Hi Folks,

Been ages since I popped in. I recently shared some thoughts on COVID-19 on my Facebook page that several folk have found helpful. Here's the link in case you are interested.

https://www.facebook.com/simon.southerton/posts/10220009671185439

I don't know that all of us are ready for a rational discussion, but what the heck, I'm willing to give it a shot!!

Good on you, sir!

Thanks, Simon. I'll give it a read right now.

Okay, I read it...

I came away with two hinge points, meaning that two issues remain unsettled, at least for Americans!

I can't mention the two points, because "politics" is not allowed.

But I will venture the very possible fallout from my two points:

We're screwed...

I don't think the US is totally screwed. The growth in new cases is slowing. More prompt action by critical people at the top would definitely have put you in a better place. Delays cost lives when things are happening exponentially.

Our governing legions excel at delay and misdirection, but it is in our best interests to be positive about it all.

But there is also a significant basis for a tad bit of pessimism.

We are not out of the woods. There are foreseeable risks.

The virus population is now massive so there is a possibility of mutation to a form that is more aggressive. However, most viruses evolve to a less aggressive form.

We also don't know how long people remain resistant to the virus once they have been infected and recovered. With some coronaviruses resistance only lasts for a year or two.

But I remain quite optimistic that we'll beat this one, but after a lot of pain. I think there is a bright future for vaccine research.

On the bright side, the problems I had before the virus came along suddenly don’t seem so bad.

bradley Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On the bright side, the problems I had before the
> virus came along suddenly don’t seem so bad.

Before coronavirus showed up Australia was still reeling from the worst bushfires and smoke we have ever experienced. We used a lot of face masks to get through the smoke. It's a distant memory now.

Australia has thankfully been extraordinarily lucky with this pandemic. We have a very low caseload and probably the lowest death rate per case in the world. We have only had 61 deaths to date and most of them came off cruise ships.

good stuff

What I was reading last night talked about the idea of it beginning in a Lab. Not that they were engineering the virus, but that they were working with bats and their diseases, when one of them got infected.

I don't know if that could ever be proven, but the simpler explanation would definitely be that it simply came from a wild bat.

But I think a few cases that had nothing to do with the animals markets is what started those rumours in the first place.

As I mention in my post, I have not seen a single scientist suggest the virus was man-made. Its RNA sequence doesn't look out of the ordinary and they are comparing it to hundreds of other coronaviruses. My guess is they will find it in a bat eventually.
Bats are eaten in many Asian countries, so it's hard to totally prevent this sort of thing happening again. But we should be far better prepared in the future given technological advances that will come out of this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/12/2020 10:28PM by SimonS.

I have read the research and I have read the denials and the denials ring a little hollow. When Ralph Baric first made his chimera, he reversed engineered the SHC014 segment and managed to get a functional chimera on a mouse coronavirus backbone. Sample 2b of SHC014 MA15 was infectous, pathogenic, reproduced and traditional methods for treating SARS-Cov lacked efficacy. Subsequent papers involved the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The altered small envelope protein could now attach to the ACE2 receptor of epithelial cells. SARS uses a different mechanism.

When I read the denial that there is no way they created a virus from scratch because the technology does not exist. I agree, but the creation of a stable chimera appears to be possible.

When I hear about the difference in genetics between SHC014 MA15 sample 2b and COVID 19, I say yeah, they used a different backbone. I have yet to hear that the segment coding for the small envelop protein is different from the altered sequence created by Ralph Baric. I have been looking.

Speak to me of motivation!

The modern world is about "coin", the 2-sided beast, wealth/power.

Where does creating such a virus fit within this parameter? I can see a long game - create an unstable, sure to mutate, virus, then create the vaccine, innoculate your soldiers and then turn it loose to ravage the enemy, then pick up the pieces of the whole rest of the world...

So was that China's plan and, oops, the virus escaped?

I'm not saying it's impossible, but given the two choices, and a calm demeanor, my pick is easy, plus it keeps my blood pressure down.

Why make it in the first place? Type in "gain of function" into your search engine and you will see that people are working on all sorts of things. Accidental release or on purpose? I don't know. Could be someone pissed off at their job, boss, significant other, lack of significant other, or just pissed off at the world. Or maybe just a little oops. Accidents do happen and sometimes with people who should know better, read about a researcher that accidentally infected himself with Sao Paulo virus, didn't report it and flew home for thanksgiving. Ends up in the ER later. A guy with a PhD should know better.

