Why would anyone, with half a brain, think that the restrictions on Chinese people, travelling from China, are anything to do with (following the science) firstly and foremost trying to prevent the further spread of COVID. I don’t pretend to know the answer, but I suspect a ‘certain’ amount of punishment, revenge and power politics at play. And, who knows maybe, if it forces China to be more open, honest and forthcoming, about the origins of COVID, then maybe, maybe, that’s no bad thing ? Or, it could just make things worse ! Of course, we, in the ‘West’, might also be a little more open, honest and forthcoming about why we’re asking for restrictions on Chinese travellers.
Why would anyone, with half a brain, think that the restrictions on Chinese people, travelling from China, are anything to do with (following the science) firstly and foremost trying to prevent the further spread of COVID. I don’t pretend to know the answer, but I suspect a ‘certain’ amount of punishment, revenge and power politics at play. And, who knows maybe, if it forces China to be more open, honest and forthcoming, about the origins of COVID, then maybe, maybe, that’s no bad thing ? Or, it could just make things worse ! Of course, we, in the ‘West’, might also be a little more open, honest and forthcoming about why we’re asking for restrictions on Chinese travellers.
Last edited 1 year ago by Tom Lewis
R Wright
1 year ago
The state of exception continues. Will nobody rid me of these turbulent scientists?
R Wright
1 year ago
The state of exception continues. Will nobody rid me of these turbulent scientists?
j watson
1 year ago
I think the reason for the travel restrictions is much more banal than the semi-scaremongering in this article. I think it’s because politicians feel the public wants them to do something, or at least be seen to do something. Hence something with the minimum impact on our own population.
Nonsense really and not driven by science, but sometimes politics works like this.
That said there might be some validity in western countries getting a chance to test some Chinese to confirm/check if there is a new variant of concern. On this one can see we might be unwise to trust the CCP to tell us if that is what they had found. This doesn’t mean we then career headlong back into Lockdowns and panic, but does mean we check out any new variant for how the immunity across the West might respond calmly.
That goes without saying: you have to do something, and this is “something”. It has be the refrain for the past three years.
j watson
1 year ago
I think the reason for the travel restrictions is much more banal than the semi-scaremongering in this article. I think it’s because politicians feel the public wants them to do something, or at least be seen to do something. Hence something with the minimum impact on our own population.
Nonsense really and not driven by science, but sometimes politics works like this.
That said there might be some validity in western countries getting a chance to test some Chinese to confirm/check if there is a new variant of concern. On this one can see we might be unwise to trust the CCP to tell us if that is what they had found. This doesn’t mean we then career headlong back into Lockdowns and panic, but does mean we check out any new variant for how the immunity across the West might respond calmly.
Edward De Beukelaer
1 year ago
The last two chapters of this article are the essence of the debate. The rest is almost irrelevant mumbo jumbo (even though it should not be) This may be due to that fact that he authors forgot to mention that the mainstream ‘scientific’ narrative is/has principally been developed by the industry. It is a narrative of investment and return very cleverly and beautifully irrestibly wrapped into a ‘health narrative’. Note a Goldman Sachs report has shown that the drug industry does not invest in medicine that cure (only medicines that treat) https://www.levinperconti.com/blog/big-banking-recommends-drug-companies-avoid-making-effective-drugs/
more articles in the BMJ on the influence of pharma on our health care…
Thank you for the link to the Goldman Sachs report
Edward De Beukelaer
1 year ago
The last two chapters of this article are the essence of the debate. The rest is almost irrelevant mumbo jumbo (even though it should not be) This may be due to that fact that he authors forgot to mention that the mainstream ‘scientific’ narrative is/has principally been developed by the industry. It is a narrative of investment and return very cleverly and beautifully irrestibly wrapped into a ‘health narrative’. Note a Goldman Sachs report has shown that the drug industry does not invest in medicine that cure (only medicines that treat) https://www.levinperconti.com/blog/big-banking-recommends-drug-companies-avoid-making-effective-drugs/
more articles in the BMJ on the influence of pharma on our health care…
Billy Bob
1 year ago
This is Chinas doing in the first place, when they lied about the spread of the new virus in the early stages. Let them deal with their sick, why should other countries pay to treat Chinese citizens after the damage the CCP has caused?
Its unlikely that they will be consigned to the queue of thousands of desperately ill people that haven’t yet succumbed whilst waiting for an NHS ambulance. We need to require evidence of robust travel insurance and let the private sector take the strain. After all, it has the benefit of a great many of the country’s university trained ex NHS nurses and doctors lured by higher pay and working conditions.
Its unlikely that they will be consigned to the queue of thousands of desperately ill people that haven’t yet succumbed whilst waiting for an NHS ambulance. We need to require evidence of robust travel insurance and let the private sector take the strain. After all, it has the benefit of a great many of the country’s university trained ex NHS nurses and doctors lured by higher pay and working conditions.
Billy Bob
1 year ago
This is Chinas doing in the first place, when they lied about the spread of the new virus in the early stages. Let them deal with their sick, why should other countries pay to treat Chinese citizens after the damage the CCP has caused?
Peter Johnson
1 year ago
We are into “The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf” territory. Our health authorities have no credibility left at all – God help us if we have a true pandemic and they really do need people to comply. Half the population- including me – will just ignore them.
Peter Johnson
1 year ago
We are into “The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf” territory. Our health authorities have no credibility left at all – God help us if we have a true pandemic and they really do need people to comply. Half the population- including me – will just ignore them.
Fran Martinez
1 year ago
We definitely have learnt nothing. And tge fact that sll the countries decided to impose this restron China basically at the same times shows that these restrictions have nothing to do with covid/flu (who can tell the difference without testing?) and something else is at play.
Sad days indeed. And to think that just a few weeks ago those people were asking us to ‘forgive and move on’ and now they are doing it all again.
Fran Martinez
1 year ago
We definitely have learnt nothing. And tge fact that sll the countries decided to impose this restron China basically at the same times shows that these restrictions have nothing to do with covid/flu (who can tell the difference without testing?) and something else is at play.
Sad days indeed. And to think that just a few weeks ago those people were asking us to ‘forgive and move on’ and now they are doing it all again.
