Covid-19 FAQ vs GBD (4): How many would die?

Anti-virus: The Covid-19 FAQ on the Great Barrington Declaration 
IV: How many would die? 

by George J. Dance

from "A Defence of the Great Barrington Declaration from Its Powerful Critics", The Daily Sceptic, 22 March 2021.  

 4) “Focused protection” would still mean a very large number of deaths among the wider population. Applying a rough age-based infection-fatality ratio based on this table,[15] and assuming half the wider population caught Covid and only a small number (5%) of pensioners ended up getting it, that would still mean 90,000 extra deaths. If 15% of pensioners caught Covid in this scenario, it would mean 175,000 deaths. However, even this is likely to be an underestimate, for reasons discussed in our next point.(9)

The FAQsters' mathematics seems sound enough; what looks more questionable is their initial assumption, that over 40% of the adult population would need to be infected before reaching the herd immunity threshold (HIT). Consider that:

• they estimate an initial R number of 2.5-3.5% for Covid-19,(16) implying a HIT of 67-72%,
• estimates of the number of Brits who have already caught Covid-19 range from 15% to more than 20%,(17, 18) and
• over 30% have had at least one dose of a vaccine.(19)

Given these numbers, it is a stretch to think that a further 40%+ would need to acquire immunity before hitting the HIT. Given that vaccinations are rising much faster than infections, it is almost impossible to believe that all of those 40% would end up gaining immunity via infection instead. 

As with all of their points after their first point – "We have vaccines now" – the FAQsters are ignoring that first point, and arguing as if we do not have vaccines now.  They have simply recycled old anti-GBD arguments from last October, when there were no vaccines, and the coming of vaccines has not induced them to even re-examine, much less question, those earlier arguments and assumptions.

Vaccines or not, the above was never a good argument. It rests on the questionable assumption that lockdowns would somehow prevent all those deaths – whereas in fact the same number of people would be just as susceptible, at the very same risk of hospitalization and death, with a lockdown or without. Either way, the same number of people would have to be infected to reach the HIT, and ceteris paribus the same number of people could be expected to die in the process. All that a lockdown could do would be to reduce the R number, ‘flatten the curve,’ and slow down the death rate. Merely slowing down the death rate is not ‘saving lives’, but just kicking the corpses down the road.

Today, though, now that "We have vaccines", the idea that anywhere near that number would be infected and die in the absence of lockdowns looks like pure imagination. Dressing up imagined assumptions in mathematical dress (as in computer modelling) may give them a patina of scientific validity; but with maths (as with logic), the conclusions reached remain just as imaginary as the starting premises. 

[Six months after I wrote the above, there is evidence that vaccinated people are being infected and infecting others; so the FAQsters' may be right that 40% of Britons will eventually catch Covid-19. However, equally strong evidence shows that most vaccinated have strong protection against hospitalization and death. So, with more than 2/3 of Britons now fully vaccinated, their estimates of both deaths and hospitalizations still look implausibly high.]

 5) The health service would be overwhelmed in this scenario, leading to a potentially much higher death rate among the rest of the population. On top of the deaths we could expect based on the fatality rates from the pandemic so far, so many other people in the rest of the population would be hospitalised in the Great Barrington scenario that the NHS would be totally overwhelmed. Applying the hospitalisation rates from this article to the rest of the population, and assuming 50% of the younger population caught COVID along with 5% of pensioners, that would mean 860,000 people would be hospitalised. If 15% of pensioners accidentally caught the virus, it would mean around 1.1m hospitalisations. This would overwhelm the health service. There are only 4,123 adult critical care beds in England, so many or most patients requiring hospitalisation would not be able to receive full treatment, and would have a much higher mortality rate.

Since this argument is so similar to the previous one – with the same oudated assumptions, and the same failure to re-examine them – a reply can be brief. 

The only difference I can see this time is an added assumption that an increase in infections and hospitalisations would happen almost immediately; that, without lockdowns, everyone’s first thought would be to run out and happily (“merrily”) catch COVID-19. To which the best reply would be to remind the FAQsters of their next point: "Young people don't want the virus either." No one wants to catch Covid, ceterus paribus, and that gives everyone a reason to voluntarily distance. 

[Voluntary distancing, like lockdown, can slow the spread of a disease It is not meant to stamp out the disease, or to prevent hospitalizations and deaths; it is meant slow them down, to reduce the R number, and  'flatten the curve': the same hospitalizations (and deaths) happen over a longer time, and are kept below the point at which they "overwhelm" the health care system. It works no differently from lockdowns.

[How well voluntary distancing works compared to lockdown measures is an empirical question, best decided by comparing outcomes in countries that relied on it (Sweden, Japan) to those that relied on lockdowns.]

*  - [written October 6, 2021]

9. All quotations in italics are from: “Claim: The Great Barrington Declaration gives a good alternative to lockdown”, Anti-Virus: The Covid-19 FAQ.

15. Smriti Mallapaty, “The coronavirus is most deadly if you are older and male — new data reveal the risks”, Nature, August 28th, 2020.

16. “Claim: 99.5% survive Covid – we’re overreacting”, Anti-Virus: The Covid-19 FAQ.

17. “COVID-19: 15.3% of England’s population estimated to have had coronavirus by mid-January”, Sky News, February 3rd, 2021.

18. Ashley Kirk, Anna Leach and Pamela Duncan, “One in five in England have had Covid, modelling suggests”, The Guardian, January 10th, 2021.

