There were a few things going on during the plandemic.
Autumn 2019 to early 2020, people were getting influenza and pneumonia in the usual, seasonal way. The new prescription was: don’t treat until at death’s door; by which portal thousands of elderly people in Homes and hospitals predictably exited, suffering mostly from lack of treatment, neglect and planned excessive sedation.
In the general community, there was no evidence of unusual amounts of illness, fatal or otherwise. Some people reported exceptionally bad bouts of flu.
Real illness and death began with the introduction of the modRNA and other injections to the population at large, and it continues to this day.
Our mistake is to imagine that any of the “public health measures” ever had anything to do with improving “public health”.
The purpose of the plandemic was to provide an excuse to inject the world’s population with the fiendishly lethal spike protein, which was and is totally devoid of any therapeutic value.
Australia and New Zealand were in a position to isolate themselves and radically control their populations during the initial plandemic period. It made no difference. Virtually all the illness, and the excess mortality they have been experiencing, began with their injection campaigns, just as it did in other Western-leaning countries.
To discuss these matters as if human health protection was the issue for the eugenicists and depopulationists who rule the world, is to force one’s brain into painful contortions, leading to …dead… ends.
Author simultaneously says the GBD is a new idea we should not be closed off to, but also that it is old from the AIDS pandemic. Of course standard pandemic preparedness is not a new idea. The semmelweiss analogy is forced and inaccurate because unlike semmelweiss, author doesn’t bring any data to support the assertion that “GBD is right”- he implies that we knew how coronaviruses behaved so naturally we should not aggressively mitigate spread to vulnerable populations. There was no evidence persay supporting GBD at the time, so there was no evidence base for Fauci to be closed off to. He just disagreed with the GBD theory, and was in power to not implement it. Not really a Semmelweiss situation.
It’s frustrating that author says “now we know GBD is right” as if it’s a foregone conclusion with no discussion of evidence.
It would have been better to state plainly that GBD emphasizes qualitative societal outcomes over excess vulnerable mortality, while lockdowns emphasizes the opposite. By saying GBD is right, author just agrees with its priorities.
Or maybe he could have mentioned that now, we know that Sweden pursued a GBD type pandemic response, and had better societal outcomes with similar excess mortality relative to Nordic neighbors. (https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/sweden-during-pandemic). Fauci’s worry about excess mortality seems to have been unfounded based on the Swedish experience. That’s how I know GBD was probably right, but no one knew that in 2020. Mentioning any of this would have made it more suitable for Sensible Medicine.
Disagree with this analysis on two fronts. First, as others have stated, the GBD was the long recommended practice in Pandemic Preparedness Plans, not the novel practice. (and I'm a little more than fatigued hearing such nonsense historical science illiteracy on both sides)
Second, there's no comparison between HIV and SCV2. HIV is transmitted via blood (in or out), and Coronaviruses are seasonal respiratory viruses, which all transmit via many paths (notwithstanding the OMG IT'S AIRBORNE! hysteria) hence high contagion.
When AIDS was still GRIDS and no one knoew what caused it, patients were "locked down" in hospital rooms and were isolated from the rest of society unti they died. It was a major effort to convince the public that AIDS was not airborne.
The patient zero story lends insight into this. The investigating CDC officer went to the Wadsworth VA Hospital where they had a couple of AIDS pateints locked away in rooms. No one talked to these patients, they kept them locked away with minimal interaction with the staff. The CDC case officer who knew that AIDS was blood borne and not contageous was the first to talk to these patients. From them, he identified the person who became known as patient zero.
My point was that there is a tendancy to invoke lockdown-type stratgies that do not make sense but are implemented out of fear of the unknown.
I'm not sure what analysis you disagree with. I agree that what the GBD proposed was what should have been the response to COVID. However, not only was the proposal not pursued, the GBD itself came under intense criticism that persists to this day.
"The GBD had no precedent" Not true. I quoted what was written in Harrison's Internal Medicine about SARS before the pandemic. Its observations and recommendations were essentially identical to the GBD.
I like remotely, but the GBD was not a "new" idea, it was the standard of practice in all Pandemic Preparedness Plans the world over. NOWHERE in Pandemic Preparedness Plans was it EVER written: ventilate-faceDiaper-isolate.
