What if the false diagnosis rate was 90%?
Don’t misunderstand me. I’m a thorough believer in the existence of this virus.

@scottorandojin To exemplify: the NHS is under severe winter pressure. Many staff are unavailable, largely due to forced isolation from testing. Also, I’m told the adaptations to the conditions make normal work almost impossible. Trying to keep apart patients in different categories must be...
@scottorandojin ...incredibly stressful. I doubt I could ever have coped. Add to this the real stream of sick people & it’s a complete nightmare. My sympathies won’t be accepted but I offer them anyway. As to “the deaths”, do you mean the reported count of “covid19 deaths”? Everyone is doing...
@scottorandojin ...their very best. But as to that count: it’s nothing to do with clinical judgement. A covid19 death is a death from any cause within 28d of a positive test. So once a person is labelled by a positive test, if they then die, they’re a covid19 death. Back to my substantive...
@scottorandojin ...question: how reliable is that labelling? It’s not a clinical diagnosis. We’re not used to this idea. Never before in medical history has someone had a disease (let alone cause of death) been defined by the result of a single year alone. Yet that’s where we are. I think that..
@scottorandojin ...is absurd & kafkaesque. I recall Whitty saying many months ago that the true way to evaluate when a pandemic (epidemic, etc) comes to an end is when excess deaths reduce. I would add the caveat that we’ve chosen to restrict access to medical services for almost nine months...
@scottorandojin ...now. We’ve seen large falls in all sorts of referrals for cancer, heart disease and the like. I don’t think anyone expects that to do anything but to steadily push up all-causes mortality. Yet it will do so in a gradual way. It would not be apparent in the way respiratory...
@scottorandojin ...virus epidemics show themselves in the excess deaths record, which is a spike. Instead it’ll be a slow, inexorable rise. I fear that is what we’re largely seeing now. I say this because recently, the PHE weekly record of all-causes mortality definitely isn’t spiking, in the...
@scottorandojin ...way we’d expect if there were thousands of correctly diagnosed deaths from a contagious respiratory virus. Here are the last two weeks. Worth reading the short narratives.
@scottorandojin Surely, if the thousands of recent “covid19 deaths” were all correctly attributed, there must be quite a pulse of excess all-causes mortality?
I expect the ‘wait two weeks’ warning will be given & I do worry about that. Nothing in this mornings tweets asks anyone to do...
@scottorandojin ...anything except to think & to ask questions.

More from Yardley Yeadon

I urge all followers who have read my criticisms of PCR mass testing in U.K. to carefully read Mr Fordham’s carefully worded letter. Note that the innovation minister in the Lords, Lord Bethel, already admitted that the PCR system doesn’t have the equivalent of an MOT. https://t.co/zXzeDMKCBb


Without this information it’s impossible to interpret any result. If the oFPR is 4%, for example, and if the true prevalence is 0.3% (it’s probably less), then for every 10,000 tests, 400 positives would be false & 30 positives would be genuine. So 93% of positives are false.

As Mr Fordham points out, almost all policies pivot on PCR mass testing. Hancock previously admitted on talkRADIO to Julia Hartley-Brewer in late summer that the FPR was “just under 1%”. That was a flat lie (possibly inadvertent but he’s never corrected the record). The reason...

...we are sure Hancock told a lie is that they have never known the FPR. Those including Hancock who believe that the oFPR can be estimated by inspection of the lowest positivity ever recorded, while logical, is completely wrong. Changes in personnel, throughout, testing...

...architecture & the like can radically alter the oFPR. Since Hancock’s remark in late summer, PCR mass testing has moved into the Lighthouse Labs & this creates a new & urgent need to continually assess oFPR. I’ve good reason to believe it’s now VERY much higher now that the...
@ukiswitheu I invite people to run the thought experiment: “what if the ‘cases’ data is inaccurate?”
Ignore ‘cases’, look instead only at excess deaths (per M Levitt’s tweet). Does that look characteristic of an epidemic? It’s completely diff from spring or any winter flu outbreak.
London:


Can anyone explain why there is no ‘2nd wave’ of excess deaths in London, without invoking herd immunity?
It’s not lockdown. See NW England:
This is the largest #SecondaryRipple (which I predicted).


https://t.co/b0rT5Lq9HI
Now check the 3 predictions I made months ago. They’ve all happened. Compare predictions from SAGE’s statements: they’re all wrong.
Even neutrals at this point might ask themselves “if he’s been right on all predictions, maybe he’s correct now?”


I’ve been saying since the Lighthouse Labs got up & running that I’m deeply sceptical about the trustworthiness of their ‘cases’ data. I showed how, at low virus prevalence, the PCR mass testing data was throwing out potentially 90% positives being

https://t.co/t4qQN4rH0u
I got ‘fact checked’ a LOT over that statement. This paper just published, about precisely that time period I speculated about. Turns out that high-80s% of Dr Healy’s positives by PCR were FALSE. This alone is sufficient in my view to throw severe doubt...

More from Health

@SMILEWithmeNGO Hello @SMILEWithmeNGO I am glad to be here. Thank you for having me.

A very big welcome to everyone joining today’s conversation. Our guest today needs no introduction especially in the sphere of cancer control and advocacy. Welcome @runciecwc
#CheatCervicalCancer


@runciecwc Q1: So Runcie @runciecwc, we see all the amazing work you do as an advocate.
Can you share with us some of the work that you have been doing in cancer control in Nigeria?
#CheatCervicalCancer

@runciecwc That’s amazing. Your work speaks for you. Thanks for all you do.
Q2: What is this @WHO Global Strategy to accelerate the Elimination of CervicalCancer? Can you elaborate on it?
#CheatCervicalCancer

@runciecwc @WHO Q3: In your experience, so far what are the greatest challenges you have identified with cancer control in Nigeria?
#CheatCervicalCancer.

@runciecwc @WHO Q4: Interestingly, we have seen that your organization is part of the Coalition of CSOs against Cervical Cancer in Nigeria, @CervicalCancerN, what is the goal of this Coalition? #CheatCervicalCancer
1/15
Why can cefepime cause neurological toxicity?

And why is renal failure the main risk factor for this complication?

The answer requires us to learn about cefepime's structure and why it unexpectedly binds to a certain CNS receptor.

#MedTwitter #Tweetorial


2/
Let's establish a few facts about cefepime:

🔺4th generation cephalosporin antibiotic
🔺Excretion = exclusively in the urine (mostly as unchanged drug)
🔺Readily crosses the blood-brain barrier (so it easily accesses the brain)

https://t.co/rjYG1BfGPR


3/
The first report of cefepime neurotoxicity was in 1999.

A patient w/ renal failure received high doses of cefepime and then developed encephalopathy, tremors, myoclonic jerks, and tonic-clonic seizures.

✅All symptoms resolved after hemodialysis.

https://t.co/u7JLVitQpp


4/
Cefepime neurotoxicity is surprisingly common, occurring in up to 15% of treated critically ill patients (w/ symptoms varying from encephalopathy to seizures).

💡The main risk factors = renal failure and lack of dose adjustment for renal function.

https://t.co/nxbnzSq8AR


5/
What about cefepime induces neurotoxicity?

One clue is that it's not the only antibiotic that causes neurotoxicity, particularly seizures.

This actually is a class effect w/ other beta-lactam antibiotics (including penicillins and carbapenems).

https://t.co/Lf4BhON9IY

You May Also Like