If Not Us, Then Who?

PANDA ~ Pandemics Data and Analytics published a Review update of recent science relating to Covid-19 policy in early January. “The unprecedented measures of universal lockdowns, tight institutional lockdowns of care homes, universal masking of the general population, obsession with surfaces and hands, and the accelerated vaccine deployment are contrary to known science, and contrary to recent leading studies. There has been government recklessness by action and negligence by omission. Institutional measures have been needed for a long time to stem corruption in both medicine and public health policy….. Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. COVID-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health.[Ref] Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science….“.

PANDA were recently attacked by what Nick Hudson describes as a “tabloid-grade hit piece”, referring to PANDA as “misguided charlatans” among other unjustified nonsense. In the article at The Daily Maverick titled “Kung Flu Panda: Dodgy analytics or pandemic propaganda”, journalists Nafeez Ahmed and Rebecca Davis write “a very taudry piece of tabloid journalism”. Hudson has told PANDA members to “put on your thicker skins”, predicting that as PANDA’s reach and capacities increase, more personal attacks will occur. A number of experienced and skilled public health professionals volunteer at PANDA anonymously for this reason. Hudson suggests that between our supporters and detractors, are many who are unsure what to think, who are likely open to logical reconsideration about lockdown as any type of rational response because “Men go mad in herds, but regain their sanity one by one”.

Hudson’s response to the tabloid attack in which The Daily Maverick denied PANDA a right of reply is available in this BizNews article including a podcast style interview. The article and the interview are both testament to Hudson’s voice of calm and reason, representing genuine public health. His main points are:

  • The attack gave PANDA an opportunity to restate and clarify their position.
  • These journalists apparently consider it their job to silence lockdown critics. This confirms that lockdown is an authoritarian strategy which can only work if the general population are misled in order to maintain the narrative.
  • PANDA have offered to debate with lockdown proponents repeatedly but offers are persistently ignored in favour of taudry tabloid journalism and false accusations.
  • PANDA’s Scientific Advisory Board are luminaries in the fields of infectious diseases, epidemiology, education and other public health associated disciplines at internationally renowned institutions.
  • PANDA consists of another 125 voluntary members, also leaders in their relevant fields such as genetics, pathology and biostatistics. Many volunteers act anonymously due to the intense censorship and authoritarianism reinforcing the narrative around lockdown and related restrictions which are not supported by evidence.
  • PANDA do not see any evidence supporting draconian mandates relating to mask wearing. For example in South Africa today, you can be arrested for not wearing a mask. Mask mandates are a very bad social invention which were ruled out, as were lockdowns, in pre-pandemic guidelines written by WHO, CDC and many other journals etc.
  • The main transmission mode of Covid-19 is probably via aerosols, although PANDA’s scientists look for explanations that fit with evidence rather than explanations that fit with an established narrative. Where aerosols play a role, mask effectiveness is implausible as aerosol particles are far smaller than the apertures in mask fibres. Even if larger droplets are stopped by a mask, you still breathe out over those droplets, causing them to aerosolise and drift out into the air where they remain suspended for extended periods of time. This in turn places social distancing rules into question.
  • PANDA’s mathematical modeling has attracted criticism for under-estimating the numbers of Covid related excess deaths [specifically in South Africa]. This criticism is disproportionate given the accuracy of these models, particularly when compared with the exaggerated over-estimates provided by the South African government.
  • PANDA don’t believe the majority of excess deaths being seen are caused by Covid. Serious cases of Covid become progressively ill and distressed, and are highly unlikely to stay at home without seeking medical attention. The video footage from China of people suddenly dropping dead in the streets was obviously false propaganda.
  • Worldwide data show a substantial proportion of treatment-associated deaths in Covid patients [eg WHO recommendations for toxic doses of Hydrochloroquine; and WHO recommendations to ventilate people at high risk of ventilator-associated injury].
  • Governmental use of scare tactics has generated reluctance in hospital attendance of people with non-Covid symptoms, contributing to excess deaths.
  • PANDA believe that public health policy in this pandemic has been extremely destructive, and that the outcomes of the public health response are much worse than the outcomes of Covid-19.
  • PANDA are not engaged in conspiracy theories, but base their information on sound scientific logic, referring to leading specialists in a multidisciplinary team. Sometimes they make errors but their approach is disciplined and evidence-based, questioning and exploring issues beyond the consensus narrative.
  • Many of PANDA’s Scientific Advisory Board have been attacked relentlessly in both social media and mainstream media, by what appears to be a posse of rabid lockdown authoritarians who are concerned with anything but public health.

