The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPatrick Cockburn Archive
Lockdown Restrictions Do Not Work Because Many People Ignore Them
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Debate rages on every television screen and newspaper front page about the fairness or unfairness of lockdowns and semi-lockdowns. The finger of blame for the failure to stop the spread of coronavirus is increasingly pointed at the chief of NHS Test and Trace, Baroness Harding, and at the health minister, Lord Bethell, serial blunderers referred to derisively by senior civil servants as “Laurel and Hardy”.

But putting the focus on the failure of the £12bn Test, Trace and Isolate (TTI) system misses a more important point that makes the furore over the new restrictions largely irrelevant. People are rightly outraged by the revelation that a myriad of private sector consultants, without experience of public health and paid up to £7,000 a day, should have orchestrated this fiasco, but their anger is a diversion from a more significant development.

The evidence is mounting that a sizeable part of the population is voting with their feet and opting out of the elaborate regulatory system that is supposed to prevent the spread of the epidemic. They do so because they have become more frightened of these restrictions ruining their livelihoods than they are of contracting Covid-19 in a serious form.

Government and media are so absorbed in a narrative that is all about these new rules that they have not paid enough attention to the limited degree to which people obey them in real life. Blindness about lack of compliance is pervasive, though it is self-evident that adherence to restrictions is ebbing fast. This week it emerged that only 59.6 per cent of the contacts of infected people are reached by phone and told to isolate by the TTI contact tracers.

The official explanation for this low figure is lack of capacity on the part of the TTI system, but another reason is that people who cannot afford to self-isolate, for job or family reasons, simply do not answer the phone when they see a number that they do not recognise coming up. Statistics showing that people really do behave like this were published last month in a groundbreaking survey by King’s College London of 30,000 people, which I have quoted before in this column but do so again because of its great importance.

The survey shows that, while 70 per cent of people say that they will self-isolate if they have Covid-19 symptoms, only 18.2 per cent of them actually did so. The same disparity is true of testing, with 50 per cent saying that they will ask for a test if they have symptoms of the illness, but only 11.2 per cent really do self-isolate. Of those contacted by the NHS and told to quarantine themselves, just “10.9 per cent reported staying at home or quarantining for the following 14 days”.

Chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance said diplomatically that there is “room for improvement” in the TTI system, and even Boris Johnson seems to have noticed that it is not working properly. But the Sage report last month famously recommending a short circuit-breaking lockdown, also dismissed the whole TTI system as having only a marginal impact on the transmission rate of coronavirus. It said TTI has failed to do so because it does not contact a sufficient number of potentially infected people, obtain test results early enough to be of use, and too few of those who are contacted adhere to the self-isolation rule.

It is easy to see why people who are at low risk are not complying. A person under the age of 29, who is lucky enough to have a job during a time of soaring unemployment, must balance his or her very low chances of having coronavirus badly enough to make them seriously ill against the undoubtedly damaging impact of self-isolating. Many have every reason to dread testing positive and may instead keep quiet about their symptoms or about any contact they may have had with somebody they know to have been infected.

Personal risk assessments like this explain why infection is still rising in towns and cities where there have been partial lockdowns since midsummer. The government appears baffled by this and blames rowdies outside pubs and other anti-social elements for breaking the rules. Yet for much of the population – essentially the younger part of it – non-compliance makes complete sense. Theirs is not necessarily an “I’m All Right Jack” attitude, since those ignoring the restrictions may try to keep away from their grandparents. It was surely always inevitable that those minimally endangered by the disease would not accept economic ruin and partial house arrest once initial panic was over.

Lockdown sceptics may applaud the idea that Britain has ended up with a sort of variant of the Swedish approach to coronavirus by default and without knowing it. But the sceptics who argue that the economic destruction is too great and does not, in any case, stop the epidemic, spoil their case by downplaying the virulence of coronavirus as a horrible disease. Even those openly or covertly prescribing “herd immunity” – something that is probably unattainable – are not keen to volunteer themselves for early membership of a supposedly “immunised herd”.

When President Trump said in the presidential debate this week that people would have to learn to live with coronavirus, Joe Biden made the obvious retort that a lot of people were dying with it. A total lockdown could work, as it appears to have done in China, but only through a huge and permanent mobilisation of state resources, backed by a fair degree of compulsion. For instance, Chinese returning from abroad have to isolate – and to make sure that they do just that they are allocated a hotel in which to quarantine and not let out until it is over. It is doubtful if Britain – or any European state – has the mechanisms or the determination to do the same.

ORDER IT NOW

All epidemics generate fear – and in the case of coronavirus there is plenty to be frightened of. The fear may be greater in Britain because of its spectacularly incompetent government, visibly out of its depth, stumbling from one unforced error to another. But its ineptitude should not distract from the fact that there is no real alternative to a policy of restrictions because two-thirds of the population want them. A Sky News/YouGov poll shows that 67 per cent support a “circuit breaking” temporary lockdown, 64 per cent oppose different rules for young and old, and 61 per cent do not trust Boris Johnson to take the right decisions on the pandemic.

The government and its medical experts risk wrecking the economy in return for limited success in combating the virus, but what they are doing reflects a contradictory popular view that restrictions must be imposed – even when so many people will not, in practice, comply with them because they believe that their personal sacrifice is not proportionate to the danger they face.

(Republished from The Independent by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Britain, Coronavirus, Disease 
Hide 64 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. anon[198] • Disclaimer says:

    imo the problems will only end when the rules are enforced with harsh punishments. There needs to be emergency legislation and special courts should be set up for speedy sentencing of Corona-deniers and anti-maskers. They should be interned in concentration camps for the duration of the crisis.

  2. meamjojo says:

    Media whore Fauci is in the news yet again suggesting that they may need to MANDATE masks if people keep refuse to wear them.

    I say go ahead and mandate masks. Will there be people assigned to follow us around and check if we are wearing them correctly? Maybe have these people carrying long guns dressed in combat armor also?

    I’ve been wearing the same three $1Store masks for 8 months now. They are ragged after being wrinkled up in my pockets or stuffed in my car glove box. I bet there are a lot of virus remnants on them by now!

    I also wear them below my nose. Even when forced to pull the mask up it has all kinds of gaps around it. Will people be assigned to make sure we have the masks on tight?

    Or I guess we could all get some of the mesh masks I see people wearing. The look just like the real thing in black unless you get very close.

    The number of people who have died from Covid-19 (assuming the numbers are correct) is so relatively small that it is immaterial in the big picture of total human population. I’m sick of hearing about it. Think of it as culling the herd of the weak. It’s what Nature has done for billions of years. Why should humans think they can escape the rule of Nature?

