As you say Jonathan, if any part of the narrative that 'a novel and lethal virus to which we had no immunity spread from Wuhan directly causing waves of all-cause excess deaths, that propagated throughout the world' is untrue, then what we are being told is a lie.
It's the biggest crime of all time, stealing people's freedom, personal autonomy and bodily integrity, and creating massive economic, social and political damage.
One of the most shocking things has been the violation of voluntary informed consent for Covid-19 vaccination, with much of the Australian population pressured, coerced and manipulated into submitting to Covid vaccination under mandates, ranging from No Jab, No Job; No Jab, No Travel; No Jab, No Restaurant; No Jab, No Haircut; No Jab, No Entertainment; No Jab, No Sport...to...No Jab, No Life.
This is what happened in Australia at the height of the Covid debacle, and there are still people here who are subject to Covid vaccination mandates to maintain their livelihoods.
It is the most diabolical situation - mandated medical interventions in a supposed free country, and the medical 'profession' went along with this assault...unbloodybelievable...
So how was the medical profession captured to participate in this violation of voluntary informed consent for vaccination, the destruction of valid consent?
The regulator of health practitioners here, AHPRA, set the scene by issuing a position statement in March 2021, which effectively mandated practitioners to support the then Morrison Government's Covid-19 vaccination policy, and gagged them from openly questioning the Morrison Government's Covid-19 vaccination rollout.
You know, I'm not a medical person (failed my biology O level) or involved in the health service in any way but I was shouting from the rooftop back in March 2020 that there was no pandemic and no lethal virus and there was no need to panic. Why was I doing that? Because I'm not an idiot!
If the virus was lethal and nobody had any immunity then the whole of China would have died within a few weeks. Every single one of them. They didn't.
If the people on the Diamond Princess had this lethal virus they would certainly have all died, being mostly old folk. They didn't.
If it was a respiratory virus then it made no difference what anyone did because people catch colds regardless of what they do. I thought at first it was just influenza then they said it was a coronavirus. The world and his wife have ALL had a coronavirus infection at least once in their lives - their immune system would cope with another one.
So if a pleb like me could see all that, why couldn't everyone else? Why did people decide to panic? Why did the authorities behave the way they did? Why are they still lying and censoring?
I will never ever forgive all the people who went along with this charade of death - it has changed everything for me and I don't even know anyone who was ill with it.
I think it's important to recognise the mental and emotional journey from 'pandemic/ virus believer' to 'covid skeptic' and finally total 'non believer' is a HUGE and potentially disorientating/ distressing journey. The more you've invested in the official narrative, the harder that journey is going to be.
But there were people who understood it was a false narrative from the beginning. And what's funny is that for them the exact same signifiers of a pandemic (masks, stickers, perspex screens, politicians giving press conferences behind their podiums, celebrity concerts etc) only confirmed there was no actual pandemic and that the whole thing was essentially theatre/ mass psychosis.
For those now starting to question the official narrative, an interesting exercise might be to look again at the events of 2020 without the terror and automatic belief in 'the pandemic' ...... and notice how utterly absurd it all looks when viewed a little more objectively and dispassionately (and dare I say with a sense of humour).
To that end, here's a video to illustrate just how absurd and surreal 2020 actually was ....
"Firstly, huge harms have been wrought on the world’s population based on the assumption that we had a global problem requiring a top-down centralized global solution. In my view that’s a dangerous notion in itself, easily twisted and usable by bad actors with control over the media for a variety of purposes which may not be totally benign."
"The World Population Plan of Action is not self-enforcing and will require vigorous
efforts by interested countries, U.N. agencies and other international bodies to make it effective.
U.S. leadership is essential."
I'd be surprised if nothing further had been considered in the intervening half-century as populations have grown roughly in line with the report's predictions.
In the FWIW category ... I see just two possibilities:
1) There WAS a novel new virus spreading in the world …. or there was NOT a novel virus spreading in the world. (But maybe there was a non-novel ILI “bug” spreading?)
And then there are these two questions:
If there WAS a novel new virus spreading around the world, was it a virus that occurred from nature or was it a virus developed in a lab (and then it escaped or was released)?