The interviewer asks Hudson: Why are PANDA, “pretty smart guys”, setting themselves up to become the targets of those who perhaps believe that they are conspiracy theorists, that they’re trying to spread fake news? Hudson’s reply here:

If it’s not us, who will do it? We believe that the whole public health policy response has been shocking, resulting in such destruction, and we have from the word-go predicted that the public health outcomes from the response will be much worse than the disease itself. We stand by that view and we believe there is emerging evidence for precisely that. The evidence base for this is building up over time. In the absence of PANDA, who else?… We are recognised now, on an international level, as being a group that is not captured by crazy conspiracy theories… We have stayed well away from <the cooky elements> and we provide a platform that people can trust. We base our information on facts and our explanations for what is going on, whilst we don’t pretend that they are perfect, are based on sound scientific logic, and we access in a very multidisciplinary fashion, some really top minds in diverse fields, in order to generate our viewpoints. We are very careful with our communications, and sure from hundreds of pages and loads of interviews, from time to time a little error or gremlin slips through, but it is quickly corrected. We have a very disciplined approach in forming a view on all of these complex issues, from variants (or as we call them scariants), asymptomatic transmission, lockdown effectiveness, mask mandate effectiveness, and this type of thing.

Misleading the World

I don’t know if Israel National News is a mainstream media outlet, but I guess perhaps it is not given the article Lawyers to sue WHO for ‘misleading world over COVID-19 outbreak’ which they published on 28 February 2021. The article includes a video interview with Dr Reiner Fuellmich which I first shared here three months ago when I wrote Clickbait and Kludge.

The information from Dr Fuellmich and his investigative team isn’t fading away into the ether of conspiratorial cults. In fact it is becoming more pertinent as evidence acrrues and we slowly start to realise one by one, that a series of events over the past year has not made logical sense. The world’s most vulnerable will suffer the consequences for decades. Many millions of children have unnecessarily missed an entire year of school; elderly in care homes have been separated from their families and existed in almost complete isolation for a full year near the end of their life, many of whom have died alone; hundreds of thousands of business owners are bankrupted; workers across the impoverished world suddenly found themselves stranded and even more vulnerable to abuse than before; millions of starving children; and the many millions of individual stories of suffering, hardship, abuse and unnecessary death across the globe.

As Dr Roger Hodkinson stated passionately on 19 November 2020, a five minute video which has been removed from YouTube for violating their terms of service, “This is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public”. Dr Hodkinson has since been severely maligned for speaking out against the consensus narrative of locking down society as a public health intervention.

The below transcript from part of the interview with Dr Fuellmich about his legal team’s investigations into the corruption playing out, describes the extent of this hoax. A real virus is circulating but those with alterior motives and the knowledge to manipulate the situation have worked interconnectedly, in very sophisticated ways, to upturn modern society under the guise of public health, for their own personal gain.

WHO, the World Economic Forum, the United Nations… they are all supranational, private organisations. The World Economic Forum for example, was invented by a German by the name of Klaus Schwabb. He is a private person. This is an extremely powerful organisation right now because they lobby politicians through their annual meeting, at Davos. That’s where they mingle and that’s where many politicians who may not be the toughest people in the world, but who constantly have to pretend that they’re in power and that they know what they’re doing. Where many politicians are really flattered by being so close to the really powerful.

