Nobody knows how many people died as a result of the UK/US Coalition of Death led destruction of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and, by proxy, Syria and Yemen. Nobody even knows how many people western forces themselves killed directly. That is a huge number, but still under 10% of the total. To add to that you have to add those who died in subsequent conflict engendered by the forced dismantling of the state the West disapproved of. Some were killed by western proxies, some by anti-western forces, and some just by those reverting to ancient tribal hostility and battle for resources into which the country had been regressed by bombing.
You then have to add all those who died directly as a result of the destruction of national infrastructure. Iraq lost in the destruction 60% of its potable drinking water, 75% of its medical facilities and 80% of its electricity. This caused millions of deaths, as did displacement. We are only of course talking about deaths, not maiming. This very sober analysis from Salon makes a stab at 2.4 million for Iraqi deaths caused by the war.
The number of Iraqi casualties is not just a historical dispute, because the killing is still going on today. Since several major cities in Iraq and Syria fell to Islamic State in 2014, the U.S. has led the heaviest bombing campaign since the American War in Vietnam, dropping 105,000 bombs and missiles and reducing most of Mosul and other contested Iraqi and Syrian cities to rubble.
An Iraqi Kurdish intelligence report estimated that at least 40,000 civilians were killed in the bombardment of Mosul alone, with many more bodies still buried in the rubble. A recent project to remove rubble and recover bodies in just one neighborhood found 3,353 more bodies, of whom only 20% were identified as ISIS fighters and 80% as civilians. Another 11,000 people in Mosul are still reported missing by their families.
For a vivid illustration, here is a photo of Sirte, Libya, after it was kindly “liberated” by NATO aerial bombardment. NATO carried out 14,000 bombing sorties on Libya.
Sirte, Libya, after NATO bombing
The neo-con drive to dominate the Middle East, in alliance with Saudi Arabia and Israel, has caused an apocalyptic level of death and destruction. It really is very difficult indeed to quantify the number of people killed as a direct result of the policy of “liberal intervention” in these countries. Bombing people into freedom has collateral damage. There are also the vast unintended consequences. The destruction of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria launched a wave of refugee migration which led to politicial instability throughout Europe and contributed to, among many other consequences, Brexit.
For the purposes of argument, I am going to put an extremely conservative figure of 5 million on the number of people who died as a result of Western military intervention, direct or proxy, in the Middle East.
Now compare that to the worldwide death toll from coronavirus: 220,000. Let me say that again.
Western aggressive wars to coronavirus: 5,000,000 : 220,000.
Or put it another way. The total number of deaths from coronavirus in the UK so far is about half the number of civilians killed directly by the US military in the single city of Mosul.
Makes you think, doesn’t it? There are four horsemen of the apocalypse, and while of course I do not blame people for focusing on the one which is riding at them personally, do not forget the others. Coronavirus has not finished killing. But then nor have western wars.
The sight which I cannot stand is the mainstream media which cheered on the horseman of war as they argued for the invasion Iraq on the basis of lies – and still defend it as a “liberation” – who now pretend massive concern for human life. The hypocrites are disgusting.
I was wrong when I initially wrote about the coronavirus.
Before I detail where I was wrong, let me say where I believe I was right. Large general population sampling antibody studies are now just beginning to emerge, and I feel reasonably confident that I was in fact correct that the mortality rate of coronavirus is under 1%, and probably not too different from the 0.5% generally quoted for Hong Kong flu. The term “infection fatality rate” is now being used to describe this true mortality rate. The “infection fatality rate” is the percentage of those who get the disease who die.
These are very early days for whole population sampling antibody studies, and the true picture should become more plain over the next month or two. I must say I have found it alarmingly difficult to explain to people the rather simple concept that you cannot infer a mortality rate among everybody who catches the disease, from the results you get when by definition you have only been offering tests to the most acute cases presenting as needing serious treatment. Of course a fair proportion of the worst cases don’t make it through the disease. But there is a population of millions in the UK (and nobody has a serious idea how many) who have had the disease with no or mild symptoms, and who do not figure in the statistics.
The very large majority of people in the UK who have had coronavirus have never been tested. That is simply true. How many, nobody knows. That is also true.
I do not endorse the extrapolation from New York to the UK, in this Daily Mail piece, to try to calculate how many people may have had coronavirus in the UK. But buried in there is the best collection I can find anywhere of what sampling antibody studies are indicating for the “infection fatality rate” across various US and European locations, and there is a strong clustering under 1%. Now these are preliminary studies, though almost all from reputable institutions. Proper, large scale, antibody testing programmes to produce peer reviewed and authoritatively published studies are on the way, but not here yet. I repeat, though, that I think the infection mortality rate is somewhere below 1%.
Where I was wrong, was in not realising that what is different about this disease from a flu is that it is really very, very contagious. So a far higher percentage of the population get it, all at once. Over two seasons, only about 30% of the UK population got the Hong Kong flu. Unchecked, it seems this coronavirus can spread very much quicker than that. I do not know why, but it appears that it can. So the lockdown policies to prevent health services being overwhelmed are needed and do have my support.
I do not however support the level of alarmism and panic. Of course the disease is really appalling for those who get it badly. It is a painful, protracted and terrifying experience. But a similar level of scrutiny of extreme illnesses of other kinds would bring similar stories. I have had three brushes with death in my own life.
In 2003 I had multiple pulmonary emboli (bloodclots in both lungs), which left me in a coma for days, was incredibly painful and I understand very similar in terms of experience to the end phase of this coronavirus. In 1986 I was actually declared dead in a hospital in Kaduna, Northern Nigeria (salmonella paratyphoid B), and was woken up on a morgue trolley by a cockroach eating my nostril. In 1974 I had emergency surgery for peritonitis, and was in hospital for 5 weeks and then a convalescent home. Retailing the experience or images of any of these illnesses would be as capable or more of generating the terror being created by the detailed coverage of extreme cases of coronavirus.
Yes the coronavirus is horrible if you get it badly. Almost all severe disease is horrible and death very seldom consists of peacefully stopping breathing, despite Hollywood. I wonder if having lived so much in Africa has changed my attitude to death. We do not see death much in the UK. Did you know the British have a 350% higher propensity than the Italians to put their elderly into care homes? That is why the deaths in Italy were so much more visible, even though the truth is that the UK government is doing not significantly better, and quite probably worse, than the Italian government, at containing the virus. It is only now making a start at adding English care home deaths to the official statistics (Scotland has for weeks).
I do support lockdown, I do support every sensible precaution being taken because the virus is so contagious. I utterly deplore the vast quantities being spent on war, the $220 billion being squandered on Trident missiles while the most basic precautions stockpiling against the much more real threat of a pandemic were not undertaken, because Tories begrudged spending a few millions on the NHS. I get all of that and I repeat it. But we must not be panicked into believing that the threat is greater than it is. You have approximately a 99% chance, (still nobody knows for certain) of surviving this disease if you catch it. If you are under 60, your chance of death is almost certainly at worst 1 in 500 if you catch it. If you are older or like me have heart and lung issues, it looks a bit bleak. But we are not immortal, nor would I wish to be.
But remember this. Your odds of survival are massively better than were those of a civilian in a country that your country chose to invade in recent years. Did you, personally, do enough to try to stop that?
Remember, there are other horsemen.
——————————————
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
Maggie Thatcher evidently thought that her most important legacy was New Labour- an Opposition that shared her ideology and hatred of the working class. She was wrong though, bad as New Labour is, the worst of her legacies was the hatred of community-passed off as suspicion of the state- that is evidenced in the cult promoting the idea that there is no pandemic.
Those who view themselves as being of the left-Marxist!- ought to look around them: their associates are all the old Reaganites and Thatcherites such as Trump, Johnson and Bolsonaro who hold that much more important than public health is the capitalist economy. To save capitalism and protect capital accumulation from the “waste” involved in keeping the unemployed alive, they are even prepared to let the virus spread unchecked, while they experiment with propaganda.
And this latest experiment, made possible by the success achieved in previous campaigns, including the Iraq war preliminaries, is the most daring yet: as all over Europe mass graves are being dug, and mortality figures are rising alarmingly, the friends of the system are denying that there is anything to be alarmed about. In doing this the Trumps and neo-liberals, the Cummings and the Michigan militia are gratefully acknowledging the invaluable assistance of the “leftists” posing as libertarians without whose assistance and paranoid theorising
none of this would have been possible.
Excellent points. I am surprised at those who think they are right-on and sticking it to the man, as they do precisely what the rich capitalists want, while parroting the nonsense of Trump and his alt-right fascists. The term “useful idiots” could have been specifically designed for these ludicrous and dangerous denialists.
Well said bevin.
Over and over again we see that conspiracy theory bolsters the arguments of the right; go after Condoleezza Rice and Dick Cheney? Nah, it’s NIST we need to attack, and Noam Chomsky, Amy Goodman and Julian Assange are “controlled opposition”. Right-wing governments letting the virus run riot? Nah, it’s ICL and the WHO, in a big conspiracy to enforce vaccination.