I’m the “early-spread” Substacker so - based on too many reasons to list - I think there WAS a virus spreading - but the start date of virus spread is significantly off. I think a “novel” virus was probably circulating, that this virus was probably created in a lab and this virus was quite contagious … but it was just not lethal at all. I agree with the author’s point that Iannodis’s IFR rate is too high.
However, I am open to the theory of Rancourt and Yeadon (among others) that there might not have been a novel virus at all. All the “sick” people I’ve identified could have simply been people who were ill from “re-branded” ILI (or some percentage had influenza). Based on my research, there obviously was some bug(s) circulating that was making many people sick, but maybe this was just a “coincidence” and this wasn’t the virus that causes Covid?
If Yeadon’s theory is true, we actually have an even more sinister and stunning hoax - e.g. the entire pandemic was contrived. The PCR tests were bogus; all the antibody tests from people who had symptoms in November or December 2019 that were “positive” were ALL wrong or “false positives.” It would be stunning to tally up all the mechanisms that must have been used to support this “faux pandemic” hypothesis.
For now, I’m sticking with the hypothesis a novel virus was spreading - very widely - at least by October 2019 with this virus spiking a little bit in November 2019, definitely in late December around Christmas into the first few days of January … and one last really big spike/wave in late January/early February. (This is the spike that closed hundreds of schools all across the country … although schools were closing from “early flu” in early November).
I think the virus was actually dying out on its own by the lockdown dates (mid-March) … and so I agree that all - or almost all - the later “Covid deaths” had to be iatrogenic. (This is the key point).
I do think the ILI reports showing “severe” and “widespread” ILI and the anecdotal reports of millions of people saying they were sick from some “odd” or different-type virus should NOT be ignored or dismissed. And someone needs to plausibly explain how all the Covid antibody tests (from “early” cases) came back “positive.”
Regardless of what’s the “real truth,” the official narrative (which is actually “late spread” happened - but only in certain places) is certainly bogus and the greatest medical lie of history.
In a nutshell, I think authorities intentionally concealed evidence of "early spread" to keep virus-origination sleuths from finding the fingerprints of the people who really created this virus. The "late spread" Wuhan Live Market "authorized narrative" actually kept any detectives from working backwards. The further back they went - and to countries besides China - the more likely any Sherlock Holmes detectives might have found the truth.
Here’s a few links from my articles that I think are germane to this discussion:
Huge spike in school closings in flu season of 2019-2020:
The “flu season” of 2019-2020 was NOT “normal” compared to other ILI seasons of the prior 10 or so years. ILI outbreaks started earlier, lasted longer and were above traditional “baseline” percentages much longer than previous flu seasons.
Aug 4, 2023·edited Aug 4, 2023Liked by Jonathan Engler, Martin Neil
I enjoyed the written recap and will definitely watch the podcast. The authors reference the Diamond Princess outbreak/case. I wonder if you have taken a deep dive into the "outbreaks" on the USS Roosevelt aircraft carrier and the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carriers. Later antibody tests showed that 60 percent of Roosevelt crew members and 64 percent of de Gaulle crew members had "confirmed" infections. Previous reports - based on PCR tests - had said maybe 17 to 24 percent of crew members had been infected.
I'm soon going to write a series of articles on my key take-aways from the Roosevelt case study (all missed by officials and the MSM).
One contrarian thought: I actually wonder why 90 percent of Roosevelt or de Gaulle crew members didn't test positive for antibodies (and have theories on why this wasn't the case).
Regarding the IFR, the cases of the Roosevelt, de Gaulle and also the USS Kidd show that only one sailor (out of 7,000 on all three ships) died from Covid. That sailor was 41 and there are odd elements to that possible Covid fatality. Still, the antibody and PCR tests seem to "confirm" that at least 4,000 sailors were infected at some point. And one death. The IFR for sailors under age 41 was 0.0000 percent. This is telling us something very important about this virus (if it was a new virus).
Also, based on symptom evidence included in the CDC's own study, I think the virus came on board the Roosevelt before it left port on Jan. 17, 2020. It's almost certain several sailors were infected before the first confirmed case in America (Jan. 18, 2020).
I think the "outbreak" on the Roosevelt was only noticed because they started doing PCR testing. No PCR testing was done on hundreds of other Naval ships at the same time. If this had been done, "positive cases" would have started popping up on those ships as well. "No PCR tests" = "No cases." "Many PCR tests" = "many cases" - this was the case on these three ships and in the whole world.
