COVID-19: Project Veritas Unearth Documents about GOF contradict Fauci testimony and Support Lab Leak Hypothesis

It seems that the "conspiracy theories" about the origin of Covid-19 and whether America (and the rest of the West) were funding the research that created it are actually factually accurate.

It shows that Occam's Razor, when applied to any problem, usually provides the right result. When applied to where Covid-19 originated, the fact that it happened in Wuhan, very close to a virology institute, close to a lab that was experimenting on modified bat viruses... yadda yadda.. 

Now if proved true, these documents show the US Government knew how dangerous gain of function research was and tried to stop it. But the scientific community carried on regardless and actively funded what was going on in Wuhan by various back door methods. The scientists basically said "to hell with democracy and the political will of the people" and actively made steps to continue anyway.

The US scientific community found ways of circumventing the moratorium on gain of function research despite the instructions of political leaders. Ostensibly changing the definition of gain of function research to justify their actions. Semantics. Just by changing words. 

If true, this taints the whole US scientific community. 

The next thing to investigate the climate change industry, where billions of taxpayer's money has already been sunk into something that is quite possibly the biggest white Elephant or Scientific Con in history.

COVID-19: Bonfire of the Carers.

 Apparently in November, care staff that refuse to have the covid vaccine will be sacked. It will be a requirement for health and care workers to be double-jabbed in order to continue working.

In a flagrant abuse of worker's rights, the NHS and the government are mandating workers be forced into medical procedures they don't want or need.

It will be interesting what lawsuits come out of this. I know the vaccine providers are indemnified against any action by the government, but are the employers? For instance if an employee takes the vaccine under protest in order to keep their job and suffer side effects and dies. Are  the employer liable? Because had the employee been left alone they would not be dead. Someone has to be accountable and liable in the event something that an employee is forced to do has a negative impact on them.

Also are employers liable for breach of contract, given that contracts do not have a clause in them regarding mandatory medical procedures.

This is yet another ill-thought-out plan by the government, without any thought for the repercussions.

By the governments own admission, the vaccine doesn't stop you getting covid, nor does it stop you passing it on. It reduces the transmissibility somewhat, but doesn't stop it completely. 

The only reason for taking the vaccine is to reduce the effects if you get it yourself. 

Also, by now all the residents of care homes, being in at-risk groups should have had their own vaccinations. So where exactly is the risk from having an un-jabbed worker in a care setting? The only risk is to the worker themselves because they have a higher risk of dying if they catch covid.

What it all boils down to is once again the government are willing to throw the care sector onto the bonfire and let it burn. Workers will just leave, given you can earn more at a supermarket and there's no mandatory vaccination required there. I look forward to the government apologising for the care sector's inability to provide adequate care due to lack of staff. Also for the millions of pounds of compensation that will have to be paid out by employers at tribunals.

I do wonder where the Labour party stands on the abuse of worker's rights. The same for the unions. Why are they not up in arms regarding forcing workers into having a medical procedure in order to keep their job? Especially when it's not in any contract of employment. It's also not in any Health and Safety legislation. So exactly under what legislation are employers able to mandate this, how will they immunise themselves from claims for unfair dismissal?

But where will it stop? If the gate is opened, what's to stop employers demanding cosmetic surgery for instance? Mandatory boob jobs for barmaids? Forced facelifts for the over-50s? Webbed feet and hands for divers? I may sound facetious, but just where is the line going to be drawn? The care sector is not the military, and I understand in the military certain injections and vaccinations are necessary in order to keep the solider fighting fit.

But care workers have not signed up to be used any way the employer seems fit. They are not chattels, they are not serfs.  

But that's how the government appears to be treating them and the wider population.

One of the things I would advise any care employee that is being forced down this route to request in writing a change to their contract of employment, specifically with a clause that makes the employer liable for compensation if the employee suffers any ill-effects from the vaccination forced on the employee at their request. The compensation should for instance be similar to a life-assurance policy, in order to adequately compensate the carer's family should the worst happen. Also the care worker should demand monetary compensation for going through the procedure against their will. Pick the figure you are comfortable with and see if your employer is willing to pay it. Any refusal to agree these new terms and the termination of the employee in breach of contract of employment will result in legal action. 

After all, it's your body and you should be compensated. Just as if you had an accident at work. 

When is a Vaccine not a Vaccine?

When it's a genetically modified Simian virus that doesn't stop you getting the virus it's supposed to prevent and it doesn't prevent transmission of the virus it's supposed to.

So, lets state the facts.

The government itself has stated the Covid-19 "vaccines" don't stop you getting the virus, nor do they stop you passing it to others. The "vaccine" actually just lessens the risk of you personally being hospitalised. 

So I'm a bit confused by the narrative that it's selfish not to get the vaccine. Especially when the only person it benefits is you. That's a fact. 

