So Hard to Watch

The UK are being dragged into a socio-economic crisis bigger than anything they have seen since World War 2, and for what reason? Mental health, food supply chains, unemployment, a widening wealth divide, health care access crisis, and so many other seemingly insurmountable issues are crashing down simultaneously on this nation. Some of the reasons are connected to Brexit which I have no understanding of. But many are related to the government’s pandemic response which I do have an understanding of and feel a need to share because our mainstream media steadfastly refuse to cover the topic with any balance. Everyone is bought into the idea that the virus is raging and killing people across Britain and Europe. In reality this is untrue. The details are complicated, but I’ll try to offer an overview here, with a focus on London but the information is transferable across Britain and in fact, most of Europe as well as some parts of the USA and elsewhere.

Firstly, this chart (from the Office of National Statistics) shows All Cause Mortality in London for the year. Below it is a similar graph for all of England showing much the same pattern, but is more complicated as different regions are affected at different times. London’s pandemic occurred across an approximately eight week period (an expected duration for pandemics) between March to June. A heatwave in August has been postulated as the actual cause for the small peak in excess deaths then, otherwise nothing is out of the ordinary by way of unexpected rates of mortality. There are still Covid-19 patients but not in pandemic numbers because London have reached the herd immunity threshold, meaning there is enough protection amongst them that the virus cannot spread easily anymore (which is considered, for this virus, to be around 60% which includes those who already had innate immunity). Excess mortality is however, expected to change once mortality caused by lockdown begins to impact statistically.

So why are London’s hospitals, and those across the nation, overwhelmed, in disarray, understaffed and under-resourced? Firstly, staff are being tested for SARS-CoV-2 weekly and required to self isolate if they produce a positive result (regardless of symptoms). This is occurring during the usual high pressure winter season when hospitals are nearly always challenged due to increased respiratory disease presentations. The below headlines are all from previous years.

Hospitals are performing SARS-CoV-2 tests on most admissions, regardless of symptoms. So if you break your leg and go to hospital, you are tested. For now, the main test remains the PCR which, as I have written about previously, is enormously problematic as a screening tool and is resulting in what can only be described as a false positive pseudo-epidemic. As I have written about, this issue is being addressed in courts across Europe. The biggest lawsuit so far is the Corona-Auschuss led by Reiner Fuellmich in Germany which is already underway. Why are interviews with Dr Fuellmich being censored? (You can watch an interview, now two months old and so slightly outdated but nevertheless showcasing his genius and ethics, at Jerm Warfare).

Anyone who tests positive is then defined as a “case” and must be sent to the Covid-19 Ward for isolation. These wards are being overrun whilst other wards are under-represented by patients, leading to a colossal rise in waiting lists for non-Covid health care across the nation. Accommodating asymptomatic “cases” with symptomatic patients is an infection control concern and hospital acquired disease represents a significant proportion of Britain’s Covid-19 unwell. Overfilling the Covid-19 wards results in a backlog in Emergency Departments which is overwhelming and worsened by problems with personal protective equipment (PPE) availability and the ongoing promotion of a fear narrative which has convinced people (including doctors, nurses and laboratory staff) without public health training, that they are dealing with an ongoing pandemic. One of the defining features of a pseudo-epidemic is that everyone experiencing it believes they are dealing with an actual epidemic, as the evidence at face value tells them that they are.

This graph, using data from the NHS Daily Situation Report, shows that confirmed Covid-19 cases increased almost three-fold between 1 December and 28 December. Yet there are >500 extra beds and >4,000 fewer non-Covid patients on 28 December, compared to 1 December. This strongly suggests that non-Covid presentations are being mis-categorised as Covid, as resource pressure has reduced despite more Covid.

Another series of graphs demonstrating the mismatch of data which would be corresponding to each other in a real pandemic is below. Briefly, each graph shows an actual epidemic pattern on the left (between March and June), and a pseudo-epidemic pattern to the right (now). People will be symptomatic when they are in fact infected with a disease and vast testing of asymptomatic people is not required to detect disease occurring at pandemic levels.