19. “As It Happened: Vaccines for 20m in UK a magnificent achievement”, BBC, February 28th, 2021.

Read full article here

Covid-19 FAQ vs GBD (5): Youth and Long Covid

Anti-virus: The Covid-19 FAQ on the Great Barrington Declaration 
V: Youth and Long Covid

by George J. Dance

from "A Defence of the Great Barrington Declaration from Its Powerful Critics", The Daily Sceptic, 22 March 2021. 

6) Younger, healthier people don’t want this virus either. Just because younger, healthier people who catch the coronavirus die at lower rates than the elderly or those with pre-existing medical conditions, it doesn’t mean that it’s fine for them to catch the virus. (9)

"Lower rates" sounds deliberately misleading; the FAQ's own cited source says that “For every 1,000 people infected with the coronavirus who are under the age of 50, almost none will die” and “The IFR [is] close to zero for people between the ages of 15 and 44” (15) . But that does not mean that young people have no risks at all. It is prudent for them to manage their risks, too.

I wish I could tell those young people to also get vaccinated. Unfortunately, they are not legally allowed to do so at this time [March 2021]; governments have monopolised the vaccines, and nobody is allowed to take them until their government lets them. As not just a Covid libertarian but a full libertarian, and in light of my earlier vaccine comments: I would like to see a legal vaccine market for those excluded from the Government program. That need not drain vaccines from the Government program: one possibility is a Right to Try law, letting people import, buy, and sell vaccines that have been authorised in other countries; a ‘Dallas Buyers Club’-type solution. Alas, governments have put themselves in charge; and they have decided that no one can receive a vaccine without their permission.

I can only advise those who do not want catch the virus, and cannot legally be vaccinated, to take the common-sense steps I mentioned earlier:  limit contacts, give other people their space, avoid crowded and closed-in spaces, take extra vitamins and zinc, and discuss with your doctor what else you can do.

Many sufferers of the coronavirus have found it to be an unpleasant few weeks, have been hospitalised, or have developed “Long Covid” – symptoms that persist long after the initial infection. The evidence for “Long Covid” is growing, although it remains inconclusive. Doctors from intensive-care units have written about their experience of watching as even young patients die from the disease. Hospitalisation rates, although highest for the elderly, have been accelerating in the UK across all age groups. Even for young people, Covid risks being far worse than just a bad cold or bout of the flu.

I know little about “Long Covid”, but I suspect I am not alone. As the John Snow Memorandum put it, “we still do not understand who might suffer from long COVID,"(3)  nor do we understand precisely what their 'suffering' entails. “Long Covid” is being used as a blanket term for a number of distinct syndromes and a whole host of symptoms, ranging from observed physical damage like scarring of the lung tissue, right through to purely patient-defined symptoms like “breathlessness, muscle pains, palpitations and fatigue”(20) (all of which I have suffered from myself through the lockdowns). The bottom line: the risks and harms of Long Covid are largely unknown.

Which appears to be the point. Normally one would expect extreme interventions to be supported by strong evidence; but if people are afraid enough of the unknown, a very lack of evidence can be used to justify extreme measures. That was the case in the March lockdowns, and it appears that a similar tactic is being tried here. Fortunately, this new variant of alarmism may not work as well. “We have to close everything, or millions may die!” has a certain cachet; “We have to close everything, or millions may have an unpleasant few weeks!”, not so much.

3. Nisreen A. Alwan et al., “Scientific consensus on the COVID-19 pandemic: we need to act now” The Lancet, October 15th, 2020.

9. All quotations in italics are from: “Claim: The Great Barrington Declaration gives a good alternative to lockdown”, Anti-Virus: The Covid-19 FAQ.

15. Smriti Mallapaty, “The coronavirus is most deadly if you are older and male — new data reveal the risks”, Nature, August 28th, 2020.

20. “Long COVID: let patients help define long-lasting COVID symptoms”, Nature, October 7th, 2020.

Read full article here

Covid-19 FAQ vs GB Declaration (6): Conclusion

Covid-19 FAQ on the Great Barrington Declaration 
VI: Conclusion

by George J. Dance

from "A Defence of the Great Barrington Declaration from Its Powerful Critics", The Daily Sceptic, 22 March 2021.

 7) Natural herd immunity is bad for other reasons. Allowing a virus to go on jumping from person to person is a significant risk: it encourages the evolution of new variants, which might be more dangerous, undermining our response and our treatments. Even if a population develops herd immunity to a disease by infection, that doesn’t mean the disease will go away. Changes in the population (such as new births and migration) and waning immunity will mean that people will continue to be susceptible to the disease over time, and new outbreaks could still occur in the future. Every person who catches the disease gives it another opportunity to mutate; only with eradication can we be sure it will not develop into a more dangerous form. [9]

This is just more alarmism: more argument that we must lock down society, not because of what we know, but because of what we do not know. What it ignores is that, if natural immunity is 'bad' for those two reasons – virus mutation and immunity waning - then immunity from vaccination must be 'bad' for the same reasons. Viruses are always mutating (the SARS-CoV-2 has mutated constantly since last January), and there is always a possibility that a mutation will both be resistant to immunity (although none has to date) and more dangerous (though natural selection seems to imply that a less dangerous virus – one that keeps more of its hosts active in the community – would have an edge in spreading). And of course vaccine immunity, like acquired immunity, can also wane. The only way to end the chances of either occurring, as the FAQsters conclude, is through through global eradication of the virus, or Zero Covid.

