The Below Disclosure And Authorization Language Is For Mandatory Use By All Account: Fill & Download for Free

IFFERENCES BETWEEN IFRSs AND Ind ASThis note is issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) to bring out the differences between the IFRSs1 as applicable on 1stApril, 2011 and the corresponding Indian Accounting Standards (Ind ASs) placed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), Government of India, on its website after recommendation of the same by the National Advisory Committee on Accounting Standards (NACAS) and the ICAI.The Ind ASs placed on the MCA website when notified under Section 211 (3) (c) of the Companies Act, 1956 by the MCA will be applicable to the companies from the date specified in the said notification. Section I of the note contains IFRSs deferred by the MCA. Section II contains carve outs from IFRSs in the relevant Ind ASs. Section III contains ‘Other major changes in Indian Accounting Standards vis-à-vis IFRSs not resulting in carve outs’. Section IV contains a comparative chart of IFRSs and corresponding Ind ASs indicating, inter alia, IFRSs in respect of which no corresponding Ind AS has been formulated and reasons therefor.I. IFRSs deferred by MCA1. Ind AS 11, Construction ContractsIFRIC 12 and SIC 29, Service Concession Arrangements and Service Concession Arrangements: Disclosures, respectively, which are included as Appendices A and B to Ind AS 11, Construction Contracts, respectively, would not be notified along with the other standards and their application has been deferred.ReasonsMCA received feedback regarding the adverse consequences which may ensue to the Indian companies in the event of immediate adoption of the IFRIC 12. Hence, MCA decided that Appendix A to Ind AS 11, corresponding to IFRIC 12, Service Concession Arrangements should be deferred and the same may be examined and applied with or without modification later.Appendix B to Ind AS 11, corresponding to SIC 29, Service Concession Arrangements: Disclosures, is related to IFRIC 12. Therefore, it has also been deferred.2. Ind AS 17, LeasesIFRIC 4 Determining Whether an Arrangement contains a Lease, which is included as Appendix C to Ind AS 17, Leases would not be notified alongwith the other standards and its application has been deferred.ReasonsMCA received feedback regarding the adverse consequences which may ensue to the Indian companies in the event of immediate adoption of the Appendix C to Ind AS 17, corresponding to IFRIC 4. Hence, MCA decided that the Appendix should be deferred and the same may be examined and applied with or without modification later.3. Ind AS 106, Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral ResourcesInd AS 106 corresponding to IFRS 6, Exploration for and Evaluation of Mineral Resources, would not be notified immediately as it is under consideration of the Government.ReasonsMCA is of view that the standard is open-ended offering freedom to companies to follow virtually any policy they like. The standard does not prescribe any standardization. In such circumstances, the standard does not serve any useful purpose and may create a wrong impression in the mind of the stakeholders that the entity concerned has complied with a strict standard when in fact, the company is free to apply any accounting treatment it wants. This may even be counter productive from a regulatory point of view by giving a false sense of correctness. Hence, this Ind AS may not be notified immediately.II Carve OutsA. Carve-outs which are due to differences in application of accounting principles and practices and economic conditions prevailing in India.1. Ind AS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange RatesAs per IFRSIAS 21 requires recognition of exchange differences arising on translation of monetary items from foreign currency to functional currency directly in profit or loss.Carve outInd AS 21 permits an option to recognise exchange differences arising on translation of certain long-term monetary items from foreign currency to functional currency directly in equity. In this situation, Ind AS 21 requires the accumulated exchange differences to be amortised to profit or loss in an appropriate manner. IAS 21 does not permit such a treatment.Reasons(i) There is significant fluctuation in the value of US dollar vis-à-vis rupee. India plans for a large expenditure on infrastructure. This may need a very large inflow in the foreign borrowings. These borrowings are denominated in foreign currencies unlike developed countries where borrowings are denominated in local currencies.(ii) Unlike currencies of many advanced countries, rupee is not fully convertible.(iii) Hedging is not possible for the full period for which the loan is taken. Hedging is available for shorter periods but not for longer periods, and the duration of the borrowings is very long.(iv) Indian companies are not permitted to prepay the foreign currency loans.(v) Other countries such as South Korea have also been raising these issues.(vi) It is not appropriate to recognise the exchange differences immediately which arise as a result of items which are to be paid/realized in foreign currency, after a long term nature.2. Ind AS 28, Investment in AssociatesAs per IFRSIAS 28 requires that difference between the reporting period of an associate and that of the investor should not be more than three months, in any case.Carve outThe phrase ‘unless it is impracticable’ has been added in the relevant requirement i.e., paragraph 25 of Ind AS 28.ReasonsSince the investor does not have control over the associate, it may not be able to influence the associate to change its accounting period if it does not fall within 3 months.Apart from this, another reason can be a situation, e.g., where an entity is an associate of two investors and difference between the reporting dates of the associate and the investors is more than three months and the reporting dates of the two investors are also different. In that case a problem will arise that in respect of which investor the associate will have to change its reporting period.3. Ind AS 28, Investment in AssociatesAs per IFRSIAS 28 requires that for the purpose of applying equity method of accounting in the preparation of investor’s financial statements, uniform accounting policies should be used. In other words, if the associate’s accounting policies are different from those of the investor, the investor should change the financial statements of the associate by using same accounting policies.Carve outThe phrase, ‘unless impracticable to do so’ has been added in the relevant requirements i.e., paragraph 26 of Ind AS 28.ReasonsSince the investor has significant influence and not control over the associate, it may not be able to influence the associate to change its accounting policies.4. Ind AS 32, Financial Instruments: Presentation Carve outAn exception has been included to the definition of ‘financial liability’ in paragraph 11 (b) (ii), Ind AS 32 to consider the equity conversion option embedded in a convertible bond denominated in foreign currency to acquire a fixed number of entity’s own equity instruments as an equity instrument if the exercise price is fixed in any currency. This exception is not provided in IAS 32.ReasonsThis position is not appropriate in instruments such as FCCBs since the number of shares convertible on the exercise of the option remains fixed and the amount at which the option is to be exercised in terms of foreign currency is also fixed; merely the difference in the currency should not affect the nature of derivative, i.e., the option.5. Ind AS 39, Financial Instruments: Recognition and MeasurementAs per IFRSIAS 39 requires all changes in fair values in case of financial liabilities designated at fair value through Profit and Loss at initial recognition shall be recognised in profit or loss. IFRS 9 which will replace IAS 39 requires these to be recognised in ‘other comprehensive income’Carve outA proviso has been added to paragraph 48 of Ind AS 39 that in determining the fair value of the financial liabilities which upon initial recognition are designated at fair value through profit or loss, any change in fair value consequent to changes in the entity’s own credit risk shall be ignored.ReasonsIt is felt that recognition of gain in profit or loss or in ‘other comprehensive income’ on deterioration of own credit risk is not proper because such deterioration ordinarily occurs when an entity is incurring losses. Thus, if an entity is allowed to recognise gain on deterioration of its own credit risk, it will book gains when its performance is not upto the mark. In the recent financial crisis in USA, it was noted that some banks booked gains while they were incurring losses due to the crisis.6. Ind AS 103, Business Combinations As per IFRSIFRS 3 requires bargain purchase gain arising on business combination to be recognised in profit or loss.Carve outInd AS 103 requires the same to be recognised in other comprehensive income and accumulated in equity as capital reserve, unless there is no clear evidence for the underlying reason for classification of the business combination as a bargain purchase, in which case, it shall be recognised directly in equity as capital reserve.ReasonsIt is felt that recognition of such gains in profit or loss would result into recognition of unrealised gains as the value of net assets is determined on the basis of fair value of net assets acquired7. Ind AS 101, First-time Adoption of Indian Accounting Standards(i) Presentation of comparatives in the First-time Adoption of Indian Accounting Standards (Ind AS) 101 (corresponding to IFRS 1)IFRS 1 defines transitional date as beginning of the earliest period for which an entity presents full comparative information under IFRS. It is this date which is the starting point for IFRS and it is on this date the cumulative impact of transition is recorded based on assessment of conditions at that date by applying the standards retrospectively except to the extent specifically provided in this standard as optional exemptions and mandatory exceptions. Accordingly, the comparatives, i.e., the previous year figures are also presented in the first financial statements prepared under IFRS on the basis of IFRS.Carve outInd AS 101, requires an entity to provide comparatives as per the existing notified Accounting Standards. It is provided that, in addition to aforesaid comparatives, an entity may also provide comparatives as per Ind AS on a memorandum basis.ReasonThis would facilitate smooth convergence with IFRS as comparatives are not required to be in accordance with the Ind ASs. It is also felt that since Ind AS 101 would not be considered to be in existence for the comparative period, requiring comparatives to be prepared on the basis of Ind AS may not be legally defensible.(ii) Presentation of reconciliationAs per IFRSIFRS 1 requires reconciliations for opening equity, total comprehensive income, cash flow statement and closing equity for the comparative period to explain the transition to IFRS from previous GAAP.Carve outInd AS 101 provides an option to provide a comparative period financial statements on memorandum basis. Where the entities do not exercise this option and, therefore, do not provide comparatives, they need not provide reconciliation for total comprehensive income, cash flow statement and closing equity in the first year of transition but are expected to disclose significant differences pertaining to total comprehensive income. Entities that provide comparatives would have to provide reconciliations which are similar to IFRS.ReasonThis would facilitate smooth convergence with IFRS.(III) Cost of Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations on the date of transition on First-time Adoption of Indian Accounting Standards (Ind AS)Carve outInd AS 101 provides transitional relief that while applying Ind AS 105 – Non-current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations, an entity may use the transitional date circumstances to measure such assets or operations at the lower of carrying value and fair value less cost to sell.ReasonThis would facilitate smooth convergence with IFRS(iv) Foreign currency gains/losses on translation of long term monetary items Carve outInd AS 101 provides that on the date of transition, if there are long-term monetary assets or long-term monetary liabilities mentioned in paragraph 29A of Ind AS 21, an entity may exercise the option mentioned in that paragraph regarding spreading over the unrealised Gains/Losses over the life of Assets/Liabilities either retrospectively or prospectively. If this option is exercised prospectively, the accumulated exchange differences in respect of those items are deemed to be zero on the date of transition.ReasonExemption given as a consequence of optional treatment prescribed in Ind AS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates, in context of exchange differences arising on account of certain long-term monetary assets or long-term monetary liabilities.(v) Financial instruments existing on transition date Carve outInd AS 101 provides that the financial instruments carried at amortised cost should be measured in accordance with Ind AS 39 from the date of recognition of financial instruments unless it is impracticable (as defined in Ind AS 8) for an entity to apply retrospectively the effective interest method or the impairment requirements of Ind AS 39. If it is impracticable to do so then the fair value of the financial asset at the date of transition to Ind-ASs shall be the new amortised cost of that financial asset at the date of transition to Ind ASs.Ind AS 101 provides another exemption that financial instruments measured at fair value shall be measured at fair value as on the date of transition to Ind AS.This exemption would facilitate smooth convergence with IFRS.