You may recall that we undertook to review the 100 models forming the backbone of the UKHSA’s latest offering: the mapping review of available evidence. Remember, UKHSA did not extract nor appraise the evidence as it does not have the resources. This drew expressions of mirth among our readers. We agree it’s a bad joke – a very bad one – considering this ‘evidence’ is what the UKHSA states justified restrictions that led to stories such as Pippa Merrick’s, which unfortunately are not the exception. Earlier versions of the justification were a bad joke, too. What follows is no better.
Diligently, as promised, we downloaded the 100 papers defined as “models” by UKHSA (please do not ask Hugo Keith KC what is meant by that term).
Of each, we are asking the following questions:
- What is the non-pharmaceutical intervention (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?)
Straightforward, we thought.
Anything but, we are finding out.
First of all, the papers are full of jargon, as they are mainly written by mathematicians, or at least that is what they say they are. Secondly, most of them come to the same conclusion: lockdown harder, do as I say, or you or your auntie (or both of you) will die.
The most disconcerting answers we are getting are those to the second question: what is the source for the effect estimate?
In a classical model, you start with describing the problem, in this case, the number of cases and complications in a population, transmission patterns and perhaps age breakdown. If your second part is about how to stop or slow down the spread, hospitalisations, deaths and so on, to model the ‘how to’ in a credible way you need facts about what you are modelling is supposed to achieve (say distancing). Which, if introduced in this or that setting, is likely to diminish the risk of infection by Z%. The numerical estimate for Z should be surrounded by a range of probabilities (confidence intervals), giving the boundaries of probabilities that the observed effect (Z) in reduction of SARS-CoV-2 infection lie within X and Y around your point estimate of Z. So you then take Z and stick it in your model to see what effect Z would have and then you can use X and Y to play ‘what if’.
The crucial word is ‘credible’ because these models (are they projections, scenarios, predictions, or scenarios upon which predictions can be projected – ask Hugo Keith KC for a simple answer) have been used to change people’s lives. Or maybe some of them were retrofits to justify something already done by the Robert Maxwell school of ethics.
Credible would mean an estimate from one or preferably more well-designed studies with a protocol and clear case definitions. As the focus is the U.K., the data should come from the U.K. or at least a similar setting.
Well, here is an example of the sources of ‘parameters’ used in one quite well-publicised model:
Of the 11 assumptions underlying the model, eight are unsourced; one comes from a systematic review without infectious case definition, one from an economic model, and one from a case-control study.
Extraordinary, you will say: this seems to be the universal method known as BOPSAT (a Bunch Of People Sitting Around a Table). Yes, it is, except that the model, in fact, was about mass community testing for SARS-CoV-2 by lateral flow devices (LFDs) with not a shred of non-pharmaceutical interventions in sight. LFDs are tests, not interventions that can slow or stop the spread of anything.
And these are some of the minor problems we face, so it takes time. Perhaps we should ask Mr. Keith for help?
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.
I had never heard of handball until seeing this article.
Me neither but I’m liking the players. A lot.
Brilliant news.
Ww need the IHF to dig their feet in and for the players to form a single, defiant block and give the IHF authorities a monumental sex and travel response.
This has the potential to be a real goody. A sporting war. Loads of publicity and lots of bad press for the poison pushers, statistics all over the place, tragic stories. Billy and Klaus flapping. Bourla nowhere to be seen. Fishy in his cave. Sage in a bunker somewhere. Michie on a fact- finding mission in Antartica and Raine AWOL.
Marvellous.
Come on you lot.
Oh I fervently hope so.
In my own circle of musicians we dodged a bullet when a minority of Karens on a management committee tried to make vaccination a requirement of performing a symphony concert. They failed to impose the requirement, but then the venue owners imposed their own restrictions which scuppered the concert at the last moment. It’s chaos. We can’t be sure that some unknown authoritarian Karen isn’t going to veto our next attempt. Legal action looks prohibitively expensive, presumably it would be ECHR Right of Assembly Case versus Article 13 lawfare.