Which brings us back to the FAQsters’ original point. Since “eradication” or Zero Covid (rather than herd immunity) is the end they have in sight, reaching that end could well be years or even decades in the future. (Eradicating smallpox took almost 200 years from the first vaccine.)[21] So how do we live until then? Do we have a free society, in which people manages their own lives (which includes managing their own health risks), or one in which a government manages their lives and risks for them?

Eliminating the disease in even a single country where it has taken root will involve further draconian intrusions (which will select for more contagious variants) for the foreseeable future. And even if that does lead to eradication in my or the FAQsters’ lifetime, it does not eliminate the risk of more pandemics in the future, and of the same cycle of interventions playing out again. If hypothetical risks like these, based on nothing but fears, are reasons for a lockdown now, then they are reasons for lockdown forever.  

To repeat what I said earlier, it will take some time before the end gets here, and until then either option – let people live their lives, or keep them locked down – is still very much a live one. The arguments for the lockdown option have always been weak, but for now the coming of vaccines has made them even weaker.

Sources (accessed March 9th-March 10th, 2020)

1. Great Barrington Declaration.
2. Gerritt Olivier, “Terrifying citizens with overwhelming statistics is no help during a pandemic”, Business Day, February 20th, 2021.
3. Nisreen A. Alwan et al., “Scientific consensus on the COVID-19 pandemic: we need to act now” The Lancet, October 15th, 2020.
4. “What is Anti-Virus”, Anti-Virus: The Covid-19 FAQ.
5. “Claim: Covid is only a problem for the elderly and vulnerable,” Anti-Virus: The Covid-19 FAQ.
6. Rachel Sylvester and Alice Thomson, “PM’s new policy guru takes Trump to task”, The Times, November 21st, 2020.
7. Jessica Elgot, Heather Stewart and Peter Walker, “Tory rebels fire warning shot as 42 MPs vote against stricter Covid measures”, The Guardian, October 13th, 2020.
8. Sam Bright, “CONSERVATIVES DIVIDED: Scourge of Lockdown Sceptics Neil O’Brien MP Receives Government Backing”, Byline Times, January 27th, 2021.
9. All quotations in italics are from: “Claim: The Great Barrington Declaration gives a good alternative to lockdown”, Anti-Virus: The Covid-19 FAQ.
10. Gavin Yamey, “This thread is brilliant”, Twitter, March 8th, 2021.
11. Dominic Lawson, “The second wave of Covid has drowned the sceptics’ delusions”, The Times, January 17th, 2021. 
12. Dominic Lawson, “This vaccine needles the lockdown sceptics”, The Times, December 6th, 2020.
13. Matthew Impelli, “Authors of Anti-Lockdown Great Barrington Declaration Suggest COVID Could Be Over in 2 Months With Vaccine”, Newsweek, December 7th, 2020.
14. Bernadette Hogan and Aaron Feis, “Cuomo wonders if coronavirus quarantine may have backfired in some cases”, New York Post, March 26th, 2020.
15. Smriti Mallapaty, “The coronavirus is most deadly if you are older and male — new data reveal the risks”, Nature, August 28th, 2020.
16. “Claim: 99.5% survive Covid – we’re overreacting”, Anti-Virus: The Covid-19 FAQ.
17. “COVID-19: 15.3% of England’s population estimated to have had coronavirus by mid-January”, Sky News, February 3rd, 2021.
18. Ashley Kirk, Anna Leach and Pamela Duncan, “One in five in England have had Covid, modelling suggests”, The Guardian, January 10th, 2021.
19. “As It Happened: Vaccines for 20m in UK a magnificent achievement”, BBC, February 28th, 2021.
20. “Long COVID: let patients help define long-lasting COVID symptoms”, Nature, October 7th, 2020.
21. Anna Medaris Miller, “It took 184 years to eradicate smallpox after a vaccine was developed — a reminder of what we may face with the coronavirus”, Business Insider, May 8th, 2020.

    Read full article here

Portrait of a Covid charlatan

The Impersonator: Eric Feigl-Ding, COVID-19, and an implicit far-left agenda | Substack - Jordan Schachtel, The Dossier:

October 26, 2020 - "If you’re on social media and you follow news related to the coronavirus pandemic, chances are you’ve stumbled upon some panicked pandemic posts coming from a man named Eric Feigl-Ding,* a nutritionist and longtime democrat political operative who has succeeded in impersonating a medical professional, and is generating a cult following in the process. With one hysterical tweet after another, Feigl-Ding went from having a small social media following to accumulating a massive army of influence. Feigl-Ding’s consistent elevation of fear and panic, doom and gloom, and his relentless themes of chaos and destruction ,,, brought his accounts millions of clicks and views, and hundreds of thousands of new followers. And he did it all without having a clue what he’s talking about.

"At the beginning of 2020, Feigl-Ding was an unpaid, visiting scientist in Harvard’s nutrition department. His academic research centered entirely around nutrition, diet, and exercise. If Eric Feigl-Ding was interested in pandemics and the study of viruses, his research and academic credentials did not reflect that. When the coronavirus pandemic began to make waves in the media, everything changed. Feigl-Ding, an aspiring politician, appeared to see an opening to influence the masses and build up his brand....

