Politicians and “experts” scream and shout about testing and isolation being the way to halt the COVID 19 pandemic to a halt, but everything else they hsve told us about the disease has been absolute bollocks, why should this be any different?
Well surprise, surprise, it isn’t any different. The idear that testing everybody ten times a day (OK I might be exaggerating for effect,) will do any good is just another diversionary tactic designed to distract us from the sure and certain knowledge that the establishment, i.e. is the politicians, the academic community and the medical professions haven’t a clue how to deal with this disease. However in saying that we are allowing that COVID 19 coronavirus actually exists though that is nor proven. For a pathogen to be recognised as the cause of a disease it must meet all of a set of croteria known as The Koch Postulates. Covid 19 or The Wuhan Virus actually meets none.
And to top that of the tests being used to identify who is infected have been shown by independent (i.e. not funded by governments, Big Pharma corporations or The United Nations,) to be not fit for purpose.
At the media briefing on COVID-19 on March 16, 2020, World Health Organisation (WHO) Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said:
“We have a simple message for all countries: test, test, test.”
The message was spread through headlines around the world, for instance by CNN, Reuters and the BBC’s news channel Germany’s heute journal — one of the most important news magazines on German television— was still repeating the mantra of the corona dogma on to its audience with the admonishing words:
Test, test, test—that is the credo at the moment, and it is the only way to really understand how much the coronavirus is spreading.”
This indicates that belief in the validity of the PCR tests is so strong that it equals a religious dogma that tolerates virtually no contradiction. But religions are about faith and not demonstrable facts. Were we still under the rile of The Holy Roman Empire, heretics who questioned this narrative would be tortured and burned.
It is certainly significant that Kary Mullis, inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology was one of the vioces dissenting from that dogma before his recent death (which was not connected to COVID – 19 we understand.) His invention got him the Nobel prize in chemistry in 1993.
But while the WHO and other health bureaucracies are hailing PCR as the saviour of humankind, the eminent biochemist himself regarded his invention the PCR as an inappropriate tool for detecting a viral infection. The intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique, being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and not as a diagnostic tool to detect viruses.
Gina Kolata in a 2007 New York Times article Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t describes declaring pandemics on the basis of PCR tests as bad science.
It is also worth mentioning that PCR tests used to identify so-called COVID-19 patients presumably infected by what is called SARS-CoV-2 are unreliable because the results show the infection does not meet any of the Koch postulates (sic).
This is a fundamental point. Tests need to be evaluated to determine their preciseness — strictly speaking their “sensitivity” and “specificity” — by comparison with an established benchmark meaning the most accurate method available.
Australian infectious diseases specialist Sanjaya Senanayake, for example, stated in an ABC TV interview in an answer to the question “How accurate is the [COVID-19] testing?”:
If we had a new test for picking up [the bacterium] golden staph in blood, we’ve already got blood cultures, that’s our gold standard we’ve been using for decades, and we could match this new test against that. But for COVID-19 we don’t have a gold standard test.”
Jessica C. Watson of Bristol University UK confirms this in her paper “Interpreting a COVID-19 test result”, published recently in The British Medical Journal. Dr Watson writes that there is a “lack of a clear-cut ‘gold-standard’ for COVID-19 testing.”
But instead of classifying the tests as unsuitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection and COVID-19 diagnosis, or instead of pointing out that only a virus, proven through isolation and purification, can be a solid gold standard, Watson claims in all seriousness that, “pragmatically” COVID-19 diagnosis itself “may be the best available ‘gold standard’.” But this is not scientifically sound.
Apart from the absurdity of taking the test itself as part of the benchmark for evaluating the PCR test, there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, as even people such as Thomas Löscher, former head of the Department of Infection and Tropical Medicine at the University of Munich has acknowledged. Recently I have read that COVID 19 is a respiratory disease that is far worse than pneumonia, that is is a disease of the blood vessels, that it causes brain damage, affects liver, kidneys and other vital organs, and that it damages the digestive tract. Maybe the obvious confusuion among medical professionals arises because people with a range of pre – existing conditions that take in all these symptoms are particularly vulnerable to COVID 19
And if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, COVID-19 diagnosis cannot be suitable for serving as a valid gold standard.
A publishing scandal recently erupted around the use of the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to treat Covid 19. It is also known as quinine and chloroquine, and is on the WHO list of essential medicines.
