EGM has done some excellent visualizations of this in the past, but you're speaking to the most important point: the lack of anything like a logical curve for a NOT AT ALL VERY REMARKABLE VIRUS is the most sobering evidence of vaccine harm to anyone with the eyes to see.
Reliable cycles of ever-widening herd immunity have collapsed.
Without TV, the fraudulent PCR "test," and the visuals provided by the muzzles, there would not have been any "pandemic." Of course, now the recipients of the lethal injections are dying out, but wait; more is coming: chemtrails and food riots, martial law and other forms of public poisonings to begin with.
The simple model is itself a big part of the reason we got ourselves into this mess in the first place. The overwhelming majority of those on both the panic merchants and the anti-panic sides believed the same simple model you describe: viruses exist and cause disease and that a virus can be transmissible.
But there is an assumption in ‘transmissible’ which goes largely ignored. This is the assumption of measles-like, direct case-to-case transmission: Alan coughs on Bill, a day or two later Bill starts to develop symptoms and sneezes on Charles, within a relatively short period again, Charles starts to feel feverish and we have sustained transmission from A to B to C.
R.E Hope-Simpson long ago pointed out that this simple model of direct case-to-case transmission cannot explain the behaviour of epidemic influenza – he suggested it was so full of holes it was more like a colander than a bucket. He pointed out that epidemics do not follow the course that the model would suggest. His solution was not to dispose of your definition, indeed he kept it whole, but he suggested that there must be a significant delay between being infected and infecting someone else; a period after illness where one becomes a non-infectious carrier before somehow being triggered to begin transmitting.
When both the panic merchants and the anti-panic side both insisted that whichever wave would end in herd immunity, just as the previous one hadn’t, I imagine the late doctor was turning in his grave.
R.E. Hope-Simpson (1992) on herd immunity: "...lack of precise definition of the term has sometimes led to confused epidemiological speculation so that the concept of herd immunity has been wrongly invoked..."
My own position on this is that viruses do indeed exist - and can cause disease. Even bacteria can get infected with viruses (these are the bacteriophages).
I think there's just too much evidence to hold a contrary position here.
What is less clear, particularly with regard to the viruses that cause respiratory disease in humans, is the detail of the transmission. There are, as far as I can tell, quite a few things we don't know. Why do some of these viruses seem to have a kind of 'trigger' point? They can simmer in the background and then, all of sudden, we have an outbreak. Seasonality is also not properly understood.
The simple picture of an infected person with lots of virus in their respiratory tract breathing out those virions, which then go on to infect someone else, makes sense - but I don't know whether that captures everything that's going on with regards to transmission. It doesn't quite seem to.
The fact that there are potentially serious gaps in our understanding of how transmission occurs, and things like seasonality, just further underlines why any epidemiological 'model' should be treated with the utmost caution.
Hope-Simpson’s 'new concept' would be consistent with the problem you note of later waves being larger than the first, and this connects to what is perhaps his simplest question, "Why do epidemics terminate in situations that are admirably suited for their continued spread?" Clearly epidemics end, and often end quite suddenly, in situations where there remain very many apparently susceptible people, many of whom will be infected in later waves.
To me the most fascinating of his observations – and one I think someone of your talents may be able to offer some insight on – is the lack of serial interval for influenza.
H-S conducts household studies for common diseases that he sees in his GP practice and, for measles, clearly demonstrates the serial interval – the time between ‘generations’ of the disease. He plots at day zero the first person in a household to fall ill and, then, those in the same household who fall ill afterwards are plotted at the number of days’ interval from the first (defined by symptom onset for each). When results for many households are combined, the graph shows a very large ‘bump’ around day nine or ten, which seems to be a clear demonstration of the presence of a serial interval. This, he says, is strong evidence that measles is being transmitted from the first person in a household to the next. He’s quite right, isn’t he?
For epidemic influenza, he is able to find no such bump – no serial interval. He suggests that the absence of a serial interval is evidence that the disease is not being transmitted from the presumed first cases to the others. He admits that some transmission may take place this way, but insists that this kind of direct, case-to-case transmission cannot be the main driver of epidemics.
It’s tempting enough to write this off with “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,” but H-S has a point here doesn’t he?
The models were custom-made to produce apocalyptic scenarios. We know this because the German government ordered that type of model from its so-called scientists.
A dozen or so years ago there was a lot of articles about the coming n-th extinction event. Were they foreshadowing? Will the "purebloods" be the progenitors of the next wave of humanity, or the pharmacological generically engineered?
From your posts, I am (among other things) learning a lot about the applied physics that is English cuisine. I'll have Eton Mess after my Mushy Pies, please.
I can't really recommend 'traditional' English cuisine. It is the applied science of taking some tasty and promising ingredients and turning them into something that tastes like shit.
Thankfully, things in the UK, culinarily speaking, have improved beyond all recognition. I can find any number of restaurants within a short distance of me offering truly excellent food - and this is the case throughout the UK.
Of course, you can still enjoy the 'delights' of mushy peas and spotted dick, if inedible slop is your thing :-)
EGM has done some excellent visualizations of this in the past, but you're speaking to the most important point: the lack of anything like a logical curve for a NOT AT ALL VERY REMARKABLE VIRUS is the most sobering evidence of vaccine harm to anyone with the eyes to see.