    • Agree: Flying Dutchman
  3. Altai says:

    It’s difficult to get a feel for it though. How much is housing density a factor. (Look at the numbers from Belgium and the Netherlands, clearly a much greater population density and lack of low density spaces between population centres is critical.) How hard must it be for people in tower blocks to avoid it.

    But simple agreeableness is surely a factor. Look at Italy, a nation famous for it’s very low agreeable population and lack of interpersonal and social trust.

    But the lockdowns for schools have ended and they couldn’t go on and students will spread this the most of anyone.

    The most important factor is to close countries off from each other, this is the policy that will cause the least disruption and also allow the best comparison of methods and policies.

    • Replies: @TG
    , @Theophrastus
  4. BuelahMan says:

    The virus has never been isolated. There is no pandemic if there is no virus.

    But thanks, Pat for letting us know what known false agents are offering us in “debate” on their known, lying outlets.

    Yeah. Thanks.

    • Replies: @AKAHorace
  5. unit472 says:

    I’m a 68 year old retired widower so social distancing is easy for me. My issue is do masks do any good? Most everyone wears one now in public yet I am not seeing much effect on the number of cases being reported in the US. Infections keep climbing and around 1000 people per day are dying of Covid. This despite the heightened precautions for long term care facilities and better survival rates even among the elderly.

    I suspect Trump is right. We are just going to have to live with the virus. At best we can only delay its spread. Eventually we will all be exposed to it absent an effective vaccine which seems unlikely given the limited efficacy of influenza vaccines.

    • Agree: meamjojo
    • Replies: @meamjojo
    , @Brás Cubas
  6. “Lockdown Restrictions Do Not Work Because Many People Ignore Them”

    Oh, really? It’s much more obvious that they do not “work” because they are not geared to stop a fake pandemic of an imaginary virus. The lockdowns are declared in order to destroy the economy of the targeted populations, not to stop the spread of a virus. For that purpose they have worked as intended, no matter whether or not the people at large ignore them, only if the corporations obey them.

  7. shredder says:

    As someone who does some home renovation, masks as most commonly used do no prevent drywall dust or sawdust from entering the nose or eyes. Drywall dust is heavy, and much larger, easily visualized.

    When I have used an N95 mask correctly applied while sanding or cutting, there is a rapid accumulation of dust on the front and sides of the mask. In minutes there is accumulation of the dust around my eyes and in my hair. If masks don’t work for large and heavy particles how can they work for invisible viruses?

  8. TG says:
    @Altai

    Indeed, but I think that so far the data shows that it is not the overall population density per se that is the issue, but the number of people living under one roof. A dense population of people living in 1’s and 2’s in separate apartments, is all other things being equal, less conducive to a spread of the coronavirus than a dense population of people living with three generations crowded into one small flat.

  9. TG says:

    There are many excellent points here. I’d like to address one in particular.

    “…simply do not answer the phone when they see a number that they do not recognise coming up.”

    I admit that I routinely no longer answer a phone call from a number that I don’t recognize. There are just so many scammers out there… In my University, if we are going to get a call or email that is important, it is now routine for our main office to make an announcement to expect a message, otherwise people will just flag it as spam and move on.

    And isn’t that an issue with our current neoliberal philosophy of there should be no rules? Sure, let shady characters make scam emails and calls, let businesses sell private information to any and all for a price, who cares, it’s every person for themselves, let the buyer beware, it’s always been a jungle, etc.etc.

    Except now public trust is so destroyed, so that when it really is important to send the public a message, people just filter it out.

    The military has strict rules on ‘signals discipline’ – no wasting people’s time with rubbish on the communication channels. Maybe we need to rethink our completely open policy of letting scam artists flood our communications systems with garbage and just let people sort it out themselves… Again, it’s the neoliberal policy of “I’m rich, I’ve got mine, screw everyone else” that is driving this…

  10. meamjojo says:
    @anon

    Ha ha. I haven’t yet heard that on CNN but it might become reality once Biden takes over.

    • Replies: @Zach
  11. meamjojo says:
    @unit472

    This might answer some of your questions:

    The Sketchy Claims of the Case for a Mask Mandate
    Phillip W. Magness
    – October 24, 2020
    https://www.aier.org/article/the-sketchy-claims-of-the-case-for-a-mask-mandate/

  12. Zach says:
    @meamjojo

    Biden couldn’t control his son let alone millions of people.

    • Replies: @Getaclue
  13. anarchyst says:

    I don’t wear a face diaper and never will. I, like you have extreme difficulty wearing a face diaper and just refuse to do so…

    Face diapers don’t work. Just read the package…
    I have walked into businesses where the mask-screener tells me to wear a face diaper. I walk right past the mask screener without either acknowledging them or even looking at them and just go about my business. I ignore anyone who tells me to “mask up”. It helps to have a slight scowl on one’s face as well…

    I have never been “asked to leave” any business for not wearing a face diaper.
    Here in the state of Michigan, the governor’s illegal executive orders have been quashed by the state supreme court.

    I am under no mandate to obey any orders that will affect my health–face diaper wearing being but one of them.

    Try it sometimes. When I meet another person who refuses to “mask up” I commend them for their actions

  14. Miro23 says:

    Government and media are so absorbed in a narrative that is all about these new rules that they have not paid enough attention to the limited degree to which people obey them in real life.

    Explain why people should obey these crazy rules. The seasonal year on year death rate in the UK is virtually the same as it was in 2019. There are currently something like 240 Covid-19 deaths per day (mostly among very old and sick people) which is nothing at all in a country of 66.000.000 people. 99.99% of working age people recover, often not even knowing they caught it, and thereby help to build herd immunity, which happens to be the way humanity has dealt with virus infections for the last 200.000 years.

    So the panic and hysteria is a government/media fabrication something along the lines of the planned WMD panic (designed by the same crowd) to enable the Iraq war. And since the blame was immediately laid at China’s door (no investigation necessary), then they are now probably preparing a China “event”.

    People are rightly walking out on all this Deep State rubbish.

    • Agree: Theophrastus
  15. bjondo says:

    Let us worry about the spread of air.
    How can we control it. How do we protect against it.

    Any vaxine, safe or dangerous, should be put into action.
    It is more important to vaxinate against air than it is to save
    society.

  16. @Altai

    Ths tighter the putative Iron Fist clenches its fingers, the more of us will slip through the gaps. Just like coyotes keep getting smarter and trickier the more the ranchers try to exterminate them, so will all non-lemmings continue to evade any and all draconian measures.

