Saturday, May 9, 2020

2008 Study: Infection Rates Not Reduced By "Social Distancing" Aka Social Segregation - Harm Outweighs Benefit

I'm becoming increasingly aware of the harm "social distancing"aka Social Segregation causes. The surface has been merely scratched here on the damaging effects of "social distancing" to our society as a whole. Is this experiment in anti social behaviour going to be worth the damage it will inevitably do? 

 Early on in this crisis there was a  voice, quickly silenced, speaking about the harmful effects of Social Segregation aka social distancing and the poor science behind it. That voice emanated from Dr Joel Kettner and it was the CBC that silenced him (see sidebar)
Dr Kettner
 Dr Kettner is not a fringe or controversial character. He is professor of Community Health Sciences and Surgery at Manitoba University, former Chief Public Health Officer for Manitoba province and Medical Director of the International Centre for Infectious Diseases

"I worry about the consequences of social distancing. I worry about people who are losing their jobs. 
I worry about the message to the public, about the fear of coming into contact with people, being in the same space as people, shaking their hands, having meetings with people. I worry about many, many consequences related to that."
Those are concerns that I share. Many others do as well. We've been told that this damage to our mental emotional and social well being is all justified by the virus. And flattening the curve.
And all the other memes that have been recently inflicted on us all.

I spent considerable time to find some real research on "social distancing" and it's effectiveness that predated the Covid-1984 crisis. Lots of recent info, but, at this point that info is being advanced to push an agenda, that's clear enough. So it's best avoided. 

Dr Kettner had this to say on the science of 'social distancing"
The other part is we actually do not have that much good evidence for the social distancing methods. It was just a couple of review in the CDC emerging infectious disease journal, which showed that although some of them might work, we really don’t know to what degree and the evidence is pretty weak.
Not only is the evidence to support Social Segregation aka social distancing  weak, while the damage from it is nearly incalculable but very well documented, it's darn hard to locate. But, I managed to find the study linked below, I suggest you have a look. It's worth your time.

2008-  The Journal of Infections Medicine: Exploration of the Effectiveness of Social Distancing on Respiratory Pathogen Transmission Implicates Environmental Contributions


Background. In both military and civilian settings, transmission of respiratory pathogens may be due to person-to-person and environmental contributions. This possibility was explored in a military training setting, where rates of febrile respiratory illness (FRI) often reach epidemic levels.

Methods. Population size and FRI rates were monitored over 10 months in the units of 50–90 individuals. Some units were open to the influx of potentially infectious convalescents (hereafter referred to as “open units,” and some were closed to such an influx (hereafter referred to as “closed units”). Virologic testing and polymerase chain reaction analysis were used to detect adenovirus on surface structures.

Results. The odds ratio (OR) associated with FRI in closed units, compared with open units, was 1.13 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99–1.28). The OR in units with a population greater than the median size, compared with units with a population lower than the median size was 1.38 (95% CI, 1.23–1.55). Between 5% and 9% of surface samples obtained from selected units harbored viable adenovirus.
Conclusions. FRI rates were not reduced in units that were closed to potentially contagious individuals. These findings imply that the primary source of the pathogen is likely environmental rather than human, and they underscore what is known about other virus types. Diligence in identifying the relative roles of different transmission routes is suggested for civilian settings similar to those described in the current study.
The conclusion is clear Infection Rates were not reduced in units that were closed to contagious individuals- Plainly stated there was no infection rate reduction when Social Segregation aka social distancing was imposed on one of  the two control groups.
"In the present study, we achieved a large measure of experimentally manipulated social distance within a military recruit population. Because the primary means of transmission was presumed to be person-to-person transmission, we expected that groups that were socially distanced from potentially infectious individuals who were new to the group would incur rates of illness lower than those noted for groups that were not socially distanced"


"The original hypothesis was rejected. There was not a statistically significant difference between the FRI rates in the open and closed units as a whole, although the tendency was for the closed units to exhibit higher rates. The rejection of the hypothesis suggests that the primary route of transmission of FRI is not via the MCU/PCU recycling protocol (i.e., not via person-to-person contact between unit members and members newly introduced to the unit [i.e., potentially infectious convalescents]). The social distancing instituted in this setting was not successful in decreasing FRI rates."
In plain talk.. The closed, Social Segregation aka  socially distanced, group was more likely to exhibit higher infection rates. Based on the outcome of the study the original hypothesis was rejected!

Reports related to this topic are relinked below:
Social Distancing is a form of social control- This reality has to be understood.
We're told it's necessary to stop the spread of a virus.  But it comes at a very high cost that is never mentioned.

