The Great Barrington Declaration

Started by ilikecomics2 pages

The Great Barrington Declaration

This document was signed by 60,000 doctors and epidemiologists.

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

Again...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid

Again...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid

The Great Barrington Declaration was sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research, a libertarian free-market think tank associated with climate change denial.[13][14][15]

"Herd immunity letter signed by fake experts including 'Dr Johnny Bananas" -snip

Oh Rightist...

How did relaxing covid restrictions work out after the 1st wave again?

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
How did relaxing covid restrictions work out after the 1st wave again?

Then why are Democrats not calling for lockdowns in the future ?

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Again...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid

The Great Barrington Declaration was sponsored by the American Institute for Economic Research, a libertarian free-market think tank associated with climate change denial.[13][14][15]

Is there a problem that it was organized by libertarians ?

Vaccines

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Vaccines

Is that in response to the question of why it's a problem that a libertarian think tank sponsored the Barrington declaration ?

No

Originally posted by ilikecomics
This document was signed by 60,000 doctors and epidemiologists.

As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

Why does the left ignore the science?

You'll have to ask Dr Johnny Fartpants, Professor Cominic Dummings and Dr Person Fakename

Originally posted by cdtm
Why does the left ignore the science?

Because the state has co-opted science by incentivizing research that legitimizes the state to begin with.

A similar thing happened with academia, which is why the majority of professors are left. They were purchased by the state to repeat the party line, that way if you disagree with the party line you're disagreeing with the "smart" guys.

Fauci is to covid what Lysenko was to humiliating starvation.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, look up lysenkoism (a collection of retarded pseudo-scientific bullshit that a guy, who was afraid to give bad news in a shoot the messenger society, passed as actual science.

Now when talking about how people were starved in Russia the left just scapegoats Lysenko, instead of the system that produces bad science.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
You'll have to ask Dr Johnny Fartpants, Professor Cominic Dummings and Dr Person Fakename

Wouldn't surprise me if leftists added those names, so they could later use them as an excuse to dismiss the entire document.

Even if only 5k Doctors signed it, it should give provaxx people pause.

Dr Johnny Bananas

Amusing that you think "the state" is left wing.

Originally posted by ilikecomics
it should give provaxx people pause.

Why?

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
Again...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/09/herd-immunity-letter-signed-fake-experts-dr-johnny-bananas-covid

Individual academics from the universities of Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Stanford, Nottingham, Edinburgh, Exeter, Sussex and York were among experts from around the world who signed the declaration. However, the declaration’s website allows anyone to add their name to the list if they provide an email address, home city, postcode and name.

Excellent, proof this is indeed backed by experts from prestigious universities.

Originally posted by cdtm
Excellent, proof this is indeed backed by experts from prestigious universities.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-11/repeat-booster-shots-risk-overloading-immune-system-ema-says?utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_medium=social

Here's from Bloomberg, dunno if that's left enough, saying EU medicine team says boostering could harm your immune system.

Originally posted by ilikecomics
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-11/repeat-booster-shots-risk-overloading-immune-system-ema-says?utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_medium=social

Here's from Bloomberg, dunno if that's left enough, saying EU medicine team says boostering could harm your immune system.

Except that's entirely not what it says though.