The Unheard Science

The [UK] Government is not guilty of anything from what we accept and allow [from the choices] under the system. They are rubbish at planning and spend most of their time trying to do nothing apart from pigeon stepping along the words, of the days forced politics. The rest of their time is spent enjoying ‘being there’ in power, machinating their partisan manoeuvres that they have been dreaming of as much as Robbie Williams was dreaming of since 1999 and going to Vegas.

The government manage nothing. Chris Grayling used that line as his defence for being played for hundreds of thousands over and over again. They tried to privatise management [because they had lost its grip – rather than to regain it.] Unfortunately ‘the grayling’s’ [uk -gov . org / thelivingdodo’s] elected to privatise it to the same advisors that kept taking candy from the chris grayling. For this they used ‘the impartial’ “heads down boys’s” club of ‘Hold steady, they are gone on two’ civil service who saw private management as a bad job opportunity for the club and shrinkage as a bi-product.

Not surprisingly when asked to produce contracts to ensure and protect Britain with caveats for regaining control, the civil service did not include in any tight contract [the key objective] of reducing and controlling the finances. ‘Given enough time the error of this pursuit will end and ‘sense’ will return to the civil service.’ In the meantime, might as well take advantage of the coming haemorrhages of money into private hands.

So when I hear the government’s best scientific advice as the words of Florence Nightingale I wonder about the causes of Florence Nightingale and wonder why I cannot hear the words of Charles Darwin? Was he wrong? – Was he a NAZI? – If he was not wrong, could he be right and should we [best scientific advice] not be acting on t-his science for the best outcome?

Social distancing is an important simple tool to help protect the weak and vulnerable and to try to reduce the spread of an outbreak virus into the old populated care homes. But the key word is to  ’Try’. For all of the efforts in the world of micro biology cannot stop an aerosol [in the air moisture of the breath] infectious virus. If you can breathe through a mask then the virus will travel out and in. The mask with an aerosol transmitted virus, is ‘a paper bag over the head when the siren goes off‘ advice.

The virus [aerosol] broke out and was off as soon as it infected patients 2 and 3. After that it was no more stoppable than a spring tide. Some areas are more isolated but unless they are totally isolated [and even then if the virus is carried by birds] the aerosol virus will only be slowed and delayed in its wave through the population.

If a virus is observed as having a 1% lethality of population then it is likely that the lethality will be observed as 1% regardless of lock-downs [their total observation] or social distancing or PPE. The lethality prediction has not been changed in the briefings.

The delay of infection [reducing a peak or the sombrero effect] is being purported as saving the NHS service capacity and saving lives. It is true that if people phone 999 and are told that “There is no available service at present, good luck”, more people with a moderate to serious immuno response will not survive without oxygen or assisted respiration. The increase in life losses if the approach were not to be restricting the speed of the spread or increase [witches hat] the speed of the spread would be a sad increase in deaths in the group on the edge of respiration failure.  

Everybody else in the other groups would be unaffected. The sick but will recover, the Immuno unresponsive will die of multiple organ failure or neuro arrest, the hyperactive immune responders will die with or without ventilation and the vast majority will be mostly unaffected whether they are scarred by wearing PPE or not.

The other science [and advice or opinion unreported] is in addition to self isolation advice for the vulnerable is to do nothing [making no changes to society]. The spread will be organic and un-delayed. The vast majority 99% of the population will experience at most an unpleasant seasonal flu. The upside would be a shorter time period of the flu event with little to no effect on the global economy of money and human life.

Second [In the long-term] it would be far better to address the causes of Florence Nightingale than continue reaping the harvests of generous seeds sown. China must change their meat market culture. Switch to factory farming, separating species, processing and supply and ban / regulate to death the market trading of all species mixed together. Also a serious consideration should be given to banning the consumption of species that are known to feed on blood and especially that then get exposed to all other species in close proximity. This allows and creates the effective cross breeding of virus. In such a circumstance there is no need for a random mutation to create a new strain and the speed of development is hyper-facilitated.

Bringing an end to China’s meat market culture will significantly reduce the opportunity and ability of virus to change into new, novel or more lethal strains. Seasonal flu will mostly go the way of the common cold.

Third a repeat of this flu lock-down event will be [by the time all effects are counted] unthinkable if not impossible. The cost to society of this lock-down is going to be immense not just in terms of money but quality of life and mind. The debt repayment is going to be long-term and further exacerbate the wealth divide. The thought of locking down again over a 0.1% death toll of population [UK 67,000] would be insane given that seasonal flu’s normally kill between 6,000 to 48,000 in recent years. This is part of the 1,500 that die in UK society everyday of the year, as average. The death toll from Corona-19 in the UK is currently [11/4/20] under 9,000. 58,000 to go to reach 0.1% lethality or to come under a 0.1% lethality.

After a second flu lock-down because of a 0.05-0.1% lethality what would be the effects on more than the death toll if the best scientific advice were to then be confronted with an aerosol virus with a lethality of 20% of population?

As a final point the WHO approach to test everyone is a pointless waste of time and resources. The virus is moving through the population, 99.9% will be fine, while [observed and predicted] 0.1% of population [or less] will die. The sick will seek treatment [along with diagnosis] and be tested. To test everyone for an effect is useless as will be demonstrated by the virus final observed and predicted score. The other science will be left silently shaking its head in disbelief at humanity chosen response to an aerosol virus’s effective conquest of human connectivity, no matter how partially delayed.