Similar mismatches are seen in media reports of enormous strain on ambulance services which is not supported by the actual data. Clogged Emergency Departments however, lead to obstructions in ambulances trying to deliver patients, so that even though call-outs are usual for this time of year, the ambulance service is impeded by the chaos. My information, which I have tried to keep brief here, all comes from resources provided by serious experts such as Dr Clare Craig, Dr Michael Yeadon, Professor Norman Fenton, Dr Joel Smalley and others who between them share a wealth of expertise in diagnostic testing, biostatistics, epidemiology, virology and other relevant disciplines required for appropriate analysis. None of them have political affiliations and all of them are taking risks by speaking out against those with powerful connections to politics and the pharmacy industry, who continue to promote the pandemic narrative. For anyone wanting to develop an understanding of the complexities involved, Clare Craig speaks with Steve Katasi in detail about Covid-19 and the public health crisis Britain is facing, at Adapnation Episode 154.

A large part of the mainstream narrative and need for relentless testing of healthy people relies on the story of asymptomatic spread. This was initially denied by all government advisors, as it is well known that respiratory viruses do not spread without the presence of symptoms. But then theories spread about this virus being so unique that you can spread it without any symptoms whatsoever. One of the proponents of this theory is Professor Christian Drosten, who is central to the Corona Auschuss lawsuit that is underway. Reiner Fuellmich has demonstrated evidence that Drosten knew he was lying about this. Meanwhile a recent meta-analysis undertaken by biostatistician researchers at University of Florida and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that “the asymptomatic/presymptomatic secondary attack rate is not statistically different from zero” (relating to spread of Covid-19).

The claims of asymptomatic transmission came alongside claims that we have no immunity and are unable to mount immunity post-infection. Evidence strongly suggests however that around 50% of us appear to have innate immunity and in some populations (eg South East Asia, Africa and Oceania), even higher rates of immunity seem likely for as yet unexplained reasons. Immunity is complicated so I won’t go on, except to point out that actually we do develop apparently long lasting immunity to this disease post-infection. Claims otherwise appear to have political motivations rather than any scientific backing, and obviously promote ongoing fear.

I am horrified for Britain and other locations in Europe and the USA experiencing similar crises. I worry that Australia and New Zealand are yet to face a similar fate once our winter arrives, of politically motivated disinformation leading us into false alarm and national chaos. The suggestion by some researchers (eg Djaparidze and Lois) that we may have higher levels of protection than populations in Europe and America may also protect us from looming political horror. Most of the world do not have our resources and are looking to the West as an example to follow, which is an evolving disaster.

Sensible, evidence based public health measures need to be implemented alongside honest investigative epidemiological research and journalism, allowing for intelligent and open consideration of all available information. The most basic tenet of public health during any epidemic is to offer appropriate information whilst minimising panic and societal disruption. We have failed.

A Single Source of Truth

I am so grateful to those people whose training, courage and collaboration results in their continuing to ask questions and explore ideas. Promotions of “a single source of truth“, as political leaders are strongly campaigning for, are disquieting. Covid-19 is in no way, shape or form, something that can be viewed through the lens of a single source of truth. Particularly not one emerging from partisan politics which have ridden roughshod over humanity in 2020 to the detriment of every one of us. The single source of truth campaign has devastated established knowledge, academic inquiry and informed discourse. Relying on politics to find a resolution seems misguided at best. We need experts without political affiliations to be heard at least as much as those speaking from their seats alongside elected officials.

One would assume that if there were a single source of truth, then that source might originate from the World Health Organisation? If that is the case, then human physiology must have metamorphosed into a new and unique entity this year. Established knowledge of the human immune system and it’s interaction with microbes has taken a sucker punch.

The Director-General of the World Health Organisation is Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus who was born in 1965 in Asmara, the capital of Eritrea, when it was still part of Ethiopia. His political affiliations include Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) who according to Wikipedia have Marxist-Leninist ideologies. From 2005 to 2012 Tedros was the Ethiopian TPLF-led government’s Minister of Health. Between 2005 – 2010 Ethiopia experienced three Cholera epidemics. Under Tedros’ command no laboratory confirmation was sought and government edict insisted that the epidemics be referred to as “acute watery diarrhoea” (a symptom of Cholera disease). Neighbouring countries confirmed their concurrent epidemics via laboratory isolation of the bacteria Vibrio cholera and received appropriate international aid to treat the sick and bring the epidemic under control. Ethiopia’s refusal to provide a diagnosis for their epidemics blocked international aid, allegedly resulting in thousands of preventable deaths, of mainly young children.

Tedros denies any wrongdoing and there are claims that these accusations were only made in 2017 by those advocating for his opponent, Dr David Nabarro to be voted Director-General of WHO. The denials may be true. However, using definitions for political purposes appears to be a peculiar phenomenon which follows Tedros around, as outlined below.