R S Foster
1 year ago
…revenge…and punishment. And quite right too. I’m all for locking them all up with the Celestial Emperor and his minions until they see sense and remove him, TBH..!
R S Foster
1 year ago
…revenge…and punishment. And quite right too. I’m all for locking them all up with the Celestial Emperor and his minions until they see sense and remove him, TBH..!
Karl Juhnke
1 year ago
The original virus came from China. A new virus could come from China. Our experts allowed the first virus in. Perhaps they are replaying what happened last time: pretend to be terrified. Pretend to take it all seriously and then allow it in. Then mandatory everything. The West will give in to China and we will have plandemic 2. Hope I am wrong.
Allowed the virus in? The whole point of the article, which has clearly sailed way above your head, is that it’s impossible to prevent an infectious virus from circulating. Ask Australia and NZ how trying to stop it worked out for them.
Allowed the virus in? The whole point of the article, which has clearly sailed way above your head, is that it’s impossible to prevent an infectious virus from circulating. Ask Australia and NZ how trying to stop it worked out for them.
Last edited 1 year ago by Rocky Martiano
Karl Juhnke
1 year ago
The original virus came from China. A new virus could come from China. Our experts allowed the first virus in. Perhaps they are replaying what happened last time: pretend to be terrified. Pretend to take it all seriously and then allow it in. Then mandatory everything. The West will give in to China and we will have plandemic 2. Hope I am wrong.
Last edited 1 year ago by Karl Juhnke
Andrew Boughton
1 year ago
Great piece, look forward to reading the book. Thomas Fazi is the most objective and incisive observer among political journalists today. It’s a riveting subject for me personally, having spent the first five years of life living in the vast grounds of our country’s only purpose-built pandemic and infectious diseases hospital, where my father was a resident doctor. Surrounded by barbed wire topped chain link fence, it wascself-sufficient for the medical staff, with oan on-site nurses’ multi-storey apartment block with swimming pool, cottages for doctors’ families, an 18 hole golf course, 12 tennis courts, ocean beach (Little Bay), billiards rooms, a small farm and local market gardens. Dad later became our country’s Chief Wuarantine Officer and CMO and a world authority on vaccines and public health. A brilliant doctor and a good man. And the last person on earth to determine public policy. Why? Those who see people die on their watch can never be objective about policy. They become absolutists. Beneficent Stalinists. Because it’s inevitably all intensely personal and emotional, despite all their scientific training and intentions of objectivity. Moreover, all hospitals are “capsules,” mini-worlds that for doctors become universal.
Steve Elliott
1 year ago
Have I got this right? They are asking for travellers from China to have two negative tests before they come. They are not stopping travellers from China entering the UK. Is that right? They are not locking down China as it says in the title of this piece. It’s hardly a severe restriction and is a sensible measure. I fully understand that it won’t stop new variants coming to the UK but if it slows down the infection rate it must be a good thing bearing in mind the warnings of overload already being given by NHS Trusts.
If two negative tests are required from travellers from China, why not from everywhere else? And then straight away we are in the economically damaging loop, where people are afraid to travel in case they are stranded on their return leg.
Isn’t the point about China that we know that there are a very large number of cases there? Some European countries are already applying restrictions. It’s a matter of risk I suppose.
There’s going to be an economic hit for the UK anyway if we have a large number of cases here.
Would you care if there were a high number of flu cases in China? Without a test it’s very hatd to tell the difference, with the flu usually being more severe nowadays. You are just afraid of this one respiratory virus because we have all been conditioned to.
Would you care if there were a high number of flu cases in China? Without a test it’s very hatd to tell the difference, with the flu usually being more severe nowadays. You are just afraid of this one respiratory virus because we have all been conditioned to.
Isn’t the point about China that we know that there are a very large number of cases there? Some European countries are already applying restrictions. It’s a matter of risk I suppose.
There’s going to be an economic hit for the UK anyway if we have a large number of cases here.
What you are telling me is that people with COVID from China are more dangerous than people with COVID from Germany or the US or Korea, and that keeping them at bay will help us… do what?
And let not forget the recommendation to mask up that they mentioned yesterday.
If two negative tests are required from travellers from China, why not from everywhere else? And then straight away we are in the economically damaging loop, where people are afraid to travel in case they are stranded on their return leg.
What you are telling me is that people with COVID from China are more dangerous than people with COVID from Germany or the US or Korea, and that keeping them at bay will help us… do what?
And let not forget the recommendation to mask up that they mentioned yesterday.
Steve Elliott
1 year ago
Have I got this right? They are asking for travellers from China to have two negative tests before they come. They are not stopping travellers from China entering the UK. Is that right? They are not locking down China as it says in the title of this piece. It’s hardly a severe restriction and is a sensible measure. I fully understand that it won’t stop new variants coming to the UK but if it slows down the infection rate it must be a good thing bearing in mind the warnings of overload already being given by NHS Trusts.
George Wells
1 year ago
I have it from colleagues in China that many people are sick (and many are hospitalised) from Covid right now and that restrictions on travel have been removed. To argue, as the authors do, that now is the time to load some of these people onto the NHS (in the busy winter season), is plainly stupid.
Many people in Ireland are sick with Covid (or other respiratory viruses) at the moment and Irish hospitals are full to overflowing. Are we to ban travel from Ireland on the same basis? It seems unlikely that anyone capable of undertaking a long distance flight, who presumably has a good reason for travelling, is particularly likely to immediately require NHS treatment. But we definitely won’t be able to afford an NHS if we keep trashing the economy.
Please, read the article again. The point being made is that travel restrictions will not stop the virus spreading. They didn’t before and they won’t again. That’s the key point, along with the lack of evidence that there’d be anything coming from China that (1) isn’t already here and (2) we don’t already have much higher level levels of resistance to in the population, due to previous high levels of exposure and better vaccines (neither of which they have in China).
I think you are missing the point. It is true that any virus (human, animal or plant) floating around in the world will eventually reach the UK. They are probably already here as you say. The point is to slow the infection rate down so we can cope with it. The more infective people in the population the higher the infection rate. If one infected person gets on the plane in China and travels 12 hours in a sealed tube by the time he gets off in the UK he’ll be accompanied by 10 others.