The bark of the South American quina-quina tree has been used to treat malaria for 400 years. Quinine, a generic drug costing pennies a dose, is available for purchase online. In rare cases it can cause dizziness and irregular heartbeat.
In late May, 2020, The Lancet published a four-author study claiming that HCQ used in hospitals to treat Covid-19 had been shown conclusively to be a hazard for heart death. The data allegedly covered 96,000 patients in 671 hospitals on six continents.
After the article had spent 13 days in the headlines, dogged by scientific objections, three of the authors retracted it on June 5.
Meanwhile, during an expert closed-door meeting leaked May 24 in France, The Lancet and NEJM editors explained how financially powerful pharmaceutical players were “criminally” corrupting medical science to advance their interests … Continue reading >>>
As British people spntaneouly rejected the continuing – and now known to be totally unnecessary lockdown rules the usual pack of snivelling ninnies who live in fear of absolutely everything and hold an unshakable belief that anybody who does not share their cringing, cowardly lifestyle poses a personal threat to us all to crawl out of the woodwork and start whining.
MPs belonging to the Snivelling Ninnies party in parliament have called on ocal councils in towns with attractive beaches must adopt Spanish-style booking systems on British beaches to better deal with crowds and avoid the chaotic scenes that unfolded last week, MPs have said.
“Oh look at all these stupid irresponsible people flouting regulations, they must be forced to remain under house arrest or we will all die of a very minor illness,” they snivel. “Why can’t we be like Spain where the beaches are empty,” they whine. It does not occour to these hald wits as they indullge in orgies of wailing and gnashing teeth that the reason Spanish beaches are empty is the British, German, French, Dutch, Swedish, Danish and other nationality holiday makers who would normally be packing onto those beaches right now just cannot get there. It is not practical to go Spain but we can drive to Bournmouth, Blackpool, Torquay or Scarborough. Once the tourists turn up with their money those Spanish towns will have their beaches and their till open to welcome all comers with a loud Ker – ching.
This bid to extend lockdown for no good reason came as some Government medical advisers suggested that large gatherings on beaches were actually safer than remaining indoors, and may not be “a great danger.”
One said: “They’re all outdoors and if every one of those groups is a family then what’s the worry?”
A major incident was declared in Bournemouth, Dorset, on Thursday after about half a million people ignored social distancing rules (they obviously read alt_media news and know it doesn’t work,) to flock to the beach. Traffic on main roads tailed back for miles, drunken fights broke out and more than 40 tonnes of rubbish was strewn across the sand. Three people were stabbed and eight were arrested.
The chaos triggered an extraordinary blame game as Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council weere slammed by MPs and community groups for failing to predict the influx and take preventative action.
We not that out of all these whining left wing idiot voices not one was raised in protest about the Black Lives Matter disorder in which social distancing was ignored as “peaceful protestors burned cars and destroyed property. But then hypocrisy has always been the core value of left wing politics.
Not exactly “BREAKING NEWS” but a story that was ignored by mainstream media and slipped by most of us alt_news sites earlier this month.
In trying to keep the pandemic going for as long as possible because that ishat best serves the globalist agenda of their political and corporate paymasters’ agenda, the World Health Organization (WHO) is insistent that developing natural immunity to the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) may not be possible, and that society’s only hope is a vaccine. But if natural immunity is out of the question, then why would vaccine-induced immunity be any better?
It was revealed by at least two very well qualified virologists early in the crisis that the Wuhan coronavirus contains HIV inserts which enable it to grt past the human immune system. At the time these were shouted down because it was more expedient to kiss Chinese arse than to prevent a pandemic. Several reports published since then claim the virus is catetorically man made or gene edited organism, but when asked for evidence to back their claims they have fallen back on the time – worn defence of “You’re not scientists so you wouldn’t understand the science”, defence.
With an estimated 310,000 deaths worldwide, the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic continues to dominate news headlines even though it is known most of the dead were in end – life care situations and mostly had underlying health conditions, But governments have caved to pressure from Big Pharma and the Trump administration in the USA is getting the ball rolling on developing and releasing a fast-tracked vaccine (in other words a vaccine that has not been tested properly,) even though it is know that most healthy perople under 60 on being exposed to Covid – 19 develop no symptoms. And nobody seems eager to address the fact that if our own natural immune systems cannot fight the thing, then there is no way a vaccine will do anything other than needlessly cause adverse effects. In fact among the people known to be most susceptible to COVID – 19, a bad reaction to the vaccine would most likely push them off this mortal coil anyway.