(vi) Definition of previous GAAP under Ind AS 101 First-time Adoption of Indian Accounting StandardsAs per IFRSIFRS 1 defines previous GAAP as the basis of accounting that a first-time adopter used immediately before adopting IFRS.Carve outInd AS 101 defines previous GAAP as the basis of accounting that a first-time adopter used immediately before adopting Ind ASs for its reporting requirements in India. For instance, for companies preparing their financial statements in accordance with the existing Accounting Standards notified under the Companies (Accounting Standards) Rules, 2006 shall consider those financial statements as previous GAAP financial statements.ReasonThe change makes it mandatory for Indian companies to consider the financial statements prepared in accordance with existing notified Indian accounting standards as was applicable to them as under Companies (Accounting Standards) Rule, 2006 as previous GAAP when it transitions to Ind AS as the law prevailing in India does not recognise the financial statements prepared in accordance with Accounting Standards other than those prescribed under the Companies Act.(vii) Cost of Property, Plant and Equipment (PPE), Intangible Assets, Investment Property, on the date of transition of First-time Adoption of Indian Accounting Standards.Ind AS 101 provides an entity an option to use carrying values of all assets as on the date of transition in accordance with previous GAAP as an acceptable starting point under Ind ASReasonsThe existing Indian notified Accounting Standards are not significantly different from IFRS as all the standards have been based on IFRS. It will minimise the cost of convergence.B. Carve-outs for specific industriesAs per IFRSOn the basis of principles of the IAS 18, IFRIC 15 on Agreement for Construction of Real Estate, prescribes that construction of real estate should be treated as sale of goods and revenue should be recognised when the entity has transferred significant risks and rewards of ownership and has retained neither continuing managerial involvement nor effective control.Carve outIFRIC 15 has not been included in Ind AS 18, Revenue. Such agreements have been scoped out from Ind AS 18 and have been included in Ind AS 11, Construction Contracts.Reasons(i) IFRIC 15, would have required the real estate developers to recognize the revenue in their financial statements based on the completion method i.e., only in the last year of the completion of the project. In that case, the profit and loss account of the developers will not truly reflect the performance of the business, as during the years the real estate project continues, no revenue will be recognised. In other words, profit and loss account will not reflect proper measure of performance of business.(ii) Some countries such as Malaysia have also decided not to apply IFRIC 15 for the time being. Similarly, while Singapore has decided to issue IFRIC 15, it has provided specific guidance in the context of legal situations prevailing in that country.2. Ind AS 18, RevenueCarve outA footnote has been added in paragraph 1 to Ind AS 18, Revenue, that for rate regulated entities, this standard shall stand modified, where and to the extent the recognition and measurement of revenue of such entities is affected by recognition and measurement of regulatory assets/liabilities as per the Guidance Note on the subject being issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India.ReasonRate regulated entities such as electricity companies are subject to tariff fixation by the relevant authorities. Tariff is fixed on the basis of certain costs which are different from the expenses recognised in financial statements. Such differences may result into certain regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities which are presently not recognised as per the IFRS. Such entities feel that such assets and liabilities exist and, therefore, should be recognised in financial statements. IASB had earlier taken up a project on this subject which has been dropped from its Agenda. ICAI is developing a Guidance Note on the subject.3. Indian Accounting Standard on Agriculture (Corresponding to IAS 41)As per IFRSIAS 41, Agriculture, requires measurement of biological assets, viz., living animals and plants at fair value and recognizing gains and losses arising on such measurement in profit or loss, unless ascertainment of fair value is unreliable.Carve outIt has been decided to revise the Standard and not to issue the standard as it is.Reasons(i) There is difficulty in identifying the attributes of biological assets, the cost of fair valuation, and high volatility of significant qualitative factors (not within the control of the entity) leads to greater subjectivity in estimating fair value.(ii) The quoted market price for bearer biological assets (e.g. long-term assets that produce each year such as tea, coffee, rubber and palm oil trees) is not easily available, since these are not traded in the open market.(iii) Present value (PV) method is to be adopted for estimating fair value of biological assets such as forests. Making appropriate estimates of future price and costs levels are key factors for a reliable fair value measurement of standing forests. Due to the long-term nature of the period of cash flows, small fluctuations in the assumptions may have a significant effect on the calculated fair value.(iv) Fair value of biological assets may not be relevant because most plantations are rarely sold. Fair valuation may give the impression that the value of the company increases when in reality nothing has changed.(v) Considering the high volatility of prices for the end products, the fair value adopted as cost as per IAS 41, may result in very significant impact on the profitability of the companies.III Other major changes in Indian Accounting Standards vis-a-vis IFRSs not resulting in carve-outsInd AS 1, Presentation of Financial Statements1 With regard to preparation of Statement of profit and loss, IAS 1, Presentation of Financial Statements, provides an option either to follow the single statement approach or to follow the two statement approach. While in the single statement approach, all items of income and expense are recognised in the statement of profit and loss, in the two statements approach, two statements are prepared, one displaying components of profit or loss (separate income statement) and the other beginning with profit or loss and displaying components of other comprehensive income. Ind AS 1 allows only the single statement approach.2 IAS 1 requires preparation of a Statement of Changes in Equity as a separate statement. Ind AS 1 requires the Statement of Changes in Equity to be shown as a part of the balance sheet.3 IAS 1 gives the option to individual entities to follow different terminology for the titles of financial statements. Ind AS 1 is changed to remove alternatives by giving one terminology to be used by all entities.4 IAS 1 permits the periodicity, for example, of 52 weeks for preparation of financial statements. Ind AS 1 does not permit it.5 IAS 1 requires an entity to present an analysis of expenses recognised in profit or loss using a classification based on either their nature or their function within the equity. Ind AS 1 requires only nature-wise classification of expenses.6 IAS 1 contains Implementation Guidance. Ind AS 1 does not include the same because various enactments have prescribed formats, e.g., Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956.Ind AS 7, Statement of Cash Flows1. In case of other than financial entities, IAS 7 gives an option to classify the interest paid and interest and dividends received as item of operating cash flows. Ind AS 7 does not provide such an option and requires these items to be classified as items of financing activity and investing activity, respectively.2. IAS 7 gives an option to classify the dividend paid as an item of operating activity.However, Ind AS 7 requires it to be classified as a part of financing activity only.Ind AS 8, Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and ErrorsInd AS 8 has been amended to provide that in absence of specific Ind AS on the subject, management may also first consider the most recent pronouncements of International Accounting Standards Board and in absence thereof those of the other standard-setting bodies that use a similar conceptual framework to develop accounting standards, other accounting literature and accepted industry practices.Ind AS 16, Property, Plant and EquipmentLanguage of paragraph 8 has been changed to clarify more precisely that ‘servicing equipment’ also qualifies as property, plant and equipment when an entity expects to use them during more than one period.Ind AS 19, Employee Benefits1. According to Ind AS 19 the rate to be used to discount post-employment benefit obligation shall be determined by reference to the market yields on government bonds, whereas under IAS 19, the government bonds can be used only where there is no deep market of high quality corporate bonds.2. To illustrate treatment of gratuity subject to ceiling under Indian Gratuity Rules, an example has been added in Ind AS 19.3. IAS 19 permits various options for treatment of actuarial gains and losses for post-employment defined benefit plans whereas Ind AS 19 requires recognition of the same in other comprehensive income, both for post-employment defined benefit plans and other long-term employment benefit plans. The actuarial gains recognised in other comprehensive income should be recognised immediately in retained earnings and should not be reclassified to profit or loss in a subsequent period.Ind AS 20, Accounting for Government Grants and Disclosure of Government Assistance1. IAS 20 gives an option to measure non-monetary government grants either at their fair value or at nominal value. Ind AS 20 requires measurement of such grants only at their fair value. Thus, the option to measure these grants at nominal value is not available under Ind AS 20.2. IAS 20 gives an option to present the grants related to assets, including non-monetary grants at fair value in the balance sheet either by setting up the grant as deferred income or by deducting the grant in arriving at the carrying amount of the asset. Ind AS 20 requires presentation of such grants in balance sheet only by setting up the grant as deferred income. Thus, the option to present such grants by deduction of the grant in arriving at the carrying amount of the asset is not available under Ind AS 20.Ind AS 21, The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates1 When there is a change in functional currency of either the reporting currency or a significant foreign operation, IAS 21 requires disclosure of that fact and the reason for the change in functional currency. Ind AS 21 requires an additional disclosure of the date of change in functional currency.2 The following examples have been included in Ind AS 21, The Effects of Changes inForeign Exchange Rates, as Appendix B:1) An example to clarify the provisions of paragraph 14.2) An example to clarify impairment loss in Paragraph 25.3) An example to clarify paragraphs 33 and 37.4) The date of change of functional currency should also be disclosed in paragraph 57.Ind AS 23, Borrowing CostsIAS 23 provides no guidance as to how the adjustment prescribed in paragraph 6(e) is to be determined. Ind AS 23 provides guidance in this regard.Ind AS 24, Related Party Disclosures1. In Ind AS 24, disclosures which conflict with confidentiality requirements of statute/regulations are not required to be made since Accounting Standards cannot override legal/regulatory requirements.2. Paragraph 24A (reproduced below) has been included in the Ind AS 24. It provides additional clarificatory guidance regarding aggregation of transactions for disclosure.