Search This Blog

Monday 26 October 2020

HOMEOPATHY & CORONAVIRUS. The Busy-Busy World of Homeopathy. Taking the fear out of COVID-19 for so many patients

Homeopathy, homeopaths, and homeopathic pharmacies around the world have been busy throughout the coronavirus COVID-19 panic, and has been successful in relieving the fears of so many people. This information will not be generally known as the governments, the pharmaceutical medical establishment and the mainstream media (MSM) in not interested in telling you: but it was broadcast loud and clear in the summer edition of the magazine "Homeopathy in Practice" (HIP), entirely devoted to the Covid-19 pandemic

HIP is published by the Alliance of Registered Homeopaths and this edition is certainly recommended reading for anyone who has not yet moved to homeopathy for their medical treatment. (This edition of HIP can be purchased at this link).

What become clear, reading all the articles, is that homeopathy has been busy, offering its treatment to homeopathy users throughout the world, although no-one can be completely free from the fear mongering to which we have been subjected during the last 9 months.

Difference between Homeopathy and Conventional Medicine

Homeopathy has both preventative strategies and treatment for COVID-19 and these have been producing positive outcomes for patients. So it can prevent people contracting the virus; or more usually ensuring that symptoms are mild. And if the virus is contracted it we can treat the infection enabling quick recovery.

Conventional medicine, on its own admission, can offer neither prevention or treatment. It is largely helpless, and in serious or acute cases can do little more than to watch as people die, caring as best they can. This is where the panic and fear has arisen - doctors knowing there is little or nothing they can do, and we are asked to "save the NHS" which is unable to cope.

And whilst homeopathy is a safe medical therapy, none of our remedies or treatments have serious side effects. Conventional medicine can only offer drugs like hydroxychloroquine and Remdesivir, whose side effects are listed on those links; and the prospect of a new vaccine, sometime in the future, if one can be developed that is safe. This has only added to the fear.

Homeopaths - learning new skills of 'virtual' consultations

Homeopaths have been subjected to the same lockdown constraints as everyone else, there have been no special dispensations for us, as health workers. So many, like Tracy Kirkut-Law, have been busy learning new skills.

               "I had always treated a few clients via video calls ... but it was a small proportion of my practice. Now however I was working full on, via a screen with all my clients... it was a massive move away from my comfort zone. Initially I found it exhausting - staring at a screen made my eyes ache, and sitting at my desk all day became very uncomfortable. I found everything took so much longer...."

Clients also adapted. "...the vast majority of my clients were happy to make the switch to video", no doubt pleased that they had continued access to safe and effective treatment in the midst of the pandemic. One homeopathy user wrote a piece for the magazine

            ".... the prospect of not having my regular appointments with my homeopath during lockdown filled me with apprehension...... Naturally there are disadvantages from not being in the physical presence of your therapist, the main one being not benefiting from her energy.... (but) just being able to speak to and see her has allowed me to continue my positive experience of my homeopathic appointments".

So most homeopaths and patients the outcome has been a continuation of business; not business as usual; but it has taught us that whatever the benefits of face-to-face contact it is not a prerequisite for good and effective homeopathic consultations. Working with children and their parents is a case in point.

            "I ask my patients to place their device (mobile phone, table or laptop) somewhere where I can see them interacting with their kids at home; I ask them to do their cooking or dish-washing, or whatever they need to do while we are having a conversation. I still get all the information I need on modalities, body temperature, food preferences, etc., but I can also see how they are behaving and interacting at home, dealing with their kids or with a stressful family experience".

Dealing with the Hysteria and Fear

The conventional medical establishment has studiously developed the fear and panic that still surrounds the COVID-19 outbreak. It was initially generated by Professor Neil Ferguson, who predicted a UK death toll reaching 1/2 million people, similar to that of the Spanish Flu of 1918, stating that the only way to avoid this was for the world to go into total lockdown. His predictions (like many of his previous predictions) were cynically over-exaggerated had the desired effect of engendering massive levels of fear.

In Carole Boyce's article, she refers this engineered fear, supported by the MSM, and noted that in the early days it seemed that even parts of the homeopathic community were worried.

            "Suddenly parts of our community had lost connection with our underlying philosophy. Had we forgotten that epidemics are where homeopathy shines?"

Rix Pyke added this picture of the fear and panic.

            "A mild to moderate viral flu was suddenly afforded Kardashian-style celebrity status and 24-hour new rolled and spewed a non-stop conveyor belt of fear-mongering terrorism, extremely incomprehensible statistics, strange military terms like furlough and Nightingale hospitals, and the rounded off each day with pictures of bats and pangolins".

Fortunately within the homeopathic community this did not last long, as Carole explained.

            "As the symptoms of COVID-19 became increasingly clear, our tried and tested familiar stalwarts came to the fore: Arsenicum album Bryonia, Gelsemium, Phosphorus, and Antimonium tartaricum."

Rix responded, as did so many homeopaths, by writing to all her patients, reminding them that she was still there, and available for consultation.

And this is why homeopathy is so brilliant. We do not have to 'reinvent the wheel', or discover new remedies in the face of (what conventional medicine believes to be) a new illness. The remedies mentioned in all the HIP articles have been part and parcel of the homeopath's tool kit for over 200 years; and are likely to be for the next 200 years. They work! Where there is illness, homeopathy is able to find a homeopathic solution by doing what it always does - matching patient symptoms with well known remedy symptoms.

Viruses put into Perspective. 

One important homeopathic understanding about viruses, including COVID-19, is the recognition that we all live with and alongside them; indeed, that our body is made up of viruses and bacteria; and that attacking these so-called germs is tantamount to attacking ourselves.

This is not the understanding of pharmaceutical medicine, which has spent its time, unsuccessfully, 'chasing' the virus. This is what hand-washing, masks, protective equipment, social distancing, lockdown and Test/Track/Trace are all about. Having nothing better to offer it is how conventional medicine thinks we can best protect ourselves from COVID-19; to stop the virus spreading.

Pharmaceutical medicine, dominant within the health systems of most western nations, have come to the disastrous conclusion - that everyone is at risk, even the young and healthy. So everyone has to be fully protected, everyone has to be locked down, tested, tracked and traced - regardless of the harm this does to our social life, our livelihoods, and the economy. The disaster this is going to cause is still to be fully realised.

The Critical Importance of the Immune System

The pandemic has demonstrated that conventional medicine no longer believes that natural immunity plays any role, not even a marginal one, in maintaining our health. It is clear from the HIP contributors that homeopathy disagrees fundamentally. Homeopathy believes that the immune system is central, an integral part of staying healthy, and free from disease. Indeed, the immune system is probably the main differentiating feature between homeopathy (and other natural medical therapies) and conventional medicine.

Several contributors emphasised that homeopaths have been focusing on the immune system, the natural defence against all infectious diseases, protecting us, assisting us to withstand the harm that any virus, bacteria, or germ, can do.