In a recent statement, the WHO admitted that there is no reliable proof to suggest people who test positive for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) and recover develop natural immunity. They could still quickly be re-infected, but the UN body insists a vaccine is the obly way forward even as it continues to ignore the fact that a strain-specific vaccine would theoretically provide even less protection than natural immunity, if this is the case.
“There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from #COVID19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection,” the WHO wrote in a statement.
The difference: While BLM protestors loot, burn and fight i n inner cities more intelligent people head for the beach – in a massive rejection of lockdown rules almost half a million people piled onto the 15 miles of beach in Bournemouth UK yesterday (Picture: Evening Standard )
An impressive array of more than 500 prominent world leaders, academics, and Nobel Laureates have written “A Call to Defend Democracy” in the face of a worldwide rise in government authoritarianism during the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic.
The June 25 text declares that beyond health concerns the COVID-19 pandemic is “a political crisis that threatens the future of liberal democracy.”
“The COVID-19 crisis is an alarming wake-up call, an urgent warning that the freedoms we cherish are at risk and that we must not take them for granted,” the document asserts.
“Authoritarian regimes, not surprisingly, are using the crisis to silence critics and tighten their political grip,” the authors note. “But even some democratically elected governments are fighting the pandemic by amassing emergency powers that restrict human rights and enhance state surveillance without regard to legal constraints, parliamentary oversight, or timeframes for the restoration of constitutional order.”
“Parliaments are being sidelined, journalists are being arrested and harassed, minorities are being scapegoated, and the most vulnerable sectors of the population face alarming new dangers as the economic lockdowns ravage the very fabric of societies everywhere,” the document proclaims.An impressive array of more than 500 prominent world leaders, academics, and Nobel Laureates have written “A Call to Defend Democracy” in the face of a worldwide rise in government authoritarianism during the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic.
The June 25 text declares that beyond health concerns the COVID-19 pandemic is “a political crisis that threatens the future of liberal democracy.”…Continue reading >>>
The UK’s Conservative Government was sold a dummy by 22 year old Marcus Rashford, a football (soccer) start who plays for Manchester United and England.
Showing more charisma that the entire government and opposition parties combined could muster, the young goalscorer successfully motivated public opinion and lobbied the government to reverse its plan to suspend the provision of supply free meals for children from poorer families during the traditional summer break. Under the coronavirus lockdown arrangements schools had remained open for children whose parents were working during lockdown and could not afford childcare, or whose incomes were not sufficient to cover the additional costs of providing extra food for children while laid off from their jobs.
In the UK children eligible for free school meals because their families are unemployed or on low incomes, have received food during the coronavirus lockdown, in some cases by attending school dining rooms but often in the form of vouchers to spend at supermarkets.
This scheme was scheduled to end at the time schools would normally have closed for the summer break, and been reviewed in accordance with prevailing circumstances before school terms resumed in September. In a letter “written from the heart,” Rashford pleaded in reasoned and articulate terms for the scheme to continue through the summer because it is now clear that although the lockdown has been eased to some extent, the situation will not return to anything like normal for several more months at least.
Rashford’s letter surprised many people because football players are not usually noted for their debating skills. However the star consolidated his newly earned reputation by successfully outmanoeuvreing the government.
In a string of tweets on Tuesday, the England star urged politicians: “When you wake up this morning and run your shower, take a second to think about parents who have had their water turned off during lockdown…
“And when you head to the fridge to grab the milk, stop and recognise that parents of at least 200,000 children across the country this morning are waking up to empty shelving.”
But the Work and Pensions Secretary Therese Coffey hit back, tweeting: “Water cannot be disconnected though.”
Her short response indicated the campaign officially dismissed by the government but when it was backed publicly by two Conservative MPs prompted a speedy reply.
Rashford wrote back: “I’m concerned this is the only tweet of mine you acknowledged. Please, put rivalries aside for a second, and make a difference.” Social media picked up on the argument and spontaneously started a national campaign. Soon it was clear that public opinion was with Rashford.