It's also a fact that you are more likely to die from the virus if you don't get vaccinated, but surely that's a personal choice. It's your informed choice to accept the higher risk of serious complications from covid-19 rather than accept injection of a  genetically modified simian virus into your body.

I'm also confused by the narrative that getting the vaccine makes you less transmissible, it makes you less likely to infect others.  That certainly isn't a fact. 

This then leads on to mandatory vaccination for people in certain jobs. Initially I'm talking about carers, many of whom themselves have health issues. So they cannot take the vaccine on health grounds. Should they be sacked because of a health issue? Even if they refuse vaccination on religious grounds, or just personal choice, should they be sacked?

Especially if they can get the virus, take it into a care setting and pass it onto their residents even if they have been vaccinated. Why is the vaccination mandatory?

Are we looking at low hanging fruit? Are we seeing the persecution of a section of society to test the reaction of the population? Are we seeing the persecution of poor, low-paid workers who can't afford to fight back in order to establish employment case law? Will we see the case law then rolled out to include the suspension or sacking of anyone for transgressions of arbitrarily established rules?

So the authorities don't like your health status? Sacked.

They don't like your Political stance? Sacked.

Don't like the words you are using on Social Media? Sacked.

Don't like the company you keep? Sacked.

Think it can't happen? Just extrapolate what is happening right now and understand that government NEVER uses legislation for it's original purpose, no matter how narrowly defined. 

The anti-terror laws have been abused, the violent porn laws have been abused, the offense laws have been abused, the communications act has been abused. ALL of those laws, all of that legislation has been used in way it wasn't originally intended for. Call it mission-creep, call it overstepping the mark; it still boils down to the abuse of law. 

The rules being proposed now essentially are work permits. You will not be permitted to work unless you fulfil certain criteria. Initially it's based on your vaccination status, but very quickly could include political status, mental health status, family status, loyalty to the party, loyalty to the state, eh comrade?

If the government gets away with mandating vaccinations or allowing discrimination against unvaccinated people, then we will truly deserve the tyranny that will follow.

COVID-19: I Spy A Conspiracy

 No, not the Wuhan leak conspiracy,. although this is related. 

I'm talking more about the number of nations that were intertwined with the Wuhan lab and the experiments going on there. It's becoming more and more apparent that Western nations were heavily involved with the actions at the lab, funded the goings-on there and knew exactly what the lab was up to.

America first: it looks a lot like the Americans were supplying funds to the Wuhan lab. The Fauchi emails provide the smoking gun.

Now Canada: it was apparent from the first days of the pandemic that Canada did the same research in country with the same scientists until it was moved to Wuhan.  Canada providing funs for research.

Australia: it is now public knowledge thanks to Sky Australia that the Aussies too were funding research at Wuhan. In fact they were shipping bats to their Jalong facility that were euthanised and used for experiments. It's still unclear as to the exact relationship between Jalong and Wuhan, but it could well be that the Aussies supplied viral material from Australian bats to Wuhan. It's not a big stretch to surmise that, given the funding and the close working relationship with Chinese scientists at Wuhan.

In one way or another, reports have come out regarding several other Western nations and working relationships with their scientists and the Wuhan lab.

Which sort of explains the initial panic to quash any idea that the Wuhan lab was the source of COVID-19. Because virtually every Western nation would be named as culpable partners. If the Western scientific community pointed fingers at China, there would be dozens of fingers pointing straight back.

I see the appeal: the Western nations outlaw gain of function research and other related research into corona viruses locally. I'm sure it became a priority after the SARS outbreak of the early 2000s that so nearly became a pandemic. 

So to get round the local ban, the Western Nations fund research in China. All under the Radar until.... COVID-19 arrives supposedly at a market not far from the Wuhan lab doing research into Corona viruses. 

Cue rapid cover-ups, denials and the labelling of investigators into the Wuhan lab as "conspiracy theorists".

It looks like Trump was wrong: it's not China alone to blame, it's the rest of the Western World and their underhand, politicised scientific community.

COVID-19: A truly Western Virus, Not as Issue in Africa

 It seems the great Gorgon Brown has raised his head again to plead on behalf of Africa and their lack of Covid-19 vaccinations. 

The Science says that the virus isn't an issue with anyone under the age of 60 unless you have co-morbidities (underlying health conditions). So Covid only causes a problem if you are already suffering from a disease that Western medicine is helping keep you alive.

In Sub-Saharan Africa, there is no such problem. There are no co-morbidities. Everyone suffering from Diabetes of heart problems have already died. They don't have the medicinal infrastructure to keep those people alive. 

Ergo, Covid-19 isn't as big a problem for African countries as it is in the West.  What is in effect a seasonal flu for people under 60 without any underlying health conditions. 