Conventional medicine has recognised that COVID-19 is particular dangerous to patients who have 'underlying health conditions', not least obesity, hypertension, diabetes, amongst other diseases. Yet the link between these conditions and a damaged immune system has never been recognised, but is referred to by several of the HIP articles, which stressed the importance of diet, exercise, and lifestyle to support immune system.

Lack of General Health Advice regarding Immunity

Conventional medicine has given some advice about how we can protect ourselves; washing our hands, social distancing, wearing masks and other protective equipment, and lockdown in all its failing varieties. But there has been little or no mention of the importance of a strong immune system, and how this can be strengthened and supported. As Carol Boyce said 

            "the UK government exercised absolute dereliction of duty in the crisis. They failed to give the population any information on how to strengthen their immune system, and instead classified much of the time-tested proven advice, such as Vitamin C, as fake news....The total disconnect between infection and the role of the immune system is surely nothing less than ludicrous."

The article by Thierry Clerc looked at how homeopathy can help patients reduce the likelihood of being seriously ill, before they get sick.

            "The best way to prepare for a pandemic is to have a healthy constitution which translates... into losing weight, if you need to, and ... to reduce or eliminate sugar, alcohol, processed food ... and increase fresh vegetable and water intake."

In the early days of lockdown, during the beautiful, sunny spring, Rix Pyke told her patients about the importance of Vitamin D.

            "Sunlight is the absolutely best medicine and we are being given loads - for free! So please open the window, sit on the balcony, sit at your front door - anywhere you can get sun on your body, and it will do the rest!"

Such advice is typical of what is going on within homeopathy, and natural medicine generally. As such this is not new or revolutionary. But it is notable that throughout the pandemic this has been rarely mentioned by government, the NHS or the conventional medical establishment.

Clerc goes into considerable detail about how healthy habits can make us feel calmer and fitter, whilst bad habits can made us feel heavy and tired. His advice clearly provides patients with 'underlying health conditions' advice about how to improve health through natural immunity; without having to take pharmaceutical drugs; and how our immune system can be supported and strengthened.

The article by Rob Verkerk, founder of the Alliance for Natural Health, focuses on supporting and strengthening the immune system, and raises serious questions about how conventional medicine treats 'germs'.

             "Given that all life forms, including humans, have co-evolved alongside viruses and other elements of the microbiota, it is essential that evolutionary, systems biology and ecological perspectives are maintained in assessments of COVID-19 and the search for solutions."

Rob explains that this is not the usual response to viruses, which are seen negatively as threats to our health by the broad conventional medical establishment. He develops the bigger picture; that viruses are the most abundant biological entities on Earth; he offered a critique of Pasteur's work, whose model he describes as being deeply influential in the creation of the current 'biomedical' model of health.

            "Dietary, lifestyle and environmental changes provide the most potent ways available to humans to change patterns of gene expression and improving resilience - a key imperative when facing adaptation to a virus newly adapted to the human species.... The biomedical model that has driven the development of the existing healthcare system has become, ironically, potentially the single greatest stumbling block to increasing the rate of human adaption to the presence of the new emerged coronavirus."

Rob's article underpins the importance homeopaths give to working alongside, and in harmony with germs, microbes and viruses. Harming viruses harms us. We have to learn to live with them.

Homeopathic Prevention or Prophylaxis.

Homeoprophylaxis (HP) is the main focus of an article by Dr Bhaisha Joshi, and Dr Shachindra Joshi, two Indian doctors who describe how they worked with the COVID-19 pandemic with their existing patients, and many others who were referred to them. Homeopathy in India is well developed, well supported, and has become an integral part of the Indian national health service.

            " After a thorough study of the symptoms and retrospective analysis of our treated and cured case, we have, since January (2020) used and advocated Arsenicum album, Bryonia alba and Phosphorus in our treatment plan. We divided the plan into two parts - immunity booster for everyone, and treatment of positive cases."

In their lengthy article they describe the treatment, and its many successes, with several case examples. It is expected that in the fullness of time the Indian AYUSH ministry will research and review the patient outcomes of patients using homeopathy in this pandemic.

            "Most of the few patients who tested COVID-19-positive responded well to their constitutional remedies. Statistically, we have seen that the majority of individuals who took Arsenicum album 30c as a preventative did not contract the infection and are symptom free."

Homeopathic Treatment for COVID-19.

The search for matching homeopathic remedies for COVID-19 patients started almost immediately information about the epidemic became known. Carol Boyce described what happened.

            "An international genus epidemicus group sprang up on Facebook. Within days it had more than 800 members .... Solid experience flowed out of India, including suggestions for homeoprophylaxis. Prominent homeopaths shared their thoughts... Different remedies seemed to work better in different locations - perhaps a sign of viral mutations."

I have witnessed similar levels of cooperation in other epidemics during the last 20 years, and similar examples of the homeopathic community working closely together, sharing their experience co-operatively, and coming up with treatment solutions.

However, it is also true that homeopathic practitioners prescribe remedies on the basis of their own experience. One contributor, David Needleman, who runs the Homeopathic Helpline, speaks of the changing symptom picture of the infection through the period of lockdown, and the changing remedies he found necessary to prescribe. Initially the main remedies were Bryonia, Phosphorus and Camphor.

            "As time passed more symptoms were seen frequently, and a number of other remedies came into plan, notable Arsenicum Album and Eupatorium perfoliatum. Arsenicum Album became the number one remedy, and Eupatorium perfoliatum was well indicated for the cough in place of Bryonia, as it was no longer dry".

Rix Pyke's article demonstrates a similar learning and assessment process about remedies. She saw, and wrote in depth, about the four stages of the illness, the specific symptoms that patient experienced in each, and detailed the remedies she matched for these symptoms.

What all the articles demonstrated was that homeopaths were coming up, independently, with the same remedies. David and Rix's articles demonstrates that homeopathy has dealt with COVID-19 without the need to find or develop new remedies. All the homeopathic remedies mentioned have a 200 year history; and that as the symptom picture of the disease changed so too does the most appropriate (the best matching) remedy the individual needed. This did not come easily, and demonstrates the skill, experience and professionalism of the homeopathic profession.

            "The complexity of symptoms experience also required a heightened level of professional homeopathic questioning and analysis in order to prescribe for the individual..."

Rix Pyke then summed up the difference between of approach to the treatment of the infection.

            "Allopathy is a heavy-handed medicine; I see the death count rise as a direct result of the suppression of each stage of this flu with vast amounts of antipyretics, antibiotics, steroids, chemo drugs, and finally the forcing of oxygen into hypoxic lungs via ventilators. Whilst the MSM continued to show horror stories of nightmare ventilator scenarios, body bags piling up, and makeshift PPE concoctions, I couldn't help thinking that the 36 remedy kit** could have saved a lot of the mayhem".

** This refers to the popular first aid remedy kits, on sale from many homeopathic pharmacies, which many homeopathy users keep in their own homes.