And so often it’s anti-scientific, anti-rational. Why? Because science gives us the tools to see through the claims in advertising and the corporate media. Science and rationality empower us; with a bit of understanding and self discipline we can do them for ourselves.
Goldacre; Bad Science. Learn it; use it.
If I could add,
I wouldnt hold Democracy now that high.
They have drifted towards a more neo-con type analysis of events past years.
I wonder whether those who control the Institute of Psychiatry, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford as they bathe in money from Big Pharma realised that by paying Ben Goldacre they were helping a man who would assist the leftwing opposition so much? What is leftwing opposition anyway if it’s not opposition to these sorts of interests? It wouldn’t surprise me if Goldacre is on first name terms with half of the membership of the Behavioural Insights Team (“nudge unit”) founded by (and which works with) the Cabinet Office.
Goldacre; Bad Science. Learn it; use it.
Ben Goldacre quotes Prof John Ioannidis extensively in his book “Bad Science.” Ben calls him a “godlike figure in the field of research about research” because he is an expert in analysing data correctly. Ioannidis has gained a global reputation by exposing bad science. His reputation and career depend on him getting data analysis right. On the 18th of April, he said:
“Our data suggests that Covid-19 has an infection-fatality rate that is in the same ballpark as seasonal influenza.”
So what? He supports restrictions.
He may say something different later. And you’re still battling experts:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/14/should-everyone-be-wearing-face-masks
Er, Node, how many times has Goldacre said that? Or praised Ioannidis in any way? You couldn’t just be cherry-picking a throw-away remark and repeating it over and over again for your own ends, could you? ‘Cos I notice that a Google search on that exact phrase now returns as its fourth hit down an obscure forum on craigmurray.org.uk about the collapse of a building…
Er, Node, how many times has Goldacre said that?
Just the once that I know of. I’m not sure what your point is. You said “Goldacre; Bad Science. Learn it; use it, “ so I did, and now you’re complaining that I did.
Perhaps I didn’t make my point clear. I can summarise it in 3 statements:
(1) You respect and trust Goldacre.
(2) Goldacre respects and trusts Ioannidis.
(3) Ioannidis says “Our data suggests that Covid-19 has an infection-fatality rate that is in the same ballpark as seasonal influenza.”
Do you dispute any of these 3 statements?
1) I’ve never met Goldacre. I don’t need to trust him because he’s never asked to borrow a tenner. His books have presented me with tools I can use for myself. I respect him for offering me those.
2) I have no idea if Goldacre has ever met Ioannidis, or lent him a tenner or anything. The tools Goldacre offers permit and encourage us to dispense with such personal issues of trust and respect, and instead consider evidence directly.
3) Yes, Ioannidis said that. He’s said a lot of things. So what? That was based on one study. If you’re so interested in that study, link to a discussion in the literature or on the technical forums, so we can see the data and the technical criticisms of the study.
Ha ha, I’ll skip over your prevarications on (1) and (2).
Clark Yes, Ioannidis said that.
So an acknowledged world expert in analysing data, in the full knowledge that he what he is about to say will come under immense scrutiny, and that he is risking his career and reputation, says “Our data suggests that Covid-19 has an infection-fatality rate that is in the same ballpark as seasonal influenza.”
Why Clark? Why would he say that if he wasn’t certain it was true? And who better to judge if it’s true? Why would he lie? How could he be wrong?
Does Ioannidis supply definitions for “suggests” and “ballpark”?
Clark.
His meaning is absolutely clear. You are conceding that you cannot offer a plausible explanation for Ioannidis’s statement other than that it is true.
I’ll leave you to think about that.
Yes, Ioannidis meaning is very clear. Covid-19’s IFR may not even be in the same ballpark as that of seasonal flu, though it probably is.
From what you’ve seen of the fatality figures, do you think it’s likely to be much lower?
– “The researchers concluded from a random sample of 919 people that about 15% of Gangelt’s population had been infected, with a fatality rate of 0.37%.”
Node, you’ve been making so much fuss over that one sentence from a YouTube talk for, er, I think it’s over a week now, and you have never once linked to the single study it was based on, nor to any technical peer-group discussion or criticism of the paper, nor to any other papers that address the same subject, nor to a systematic review of such papers; nothing. Just that one same old sentence over and over again.
Do you really think you’re presenting anything resembling a scientific argument? Is this what you think scientists do for a living? What about when they don’t agree? Do they resort to wrestling or something?
Do you really think you’re presenting anything resembling a scientific argument?
No, I’m deliberately not doing that. If I did you would argue over the data or its interpretation. You would not accept a scientific argument if it contradicted your beliefs. You argue like a Flat Earther, adopting any position, no matter how implausible, as long as it can’t be absolutely disproved. I know this with certainty from years of experience.
So instead I present a logical argument which gives you no plausible wriggle room. I cite an unimpeachable expert on the subject and explain why he should be trusted in these specific circumstances and invite you to find fault with my logic. You can’t, so instead complain on non-logical grounds, eg suggesting that citing the same logic more than once somehow weakens it.
Node: “So instead I present a logical argument which gives you no plausible wriggle room. “
You did nothing of the kind. All you’ve done is quote a few words over and over again, then proceed with the crowing. “See? See? He’s an expert! So you’re wrong! And someone _you_ like seems to like him too! So there! Gotcha!” and so forth.
That’s not the same as presenting a logical argument, sorry, it’s an appeal to authority.
Don’t worry, Glenn, I wouldn’t try logic on you.
How very unlike you, Node, to respond with a personal attack!
I understand that you’re desperate now, your thrashing around should make the most heartless feel some pity. All the same, I kindly suggest you try to retain whatever dignity you feel remains and give it up.
Unless, of course, you’re providing a public service by highlighting the absurdity of denialism when it comes to Covid-19.
The Bonn University study of Gangelt in Germany that I referenced above, May 5, 17:57, turns out to be very flawed, based on only seven deaths. Two more of the sample have died since then, and around twenty remain in critical condition, so may yet die.
Looks like this population will show around 1% Infection Fatality Rate, same as New York City is proving out at.
– Ben Goldacre quotes Prof John Ioannidis extensively in his book “Bad Science.””
Actually, I can’t think of any quotes of Ioannidis in Bad Science. And I’ve read it so many times it’s falling apart. You, Node, apparently haven’t read Bad Science at all, or you’d know to concentrate on evidence rather than a scientist’s reputation.
Here is a link about Ioannidis; most epidemiologists disagree with his Stanford study:
https://www.wired.com/story/prophet-of-scientific-rigor-and-a-covid-contrarian/
And the Stanford study has drawn major criticism; non-random subject recruitment, an unreliable antibody test, and flawed statistical analysis:
https://www.wired.com/story/new-covid-19-antibody-study-results-are-in-are-they-right/
Clark, such reactionaries cannot critique the neoiberal order and its value system because that value system is what undergirds their hyper-individualism. In lieu of going in that direction they attempt to reconcile their cognitive dissonance in conspiracy theories, antisemitism and the like.
Yep. Individualism is so seductive. “My right to express my opinion, don’t you dare contradict, you’re killing free speech…”; this is the “post truth” world. Sad, init?
I have a right to say this, even if it has been proved wrong.
I have a right to keep saying it, even if it would kill people.
Don’t you dare interfere with my rights!
With rights come responsibilities, but half of that equation has been forgotten.
Clark, are you going to answer my question at 16.14 above?
Node
Could you respond to mine @ 13:51?
Q When is the next USUKIs war and against whom? Iran?
Well they’d better not have an asymptomatic case of covid-19 on their aircraft carrier…
Do you think funeral directors in New York are part of the same clique that encompasses Trump, neo-liberals, Cummings and the Michigan militia?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5f_6ltv7oI
What an obscure question. odour=click_bait; default=deny
It is not an obscure question. It is evidence that many funeral directors in New York believe that deaths from Covid-19 are being inflated.
The suggestion is that by inflating the number of deaths attributed to Covid-19 allows New York to claim additional Federal funds.
The funeral directors admit that they are unable to quantify the degree of inflation regarding Covid-19 deaths. However support for the overall thrust of the claim comes from none other than Dr. Denorah Birx.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/birx-says-government-is-classifying-all-deaths-of-patients-with-coronavirus-as-covid-19-deaths-regardless-of-cause
I would be interested to understand how your opinion regarding the situation in New York is more informed than that of a range of New York funeral directors and Dr. Deborah Birx.
Deborah Leah Birx who works for Donald Trump and the White House?
That is correct. Are you implying that her current job invalidates her opinions?
Does she or does she not have the ability to ensure that Covid-19 death statistics are “massaged:?
Why would her stated opinion be in line with the observed experiences of New York funeral directors? Is there some implied suggestion that New York funeral directors are part of a Trump orchestrated conspiracy?
It is unlikely that smear and innuendo will contribute to developing an informed understanding as to what is actually going on.
I don’t care enough to follow your link. You obviously have a political agenda. It is clear what covid-19 does. Maybe funeral directors are expropriating funds, but if so it’s not very important, in fact its trivial by comparison. I can just as easily post something like this:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52196815
but so what? It’s anecdotal; why descend to such poor levels of evidence?
