack, Trust The Evidence, which you can subscribe to here.
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.
“Bomb Houthi bases to rubble.”
Thus Britain’s diplomacy and foreign policy nowadays, even when (as one respondent said on GB news yesterday) “I thought we were skint?” The Saudis, backed by the US, have been bombing Yemen to rubble for many years, creating the world’s biggest humanitarian crisis in the process. I guess there are always more people left to bomb.
Which snowflake was it who used to say “Jaw jaw, not war war”? Oh yes, it was Churchill, wasn’t it.
An where is the EU in all this? Do they not use these waterways for their imports and exports? Why isn’t Germany or France bombing “houthi bases to rubble”?
A potential beneficiary could be Sino-Europe rail freight. It’s been growing over the years, although the Russia/Ukraine war is a problem, no doubt. https://www.zieglergroup.com/the-best-china-to-europe-freight-transport-methods-compared/
As long as they drop bombs, it creates a demand for more. BAE share price showed a predictable increase.
Remember Aden? I bet Ansar Allah do….
Morning all! Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!
https://www.euractiv.com/section/circular-materials/news/recycling-market-in-europe-faces-collapse-after-eu-waste-export-ban/
Digital ID A Hacker’s Dream
latest leaflet to print at home and deliver to neighbours or forward to politicians, media, friends online.
Well I’ve been banging on about this for ages now. The fact that it is the persecuted Christians in majority-Muslim countries who should be given priority as far as granting them asylum in the West goes. To be fair though, I’ve no idea on the stats of who makes up what percentage of ‘refugees’ who come to our lands. I just presume they’re mostly Muslim because those are the countries they’re coming from.
Raymond Ibrahim has been shining a light on the persecution of Christians in other parts of the world for years. Here he gives the rationale as to why these people should be prioritized, but also explaining why they are not;
”All emotionalism and name-calling aside — that is, the stuff of American politics — there are, in fact, several objective reasons why the West should give priority, if not exclusivity, to Christian refugees from the Muslim world — and some of these are actually to the benefit of western nations. Consider:
Christians are real victims of persecution. From a humanitarian point of view — and humanitarianism is the chief reason cited in accepting refugees — Christians should receive top priority simply because they are the most persecuted group in the Middle East. As former Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop once put it, “I think that Christian minorities are being persecuted in Syria and even if the conflict were over they would still be persecuted.”
Indeed. While they are especially targeted by the Islamic State and other professional jihadists, before ISIS, Christians were and continue to be targeted by Muslims — Muslim mobs, Muslim individuals, Muslim regimes, and Muslim terrorists, from Muslim countries of all races (Arab, African, Asian, etc.) — and for the same reason: Christians are infidel number one.
Conversely, Muslim refugees are not fleeing direct persecution, but chaos created by the violent and intolerant teachings of their own religion, Islam — hence why violence and intolerance follows Muslims into Europe.
Muslim persecution of Christians has been further enabled by western policies. Western nations should accept Christian refugees on the basis that western actions in the Middle East are directly responsible for exacerbating the plight of Christian minorities. Christians were not terrorized in Bashar Assad’s Syria, or Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, or Muamar Gaddafi’s Libya. Their persecution grew exponentially only after the U.S. and other western states interfered in those nations in the name of “democracy.” All they did is unleash the jihadist forces that the dictators had long kept suppressed.”
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/01/what_if_the_west_only_accepted_christian_refugees_from_the_muslim_world.html
Surprised that this isn’t being covered here. Journalist and podcaster Gonzalo Lira has died while held captive in Ukraine. Tucker Carlson has given his death the coverage as a political prisoner it deserves. RIP Lira.
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1745863377493143906
Agreed. I followed his Ukraine coverage closely. He predicted his own death in his last video when he was a few miles from the border with Hungary I think. While exhaling cigarette smoke. He was a very brave man and I salute him.
A US citizen denied the protection or assistance of the US because he did not follow the warmongers’ line… or rather, he helped expose it for the criminality it is.
““Sir Ed Davey has refused to apologise over his position in the Post Office scandal””
Channelling his inner Diane Abbott. He and people like him should be dragged “of coursing” from their chairs into the street and hung from the nearest lamppost while their legs kick uselessly and their faces turn black. Of course.
Seconded. Davey is another Lib Dim – no misspelling – nutjob. A complete drain on the planet and the people on it. The reality – an oxygen thief.