Homeopathic Pharmacies 

Homeopathic pharmacies were also busy, as the article by Tony Pinkus revealed. His article looked at how homeopathy has successfully dealt with infectious epidemics over the years, quoting an aphorism initially written by Samuel Hahnemann, over 200 years agor. The principles of homeopathy have never changed; they never need to change. 

Tony compared the stark contrast between the peace and quiet of the streets of London outside to the busy, almost manic activity taking place within the Ainsworths pharmacy irself.

            "In mid-February ... we received a sudden increase in demand for our Essential Remedy kit from Japan, which we soon connected to fear of the virus spreading there. New clients appeared from around Asia, and the demand for HP and treatment for COVID-19 escalated. Soon afterwards we were met by an avalanche of enquiries increasing exponentially with a relentless demand for protection and treatment again the new disease."

Tony recalled the relentless ringing of phones, the pinging of emails, and the frantic conversations with those who needed remedies and/or reassurance. I was not surprised to hear this. Sometimes homeopaths underestimate the number of people we serve. So often we treat patients they get well, and they go away. We too often forget they are there! But this pandemic gave rise, suddenly, to a new threat; and all those people who use homeopathy for medical treatment needed assistance, all at once. Tony's description of Ainsworth's experience is certainly an apt and timely reminder of this.

Homeopathy worldwide

Several of the HIP articles refer to how homeopathy is being used in other parts of the world. In Britain homeopathy works discretely with its patients, largely unseen, unheard, unappreciated by everyone except homeopathy users. The open hostility of government, the NHS and the MSM, means that we operate more like a secret society than a major medical therapy. This is not the same everywhere in the world. In countries like India and Cuba homeopathy has become an integral part of the national health service.

Yet it is wider than this. Carol Boyce provides insight into what is happening in some African countries such as Madagascar and Tanzania. Homeopathy is practised worldwide

Antipathy towards Homeopathy

It no longer comes as a surprise to the homeopathic community that government, the NHS, the conventional medical establishment, and the mainstream media (MSM), are all openly hostile towards homeopathy (and anything else opposed to pharmaceutical medicine). As Carole Boyce commented:

            "...homeopaths were told to stay away from COVID-19 cases. Suggestions from homeopaths about HP were met with slanderous newspaper articles, accusing them of preying on the fear, and demanded we limit ourselves to cases of the 'worried well'."

Carol also mentions censorship. It has been a long time since the MSM has given any reasonable coverage to homeopathy, or to natural medicine in any form. Now even major social media platforms, like You Tube, Twitter, Google and Facebook are doing what they can to ensure that people do not get to know anything remotely positive about homeopathy and natural medicine, and nothing negative about pharmaceutical medicine.

            "The scientists made earnest videos to explain their finds and posted them on You Tube. One by one their videos were censored. You Tube's CEO, Susan Wojcicki, considered it her duty to censor anything that contradicted the official WHO narrative. Simon Stevens, CEO of NHS, recruited the help of of Google and Facebook to prevent the spread of 'fake news', and one of the first victims was Vitamin C."

For a medical system, which openly admits it has no treatment, to exclude homeopathy in this way is scandalous. It is been bad enough that the NHS has never asked the homeopathic community for help in combating the pandemic.

But of course this would have meant people would have been able to compare what homeopaths can do, with regard to patient outcomes, with what they have been quite unable to do.

HIP - A Blast of Fresh Air

Yet what this edition of HIP has demonstrated is that homeopathy is alive and well, and busily working with patients - regardless of MSM's regular, routine and gratuitous attacks. Rix Pyke reminds us that all health decision are OUR decisions. Conventional doctors insist we need their treatment, but more and more people are saying "No thanks". Increasingly people are becoming aware that conventional medicine has little or no treatment for so many serious illnesses and diseases, and has been utterly hopeless and helpless when faced with this COVID-19 pandemic. These numbers will grow as more people realise that pharmaceutical medicine has so little to offer - and homeopathy has so much.

So it is good to know that homeopathy is alive and well. More people are realising that conventional medicine is in panic, it has no effective treatment, its response to COVID-19 is wrecking social relationships, destroying our livelihoods, and the national economy. And this is a step towards even more people knowing that there is a viable medical alternative.

But allow the last word from HIP to go to Steven Cartwright, who puts the whole COVID-19 situation into a broader context. He describes the official response to the virus as a disaster.

            "Predictably the virus has been declared an enemy. The language used by politicians, scientists and medics is unequivocally one of 'war', 'battles', and 'struggles to defeat', and this stance inevitably leads to the imposition of controls, surveillance and restrictions on freedom of movement and expression, just as the war on drugs and the war on terror have led to - and failed."

            "Fighting the virus will do nothing but lead to an endless cycle of population control, living in perpetual fear, hiding and isolation and, most importantly, yet further separation from nature and spirit, all in the name of public health. One only has to look at patients in ICU, surrounded by machines, tubes and staff in Hazmat suits to see how grotesque our divorce from nature has become. Control and suppress, and when that doesn't work, control and suppress even more." 

            "Modern medicine is now so divorced from nature - and reality - that its operational philosophy is essentially a war on death. Saving lives (or rather postponing death at all costs) is all that seems to matter. This epidemic has come down to numbers - how many deaths there are each day and how each death represents a failure. There is little, if any, mention of the untold psychological suffering being inflicted on the population through the conditions of the lockdown, or any recognition of the important of human contact and touch, and togetherness..."

Thursday 22 October 2020

Coronavirus COVID-19. The Failure of Medical Lockdown Policy and the Political Outcome

There has been a general acceptance of the government's lockdown policy - although I hasten to say, not on this blog! However, the worm is now quite clearly turning, questions are being asked, at last, both on the streets, and in the world of politics. And it is embarrassing situation for our politicians who have locked us down now for months with no little positive outcome.

THE STREETS. Growing numbers of people, mainly younger people, are now clearly questioning the value and efficacy of lockdown policies, and this can be seen most vividly on the streets, where large crowds are congregating without any acceptance of  the 'social distancing' rules. Even the press, after months of political and medical indoctrination, are beginning to ask sceptical members of the public what they think about lockdown - and the overall consensus is that it is not working. They are right. The lockdown policy is leading to so many inconsistencies, and senseless anomalies. But people who are questioning lockdown have not analysed the basis of their opposition; they are apologetic; they do not have the evidence to defend their stance; and so they leave themselves open to criticism.

POLITICS. In most countries political differences are now replacing the consensus of recent months, not least in the UK where the official opposition is no longer slavishly supporting the government's lockdown policies. Even some MP's from the governing party are now voting against government legislation. And regional Mayors, especially in the north of England, are now opposing attempts by central government to enforce heavier lockdown policies. Yet there is no political analysis about what is happening, no understanding of why lockdown policies have failed. Indeed most opposition politicians seem to want a harder lockdown, with no clear explanation for why even more lockdown is likely to be any more successful.

So a discussion, of sorts, is beginning, but after months of indoctrination and brain washing it is not surprising that understanding about what is going wrong with lockdown is, at best, superficial, and certainly marginal to the real questions that need to be addressed. More people realise that social relationships are being damaged; that lives are being ruined; that our mental health is suffering; and that the economy is being destroyed.

