C: Marco Di Stefano / Shutterstock.com

Is Ireland’s never-ending lockdown actually following the science?

Our economy is crippled, and we’re facing into an expected surge of non-Covid deaths – everything from cancer to heart disease – because of the restrictions placed on our heath service for the past year. But is this never-ending lockdown actually following the science?

A growing number of leading experts don’t seem to think so, and argue that a more nuanced scientific analysis tells us that the lockdown was, in the words of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, “the worst public health mistake in the last 100 years.”

Just like the science on the impact of lockdowns, the science on the risks Covid-19 poses is far more nuanced than the lockdown advocates will tell you.

Dr. Bhattacharya, director of the Stanford Center on the Demography of Health and Aging, explains that when looking at the lethality of Covid, for each individual the greatest risk factor is age.

Children, as we know from the testament of the former director of the CDC, Dr Robert Redfield, are at an extremely low risk from Covid-19. He revealed in July last year that children – people aged under 18 – were in greater danger from the flu than from Covid. The mortality rate from the flu for children is between 5 and 16 times the rate of that of Covid-19.

As the scientists and medical experts who have produced The Great Barrington Declaration have said, the mortality risk to the elderly is more than 1000 times greater than it is for children.

Dr. Bhattacharya says that starting at the negligible rate cited by Dr. Redfield, the lethality of Covid doubles for every 6-7 years of ageing. The older you get the more doubling of the lethality, meaning the lethality of Covid-19 has an exponential relationship with age.

An exponential relationship can be a bit hard to grasp but the following table should help visualise and contextualise what it looks like. This graph represents the doubling of the lethality with every 6 years of added life. The increasing threat with age isn’t a straight line, it is an exponential relationship and it gets very serious at about 60 years of age.

Dr. Redfield stated that Covid-19 kills 1 out of every million children it infects. For illustration purposes, if we started with that level of lethality for a 3-year old and doubled that lethality every 6 years as Dr Bhattacharya has stipulated, we’d see that lethality follows the curve of exponential growth. So while death rates are very low up to 40 years of age, they start to curve upwards at about 45, and as as the age profile goes beyond 60 years of age the threat begins to get very serious.

As the signatories of The Great Barrington Declaration have said, the threat to the elderly is of the order of 1000 as great as it is to children.

Again, the above graph is for illustration purposes only, but this data produced last November by the BBC showing Case Fatality Rates by age indicates that Dr. Bhattacharya and his colleagues are correct.

As can be seen from the recorded deaths, the fatality risk for those up to the age of 45 is extremely low. The threat rises quite steeply after that and we can see that the vast majority of deaths are amongst those over 60 years of.

This was why Dr. Bhattacharya and his cosignatories of the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) advocated a focused protection policy.  The Declaration has now attracted the support of 13,000 medical and public health scientists, and more than 41,000 medical practitioners.

Focused protection is a realistic and achievable aim. As the GBD article on this subject states: “Standard public health practice regularly seeks creative ways to protect vulnerable people from a host of diseases and conditions that threaten them. These include, e.g., frequent on-site testing and limiting staff rotations in nursing homes, free home delivery of groceries for the home-bound vulnerable, providing disability job accommodations for older vulnerable workers, and temporary accommodations for older people living in multi-generational homes.”

We know that the elderly are vulnerable to Covid, so we focus most of our efforts on them and don’t apply the one size fits all draconian lockdown policy.

Michael Levitt, Stanford professor of structural biology and Nobel Laureate, produced two graphs recently which validate this. His graph of excess deaths in Sweden and Israel (which are at the opposite ends of lockdown severity) show excess deaths rates similar to each other. But more importantly they show almost all this excess was in the over 65 age category.

That makes one question the validity of mass-lockdown and the house arrest of the entire healthy non-vulnerable population. It seems like something dreamed up by a disembodied artificial intelligence. The old adage of curing a head cold by decapitating the patient comes to mind. In Ireland, as we enter a full year of lockdowns, it doesn’t feel like we are actually following the science.

As it turned out the lockdown panic did not protect the elderly. In fact, it seems the disconnected thinking of lockdown panic put the nursing home resident in greater danger, if the scandals of nursing home Covid deaths are anything to go by.

Was our Health Minister too caught up with general lockdown concerns to focus on the nursing homes, which should have been first priority? Nursing Homes Ireland said they had to ‘chase’ the Minister for Health, then Simon Harris, for weeks for a meeting at the height of the crisis.

Age is by far the greatest factor in the threat that Covid-19 poses to each individual, but weight, as we have recently been told, is also a factor. Dr Bhattacharya contextualises this as an equivalent of an addition of years to the age of the patient.

If you are overweight he says, the risk is like being one year older. An obese person adds 5 years of risk. A morbidly obese person adds 10 years of risk. To put that in context a morbidly obese 20 year old has the same risk of fatality as a normal weighted 30 year old, who still has a very low fatality risk.

So body weight is a comorbidity, just as it is with many other health questions.

If the risks for the majority of the population are so low, and there is a workable solution for focused protection of the vulnerable, why are the institutionally aligned “scientists” so keen to conduct this global experiment, where the whole world is being treated like rats in cages?

It seems from the Zeroleaks revelations on this platform that there may be an Orwellian experiment in controlled narrative going on simultaneously.

Dr. Bhattacharya revealed in his Daily Clout interview (and this has been affirmed by many more experts who question the official narrative) that this phenomenon is happening worldwide. The process of inquiry that we know of as Science has been stifled and there are many who seem afraid to go against the narrative.

Bhattacharya said: “The vilification of scientists who disagree with the lockdown ideology has been unprecedented… There has been explicit calls for censorship of science by other prominent scientists… It’s like we decided to stop doing science altogether. It’s very, very strange”

Dr. Bhattacharya’s experience indicates that “the science” as it is euphemistically known, is in danger of becoming a politically captured propaganda institute. Right before our eyes we can see that the discussion on science is not about proposing, testing, and proving hypotheses, but has devolved into a unilateral politicised contest to control the narrative.

There is an official Covid-19 narrative and its proponents are pursuing an asymmetric war of smearing any voice which questions it. This is not science, it’s an exercise in power and control, and it is implemented by a fear-fest emanating from the political and media institutions.

Speaking of control and power, the goals of the Zero Covid advocates are as close to the futile decrees of Caligula as the modern age has produced. Caligula, as we know, ordered his Roman legions to attack the sea god Neptune and sent them marching into the bay of Naples stabbing the waves.

The futility of this comes in only slightly ahead of the zerocovid cabal’s desire to enforce an unending lockdown. That posturing reminds me more of Caligula’s predecessor, Julius Caesar. Caesar as we know was initially appointed dictator for just one year, however as was plain for all to see he liked the title a lot and didn’t intended on relinquishing it. One can only wonder how long the Lockdown Dictators want to keep their “emergency powers”

 

Share mdi-share-variant mdi-twitter mdi-facebook mdi-whatsapp mdi-telegram mdi-linkedin mdi-email mdi-printer mdi-chevron-left Prev Next mdi-chevron-right Related
Comments are open

Do you agree with Senator Keogan that people on long-term unemployment benefit should have to do community service for the money?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...