There's no need to vaccinate huge swathes of the population like there is in the West. They don't have long-term health conditions, they don't have a huge population over 60. It's actually quite acceptable scientifically to not vaccinate and instead allow the population to gain immunity naturally, rather then use some genetically modified product. It's probably statistically safer too.

It's not being cynical, it's actually scientifically factual. 

COVID-19: Track and Trace Farce

 Here in the UK we've had a track & trace mobile phone available for months.

You'd think the app would be storing information on where confirmed cases of Covid transmission happened and that the government would be offering that information so the population could avoid high-risk areas.

B8ut no, we're not getting any information out of the app. No details of numbers tracked and traced, no information on the areas or activities most likely to transmit the virus, no information on areas or activities to avoid.

So, what is the point of the app?

Considering that we were obliged for a time to use the app to log in to every pub, restaurant, shop, ship, bus or train we used, there should be useful data coming out of it.

Are the shops that are staying open the highest risk infection vector?

Is public transport safe?

Is the reason the information isn't being made public because it contradicts government policy?

Looking at the stats produced by the NHS, I can tell how many females or males of a certain age were tested positive, I can see where they lived. I can drill down to individual towns and infection rates, how many were tested and how many tested positive..

But the important thing, where covid-positive people met and infected other people, where they actually caught the virus is missing. 

Is it the Supermarkets? Is Tescos more deadly that Sainsburys or Waitrose? Are killer busses roaming the streets?

COVID-19: Police Now Acting Unlawfully.

 So now we see the true colours of the bullying types that became Police officers. 

They're handing out fines for activities that are not prohibited by the Covid rules. 

The two women walking in the Park in Derby have been let off their fines. We have seen other fines have been issued by the Police and been eventually throw out.

Now if the Police can't know what the rules are and act in accordance with the actual law, then how the fuck are the public supposed to?

People fined for sitting on Park Benches, people fined for walking in parks because they have a flask of hot drink (classed by the bent copper as "a picnic").

For fucks sake Plod, sort yourself out. You can't keep handing out unlawful fines. Start acting within the law, otherwise you are just as bad as the crims you should be catching instead of arresting grannies for sitting on park benches.

The only saving grace is the Middle Classes are getting the same unlawful, unfair Bullshit interactions with the Police the working classes on the estates have been putting up with for decades.

Hopefully if enough of the chattering classes see this, feel this, there will actually be Police reform.

The Police in the UK do so by the consent of the people. When the Police lose that consent, when they start to act as an occupying force, then the jig is up. Time to disband them and rethink the Police anew.

We need to get back to the time when a Police Officer was a member of the community doing a job like anyone else, where they did the job with the consent and the backing of the community.

Finally, if the Police are acting unlawfully, who will arrest the Police?

COVID-19: Time for Plan B?

 I said way back in November that if the (then) current measures were not stopping the spread of the virus, why did we persist in continuing with them?

Successive lockdowns haven't stopped the spread of the virus, masks, perspex screens, closing pubs, closing non-essential shops, the lot. None of it has stopped the spread of the virus.

Now we have the new, more transmissible variant that has the ability to get round these measures, there's even less reason to continue with the same measures over and over again.

I haven't yet seen a proper inquiry into where the virus is spreading. Where exactly are these people contacting each other?

Is it at work? Is it in the Supermarket? Is it on Public Transport? Just exactly where are people transmitting the virus to each other? After all the NHS covid app should be storing when and where people are in contact, so it shouldn't be rocket science to extract that information from the app to get a picture of the most risky activities 

Even though not all people have downloaded and activated the NHS covid track and trace application, the government should in theory be able to get enough information on when and where people were infected. If the app doesn't supply that sort of information, then it's next to useless, because the only way to stamp out on transmission is to reduce or suppress those activities that are spreading the virus.

Also, the statistics on where the virus is most liable to be spread can be passed onto the public and then even the most sceptical lockdown-deniers can make an informed choice on whether they avoid those areas of contact and transmission.

In order to get on top of the virus, we have to change our strategy. Doing the same things over and over again that are provably not stopping the spread of the virus is a waste of time, resources and is losing people their jobs unnecessarily.

Lets work smarter, work better and beat the virus.

COVID-19: Note To Boris - LOCKDOWNS. DON'T. WORK.

 It looks like Boris is going to announce a new lockdown tonight. 

Guess what Boris? It will be as effective as the last lockdown (Tier4) and the Lockdown before that (the November "Save Christmas" lockdown) and the lockdown before those two lockdowns (The "Save the NHS" three month lockdown).

None of which have stopped the spread of the virus.

Now Boris, if you are going to have a fourth lockdown, please can we have a "proper" lockdown? 

By that I mean closing the borders, closing the airports and making people entering the country to isolate in hotels for two weeks at their expense, like they do in New Zealand and Australia.

