• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Controversy - The Great Barrington Declaration

sharon sanders

Editor-in-Chief & President
fyi - I have not signed the petition. It is a policy of FluTrackers that I do not sign any petitions and I never have. I was asked by a leading medical doctor to sign a petition to ask for the removal of the head of the W.H.O. last spring and I declined, as usual.

Please also view the video in the next post for a critique of this issue. We do not shy away from controversy. It does no public good to ignore topics that are in circulation.


------------------------------------------------------------------------


Signed by

Medical & Public
Health Scientists

4,581

Medical
Practitioners

8,477

General
Public

118,696

The Great Barrington Declaration

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent PCR testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.

Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.


Co-signers

Medical and Public Health Scientists and Medical Practitioners

Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, physician and professor emeritus of medical microbiology, University of Mainz, Germany

Dr. Rajiv Bhatia, physician, epidemiologist and public policy expert at the Veterans Administration, USA

Dr. Stephen Bremner,professor of medical statistics, University of Sussex, England

Dr. Anthony J Brookes, professor of genetics, University of Leicester, England

Dr. Helen Colhoun, ,professor of medical informatics and epidemiology, and public health physician, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

Dr. Angus Dalgleish, oncologist, infectious disease expert and professor, St. George’s Hospital Medical School, University of London, England

Dr. Sylvia Fogel, autism expert and psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital and instructor at Harvard Medical School, USA

Dr. Eitan Friedman, professor of medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Israel

Dr. Uri Gavish, biomedical consultant, Israel

Dr. Motti Gerlic, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel

Dr. Gabriela Gomes, mathematician studying infectious disease epidemiology, professor, University of Strathclyde, Scotland

Dr. Mike Hulme, professor of human geography, University of Cambridge, England

Dr. Michael Jackson, research fellow, School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, New Zealand

Dr. Annie Janvier, professor of pediatrics and clinical ethics, Universit? de Montr?al and Sainte-Justine University Medical Centre, Canada

Dr. David Katz, physician and president, True Health Initiative, and founder of the Yale University Prevention Research Center, USA

Dr. Andrius Kavaliunas, epidemiologist and assistant professor at Karolinska Institute, Sweden

Dr. Laura Lazzeroni, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and of biomedical data science, Stanford University Medical School, USA

Dr. Michael Levitt, biophysicist and professor of structural biology, Stanford University, USA.
Recipient of the 2013 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

Dr. David Livermore, microbiologist, infectious disease epidemiologist and professor, University of East Anglia, England

Dr. Jonas Ludvigsson, pediatrician, epidemiologist and professor at Karolinska Institute and senior physician at ?rebro University Hospital, Sweden

Dr. Paul McKeigue, physician, disease modeler and professor of epidemiology and public health, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

Dr. Cody Meissner, professor of pediatrics, expert on vaccine development, efficacy, and safety. Tufts University School of Medicine, USA

Dr. Ariel Munitz, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel

Dr. Yaz Gulnur Muradoglu, professor of finance, director of the Behavioural Finance Working Group, Queen Mary University of London, England

Dr. Partha P. Majumder, professor and founder of the National Institute of Biomedical Genomics, Kalyani, India

Dr. Udi Qimron, professor of clinical microbiology and immunology, Tel Aviv University, Israel

Dr. Matthew Ratcliffe, professor of philosophy, specializing in philosophy of mental health, University of York, England

Dr. Mario Recker, malaria researcher and associate professor, University of Exeter, England

Dr. Eyal Shahar, physician, epidemiologist and professor (emeritus) of public health, University of Arizona, USA

Dr. Karol Sikora MA, physician, oncologist, and professor of medicine at the University of Buckingham, England

Dr. Matthew Strauss, critical care physician and assistant professor of medicine, Queen’s University, Canada

Dr. Rodney Sturdivant, infectious disease scientist and associate professor of biostatistics, Baylor University, USA

Dr. Simon Thornley, epidemiologist and biostatistician, University of Auckland, New Zealand

Dr. Ellen Townsend, professor of psychology, head of the Self-Harm Research Group, University of Nottingham, England

Dr. Lisa White, professor of modelling and epidemiology, Oxford University, England

Dr. Simon Wood, biostatistician and professor, University of Edinburgh, Scotland


https://gbdeclaration.org/
 
That will not work because it does not include frequent rapid testing and there is no workable model to isolate the low risk from the high risk. Kids come home from school and too many of them have others in their home who are in the medium/high risk group and there is no way to tell which of those they will kill. That is not going to do anything good for their mental health. A cheap rapid test that can be self administered and many things become possible.
 