Realising they had lost this one, The Prime Minister’s office announced on Tuesday that £3million will be providede to fund extending the free school meal voucher system in England over the summer holidays in a reversal of its previous pledge to end them. Boris Johnson’s spokesperson said that the government “fully understands” that the children and parents are facing an “unprecedented situation over the summer”.
“To reflect this, we will be providing a Covid summer food fund. This will provide food vouchers covering the six week holiday period”.
“The scheme will not continue beyond the summer and those eligible will be those who already qualify for free school meals. As the PM has said it is our intention, to get all pupils back into school in September”, the spokesperson said.
Marcus Rashford declared victory by saying that this is what can be achieved when “we come together”.
The opposition Labour Party, after itself calling for the funding for the provision of free school meals, supported the decision. Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer welcomed the move and praised Rashford for his work.
A Conservative cabinet minister praised Rashford’s interest in child welfare in the UK as “great.” In an interview this earlier today, Grant Shapps agreed with Sky News host Kay Burley that the government’s decisions had been put to shame by a footballer.
“I know he’s written to the PM who will doubtless write back to him as well”, the Transport Secretary said.
He explained that it is usually not the case that free school meals are provided over the school holidays.
“But we have actually unusually in this case, along with all the other billions, multi-billion pound package we’ve put in place to help families, also provided £63m exceptionally to help local authorities help children over this period”, he added.
Several Conservative MPs had called on Johnson to “do the right thing” and extend the school meal programme.
Commentators also questioned why the government was picking a fight over such an indefensible policy when it was already on the back foot over its handling of the coronavirus outbreak.
Rashford, 22, earned praise from politicians, charities and mainstream media for his campaign. He said he was proud to have used his celebrity status to help “vulnerable parents”.
“There is still a long way to go but I am thankful to you all that we have given these families just one less thing to worry about tonight,” he added.
After writing to Boris Johndon and other MPs the prolific goalscorer wrote in The Times newspaper that he understood personally how much free school meals mattered to children receiving them.
“Ten years ago, I was one of them. I grew up in a low income family inn Manchester and know what it feels like to be hungry,” he wrote. Ahead of a parliamentary debate called by the main opposition Labour party, he urged MPs to put aside their political differences and back his campaign.
The Lockdown which, based on scientific advice that was always suspect but is now known to have been profoundly flawed, was announced by the UK government on March 23rd and passed into Law on March 25th, was widely predicted by people sceptical of they type of science based on output from mathematical models rather than empirical evidence, appears to have led to the premature deaths of tens of thousands of people in the UK according to independent research.
It was always obvious that such an outcome was inevitable as Medical practices were forced to offer a very much reduced service, hospital appointments were can celled wholesale and people with very serious health problems were denied the support they needed.
We discussed all these consequences of following the advice of a self aggrandizing attention seeker months ago and you will find links to our posts on te various COVID – 19 related topics in the scrolling table at the end of this article, but to avoid looking as if we want to give the impression that we were the only ones who knew what was going on, here’s what ITT reported on the subject: LOKIN-20 The Lockdown Regime Causes Increasing Health Concerns That post like some of ours discusses the likelihood that the Lockdown would cause significant excess mortality among people who were not infected with the Wuhan coronavirus.
The release of the latest report on non COVID 19 related deaths from the Office of National Statistics proves beyond doubt that the sceptics, those who doubted the word of government scientific advisers were right to do so, but what is truly astonishing is the scale of those deaths. Remember, the figures are not from some sensationalist tabloid newspaper but the UK Governments official statistics agency,
The ONS report reveals that between March 7th and May 1st (ONS Week 11 – 18 of year 2020) there were 46,380 excess death, over and above the statistical 5 year average, registered in England and Wales. Figures for Scotland and Northern Ireland are not included.
Of the 46,380 excess deaths 12,900 (27.8% of additional excess deaths) were not attributable to COVID 19. This suggests that 33,480 (72.2% of additional excess deaths) were attributable to COVID 19.
However, as we reported in Coronavirus: Statistics and Lies it is by no means clear how many of those deaths were as a direct or even indirect result of COVID 19 and in how many cases the deceased had merely been in contact with the virus but not affected by it. The UK Government’s administrative wing (the civil service) has dismantled the robust, almost foolproof method of recording deaths and created a system specifically for registering COVID 19 deaths which is so vague it even allows for a single death to be recorded several times, and is wide open to error and misinterpretation.