Let's not rewrite history. The hysteria was novel, the GBD was universally recommended practice... before the hysteria.
THE biggest lie perpetrated during Society in Time of Covid was "we don't know"
We KNEW about transmission paths
We KNEW of vaccine inefficacy in Coronaviruses (Ig immunity partial and temporary)
We KNEW age stratification by February 2020
We KNEW the "died suddenly" videos out of China were fakes
We KNEW low lethality from ALL available data.
"We didn't know" is a disgusting cope by health literate people. By lay people, that's another analysis. Lay people should be focused on protection of civil rights, not rewriting science.
One thing that puzzles me is how little attention Taiwan gets for its handling of the pandemic. For the first 18 months, they were exceptional. No lockdowns, and life carried on almost as usual—something unique at that time. Their success was so remarkable that vaccine uptake was initially low because people didn’t feel an urgent need. Unfortunately, it all fell apart later.
The key takeaway from Taiwan’s experience is the importance of early action—particularly strict quarantine measures for travelers entering the country. Once the virus establishes itself in the community, the game changes entirely.
The current debate often feels oversimplified, reduced to a binary choice between “lockdowns” and “doing nothing.” But isn’t the real question: “Should we intervene early, and if we miss that window, does doing nothing become the better option?”
The type of healthcare system also matters. In countries like Canada, with socialized healthcare, vaccine mandates and COVID protocols may make more sense than in systems like the U.S., where access and funding are different.
No, all respiratory viruses eventually reach everyone within a couple of years. ALL stop-it mandates are inane. You fight viruses with HEALTH and PEACE, not authoritarianism and police.
I think it’s worth pointing out that Taiwan’s approach wasn’t authoritarian—it was actually quite pragmatic. They relied on targeted measures like early quarantines for travelers, which helped prevent widespread community transmission without imposing lockdowns or heavy-handed restrictions on the general population.
This allowed life within Taiwan to continue almost as usual for over a year, something no other country achieved during that time. They were essentially the only country on earth hosting concerts and other large group gatherings. It wasn’t about “stopping” the virus entirely but managing its spread in a way that protected vulnerable populations and kept their healthcare system functional until treatment or a vaccine became available. It fell apart a few days after they reduced the quarantine times for flight crew. Regardless, they still had some vaccine uptake and still ended up with one of the lowest (I think THE lowest) covid mortality rates in the world.
While I agree that promoting health and peace is vital, I think timing and strategy matter too. Taiwan’s success highlights that early, targeted actions can prevent the need for more disruptive measures later.
At the 12 month mark Taiwan had 7 deaths (population 24 million) and GDP increased 2.5% (everywhere else it decreased). The vaccine came out at the 12 month mark.
Early action is key. That is exactly why the GBD was too little and much too late.
Taiwan has massive and immediate connections to China.
It helped that Taiwan had learned the lessons of SARS in 2003.
A Johns Hopkins trained epidemiologist, Chen Chien-jen, was Vice-President of Taiwan in January 2020. He orchestrated Taiwan's response. I remembered reading during the pandemic that he immediately traveled to Wuhan to learn about the situation. He did not like what he saw and prepared for the worst. I could not double check this fact for this comment.
Taiwan imposed entry controls on January 5th 2020, six days after the WHO was informed of the new pneumonias in Wuhan.
Taiwan is an island and can control its entry points rather easily.
"We now know that Dr. Bhattacharya and the other GBD authors were correct"
Correct about what?
In October 2020, Professor Bhattacharya and his GBD colleagues knew that herd immunity would come in within three to six months if we only infect low risk populations.
Coronaviruses do not bring lasting immunity. As RNA viruses do, they mutate rapidly.
In a recent Cold Spring Harbor Asia Conference, scientists demonstrated that today's SARS-COV-2 variants resist the antibodies and monoclonals of 2020.
Only repeated new vaccinations can keep up with SARS-CoV-2.
I might not write it that way, but the words "pandemic" and "novel" require a definition overhaul. Over 99.9% of humanity dealt with this just fine, and 0.8% of humans die every single year. "eradicate illnesses" (zero pain types of people) are insane.