Well, looking at the flow of my life, and using it as a gauge, the 'Oops!" theory of how the world works, is a more than adequate explanation.

SimonS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As I mention in my post, I have not seen a single
> scientist suggest the virus was man-made. Its RNA
> sequence doesn't look out of the ordinary and they
> are comparing it to hundreds of other
> coronaviruses. My guess is they will find it in a
> bat eventually.
> Bats are eaten in many Asian countries, so it's
> hard to totally prevent this sort of thing
> happening again. But we should be far better
> prepared in the future given technological
> advances that will come out of this.

I wasn't suggesting that it was man-made. The suggestion is that scientists were working with bats, trying to sequence the DNA of their viruses, when one of them accidentally became infected. But that's not my suggestion or belief, but just something I've read.

Thank you Simon.

Thanks Simon.

“Why don’t we let this [coronavirus] wash over the country?” -- D.J.T.

Why not ask the question?

Should we eat broken glass for dinner?

Is it in our food?

There are some questions whose asking provides an answer. Like whether we should let the corona virus wash over us unimpeded.

Your question might answer itself based on what we already know, though it may require clarification as I demonstrated.

His question is one that many people asked and they needed an answer from someone like Dr. Fauci. I’m sure I would have asked Fauci the question.

I’ve long observed that many people treat questions as statements.

“Why don’t we let this [coronavirus] wash over the country?” -- D.J.T.

Fauci has answered that question many, many times. He answered it several times just this week, every time he said the US cannot safely open up yet.

What more do you want?

I think Dr. Fauci is doing the best thing to do when someone asks a question. Answer it.

And they’re probably still people in the country that are working and taking care of families that haven’t heard him answer the question yet. So hopefully you’ll have more opportunities to educate and more people.

It’s nothing to take offense at. Just a question. I think I remember Thoreau saying something about people who were afraid of a question and what their life must be like.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2020 09:04PM by jay.

I heard Fauci answer the question yet again today. Every time people ask him if it would be safe to open the states now, and he says no. He outlines what preconditions must be met.

He said the same thing last night on Laura Ingraham's variety show. She ridiculed the constraints and called on the government to remove the constraints, and he interrupted her and set her straight.

He's not even very subtle as was evidenced when last weekend he spoke so bluntly Trump demanded a retraction on Monday. Birx has done virtually the same thing many times.

I believe that the brave lads and lasses who are fomenting for a relaxation of the COVID Quarantine are only those who believe that they are not at risk of death should they contract it.

And from the data emerging, they are probably correct. So they 'bravely' demand their American Right to take the risk.

I am relatively healthy and I tend to believe I would survive. But I'm lazy, (and adequately funded) so I am quite happy to 'Shelter at Home' until the government sounds an all-clear.

It's easy to understand the compulsion of the teen through 50s bunch who want their freedom of mobility back, along with their jobs! They are standing up to be counted: "We accept the risk!" they are beginning to thunder.

Now, if the stats are borne out, COVID-19 left to spread free as a bird, will lay low maybe 65% of the population within a matter of weeks. So roughly 227,500,000 Americans of all shapes, sizes, and ages will be stricken. Worst case scenario, 2% will die: 4,550,000. The vast majority of this figure will die because of an underlying condition, which includes old age. (What will happen in hospitals during this period is the stuff of nightmares.)

One way to look at is to say, "Hey, we cleaned out 4 million "less desirable" people from the gene pool! And what the heck, everybody dies, so..."

All the people who are willing to take their chances are saying to those who don't have great odds at surviving, "Let's all be brave so that our Rights as Americans are sustained!!"

It's almost like the majority telling the minority, "Hey, this is a democracy: the majority rules!"

But hopefully, a majority of Americans will recognize that minorities (except NAMBLA, et alia) have the same rights as the majority, one of which is not to be sacrificed because it's convenient.


Cynical me: There's big money in getting the machinery of society moving again. BIG MONEY! Maybe even a few votes!

and

What's more important, what I want or the lives of people I've never met?


Lucky Mormons: whatever happens is ghawd's will, part of the plan, and always what's best! In Jesus' name, amen.