The Dr Birk who was seen squirming when the blond buffoon ( the US version) was promoting his cure of intravenous bleach/disinfectant?
I doubt there are many genuine leftists of that ilk, bevin,. Liberals, certainly — of the hyper-individualistic libertarian stripe, ones who believe only in negative freedom. Their whole outlook is one of total self-absorption: “I don’t want to be inconvenienced in any way., if I spread the virus to other people, who cares?” Petulant entitlement and utter narcissism which they try and justify with imagined oppression and lame conspiracies.
So, it was Thatcher who was responsible for scepticism of the pandemic? What astonishing powers of prophecy she had!
“the cult promoting the idea that there is no pandemic.”
Umm no, the idea that there IS a pandemic is the initial movement. So let’s not reheat that old 9/11 manoeuvre of reversal of the burden of proof.
“To save capitalism and protect capital accumulation….”
No – once again, it is the news of the pandemic that came first. Although by “news” we should say that tsunami of hysteria pedalled by the media – which has suddenly become “Marxist”. Well I guess they must care after all!
“…prepared to let the virus spread unchecked, while they experiment with propaganda.”
Begging the question over and over again.
“And this latest experiment, made possible by the success achieved in previous campaigns, including the Iraq war preliminaries, is the most daring yet:”
This latest experiment certainly is the most daring yet. We have here the old war propaganda as tried out with 9/11: “You are under attack! Don’t think about it! You have no time! We need emergency measures! We need a police state!” Only note how this time: the pubic themselves are not only going along with it. They are clamouring for it! Such is the power of propaganda!
“that is evidenced in the cult promoting the idea that there is no pandemic.”
It depends what you mean by pandemic. If you mean “endemic in every country”, then they are wrong. If you mean “endemic in every part of every country” then they are right.
Er, you don’t mean “endemic”, do you? Do you mean “epidemic”?
endemic – ɛnˈdɛmɪk – adjective
1 – (of a disease or condition) regularly found among particular people or in a certain area.
– ‘complacency is endemic in industry today’
2 – (of a plant or animal) native and restricted to a certain place.
– ‘a marsupial endemic to north-eastern Australia’
Covid-19 wasn’t regularly found anywhere last year. That’s why it’s epidemic everywhere now.
Today’s lie from the Rothermere press about Covid-19: “Another 453 dead from coronavirus in hospitals across UK”
Nope. Not even the government and its holy private-public partnership known as the “NHS” claim that 453 died today in Britain “from” Covid-19. (I assume the Metro are talking about Covid-19 rather than other coronaviruses such as the ones that cause the common cold.) In fact I don’t think the authorities have EVER published a figure for how many have died FROM the coronavirus.
For all the fancy arithmetic stuff that’s being pushed out in different flavours to different segments of the population (most of whom don’t know the difference between a peak and a point of inflection), the basic difference between dying FROM something and dying WITH it is obscured.
Some of these people who died with the coronavirus probably didn’t even show any symptoms of it!
(More “quality” newspapers talk of “those who have died after testing positive for Covid-19”, which conveys the same lie but with twisty words that on the face of it are true, unlike the sh*t that’s in the Metro.)
– “…nobody knows how many died of rather than with the virus”
Overall mortality figures rubbished that argument weeks ago Keep churning it out.
Here:
https://squonk.tk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/deng17.png
Was that huge peak due to deaths from or with the virus?
And who cares?
Don’t you ever wonder why that red herring suddenly surfaced just now? We never used to care. When seasonal flu peaks the mortality curve, no one goes “oh yes, but a load of those died with the flu rather than from the flu”. It’s just a peak, and flu did it.
Watch out there is a pandemic about.
No-one knows the mortality rate of this pandemic but it seems likely that it is considerably less than 1%. In the period 1941-1945 there was a different kind of pandemic. That pandemic had a mortality rate of 15% for the population of the Soviet Union.
Had the Soviet Union locked down its economy and issued stay at home orders to its entire population then that particular pandemic would likely have infected the entire world.
Luckily no such dichotomy exists in the contemporary world as the human condition has evolved to such a degree that no-one any longer needs to eat, and so destroying the food chain will have no adverse consequences at all.
Alarmist mof the term “food chain”. The food chain is not threatened.
– “A food chain is a linear network of links in a food web starting from producer organisms (such as grass or trees which use radiation from the Sun to make their food) and ending at apex predator species (like grizzly bears or killer whales), detritivores (like earthworms or woodlice), or decomposer species (such as fungi or bacteria). A food chain also shows how the organisms are related with each other by the food they eat.
Don’t tell me, tell the management and customers of Wendys who have just started taking burgers off their menus.
You could then move on to advising the management of Costco and Kroger who have engaged in alarmist behavior by warning of dwindling supplies and the risk of rationing.
No doubt your explanation of the ecological meaning of “food chain” will be of great sustenance to the hungry.
I think you must mean “supply chain” Loony, not “food chain”, ie. a political-economic problem, not an ecological-environmental problem.
OK, so what’s wrong with the supply chain?
Coronavirus and the Middle East.
Perhaps growing bored with blaming, condemning and vilifying China over the outbreak of the virus, our “gold standard” news provider, the BBC, today chose to turn its (f)ire on Iran.
Astonishingly, of all the news they could be covering they chose to spend licence fee payers’ money tracking and tracing Iranian flights to blame them for the spread of Covid in Iraq and Lebanon.
Is BBC news and current affairs now anything more than a crude, pro-active propaganda machine for western, imperialist, neo-con governments and crooks?
Listen from 2:02:25:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000hvkk
BBC should probably be more concerned about this from closer to home.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-pictures-of-packed-aer-lingus-flight-from-belfast-spark-concerns-39181023.html#
Someone will raise this on ‘Points Of View’, and the 0.00001% of the viewing public who watch the programme will have satisfied themselves that it has been clocked/discussed/dealt with. Then they will return to watching the (next batch of) WWII anniversary celebrations.
Coronavirus and the Middle East…….
Sky News just now “RAF jets bomb northern Syria” , bomb who?, under just what level of permissions?, relevant international laws?, one might think that with UK care-home covid looking grim, a quick hobgoblin was needed… there’ll be ramped-up Chinese Russian haxors threat next….
That story is just bollox. What Mahan air did was no different from what British airlines were doing at the time. That’s why we have the second highest number of dead in the world. Iran not so much. Yes some virus were sent to Iraq and Lebanon no doubt, along with the Iranian pilgrims, but neither country has reported many cases. The worldometers list has 102 dead for Iraq, and 25 in Lebanon.
i’d be interested in what you think of this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=7&v=a3Ja0fsnFO4&feature=emb_logo
a vaccine already exists for the corona virus – what?
– “what?”
Yeah. If I had any money, I’d put it on this being pure bollox.
So if you pause the vid quick enough so that you can copy it down, the patent number they give is US 2006257852, and they say it’s a patent for a vaccine against SARS-CoV which causes SARS, not SARS-CoV-2 which causes CoVID-19. Then they give patent number EP 3172319B1, and then from 04:00 they show a screen showing patent number EP 3172319A1
There are lots of coronaviruses, so if those aren’t patents for vaccines against specifically SARS-CoV-2 / CoVID-19, it’s bollox. Patents are free to access, so you can go and look them up.
– Rashid Ali Buttar (born January 20, 1966) is an American osteopathic physician, conspiracy theorist, and anti-vaccine proponent from Charlotte, North Carolina. He is known for his controversial use of chelation therapy for numerous conditions, including autism and cancer. He has twice been reprimanded by the North Carolina Board of Medical Examiners for unethical treatment of patients and cited by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for illegal marketing of unapproved and adulterated drugs.
– During the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic, a series of videos featuring Buttar were posted to YouTube by the fake news website Next News Network, in which Buttar advanced a conspiracy theory claiming that NIAID director Anthony Fauci’s research helped create COVID-19, as well as numerous other false claims, such as that 5G cell phone networks and “chemtrails” cause COVID-19. YouTube removed the video a week after it was posted, replacing it with a message saying, “This video has been removed for violating YouTube’s Community Guidelines.”
wow, that’s interesting, thanks i’ve seen him posting elsewhere and have been unsure
no doubt you think it’s correct that youtube should rightly remove his posts as they contravene their guidelines – whatever they are
still, onwards and upwards as we face an even longer time in lockdown whilst at the same time this devious regime (i can’t call it government because i don’t believe it is) starts opening things up, like B&Q and Homebase even though they deny it!!
Let’s hope the government can be persuaded (tricked?) into adopting some more intelligent strategies. A friend of mine was hounded by a police helicopter while sunbathing a week ago; he must have been half a mile from the next nearest person.
It is interesting to see mention of food rationing: for many of us, of the superfluous generation condemned to DNR notices, Food Rationing is where we came in. Food rationing by the state that is, not Costco, Krogers or the marketplace. There are things much worse than the state, so long as people make sure that it is not used against them.
The market brings homelessness: the state can build houses and ensure that all have homes.
The market brings DNR notices: the state can ensure that there are enough resources-from beds to masks to nursing staff- in the healthcare system to accommodate the strains of an epidemic.