So important is social connection to humans that the lack of it is terrible for our health. 

  • Lock Downs To Do More Damage then Virus: Shielding Elderly & Vulnerable A Huge Fail

    “In fact, the damaging effect now of lockdown is going to outweigh the damaging effect of coronavirus.”  
     "The second issue of lockdown is that it's making the public scared to engage with healthcare. People are avoiding going to GPs and hospitals because they believe there is so much infection there that they might catch it [coronavirus]. That’s really damaging.”
Earlier today:


  1. I should mention the study was done by the US military, using the military as subjects, it would have been and is acknowledged to have been an well controlled group- Able to ensure social distancing was adhered to as is stated and it still failed to reduce infection rates- I'm suggesting that tells us much about how ineffective this tactic really is.

    "In the present study, we achieved a large measure of experimentally manipulated social distance within a military recruit population"

  2. Hello again.
    Ever since the whole shebang started, I've gotten addicted to copy-pasting the tweets from the person of Phil greaves, because he's one of the few who were smart enough to not cave into the peer pressure to buy the coronavirus narratives. In contrast with the legions of pathetic careerist journalists and scholars all over the worldwho willfully put society on the sacrificial altar of their institutional backers' pet projects. Here are some examples:
    Phil Greaves
    'The New Normal'... 1) Liberty depends on your willingness to take junk vaccines, be permanently tagged & tracked like a dog. 2) Half the amount of work, for a quarter of the pay. 3) No right to freedom of assembly. 4) No return of gutted public services, NHS, or social life.
    There are lots of supposedly intelligent people who still don't seem to realise that 99.9% of us are surviving this 'Plague', the vast majority without treatment, or even noticing we've had it...
    #EndTheLockdown There's a Massive drop in A& E patients, 50% drop in heart attack attendances. Surgeries postponed. Cancer treatment and dialysis disrupted or put off. Domestic abuse is up 30% to 50%. Suicides 100s of NHS centres not seeing patients..
    We now know far more about Covid19 – the Lockdown should end
    This is the largest interference with personal liberty in our history” Lord Sumption Virtually overnight our world has turned into a wasteland of closed towns, deserted streets and a few peop…
    Phil Greaves
    Extending the lockdown is extending the imprisonment & impoverishment of hundreds of millions of toilers, the masses who really are 'The Wealth Creators' of this world, under guise of saving 'the chosen people' from a virus less deadly than seasonal flu.
    1:55 p. m. · 8 may. 2020
    Steve Jobs’ Revenge
    En respuesta a
    Teacher on Reddit suggests initial lockdown was ok,but is ripped to shreds by his compatriots after suggesting getting back to a modified version of school by September after the usual summer break. Why wear a simple cloth mask when you can work from home?
    8 may.
    So, ventilator treatment is being removed from people who need it to survive, and being given to #covid19 patients, who don't need it to survive and may possibly be killed by it? Just b/c of some NHS guideline that IMV 'might' cut down on virus transmission.
    Citar Tweet

    Disability News DNS
    · 7 may.
    An NHS trust has told disabled ppl with life-limiting conditions it will no longer supply replacement anti-bacterial filters for the ventilators keeping them alive because stocks are running low and they are being reserved for patients with #coronavirus.…
    8 may.
    This guy would have you locked up forever Counting every death while ignoring the *fact* that children are largely immune from #COVID19 As this among many studies finds…

  3. (continued)
    While the fat pig union leaders make a fetish of totally unnecessary 'social distancing' in the workplace, giving the capitalists every alibi they need to indefinitely maintain the total abolition of workers rights & make even more redundant, under guise of 'health & safety'.
    There are no legal forms of class-struggle left available to the proletariat, so what do the 'socialists' say? "Sit on hind quarters until the master gives you a biscuit!"
    Is the Grand Plan to turn the 'non-essential' workers into pitiful house-arrested grovelers, totally dependent on crumbs thrown down from on high, or is it to empower & liberate the workers from the clutches of capitalist parasites?
    Do they seriously think genocidal imperialists are going to kindly hand the workers they've now deemed 'non-essential' and put under practical house-arrest everything they desire, through fear of online petitions? Sick of this amateurish cart before horse opportunism.
    How can communists demand food & housing security for every 'non-essential' worker without first demanding our full liberty and right of assembly be restored? Without first demanding the vital weapon which all proletarian struggle is dependent upon?
    Another story to cheer up your day:

    1. Thanks for sharing those Martin
      The man makes many good points!