“She ridiculed the constraints and called on the government to remove the constraints, and he interrupted her and set her straight.”

She actually didn’t call on removal of the constraints during the interview. She was actually asking him questions. But people were interpreting her questions as statements. she was actually asking questions and he was answering them.

You kind of prove my point. People interpret questions as statements often. I think it was good for her particular audience to hear her questions and hear his answers.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/17/2020 09:43PM by jay.

I think you are the one who misses the bigger picture. Ingraham is not known for straight questions; virtually everything she asks is a pointed question designed to validate one of her talking points.

If you couldn't see that, you are not particularly perceptive--an impression conveyed initially by your failure to understand what Fauci has been saying for weeks.

Speaking of perception, please quote from any post I made showing that I did not understand what Fauci had been saying for weeks.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/18/2020 06:34PM by jay.

We were talking about Ingraham and whether her questions were really questions. Fauci is beside that point, though I suspect you don't get him either, but the issue at hand is that your previous interpretation of Ingraham as a honest poser of honest questions indicates pretty obvious credulousness.

I didn’t say that either. And you won’t be able to quote me on that just like you weren’t able to provide the previous quote I asked you for. :)

But it still stands that answering a simple question is often the best way to deal with a question. You can get mad, you could be offended, you can be incredulous. Or you can just simply provide an answer.

You are just too smart for me, Jay.

“I think you are the one who misses the bigger picture. Ingraham is not known for straight questions; virtually everything she asks is a pointed question designed to validate one of her talking points.”

If the answer to the pointed question isn’t what the questioner was looking for, then was their talking point validated?

Did Fauci validate Ingram’s talking point by answering Ingram’s pointed question?

If not, then maybe answering a question isn’t the worst response.

Simon, you are a godsend. We've missed you on this board. Thank you for your insight.

I appreciate your point of view, Simon. It's always good to see you here.

You mentioned that you like a German vaccine candidate. Would that be the Pfizer/BioNTech candidate?

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I appreciate your point of view, Simon. It's
> always good to see you here.
>
> You mentioned that you like a German vaccine
> candidate. Would that be the Pfizer/BioNTech
> candidate?

Thank you. The one I referred to is being developed by CureVac. https://www.curevac.com/

"A recent Pew Research Center study found that 30% of Americans believe COVID-19 is a manmade virus. While some believe it was intentionally created in a laboratory, others believe it was an accident. "

In that Pew Report, how many believed ghawd sent the virus to get rid of Mexicans and Queers?

I suspect the overlap between believers in "9/11" and "COVID-19 is man-made" would be close to 100%.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/13/2020 03:32AM by SimonS.

Thank you Simon.

Thanks very much, Simon. That was very informative - and without any sensationalism (as one would expect from a scientist, but these days...).

All the best to you

Tom in Paris

Thanks Simon, it all makes good sense.

Those living in the more sparsely populated areas really should be able to beat this pretty quickly, but only if social distancing and handwashing becomes second nature. Travel restrictions are also pretty useful where they are practicable.

Don't let your politicians insist on the right to hold religious services, or worry about the threat to civil liberties that comes with lock-down orders. Older, poorer at-risk people have a right to life that trumps the normal rights to gather socially in the short term.

Thanks Simon. Hard to face this. Nice to have facts and a scientific point of view. I don't feel any better, but I do feel more armored in some ways but more vulnerable because in America ---Gawd and Politics.



I am hungry for a time when we don't fire Scientists because we don't like what they are saying.

I am going to pick a nit. In short, I believe you are too generous to China.

Although I do not believe China intentionally engineered the virus or intentionally released it, as someone who frequently deals with Chinese data I know that the official reports are skewed in the government's favor. There is nothing unusual in such censorship; Beijing does it all the time when confronting embarrassing information--and, frankly, we see a similar if less comprehensive and polished pattern of dissimulation in Washington.

Moreover, there is abundant evidence indicating that Beijing has been less than forthright regarding the COVID-19 crisis. The first doctors who worked on the illness were reprimanded for going public with their findings, and just in the last two days Beijing has superimposed bureaucratic control over the publication of scientific analysis of the pandemic.