Established knowledge of human immunity is outlined in all texts in much the same way, using diagrams that look somewhat like this to provide a basic overview of a very complex system.

In active immunity our body is exposed to foreign substances which prompt it to work out an immune response, a complicated process which induces long-term protection. In passive immunity the complicated process is bypassed and our body “receives” someone else’s immunity, offering short term protection. Herd immunity occurs via the active process of building a response, which can be via infection or vaccination. Where vaccination is used for the purposes of attaining herd immunity in a population, it often works in conjunction with natural infection. For example, we don’t vaccinate those already immune via infection.

One example of herd immunity established through infection is Hepatitis A. This virus is very common in impoverished communities where it spreads via contaminated water and food. Children in poor communities across the globe are exposed to Hepatitis A virus very early in life. Although Hepatitis A can cause severe illness and death, infected children usually experience no or few symptoms, such that most do not get sick, but develop lifelong immunity. According to WHO, 80-95% of infected children have asymptomatic infection compared with only 10-25% of infected adults. The same document provides a case fatality rate of 0.1% for children under 15yo compared to 2.1% for adults over the age of 40yo. Hepatitis A vaccination is not recommended in populations where the virus is endemic, as it is known that herd immunity establishes with relatively minimal harm amongst childhood populations. The vaccine is however, recommended for travelers visiting endemic areas, from areas where the virus is rare, as these people are at high risk of developing illness.

Herd immunity by infection with organisms occurs in many other instances and many complicated ways. It is a necessary part of the complicated interplay between our bodies and the millions of organisms which surround and infiltrate us everyday. These exposures start with our very first breath and ensure our immune systems remain challenged and competent. We are yet to see if the suppression of exposures caused by lockdown have an impact on immune system health for populations. Sunetra Gupta’s 2013 presentation Pandemics: Are We All Doomed? covers the subject with an interesting twist. Without a robust immune system even harmless micro-organisms could hurt us, as seen in people with conditions such as HIV or receiving chemotherapy, which suppress their immune system.

Why then, have World Health Organisation done this?

Someone suggested that to refer to this as pseudoscience is an insult to pseudoscientists everywhere. Tedros claims in his 12 October Briefing Speech (link above) that “Never in the history of public health has herd immunity been used as a strategy for responding to an outbreak, let alone a pandemic”. This is a bold-faced lie, as herd immunity is an important consideration in many outbreaks and is not a “strategy” but an end-point to all epidemics.

Anti-science can become our single source of truth if we passively accept these events. This frightens me far more than any virus.

Wicked Problems and Collective Impact

Wicked problems appear impossible to solve. They are complex, long-standing, seemingly intractable, and there are divergent opinions about the ways to address them. Wicked problems do not occur in a vacuum. They are enmeshed in wider social, cultural and political issues. Typically, governments and other organizations attempt to fix wicked problems through a particular lens or focus (such as housing, education or health) when, for real and lasting impact, these problems need multidimensional, dynamic and sustained solutions.

From Applying Collective Impact to Wicked Problems in Aboriginal Health, Kylie Gwynne and Annette Cairnduff

Around the world collectives are forming in response to the ever-expanding global public health crisis. The purpose is to offer alternative public health responses and pressure governments to reconsider hysteria-based lockdowns in favour of a return to established public health evidence. This is collective impact in motion.

Examples of the collectives include:

  • United Kingdom – PCRClaims. Representing pro bono lawyers gathering evidence for negligence and malfeasance claims against Her Majesty’s Government for use of PCR testing, causing unprecedented collateral harms.
  • Australia – Covid Medical Network. Doctors and health professionals concerned about the health impacts of the lockdowns used in response to the SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks in Victoria and across Australia.
  • Global – Great Barrington Declaration. Infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists who have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, recommending an approach called Focused Protection. (>750,000 signatures to date).
  • Germany – Corona Ausschuss. (Translated from German): The coronavirus events in Germany have now almost completely come to a standstill. A large number of studies have now shown that lethality and mortality are flu-like in proportion. The health system was not even remotely overloaded. However, the government’s corona measures, in particular the lockdown imposed in great panic, have, as is becoming increasingly clear, caused massive social, psychological, health, cultural and economic collateral damage… All persons involved are committed to the principles of scientific evidence and are willing to conduct an objective discussion on the various topics without any personal, scientific or economic conflicts of interest.
  • South Africa / Global – Pandemics Data & Analytics (aka PANDA). Our mission is simple. We see in lockdown and its related intrusions on civil liberties a serious threat not only to lives but to civilization itself. This threat must be resisted… Our view is that at this juncture, the science is quite clear on what key policy responses should be—or should have been. But this is no longer about the science, if it ever was. What is required now is a mobilisation against what is essentially an enormous public relations machine that is fuelling fear and removing agency from people’s lives the world over.