Bumping this because apparently 2 big social media have either banned this topic or buried it (redditt & google). Apparently the search engine bing is "playing it straight" by just listing the item.

I am not endorsing or condemning the opinions of the above medical doctors and scientists. I think JJackson has some valid points. It is a valid discussion. No public service is done by ignoring widely circulated topics.

We do not do cancel culture on FluTrackers. It serves no one. We usually get to the truth by our process of pro and con discussion.

And as far as big social media goes....


Click image for larger version  Name:	ifyouarenotpayingforit.PNG Views:	1 Size:	44.9 KB ID:	895818
 
Climate Science Denial NetworkBehind Great Barrington Declaration

Nafeez Ahmed
9 October 2020

The ‘think-tank’ behind the Great Barrington Declaration is part-funded by right-wing American billionaire Charles Koch, reports Nafeez Ahmed.

Documents seen by Byline Times confirm that the Great Barrington Declaration advocating a ‘herd immunity’ approach to the COVID-19 pandemic has been sponsored by an institution embedded in a Koch-funded network that denies climate science while investing in polluting fossil fuel industries.

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/10/09/...-network-behind-great-barrington-declaration/
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tweet
Oct 8

Laurie Garrett
Former Sr Fellow@CFR_org
. Recipient of Pulitzer Prize, Polk (2Xs) and Peabody Awards. Author: IHeard theSirensScream, TheComingPlague, Ebola & BetrayalofTrust.
New York, NYcfr.org/experts/global…Joined May 2011

This Declaration says: "As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity...and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine.

https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1314230726892703747
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rles-koch-really-thinks-about-climate-change/
What Charles Koch really thinks about climate change
"Koch’s point about wood pellets suggests a surprising alignment with many environmentalists and scientists, who have raised concerns about the potential carbon consequences of burning wood for electricity. "

"While we’re at it, we should note that the Koch Nitrogen Co. plant near Enid, Okla., has also been highlighted as a leader in carbon capture and sequestration. Carbon dioxide from the process of making nitrogen fertilizer is piped to oilfields nearby, where it is used in enhanced oil recovery and then left buried beneath the ground, according to the Global CCS Institute.

“Exceptionally, the Enid Fertilizer plant in Oklahoma, United States, operated by the Koch Nitrogen Company, has captured over 600000 tCO2 a year since 2003 for use in [enhanced oil recovery],” notes the United Nations Industrial Development Organization."
 
Here's another video that was banned on Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biC4nHPYtbA
Recorded on June 18, 2020 and originally published on June 23,2020 - Original post accrued 719K views and 18.5K likes. - Reposted on September 28, 2020 (see note to viewers below) Dr. Scott Atlas is the Robert Wesson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, an accomplished physician, and a scholar of public health. When this was recorded Dr. Atlas has been making the case in print and in other media that we as a society have overreacted in imposing draconian restrictions on movement, gatherings, schools, sports, and other activities. He believes the virus is a real threat and should be managed as such. But, as Dr. Atlas argues, there are some age groups and activities that are subject to very low risk. The one-size-fits-all approach is overly authoritarian, inefficient, and not based in science. Dr. Atlas’s prescription includes more protection for people in nursing homes, two weeks of strict self-isolation for those with mild symptoms, and most importantly, the opening of all K–12 schools. Dr. Atlas was also adamant that an economic shutdown, and all of the attendant issues that go along with it, is a terrible solution— a cure that's worse than the disease. Finally, Dr. Atlas revealed some steps he’d taken in his own life to try to get things back to normal.