What might the Chinese be concealing? Knowing the government's history of covering up serious regulatory failures, it is possible that researchers unwittingly released the virus from the laboratory in which they work. I would put the probability of such a mistake at about 5%, meaning vastly less likely than the alternative of a natural emergence from the wet markets but nevertheless conceivable. Much more plausible in my view is a desire to suppress information about when the virus crossed the species barrier, how the incipient pandemic was handled in its early stages, and then perhaps the magnitude of the challenge bequeathed to the rest of the world.

Consider the context. We know China's claims that COVID-19 entered the human species at the beginning of December is almost surely false. Geneticists who have studied the rate of the contagion and mutations in the virus reckon that the barrier was crossed in November or conceivably even October. We have also seen Xi Jinping embark on a propaganda campaign declaring that China handled everything really well, relative to the US and other countries, and has been leading the global effort to contain the pandemic through aid to developing countries, etc. At a time when China is asserting itself as the most dependable great power in the world, admitting that it mishandled COVID-19 would represent a serious setback.

So while I agree that the intentional development or release of the virus is the stuff of conspiratorial fantasy, it would be a mistake to assume that the information about the pandemic that emanates from China is fully credible. On a scientist-to-scientist level communication may be frank and unimpeded, but anything that passes through the bureaucracy or political organs should be taken with a grain of salt.

I showed this to my chemist boyfriend. I could post what he said, but I won't.

Everyone has an opinion. I've read and heard enough of them to last a lifetime.

I don't think I am disagreeing very much with Simon. I believe he was arguing against the conspiracy theorists, where I am on the same page as he, but went a bit too far in defending Chinese information. I just wanted to narrow the scope of his endorsement to exclude censorship and propaganda. China, after all, is floating the notion that the United States developed and deployed COVID-19.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think I am disagreeing very much with
> Simon. I believe he was arguing against the
> conspiracy theorists, where I am on the same page
> as he, but went a bit too far in defending Chinese
> information. I just wanted to narrow the scope of
> his endorsement to exclude censorship and
> propaganda. China, after all, is floating the
> notion that the United States developed and
> deployed COVID-19.

Given the number of conspiracy theories (CS) Americans are churning out I think its reasonable to expect some coming back at you. I also think its a bit unfair to attribute what one idiot Chinese CS nutter says to the entire country of China. I don't think the Chinese population is buying this CS anyway, at least from what I have heard.

I expected my comments on China to get a bit of push back from Americans. Its good to hear a different perspective from time to time. Aussies don't like a lot of the crap things China does, but we are WAY less aggressive towards China than your average American. About 7% of our population has Chinese ancestry (US - 1.5%). We typically have close to 2 million Chinese students at any one time in Australia so it seems like a lot more.

Right now we are hearing a lot of anti-Chinese sentiments being expressed in the US, much of which is just racist. Your President should definitely not be calling this the "China virus". This is inciting hatred and extremely unhelpful.

Hi Simon,

First, I wouldn't call a deputy director in the Chinese foreign ministry a "nutter." People in his position get fired very fast for saying controversial things that are not approved by the State Council, and he advanced his claims on multiple public occasions. His assertions may be patently ridiculous, but as recent American history indicates one can get a lot of mileage out of such propaganda if it is repeated often enough--even if only to muddy the waters of responsibility.

I agree with you that the US is spouting all sorts of nonsense about China; in fact, I have often been accused on RfM of being an apologist for that country. That, however, is not the truth. I simply know China well and am used to processing Chinese information professionally. My hope would therefore be that we can avoid the shoals on either side and find the sweet spot of accuracy.

It is in that context that I argue that the Chinese government, much like the US government, is trying to manipulate national and world opinion about the pandemic. To concretize the issue, are there specific points of mine--that China tried to silence physicians in early December, that it has still not been entirely forthcoming about the early stages of the pandemic, and that it is now imposing unusually strict censorship on scientific publications about COVID-19--with which you disagree?

Again, I am not claiming that China intentionally developed or spread the virus, merely that it is trying to make the best of a bad situation.

Lot's Wife Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> It is in that context that I argue that the
> Chinese government, much like the US government,
> is trying to manipulate national and world opinion
> about the pandemic. To concretize the issue, are
> there specific points of mine--that China tried to
> silence physicians in early December, that it has
> still not been entirely forthcoming about the
> early stages of the pandemic, and that it is now
> imposing unusually strict censorship on scientific
> publications about COVID-19--with which you
> disagree?
>
> Again, I am not claiming that China intentionally
> developed or spread the virus, merely that it is
> trying to make the best of a bad situation.