Everyone always had the individual option to stay home hiding under the bed wearing a filthy face rag and crawling out once a month to get jabbed with whatever experimental slop was on offer… anyone that defends any of the mandates is a self-righteous, fascistic POS that must be derided and ridiculed as the scum they are.
100% and if I, a 60 year old lady, was able to exist un-faceDiapered and un-jabbed, for all this time, we all could have. People (incl. experts) are hysterically driven sheeple, and I have sincerely lost hope for any human rationality after these years. There are basically two types of people, lone wolves and sheeple. Both have their advantages and disadvantages, but our society is very much in a sheeple era. My only fear is that I'll die before independent rational thinkers reclaim their societal influence.
As a medico I cannot agree with this essay. The GBD proposed strategies that were unworkable from a public health perspective and almost all epidemiologists and virologists I know did not agree with it at the time. Not to mention the fact that the GBD was sponsored by the Koch corporation who had a vested interest in avoiding lockdowns.
GBD was for all intents and purposes exactly the recommendation of all pre-2020 Pandemic Preparedness Plans. I read our government Pandemic Preparedness Plan every year. Most people are speaking from their exit hole.
Well I guess the USA wasn’t well prepared for a pandemic then, given how abysmally it dealt with Covid. A one size fits all plan has to be adapted to suit an individual viruses behaviour anyway. The Plan would be fairly useless for an Ebola outbreak, for example. Also, are you suggesting that most of the expert epidemiologists and virologists globally wer speaking out of their exit holes?
The reason why western countries did so much worse than Sweden is that Sweden followed the Pandemic Preparedness Plans in place for decades, written by public health experts with integrity, based on decades and 100s of years of evidence, while Western officials and the public fell for mass hysteria against of all the evidence present and past.
Mass psychosis + Medical Industrial Complex messaging guaranteeing transfer of wealth from poor to wealthy.
I don’t agree. Sweden adopted a different approach to neighbouring Norway. At the end of it all, Sweden took a virtually equal hit to its economy, yet about 10 times as many people died compared to Norway. Sweden’s government epidemiologist even admitted at the end that he made the wrong call. Other western countries like Australia followed vigorous lockdowns and used appropriate govt relief to support businesses. It certainly had consequences but its economy recovered better than the USA and its covid mortality was a fraction of that in the USA.
What’s really extraordinary about the Semmelweis effect is how it is evidence independent.
In Semmelweis’ own case, the impact of his new hygiene regimen was immediate and persistent. Post natal death rates dropped from 10-15% in the worst hospital (women begged not to be sent there, some preferring to have their children in the street rather than be admitted) to 1-2% almost immediately. The effect also transferred from Vienna, from which he was hounded, to his hometown Budapest. There he was barely allowed to eke out a living, despite stellar (for the time) post-natal death outcomes (<1%) over a 7 year period, during which he supervised about 900 births, before again being hounded out by his “professional”
So while we think ourselves quite superior, more scientific, to the Victorians, the Covid experience shows it’s more a case of plus ca change…. Reality, evidence etc simply don’t count to, or are actively avoided by, the intellectually or financially invested.
One can apply the Semmelweis effect to a few other medical advances that were initially gaslit.
In the early 1900s there were US military surgeons who
vociferously criticized the French military's use of battlefield tourniquets. That’s hard to believe
based upon what we know today. But some of these surgeons wrote editorials about the dangers of using a tourniquet. Camps based upon opinions on tourniquets were formed. Debates ensued. But ultimately in the end the discourse led to open discussion and refining of uses, approaches and designs for what is a life-saving maneuver used by EMTs, trauma doctors and taught to civilians today. While the
debate on the optimal use of torniquets continues the discourse remains open and is devoid of
suppression of differing theories. It represents scientific deliberation in motion.
In 2002 neuropathologist Dr Bennet Omalu described what we now refer to as chronic traumatic
encephalopathy (CTE) while conducting an autopsy on a former NFL player. His paper describing what is well known today was “retracted” by the journal Neurosurgery. Despite an
independent review of Dr Omalu’s findings the NFL suppressed the information for 4 years.
CTE was and continues to be debated within the medical community despite its earlier
suppression by a powerful organization with an agenda. Open debate about CTE continues
today.
Perhaps one day Drs Fauci and Collins will apologize to the GBD authors.