“24A Disclosure of details of particular transactions with individual related parties would frequently be too voluminous to be easily understood. Accordingly, items of a similar nature may be disclosed in aggregate by type of related party. However, this is not done in such a way as to obscure the importance of significant transactions. Hence, purchases or sales of goods are not aggregated with purchases or sales of fixed assets. Nor a material related party transaction with an individual party is clubbed in an aggregated disclosure.”3 In the definition of the ‘close members of the family of a person’, relatives as specified under the meaning of ‘relative’ under the Companies Act, 1956, has been included.Ind AS 27, Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements1 Paragraphs 8, 10 and 42 have been deleted and paragraphs 9, 11, 39 and 43 have been modified as the applicability or exemptions to the Indian Accounting Standards is governed by the Companies Act and the Rules made thereunder.2 A sentence has been added in paragraph 9 of Ind AS 27, Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements requiring that for companies the form of consolidated financial statements as given in Appendix C to this standard shall be applied to the extent circumstances admit.Ind AS 29, Financial Reporting in Hyperinflationary EconomiesInd AS 29 requires an additional disclosure regarding the duration of the hyperinflationary situation existing in the economy.Ind AS 33, Earnings per Share1 IAS 33 provides that when an entity presents both consolidated financial statements and separate financial statements, it may give EPS related information in consolidated financial statements only, whereas, the Ind AS 33 requires EPS related information to be disclosed both in consolidated financial statements and separate financial statements.2 Paragraph 2 of IAS 33 requires that the entire standard applies to :(a) the separate or individual financial statements of an entity:(i) whose ordinary shares or potential ordinary shares are traded in a public market (a domestic or foreign stock exchange or an over-the-counter market, including local and regional markets) or(ii) that files, or is in the process of filing, its financial statements with a Securities Regulator or other regulatory organisation for the purpose of issuing ordinary shares in a public market; and(b) the consolidated financial statements of a group with a parent:(i) whose ordinary shares or potential ordinary shares are traded in a public market (a domestic or foreign stock exchange or an over-the-counter market, including local and regional markets) or(ii) that files, or is in the process of filing, its financial statements with a Securities Regulator or other regulatory organisation for the purpose of issuing ordinary shares in a public market.It also requires that an entity that discloses earnings per share shall calculate and disclose earnings per share in accordance with this Standard.The above have been deleted in the Ind AS as the applicability or exemptions to the Indian Accounting Standards is governed by the Companies Act and the Rules made there under.3 Paragraph 4 has been modified in Ind AS 33 to clarify that an entity shall not present in separate financial statements, earnings per share based on the information given in consolidated financial statements, besides requiring as in IAS 33, that earnings per share based on the information given in separate financial statements shall not be presented in the consolidated financial statements.4 In Ind AS 33, a paragraph has been added after paragraph 12 on the following lines –“Where any item of income or expense which is otherwise required to be recognized in profit or loss in accordance with accounting standards is debited or credited to securities premium account/other reserves, the amount in respect thereof shall be deducted from profit or loss from continuing operations for the purpose of calculating basic earnings per share.”5 In Ind AS 33 paragraph 15 has been amended by adding the phrase, ‘irrespective of whether such discount or premium is debited or credited to securities premium account’ to further clarify that such discount or premium shall also be amortised to retained earnings.Ind AS 34, Interim Financial ReportingA footnote has been added to paragraph 1of Ind AS 34, Interim Financial Reporting that Unaudited Financial Results required to be prepared and presented under Clause 41 of Listing Agreement with stock exchanges is not an ‘Interim Financial Report’ as defined in paragraph 4 of this Standard.Ind AS 40, Investment PropertyIAS 40 permits both cost model and fair value model (except in some situations) for measurement of investment properties after initial recognition. Ind AS 40 permits only the cost model.Ind AS 101 First-time Adoption of Indian Accounting Standards1. Paragraph 3 of Ind AS 101 specifies that an entity’s first Ind AS financial statements are the first annual financial statements in which the entity adopts Ind ASs in accordance with Ind ASs notified under the Companies Act, 1956 whereas IFRS 1 provides various examples of first IFRS financial statements.2. Paragraph 4 of IFRS 1 provides various examples of instances when an entity does not apply this IFRS. Ind AS 101 does not provide the same.3. IFRS 1 requires specific disclosures if the entity provides non-IFRS comparative information and historical summaries. Such disclosures are not required under Ind AS 101.Ind AS 103, Business CombinationsIFRS 3 excludes from its scope business combinations of entities under common control. Appendix C of Ind AS 103 gives guidance in this regard.Notes:1. Differences between Indian Accounting Standards (Ind-ASs) and corresponding IFRSs are given in Appendix 1 at the end of each Indian Accounting Standard.2. Apart from the changes in IFRSs as a result of carve-outs and other changes as described in above section, changes consequential thereto have also been made in all Ind ASs, wherever required.

Are the Republicans "The party of No!"?Are the Democrats the party of "It's Bush's fault."?Let's examine that and where that answer takes us.PROLOGUEThere is a Presidential election in 2016, and it is not too early to start thinking about what is happening today. A full throated debate that will begin early in 2014. The Congressional mid-terms occur 04 Nov 2014. Republicans need to prepare. America needs to decide. Maintain course or make an adjustment. Both sides of this debate have their reasons for staying the course or making a hard turn.This map shows the Senate by party and by state. PPACA was passed under some chicanery by the Senate Democrats, with no Republicans voting in the affirmative. More on that in a moment. This type of legislation has been pushed by Republicans in some form, notably Rommey Care in Massachusetts, and in more dynamic forms by Democrats, for over the last 75 years. Since the New Deal under FDR.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••The bill sent to the Senate, by the House, had the original House language in the bill gutted. The Senate had the language replaced and sent back to the House. All spending must originate in the House, and this bill fundamentally violates the Constitution."A challenge filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation contends that the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional because the bill originated in the Senate, not the House. Under the Origination Clause of the Constitution, all bills raising revenue must begin in the House.The Supreme Court upheld most provisions of the act in June, but Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. took pains in the majority opinion to define Obamacare as a federal tax, not a mandate. That was when the Sacramento, Calif.-based foundation’s attorneys had their “aha” moment.“The court there quite explicitly says, ‘This is not a law passed under the Commerce Clause; this is just a tax,’” foundation attorney Timothy Sandefur said at a Cato Institute forum on legal challenges to the health care act. “Well, then the Origination Clause ought to apply. The courts should not be out there carving in new exceptions to the Origination Clause.”http://www.freerepublic.com/focu...http://cookpolitical.com/file/20...•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Here is some Senate math on the seats as the 2014 mid-term elections approach.House seats in play:http://www.centerforpolitics.org...Senate seats in playhttp://rothenbergpoliticalreport...•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••15 Democrat Senate seats (*) are competitive, and 2 Republican(**) seats are competitive.(*) Oregon,(*) Alaska,(*) Hawaii,(*) Montana,(*) Colorado,(*) Minnesota,(*) South Dakota,(*) Iowa,(*) Missouri,(*) Louisiana,(*) Michigan,(*) West Virginia,(**) Kentucky(**) Georgia(*) North Carolina,(*) New Hampshire,(*) Massachusetts,http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...CHAPTER ONEThe debate on who should be elected, and how to secure a dominate party to ease this country away from the Progressive movement that has been underway since 20 Jan 2009, needs to begin yesterday!Will the Republican's blame Obama, since the Democrats can't blame Bush anymore in 2014? Will the Democrats be blamed for the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, since "the bloom was off this rose" before it was jammed down our throats? The Republicans will be blamed for not helping fix something they vehemently disagreed with, never voted for, and tried to compromise on or defeat, but were rebuffed at every opportunity. It was going to be the Progressive's moment, finally, after scores of years. Generations of effort. Now was the chance, with a "Manchurian Candidate" to have a true "Mission Accomplished" moment!What will be the key issues after all the finger pointing is dismissed by both parties, and the media ignores the entire story as Republican obstruction?It should be the economy. It should be jobs. It should be energy; finally—no more "put on a sweater (Jimmy Carter) turn down the thermostat policy", for energy independence. We have the energy, we just have too many modern day "Luddites" who are afraid their "save the planet" jobs and the Earth will be destroyed. We will only be able to "save the planet" when we restore science and remove politics from the debate. Until then, the hateful ads that depict Santa as being melted out of the North Pole, and thus no more Christmas for the kids, is deplorable. This does nothing to advance the Environmentalist's cause.There should be a debate on privacy and the 4th Amendment. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."It should be about the separation of powers, the "take care clause" in Article 2, Section 1, Paragraph 7"Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.""There has been an erosion of the separation of powers under the current administration, and were outline in a Dec.4, 2013 House Judiciary hearing. See below for additional statements from that hearing.Statement of Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob GoodlatteFull Committee Hearing “The President’s Constitutional Duty to Faithfully Execute the Laws”Chairman Goodlatte: Today’s hearing is about the President’s role in our constitutional system.Our system of government is a tripartite one, with each branch having certain defined functions delegated to it by the Constitution. The President is charged with executing the laws; the Congress with writing the laws; and the Judiciary with interpreting them.The Obama Administration, however, has ignored the Constitution’s carefully balanced separation of powers and unilaterally granted itself the extra-constitutional authority to amend the laws and to waive or suspend their enforcement.This raw assertion of authority goes well beyond the “executive power” granted to the President and specifically violates the Constitution’s command that the President is to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”The President’s encroachment into Congress’s sphere of power is not a transgression that should be taken lightly. As English historian Edward Gibbon famously observed regarding the fall of the Roman Empire, “the principles of a free constitution are irrevocably lost, when the legislative power is dominated by the executive.” Although the President’s actions may not yet amount to the executive’s powers overtaking the legislative power, they are certainly undermining the rule of law that is at the center of our constitutional design.From Obamacare to immigration, the current administration is picking and choosing which laws to enforce. But the Constitution does not confer upon the President the “executive authority” to disregard the separation of powers by unilaterally waiving, suspending, or revising the laws. It is a bedrock principle of constitutional law that the President must “faithfully execute” Acts of Congress. The President cannot refuse to enforce a law simply because he dislikes it.Certainly, presidents have from time to time made broad claims of executive power. However, assertions of executive authority have traditionally been limited to the area in which presidential powers are at their strongest—foreign affairs.The Obama Administration though has been equally assertive in the realm of domestic policy, routinely making end runs around Congress through broad claims of prosecutorial discretion and regulatory actions that push executive power beyond all limits. Indeed, President Obama is the first President since Richard Nixon to ignore a duly-enacted law simply because he disagrees with it.In place of the checks and balances established by the Constitution, President Obama has proclaimed that “I refuse to take ‘no’ for an answer” and that “where [Congress] won’t act, I will.” Throughout the Obama presidency we have seen a pattern: President Obama circumvents Congress when he doesn’t get his way.For instance, while Congress is currently debating how to reform our immigration laws, the President effectively enacted the DREAM Act himself by ordering immigration officials to stop enforcing the immigration laws against certain unlawful immigrants. When he couldn’t get his preferred changes to the No Child Left Behind education law, he unilaterally waived its testing accountability provisions. When he objected to the work requirements in the bipartisan welfare reform law, he granted waivers that are specifically forbidden by the statutory text. Instead of working with Congress to amend federal drug enforcement policy, he’s instructed prosecutors to stop enforcing certain drug laws in certain states and mandatory minimum sentences for certain offenses.And, most notably, the President has—without statutory authorization—waived, suspended, and amended several major provisions of his health care law. These unlawful modifications to Obamacare include: delaying for one year Obamacare’s employer mandate; instructing States