The point is to push the narrative of "incompetence" rather than planned bad intentions. It's also to make way for health policy being decided at an international level rather than by nation states, and for more restrictions on civil liberties.
@@MrDeadhead1952 There are many reasons why it shouldn't be done on an international basis. First of all the virus did not originate internationally but originated in a nation state where the Wuhan Institute of Virology is located. Specifically it originated in the world's most populous, and one of the world's most powerful countries which was conducting research into coronaviruses with research collaboration from the de-facto most powerful country. Having any influence whatsoever on these countries is not possible in any way. Further to that the views of international bodies might be antithetical to the views of less powerful nation states meaning that international institutions can use health policy to mandate the response to pathogens released without democratic forms of agreement. Countries such as the USA and China have permanent seats on the UN security council that allows them to shape what the international response is. The control posessed by the government that released the virus over international institutions, not just the WHO but others means that they can gauge the response to influence the rate and extent to which pathogens are distributed in outbreaks of the future for economic, reputational, or state security reasons that prioritise the large powerful nations conducting research on highly infectious diseases.
EXACTLY as we all know that nothing will get done against all who took part in the biggest scam against humanity , very carefully thought through from the start with all the right people in the right places
Carl Heneghan, as we have known since around May 2020, is a man of competence, knowledge and integrity. As such, they will ignore him, then destroy him. The British governing class, and the establishment in general, is simply sickening in its wickedness and incompetence.
@@davidmullens2464'British general practitioner physician, a clinical epidemiologist and a Fellow of Kellogg College. He is the director of the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and former Editor-in-Chief of BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine' Willing to risk his career & livelihood to bring you the truth, but you
@@davidmullens2464As if there was some 'inner core' of scientific opinion that is unquestionably right, rather than a range of opinions that should all be considered.
@@yvonnedays8292 of course but Henegan is on the extremes dismissed as a loon. I don't know if it's true but I do know Nelson, the Venetians and the Romans all understood the place of Lockdown/Quarantine.
@@Valhalla-vk7hf"Failures with what". Did you not listen to the podcast? There was an immediate over-estimation of COVID caused deaths while simultaneously ignoring the long-term deaths due to people unable to access scheduled medical care for serious/life-threatening illnesses such as cancer. Closer to your statement is that the lab-leak theory was immediately downplayed as a conspiracy all the while China refused to allow WHO members to review their data or investigate their wet market theory. Since they found no suspected bats with the virus in the wild at the time of the investigation shows that theory is the one which is remote. The fact that government refuses to admit mistakes is on point. Continued investigation into various reactions by nation show that those with less severe lockdowns actually had less deaths in the long term. But no one in countries who did lockdowns aggressively will admin that.
Helen McNamara did give honest answers. She said there was not one day when the guidance was followed by the staff at number 10. She also said that number 10 had wiped her phone of evidence she wanted to bring.
I'll save everyone a lot of time and lot of money: "Deaths were regrettable.... Chronic underfunding and systemic issues.... No impropriety established and no individuals are to blame... Lessons will be learnt.... Here are some recommendations... [Annexe 1453: Rinse and repeat]
The Rogers' Commission that investigated the Challenger disaster had Richard Feynman on the team - a smart scientist whose smartness was beyond question and would say the truth and dig into the baloney. The UK COVID inquiry needs someone similar. ...for nature cannot be fooled....
They should have done a full trial of Ivermectin as they did in other countries such as India where in Uttar Pradesh 200 million had Ivermectin at home and cases fell dramatically to ten not thousands. 3 months in uk would have probedits miraculous properties for almost no cost.
Professor Heneghan hits on a very good point …why weren’t those in power,and partying away,not afraid .let’s face it Boris Johnson is the type of person who would run at the first whiff of danger . It wasn’t only in the U.K. where things didn’t make sense . I was living in Malta at the time where quite strict rules were in force. I recall visiting a local health centre and we had to queue outside 2m apart fully masked. The person at the door was in full PPE and repeatedly shouting to keep apart. Three members of staff walked past him,and those queuing ,in their green overalls and a simple face mask ,walked to a street cafe about 15m from where we were queuing sat down together and removed their masks ,to drink a beer,smoke a cigarette,before returning to work .The rule at the time was rather strangely ,that to walk on a street you needed a mask ,even on a deserted country lane alone,but you could sit at a table on the same street without a mask,while someone stood immediately next to you needed one. Oh and you could also run and cycle along the street without a mask ,regardless of how busy it was. During the pandemic I also travelled to Hungary ,to visit family. I went overland via Bulgaria because the rule at the time was that to enter Hungary by air you needed quarantine but via a land crossing you didn’t ! For me it became very difficult to take the message seriously.