It is worth noting that senior civil servants have, since 2016, been determined to prevent the UK leaving the European Union (Brexit,) and have been involved in several plots to overturn the democratic vote.The pandemic presented them with a golden opportunity for mischief. We will of course never know what machinations have been going on under cover of the pandemic as politicians, corportate bosses, bureaucrats and meddlesome billionaires have sought to advance their own narrow interests.
All developed nations have their registration processes and data collection systems, tested over time and unually totally trustworthy but the situation in the UK resembled that in Italy where an unpopular government imposed by the EU bureaucracy after the elected government collapsed, used the pandemic to spread fear and panic and divert attention from internal political problems. The Italian government imposed their lockdown on March 9th. On March 20th, as assumed COVID 19 deaths piled up, Italy’s National Institute of Health (ISS) issued a report into the characteristics common to those dying from the disease.
Citing this report, which found no clear evidence that COVID 19 was the cause of death in 88% of deaths attributed to the virus, the chief scientific adviser to Italy’s health department, Professor Walter Ricciardi, said:
“The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus……On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus.”
No such admission has been made by the UK government as yet, but it is reasonable to assume similar misrepresentations of the facts have been used here, and probably in the USA and other countries reporting high kill rates for COVID – 19. The revised figure from Italy puts the kill rate for COVID – 19 in line with that reported by Germany where doctors flatly refused to register cause of derath as COVID – 19 Coronavirus, unless the deceased died prinicpally from the effects of Wuhan Coronavirus infection.
Sir Patrick Vallance, UK Chief Scientific Officer
All this should be considered in the light of the statement made by Professor Ricciardi’s UK counterpart. Speaking on April 16th the UK’s Chief Scientific Officer, Sir Patrick Vallance (above), said:
“It is worth remembering again that the ONS rates are people who’ve got COVID on their death certificates. It doesn’t mean they were necessarily infected because many of them haven’t been tested. So we just need to understand the difference.”
The UK, like Italy, instructed the its national statistics agency (ONS) to record any and all mentions of COVID 19 on the death certificate (MCCD) as COVID 19 mortality. Furthermore, the ONS were ordered to accept suggested COVID 19 mortality figures from the Care Quality Commission (CQC) even if COVID 19 was not mentioned on the MCCD.
This has left the collection and reporting of COVID 19 mortality in both Gr,eat Britain and Italy, the two nations with the highest death numbers in Europe in total disarray. Certainly the official reporting of the pandemic by the taxpayer funded BBC (often referred to as the government propaganda deprtment reporting of those statistics, which has overwhelmingly been in support of the lockdown regime, is as close to meaningless as it is possible to get without simply making up the numbers.
Between March 7th and May 1st figures from the Care Quality Comission (CQC) played no part in the ONS mortality analysis. The CQC didn’t start submitting their data to the ONS until April 29th. What is reported here serves to highlight how absurd the COVID 19 mortality statistics have become. And yet the future of our nations and our lives is being shaped by this absurdity.
This is a post from a U.S. economic research website, criticizing the ludicrously over – the – top actions taken to limit the effects of the COVID – 19 coronavirus pandemic. The responses were of course based on the warnings of “scientists” who rather than using empirical evidence relied on output from mathematical models in order to predict how the pandemic would unfold.
Needless to say the predictions were hopelessly wrong …
As a site focused on economics, AIER would rather have stayed away from commentary on diseases and their mitigation. In normal times, we would have.
The archives of AIER dating back to 1933 show that we had no comments on the polio epidemic (1948-1951), the Asian Flu (1957-59), the Hong Kong flu (1968-69), the Avian bird flu (2006), or the Swine flu pandemic of 2009, which was a strain most like 1918 and therefore, one might suppose, would have caused panic but did not.
We had nothing to say because disease mitigation is a job for medical professionals, not economists and certainly not politicians.
The problem is that this time, the disease mitigators (some of them, the ones in power and with the ear of politicians) didn’t stay out of economics. Indeed, their plans for mitigation trampled all over commerce, life, and the freedoms that are necessary to make it function. For a few months in 2020, the presumptuous model-building disease mitigators became central planners, overriding the wisdom of not only medical professionals but also economists, philosophers, political scientists, historians, and everyone else including legislatures and voters.