"But ... Feigl-Ding’s frequent use of Harvard-associated credentials to elevate his baseless COVID-19 proclamations greatly upset some of his colleagues (despite many of them advocating for the same draconian measures proposed by Feigl-Ding to 'combat' the virus), and landed him in hot water.... Marc Lipsitch, a professor of epidemiology at Harvard, described him as a 'charlatan exploiting a tenuous connection for self-promotion.' The Association of Health Care Journalists also took notice, reporting that he has 'precisely zero experience in infectious diseases.' An unnamed source at Harvard told the Chronicle on Higher Education in April [2020] that Feigl-Ding has 'been asked many times to stop promoting himself as having specialized knowledge.' In [the second half of 2020], Feigl-Ding updated his profile to show that he is no longer associated with Harvard.... 

"In order to sell his purported expertise on COVID-19, Feigl-Ding has repeatedly misrepresented his credentials.... [P]rior to the pandemic, Ding clarified that he was a PhD nutritionist, and not a medical doctor. He has since removed the PhD label from his account.  [He] has continued to muddy the waters surrounding his credentials, taking it to new heights ... in a pro-Biden Super PAC (funded by Silicon Valley billionaires) ad about the coronavirus pandemic. It features 'Dr' Feigl-Ding in a lab coat with tie ensemble that is associated with the attire worn by a medical doctor.... 'Joe Biden has a plan,' Feigl-Ding says in the ad. 'He listens to medical experts. Joe Biden will do what needs to be done so we can live a healthy, normal life again.' Many reporters were falsely led to believe that Feigl-Ding was one of the medical doctors featured in the ad spot.....

"Feigl-Ding has long been a far-left activist who advances his agenda under a healthcare reform label. In 2018, he ran unsuccessfully for a congressional seat in Pennsylvania. Universal healthcare and medicare for all, or socialized medicine, was the centerpiece platform of his congressional run. According to Science Magazine, Feigl-Ding was supported in his run by political networks associated with far-left democrat mega donor George Soros, and FEC records reflect that. Feigl-Ding’s ties with Soros go back many years. In 2008, he received a Soros scholarship for his medical school studies (he would later drop out).... Feigl-Ding finished an unimpressive third place in the PA-10 2018 Democratic Primary. 

"Feigl-Ding remains closely connected to the Soros network. He currently serves as Treasurer of the The Paul and Daisy Soros Fellows Association (PDSFA). And through his Twitter and Facebook feeds, Feigl-Ding has utilized his unwarranted credential as a 'COVID-19 health expert' to promote his far-left politics, disguised as healthcare expertise, to hundreds of thousands of people....

"Feigl-Ding’s political aspirations did not cease with his failed congressional run. During [the 2020] election cycle, he ... contributed over $110,000 of his own money to a non-profit he founded called Health Justice For All. His organization’s website claims to be 'building a grassroots network to expose Big Pharma, to fight for affordable medications, and to elect a bold new generation of leaders who will not stop fighting Big Pharma until there is health justice for all.' However, there is nothing particularly health oriented about this organization. FEC records show that Feigl-Ding uses Health Justice for All to run attack ads against Republicans and supportive ads for Democrats.

"Social media’s foremost COVID-19 hysteric has leveraged his baseless pandemic panic promotion to achieve newfound fame. [During the presidential race last year] the hyper-political nutritionist turned 'COVID-19 expert' ... dedicated his social media feed to nonstop promotion of Joe Biden’s candidacy for president. What happens next is anyone’s guess, but it’s safe to say that Eric Feigl-Ding’s rise to 'public health' stardom has delivered plenty of opportunities to resurface as a true contender in the future political arena."

Read more: https://dossier.substack.com/p/the-impersonator-eric-feigl-ding

* signatory of the John Snow Memorandum

Why are hospitals firing Covid-immune workers?

Hospitals Should Hire, Not Fire, Nurses with Natural Immunity | Brownstone Institute - Martin Kullforff:

October 1, 2021 - "Among many surprising developments during this pandemic, the most stunning has been the questioning of naturally acquired immunity after a person has had the Covid disease. We have understood natural immunity since at least the Athenian Plague in 430 BC.... We have lived with endemic coronaviruses for at least a hundred years, for which we have long-lasting natural immunity. As expected, we also have natural immunity after Covid-19 disease, as there have been exceedingly few reinfections with serious illness or death, despite a widely circulating virus. 

"For most viruses, natural immunity is better than vaccine-induced immunity, and that is also true for Covid. In the best study to date, the vaccinated were around 27 times more likely to have symptomatic disease than those with natural immunity, with an estimated range between 13 and 57. With no Covid deaths in either group, both natural and vaccine immunity protect well against death. 

"During the last decade, I have worked closely with hospital epidemiologists.... [T]he task of the hospital epidemiologist is to ensure that patients do not get sick while in the hospital, such as catching a deadly virus from another patient or a caretaker. For that purpose, hospitals employ a variety of measures, from frequent hand washing to full infection control regalia when caring for an Ebola patient. Vaccinations are a key component of these control efforts.... Infection control measures are especially critical for older frail hospital patients with a weakened immune system. They can become infected and die from a virus that most people would easily survive. A key rationale for immunizing nurses and physicians against influenza is to ensure that they do not infect such patients. 