Why didn’t the government speak to ‘Del Bigtree’ of ‘The Highwire’. His team talked to all the right experts and got things right at every step. His podcasts even got thrown off YT as misinformation since they were so spot on, week after week. We need a proper Nuremberg 2.0 with long jail time for these opportunists.
The contribution of Oxford Alumni to the degradation of this country over the last decade; should tell us that precluding them from high office and positions of influence would benefit the country greatly.
The 'inquiry' is only asking why the government didn't do more sooner. There has been nothing about the lack of thought put into the costs of intervention and loss of civil liberties.
Exactly. It makes an absolute sham of all those lost lives. We need to stand up against this. If we had been responsible for any of this, we would be in prison. One rule for them and another for us. It is not good enough!!!!!!!!
Rude words were incidental and for me not the focus of the questioning. It showed me what a calous, despicable, inhumane government that was in power. Their attitudes to people who were clinically vulnerable (CEV) and the elderly was in my mind criminal and was borne out by 25% of all covid deaths from the clinically vulnerable group. We are still abandoned, NO covid protection at all, refused the one prophylatic drug that would have enabled us to safely leave our homes, and now gaslighted by society for having to continue to wear masks in public and NHS settings. No mask rules in health settings means the CEV run the risk of death if they wish to have healthcare. Covid treatments are now in scare supply and there are some horror stories that CEV people are reporting and still the media talk about the pandemic being over! That for me was the biggest issue to come out of that session. 1 in 2 people in this country are getting cancer in their lifetime and I sincerely hope that those decision makers at the time remember what they are doing to the CEV when its their turn to get cancer or even get arthritis and are on a drug that suppresses their immune system. It has nothing to do with age either!
Absolute hatchet job on CH. Why did they invite him along if they weren't interested in his opinions? I thought he remained dignified throughout - unlike the judge and QCs.
This public enquiry, conducted at great public expense, is not seriously examining the real issues, amongst which are the necessity for lockdowns, particularly once it became apparent that the threat was little more than that of the common cold, and the cause of the sustained, high rate of excess deaths, particularly those in the home, over the last couple of years. instead, it is focused upon tittle-tattle and name calling between those whom the pandemic made "celebrities". It is an absolute disgrace but, sadly, fully expected. Nobody can have any confidence in its conclusions.
Hi Pete Kadenz, enlightened comments!, unlike me you seem able to keep it short and sweet!. That thing about the ideologists has be a recurring topic for me, I am still trying to come to terms with the 'reality' of such deluded concepts!. At this time I am most interested in the potential explanation offered by the sharp contrast between the time and effort required for silly humans to sit and think clearly systematically and critically about anything!, so much easier to just grasp the nearest ready made recipe!, thus all sorts of dotty ideas like 'free markets' and the majority must be right are so powerful and popular. One of the key features to this behaviour is of course since their 'beliefs' have no rational foundation they cannot present any logical or consistent defence if challenged, thus they turn to personal abuse and vilification of the challenger, as always with this sort of concept I run the risk of severe optimism bias if I find evidence that seems to support my hypothesis and I am not at all certain that emotional rejection and hostility is always a symptom of cognitive delusion but in the meantime close correlation will do. Cheers, Richard.
Pretty well, actually. If you actually read his papers and his analysis of different scenarios based on a variety of assumptions, with the benefits of three years' hindsight, his predictions were remarkably good. Most people who criticise him only read the media headline summaries.
@@freeforester1717 I haven't read what he wrote about foot and mouth so I won't express a view. Have you? I spent a couple of hours today listening to Ferguson's session at the Covid Inquiry and I thoroughly recommend it if you've got the time.
All very fine looking in retrospect. Waste of money, we were no worse than the rest of Europe. What must be remembered is we live in a lawless country where people stick their two fingers up to rules and regulations. Spain and Italy drew the batons and knocked the living daylights out of people not following the rules. Imagine that in this country, the lawyers would have thousands of lawsuits against our police forces. No win situation.
It's a total white-wash, and not addressing any of the real concerns about the affair - but it can't because to do so, would entirely undermine the WHO's global framework about to be implemented for the next emergency, in which any such concerns will e banned. It is horrendous, but things are about to get much, much worse.
The lockdowns worked because the graph went down. No lockdowns worked because the graph went down. The masks worked because without them the infections would have been higher. The masks didnt work because the infections stayed pretty much the same. Im done..
I live in a small village of 3000 people in Canada. During the height of the plandemic, one doctor predicted that over 400 people would die from co-vid in our village. Four years later in 2024, we are still waiting for the first one. Out of a population of over 1 million in the province of Nova Scotia, 65 supposedly died with co-vid in 2020, average age of death 83 years old. Normally, about 10,000 people die every year in N.S.. Actually less people died in 2020 than would be normally expected. Some deadly virus that spread like wildfire.
The problem was a lack of hospital beds, the correct solution would have been to increase the number of beds. We should have been informed about the risks and given ADVICE. Lockdown should NEVER be allowed again.
Hi B Double B, I do agree with you, at the time I was well aware that the Red Cross volunteers that had chosen to support the NHS when an emergency arose fifteen months before were still in action! the original problem of staff shortages had not been s-resolved, in fact the shortfall had increased from thirty to forty five thousand nurses. This was the direct consequence of government policy which persistently starved the NHS of necessary funding for all of the previous twelve years for mainly ideological 'reasons'. This has always confused me, how can the hundreds of millions spent on gambling and 'hospitality' be considered \productive' industry while essential health care services called an undesirable expense?. This looked to me then and still does now to be the underlying reality at the time and it was vital for these exigent politicians to ensure the general population was effectively distracted from the facts of the matter!. In addition of course it was important to conceal the fact that members of this government were party to the earlier decisions to ignore the Cygnus report which clearly outlined the precautionary measures that might have been effective but would certainly have been quite expensive, these two issues combined if revealed would definitely have caused significant embarrassment if not a change of government. Cheers, Richard.
Totally agree Prof needs to get more airtime on mainstream media as providing proper scientific scrutiny. unfortunately association with Spectator maybe undermining his message due to some of the other bonkers stuff you regularly put out but good work with COVID enquiry
This public enquiry, conducted at great public expense, is not seriously examining the real issues, amongst which are the necessity for lockdowns, particularly once it became apparent that the threat was little more than that of the common cold, and the cause of the sustained, high rate of excess deaths, particularly those in the home, over the last couple of years. instead, it is focused upon tittle-tattle and name calling between those whom the pandemic made "celebrities". It is an absolute disgrace but, sadly, fully expected. Nobody can have any confidence in its conclusions.
the numpty scientist who appeared today mon 6/11 was quite bizzarre.. cummins remembers everything, this guy 'ben warner' couldnt remember anything or string 2 words together. ????
An inquiry can do one of two things... it can try and 'learn and advocate’, for better practices in the future. Or it can be a stick to punish people with. The general public need to understand... this pandemic was not zoological in origin. The WHO specifically, and virologists everywhere... had no idea how this virus, would react in large population centres. How it would mutate or its effect over time. There was no precedent, no model or formula to follow. The world health organisation had no idea how bad, or innocuous this could be. The government were in constant 'catch-up' with the WHO's various hypothesises and findings. Everything was set-up for the worst case scenario. Remember... 'normally' five hundred thousand people die a year in the UK. For many... this was an extremely lucky escape. The 'government' is not the place to look for scapegoats and lynchings. It wasn’t a trick that Sweden was touted as an outlier… during Covid. They’re mostly fitter, eat less ultra-processed foods and live in less polluted, dense population centres. The UK and the US populations are the complete opposite. This was the one element the WHO did know about. How unhealthy people in the UK/US are. That even a mild virus would have serious detrimental effects on the unhealthy. 'Covid' was a litmus test of the physical health of the nation... not the government. If anything failed...it was the general health of the UK's population.
