The Myths of Conventional Medical Success. The Covid-19 Pandemic - the history is being written NOW

Around the world the fiasco of the Covid-19 vaccines is becoming apparent, at least outside the conventional medical establishment. Over 12 billion doses of these vaccines have been injected into people. An in countries where vaccination rates are higher the worse the Covid-19 situation has become. This has been apparent for some months - Covid-19 cases have been rising where vaccination rates are high, but the upward trend did not happen in less heavily rates apply, like Africa. Africa has had fewer vaccinations, fewer cases, fewer hospitalizations, and a lower death rates.

The problem faced by the 'advance' or 'developed' world has been that it could afford to vaccinate more people, for free. The advantage of less developed areas has been that it could not do so. 

• Where there has been mass vaccination, there has been a pandemic!
• Where there has been no mass vaccination, the 'pandemic' has not happened!

This is not a new or unusual situation. We have been brought up to believe that vaccines are safe and effective. They are not - and they never have been. I have written before on the myths of vaccine success, about smallpox, about polio, antibiotics and about measles. 

Now I suspect we will soon be hearing that the awful Covid-19 pandemic was also ended because of the success of the vaccines! The lie is already being told.

Since writing these three blogs I have discovered another book on the subject, "The Poisoned Needle: Suppressed Facts about Vaccination". It was written by Eleanor McBean. What makes this book even more interesting is that it was written in 1957. So for polio and measles it was a contemporaneous account of what was happening, both with the polio vaccines, and the early days of the measles vaccines. It is not an historical document. For that reason alone it is worth reading, and what is demonstrated is that at the very time that smallpox and measles were (allegedly) being overcome by vaccines, many doctors (many quoted in the book) were very clearly contradicting the propaganda of the conventional medical establishment.

We are often told that history is written by the victorious, and so provides us with a sectional account of what actually happened. Vaccines were not victorious, with smallpox, polio or measles, but conventional medical propaganda most certainly was. Before reading the McBean book I had little or no idea that there was so much opposition to the vaccines at that time.

Yet the same message comes across as is happening now with Covid-19. 

    * The vaccines were exacerbating the problem.

    * It was not until vaccination programmes declined, and people began to refuse the vaccines, that the diseases began to decline, and were brought under control.

The same thing has happened with the Covid-19 pandemic (as I predicted it would in a blog in early 2020). The Covid-19 vaccines have been an unmitigated disaster; they have not prevented the vaccinated contracting the disease; or transmitting it; or being hospitalised; or dying. 

Indeed, they made all these outcomes far worse.

Yet this is not the message coming from governments, from conventional medical authorities, or from the mainstream media. The pandemic is in steep decline, and entirely unsupported and uncorroborated, statements are being made about the "success" of the vaccines role in this decline. There is no evidence for making these claims; indeed all the evidence is suggesting quite the opposite.

    So what will the outcome be? 

    Who will write the history of the Covid-19 pandemic? 

    Will it be the evidence that the pandemic was exaggerated, that the vaccine did not stop it, that the vaccine caused more patient reports of harm than any other previous vaccine, or drug? 

Or will pharmaceutical propaganda be able to persuade future generations that the vaccines saved us?

This Medscape article (part of the conventional medical establishment), entitled "Opposition to vaccines has a long history" states that opposition to vaccine started in the 1860's, against the smallpox disease.

            "To fight this disease, countries implemented the first set of laws ever to mandate vaccination. "When vaccination becomes a political matter, resistance to vaccination does as well. And so, from 1860 to 1870, we see anti-vaccination leagues being established - the first of which appear in England." These leagues against "vaccine tyranny" came about following the United Kingdom's Vaccination Act of 1853, which required infants to be vaccinated against smallpox within 3 months of being born. The smallpox vaccine did not become mandatory in France until 1902, which was "quite late." 

There is little doubt that Covid-19 has been a significant event in the minds and experience of most people. People were offered the vaccines, many took it. They were the offered another dose, but fewer took it. They were offered boosters; but take up declined with each one. People learnt, just as people learnt about the harm caused by other vaccines

But what will history say, who will write the story? Whether the significance of Covid-19 will be sufficient to persuade enough people to challenge conventional medical wisdom (propaganda) is another matter. The conventional medical establishment will not admit that the vaccines they promoted caused harm. The drug companies made too much money from them to do so. Governments gave too many assurances for too long about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccines, as did the entire mainstream media. 

To admit that the were wrong would be just too embarrassing for any of them; they will stick to their narrative, and seek to write the narrative into our history books.

So what they will all do is what what they have always done. They will deny that they are wrong, they will stick to their narrative, regardless of the available evidence. They continue to repeat the same message - the vaccines are safe and effective. And they will hope that they have enough control over the information that we receive to ensure that, as the events fade from our memory, we will only see and believe the 'history' they will write.

It is our task to ensure they are not successful.

 

Also read my other blogs on the Myths of Conventional Medicine.

The Myths of Conventional Medicine. Eradicating Smallpox.

The Myths of Conventional Medicine. Conquering Polio.

The Myths of Conventional Medicine. Conquering Measles.

The Myths of Conventional Medicine. Whooping Cough (Pertussin)

The Covid-19 Pandemic. How can the disinformation be stopped? If there is a dispute how can we determine who is correct? "Follow the money"?