The root of the problem is this; that washing our hands, social distancing, masks, lockdown policies, and even test and trace, are all aimed at chasing an invisible virus. And very clearly they do not work, and it should be clear now that lockdown itself has become the problem, not the solution.


This failure of conventional medical policy, the only policy our doctors have, is exacerbated by attempting to measure the virus, and create fear, with the use of dodgy statistics, based on inaccurate testing, misleading information, and the use of 'damned' statistics. To mention but three:

  • In Britain, 43,000 people have NOT died OF coronavirus; at least 95% have died WITH coronavirus - but OF some underlying health condition.
  • There may, or may not be, lots more people diagnosed with  COVID-19 - depending on how much we can rely on the validity of the test being used to determine this. But most patients recover, fully, within a short space of time.
  • And most people who have tested positive for COVID-19 are asymptomatic; that is, they have no symptoms of illness; that is they are not ill; their immune system is coping with the virus, just as our immune system is designed to do.

Government policy, as we have been consistently told, has always followed 'scientific advice'. This means that policy has been devised by medical scientists; that is, by leading members of the conventional medical establishment; the people who dominate and control the NHS. Conventional medicine, on its own admission, has no treatment for COVID-19. So the NHS has no treatment to offer. If a pharmaceutical drug existed that could save the lives of people who contract the virus there would be no problem. Doctors would use the drug and people would not die. As it is, however, COVID-19 patients are admitted to hospital, nurses look after them as well as they can, some survive, but many die. And all the NHS can do is to watch, with no treatment. Doctors are mere observers.

This is one of the central problems. It is embarrassing for NHS doctors to watch on, helpless, hopeless, whilst their patients die in their hospitals. It is embarrassing for government, who spend some £150 billion on the NHS every year, and rising, to see this happening. So something must be done, or at least be seen to be done. And the best they have come up with is washing our hands, social distancing, masks, lockdown, and test and trace.


So I am busy politician-watching at the moment! Lockdown is palpably failing proving that chasing the virus in any form does not work; and it is becoming clear now that politician know this. The Conservative government might stick to their policy, or be forced into a tighter lockdown. The Labour opposition may come up with a different policy on lockdown. But policy remains - lockdown, or more lockdown. Yet politicians from every side admit, in their more honest moments, that tighter lockdown is unlikely to help significantly, and is more likely to increase the seriousness of social breakdown, and the destruction of the economy.

The libertarian right are, at least, addressing the political and economic damage of lockdown, objecting to the human rights violations of government policy. Yet as far as the virus is concerned they have nothing different to offer, other than allowing the infection to grow, watching on as more people are diagnosed, some are hospitalised, with many dying.


The Alliance of Natural Medicine has summarised the evidence that supports the effectiveness of lockdown policies. I can do it no better.

        "What’s emerging is an interesting balance of evidence: The evidence for lockdown benefit continues to be wafer-thin, with the harms caused by lockdowns increasingly outweighing any perceived or measured benefits. As we showed last week, countries that have locked down hardest have among the highest covid-associated mortalities and there is no clear association with outcomes and lockdown severity or absence. Even Dr David Nabarro from the World Health Organization has gone on record to say that governments should only ever use lockdown as a last resort."

So much for our government 'following the science'!


Why do some people contract COVID-19 and die; whilst others get better, and some remain entirely asymptomatic? Indeed, why is it that in every infectious epidemic in the history of the world many people have died, but most survive? Why is it that some people live, whilst close neighbours die? The answer was a mystery until medicine began to understand the functioning of the immune system.

Unfortunately conventional medicine, and therefore the NHS, appears to have forgotten much of what they once knew about the immune system, and natural immunity. It is perhaps too busy prescribing pharmaceutical drugs, and promoting vaccines, as the answer to all ills. So several questions arise:

  • Why is our NHS not informing us about our immune system? How we can support and enhance it through diet and exercise? 
  • Why is the NHS not looking at the pharmaceutical drugs are known to interfere and undermine the immune system, and so making people who take these drugs more vulnterable? 
  • Why is the NHS not warning us that immunosuppressant drugs have for many people completely suppressed our natural immunity, and created patients who are completely susceptible to COVID-19, and any other infections?
  • Why are natural therapies not alive and well within the NHS, working alongside conventional medical practitioners so that they can learn from each other? 
  • Why is the NHS not looking carefully at the way homeopathy has been used in India, Cuba, and other countries?

Regular readers of this blog will know the answer to all these questions. We are dealing with a medical monopoly within an NHS, dominated by the pharmaceutical industry.

This is what politicians (of all colours), governments, and the mainstream media are failing to look at - because such questions have become taboo. The 'experts' politicians, governments and the mainstream media consult and use come from the same monopoly group. And if alternative medical strategies are mentioned they are ridiculed, dismissed as 'conspiracy theories'.

So TINA applies: There Is No Alternative. So most people do not know about an alternative strategy. It is lockdown or nothing. The debate is about how hard (how damaging it is to social relationships, and the economy) lockdown should be.


It is the alternative strategy that natural medicine offer that would save us all from the non-sense and hopeless insanity of government policy lockdown, conventional medical advice, and government policy including politicians and young people wanting to have a social life, from the hopeless insanity that is government policy.

  • Focus on natural immunity; give each and every one of us the tools to measure it; give us all the information we need to support and strengthen our immune system. When natural immunity is strong there is no need to lock people down, to damage social relationships, to destroy the economy. Let them get on with their lives, engage them in helping those less fortunate.
  • For those whose immunity is weak, educate and protect them; give them the information they need to support and improve their immune system; recommend they make changes to their diet and lifestyle; stop giving them the pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that are known to harm the immune system; ban immunosuppressant drugs completely and ask natural medicine to treat the 'underlying health condition' for which they are being given. And with the protection of social distancing, masks and other protective equipment, encourage them to get on with their lives.
  • Where the immune system is more seriously compromised, where there are already serious 'underlying health conditions', protect and shield them fully; work out and utilise sensible and considered lockdown measures; and again, ask natural medicine to help treat their 'underlying health condition' as best it can, and repair their immune systems as much as possible.

And above all, we should accept an alternative explanation of life and death; that any infectious epidemic WILL kill some people; they always have done; it is regrettable; but it is part and parcel of living. The task of medicine and government should be to reduce this as much as possible, without destroying everything that is important to living.


Thursday 15 October 2020

IF PHARMACEUTICAL VACCINES & DRUGS ARE SO SAFE - why don't they pay their own indemnity insurance against causing patient harm?

Do pharmaceutical drug/vaccine companies take out indemnity insurance to safeguard themselves from causing harm to patients?

Do conventional doctors have indemnity insurance to compensate patients who are harmed by the pharmaceutical drugs/vaccines they prescribe?