For the same reason we shouldn’t allow history to be rewritten. So we won’t have to repeat the mistakes of the past. If we don’t know what was actually done how will we know what NOT to do?
The point of the inquiry was largely to expose the incompetence of those Spectator Barrington Declaration favourites such as Heneghan, of course. Anyine who has followed the pandemic and the inquiry can see that promoting natural herd immunity would have caused far greater havoc - a huge number of deaths and a paralyzed health system.
I don't think either of these two interviewees has all the answers about whether the government took the right course of action, but they are both spot-on that the inquiry is not going about things in a way that will yield any useful insights into that question. And one thing I am quite sure of: by exposing the private conversations of those who had to make the big decisions, the inquiry is ensuring that future leaders facing a similar crisis will be inhibited from arguing every viewpoint before coming to a conclusion.
Excess deaths in the home, that is the number of deaths greater than the statistic average for prevailing conditions, was 140 000 during the period of the pandemic. So where did those excess deaths come from? If not from Covid, where from? It wasn't only GB that suffered , it's no good pointing to Sweden and saying they got it right, to completely different countries and population dispersal. We need to analyse what happened and stop trying to pin the blame on someone. The Government HAD to act, this thing was so contagious and considering the initial death toll on older people I can't say how anyone can point a finger and say you're to blame.
It seems to have a very narrow focus on the Covid deaths (which were overstated anyway) and what could have been done to prevent them rather than all the other unintended consequences which were disastrous but don't seem to matter to this so called enquiry.
No, it is about, what happened by those with responsibility to guide us thru the covid epidemic. It was a s&&show, they didn't give a toss, making money for THEMSELVES. Disgusting!
We the British Government investigate us the British government and here by conclude there was no wrong doing on our part and find ourselves ourselves wholly not guilty on all charges. So let's have no more outrageous decent from 'conspiracy' theorists and no more inconvenient questioning please. Nothing to see hear. Move on. Jolly Good Show. Thank you...
Biggest crime in human history.
They’ll wriggle and squirm but the facts speak for themselves …
What? The virus was the the biggest crime? I don't get it.
Prof Carl. Thank you. We are with you
The point is to push the narrative of "incompetence" rather than planned bad intentions. It's also to make way for health policy being decided at an international level rather than by nation states, and for more restrictions on civil liberties.
Please explain why planning for a pandemic that originated outside of the country shouldn't be done on an international basis?
@@MrDeadhead1952Because other countries may not have your best intentions at heart.
Bang on !
@@MrDeadhead1952 There are many reasons why it shouldn't be done on an international basis. First of all the virus did not originate internationally but originated in a nation state where the Wuhan Institute of Virology is located. Specifically it originated in the world's most populous, and one of the world's most powerful countries which was conducting research into coronaviruses with research collaboration from the de-facto most powerful country. Having any influence whatsoever on these countries is not possible in any way. Further to that the views of international bodies might be antithetical to the views of less powerful nation states meaning that international institutions can use health policy to mandate the response to pathogens released without democratic forms of agreement. Countries such as the USA and China have permanent seats on the UN security council that allows them to shape what the international response is. The control posessed by the government that released the virus over international institutions, not just the WHO but others means that they can gauge the response to influence the rate and extent to which pathogens are distributed in outbreaks of the future for economic, reputational, or state security reasons that prioritise the large powerful nations conducting research on highly infectious diseases.
Exactly
It was never going to be an enquiry it was always going to be for appearance.
EXACTLY as we all know that nothing will get done against all who took part in the biggest scam against humanity , very carefully thought through from the start with all the right people in the right places
Don't talk nonsense!!!
great film thank you for putting Carl Heneghan on
The point is to get justice for injustice.
Carl Heneghan, as we have known since around May 2020, is a man of competence, knowledge and integrity. As such, they will ignore him, then destroy him. The British governing class, and the establishment in general, is simply sickening in its wickedness and incompetence.
No he's a man out on the edge of scientific opinion in this case. He just happens to provide an opinion you like.