The market teaches us to rely on other peoples’ food- that is why famines are so regular in food exporting countries-. The state can encourage agriculture and ensure self sufficiency.
In fact the history of the state has largely been one of the use of centralised resources to protect the population from famines, natural disasters and invasions. And when the state failed, and people starved or died in large numbers, it was deemed that the Mandate of Heaven had run out and that a new state was necessary.
No doubt, as the ‘potato famine’ devastated Ireland and the famines that came with British rule, and export commodity production, to India, raged, there were many who from comfortable vantage points far away from the crises denied that there were crises at all. The Trevelyan family name sticks out in this context.
Denying that anything could be done about the mass starvation of poor people- most of whom were already half dead anyway and all of whom were mortal- the public was told that to feed the Irish without insisting on their slaving hours for every penny they got, put the entire economy in peril and subverted every principle of society.
We used to think that such callous and idiotic ideas had disappeared with the Depression, the Beveridge Report and the coming-by popular demand- of the Welfare State which brought the people of the UK unprecedentedly high living standards, opportunities for social mobility and encouragement of the talents and creativity of the nation. But we had reckoned without the cheap intellectual appeal of neo-liberalism and its get rich quick schemes. And now, when everything calls out for enlightened and firm state action, to save lives and provide the foundation for future happiness, these discussions are overwhelmed by lazy minded disciples of Thatcherite economics and sociology for whom the only possible role if the state is the protection of private property and the war criminals who broke the law in its defence.
Are there things worse than the state?
The US state decided to infect Guatemalan prisoners with syphilis.
The British state decided to deliberately expose conscript servicemen to radiation produced by nuclear tests.
An plethora of states have decided to appropriate citizens money to develop, test, produce and store nuclear weapons
The German state decided to lay waste to all of Europe and kill 15% of the population of the USSR.
The Cambodian state decided to liquidate approximately 30% of its entire population
The Chinese state decided to starve to death somewhere between 26 and 42 million people
The USSR decided to kill a few 10’s of millions of its own population.
Various states decided to fight WW1 and kill about 40 million people
The British state oversaw the Irish potato famine which killed about 1 million people and saw the population of Ireland fall by 25%
The South African state decided to introduce Apartheid.
The British state decided to infect hemophiliacs with AIDS
The Saudi Arabian government decides to execute homosexuals and apostates and pretty much anyone else they don’t like.
A range of states decided to bomb to destruction pretty much all real estate in Iraq, Libya and Syria
I could go on and on – it would be a very long list. It encompasses all governments of all political persuasions .
And then all of a sudden and for no reason at all Governments can be relied upon to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth with regard to Covid-19.
The German state, whose Supreme Court (unlike ours with Factortame) never accepted that EU courts were superior to their domestic Supreme Court, have ruled that the EU Court of Justice over stepped its powers when in Dec 2018 it declared ECB QE to be lawful. According to Bloomberg the German court have given the EU court 3 months to fix its ruling!
When I learnt of Factortame many years ago I was really surprised as to how it had happened, but maybe it didn’t have to happen that way and perhaps we could have stayed and just adopted a German approach to the EU. It seems to me in the EU there are countries who obey EU laws, there are countries who say they obey but sometimes don’t and then there is one who is above it. Anyway QE appears to either be crazy or at least in need of serious scrutiny and so at least the Germans are attempting to focus on the rapid forestation of all world economies with Magic Money Trees.
So what is this going to mean for (1) all the other compliant states who (a) obey the EU Court and who (b) need QE bail out money and (2) for ECB QE bailout funds?
Is this going to result in other countries re-considering their mass QE state support?
As usual I have no idea.
Well I have to congratulate you on your latest spin of the random outrage generator. Well done. Way to muddy the waters with a host of hot button assertions, leading to, guess what, a pseudo claim, which hardly anybody is actually contending.
Hardly anybody is actually contending apart from the person who postulated that there were worse things than the state – the person to whom the response was addressed.
By the way they are not assertions but facts.
Is this similar to a ‘ fate worse than death? ‘
No State of any kind is easy:
It’s Anarchy.
Now you may disagree Left and Right but in order for Humans to survive individualism is out of the window.
Have we come all this way through Husbandry of animals – crops etc in order to stand up and apart as human beings against The Powers That Be?
Can we not be ‘ The Powers That be? ‘
Or is that too big an ask?
Nothing wrong with Individualism – but it doesn’t keep the lights on or feed the Starving billions.
We cann live with Individualism when we can feed clothe – water and house the people of the world.
Until then – it remains Philosophy and not Politics (action ).
“The British state oversaw the Irish potato famine which killed about 1 million people and saw the population of Ireland fall by 25%”
An interesting interpretation. In fact the British government refused to use its powers, and fulfill its duty of protection, when faced with the potato blight. It did so because it wished to minimise the powers of the state for the same reasons that the neo-liberals today want to do the same: where the state refuses to act power is put into the hands of the ruling class, the wealthy and The Establishment.
The distrust of the state that we see here comes not from an anarchist perspective in which the duties of the state are undertaken by small self governing communities but from the liberal perspective in which the powers of the state are employed for the exclusive benefit of those who own the economy and their agents in the political, media and academic establishment.
By the way, nobody that I know of trusts the government on the Covid issue, what we believe is that to hold the government to account and to force it to adopt measures that it does not wish to enforce- the ‘lockdown’ quarantines being the best current example- it is best to argue on the basis of established facts rather than to howl imprecations at the ‘state’ and the government, while in fact urging it to take the dangerous and anti-social measures that it wants to take. And which Mr Cummings ideology teaches ought to be taken.
Public opinion is very rational in this instance, it knows that lives will be saved by restricting activities which lead to the spreading of the virus, and it knows that the government wants to end these restrictions- it is this public steadfastness which is going to control,the spread of the pandemic.
The nonsense you, Loonie and the other OffGuardian types, are spreading is precisely what Trump, Johnson and the capitalist class want the public to believe. They can hardly believe their good luck when they discover that many of those giving them the most fervent support actually consider themselves to be opposing them, and regard their consent to the state’s abdication of its responsibility to protect the vulnerable as a revolutionary act. l In a sense, of course, they are right- transferring power from a notionally democratic representative body into the hands of the corporations is precisely the revolution desired by fascists.
Loony confuses tthe concept of the state with misapplication a of how certain regimes have distorted that concept.
“duties of the state are undertaken by small self governing communities”
A small self governing community is a small state.
On the mortality rate which some here seems to argue about:
From yesterday: England’s excess death rate ‘is highest in Europe amid coronavirus crisis’, WHO reveals
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11542171/englands-excess-death-rate-highest-europe-coronavirus/
check this out
https://in-this-together.com/covid-19-is-a-statistical-nonsense/
all figures are meaningless as the narrative has to be maintained
Excess mortality is not created out of thin air, it is objective facts. These numbers doesnt say what people died from but its a no-brainer to claim that Covid19 have alot to do with these additional deaths. Or what else do you claim is behind the rise?
Jack
There are 100s of 1000s missing vital procedures and Ops right now.
People are dying because nothing else is going on in UK hospitals.
I’m not convinced that’s so. A regular, Tony M, commented on here that he was treated for broken bones just a few days ago. A friend of a friend continues to receive cancer treatment.
John+Pillager
How do you explain additional deaths in countries with no lockdown?
My very local to me Urgent Care Center closed on Friday.
Yet the government say the NHS is now open for everyone.
The two things seem incompatible.
Michael, I don’t suppose they said why; it could be cross-infection risk, or it could be staff shortage.
Yesterday I called a friend of mine who until recently was a nurse. I was specifically asking about the situation in the NHS. A friend of hers is a theatre nurse who has been taken off theatre to do ventilators in a covid-19 ward. She complains that her training on ventilators is utterly inadequate.
Despite the decreasing death rate, critical cases are still accumulating in wards because many take a long time to either recover or die.
Staff are complaining about increased work pressure, and shortage of personal protection equipment.
England has extremely high excess rate. It is number of death compared to expected number of deaths for a period. Whether with,without, or from Covid. Just literally deaths! https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps
England Spain Belgium Extremely high
Sweden and France Very high
Italy High
Calm down, dear commentators, the game is over. China has vaccine already. Old good method, inactivated virus.
Proved effective in mice and monkeys, vaccinated monkeys didn’t fell ill even when the live virus was brought directly in their trachea
Key word is PiCoVacc
Pre-print https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.17.046375v1
I know, there’s a lot of work before they are able to offer it to the world, let’s not discuss the procedure
@Clark, I hope you cheer up on hearing this news. Also, I’d like to thank you for advocating scientific approach.
Do you think we have to stock up on popcorn now, as an new drama will unfold? I expect USA will play “bad chinese vaccine, outdated cheap vaccine, malicious wrecked chinese vaccine” and “good modern expensive US reliable vaccine”. New but boring drama with predictable dialogues.
Hope russians calmly and silently get vaccinated and move on.
Tatyana, thanks, your news sounds good, but I’ll check it out before I celebrate.
So I’m hearing that a number of vaccines are being trialled, but the problem is that the test subjects (animals at first, humans later) have to be re-exposed to live virus after increasing time periods, because it is possible for vaccination to make matters worse, on exposure to live virus maybe three months after vaccination.
