Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dr Mike Yeadon's avatar

I’m surprised that the best rebuttal to a unitary WHO led global response wasn’t featured.

Consider the setting. A new pathogen is sweeping the globe.

Does anyone know the optimal response?

NO. By definition, the situation is new so NOBODY KNOWS.

Not the WHO, not any single government.

Is the globe best served by one group guessing the best response, or by many doing so?

MANY.

There’s no better way rapidly to learn best practise than for many simultaneous empirical experiments, maintaining high quality open communication.

Centering a global response in WHO is known, ahead of time, to be close to the worst conceivable approach, which is WHY ITS NEVER BEEN DONE LIKE THIS BEFORE.

It’s obviously a fraudulent way for One World Government to install itself. Wake up. Be blunt. Call the NWO types out & flat out refuse to cooperate on their criminal deeds.

Expand full comment
Dr Mike Yeadon's avatar

Creating a new vaccine in response to a moderate lethality new pathogen is ALWAYS the wrong approach.

Why?

Public safety is paramount in any public health intervention. More so even than efficacy, because so many people are expected to be exposed to the new vaccine.

The time required to do even the barest job of developing a new vaccine, including even an inadequate longitudinal safety database, will inevitably take longer than the likely duration of any pandemic.

Doubly so if what’s proposed involves new technology.

No one knows the safety profile that will result. It must be determined empirically.

There have been harmful vaccines in the past.

If anyone proposes a new vaccine in response to the alleged next pandemic, decline any involvement & point this note out to everyone you can.

Expand full comment
64 more comments...

No posts