Without proper control of people entering into the country, how the hell can we control the virus? 

Lets have a proper closure of shops, or at the very least control of the numbers entering shops, like the original lockdown.

And I hope the government give up with this stupid notion of keeping schools open as well. Those little snot-breathing bacteria-farms called children will spread the virus as surely as eggs are eggs. And if not them then their parents meeting up at the school gates are a vector for infection spread.

Otherwise, without proper lockdown, what's the point? It will be a failure, just like the ones before.

Or alternatively, now we know that lockdowns (at least the UK version) don't work, lets not fucking bother and let all the people that have a 99.999999% chance of surviving infection just go about their daily business.

Let's stop fucking the country up for no apparent gain. Because Boris, you are quickly losing the support of the country. We can't keep going into lockdown after lockdown and still be where we were before.

You will lose the support of the people, the government will lose the support of the people. The Police and the NHS will lose support also.

I can quickly see the day when we lose all respect for authority in this country and the ensuing chaos will not be pretty. The Police have already lost the respect of the working class, it's quickly losing the support of the middle class too. When the majority of the population have no respect for the law, or the rules the government put forward (illegally, without consent of Parliament) then you have a BIG problem.

You have been warned. 

The Science of Fear.

 Well, it's happened: Science has crossed the rubicon and is no longer Science as we knew it back in the Seventies. 

Back then Science was... Science. No corporate or financial funding pressures, Science was done on an altruistic basis. It was for the benefit of humanity. Funding was done not on the basis of profit, or return on investment, or what those funding the science could get out of it.

Then in the Eighties and Nineties, return on investment became ever more important. Pharmaceuticals in particular defunded research in compounds that didn't have promise and a lucrative application down the pipeline.

Environmental scientists started to speak of Armageddon in order to stoke up pressure for funding. At the end of the seventies we had tales of impending ice ages. By the Nineties, that had changed to tales of runaway global warming. Fear was a great tool to use to stoke up funding for research into largely unprovable theories of impending doom decades further down the line, when the funding couldn't be clawed back if the science was found to be flawed.

Now epidemiology has caught the fear bug. We are being told that we have to shield in place to avoid contact with a virus that has a 99.9% survival rate in healthy people under the age of 60.

Er, isn't that just like the "normal" 'flu? Well, essentially, yes.

So, why are we buying in millions of doses of vaccine to vaccinate people against a virus they would survive?

Why are we not doing as we do with the normal flu and only vaccinating those that have underlying health problems and therefore are in the 0.1% of people under 60 that are at risk of dying from the bug, along with those over 60 that are at greater risk?

Again, fear is driving the process, as scientists stoke it up and justify their salaries and funding. But wher is the science. I mean, the actual, objective, unswayed by money science?

I can't see much of it anywhere, least of all in those so-called scientists that are advising the government to wast money vaccinating people that need not be vaccinated, stopping people from working that need not be stopped, preventing people from socialising that need not be stopped.

Either the Wuhan Flu is just another Corona virus and will do what viruses do normally, the majority of the people will get it and not be affected.

Or, there is something in it Governments and scientists across the world aren't telling us. We need to know, because without knowing what that "it" is, their fears and subsequent knee-jerk reactions make no sense.

Either treat it like normal 'flu and let the majority of people get on with their lives, or come clean on what is special about Covid-19 that requires nay, mandates that everyone be vaccinated.

UPDATE:

It seems now that there are reports by the News agencies that even though we get vaccinated, the virus will still live on in our nasal passage. 

Er, yep, that's not news. A multitude of viruses live in our nasal passages after we have beaten them off.  They need to be infecting us to make us infectious. If we have had the virus and we are no longer spewing out viral particles they are not harmful to us, nor are they harmful to others. Normally.

Unless there is (as I said above) that there is something special about COVID-19 that surpasses all the previously known virologic and epidemiologic science.

But we need to know the truth to be able to make an informed decision and especially to understand government policy, which at the moment appears random and incomprehensible.

COVID-19: Response is The Definition of Insanity.

 So, the majority of the country goes to Tier4, which is Lockdown in Name Only.  Which has been proven not to work. Twice. The definition of insanity is repeating behaviour that has been proven not to work with the misguided notion that it will, finally, work.

Strangely Liverpool, Surrounded by Tier4 Zombie apocalypse wastelands stays in Tier3. I assume the decision is political to save face over the track and trace fiasco that failed in Liverpool. Gone quiet about that hasn't it? It was supposed to be a beacon for the country as best practice. 

Then everyone in Liverpool did what they wanted and stuck two fingers up to the track and track people. Either by ignoring them or just disabling bluetooth on their phones, or just not downloading the NHS Covid app.

Anyhoo, I expect Liverpool will be in Tier4 next week. Just a slight delay so the government can say T&T is working when we patently know it isn't.

