Then that is all we need to agree on in the present situation. I don't think anyone is denying the uses of a spanner that fits other nuts but is ill-fitting for the one that needs shifting.

That's right Mike. it is all we need to agree on in the present situation. I hope to be in the first row when the public inquiry uncovers that, and tells the world the was all we needed to agree. Oh happy days once it comes out.

>SAGE prepared and is preparing for a second wave, but viruses to NOT have second waves, this is basic knowledge in immunology.

I'm afraid I haven't got time to read through 14 pages (sorry!) so why the recent increase in cases? Am aware of the concerns over PCR testing but is this statement incorrect? I can accept that all we did in the UK was hide away from it for a while during lockdown therefore it was still there but it didn't surge over the summer, waited until winter. Sweden has also had an increase?

Globally its increasing as places hit winter (and decreasing southern hemisphere as they hit summer).
This is exactly the behaviour you'd expect from a seasonal endemic virus.

All this talk of "waves" is meaningless. It became endemic in most countries by March. At this point any talk of waves was nonsense. It was just controlled via social measures and seasonality.

Hiding behind the sofa hoping it goes away accomplishes nothing long term - the second its released you have a huge reservoir of unexposed people just lined up to get infected and spread.
Far better would be to allow spread in the summer where its naturally slower, infect the healthy and people with highest contacts so that when winter came it had fewer hosts once conditions were more favourable to it.
So likely lockdown made things far worse and quite possibly caused far more deaths when that is factored in.

SAGE and IC Report 9 modelled this spike after lockdown, Lancet in October reviewed global data and show it was a real thing, the Wales lockdown again proved this point.
Lockdowns kick the can down the road at the expense of a worse problem further down that road.

False positive Covid-19 tests may be the result of contamination in laboratories
By Natasha Meredith. Published 01 December 2020

A major cause of false positive Covid-19 test is contamination, as outlined in a new opinion piece in the journal Clinical Chemistry.

Read the full article here
https://www.surrey.ac.uk/news/false-positive-covid-19-tests-may-be-result-contamination-laboratories

'They don’t understand how serious this is. If they can’t tell us the oFPR, our PCR testing is worthless.'
Thread by Dr Mike Yeadon

I urge all followers who have read my criticisms of PCR mass testing in U.K. to read Mr Fordham’s carefully worded letter. (Note that the innovation minister in the Lords, Lord Bethel, already admitted that the PCR system doesn’t have the equivalent of an MOT.)

Mr Fordham's letter to Lucy Frazer MP for South East Cambridgeshire.

They don’t understand how serious this is. If they can’t tell us the oFPR, our PCR testing is worthless.
https://twitter.com/EdmundFordham/status/1332754320459255813

Without this information it’s impossible to interpret any result. If the oFPR is 4%, for example, and if the true prevalence is 0.3% (it’s probably less), then for every 10,000 tests, 400 positives would be false & 30 positives would be genuine. So 93% of positives are false.

As Mr Fordham points out, almost all policies pivot on PCR mass testing. Hancock previously admitted on talkRADIO to Julia Hartley-Brewer in late summer that the FPR was “just under 1%”. That was a flat lie (possibly inadvertent but he’s never corrected the record).

The reason we are sure Hancock told a lie is that they have never known the FPR. Those including Hancock who believe that the oFPR can be estimated by inspection of the lowest positivity ever recorded, while logical, is completely wrong.

Changes in personnel, throughout, testing architecture & the like can radically alter the oFPR. Since Hancock’s remark in late summer, PCR mass testing has moved into the Lighthouse Labs & this creates a new & urgent need to continually assess oFPR.

I’ve good reason to believe it’s now VERY much higher now that the testing is being done by people far less experienced than before & at considerably higher throughput. Both factors greatly increase oFPR. I believe almost all positives out of these favourites are false, most of the time.

This accounts entirely for the notion that we’re in the midst of a lethal pandemic of a SARS virus, whereas the empirical data tells us for certain that we are not.

We are running at fewer respiratory illness calls to NHS111 & attendances to A&E. Yet this mass of false positives floods the deaths attribution system, making it appear that we’ve hundreds of covid19 deaths per day when we don’t. These deaths would be additional to other deaths for precautions to make any sense. Yet adjusted all causes mortality does not reflect this.

It is not just me having severe doubts about the trustworthiness of the PCR mass testing system in U.K. (note, I’m making no claims about what’s happening in other countries).

Here’s my latest:
https://lockdownsceptics.org/the-pcr-false-positive-pseudo-epidemic/

Univ Surrey also:
https://academic.oup.com/clinchem/article/66/11/1369/5902447

They’ve just got to halt this test ‘with no MOT’ before they kill anyone else.

Forgot to add that the lateral flow tests do have the test equivalent of an MOT. Whatever you think of them, unless you’ve read the entire 3rd party validation report (which the PCR testing system doesn’t have) it's probably wrong. There’s a great deal of propaganda about LFT possibly originating from those making pots of money from Lighthouse Labs or those who are “immunity deniers”, but it’s perfectly good enough to identify infectious subjects, and misses no more of these than does PCR, even done well.

I’m aware of population tests with LFT in Liverpool, the nations hotspot, and Merthyr Tydfil, and in both cases finding either very low prevalences (possibly zero, depending on where the line is drawn for oFPR when performed by the army rather than by Porton Down scientists).

Same story in Vienna, by the way despite their prevalence by PCR recently being the same as in U.K.

Then there’s the infamous recent case in University of Cambridge, where all students initially testing positive by PCR were negative on retest, for a 100% false diagnosis rate. No virus.

Yardley Yeadon
https://twitter.com/MichaelYeadon3/status/1337686956449423361