Of all the crass misappropriations of scientific principles during the pandemic, none did more harm than the corruption of the ‘precautionary principle’ — the notion that an action or an intervention is justified only once one is clear that the benefits exceed the harms and that, as one sociologist put it, “you have looked very hard for the harms”.
That principle came to be almost wholly inverted in the context of the pandemic: an intervention seemingly could be justified on the ‘precautionary’ basis that if it might have any beneficial effect in slowing the course of the pandemic, it would be worthwhile. This justified indiscriminate measures ranging from universal masking, mass testing (including of young children), 14-day isolated quarantines and even lockdown itself for entire healthy populations, on the basis that even though the evidence base was often weak or non-existent, the intervention just might achieve something, and opened the door to a slew of harms impacting almost all cohorts of the British population.
It was to be hoped that a core task for the Covid Inquiry in this key Module 2 would have been a dispassionate objective assessment of whether the costs (financial costs, direct harms, probable indirect harms, risk of unquantified future harms) of the Government’s population-wide interventions outweighed possible benefits. So, it was deeply disappointing last week to see not only key witnesses but the inquiry Chair herself repeat the same dangerous misconception of the precautionary principle.
In one of the most jaw-dropping interjections of the inquiry to date, Baroness Hallett revealed a prejudgement that if masking people could have had even the slightest of benefits, and seemingly without even contemplating that risks and known harms might need to be weighed too, she pressed Sir Peter Horby, an esteemed epidemiologist at Oxford University, who had indicated that he believed universal masking was not a straightforward decision: “I’m sorry, I’m not following, Sir Peter. If there’s a possible benefit, what’s the downside?”
Coming from the independent Chair of a public inquiry, this is an astonishing comment. It betrays a presumption, or at the very least a predisposition, to accept that it was better to act than not to act — the reverse of the precautionary principle. When a comment such as this, from the Chair of the Inquiry, goes unchallenged, it risks anchoring the entire frame of reference for the inquiry’s interrogation of this critical topic. In our view it was a surprising and serious error of judgement for an experienced Court of Appeal judge.
What made Baroness Hallett feel this to be an appropriate thing to think, let alone say out loud? We suggest the issue lies in the fact that the Chair and the official counsel to the inquiry seem already to have the storyline of the pandemic wrapped up.
The inquiry’s counsel has been at pains to paint a picture of the country facing an almost existential threat from the virus. From the outset, counsel has framed his questioning on the basis that it was indisputable a “highly dangerous fatal viral outbreak was surely coming”, and “by February this viral, severe pandemic, this viral pathogenic outbreak is coming, and it can’t be stopped”. Even hardened lawyers and epidemiologists, it has seemed, were bunkering down because “the virus was coming, it was a fatal pathogenic disease”.
And, with the precautionary principle inverted in the collective mind of this inquiry, almost anything the Government then did against that backdrop was justified.
With preference…
Worse still, it is now starkly evident that the witnesses whose opinions and perspectives support that proposition are being overtly praised and pedestaled, while those whose opinions and perspectives might cast doubt are treated with prejudice and hostility.
For those witnesses who were part of the ‘home team’ — Government-appointed advisers, and those who have already publicly ascribed to the inquiry’s apparently favoured storyline — impeccable credentials and impartiality have been assumed.
Sir Jeremy Farrar, for example, former Director of the Wellcome Trust, member of SAGE and currently Chief Scientist at the WHO gave oral evidence to the inquiry in June. One can almost picture counsel for the inquiry scattering rose petals as he sums up Farrar’s illustrious credentials:
You trained, I believe, in medicine, with postgraduate training in London, Chichester, Edinburgh, Melbourne, Oxford and San Francisco. You have a DPhil PhD from the University of Oxford. You were a director of the Oxford University Clinical Research Institute at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam from 1996 to 2013. From 2013 you were Director of the Wellcome Trust, and from May 2023 have you been the Chief Scientist at the World Health Organisation? Have you throughout your professional career served as a chair on a multitude of advisory bodies, for governments and global organisations? Have you received a plethora of honours from a number of governments, institutes and entities?
Farrar is then treated to counsel’s softest underarm bowls and allowed to give unchallenged testimony in favour of an intervention-heavy approach to pandemic management: “when you have the countermeasures you’re talking about, diagnostic tests, treatment and vaccines, together they create a Swiss cheese model of what our public health is”.
Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London, and chief architect of the dramatic scientific modelling on which the global lockdown response was predicated, was warmly welcomed to the witness box by counsel last week “as a world leading specialist in this field”, and was later thanked profusely for his hard work by Baroness Hallett: “Thank you very much for all the work that you did during the pandemic.”
Gushing perhaps, but nothing compared to the farewell given to SAGE modeller Professor John Edmunds, who had been affirmed upfront by counsel as, “a de facto expert in epidemiology”, and one of “a number of brilliant scientists and advisers who assisted the Government and the country in the remarkable way that you did”. At the end of his evidence, Baroness Hallett delivered the eulogy:
Thank you very much indeed. If I may say so, professor, I think you were unduly harsh on yourself this morning. You had a job, and you described it yourself, your job was to provide expert advice to the policy and decision-makers, and if the system is working properly that advice is relayed to them, then they consider advice coming from other quarters about economics and social consequences and the like. I’m not sure you could have done more than you did, consistent with your role at the time, but you obviously did as much as you felt was appropriate. So I’m really grateful to you, I’m sure we all are.
This is a far departure from the rigorous testing of credentials and potential conflicts that one could expect as an expert witness in any court proceedings, and of the studious impartiality of the presiding judge. It is certainly far short of what the public should rightly expect for an exercise set to spend over £55m on lawyers alone.
None of these witnesses were asked whether their senior positions within organisations that rely on very valuable relationships with global pharmaceutical groups and private pharma-focused organisations could have had any bearing on their advice at the time or their evidence to the inquiry now.
Farrar was director of the Wellcome Trust throughout the pandemic. The Wellcome Trust is one of the institutions behind CEPI, a global vaccine development fund created in 2015 which partners with vaccine manufacturers, including Moderna. During the pandemic Farrar frequently and vocally promoted his view that vaccines would be the means for us to exit the pandemic. He is plainly someone whose professional success and credibility has become indelibly attached to the pharmaceutical industry and in particular the use of pharmaceutical interventions in public health, yet counsel and the inquiry Chair seemed uninterested in that colouring of Farrar’s evidence.
Likewise, Ferguson, of Imperial College London was not asked a single question about potential conflicts or risk of bias. Again, the inquiry seemed unaware, or at least uninterested, that a month after Ferguson’s seismic March 2020 paper had concluded that “epidemic suppression is the only viable strategy at the current time” and that “the major challenge of suppression is that this type of intensive intervention package – or something equivalently effective at reducing transmission – will need to be maintained until a vaccine becomes available”, it was reported that Imperial College had received £22.5 million in funding from the U.K. Government for vaccine research and development; and that in that same year, 2020, Imperial received at least $108 million in funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).
BMGF is a private philanthropic organisation which has been open about its ideological commitment to vaccine-based solutions for global health issues and which itself has very significant financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry.
…and with prejudice
For witnesses such as Professor Carl Heneghan, Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University, but not a member of SAGE, and (unhelpfully for the inquiry) not an enthusiastic supporter of lockdowns, the inquiry appeared to have made somewhat less glowing presumptions:
You are a professor of evidence-based medicine at Oxford University. Could you explain what that discipline entails?
Heneghan’s explanation was swiftly followed with a presumptive conclusion as to the strength of his credentials:
As you know, because I think you have been following the inquiry, we have heard this week from a series of academics who have spent, in the main, their professional careers researching, analysing the spread of infectious diseases, developing models, to analyse how such diseases are spread and how they can be controlled, and considering large-scale public health issues relating to pandemic preparedness and so on. You don’t have a comparable type of expertise in this area, do you?
Not satisfied with having attempted his own disparagement of the man, counsel took the opportunity while having Heneghan in the witness box to ask for his perspective on two ‘home team’ scientists having described him in a private discussion as a “fuckwit” (Dame Angela McLean and Professor Edmunds) — to what ends, other than to rattle, rile or embarrass, was not clear. It was the cheapest shot of the inquiry so far.
During Heneghan’s evidence session, and having seemingly felt entirely comfortable to rely on the expert opinions of Farrar, Ferguson, Edmunds et al. — the ‘good guy’ home team scientists — Baroness Hallett gives short shrift to the notion that Professor Heneghan’s opinion might be relied upon. When talking about the broad scope of evidence-based medicine Heneghan explains that “even my opinion” amounts to evidence, Baroness Hallett retorted dismissively: “Not in my world it doesn’t, I’m afraid.”