that they are free to ignore the law’s clear language regarding which existing health care plans may be grandfathered; and promulgating an IRS rule that allows for the distribution of billions of dollars in Obamacare subsidies that Congress never authorized.The House has acted to validate retroactively some of the President’s illegal Obamacare modifications. However, rather than embrace these legislative fixes, the President’s response has been to threaten to veto the House passed measures.The President’s far-reaching claims of executive power, if left unchecked, will vest the President with broad domestic policy authority that the Constitution does not grant him.Those in the President’s political party have been largely silent in the face of this dangerous expansion of executive power. But what would they say if a president effectively repealed the environmental laws by refusing to sue polluters or the labor laws by refusing to fine violators?What if a president wanted tax cuts that Congress would not enact? Could he instruct the IRS to decline to enforce the income tax laws? President George H. W. Bush proposed, unsuccessfully, a reduction in the capital gains rate. Should he have instead simply instructed the IRS not to tax capital gains at a rate greater than 10 percent?The point is not what you think of any of President Obama’s individual policy decisions. The point is that the President may not—consistent with the command that he faithfully execute the laws—unilaterally amend, waive, or suspend the law.We must resist the President’s deliberate pattern of circumventing the legislative branch in favor of administrative decision making.We cannot allow the separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution to be abandoned in favor of an undue concentration of power in the executive branch. As James Madison warned centuries ago in Federalist 47, “the accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”http://judiciary.house.gov/heari...Written Statement Jonathan Turley,Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law George Washington University"The President's Constitutional Duty to Faithfully Execute the Laws" Committee on the Judiciary United States House of Representatives 2141 Rayburn House Office Building December 3, 2013http://judiciary.house.gov/heari...Two recent rulings from a District Judge lay a heavy emphasis on these complaints above. They go directly to the encroachment of a President on the separation of powers, and diminish our freedoms.Judges rulings against OBAMAJudge orders Obama foreign aid order releasedRejecting one of the Obama White House's most aggressive attempts to preserve executive branch secrecy, a federal judge Tuesday ordered the disclosure of a government-wide foreign-aid directive President Barack Obama signed in 2010 but refused to make public.The Justice Department asserted that the Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development was covered by executive privilege, even though it is unclassified and reflected standing guidance to agencies rather than advice given to the president.Acting on a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by the Center for Effective Government, U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle concluded that the presidential order is not properly within the bounds of the so-called "presidential communications privilege." The judge went further, calling "troubling" the sweeping nature of the government's argument's in the case."This is not a case involving 'a quintessential and nondelegable Presidential power' — such as appointment and removal of Executive Branch officials...where separation of powers concerns are at their highest. Instead, the development and enactment of foreign development policy can be and is “exercised or performed without the President’s direct involvement," Huvelle wrote in her opinion.Huvelle noted that she ordered the document delivered to her under seal last month and said she disagreed with the government's contention that the order is "'revelatory of the President's deliberations' such that its public disclosure would undermine future decision-making." She also found that "'the President's ability to communicate his [final] decisions privately' ... is not implicated, since the [order] was distributed far beyond the President’s close advisers and its substance was widely discussed by the President in the media.""Here there is no evidence that the [directive] was intended to be, or has been treated as, a confidential presidential communication," wrote Huvelle, a Clinton appointee.The Obama Administration argued that the distribution of the document was restricted to those with a "need to know," but the judge dismissed that contention as "amorphous.""The government has not, even after plaintiff raised the issue...defined what 'need to know' means," Huvelle wrote.The judge also suggested the administration had lost sight of the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act and transparency itself."The government appears to adopt the cavalier attitude that the President should be permitted to convey orders throughout the Executive Branch without public oversight ... to engage in what is in effect governance by 'secret law,'" Huvelle said.The White House referred a request for comment on the ruling to the Justice Department, which did not immediately respond to a query about the case.http://www.politico.com/blogs/un...•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••Judge: NSA phone program likely unconstitutionalThe ruling is the first significant legal setback for the NSA’s surveillance program.A federal judge ruled Monday that the National Security Agency program which collects information on nearly all telephone calls made to, from or within the United States is likely unconstitutional.U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon found that the program appears to violate the Fourth Amendment ban on unreasonable searches and seizures. He also said the Justice Department had failed to demonstrate that collecting the information had helped to head off terrorist attacks.Acting on a lawsuit brought by conservative legal activist Larry Klayman, Leon issued a preliminary injunction barring the NSA from collecting so-called metadata pertaining to the Verizon accounts of Klayman and one of his clients. However, the judge stayed the order to allow for an appeal.“I cannot imagine a more ‘indiscriminate’ and ‘arbitrary invasion’ than this systematic and high-tech collection and retention of personal data on virtually every single citizen for purposes of querying it and analyzing it without judicial approval,” wrote Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush.The preliminary injunction Leon granted Monday does not require him to make a definitive ruling on the constitutional questions in the case, but does take account of which side he believes is more likely to prevail.Leon’s 68-page opinion is the first significant legal setback for the NSA’s surveillance program since it was disclosed in June in news stories based on leaks from former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. For seven years, the metadata program has been approved repeatedly by numerous judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and found constitutional by at least one judge sitting in a criminal case.The Justice Department persuaded those courts that the collection of information on the time and length of calls, as well as the numbers called, did not amount to a search under the Fourth Amendment because that information is routinely available to telephone companies for billing purposes and is shared with those firms voluntarily.Government lawyers and the judges who found the NSA program legal pointed to a 1979 Supreme Court ruling, Smith v. Maryland, which found no search warrant was needed by police to install a device which recorded the numbers dialed on a particular phone line.But Leon said the three-decade-old precedent was not applicable to a program like the NSA’s because of its sophistication and because telephone use has become far more intense in recent years.“The ubiquity of phones has dramatically altered the quantity of information that is now available and, more importantly, what that information can tell the Government about people’s lives,” the judge wrote. “I cannot possibly navigate these uncharted Fourth Amendment waters using as my North Star a case that predates the rise of cell phones.”The judge went on to conclude that the searches involved in the NSA metadata program were likely not permissible under the Fourth Amendment in part because there was little evidence the program has actually prevented terrorism.“I have significant doubts about the efficacy of the metadata collection program as a means of conducting time-sensitive investigations in cases involving imminent threats of terrorism,” Leon wrote. “The government does not cite a single instance in which analysis of the NSA’s bulk metadata collection actually stopped an imminent attack, or otherwise aided the Government in achieving any objective that was time-sensitive in nature.”Edward Snowden himself praised the decision.“I acted on my belief that the NSA’s mass surveillance programs would not withstand a constitutional challenge, and that the American public deserved a chance to see these issues determined by open courts. Today, a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans’ rights. It is the first of many.”The judge’s ruling was issued just before White House press secretary Jay Carney took the podium for the daily press briefing. Carney said he was unaware of the decision and he referred inquiries to the Justice Department.“We are reviewing the court’s decision,” DOJ spokesman Andrew Ames said.Similar lawsuits challenging the program are pending in at least three other federal courts around the country. In addition, criminal defendants are beginning to challenge the program after the Justice Department disclosed it had played a role in investigating their cases.Critics of the NSA program leapt on Leon’s decision as evidence that the legal foundation of the surveillance effort is deeply flawed.“The ruling underscores what I have argued for years: The bulk collection of Americans’ phone records conflicts with Americans’ privacy rights under the U.S. Constitution and has failed to make us safer,” Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) said in a statement urging passage of legislation ending the so-called bulk collection program. “We can protect our national security without trampling our constitutional liberties,” he added.At a hearing last month, Leon said he knew that his decision would be far from the last word on the issue, which is almost certain to wind up at the Supreme Court.However, he added some flair to his opinion Monday, referring at one point to the Beatles and at another to Federalist Papers author James Madison, who later became president.“Surely, such a program infringes on ‘that degree of privacy’ that the Founders enshrined in the Fourth Amendment. Indeed, I have little doubt that the author of our Constitution, James Madison, who cautioned us to beware ‘the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power’ would be aghast,” the judge wrote.http://www.politico.com/story/20...There is little doubt that the public's appetite for this level of overreach will help the Democrats position in the next two election cycles ('14 and '16), and this is central to this discussion here.CHAPTER TWOVarious other "phony scandals" according to President Obama that the American public is not buying.(1) Obama, without Congressional approval or consideration, unilaterally chose to specifically violate the oath of office (see quoted above) and by deferring the implementation of the ACA for the employer mandate did extend it by one year. This is a clear violation of the constitution.(2) The President did not seek Congressional approval to invade and subsequently overthrow the President of Libya.(3) CENSUS.gov Mess in 2012 where election was influencedByron's Blog: Which are the phony Obama scandals, and how do we know which is which?(4) IRS.gov Mess in 2014 where TEA Party was blocked from approvals.Malik Obama: The IRS and Health CareLois Lerner: Tom Byron's answer to The White House: What are examples of US administration officials having been rewarded in spite of their incompetence?(5) Healthcare.gov Mess since 2010Mandate or pay fine? NoKeep your doctor? NoKeep your insurance? NoKeep your hospital? NoKeep you drug plan? NoHigh deductibles? YesHigh policy premiums? YesCHAPTER THREERepublican alternatives that aren't anywhere nearly as many pages, nor as complex or intrusive as ACA:http://rsc.scalise.house.gov/upl...And also we have over 100 members of Congress now (Nov. 2013) that have co-sponsored it. And we had medical doctors who serve in Congress, like Dr. Phil Roe, help write this bill. This is a bill based on putting patients back in charge of their health care and lowering the cost and getting government out of health care decisions.http://m.cnsnews.com/news/articl...John Podesta will help Obama extend the President's executive power. Congress will become even more irrelevant.Why didn't Obama know about various issues? Podesta will help clear this problem by advising the Chief of Staff for Obama. No more secrets will be kept from the President!KEILAR: Obama was unable to. And with the window closing on his chance for second term achievements, Democratic sources tell CNN Podesta's expertise is much needed.As President Clinton's disciplined chief of staff, Podesta guided that White House through a sex scandal, impeachment and a war in Kosovo. He was known for cracking the whip, one former Clinton colleague telling CNN his co-workers made him a name plate. On one side, "John D. Podesta."http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANS...CHAPTER FOURBlacks used to be Republicans, but in the years since FDR, they have, sadly, become a group of voters the Democrats have exploited. If you are a Conservative Black in America, you get the full wrath of of the left. You get audited if you speak out (Dr. Ben Carson). http://touch.baltimoresun.com/#s...Additional reading on this topic.http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu...Compare the rhetoric of these politically active individuals and how the media treats them:Alan West v. Al SharptonJC Watts v. Jessie JacksonCondie Rice v. Sheila Jackson LeeREPUBLICANS NEED ANOTHER MARGARET THATCHER OR MAYBE ANOTHER RONALD REAGAN.

