Whilst I do agree fresh ai, uv and vit d all help how do you know there were no transmissions at the beaches? People from all over coming together and scattering again would be hard to trace to the beach.
Outside is safer than inside. Also many of the photos showing allegedly crowded beaches were carefully taken to show that and in many cases the beaches weren't crowded at all. I doubt vitamin D makes a big enough difference to matter and maybe UV does but I'd guess just fresh air is sufficient to explain it all. (Being deficient in vitamin D is bad, but beyond that there's a whole set of proposed things that vitamin D supplements might help with that turn out not to be helped by the supplements.)
That would be like asking how do you know if the vaccines worked. I mean, say you wanted to test how well your insulin works at reducing blood sugar, you could try missing a dose for one meal and then take if for another meal. This easy to perform experiment would provide a very good (evidence based) indication of how well the insulin is working, because you've taken it and not taken it with a meal. There would be no need to rely on claims from official studies or manufacturers etc
Not at all the same. They did studies and tests on how figures were before and after vaccines. They didn’t for beach visits.
According to Prof Mark Woolhouse, an epidemiologist at Edinburgh University who sits on the government’s SPI-M committee, the chance of a super-spreader event among the crowds that turned up from Bournemouth to Southend was minimal in theory – and nonexistent in practice.
www.theguardian.com
Yes, they did "their" studies and used "their" figures, but how do you know for "yourself" if the vaccine worked?
So as a lay person, do you think the virus would have been gone by summer in 2021?
Another study
Yet under oath, none of these types of studies are ever mentioned. They were quick to mandate something when they had no evidence (and still to this day at the covid inquiry claim there is no evidence) masks would make any difference which could possibly explain why they never made them available for free to the public.
The finding of the paper is about reducing illness (and absences) in schools (I think at the time they were testing and positive cases were encouraged to stay away for 5 days, so not just illness). Those seem worthwhile goals even if the children (and staff) didn't die.
I agree, so what did the novel vaccines do to prevent infections?
They reduced them. Initially quite a bit, later less so. They seem to reduce the harms of infection even for people not that badly affected (rates of long covid seem to be reduced generally). Of course that wasn't the goal, and they're still very effective at reducing the risks of hospitalisations and death.
I don't think everyone shares such conviction to the sales figures.
www.theguardian.com
Lawyers will do what lawyers do. As to the share price, a pandemic is (unsurprisingly) a great time to sell vaccines and other effective drugs. Once almost everyone has had the doses there'll inevitably be a drop in sales. That's one big reason for governments funding the initial development and manufacturing (though that's also important because of the risk of failure).
Birx, the coordinator of the White House Coronavirus Task Force under former President Donald Trump, said faith that the vaccines created a wall of protection was misplaced – and she knew it.
www.westernjournal.com
www.bmj.com
How many do you know that have never had covid? I literally only know one person.
The point I am making is, only a small percentage of people ever caught the virus during each variant in 2020. Of those that did, most age groups would not show symptoms or have only mild symptoms etc The average age of death from covid is 83yrs of age.
Almost nobody was offered a vaccine in 2020. I suspect the Kent/alpha variant at the end of 2020 made quite a difference to how many people were infected. (How many people had been infected was an issue of controversy, with some arguing that it had been underestimated significantly. I tend to agree that the ONS infection survey is pretty convincing that rates were pretty low, somewhere around 2-3% at any time.)