"How can hospitals best protect their patients from Covid disease? It is an enormously important question, also relevant for nursing homes. There are some obvious standard solutions, such as separating Covid patients from other patients, minimizing staff rotation, and providing generous sick leave for staff with Covid-like symptoms. Another goal should be to employ staff with the strongest possible immunity against Covid, as they are less likely to catch it and spread it to their patients. This means that hospitals and nursing homes should actively seek to hire staff that have natural immunity from prior Covid disease and use such staff for their most vulnerable patients. 

"Hence, we are now seeing a fierce competition where hospitals and nursing homes are desperately trying to hire people with natural immunity. Well, actually, not. Instead, hospitals are firing nurses and other staff with superior natural immunity while retaining those with weaker vaccine-induced immunity. By doing so, they are betraying their patients, increasing their risk for hospital-acquired infections. 

"By pushing vaccine mandates, White House chief medical advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci is questioning the existence of natural immunity after Covid disease. In doing so, he is following the lead of CDC director Rochelle Walensky*, who questioned natural immunity in a 2020 Memorandum published by The Lancet. By instituting vaccine mandates, university hospitals are now also questioning the existence of natural immunity after Covid disease.... 

"I work at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, which has announced that all nurses, doctors and other health care providers will be fired if they do not get a Covid vaccine. Last week I spoke with one of our nurses. She worked hard caring for Covid patients, even as some of her colleagues left in fear at the beginning of the pandemic. Unsurprisingly, she got infected, but then recovered. Now she has stronger and longer-lasting immunity than the vaccinated work-from-home hospital administrators who are firing her for not being vaccinated. 

"If university hospitals cannot get the medical evidence right on the basic science of immunity, how can we trust them with any other aspects of our health?"

Read more: https://brownstone.org/articles/hospitals-should-hire-not-fire-nurses-with-natural-immunity/

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Bibliography on Great Barrington Declaration

"AIER Hosts Top Epidemiologists, Authors of the Great Barrington Declaration," American Institute for Economic Research, Oct. 5, 2020. https://www.aier.org/article/aier-hosts-top-epidemiologists-authors-of-the-great-barrington-declaration/

"expert reaction to barrington declaration, an open letter arguing against lockdown policies and for ‘focused protection’," Science Media Centre, Oct. 6, 2020. https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-barrington-declaration-an-open-letter-arguing-against-lockdown-policies-and-for-focused-protection/

Terry Cowgill, "NEWS ANALYSIS: Disputed ‘Great Barrington Declaration’ issued by free-market think tank," Berkshire Edge, Oct. 6, 2020. https://theberkshireedge.com/news-analysis-disputed-great-barrington-declaration-issued-by-free-market-think-tank/

"Coronavirus: Health experts join global anti-lockdown movement," BBC News, Oct. 7, 2020. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54442386

Alex Berezow, "Is Great Barrington Declaration A Solution To Endless COVID Lockdowns?, American Council on Science and Health, Oct. 7, 2020. https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/10/07/great-barrington-declaration-solution-endless-covid-lockdowns-15074

Jeanne Lenzer, "Covid-19: Group of UK and US experts argues for 'focused protection' instead of lockdowns," British Medical Journal, Oct. 7, 2020. https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3908

Matt Reynolds, "There is no ‘scientific divide’ over herd immunity," Wired, Oct. 7, 2020. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/great-barrington-declaration-herd-immunity-scientific-divide

Ryan Flanagan, "Latest call for herd immunity draws scorn from public health experts," CTV News, Oct. 8, 2020. https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/latest-call-for-herd-immunity-draws-scorn-from-public-health-experts-1.5137679

Brian Passifiume, "Canadian physicians lend support for Great Barrington Declaration, Toronto Sun, Oct. 8, 2020. https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/canadian-physicians-lend-support-for-great-barrington-declaration

Nafeez Ahmed, "Climate Science Denial Network Behind Great Barrington Declaration," Oct. 9, 2020. https://bylinetimes.com/2020/10/09/climate-science-denial-network-behind-great-barrington-declaration/

Keira Butler, "The “Great Barrington” Plan for Reopening Is Championed as Good for the Poor. It’s Not.", Mother Jones, Oct. 9, 2020. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/10/the-great-barrington-plan-for-re-opening-is-championed-as-good-for-the-poor-its-not/

Freddy Sayers, "Is The Guardian planning an attack on the Great Barrington scientists?," Unherd, Oct. 9, 2020. https://unherd.com/thepost/is-the-guardian-planning-an-attack-on-the-great-barrington-scientists/

Andrew Mark Miller, "'Pro-lockdown' advocates 'submit hoax signatures' to an anti-lockdown declaration signed by thousands of medical experts," Oct. 9, 2020. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/pro-lockdown-advocates-submit-hoax-signatures-to-an-anti-lockdown-declaration-signed-by-thousands-of-medical-experts

PA Media, "Herd immunity letter signed by fake experts including 'Dr Johnny Bananas'," The Guardian, Oct. 9, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid

Sonia Sodha, "The anti-lockdown scientists' cause would be more persuasive if it weren't so half-baked," The Guardian, Oct. 11, 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/oct/11/the-rebel-scientists-cause-would-be-more-persuasive-if-it-werent-so-half-baked

Elizabeth Crisp, "White House Embraces Herd Immunity in Latest Push to End COVID-19 Lockdowns," Newsweek, Oct. 12, 2020. https://www.newsweek.com/white-house-embraces-herd-immunity-latest-push-end-covid-19-lockdowns-1538430