While I learnt alot from WCH during the earliest periods of the Covid pandemania, I feel they have reinforced, even promoted the myth of "deadly SARS-Cov-2 virus." Many other experts with serious credentials & equally serious evidence are questioning the very foundations of virology, and of Covid-19 as a real, harm-causing "virus." What I disturbingly find (please correct me) is WCH fixation with "alternative" treatments for the "Covid virus," and greater reluctance to dialogue (or debate) with those who challenge its virology basis, which the GBD proponents (also helpful and important early on, arguably) must be challenged on.
This is a great article and full of good insight, but it misses the main point: the Holocaust Effect.
Hidden power mongers target earth’s population for death through the vaccines. This targeting through medical denialism was laced with a covenant with death: depopulation.
Excellent summary. One example not mentioned that can easily be understood by the public was immortalised in the movie "Something the Lord Made" which I recommend highly.
It's about the Blalock shunt which is now a standard procedure but at the time was ridiculed by the establishment. If they had their way many many babies would be dead.
There were a few things going on during the plandemic.
Autumn 2019 to early 2020, people were getting influenza and pneumonia in the usual, seasonal way. The new prescription was: don’t treat until at death’s door; by which portal thousands of elderly people in Homes and hospitals predictably exited, suffering mostly from lack of treatment, neglect and planned excessive sedation.
In the general community, there was no evidence of unusual amounts of illness, fatal or otherwise. Some people reported exceptionally bad bouts of flu.
Real illness and death began with the introduction of the modRNA and other injections to the population at large, and it continues to this day.
Our mistake is to imagine that any of the “public health measures” ever had anything to do with improving “public health”.
The purpose of the plandemic was to provide an excuse to inject the world’s population with the fiendishly lethal spike protein, which was and is totally devoid of any therapeutic value.
Australia and New Zealand were in a position to isolate themselves and radically control their populations during the initial plandemic period. It made no difference. Virtually all the illness, and the excess mortality they have been experiencing, began with their injection campaigns, just as it did in other Western-leaning countries.
To discuss these matters as if human health protection was the issue for the eugenicists and depopulationists who rule the world, is to force one’s brain into painful contortions, leading to …dead… ends.
Author simultaneously says the GBD is a new idea we should not be closed off to, but also that it is old from the AIDS pandemic. Of course standard pandemic preparedness is not a new idea. The semmelweiss analogy is forced and inaccurate because unlike semmelweiss, author doesn’t bring any data to support the assertion that “GBD is right”- he implies that we knew how coronaviruses behaved so naturally we should not aggressively mitigate spread to vulnerable populations. There was no evidence persay supporting GBD at the time, so there was no evidence base for Fauci to be closed off to. He just disagreed with the GBD theory, and was in power to not implement it. Not really a Semmelweiss situation.
It’s frustrating that author says “now we know GBD is right” as if it’s a foregone conclusion with no discussion of evidence.
It would have been better to state plainly that GBD emphasizes qualitative societal outcomes over excess vulnerable mortality, while lockdowns emphasizes the opposite. By saying GBD is right, author just agrees with its priorities.
Or maybe he could have mentioned that now, we know that Sweden pursued a GBD type pandemic response, and had better societal outcomes with similar excess mortality relative to Nordic neighbors. (https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/sweden-during-pandemic). Fauci’s worry about excess mortality seems to have been unfounded based on the Swedish experience. That’s how I know GBD was probably right, but no one knew that in 2020. Mentioning any of this would have made it more suitable for Sensible Medicine.
Disagree with this analysis on two fronts. First, as others have stated, the GBD was the long recommended practice in Pandemic Preparedness Plans, not the novel practice. (and I'm a little more than fatigued hearing such nonsense historical science illiteracy on both sides)
Second, there's no comparison between HIV and SCV2. HIV is transmitted via blood (in or out), and Coronaviruses are seasonal respiratory viruses, which all transmit via many paths (notwithstanding the OMG IT'S AIRBORNE! hysteria) hence high contagion.
When AIDS was still GRIDS and no one knoew what caused it, patients were "locked down" in hospital rooms and were isolated from the rest of society unti they died. It was a major effort to convince the public that AIDS was not airborne.