@@davidmullens2464'British general practitioner physician, a clinical epidemiologist and a Fellow of Kellogg College. He is the director of the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and former Editor-in-Chief of BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine'
Willing to risk his career & livelihood to bring you the truth, but you
@@cbarronie2361 I understand that but he's still on the outside edge of scientific opinion. It may be the truth to you but he's in a tiny minority.
@@davidmullens2464As if there was some 'inner core' of scientific opinion that is unquestionably right, rather than a range of opinions that should all be considered.
@@yvonnedays8292 of course but Henegan is on the extremes dismissed as a loon. I don't know if it's true but I do know Nelson, the Venetians and the Romans all understood the place of Lockdown/Quarantine.
Prof Carl was treated appallingly at the Inquiry.
He was called out for what he was.
Was always going to be agenda ridden. How can they publicly discuss their failures?
Political reputation not healthcare is paramount.
@@Valhalla-vk7hf"Failures with what". Did you not listen to the podcast? There was an immediate over-estimation of COVID caused deaths while simultaneously ignoring the long-term deaths due to people unable to access scheduled medical care for serious/life-threatening illnesses such as cancer. Closer to your statement is that the lab-leak theory was immediately downplayed as a conspiracy all the while China refused to allow WHO members to review their data or investigate their wet market theory. Since they found no suspected bats with the virus in the wild at the time of the investigation shows that theory is the one which is remote.
The fact that government refuses to admit mistakes is on point. Continued investigation into various reactions by nation show that those with less severe lockdowns actually had less deaths in the long term. But no one in countries who did lockdowns aggressively will admin that.
@@Valhalla-vk7hfI guess you are taking the whatsit. The ‘experts’ determined to treat a virus by ventilation which was virtually a death sentence.
All this inquiry is going to do is promote lockdowns for longer and harder
Wasn't expecting the truth....😲
And we won't get it!
Helen McNamara did give honest answers. She said there was not one day when the guidance was followed by the staff at number 10. She also said that number 10 had wiped her phone of evidence she wanted to bring.
Excess deaths.
I'll save everyone a lot of time and lot of money: "Deaths were regrettable.... Chronic underfunding and systemic issues.... No impropriety established and no individuals are to blame... Lessons will be learnt.... Here are some recommendations... [Annexe 1453: Rinse and repeat]
One of the recommendations will be that the UK joins the WHO regime to handover decision making to the WHO.
The Rogers' Commission that investigated the Challenger disaster had Richard Feynman on the team - a smart scientist whose smartness was beyond question and would say the truth and dig into the baloney. The UK COVID inquiry needs someone similar. ...for nature cannot be fooled....
They should have done a full trial of Ivermectin as they did in other countries such as India where in Uttar Pradesh 200 million had Ivermectin at home and cases fell dramatically to ten not thousands. 3 months in uk would have probedits miraculous properties for almost no cost.
Professor Heneghan hits on a very good point …why weren’t those in power,and partying away,not afraid .let’s face it Boris Johnson is the type of person who would run at the first whiff of danger .
It wasn’t only in the U.K. where things didn’t make sense . I was living in Malta at the time where quite strict rules were in force. I recall visiting a local health centre and we had to queue outside 2m apart fully masked. The person at the door was in full PPE and repeatedly shouting to keep apart.
Three members of staff walked past him,and those queuing ,in their green overalls and a simple face mask ,walked to a street cafe about 15m from where we were queuing sat down together and removed their masks ,to drink a beer,smoke a cigarette,before returning to work .The rule at the time was rather strangely ,that to walk on a street you needed a mask ,even on a deserted country lane alone,but you could sit at a table on the same street without a mask,while someone stood immediately next to you needed one. Oh and you could also run and cycle along the street without a mask ,regardless of how busy it was.
During the pandemic I also travelled to Hungary ,to visit family. I went overland via Bulgaria because the rule at the time was that to enter Hungary by air you needed quarantine but via a land crossing you didn’t !
For me it became very difficult to take the message seriously.
Totally agree, the chat is secondary to policy but in this woke ideological climate, the world's turned upside down 😢
Why didn’t the government speak to ‘Del Bigtree’ of ‘The Highwire’. His team talked to all the right experts and got things right at every step. His podcasts even got thrown off YT as misinformation since they were so spot on, week after week. We need a proper Nuremberg 2.0 with long jail time for these opportunists.