NOTE TO VIEWERS: On September 11th, 2020 YouTube removed this episode of Uncommon Knowledge with Peter Robinson with Dr. Scott Atlas and notified The Hoover Institution that the video “violates our guidelines." The takedown notice further explained that “YouTube does not allow content that spreads medical misinformation that contradicts the World Health Organization (WHO) or local health authorities’ medical information about COVID-19, including on methods to prevent, treat, or diagnose COVID-19 and means of transmission of COVID-19.” In order to reinstate the interview on their platform, YouTube required the Hoover Institution to add the following disclaimer to two portions of the interview: "Prevailing medical consensus suggests that children can transmit the disease, but at a lower rate than adults." While we disagree with YouTube’s interpretation of what Dr. Atlas said in this video, we have complied with this request to make the video available to viewers.
 
So true. Always look a gift horse in the mouth carefully. Thanks for the tip on Bing.
 
The Week in 60 Minutes #6 - with Andrew Neil and WHO Covid-19 envoy David Nabarro | SpectatorTV
44,960 views•Oct 8, 2020


Some of the highlights:
- Catch it quickly, suppress outbreak fast.
- Backbone: testing, contact tracing, isolation
- Best done locally.
- Physical distance, face protection, hygiene, isolating if ill, protecting those most at risk
David Nabarro seems to agree with professor Gupta:
- We at WHO do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of controlling this virus... we may well have a doubling of world poverty next year, doubling of child malnutrition... This is a terrible, ghastly global catastrophe actually...
 
From the above video:

Nabarro: "We believe lock downs only serve one purpose, and that is to give you a bit of breathing space......"

"The backbone of this kind of thing is always, testing, contact tracing, and isolation."
 
Coronavirus: WHO backflips on virus stance by condemning lockdowns
...
AlexTurnerCohen
OCTOBER 12, 20208:16AM

...
“We in the World Health Organisation do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” Dr Nabarro told The Spectator.

“The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganise, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”

“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
...
His message is timely. In a world first, a number of health experts from all over the world came together calling for an end to coronavirus lockdowns earlier this week.

They created a petition, called the Great Barrington Declaration, which said that lockdowns were doing “irreparable damage.”
...
When asked about the petition, Dr Nabarro had only good things to say. “Really important point by Professor Gupta,” he said.

https://www.news.com.au/world/coron...s/news-story/f2188f2aebff1b7b291b297731c3da74
 
Corralling the Facts on Herd Immunity

By Aneri Pattani
SEPTEMBER 29, 2020

... A new, large study found fewer than 1 in 10 Americans have antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Even in the hardest-hit areas, like New York City, estimates of immunity among residents are about 25%.

To reach 50% to 70% immunity would mean about four times as many people getting infected and an “incredible number of deaths,” said Josh Michaud, associate director of global health policy at KFF. Even those who survive could suffer severe consequences to their heart, brain and other organs, potentially leaving them with lifelong disabilities.

“It’s not a strategy to pursue unless your goal is to pursue suffering and death,” Michaud said.

https://khn.org/news/corralling-the-facts-on-herd-immunity/
 
Herd immunity letter signed by fake experts including 'Dr Johnny Bananas'

Open letter calling for new Covid-19 strategy also signed by ‘Prof Cominic Dummings’

PA Media
Fri 9 Oct 2020 13.09 EDT

An open letter that made headlines calling for a herd immunity approach to Covid-19 lists a number of apparently fake names among its expert signatories, including “Dr Johnny Bananas” and “Professor Cominic Dummings”.

The Great Barrington declaration, which was said to have been signed by more than 15,000 scientists and medical practitioners around the world, was found by Sky News to contain numerous false names, as well as those of several homeopaths.

Others listed include a resident at the “university of your mum” and another supposed specialist whose name was the first verse of the Macarena.

Sky News discovered 18 self-declared homeopaths in the list of expert names and more than 100 therapists whose expertise included massage, hypnotherapy and Mongolian khoomii singing.