Another question I have: What if antibody tests had been done of all U.S. naval ships that were at sea b/w December 2019 and March 2020? I think you would have had ... 60 percent positives. So (IMO) there's a reason the NAVY and CDC never did AB tests of crew members serving on other ships at the same time as these three. The reason? They didn't want to "confirm" more "early" cases. Never test for or investigate that which you don't want to "confirm." This strategy works every time.
Here is HMG's list of Threats-Which-Should-Have-Us-All-Quaking-With-Fear-And-Free-Floating-Anxiety: so much scope for the lockdown propagandists.
As to the jabs: informed consent and informed dissent cancelled ; of course the taste for cancellation has spread to freedom of speech, the right to have a bank account and the right to question anything which the elite does not approve of.
I have evaded the thought police thus far, but for how much longer?
Great article. I agree that the question of a "lab leak" is more or less irrelevant in the broader context. But still, about that. Another possibility why they are pushing this theory so hard could be that The Virus actually did leak from a lab, but not in Wuhan. There were some strange events around Ft Detrick in spring/summer 2019. Then there was the "mysterious respiratory outbreak" at Greenspring, approx 80 miles from Ft Detrick, in June/July 2019, which was very soon declared case closed, it was just the common cold, don't look here, look somewhere else. Then there is this paper which I only recently stumbled upon: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.01.30.926477 If their assumptions are correct, The Virus started to spread at some point between May 2019 and September 2019, which would be entirely consistent with that timeline.
Could it be that The Virus actually leaked from a US lab and they know it and they're trying to shift the blame to China and distract from the true origin? Nah, they would never do that. It's just a conspiracy theory.
*** That the virus was novel (meaning we had no prior immunity and “everyone was susceptible”) - but if it was, how come so few people (eg on the Diamond Princess) became ill? ***
Covid deaths were age-stratified amongst various age cohorts along the lines of how strong Innate Immunity is in a particular cohort. The elderly have weak Innate Immunity. Children and babies have phenomenally strong Innate Immunity to compensate for being born immunological naive.
Immuno-compomised people generally also have weaker innate immunity.
I agree that the virus origin is irrelevant, though the politics of it are interesting.
Two things you missed out. First, ventilation contributed to deaths. The lung pathology in severe Covid is alveolar leakage and no amount of ventilating will beat that - indeed, it will make things worse. Pierre Kory has written an elegant exposition of this (https://pierrekory.substack.com/p/the-premature-use-of-mechanical-ventilation). Second, the underlying mechanism of the severe systemic effects is a cytokine storm (which, as it happens, can be provoked by other viruses) probably generated by the original version's spike protein. The huge peak in deaths was due to ventilator misuse on the one hand, and failure to deploy treatment for the cytokine storm on the other. Once this was done using steroids and tocilizumab, pari passu with the spike protein mutation resulting in a much decreased risk of CSS, the fatality rate plummeted.
My experience of attempting to bring the second point to the attention of the UK authorities underlines the resistance of those authorities to any hypothesis that challenged the "Settled Science" view; the refusal of said authorities to admit their mistakes; and the virtual impossibility of a retired physician (me) to get my points across. I would argue further that by the time any infection is at risk of being identified as a pandemic it is too late to stop spread; if most people don't get sick it doesn't matter, and if a few do get sick then the proper treatment must be instigated immediately. I outlined an investigation and treatment protocol in the UK in May 2020. Bits of it were adopted by January 2021. How many deaths might have been prevented had there not been an 8 month delay?
classic case of "correlation doesn't equal causation." seek and ye shall find. as reiner fuellmich says, it was a testdemic. cycle theshold is irrelevant. pcr isn't a diagnostic tool and was not designed to be.
The $64,000 question is…why was there a global mass population vaccination response against a disease it was known from the beginning wasn’t a serious threat to most people?
I asked this question in a BMJ rapid response in March 2020…but there weren’t many in the medical and scientific establishment asking this question then, because most of them were too terrified to question the blessed Church of Vaccination, because to do so would be heresy…and now here we are…
Is it ethical to impede access to natural immunity? The case of SARS-CoV2
Dear Editor
If children, young adults and others can mount their own effective immune response to SARS-CoV2, is it ethical to impede their ability to access natural immunity by interfering with the natural progression of the virus?