So we are definitely not out of danger yet.
That sounds hopeful Tatyana , though as you say “ let’s not discuss the procedure”. Well done for finding out about it. i expect you are right about the likely western response .
As Clark says it’s only one of a number of vaccines being trialled. The US, UK, Australia, Germany and others all have offerings at a similar state of development.
I realised that I made my first comments on Mr. Murray’s blog in this thread and didn’t give a message of support, for which I apologise. I have been reading your blog for a long time now and wish to say how much better informed I am because of that and thanks to your insight and fortitude. I have also read your three books and look forward to your next if you ever get around to it. I hope even in this difficult time for you that you and your family are well and as far as possible, keeping your spirits up. I hope that your legal preparations are going smoothly.Thank you for your great work and may you have many more years of great blogging.
UK, Sweden and three other European nations are not seeing a drop in cases, EU declare
CNBC report (5 May 2020)
Thats what you get for acting slow?
Perhaps the person most responsible for the UK being in lockdown is Professor Neil Ferguson. Ferguson believes that current measures are essential and necessary to protect the general population.
Whilst Ferguson is content with the entire population being subject to effective house arrest he is seemingly not content that his advice and recommendations apply to himself.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52553229
There have been a number of similar cases now. Advisors acting contrary to their advice.
I mean, how do these stories get out.
Are hacks watching their homes?
There are loads of celeb stories of this nature, for example.
That’s much more trivial.
You have to ask if there’s a political motivation behind these advisors being “outed”, or is it simply good copy, as with the celeb-outing.
– “Are hacks watching their homes?”
There’s been a pack of them watching Ferguson.
Which he should’ve realised before sloping off for a quick legover with his bit on the side.
He’s now resigned.
Whether this will signal a change in Govt. policy remains to be seen
With all things Covid-19 it is important to follow the science.
When Professor Ferguson ignores his own recommendations he does so based on his own scientific knowledge. Hence he is able to say that although he failed to follow social distancing guidelines but “I acted in the belief that I was immune, having tested positive for coronavirus and completely isolating myself for almost 2 weeks after developing symptoms”
Ah well bad optics, but a sound scientific rationale to underpin his decision making process. Except…
Sir Patrick Vallance, another accredited and respected scientist has today opined that people who recover from Coronavirus are not exempt from contracting it a second time.
Luckily the science is clear and unambiguous – If you recover from Coronavirus then you can act in the belief that you are immune whilst simultaneously acting in the belief that you can re-contract the infection.
The behaviour of scientists is not science; it’s just trivia. Science is about evidence, not scientists.
This would be a valid point were it not for the fact that a scientist is citing science as a justification for his behavior, and another scientist is citing science to reach the opposite conclusions of the first scientist.
A lot of things are about evidence – such as the need to review evidence so as to reach a determination regarding logical coherence.
It’s still just trivia. It should be no surprise to anyone that scientists talk about their everyday lives in terms of science. This is no more newsworthy than me going sunbathing.
Ah, but it’s a victory for the likes of Loony. It shows this guy isn’t “pure”, so therefore his message is besmirched.
Perhaps Loony doesn’t understand that this isn’t how science works, but he certainly understands how to work the ‘Poisoning the Well’ fallacy.
Science, these days, like Art, is about funding.
Modelling is speculative.
Hypothetical numerical projections presented as highly likely outcomes only to be rolled back enormously at a later stage.
And there’s a history of this with these Modelers.
They’re not doing Science.
They’re Modelling.
No need to defend them.
Mathematical modelling is a vitally important aspect of science. I’ve written mathematical models myself; just look at my Gravatar. Computers are mathematical instruments that enabled the solution of non-linear equations; a massive advance. Computers are to mathematics as microscopes and telescopes are to biology and astronomy.
Math is but a tool, a functional tool, of rational enquiry, of Science.
Hypothetical speculation in Modelling, is just that.
Speculation.
Should the actual numbers be much less by factors. then we reject the Model upon which the prognosis was based.
At the very least we ought to be looking to better Modelling.
Don’t see much action on this front.
I mean, is this fulsome rational enquiry and science, or like a religious faith kinda thing.
Herbie, the computing device you’re posting from was designed as a set of simulations. It seems to have been working OK when you posted your comment. People moan about the weather forecasts, but it’s like litter, you never notice the girt load in the bin, just the wee bit on the floor. We are surrounded by stuff that first existed as computer models; we never notice.
The people who usually complain about computer modelling are the ones who want to cast doubt on climate science. They don’t complain about aerodynamic modelling of all the stuff we’re surrounded by. It’s very selective criticism, and rather predictable.
Do you think science should steer clear of all maths, or just maths done on computers?
“I mean, is this fulsome rational enquiry and science, or like a religious faith kinda thing.”
The latter, it always is. Nobody is really interested in science, because science is about theories and proving them wrong. Religion, however, is about the truth and persuading people to accept that you are right (or abusing them if they don’t).
Well I love science, and all sorts of stuff will be disproved about SARS-CoV-2 and CoVID-19 over the coming years. But when you find yourself in the path of an oncoming truck, you take the action you know to get out of its path rather than hanging around to refine your theory.
Herbie seems to think that models don’t evolve, but they’re being worked on and updated all the time. In the case of covid-19 this takes place in full view of the public. At the link below you can see three major versions of the ICL model each with several modifictions (‘commits’) as it went along.
https://github.com/ImperialCollegeLondon/covid19model/compare/v3.0…master
Well, let’s give thanks then that these virus and climate modelers are kept busy and well away from aerodynamic modelling.
Seems there are useful models and completely crap models, the latter having a documented history of complete crapness. often involving the same modelers and funding network.
We can all agree, I’m sure, that it is correct to question a history of poor modeling when in other areas modeling is excellent.
That would be the rational way to proceed.
If you’re really interested and aren’t just manufacturing doubt, here are a couple of articles about modelling. Non-technical:
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2020/04/coronavirus-models-arent-supposed-be-right/609271/
Technical – “Transparency, Reproducibility, and Validity of COVID-19 Projection Models”
https://towardsdatascience.com/transparency-reproducibility-and-validity-of-covid-19-projection-models-78592e029f28
I know that climate models are validated by setting them to initial conditions from the past, and then running them to see how well they follow what actually happened.
Continuing with the theme of all responses to Covid-19 being led by science it seems that people should be wearing face masks at exactly the same time as not wearing face masks
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/04/scientists-disagree-over-face-masks-effect-on-covid-19
It is little wonder that the Government need to be actively involved. The general population are far too stupid to understand the simple principles of going outside whilst at the same time staying inside and wearing face masks contemporaneously with not wearing face masks.
Nothing could be more straightforward, and just to think the UK government spends over £90 billion per year on education and still the population are unable to understand these very simple principles absent specific government direction
WEAR A MASK
Anyone wanting to understand the masks issue would do much better to bypass the confusion being peddled by the Graun and go straight to the systematic review of various mask research. It is unambiguous:
– Face masks could offer an important tool for contributing to the management of community transmission of Covid19 within the general population. […] Our analysis suggests that their use could reduce onward transmission by asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic wearers if widely used in situations where physical distancing is not possible or predictable, contrasting to the standard use of masks for the protection of wearers. If correctly used on this basis, face masks, including homemade cloth masks, can contribute to reducing viral transmission.
https://rs-delve.github.io/reports/2020/05/04/face-masks-for-the-general-public.html
Yes Loony, I pointed out that piece of bad science coverage from the Guardian this morning:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/04/backing-the-wrong-horseman/comment-page-8/#comment-940056
Is that why you reposted it? Just to help undermine public understanding of science a wee bit further? Try to increase the death rate a bit? You’re clearly better at understanding science than the people you’re trying to mislead.
To suggest that I am seeking to increase the death rate is an utterly disguising accusation disseminated on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.
There are a lot of things that are either unknown or unclear with regard to both the pandemic and the response to the pandemic. No less a figure than Jonathon Sumption a former Supreme Court judge has urged the public to ask questions, and to challenge assertions so that they may as reasonable people seek an informed understanding as to an issue that effects every aspect of their lives.
You seem to claim perfect knowledge and according to you anyone that disagrees with you or challenges any of your musings must by definition be motivated by the most base, vile and genocidally nefarious motives. Accusations that are naturally made with complete disregard for any form of evidence whatsoever.
Oh well I’m terribly sorry Loony, but you do seem entirely capable of understanding the point I made on the previous page, and you were commenting when I posted it, so why did you link to that crap, confusing Guardian nonsense rather than the clear and unambiguous systematic review it was supposedly about? Should I just assume you’re hopelessly thick in future?
Loony: Your interest in increasing the death rate is illustrated by such sentiments (expressed by you) that “The NHS has to go”.
If we were to have the shambles of a health system that your American system is currently floundering under, there would be vastly more death. And I agree, that would be utterly disgusting – you should be ashamed of yourself. You will find no support whatsoever in the UK for abolishing the NHS, so why are you expressing such idiotic and extremely unpopular notions?
