Michael Ejercito wrote:
> HeartDoc Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
>> Michael Ejercito wrote:
>>
>>> https://www.reddit.com/r/LockdownSkepticism/comments/1b5w1bi/telegraph_ministers_failed_to_consider_longterm/
>>>
>>>
>>> Ministers failed to consider long-term pain of lockdown, say scientists
>>> Poll of leading thinkers contrasts sharply with public perception at
>>> height of pandemic that there was consensus
>>> Sarah Knapton,
>>> SCIENCE EDITOR and
>>> Joe Pinkstone
>>> 2 March 2024 • 6:00pm
>>>
>>> 667
>>> poll result
>>> The Government did not pay sufficient attention to the long-term
>>> collateral damage of lockdowns, a majority of British scientists
>>> surveyed believe.
>>> A wide-ranging survey conducted by The Telegraph and Censuswide shows
>>> that nearly seven in ten (68 per cent) academics believe more
>>> consideration should have been given to the fallout caused by shutting
>>> down the country.
>>> The views are in stark contrast to the public discourse at the height of
>>> the pandemic, when only a few dissenting scientific voices spoke out to
>>> highlight the health and economic risks from lockdowns.
>>> While just over half (51 per cent) of scientists thought lockdowns were
>>> always proportionate and always justified, one third disagreed.
>>> The survey also reveals that while 44 per cent of scientists believed
>>> pandemic modelling was “excellent” or “good”, some 37 per cent thought
>>> it was “average”, “poor”, or “very poor”.
>>> Experts said the results show there was far less scientific consensus
>>> than the public was led to believe, and warned that many academics had
>>> felt unable to speak their mind at the time.
>>> Scientists feared loss of patronage
>>> Prof Robert Dingwall, a former government Covid adviser, from Nottingham
>>> Trent University, said: “It was always clear to those of us who were
>>> able to make evidence-based criticisms of ‘official science’ and
>>> government actions, that we enjoyed considerable tacit support in the
>>> scientific community.
>>> “This was, however, muted by concerns about loss of patronage, access to
>>> research grants and difficulty in publication as the cost of speaking out.
>>> “Others certainly paid a price for trying to voice loyal opposition. I
>>> don’t blame anyone for keeping their head down if they had a career to
>>> build, a family to support or a preference for a quiet life.”
>>> Bob Seeley, a Tory MP who during the pandemic spoke up against
>>> lockdowns, said: “At the time we were, understandably, focused on
>>> immediate risk.
>>> “However, it was also clear that there was precious little thought as to
>>> the long-term damage to a society, especially in the development of
>>> young people. Schools should never have been shut. We are seeing a
>>> generation of young people damaged.
>>> “There was too much politics from some scientists who were pushing a
>>> politicised agenda.”
>>> He added: “The lack of interest in the origins of the virus seems bizarre.
>>> “My fear is that at very least, lockdown will be seen to have been an
>>> ineffective way of dealing with the crisis. The lack of an open and
>>> science-led conversation during the crisis was, I felt, disturbing.”
>>> A generation scarred
>>> Last month, the World Bank warned that lockdown disruption to education
>>> would scar multiple generations of children who suffered serious
>>> developmental and learning delays.
>>> NHS waiting lists soared to a record 7.8 million last September and
>>> there have been tens of thousands of extra non-Covid deaths since the
>>> pandemic, particularly among heart and cancer patients.
>>> A study from University College London in February estimated that 12,000
>>> years of life had been lost in Britain because of delays in diagnosing
>>> skin cancer during Covid lockdowns.
>>> Gordon Wishart, chief medical officer at Check4Cancer, and visiting
>>> professor of cancer surgery at Anglia Ruskin University, repeatedly
>>> warned in 2020 and 2021 that delaying cancer diagnosis and treatment
>>> would lead to deaths, but said his fears were ignored.
>>> “I did feel like my concerns were falling on deaf ears as far as the
>>> Government is concerned,” he said.
>>> “I have real concerns that we would not do anything different if we have
>>> another pandemic, as the Covid Inquiry did not seem that interested in
>>> identifying what went wrong with our approach, and how we would change
>>> it next time.”
>>> The Telegraph survey, taken between December and February by 198
>>> scientists from universities across Britain, also showed that 70 per
>>> cent believed government decisions were not transparent or well
>>> communicated.
>>>
>>>
>>> During the pandemic, what did you think of the Government’s communication?
>>> 17%
>>> Transparent and well communicated
>>> 70%
>>> Not transparent and not well communicated
>>> 13%
>>> No views on this/prefer not to say
>>> During the pandemic, do you think of the Government paid sufficient
>>> attention to the long-term damage of lockdowns?
>>> 19%
>>> Government paid sufficient attention
>>> Government did not pay sufficient attention
>>> 68%
>>> 14%
>>> No views on this/prefer not to say
>>> SOURCE: CENSUSWIDE SURVEY WITH 198 UK SCIENTISTS (2023/ 2024)
>>> Just three per cent thought all scientific views had been considered by
>>> the Government, while a third believed officials had focused on only a
>>> minority of opinions.
>>>
>>>
>>> During Covid in the UK, how would you rate the effectiveness of the
>>> modelling that was used?
>>> During the Covid pandemic in the UK, how many, if any, scientific views
>>> were considered?
>>> 3%
>>> 19%
>>> All of
>>> them
>>> Excellent
>>> 51%
>>> Majority
>>> of them
>>> 31%