Our first piece on the topic ran January 27. The focus was on the quarantine power and the argument was simple: because people are not ridiculous and know how to deal with disease in consultation with medical professionals, this state power should not be deployed. At the time, people said we were being alarmist even for saying this. Nothing like this could ever happen in the U.S. because we have a Constitution and courts and a tradition of trusting the people … Continue reading >>>
Coronavirus fear and panic
8 June 2020, Ian R Thorpe
Facemasks: Even if they worked they wouldn’t be any use (Picture: SkyNews)
Yesterday the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) which has since the beginning of February been at the forefront of the fear and panic campaign stunned the world when it was reveled in an announcement reported by CNBC that the coronavirus is not being spread by asymptomatic carriers.
This means that the lockdown, social distancing and all the rest of the pandemic measures were based on errors and misunderstandings (or what us cynics might call a pack of lies.)
“From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual,” said Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the W.H.O.’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit. “It’s very rare.”
In point of fact, a W.H.O. fact sheet states that “to date, there has been no documented asymptomatic transmission.” Earlier reports that people had caught the virus from people with no symptoms were eventually debunked, as reported here in Science magazine but the public continued believing that asymptomatic contagion was likely.
And the fuss about face masks was even more idiotic because a virus, the smallest biological entity currently known at an estimated 30 microns, may easily be blasted through the fabric of a face mask.
The widespread belief that people could be infecting others without knowing it was the primary justification used to convince people that they should be wearing face masks. Even if you have no fear for yourself — it was said — at least wear a mask and practice social distancing for the sake of other people you could be infecting.
News that this is not the case will surely lead to a further breakdown in confidence in health experts, whose advice has led to the largest containment of healthy populations in the history of the world.
Unless of course the whole lockdown was always a ruse to distract us from a particularly nasty political agenda that is being implemented by subterfuge. Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like, but before you do, take time to examine the evidence.
Among the evidence you should examine, along with those insanely overstated figures for projected deaths (500,000 in the case of the UK,) is the vanishingly low incidence of death or even serious illness in people who were infected with COVID – 19 but were under 60 and otherwise in good heath. In the UK, as in France, Italy and Spain, the 4 European nations hardest hit, it has been stated by official sources many times that the overwhelming majority of deaths occurred in people over the age of 65 who had long term health problems or conditions such as cardio – vascular ailments or diabetes. I understand this is also the case in the U.S.A. and Canada though I do not have figures.
Yet when I reported this I was called a conspiracy theorist, a far right nutcase, one zealous sheep even tried to warn me that by sticking with my “bring it on” attitude rather than living in isolation or getting vaccinated was “volunteering for death.” It completely escaped him, as he quaked in fear of a fake news story that there was and is no vaccine and if we all lived in total isolation we would probably starve within a couple of weeks. but the terminally fearful weren’t going to admit that they didn’t give a stuff about the ones who had to grow and pack and deliver our food, keep water and sewerage systems running and maintain the electricity generating and distribution systems. But enough of my sarcasm, let’s look at the science, as those terminally fearful people have also told us we should trust “the scientists.” Should we?
Around 150 years ago, medical; researchers began to move to the idea that a particular pathogen is related to each illness and set about proving whether a particular microbe causes of a specific illness or is just a coincidental to the ailment. One of those researcher, a German doctor named Robert Koch proposed a set of four criteria with a specific pathogen must meet in order to be universally accepted as the cause of an illness. Those criteria, known as The Koch Postulates are:
A specific microorganism is always associated with a given disease.
The microorganism can be isolated from the diseased animal and grown in pure culture in the laboratory.
The cultured microbe will cause disease when transferred to a healthy animal.
The same type of microorganism can be isolated from the newly infected animal.
(source: Encyclopedia Britannica)
Like most human endeavours, the Koch postulates were the product of collaboration. First, Jakob Henle developed the underlying concepts, and then Robert Koch and Friedrich Loeffler spent decades refining them until they were published in 1890.
The Silicon Valley funded scientists (i.e. mathematical modellers,) who have been fuelling fear and panic with data from their mathematical models that predict global catastrophe have been among those rubbishing The Koch Postulates and it is fair to say they are an oversimplification, but in general terms they still hold true though the principles have been refined by various researchers over the ensuing century and a half. But the changes concomitantly watered down the postulates. That’s why they’re still used today by most researchers seeking to robustly prove or disprove the existence of a pathogen and its relationship with a specific disease.