According to the WHO, "Illness due to COVID-19 infection is generally mild, especially for children and young adults."[1]
Is the focus on future fast-tracked vaccine products blocking full consideration of the opportunity for natural herd immunity? Who is Neil Ferguson to say "The only exit strategy [in the] long term for this is really vaccination or other forms of innovative technology that allows us to control transmission".[2]
In regards to young people's and others' right to natural immunity, it's also vital to consider the startling admission by Heidi Larson, Director of The Vaccine Confidence Project, during the recent WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, i.e. "...We've shifted the human population...to dependency on vaccine-induced immunity...We're in a very fragile state now. We have developed a world that is dependent on vaccinations".[3]
This is a very alarming statement by Professor Larson, particularly with the prospect of other epidemics emerging in the future. We have to learn to deal with epidemics and illnesses as they emerge, it's not feasible to vaccinate the global population against every threat.
In a recent article raising concern about making decisions about this pandemic without reliable data, John Ioannidis notes that "School closures may also diminish the chances of developing herd immunity in an age group that is spared serious disease".[4] The UK's chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, raised the prospect of developing natural herd immunity[5], but this idea was subsequently howled down by Matt Hancock, the UK secretary of state for health and social care[6], and others such as Willem van Schaik, a professor of microbiology and infection, as reported by the Science Media Centre.[7]
Again, is it ethical to deny children, young people and others their opportunity for natural immunity, and to plan to make them dependent on vaccine-induce immunity, to in effect make them dependent on the vaccine industry?
This is even more serious to consider in light of emerging vaccine product failures, e.g. pertussis and mumps.
The international community must be assured that independent and objective thinkers are carefully considering the way ahead on this matter.
References:
1. WHO Q&A on coronaviruses (COVID-19) - Should I worry about COVID-19. 9 March 2020.
2. Elisabeth Mahase. Covid-19: UK starts social distancing after new model points to 260 000 potential deaths. BMJ2020;368:m1089
3. Heidi Larson. Vaccine safety in the next decade. Why we need new modes of trust building? WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, 2-3 December 2019.
4. John P.A. Ioannidis. A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. STAT, 17 March 2020.
5. Coronavirus: 60% of UK population need to become infected so country can build 'herd immunity', government's chief scientist says. Independent, 13 March 2020.
6. The UK backs away from "herd immunity" coronavirus proposal amid blowback. Vox, 15 March 2020.
7. Expert comments about herd immunity. Science Media Centre, 13 March 2020.
Competing interests: No competing interests
25 March 2020
Elizabeth M Hart
Independent citizen investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
Excellent article, thanks. I would however suggest it is important to keep the question of a lab leak in mind, (whether it's true or false), simply because the same (bad) actors were involved in gain of function research and then supporting (or even suggesting) restrictions which followed the "launch of the so-called pandemic". So for me the two aspects are intertwined. I see you referred to the rise in C19 infections shortly after 'vaccination', attributing it to temporarily reduced immunity. That may be true but I'd also suggest a second possible reason. Namely that it's conceivable the 'vaccines' (despite official claims to the contrary), effectively give many recipients the virus. They turn the person into a spike factory (which as we know is a major part of the virus), and if that isn't "giving them covid" in one shape or another, then what is it?
As you say Jonathan, if any part of the narrative that 'a novel and lethal virus to which we had no immunity spread from Wuhan directly causing waves of all-cause excess deaths, that propagated throughout the world' is untrue, then what we are being told is a lie.
It's the biggest crime of all time, stealing people's freedom, personal autonomy and bodily integrity, and creating massive economic, social and political damage.
One of the most shocking things has been the violation of voluntary informed consent for Covid-19 vaccination, with much of the Australian population pressured, coerced and manipulated into submitting to Covid vaccination under mandates, ranging from No Jab, No Job; No Jab, No Travel; No Jab, No Restaurant; No Jab, No Haircut; No Jab, No Entertainment; No Jab, No Sport...to...No Jab, No Life.
This is what happened in Australia at the height of the Covid debacle, and there are still people here who are subject to Covid vaccination mandates to maintain their livelihoods.
It is the most diabolical situation - mandated medical interventions in a supposed free country, and the medical 'profession' went along with this assault...unbloodybelievable...