So you have the self-appointed political elite, and you have the self-appointed corporate elite, who are meeting over and over again. They are so close that in the meantime they have in some instances usurped the government’s sovereign powers, the most important right that we have all over the world. The right to free speech. The fundamental right, the most important right for democracy, because you have to be able to discuss different opinions, which is not happening right now. And the power to regulate this should be the government’s power.

But look at what’s happening. My English version of my video was taken down by YouTube. That’s Google. So they believe that they have the power to censor us. That is not right. We have to take back the powers from them and put them back to where it belongs, with the government. And we have to take a really close look at who is in government and who became too close to these corporations….

The concrete instance of how we became alerted to this. One of us watched a film clip on the internet. It was filmed in May of 2019. This was a congress that was held by the leading German governmental party, CDU (Christian Democratic Union). We have a grand coalition which is ruling our country and the stronger one of the two parties is the CDU. They held this Congress in May of 2019. You would expect all of the people who play a role in this party to be there: Angela Merkel; the Secretary of Health. But in addition to that, there was this now infamous Professor, Doctor Christian Drosten, of Charite University. The one who pushed the idea that this is going to be a really dangerous pandemic and the one who convinced the world – not just Germany, but the world, because his test was the one recommended by the World Health Organisation, to be used all over the world – he convinced the world that with PCR tests you can see how many people are infected with the Coronavirus, with Covid.

So he was there. At first I thought well maybe he’s a member of the CDU? No. There was Professor Wieler, he runs the German equivalent of the CDC, the RKI (Robert Koch Institute). Professor Wieler, who’s a veterinarian, how did he get into that position? Then there was Tedros, of the World Health Organisation. Dr Tedros, many people think he’s a doctor. No, he’s a philosopher. And there were the two leading lobbyists of the two biggest, most important, richest health care organisations in the world which is Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust. They were all there.

Now this could have been a coincidence but we kept looking and then we could see that these people had met over and over and over again through the years. And these very same people, who met in May of 2019, are the ones who then called the pandemic in March of 2020. The very same people.

And it was Drosten, whose paper, written January 23rd I think it was published, and the experts we spoke with say it’s very sloppy, he wrote it with other authors. Very sloppy, but it’s the centrepiece of this pandemic. Because it spells out that with a PCR test that he invented specifically for this purpose, we would be able to tell who was infected and how many people are infected. A blatant lie as we now know.

At the same time… we found out that there’s a Chinese paper which is also written about this pandemic and how to best play it. The Chinese paper is very well done. And one of the experts who advises us on our committee said the Chinese don’t need any advice from the Germans. They don’t need any help from us. They could have taken the Chinese paper. It now turns out the Drosten paper was only there to convince the rest of the world to use the PCR tests in order to test for infection. The Chinese paper seems to be the one that was used by the Chinese. The Chinese don’t have a pandemic anymore. They understood very quickly that this was made up. Maybe they took part in making it up”.

Independent journalists are fighting back against owned mainstream outlets who only share the consensus narrative. Anna Brees is an excellent example. Her interview on 1 March 2021 with David Rose, Dr Tess Lawrie and Dr Pierre Kory discusses the issue of Ivermectin, a recognised and very cheap treatment which has been removed from authorised treatment protocols. Despite having known therapeutic effects, doctors are banned from using it, in favour of new, expensive drugs connected with the same corporations offering us the tests, vaccines and other products being fiercely promoted, to the point of being linked to “freedom passports”.

Here, Richie Allen interviews Dr Thomas Binder, another specialist speaking out at great personal expense. He studied Immunology and Virology before specialising in Cardiology and describes himself as having over 30 years’ experience in diagnostics and treatments. In 2020, as a clinician, he suddenly found himself required to follow rules set by non-clinical biologists and epidemiologists coordinating the pandemic response using faulty tests, and enforcing doctors to test healthy people which he describes as against medical ethics and common sense. In February 2020 he became suspicious that something was wrong, but he waited until March “when I was 200% sure”, to speak out. He wrote in opposition of the PCR tests and was arrested by an anti-terrorism squad, under a false accusation of having threatened the government. He was soon released but a colleague claimed he had “covid insanity” and he was sectioned as a psychiatric inpatient for six days. He has since employed a legal team to investigate these events. He discusses the fact that the attacks against himself and other doctors daring to speak out are used as a way to silence most from speaking out against the consensus narrative.