I’m not a fan of the NHS. I think it’s failing us. I feel sick every time I see one of those rainbow “Thank you NHS posters”. But it’s all we’ve got and we have to try to stop it being overwhelmed.
I’m quite sure that between them the Foreign office and the Home Office will screw up the arrangements but otherwise it’s a sensible and not overly restrictive policy. They are not locking down China.
And when will this wonderful time when the NHS can cope arrive? What is the NHS doing with the extra time, given that any restriction has some economic impact, so is not cost-free? Slowing the spread of the virus doesn’t seem to have done much for us up until now, even accepting it’s actually ever been achieved.
How does it slow the infection rate? We already have the virus spreading around the UK, it will be back every winter along with flu and the other coronaviruses etc. People can still travel from China, they just need a test, which I assume is done in China?
I might have missed something though, have our government provided some statistics about how it will slow the infection rate?
Thanks Paul, My main argument with the article is that he refers to “Locking Down China”. But, as you say, people can still travel from China but they must have a test first which doesn’t seem to be a huge imposition. It’s not really locking down China.
You may be right about the infection rate. My thinking was that if you introduce one infective person into a population and that person infects two others in the first week then after 8 weeks you’ve got 256 people infected. If you start with 10 infective people entering the population then after 8 weeks you’ve got 2560 infections. So I figure you need to keep the number of infective people entering a population to a minimum. Many of the Chinese entering the UK will be students going to University which may be a good way to spread it around, mixing with lots of others students and so on.
I seems common sense to me that the more infective people entering the country the more infections there will be.
To me, asking for visitors from China to get tested before they come here seems proportional to the risk. It’s not a great imposition and may help.
You are right on that point, sounds like a click bait headline. I believe the testing also only applies to direct flights from China.
I think spread is slightly more complex than your example. It is mainly airborne spread, not person to person. Keeping out crowded indoor spaces is probably the best thing anyone vulnerable to the virus can do, assuming they are already vaccinated.
It is already in the air in all these crowded spaces along with flu virus etc.
Constantly bringing in pointless restrictions damages economies and is especially harmful to poorer people.
Steve, how can it be “common sense” when you have already plenty of people here who can transmit COVID freely and, very likely, do so? I don’t know what the latest statistics on infections are, but let’s say that 1 in 35 people has now COVID, that is about 2 mil out of a population of 70 mil.
Say 100000 chinese people arrive in the next could of weeks, all with COVID, that would mean an increase of 5% of the infected, while the indigenous COVID may have increased to 1/20, i.e. 3.5 mil.
As you see we are talking about a difference of several orders of magnitude. A bit like, you fall into the sea, but then get annoyed because someone hits you with a water gun as it makes you wetter.
Which Covid are you referring to? China searched for and incubated the original strain which we’re relatively chummy with now – well those with young, robust immune systems. What may be imported now is anybody’s guess (due to the lack of curiosity of the WHO have been as useful as a chocolate teaspoon throughout) Consider the vulnerable and your grannies and grandads who won’t ‘get over’ a visitation from a more rapacious strain.
Which Covid are you referring to? China searched for and incubated the original strain which we’re relatively chummy with now – well those with young, robust immune systems. What may be imported now is anybody’s guess (due to the lack of curiosity of the WHO have been as useful as a chocolate teaspoon throughout) Consider the vulnerable and your grannies and grandads who won’t ‘get over’ a visitation from a more rapacious strain.
You are right on that point, sounds like a click bait headline. I believe the testing also only applies to direct flights from China.
I think spread is slightly more complex than your example. It is mainly airborne spread, not person to person. Keeping out crowded indoor spaces is probably the best thing anyone vulnerable to the virus can do, assuming they are already vaccinated.
It is already in the air in all these crowded spaces along with flu virus etc.
Constantly bringing in pointless restrictions damages economies and is especially harmful to poorer people.
Steve, how can it be “common sense” when you have already plenty of people here who can transmit COVID freely and, very likely, do so? I don’t know what the latest statistics on infections are, but let’s say that 1 in 35 people has now COVID, that is about 2 mil out of a population of 70 mil.
Say 100000 chinese people arrive in the next could of weeks, all with COVID, that would mean an increase of 5% of the infected, while the indigenous COVID may have increased to 1/20, i.e. 3.5 mil.
As you see we are talking about a difference of several orders of magnitude. A bit like, you fall into the sea, but then get annoyed because someone hits you with a water gun as it makes you wetter.
There are many viruses around, any one of which can and do mutate all the time. The logic of stopping something that might happen, is that we should never let anyone travel anywhere.
There are many viruses around, any one of which can and do mutate all the time. The logic of stopping something that might happen, is that we should never let anyone travel anywhere.
Thanks Paul, My main argument with the article is that he refers to “Locking Down China”. But, as you say, people can still travel from China but they must have a test first which doesn’t seem to be a huge imposition. It’s not really locking down China.
You may be right about the infection rate. My thinking was that if you introduce one infective person into a population and that person infects two others in the first week then after 8 weeks you’ve got 256 people infected. If you start with 10 infective people entering the population then after 8 weeks you’ve got 2560 infections. So I figure you need to keep the number of infective people entering a population to a minimum. Many of the Chinese entering the UK will be students going to University which may be a good way to spread it around, mixing with lots of others students and so on.
I seems common sense to me that the more infective people entering the country the more infections there will be.
To me, asking for visitors from China to get tested before they come here seems proportional to the risk. It’s not a great imposition and may help.
‘Slow the infection rate’ … Do you have any data that shows that these restrictions indeed have slowed down the infection rate in any meaningful way? Or are you just repeating the “flatten the curve” propaganda that we were fed in 2020,
So please answer the comments above as to why someone from China with Covid is more dangerous to the NHS than someone from Ireland, the US, Korea or anywhere else?
And when will this wonderful time when the NHS can cope arrive? What is the NHS doing with the extra time, given that any restriction has some economic impact, so is not cost-free? Slowing the spread of the virus doesn’t seem to have done much for us up until now, even accepting it’s actually ever been achieved.
How does it slow the infection rate? We already have the virus spreading around the UK, it will be back every winter along with flu and the other coronaviruses etc. People can still travel from China, they just need a test, which I assume is done in China?