David Gorski, "The Great Barrington Declaration: COVID-19 deniers follow the path laid down by creationists, HIV/AIDS denialists, and climate science deniers," Science-Based Medicine, Oct. 12, 2020. https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/great-barrington-declaration/

Terry Cowgill, "‘Great Barrington Declaration’ and AIER feeling heat on both sides of the Atlantic," Berkshire Edge, Oct. 13, 2020. https://theberkshireedge.com/great-barrington-declaration-and-aier-feeling-heat-on-both-sides-of-the-atlantic/

Joel Achenbach, "Proposal to hasten herd immunity to the coronavirus grabs White House attention but appalls top scientists, Washington Post, Oct. 14, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/covid-herd-immunity/2020/10/10/3910251c-0a60-11eb-859b-f9c27abe638d_story.html

Kevin Kunzmann, "Herd Immunity Again Addressed in Great Barrington Declaration," Contagion, Oct. 14, 2020. https://www.contagionlive.com/view/herd-immunity-addressed-great-barrington-declaration

Bruce, Y. Lee, "White House Considering ‘The Great Barrington Declaration’ Herd Immunity Strategy For Covid-19 Coronavirus," Forbes, Oct. 14, 2020. https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2020/10/14/the-great-barrington-declaration-herd-immunity-strategies-for-coronavirus-overlook-8-problems/

Stephanie M. Lee, "Scientists Are Slamming The Great Barrington Declaration’s Call For “Herd Immunity”," BuzzFeed Media, Oct. 14, 2020. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stephaniemlee/herd-immunity-great-barrington-backlash-letter

Joel Achenbach, "Proposal to hasten herd immunity to the coronavirus grabs White House attention but appalls top scientists, Washington Post, Oct. 14, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/covid-herd-immunity/2020/10/10/3910251c-0a60-11eb-859b-f9c27abe638d_story.html

Marc Lipsitch, Gregg Gonsalves, Carlos del Rio & Rochelle P. Walensky, "Trump wants to try for herd immunity. Without a vaccine, it could kill millions," Washington Post, Oct. 14, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/14/herd-immunity-barrington-declaration/ 

Beryl Wajsman, "The Great Barrington Declaration opposes lockdowns," The Suburban, Oct. 14, 2020. https://www.thesuburban.com/news/city_news/the-great-barrington-declaration-opposes-lockdowns/article_52f0e22f-6926-560d-af59-1c4e3d88d72a.html

Robin Young, "Herd Immunity Is 'Pixie Dust Thinking,' Infectious Disease Expert Says," WBUR, Oct. 14, 2021. https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2020/10/14/herd-immunity-coronavirus

Bruce Arthur, "‘Dangerous.’ ‘Hallucinatory.’ The new declaration pushing for herd immunity is not looking at the science, or looking out for you, " Toronto Star, Oct. 15, 2020. https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2020/10/15/dangerous-hallucinatory-the-new-declaration-pushing-for-herd-immunity-is-not-looking-at-the-science-or-looking-out-for-you.html

Alden Bourne, "'Herd Immunity' Great Barrington Declaration On COVID-19 Sparks Controversy," New England Public Media, Oct. 15, 2020. https://www.nepm.org/post/herd-immunity-great-barrington-declaration-covid-19-sparks-controversy#stream/0

Hilary Brueck & Aylin Woodward, "The White House-backed 'Great Barrington Declaration' calling for herd immunity wouldn't just fail — it could lead to 640,000 deaths," Business Insider, Oct. 15, 2020. https://www.businessinsider.com/herd-immunity-plan-great-barrington-declaration-wont-work-2020-10

Tyler Cowen, "A Dangerous Libertarian Strategy for Herd Immunity," Bloomberg, Oct. 15, 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-10-15/great-barrington-declaration-is-wrong-about-herd-immunity

Andre Damon, "The Great Barrington Declaration. A manifesto of death," World Socialist Website, Oct. 16, 2020. https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/10/16/pers-o16.html

Frank Diamond, "Great Barrington Declaration: COVID Lockdowns Unnecessary," Infection Control Today, Oct. 16, 2020. https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/view/great-barrington-declaration-covid-lockdowns-were-unnecessary 

Kevin Kavanagh, "Viewpoint: The “Not So” Great Barrington Declaration," Infection Control Today, Oct. 16, 2020.https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/view/viewpoint-the-not-so-great-barrington-declaration

Josh Landes, "Great Barrington Declaration’s Herd Immunity Pitch Receives International, Local Condemnation, Northeast Public Radio, Oct. 16, 2020. https://www.wamc.org/new-england-news/2020-10-16/great-barrington-declarations-herd-immunity-pitch-receives-international-local-condemnation

Brian Resnick, "The Great Barrington Declaration is an ethical nightmare," Vox, Oct. 16, 2020. https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/21517702/great-barrington-declaration-john-snow-memorandum-explained-herd-immunity

Tom Frieden, "Opinion: The path to ‘herd immunity’ would be lined with half a million dead Americans," Washington Post, Oct. 18, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/tom-frieden-herd-immunity-wrong-solution-coronavirus/2020/10/16/acb4ae8a-0fe6-11eb-8074-0e943a91bf08_story.html

Sarah Toy & Daniela Hernandez, "Scientists Push Back on Herd-Immunity Approach to Covid-19," Wall Street Journal, Oct. 18, 2020. https://www.wsj.com/articles/white-house-touts-document-calling-for-herd-immunity-approach-to-covid-19-crisis-11603051550