If we drive a car, or live in a house, we buy car and house insurance. It costs us an annual premium. The benefit is that it ensures us if anything happens that hurts us, or causes harm to other people we are compensated. It also acts as a reminder; that we need to ensure that we keep ourselves safe because if we claim on the policy too often we know that the annual premium is likely to go up, and eventually, we might even make ourselves ‘uninsurable’. 

Both these elements are part of any insurance deal. Insurers ensure us against harm; but we agree to minimise their financial risk through sensible, careful and responsible behaviour. This reduces the risk to insurers; and reduces the size of the premiums we have to pay.

Every company has to take out insurance in case they cause harm or damage either to people or property. In return businesses are obliged to take every necessary precaution in the way it works with its customers; and when they do it helps keep their premiums at reasonable levels. 

This contract between insurers and the ensured has become part and parcel of living in a world that increasingly wants to be minimise risk. Health and safety has become more important now than it has ever been before; the precautionary principle is universally applied.

Except, of course, that the precautionary principle does NOT apply to the pharmaceutical industry, or the world of conventional medicine!

Doctors have always had to pay indemnity insurance, but in the UK over 50% of insurance premiums are now paid by government. I have written about this in 2016 and 2017, when doctors were complaining that their indemnity insurance premiums had become too high for them to pay, and government stepped in to pay them. For more details click on these links.

             "Indemnity insurance enables doctors to harm patients without facing the full financial consequences of doing so. For the conventional medical establishment this is important; after all, they are dealing with dangerous drugs and vaccines every day. Doctors give them to patients on the basis that they are safe, in the full knowledge that they are not only unsafe, but cause diseases far worse than the conditions for which they are prescribed, and will actually kill a certain percentage."

Pharmaceutical drug companies, too, try to ensure themselves against the harm their drugs and vaccines cause, and increasingly their ‘premiums’ are now being paid by governments too. This is the situation in the USA, for instance, particularly for vaccine damaged patients. What this means is that when pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines cause serious patient harm it is the government who pays the compensation!

As patients it is important that we all recognise this. It means that drug companies, and conventional medicine generally, are being absolved from much of the financial liability for the harm they cause to us. They no longer have to worry about increased insurance premiums as they do not pay them.

What this means is that the medical profession no longer has to be as careful about our safety, like when you or I are driving our cars!

If the government started to pay for our car insurance, would this ‘absolve’ us from causing a road accidents, or injuring, harming and killing other people? Of course not! But at least we would not have to worry about paying increased insurance premiums! This is the position of doctors, and drug companies now; they do not have to worry about the safety of what they are doing to us.

The situation is actually worse than this! Conventional medicine is the only industry (tell me if you know another) that does not have to worry about the precautionary principle. If you refused to wear a hard-hat, or proper footwear on a construction site, if you did not sit on an ergonomic officer chair in an office, if you were regularly subjected to loud noises with ear protection, if you worked on a roof without suitable safety measures - etc., etc., - these matters would be a problem in most industry. The company would take action against the employee. The H&S executive would take action against the company.

The company remains liable for any harm caused to us.

Yet pharmaceutical companies have no such worries. They can bring out drug after drug, vaccine after vaccine, all known to have serious side effects; and they can profit from them without fear of any financial penalty. Similarly, doctors can prescribe these same drugs to patients even when they are aware of the serious adverse drug reactions they can cause.

No other industry would be allowed to get away making excuses, stating that the drug is "safe" or "well tolerated", or that the ‘benefits outweigh the risk’. The amount of illness, disease and death caused by conventional medical treatment would not be accepted by any other industry. We regularly hear about new discovered and harmful ‘side effects’ caused by drugs and vaccines that conventional medicine has been using for years, decades - and yet still nothing is done to protect patients from the harm they are known to cause.

This is not only extraordinary, it is an unparalleled situation. No other industry is absolved from doing harm in the same way that conventional medicine is. And we are all paying for it by levels of chronic illness, often the result of side effects, that have never been known before.

This is why going to see a doctor, or to the hospital, is now one the most dangerous thing we ever do in our lives.

  • Take this pharmaceutical drug - just be careful and report any side effects.
  • = You don’t need to wear a hard hat - so long as you are careful (?!!?)

If conventional medicine will not look after us, we must look after ourselves. This is why I no longer see a doctor, and keep well clear of hospitals. I am thankful that I discovered homeopathy, 40 years ago; I don’t need them any more. 

But we warned!

We are told that the solution to coronavirus COVID-19 is a vaccine. So, supported by government funding, lots of drug companies are rushing to produce a new vaccine. And they are all eager to discount any risk to themselves if this rushed vaccine proves to be harmful to patients.  

So governments around the world have indemnified them from this threat. If patients are harmed by these new vaccines they will not have to pay the compensation - the government will - the taxpayer will - and that's you and me!


Wednesday 14 October 2020

NHS in Crisis (Autumn 2020). Coronavirus COVID-19 is confirmation that conventional medicine is failing us

The NHS is now in a constant financial crisis. Coronavirus COVID-19 may be clouding the overall picture but look underneath the bluster and panic the pandemic has caused and there is, in effect, no difference to the annual NHS crisis which I have been describing for the last 10 years (to see this series of blogs, type 'NHS in Crisis' in the search bar above). The main features of the crisis, every year, are:

  • The NHS is a prisoner of the conventional medical establishment, which has no effective treatment for most chronic disease, and all infections; coronavirus is just another infection.
  • People get sick, become patients, and as the NHS has little effective treatment, they do not get better; they continue to be sick, and in need of treatment.
  • Most treatment involves patients taking pharmaceutical drugs and vaccine, and the main outcome is that they actually get sicker - through their well-known adverse drug reactions which are outlined in conventional medicine's own literature.
  • As people don't get better, and conventional medical treatment makes them sicker, demands for health services increase, and the NHS cannot meet demand for treatment; it causes a financial crisis, and the NHS demands more money for more treatment; treatments that do not work, and made us sicker.
  • The government provides more money, which increases the amount of largely ineffective, and harmful treatment; this leads to an increasing patient demand for medical services, and NHS demands for yet more funding.

And so the crisis perpetuates itself, year by year. The main result is that the NHS is now a gigantic organisation, built upon its ongoing failure to meet patient treatment needs, plus the willingness of successive governments to fund this growing monster.

So how has coronavirus COVID-19 changed this situation?