I might have missed something though, have our government provided some statistics about how it will slow the infection rate?
‘Slow the infection rate’ … Do you have any data that shows that these restrictions indeed have slowed down the infection rate in any meaningful way? Or are you just repeating the “flatten the curve” propaganda that we were fed in 2020,
So please answer the comments above as to why someone from China with Covid is more dangerous to the NHS than someone from Ireland, the US, Korea or anywhere else?
What I remember is that the West allowed the virus in via China whilst pretending to take it seriously and then locked us up and forced the jab. More of the same coming I think.
I think you are missing the point. It is true that any virus (human, animal or plant) floating around in the world will eventually reach the UK. They are probably already here as you say. The point is to slow the infection rate down so we can cope with it. The more infective people in the population the higher the infection rate. If one infected person gets on the plane in China and travels 12 hours in a sealed tube by the time he gets off in the UK he’ll be accompanied by 10 others.
I’m not a fan of the NHS. I think it’s failing us. I feel sick every time I see one of those rainbow “Thank you NHS posters”. But it’s all we’ve got and we have to try to stop it being overwhelmed.
I’m quite sure that between them the Foreign office and the Home Office will screw up the arrangements but otherwise it’s a sensible and not overly restrictive policy. They are not locking down China.
What I remember is that the West allowed the virus in via China whilst pretending to take it seriously and then locked us up and forced the jab. More of the same coming I think.
If you lock up people long enough and then allow them to mix there will always be a huge surge in ‘infectious illness’ that is normal and natural.
Politicians should concentrate on making people healthy rather than fire-brigade trying to cure infectious illness: our modern health care narrative has now failed long enough for us trying to come to grips with this: there are ore chronically ill people now than there ever have been which brings its own share of acute pressures… As long and you think ‘infection’ – illness you will miss the point completely and remain a good client for the very clever pharma industry
I get your point about big pharma and that’s a valid consideration. But at the end of the day letting a possibly rapacious and unknown strain tour the country will sacrifice those who should have our protection, not, I suspect, the young and fit commentators here (although not always) who have a robust immune system.
I get your point about big pharma and that’s a valid consideration. But at the end of the day letting a possibly rapacious and unknown strain tour the country will sacrifice those who should have our protection, not, I suspect, the young and fit commentators here (although not always) who have a robust immune system.
Many people in Ireland are sick with Covid (or other respiratory viruses) at the moment and Irish hospitals are full to overflowing. Are we to ban travel from Ireland on the same basis? It seems unlikely that anyone capable of undertaking a long distance flight, who presumably has a good reason for travelling, is particularly likely to immediately require NHS treatment. But we definitely won’t be able to afford an NHS if we keep trashing the economy.
Please, read the article again. The point being made is that travel restrictions will not stop the virus spreading. They didn’t before and they won’t again. That’s the key point, along with the lack of evidence that there’d be anything coming from China that (1) isn’t already here and (2) we don’t already have much higher level levels of resistance to in the population, due to previous high levels of exposure and better vaccines (neither of which they have in China).
If you lock up people long enough and then allow them to mix there will always be a huge surge in ‘infectious illness’ that is normal and natural.
Politicians should concentrate on making people healthy rather than fire-brigade trying to cure infectious illness: our modern health care narrative has now failed long enough for us trying to come to grips with this: there are ore chronically ill people now than there ever have been which brings its own share of acute pressures… As long and you think ‘infection’ – illness you will miss the point completely and remain a good client for the very clever pharma industry
George Wells
1 year ago
I have it from colleagues in China that many people are sick (and many are hospitalised) from Covid right now and that restrictions on travel have been removed. To argue, as the authors do, that now is the time to load some of these people onto the NHS (in the busy winter season), is plainly stupid.
Last edited 1 year ago by George Wells
Gary Baxter
1 year ago
It’s only natural and perfectly reasonable for people outside of China to fear for a repeat of Wuhan virus spread exactly three years ago. The world simply can’t afford another three-year long pandemics.
No political diktat can prevent the spread of a virus. Only government imposed restrictions turned Covid into a three-year long pandemic and economic catastrophe, with the resulting backlog in the treatment of other conditions, and reduced resistance to other respiratory viruses, contributing to the excess mortality we now see in many western countries. There is no reason to believe a new variant is proportionately more likely to emerge from China than from anywhere else: if anything a new variant is surely more likely to emerge in a country where most of the population has already been exposed to Omicron, or earlier variants. These travel restrictions make no sense, are for show only, and trap us in an economically damaging loop of pointless intervention.
It might be natural but it’s not the point. There’s no evidence of any significantly new variant in China, and the indications are that we already have what they’ve got; and, most importantly, travel restrictions wouldn’t stop any new variants arriving anyway.
No political diktat can prevent the spread of a virus. Only government imposed restrictions turned Covid into a three-year long pandemic and economic catastrophe, with the resulting backlog in the treatment of other conditions, and reduced resistance to other respiratory viruses, contributing to the excess mortality we now see in many western countries. There is no reason to believe a new variant is proportionately more likely to emerge from China than from anywhere else: if anything a new variant is surely more likely to emerge in a country where most of the population has already been exposed to Omicron, or earlier variants. These travel restrictions make no sense, are for show only, and trap us in an economically damaging loop of pointless intervention.
It might be natural but it’s not the point. There’s no evidence of any significantly new variant in China, and the indications are that we already have what they’ve got; and, most importantly, travel restrictions wouldn’t stop any new variants arriving anyway.
Yes Gary. They invented the last one in hand with Fauci. Why not another and another?
Gary Baxter
1 year ago
It’s only natural and perfectly reasonable for people outside of China to fear for a repeat of Wuhan virus spread exactly three years ago. The world simply can’t afford another three-year long pandemics.
Why would anyone, with half a brain, think that the restrictions on Chinese people, travelling from China, are anything to do with (following the science) firstly and foremost trying to prevent the further spread of COVID. I don’t pretend to know the answer, but I suspect a ‘certain’ amount of punishment, revenge and power politics at play. And, who knows maybe, if it forces China to be more open, honest and forthcoming, about the origins of COVID, then maybe, maybe, that’s no bad thing ? Or, it could just make things worse ! Of course, we, in the ‘West’, might also be a little more open, honest and forthcoming about why we’re asking for restrictions on Chinese travellers.