I think we basically see eye to eye sort of.

I agree physicians were silenced by local police and probably local authorities in Wuhan. Im not convinced national Chinese authorities were silencing them, although it's easy to blame the entire communist party. Given how rapidly China acted, like every other Asian country,it is very clear they take disease threats extremely seriously. I would have thought at the national level they would want all provinces to report emerging disease threats quickly. To me this suggest incompetence at a city level.

I don't think there is enough solid data at the moment to pinpoint where and when this virus jumped. I suspect there are chinese scientists looking. They found where SARS came from so I'm guessing they'll find where this one came from soon.

I know the FBI and MI6 suspect the Chinese are lying about having 80,000 cases and 3,000 deaths. I still think China's numbers are in the ballpark + or - 25%. I don't think many countries are reporting very accurate numbers right now, particularly countries in the grip of dealing with the pandemic. New York doctors are not even DNA testing people who die in nursing homes and they suspect many have died of COVID-19.

I haven't read claims the Chinese are suppressing publication of research. I am seeing plenty of papers being published by Chinese groups. If a scientific journal like Science or Nature accused China of suppressing publication of research I'd take notice.

There is no question that many countries' data are wide of the mark. The US, as you know, is only now beginning to test the broader population as opposed to those with COVID symptoms, and until that broader research is done it is impossible to know the extent of the infection or to get a sense of progress towards herd immunity. Meanwhile the administration is throwing sand in the air to divert attention and shift responsibility.

That said, I have read a number of reports based on the rate of mutation and the speed of the early pandemic concluding that it is highly unlikely that the illness only entered humans in early December. There were two peer-reviewed articles in particular but I can't find them now and, in any case, don't have the academic background to evaluate them with full confidence. But the official Chinese position is that the infection began in Wuhan on December 8th and Beijing only admitted that human-to-human contagion was possible on January 21st.*

The facts belie those claims. When doctors went public in late December, they were reprimanded by their hospital superiors and at least one physician was compelled by police to sign a confession that his public statements were false.** It is tempting to conclude that that was a local initiative but I don't buy it since these matters are routinely handled by the State Council which, as you know, is the de facto cabinet. There is now a running battle between the Beijing and private individuals all over the country who keep posting screen shots of the banned interviews and the supporting documentation. The national government would not be involved if the dispute were merely local.

Moreover internal Chinese sources state that the earliest infection dates to November 17, three weeks before the original transmission "officially" occurred.*** So this is clearly an instance in which the scientists with whom you might professionally interact are saying things privately that Beijing denies publicly.

Beijing's directive demanding that all research on COVID-19 be submitted for special review was issued on March 25 by the Ministry of Education to at least two universities in Wuhan as well as to Fudan University in Shanghai. [Original document****] It stipulated that all research on the pandemic be scrutinized not only through the usual scholarly process but also by a special "academic body" that would review it "with an emphasis on checking the accuracy of the thesis, as well as whether it is suitable for publication." Thereafter the papers must be sent to the Ministry of Science and Technology for yet another review and may "only be published after [having] been checked by MOST." We thus see the central government imposing two additional levels of vetting, both expressly designed to decide whether the research is "suitable for publication." Two of the universities posted the document online, and last week the central government demanded that it too be deleted on the grounds that it is unsuitable for publication.*****

None of this surprises me. China has always sought to downplay embarrassing news both domestically and internationally, and in April 2014 Xi Jinping elevated that effort to a key element of his national security strategy. There is really nothing secret about the government's determination to "shape" the news. Of course this does not add up to evidence that China designed the virus or intentionally unleashed it--risible, in my opinion, conspiracy theories--but by the same token there is abundant evidence that the central government is dissembling about China's role in the early stages of the pandemic.

That is the one point in your essay with which I would quibble.