"The problem was we didn't take draconian enough measures"
-Mainstream media, politics, most of society -
Yup!
Well, never mind, we can take "more draconian" measures next time, and fυck society up completely.
Something to look forward to!
The contribution of Oxford Alumni to the degradation of this country over the last decade; should tell us that precluding them from high office and positions of influence would benefit the country greatly.
The 'inquiry' is only asking why the government didn't do more sooner. There has been nothing about the lack of thought put into the costs of intervention and loss of civil liberties.
I don’t see the point of the enquiry with the Tories in power.
Exactly. It makes an absolute sham of all those lost lives. We need to stand up against this. If we had been responsible for any of this, we would be in prison. One rule for them and another for us. It is not good enough!!!!!!!!
Rude words were incidental and for me not the focus of the questioning. It showed me what a calous, despicable, inhumane government that was in power. Their attitudes to people who were clinically vulnerable (CEV) and the elderly was in my mind criminal and was borne out by 25% of all covid deaths from the clinically vulnerable group. We are still abandoned, NO covid protection at all, refused the one prophylatic drug that would have enabled us to safely leave our homes, and now gaslighted by society for having to continue to wear masks in public and NHS settings. No mask rules in health settings means the CEV run the risk of death if they wish to have healthcare. Covid treatments are now in scare supply and there are some horror stories that CEV people are reporting and still the media talk about the pandemic being over! That for me was the biggest issue to come out of that session. 1 in 2 people in this country are getting cancer in their lifetime and I sincerely hope that those decision makers at the time remember what they are doing to the CEV when its their turn to get cancer or even get arthritis and are on a drug that suppresses their immune system. It has nothing to do with age either!
Absolute hatchet job on CH. Why did they invite him along if they weren't interested in his opinions? I thought he remained dignified throughout - unlike the judge and QCs.
They're snobs who think he's stupid because he's got a northern accent.
Well established Registered PPE companies were excluded from getting contracts,WHY?
10:37 he hits the nail right on the head
This public enquiry, conducted at great public expense, is not seriously examining the real issues, amongst which are the necessity for lockdowns, particularly once it became apparent that the threat was little more than that of the common cold, and the cause of the sustained, high rate of excess deaths, particularly those in the home, over the last couple of years. instead, it is focused upon tittle-tattle and name calling between those whom the pandemic made "celebrities". It is an absolute disgrace but, sadly, fully expected. Nobody can have any confidence in its conclusions.
Good on you fella🤗
Ferguson should be imprisoned for the rest of his life
Why? Because you don't agree with him?
Instead of paid investigators within the system, they need independent laymen or even critical thinking members of the public.
what’s the point of the Covid inquiry?
To find out what happened.
It won't. It's just to cover the backs of the Oxbridge civil service who railroaded the lockdowns through.
Don't you mean "Professor Pantsdown"?
How about should they have done it at all¡
To find out the truth and make recommendations to ensure it doesn’t happen again. But I can see why ideologists find that difficult to understand.
Hi Pete Kadenz, enlightened comments!, unlike me you seem able to keep it short and sweet!. That thing about the ideologists has be a recurring topic for me, I am still trying to come to terms with the 'reality' of such deluded concepts!. At this time I am most interested in the potential explanation offered by the sharp contrast between the time and effort required for silly humans to sit and think clearly systematically and critically about anything!, so much easier to just grasp the nearest ready made recipe!, thus all sorts of dotty ideas like 'free markets' and the majority must be right are so powerful and popular. One of the key features to this behaviour is of course since their 'beliefs' have no rational foundation they cannot present any logical or consistent defence if challenged, thus they turn to personal abuse and vilification of the challenger, as always with this sort of concept I run the risk of severe optimism bias if I find evidence that seems to support my hypothesis and I am not at all certain that emotional rejection and hostility is always a symptom of cognitive delusion but in the meantime close correlation will do.
Cheers, Richard.
How’s Ferguson the modeller’s track record holding up? 🤔🤣🤣
Pretty well, actually. If you actually read his papers and his analysis of different scenarios based on a variety of assumptions, with the benefits of three years' hindsight, his predictions were remarkably good. Most people who criticise him only read the media headline summaries.
@@michaelkay1508 indeed? How about foot and mouth?
@@freeforester1717 I haven't read what he wrote about foot and mouth so I won't express a view. Have you? I spent a couple of hours today listening to Ferguson's session at the Covid Inquiry and I thoroughly recommend it if you've got the time.
All very fine looking in retrospect. Waste of money, we were no worse than the rest of Europe. What must be remembered is we live in a lawless country where people stick their two fingers up to rules and regulations. Spain and Italy drew the batons and knocked the living daylights out of people not following the rules. Imagine that in this country, the lawyers would have thousands of lawsuits against our police forces. No win situation.
It's a total white-wash, and not addressing any of the real concerns about the affair - but it can't because to do so, would entirely undermine the WHO's global framework about to be implemented for the next emergency, in which any such concerns will e banned. It is horrendous, but things are about to get much, much worse.
Sadly true, it will be out of our governments hands which is great for them because they cant be blamed.
The lockdowns worked because the graph went down.
No lockdowns worked because the graph went down.
The masks worked because without them the infections would have been higher.
The masks didnt work because the infections stayed pretty much the same.
Im done..
O B E Y 🐑
I live in a small village of 3000 people in Canada. During the height of the plandemic, one doctor predicted that over 400 people would die from co-vid in our village. Four years later in 2024, we are still waiting for the first one. Out of a population of over 1 million in the province of Nova Scotia, 65 supposedly died with co-vid in 2020, average age of death 83 years old. Normally, about 10,000 people die every year in N.S.. Actually less people died in 2020 than would be normally expected. Some deadly virus that spread like wildfire.
Whatever the point of it all, most the people in the hotseat look like they're bricking it and "can't recall" a hell of a lot of things...
The problem was a lack of hospital beds, the correct solution would have been to increase the number of beds. We should have been informed about the risks and given ADVICE. Lockdown should NEVER be allowed again.
Hi B Double B, I do agree with you, at the time I was well aware that the Red Cross volunteers that had chosen to support the NHS when an emergency arose fifteen months before were still in action! the original problem of staff shortages had not been s-resolved, in fact the shortfall had increased from thirty to forty five thousand nurses.
This was the direct consequence of government policy which persistently starved the NHS of necessary funding for all of the previous twelve years for mainly ideological 'reasons'. This has always confused me, how can the hundreds of millions spent on gambling and 'hospitality' be considered \productive' industry while essential health care services called an undesirable expense?.
This looked to me then and still does now to be the underlying reality at the time and it was vital for these exigent politicians to ensure the general population was effectively distracted from the facts of the matter!. In addition of course it was important to conceal the fact that members of this government were party to the earlier decisions to ignore the Cygnus report which clearly outlined the precautionary measures that might have been effective but would certainly have been quite expensive, these two issues combined if revealed would definitely have caused significant embarrassment if not a change of government.
Cheers, Richard.
Totally agree Prof needs to get more airtime on mainstream media as providing proper scientific scrutiny. unfortunately association with Spectator maybe undermining his message due to some of the other bonkers stuff you regularly put out but good work with COVID enquiry
This public enquiry, conducted at great public expense, is not seriously examining the real issues, amongst which are the necessity for lockdowns, particularly once it became apparent that the threat was little more than that of the common cold, and the cause of the sustained, high rate of excess deaths, particularly those in the home, over the last couple of years. instead, it is focused upon tittle-tattle and name calling between those whom the pandemic made "celebrities". It is an absolute disgrace but, sadly, fully expected. Nobody can have any confidence in its conclusions.
The mainstream media in this country are largely complicit, I think you’ll find.
the numpty scientist who appeared today mon 6/11 was quite bizzarre.. cummins remembers everything, this guy 'ben warner' couldnt remember anything or string 2 words together. ????
The ones who gave straight answers are a minority. Most are allowed to duck and dive and so the whole exercise becomes a waste of time
An inquiry can do one of two things... it can try and 'learn and advocate’,
for better practices in the future. Or it can be a stick to punish people with.
The general public need to understand... this pandemic was not zoological in origin.