    When it comes to evading a predator, it is not necessary to out-run him, but only to be faster than half the prey. Those who abide by the slow strangulation of lockdown (a term originally used in prisons) make it that much easier for the rest of us to survive.

    And I am proudly Italian. We are actually quite agreeable, but the other person has to prove himself first, because we’ve learned no longer to be gullible. If the other has bad intent, then our disagreeableness comes out, and then watch out, because we stick together when one of our own is threatened. That’s where the foreigner gets the view that Italians are disagreeable: come at us with malevolence and we will happily –joyfully!– bite your head off, and then go back to enjoying la bella vita which we created and are famous for, and which we will happily share with you if, and only if, you are a decent sort.

    We do the same to our lying, thieving corrupt politicians, but it takes some shaking before we actually wake up and hang the dictators up by their feet in the city square. That’s a consequence of the gullibility mentioned above; it goes hand in hand with wanting to lead a good life. An uprising will happen, but things will have to get worse first. The events in Naples are but a harbinger.

    And if anyone disagrees, here you go: Al lumere mamma-te!

    • Agree: Miro23
  17. Getaclue says:
    @Zach

    Won’t be Biden — it will be the NWO Oligarchs behind him — and their “Foundations” and NGOs — Rockefeller Foundation, Gates Foundation, Ford Foundation — they together have something like $1.5 Trillion stored up in these things to do the job — that’s the plan and so far they seem to be right on target — got a useless Mask on just about all and are teeing up the “vaccine”/poisoning in the not too distant future after they release the 2nd more deadly virus that Gates and his wife were smirking and smiling about on video as being one that will not be so easily ignored —

    Check them out here — in this short video (that is worth seeing any way….) — hard to believe but seeing is believing and obviously they know something is coming — “Dark Winter” the small pox like/skin disease virus on the way? No doubt…. — tell me any “normal” people laugh and smirk about the deaths of hundreds of thousands as there is worse to come– and they think that’s just great? Watch them. I challenge anyone to watch this — the part with Gates and his wife on it and tell me there is not something drastically wrong here with these two?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKCTkLJbtT4&feature=youtu.be

    Gates did this on Good Friday at Microsoft. Why? What is he telling us about himself?: https://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/microsoft-releases-and-deletes-an-ad-with-elite-occultist-marina-abramovic/

    Gate’s wife Melinda did this on National TV — What is she telling us about herself?: https://www.barnhardt.biz/2020/05/11/one-of-the-things-satanists-are-required-to-do-at-a-certain-point-of-advancement-is-to-start-openly-manifesting-their-satanism/?fbclid=IwAR2UBi4jOK2O3-4YVhTCZJgJBWYoWy0poZd4qX0cCUKldlwIyZjA1LRMqTw

    Anyone accepting their “vaccine” gets exactly what they deserve– they have literally brought Polio back and been cheered for doing so claiming they eradicated it– total and complete bs but they receive nothing but over the top praise when they should be arrested — putting $45 Billion into buying off the Media (and everyone else) gets you that:

    “The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) is a prime example of how oligarchic philanthropy works. Since 2000, it has donated more than $45 billion to “charitable causes” and a chunk of this is designed to control the global media narrative. The Guardian, rather tellingly, credits the BMGF for helping eradicate polio despite contrary reports of wanton procedural abuses, child death tolls and poverty exploitation which routinely mar the foundation’s vaccination programs. Bill Gates even interprets vaccine philanthropy in terms of a 20-to-1 return on investments, as he effused to CNBC last year.

    As for the BMGF’s alleged polio success, officials now fear that a dangerous new strain could soon “jump continents”. After spending $16 billion over 30 years to eradicate polio, international health bodies – which work closely with BMGF – have “accidentally” reintroduced the disease to Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iran.” https://www.activistpost.com/2020/10/covid-19-lockdowns-are-in-lockstep-with-the-great-reset.html — When you buy off the Mainslime Media you get to operate like this — Peons need to WAKE UP!

  18. There is no pandemic.

    It’s a hoax.

    • Agree: acementhead
  19. anon[353] • Disclaimer says:

    There should be an official declaration of war against the virus, so those denying and downplaying it can be tried for defeatism and treason.
    Corona-deniers like Robert Dolan should be sent to a Corona-concentration camp.

    • Troll: Theophrastus
    • Replies: @JasonT
  20. @anarchyst

    223,000 is a complete fabrication.

    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
  21. @anarchyst

    Winter is coming —take care.

  22. jsinton says:

    Lockdowns won’t work because they’re not supposed to. They can only slow it down. In the end, everyone will be exposed sooner or later. The question is will we reach herd immunity or not.

  23. Lockdowns are irresponsible fantasy measure that do more harm than good. Waiting locked down and socially distanced for a vaccine to make everything better is little more than Cargo Cult magical thinking.

    Life as we know it needs to go on. Few of us look forward to living in the world TPTB seem to be shaping for us with this ‘crisis’ they refuse to let go to waste.

    • Agree: Theophrastus
  24. @GomezAdddams

    If you have close relatives working in hospitals, then you know that the figure of 223,000 is wildly exaggerated. It could easily be a tenth or even a hundredth of that. Phony attributions of COVID death are abounding.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  25. anarchyst says:
    @The Grate Deign

    Here in the USA hospitals receive $39,000 for a positive COVID diagnosis. A non-COVID diagnosis receives only $13,000…
    Follow the money…

  26. @unit472

    Masks are good because they reduce the amount of virus being spread. In many cases, it will not prevent infections, but it will probably make the disease milder, because the amount of virus inhaled will be smaller and as a consequence the viral load in the infected person will be lower.

    The reply by commenter meamjojo has a link to an article which reports only the surge in *cases*, saying nothing about how the death rate behaves. I, in turn, offer you this link:

    “Face mask wearing rate predicts country’s COVID-19 death rates”
    by Daisuke Miyazawa and Gen Kaneko
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342409160_Face_mask_wearing_rate_predicts_country’s_COVID-19_death_rates

    In the long run, it’s possible that masks will bring about both desired outcomes: herd immunity and a reduction in fatalities. Lockdowns can’t achieve the former and widespread contagion without any type of protection cannot achieve the latter. So, masks may be the ideal solution which preserves economic activity and preserves lives.

    • Replies: @John Johnson
  27. Maybe it’s the water or the food. That seems to be more likely. People have contracted viruses even when totally isolated. So it is either the water, the food, the air, or viruses already present in the body that are re-activated. Obviously, the lock downs do not prevent viruses, and neither do distancing, masks, or vaccines. Milwaukee had a cryptosporidium outbreak from the water supply in the 1993 and polio outbreaks were from the water supply too. 