Spoiler alert
Here’s what the inquiry is going to conclude, after three to seven years and perhaps £200 million: the Government and its official scientific advisers mostly did their best in the face of what they rightly and fairly believed to be the most devastating viral threat the world had ever seen; those scientists gave the best advice they could, and were entitled to assume that the Government was taking account of other factors; if it hadn’t been for Brexit, we would have been better prepared; the Government perhaps could have thought a bit more about the impact of lockdowns on the economy, but ultimately lockdowns were unavoidable; if it had all been done faster and harder, the U.K. might have come out in a better place, clinically and economically; the sacrifices imposed on children, the isolated and those who missed diagnoses and treatments, were regrettable but had to be done (the ‘precautionary principle’); if we could have saved one more person who died of Covid we should have done; the NHS did a superb job in difficult circumstances. Oh, and COVID-19 vaccines saved us so we should devote more public funds to partnerships with heroic pharmaceutical groups and irreproachable public scientists such as Jeremy Farrar at the WHO.
The inquiry is now hopelessly compromised by the partisan and presumptive words of its own Chair and leading lawyers which are setting us up for a doom-loop of catastrophic errors we cannot afford to repeat. It has become an embarrassment to the legal profession and is jeopardising the reputation of the English legal system. Its exorbitant costs already cannot be justified, and there is only worse to come. It should be abandoned.
First published on the UsForThem Substack page. Subscribe 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.
The corona madness industry is already huge and cemented in
Impossible to get rid of now
Medico fascist industrial complex
[COUGH]
What I’ve never understood about that photo is as it’s of the G7, there only being seven members of the group how come the photo shows nine people?
Ferguson does their maths.
let’s stop The corona madness industry
LONDON ANTI LOCKDOWN EVENTS https://www.standupx.info/
Sun, 20 Jun, 1pm – Streatham Common, SW16 5TF
Mon, 21 Jun, from 8am – Gather at Speaker’s Corner, Hyde Park
Mon, 21 Jun, from 12pm – Ready to march to Parliament from Speaker’s Corner
Mon, 21 June, 11am till late Parliament Square
Join any day, any time
https://t.me/M1L2BM7Parliament Square
A 167% rise of positive tests in Shropshire during the week the 4th to the 10th of June.
A massive Increase of 83.
I think that we can rest our case.
And no deaths, and a massive TWO hospital beds were occupied by “Covid patients”.
It’s The Apocalypse I tells ee..!!!
Would that be Jackfield, Ironbridge? Baron.
I used to walk there from Horsehay, Dawley many many years ago.
Happy if poor days.
You do realise that you get more positive test results if you do more tests?So do you see, the likelihood is there’s been more testing done? You do realise don’t you, that positive test results mean absolutely nothing if those positive results are all from asymptomatic people? The important numbers you should be raving about isn’t positive test results but rather the numbers of people admitted to hospital for life threatening symptoms due to Covid alone… not people who test positive for Covid and were knocked down by a bus, as an example. In fact more positive test results is actually a very good thing, it means people will become immune to the virus and don’t need a vax.
More positive test results can be achieved simply by doing more testing? Also positive test results mean absolutely nothing if those positive test results are people who are asymptomatic, which means they’re not sick and don’t spread the virus. You do understand that don’t you?
It’s not positive test results you need to be raving about. It’s how many people have been admitted into hospital with a positive Covid test result alone. Not people who were admitted with a positive test result and were run over by a bus say. The only true way of realising how serious this pandemic is, is to look at the total death toll numbers. And the average death toll numbers for 2020 are no greater than some years in the last decade. Yes that’s absolutely correct, THE DEATH TOLL IN 2020 IS NO GREATER THAN SOME YEARS IN THE LAST DECADE… that’s how serious this pandemic is!!
The more people tested positive of Covid 19 is a very good thing, it means more people are building up an immunity and don’t need to have a vax.
We all know what this is really for….
Convert them into “Soylent Green”!
But it will only be made from the vaccinated, so as to be safe. Yummy.
Yes they know what the vaccines are truly doing
I wish I didn’t agree with this comment.