  1. Coronavirus COVID-19 is an infection for which conventional medicine has no treatment. This is not new, but faced with an new, highly infectious disease, the NHS has been scared into a full-scale panic. It fears that demand for treatment, by sick people, it will be overwhelmed, and thousands of patients will die. The government has bought into this fear, that the NHS will be overwhelmed, and this has led to its central strategy - to "Save the NHS", which has become its constant mantra.
  2. The absence of effective treatment for COVID-19 is not a new phenomenon for the NHS. Conventional medicine has always had a paucity of effective treatment - for any illness. The inability of the NHS to treat serious illness and disease successfully is the reason for its failure, and has been an integral part, the major cause, of the ongoing annual NHS crisis.
  3. COVID-19 has certainly increased the degree of panic within both government and the NHS. Although the number of patients hospitalised, and the number of people dying have not been significantly greater than in other recent years, the policies of panic we are witnessing are doing unprecedented harm to our social life, and to our economy.
  4. The pandemic has, however, led to the cessation/postponement of many other NHS treatments for illness and diseases far more serious than coronavirus. Routine testing, treatments and operations have been stopped in order to provide the NHS with greater capacity to deal with COVID-19 patient. In recent years this has been done during the annual winter crises, but this year this has been  extended through the summer, and into the autumn; and is likely to continue until the spring - at least. The result is that waiting lists have gone through the roof, and it is expected/feared that this may lead to an increased number of non-coronavirus deaths, almost certainly more than the deaths caused by COVID-19.
  6. The coronavirus panic has also been successful in removing any semblance of financial constraint. The nation's coffers are now wide open. After 10 years of austerity the new Conservative government, elected in December 2019, was already planning to increase spending on the NHS by £billions. Now it has discovered the 'magic money tree' so that it can spend much more than it had planned on health services.
  7. The current crisis is no longer seasonal, it has now stretched beyond the winter, in the spring and summer, and now into the Autumn and winter. It has become an annual event lasting a full year. Will this continue? We will see
  8. The only sign of an NHS (conventional medicine) saviour is a new vaccine, which does not exist, which is being rushed through its trials, at enormous cost to government and taxpayer (and enormous profit for the pharmaceutical industry).

So the NHS crisis of 2020, which will now run through the winter into 2021, is merely an extension of what I have been writing about over the years. It is no different. There may be no NHS demands for increased resources but this is because it has now been given a blank cheque; effectively it can now spend whatever it wants to spend, regardless of whether it will bankrupt the national economy. 

And whatever money the NHS spends it will be spent on more conventional medical treatment, which will once again prove to be ineffective, and add to the level of sickness - as it has done now for decades.

The vaccine, for instance, will be rushed through the testing process; the people who have become sick in the vaccine trials to date will be forgotten; or paid off; it may not be effective (no vaccine for any strain of coronavirus has ever been effective); it will cause more patient harm (our government has already recognised it is likely to harm patients by agreeing to indemnify drug companies from any harm their vaccine causes).

Perhaps there are two changes that the coronavirus COVID-19 panic might bring about. First, it will throw the NHS more deeply into crisis, a more permanent crisis. Second, the disastrous social and economic outcomes of the pandemic will bring to people's attention to the failure of conventional medicine. 

  • Why is it that we cannot see our relatives in hospital, in care homes, or even attend their funerals?
  • Why is it that we cannot hug our grandchildren?
  • Why is it that we cannot socialise with our friends?
  • Why is it that our freedoms and liberties being undermined?
  • Why is it that we have lost our job in what were viable, profitable companies and industries?

The outcome of Coronavirus COVID-19 might just be that it leads to a re-assessment of a system of medical care that kills, allows patients to die, destroys economies, and social life - as the result of an infectious disease?

There are so many questions gradually surfacing now amongst the people. The are arising from the inadequacy and failure of hand-washing, social distancing, lockdowns, and similar policies - all seeking to 'chase the dreaded virus'. 

Any successful medical system would not be chasing the virus. This has always been a pointless task; we have always shared our world with bugs, bacteria and viruses. An effective medical system would, instead, be ensuring that we all, each one of us, focused on our immune system, and how we are able to strengthen and support our ability to cope with infections. 

And this is just what homeopathy, and other natural medical therapies do; and have been doing throughout the pandemic.

Monday 12 October 2020

DRUG REGULATION. Reporting Pharmaceutical Drug Side Effects. Do doctors take their responsibility seriously?

Conventional medicine admits that pharmaceutical drugs can produce serious adverse reactions to our health; in other words, that they can do harm to patients. However, as this blog will demonstrate, doctors usually fail to report serious drug side affects do so with their patients.

After the Thalidomide tragedy of the 1960's, a comprehensive system of drug regulation was introduced, designed to stop patients being harmed by drugs. It is still in operation today; or at least it should be. (To read a critique of drug regulation, as it exists throughout the world, click here). An important part of the regulatory process was the reporting of side effects to the drug regulator.

In addition, this blog has regularly referred to several studies that have demonstrated that only between 1% and 10% of drug side effects (at best) are ever properly reported.

My recent experience of two NHS patients, both of whom I know well, have demonstrated that the process of drug regulation, and in particular the reporting of drug side effects, is not working. And it is not working because conventional doctors are not using the reporting system, but actively ignoring it.

This situation raises serious questions about whether patients can make an informed choice, about health freedom and patient choice, and the honesty of conventional medicine.

  • All adverse drug reactions, or 'side effects' as they are euphemistically called, are supposed to be reported by doctors, not as a matter of personal judgement, but as a matter of routine.
  • And doctors are supposed, if not obliged, to tell their patients of the known and suspected side effects of the drugs they prescribe.

TP. The first patient is a woman in her late 80's. Only a year ago I commented on her health; that she was so well for her age, fit and fully active, and on no medication (except for eye drops taken for her long-term glaucoma). I linked these two facts together, as I always do; people who do not take pharmaceutical drugs remain healthier for longer. 

Then TP went to see her doctor as she was worried (she is an inveterate worrier) about her high blood pressure. She was given drugs, and her health has deteriorated seriously since that time.

Her doctor gave her Amlodipine for the high blood pressure. This drug has a long list of side effects; but her doctor did not tell her about these; and TP did not read the Patient Information Leaflet (PIL). So few people ever do - they assume that their doctor will not give them drugs that will do harm. So when, over the next few months, TP began to complain of slow and irregular heartbeat, fatigue, joint and muscle pain, loss of appetite, nausea, swelling of ankles and feet, difficult urination, dizziness, anxiety, depression, and loss of memory, I suggested that these were not the result of old age, or high blood pressure (as she assumed, and other people told her) but were adverse drug reactions to Amlodipine.

This is not a popular diagnosis! Certainly, when this possibility was mentioned her doctor did nothing; even though she is supposed to know about adverse reactions, and to report them when potential side effects are reported by a patient. And TP herself did nothing; on the basis that her doctor would not give her anything that would cause such problems.

So the situation continued. TP's health declined until she was admitted to hospital, where she stayed for 3 days. When she was discharged the drug regime had changed. She had been taken off Amlodipine, but now she was taking 3 drugs, Bisoprolol, Losartan, and Eliquis. Again, hospital staff did not tell her about the side effects of the new drugs, and she did not did bother to read the PILs which came with them. For 2-3 weeks she seemed to be much better; relief was expressed that the hospital had sorted out her medication, which was now working properly. 

But gradually she became unwell again, with many of the old side effects returning, and a few new ones. The worst of these was increasing short-term memory loss and confusion. Her friends were now worried that she was suffering from dementia, after all, she was in her late 80's now.