    Yes. We Are All Going To Die. Why Is This Shocking Adults? It Is Common Knowledge. Grow Up! This is not a justification for contaminated water, but locking down Milwaukee would not have prevented the transmission of cryptosporidium, since it was in the water supply.

    Andrea Iravani

  28. AKAHorace says:
    @BuelahMan

    The virus has never been isolated. There is no pandemic if there is no virus.

    But thanks, Pat for letting us know what known false agents are offering us in “debate” on their known, lying outlets.

    Yeah. Thanks.

    What do you mean by this ? Sequences of the virus have been publicly available since early this year.

    • Replies: @Von Richtofen
    , @BuelahMan
  29. @AKAHorace

    the sequence is a computer generated nonsense, 7% indeterminant RNA, 93% bullshit,
    please read Dr. Tom Cowan’s evidence that the genetic sequence of “the virus” was cobbled together, piecemeal, from databases, based on zero science. In other words, the “sequencing” was a fraud.

  30. AKAHorace says:

    the sequence is a computer generated nonsense, 7% indeterminant RNA, 93% bullshit,
    please read Dr. Tom Cowan’s evidence that the genetic sequence of “the virus” was cobbled together, piecemeal, from databases, based on zero science. In other words, the “sequencing” was a fraud.

    Does Cowan believe in any disease causing viruses at all ? If he is right pretty much all of medical virology is wrong. It is a big leap of faith to trust him. Sequencing is happening in many places independently. For Cowan to be right there either has to be a massive conspiracy across many countries or medicine to be wrong in a way that is unprecedented since the 1900.

    Also when you sequence DNA, you sequence randomly, so there are a lot of overlaps which means that you can be reasonably sure about assembly.

    • Replies: @anon
  31. skrik says:

    @Patrick Cockburn

    The evidence is mounting that a sizeable part of the population is voting with their feet and opting out of the elaborate regulatory system that is supposed to prevent the spread of the epidemic

    Agreed, and thanks for the article.

    1stly, it should be obvious that Covid-19 is spread person-to-person, and the way to stop that spreading is to prevent as many person-to-person encounters as possible. Der. 2ndly, it should be obvious that the 1st wave was more or less controlled by ‘social isolation’ and such efforts. 3rdly, it should be obvious that anywhere there is a second (third, etc.) wave, that person-to-person encounters are becoming more [and far too many more] than is ‘healthy.’ [Here referring to physical/virus health, not mental/libertarian health.] Lastly, it should be obvious that without effective action, almost every person on the planet will eventually get infected [surviving – or not, gaining ‘herd immunity’ – or not] OR we get a both effective and accepted vaccine.

    It should be noted that my so-termed ‘mental/libertarian’ faction includes persons alleging ‘scam,’ ‘hoax’ and ‘deep-state conspiracy against us, we the people.’

    Finally, it should be noted that whilst waiting for ‘the end game,’ our society can only begin to recover by defeating the ‘next wave’ and the only way we know that works is by ‘social isolation’ and such efforts. IMHO *all* better get weaving on getting some distance, eh?

    PS The main point of the face-mask for the general population is to prevent [as far as possible], aerosols being projected into the public space by possibly unsuspecting infected and contagious persons coughing or sneezing.

    PPS For sceptics: “Covid-19: At least two thirds of 225 000 excess deaths in US were due to virus”
    https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3948 rgds

    • LOL: Theophrastus
    • Replies: @MOG
  32. anarchyst says:

    American hospitals get $39,000 for a positive COVID diagnosis versus $13,000 for a non-COVID diagnosis.

    Follow the money…

    • Replies: @skrik
  33. TG says:

    It should be noted that we are starting a natural experiment, and in about 6 months we will have a pretty good idea if masks and lockdowns do or do not work.

    The Covid19 virus seems to be really infectious, and we don’t have much experience with it. The seasonal influenza, we do. If this year we have a really mild/negligible flu season, then that would be pretty good evidence that masks etc. work to a significant degree. If however the flu seasons is about as bad as usual, then what the heck have we been doing?

    I am surprised that this hasn’t gotten more public attention. Surely this is logical?

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @John Johnson
  34. skrik says:
    @anarchyst

    Do you have a source? IIRC, it was $13k for Covid, $39k if then intubated. Some said the way they forced oxygen was destructive. rgds

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  35. anarchyst says:
    @skrik

    Here in Michigan it was common knowledge from various sources in the mainstream media…
    You are correct about the COVID being paid at $13,000 while the $39,000 intubation was being “encouraged” in order to “up the numbers” and increase the payouts.
    Regards,

    • Replies: @skrik
  36. anarchyst says:

    Study: Bacterial pneumonia was main killer in 1918 flu pandemic

    Aug 22, 2008 (CIDRAP News) –

    It was secondary bacterial pneumonia—not the influenza virus by itself—that killed most of the millions who perished in the 1918 flu pandemic, which suggests that current pandemic preparations should include stockpiling of antibiotics and bacterial vaccines, influenza researchers reported this week.

    [MORE]

    Experts at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) examined pieces of lung tissue preserved from 58 victims of the 1918 pandemic and reviewed reports distilled from thousands of autopsies to reach their conclusions, published online by the Journal of Infectious Diseases.

    “Histological and bacteriologic evidence suggests that the vast majority of influenza deaths resulted from secondary bacterial pneumonia,” says the report by David M. Morens, MD, Jeffery K. Taubenberger, MD, PhD, and NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, MD.

    Many accounts of the 1918 pandemic have emphasized how quickly patients succumbed to the infection, creating an impression that a large share of the victims died of the virus’s direct effects on the lungs or the immune system’s intense response to the infection. But the new report suggests that more than 90% actually died of invading bacterial pneumonia after the virus wiped out cells lining the bronchial tubes and lungs.

    “In essence, the virus landed the first blow while bacteria delivered the knockout punch,” said Fauci in an NIAID news release.

    Lung sections and autopsy reviews

    The researchers pursued two strategies. First, they examined sections newly cut from blocks of lung tissue preserved from 58 military members who died during the pandemic, representing all known 1918 flu cases in a tissue collection at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology.

    Second, they reviewed 1918-era literature on influenza pathology and bacteriology, gleaning 109 reports providing useful bacteriologic information from 173 series of autopsies. These covered 8,398 autopsies from 15 countries.

    Nearly all of the lung tissue examinations yielded “compelling histologic evidence of severe acute bacterial pneumonia, either as the predominant pathology or in conjunction with underlying pathologic features now believed to be associated with influenza virus infection,” including damage to the bronchial epithelium, the report says. Bacteria were often present in “massive numbers.”

