Neil

International mountain leader, Microbiologist

[Neil @neilperry3]

@Teflon93Wins @afneil Appreciated though it wasn’t exactly a free rescue package. Britain had been fighting (and paying) for years before the US entered, and the final WWII debt to the US was only paid off in 2006.

[Neil @neilperry3]

@FloridaManV @afneil Torch wasn’t proof the US could bypass Britain it only worked because Britain already controlled the Atlantic that made it survivable. Without the Royal Navy, British bases, and Gibraltar, there’s no obvious way the US builds logistical dominance needed to invade Europe at all.

[Neil @neilperry3]

@Jedihansolo1 @stuartbuck1 @wolfejosh When one side sees permafrost as ‘undeveloped terrain’ and the other sees it as a fragile homeland, the debate will always talk past itself.

[Neil @neilperry3]

@kerton_emma @jonsopel Said by Trump “the oil business in Venezuela has been a "bust", and that large US companies are going to go into the country to fix the infrastructure and "start making money for the country"

[Neil @neilperry3]

@jonsopel They’re trying to downgrade a foreign head of state into a criminal suspect in order to downgrade an act of war into “law enforcement”. That logic doesn’t stop with Venezuela it hands China a ready-made argument to do the same to Taiwan’s leadership does it not?

[Neil @neilperry3]

@TemporalMech @haveigotnews A good idea in principle but the NHS relies on skilled, vetted, trained staff. Even if they only did non-clinical tasks, someone still has to train, supervise and safeguard them, and the NHS doesn’t have that spare capacity.
It would burden staff, not relieve them

[Neil @neilperry3]

@Soulgirl1RN @cremieuxrecueil It was funded by the Wellcome Trust, the British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre, and Health Data Research UK. The data are held securely in the NHS Secure Data Environment; independent researchers can apply for access to verify the results under strict privacy rule

[Neil @neilperry3]

@DIY_Tardis @cremieuxrecueil The strict privacy rules exist to protect patient data, not to block scrutiny. Independent researchers can still apply for access via the NHS Secure Data Environment to verify findings.

[Neil @neilperry3]

@DrNeilStone Exactly. If you’re panicking about micrograms of ethylmercury in old vaccines, you’d better leave off sushi because seafood mercury exposure absolutely dwarfs that

[Neil @neilperry3]

@GoldenGirl_LV @miss_x_tina @DrNeilStone If anything, it would be hugely profitable to prove vaccines cause autism it would trigger lawsuits, funding shifts, and a new research and drug re-evaluations. The incentives actually favour anyone who could prove that link. The absence of credible evidence after says a lot.

[Neil @neilperry3]

@bikes002 @FloFlorencebell @deirdreheenan @grok I’ve no objection to a UK constitution or even leaving the ECHR in principle but drawing one up would take years, and until then we’d be relying entirely on the goodwill of whoever’s in power. That’s a risky gap to live through under any populist governments

[Neil @neilperry3]

@bikes002 @FloFlorencebell @deirdreheenan @grok Grok’s right that our rights have deep roots, but it misses the key point Parliament can change or repeal any UK law. The ECHR is the only external safeguard individuals can turn to if those protections are weakened. A written constitution could replace that but we don’t have one

[Neil @neilperry3]

@bikes002 @FloFlorencebell @deirdreheenan Not quite. Some people had rights many didn’t. The idea of universal, legally enforceable rights evolved over centuries. The ECHR didn’t invent rights, but it made them accessible and enforceable for everyone, not just those with privilege or power

[Neil @neilperry3]

@ViroLIEgy @NoVirusLies @harryetaylor Interesting position.
By that logic we’d still blame “bad air” for cholera and never have accepted germ theory at all. Koch challenged old assumptions with new evidence; Rivers did the same for viruses. Updating ideas when data change isn’t abandoning logic

[Neil @neilperry3]

@ViroLIEgy @NoVirusLies @harryetaylor By that logic, Chlamydia trachomatis, Rickettsia rickettsii & Mycobacterium leprae wouldn’t exist either none can be cultured on inert media, so they can’t meet Koch’s postulates. Yet they clearly cause disease. Biology moved beyond 1884

[Neil @neilperry3]

@ViroLIEgy @harryetaylor And long before that, bacteriophages were purified directly from host bacteria (no cell culture), shown to infect fresh hosts (d’Herelle 1917), and later EM-imaged confirming viral particles (Luria & Anderson 1942)

[Neil @neilperry3]

@ViroLIEgy @harryetaylor Norovirus was purified directly from stool (no culture), EM done, and shown to cause gastroenteritis in volunteers. Kapikian AZ et al. (1972) J Virol 10 “Visualization by immune electron microscopy of a 27-nm particle associated with acute infectious nonbacterial gastroenteritis”

[Neil @neilperry3]

@NoVirusLies @ViroLIEgy @harryetaylor Exactly. Koch’s postulates were written for 19th-century bacteria that could be cultured on inert media. Many pathogens (e.g. Treponema pallidum, M. leprae, Chlamydia) can’t be. Rivers (1937) adapted the criteria for viruses same logic, updated biology

[Neil @neilperry3]

@JamieAA_Again Not interested in trading insults.
I’ve shared peer-reviewed, verifiable data for anyone who wants to check the evidence.
I’ll leave it there thanks for the discussion

[Neil @neilperry3]

@JamieAA_Again Every major discovery from DNA structure to SARS-CoV-2 isolation became accepted only after other labs repeated it independently. That’s how science works.

[Neil @neilperry3]

@JamieAA_Again If their results are truly groundbreaking other labs will want to replicate them.
That means publishing full methods, naming the lab, and sharing raw data.
Without that no one can reproduce or verify anything and reproducibility is the foundation of science