I pointed out, in vain, that all the 3 drugs she was now taking were known to cause 'confusion'. It was a 'side effect' clearly stated on each of the PILs. 

But obviously (sic) a hospital specialist would surely not put her on drugs that might harm her. So she continued taking them, and her confusion got worse, quite quickly. TP's doctor was informed, and also asked whether the 3 drugs might be the cause of her confusion. This suggestion seemed to make little difference; the drugs were not stopped, even temporarily. Yet if her drugs were causing confusion the problem could be treated simply, and probably resolved, by taking her off the drugs!

But conventional medicine is loathe to admit that pharmaceutical drugs can cause serious illness and disease, even when their literature tells them that it does. So instead she was sent for a blood test. And her doctor informed her that she would be given a dementia test. 

"First, do no harm" does not appear to be something that is alive and well within conventional medical practice.

SL. The second patient is a man in his late 40's. SL is not someone who supports conventional medicine, he has been a user of homeopathy for most of his life. However, following an sport-related accident, which led to headaches, and difficulty finding words, he was given an MRI scan which, to everyone's surprise, discovered a sizeable tumour on his brain. He was sent for another, more detailed MRI scan; but this time he was to have an injection - to improve the quality of the scanned image. SL told me that he asked the doctors what the injection was, but they were reluctant to tell him. Eventually, at his insistence, he was told it was Gadobutrol (Gadovist). He insisted on having the box, and the PIL that came with the drug, so that his homeopath could have a look at it. This is how the PIL describes the side effects of Gadivist - click here to read the PIL for yourself.

"The most serious side effects (which have been fatal or life-threatening in some cases) are:

  • heart stops beating (cardiac arrest) and severe allergy-like (anaphylactoid) reactions (including stop of breathing and shock).

In addition for the following side effects life-threatening or fatal outcomes have been observed in some cases:

  • shortness of breath (dyspnoea), loss of consciousness, severe allergy-like reaction, severe decrease of blood pressure may lead to collapse, stop of breathing, fluid in the lungs, swelling of mouth and throat and low blood pressure."

Thousands of people, throughout the world, have MRI scans, every day; and it seems likely that most of them, the vast majority, either do not bother to ask about either the side effects of the scan, or this drug; do not read the PIL; and are not told about its dangers by doctors.

The Gadovist PIL went on to describe a multitude of other known (and officially accepted) adverse reactions caused by the drug, although as usual they are always heavily discounted.

  • "Like all medicines, this medicine can cause side effects, although not everybody gets them".
  • "In rare cases".
  • "Uncommon".

Yes, they many indeed be uncommon and rare....

  • if very few side effects are reported by doctors; 
  • if known side effects are routinely kept from patients by their doctors; 
  • if , when side effects are mentioned, they are accepted or properly reported by doctors; 
  • if patients are not told, and discouraged from finding out about drug side effects;
  • and not encouraged to report them when they experience them.

Both these cases demonstrates that all is not well with drug regulation, the system designed to keep patients safe, and free from the harm pharmaceutical drugs are known to cause. Moreover, they suggest that it is the doctors, the people who are supposed to administer the system, who are largely to blame.

If these two cases are typical of what is going on within conventional medicine, and my experience is they are, then drug regulation is not happening, it is being circumvented and ignored. 

This means that patients are routinely at risk of harm. Informed patient choice and health freedom cannot exist without full and freely available information. And it would appear that this is not provided - unless patients (like SL) actually demand it.


DANGEROUS DRUGS? It's not just the harm they cause to our health: beware the fact that doctors don't tell us about them!

The problem with pharmaceutical drugs is not only that they cause serious harm to our health; it's the fact that doctors do not tell us about them; and frequently deny it.

I recently answered a question on the Quora forum from someone who was taking the harmful side effects of the ADHD drug, Adderall. This was my answer - an answer that is relevant to ANYONE and EVERYONE who is taking ANY pharmaceutical drug.

          "Your question is what concerns me about conventional medicine generally, not just for yourself, but for other people who allow doctors to prescribe dangerous and harmful pharmaceutical drugs for any illness. It’s not just that drugs like Adderall are prescribed to patients; much more serious is that patients are NOT told about the harm they can cause. The dangers of pharmaceutical drugs are well known; but so often conventional doctors do not tell their patients about it; they discount them as ‘side effects’; they are not up-front about the ‘permanent effects’ of taking them."

I provided a link that outlined some of the side effects of Adderall, Adderall Side Effects: Common, Severe, Long Term -, but then emphasised that although some were listed  as ‘rare’ or ‘uncommon’, their rarity was down to the fact that most doctors routinely and consistently fail to report drug side effects to the regulatory authorities.

This is (one of) the many reasons why there is so much chronic illness around now; chronic disease epidemics have largely been the result of the trust we have placed, and continue to place, on conventional medicine, and our doctors. 

We have been doing this now for 70–100 years - and EVERY chronic disease you might care to mention is now at running at epidemic levels. Plus there are now so many 'new' and ‘rare’ diseases that have no conventional medical explanation, but likely conventional medical causes. So I ended with a plea, which I repeat here - for everyone.

Please, please read about these so-called drug ‘side effects’, and do so BEFORE you start taking them. Take the information seriously; don't rely on the reassurance of doctors; make an informed decision about whether you wish to risk adverse drug reactions.

And then, begin to do what so many other people are now doing - look at natural medical therapies, like homeopathy, naturopathy, osteopathy, chiropractor, acupuncture, et al, for safer and more effective medical treatment.

The Three Serious Outcomes of Coronavirus COVID-19. The Threat to Social Relationships. The Destruction of the Economy & Jobs. Personal Freedom & Liberty

Conventional Veterinary Medicine culls animals and birds in the name of 'medicine' because of infections like Foot and Mouth, Swine and Avian Flu - even the culling of badgers because of bovine TB. And they call it 'treatment'. So I have wondered for some time what similar nonsense conventional medicine would come up with if humanity was ever faced with a 'killer' virus.

Now we know. Conventional medicine admitted early in the crisis that it had no treatment for Coronavirus COVIS-19. As a result, the first 'treatment' was to scare everyone about its seriousness, to create fear, to frighten us into compliance. It was likely that over 500,000 might die. 

Fear was required in order ensure that we conformed to the only treatment conventional medicine had to offer; we had to wash our hands, socially distance, go into social lockdown, and eventually to wear masks we were initially told were useless. At least we were not to be culled, we were spared the fate of animals and birds.

And fear ensured that we all conformed, and went into lockdown. The media has also conformed; until recently it has tirelessly relayed the governments medical message, and ruthlessly refused to ask the important questions this blog has been was asking for the last 7-8 months. The media consistently and unquestioningly supported the government line. For months no opposing voice was ever heard, it was never allowed to be heard. And if there was an opposing voice it was ridiculed and attacked.

Now, after some 9 months of nonsense conventional medical policies, all based on the advice of science, medical science, there is a growing realisation that life is going to have to return to 'normal'; that the current restrictions are unacceptable.