I’ve seen a few of these tenders for similar things pop up over the last month. It’s really hard not to be a ‘conspiracy theorist’ sometimes.
Also there’s the alarm siren being tested for mobile phone networks, which together with these body storage facilities makes me wonder what disaster is being anticipated. Could it be the global cyber attack being touted by the WEF?!
Body Identification Tents tender from Police Scotland.
Well these deaths aren’t going to be from COVID-19, because everyone vulnerable to it has either already died or has immunity.
So this is either for lots of people dying from side effects of the vaccine or boosters in coming months, or they are working on another virus to “accidentally” leak from a lab.
I’m sure there will be another accidental virus or two, if only to encourage people to get their terminator shots.
Every day, things become an order of magnitude more surreal.
most overhyped ‘wave’ in the history of ‘pandemics’
lol!
Dig pit.
Fill with quicklime.
Chuck bodies in.
Sprinkle earth on top.
Job done.
1348 version.
PS. On second thoughts … Westminster … parliament … government …lynchings …
Naughty Annie.
Bliar has already trialled this when he slaughtered 11 million cattle in the last foot and mouth cock-up that he “arranged.”
He tried mass burnings but these were a disaster with black smoke wafting all over the country.
I think in the end it was lime pits.
He will have a manual for this no doubt.
One of Neil Ferguso’s earlier triumphs was Mad Cow Disease, that led to the unnecessary slaughter of all those poor livestock. The problem was that the “deadly prion” was believed to survive everything except high temperature incineration, and the UK had insufficient incinerator capacity to make this possible. The result was that MAFF/DEFRA paid a fortune for long-term storage of the poor victims’ bones until the sufficient additional incineration capacity was produced, at extortionate costs. (Friends of mine hired a large disused aircraft hangar in Lincolnshire for this purpose and earned a fortune from it.)
If Ferguson had any integrity, his conscience would have been so weighed down with guilt at the catastrophe he wrought – the extreme suffering of millions of helpless animals and the broken lives of thousands of powerless, weeping farmers, he would have quietly resigned and lived as obscure a life as possible, doing penance and praying for forgiveness.
Instead, this morally bankrupt ‘scientist’ stays in the public eye and in positions of importance while continuing to thrust his ‘models’ at a prime minister dumb and stupid enough to listen to him as though he was some kind of expert (which he blatantly isn’t).
Ferguson and Blair are two disgusting peas from the same rotten pod – both entirely without conscience, either unwilling or unable to accept culpability for their murderous actions, both continuing in the public eye, ignoring the condemnation they richly deserve. These creatures are the very personification of dangerous arrogance and both should dance, one day, in front of cheering crowds.
Bunkers come in very handy for lunatic regimes making last stands.
That’ll be the vaccinated getting hit by ADE when the next wild coronavirus hits..
All the time I find myself having to think previously unthinkable thoughts.
a. Our modelling friends have given the Government a model going four years forward which predicts doom will never end, needing equally never-ending spending and vaccines, Civil servants have saluted and set about procurement.
This is the optimistic take.
This then is partly PR, which will be confirmed when Susan Michie turns the first turf on a massive plague pit being dug in Kensington Gardens.
b. Looking at internal reports, the NHS has realised that deaths from cancer and other untreated conditions are going to rise so high in the next four years that space in private undertaker facilities will run out.
The CCP has given them some tips on how to manage this situation as quietly as possible, for example rationing the numbers who can turn up each day to collect ashes.
c. Looking at the real world data they now have, the English branch of the Faucist regime have realised that a massive immune over response in the vaccinated when they meet a wild virus is inevitable. They can and will blame this on a new variant and use it to increase power further, but meanwhile they’re gonna need a lot of body storage goin’ forward.
This is informally known amongst them as The Reverse Ferret.
As Toby Young might say: eek.
“when Susan Michie turns the first turf on a massive plague pit being dug in Kensington Gardens.”
as long as she jumps in when she’s finished I don’t mind
The problem for them remains the unvaccinated, who will effectively be an unofficial control group, and by refusing to die will make it all too obvious just WTF is going on. So they will try every trick under the sun to get the unvaxxed numbers as low as possible. This will inevitably turn very nasty, but there is no viable alternative to saying no repeatedly firmly and very loudly, if needs be.
