Omicron = endemic COVID?

[harm_less]

This presentation includes some potentially good news regarding the COVID19 Omicron variant:

[Praktica]

I'm a bit dubious about "Dr" John Campbell...

[Olive]

I'm a bit dubious about "Dr" John Campbell...

So am I.    More than dubious.   From Wikipedia:

"In November 2021, Campbell said in a video that ivermectin might have been responsible for a sudden decline in COVID-19 cases in Japan. However, the drug had never been officially authorised for such use in the country—its use was merely promoted by the chair of a non-governmental medical association in Tokyo, and it has no established benefit as a COVID-19 treatment.[3] Meaghan Kall, the lead epidemiologist for COVID-19 at the UK Health Security Agency, said that Campbell was confusing causation and correlation. Further, Kall said that there was no evidence of ivermectin being used in large numbers in Japan; rather, she said it "appears this was based on anecdata on social media driving wildly damaging misinformation".[3]"

[Praktica]

Campbell seems to trade on the "Dr". He has a PhD, in nurse education. I would rather take notice of Michael Baker, and our local experts.

[king1]

thing I noticed in the video was his conclusion that Scotland's restrictions in the second peak hadn't worked (and all the restrictions scots endured were for naught) because their second peak was over 600% compared to England's 300%.

To me this doesn't necessarily hold true, it could very easily be explained if Scotland had significantly lower real numbers of covid cases (probably 50% less) than England in the first peak...

[harm_less]

Campbell seems to trade on the "Dr". He has a PhD, in nurse education. I would rather take notice of Michael Baker, and our local experts.

PhD = Doctorate = Doctor, and with around half a century of workplace experience in medical environments worldwide I'm convinced that Dr John has more than enough wisdom to evaluate the research data he bases his presentations on.

There is no shortage of people who are working in professional positions other than that which their university qualifications denote them as being 'expert' in. In my experience a university degree is as much proof in an individual's ability to understand and process scientific data as a relegation into a rigid field of work focus.

Also many of the COVID 'experts' that continually front our media broadcasts are aligned to tertiary institutions so are beholden to towing the accepted line in terms of public health measures. Dr John is independent as a retired professional and the fact that his YouTube videos remain online two years into this pandemic would be proof that the powers that be haven't had grounds to contest the interpretation of facts that he presents. He is a breath of fresh air in the current climate of redacted info and political double speak regarding COVID.

[Praktica]

Campbell seems to trade on the "Dr". He has a PhD, in nurse education. I would rather take notice of Michael Baker, and our local experts.

PhD = Doctorate = Doctor, and with around half a century of workplace experience in medical environments worldwide I'm convinced that Dr John has more than enough wisdom to evaluate the research data he bases his presentations on.

There is no shortage of people who are working in professional positions other than that which their university qualifications denote them as being 'expert' in. In my experience a university degree is as much proof in an individual's ability to understand and process scientific data as a relegation into a rigid field of work focus.

Also many of the COVID 'experts' that continually front our media broadcasts are aligned to tertiary institutions so are beholden to towing the accepted line in terms of public health measures. Dr John is independent as a retired professional and the fact that his YouTube videos remain online two years into this pandemic would be proof that the powers that be haven't had grounds to contest the interpretation of facts that he presents. He is a breath of fresh air in the current climate of redacted info and political double speak regarding COVID.

Why would an official organisation contest the views produced by an amateur commentator - amateur because Campbell has no recognised expertise in epidemiology or public health? All contesting these views does, is validate what could be a load of dingoes kidneys. Populism, especially in science, does not appeal to me.

[nzoomed]

This presentation includes some potentially good news regarding the COVID19 Omicron variant:

This confirms what many have been already saying, covid19 is now endemic and is just going to become your new strain of the regular common cold.
It will still be worse than the common cold, but with each mutation its only going to get weaker and weaker, while at the same time becoming more contagious.
This is what the experts were even saying right back near the start of the pandemic. This can be seen with the spanish flu, its still in circulation (albeit a weaker strain) to this very day and likely most of us have had it at some point in our life.

I'm a bit dubious about "Dr" John Campbell...

