The idea that lockdowns can be used to control a viral outbreak is the novel idea. It is the pro-lockdowners who are proposing something controversial. Lockdowns contradict a century of pre-Covid science. And so the onus is on those who propose lockdowns to prove that they work and do not cause harm.
Peter Castleden and Piet Streicher of PANDA unpack the modelling and predictions that PANDA made in 2020 with regard to the COVID-19 pandemic. This retrospective look at what PANDA got right and wrong in the predictions also provides insight into how the models are made.
Big Daddy reconnects with Nick Hudson and Peter Castleden from PANDA. With the South African government and political-elites having now reached the odd milestone of stifling the country in over 300 days of lockdown; we ask the question, did this “#StopTheSpread” of the Coronavirus? What does the evidence and data tell us about the effectiveness of “lockdowns” and other Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPI)? If they don’t work, is it time for citizens to use the science to push back against politicians imposing this tyranny on them?
The Spanish randomised control trial results of Vitamin D treatment for Covid are in pre-print.
The trial was conducted on 930 patients with Covid requiring hospitalisation. Of these, 551 randomised to 25-OH vitamin D3 and 379 randomised to control. 5.4% of the D3 group required ICU admission. 21.1% of the control group required ICU admission.