These are not small, and nor are they fringe movements. Some of the world’s most pre-eminent public health experts are signing up, coordinating or otherwise involved in various ways. Those joining these movements have nothing to gain and much to lose. Many talk of losing clients, having opinions silenced, verbal abuse, physical threats and intimidation, and employment security threatened. So much so that there are reports that many only register with the guarantee of anonymity. My prediction / hope is that as the situation evolves, less damaging views will become more and more mainstream in a watershed moment when the vast majority become anti-lockdown and claim that they always were, despite current evidence suggesting quite the opposite.

The Post Covid-19 Stockholm Peace Summit was held last week as a collective of key international experts. It begins at 14m:15s. Dr Michael Yeadon speaks from 17m:45s. Professor Christian Schubert, a psycho-neuro-immunologist speaks from 47m. Professor Martin Kulldorff speaks from 1h:12m. Although these three are scientists, they speak eloquently with passion about world events and offer information that we all deserve to hear, but which is being censored for political reasons. Then a group of lawyers discuss the various legal issues arising around the world.

Over 3,000 different strains of Covid-19 have been identified in the UK since the pandemic began. There is nothing unusual about this as viruses mutate, inevitably becoming more transmissible whilst simultaneously less virulent. This is an evolutionary mechanism for survival. One of the reasons that Ebola, for example, whilst highly transmissible, doesn’t spread in the way that viruses like influenza do, is that it is also highly virulent, meaning it efficiently kills its hosts, effectively blocking its own survival. Days ago, to justify a new lockdown which inundated London’s public transport system with hoardes of travelers escaping before the deadline, Matt Hancock made a fearful statement to parliament about a new Covid-19 strain circulating in London that is “up to 70% more transmissible”. It is difficult to understand the motivation of this claim without supporting evidence that anyone needs to feel afraid.

During this seven minutes with Clare Craig she describes the evidence around what is happening in London and the UK right now. Her views are strongly backed by evidence but she struggles to receive any attention from mainstream media outlets. For now. She is an active member of a number of collective impact groups in the UK and beyond.

Pillars of Public Health

PANDA ~ Pandemics Data and Analytics invited me to become a member three days ago! This stemmed from my opinionating on Twitter. The movement has largely grown out of recruitments from Twitter, with like minds gravitating towards each other. There are more than a hundred of us, with various skills to offer such as mathematicians, virologists, immunologists, epidemiologists, clinicians, lawyers, communications specialists and more general public health practitioners (where I fit in). My first meeting was a Zoom with one of the founders, explaining the way things work and sharing links so that I can start working out how to navigate activities and consider where I might be useful.

The day I joined, PANDA released their document: Preliminary Protocol for Reopening Society. The press release for this document reads in part:

For decades, it has been acknowledged by the world’s premier health authorities that amid a pandemic, the functioning of society should be maintained, and human rights upheld. Governments and health organisations have at their disposal country-specific pandemic preparedness plans, as well as the World Health Organisation pandemic guidelines, which provide a roadmap outlining how to keep society functioning, while also mitigating the impact of a disease or virus.

In 2020, SARS-CoV-2 brought an almost-instantaneous rewriting of disease management principles as countries, with few exceptions, disregarded existing pandemic plans and replaced them with policies of ‘lockdown’.

Legal papers have been served on Professor Christian Drosten at Universite Charite in Berlin. An English version of what they have to say is available here. It will be interesting to see if and when the mainstream media choose to acknowledge these events are unfolding? Cease and Desist Papers Served on Prof Dr Christian Drosten by Dr Reiner Fuellmich 15 December 2020.

Martin Kulldorff is an Infectious Diseases Epidemiologist at Harvard University and a member of the Advisory Board of PANDA. His knowledge, humility, integrity and persistence have been exemplary throughout this year. Somehow a few hours ago he managed to summarise public health into twelve tweets, all of which hold firmly true for me.

Twelve Forgotten Principles of Public Health

#1 Public health is about all health outcomes, not just a single disease like #COVID19. It is important to also consider harms from public health measures.