From the available information, the Wuhan coronavirus does not appear to meet any, never mind all, of these four criteria. But in the course of thois pandemic we, those of us who were paying attention, have learned things about viral illnesses and their causes that have eroded our trust in academics, the medical professions and the institutions of state (our trust in politicians and the media was already at zero when the whole thing kicked off. A virus is a sub microscopic organism, which means that at 30 micons they are too small to be seen with an optical microscope, so the only evidence of their existence is electro – magnetic emissions recorder on super sensitive radio – microscopes, and the presence of certain antibodies in the blood or tissue of infected bodies. Nobody has ever seen a coronavirus, those spiky balls are computer generated simulations.
What we know are that the same antibodies are created by infected bodies in response to many strains of coronavirus.
There’s an urgent need for scientists to step up and carry out this exercise to prove conclusively with COVID-19, to prove primarily that it actually exists and we have not simply had several simultaneous pandemics of different diseases. But, strangely, the torrent of scientific papers on the virus have all started from the assumption that information provided by the tyrannical regime in The People’s Repiblic Of China is unquestionably accurate. Few, if any of the research projects have fucused on the tremendously question of whether COVID – 19 Coronaviris is what it says on the box.
A very straightforward and inexpensive experiment is all that’s needed to prove that the first postulate has been met. Test the blood samples of a large sample of infected people using a test that’s been proven by several non-conflicted third parties to be accurate – the difficulty here is none of the available tests have been proved accurate.
Then, if all the people who are diagnosed with COVID-19 are the same ones who tested positive for antibodies associated with the virus, that would prove the virus causes COVID-19. Here the difficulty is that COVID-19 diagnosis would have to be based on a well-defined set of symptoms. The current diagnostic criteria – such as pneumonia, or the combination of fever and cough does not met this requirement, because those are typical symptomd in many other respiratory conditions.)
But such testing project has not yet been done, or if it has, the results have not been made public and there could only be one reason why such information would not be published.
The real kicker, though, is that the third postulate – isolating and sequencing the virus and then showing it causes the disease in other organisms – has not been fulfilled either and the fourth is dependent on the other three.
So in fact we have seen economies trashed, lives ruined and the world plunged into chaos, and as yet we do not even know if the alleged threat used to justify this existed or not.
When the leftie Canuk wuss Mark Carney left his job as governor of the Bank of England early this year, Conservatives and libertarians rejoiced, the UK’s central bank had been under the influence of a cultural Marxist ideologue for too long and Carney’s efforts on support of the people prepared to go to any lengths tp prevent the UK leaving the European Unon had not gone unnoticed. Unfortunately instead of going back to his naitive Canada to assist ultra- liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in turning Canada into the first developed nation to make transgenderism mandatory Carney walked into a new government advisory role connected to the COP26 climate change conference, which the UK is hosting.
Since then he has been dispensing little pearls of green wisdom borrowed from the Swedish infant troll with the face of a Cabbage Patch doll, Greta Thunberg ever since. The pandemic presents “a big opportunity” to transition to a new sort of economy, he said recently. He co-authored a column on the subject for The Guardian last week. He has called for policies that will accelerate green growth, citing the coming UK ban on diesel and petrol cars. Maybe you agree with Mr Carney. I do not. But a Conservative Government has given him an official platform from which to lecture the rest of us on how we should be living.
All this eagerly reported by the BBC, of course. The Corporation last week announced its new director-general will be Tim Davie, who some are describing as a new broom because he ran the BBC’s commercial arm and was once apparently a Conservative. I don’t wish to prejudge Mr Davie, and his appointment was not in Downing Street’s direct gift. Perhaps he will address the Corporation’s systematic under-representation of non-liberal, non-PC viewpoints, and accept that the licence fee must be replaced by a subscription model. But is this necessary revolution likely from a long-time BBC insider who by most accounts is a safe pair of hands?
Then there is the Chancellor’s nominee to chair the Office for Budget Responsibility. This is not a minor job. The OBR’s judgments on the Government’s spending plans are treated as gospel from heaven, even if its work is somewhat technocratic. So it is important that Rishi Sunak has selected Richard Hughes, a research associate for the Left-leaning Resolution Foundation, to fill the role. Was a Right-leaning economist not available? When Labour governments are in power they never miss a chance to advance their own side.
