Dr Mike Yeadon, Ex VP of Pfizer

Pasty

Member
Location
Devon
He's been on Talk Radio a lot with a host who I cannot recall. Speaks total sense and completely predicted the current curve. He's very qualified and a voice of sense with as far as I can see no political agenda.

Edit: it's on Ytube if you search talk radio. Actual sensible discussions you are never going to get on Breakfast or GMTV.
 
Last edited:

Ncap

Member
How do we know it has, if the testing is highly inaccurate? Results we get fed on the news are deaths for any reason within 28 days of a (possibly) positive test, it could basically be complete disinformation.
Yes you’re absolutely right
I am so wrong
Britain has the absolutely bestest record for dealing with Covid in the whole wild world
Excuse my silliness I’m not believing enough in my betters
 

Macsky

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Highland
Yes you’re absolutely right
I am so wrong
Britain has the absolutely bestest record for dealing with Covid in the whole wild world
Excuse my silliness I’m not believing enough in my betters

I think you misunderstand my point. I’m not at all saying that the government has had the best response, I’m saying if the PCR test that is being used is highly inaccurate, then we have absolutely no way of knowing either way.
 

Ncap

Member
I think you misunderstand my point. I’m not at all saying that the government has had the best response, I’m saying if the PCR test that is being used is highly inaccurate, then we have absolutely no way of knowing either way.
Apologies
 

Macsky

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
Highland
Interesting:
This is a response to the above editorial in the BMJ linking a discussion that the German 'Stiftung Corona Ausschuss’ (An extra-parliamentary committee of lawyers investigating the Corona Crisis) had with Dr Mike Yeadon-


It is nearly 4 hours long, Ive just listened to the first hour, and am finding it so refreshing to hear genuine discussion between real highly qualified people. To say I’m sceptical of the ongoing response to covid would be puting it mildly.

Youtube link (English discussion with German translation):
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
I hope I'm reading this right. The false positive rate doesn't seem that high at 4% but when applied to big numbers like the NHS workforce, that could equate to more than 40k staff isolating at home unnecessarily.

Yes 4-5% does not seem that high and was less concerning when symptomatic individuals only were being tested and overall positive rate was 50%
But when overall positive rate was 1% ???
The false positive rate must then be below 1%
So is related to the positive rate or related to the type of individual i.e symptomatic or otherwise.
No one really knows.
There is no better test to check and compare results with .
They do have a much worse test though!
They rolling it out now for use in mass testing, lateral flow something...half as accurate!
 

Charlie Gill

Member
Location
Kent
Yes 4-5% does not seem that high and was less concerning when symptomatic individuals only were being tested and overall positive rate was 50%
But when overall positive rate was 1% ???
The false positive rate must then be below 1%
So is related to the positive rate or related to the type of individual i.e symptomatic or otherwise.
No one really knows.
There is no better test to check and compare results with .
They do have a much worse test though!
They rolling it out now for use in mass testing, lateral flow something...half as accurate!
If the false positive rate of the test is 4% it's 4%. That percentage doesn't change regardless of how many tests are done or how many people tested positive.
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
If the false positive rate of the test is 4% it's 4%. That percentage doesn't change regardless of how many tests are done or how many people tested positive.
The false positive rate is the percentage of negative tests tests that are positive.
If you run 100 tests and get one positive.
There are 99 negative tests 4% of 99 is just under 4 .
The false positives are not 3 or 4 because you only have one positive result
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
This is some thought that when prevalence rises then false positives percentages rise.
Maybe viral fragments causing positives or greater contamination of lab equipment etc
 

Charlie Gill

Member
Location
Kent
The false positive rate is the percentage of negative tests tests that are positive.
If you run 100 tests and get one positive.
There are 99 negative tests 4% of 99 is just under 4 .
The false positives are not 3 or 4 because you only have one positive result
That's not how I read it. I thought the false positive rate was determined by the amount of tests that came back positive which were actually negative.
 

essex man

Member
Location
colchester
100 tests
1 is a real positive
If the false positive rate is just over 1% you will get an additional 1 positive result
So you will have one real positive and one false positive.
If you have a positive test result you don't know which one you are
 

Lowland1

Member
Mixed Farmer
A worthwhile watch in my opion!

Edit: Found the full interview.
i was really amazed that during my trip to England pre and during lockdown how little educated debate there was. There was input from the opposing side but the media is happier dealing with nutters and conspiracy theorists rather than people who have sensible alternative views.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 79 42.9%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 63 34.2%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 16.3%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 6 3.3%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,287
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top