So, the Isles of Scilly are the only area in Tier one. The Isle of Man stays Alcatraz-like off the coast of the North West refusing to allow people on or off. You're imprisoned on that rock for the foreseeable. Unless you have a jetski.

Rumours abound of an impending new, specially-made-up Tier 5 for the naughty boys and girls that don't isolate. You will be sent back to your room without tea and you'll stay there until your attitude improves.

If you don't mend your ways, the government are contemplating Tiers all the way up to ten.

Tier 9 is "Kill Yourself - to save the NHS"

Tier 10 is "If you won't do it, we'll come round your house and kill you ourselves - to save the NHS"

Otherwise known as the Final Solution.

COVID-19: Ignoring Lockdown

 I think we'll see a lot more people ignoring lockdown rules this time round. Mainly because the rules don't make sense and most of the measures put in place since the first lockdown haven't stopped the rise of case numbers. 

The wearing of masks hasn't stopped a rise in cases.

Social distancing Rules haven't stopped a rise in cases.

Plastic screens in pubs and restaurants haven't stopped a rise in cases.

So, if they haven't stopped a rise in cases, they are not stopping infections. So why do we persist in using them?

The obvious answer is infections are being caused by something that these measures don't prevent.

So where are the infections coming from? What has opened up since the initial lockdown? 

Is it the pubs? Is it the Restaurants? Is it the non-essential shops? 

Or could it be the opening of schools and colleges? 

Persisting with measure that provably don't prevent the spread of the virus is just wrong-headed. Why are they still in place? Are they just there to reassure people? If that's the case, that's criminal. 

Reassurance does not stop infections.

We need to look into this and find the real reasons why infections are increasing. Then deal with it properly.

Locking down and keeping schools open sends the wrong message. Also if schools are the source of the spread, then keeping them open whilst locking down won't stop the spread.

Is this some sort of giant experiment to try and find the true infection vector?

People are fed up with jumping through hoops and being blamed for the spread, when it's the government's lack of acknowledgement of the rear sources of infection that is the real issue.

We've jumped through hoops and the infection is spreading, so why do we continue to jump? People are rebelling and I've heard several normally compliant and sensible people saying they will rebel. 

Fuck the rule of six, fuck the masks, fuck the closure of non-essential shops. They will find a way round it. A kind of lockdown black market is already forming.

It's about time the government came to it's senses and started coming up with common sense solutions that people can get behind.

COVID-19: Unanswered Queations.

 It seems the media have slipped into full propaganda mode lately and just parrot the government line on anything, not just the Covid crisis. 

But there are questions that need to be asked. 

For instance why are we locking down the whole population when less than 5% are at serious risk of complications from the virus? 

Why are we  paying people that are effectively immune from the virus to stay at home?

What happens to the DNA information gathered as part of the Covid testing procedure? 

Is it stored and if it is, where is it stored and for how long? 

Who has access to the DNA information collected?

By what authority is the Government issuing Lockdowns?

What oversight is being done by the various Parliamentary committees regarding the Government's use of powers regarding Covid?

Are the Government just issuing illegal edits that can be challenged legally, or is there full Parliamentary approval?

What legal powers do the Police have under these circumstances? Are they acting legally or illegally?

What risk assessments have the Government done regarding Covid-19 and are they available for scrutiny?

How much has been spent during the Pandemic and how do the Government expect the money to be paid back?

Will taxes be raised in the future? If so, for how long?

The list goes on and on, but there seems to be no-one putting these questions to the various authorities.

There seems to be a blind acceptance by the press that the government can just issue commands and they get blindly implemented by the NHS and the Police. That's not how things work in a democracy. The government has to put it's plans before Parliament and then Parliament including the House of Lords ratify any changes to the legal framework.

If this is not being done, how legal are these edicts? Can they be challenged in court? 

For God's sake media, please wake up and do your job!

COVID-19: Wales in Lockdown.

 The Welsh government has announced a short sharp lockdown beginning November 9th. 

Who exactly is paying for all of these Welsh people to sit at home? I hope that the devolved government will be footing the bill and any damage to the Welsh economy will be paid for out of the Welsh pocket.

Otherwise I think the UK government should be quite right to overrule any decision like this that the English have to foot the bill for.

Also, what are they going to do about people in England not under lockdown rules crossing the border into Wales? Are they going to sit Police on every single road between the two countries stopping traffic?

When are they going to accept that it's past the time for lockdowns? They're good for stalling the inevitable, but once you have the extra capacity in place like the Nightingale hospitals, the lockdowns are not a positive measure. Instead they only prolong the length of the infection. 

Now we have the extra capacity available, let the country go about it's business and hospitalise those that need hospitalisation. Only if the nightingale hospitals are at serious risk of being overtopped should we start to restrict movements and meetings.

