Here’s an interesting graph, which is discussed in this article.
It looks superficially pretty much like the COVID case-numbers ONS data, but is in fact based on asking people who have had COVID, based on the presence of antibodies, when their symptoms appeared. A bit of tweaking to estimate likely time of infection produces a rather cleaner picture of infection trends since the end of 2019.
The most obvious thing to see is how it confirms the fact that all three UK lockdowns began after infections began to drop, and that infections had already started to rise before the second lockdown ended. The article also points out what I observed at the start of the year in posts here, that the final downturn began abruptly at the very time people were getting together at Christmas – the occasion that SAGE warned us would certainly trigger a new holocaust. If correlation meant causation, the opposite of SAGE’s soothsaying would be true – Christmas gatherings, and not the lockdown, reversed the peak that began, for no obvious reason, a fortnight after lockdown #2 started.
For myself, I would observe that the cleaner shape of this particular plot proves that there was no discernible alteration to what was already happening through either imposing or lifting lockdowns. There is no discernible effect on the slopes at all – except that with lockdown #1 in March 2020 there was a minimal and temporary slowing of the improvement in infections, and at lockdown #2 last November, an actual brief reversal of the improvement: neither is likely to be significant.
I’d also add that, although the onset of the mask mandate last July 24th is not shown, you certainly couldn’t pin the tail on the donkey using this graph – in fact the compulsory muzzling began more or less at the lowest point for infections, and a month later infections began to rise, only returning to a similar low level around now, when mask compliance is probably at its lowest point so far.
Both these findings are actually strong indications that neither asymptomatic nor presymptomatic spread, the only justification for lockdowns or masking, have played any part in COVID. But you knew that from numerous other evidence – oddly enough, most of the population still doesn’t.
The article makes the significant point that COVID infections producing antibodies began rising in November 2019, rubbishing the offficial Chinese narrative, but also leaving unexplained the sudden triggering of exponential growth at the end of February 2020, whose most reasonable explanation appears to be that novel infections reach some kind of critical mass in a population, but may have more mysterious causes like dormancy and/or complex weather interactions with the virus. It’s a reminder that the intensive study of SARS-CoV-2 opens up interesting new questions about viruses in general – though studying a lab-leaked chimaera to answer them could prove misleading.
One more recurrent pattern in this chart is the presence of small spikes and dips, as if the overall picture consists of overlapping “spikes” that combine to form an overall smoother shape. This would fit well with the observation that epidemics actually consist of local outbreaks, each with a characteristic Gompertz curve (as Michael Levitt showed early on), some of which rapidly spread to other areas presumably because of people-movements. It would be interesting to correlate the antibody data geographically to see if this is true, which might give indications of how the virus spread, and hence the principles on which such epidemics operate.
The “local spike” idea is significant in the current kind of situation, where finding some new variant cluster has led to local surge testing at the expense of more general testing. Obviously this would give a false impression of a general increase in infections, whereas in fact it is like counting ants round an ants nest and then generalising the population density to the whole field. Meanwhile, even my compliant brother has picked up on some of the nonsense surrounding variants and their supposedly different symptoms, mentioning that he developed mild hay fever symptoms whilst gardening, “or, as it’s called now, the delta variant.” Perhaps he is not far from the kingdom…
Isn’t is a pity, though, that with such instructive portrayal of real data easily available, the general public – meaning our friends and relatives – have to make do with the kind of fictional models trotted out by Dr Whitty and his cronies, provably wrong even as they were made public, to justify keeping the useless lockdowns in place?
As so many, especially medics and scientists, have been coming to see over the last 15 months, it is absolutely impossible that SPI-M-O and Co (right across the civilised world) have been unable to see for themselves the uselessness of lockdowns. So the only explanation is conscious deception by named suspects. As the press now begins to regurgitate what it has been fed about the fearful “Nepal Variant,” the “Delta Variant” resolving into a damp squib plus hayfever, it’s clear that the whole mutation story has the same political purpose – because it certainly has nothing to do with legitimate scientific concerns: