FIGHTING CORONAVIRUS COVID-19. At least we get a better deal than animals who get an infection!

If anyone believes we are facing difficult times because of coronavirus COVID-19, with the unreasonable constraints on social life, the destruction of job, livelihoods, and the economy, and the full frontal attack on human rights and liberty - we may need to think again. Animals with an infection get a much worse deal.

This BBC article (published 5th November 2020) concerns Bird Flu. There has been an outbreak of bird flu in two poultry farms in Holland and "the Dutch authorities are racing to contain it". There have been similar outbreaks in chickens, and wild birds in north Germany.

The treatment for this outbreak of influenza is to cull, to slaughter, the birds! A farm in the Dutch town of Puiflijk, and another nearby, have been told to cull 200,000 chickens. One farm in Frodsham, England, has had to cull 13,000 birds; another in Kent has also been ordered to slaughter the birds.

And the article goes on to state that Germany's worst bird flu outbreak was in 2016-1027, "when more than 900,000 birds were culled".

So whatever difficulties we may experience during this current lockdown, at least we are not being culled or slaughtered. So perhaps we should think ourselves lucky - perhaps.

Or perhaps we should begin to ask ourselves what sort of medical system is it that is quite unable to deal with outbreaks of viral infections - with birds, animal, humans or anything else? I have asked the question before.

Veterinary medicine and Avian Flu. What good is it if it has to kill the patients? Mass slaughter is not medicine!

Veterinary Medicine kills Badgers as a Treatment for Bovine TB. How sensible is this?

Veterinary Medicine. A monopoly occupation that kills its patients

So although our lives have certainly been damaged, in so many ways, by government policy, informed by conventional medical science, we should perhaps consider ourselves lucky pharmaceutical medicine has not been allowed to cull us.

Lockdown does not work. 

This is becoming clearer as the days and months pass. Lockdown is necessary only because conventional medicine (on its own admission) has no effective treatment. Lockdown is the only alternative conventional medicine has to effective medical treatment. And note: lockdown is necessary, not for us, but to "save the NHS"; that is, to save an organisation which is dominated and controlled by pharmaceutical medicine. Without lockdown the NHS would be overwhelmed - because it has no treatment - because each individual contracting the virus either has to overcome it through his/her natural immunity - or die.

It is a hopeless situation; and will continue to be a hopeless situation until we work out what is happening, and why it is happening.

It all has to do with the failure of conventional medicine, something I have argued and written about in detail.

But let us be thankful too. 

At least we are not poultry, or cows, or badgers ....

.... that would be a fate equal to death!

 

THE BARRINGTON DECLARATION AND COVID-19 LOCKDOWN POLICY. Justifying opposition to damaging and nonsensical government policies.

As the coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic crisis continues it is demonstrating two main things.

1. Conventional medicine has no effective or adequate medical treatment, and the public health advice that is being offered does not extend much beyond social distancing and lockdown policies.
2. These social distancing and lockdown policies are ineffective; but they are leading to
• the destruction of the economy, our jobs and livelihoods
• and to utterly ludicrous social consequences.

So it is not surprising that many people are now questioning the official government response to the pandemic. But: 

• Are people justified in doing so?
• Are 'non-compliant' people able to justify their opposition?

In the main most people are unable to justify non-compliance. The main reason for this is that people do not know how to justify what they are doing; beyond their incomprehension, distress, or anger about the stupidity of what they are being asked to do.

• Moreover, non-compliance is faced with a solid wall of government and MSM criticism, abuse and threat. 
• "this is the policy"
• "everyone is expected to comply with the policy"
• "anyone who does not comply is breaking the law"
• "the law will be enforced on anyone who does not comply".
• Indeed, government and the MSM are blaming those who are non-compliant for spreading the virus! It is easier for them to do this than to accept that their policies just aren't working!
  
• And the feelings of non-compliant people are either ignored or castigated as they fail to justify what they are doing; they are being selfish, emotionally unstable, and above all, of course, unscientific.

The Great Barrington Declaration (GBD)

The GBD has been produced by infectious disease epidemiologists, and public health scientists from all over the world. It expresses deep concern about the negative repercussions of COVID-19 lockdown measures that are being imposed by governments worldwide, and calls for a global policy change to what they describe as “focused protection”.

So the GBD represents a major justification for everyone who questions and opposes social distancing and lockdown policies on the basis of their ineffectiveness in combating the virus, the personal financial and economic consequences, and the lunatic social consequences.

    First, it demonstrates that the 'science' governments say is leading or informing their health strategy is partial science, the science they have selected to follow.

    Second, it outlines an alternative approach to the pandemic which is also based on science but whose outcome would releases us from the most harmful economic consequences, and the unexplained / unexplainable illogicality of social distancing and lockdown policies.

The Great Barrington Declaration, which can be read here, was made on 6th October 2020 by an international coalition of scientists, doctors and medical professionals in Barrington, Massachusetts, USA. Within the month it had been signed by 10,233 scientists, 27,860 medical professionals, and 504,875 concerned citizens.

So there is an alternative scientific response to COVID-19! So we can answer the diktats of government science with another, kinder, more rational science.

The GBD confirms that “current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health.” This includes postponed healthcare screening visits, worse outcomes for cancer, cardiovascular disease and other pre-existing conditions, as well as having serious effects on mental health. The GBD states that “vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young” and further, that “for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.” 

So the crucial distinction is that the science of the GBD recommends measures that would protect vulnerable segments of society, like nursing care staff, and the vulnerable elderly.

Everyone else, with acquired immunity, should immediately be allowed to return to normal life.

• it recommends that schools and universities to re-open for in-person attendance, including all extracurricular activities
• it recommends that businesses and restaurants to remain open fully
• it recommends that art, music, sports and other group events resume
• it recommends younger, low-risk adults should return to work instead of working from home.

Such a policy would be both easier to understand and to defend. It would safeguard the economy, and social and family relationships. It would not lead to incongruous and absurd social distancing and lockdown policies. It would protect us from controlling, paternalistic and dictatorial government policies, and maintain individual freedom and liberty.

Beyond the GBD
My main criticism of the GBD is that it does not go far enough. The signatories are all members of the conventional medical establishment; and as such even they do not appear to emphasise sufficiently the importance of supporting and strengthening the immune system.

 

So natural medicine would want to do much more. We would want to devise a supported self-assessment process for each individual - to find out how strong their immune system is likely to be, and therefore, how careful they needed to be to protect themselves. It would include the following broad strategies.

• What aspects of the individual's lifestyle was conducive to supporting, and what aspects were undermining, their natural immunity?
• Part of this self-assessment would be to look at the harm caused to their immune system by specific pharmaceutical drugs, vaccines, and other conventional medical treatments.
  
• Sound, evidence based recommendations for everyone about how we can best support and strengthen our immune system.
• As a homeopath I would want to offer advice on homeopathic remedies that can be taken regularly  to protect people from the virus. No doubt, other natural therapies would have similar protective protocols to offer too.
• And each natural therapy would be encouraged to offer and develop therapeutic treatments for those people who did contract the virus.

Ideally, all this advice and treatment should be offered within the national health service of each country. Indeed, this should be happening now, but isn't, except for a handful of countries, like parts of India, and Cuba. Why is it not happening?

In the UK, for example, homeopaths, and other natural therapists, are actually 'locked down'! They are considered to be "non-essential health care workers" - another example of the nonsense of lockdown policy. If you are a conventional health worker offering little or no treatment, and apparently with little or no understanding of natural immunity, then you are an essential health care worker. If you are a health care worker that can offer effective treatment for people with the virus, and focus on the importance of natural immunity, you are not.

Yet natural therapists ARE providing this information to their patients. It's just that the government, the conventional medical establishment, and the mainstream media are not telling you about it. They just don't want you to know!

 

Post Script.

In September 2020, a group of doctors, from Belgium, expressing similar doubts about coronavirus COVID-19 policy, wrote an open letter to the Belgian authorities, and to the Belgian media. The contents of that letter can be found here.

Post Script. November 2020.

The idea that any government is 'following the science' has been further undermined by 50 German medical association who signed a paper opposing tighter restriction to combat the spread of COVID-19. This taken from Children's Health Defense...

            "Fifty German medical associations have co-signed a white paper opposing even tighter restrictions aimed at combatting the ongoing spread of SARS-CoV-2. In the paper they propose a system more akin to that proposed by the Great Barrington Declaration and oppose the continued use of lockdowns due the damage they cause. German citizens rallied outside the German Parliament building this week to oppose attempts by the German government to enshrine draconian pandemic restrictions in law. Mainstream media reports showed the police taking hard action to break up the demonstration, although social media posts suggested the large demonstration was peaceful."

Post Script February 2021

The ideas of the Great Barrington Declaration have been too much for the conventional medical establishment (CME) to accept, and social media censorship has swung into action. Facebook has summarily deleted the Great Barrington Facebook page - because it posted a comment in support of voluntary vaccine programmes, and they have done so without recourse for review or reinstatement.

Discussion about health issues is not allowed if it runs against the position and interests of the CME.

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.

THE FAILURE OF CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE

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.

THE POLITICS OF LOCKDOWN FAILURE

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 EVIDENCE ON LOCKDOWN EFFECTIVENESS

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'!

IS THERE A DIFFERENT WAY OF LOOKING AT COVID-19?

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.

AN ALTERNATIVE STRATEGY

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.

UNTIL WE REALISE THIS UNIVERSALLY APPLIED LOCKDOWN POLICIES WILL BE THE BEST WE CAN DO.

Coronavirus COVID-19. Everyone has gone through lockdown. but ''Shielding' patients have had it much worse. So who are these people?

The madness of conventional medicine's response to coronavirus COVID-19 (and the government admits it is conventional medical science that is determining their policy) is that everyone has suffered lockdown, regardless of their personal health and fitness. If Natural Medicine had been directing government policy things would have been very different - lockdown policy would have been determined by an assessment of the strength of our immune systems. Only those people who have been described as 'shielded patients' would have been directed to lock down.

The reason is simple. It is these 'shielded' people who are most at risk of catching COVID-19, and most at risk of dying from the infection.

Everyone else could have been asked to to continue with their life normally. They could have been asked to take important self-protective measures, and be given information about how they could support and enhance their immune systems, which if robust would have been sufficient protection. In this way our economy would not have been damaged to the extent that it has - something we will learn more about in the coming months.

So who are these 'shielded patients'? And why do they need special treatment?

This UK Government website, 'Guidance on shielding and protecting people who are clinically extremely vulnerable from COVID-19', informs us exactly who they are.

               "This guidance is for people who are clinically extremely vulnerable, including children. It’s also for their family, friends and carers..... It’s for situations where a clinically extremely vulnerable person is living at home, with or without additional support. This includes clinically extremely vulnerable people living in long-term care facilities for the elderly or people with special needs."

It goes on to describe 'clinically extremely vulnerable people', and what is noticeable from this description is that these people are all on conventional medical treatment, and taking pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that have a harmful impact on natural immunity.

1. Solid organ transplant recipients (that is, people who are on immunosuppressant drug treatment to stop the immune system expelling the foreign organ).
2. People with specific cancers:
   • people with cancer who are undergoing active chemotherapy
   • people with lung cancer who are undergoing radical radiotherapy
   • people with cancers of the blood or bone marrow such as leukaemia, lymphoma or myeloma who are at any stage of treatment
   • people having immunotherapy or other continuing antibody treatments for cancer
   • people having other targeted cancer treatments which can affect the immune system, such as protein kinase inhibitors or PARP inhibitors
   • people who have had bone marrow or stem cell transplants in the last 6 months, or who are still taking immunosuppression drugs
3. People with severe respiratory conditions including all cystic fibrosis, severe asthma and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary (COPD).
4. People with rare diseases that significantly increase the risk of infections (such as severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), homozygous sickle cell).
5. People on immunosuppression therapies sufficient to significantly increase risk of infection.
6. Women who are pregnant with significant heart disease, congenital or acquired.

So the last thing any one of us needs during this coronavirus COVID-19 epidemic is to be taking pharmaceutical drugs, particularly those that seek to interfere with our immune systems.

• It is natural immunity that protects us from infections
• The last thing any medical system should do is to interfere with our natural immunity
• And conventional medicine is the only medical therapy that does this

The panic surrounding this pandemic has been necessary not so much to protect 'us', but to protect conventional medicine (notably the NHS in the UK). It's really a reputation thing. It's not just that there is no conventional treatment for coronavirus, which is bad enough. It's because doctors don't want us to know it is 'tinkering' with our natural immunity with pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that harm us, leaving us grotesquely vulnerable to any infection.

Pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are known to have caused an epidemic of hundreds of new autoimmune diseases. So it should not take a serious viral epidemic, like COVID-19, to draw our attention to this.

We all need to be aware that conventional medicine is failing, it is making us more vulnerable to illness; it is making us sicker; and it is certainly not 'winning the war' against illness and disease as it so often claims. It is not only losing the battle - comprehensively. It is contributing to our sickness.