... “Ultimately, the Barrington Declaration is based on principles that are dangerous to national and global public health,” said Head.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...r-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid
 
Great Barrington Declaration

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On 5 October – the day after the date of the declaration – Gupta, Bhattacharya, and Kulldorff met with the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services, Alex Azar, an appointee in the Cabinet of Donald Trump, and the neuroradiologist Scott Atlas, an adviser to the Trump administration's White House Coronavirus Task Force.[SUP][17][/SUP] According to Azar, the meeting was held "as part of our commitment to ensure we hear broad and diverse scientific perspectives" and that "we heard strong reinforcement of the Trump Administration’s strategy of aggressively protecting the vulnerable while opening schools and the workplace" while according to Kulldorff "we had a very good discussion. He asked many questions, and we put forth our case to protect the people who are vulnerable, and the idea of trying to do lockdowns to eliminate this disease is not realistic".[SUP][17][/SUP] Afterwards Atlas also endorsed the declaration, telling The Hill that the "targeted protection of the vulnerable and opening schools and society policy matches the policy of the President and what I have advised".[SUP][17]

... [/SUP]Gupta said that "the alternative [to herd immunity], which is to keep suppressing the virus, comes at an enormous cost to the poor and to the young and not just in this country [the United States] but worldwide", arguing that the herd immunity threshold for SARS-CoV-2 will be reached in December 2020.[SUP][17][/SUP]

Bhattacharya advised that until that time vulnerable people might be housed away from multigenerational households, with government support, saying that "we could do policies that would make those resources available to older people in multigenerational settings for the limited period of time that's necessary until the disease is under control, and after time, they could go back home".[SUP][17]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrington_Declaration
[/SUP]
 
Pathfinder summarised Dr. Nabarro as

- Catch it quickly, suppress outbreak fast.
- Backbone: testing, contact tracing, isolation
- Best done locally.
- Physical distance, face protection, hygiene, isolating if ill, protecting those most at risk
and he said
“We in the World Health Organisation do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,”

I do not have a problem with either of these statements but I do not think he is agreeing with The Barrington Declaration or that the WHO has performed any kind of 'backflip' on lockdowns. From the beginning Dr. Tedros has stressed that lockdowns are necessary only as a means of containing rapid spread as test, trace and isolation are put in place. The problem is the time bought has not been used to institute any of these. China found 9 cases in one city and are going to test a million people for each of these cases in as many days. Could that be why 9 cases make the headlines there when 9 cases anywhere else (apart from the White House) will not make the local paper?
Unless you can test, and get back results on the same day, you can not 'catch it quickly, suppress outbreaks fast, contact trace or isolate'.
Current data suggests about 20% of cases never develop symptoms, but have similar viral loads as the symptomatic. Added to this is that symptomatic cases are at their highest viral loads around symptom onset. Taken together these show most transmission is from people who have no idea they have the virus and will only be infectious for a few days after symptom onset. If you are not testing the asymptomatic/presymptomatic you can not effectively do any of the things the WHO have been advocating. China also adopted a radically different approach to isolating mild cases who they tried not to send back home, where there was little chance of their family being able to look after them without risking infection, but held them in a hotel or hospital setting where PPE and trained staff were available. We built surge capacity but did not use it wisely.
Now is the time to listen to what the WHO have been telling us for months. Get a low cost (must be less than $10/per test and hopefully less than $1) self administered rapid test in vast quantities, build a contact tracing infrastructure and safe isolation procedures. With this in place a semblance of normality can return while we wait for a vaccine. It does not mean the Barrington differentiated control measures should not also be instituted it is just that they are a recipe for disaster without the TETRIS (TEst TRace ISolate) measures that go with them.
 
so if they found several "fake experts" then it invalidates everything??? so, let's say there were 100 bogus and/or questionable signatures then that would be .67% of the total, so less that 1% invalidates the other 99.33% of valid signatures... but wait, it only took one opinion of Dr. Head to invalidate the 14,900 other opinions, hmmmm...
 
Back
Top Bottom