Obviously I am not proposing some kind of Test Act. Consult the Cabinet Office’s list of recent public appointments and you will see that a smattering of Tories have also been honoured with jobs in the quangocracy, although they have tended to be ex-politicians like Lord Pickles rather than civil society figures. But where is the army of unorthodox-thinking battle-hardened radicals we were promised to remake the state from the inside?
The pandemic has shown all too clearly the failures of the bureaucracy. It has also shown how “sticky” bad Left-wing policy-making can be unless there are people in positions of authority to challenge them. Why is the Government making such a song and dance about cycling, when we know that most people have reacted to the pandemic by jumping in their cars, and the policy of widening cycle lanes makes the latter harder? Why is the Treasury reportedly seeking to revive the economy through “green jobs”, when any jobs would do? Why does it feel as if authentically pro-freedom, pro-individual policies to lift us out of this nightmare are not even being considered?
Why are the neoliberal establishment still in power? The punters ask.
Because electing a new parliament does not change the government, as most of us have been aware for at least two and a half decades (and many of us strongly suspected it long before that.
Look at the way the Coronavirus crisis has been mishandled. What was the government’s big mistake? They listened to the experts, one of whom, with his dodgy mathematical models, has been responsible for recommending several disastrous policy decision in the past and yet his advice was trusted when even an economic ignoramus would have recognised lockdown would wreck the economy.
In spite of that, we continued to allow flights to and from China, the probable source of the pandemic? Apparently that stupid decision was made on the strength of advice from “foreign policy experts” who thought importing an allegedly deadly plague was preferable to pissing off the Peoples Republic of China’s tyrannical regime.
It still seems to be one rule for the ‘woke’ lefties and another for the rest. We have members of the highly politicized Metropolitan police taking the knee for these protestors whilst their colleagues are injured as these same protestors throw Molotov cocktails, bottles and other objects including a bicycle, and then complain when a blolice horse, struck by the aforementioned bicycle blots and injures a few of them. The police should stay out of politics not be steeped in it.
Black Lives Matter protest – no masks, no social distancing, no respect for law (Picture: Getty images)
The latest round of protests and the accompanying violence are another example of how cultural Marxist ideology has infiltrated the institutions of state. Sure, the killing of George Floyd was a terrible thing, a completely unnecessary and overzealous reaction to a trivial matter. But does anyone really think that these protests are to do with George Floyd?
The lefties have not been able to let of steam for a few months … and their anger at people having the right to disagree with them has kept them at ignition point all that time. These people are not disgruntled working class types protesting about lockdown, loss of their freedoms / jobs and destruction of the economy that supports our lifestyle, they are middle class, Glastonbury attending, ekSTINKtion rebellion crusties, social justice warriors, remoaners, the climate change Warmageddonists indulting in one of their Orwellian two – minutes – hate sessions.
The copper in the US was a bad guy but Floyd, who at first I was prepared to believe was entirely innocent of anything other than being in the wrong place, is now known to have been a career criminal, drug user and low level dealer and small – time dickhead. This probably makes him a hero to the left, because he’s black he is not a criminal but a victim of white supremacism, therefore he had no choice but to turn to crime, so the narrative goes .
COVID – 19 is racist and everything is the fault of white people we are told…The same white people who go out to work to make an honest living in mind numbing jobs so their taxes can pay out benefits to the likes of Floyd’s UK counterparts.
Neo – Liberalism infiltrated our police. We see the commissioner virtual signalling and pandering to law breakers only a week afterr presiding over the roughing up of law abiding families out to enjoy a holiday weekend picnic in one of the capital’s green spaces, now paralyzed with fear of being labelled racist, failing to act against people intent on disturbing the peace and destroying property. Our politicized police forces are not fit for purpose. Neoloberalism and cultural Marxism are turning this country into a shithole like Cuba or Venexuela.
It seems unlikely that anyone within the political system is ready or able to take the fight to the left; to challenge their fundamental premise that group identity determines moral virtue and “rightness”; their presumption of the entitlement to claim power and preference without earning those things; their self righteous and illiberal assumption that there are no valid poinst of view other than those propounded by the left. The Tories aren’t anti-liberal, that’s the problem. Boris and Sajid Javed to name just two, are libertarians at heart but are scared witless by the screaming hysteria of the left whenever these extremists feel their sacred cows are not being sufficiently respected.
Well it’s barbecue season, time to slaughter those sacred cows. Leftburger anyone?