The patient zero story lends insight into this. The investigating CDC officer went to the Wadsworth VA Hospital where they had a couple of AIDS pateints locked away in rooms. No one talked to these patients, they kept them locked away with minimal interaction with the staff. The CDC case officer who knew that AIDS was blood borne and not contageous was the first to talk to these patients. From them, he identified the person who became known as patient zero.
My point was that there is a tendancy to invoke lockdown-type stratgies that do not make sense but are implemented out of fear of the unknown.
I'm not sure what analysis you disagree with. I agree that what the GBD proposed was what should have been the response to COVID. However, not only was the proposal not pursued, the GBD itself came under intense criticism that persists to this day.
The GBD had no precedent. No one has previously recommended that children get infected to protect the elderly.
Second, the GBD came nine months into the pandemic. That was much too late for anyone to implement or prepare for.
The GBD did not provide any concrete modeling or analysis as how their strategy would work.
Finally, they did not state who would be responsible for what, where the leadership would come from.
"precedent" irrelevant sentence.
The GBD was a perfect reflection, in short form, of all Pandemic Preparedness Plans.
It's exactly what Anders Tegnell did in Sweden which got Sweden THE lowest excess death numbers, even compared to all the most hysterical countries.
"The GBD had no precedent" Not true. I quoted what was written in Harrison's Internal Medicine about SARS before the pandemic. Its observations and recommendations were essentially identical to the GBD.
I like remotely, but the GBD was not a "new" idea, it was the standard of practice in all Pandemic Preparedness Plans the world over. NOWHERE in Pandemic Preparedness Plans was it EVER written: ventilate-faceDiaper-isolate.
Let's not rewrite history. The hysteria was novel, the GBD was universally recommended practice... before the hysteria.
THE biggest lie perpetrated during Society in Time of Covid was "we don't know"
We KNEW about transmission paths
We KNEW of vaccine inefficacy in Coronaviruses (Ig immunity partial and temporary)
We KNEW age stratification by February 2020
We KNEW the "died suddenly" videos out of China were fakes
We KNEW low lethality from ALL available data.
"We didn't know" is a disgusting cope by health literate people. By lay people, that's another analysis. Lay people should be focused on protection of civil rights, not rewriting science.
One thing that puzzles me is how little attention Taiwan gets for its handling of the pandemic. For the first 18 months, they were exceptional. No lockdowns, and life carried on almost as usual—something unique at that time. Their success was so remarkable that vaccine uptake was initially low because people didn’t feel an urgent need. Unfortunately, it all fell apart later.
The key takeaway from Taiwan’s experience is the importance of early action—particularly strict quarantine measures for travelers entering the country. Once the virus establishes itself in the community, the game changes entirely.
The current debate often feels oversimplified, reduced to a binary choice between “lockdowns” and “doing nothing.” But isn’t the real question: “Should we intervene early, and if we miss that window, does doing nothing become the better option?”
The type of healthcare system also matters. In countries like Canada, with socialized healthcare, vaccine mandates and COVID protocols may make more sense than in systems like the U.S., where access and funding are different.
Understanding the exceptional pre-vaccination Era East Asian COVID-19 outcomes
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36328937/
by S Bhattacharya
Professor Bhattacharya edited a book on Japanese health care. He has written a series of articles on Japanese health care.
In the above article, he is at a loss to explain Japanese success. Japan is the OLDEST nation in the world. It is adjacent to China.
It was easy for them.
It has universal insurance, and a robust ID public health sector.
The Japanese mask.
It used a non-coercive three word warning system: avoid close contact, avoid closed spaces when with other people, avoid crowds.
Unlike the GBD, they acted promptly and simply.
Their society worked.
SHOULD WE NOT BE LEARNING FROM OTHER SOCIETIES?
Should not Dr. Cifu be encouraging us to learn from success stories?
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
USA 341.11 COVID deaths per 100K
Canada 135.23
Norway 96.16
Australia 76.88
Taiwan 74.20
South Korea 66.50
Japan 57.72
No, all respiratory viruses eventually reach everyone within a couple of years. ALL stop-it mandates are inane. You fight viruses with HEALTH and PEACE, not authoritarianism and police.