You do seem a even more confused than usual though, which is understandable given the unstable lunatic Trump that you’re here to provide cover for. What is your story now, that C-19 doesn’t exist? It’s isn’t a problem, is going away… what?
Average overall death rate is a guide and the average this year was lower than the preceding 5 years before the lockdown and after the peak had passed.
So any increase could be due to the lockdown and calling every death due to Covid! But the figures after the lockdown will need closer examination, separating respiratory illness from others, because presumably certain causes such as road accidents will decline (although I have witnessed two near misses on an empty road) and accidents in the home will increase!
The UK death rate has gone through the roof:
https://squonk.tk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/NCHS15_small.gif
Or against five year figures:
https://squonk.tk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/deng17.png
Here is the death rate in the US mid April:
https://squonk.tk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/NCHS15_small.gif
Of course if you look at the figures averaged over a year the current figures will look low; we’ve still got over half the year to come.
Lockdown is still in place, but the death rate does seem to be falling quite effectively:
https://twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1257691810899599364
Sorry, in my 23:20 comment I should have said “the death rate went through the roof”. It’s falling quite impressively now because lockdown decreased the infection rate from around 300,000 a day to around 100,000 a day, and it has continued to fall since then:
https://mrc-ide.github.io/covid19estimates/#/details/United_Kingdom
It’s A mighty Battle Clark..
I made a wee Video –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBQQaZcGaF8
Thank you Brian. I’ll get that old Dobsonian back up to Scotland yet, eh?
Clark, am I missing something? You say the infection rate is is down from 300,000 to 100,000, but isn’t that just a derived number, an estimate generated by the model? Isn’t it the case that from end of March to the present that the actual number of new cases has been pretty much stable at about 4500 a day.
300,000 to 100,000 is the infection rate per day as estimated by ICL’s model, which is about the best guide we have. The number of confirmed case depends mostly on how many tests get done, and it is always far short of the actual number of infections, because infected people with no symptoms don’t seek testing, and no one else is keen to test them either, because there are too few test kits, medical staff are short of time, and medical staff needing testing.
While covid-19 is spreading into a plentiful population with no resistance, ie. when it has no trouble finding new hosts, you’d expect deaths to be roughly proportional to infections, because both should increase at the same rate. So if you look at the Worldometers page:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
France, 170,551 confirmed cases, 25,531 deaths
Germany, 167,007 confirmed cases, 6,993 deaths
Russia, 155,370 confirmed cases, 1,451 deaths
Rather similar confirmed case numbers, but lots of variation in deaths. What’s going on is that France has done the least tests, Germany middling and Russia the most, and that’s reflected in the confirmed cases. Look in the columns on the right:
France, 1,100,228 total tests, 16,856 tests per million population
Germany, 2,547,052 total tests, 30,400 tests per million population
Russia, 4,460,357 total tests, 30,564 tests per million population
OK it’s a rough correlation, but now compare other countries and you’ll find the same rough correspondence.
“It’s falling quite impressively now because lockdown decreased the infection rate from around 300,000 a day to around 100,000 a day, and it has continued to fall since then:”
So how did the death rate manage to fall “quite impressively” in the spring of 2018 without “lockdown” then? We see two peaks, one larger than the other, one where there is “lockdown” and one where there wasn’t, yet, apparently, it is obvious that the shape of the second peak is due to “lockdown” even when the similar shape of the first peak isn’t.
Could you cite the graph you’re referring to please Bayard?
Meanwhile, probably you’re talking about flu, and probably it started running out of available hosts. The restrictions do artificially the same as would happen naturally, only sooner; both arrest the rise by making it increasingly difficult for the virus to encounter new hosts.
The difference is resistance in the population; covid-19 starts out in each new area with no resistance whatsoever in the population, so infection numbers rocket up with nothing to oppose them. By the time half the population are infected, it’s only half as likely for the virus to encounter new hosts, because half are already ‘occupied’ as it were. Its ‘target’ is 100%.
But flu set off out into a population most of whom have encountered flu before; it couldn’t make 100% infectious, maybe only 20% (I’m guessing here), so it can only get a fifth as far before resistance arrests it.
Sorry for the delay; continued below:
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/04/backing-the-wrong-horseman/comment-page-9/#comment-940487
Don’t worry about providing evidence, Dave! We’ll just take your word for these assertions.
After all, it’s just sunshine and fresh air, that’s the ticket for beating C-19, right? Cor Blimey, if only the doctors were as brilliant as you. Have you considered going down to your nearest major hospital and enlightening them?
Once it was revealed the overall death rate this year was below the average for preceding 5 years, (prior to lockdown) some fiddling the numbers and spin was required, as highlighted by Clark, to cast the figures as worse.
This was done by saving up the numbers and casting as much as possible as Covid and releasing them to a provide an above average figure for one week only, and then spinning a spike to hide a below average death rate.
Utter tosh, Dave. Yet again you assert while offering zero evidence.
Sure looks worse to me:
https://squonk.tk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/NCHS15_small.
– “…saving up the numbers and casting as much as possible as Covid and releasing them to a provide an above average figure for one week only”
This sounds like the care home deaths that hadn’t been counted, and were initially added into one single day of the ICL model. This distorted the figures for a couple of days, before those deaths were redistributed.
Some like Loony confuse science, hard data, with the interpretation of science by individual scientists sometimes influenced by politics. Others like Dave think that science is what the Advocate of bleach infusions, the idiotic POTUS says we must do. Others like node say that science is what one scientist finds and advocates is the right one Even though hundreds of others disagree. As to Paul, he thinks all science is a hoax and scientists are paid to fake results, but only those who fake results and get paid, thereby becoming ‘whistleblowers’ are to be believed. Rhys wants scientists rounded up and tried, some even locked up and perhaps tortured or killed.
Only those who get caught not paid.
You can’t prove anything with science. To prove something in science you have to know that you have all the relevant evidence has been collected and that all other possible explanations have been eliminated. You can never know those two things about anything. That said, the scientific method helps you guess the odds more successfully. It is an attempt to eliminate such things as confirmatory bias, group think, politics and bribary. I wonder how often it succeeds.
Johny Conspiranoid
May 5, 2020 at 18:28
The people the WHO serve want millions unemployed because they want an economic crash.
I see …
“We don’t look for absolute proof, as that can never really exist in science, we look for what the preponderance of evidence tells us. There is no absolute proof for Gravity, Evolution, Quantum Mechanics, Particle Physics, insert your discipline of choice. There is only what the weight of evidence tells us. Climatology is no different.”
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/05/there-is-no-evidence/
“Five Characteristics of Science Denial”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXA777yUndQ&feature=youtu.be
“No one claims “consensus” makes something true. This is a strawman argument and verging on sloganeering. Consensus studies show (a) that, in regards to global warming, a consensus exists {counters the argument the science is divided}, and (b) that it is strong.
Everything in science is conditional, no better than the next experiment, but a scientific consensus, especially when it is strong, is the only rational guide to policy.
And of course the science is always open to question–just not by complete an ignoramus with no grasp of the science. That means if you haven’t published in the field, maybe you should focus on learning, rather than correcting the experts.
Genuine experts will satisfy themselves of the case for AGW. Non-experts who refuse to accept the overwhelming consensus of actual experts, albeit tentatively and provisionally as the experts do themselves, are merely the pathetic victims of the Dunning-Kruger Effect. And of course questions may be asked, though only those asked in good faith deserve answers. Arguments from logical fallacies and fabricated ‘facts’, or from sheer wilful ignorance, do not.”
– “I wonder how often it succeeds”
Ha! We’re in the process of finding out, the hard way! We are our own lab rats!
Stay safe Johny.
But maybe science gets it right quite a lot. Look around at all the successes of our science, embodied in the technologies we use so often that we take them for granted. When I was growing up we had landline telephones and monochrome tellies that an adult could barely lift. I had absolutely no idea that by my 50s I’d have most of humanity’s accumulated knowledge at my fingertips and I’d be able to publish my thoughts internationally in a matter of milliseconds, from a slab of plastic I could rest in my hand.
I think that its bizarre how many people live in denial about it, their attitude is in part what is making the spread and ultimately the deaths to happen.
Some of these people argue that there is no pandemic, there is no death, there is no excess mortality, there has been no one dying from Covid19, that it is just a flu or the dead people didnt have much time left anyway.
But the more wrong they are the more they think they are on to something. Bonkers!
As you know Trump never said drink bleach which is what the BBC reported via a guest after a cut and paste of the press conference. The fact the reputable BBC pedalled that fake news is evidence of how this virus story and lockdown is contrived for political rather than medical reasons.
You tube. BBC lies & fakery: editing and manipulating Trump “sunlight and bleach” press briefing
President Trump claims injecting people with disinfectant could treat coronavirus (YouTube)
24 Apr 2020
I rest my case.
Disinfect an infected body (not with bleach) as explained in the scientific presentation made at the press conference which his comments deliberately taken out of context (BBC cut and paste and fake) were referring to.
He does not know what he is talking about, just a bumbling fool.
UK/US out in front again for all the world to see. What a pair.