Gwynne Dyer, "Herd immunity, reinfection and the Great Barrington Declaration," The Hill Times, Oct. 19, 2020. https://www.hilltimes.com/2020/10/19/herd-immunity-reinfection-and-the-great-barrington-declaration/267783

Apoorva Mandavilli & Sheryl Gay Stolberg, "A Viral Theory Cited by Health Officials Draws Fire From Scientists," New York Times, Oct. 19, 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/19/health/coronavirus-great-barrington.html

John Parkinson, "Experts Forcefully Push Back on Barrington Declaration," Infection Control Today, Oct. 20, 2020. https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/view/experts-forcefully-push-back-on-barrington-declaration 

Bryan Vartabedian, "Great Barrington Declaration and What It Says About Us," 33 Charts, Oct. 20, 2020. https://33charts.com/great-barrington-declaration-covid19/

Gwynne Dyer, "Herd immunity, reinfection and the Great Barrington Declaration," Japan Times, Oct. 21, 1020. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2020/10/21/commentary/world-commentary/herd-immunity-reinfection-great-barrington-declaration/

Derrick Z. Jackson, "Herding People to Slaughter: The Dangerous Fringe Theory behind the Great Barrington Declaration and Push toward Herd Immunity," Union of Concerned Scientists, Oct. 23, 2020. https://blog.ucsusa.org/derrick-jackson/herding-people-to-slaughter-the-dangerous-fringe-theory-behind-the-great-barrington-declaration-and-push-toward-herd-immunity/

Greg Ganske, "The fraught debate over herd immunity and the Great Barrington Declaration: What we need next," Des Moines Register, Oct. 25, 2020.   https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/iowa-view/2020/10/25/great-barrington-declaration-straw-men-and-herd-immunity-debate/3732303001/

Union of Concerned Scientists, "The Dangerous Fringe Theory Behind the Great Barrington Declaration and Herd Immunity," EcoWatch, Oct. 26, 2020. https://www.ecowatch.com/herd-immunity-coronavirus-2648499239.html

Samantha Putterman, "Great Barrington herd immunity document widely disputed by scientists," Politifact, Oct. 27, 2020. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/27/facebook-posts/great-barrington-herd-immunity-document-widely-dis/

Will Wilkinson, "The Useful Libertarian Idiocy of The Great Barrington Declaration," Niskanen Center, Oct. 27, 2020. https://www.niskanencenter.org/the-useful-libertarian-idiocy-of-the-great-barrington-declaration/

Elizabeth Yuko, "Can Herd Immunity Save Us?," Rolling Stone, Oct. 27, 2020. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/covid-herd-immunity-great-barrington-declaration-1080991/

Stephen L. Archer, "5 failings of the Great Barrington Declaration’s dangerous plan for COVID-19 natural herd immunity," The Conversation, Nov. 2, 2020. https://theconversation.com/5-failings-of-the-great-barrington-declarations-dangerous-plan-for-covid-19-natural-herd-immunity-148975

Austin Williams, "‘Great Barrington Declaration’ on COVID-19 ‘herd immunity’ draws criticism from experts," Fox News, Nov. 2, 2020. https://www.fox29.com/news/great-barrington-declaration-on-covid-19-herd-immunity-draws-criticism-from-experts

Tyler S. LeComer, Arushi Saini, and Barune Thapa, "In Condemnation of the Great Barrington Declaration," Harvard Crimson, Nov. 4, 2020. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2020/11/4/lecomer-saini-thapa-condemn-great-barrington-declaration/

Brooks B. Gump, "The Great Barrington Declaration: When Arrogance Leads to Recklessness," U.S. News & World Report, Nov. 6, 2020. https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2020-11-06/when-scientists-arrogance-leads-to-recklessness-the-great-barrington-declaration

Alicia Ault, "Great Barrington Coauthor Backs off on Struck Reliance on Herd Immunity, Medscape Today, Nov. 9, 2020. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/940637

Talha Khan Burki, "Herd immunity for COVID-19," The Lancet, Nov. 24, 2020. https://www.thelancet.com/article/S2213-2600%2820%2930555-5/fulltext

Nafeez Ahmed, "Ministry of Defence Funds Man Behind Great Barrington Declaration," Byline Times, Dec. 2, 2020. https://bylinetimes.com/2020/12/02/ministry-of-defence-funds-man-behind-great-barrington-declaration/

Alex Lieske, "In defense of The Great Barrington Declaration," Rational Ground, Dec. 21, 2020. https://rationalground.com/in-defense-of-the-great-barrington-declaration/

Leo Mirani, "The Great Barrington Declaration Ruffles Locals’ Feathers," New Yorker, Dec. 21, 2020. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/12/28/the-great-barrington-declaration-ruffles-locals-feathers

2021

"Over 13,000 medical and public health scientists sign on to Great Barrington Declaration," North State Journal, Jan. 8, 2021. https://nsjonline.com/article/2021/01/over-13000-medical-and-public-health-scientists-sign-on-to-great-barrington-declaration/

Alec Marsh, "Sunetra Gupta: ‘There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of how we live with germs’," Spears, Jan. 27, 2021. https://www.spearswms.com/sunetra-gupta-spears-liquid-lunch/

"Great Barrington Declaration Scientists with Gov. DeSantis in Florida," American Institute for Economic Research, Mar. 18, 2021. https://www.aier.org/article/great-barrington-declaration-scientists-with-gov-desantis-in-florida/