Common sense realy, which seems to be in very short supply in political circles these days. It seems emotions and posturing for political effect totally outweigh common sense.

COVID-19: Stop the Scattergun Approach.

 The government says when it comes to covid that it is following the science. However, from their actions, this seems about as far from the truth as you can get.

The science says people under the age of 50 have a 99.9% chance of surviving the virus. The chances of surviving stay above 95% up to the age of 70.

So why are we not targeting those people who are at higher risk, like old people and those with pre-existing conditions, like diabetics? Get them to shield at home and let the rest of the population go about their daily business.

The current lockdown approach, even local lockdowns are a like using a Blunderbuss to kill a fly. The lockdown rules themselves are pushing people together and creating MORE risk of transmission than just letting people carry on with their lives.

I've already said we should (for the time being) lower the pension age so that those over 60 can remove themselves from the workforce and reduce their number of contacts.

Those with serious illnesses (essentially those people that qualify for the flu jab) should get a letter to be paid to stay at home. After all, if the flu is s risk to these people, then covid-19 certainly is.

Then the youngsters can get on and get infected. Those with serious covid symptoms go straight to the Nightingale hospitals, which allows the regular NHS facilities to function as normal. Only if and when there's a chance of the Nightingale units being overtopped (say 75-80% occupancy) is the point we start to lock down. 

That way the economy gets to continue, people's freedoms are not eroded and there's a bloody good reason for locking down. Rather than the shit-show we have at the moment, where a city is in full lockdown but the people can still drive to a pub 10 miles away.

At the moment the government have it arse-about-face and it's about time they were challenged on the policies in place at the moment or the government themselves had a bloody good rethink and returned to common sense.

COVID-19: Targeting the at Risk.

First, let's look at some facts. 

1. Those over the age of 60 are at significantly greater risk of serious complications from covid-19 infection.

2. Conversely, those under 30 are at significantly lower risk of serious complications.

3. The two facts above inform that paying young people to stay at home or isolate in another lockdown is a waste of money.

4. It also informs one that keeping older people in work increases their risk of exposure to the virus and therefore significantly increases the number of serious cases and therefore the cost in lost man-hours, tax revenue and NHS costs.

5. We also know that the virus is here to stay and a vaccine could be years away.

So if a way of targeting the vulnerable and paying them to isolate while at the same time keeping the young in employment could be found, that would keep the economy going whilst simultaneously keeping the numbers of serious cases down. Effectively the holy grail the government is seeking.

I commented on the Guido Fawkes website yesterday about my idea to lower the retirement age to 60. It was the first comment on there that I've had with more down votes that up.

Interesting.

The reasons varied from the cost, to why force old people to retire.

So, let's examine the cost. So far we're at the thick end of a Trillion pounds spent on the COVID-19 response. A lot of that was paying the wrong people to stay off work. We now know that the virus has a disproportionately bad effect on people the older they get. 

So instead of a 2nd blanket lockdown, which the government is trying to avoid, let's target old people and get them out of the job pool. Those billions paid will be paid to people at highest risk of death and therefore the money isn't being wasted on paying 20-year-olds to sit at home when they are at minimal risk from the virus if they get it at work.

The money is keeping those older people at home, away from work, it's reducing the workload on the NHS created by serious covid cases. 

The money is allowing older people to pay the rent and put food on the table without the need to work. It gives them the choice. If they feel the risk to them is minimal, they can continue to work and mingle in the community. But it's their choice and hopefully those mad enough to think they are immune will be in the minority.

That gets on to the criticism of forcing people to retire. No-one is forcing anyone. They assess the risk of working against the risk of staying away from work and daily exposure to the virus. The option of the pension and associated benefits is there should they assess the risk is too great. At least then when they do give up working they won't starve or end up homeless.

The other thing is there's no need to set up yet another government agency to administer the change. All that is required is a change to the rules regarding pension age and then people opting to retire at 60 can do and the machinery to support them is already there.in place and just kicks in 5 years earlier than normal.

This is a minimal impact option, especially if the virus is going to be around for years to come. The number of deaths in the 60-65 age group can be severely reduced by taking them away from the work environment and removing that source of infection from their lives. Let the youngsters replace the oldies, the people best able to resist the virus when exposed to it.

The main impact of lowering the retirement age would be private pensions and mortgages as people retire at 60 instead of 65. Again, the government can chose to mitigate any adverse financial impact to the minority of people affected. A minority of a minority, a comparatively low cost. Certainly not paying the whole flipping workforce of the UK to sit on their arse..

If a vaccine is 3-5 years or more away, or if some herd immunity can't be achieved, we are going to have to come up with a solution that supports the parts of the population most at risk. Here it is.

COVID-19: Land of Confusion.

 The Government has announced new extra lockdown measures for the Midlands, North West and parts of Yorkshire.