NO. Evidence shows increased pestilence happens when the earth is cooling not warming. Cooler and wet summers and more flooding cause infestations to rise.Extreme flooding recorded during the Little Ice Age when many perished. Even in semi- tropical regions like Brazil the summers are wetter and the winters cooler for more plague.This means a reverse question: does the coronavirus plague shake the tree of the global warming theory?Covid 19 and climate change / global warming are the much exaggerated fears of our century. They are two peas in a pod in the overreaction with blanket lockdowns and carbon taxes imposed without founded science.Research Article | Open AccessVolume 2017 |Article ID 5058085 | 25 pages | The Effect of Seasonal Weather Variation on the Dynamics of the Plague DiseaseThe Effect of Seasonal Weather Variation on the Dynamics of the Plague DiseaseRigobert C. Ngeleja ,1 Livingstone S. Luboobi ,1,2 and Yaw Nkansah-Gyekye11. IntroductionPlague is the ancient disease caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis and has had significant effects on human societies throughout the history [1]. Dynamics of plague disease are the result of complex interactions between human beings, rodent population, flea population, and pathogens in the environment. Seasonal variation particularly temperature, humidity, rainfall, and precipitation greatly affects the normal transmission capacity of plague disease by either lowering it or raising it. It affects pathogen in the environment, fleas, rodents, and even human behavior by altering their normal immigration rate, death rate, survival rate, and infectious capability [2].People walk in the flooded street during a period of seasonal high water in Venice, Italy, November 15, 2019. This week saw the city's worst flooding in 50 years. REUTERS/Manuel SilvestriHype Exposed: Central Europe GETTING WETTER (Not Drier) Since Industrialization BeganBy P Gosselin on 27. May 2020Central Europe has been getting WETTER over the long term, and not drier like much media like to suggest. Dry years are nothing new.Lately in Central Europe we’ve been hearing a lot about drought becoming the new normal – all because of man-made global warming, of course.Lots of hype made from 2 years of “drought”For example, Latest breaking news available as free video on demand | Euronews here reported that the single dry year of 2018 should be a “wake-up call for climate change”.Scientist Peter Hoffmann from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research expects even more frequent drought-producing omega highs blocking in the future – due to climate change.Today the media keep reporting Central Europe’s current dry conditions, which have persisted over the past two years, as if they have been unprecedented. Is it really so?Data tell another storyCentral Europe was far drier back when CO2 was below 300 ppm, before 1900. Long-term trend has been towards a wetter climate. Data: German DWD National Weather Service.It’s useful to go back again and look at the precipitation data for Germany – which well represents Central Europe.Central Europe was far drier back when CO2 was below 300 ppm, before 1900. Long-term trend has been towards a wetter climate. Data: German DWD National Weather Service.Hat-tip: Schneefan.As the chart above shows, extremely dry years like 2018 happened before, and 2019 precipitation was even well within the 10% variability range.Also the 30-year period of 1881-1920 was far drier than the most recent 30 years. Nothing unusual is happening.So the next time you hear doom and gloom reports from the COVID-19 hysteria media about Europe’s droughts being the new normal and we’re all gonna dry up and die unless we lock down fossil fuels, just dismiss them as more fake news."Not here to worship what is known, but to question it" - Jacob Bronowski. Climate and energy news from Germany in English - by Pierre L. GosselinTHE RATIONAL CLIMATE E-BOOK by Patrice Peyot“The first thing to observe, is that CO2 will not change more the fate of mankind than COVID-19 has. As cruel as the death of a loved one is in every family, reasoning must distance itself from the emotions. Each year, 60 million people die worldwide (Ritchie, 2019) and would none of the 1.11 million who died of COVID-19 as of late Oct. 2020 have died this year of something else (which is a doubtful hypothesis as most were elderly with medical pre-conditions and previous morbidity), then COVID-19 will account at most in the worse case for just 1,85% of the annual death toll so far and will hardly reach 2% by year end; Furthermore, 1.11 million over 7.8 billion is a tiny 0.0142% of the world population, do you think it is going to change anything to mankind's fate on this planet? Thus, this leaves us with 98% of the deaths to be attributed to another cause.So when Gates (2020) states “A global crisis has shocked the world. It is causing a tragic number of deaths, making people afraid to leave home, and leading to economic hardship not seen in many generations. Its effects are rippling across the world”, one will notice that the tragedy and the economic devastation does not result of COVID-19, but of the inappropriate measures taken by most governments and local authorities worldwide, reproved by many health practitioners (UHP, 2020). As Grannis (2020) puts it “The shutdown of the US economy will prove to be the most expensive self-inflicted injury in the history of mankind”.Sweden and a few other countries have taken another route and resorted to the responsibility of their citizen by informing them and letting them free of taking what appropriate measures they deemed necessary for their protection and to let the virus propagate until herd immunity would be obtained. Did Sweden fare worse than the others who enforced extraordinarily coercive measures violating the most fundamental human rights? Certainly not!Furthermore, not accounted for by the COVID-19 statistics will be the host of mental illnesses, people committing suicide because they will no longer succeed to feed their families, all deaths that result not of COVID-19 but of the desire to protect us against our will by enacting at all levels, i.e. governments, local authorities, etc. regulations and decrees that have simply trampled our most basic freedoms, i.e. to go to work, to move around, to freely travel, to meet who we needed or wished when we wanted, etc.Pages 300–301The Rational Climate e-BookThis book addresses all aspects of climate and paleo-climates, from atmospheric physics, to astronomical influences and geological and geochemical drivers. It covers the computer models claiming to simulate the climate and the policies that are projected from themhttps://patricepoyet.org/COVID Lockdowns May Have No Clear Benefit vs Other Voluntary Measures, International Study ShowsBY NATALIE COLAROSSION 1/14/21 AT 11:41 AM ESTWhat Is Herd Immunity? How To Achieve It And Why It Can Be Controversial Amid COVID-19NEWS CORONAVIRUS PANDEMICS HEALTH AND SCIENCEA study evaluating COVID-19 responses around the world found that mandatory lockdown orders early in the pandemic may not provide significantly more benefits to slowing the spread of the disease than other voluntary measures, such as social distancing or travel reduction.The peer reviewed study was published in the European Journal of Clinical Investigation on January 5, and analyzed coronavirus case growth in 10 countries in early 2020.The study compared cases in England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and the U.S. – all countries that implemented mandatory lockdown orders and business closures – to South Korea and Sweden, which instituted less severe, voluntary responses. It aimed to analyze the effect that less restrictive or more restrictive measures had on changing individual behavior and curbing the transmission of the virus.The researchers used a mathematical model to compare countries that did and did not enact more restrictive lockdown orders, and determined that there was "no clear, significant beneficial effect of [more restrictive measures] on case growth in any country.""We do not question the role of all public health interventions, or of coordinated communications about the epidemic, but we fail to find an additional benefit of stay-at-home orders and business closures," the research said.However, the researchers also acknowledged that the study had limitations, and noted that "cross-country comparisons are difficult," since nations may have different rules, cultures, and relationships between their government and citizenry.The study was conducted by researchers affiliated with Stanford University, and was co-authored by Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine and economics who has been a vocal opponent of coronavirus lockdowns since March.Bhattacharya was also among a group of scientists who wrote The Great Barrington Declaration, a controversial statement that encouraged governments to lift lockdown restrictions to achieve herd immunity among young and healthy people, while focusing protections on the elderly.For additional context, other studies have oppositely determined that lockdown orders have effectively saved millions of lives.A new study shows that mandatory lockdown orders may not provide more significant benefits to curbing the spread of COVID-19 vs voluntary measures such as social distancing and travel restrictions. Here, one pedestrian walks on the pavement in central London in the morning on March 24, 2020 after Britain ordered a lockdown.JUSTIN TALLIS/GETTYA study published in the journal Nature by researchers at Imperial College London in June found that some 3.1 million deaths had been averted due to lockdowns across Europe early on in the pandemic."This data suggests that without any interventions, such as lockdown and school closures, there could have been many more deaths from COVID-19. The rate of transmission has declined from high levels to ones under control in all European countries we study," Dr. Samir Bhatt, an author of the study from Imperial College London said in June, according to the university."Careful consideration should now be given to the continued measures that are needed to keep SARS-CoV-2 transmission under control," he added.A second study published alongside that report in Nature, and led by scientists in the United States, found that 530 million coronavirus infections had been avoided due to early lockdowns in China, South Korea, Italy, Iran, France and the United States, according to the news outlet.Mandatory lockdown orders have also been a highly politicized issue across the U.S.Some Republican leaders, including Florida Governor Ron DeSantis and Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves, have vehemently opposed state or nationwide closures to curb the spread of COVID-19. In Democratic states, including New York and California, lockdown orders have been a consistent part of the coronavirus response since March.According to a poll released by Vox and Data for Progress on December 24, more than half of Americans said they would support a nationwide lockdown for one month.But President-elect Joe Biden said in an interview in November that he had no intention of implementing a national shutdown when he takes office on January 20."I'm not going to shut down the economy. I'm going to shut down the virus," Biden said. "There is no circumstance which I can see that would require a total national shutdown. I think that would be counterproductive."As of Thursday, the United States had recorded over 23 million COVID cases and 385,178 deaths since the start of the pandemic, according to Johns Hopkins University.COVID lockdowns may have no clear benefit vs other voluntary measures, international study shows125-year mini ice age linked to the plague and fall of empiresEARTH 8 February 2016By Penny SarchetThe Course of Empire: The Destruction (1836) by Thomas ColeEmpires caught a chillNew York Historical Society/GettyWinter was coming. In AD 536, the first of three massive volcanic eruptions ushered in a mini ice age. It coincided with an epidemic of the plague, the decline of the eastern Roman Empire, and sweeping upheavals across Eurasia.Now we have the first evidence that the disruption to climate continued a lot longer than a decade, as was previously thought. The extended cold period lasted until around 660, affecting Europe and Central Asia, and perhaps the rest of the world too.The work builds on research that used ice cores to identify three significant volcanic eruptions in the years 536, 540 and 547. Now Ulf Büntgen at the Swiss Federal Research Institute in Birmensdorf and his colleagues have used tree ring data from Europe and Central Asia to show that decades of cooler summers – in some cases 4 °C cooler – ensued, probably caused by volcanic particulates in the atmosphere.Over this time, average summer temperatures would have been roughly 2 °C below those from 1961 to 1990, the standard reference period for studies of this kind.This long cold spell coincided with a period of widespread social turmoil across Eurasia, including the plague sweeping across Eastern Europe, Chinese dynasties changing, the Slavs expanding across Europe, and the transformation of the eastern Roman empire into the Byzantine empire.