Dr Binder also describes the 2009 “pandemic” as a “Flu Swindle” which was similar to Covid-19 but was stopped much earlier than this pandemic. As I have described before, Dr Wolfgang Wodarg coordinated events which stopped the Swine Flu pandemic response, and has paid a very high price for daring to do so. Dr Binder speaks about the corruption within World Health Organisation at length; they changed the threshold for defining a pandemic in 2009 so that “any cold or flu virus” can be declared a pandemic, and when such a declaration is made, countries are required to impose the same measures at the same time, in lockstep, “so we end up in a kind of totalitarian world government”. He outlines how many, even in high level government positions, don’t understand what they are involved in, and that rather than being evil, it is a form of mass delusion. But that once we are enlightened, we must stand up and speak out to stop the insanity playing out. The industry is new medications, new tests, new vaccines, being led by people who refer to themselves as “Virus Hunters”.

He discusses how our paradoxical response to the virus has caused much more harm than the virus itself, with testing of healthy people being “the coronation of insanity”. The majority of those being tested have no symptoms, and this was never previously a public health intervention. If, as we are currently doing with Covid, we used a non-specific, non-validated, non-standardised test with high cycle threshold for Influenza, to test the whole population, we would also find ourselves in an Influenza epidemic. Video footage from China and Northern Italy was frightening, creating understandable panic a year ago, including in the medical profession. This led to over-treatment of patients including the use of toxic doses of medications [and use of ventilators] recommended erroneously by World Health Organisation. The way to assess the pandemic is not by looking at case numbers, or even numbers of Covid deaths, but rather at ICU occupancy and excess death rates. He discusses the fact that despite the reported numbers of Covid-19 deaths, very few places globally have seen any excess deaths at all.

The interview with Dr Binder is almost an hour long, and his interviewer has a strong Irish accent, but it provides observations of the Covid-19 pandemic which are worth considering.

There has never been a counter-argument to anything I have said. Only a label. This is proof that I am correct. Any doctor on this planet has a duty to stick to his oath, and to reality, and to stand up to this insanity. To inform the public so that the informed public can use lawyers to reinstitute law. Always by peaceful means. In a democracy the populace should decide. Not the governments following some multi billionairre psychopaths“. ~ Dr Thomas Binder

Corruption and Criminality

When the pandemic happened I realised there is something not right and not corresponding to the international health regulations. I thought this is very weird ….. The inconsistencies of everything they are doing ….. This has made health security a dictatorship, where Director-General [World Health Organisation] can decide on his own, to sell vaccines, to sell the PCR instead of all the documents that say you also need a clinical diagnosis” ~ Dr Astrid Stuckelberger

Dr. Astrid Stückelberger (Health Scentist) relates her experience of working over several years at the WHO on training others to apply the most recent revision of the IHRs (International Health Regulations). At the 41st sitting of German Corona Committee (Feb 26th 2021) she presented evidence of irregularities she observed at the WHO prior to the declaration of the pandemic of 2020. Her work to train member countries in the use of these regulations, which are essential for proper handling of potential pandemic emergencies, was stopped without adequate explanation by senior leadership.

She goes on to describe the influence of Bill Gates in operations at World Health Organisation, including his attempts in 2017 for recognition as a sovereign member state on the WHO executive. (See Part 2).

Corruption and Criminality at Leadership Level of the WHO: Coronavirus Ausschuss.

On the same theme, another interview here with Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, speaking of the corruption inside World Health Organisation. He discusses two misuses of WHO by powerful pharmaceutical companies, being: 1) drug development; 2) “making panic” to sell drugs. “If you can use such an agency to rise fear in the people, then you can use it for any purpose … to paralyse people with fear. Say there is a big pandemic and then they will do anything you tell them“. This statement does not deny existence of a virus, but certainly raises into question the idea that a virus with an overly excessive fatality rate is circulating amongst us with universal susceptibility. The Wodarg interview is particularly hard hitting.