That’s upsetting to hear.
All the best
Michie the Bichie in the snow ! Frostbite would be too kind ! Mind you her hatchet face would probably melt the thickest ice
Nice one Freddy
The person who runs the IHF needs to be named and publicly shamed for the petty tyrant that he is.
Not yet. We want a proper set to, something that even The Times cannot ignore.
Come on lads. Get in to them!
Being a personal fiefdom, The Times can ignore whatever it wants!
I’ve looked him up. His name is Hassan Moustafa.
He’s been the president of the federation since 2000. So he’s been running the sport for 22 years, being reelected 6 times, the last 3 unopposed.
I bet he runs it like a personal fiefdom. That’s how most of these international federations operate, accountable to no one but themselves.
The Sep Blatter of Handball then !
You beat me to it Freddy.
Since when does the International Handball Federation, a perfectly private organization, have the authority to prescribe mandatory medical procedures for people attending or playing handball matches?
NB: The obvious answer is It doesn’t.
Governments have signalled over the last three years that they are quite happy for private companies and NGOs to do as they like in this regard and essentially do their dirty promotion and enforcement work for them.
And these international sports federations are completely unaccountable to anyone but themselves. Not unlike the WHO or UN. They have these pseudo democratic processes that elevate a delegate from each country to a global council which then sets rules for the entire world. And because it’s “democratic” then everyone has to follow their rules.
The moment you open your eyes, it’s impossible not to see the world as just a series of cartels. The pharma cartel, the media cartel, the energy cartel, all the sports cartels, the tech cartels, the banking cartel… etc….
The thing is the IHF really doesn’t have this authority, no more than they can randomly arrest people on premises they happened to rent. It’s neither a sovereign government enforcing some laws on its own territory nor an organization created by sovereign governments which have chosen to delegate certain powers to it. The people behind this may have the chutzpah to try it nevertheless, on the grounds that bullying oftentimes works, but bullying is all they have to support their stance.
They can keep the players out of the tournament which belongs to them, unless there are laws explicitly prohibiting that sort of discrimination.
I don’t know what the laws in Sweden and Poland say in this regard.
Of course, the players can get together and decide to boycott. At this point, they’re insane if they don’t.
After Damar Hamlin, I find it hard to imagine there is any athlete of any note who is not concerned about the vaxxes and certainly don’t want any / any more at this point in time. It only stops when we make it stop.
I don’t think your theory that the IHF is a sovereign government which has automatic exterritoriality in any place it may rent somewhere and is thus not subject to the laws of the countries its operating in and authorized to make up its own laws as it sees fit and enforce them violently is correct. But please feel free to prove me wrong by coming up with something which shows that private associations of businesspeople do actually have these rights in Sweden and Poland.
Re private companies setting mandates…
The situation is really bad in Australia where it’s likely millions have been impacted by jab mandates set by state governments, businesses, sports clubs etc.
In regard to companies, I’m challenging the jab mandate set by Westpac Bank for its employees, a jab mandate which is still in place.
See my email to the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Westpac Group: Westpac and Covid jab mandates – why were employees denied a voluntary decision on this medical intervention? 4 January 2023.
Well maybe, but where were they when people including children were being forced, coerced and gaslighted into being injected and generally vilified if they weren’t.
Most sports governing bodies are inept, corrupt because they are monopolies. Competition is the only thing that can keep them on their toes. There is little to prevent a group of professionals setting up a more democratic leaner and meaner organisation and ensure by a comprehensive constitution that the tendency to corruption and being captured by bad actors is democratically blocked. Two competing governing bodies in a region or country tend to keep each other a bit more efficient and honest. Perhaps Iceland should make a start.
Now the “Long march through the institutions’ is complete the march through sporting associations seems well underway as the England squad demonstrated in Quatar.