• 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.

Why lockdowns are the wrong policy - Swedish expert Prof. Johan Giesecke

Emily

Editor, Senior Moderator
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY
UnHerd
17.4K subscribers
That was one of the more extraordinary interviews we have done here at UnHerd.
Professor Johan Giesecke, one of the world’s most senior epidemiologists, advisor to the Swedish Government (he hired Anders Tegnell who is currently directing Swedish strategy), the first Chief Scientist of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and an advisor to the director general of the WHO, lays out with typically Swedish bluntness why he thinks:
- UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based
- The correct policy is to protect the old and the frail only
- This will eventually lead to herd immunity as a “by-product”
- The initial UK response, before the “180 degree U-turn”, was better
- The Imperial College paper was “not very good” and he has never seen an unpublished paper have so much policy impact
- The paper was very much too pessimistic - Any such models are a dubious basis for public policy anyway - The flattening of the curve is due to the most vulnerable dying first as much as the lockdown
- The results will eventually be similar for all countries
- Covid-19 is a “mild disease” and similar to the flu, and it was the novelty of the disease that scared people.
- The actual fatality rate of Covid-19 is the region of 0.1%
- At least 50% of the population of both the UK and Sweden will be shown to have already had the disease when mass antibody testing becomes available
 
Thanks Emily that was very interesting and the interviewer was excellent, he knew his stuff but was not trying to make a point.
While I disagreed on some points Professor Johan Giesecke argument was well thought out and logical.
 
Merci Emily , c'est un des plus grands et ce qu'ils dit est vrai. La seule bonne chose qui a ?t? faite au d?but c'est de stopper les avions pour les passagers . C'est d'ailleurs cela qui a permis ? certains d'enfin commencer ? ouvrir les yeux .

Pour le reste il faut regarder ceci, qui d?crit bien mieux la r?alit? que les discours officiels qui sont truff?s de mensonges :
https://www.lemonde.fr/blog/lavventu...face-au-covid/

Concernant les conseils alimentaires pour la population, il suffit de voir les ?volutions des pratiques alimentaires des populations animales de rente enferm?es .Si l'on peut critiquer ces personnes, l'on doit aussi voir qu'au cours du temps ils ont fait de grands progr?s ...
 
Back
Top Bottom