So how was the medical profession captured to participate in this violation of voluntary informed consent for vaccination, the destruction of valid consent?
The regulator of health practitioners here, AHPRA, set the scene by issuing a position statement in March 2021, which effectively mandated practitioners to support the then Morrison Government's Covid-19 vaccination policy, and gagged them from openly questioning the Morrison Government's Covid-19 vaccination rollout.
I'm challenging AHPRA about the disaster they have caused via their position statement, see my recent email to AHPRA: Reckless disregard for voluntary informed consent - the AHPRA Position Statement 9 March 2021: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2023/07/reckless-disregard-for-voluntary-informed-consent-the-ahpra-position-statement-9-march-2021.pdf
Excellent article!
You know, I'm not a medical person (failed my biology O level) or involved in the health service in any way but I was shouting from the rooftop back in March 2020 that there was no pandemic and no lethal virus and there was no need to panic. Why was I doing that? Because I'm not an idiot!
If the virus was lethal and nobody had any immunity then the whole of China would have died within a few weeks. Every single one of them. They didn't.
If the people on the Diamond Princess had this lethal virus they would certainly have all died, being mostly old folk. They didn't.
If it was a respiratory virus then it made no difference what anyone did because people catch colds regardless of what they do. I thought at first it was just influenza then they said it was a coronavirus. The world and his wife have ALL had a coronavirus infection at least once in their lives - their immune system would cope with another one.
So if a pleb like me could see all that, why couldn't everyone else? Why did people decide to panic? Why did the authorities behave the way they did? Why are they still lying and censoring?
I will never ever forgive all the people who went along with this charade of death - it has changed everything for me and I don't even know anyone who was ill with it.
I think it's important to recognise the mental and emotional journey from 'pandemic/ virus believer' to 'covid skeptic' and finally total 'non believer' is a HUGE and potentially disorientating/ distressing journey. The more you've invested in the official narrative, the harder that journey is going to be.
But there were people who understood it was a false narrative from the beginning. And what's funny is that for them the exact same signifiers of a pandemic (masks, stickers, perspex screens, politicians giving press conferences behind their podiums, celebrity concerts etc) only confirmed there was no actual pandemic and that the whole thing was essentially theatre/ mass psychosis.
For those now starting to question the official narrative, an interesting exercise might be to look again at the events of 2020 without the terror and automatic belief in 'the pandemic' ...... and notice how utterly absurd it all looks when viewed a little more objectively and dispassionately (and dare I say with a sense of humour).
To that end, here's a video to illustrate just how absurd and surreal 2020 actually was ....
https://odysee.com/@CoronaStudies:3/Corona-Studies-Ep1:7
"Firstly, huge harms have been wrought on the world’s population based on the assumption that we had a global problem requiring a top-down centralized global solution. In my view that’s a dangerous notion in itself, easily twisted and usable by bad actors with control over the media for a variety of purposes which may not be totally benign."
The 'Kissinger Report' of 1974 (https://static1.squarespace.com/static/61910a2d98732d54b73ef8fc/t/64bfd6e7f5ca8d4e8192bdbb/1690293992297/Kissinger+report+declassified.pdf) concerns itself with overpopulation and what to do about it. It offers a plan of action and suggests in section 30 of the Executive Summary that:
"The World Population Plan of Action is not self-enforcing and will require vigorous
efforts by interested countries, U.N. agencies and other international bodies to make it effective.
U.S. leadership is essential."
I'd be surprised if nothing further had been considered in the intervening half-century as populations have grown roughly in line with the report's predictions.
In the FWIW category ... I see just two possibilities:
1) There WAS a novel new virus spreading in the world …. or there was NOT a novel virus spreading in the world. (But maybe there was a non-novel ILI “bug” spreading?)
And then there are these two questions:
If there WAS a novel new virus spreading around the world, was it a virus that occurred from nature or was it a virus developed in a lab (and then it escaped or was released)?
I’m the “early-spread” Substacker so - based on too many reasons to list - I think there WAS a virus spreading - but the start date of virus spread is significantly off. I think a “novel” virus was probably circulating, that this virus was probably created in a lab and this virus was quite contagious … but it was just not lethal at all. I agree with the author’s point that Iannodis’s IFR rate is too high.
