Search results

It wasn't, and I'm pretty sure you're aware of that anyway. There's a difference between Jones, who shows his colours and whose output is a little bit up and down accordingly in my view, and Sikora, who is an oncologist, but likes to think he's an expert on virology/epidemiology, and posts...

No it's not. There's nothing inaccurate in that article, yet Sikora has been repeatedly exposed as a charlatan. It's not left vs right, it's accuracy vs inaccuracy.

Yes, I do but, then again, he's played a part in encouraging restrictions on social interaction which has led to more CV cases and, therefore, hospitalisations which has compromised the NHS' ability to focus on non-CV-related illnesses and conditions, including cancer.

The charlatan quite beautifully exposed: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/01/false-hope-pandemic-dangerous-disinformation He's now been trotting out his nonsense for nine months, and still finds his place on to multiple platforms. Earlier in this thread, the standard response...

I'm not quite sure why you're responding to that particular post but I'll have a stab: You want good news related to CV19. I also want good news related to CV19. There's good news from South Korea on CV19. There's bad news from the UK on CV19. I trust that isn't too contentious a series of...

One of Sikora's CV19 claims was analysed on More or Less this morning and, in short, it didn't come out well.

Oh, and there I was thinking that they were all for transparency. They've said as much themselves.

One of NSC's finer posts :clap:

The data's not wrong. Excavating good news from it, on the other hand ...

Oh, ta for that. Is that the one where the IEA, Adam Smith Institute, Policy Exchange, etc are based? If so, what's extraordinary is that they all came out against austerity as a response to easing out of the lockdown on mass. It's almost as if they're co-ordinated. My guess is it's either the...

1, "forget about politics, and follow the government" :lolol: 2, Tufton Street lot: que?

Of course he's a **** for supporting a private hospital system, because there's one across the pond that costs twice as much as what we've got and yet is about half as good (which, admittedly, is somewhat difficult to substantiate, so I'll just ask you to focus on life expectancy there and...

Oh, it appears I'm not on my own.

Oh go on then, I'll re-quote myself: Sikora is a charlatan. I've still no idea why he's considered the oracle on CV19.

You and I are back in full agreement. Could we also agree that despite both being highly qualified in their field, they're both a bunch of charlatans?

Although I agree with your previous post, Sikora's title and area of expertise suggests that he's at least familiar with the scientific method (and the debates surrounding it). I'm no fan of either of them, but both seem to be popular. I'm not sure why either are so readily invoked to consider...