“There was dramatic social, cultural, and political change in this period,” says Shaun Tougher, a historian at Cardiff University, UK, who was not involved in the research. “Perhaps aspects of the changes were exacerbated by a colder period.”Stress on societies“Suggesting climate caused complex events in human history like the fall of empires is controversial,” says geographer Francis Ludlow of Trinity College Dublin in Ireland. “Ultimately [though], there can be very little doubt that these sorts of abrupt climatic events place great stress on societies, and can sometimes tip them over the edge.”This could have helped speed the demise of what remained of the Roman empire, by then restricted to the Mediterranean, which lost land and power during the mini ice age. The shorter growing season would have affected crops, and this could have led to famine and made people more vulnerable to disease.“Such climatic disruption could have contributed to the movement of plague-bearing rodents into the empire,” says historian Doug Lee of the University of Nottingham, UK.It wasn’t just the Romans who suffered – the eastern Türk empire around modern-day Mongolia and the Northern Wei and Sui dynasties in China also fell during this time.Weather winnersThis period is what historians refer to as Late Antiquity, and so Büntgen’s team named the cooling event the Late Antique Little Ice Age.It could have been more severe than the later, better-known Little Ice Age. “Based on this study, we would say this episode was the coolest over the last 2000 years,” says Büntgen.The period had its share of winners too. “In any period of changing climate, there will be some regions and societies that are better able to adapt,” says Ludlow.The Arabian peninsula may have been one area that benefited, perhaps becoming less dry during this time, says Büntgen. “We argue that this was a time when increased vegetation in this area could have been useful for nomadic people or for feeding camels.” This could helped Arab peoples move into Europe and take land from the Romans.Other winners during this period include the Lombards, who invaded Italy, and the early Slavic languages, which seemed to have spread across most of continental Europe at this time from an unknown homeland.Journal reference: Nature Geosciences, DOI: 10.1038/NGEO2652Read more: AD 536: The year that winter never endedRead more: 125-year mini ice age linked to the plague and fall of empiresNote the evidence is overwhelming that global warming is not happening as solar activity goes blank and winters happen earlier and longer.This question is only a red herring without any foundation but there is very real issue as to whether the coronavirus was bioengineered and not sourced from bats or wet markets.How COVID-19 was madeThere is ongoing censorship, even in the scientific literature, to restrict publication of information contrary to the accepted narrative that COVID-19 is naturally-occurring.What follows is not an analysis of motivations or an indictment meant to assign blame, but a history of scientific investigation that eventually led to COVID-19.A recent news article published in the scientific journal Nature noted, that while it is important to find the origin of COVID-19 to prevent reinfection, it has been difficult pinpointing the source.“It is quite possible we won’t find it. In fact, it would be exceptionally lucky if we land on something,” said Lucy van Dorp, a geneticist from University College London.It may indeed be impossible to identify a natural source, if COVID-19 was the product of bioengineering…. Read more details at this site.The fact that no natural source of COVID-19 has been identified, that scientific evidence exists suggesting bioengineering and the clear ability to do so, all demand an expanded investigation as to its origin.Climate, Ecology, and Infectious DiseaseCSUN History Professor Explores Similarities Between COVID-19 and Bubonic Plagueon August 31, 2020An illustration from the 14th century of how people saw the plague. Image courtesy of Clementine OliverSeveral centuries may have passed, but California State University, Northridge history professor Clementine Oliver has noticed several parallels between the current COVID-19 crisis and the bubonic plague of the 14th century, including culture shifts and changes in society that resulted from both pandemics.Also known as the “Black Death” because one of its most common symptoms, blackened and swollen lymph nodes, the bubonic plague widely affected Europe and Asia. About 25 million people died due to it between 1346 and 1351.Oliver noted similarities between the actual viruses — the plague had a pneumonic form that can be spread through coughing and breathing, like COVID-19 — as well as similarities in how society responded to the viruses.CSUN History Professor Explores Similarities Between COVID-19 and Bubonic PlagueAdditional Reasons for Being Concerned: BioterrorChina bubonic plague: Beijing seals off village as panicked experts confirm black deathCHINESE officials have been forced to close off a village in the country after an outbreak of the bubonic plague this week.By BILL MCLOUGHLINPUBLISHED: 11:58, Tue, Aug 11, 2020China bubonic plague: Beijing seals off village as panicked experts confirm black deathBubonic Plague emergence near Wuhan ‘sowing seeds for worst pandemic in history’ revealedTHE Bubonic Plague has been confirmed to have infected one person in China's Inner Mongolia province, with authorities placing the city of Bayan Nur under a level three warning for epidemic control, but it is not the first time the infamous disease has wreaked havoc.By CALLUM HOAREPUBLISHED: 00:50, Tue, Jul 7, 2020| UPDATED: 10:27, Tue, Jul 7, 2020Solar “Grand Minima” Preparedness Plan i.e. Little Ice Age Preparedness PlanBy James Marusekhttp://www.breadandbutterscience.com/GMDPP.pdfThe second threat is the Bubonic Plague. Yersinia Pestis is a pathogen that has undergone large-scale genetic flux. Global cooling at the beginning of the Dark Ages began in 536 A.D. An outbreak of the Bubonic Plague struck Constantinople 6 years later. It was caused by a very deadly variant of the Yersinia Pestis bacillus that used fleas (and rats) as a plague transport mechanism. This plague was referred to as the Plague of Justine.As it swept from the Middle East to the Mediterranean Basin, approximately 50 percent of population perished. Impact, 2009 James A. Marusek 35 Global cooling at the beginning of the first Little Ice Age began in 1315 A.D. An outbreak of the Bubonic Plague struck the Chinese Gobi Desert 15 years later.This deadly variant of the Yersinia Pestis bacillus killed 35 million Asians and spread westward where it killed approximately 1/3 of the European population. The plague was known as the Black Death. It came in three variants: bubonic plague, primary septicemic plague, and the pneumonic plague. To date, this deadly bacillus has been responsible for 200 million human deaths.The flea/rat/human plague route still exists today. As a result, the Earth is a fertile ground for the next great plague. If a mutated form of the bubonic plague were to infect the rat population, the results could be devastating. For example, it is estimated that the number of rats living in New York City alone is in the 44-96 million range. The estimated rat population in the United States may exceed 300 million.One method to combat this threat is to destroy a critical link in the transmission route, namely the fleas. Over the past few years, many inexpensive pesticides that have been shown to be highly effective in flea control have been driven off the market. I recommend we reevaluate the safety concerns with these products in relationship with the benefits that might be gained by halting the spread of the bubonic plague. (I suspect these safety concerns have been overblown by the radical environmental movement and will not stand up to real scientific scrutiny.) Another approach is immunization. While going through basic training in the military, I underwent a series of immunization shots. One of these was for the bubonic plague. Of all the immunizations that I received in my lifetime, this was the only one that physically affected me. Almost immediately after receiving the shot, I could feel my body going wobbly. Several individuals in my squad fainted. It underlies the potency of the bubonic plague to produce death. The immunizations should be voluntary. Some individuals will have a severe reaction to this immunization. The shot is several times more potent than the Smallpox vaccination. I recommend individuals not underestimate the lethality of the Bubonic Plague and obtain this immunization.Colder and snowy winters are evidence against global warming according to the UN IPCC when they predicted the end of snow.This prediction could not be further from the truth as is the best evidence that the null hypothesis i.e. “there is no global warming” is true.Prolonged temperature drop debunks any fear of a climate crisis from warming.The flu and Covid-19 are classic winter respiratory disease not happening in the tropics. See this data on the virus and you will see it is a Northern Hemisphere health problem almost entirely.Vancouver is the earliest infected in Feb and now leads Canada with flattening the curve and few deaths and Vancouver has an unusually warm March while Eastern North America had record cold winter that is still extent. This shows the opposite of the question as also is evident during the brutal Little Ice Age.Frost fairs in London as the Thames iced over during the Little Ice AgeReferences supporting the aboveEmerging Infectious DiseasesMalaria in England in the Little Ice AgePaul Reiter, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, San Juan, Puerto RicoDISCLOSURESEmerging Infectious Diseases. 2000;6(1)·0Read CommentsAbstract and IntroductionPresent global temperatures are in a warming phase that began 200 to 300 years ago. Some climate models suggest that human activities may have exacerbated this phase by raising the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Discussions of the potential effects of the weather include predictions that malaria will emerge from the tropics and become established in Europe and North America. The complex ecology and transmission dynamics of the disease, as well as accounts of its early history, refute such predictions. Until the second half of the 20th century, malaria was endemic and widespread in many temperate regions, with major epidemics as far north as the Arctic Circle. From 1564 to the 1730s--the coldest period of the Little Ice Age--malaria was an important cause of illness and death in several parts of England. Transmission began to decline only in the 19th century, when the present warming trend was well under way. The history of the disease in England underscores the role of factors other than temperature in malaria transmission.The earth's climate has always been in a state of change. The past 250 to 300 years have seen a fairly steady warming trendhttps://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/414687_1The real reason germs spread in the winterBy David Robson18th October 2015Flu season is a fact of life – but until recently, no one knew why. The answer hinges on the disgusting ways that germs pass between people.IIt begins as surely as the leaves dropping off the trees. As the mercury drops and the sunlight fades, the sniffles set in. At best, it’s just a cold that leaves us with the strange feeling that we’ve swallowed a cheese grater; if we’re unlucky, our body is wracked with a high fever and aching limbs for up a week or longer. We have flu.The flu season arrives so predictably, and affects so many of us, that it’s hard to believe that scientists have had very little idea why cold weather helps germs to spread. Over the last five years, however, they have finally come up with an answer that might just offer a way to stem the tide of infection – and it revolves around a rather grim fact about the ways that your sneezes linger in the air.The fact that it is simply colder in winter can’t explain the yearly flu seasonA new understanding of influenza couldn’t come quickly enough; worldwide, up to five million people catch the illness each flu season, and around a quarter of a million die from it. Part of its potency comes from the fact that the virus changes so quickly that the body is rarely prepared for the next season’s strain. “The antibodies we’ve built up no longer recognise the virus – so we lose our immunity,” says Jane Metz at the University of Bristol. It also makes it harder to develop effective vaccines, and although you can engineer a new jab for each strain, governments often fail to persuade enough people to take it up.Germs can linger for a long time on an underground train (Credit: Getty Images)The hope is that by understanding better why flu spreads in winter, but naturally fades in summer, doctors could find simple measures to stop its spread. Previous theories had centred on our behaviour. We spend more time indoors in the winter, meaning that we’re in closer contact with other people who may be carrying germs. We’re more likely to take public transport, for instance – and as we’re pressed against spluttering commuters, misting up the windows with their coughs and sneezes, it’s easy to see how this could send us over a tipping point that allows flu to spread through a population.Without much sunlight, we may run low on Vitamin D, weakening the immune systemAnother popular idea concerned our physiology: the cold weather wears down your body’s defences against infection. In the short days of winter, without much sunlight, we may run low on Vitamin D, which helps power the body’s immune system, making us more vulnerable to infection. What’s more, when we breathe in cold air, the blood vessels in our nose may constrict to stop us losing heat. This may prevent white blood cells (the warriors that fight germs) from reaching our mucus membranes and killing any viruses that we inhale, allowing them to slip past our defences unnoticed. (It could be for this reason that we tend to catch a cold if we go outside with wet hair.)While such factors will both play some role in transmission, analyses suggested that they couldn’t completely explain the yearly emergence of flu season. Instead, the answer may have been lying invisible in the air that we breathe. Thanks to the laws of thermodynamics, cold air can carry less water vapour before it reaches the “dew point” and falls as rain. So while the weather outside may seem wetter, the air itself is drier as it loses the moisture. And a steady stream of research over the past few years has shown that these dry conditions seem to offer the perfect environment for the flu virus to flourish.In winter, we’re more likely to take public transport, pressed against wet windows and spluttering commuters (Credit: iStock)Lab experiments, for instance, have looked at the way flu spreads among groups of guinea pigs. In moister air, the epidemic struggles to build momentum, whereas in drier conditions it spreads like wildfire. And comparing 30 years’ worth of climate records with health records, Jeffrey Shaman at Columbia University and colleagues found that flu epidemics almost always followed a drop in air humidity.In fact, the overlap of the graphs was so close, “you could pretty much put one on top of each other,” says Metz, who together with Adam Finn, recently reviewed all the evidence for the Journal of Infection. The finding has now been replicated many times including analyses of the 2009 Swine flu pandemic.In winter, you are breathing a cocktail of dead cells, mucus and viruses from everyone who has visited the room recentlyThat’s counter-intuitive – we normally think that the damp makes us ill, rather than protects us from disease. But to understand why, you need to grasp the peculiar dynamics of our coughs and sneezes. Any time we splutter with a cold, we expel a mist of particles from our nose and mouths. In moist air, these particles may remain relatively large, and drop to the floor. But in dry air, they break up into smaller pieces – eventually becoming so small that they can stay aloft for hours or days. (It’s a bit like the mist you get when you turn a hose pipe to its finest spray.) The result is that in winter, you are breathing a cocktail of dead cells, mucus and viruses from anyone and everyone who has visited the room recently.What’s more, water vapour in the air seems to be toxic to the virus itself. Perhaps by changing the acidity or salt concentration in the packet of mucus, moist air may deform the virus’s surface, meaning that it loses the weaponry that normally allows us to attack our cells. In contrast, viruses in drier air can float around and stay active for hours – until it is inhaled or ingested, and can lodge in the cells in your throat.There are some exceptions to the general rule. Although the air on aeroplanes is generally dry, it does not seem to increase the risk of catching influenza – perhaps because the air conditioning itself filters out any germs before they have a chance to circulate. And although the dry air seems to fuel the spread of flu in the temperate regions of Europe and North America, some contradictory results suggest the germs may act somewhat differently in more tropical areas.In particularly warm and wet conditions, the virus may end up sticking to more surfaces within a roomOne explanation is that in particularly warm and wet conditions of a tropical climate, the virus may end up sticking to more surfaces within a room. So although it can’t survive in the air so well, the flu virus could instead be thriving on everything that you touch, making it more likely to pass from hand to mouth.To understand why dry air makes us ill, you need to understand the peculiar dynamics of our coughs and sneezes (Credit: Getty Images)But in the northern hemisphere at least, these findings could offer a simple way to kill the germs while they are still hanging in the air. Tyler Koep, then at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, has estimated that simply running an air humidifier in a school for one hour could kill around 30% of the viruses flying around the air. Similar measures could (almost literally) pour cold water on other disease hotspots – such as hospital waiting rooms or public transport. “It would be a way of curbing the large outbreaks that occur every few years as the flu virus changes,” he says. “The potential impact in the cost of work days missed, schools days missed, and healthcare, would be substantial.”Can wearing a surgical mask help prevent a cold? Not always (Credit: Getty Images)Shaman is now working on further trials, though he thinks that it will involve a tricky balancing act. “Though higher humidity is associated with lower survival rates for influenza, there are other pathogens, such as pathogenic mould, that thrive at higher humidity,” he says. “So care must be taken with humidification – it's not solely beneficial.”The scientists are keen to emphasise that measures like vaccines and good personal hygiene are still the best ways to protect yourself; using water vapour to kill the germs would just offer an additional line of attack. But when you are dealing with an enemy as mercurial and pervasive as the flu virus, you need to use every possible weapon in your arsenal.https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20151016-the-real-reason-germs-spread-in-the-winterThe complexity of climate and viruses make models false predictors. “… we have massively overestimated the fatality of covid-19.” Stanford Professor. Pestilence rises as earth cools.Stanford Professor: Data Indicates We’re Severely Overreacting To CoronavirusPerspectives on the Pandemic:Empty streets in New YorkDealing with Coronavirus, a fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data.Dr John P.A. Ioannidis is a professor of medicine and professor of epidemiology and population health, as well as professor by courtesy of biomedical data science at Stanford University School of Medicine, professor by courtesy of statistics at Stanford University School of Humanities and Sciences, and co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) at Stanford University.In an analysis published Tuesday, Stanford’s John P.A. Ioannidis — co-director of the university’s Meta-Research Innovation Center and professor of medicine, biomedical data science, statistics, and epidemiology and population health — suggests that the response to the coronavirus pandemic may be “a fiasco in the making” because we are making seismic decisions based on “utterly unreliable” data. The data we do have, Ioannidis explains, indicates that we are likely severely overreacting.“The current coronavirus disease, Covid-19, has been called a once-in-a-century pandemic. But it may also be a once-in-a-century evidence fiasco,” Ioannidis writes in an opinion piece published by STAT on Tuesday.“Draconian countermeasures have been adopted in many countries. If the pandemic dissipates — either on its own or because of these measures — short-term extreme social distancing and lockdowns may be bearable,” the statistician writes. “How long, though, should measures like these be continued if the pandemic churns across the globe unabated? How can policymakers tell if they are doing more good than harm?”The woefully inadequate data we have so far, the meta-research specialist argues, indicates that the extreme measures taken by many countries are likely way out of line and may result in ultimately unnecessary and catastrophic consequences. Due to extremely limited testing, we are likely missing “the vast majority of infections” from COVID-19, he states, thus making reported fatality rates from the World Health Organization “meaningless.”“Patients who have been tested for SARS-CoV-2 are disproportionately those with severe symptoms and bad outcomes,” Ioannidis explains. With very limited testing in many health systems, he suggests, that “selection bias” may only get worse going forward.Ioannidis then zooms in on the “one situation” where “an entire, closed population was tested”: the Diamond Princess cruise ship’s quarantined passengers. While the fatality rate was 1.0%, he points out, the population was largely elderly, the most at-risk demographic. Projected out onto the age structure of the U.S. population, he calculates, the death rate is more like 0.125%, with a range of 0.025% to 0.625% based on the sample size:Projecting the Diamond Princess mortality rate onto the age structure of the U.S. population, the death rate among people infected with Covid-19 would be 0.125%. But since this estimate is based on extremely thin data — there were just seven deaths among the 700 infected passengers and crew — the real death rate could stretch from five times lower (0.025%) to five times higher (0.625%). It is also possible that some of the passengers who were infected might die later, and that tourists may have different frequencies of chronic diseases — a risk factor for worse outcomes with SARS-CoV-2 infection — than the general population. Adding these extra sources of uncertainty, reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%.“That huge range markedly affects how severe the pandemic is and what should be done,” Ioannidis stresses. “A population-wide case fatality rate of 0.05% is lower than seasonal influenza. If that is the true rate, locking down the world with potentially tremendous social and financial consequences may be totally irrational. It’s like an elephant being attacked by a house cat. Frustrated and trying to avoid the cat, the elephant accidentally jumps off a cliff and dies.”For those who argue that the high fatality rate among elderly people indicates that the death rate cannot be as low as 0.05%, the professor notes that “even some so-called mild or common-cold-type coronaviruses that have been known for decades can have case fatality rates as high as 8% when they infect elderly people in nursing homes.” (Read the full opinion piece here.)The climate conundrum rising CO2 despite lockdowns verifies natural sources so dominate the human emissions are immaterial.Recent Daily Average Mauna Loa CO2January 03:415.46 ppmJanuary 02:415.14 ppmJanuary 01:415.54 ppmDecember 31:415.15 ppmDecember 30:415.23 ppmLast Updated: January 4, 2021Mauna Loa Global Monitoring Laboratory.Brazilian scientists and academics write an Open Letter on the “science” of the #coronavirus pandemicCharles Rotter / 4 hours ago May 31, 2020From CONEXÃPOLÍTICAThe coordinator of the statement is Marcos Nogueira Eberlin. He is a member of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and holds a PhD in chemistry from the University of Campinas. After postdoctoral work at Purdue, he founded the Thomson Mass Spectrometry Laboratory, growing it into a highly distinguished lab and supervising some 200 graduate and post-doctoral students, scientists who today work as researchers and professionals all around the globe.Text of letter:The “science” of the PandemicDuring this pandemic, the term “science” has been used “ad nauseam”, that is, has been repeated to exhaustion: “Science, science, science”, “I’m pro-science”, “For from the science, through the science and to the science I guide my decisions and acts” and “I am, therefore, fully right to do so”. It is clear that the intention here is to lead all of us to the idea of ​​decisions based on something unquestionable and infallible, as scientific as law, as the law of gravity.Groups of “science experts” or famous YouTube scientists, many of them still “beginners” in science, some of them with a minimal or no experience in fighting pandemics, are selected by the establishment and the media to give “scientific aura” for the lockdown and the condemnation of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as an ineffective drug; worse, as a deadly poison.That disastrous apocalyptic simulations from the “Imperial College” – this pompous name that brings us to the idea of ​​a center of excellence of infallible, omnipotent and unquestionable knowledge, an “College of the Empire” – are being used to place everyone at home, and then, to compare data as being the absolute reference of the truth. “We did something and as a result, we reduced those many deaths. Therefore: ‘blessed be the science!’”