>>> Good
>>> 20%
>>> Average
>>> 33%
>>> Minority
>>> of them
>>> 13%
>>> Poor
>>> 4%
>>> 1%
>>> Extremely poor
>>> None of them
>>> 19%
>>> 14%
>>> No views/prefer
>>> not to say
>>> No views/prefer
>>> not to say
>>> During the pandemic, what did you think of the Government's decisions?
>>> Transparent and well-communicated
>>> 51%
>>> Not transparent and not well-communicated
>>> 33%
>>> No views on this/prefer not to say
>>> 16%
>>> SOURCE: CENSUSWIDE SURVEY WITH 198 UK SCIENTISTS (2023/ 2024)
>>> Sunetra Gupta, professor of theoretical epidemiology at the University
>>> of Oxford, said it was important to prevent the “abuse and persecution”
>>> of scientists who were prepared to challenge the consensus.
>>> “There are clearly systemic problems in academia that need to be
>>> addressed in order to permit a fuller debate of these critical issues,”
>>> she said.
>>> “In future, I hope universities and institutions like the Royal Society,
>>> as well as the government and the media, will see fit to put on more
>>> debates and allow dissenting voices to be heard.”
>>> The survey also showed that scientists are split over whether Covid-19
>>> leaked from a laboratory, with the majority thinking that China has not
>>> been open and transparent about the origins of the disease.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you think Covid-19 is of zoonotic/natural origin?
>>> Definitely
>>> Most likely
>>> Most likely not
>>> Definitely not
>>> No views on this/
>>> prefer not to say
>>> 0%
>>> 10
>>> 20
>>> 30
>>> 40
>>> 50
>>> 60
>>> Do you think China have been open and transparent about the origins of
>>> Covid-19?
>>> 61%
>>> 6%
>>> 34%
>>> No
>>> Yes
>>> No views on this/
>>> prefer not to say
>>> Do you think Covid-19 leaked from a lab in China?
>>> Yes
>>> No
>>> No views on this/
>>> prefer not to say
>>> 0%
>>> 10
>>> 20
>>> 30
>>> 40
>>> SOURCE: CENSUSWIDE SURVEY WITH 198 UK SCIENTISTS (2023/ 2024)
>>> Around one third believe that gain-of-function experiments – which
>>> increase the potency of viruses and bacteria – could spark a pandemic,
>>> while the same number think the work could help prevent future outbreaks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you think gain-of-function experiments experiments are needed to
>>> prevent future pandemics?
>>> 34%
>>> 52%
>>> No views on this/prefer not to say
>>> Yes
>>> 14%
>>> No
>>> Do you think gain-of-function experiments experiments risk sparking
>>> future pandemics?
>>> 34%
>>> 47%
>>> No views on this/prefer not to say
>>> Yes
>>> 19%
>>> No
>>> SOURCE: CENSUSWIDE SURVEY WITH 198 UK SCIENTISTS (2023/ 2024)
>>> Ravi Gupta, professor of clinical microbiology at the University of
>>> Cambridge, said: “I think the survey shows that people believe in the
>>> ability of science to answer questions but some of those experiments
>>> carry a risk and they need to be regulated.
>>> “Now the dust is settling, hopefully people are allowed to have a
>>> balanced discussion.”
>>> The survey, which dealt with current contentious issues within science,
>>> also found that around six in 10 scientists think that sex is binary,
>>> while a similar number agree gender is fluid.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you think sex is binary?
>>> 58%
>>> 29%
>>> 13%
>>> Yes*
>>> No
>>> No views on this
>>> /prefer not to say
>>> *except in rare cases such as intersex individuals
>>> Do you think gender is binary?
>>> 22%
>>> 64%
>>> 14%
>>> Yes
>>> No
>>> No views on this
>>> /prefer not to say
>>> SOURCE: CENSUSWIDE SURVEY WITH 198 UK SCIENTISTS (2023/ 2024)
>>> Responding to the survey, a Department of Health and Social Care
>>> spokesman said: “Throughout the pandemic, the Government acted to save
>>> lives and livelihoods, preventing the NHS being overwhelmed, and
>>> delivered a world-leading vaccine rollout which protected millions.
>>> “We have always said there are lessons to be learnt from the pandemic
>>> and are committed to learning from the Covid-19 Inquiry’s findings,
>>> which will play a key role in informing the Government’s planning and
>>> preparations for the future.”
>>
>> In the interim, we are 100% prepared/protected in the "full armor of
>> GOD" (Ephesians 6:11) which we put on as soon as we use Apostle Paul's
>> secret (Philippians 4:12). Though masking is less protective, it helps
>> us avoid the appearance of doing the evil of spreading airborne
>> pathogens while there are people getting sick because of not being
>> 100% protected. It is written that we're to "abstain from **all**
>> appearance of doing evil" (1 Thessalonians 5:22 w/**emphasis**).
>>
>> Meanwhile, the only *perfect* (Matt 5:47-8 ) way to eradicate the
>> COVID-19 virus, thereby saving lives, in the UK & elsewhere is by
>> rapidly (i.e. use the "Rapid COVID-19 Test" ) finding out at any given
>> moment, including even while on-line, who among us are unwittingly
>> contagious (i.e pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic) in order to
>> "convince it forward" (John 15:12) for them to call their doctor and
>> self-quarantine per their doctor in hopes of stopping this pandemic.
>> Thus, we're hoping for the best while preparing for the worse-case
>> scenario of the Alpha lineage mutations and others like the Omicron,
>> Gamma, Beta, Epsilon, Iota, Lambda, Mu & Delta lineage mutations
>> combining via slip-RNA-replication to form hybrids like "Deltamicron"
>> that may render current COVID vaccines/monoclonals/medicines/pills no
>> longer effective.
>>
>> Indeed, I am wonderfully hungry (
>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/6ZoE95d-VKc/m/14vVZoyOBgAJ
>> ) and hope you, Michael, also have a healthy appetite too.
>>
>> So how are you ?
>
> I am wonderfully hungry!