And what about the recommendation to mask up??
And what about the recommendation to mask up??
Why would anyone, with half a brain, think that the restrictions on Chinese people, travelling from China, are anything to do with (following the science) firstly and foremost trying to prevent the further spread of COVID. I don’t pretend to know the answer, but I suspect a ‘certain’ amount of punishment, revenge and power politics at play. And, who knows maybe, if it forces China to be more open, honest and forthcoming, about the origins of COVID, then maybe, maybe, that’s no bad thing ? Or, it could just make things worse ! Of course, we, in the ‘West’, might also be a little more open, honest and forthcoming about why we’re asking for restrictions on Chinese travellers.
The state of exception continues. Will nobody rid me of these turbulent scientists?
The state of exception continues. Will nobody rid me of these turbulent scientists?
I think the reason for the travel restrictions is much more banal than the semi-scaremongering in this article. I think it’s because politicians feel the public wants them to do something, or at least be seen to do something. Hence something with the minimum impact on our own population.
Nonsense really and not driven by science, but sometimes politics works like this.
That said there might be some validity in western countries getting a chance to test some Chinese to confirm/check if there is a new variant of concern. On this one can see we might be unwise to trust the CCP to tell us if that is what they had found. This doesn’t mean we then career headlong back into Lockdowns and panic, but does mean we check out any new variant for how the immunity across the West might respond calmly.
That goes without saying: you have to do something, and this is “something”. It has be the refrain for the past three years.
Nassim Taleb’s theory of naive interventionism.
Nassim Taleb’s theory of naive interventionism.
That goes without saying: you have to do something, and this is “something”. It has be the refrain for the past three years.
I think the reason for the travel restrictions is much more banal than the semi-scaremongering in this article. I think it’s because politicians feel the public wants them to do something, or at least be seen to do something. Hence something with the minimum impact on our own population.
Nonsense really and not driven by science, but sometimes politics works like this.
That said there might be some validity in western countries getting a chance to test some Chinese to confirm/check if there is a new variant of concern. On this one can see we might be unwise to trust the CCP to tell us if that is what they had found. This doesn’t mean we then career headlong back into Lockdowns and panic, but does mean we check out any new variant for how the immunity across the West might respond calmly.
The last two chapters of this article are the essence of the debate. The rest is almost irrelevant mumbo jumbo (even though it should not be) This may be due to that fact that he authors forgot to mention that the mainstream ‘scientific’ narrative is/has principally been developed by the industry. It is a narrative of investment and return very cleverly and beautifully irrestibly wrapped into a ‘health narrative’. Note a Goldman Sachs report has shown that the drug industry does not invest in medicine that cure (only medicines that treat) https://www.levinperconti.com/blog/big-banking-recommends-drug-companies-avoid-making-effective-drugs/
more articles in the BMJ on the influence of pharma on our health care…
Thank you for the link to the Goldman Sachs report
Thank you for the link to the Goldman Sachs report
The last two chapters of this article are the essence of the debate. The rest is almost irrelevant mumbo jumbo (even though it should not be) This may be due to that fact that he authors forgot to mention that the mainstream ‘scientific’ narrative is/has principally been developed by the industry. It is a narrative of investment and return very cleverly and beautifully irrestibly wrapped into a ‘health narrative’. Note a Goldman Sachs report has shown that the drug industry does not invest in medicine that cure (only medicines that treat) https://www.levinperconti.com/blog/big-banking-recommends-drug-companies-avoid-making-effective-drugs/
more articles in the BMJ on the influence of pharma on our health care…
This is Chinas doing in the first place, when they lied about the spread of the new virus in the early stages. Let them deal with their sick, why should other countries pay to treat Chinese citizens after the damage the CCP has caused?
Its unlikely that they will be consigned to the queue of thousands of desperately ill people that haven’t yet succumbed whilst waiting for an NHS ambulance. We need to require evidence of robust travel insurance and let the private sector take the strain. After all, it has the benefit of a great many of the country’s university trained ex NHS nurses and doctors lured by higher pay and working conditions.
Its unlikely that they will be consigned to the queue of thousands of desperately ill people that haven’t yet succumbed whilst waiting for an NHS ambulance. We need to require evidence of robust travel insurance and let the private sector take the strain. After all, it has the benefit of a great many of the country’s university trained ex NHS nurses and doctors lured by higher pay and working conditions.
This is Chinas doing in the first place, when they lied about the spread of the new virus in the early stages. Let them deal with their sick, why should other countries pay to treat Chinese citizens after the damage the CCP has caused?
We are into “The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf” territory. Our health authorities have no credibility left at all – God help us if we have a true pandemic and they really do need people to comply. Half the population- including me – will just ignore them.
We are into “The Little Boy Who Cried Wolf” territory. Our health authorities have no credibility left at all – God help us if we have a true pandemic and they really do need people to comply. Half the population- including me – will just ignore them.
We definitely have learnt nothing. And tge fact that sll the countries decided to impose this restron China basically at the same times shows that these restrictions have nothing to do with covid/flu (who can tell the difference without testing?) and something else is at play.
Sad days indeed. And to think that just a few weeks ago those people were asking us to ‘forgive and move on’ and now they are doing it all again.
We definitely have learnt nothing. And tge fact that sll the countries decided to impose this restron China basically at the same times shows that these restrictions have nothing to do with covid/flu (who can tell the difference without testing?) and something else is at play.
Sad days indeed. And to think that just a few weeks ago those people were asking us to ‘forgive and move on’ and now they are doing it all again.
…revenge…and punishment. And quite right too. I’m all for locking them all up with the Celestial Emperor and his minions until they see sense and remove him, TBH..!
…revenge…and punishment. And quite right too. I’m all for locking them all up with the Celestial Emperor and his minions until they see sense and remove him, TBH..!
The original virus came from China. A new virus could come from China. Our experts allowed the first virus in. Perhaps they are replaying what happened last time: pretend to be terrified. Pretend to take it all seriously and then allow it in. Then mandatory everything. The West will give in to China and we will have plandemic 2. Hope I am wrong.