.But what kind of “science” is that to which they are appealing? And who, in the name of this “science”, would be allowed to speak? Science (I know that there are controversies, as scientists even debate on its meaning) is “the dispassionate search for the truth about the Universe and life”. But ironically, we seek truths that we don’t even know what those truths would be like, or where they would be found. For this reason, sometimes, ironically, even when scientists find a truth that is indeed true, yet they doubt that they have found it. We literally zigzag in the dark, searching for solutions to our problems. Therefore, we sometimes say that: “eating eggs is bad, it increases cholesterol”; and sometimes: “eggs are good, eat at ease”.Richard Feynman put it this way: “Science is the culture of doubt”. And I would add, “science is the culture of debate, of divergence of opinions”.Rarely, there are situations in which we reach consensus in science, even a momentary consensus. Some defend the “Big Bang” and the theory of evolution, others, including myself, are skeptical of them. Some defend with data and papers the central role of men in global warming, others defend, with the same data and papers, that human activity is irrelevant. Scientists are human beings, therefore, skeptics and enquirers who can and should speak for themselves, like all scientists have the right to do, but NEVER A SCIENTIST OR A GROUP OF THEM CAN DECLARE TO BE AUTHORIZED TO SPEAK IN THE NAME OF SCIENCE!Nobody, absolutely nobody is allowed to speak for science or declare that he is “been guided” by science! In times of pandemic, this impossibility is even greater, as we face an unknown enemy. Data is still being collected and researches are being performed and published by scientists divided by their worldviews, and by their political and party preferences.Whoever said he acted in the name of science, dishonestly usurped science prestige. For what type of “science” is this, unanimous and consensual, that no one has ever heard of? Could someone give me its address so I can confirm its consent? Its phone, email and WhatsApp?As for hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), the inevitable scientific clash between theses is clear when renowned scientists from around the world and in Brazil – such as virologist Paolo Zanotto (with 7,400 scientific citations) and doctors Didier Raoult (with 148,000 citations), Philip M. Carlucci and Vladimir Zelenko – defend its use based on studies and articles, whereas other scientists, also renowned and based on the same or other studies and articles, condemn it. Numerous countries such as the USA, Spain, France, Italy, India, Israel, Russia, Costa Rica and Senegal use the drug (HCQ) to fight covid-19, whereas other countries refrain from using HCQ as one of the strategies to contain the pandemic, betting on other controversial tactics.Who then speaks here in the name of “science”? Which group has a monopoly on reason and its exclusive authorization to be the spokesperson of “science”? Where is such authorization found?One can choose an opinion, and base his strategy on it, this is fine, but no one should commit the sacrilege of protecting his decision risking to tarnish with it the “sacred mantle of science”.Outraged, every day I hear mayors and governors saying at the top of their lungs that they “have followed science”. Presidents of councils and some of their advisers, and of academies and deans in their offices write letters on behalf of their entire community, as if they reflect everyone’s consensual position. Nothing could be more false.Have they followed science? Not at all! They have followed the science wing which they like, and the scientists who they chose to place around them. They ignore the other wing of science, since there are also hundreds of scientists and articles that oppose their positions and measures.Worse, scientists are not angels. Scientists are people, and people have likes and dislikes, passions and political party preferences. Or wouldn’t they? There are many scientists, therefore, who do good without looking at whom, I know and admire many of them. But there are also pseudoscientists who use science to defend their opinion, their own pocket, or their passion. Scientists have worked and still work hard and detached to contribute to the good of humanity, many of whom are now in their laboratories, risking their lives to develop new methods of detecting coronavirus, drugs and vaccines, when they could stay “safe at home”. But, to illustrate my point, I know scientists who have published articles, some even in major journals such as “Science” or “Nature”, with data they have manufactured “during the night”; others who have removed points from their curves, or used other similar strategies. Many scientists were at Hitler’s side, weren’t they? Did they act in the name of “science”? Others have developed atom bombs. Others still develop chemical and biological weapons and illicit drugs, by design.The Manaus’ study with chloroquine (CQ) performed here in Brazil and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) [1], is emblematic to this discussion of “science”. Scientists there used, the manuscript reveals, lethal doses in debilitated patients, many in severe conditions and with comorbidities. The profiles of the groups do not seem to have been “randomized”, since a clear “preference” in the HIGH DOSE group for risk factors is noted. Chloroquine, which is more toxic than HCQ, was used, and it seems that they even made “childish mistakes” in simple stoichiometric calculations, doubling the dosage with the error. I’m incapable of judging intentions, but justice will do it. The former Brazilian Health Minister Luiz Henrique Mandetta quoted this study, supported it, and based on it, categorically stated: “I do not approve HCQ because I am based on ‘science, science, science’!”.Another study published by Chinese researchers in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) and which is still persistently used against HCQ was also at least revolting [2]. In it, the authors declared: “we administer 1,200 mg for 3 days, followed by 800 mg for 12 to 21 days, in patients with moderate to severe symptoms”. In other words, they gave a huge dosage of the drug that could reach the absurdity of 20 grams in the end, and it given was too late to patients (HCQ should be administered in the first symptoms or even earlier). And even worse, overdosing on HCQ or any other drug for severe cases is poisonous. What do you think, was it good science? The recommended dosage in Brazil, since May 20th, 2020, by the new Ministry of Health, for mild symptoms is 2 times 400 mg in the first day (every 12 hours) and 400 mg for 5 days for a total of 2.8 grams.In other published studies, also in these internationally renowned journals such as The New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA and BMJ [3-5], once again, “problems” are clearly noted, since or the patients were randomized in irregular ways, placing older, more susceptible or most severe and hypoxemic patients in the higher (lethal) dose groups, or more men (almost 3 times more deadly by covid than women), or more black people (in the USA, black people have displayed higher mortality) and more smokers, and where most of the deaths occurred in the first days of the studies (signs that were deaths of critically ill patients, who at this stage would be more “intoxicated” than “treated” with HCQ), or they administered HCQ isolated, when it is known that it is necessary to associate HCQ at least with azithromycin. One of these studies [5] administered HCQ only on the sixteenth day of symptoms (for really early treatment, HCQ administration should be started up to fifth day), in other words, at the end of the disease, when the drug can do little good or nothing to the patient.These studies indicate that some scientists either forgot how “science” is done or that there is a huge effort to disprove, whatever it takes, that HCQ works. How can someone or even Councils and Academies of Medicine cite such studies as the “science” of their decisions? How can that be?On the contrary, the study published – and today with more than 3 thousand patients tested – and carried out by Dr. Didier Raoult in France [6], using the correct dosage and at the right time, with a very low mortality rate (0.4%), and the Prevent Senior’s clinical experience in Brazil – also quite encouraging – are disqualified with very “futile” arguments such as: “Didier Raoult is a controversial and unworthy researcher”, “At Prevent Senior Clinic they were not sure of the diagnosis” (but none of the hospitalized patients with clear COVID symptoms died), “Placebo effect” (what a supernatural power of inducing our mind that reduces mortality from 40% to zero, I want this placebo!), “Study performed by a health plan company” (I do not doubt that this people indeed want to save lives, because the patients were their customers who pay their bills), and similar ephemeral arguments.I post on my Facebook, almost daily, works, studies and incredible reports in favor of HCQ. Many sympathize with me, but some are vehemently opposed, and confront me with arguments such as: “how can such a respected scientist lose his prestige to defend such a president [Bolsonaro]?”. Some of them I know personally, others I search on their profiles. They may exist, I know, but I haven’t found even one of these Facebook friends so far who is not a leftist, fight against the current president of Brazil and, as a rule, is in favor of the clumsy #StayAtHome.But the most important question I think it should be ask is this: are we absolutely certain by “science” that HCQ is efficient and saves lives? No, we are not. The chance is high, but certainly no scientist is sure about it. In a few years, we will know better. Are we then absolutely certain today that HCQ does not work? Of course we are not, no one honestly is certain of it. Therefore, I want to leave the “science of doubt” aside, since scientists diverge, and appeal to another area: the law. Here in Brazil the use of HCQ has even been questioned to the supreme court asking judges to settle the debate based on “science”. Nobody knows, however, who will speak “in the name of science”. But there is, in Law, a unquestionable and consensual position that could be used to define the dilemma:“In dubio pro reo”. In other words, in case of doubt, favor or absolv the defendant (in this case, the HCQ).If there is doubt by “science”, and a plausible possibility is the cure with HCQ, and if the drug is cheap (nearly free), available and distributed by several pharmaceutical companies ( in Brazil by Cristália, Apsen, EMS, Armed Forces , Sanofi-Aventis), and since it has minimal side effects in acute dosages of only 5 days (many take the drug daily for years), similar to all drugs (see aspirin and paracetamol), and considering that the defendant is likely to face a higher risk of life, if not medicated, then we should all be PRO-LIFE!THAT ALL, ABSOLUTELY ALL BRAZILIANS WHO WISH TO DO SO, SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE TREATED WITH HCQ.It’s a fair legal decision. And that is it.This is science, not the “science” that I like or the “science” that others have appropriated it, but the “science” that we have here and now, based on the current facts, based on reason.Finally, let us all remember that in the face of a new disease and its extremely rapid progression in the most debilitated patients with very serious complications, and so many uncertainties in the diagnosis, and as we don’t treat papers or health forms, but PEOPLE, it is imperative to the doctor look face to face their patients and decide invoking not the “science of some”, but the valuable compass of medicine that has saved many lives since the beginnings of medicine: “THE CLINIC IS SOVEREIGN!”Prof. Marcos N. Eberlinhttps://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/05/31/brazilian-scientists-and-academics-write-an-open-letter-on-the-science-of-the-coronavirus-pandemic/Original post: By James Barrett DailyWire.comLIST OF EXPERTS/STUDIES/ANALYSES CHALLENGING COVID-19 PANIC (VIEW AS SLIDESHOW)COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, Californiahttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.05.20054361v1.full.pdfhttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20050542v1.full.pdfA Conversation with Knut Wittkowski, PhD, Apr 1-2, 2020In the coronavirus pandemic, we're making decisions without reliable datahttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1.full.pdfTop Israeli prof claims simple stats show virus plays itself out after 70 daysGermany’s 'Wuhan' has 15 per cent infection rate and low death tollCoronavirus disease 2019: The harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measureshttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.12.20059618v1.full.pdfCOVID-19, Urgent Reassessment, Diagnosis and Basic Principles of Infectiology: Open Letter from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi to German Chancellor Dr. Angela Merkel - Global ResearchSARS-CoV-2: fear versus dataHas Sweden Found the Right Solution to the Coronavirus? | National Review12 Experts Questioning the Coronavirus Panic - Global ResearchSunlight destroys virus quickly, new govt. tests find, but experts say pandemic could last through summerhttps://www.nber.org/papers/w26917.pdfList of experts/studies/analyses challenging covid-19 panicMore plague therefore challenges alarmist science pushing global warming.