However, I am open to the theory of Rancourt and Yeadon (among others) that there might not have been a novel virus at all. All the “sick” people I’ve identified could have simply been people who were ill from “re-branded” ILI (or some percentage had influenza). Based on my research, there obviously was some bug(s) circulating that was making many people sick, but maybe this was just a “coincidence” and this wasn’t the virus that causes Covid?
If Yeadon’s theory is true, we actually have an even more sinister and stunning hoax - e.g. the entire pandemic was contrived. The PCR tests were bogus; all the antibody tests from people who had symptoms in November or December 2019 that were “positive” were ALL wrong or “false positives.” It would be stunning to tally up all the mechanisms that must have been used to support this “faux pandemic” hypothesis.
For now, I’m sticking with the hypothesis a novel virus was spreading - very widely - at least by October 2019 with this virus spiking a little bit in November 2019, definitely in late December around Christmas into the first few days of January … and one last really big spike/wave in late January/early February. (This is the spike that closed hundreds of schools all across the country … although schools were closing from “early flu” in early November).
I think the virus was actually dying out on its own by the lockdown dates (mid-March) … and so I agree that all - or almost all - the later “Covid deaths” had to be iatrogenic. (This is the key point).
I do think the ILI reports showing “severe” and “widespread” ILI and the anecdotal reports of millions of people saying they were sick from some “odd” or different-type virus should NOT be ignored or dismissed. And someone needs to plausibly explain how all the Covid antibody tests (from “early” cases) came back “positive.”
Regardless of what’s the “real truth,” the official narrative (which is actually “late spread” happened - but only in certain places) is certainly bogus and the greatest medical lie of history.
In a nutshell, I think authorities intentionally concealed evidence of "early spread" to keep virus-origination sleuths from finding the fingerprints of the people who really created this virus. The "late spread" Wuhan Live Market "authorized narrative" actually kept any detectives from working backwards. The further back they went - and to countries besides China - the more likely any Sherlock Holmes detectives might have found the truth.
Here’s a few links from my articles that I think are germane to this discussion:
Huge spike in school closings in flu season of 2019-2020:
https://billricejr.substack.com/p/school-closings-galore-documented?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
“Case zero” was NOT in Wuhan in December or November 2019 (summary of antibody evidence outside Wuhan before these alleged first cases):
https://billricejr.substack.com/p/case-zeroes-in-world-did-not-come?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
The “flu season” of 2019-2020 was NOT “normal” compared to other ILI seasons of the prior 10 or so years. ILI outbreaks started earlier, lasted longer and were above traditional “baseline” percentages much longer than previous flu seasons.
https://billricejr.substack.com/p/influenza-like-illness-probably-tells?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Thanks for your great work! I appreciate any comments on my prior work on “early spread.”
- Bill Rice, Jr.
I enjoyed the written recap and will definitely watch the podcast. The authors reference the Diamond Princess outbreak/case. I wonder if you have taken a deep dive into the "outbreaks" on the USS Roosevelt aircraft carrier and the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carriers. Later antibody tests showed that 60 percent of Roosevelt crew members and 64 percent of de Gaulle crew members had "confirmed" infections. Previous reports - based on PCR tests - had said maybe 17 to 24 percent of crew members had been infected.
I'm soon going to write a series of articles on my key take-aways from the Roosevelt case study (all missed by officials and the MSM).
One contrarian thought: I actually wonder why 90 percent of Roosevelt or de Gaulle crew members didn't test positive for antibodies (and have theories on why this wasn't the case).
Regarding the IFR, the cases of the Roosevelt, de Gaulle and also the USS Kidd show that only one sailor (out of 7,000 on all three ships) died from Covid. That sailor was 41 and there are odd elements to that possible Covid fatality. Still, the antibody and PCR tests seem to "confirm" that at least 4,000 sailors were infected at some point. And one death. The IFR for sailors under age 41 was 0.0000 percent. This is telling us something very important about this virus (if it was a new virus).
Also, based on symptom evidence included in the CDC's own study, I think the virus came on board the Roosevelt before it left port on Jan. 17, 2020. It's almost certain several sailors were infected before the first confirmed case in America (Jan. 18, 2020).