Reliable cycles of ever-widening herd immunity have collapsed.
Without TV, the fraudulent PCR "test," and the visuals provided by the muzzles, there would not have been any "pandemic." Of course, now the recipients of the lethal injections are dying out, but wait; more is coming: chemtrails and food riots, martial law and other forms of public poisonings to begin with.
What can be done about the extermination machine?
Harsh criticisms delivered with rapier wit...always a pleasure to get your articles in my feed!
Thanks Aaron - much appreciated
The simple model is itself a big part of the reason we got ourselves into this mess in the first place. The overwhelming majority of those on both the panic merchants and the anti-panic sides believed the same simple model you describe: viruses exist and cause disease and that a virus can be transmissible.
But there is an assumption in ‘transmissible’ which goes largely ignored. This is the assumption of measles-like, direct case-to-case transmission: Alan coughs on Bill, a day or two later Bill starts to develop symptoms and sneezes on Charles, within a relatively short period again, Charles starts to feel feverish and we have sustained transmission from A to B to C.
R.E Hope-Simpson long ago pointed out that this simple model of direct case-to-case transmission cannot explain the behaviour of epidemic influenza – he suggested it was so full of holes it was more like a colander than a bucket. He pointed out that epidemics do not follow the course that the model would suggest. His solution was not to dispose of your definition, indeed he kept it whole, but he suggested that there must be a significant delay between being infected and infecting someone else; a period after illness where one becomes a non-infectious carrier before somehow being triggered to begin transmitting.
When both the panic merchants and the anti-panic side both insisted that whichever wave would end in herd immunity, just as the previous one hadn’t, I imagine the late doctor was turning in his grave.
R.E. Hope-Simpson (1992) on herd immunity: "...lack of precise definition of the term has sometimes led to confused epidemiological speculation so that the concept of herd immunity has been wrongly invoked..."
My own position on this is that viruses do indeed exist - and can cause disease. Even bacteria can get infected with viruses (these are the bacteriophages).
I think there's just too much evidence to hold a contrary position here.
What is less clear, particularly with regard to the viruses that cause respiratory disease in humans, is the detail of the transmission. There are, as far as I can tell, quite a few things we don't know. Why do some of these viruses seem to have a kind of 'trigger' point? They can simmer in the background and then, all of sudden, we have an outbreak. Seasonality is also not properly understood.
The simple picture of an infected person with lots of virus in their respiratory tract breathing out those virions, which then go on to infect someone else, makes sense - but I don't know whether that captures everything that's going on with regards to transmission. It doesn't quite seem to.
The fact that there are potentially serious gaps in our understanding of how transmission occurs, and things like seasonality, just further underlines why any epidemiological 'model' should be treated with the utmost caution.
Agreed, and thank you for you reply.
Hope-Simpson’s 'new concept' would be consistent with the problem you note of later waves being larger than the first, and this connects to what is perhaps his simplest question, "Why do epidemics terminate in situations that are admirably suited for their continued spread?" Clearly epidemics end, and often end quite suddenly, in situations where there remain very many apparently susceptible people, many of whom will be infected in later waves.
To me the most fascinating of his observations – and one I think someone of your talents may be able to offer some insight on – is the lack of serial interval for influenza.
H-S conducts household studies for common diseases that he sees in his GP practice and, for measles, clearly demonstrates the serial interval – the time between ‘generations’ of the disease. He plots at day zero the first person in a household to fall ill and, then, those in the same household who fall ill afterwards are plotted at the number of days’ interval from the first (defined by symptom onset for each). When results for many households are combined, the graph shows a very large ‘bump’ around day nine or ten, which seems to be a clear demonstration of the presence of a serial interval. This, he says, is strong evidence that measles is being transmitted from the first person in a household to the next. He’s quite right, isn’t he?
For epidemic influenza, he is able to find no such bump – no serial interval. He suggests that the absence of a serial interval is evidence that the disease is not being transmitted from the presumed first cases to the others. He admits that some transmission may take place this way, but insists that this kind of direct, case-to-case transmission cannot be the main driver of epidemics.
It’s tempting enough to write this off with “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence,” but H-S has a point here doesn’t he?
The models were custom-made to produce apocalyptic scenarios. We know this because the German government ordered that type of model from its so-called scientists.
https://greatgameindia.com/germany-hired-scientists-fake-coronavirus-model/
A dozen or so years ago there was a lot of articles about the coming n-th extinction event. Were they foreshadowing? Will the "purebloods" be the progenitors of the next wave of humanity, or the pharmacological generically engineered?
From your posts, I am (among other things) learning a lot about the applied physics that is English cuisine. I'll have Eton Mess after my Mushy Pies, please.
Lol
I can't really recommend 'traditional' English cuisine. It is the applied science of taking some tasty and promising ingredients and turning them into something that tastes like shit.
Thankfully, things in the UK, culinarily speaking, have improved beyond all recognition. I can find any number of restaurants within a short distance of me offering truly excellent food - and this is the case throughout the UK.
Of course, you can still enjoy the 'delights' of mushy peas and spotted dick, if inedible slop is your thing :-)
Thanks for the spotted dick... the Wikipedia page stresses that "dick" is an old dialectal term for pudding...
🤣