Glossing over the high Muslim population in the Midlands and Yorkshire, the restrictions are hitting Merseyside too, but then the Scousers don't go much for being told what to do.

But I notice that some parts of Greater Manchester are going back into lockdown after Augusts extra restrictions were lifted. I didn't know that the extra restrictions were lifted already.

And there's the issue: with all of these different edicts, rules, regulations and restrictions coming out of government, it's hard to know what the score is in parts of the country. England, Wales and Scotland, not a problem. Wales and Scotland talk funny so you know you're somewhere where the rules may be different.

But issuing several on-off-in-out-shake-it-all-about restrictions and relaxations in England is just causing confusion. And people are now saying "fuck it, why bother?" because it's too complicated to keep up.

Instead, lets have a short, sharp shutdown to sort the issue out. 14 days lockdown and let's see how the virus progresses afterwards. The time has come to reset, reboot and make it simple again. Stop spreading the fucking virus!

And why the fuck are we accepting illegal immigrant's from plague-ridden France still? Immediately bussed to hotels in Northern England and the Midlands (those locations sound familiar) and then free to roam the streets immediately, with no 14 days isolation period. Coincidence? I think not!

Let's have it: lockdown and only essential workers exempt. 

And only release lockdown after clear guidelines have been given and pubs, restaurants and cafes only allowed to reopen with proper mitigation measures in place. I've seen too many lax establishments open up with absolutely nothing in the way of mitigation. No screens, no distancing, not even hand sanitiser. Those fuckers need to be jumped on.

And lets stop pretending BLM and Extinction Rebellion are immune. They're not. Large Gatherings and protests should be stopped.

In Southampton the boat show was stopped just hours before it was due to open. What the fuck was it doing opening anyway? Who the fuck thought it was a good idea?

God fucking help us if COVID-19 was something really deadly like Ebola. We'd be royally fucked by now.

COVID-19 - Release from Lockdown Failing

 The cracks in the release from Lockdown are starting to show. The Government has just released figures that show the R or infection rating is above 1 for the first time since lockdown.

It's now quite obvious the policy employed since lockdown has failed. For whatever reason, the infection rating has climbed above 1 and the virus is starting to increase once again.

I urge the government to act now and not fuck about like it did last time. We need lockdown NOW.

Close the schools, close the pubs (the most obvious vector for the virus and not at all necessary to keep open), and limit access to shops again. This time, keep non-essential shops open, but limit access. So at least a significant majority of people can continue to work and keep their jobs.

Schools should become a safe repository for kids while parents are working. Kids stay in fixed classes, no moving around from class to class spreading the virus. 

Beauty salons are not essential and promote close personal contact. They should also be closed. Tough luck ladies, learn to love the grey.

Work should continue as much as possible, with proper social distancing measures in place. Offices should install screens between desks and workers should wear masks where they can.

Movement between households should be stopped. Scrap the rule of six, stop all non-essential meetings between households.

Non-essential travel should also be stopped.

Migrants reaching our shores should be returned under quarantine back to France. They should not be allowed into the country, they should not be bussed to the North and they should not be allowed the freedom to roam the streets.

It should be made clear to the country that they cannot go back to pre-lockdown levels of social interaction. If they continue to act in the irresponsible way they are, then they risk a second lockdown and this time the country may not be able to afford the cushion that was given to them the first time round. Next time will be harder. Unless they start to act responsibly and start to get back to what they were doing during lockdown, then there will be a tougher period of lockdown. Your choice.

And to the Government: for fuck's sake stop changing the rules! No wonder people just do what the fuck they like, because the Government changes the rules every week. Let's have some common sense rules that people can actually see make sense. Stop with the ever changing tag lines.

Right now the government should be saying we should be working to prevent another harder lockdown. We are all in it together and if we don't, the government cannot be as generous as last time and the next time will be harder for a lot of people. It may be harder for YOU.

Do you ant to risk your home, your job? If you don't then start to act like responsible adults and keep your distance, stop spreading the virus and stop acting like there's nothing going on. Stay away from pubs if at all possible. The pubs are there as a service, they are not be be abused on drunken orgies like before the virus. If you can't grow up and take some responsibility, then you will lose the privilege and pubs and other services will be shut down again.

COVID-19: The Problem with the Track and Trace and Shielding the Over 50's

The track and trace scheme, and the on/of plans to isolate the over-50's are all well and good, but if neither scheme is backed up by a reasonable level of payment, then neither scheme will gain much support.

Boris has said that he expects companies to be reasonable and support those people affected. But what if the company is "reasonable"? What if they don't pay the person shielding or isolating? How can Boris force companies to pay employees that have to isolate or shield?

Basically, he can't. So either scheme is a busted flush.

Because without financial support, people will just continue to go to work. Either they won't declare symptoms, or they will ignore the track-and-trace advice. Over 50' will just take a pragmatic view and continue to work.

