Harvard epidemiologist: lockdowns a disaster
The White House press conference of September 23rd 2020, featuring Dr. Scott Atlas, was an extraordinary thing to watch. Against a hostile media (of course), Atlas flat-out contradicted the CDC’s Dr. Redfield and taught the up-to-date science that the country needs to hear — the very research that Dr. Fauci had bizarrely tried, in his exchange with Rand Paul, to claim did not exist.
The main exchange Atlas had with the press involved Redfield’s claim that 90 percent of Americans were still susceptible to the virus.
This was wrong on two counts, Atlas said.
First, he said, Redfield was basing this claim on surveillance data showing that nine percent of Americans had antibodies. The problem here, said Atlas, is that much of this state-by-state data is old, going back to March or April, before cases had really begun to spread in many states.
More importantly, Atlas adds:
“The immunity to the infection is not solely determined by the percent of people who have antibodies. If you look at the research — and there’s been about 24 papers at least on the immunity from T-cells, that’s a different type of immunity than antibodies…. According to the papers from Sweden, Singapore, and elsewhere, there is cross-immunity, highly likely from other infections, and there is also T-cell immunity. And the combination of those makes the antibodies a small fraction of the people that have immunity. So the answer is no, it is not 90 percent of people that are susceptible to the infection.”
Later in the exchange Atlas refers the media to top epidemiologists: Jay Bhattacharya and John Ioannidis from Stanford, Sunetra Gupta at Oxford, and Martin Kulldorff of Harvard Medical School.
Well, as it happens, Martin Kulldorff is my guest on today’s episode of the Tom Woods Show.
Kulldorff, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, is a biostatistician and epidemiologist whose research centers on the early detection and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks.
He has been against lockdowns from day 1.
I asked him whether, with a harsh enough lockdown, suppression of the virus was even possible. We discussed which metrics people should be looking at, and whether the number of “cases” even mattered.
We talked about the excessive sensitivity of the PCR testing in the United States and what the implications of that are. We talked about the collateral damage caused by lockdowns. I asked him for his opinion of Dr. Fauci.
And plenty more.
We covered a lot of ground — and I asked him pretty much every question to which a reasonable person would want an answer.
I urge you to find the time to listen: tomwoods.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Trackback from your site.
Tom O
| #
Thanks for the self-promotion. Had you included some information from your interview, I might have been more inclined to check it out. This reminds me of the articles that flow into my spam filter where I get a shock paragraph and a hook to promote the author’s blog.
Reply