    In perusing the contemporary autopsy studies, the authors found 96 reports of lung tissue culture results from 5,266 patients, in which only 4.2% showed no bacterial growth. In 68 “higher quality” autopsy series, representing 3,074 patients, 92.7% of the lung cultures were positive for at least one bacterial species. Cultures of blood samples from another 1,887 victims were positive for bacteria in 70.3% of cases.

    At the time of the pandemic, nearly all experts agreed that deaths were almost never caused by the then-unidentified flu virus itself, “but resulted directly from severe secondary pneumonia caused by well-known bacterial ‘pneumopathogens’ that colonized the upper respiratory tract,” the report states. The most common pathogens were pneumococci, streptococci, and staphylococci.

    The authors also reviewed evidence from the relatively mild pandemic of 1957-58 and determined that most deaths were due to secondary bacterial pneumonia. In addition, the “few relevant data from the 1968-1969 pandemic” reflect the same pattern, they write.

    “We believe that the weight of 90 years of evidence, including the exceptional but largely forgotten work of an earlier generation of pathologists, indicates that the vast majority of pulmonary deaths from pandemic influenza viruses have resulted from poorly understood interactions between the infecting virus and secondary infections due to bacteria that colonize the upper respiratory tract,” the report says.

    Severity still unexplained

    The researchers say their findings leave the extreme severity of the 1918 pandemic unexplained. Because they found evidence of many different types of invading bacteria, it was probably not due to specific virulent bacterial strains. Instead, they speculate that “any influenza virus with an enhanced capacity to spread to and damage bronchial and/or bronchiolar epithelial cells” could pave the way for bacteria in the upper respiratory tract to invade the lungs and cause a severe infection.

    The authors suggest that, as in past pandemics, secondary bacterial pneumonia is likely to be the leading killer in the next pandemic—if it is caused by “a human-adapted virus similar to those recognized since 1918.” If that’s the case, they assert, pandemic preparations must go beyond the development and stockpiling of influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs; efforts should also include the stockpiling of antibiotics and bacterial vaccines to protect against bacterial pneumonia.

    However, the investigators also write that if a derivative of the H5N1 avian flu virus causes a future pandemic, lessons from past pandemics may not be “strictly applicable.” That virus’s pathogenic mechanisms may be atypical because it is poorly adapted to humans and because it causes unusual pathology in animals. On the other hand, they say that if the H5N1 virus fully adapts to humans, the spectrum of resulting disease could revert to something more similar to what was seen in past pandemics.

    Study may change thinking

    William Schaffner, MD, an influenza expert and chairman of the Department of Preventive Medicine at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, said the new study may change the general understanding of the causes of death in the 1918 pandemic.

    “The general notion at least heretofore is that there were two kinds of deadly illnesses, the first caused by the virus all by itself,” Schaffner told CIDRAP News. “We know that the influenza virus can cause primary pneumonia, and the time course was so brief from onset to death in many patients that it was thought this was likely due to an extremely virulent influenza virus—an influenza virus on steroids.”

    But it has also been assumed that bacterial pneumonia often complicated flu cases then, as it does today, and was fatal for many patients in that pre-antibiotic era, he added. “So the general notion was that there were two causes of death. The general sense was that the former, the virus, was more important than the latter. This comes largely from repeated stories about the rapidity with which this carried people off.”

    But the findings of Morens and colleagues indicate that secondary bacterial pneumonia was the more common cause of death. “The impressive thing is, though this is a tiny, tiny sample of what went on, they showed bacterial pneumonia was extraordinarily common,” Schaffner said. “I think they make the point that it was in every one of the autopsy sections they examined. I have to tell you that made me sit up.”

    He suggested one possible source of inadvertent bias in the study: Because the evidence is derived from autopsies, the subjects included in the study could represent a skewed sample. The victims most likely to be autopsied were those who died in hospitals, and they probably were less sick initially and had a longer course of illness than those who died at home, Schaffner said. Those who died at home were much less likely to be autopsied.

    Nevertheless, the study is an important contribution for showing that bacterial pneumonia was common in the 1918 pandemic, Schaffner added. “I’m still not convinced that that bimodal concept [of the causes of death in 1918] is not true,” he said. “These fellows have nailed the second part; I’m just not sure they represent the entire population of deaths.”

    Schaffner observed that the idea of including bacterial pneumonia in pandemic planning has already been under discussion for a while. “But the fact that Tony Fauci lends his name to these discussions gives them impetus because of his central role in the pandemic planning process in Washington,” he said.

    He said the federal stockpile of drugs and medical supplies for public health emergencies includes some antibiotics, but they are mainly intended for bioterrorism-related diseases, such as ciprofloxacin for anthrax. But some of the antibiotics might be useful for both bioterrorism-linked diseases and pneumonia, he said.

    No vaccines to prevent bacterial pneumonia have been included in the federal stockpile, Schaffner said. However, he noted that between 40% and 50% of people aged 65 and older have been vaccinated against pneumococcal disease, as recommended by federal guidelines.

    Morens DM, Taubenberger JK, Fauci AS. Predominant role of bacterial pneumonia as a cause of death in pandemic influenza: implications for pandemic influenza preparedness. J Infect Dis 2008 Oct;198 (published online Aug 18

    This is PROOF that “face diapers” were responsible for the deaths. Breathing in your own exhalation is not only uncomfortable but dangerous. Put 2 and 2 together…

  37. skrik says:
    @anarchyst

    was being “encouraged” in order to “up the numbers” and increase the payouts

    Errr, that’s not actually what I wrote.

    Try this:

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/medicare-hospitals-covid-patients/

    Wherein:

    JENSEN: Well I would remind him that any time health care intersects with dollars it gets awkward. Right now Medicare has determined that if you have a COVID-19 admission to the hospital, you’ll get paid $13,000. If that COVID-19 patient goes on a ventilator, you get $39,000, three times as much. Nobody can tell me after 35 years in the world of medicine that sometimes those kinds of things impact on what we do

    Me: If you set up a system of ‘medicine for profit’ [especially in a neoliberal-tainted environment], one should hardly be surprised that profits may take precedence over health. But none of this [= with/out ventilator] means inflating numbers; then kindly let us know if/when you understand my #33 PPS above. rgds

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  38. anarchyst says:
    @skrik

    Using snopes as a source is questionable. snopes cannot be trusted. Regards,

    • Replies: @skrik
    , @acementhead
  39. “Debate rages on every television screen and newspaper front page about the fairness or unfairness of lockdowns and semi-lockdowns.”