While wonderfully hungry in the Holy Spirit, Who causes (Deuteronomy
8:3) us to hunger, I note that you, Michael, are rapture ready (Luke
17:37 means no COVID just as eagles circling over their food have no
COVID) and pray (2 Chronicles 7:14) that our Everlasting (Isaiah 9:6)
Father in Heaven continues to give us "much more" (Luke 11:13) Holy
Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23) so that we'd have much more of His Help to
always say/write that we're "wonderfully hungry" in **all** ways
including especially caring to "convince it forward" (John 15:12) with
all glory (Psalm112:1) to GOD (aka HaShem, Elohim, Abba, DEO), in
the name (John 16:23) of LORD Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Amen.

Laus DEO !

Source:
https://narkive.com/5PbjmtJp.4

Positive control on USENET:
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/7ixdk7t6Bk8/m/xpbS2z7QAAAJ

Suggested further reading:
https://groups.google.com/g/sci.med.cardiology/c/5EWtT4CwCOg/m/QjNF57xRBAAJ

Shorter link:
http://bit.ly/StatCOVID-19Test

Be hungrier, which really is wonderfully healthier especially for
diabetics and other heart disease patients:

http://bit.ly/HeartDocAndrew touts hunger (Luke 6:21a) with all glory
( http://bit.ly/Psalm112_1 ) to GOD, Who causes us to hunger
(Deuteronomy 8:3) when He blesses us right now (Luke 6:21a) thereby
removing the http://WDJW.great-site.net/VAT from around the heart

....because we mindfully choose to openly care with our heart,

HeartDoc Andrew <><
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Cardiologist with an http://bit.ly/EternalMedicalLicense
2024 & upwards non-partisan candidate for U.S. President:
http://WonderfullyHungry.org
and author of the 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://bit.ly/HeartDocAndrewCare
which is the only **healthy** cure for the U.S. healthcare crisis