I think the "outbreak" on the Roosevelt was only noticed because they started doing PCR testing. No PCR testing was done on hundreds of other Naval ships at the same time. If this had been done, "positive cases" would have started popping up on those ships as well. "No PCR tests" = "No cases." "Many PCR tests" = "many cases" - this was the case on these three ships and in the whole world.
Another question I have: What if antibody tests had been done of all U.S. naval ships that were at sea b/w December 2019 and March 2020? I think you would have had ... 60 percent positives. So (IMO) there's a reason the NAVY and CDC never did AB tests of crew members serving on other ships at the same time as these three. The reason? They didn't want to "confirm" more "early" cases. Never test for or investigate that which you don't want to "confirm." This strategy works every time.
https://inews.co.uk/news/chance-pandemic-next-five-years-new-risk-register-2522996?ITO=msn
Here is HMG's list of Threats-Which-Should-Have-Us-All-Quaking-With-Fear-And-Free-Floating-Anxiety: so much scope for the lockdown propagandists.
As to the jabs: informed consent and informed dissent cancelled ; of course the taste for cancellation has spread to freedom of speech, the right to have a bank account and the right to question anything which the elite does not approve of.
I have evaded the thought police thus far, but for how much longer?
Great article. I agree that the question of a "lab leak" is more or less irrelevant in the broader context. But still, about that. Another possibility why they are pushing this theory so hard could be that The Virus actually did leak from a lab, but not in Wuhan. There were some strange events around Ft Detrick in spring/summer 2019. Then there was the "mysterious respiratory outbreak" at Greenspring, approx 80 miles from Ft Detrick, in June/July 2019, which was very soon declared case closed, it was just the common cold, don't look here, look somewhere else. Then there is this paper which I only recently stumbled upon: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.01.30.926477 If their assumptions are correct, The Virus started to spread at some point between May 2019 and September 2019, which would be entirely consistent with that timeline.
Could it be that The Virus actually leaked from a US lab and they know it and they're trying to shift the blame to China and distract from the true origin? Nah, they would never do that. It's just a conspiracy theory.
I think we need to stop using the word "vaccine" it's not.
Regarding your question:
*** That the virus was novel (meaning we had no prior immunity and “everyone was susceptible”) - but if it was, how come so few people (eg on the Diamond Princess) became ill? ***
The answer lies in the Innate Immune System.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279396/#:~:text=The%20innate%20immune%20system%20is,the%20%22nonspecific%22%20immune%20system.
Covid deaths were age-stratified amongst various age cohorts along the lines of how strong Innate Immunity is in a particular cohort. The elderly have weak Innate Immunity. Children and babies have phenomenally strong Innate Immunity to compensate for being born immunological naive.
Immuno-compomised people generally also have weaker innate immunity.
I agree that the virus origin is irrelevant, though the politics of it are interesting.
Two things you missed out. First, ventilation contributed to deaths. The lung pathology in severe Covid is alveolar leakage and no amount of ventilating will beat that - indeed, it will make things worse. Pierre Kory has written an elegant exposition of this (https://pierrekory.substack.com/p/the-premature-use-of-mechanical-ventilation). Second, the underlying mechanism of the severe systemic effects is a cytokine storm (which, as it happens, can be provoked by other viruses) probably generated by the original version's spike protein. The huge peak in deaths was due to ventilator misuse on the one hand, and failure to deploy treatment for the cytokine storm on the other. Once this was done using steroids and tocilizumab, pari passu with the spike protein mutation resulting in a much decreased risk of CSS, the fatality rate plummeted.
My experience of attempting to bring the second point to the attention of the UK authorities underlines the resistance of those authorities to any hypothesis that challenged the "Settled Science" view; the refusal of said authorities to admit their mistakes; and the virtual impossibility of a retired physician (me) to get my points across. I would argue further that by the time any infection is at risk of being identified as a pandemic it is too late to stop spread; if most people don't get sick it doesn't matter, and if a few do get sick then the proper treatment must be instigated immediately. I outlined an investigation and treatment protocol in the UK in May 2020. Bits of it were adopted by January 2021. How many deaths might have been prevented had there not been an 8 month delay?
Excellent post. It has given me further points about the 'Pandemic' that I had not considered. Thank you.
classic case of "correlation doesn't equal causation." seek and ye shall find. as reiner fuellmich says, it was a testdemic. cycle theshold is irrelevant. pcr isn't a diagnostic tool and was not designed to be.