Every winter Coronaviruses comprise 10-15% of influenza-like-illness. Did this change in 2020? Where did influenza go in 2020? Is “successful lockdown” what the countries with low death rates in this map have in common? Is “ineffective lockdown” what the countries with high death rates have in common? Do we need to be so afraid that we postpone life for a year and counting? Asking questions about this would be true public health in action. Not merely believing blindly, what appears to be true through a global politico-media consensus driven by powerful profiteering private corporations.

Deadly Public Health

Why did World Health Organisation promote lockdown as a public health intervention? They knew the harms, yet they recommended it anyway. For what possible reason? A part of the answer must surely include the background Crimes of Tedros Adhanom. The Chinese Communist Party are clearly implicated, along with multiple others such as (but not limited to) Bill Gates and Christian Drosten.

It is natural to assume that the medical profession always work in our best interest, yet history tells another story. Most notably, the active participation of the medical community in Germany and other occupied zones during the Nazi regime, of systematic killing, forced sterilisation and human subject research. Post-war many of the physicians involved in these actions kept their jobs and advanced their careers. Health practitioners across the globe today are heavily invested in corrupt practices and systems which allow for wealth accumulation at the expense of the people they purport to be helping. As a medical specialist once said to me, “anywhere without adequate systems in place to protect the public, health professions can be ruthlessly corrupt”.

The role of public health, and what public health professionals are trained for in epidemics, is to provide accurate, timely, contextualised information based on clearly defined data and offering evidence based guidance on how to respond. “We should all be afraid” is NOT a public health message. Yet these words have been spoken by public health officials repeatedly in the past year (Dr David Fisman in Toronto Canada and Professor Raina McIntyre in Sydney Australia are two such examples). Ongoing abuses of the world’s most vulnerable people, our children, our elderly and the poor, is NOT public health. Profiteering from tests, vaccines and other pandemic related products is NOT public health. Promoting policies which ensure massive wealth transfer, further widening the gap between rich and poor is NOT public health.

In response to this fraudulent takeover, an independent movement of voluntary and skilled public health practitioners is evolving. Not the only example, but perhaps the most notable, is Pandemics Data and Analytics aka PANDA, led by some of the world’s most eminent public health experts. Volunteering with this group is reminiscent of my more than 15 years working on disease surveillance and outbreak control in a small public health unit. PANDA gives me hope that whatever has gone wrong in the institutions of public health currently implementing a tainted political response, can and will be made right again.

In this half hour presentation, delivered six months into South Africa’s Covid-19 crisis, Nick Hudson of PANDA unpacks the pandemic response and its devastating costs to lives and livelihoods. He demonstrates authentic public health in action.

Definitive Lockdown Presentation with Nick Hudson

Cracking the Lunacy

At last mainstream media are starting to question events of the past year. Hopefully this is a sign that normalcy will begin to return and our lunatocracies revert to democracies again before it is too late.

Coronavirus lockdown lunacy is frying our minds: Adam Creighton in The Australian reported ten days ago on this study about mass hysteria in the context of COVID-19.

Victoria to Western Australia: hold my beer.

If you thought Perth’s bizarre five-day lockdown over a single person, who wasn’t sick and infected no one else, was strange, then Victoria’s statewide third lockdown of 6.6 million people is so freakish it raises a worrying possibility.

The west, and Australia and New Zealand in particular, are suffering mass psychogenic illness, where only sociology, psychology and the perverse incentives of large welfare states, can explain the ongoing obsession with COVID-19 and our medieval responses to it after almost a year of improved treatments and new information.