#2 Public health is about the long term rather than the short term. Spring #COVID19 #lockdowns simply delayed and postponed the pandemic to the fall. The Invisible Pandemic: Johan Giesecke, The Lancet, May 30 2020

#3 Public health is about everyone. It should not be used to shift the burden of disease from the affluent to the less affluent, as the #COVID19#lockdowns have done. OPINION: Canada’s Covid-19 strategy is an assault on the working class, Toronto Sun, November 29 2020

#4 Pubic health is global. Public health scientists need to consider the global impact of their recommendations. Virus-linked hunger tied to 10,000 child deaths each month, AP News, July 28 2020

#5 Risks and harms cannot be completely eliminated, but they can be reduced. Elimination and zero-COVID strategies backfire, making things worse. Quarantine Fatigue is Real, May 11 2020

#6 Public health should focus on high-risk populations. For #COVID19, many standard public health measures were never used to protect high-risk older people, leading to unnecessary deaths. We Should Focus on Protecting the Vulnerable from COVID Infection, Newsweek, October 30 2020

#7 While contact tracing and isolation is critically important for some infectious diseases, it is futile and counterproductive for common infections such as influenza and #COVID19. On the Futility of Contact Tracing, Inference Review, September 2020

#8 A case is only a case if a person is sick. Mass testing asymptomatic individuals is harmful to public health. The Case Against Covid Tests for the Young and Healthy, Wall St Journal, September 3 2020

#9 Public health is about trust. To gain the trust of the public, public health officials and the media must be honest and trust the public. Shaming and fear should never be used in a pandemic. Facts – not fear – will stop the pandemic, December 3 2020

#10 Public health scientists and officials must be honest with what is not known. For example, epidemic models should be run with the whole range of plausible input parameters. A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data, Stat News, March 17 2020

#11 In public health, open civilized debate is profoundly critical. Censoring, silencing and smearing leads to fear of speaking, herd thinking and distrust. The COVID Science Wars: Shutting down scientific debate is hurting the public health, Scientific American, November 30 2020

#12 It is important for public health scientists and officials to listen to the public, who are living the public health consequences. This pandemic has proved that many non-epidemiologists understand public health better than some epidemiologists. / END

On 7 December Professor Kulldorff joined Professor Jay Bhattacharya on a podcast with Megyn Kelly, who in the same podcast talks with Dr David Dowdy, an infectious disease epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University. The Megyn Kelly Show: COVID Truth on Lockdowns, Vaccines and Schools, with the Great Barrington Declaration Doctors.

Another PANDA member is Kevin McKernan who co-authored the Corman Drosten Review Report. Bretigne Shaffer interviews Kevin about this peer review and the issue of PCR testing which is now under serious scrutiny, at Kevin McKernan on the review of the Corman-Drosten review that he co-authored.

Making WHO Accountable

Description of the problem: WHO has received user feedback on an elevated risk for false SARS-CoV-2 results when testing specimens using RT-PCR reagents on open systems.

This is from the WHO Information Notice for IVD Users (In Vitro Diagnostic Users), dated 7 December and published online 14 December 2020. That’s almost exactly 11 months after they published the Corman-Drosten paper to guide their diagnostic protocol and about ten days after the Corman-Drosten Review Report was submitted. This update is open to interpretation, does not offer complete or adequate recommendations and is obviously a direct damage control measure without directly addressing the specific concerns of the Review Report. Nevertheless it appears to be a small improvement on prior guidance, including the following previously absent advice: “Therefore, healthcare providers are encouraged to take into consideration testing results along with clinical signs and symptoms, confirmed status of any contacts, etc.“.

The Corman-Drosten Review Report identified multiple serious concerns with this paper including in part:

The Corman-Drosten paper was submitted to Eurosurveillance on January 21st 2020 and accepted for publication on January 22nd 2020. On January 23rd 2020 the paper was online. On January 13th 2020 version 1-0 of the protocol was published at the official WHO website [17], updated on January 17th 2020 as document version 2-1 [18], even before the Corman-Drosten paper was published on January 23rd at Eurosurveillance.

Normally, peer review is a time-consuming process since at least two experts from the field have to critically read and comment on the submitted paper. In our opinion, this paper was not peer-reviewed. Twenty-four hours are simply not enough to carry out a thorough peer review. Our conclusion is supported by the fact that a tremendous number of very serious design flaws were found by us, which make the PCR test completely unsuitable as a diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Eleven months into this pandemic, the force of multiple collaborations using scientific evidence to challenge fierce opposition has had a small win against the powerful institutions and corporations imposing catastrophic devastation on the world. The courage of these people leaves me in awe.