The $64,000 question is…why was there a global mass population vaccination response against a disease it was known from the beginning wasn’t a serious threat to most people?
I asked this question in a BMJ rapid response in March 2020…but there weren’t many in the medical and scientific establishment asking this question then, because most of them were too terrified to question the blessed Church of Vaccination, because to do so would be heresy…and now here we are…
Please see my BMJ rapid response below: https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m1089/rr-6
Is it ethical to impede access to natural immunity? The case of SARS-CoV2
Dear Editor
If children, young adults and others can mount their own effective immune response to SARS-CoV2, is it ethical to impede their ability to access natural immunity by interfering with the natural progression of the virus?
According to the WHO, "Illness due to COVID-19 infection is generally mild, especially for children and young adults."[1]
Is the focus on future fast-tracked vaccine products blocking full consideration of the opportunity for natural herd immunity? Who is Neil Ferguson to say "The only exit strategy [in the] long term for this is really vaccination or other forms of innovative technology that allows us to control transmission".[2]
In regards to young people's and others' right to natural immunity, it's also vital to consider the startling admission by Heidi Larson, Director of The Vaccine Confidence Project, during the recent WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, i.e. "...We've shifted the human population...to dependency on vaccine-induced immunity...We're in a very fragile state now. We have developed a world that is dependent on vaccinations".[3]
This is a very alarming statement by Professor Larson, particularly with the prospect of other epidemics emerging in the future. We have to learn to deal with epidemics and illnesses as they emerge, it's not feasible to vaccinate the global population against every threat.
In a recent article raising concern about making decisions about this pandemic without reliable data, John Ioannidis notes that "School closures may also diminish the chances of developing herd immunity in an age group that is spared serious disease".[4] The UK's chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, raised the prospect of developing natural herd immunity[5], but this idea was subsequently howled down by Matt Hancock, the UK secretary of state for health and social care[6], and others such as Willem van Schaik, a professor of microbiology and infection, as reported by the Science Media Centre.[7]
Again, is it ethical to deny children, young people and others their opportunity for natural immunity, and to plan to make them dependent on vaccine-induce immunity, to in effect make them dependent on the vaccine industry?
This is even more serious to consider in light of emerging vaccine product failures, e.g. pertussis and mumps.
The international community must be assured that independent and objective thinkers are carefully considering the way ahead on this matter.
References:
1. WHO Q&A on coronaviruses (COVID-19) - Should I worry about COVID-19. 9 March 2020.
2. Elisabeth Mahase. Covid-19: UK starts social distancing after new model points to 260 000 potential deaths. BMJ2020;368:m1089
3. Heidi Larson. Vaccine safety in the next decade. Why we need new modes of trust building? WHO Global Vaccine Safety Summit, 2-3 December 2019.
4. John P.A. Ioannidis. A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. STAT, 17 March 2020.
5. Coronavirus: 60% of UK population need to become infected so country can build 'herd immunity', government's chief scientist says. Independent, 13 March 2020.
6. The UK backs away from "herd immunity" coronavirus proposal amid blowback. Vox, 15 March 2020.
7. Expert comments about herd immunity. Science Media Centre, 13 March 2020.
Competing interests: No competing interests
25 March 2020
Elizabeth M Hart
Independent citizen investigating the over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
Adelaide, Australia
About "Part One: Did we actually have a lethal pandemic of a novel spreading virus?":
1. Visit https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps for official European mortality statistics
2. Click "Z-scores by country"
2. Expand year range to 2017-23
3. See that spring 2018 and 2020 look identical, or worse in 2018
This is surprising, considering there was a deadly pandemic in 2020.
Excellent article, thanks. I would however suggest it is important to keep the question of a lab leak in mind, (whether it's true or false), simply because the same (bad) actors were involved in gain of function research and then supporting (or even suggesting) restrictions which followed the "launch of the so-called pandemic". So for me the two aspects are intertwined. I see you referred to the rise in C19 infections shortly after 'vaccination', attributing it to temporarily reduced immunity. That may be true but I'd also suggest a second possible reason. Namely that it's conceivable the 'vaccines' (despite official claims to the contrary), effectively give many recipients the virus. They turn the person into a spike factory (which as we know is a major part of the virus), and if that isn't "giving them covid" in one shape or another, then what is it?