James Sessford
LightNews LightNews
sessford.bsky.social
James Sessford
@sessford.bsky.social
96 followers 150 following 15 posts
Long covid research
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by James Sessford
mark-ungrin.bsky.social
Country club insiders investigating their friends behind closed doors reflects our well-established tradition of burying major medical scandals.

Like the Seven Oaks whitewash, that was so bad Justice Campbell added an extra section to the report of the SARS Commission while he was dying of cancer.
Seven Oaks also showed the bad side of Ontario’s response to SARS systemic problems that remain unfixed; the problems at the provincial laboratory; the two solitudes between infection control experts and worker safety experts; the exclusion of the Ministry of Labour from the centre of the investigation and the subsequent report; the occupation by the Ministry of Health of worker safety territory, where one would expect greater presence and collegial involvement by the Ministry of Labour; the failure to ensure effective consultation with safety officials from health worker unions; and the strong echo of the turf wars between the health system and the worker safety system that so bedevilled SARS. Seven Oaks demonstrated that many worker safety lessons of SARS have not been learned. The Ministry of Labour must be independent in setting workplace standards and in enforcing them. It must be an integral member of the response to any infectious disease outbreak. It must be directly involved in any post-event review of any infectious disease outbreak in which workers have gotten sick. Any post-event review of an infectious disease outbreak in which workers have gotten sick must include worker safety experts. The Seven Oaks outbreak also demonstrates the continuing reluctance of the health system to fully accept the importance of the precautionary principle in worker safety. Until this precautionary principle is fully recognized, mandated and enforced in our health care system, nurses and doctors and other health workers will continue to be at risk from new infections like SARS. Seven Oaks also showed the bad side of Ontario’s response to SARS systemic problems that remain unfixed; the problems at the provincial laboratory; the two solitudes between infection control experts and worker safety experts; the exclusion of the Ministry of Labour from the centre of the investigation and the subsequent report; the occupation by the Ministry of Health of worker safety territory, … Members of the Expert Panel Bonnie Henry MD MPH FRCP(C) Physician Epidemiologist, BC Centre for Disease Control Assistant Professor, Department of Health Care and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia James G. Young MD O-Ont. Special Advisor to the Deputy Minister, Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada Former Chief Coroner of Ontario David M.C. Walker MD FRCPC Dean, Faculty of Health Sciences Director, School of Medicine, Queen’s University Chair, Expert Panel on SARS and Infectious Disease Control SARS Commission Final Report: Volume Three Spring of Fear Did Politics Intrude? was outraged and fighting together, and then when they got the travel advisory turned back, everybody celebrated about that and once everybody were getting back to normal and everybody was that is part of why the lack of leadership. There should have been somebody who said... nobody questioned it. [Dr.] Jim Young went off to China to talk about our successes and how we controlled it. [Dr.] Bonnie [Henry] went with him and [Dr.] Tony [Mazzulli] went with him and nobody said, "how do you know it is over?" including myself. None of us said "well, just because," and it is such a simple question to ask and we blew it. It is just amazing everybody blew it.
January 20, 2026 at 9:39 AM
Reposted by James Sessford
covidsolutions.bsky.social
Maybe we'll see some movement on the legal side?

👇🤞
bsky.app/profile/chan...
January 16, 2026 at 4:12 PM
Reposted by James Sessford
mark-ungrin.bsky.social
The information that could have stopped the pandemic in 2020, that Dr. Morawska was desperately trying to teach WHO infection control leaders in 2020, was known for 👉84 years👈 before these events (documented in @carlzimmer.com's excellent book AIR-BORNE):

(figure: academic.oup.com/aje/article/...)
A page from Carl Zimmer's book AIR-BORNE: Kerkhove started the conversation off politely, but it quickly devolved. Some WHO representatives rejected Group 36's concerns out-right, dismissing their evidence as weak. Julian Tang, a British virologist with Group 36, pushed back, pointing out that WHO was claiming that fomites and large droplets spread SARS-CoV-2 while it had no rigorous proof of its own. Before long, Jimenez recalled, the temperature hit the boiling point. He watched John Conly scream at Morawska. "He kept yelling, 'But, Lidia, where is your evidence? Where is your evidence?" Jimenez recalled. "I was thinking, 'Jesus Christ, what is this?" The Group 36 scientists would later publish a collective account of the shocking experience. "After the call was finished, disappointed and frustrated, we wondered, Why are they acting like this?" they wrote. "Why are they so bluntly rejecting our arguments?" I later asked Conly about Group 36's account. He stressed that he was not directly involved in the conflict over WHO's guidelines. With over thirty advisors from around the world helping to develop the guide-lines, he wasn't that high on the WHO ladder. Conly thought that scien-tists like Li and Morawska did great work, but he saw many gaps in the evidence about how Covid-19 spread. They all deserved careful scientific inquiry. With so much complexity and uncertainty to contend with, dis-putes were inevitable. "The flattest pancake in the world has two sides," Conly told me. Reeling in frustration after the April 3 call, Group 36 conferred about what to do next. "We were like, 'Okay, we need to find more evidence," Jimenez said. They had to find an outbreak of Covid-19 that they could document, taking proper account of the role that air played in the infections. A plot from Wells' 1934 paper showing particles on the order of 100 microns or less will evaporate to airborne aerosol size before they have time to fall to the ground from head height. Associated text reads: residues or nuclei physically comparable with particles of fine dust may be of considerable hygienic importance. The size of droplet nuclei depends upon the amount of solid matter contained in the evaporating droplet. Because of the high percentage of water in body fluids, nuclei will be small in proportion to the size of the original droplet. Yet they will remain large in comparison to the mass of a bacterium. Normal saline droplets would reduce to salt nuclei roughly one-fifth of the former diameter, having a volume of some ten thousand bacteria. The nuclei of such droplets would settle slowly and be carried long distances by light air currents.
November 21, 2025 at 6:05 PM
Reposted by James Sessford
sansnom.bsky.social
Amputating a limb provides strong long term protection against losing same limb from frostbite.
November 11, 2025 at 8:01 PM