For three German and Spanish economists, it’s time to ask this question: have we forgotten the rationality that’s meant to define policymaking in advanced liberal democracies? Their new research paper, COVID-19 and the Political Economy of Mass Hysteria, lays out how our biological tendency to overreact coupled with a social and mass media that profit from panic, plus powerful welfare states, make mass psychosis likely, and hard to reverse.

“Governments have prohibited activities that reduce fear and anxiety, such as sports and socialising, thereby contributing to anxiety and psychological strain,” one of the authors, Philipp Bagus, told The Australian.

“They have instilled fear in the general public to achieve political goals, exploiting the negativity bias of the human brain,” he said, revealing how a leaked German government paper last year recommended scaring people to ensure compliance with health advice. “Politicians have an incentive to overshoot the mark in their responses to a threat because they are largely exempt from the risk of possible wrong decisions and their costs, which they pass on to others,” Bagus added.

Whether we’ve reached mass psychosis is debatable, but some seriously weird behaviours have emerged, quite beyond double-masking and the odd burst of toilet paper hoarding.

Australia and New Zealand have incurred costs equivalent to a world war — and more than any other nation has — fighting a pandemic that has killed not even 1000 people, with a median age in the mid-80s, between them. And this is widely seen as brilliant.

Having insisted early last year that lockdowns were necessary to “flatten the curve”, rolling capital city “snap” lockdowns of millions of people have become the norm, at extraordinary economic, psychological and social cost, without a single person in ICU across either country.

The nation tuned into the Victorian Premier’s 100-minute press conference on Monday to hear how the state was handling one new COVID case, while a few kilometres away tennis stars Nadal and Medvedev were about to square off to the sound of artificial clapping.

Two exhausted Auslan interpreters tag-teamed to convey the latest daily update from Daniel Andrews on Melbourne’s “ring of steel”, nebulisers, and the “highly infectious UK strain”, which has barely infected a soul and killed no one in Australia or New Zealand. A day earlier more than 25,100 Victorians, on government orders, flocked to testing centres to see if they had COVID-19.

“I am proud,” said Mr Andrews. Well, I’m embarrassed that so many people, the bulk of them healthy, waste hours and the $100 it costs taxpayers for each of the 13.7 million tests carried out so far.

Across the Tasman, Auckland entered its own three-day lockdown (the science is a little different there) on Sunday. Valentine’s Day diners fled restaurants mid-meal at 8.30pm, the media reported, as patrons’ mobile phones, courtesy of government apps designed for earthquakes, lit up with the announcement of the city’s third lockdown.

The Australian’s Adam Creighton says there has been “enormous economic damage” inflicted from Premier Mark McGowan’s snap lockdown in parts of Western Australia.

Our leaders should level with voters that we can’t remain an open liberal society without incurring further deaths and cases from COVID-19. Let vulnerable groups be vaccinated, and let everyone else get on with their life. The three authors, at universities in Spain and Chile, argue that hysteria dissipates more quickly in nations that respect civil liberties, where the minority who wish to behave rationally “can just ignore the collective panic and continue to live their normal lives”, illustrating to the hysterical majority that they too can safely return to normal.

Unfortunately that’s not an option in Australia or New Zealand, where the freedoms taken for granted before 2020 — to come and go, see whomever, and privacy — have been sacrificed to the god of “public health”.

Pockets of sanity remain. Norway apologised to its people last June for a lockdown, promising never to do it again. Meanwhile Sweden, where deaths from all causes were no higher last year than in 2015, valiantly trudges on, letting Swedes live their lives relatively normally, as the pandemic rule book allows, notwithstanding the fact that every other ­nation has torn it up.

And in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. So thank god for NSW, where relative sanity has prevailed for now.


Sweden: What was going to happen if they didn’t lockdown according to Imperial College London’s lockdown-promoting model (orange bar), against what actually happened when their State Epidemiology team, free of political interference, followed their own public health expertise instead of Fangkong-inspired “public health”. Reporting without context, as is happening across the globe, led to a widely held belief that Sweden experienced more deaths than usual in 2020. They did not.

More at Final Report on Swedish Mortality 2020, Ano Covidius.