Allowed the virus in? The whole point of the article, which has clearly sailed way above your head, is that it’s impossible to prevent an infectious virus from circulating. Ask Australia and NZ how trying to stop it worked out for them.
Allowed the virus in? The whole point of the article, which has clearly sailed way above your head, is that it’s impossible to prevent an infectious virus from circulating. Ask Australia and NZ how trying to stop it worked out for them.
The original virus came from China. A new virus could come from China. Our experts allowed the first virus in. Perhaps they are replaying what happened last time: pretend to be terrified. Pretend to take it all seriously and then allow it in. Then mandatory everything. The West will give in to China and we will have plandemic 2. Hope I am wrong.
Great piece, look forward to reading the book. Thomas Fazi is the most objective and incisive observer among political journalists today. It’s a riveting subject for me personally, having spent the first five years of life living in the vast grounds of our country’s only purpose-built pandemic and infectious diseases hospital, where my father was a resident doctor. Surrounded by barbed wire topped chain link fence, it wascself-sufficient for the medical staff, with oan on-site nurses’ multi-storey apartment block with swimming pool, cottages for doctors’ families, an 18 hole golf course, 12 tennis courts, ocean beach (Little Bay), billiards rooms, a small farm and local market gardens. Dad later became our country’s Chief Wuarantine Officer and CMO and a world authority on vaccines and public health. A brilliant doctor and a good man. And the last person on earth to determine public policy. Why? Those who see people die on their watch can never be objective about policy. They become absolutists. Beneficent Stalinists. Because it’s inevitably all intensely personal and emotional, despite all their scientific training and intentions of objectivity. Moreover, all hospitals are “capsules,” mini-worlds that for doctors become universal.
Have I got this right? They are asking for travellers from China to have two negative tests before they come. They are not stopping travellers from China entering the UK. Is that right? They are not locking down China as it says in the title of this piece. It’s hardly a severe restriction and is a sensible measure. I fully understand that it won’t stop new variants coming to the UK but if it slows down the infection rate it must be a good thing bearing in mind the warnings of overload already being given by NHS Trusts.
If two negative tests are required from travellers from China, why not from everywhere else? And then straight away we are in the economically damaging loop, where people are afraid to travel in case they are stranded on their return leg.
Isn’t the point about China that we know that there are a very large number of cases there? Some European countries are already applying restrictions. It’s a matter of risk I suppose.
There’s going to be an economic hit for the UK anyway if we have a large number of cases here.
Would you care if there were a high number of flu cases in China? Without a test it’s very hatd to tell the difference, with the flu usually being more severe nowadays. You are just afraid of this one respiratory virus because we have all been conditioned to.
Would you care if there were a high number of flu cases in China? Without a test it’s very hatd to tell the difference, with the flu usually being more severe nowadays. You are just afraid of this one respiratory virus because we have all been conditioned to.
Isn’t the point about China that we know that there are a very large number of cases there? Some European countries are already applying restrictions. It’s a matter of risk I suppose.
There’s going to be an economic hit for the UK anyway if we have a large number of cases here.
What you are telling me is that people with COVID from China are more dangerous than people with COVID from Germany or the US or Korea, and that keeping them at bay will help us… do what?
And let not forget the recommendation to mask up that they mentioned yesterday.
That’s the thing. If you’re from Germany or Holland, we don’t care if you have Covid, but if you’re from China, well we can’t have that.
That’s the thing. If you’re from Germany or Holland, we don’t care if you have Covid, but if you’re from China, well we can’t have that.
If two negative tests are required from travellers from China, why not from everywhere else? And then straight away we are in the economically damaging loop, where people are afraid to travel in case they are stranded on their return leg.
What you are telling me is that people with COVID from China are more dangerous than people with COVID from Germany or the US or Korea, and that keeping them at bay will help us… do what?
And let not forget the recommendation to mask up that they mentioned yesterday.
Have I got this right? They are asking for travellers from China to have two negative tests before they come. They are not stopping travellers from China entering the UK. Is that right? They are not locking down China as it says in the title of this piece. It’s hardly a severe restriction and is a sensible measure. I fully understand that it won’t stop new variants coming to the UK but if it slows down the infection rate it must be a good thing bearing in mind the warnings of overload already being given by NHS Trusts.
I have it from colleagues in China that many people are sick (and many are hospitalised) from Covid right now and that restrictions on travel have been removed. To argue, as the authors do, that now is the time to load some of these people onto the NHS (in the busy winter season), is plainly stupid.
Many people in Ireland are sick with Covid (or other respiratory viruses) at the moment and Irish hospitals are full to overflowing. Are we to ban travel from Ireland on the same basis? It seems unlikely that anyone capable of undertaking a long distance flight, who presumably has a good reason for travelling, is particularly likely to immediately require NHS treatment. But we definitely won’t be able to afford an NHS if we keep trashing the economy.
Please, read the article again. The point being made is that travel restrictions will not stop the virus spreading. They didn’t before and they won’t again. That’s the key point, along with the lack of evidence that there’d be anything coming from China that (1) isn’t already here and (2) we don’t already have much higher level levels of resistance to in the population, due to previous high levels of exposure and better vaccines (neither of which they have in China).
I think you are missing the point. It is true that any virus (human, animal or plant) floating around in the world will eventually reach the UK. They are probably already here as you say. The point is to slow the infection rate down so we can cope with it. The more infective people in the population the higher the infection rate. If one infected person gets on the plane in China and travels 12 hours in a sealed tube by the time he gets off in the UK he’ll be accompanied by 10 others.
I’m not a fan of the NHS. I think it’s failing us. I feel sick every time I see one of those rainbow “Thank you NHS posters”. But it’s all we’ve got and we have to try to stop it being overwhelmed.
I’m quite sure that between them the Foreign office and the Home Office will screw up the arrangements but otherwise it’s a sensible and not overly restrictive policy. They are not locking down China.
And when will this wonderful time when the NHS can cope arrive? What is the NHS doing with the extra time, given that any restriction has some economic impact, so is not cost-free? Slowing the spread of the virus doesn’t seem to have done much for us up until now, even accepting it’s actually ever been achieved.