Also, those who’ve had covid and recovered (like myself and all my family) need to research T-cell immunity so they can show they know the true facts about naturally-acquired immunity, and that they CANNOT get this virus a second time, nor any of its variants
I explained this to the caller who was badgering me and she finally said “fair enough!” and I’ve heard no more since.
Why?
JAB HORROR Man has leg amputated after suffering rare blood clot three weeks after first dose of AstraZeneca vaccine
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15320182/man-leg-amputated-blood-clot-three-weeks-astrazeneca-vaccine/
Just a flesh wound.
He has already put himself on the waiting list for the booster.
Why do they add the “rare” bit? And in the article it seems they can’t write blood clot without adding “rare” (Well I know why psyops…). I have say the man doesn’t look particularly pleased with his rare blood clot.
Either this is pure grift, they expect people to be dropping like flies from ADE, or a bit of both.
May be needed for ADE
As an aside, I’m starting to prefer the Chinese communist regime to our own communist regime
To paraphrase Mohammed Ali
‘No Old Etonian ever cooked me no takeaway meal’
Surely our communist regime is just a subsidiary?
one thing that got overlooked-and I wish I’d kept the Evening Standard that day-was when it was announced Mar 2020 permission given to councils for funeral pyres
Last year a Channel 4 report declared that the “fires never stop burning” at crematoriums in Mexico, with videos of billowing black smoke, no context whatsoever. The Dollar Vigilante in Mexico went to investigate these crematoriums. Most were either closed or operating at much reduced capacity, with bored security staff at the gates.
This will be as useful as the emergency mortuaries commissions in March/April last year. The ones no one ever talks about.
Last year, Pembrokeshire County Council, amidst considerable publicity, had fifty extra graves dug to receive covviecorpses. There’s nothing like prompt and decisive action to control a pandemic.
Oh the humanity!
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=nhstrust&areaName=Buckinghamshire%20Healthcare%20NHS%20Trust
Open up those emergency morgues
DO IT NOW!!!!!
I’m emptying the freezer so I have somewhere to store the bodies of my beloved family when the delta wave washes over Buckinghamshire. Amazing how many frozen mini sausage rolls accumulate at the bottom. That’s tea sorted
Did you find any distorted ice lollies?
hell yeth! that was brunch
also found a couple of relatives from the first wave – lol!
My relatives or yours?
(Aunt Maud has not not been answering her phone since March 2020)
could be anybody’s, I don’t recognise them. I just remember the trouble I had squeezing the wheelchair in. (its not a big freezer)
I put it down to lockdown madness and blame the government
Steve W – thank you so much for some much-needed laughter!!
There’s always a stray fish finger at the bottom of mine.
have you considered eating it? Or maybe you are and they are breeding?
Well…Mr H doesn’t balk at the idea. He often rounds up any fugitives and makes a sandwich out of them. Bit like what could happen to us, I suppose.
Bags of mixed veg seem to be breeding in ours.
Love that. Need a good laugh nowadays!
Just out of interest which travel list is Russia on?
Gold with spots on
Don’t even go there.
“We could have to vaccinate children to stop the spread of the Delta variant, virologist Dr Chris Smith says.”
another one for the gallows
lets see how those SAGE predictions are going
normally in science, if your model doesn’t agree with reality you throw away the model
in ‘build back better’ science, you just carry on with the same model and outlandishly claim your model has always been right and people who don’t accept that are probably some sort of right wing ‘denier’
They had build back better science in the Dark Ages
It didn’t do awfully well
The trouble with insisting 2+ 2= 5 is that your bridges collapse
They throw away the data and do more testing, and it STILL WONT CURVE FIT.
so they just say it’s DELAYED, next week the sky will fall.
Excess deaths from… the spike protein, which, as we now know, is cytotoxic?
This so called vaccine isn’t much cop is it? Thankfully I’m waiting for the vaccine against the Martian variant.
That one only attacks men. Women must fear the Venusian variant.
Another building block in the mind games
This will be to dispose of the criminals post Nuremberg 2
Ah yes, Westminster was the clue
Are they real? This is beyond a joke now.
Obviously not worrying anyone at Ascot, the politicians need to be shown the door now, its getting farcical
I wonder though if the advert is actually a plant, intended to be found and find its way to the media and spread fear?
This is exactly my thought now, so much Psyops going on. Is this designed to ramp up fear so more get injected?