    I haven’t seen much debate at all, let alone a ‘raging’ one on ‘every’ outlet. Perhaps the author lives somewhere in which debate on the subject is less controlled? I can only envy him.

    The media is far more likely to blame the virus itself for the social and economic fallout, utterly avoiding the plain truth that the imposed measures are the cause. As far as debates over fairness, you’re just now seeing some occasional half-hearted questioning from some of the outlets that spent months constantly rallying around the lockdown cause, but that’s a far cry from a perpetual raging media debate.

    This entire article can be summed up by saying “real mask-wearing has never been tried.” Sound familiar?

    • Replies: @AKAHorace
  40. anonymous[417] • Disclaimer says:
    @TG

    If this year we have a really mild/negligible flu season, then that would be pretty good evidence that masks etc. work to a significant degree. . . .
    Surely this is logical?

    It’s logical for someone who believes that putting a tooth under the pillow causes a silver coin to appear.

    Khan Academy is geared to a slightly higher level of logical development: In the Khan Academy, pitched to high school students,

    “to be considered as the scientific method, it has to be:
    controlled,
    to include dependent and independent variables,
    to start with a hypothesis,
    to be iterative and repeated by other researchers,
    to use only accurate already proven facts and methods.”

    Iterating an experiment means the conditions of the original experiment must be the same in its repetition. That’s why haphazardly using the Italian experience as a model for US response to covid was flawed from the get-go.

    That apparent use of masks might correlate with a reduction in influenza does not provide evidence of causation but only of two selected things occurring at the same time. If no other simultaneously occurring events or conditions are considered and eliminated as causal elements, then there is no proof that masks rather than other variables caused the “mild flu season.”

  41. AKAHorace says:
    @Sollipsist

    This entire article can be summed up by saying “real mask-wearing has never been tried.” Sound familiar?

    Hasn’t real masking been tried in Asia and worked ?

    • Replies: @Sollipsist
  42. MOG says:

    During the peak of the NY City Covid season, a 1-week survey was taken of 100 NY hospitals, to determine who was getting sick. Turn out that 66% of new hospital admissions for Covid during that period were people who were “sheltering in place”. So, how are the lockdowns providing protection from the disease?

  43. skrik says:
    @anarchyst

    American hospitals get $39,000 for a positive COVID diagnosis versus $13,000 for a non-COVID diagnosis.
    Follow the money…

    It’s not so much who says what but more what is said – and what you wrote *twice* is utter bullshít. Bye.

    • Replies: @anarchyst
  44. MOG says:
    @skrik

    The things you point out as “obvious” are not obvious at all. The virus may be transmitted by contact in some cases, but the lion’s share appears to be spread by airborne aerosol particles (100-200 nanometers in diameter) which accumulate in buildings which recirculate the indoor air without sufficient external ventilation. Thus the large fraction of new hospital admissions of patients who got sick while sheltering in place. They should have gone out for stroll in the sunshine instead. Masks do not impede the spread of virus. This has been shown repeatedly in clinical studies performed over decades. Trapping mucous particles is no help either, as these evaporate rapidly (a few milliseconds for the smallest, 5-10 microns to 2 seconds for the largest, about 100 microns) releasing any entrapped virus particles into the air as an aerosol, to be expelled with your next breath. There is nothing you can do to “defeat” the virus. We’ve tried various methods, lockdowns, masks, distancing, and the virus is receding, as all seasonal flus do after a few months, but is still with us. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result. We have a number of highly effective treatments which vastly reduce Covid deaths (here I exclude Remdesivir, which does not work), so widespread mandatory vaccinations are NOT needed. Moreover, vaccines for CORONA viruses tend to produce deadly ‘antibody immune enhancement’ reactions and should not be used. The virus will abate when we achieve herd immunity, and not a minute sooner. So let’s get out of the house, get back to work/school, start socializing again, lose the masks, and get on with our lives.

    • Agree: Theophrastus
    • Replies: @skrik
  45. skrik says:
    @MOG

    So let’s get out of the house, get back to work/school, start socializing again, lose the masks, and get on with our lives

    Thanks for your input; sounds good, but IMHO 180° *not* what we need.

    They should have gone out for stroll in the sunshine instead

    Would not help at all; the contaminated ‘aerosol’ will contain lots of tiny little trouble-bombs, and you can get quite enough of them from a single exhalation by any contagious person standing/sitting/singing/dancing near you.

    Perhaps you could consult some statistics:

    https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

    Note that many places are going into a 2nd[+] ‘wave.’

    The 1st wave subsided because people both listened and concurred; they heard ‘social distancing’ and most did enough such. Whatever, but let’s run the clock back a bit:

    AFAIK, Covid-19 was 1st noticed in Wuhan; they went ‘full-bottle’ to defeat it and did so, using total lockdown and subsequent exhaustive contact-tracing strategies.

    (Kindly note here that IMHO Covid-19 is a bio-warfare agent [*not* developed by China] but detected by them when they recognised the PRRA spike-inclusion for what it is = *BIG* trouble. Note also that only psychpaths could develop such a weapon without providing themselves with an antidote.)

    ‘The West’ ridiculed China as reacting in a ‘totalitarian’ way, so when Covid-19 showed up in the West, they obviously had to avoid being totalitarian themselves, so Covid-19 was ‘allowed’ to spread madly.

    But all along, lots of people [libertarian bolshies?] kept yelling “It’s only a flu!” {My word: nurFlu} – and so the civil-disobedient libertarian bolshie nurFlus are now ignoring/contravening the sensible/serious suggestions being made by ‘the authorities’ [as in the headline article] and so we’re getting ‘next waves.’

    IMHO, it will only stop when Covid-19 is banished from the planet:

    https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56 rgds

    • LOL: Theophrastus
  46. @AKAHorace

    Exactly my point. Just like Communism worked in China.

  47. AKAHorace says:

    This entire article can be summed up by saying “real mask-wearing has never been tried.” Sound familiar?

    Hasn’t real masking been tried in Asia and worked ?

    Exactly my point. Just like Communism worked in China.

    Not sure what you mean. Several non Communist Asian countries have done a lot better than we in the west incontrolling Coronavirus without the economic damage that we have gone through. We have gone deeper into debt and been unable to prevent the spread of the virus.

    For that matter the communists in China have done pretty well in managing their economy since the early 80s. I wouldn’t want the Chinese system, but most of the locals seem to like it.

  48. anon[407] • Disclaimer says:
    @AKAHorace

    Does Cowan believe in any disease causing viruses at all ? If he is right pretty much all of medical virology is wrong.

    Yes it is imo. Way to much positives without any symptoms, and there is no publication of false negatives.