The WHO specifically, and virologists everywhere... had no idea how this virus,
would react in large population centres. How it would mutate or its effect over time.
There was no precedent, no model or formula to follow.
The world health organisation had no idea how bad, or innocuous this could be.
The government were in constant 'catch-up' with the WHO's various hypothesises and findings.
Everything was set-up for the worst case scenario.
Remember... 'normally' five hundred thousand people die a year in the UK.
For many... this was an extremely lucky escape.
The 'government' is not the place to look for scapegoats and lynchings.
It wasn’t a trick that Sweden was touted as an outlier… during Covid.
They’re mostly fitter, eat less ultra-processed foods and live in less polluted,
dense population centres. The UK and the US populations are the complete opposite.
This was the one element the WHO did know about. How unhealthy people in the UK/US are.
That even a mild virus would have serious detrimental effects on the unhealthy.
'Covid' was a litmus test of the physical health of the nation... not the government.
If anything failed...it was the general health of the UK's population.
For the same reason we shouldn’t allow history to be rewritten. So we won’t have to repeat the mistakes of the past. If we don’t know what was actually done how will we know what NOT to do?
Excellent. In contrast, you show most other British press as being infantile, and manipulative.
Did note the abrupt end.
The point of the inquiry was largely to expose the incompetence of those Spectator Barrington Declaration favourites such as Heneghan, of course. Anyine who has followed the pandemic and the inquiry can see that promoting natural herd immunity would have caused far greater havoc - a huge number of deaths and a paralyzed health system.
Classic Smoke and mirrors. Playing to the Daily Mirror readers.
As a Claims Expert the opposition will always expose your personal and professional weaknesses
The big question is, 'If lockdowns had been implemented sooner, would they have failed earlier?'
Safe and Effective=Scary and Defective.
Follow the science $$$.
I don't think either of these two interviewees has all the answers about whether the government took the right course of action, but they are both spot-on that the inquiry is not going about things in a way that will yield any useful insights into that question. And one thing I am quite sure of: by exposing the private conversations of those who had to make the big decisions, the inquiry is ensuring that future leaders facing a similar crisis will be inhibited from arguing every viewpoint before coming to a conclusion.
it was a plandemic
Excess deaths in the home, that is the number of deaths greater than the statistic average for prevailing conditions, was 140 000 during the period of the pandemic. So where did those excess deaths come from? If not from Covid, where from? It wasn't only GB that suffered , it's no good pointing to Sweden and saying they got it right, to completely different countries and population dispersal. We need to analyse what happened and stop trying to pin the blame on someone. The Government HAD to act, this thing was so contagious and considering the initial death toll on older people I can't say how anyone can point a finger and say you're to blame.
Ask anyone who lost someone …
Cos! People are always looking for someone to crucify!
Total waste of time. It was what it was. There will be another one along soon probably before this enquiry is finished move on .
The use of taxpayer money to exonerate the guilty.
Boris Covid party
Seems to me its not oñly a whitewash but reinforcing all the things that were done wrong and dispicable. Its a pantomime.
BMJ has an interesting article on 'evidence based medicine'. Even more so the comments by their fellows.
It seems to have a very narrow focus on the Covid deaths (which were overstated anyway) and what could have been done to prevent them rather than all the other unintended consequences which were disastrous but don't seem to matter to this so called enquiry.
No, it is about, what happened by those with responsibility to guide us thru the covid epidemic. It was a s&&show, they didn't give a toss, making money for THEMSELVES. Disgusting!
Follow the money. Put all those people on a lie detector.
QUESTION.
DID YOU GET MONEY INTO AN OFFSHORE TRUST.
There was no science to follow. All bs.
When they can’t play the ball, they hack at the Man.
Pantomime dressed up as charades, disguised as an enquiry, pretending to be a worthwhile venture.
Waist of my money 😮 , just blame the Chinese
We the British Government investigate us the British government and here by conclude there was no wrong doing on our part and find ourselves ourselves wholly not guilty on all charges.
So let's have no more outrageous decent from 'conspiracy' theorists and no more inconvenient questioning please.
Nothing to see hear. Move on.
Jolly Good Show.
Thank you...
Lip service only..............
Kate the stooge
Sod the data!
Look st the science.