There are three areas, in particular, that now have to be addressed. And after an extensive period of obsession with an 'untreatable' virus, the mainstream media is beginning - just - to discuss them; they are being forced to do so because growing numbers of people know there is something serious wrong, not working, with conventional medical strategy. 

So why is the strong alliance between  government and the mainstream media breaking down? And why now? Why have critical voices, previously censored, begun to be heard - after all this time? The answer tells us much about the mainstream media, our so-called 'free press'. 

Fundamentally, the media will toe the dominant (government/corporate led) line until such time that this line is no long viable, can no longer be supported.

Three serious issues, the main long term consequences of the nonsense policies pursued by governments around the world, and promoted by conventional medical science, are now forcing the media to discuss them.

1. Social Life and Family Relationships

Social lockdown has produced many unpalatable and unacceptable consequences.
  • Hospital visiting has been stopped, preventing close friends and relatives visiting even the most severely sick patients. People have entered hospital, suffered for days, weeks and months, without being able to see those who love and care for them, or being to benefit from the moral support they could have received from them.
  • Funerals have been conducted with attendances heavily restricted to a handful of people who would otherwise have attended.
  • Weddings have suffered seriously, with perhaps the doubtful advantage of having the option of postponement.
  • Grandparents have been unable to see or hug their grandchildren.
  • People in relationships have been unable to meet with their friends and lovers.

 An increasing number of people are now demanding to know why, they are questioning the non-sense of such a policy, they are asking why these measures have not worked.

2. Jobs and the Economy

Government policy is in the process of destroying the economy, people are losing their jobs, unemployment is rising, and likely to rise considerably further in the months to come - all as a result of government policy, based on the 'science' of conventional medicine.

For 10 years, prior to the onset of Coronavirus COVID-19 in early 2020, three Conservative-led governments have responded to the 2008 financial crisis with a policy of severe austerity. This was the correct economic policy for such times - restrict spending on education, law and order, local government, the armed forces - everything except health spending and the NHS. Then, faced with an epidemic, the conservative government  began to spend money from what it has described, dismissively, as 'the magic money tree'. After 10 years of damaging austerity the government was suddenly prepared to spend any amount of money, even silly amounts of money on 'moon missions', committing it to borrowing £billions - all because of a viral infection for which conventional medicine had no treatment, and in order to 'save the NHS' which had no treatment, and could only care for people as they died.

Simultaneously it locked down the economy. No one except essential workers were allowed into work; whole industries were closed down; staff were put on an expensive furlough scheme. Expenditure commitments increased whilst income from taxation reduced.

Yet none of this expenditure was able to stop that loss of jobs, the unemployment; and consequently the number of people who are angry, and are beginning to ask if this intentional destruction of the economy was for a good reason.

3. Personal Freedom and Liberty

If social life, and the economy, were put at risk, uprooted by coronavirus COVID-19, a third casualty soon became apparent. In order to ensure that nonsense medical policies could be introduced, and enforced, governments around the world introduced laws that now threaten personal freedom and liberty. In the UK, legislation was quickly enacted to give the government powers to control the spread of the virus, but which now seriously threatens our time honoured personal freedoms and liberty. In the UK the legislation was called the Coronavirus Act, and it was designed to 5 things:

  1. to contain and slow the spread of the virus,
  2. to ease legislative and regulatory requirements,
  3. to enhance capacity and the flexible deployment of staff across essential services
  4. to manage the deceased in a dignified way,
  5. to suppose and protect the public to do the right thing, and follow public health advice.

All this seemed perfectly reasonable, understandable, acceptable; especially after most people had been scared stiff by reports of the serious nature of the infection - predictions (500,000 people might die, et al) that have never materialised. But this was legislation that would enable to government to impose strict limitations of people's freedom and liberty - even when it became clear that government policy was not working.

The Price for an Untreatable Virus

These have been the main three costs to humanity when faced with an (allegedly) killer virus. Unlike the animal world we have not been culled - like veterinary medicine has imposed on cows, pigs, poultry and badgers! But we are paying, and certainly will be paying, every price short of this.

 All for a virus that is not particularly dangerous!

  • death figures - it has been calculated that 95% of those who have died have other, underlying illnesses: they have died with coronavirus, not of it.
  • note, the dangers of the virus used to be calculated by the number of deaths; now it is being measured by the number of cases because deaths are nowhere near the levels of earlier this year.
  • The total number of deaths, caused by all causes, have not been significantly higher, if at all, when compared to previous years.

So all this has arisen from the same common denominator:  the extraordinary inability of pharmaceutical medicine to treat an infectious disease - something that has never been discussed.

Monday 5 October 2020

"Breaking Up With Fear and Conformity" by Tessa Lina

This lovely poem, which expresses the feelings of so many people about health and freedom during this 'pandemic', was published by on 4th October 2020.

 Data’s rotten,
Tests are toast.
News is sullen,
Coast to coast.

Feudal darkness
Here and now!
To the masters
Peasants bow.

Facts are fiction,
Love is screen.
Gossip’s trending,
Trends are mean.

Hear, hear,
Where’s the joy?
Ask Alexa.
She’ll annoy.

This is a breakup letter. I am breaking up with fear.

Farewell, my clean and proper friends. I’ve had enough. I am not interested in your scarecrows and rules of good behavior.

I did my time inside the cage, and now I intend to breathe.

Your air is stale with gossip and anxiety. It’s suffocating. It’s low on oxygen. I can’t.

Your safe space is for crippled animals.

I feel bad for you but I don’t owe you self-abuse.

I really can’t do this anymore. I tried and tried and tried—but my fear is no more, and it’s time to say good bye. It’s not me, it’s you. The heroes you pray to insist that I betray my heart and intellect. I can’t do that. I am not a slave. You do it if you want but you have to let me be.

Perhaps I’ve never belonged in the cage of good behavior. Perhaps, I’ve always been unshackled.

This world is full of love and beauty.

This world does not belong exclusively to you or whomever has hurt you and made you proudly, complacently obedient.

You are not the owner of everyone’s descriptions of things and ways to think. My relationship with language, with the mystery of life and with the physical world around us is important to my heart, and you don’t have any say in that.

Thus, your influence over my language is over. Your convictions and hangups have nothing to do with me.

So please do what’s best for you, and I’ll do the same, with love and hope for truth. I wish you well, and I am not scared of your ghosts.

If I can be of help to you in a dignifying way that doesn’t require my self-betrayal, I am around with all good vibes. Just don’t hate me for not kneeling before your fears.

I feel like a kid again, free from adult confusions, curious about everything, attracted to freedom and aliveness, and drawn to my fellow travelers whose spirits are pure and whose minds are interesting.

Please spare me the shaming and the boring Pravda-like clich├ęs, they won’t convince me, they will only prolong the agony of parting.

I’ve been waiting for this moment my entire life. Farewell.

We’ll meet again.


Tessa Lena is a Russian-born musician living in New York, you can read more of her work at her blog Tessa Fights Robots.