Looks like we might have the first reliable indications of IFR infection fatality rate, from high-quality antibody tests in New York, city and state. IFR looks to be between 0.5% to 1.25%. Here are some links which I can’t be bothered to check right now; need sleep:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/nyregion/coronavirus-antibodies-test-ny.html
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/amid-ongoing-covid-19-pandemic-governor-cuomo-announces-results-completed-antibody-testing
Heartwarming news. Professor Neil Ferguson, whose research has been largely funded by Bill Gates, has “stepped down” due to breaking the social distancing rules he imposed on us all. He entertained a lover but that of course is not the real story.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52553229
The real story is he gave bad advice. Now the epidemic has peaked and his way out predictions of 250,000 deaths without lockdown led to the building of Nightingale hospitals and morgues have been shown to be utter bunkum. This is not for the first time. Thank God for the good honest reporting of OffGuardian to make those of us who chose to be aware privy to what was really happening. I even detected a mellowing from the creepy BBC, which I watch to get anger out of my system, this morning.
https://off-guardian.org/2020/05/06/authoritarianism-in-the-age-of-pseudoscience/
Now can we please start to get our lives back and stop listening to the servants of authority. Thank you.
Further heartwarming news for you …
UK death toll climbs above Italy’s, becomes second-highest worldwide behind United States
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-06/uk-has-second-highest-coronavirus-death-toll-worldwide/12217924
Yes well here and in the States they have often neglected all other patients to deal with COVID-19.
“I fully recognise that looking at human life in from this purely economic perspective can seem harsh, almost inhumane. Can we really stand back and watch an elderly person ‘drown’ as their lungs fill up with fluid ‘Sorry, we are not spending money on more ventilators, because it is not cost-effective.’ Or suchlike.
However, there is also a health downside associated with our current approach. Many people are also going to suffer and die, because of the actions we are currently taking. On the BBC, a man with cancer was being interviewed. Due to the shutdown, his operation is being put back by several months – at least. Others with cancer will not be getting treatment. The level of worry and anxiety will be massive.
Hip replacements are also being postponed and other, hugely beneficial interventions are not being done. Those with heart disease and diabetes will not be treated. Elderly people, with no support, may simply die of starvation in their own homes. Jobs will be lost, companies are going bust, suicides will go up. Psychosocial stress will be immense.
In my role, working in Out of Hours, we are being asked to watch out for abuse in the home. Because we know that children will now be more at risk, trapped in their houses. Also, partners will suffer greater physical abuse, stuck in the home, unable to get out. Not much fun.
Which means that we are certainly not looking at a zero-sum game here, where every case of COVID prevented, or treated, is one less death. There is a health cost.”
https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2020/03/29/a-health-economic-perspective-on-covid-19/
I should mention Dr Kendrick’s concerns were raised above a month ago.
And the figures are being massaged,
The other thing the BBC covered was two COVID-19 cases but for the first time I can recall used more carefully measured terminology, like “displaying symptoms of coronavirus” and neither had been diagnosed. Then a third person was interviewed who clearly had problems before resident GP Dr Rosemary Leonard brought a voice of reason into the arena saying that we don’t know who has or does not have COVID-19 and people with symptoms may have other viruses. In my mind I am going to call today Good Wednesday. Hope the rest of the day lives up to the name. Hugs everyone!
Sorry John
I really don’t want your smug hugs for now. You seem very pleased with yourself and sure in your confidence that Covid-19 is really not worth all this fuss, despite expert advice. Is this state of bliss that you are in purely as a result of ignorance? Or is that you know something the experts do not know?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pL5usTutJgU
This is the story ’bout Bald-Headed John
(Dong work for Yuda, Dong, Dong)
He talks a lot ‘n it’s usually wrong
(Dong work for Yuda, Dong, Dong)
He said Dong was Wong,
‘N Wong was Kong
‘N Dong work for Yuda,
‘N John was wrong
Sorry, John, sorry, better try it again
(Dong work for Yuda, Dong, Dong)
Sorry, John, sorry, better try it again
He said Dong was Wong
And Wong was Kong
And Dong was Gong
‘N John was wrong
– “And for my next trick, I’ll persuade these primary school kids to run blindfolded across the motorway at rush hour. Roll up! Roll up!”
perhaps someone could explain this
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/coronavirus-tanzania-test-kits-suspicion-goat-pawpaw-positive-a9501291.html
goat and pawpaw fruit test positive for covid19
There is not enough information there to make even an informed guess. Usually reagents are tested in the setting for which they will be used rather than taking random controls. Paw Paw contains an enzyme which breaks down proteins and may therefore interfere with tests using protein reagents.
Of the various antibody tests being sold, most are prone to false positive results:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.15.20066407v1.full.pdf
– Conclusions:The performance of current LFIA (lateral flow immunoassay) devices is inadequate for most individual patient applications…
Of the 9 widely available rapid antibody tests, only 2 did not generate false positives despite only limited testing. Most tests would indicate 2% – 5% antibody positives if carried out on a population where the true rate of positive was zero. In the worst case it was estimated that there was a 5% chance that the false positive rate was as high as 14%
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-roche-hldg-idUSKCN2240XS
Roche CEO calls some COVID-19 antibody tests a ‘disaster’, questions makers’ ethics
– …“It’s a disaster. These tests are not worth anything, or have very little use,” Schwan told reporters on a conference call on the Basel-based company’s first-quarter results. “Some of these companies, I tell you, this is ethically very questionable to get out with this stuff.”
“Could you cite the graph you’re referring to please Bayard?”
It was the one you linked to: https://squonk.tk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/NCHS15_small.gif
“But flu set off out into a population most of whom have encountered flu before; it couldn’t make 100% infectious, maybe only 20% (I’m guessing here), so it can only get a fifth as far before resistance arrests it.”
The reason why you have to have the flu jab every year is that each case of flu is a different virus. I even remember one year where the flu that hit the country was already a different virus from the one in the vaccine. So, no, most of the population haven’t encountered it before, just like they haven’t encountered that strain of cold before.
Sorry for the delay; I had to ask. You wrote:
– “…each case of flu is a different virus”
No. There are mostly only two types of flu that circulate but they come around with minor variations, so people have “cross-reactive antibodies” from their previous encounters, which impart some resistance. This reduces the reproduction number R, so with R not much above 1 it only takes some minor change, such as temperature or humidity, to turn the spread into a reduction.
If R is lower for flu I’d expect the rise shown for flu (left peak, 2017-2018) to be less steep than that for covid-19 (right peak, 2020), so I had a go at measuring them on the graph. It’s a small graph so accuracy isn’t great, but the rise for covid-19 does work out as almost twice as steep as the rise for the flu peak (I made it about x1.96). That’d be easy to check by getting the separate yearly graphs and comparing them.
– “I even remember one year where the flu that hit the country was already a different virus from the one in the vaccine”
I got an answer to this too, but I’m not sure I remember it right. I think a vaccine against the wrong major type was chosen or something. But no, each flu isn’t a completely different virus.
On the other hand, covid-19 is caused by the new type of SARS, SARS-CoV-2. The original SARS never got very far before the health authorities contained it, so essentially none of the global population have ever encountered any type of SARS. That’s why covid-19 spreads so fast. The 2020 rise was arrested by the lockdown, not immunity. In the UK it had only infected about 5% of the population, so that 2020 rise had the potential to get twenty times higher. If deaths so far are around 40,000 to 50,000, that could work out at 640,000 to 800,000 deaths if it infected, say, 80% of the population. But it could be even worse than that because if critical cases overwhelm the UK’s few thousand critical care beds, covid-19 kills at an even higher rate.
@ John Goss
“The other thing the BBC covered was two COVID-19 cases but for the first time I can recall used more carefully measured terminology, like “displaying symptoms of coronavirus” and neither had been diagnosed”.
Perhaps after faking Trump says drink bleach perhaps they want to provide some examples of balance if there is a public inquiry/investigation into their coverage of the lockdown! That said I’ve noticed plenty of debunking within the newspapers despite their strident and scaremongering headlines.
For example despite carrying the Boris could have gone either way story, Sunday Mail and Sun recorded him saying “I never had trouble breathing”, which of course debunks the whole thing. Curiously deep state/CNN reported he never had Covid!
https://vimeo.com/414289492?ref=em-share
May 6th, 42,900 ‘excess deaths’ in the U.K.?
https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441
Maybe more like 54,000. Many graphs, statistics and methodology linked from here:
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisGiles_/status/1258042222081163265?p=p
Thanks for that.
Office for National Statistics
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/excesswintermortalityinenglandandwales/2018to2019provisionaland2017to2018final
See graph
Excess winter deaths and five-year central moving average (based on death occurrences), England and Wales, between 1950 to 1951 and 2018 to 2019
Current Covid death toll is 30,000.
This count rarely exceeds the final (highest) of any of the 5 year averages for the last 60 years. Therefore excess deaths could be on track for the same as Germany ZERO. Which I count as the good news oops slight problem 1/2 the population of the world are out of a job! Bad science has lead to bad policy on a monumental scale.
Nonsense on stilts.
