Isolating People Won’t Protect Them From Pathogens in the Long Run
Today we’re publishing an original piece by John Tamny, a Vice President at FreedomWorks, editor of RealClearMarkets, and the author of the newly released book, When Politicians Panicked: The New Coronavirus, Expert Opinion, and a Tragic Lapse of Reason. In the following extract, he describes how the opposite of isolating people in their homes – opening the world up and making it easier for people to bump into each other – has helped reduce our vulnerability to disease.
Oxford professor Sunetra Gupta, one of the authors of The Great Barrington Declaration, has long argued that globalisation’s genius has been understated. It’s not just that the division of labour has enabled relentless specialisation among the world’s workers, it’s not just that people ‘bumping into each other’ have spread ideas and processes that have driven even greater economic advancement that has easily been the greatest foe of disease and death, globalisation has also fostered a great deal of physical, in-person interaction among productive, specialised people increasingly possessing the means to see the globe.
As a consequence they haven’t just seen the world. In a health sense, they’ve spread viruses around the world. With more and more of the world’s inhabitants moving around the globe, so have viruses. The spreading hasn’t weakened the global population, rather it’s strengthened it. Immunity is most notably achieved naturally, and it’s achieved much more quickly when people are constantly interacting with other people.
worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Yep. If New Zealand ever opens up, the entire population will be at risk of perishing within a few weeks. Oh well, few will be missed!
That’s a nasty comment to make IMO. I found NZ to be full of generous, kind people who would be unlikely to make such a crass and insensitive comment. I don’t suppose for a minute they’re enjoying the situation they’ve found themselves in, any more than we are.
I’m not defending the comment (though I suspect it was meant to be ironic) but the measures in NZ may well have a broad level of popular support, just as the measures in the UK did to start with.
Is a loss of sense of humour a symptom of covid? No need to attack iane for cheeing us all up. Anyway sheep can’t catch covid.
Symptom of lockdown…
True. My apologies Bluemoon.
They had their chance and voted the witch back in.
The whole idea that respiratory viruses of this nature can be effectively suppressed given current technology is so obviously preposterous that it’s hard to know where to start when arguing against it.
Similarly, interfering with the natural course of what is for most not a significantly harmful virus may have consequences for public health that are unintended and negative, and the same goes for mass vaccination.
Your two points are well made. I think that the second one may be the most significant – equivalent of letting loose a barely understood pathogen in itself : one much worse than the current virus.
The parallel with the inhabitants of North Sentinel certainly gives pause for thought, and raises issues re. the real balance of problems re. globalisation.
This implies incompetence. This is not incompetence. These are crimes. To say the vaccination rollout “may have consequences for public health that are unintended and negative” is to let these criminals off the hook by implying they do not understand what they are doing. They know exactly what they are doing, which is why they have gone as far as to change the laws of the land to formalise their deeply sinister, criminal behaviour. For example, here is a document published in The International Journal Of Clinical Practice detailing the very real risks of Antibody Dependence Enhancement (ADE) from the covid “vaccines” and how the risks of this are being concealed from the duped public, most of which have been brainwashed with the lies about how the vaccines have all been fully tested with no indication given that they are totally experimental and in fact unnecessary, because the mortality rate is so low. It is impossible to give a valid statement on how safe or unsafe the injections truly are, because the trials are ongoing until 2023, but all the indications so far is that they are very harmful, and the ADE has not even had a chance to materialise… Read more »
To say the vaccination rollout “may have consequences for public health that are unintended and negative” is to let these criminals off the hook
No it’s not. To say it is doing that is just hysterical.
I think the vaccine rollout may have consequences. Non evasive medication should always be first port of call. They rubbished medication that has been tried and tested over many, many years. In their tests they quadrupled the dose with disastrous outcomes.
The vaccines only have a temporary licence, because they are still in phase III trials, the findings will not be known until Jan 2023. Certainly the long term effects couldn’t possibly be known. There is a protocol to medical trials (my brother was a research chemist at Boots – he’s had his vaccine) Firstly they have to have informed consent, the documentation that is signed at the outset is very extensive. They can withdraw at any time. I know someone that works for a government department, who was told that if they didn’t have the vaccine they couldn’t come into work. This is coercion.
They are criminals and should not be let off the hook. Some of what has happened seems criminally negligent, some looks very deliberate. We may never know the exact mix.
The problem is that Big Pharma, who are supported by Big Finance, and use the tools of Big I.T./AI, and subsidise the lifestyles of little men like Whitty, Johnson, Handcock etc, dont want the human immune system to work optimally. They all want to weaken it and replace it with injections, drugs etc that require regular updating and are never designed to actually fully cure or make/keep people healthy.
Its their business model.
It is difficult to avoid peyrole’s conclusion. There is still a prevailing view that these companies and trusts and universities are motivated in the main by a desire to help mankind. It is demonstrably absurd.
Absolutely. Well said.
I know this isn’t exactly on topic, but why have masks become a standard now? Even Google is telling me about the importance of masking? This is driving me crazy. What evidence do they have that masks do anything but they are ‘important? Stupid
Masking – a filthy habit. I remember all those graphs showing no obvious reduction in “cv” deaths after masking was mandated in various countries. I saw another mask discarded on the ground today. One of many millions – I suppose the oceans weren’t polluted enough…
“….even Google..” Quelle surprise. Sarcasm surely?
Several reasons, none medical.
fear propagation and reinforcement
depletion of personal sense of agency
creation of social interaction barriers….dehumanisation
promotion of homogeneous behaviours – sheople
lighting up the targets for persecution: the non mask wearers.
i could go on…and others have already articulated it better elsewhere.
this is very, very sinister and designed, as a bonus, to be corrosive to our sceptic morale.
Don’t forget the huge amount of money that companies making them are raking in. They have become yet another vested interest who are no doubt lobbying for the whole Covid scare to be continued as long as possibe.
Yes, very true. Helping the wealth transfer back to the top…..plus: important as a mechanism to create slush money for the corrupt useful idiots (including political and administrative classes) too.