It’s not for COVID. It’s for when skeptics go full Michael Douglas.
https://twitter.com/APhilosophae/status/1402434266970140676
Now what do we have here?
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/blackrock-vanguard-own-big-pharma-media/
Still think this about a virus?
What I have posted above may well be the smoking gun behind this entire hoax.
Thank for the housing story from the US. Here is the timber story from Europe
Clear cutting of local forests is leaving hill tops bald……….WHY?
Bark beetle
Like covid, another pestilence; the bark beetle, is being blamed in Germany but those of us who have lived in Germany for many years are well aware that there has been ‘forest die back’ for 10’s of years. What changed however in 2020 was new nation forestry strategies based upon modelling of carbon uptake by trees of different ages along side the dogma of the climate change science based, like covid outcomes, upon crystal ball predictions that led to the Paris Agreement.
So what we have is $cience providing the basis for policies to ultimately benefit the wealthy. In the case of Natural Capital it has been driven by the land owning classes and will force land values to high levels as all aspects of what the land (nature) provides us (so called ecosystem services) from ‘spiritual peace’ to ‘flood protection’ will be (valued) priced under these new land use policies. Any kind of value can be conjured up and assigned to a service. Reference: Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2, 1. Online: http://dx.doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1116
Novel beetle: The current infestation of European spruce bark beetles is said to have begun in 2012 but started growing significantly in mid-2018. (LULUCF Regulation) was adopted by the Council on 14 May 2018,
Or not novel;
“Rettet den Wald” Briefmarke der Deutschen Bundespost von 1985.
“Rescue the forests”: German postage stamp from 1985 Forest dieback is the term used to describe damage to forests that has occurred over large areas since around 1980. The area of distribution includes Central, Northern and Eastern Europe. It is characteristic that the damage symptoms appear independently of climate, location and silvicultural practices. Symptoms differ between species, regions and forest sites. A single triggering cause of forest dieback could not be identified. The complex effects of various air pollutants seem to be central. Recently, older stands and individual trees of numerous tree species have increasingly been dying, which is seen in connection with climate change.
2. Zero beetle: In the third quarter of 2018, the European lumber industry began introducing the damaged timber to the market. Healthy timber is also being logged in increasing quantities as countries have adopted harvesting policies to stifle the impacts and spread of bark beetle infestations and decrease forest density.
3. Who benefits?: Influx of supply has led EU prices to fall to record lows, making European exports highly competitive. China is the world’s largest market for logs, and the second largest importer of lumber, with growing demand for softwood products. China has welcomed the damaged European softwood. China’s demand for wood chips and wood pulp products is steadily increasing, which is likely a result of China’s recent import ban on wastepaper for recycling starting in 2018, thereby providing demand for the damaged European wood, which is still suitable for paper making.
4. Scientific dogma: Our most powerful weapon: Trees : 400+ tonnes carbon per hectare:
Trees are the ultimate carbon capture and storage machines. Like great carbon sinks, woods and forests absorb atmospheric carbon and lock it up for centuries. They do this through photosynthesis. The entire woodland ecosystem plays a huge role in locking up carbon, including the living wood, roots, leaves, deadwood, surrounding soils and its associated vegetation.That’s how much a young wood with mixed native species can lock up in trees, roots and soil.
5. Paris Agreement: 2016 A REGULATION ON THE INCLUSION OF GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM LAND USE, LAND USE CHANGE AND FORESTRY (LULUCF) INTO THE 2030 CLIMATE AND ENERGY FRAMEWORK AROSE OUT OF THE PARIS AGREEMENT.
6. Germany Forest Strategy 2020: The Climate Action Plan of the Federal Government (BMUB 2016) includes a section on the sector land-use, land-use change and forestry which, inter alia, aims at “maintaining and improving the ability of forests to act as a sink.” The LULUCF sector should thereby contribute to the economy-wide guiding principle of becoming virtually carbon-neutral by mid-century. It links to the Forestry Strategy 2020 and encourages a sustainable management of forests, aiming at forests’ potential to take up and store CO2, and the closely-associated use of wood, permanent grassland conservation, protection of peatlands and potential of natural forest development to mitigate climate change. The Climate Action Plan contains a range of forestry- related measures aimed at reaching these targets.