It is a bit like not getting splashed with water when you come out of the bath for fear of getting wetter.
How does it slow the infection rate? We already have the virus spreading around the UK, it will be back every winter along with flu and the other coronaviruses etc. People can still travel from China, they just need a test, which I assume is done in China?
I might have missed something though, have our government provided some statistics about how it will slow the infection rate?
Thanks Paul, My main argument with the article is that he refers to “Locking Down China”. But, as you say, people can still travel from China but they must have a test first which doesn’t seem to be a huge imposition. It’s not really locking down China.
You may be right about the infection rate. My thinking was that if you introduce one infective person into a population and that person infects two others in the first week then after 8 weeks you’ve got 256 people infected. If you start with 10 infective people entering the population then after 8 weeks you’ve got 2560 infections. So I figure you need to keep the number of infective people entering a population to a minimum. Many of the Chinese entering the UK will be students going to University which may be a good way to spread it around, mixing with lots of others students and so on.
I seems common sense to me that the more infective people entering the country the more infections there will be.
To me, asking for visitors from China to get tested before they come here seems proportional to the risk. It’s not a great imposition and may help.
You are right on that point, sounds like a click bait headline. I believe the testing also only applies to direct flights from China.
I think spread is slightly more complex than your example. It is mainly airborne spread, not person to person. Keeping out crowded indoor spaces is probably the best thing anyone vulnerable to the virus can do, assuming they are already vaccinated.
It is already in the air in all these crowded spaces along with flu virus etc.
Constantly bringing in pointless restrictions damages economies and is especially harmful to poorer people.
Steve, how can it be “common sense” when you have already plenty of people here who can transmit COVID freely and, very likely, do so? I don’t know what the latest statistics on infections are, but let’s say that 1 in 35 people has now COVID, that is about 2 mil out of a population of 70 mil.
Say 100000 chinese people arrive in the next could of weeks, all with COVID, that would mean an increase of 5% of the infected, while the indigenous COVID may have increased to 1/20, i.e. 3.5 mil.
As you see we are talking about a difference of several orders of magnitude. A bit like, you fall into the sea, but then get annoyed because someone hits you with a water gun as it makes you wetter.
Which Covid are you referring to? China searched for and incubated the original strain which we’re relatively chummy with now – well those with young, robust immune systems. What may be imported now is anybody’s guess (due to the lack of curiosity of the WHO have been as useful as a chocolate teaspoon throughout) Consider the vulnerable and your grannies and grandads who won’t ‘get over’ a visitation from a more rapacious strain.
Which Covid are you referring to? China searched for and incubated the original strain which we’re relatively chummy with now – well those with young, robust immune systems. What may be imported now is anybody’s guess (due to the lack of curiosity of the WHO have been as useful as a chocolate teaspoon throughout) Consider the vulnerable and your grannies and grandads who won’t ‘get over’ a visitation from a more rapacious strain.
You are right on that point, sounds like a click bait headline. I believe the testing also only applies to direct flights from China.
I think spread is slightly more complex than your example. It is mainly airborne spread, not person to person. Keeping out crowded indoor spaces is probably the best thing anyone vulnerable to the virus can do, assuming they are already vaccinated.
It is already in the air in all these crowded spaces along with flu virus etc.
Constantly bringing in pointless restrictions damages economies and is especially harmful to poorer people.
Steve, how can it be “common sense” when you have already plenty of people here who can transmit COVID freely and, very likely, do so? I don’t know what the latest statistics on infections are, but let’s say that 1 in 35 people has now COVID, that is about 2 mil out of a population of 70 mil.
Say 100000 chinese people arrive in the next could of weeks, all with COVID, that would mean an increase of 5% of the infected, while the indigenous COVID may have increased to 1/20, i.e. 3.5 mil.
As you see we are talking about a difference of several orders of magnitude. A bit like, you fall into the sea, but then get annoyed because someone hits you with a water gun as it makes you wetter.
How about a new one? Happened before.
There are many viruses around, any one of which can and do mutate all the time. The logic of stopping something that might happen, is that we should never let anyone travel anywhere.
There are many viruses around, any one of which can and do mutate all the time. The logic of stopping something that might happen, is that we should never let anyone travel anywhere.
Thanks Paul, My main argument with the article is that he refers to “Locking Down China”. But, as you say, people can still travel from China but they must have a test first which doesn’t seem to be a huge imposition. It’s not really locking down China.
You may be right about the infection rate. My thinking was that if you introduce one infective person into a population and that person infects two others in the first week then after 8 weeks you’ve got 256 people infected. If you start with 10 infective people entering the population then after 8 weeks you’ve got 2560 infections. So I figure you need to keep the number of infective people entering a population to a minimum. Many of the Chinese entering the UK will be students going to University which may be a good way to spread it around, mixing with lots of others students and so on.
I seems common sense to me that the more infective people entering the country the more infections there will be.
To me, asking for visitors from China to get tested before they come here seems proportional to the risk. It’s not a great imposition and may help.
How about a new one? Happened before.
‘Slow the infection rate’ … Do you have any data that shows that these restrictions indeed have slowed down the infection rate in any meaningful way? Or are you just repeating the “flatten the curve” propaganda that we were fed in 2020,
So please answer the comments above as to why someone from China with Covid is more dangerous to the NHS than someone from Ireland, the US, Korea or anywhere else?
And when will this wonderful time when the NHS can cope arrive? What is the NHS doing with the extra time, given that any restriction has some economic impact, so is not cost-free? Slowing the spread of the virus doesn’t seem to have done much for us up until now, even accepting it’s actually ever been achieved.
It is a bit like not getting splashed with water when you come out of the bath for fear of getting wetter.
How does it slow the infection rate? We already have the virus spreading around the UK, it will be back every winter along with flu and the other coronaviruses etc. People can still travel from China, they just need a test, which I assume is done in China?
I might have missed something though, have our government provided some statistics about how it will slow the infection rate?
‘Slow the infection rate’ … Do you have any data that shows that these restrictions indeed have slowed down the infection rate in any meaningful way? Or are you just repeating the “flatten the curve” propaganda that we were fed in 2020,
So please answer the comments above as to why someone from China with Covid is more dangerous to the NHS than someone from Ireland, the US, Korea or anywhere else?