So am I.    More than dubious.   From Wikipedia:

"In November 2021, Campbell said in a video that ivermectin might have been responsible for a sudden decline in COVID-19 cases in Japan. However, the drug had never been officially authorised for such use in the country—its use was merely promoted by the chair of a non-governmental medical association in Tokyo, and it has no established benefit as a COVID-19 treatment.[3] Meaghan Kall, the lead epidemiologist for COVID-19 at the UK Health Security Agency, said that Campbell was confusing causation and correlation. Further, Kall said that there was no evidence of ivermectin being used in large numbers in Japan; rather, she said it "appears this was based on anecdata on social media driving wildly damaging misinformation".[3]"

Note he said "might", I dont think that can equate to him saying it was the reason.
He also did a video about a mutation to the virus discovered in Japan that was affecting the viruses ability to reproduce effectively.
He has always provided sources to all the material he discusses on his channel.

[harm_less]

PhD = Doctorate = Doctor, and with around half a century of workplace experience in medical environments worldwide I'm convinced that Dr John has more than enough wisdom to evaluate the research data he bases his presentations on.

There is no shortage of people who are working in professional positions other than that which their university qualifications denote them as being 'expert' in. In my experience a university degree is as much proof in an individual's ability to understand and process scientific data as a relegation into a rigid field of work focus.

Also many of the COVID 'experts' that continually front our media broadcasts are aligned to tertiary institutions so are beholden to towing the accepted line in terms of public health measures. Dr John is independent as a retired professional and the fact that his YouTube videos remain online two years into this pandemic would be proof that the powers that be haven't had grounds to contest the interpretation of facts that he presents. He is a breath of fresh air in the current climate of redacted info and political double speak regarding COVID.

Why would an official organisation contest the views produced by an amateur commentator - amateur because Campbell has no recognised expertise in epidemiology or public health? All contesting these views does, is validate what could be a load of dingoes kidneys. Populism, especially in science, does not appeal to me.

The taking down of all manner of 'alternative' views towards COVID such as ivermectin, vitamin C & D, vaccine injuries, etc. are all too common and for Dr Campbell's posts to remain still is evidence in itself that what he is presenting is an accurate appraisal of publicly released and often peer reviewed data. Science in itself is dictated by group consensus and when many of the institutions that produce and support the scientific community that decide that consensus are beholden to public funding I tend towards cynicism in regard to unquestioning belief in the info we are fed by them, especially when that info is filtered through the typically scientifically illiterate media and our politicians. The lingual gymnastics that Dr Campbell refers to in his video on vaccine advice (below) where he interprets the UK NHS's "Slightly less rare" vaccine risk as also meaning 'more common' is one such example of the sales spin we are exposed to by publicly distributed information. I would sooner have a expert in evaluating such data than some wet behind the ears journalist.

[TygerTung]

If one has a PhD, one is only supposed to use the title if speaking on the area of their degree. For example if one has a PhD in entomology, one would use it when speaking with regard to insects.

[harm_less]

If one has a PhD, one is only supposed to use the title if speaking on the area of their degree. For example if one has a PhD in entomology, one would use it when speaking with regard to insects.

There are a few politicians that refer to themselves as 'doctor' due to their PhDs. Don't think their political efforts are always related to the area of their degrees. More used as a status seeking title in many cases.

But in regard to John Campbell his nurse trainer doctrate, expertise in preparing course material for same and his professional life experience would make him well placed to be evaluating research pertaining to public health issues.

[Wainuiguy]

Campbell seems to trade on the "Dr". He has a PhD, in nurse education. I would rather take notice of Michael Baker, and our local experts.

Well we did have a "Dr " as Minister for Health at the beginning of Covid.   Of course he was a Doctor of theology.

[SueDonim]

Campbell seems to trade on the "Dr". He has a PhD, in nurse education. I would rather take notice of Michael Baker, and our local experts.

PhD = Doctorate = Doctor, and with around half a century of workplace experience in medical environments worldwide I'm convinced that Dr John has more than enough wisdom to evaluate the research data he bases his presentations on.

There is no shortage of people who are working in professional positions other than that which their university qualifications denote them as being 'expert' in. In my experience a university degree is as much proof in an individual's ability to understand and process scientific data as a relegation into a rigid field of work focus.