Dave Naylor, "Great Barrington Declaration on COVID lockdowns sees boom in popularity," Western Standard, Mar. 30, 2021. https://westernstandardonline.com/2021/03/great-barrington-declaration-on-covid-lockdowns-sees-boom-in-popularity/

David Climenhaga, "Kenney's Surrender to Covid: Has the Great Barrington Declaration Become the Great Edmonton Declaration?", Albertapolitics.ca, Apr. 27, 2021. https://albertapolitics.ca/2021/04/kenneys-surrender-to-covid-has-the-great-barrington-declaration-become-the-great-edmonton-declaration/

Ryan MacGreal, "Did Doug Ford Test the 'Great Barrington Declaration' on Ontarians?," Raise the Hammer, June 29, 2021. https://www.raisethehammer.org/article/3807/did_doug_ford_test_the_great_barrington_declaration_on_ontarians 

Federica Angeli, Silvia Camporesi & Giorgia Dal Fabbro, "The COVID-19 wicked problem in public health ethics: conflicting evidence, or incommensurable values?," Nature, June  30, 2021. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-021-00839-1 

Jeffrey A. Tucker, "A Short History of the Great Barrington Declaration," Brownstone Institute, July 17, 2021. https://brownstone.org/articles/a-short-history-of-the-great-barrington-declaration/

Jay Bhattacharya & Martin Kulldorff, "The smear campaign against the Great Barrington Declaration," Spiked, Aug. 2, 2021. https://www.spiked-online.com/2021/08/02/the-smear-campaign-against-the-great-barrington-declaration/

David Gorski & Gavin Yamey, "Covid-19 and the New Merchants of Doubt," British Medical Journal, Sep. 13, 2021. https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/09/13/covid-19-and-the-new-merchants-of-doubt/

Heather Bellow, "Those who penned Great Barrington Declaration a year after it sparked worldwide firestorm: 'This is our crucible'," Berkshire Eagle, Oct. 13, 2021. https://www.berkshireeagle.com/coronavirus/those-who-penned-great-barrington-declaration-a-year-after-it-sparked-worldwide-firestorm-this-is/article_b862f134-2619-11ec-81eb-93dc5df41642.html 

Vietnam lockdowns leading to global shortages

A Covid Lockdown In This Country Brings Global Clothing Giants To A Halt | NDTV - Agence France-Presse:

September 29, 2021 - "From shoes and sweaters to car parts and coffee, Vietnam's strict and lengthy coronavirus lockdown has sparked product shortages among worldwide brands such as Nike and Gap which have grown increasingly dependent on the Southeast Asian nation's manufacturers. The snarl-ups at Vietnam's factories are part of a broader crisis around the planet that is sending inflation surging and raising concerns about the pace of recovery in the global economy....

"At a fabric mill east of Hanoi, Claudia Anselmi – the Italian director of Hung Yen Knitting & Dyeing, a key cog in the supply chain of several European and US clothing giants – worries daily if the factory can keep the lights on. Its output plunged by 50 percent when Vietnam's latest devastating virus wave first struck in spring, and it faces perpetual problems securing the yarn it needs for its synthetic material.

"While lockdowns are gradually loosening across the country as infections steadily decline, millions of Vietnamese have been under stay-at-home orders for months. And a complex web of checkpoints and confusing travel permit regulations have made life impossible for truck drivers and businesses trying to move goods across, as well and in and out of, the country.... 

"The delays and restrictions are a major headache for foreign businesses, many of which have pivoted to Southeast Asia from China in recent years – a trend accelerated by the bruising trade war between Washington and Beijing. In the south – the epicentre of Vietnam's fight against Covid-19 – up to 90 percent of supply chains in the garment sector were broken, the Vietnam Textile and Apparel Association (Vitas) said in August, according to state media.

"Nike – which warned last week it was struggling with shortages of its athletic gear and cut its sales forecasts – pointed the finger at Vietnam, among others, saying 80 percent of its factories in the south and nearly half of its apparel plants in the country had shut their doors. The sports colossus sources around half of its footwear from the communist country.... Japan's Fast retailing, which owns the popular Uniqlo brand, also blamed the situation in Vietnam for hold-ups on sweaters, sweatpants, hoodies and dresses, while Adidas said supply chain issues – including in the country – could cost it as much as 500 million euros ($585 million) in sales by the end of the year.

"Even with the prospect of lockdowns easing, many are fretting over the long-term impact on Vietnamese manufacturing, with Nike and Adidas admitting they were looking to temporarily produce elsewhere. In a letter to Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh, leading business associations representing the United States, the European Union, South Korea and Southeast Asian nations sounded the alarm over production shifting away from Vietnam, warning 20 percent of its manufacturing members had already left....

"The pandemic has not only hit the country's textile industry but is also threatening global coffee supplies, with Vietnam the world's largest producer of robusta beans – the variety used in instant coffee. Prices for the commodity are now sitting at a four-year high. Car companies have not escaped either – Toyota slashed production for September and October owing partly to virus issues, telling AFP 'the impact has been big in Vietnam', as well as Malaysia. 

"Shortages have been made worse by a rise in demand in the West after a virus-induced slump."

Read more: https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/coronavirus-coronavirus-vietnam-a-covid-lockdown-in-vietnam-brings-global-clothing-giants-to-a-halt-2557332