I shared this interview with Ivor Cummins on Facebook, and had a response from a friend on Facebook - criticizing me for not following 'the science'. Thought I'd just keep a note here of my response.
-
Did you watch the interview? Ivor seems to do a good job of running through the stats. Check out his YouTube channel and let me know what you think.
Isn’t ‘the science’ that we have a new (seasonal?) virus that has thankfully been nowhere near as bad as some forecast? Isn’t ‘the science’ that the measures we’ve taken in response to it have caused catastrophe; and were quite possibly mostly futile, given that the number of deaths seems to be quite random, whatever measures a country puts in place? Many countries which didn’t lock down, have had better/similar fatality rates than those that did, right?
Seems to me like there must be other factors that determine outcome. Environmental factors?
Unless perhaps you do what NZ and Oz did. Though, given that countries like Belarus, Nicaragua and much of Africa did sod all in response to the virus and, like NZ and Oz, have had barely any deaths, it might be a bit presumptuous to say as fact that the lockdowns is what caused a lack of deaths in those countries. (Maybe the virus spread a lot pre-lockdown, with little impact? Probably not, but just a thought). In any case, their approach seems like a recipe for perpetual lockdowns, surveillance, loss of civil rights... totalitarian society. (Popular though, by the looks of it!).
My main concern is about how damaging it has been to just focus on a - possibly mostly futile - war against one virus, (whilst doing nothing to wage war on the things that cause new viruses to do harm). I've also been looking into the possibility that our entire understanding of, and approach to, viruses, and human/environmental health in general, is based on out of date science - I've been listening a lot to a guy called Zach Bush, who is super interesting:
Famines now loom in the global south. Cancer etc treatment/diagnosis delayed. Depression and suicides on the rise. Economies/small businesses destroyed. Massive concentration of wealth. Etc. Lockdowns kill, especially in an extremely unequal and globalised world. God knows what the long term impact of all this is going to be. Also any potential normalisation of fear, separation, sterilisation is pretty suicidal for our species.
Almost no effort has been made to address the issues that cause viruses to do harm; to protect and heal people by enabling and encouraging them to improve their general health; ie to detoxify, to address nutrient deficiencies (which would be so easy and cheap to do!!) and poor diet etc. Despite this clearly being heavily correlated with Covid susceptibility - the vast majority of those dying have diet-related comorbidities, right? And there's so many studies linking Vitamin D deficiency to increased mortality. (And like, what is there to lose? Ah yeah, profit for big pharma/food companies!). Instead, we're just forced to stay home, out of the sun; do less exercise, be anxious, get depressed, get bombarded with junk food advertising on tele, comfort eat. Hasn't all of this actually made people more susceptible to viral infections, and other diseases?
And what's more: the rushed vaccines are likely to be crap, particularly on the vulnerable, (and at best only likely to reduce symptoms a bit, not stop infection?). And we will not know the long term side effects. And researchers have warned they might increase risk of HIV. And I think they will only have been tested on healthy people? So we won't know how vulnerable people will react?
Oh and they’re being developed by massively corrupt, criminal corporations, so many people will understandably reject them, however effective and safe they are deemed! So to be pinning all hope on a vaccine, makes no sense to me. I think it’s a really nonsensical and irresponsible strategy to promote. It does nothing to address poor health and susceptibility, and it's led to all those catastrophic consequences I mentioned. And if this continues to be our strategy, I worry we will remain living like this forever. (Authorities will like it that way). We have no choice but to take a root-cause approach, if we want to avoid a totalitarian future.
It all seems very irrational, reductionistic, destructive, anti-human and anti-science to me, (and to many, many other, actually-qualified, people!).
I supported the lockdowns in March, but looking back now, I'm unconvinced they did much, and my view is that as soon as we knew the curve was flattening, we should've opened back up, but enabled all under 60s to retire early (if they wanted to), prepared the NHS with more beds/PPE etc, in case of any more waves, and embarked on a massive campaign to address nutrient deficiencies, poor diet, the mental health crisis, poverty, etc. (Ultimately, we need to begin changing the food system to organic/regenerative, so that we stop fueling new viruses and disease, but the further concentration of wealth and power that the Covid response has led to, probably makes this even more unlikely now).
Who’re you getting modelling from btw? I think Michael Levitt’s predictions back at the beginning of the year were more accurate than most. So might be worth following him.
This is worth watching too.
-
Some other points:
What about the tests? Have we ever done mass testing like this for any other virus? Is it correct that we refer to a positive test result as a 'case'? It seems the inventor of the PCR test would've disagreed with this.
Where has the flu gone? According to the stats, it's almost vanished in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Would everyone dying with Covid have otherwise died with flu? Are all viral deaths automatically being registered as Covid, when it might've been flu?
No comments:
Post a Comment