I think it’s worth pointing out that Taiwan’s approach wasn’t authoritarian—it was actually quite pragmatic. They relied on targeted measures like early quarantines for travelers, which helped prevent widespread community transmission without imposing lockdowns or heavy-handed restrictions on the general population.
This allowed life within Taiwan to continue almost as usual for over a year, something no other country achieved during that time. They were essentially the only country on earth hosting concerts and other large group gatherings. It wasn’t about “stopping” the virus entirely but managing its spread in a way that protected vulnerable populations and kept their healthcare system functional until treatment or a vaccine became available. It fell apart a few days after they reduced the quarantine times for flight crew. Regardless, they still had some vaccine uptake and still ended up with one of the lowest (I think THE lowest) covid mortality rates in the world.
While I agree that promoting health and peace is vital, I think timing and strategy matter too. Taiwan’s success highlights that early, targeted actions can prevent the need for more disruptive measures later.
At the 12 month mark Taiwan had 7 deaths (population 24 million) and GDP increased 2.5% (everywhere else it decreased). The vaccine came out at the 12 month mark.
VP Chen Chien-jen documented his leadership in this video: https://taiwancanhelp.us/en/bag
Taiwan used quarantine.
Your points are well taken.
Early action is key. That is exactly why the GBD was too little and much too late.
Taiwan has massive and immediate connections to China.
It helped that Taiwan had learned the lessons of SARS in 2003.
A Johns Hopkins trained epidemiologist, Chen Chien-jen, was Vice-President of Taiwan in January 2020. He orchestrated Taiwan's response. I remembered reading during the pandemic that he immediately traveled to Wuhan to learn about the situation. He did not like what he saw and prepared for the worst. I could not double check this fact for this comment.
Taiwan imposed entry controls on January 5th 2020, six days after the WHO was informed of the new pneumonias in Wuhan.
Taiwan is an island and can control its entry points rather easily.
Dr. Livingston stated this.
"We now know that Dr. Bhattacharya and the other GBD authors were correct"
Correct about what?
In October 2020, Professor Bhattacharya and his GBD colleagues knew that herd immunity would come in within three to six months if we only infect low risk populations.
Coronaviruses do not bring lasting immunity. As RNA viruses do, they mutate rapidly.
In a recent Cold Spring Harbor Asia Conference, scientists demonstrated that today's SARS-COV-2 variants resist the antibodies and monoclonals of 2020.
Only repeated new vaccinations can keep up with SARS-CoV-2.
Science reported this on January 2, 2024:
www.science.org/content/article/covid-5-years-later-learning-pandemic-many-are-forgetting
Making a prediction on how RNA viruses will turn out is a risky business.
The GBD was not based on science but on hope. Hope is not a policy option.
Bohdan A Oryshkevich, MD, MPH
Propaganda was raging, I never observed any pandemic.
I might not write it that way, but the words "pandemic" and "novel" require a definition overhaul. Over 99.9% of humanity dealt with this just fine, and 0.8% of humans die every single year. "eradicate illnesses" (zero pain types of people) are insane.
Everyone always had the individual option to stay home hiding under the bed wearing a filthy face rag and crawling out once a month to get jabbed with whatever experimental slop was on offer… anyone that defends any of the mandates is a self-righteous, fascistic POS that must be derided and ridiculed as the scum they are.
100% and if I, a 60 year old lady, was able to exist un-faceDiapered and un-jabbed, for all this time, we all could have. People (incl. experts) are hysterically driven sheeple, and I have sincerely lost hope for any human rationality after these years. There are basically two types of people, lone wolves and sheeple. Both have their advantages and disadvantages, but our society is very much in a sheeple era. My only fear is that I'll die before independent rational thinkers reclaim their societal influence.
Thank you Thank you
As a medico I cannot agree with this essay. The GBD proposed strategies that were unworkable from a public health perspective and almost all epidemiologists and virologists I know did not agree with it at the time. Not to mention the fact that the GBD was sponsored by the Koch corporation who had a vested interest in avoiding lockdowns.
GBD was for all intents and purposes exactly the recommendation of all pre-2020 Pandemic Preparedness Plans. I read our government Pandemic Preparedness Plan every year. Most people are speaking from their exit hole.