Also many of the COVID 'experts' that continually front our media broadcasts are aligned to tertiary institutions so are beholden to towing the accepted line in terms of public health measures. Dr John is independent as a retired professional and the fact that his YouTube videos remain online two years into this pandemic would be proof that the powers that be haven't had grounds to contest the interpretation of facts that he presents. He is a breath of fresh air in the current climate of redacted info and political double speak regarding COVID.

Campbell seems to be a legitimate nursing expert who is bordering on the fringe with some unsubstantiated theories. He could eventually be proven to be right, but not yet. In the meantime we have our government being advised by experts in relevant fields of epidemiology, infectious diseases and public health. All who are much closer to the coal face and appear to be following the evidence coming out of the international research.

These experts are aligned to our tertiary institutions and yes, they have to be loyal to the objectives of these institutions when they speak to the media. But...
- they are mainly professors who "outrank" Campbell's PhD
- Campbell's specialty is nursing which is a different kind of discipline from the the specific medical disciplines of the various professors we have guiding us
- the institutions that are behind the various professors are those that are teaching the next generation of doctors and have a vested interest in having their representatives present high quality evidence based output. The reputation of their institutions depends on the world seeing credible advice from professors who really are expert.

I would trust their knowledge and advice well ahead of Campbell's.

Also, when there is talk of Covid becoming endemic, we need to remember:
- people who have only a mild case can still suffer from long covid and be left with a degree of disability long term
- one of the issues with covid is the autoimmune response that it can trigger. You may think you dodged the bullet with covid itself, but months or even years later come down with a lifelong condition like rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, type 1 diabetes, etc. It's only early days yet - we simply don't know how it will pan out in that direction but the autoimmune response from hospitalised has been well  documented.
- the road to the disease becoming endemic still means everyone gets sick. What does that do to our economy and infrastructure while we go through that?
- the virus mutates readily. Omicron might turn out to be mild but the more people who contract it, the more likely it is to mutate and every mutation has the potential to be deadly.

[Magoo]

i want to give that pommy a good slapping, for no other reason than not liking the cut of his jib.

[harm_less]

i want to give that pommy a good slapping, for no other reason than not liking the cut of his jib.

Is that feeling common towards those people that know more than you? Maybe worth your noting that being loud and obnoxious is often less effective than an understated measured approach, and that is where Dr Campbell shines.

[Magoo]

i want to give that pommy a good slapping, for no other reason than not liking the cut of his jib.

Is that feeling common towards those people that know more than you? Maybe worth your noting that being loud and obnoxious is often less effective than an understated measured approach, and that is where Dr Campbell shines.

well, theres a little bit to unpack in that post.
yes it (the feeling) is common, but not restricted to people knowing more than me. (that pools too small) you can annoy me in any number of ways. peter williams, annoying. don brash, annoying. both dumber than me but annoying nonetheless. john campbell, annoying.  russell brand, annoying. most gingers, annoying, bespoke joinery, annoying. there is no common thread., no one is precluded.
lets explore this loud and obnoxious business shall we?
being understated and measured is all very well, but ive found being loud and obnoxious synonymous to being heard.
but hey, meek works too, you might inherit the earth who knows? bit of booby prize in the grand scheme of things, but i feel if theyd wanted more the meek should have spoken up when god was divvying shit up.
dr campbell shines, like the sun, out my bum.

[king1]

Is that feeling common towards those people that know more than you? Maybe worth your noting that being loud and obnoxious is often less effective than an understated measured approach, and that is where Dr Campbell shines.

well, theres a little bit to unpack in that post.
yes it (the feeling) is common, but not restricted to people knowing more than me. (that pools too small) you can annoy me in any number of ways. peter williams, annoying. don brash, annoying. both dumber than me but annoying nonetheless. john campbell, annoying.  russell brand, annoying. most gingers, annoying, bespoke joinery, annoying. there is no common thread., no one is precluded.
lets explore this loud and obnoxious business shall we?
being understated and measured is all very well, but ive found being loud and obnoxious synonymous to being heard.
but hey, meek works too, you might inherit the earth who knows? bit of booby prize in the grand scheme of things, but i feel if theyd wanted more the meek should have spoken up when god was divvying shit up.
dr campbell shines, like the sun, out my bum.

oh the wrath thou shalt rain down from the Gingers