*https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/first-covid-19-case-happened-in-november-china-government-records-show-report


**https://nypost.com/2020/04/13/chinese-universities-delete-censorship-notices-for-new-coronavirus-research/


***https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3074991/coronavirus-chinas-first-confirmed-covid-19-case-traced-back

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/first-covid-19-case-happened-in-november-china-government-records-show-report

https://www.livescience.com/first-case-coronavirus-found.html


****http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:L9chDVyS40AJ:kjc.cug.edu.cn/info/1193/5233.htm+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de


*****https://nypost.com/2020/04/13/chinese-universities-delete-censorship-notices-for-new-coronavirus-research/

https://www.ibtimes.com/coronavirus-origin-cover-china-stifles-research-instructions-posted-online-deleted-2957287

https://www.newsweek.com/china-censoring-research-covid-19-origins-deleted-page-wuhan-university-website-suggests-1497467

https://nypost.com/2020/04/13/chinese-universities-delete-censorship-notices-for-new-coronavirus-research/



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 04/14/2020 05:47AM by Lot's Wife.

I'm going to add a bit more about Chinese deception.

If you look at Chinese GDP data, the provincial figures and the national ones have for decades been incompatible. Until quite recently, the central government statisticians literally added up the provincial numbers and then subtracted two percentage points. Then they went on and made other adjustments before publishing their final numbers.

But those reports were also disingenuous. Chinese claims through the late 1990s were almost uniformly of GDP growth of 8% per annum. That was true even in 1997 and 1998, when the East Asian Financial Crisis occurred; and in 2009-2010 the official figures showed almost no impact from the Great Recession. Those data were manifestly false. What analysts did in those and other cases was to go beyond the GDP reports and look at energy utilization, railroad and port traffic, and consumption of industrial metals. If those fell sharply, as they did, then it was clear Beijing was lying and one had to come up with independent estimates. The same sort of thing happened, and still happens, with reports of public protests and political disturbances. Beijing forbids media reports about these things, so foreign governments and research houses gather reports directly from the localities; the numbers are in the tens of thousands per year. Accounting for official dissimulation is thus something investors, businesses, and governments do routinely when analyzing China.

It therefore requires no conspiratorial predilection to see that China is suppressing information about COVID-19. We see solid evidence of deception, and the motivation behind it is clear. There is a distinct, if small, chance that the virus spread because of a laboratory mistake. Beijing does not need to believe that that happened to want to hide information; it just needs to think it possible and want to dampen speculation that could tarnish China's international reputation. In addition, there are grounds--virtual certainty--that the Chinese government has, through not a nut case but its Deputy Minister of Communications, tried to encourage speculation that the United States caused the pandemic; and that Beijing has ordered researchers not to publish analysis without permission from political supervisors seconded from the State Council. All of this is demonstrated not by antagonistic foreigners but by the transcripts of Zhao Lijian's official speeches and by State Council documents as posted by the university researchers who were ordered to shut up.

It is important, always, to avoid reaching for conspiracy theories when explaining important events. Judgments should arise from concrete facts rather than paranoid fantasy. Yet by the same token, one cannot ignore what the evidence clearly indicates. In this instance that means acknowledging that Beijing has not been forthcoming about the evolution of the pandemic within its borders.

He claims many viruses are named after the location where the virus originated. But he's not even polite enough to call it the china virus. He calls it the Chinese virus. Chinese is not a location.

As to whether China is forthright with its numbers . . . maybe you'll get to use your science background to expose another lying organization.

"I am hungry for a time when we don't fire Scientists because we don't like what they are saying."

Yet many experts in epidemiology are being ignored because they question government action, because of lack of data, and because lockdowns can make things worse.

Policy based on 4% mortality, but 4% of what? We have no idea how many have been infected, as many are asymptomatic.

You would think the media would be interviewing this guy more:

"John P.A. Ioannidis is professor of medicine and professor of epidemiology and population health, as well as professor by courtesy of biomedical data science at Stanford University School of Medicine, professor by courtesy of statistics at Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences, and co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) at Stanford University."

But he dares to question things:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/

Here's another good site which discusses many issues:

https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/

I took a look at John P.A. Ioannidis' piece. It was written about three weeks ago when there were a handful of deaths and people complaining about shutdowns. He was out of step with the majority of his peers then and even more now. There are far fewer skeptics now than there were three weeks ago. There is no doubt if the US had not introduced tight social distancing controls you would likely have 5 to 10 million cases now instead of 600,000.

Have you reviewed Dr. Drew's work and commentary on the virus?

There's nothing left to review. Pinsky has apologized for his statements--"I got it wrong"--and withdrawn them.

Simon, thank you. This is such a great article.