At the Covid Inquiry we’re all being given the chance to see the Ideology of lockdown being wheeled out almost every day in what seems like a mission to make sure that ‘next time’ the only solution is a harder, faster and more rigorously enforced lockdown.
Back in 2020, like most of us I heard the statistician Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter being interviewed constantly. He struck me as one of the few professional scientists and commentators capable of nuanced thought and who also had a firm grip on the need for quality evidence and its dispassionate interpretation.
As it happens, I corresponded with him several times during those gloomy months that turned into years. He always replied and he always answered my questions carefully and considerately. For that I will always be grateful.
He was on BBC Radio 4’s PM programme yesterday. The presenter Evan Davies interviewed him. Professor Spiegelhalter came out with a line that ought to be resonating round the Covid Inquiry but doubtless won’t. In his view, because deaths peaked in early April 2020, thanks to the voluntary reduction in travel and social contact, infections must have been falling before the March 23rd lockdown kicked in. If so, then it must follow that the lockdown, which so many at the Covid Inquiry seem to be claiming should have been brought in earlier, would have made no difference. Or, am I missing something?
Here’s part of the exchange:
David Spiegelhalter: I think personally, the biggest most interesting thing is, which is in a sense unanswerable, is whether voluntary measures would have been enough because you know we know that deaths from Covid peaked in early April in fact, 2020, which means that infections must have been falling before the mandatory lockdown on March the 23rd.
Evan Davies: But hold on, run that past me again, so you were saying the deaths peaked at a time that would imply that it was already falling before the lockdown?
DS: The number of infections I think would have been falling before March the 23rd, probably about in the week beforehand because you know, the week before March the 16th there were lots of you know requests to reduce travel and all sorts of voluntary ..
ED (interrupts): We had a soft lockdown …
DS: Yes, we had a soft one and it’s always going to be an open question whether if that had been made harder but not actually mandatory what effect would have been.
ED: I mean, look, several years on now David, we talked to you all the time during the pandemic, sort of on-the-go commentary. What have you reflected over the years about what might have been done differently, better, or how you think about it?
DS: Well, there are some things that, you know, have been recognised, sending people back to care homes, and in particular the lack of testing for people not knowing what was going on, a huge amount was spent on Test and Trace and I always wonder whether that could have been done better, and in particular could have been evaluated better. I think there should have been far more experimentation. They finally got around to randomising schools, different policies for sending kids home in 2021. I found out they’d been sending kids home unnecessarily. And so as a statistician I really, really regret that there wasn’t more evidence being gathered about the effectiveness of what we’re all doing.
You can listen to the show yourself right here. Spin through to about 50 minutes in. I have heard enough of David Spiegelhalter since 2020 to know that he is a man worth listening to. But so often what matters more with someone worth listening to is having enough people prepared to listen.
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 Telegraph headlines :-
“Matt Hancock warns vaccine fake news is a ‘deadly threat’”
In any past normal society Hancock would be ended up behind bars or at least sacked for his gross incompetence, but no, Johnson, ploughs on with these totally corrupt agenda driven globalists.
Hancock is still young, plenty of time for him to face “justice”.
I ‘m not sufficiently familiar with the detail of the legislation. But are those responsible for deliberately engendering fear guilty of terrorist offences?
After all – this is the purpose of terrorist acts : to create disproportionate fear in the population, and even in terms of death toll, the victims of associated fear measures must now far exceed the twin towers fatalities.
From CPS website, Rick:
Terrorism is the use or threat of action, both in and outside of the UK, designed to influence any international government organisation or to intimidate the public. It must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
Examples include:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/terrorism
Thanks, Sam. Confirms my instinct.
Of course, the withholding of Ivermectin might be considered as : “endangering a person’s life”, as could coercing a ‘vaccine’ whilst withholding information about side effects….?
This quotation should go hand-in-hand with an email to local MPs while asking them if they received their copy of Laura Dobsworth’s State of Fear.
He knows he’s going to prison if the truth ever gets out
You think so? Blair is still running about earning good money with his nose in government policy after Iraq. The same will happen to this snivelling little shit no doubt.
Personally, I hope he’s tried for treason but he’s not the only one complicit in all this so will have his back covered.
He’ll get a knighthood!
Jimmy Saville had one, Nick Clegg and Keir Starmer have one so it seems they hand them out like sweets.
I’d like one too – so I can rock up to the queen and tell her where to shove her sword – preferably up the arse of Mancock.
I live for that day.
I don’t think there’s any point in fantasizing. It’s unlikely to happen.
What I would like to see is a growing awareness that destroys the establishment game-plan with growing antagonism to it. After that … we’ll see.
Sod zero covid, I want to see zero Hancock
I think it’s time to sue, sue and sue again!
Right. So have you started the ball rolling by employing a legal team?
Still using that meaningless, brain-dead term ‘Covid deaths’ without explanation. Why?
… and why yet another repetition of that stupid bar chart? The fake news business doesn’t need distribution help.
I wouldnt be surprised if a large percentage of the remaining 60% werent covid deaths either. Doctors dont always put the true reason for death down on death certificates. Dr Harold Shipman is unlikely to be the first and last Doctor to wield their power of trust in an evil way.
My impression is that, for any elderly person with a slew of conditions (as is very common in the very old, who are unkindly called ‘crocks’ in the trade), the death cert. mentions all the conditions and you take your pick. Of course, if you’re an NHS liar, you pick covvie and leave the rest.
My mother died in April, in a care home, fell and broke her hip, had it fixed, came home and the next day had a stroke and died 3 days later. What was on her death cert? “Old age”. Nothing else. The registrar was appalled and had to bounce it back to the coroner. So yes, death certs are as accurate as a Ferguson model.
Spot on. I’ve used the somewhat pejorative term “Shipman Certificates” elsewhere for the same reason. There appears to have been a substantial ‘transition’ on paper over the winter, for example. After all, the creation of a special ‘tick box’ (as it were) on the form was an open goal for some. As a result, the ONS weekly reports are probably best read with a degree of scepticism – not just in this place!
Of course, historically, Shipman committed suicide in the slammer, perhaps ‘cos someone turned a blind eye.
I’m well past believing our official figures.
Why wasn’t there an investigation into the gold standard of testing when it reveals positive in engine oil and pawpaw fruit.
I should think the real number is closer to 100%.
How about 99.9999999999999999999999999999999%. Even that might be understating the extent of the Covid death certificate fraud. See today’s OffG articlehttps://off-guardian.org/2021/06/02/counting-covids-deceptive-deaths/
I think “recent” can be taken out of the above and 40% is probably a large underestimate.
40% seems far too low.
Actual causes of death are probably things like motorcycle accidents, plane crashes, and gunshot wounds.
A friend just rang to say he believes I may have an asymptomatic beer deficiency
Well if my visit to the freedom pub saves just one life
The thing is, none of us believes a word their stats suggest any more.
The Fauci emails look cheering though.
Any straight to Wormtongue?
Blimey, that’s what I would truly call a “No shit Sherlock” piece of reporting from the Telegraph.
Will they count me as a covid death. I’m dead mad about all the bollocks and sick to death of Matt Hancock.
Little cheery news to read that Sir Kevan Collins has told auld Lard Arse to sick his schools rescue up his arse.
And yet this b.s. continues…