Well I guess the USA wasn’t well prepared for a pandemic then, given how abysmally it dealt with Covid. A one size fits all plan has to be adapted to suit an individual viruses behaviour anyway. The Plan would be fairly useless for an Ebola outbreak, for example. Also, are you suggesting that most of the expert epidemiologists and virologists globally wer speaking out of their exit holes?
The reason why western countries did so much worse than Sweden is that Sweden followed the Pandemic Preparedness Plans in place for decades, written by public health experts with integrity, based on decades and 100s of years of evidence, while Western officials and the public fell for mass hysteria against of all the evidence present and past.
Mass psychosis + Medical Industrial Complex messaging guaranteeing transfer of wealth from poor to wealthy.
It was all a damned disgrace.
I don’t agree. Sweden adopted a different approach to neighbouring Norway. At the end of it all, Sweden took a virtually equal hit to its economy, yet about 10 times as many people died compared to Norway. Sweden’s government epidemiologist even admitted at the end that he made the wrong call. Other western countries like Australia followed vigorous lockdowns and used appropriate govt relief to support businesses. It certainly had consequences but its economy recovered better than the USA and its covid mortality was a fraction of that in the USA.
Not all pandemics are the same.
What’s really extraordinary about the Semmelweis effect is how it is evidence independent.
In Semmelweis’ own case, the impact of his new hygiene regimen was immediate and persistent. Post natal death rates dropped from 10-15% in the worst hospital (women begged not to be sent there, some preferring to have their children in the street rather than be admitted) to 1-2% almost immediately. The effect also transferred from Vienna, from which he was hounded, to his hometown Budapest. There he was barely allowed to eke out a living, despite stellar (for the time) post-natal death outcomes (<1%) over a 7 year period, during which he supervised about 900 births, before again being hounded out by his “professional”
So while we think ourselves quite superior, more scientific, to the Victorians, the Covid experience shows it’s more a case of plus ca change…. Reality, evidence etc simply don’t count to, or are actively avoided by, the intellectually or financially invested.
One can apply the Semmelweis effect to a few other medical advances that were initially gaslit.
In the early 1900s there were US military surgeons who
vociferously criticized the French military's use of battlefield tourniquets. That’s hard to believe
based upon what we know today. But some of these surgeons wrote editorials about the dangers of using a tourniquet. Camps based upon opinions on tourniquets were formed. Debates ensued. But ultimately in the end the discourse led to open discussion and refining of uses, approaches and designs for what is a life-saving maneuver used by EMTs, trauma doctors and taught to civilians today. While the
debate on the optimal use of torniquets continues the discourse remains open and is devoid of
suppression of differing theories. It represents scientific deliberation in motion.
In 2002 neuropathologist Dr Bennet Omalu described what we now refer to as chronic traumatic
encephalopathy (CTE) while conducting an autopsy on a former NFL player. His paper describing what is well known today was “retracted” by the journal Neurosurgery. Despite an
independent review of Dr Omalu’s findings the NFL suppressed the information for 4 years.
CTE was and continues to be debated within the medical community despite its earlier
suppression by a powerful organization with an agenda. Open debate about CTE continues
today.
Perhaps one day Drs Fauci and Collins will apologize to the GBD authors.
While I learnt alot from WCH during the earliest periods of the Covid pandemania, I feel they have reinforced, even promoted the myth of "deadly SARS-Cov-2 virus." Many other experts with serious credentials & equally serious evidence are questioning the very foundations of virology, and of Covid-19 as a real, harm-causing "virus." What I disturbingly find (please correct me) is WCH fixation with "alternative" treatments for the "Covid virus," and greater reluctance to dialogue (or debate) with those who challenge its virology basis, which the GBD proponents (also helpful and important early on, arguably) must be challenged on.
Both sides are hysterical.
Viruses are fought with health, not pills and policing.
This is a great article and full of good insight, but it misses the main point: the Holocaust Effect.
Hidden power mongers target earth’s population for death through the vaccines. This targeting through medical denialism was laced with a covenant with death: depopulation.
Excellent summary. One example not mentioned that can easily be understood by the public was immortalised in the movie "Something the Lord Made" which I recommend highly.
It's about the Blalock shunt which is now a standard procedure but at the time was ridiculed by the establishment. If they had their way many many babies would be dead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Something_the_Lord_Made