Without financial support from the government, you can't expect people to just stop working for two weeks or indefinitely. To make the schemes work you have to have a carrot. Sticks don't work and quite soon you'll have an angry mob on your hands.

Want to win the next election Boris? Have some common sense and sort it out.

COVID-19 Panorama Programme and Community Integrated Care.

Last Thursday the Panorama Programme highlighted the care charity Community Integrated Care and how one of their home for dementia patients coped during the COVID-19 crisis. They lost quite a lot of their residents to the virus. 

Sadly Panorama did the usual lefty thing of Tory government bashing and tugging at heart strings. Plenty of emotional content and not much factual content. Let's have less of the "care workers crying in front of the camera" angle and more of the "fucked up confusion, changing the rules on a daily basis" angle instead.

The Panorama programme completely missed the reasons why care homes failed to prevent COVID-19 infections from getting inside.

In fact the programme blatantly showed on of the big issues during the crisis: whilst NHS hospital staff were doing full-on biological protection in what were effectively hazmat suits, care homes were left to deal with COVID-19 patients using just surgical masks, gloves and plastic aprons.

Where NHS staff were exiting COVID-19 wards and completely stripping off scrubs and PPE, the care home staff were wearing the same clothes walking from resident to resident.

It came as no surprise then that once testing had been established, the majority of care workers and residents in the home being filmed tested positive for COVID-19. The infection prevention was lacklustre at best. But homes can only follow official advice and use the equipment given to them. If they overstep their remit they can (and are) sanctioned. 

And this is where I am at odds with the Panorama programme: they didn't focus on the differences in advice and procedures between the NHS and care homes. Given there were dealing with effectively the same environment (working closely with a number of "patients", both infected and non-infected), why were the advice and infection control procedures so disparate?

The pictures on the news coming out of Covid wards at the time are chalk and cheese different between the advice given to care homes at the same time. 

The NHS had the resources available to protect staff (although there were issues even within the NHS) and patients. In the care sector people were just left to muddle through and deal with it as best they could.

The Panorama programme dealt with the subject of patients being sent to care homes from hospitals without covid testing and in some cases already infected patients being delivered to care homes which then went on to infect other staff and residents. Panorama dealt with the pressure that care homes were being put under to accept these patients, but nothing was said about practices, procedures and advice given to care homes. Yes, this was an issue, but only in limited cases.

In fact Community Integrated Care used common sense and instigated the full PPE policy (albeit only masks, gloves and aprons) and locked down care homes way before they were given official advice, which protected the majority of their homes from infection. The majority of their homes being infected from residents returned back to them infected from hospital visits.

The second thing the Panorama programme failed to investigate was the almost daily changes in official advice coming from official sources. I remember early in the pandemic, there was no advice for a number of weeks. Those homes that took it upon themselves to isolate and protect staff and residents fared best. Official advice at the beginning was woeful.

It was only when the horror stories came out of Italy of care home residents being left to die in abandoned homes that the government and their agents started to get their shit together and start offering advice. In one week the advice changed three times, such was the chaos around care. There was one change at least every week. And I've already blogged about the difference in advice given to different care sectors. Even though they may be doing the exact same job or type of care, residential care homes regulated by the CQC got more robust advice then other care sectors. The only difference I could see was that CQC regulated homes account for the stats about care homes that were being shown on the daily briefings. Unregulated care homes count as stats in the general population.

Other types of care such as domiciliary care or supported living were not given the same level of advice or support. My wife manages a number of homes that provide different forms of care. She was working to one set of guidelines for her registered home and a completely different set of guidelines for her other care homes. Despite them doing essentially the same job. That's how fucked up the advice was and still is.

And that's just advice. The debacle around getting hold of PPE is another saga entirely. Private care homes left out in the lurch, care homes in general left out of government initiatives and even when government -sponsored free PPE was available, the emails looked like a scam from some completely non-healthcare-related company.

The government deny care was an afterthought, but the evidence suggests otherwise.

But in my book, by concentrating on emotions Panorama spectacularly failed to score any point against the government. 

How's about playing back Chris Whitty's first few visits to the daily Covid-19 briefings when he went on about herd immunity when it wasn't a given there was any immunity against covid? How's about contacting care providers and asking for the emails that changed on almost a daily basis? How's about checking the difference between registered care homes and other forms of care?

And still the bollocks continue to be dropped: currently the plan is to test every care home worker for COVID on a weekly basis. Residents get tested every 28 days. 

Except currently not one testing kit has been delivered, so homes cannot meet the weekly target. Where's Panorama on that spectacular clanger?

It just shows that the BBC is run by children who fixate on one point and spectacularly miss attention to other details. They could have made one hell of a damning documentary if they had a clue about the subject they were filming.