7. Playing the wild land & biodiversity cards: Forests also play an important role in Germany’s National Strategy on Biological Diversity (2007). In the strategy it is envisioned that “forests in Germany have a high level of natural diversity and momentum in terms of their structure and species composition, and people are fascinated by their beauty. The number of natural and near-natural forest communities has increased significantly. Forests are sustainably managed in line with their ecological and social functions. The raw material wood obtained sustainably from the forests is highly valued.” The aims for the year 2020 are that “the conditions for typical biotic communities in forests (diversity in structure and momentum) have been further improved.
WHAT ARE THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES OF LULUCF REGULATION FOR THE FOREST-BASED SECTOR?
Joint workshop of forest-based stakeholders (EUSTAFOR, EOS, CEPI and CEPF) on the practical consequences of the Regulation for the inclusion of Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) within the 2030 EU Climate and Energy framework 25 September 2018, Tuscany Region Office in Brussels, Rond-point Robert Schuman 14, Brussels, Belgium
BACKGROUND:
The Regulation on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF) into the 2030 climate and energy framework (LULUCF Regulation) was adopted by the Council on 14 May 2018, following the European Parliament vote on 17 April 2018. The Regulation ensures implementation of political agreement that the land use sector, along with other sectors, contributes to the EU’s 2030 emission reduction target. It is also in line with the Paris Agreement, which points to the critical role of the land use sector in reaching the long-term climate mitigation objectives.
To support the Member States in complying with the LULUCF Regulation, a technical guidance document has been prepared by IIASA for DG Climate Action in July 2018. The aim of this document is to provide guidance for the Member States on the establishment of Forest Reference Levels (FRLs) and National Forestry Accounting Plans (NFAPs) as required by the LULUCF Regulation.
ias that when the vaccine is set to bump everyone off?
Exclusive: Asthma inhalers speed up Covid recovery by three days
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/19/asthma-inhalers-speed-covid-recovery-three-days/
Out of interest, how many asthmatics here had the number of inhalers they were allowed cut shortly before the ‘pandemic’? The claim being they were being used too much? Thus leaving them in short supply?
In the early days it was noticed that asthmatics were underrepresented amongst those dying or severely affected by COVID19. The opposite of what you might expect with a respiratory illness.
In any normal medical world, somebody would have investigated why this was the case.
But no. Vaccines vaccines vaccines.
Worth buying from an online pharmacy then, just in case.
What rubbish, what propaganda, what fear tactics, I could go on,,,,,,,,,,
Government sponsored scaremongering.
Keep drip feeding scary headlines, keep paying the 80% 80% of their wages to stay home.
Eventually, they reason, folks will capitulate to their vax passports.
its so easy to spend other people’s money.
Maybe we, the list or the site should apply. I’m sure Toby and the team could use the 6mil for something? Even if it’s only getting rid of the ‘donate’ banner.
It’s not one council overreacting. I’ve seen almost identical contracts in other large cities (Liverpool I think).
Some people have been warning for months that there’s no possible alternative interpretation than, at best, totalitarian tyranny. At worse, mass depopulation. The latter is by far the better fit to the observations.
I’ve little doubt that, even if you’ve watched any of my recent interviews, you’ll probably self censor & deny it. And so goes the end of the free human race.
Mike
Is this because they know the vaccines will cause carnage soon? Otherwise nothing else makes sense. More BS.
Scare tactics that they’ve tried before. Surely even the brainwashed are not buying this shit?
Why won’t this website allow me to post this reply below to Fingerache Philip? It’s not abusive, no swearing and is honest. So why does it keep getting removed? Clearing this website is corrupted and agenda driven to supply misinformation and lies.
More positive test results can be achieved simply by doing more testing? Also positive test results mean absolutely nothing if those positive test results are people who are asymptomatic, which means they’re not sick and don’t spread the virus. You do understand that don’t you?
It’s not positive test results you need to be raving about. It’s how many people have been admitted into hospital with a positive Covid test result alone. Not people who were admitted with a positive test result and were run over by a bus say. The only true way of realising how serious this pandemic is, is to look at the total death toll numbers. And the average death toll numbers for 2020 are no greater than some years in the last decade. Yes that’s absolutely correct, THE DEATH TOLL IN 2020 IS NO GREATER THAN SOME YEARS IN THE LAST DECADE… that’s how serious this pandemic is!!
In fact the more people tested positive of Covid 19 is a very good thing, it means more people are building up an immunity and don’t need to have a vax.