What I remember is that the West allowed the virus in via China whilst pretending to take it seriously and then locked us up and forced the jab. More of the same coming I think.
I think you are missing the point. It is true that any virus (human, animal or plant) floating around in the world will eventually reach the UK. They are probably already here as you say. The point is to slow the infection rate down so we can cope with it. The more infective people in the population the higher the infection rate. If one infected person gets on the plane in China and travels 12 hours in a sealed tube by the time he gets off in the UK he’ll be accompanied by 10 others.
I’m not a fan of the NHS. I think it’s failing us. I feel sick every time I see one of those rainbow “Thank you NHS posters”. But it’s all we’ve got and we have to try to stop it being overwhelmed.
I’m quite sure that between them the Foreign office and the Home Office will screw up the arrangements but otherwise it’s a sensible and not overly restrictive policy. They are not locking down China.
What I remember is that the West allowed the virus in via China whilst pretending to take it seriously and then locked us up and forced the jab. More of the same coming I think.
If you lock up people long enough and then allow them to mix there will always be a huge surge in ‘infectious illness’ that is normal and natural.
Politicians should concentrate on making people healthy rather than fire-brigade trying to cure infectious illness: our modern health care narrative has now failed long enough for us trying to come to grips with this: there are ore chronically ill people now than there ever have been which brings its own share of acute pressures… As long and you think ‘infection’ – illness you will miss the point completely and remain a good client for the very clever pharma industry
I get your point about big pharma and that’s a valid consideration. But at the end of the day letting a possibly rapacious and unknown strain tour the country will sacrifice those who should have our protection, not, I suspect, the young and fit commentators here (although not always) who have a robust immune system.
I get your point about big pharma and that’s a valid consideration. But at the end of the day letting a possibly rapacious and unknown strain tour the country will sacrifice those who should have our protection, not, I suspect, the young and fit commentators here (although not always) who have a robust immune system.
Many people in Ireland are sick with Covid (or other respiratory viruses) at the moment and Irish hospitals are full to overflowing. Are we to ban travel from Ireland on the same basis? It seems unlikely that anyone capable of undertaking a long distance flight, who presumably has a good reason for travelling, is particularly likely to immediately require NHS treatment. But we definitely won’t be able to afford an NHS if we keep trashing the economy.
Please, read the article again. The point being made is that travel restrictions will not stop the virus spreading. They didn’t before and they won’t again. That’s the key point, along with the lack of evidence that there’d be anything coming from China that (1) isn’t already here and (2) we don’t already have much higher level levels of resistance to in the population, due to previous high levels of exposure and better vaccines (neither of which they have in China).
If you lock up people long enough and then allow them to mix there will always be a huge surge in ‘infectious illness’ that is normal and natural.
Politicians should concentrate on making people healthy rather than fire-brigade trying to cure infectious illness: our modern health care narrative has now failed long enough for us trying to come to grips with this: there are ore chronically ill people now than there ever have been which brings its own share of acute pressures… As long and you think ‘infection’ – illness you will miss the point completely and remain a good client for the very clever pharma industry
I have it from colleagues in China that many people are sick (and many are hospitalised) from Covid right now and that restrictions on travel have been removed. To argue, as the authors do, that now is the time to load some of these people onto the NHS (in the busy winter season), is plainly stupid.
It’s only natural and perfectly reasonable for people outside of China to fear for a repeat of Wuhan virus spread exactly three years ago. The world simply can’t afford another three-year long pandemics.
No political diktat can prevent the spread of a virus. Only government imposed restrictions turned Covid into a three-year long pandemic and economic catastrophe, with the resulting backlog in the treatment of other conditions, and reduced resistance to other respiratory viruses, contributing to the excess mortality we now see in many western countries. There is no reason to believe a new variant is proportionately more likely to emerge from China than from anywhere else: if anything a new variant is surely more likely to emerge in a country where most of the population has already been exposed to Omicron, or earlier variants. These travel restrictions make no sense, are for show only, and trap us in an economically damaging loop of pointless intervention.
Of course they just might be concocting another virus.
Of course they just might be concocting another virus.
It might be natural but it’s not the point. There’s no evidence of any significantly new variant in China, and the indications are that we already have what they’ve got; and, most importantly, travel restrictions wouldn’t stop any new variants arriving anyway.
There was no evidence put forward last time around, but plenty came later. Military Games etc. Why not again?
There was no evidence put forward last time around, but plenty came later. Military Games etc. Why not again?
It’s like you have learned nothing in three years. The lockdowns caused more pain than the pandemic ever did.
And the same thing can happen again.
And the same thing can happen again.
And I thought the virus was already here. Silly me.
Maybe silly you. Why wouldn’t China invent plandemic 2 with big pharma and big gov putting the boot in again?
Maybe silly you. Why wouldn’t China invent plandemic 2 with big pharma and big gov putting the boot in again?
Yes Gary. They invented the last one in hand with Fauci. Why not another and another?
No political diktat can prevent the spread of a virus. Only government imposed restrictions turned Covid into a three-year long pandemic and economic catastrophe, with the resulting backlog in the treatment of other conditions, and reduced resistance to other respiratory viruses, contributing to the excess mortality we now see in many western countries. There is no reason to believe a new variant is proportionately more likely to emerge from China than from anywhere else: if anything a new variant is surely more likely to emerge in a country where most of the population has already been exposed to Omicron, or earlier variants. These travel restrictions make no sense, are for show only, and trap us in an economically damaging loop of pointless intervention.
It might be natural but it’s not the point. There’s no evidence of any significantly new variant in China, and the indications are that we already have what they’ve got; and, most importantly, travel restrictions wouldn’t stop any new variants arriving anyway.
It’s like you have learned nothing in three years. The lockdowns caused more pain than the pandemic ever did.
And I thought the virus was already here. Silly me.
Yes Gary. They invented the last one in hand with Fauci. Why not another and another?
It’s only natural and perfectly reasonable for people outside of China to fear for a repeat of Wuhan virus spread exactly three years ago. The world simply can’t afford another three-year long pandemics.