    Same as Aids some time ago. Too much false diagnostics and testing the same person several times give contrary results. All the same frauds than the CO2 tale (which is technical impossible but generates a lot of taxes and income).

    That do no mean covid (or global warming) didn’t exist. Neither that it isn’t transferable. But it is obvious that RNA sequences cant be the reason, or the only reason. Papaya were tested positive, do you avoid to eat them?

    Imo science did not know the cause, but gouvernments are pretty sure that lockdown (or CO2 taxing) will work (which did not, see current situation).

  49. Mr Unz,
    I beg you, please get rid of this government shill.
    I know he’s big, bad boy Alex’s bro, but they’re both twats.
    Enough of government agents, which this guy obviously has to be!
    He’s an embarrassment to your site.
    Thank you.

  50. @anarchyst

    Using snopes as a source is questionable. snopes cannot be trusted.

    Snopes absolutely can be trusted, to push the government line every single time. Snopes is a ‘deep state’ operation.

  51. anarchyst says:
    @skrik

    Keep wearing your “face diaper”…baa…baa…baa

  52. From the very beginning when the media first published stories of a dangerous new virus and the first lockdowns were imposed, it was obvious it was all a mighty hoax. We are definitely NOT in a medical emergency or crisis, but in a political and social crisis. Brought to you by the usual suspects, namely a small clique of ruthless criminals.

    Facemasks only serve to wear down the immune system, cause damage to the brain and vital organs by lowering oxygen absorption and to make the wearer afraid, which further weakens the immune system. DO NOT WEAR A FACE MASK!

    All that our criminal rulers want to accomplish is to create a sick society of slaves, held together by media-instilled fear.

    It is all very simple:

    Eat healthy, walk, do exercise, sports or whatever. Don’t read or listen to the news (all fake anyway), don’t listen to “experts” like that evil goblin Fauci, inform yourself properly instead, don’t self-isolate, don’t test for “Covid-19.”

    If for by some freak coincidence you might contract the “virus,” take HCQ, zinc and an antibiotic and you’ll be fine in a few days.

    • Agree: Theophrastus
    • Replies: @anarchyst
    , @Dr Giggles
  53. anarchyst says:
    @Hans Vogel

    In fact, in one of Dr. Fauci’s “studies”, the 1918 “flu pandemic” in which millions perished, it was determined that the deaths were caused by pneumonia, NOT the “flu virus”. It was also stated that the use of “face diapers” (masks) was a contributing factor in the prevalence of pneumonia at that time.
    Don’t wear a face diaper. Breathing in your own exhalations is dangerous.

  54. @anon

    Smoking Endo and Chronic while standing on your head is not good for your mental state.

  55. @Hans Vogel

    Quite right. However if by some freak coincidence one contracts the virus, besides taking the medications you recommended, one can also send for Dr Giggles skivvies. The cost is $15.99 plus shipping. They can wash so they can save !

    But wait, if they order now I will send a free pair for $7.99

  56. Iskandar says:
    @JasonT

    Kiss the boots of captains of industry!

  57. @Brás Cubas

    In the long run, it’s possible that masks will bring about both desired outcomes: herd immunity and a reduction in fatalities. Lockdowns can’t achieve the former and widespread contagion without any type of protection cannot achieve the latter. So, masks may be the ideal solution which preserves economic activity and preserves lives.

    The problem is that there wasn’t a drop off in new cases after numerous states required masks.

    I’m not anti-mask but we have a numbers problem. There should have been a clear drop off in states that had mask mandates. Are we supposed to just ignore this?

  58. @TG

    The Covid19 virus seems to be really infectious, and we don’t have much experience with it. The seasonal influenza, we do. If this year we have a really mild/negligible flu season, then that would be pretty good evidence that masks etc. work to a significant degree. If however the flu seasons is about as bad as usual, then what the heck have we been doing?

    I am surprised that this hasn’t gotten more public attention. Surely this is logical?

    It is possible but it could also mean that masks and isolating when sick are more effective against regular flu than covid.

  59. anarchyst says:

    Study: Bacterial pneumonia was main killer in 1918 flu pandemic

    [MORE]