According to the ONS:
Total deaths (all ages) in the 4 weeks to 24 April 2020 = 16,387 + 18,516 + 22,351+ 21,997 = 68,395 deaths
Average of corresponding weeks over previous 5 years = 10,305 + 10,520 + 10,497 + 10,458 = 41,452 deaths
That’s an increase of 65%, i.e. over two thirds more than the five year average. And you’re trying to suggest that excess deaths are on track for ZERO?
Maybe we should be more worred about education standards in this country.
Johnstone linked last year’s report. Here’s this year’s, with graph:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/weekending24april2020#deaths-registered-by-week
The running average deaths (all causes) over 5 year periods over the past 60 years stays the same,
no matter whether its last years graph or this years graph. The difference is that your graph shows excess Covid fatalities over and above Influence deaths NOT all causes.
The purpose of the graph I showed is to pick up flu epidemics spikes and to be able to compare them year upon year.
HERE is the title of the graph I linked to
Excess winter deaths and five-year central moving average (based on death occurrences), England and Wales, between 1950 to 1951 and 2018 to 2019
Here is the title of yours
Figure 1: The number of deaths involving COVID-19 and the number of deaths involving “Influenza and Pneumonia” decreased compared with the previous week
Number of deaths registered by week, England and Wales, 28 December 2019 to 24 April 2020.
Different data… you need HISTORIC perspective hence the graph I linked to.
Yes a historical perspective can be useful, but you aren’t exactly comparing like with like. Evidently quite a lot has changed in the last 60 years. Here are the ONS figures on average life expectancy:
1960-62: Males = 68; Females = 74.
2010: Males = 78.4; Females = 82.4.
2020: Males = 79.8; Females = 83.3.
Why were people dying around 10 years younger back in the 1960s? Well, the excess death rate over the winter months was much higher so it’s a fair guess that seasonal flu or colder household temperatures were responsible. Luckily we can do a lot more to prevent that now.
Ah, the Good Old Days! Nostalgia ain’t what it used to be.
What relevance do you see in this to the current pandemic? What point are you making?
If, as you say, “the running average deaths (all causes) over 5 year periods over the past 60 years stays the same” (surely there’s some variation?), well, the population has greatly increased over sixty years, so the running average deaths must have decreased as a proportion.
Clark is right. The graph shows that the 5 year average of excess winter deaths doesn’t stay the same at all. Anything but. There is a wide variance from an extreme outlier of 106,400 in 1950-51 to 23,200 in 2019, and the 5 year trend is steadily downward. Do you want the linear regression value? (I’d have to download the dataset to calculate it, and I’d rather not bother because the evidence is so clear in the graph.)
So what’s your point, Johnstone? There’s certainly an interesting observation to be made here, but I don’t think it’s quite what you’re implying.
What relevance do you see in this to the current pandemic? What point are you making?
If, as you say, “the running average deaths (all causes) over 5 year periods over the past 60 years stays the same” (surely there’s some variation?), well, the population has greatly increased over sixty years, so the running average deaths must have decreased as a proportion.
Truly figures of biblical proportion, now pestilence, as the four horse stalk the land. But the most apocalyptic vision of all is what’s to come: World War Three. The pattern of history shows humanity on course for another global war between the Great Powers.
https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
Covid-19 distribution map for England and Wales, interactive:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/dvc811/multimap/index.html
I like maps; they’re informative. If your local hospital hasn’t overloaded, this may help explain why, rather than some colossal international science and medical conspiracy. And each of those little cells is a local authority, where ordinary people working for ordinary councils have compiled mortality statistics, so ask yourselves; are they all “in on it”? Do they all concoct inflated figures because some shadowy figure tells them they’ll be sacked otherwise, and then they go and stand two metre from everyone else in the supermarket queue? And they never turn up on sites like this and say “hey, I got this work e-mail today telling me to record three times as many deaths as my incoming records show or I’d lose my pension”?
Another difficulty with comparing yearly figures without the lockdown, is the figures for this year went up after and due to the lockdown as we now know virus deaths in care homes were a result of their policy of emptying NHS beds by putting patients into Care Homes.
MP: Cardboard box?
TJ: Aye.
MP: You were lucky. We lived for three months in a brown paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six o’clock in the morning, clean the bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down mill for fourteen hours a day week in-week out. When we got home, our Dad would thrash us to sleep with his belt!
GC: Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at three o’clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of hot gravel, go to work at the mill every day for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would beat us around the head and neck with a broken bottle, if we were LUCKY!
TJ: Well we had it tough. We used to have to get up out of the shoebox at twelve o’clock at night, and LICK the road clean with our tongues. We had half a handful of freezing cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at the mill for fourpence every six years, and when we got home, our Dad would slice us in two with a bread knife.
EI: Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o’clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us, and dance about on our graves singing ‘Hallelujah.’
MP: But you try and tell the young people today that… and they won’t believe ya’.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKHFZBUTA4k
Sad but true, there is public support for the fascist lockdown as I know people who have been taken in by it all and are fearful of going to hospital in case they catch it.
But as the government has suddenly found billions (after years of austerity) to underwrite the healthy economy, where is the incentive to go back to work for millions of people? In other words the rich and healthy can afford to look the other way and pretend they’re doing their bit, as lives and livelihoods of poorer and vulnerable are deliberately lost to the (political rather than medical) lockdown.
One third of working age people in America are now without employment.
Brazil is going down the tubes at an ever quicker rate.
The U.K. is going to move into the worse economic position it has been in for three hundred years.
The oil producing nations will be on starvation rations, shortly.
Airlines are folding.
This Lock-Down is not in any way sustainable.
World wide I expect far more people to suffer from being incomeless than suffer from covid-19.
“A patient treated in a hospital near Paris on 27 December for suspected pneumonia actually had the coronavirus, his doctor has said.
This means the virus may have arrived in Europe almost a month earlier than previously thought.
. . . Two weeks ago, a post-mortem examination carried out in California revealed that the first coronavirus-related death in the US was almost a month earlier than previously thought. . . .
Dr Cohen, head of emergency medicine at Avicenne and Jean-Verdier hospitals near Paris, said the patient was a 43-year-old man from Bobigny, north-east of Paris.
He told the BBC’s Newsday programme that the patient must have been infected between 14 and 22 December, as coronavirus symptoms take between five and 14 days to appear.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-52526554
Unbelievably? There are ‘only’ 9 reported deaths in Beijing and 7 in Shanghai?
https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
Beijing, China
Confirmed: 593
Deaths: 9
Shanghai, China
Confirmed: 657
Deaths: 7
Remarkably few deaths in Tibet.
Remarkably few deaths in Mongolia.
No apparent cases of covid-19 in North Korea but things are hotting up again in Japan and South Korea.
What is quite surprizing other than the areas around Wuhan, not that many cases “reported” in the rest of China?
But it is now thought that there were earlier outbreaks in China, before that which has been aknowledged by the Chinese Regime?
USA (New York), UK (London), Belgium (Brussels), Italy (Lombardy) and France (Paris) are the hot spots, almost nothing everywhere else. Looks like a very discerning (political) virus!!!
They’re all centres of international travel. Also notable that various celebs, politicians and sport stars were reported with it before anyone I had any personal connection to.
The numbers in Beijing and Shanghai seem unsurprising; after Wuhan and Hubei, China was prepared and restrictions were applied.
https://consortiumnews.com/2020/05/10/covid-19-2020-year-of-the-virus/
Good post at consortiumnews today. Finishing with a quote from one of the characters in Camus’s The Plague which seems rather apt “There is a plague and we must fight it. I only wish everything were as simple”.
– “There is a plague and we must fight it”
The Westminster government doesn’t seem to think so. Its measures are decidedly half-hearted.
Chinese authorities plan to test all of Wuhan’s 11 million residents for Covid-19 in a little over a week. After more than a month without newly-recorded cases, the disease has suddenly reappeared in the city.
Yet we in the U.K. can’t test 100,000 a day?
Russia seems to be engulfed by it now, with several senior figures in the government hospitalised.
They now have more covid-19 victims than does United Kingdom.
But much, much less deaths, so far.
It takes a while for the deaths. From what I’ve heard about day ten is critical; a turn for the worse about then is bad news.
The UK government’s actions have been irresponsible in the extreme. Why aren’t there boxes of masks everywhere? Can’t the UK make masks any more? A permanent shortage of test kits? Restrictions introduced too late, seven weeks with zero attempt to target them, then this shambles. Why the same restrictions across the whole country, when the distribution of deaths looks like this?
https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/dvc811/multimap/index.html
Why is the London Underground permitted to be packed? London has the highest infection density in the country.
I wonder how well this works:
https://www.abbott.com/corpnewsroom/product-and-innovation/detect-covid-19-in-as-little-as-5-minutes.html
There must be others like it.
Russia and the U.K. have almost the same amount of people who have tested positive for covid-19, they also have exactly the same number of hospitalised victims
but the death toll in the U.K. is staggering, while in Russia ( so far) it is modest.
That depends on how accurate in terms of sensitivity and specificity the baseline test they are using is, which is an RT- PCR test of some kind with a fluorescent marker or other marker that the machine can read when the test is finished running.
Without knowing the specifics of the underlying PCR test it’s hard to know. Good idea if it works and they can quality assure the reagents etc.