    Aug 22, 2008 (CIDRAP News) – It was secondary bacterial pneumonia—not the influenza virus by itself—that killed most of the millions who perished in the 1918 flu pandemic, which suggests that current pandemic preparations should include stockpiling of antibiotics and bacterial vaccines, influenza researchers reported this week.
    Experts at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) examined pieces of lung tissue preserved from 58 victims of the 1918 pandemic and reviewed reports distilled from thousands of autopsies to reach their conclusions, published online by the Journal of Infectious Diseases.
    “Histological and bacteriologic evidence suggests that the vast majority of influenza deaths resulted from secondary bacterial pneumonia,” says the report by David M. Morens, MD, Jeffery K. Taubenberger, MD, PhD, and NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, MD.
    Many accounts of the 1918 pandemic have emphasized how quickly patients succumbed to the infection, creating an impression that a large share of the victims died of the virus’s direct effects on the lungs or the immune system’s intense response to the infection. But the new report suggests that more than 90% actually died of invading bacterial pneumonia after the virus wiped out cells lining the bronchial tubes and lungs.
    “In essence, the virus landed the first blow while bacteria delivered the knockout punch,” said Fauci in an NIAID news release.
    Lung sections and autopsy reviews
    The researchers pursued two strategies. First, they examined sections newly cut from blocks of lung tissue preserved from 58 military members who died during the pandemic, representing all known 1918 flu cases in a tissue collection at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology.
    Second, they reviewed 1918-era literature on influenza pathology and bacteriology, gleaning 109 reports providing useful bacteriologic information from 173 series of autopsies. These covered 8,398 autopsies from 15 countries.
    Nearly all of the lung tissue examinations yielded “compelling histologic evidence of severe acute bacterial pneumonia, either as the predominant pathology or in conjunction with underlying pathologic features now believed to be associated with influenza virus infection,” including damage to the bronchial epithelium, the report says. Bacteria were often present in “massive numbers.”
    In perusing the contemporary autopsy studies, the authors found 96 reports of lung tissue culture results from 5,266 patients, in which only 4.2% showed no bacterial growth. In 68 “higher quality” autopsy series, representing 3,074 patients, 92.7% of the lung cultures were positive for at least one bacterial species. Cultures of blood samples from another 1,887 victims were positive for bacteria in 70.3% of cases.
    At the time of the pandemic, nearly all experts agreed that deaths were almost never caused by the then-unidentified flu virus itself, “but resulted directly from severe secondary pneumonia caused by well-known bacterial ‘pneumopathogens’ that colonized the upper respiratory tract,” the report states. The most common pathogens were pneumococci, streptococci, and staphylococci.
    The authors also reviewed evidence from the relatively mild pandemic of 1957-58 and determined that most deaths were due to secondary bacterial pneumonia. In addition, the “few relevant data from the 1968-1969 pandemic” reflect the same pattern, they write.
    “We believe that the weight of 90 years of evidence, including the exceptional but largely forgotten work of an earlier generation of pathologists, indicates that the vast majority of pulmonary deaths from pandemic influenza viruses have resulted from poorly understood interactions between the infecting virus and secondary infections due to bacteria that colonize the upper respiratory tract,” the report says.
    Severity still unexplained
    The researchers say their findings leave the extreme severity of the 1918 pandemic unexplained. Because they found evidence of many different types of invading bacteria, it was probably not due to specific virulent bacterial strains. Instead, they speculate that “any influenza virus with an enhanced capacity to spread to and damage bronchial and/or bronchiolar epithelial cells” could pave the way for bacteria in the upper respiratory tract to invade the lungs and cause a severe infection.
    The authors suggest that, as in past pandemics, secondary bacterial pneumonia is likely to be the leading killer in the next pandemic—if it is caused by “a human-adapted virus similar to those recognized since 1918.” If that’s the case, they assert, pandemic preparations must go beyond the development and stockpiling of influenza vaccines and antiviral drugs; efforts should also include the stockpiling of antibiotics and bacterial vaccines to protect against bacterial pneumonia.
    However, the investigators also write that if a derivative of the H5N1 avian flu virus causes a future pandemic, lessons from past pandemics may not be “strictly applicable.” That virus’s pathogenic mechanisms may be atypical because it is poorly adapted to humans and because it causes unusual pathology in animals. On the other hand, they say that if the H5N1 virus fully adapts to humans, the spectrum of resulting disease could revert to something more similar to what was seen in past pandemics.
    Study may change thinking
    William Schaffner, MD, an influenza expert and chairman of the Department of Preventive Medicine at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, said the new study may change the general understanding of the causes of death in the 1918 pandemic.
    “The general notion at least heretofore is that there were two kinds of deadly illnesses, the first caused by the virus all by itself,” Schaffner told CIDRAP News. “We know that the influenza virus can cause primary pneumonia, and the time course was so brief from onset to death in many patients that it was thought this was likely due to an extremely virulent influenza virus—an influenza virus on steroids.”
    But it has also been assumed that bacterial pneumonia often complicated flu cases then, as it does today, and was fatal for many patients in that pre-antibiotic era, he added. “So the general notion was that there were two causes of death. The general sense was that the former, the virus, was more important than the latter. This comes largely from repeated stories about the rapidity with which this carried people off.”
    But the findings of Morens and colleagues indicate that secondary bacterial pneumonia was the more common cause of death. “The impressive thing is, though this is a tiny, tiny sample of what went on, they showed bacterial pneumonia was extraordinarily common,” Schaffner said. “I think they make the point that it was in every one of the autopsy sections they examined. I have to tell you that made me sit up.”
    He suggested one possible source of inadvertent bias in the study: Because the evidence is derived from autopsies, the subjects included in the study could represent a skewed sample. The victims most likely to be autopsied were those who died in hospitals, and they probably were less sick initially and had a longer course of illness than those who died at home, Schaffner said. Those who died at home were much less likely to be autopsied.
    Nevertheless, the study is an important contribution for showing that bacterial pneumonia was common in the 1918 pandemic, Schaffner added. “I’m still not convinced that that bimodal concept [of the causes of death in 1918] is not true,” he said. “These fellows have nailed the second part; I’m just not sure they represent the entire population of deaths.”
    Schaffner observed that the idea of including bacterial pneumonia in pandemic planning has already been under discussion for a while. “But the fact that Tony Fauci lends his name to these discussions gives them impetus because of his central role in the pandemic planning process in Washington,” he said.
    He said the federal stockpile of drugs and medical supplies for public health emergencies includes some antibiotics, but they are mainly intended for bioterrorism-related diseases, such as ciprofloxacin for anthrax. But some of the antibiotics might be useful for both bioterrorism-linked diseases and pneumonia, he said.
    No vaccines to prevent bacterial pneumonia have been included in the federal stockpile, Schaffner said. However, he noted that between 40% and 50% of people aged 65 and older have been vaccinated against pneumococcal disease, as recommended by federal guidelines.
    Morens DM, Taubenberger JK, Fauci AS. Predominant role of bacterial pneumonia as a cause of death in pandemic influenza: implications for pandemic influenza preparedness. J Infect Dis 2008 Oct;198 (published online Aug 18

  60. BuelahMan says:
    @AKAHorace

    Page 39 (under “Performance Characteristics”) of this CDC document shows that no virus isolates are available.

    https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download

    “Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays [diagnostic tests] designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA…”

    The PCR test is bogus and doesn’t give you actual Covid-19 results.

    The virus has never been isolated.

  61. Snert says:

    “ ‘ Lockdown sceptics may applaud the idea that Britain has ended up with a sort of variant of the Swedish approach to coronavirus by default and without knowing it. But the sceptics who argue that the economic destruction is too great and does not, in any case, stop the epidemic, spoil their case by downplaying the virulence of coronavirus as a horrible disease. Even those openly or covertly prescribing “herd immunity” – something that is probably unattainable – are not keen to volunteer themselves for early membership of a supposedly “immunised herd”.’ “

    I don’t support lockdowns and at the same time, I recognize the virulence of SARS-CoV-2 and recognize its potential to cause widespread serious illness, death, and disability.

    I don’t support lockdowns because they don’t work very well, and because I am both a pragmatist and a realist. Lockdowns confer neither permanent nor long-lasting benefits, don’t reduce the danger posed by the virus, and cause severe economic and societal damage that may well be long-lasting. In addition, once a lockdown is lifted, infection spreads and cases grow exponentially.

    I don’t support herd immunity either, because the best available science says that herd immunity is simply not possible with the SARS-CoV-2 virus because antibodies created in the wake of an infection do not last long enough to permit herd immunity to develop. Moreover, herd immunity has never been possible with any other coronavirus or even infiuenza.

  62. Anon[316] • Disclaimer says:

    If masks work then why has the government or anyone else ever advised us to wear them during flu season, seems to me that their logic would deem that a cure.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Patrick Cockburn Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Full Story of the Taliban's Amazing Jailbreak
"They Can't Even Protect Themselves, So What Can They Do For Me?"
"All Hell is Breaking Loose with Muqtada" Warlord: the Rise of Muqtada al-Sadr