Controversy surrounds the Covid-19 Pandemic; and whether we like it or not, the controversy continues, and will continue - unabated.

In most of the world it is a medical matter. In the USA it has also become a political matter. So let's examine both sides of this equation, and see if there is a simple way of determining which side of the argument is "Following the Money", and which side is more interested in health outcomes.

• On one side there is the well known "narrative", promoted by government, conventional medicine, and the mainstream media (MSM): that the virus is deadly; that it is a threat to everyone; that millions of people have died, and are dying of it; that there is no medical treatment for it; that washing hands, social distancing, the wearing of masks, test and trace, and lockdown are the only effective responses to it; that ultimately only Covid-19 vaccines will save us from the virus, that it is essential for everyone to accept the vaccine, and that it is anti-social for anyone to refuse to be vaccinated.
• On the other side there are the arguments that the 'narrative' dismisses and describes as "misinformation": that Covid-19 is not a pandemic; that people are dying 'with' it, not 'of' it; that innate and natural immunity is more effective than vaccines; and that vaccines are causing serious patient harm. In this respect, the 'misinformation campaigns' accuse the official narrative of "information blight" - that is, that information  has been censored, that people are not been properly or accurately informed about what is really happening.
  

So how does "following the money" help us to differentiate between these two polar extremes, and what they are arguing for? Let's do an analysis on this basis.

The virus is (or is not deadly), a threat to everyone alike.

If Covid-19 is a deadly virus, and can strike down anyone at anytime, people will be concerned, fearful, willing to do anything to protect themselves, and so ready to accept whatever treatment is offered to them. Fear of the virus has been one of the major means for selling not only medical treatment, even to the most reluctant patient, but the loss of freedom and liberty that this has entailed.

However, if Covid-19 is not such a deadly virus, if it will not effect everyone, then people will be less concerned, less willing to accept the need for medical treatment, or the loss of freedom and liberty this entails. The absence of fear will sell less medical treatment, patients will be more reluctant to accept it.

• The 'narrative' is better designed to sell pharmaceutical vaccines.
• It is uncertain that the 'misinformation' agenda is selling anything.
  

Millions of people have die, and are dying, of the Covid-19 virus

A similar argument can be used here, that is, the more people we believe to be dying, the more medical treatment (vaccines) can be sold. Therefore it is in the interests of pharmaceutical medicine to emphasise, even exaggerate, the number of deaths being caused by the virus. Hence, mortality has been counted in a way that have exaggerated the deaths caused by the virus, that is, anyone who tests positive for the virus, and dies within 28 days of that test, is automatically assumed to have died of the virus.

The 'misinformation' agenda has pointed out, from the early days of the pandemic, that initially the government, medical authorities, and the MSM accepted that deaths being attributed to Covid-19 were actually people with "serious underlying health conditions". In other words, the death count included those who died "of" Covid-19, and those who died "with" it. It no longer mentions this.

• Again, the 'narrative' is better designed to sell pharmaceutical vaccines.
• The 'misinformation' agenda appears to be selling anything.
  

There is no treatment for Covid-19

During the early days of the pandemic conventional medicine admitted that there was "no treatment" for the virus. This further exacerbated the fears the virus generated. There was no protection. This statement was undeniably true, although only if a single word was added. There was no conventional medical treatment for the virus. The lack of effective treatment also contributed to the fear of the virus, and over time, increased the demand for, and people's willingness to take, any treatment that was to be offered later.

The "misinformation" campaign (if it ever had a single voice) pointed to our immune system, that this was capable of protecting people from the virus, and that medicine should be placing more emphasis on supporting and strengthening the innate and natural immunity that we all had. 

• The lack of conventional medical treatment increased public fear, and thereby people's willingness to accept the 'narrative', the loss of jobs and livelihoods, the loss of social intreraction, the damage to our emotional lives, and the loss freedom and liberty, etc., and ultimately, of course, to take the vaccines that we were being told would be our only salvation.
  
• The problem the disinformation argument, when it focused on the immune system, was that it did not sell anything - except perhaps for a few more oranges, some exercise footwear, and some exposure to the sun. 
• Natural therapists, homeopaths, naturopaths, nutritionists, acupuncturists, et al, always placed natural immunity at the heart of their treatment. But this was not allowed within the narrative. Natural medicine was never mentioned, nor was any mention allowed. The therapists, by and large, merely got on with their work with their patients, who had in most part accepted the 'misinformation' message of their therapists.
  

Public Health Measures

The narrative placed its emphasis on public health measures, hand washing, social distancing, the wearing of masks, test and trace systems, and lockdown. They were important, not least to people with a 'compromised' immune system, and they offered conventional medicine an excuse: they may have no treatment, but at least something, however damaging, was being done.

Those people plying "misinformation" however were arguing that whilst these measures were important for some immunocompromised people, people with strong natural immunity should continue leading their lives normally, keeping social life and the economy moving.

• During the lockdown periods the narrative told people that vaccines were on the way, and might be available within a short time. It emphasised that these vaccines would save lives, provide 90% protection, and return life to normal very quickly. It was, therefore, a lengthy promotion campaign for the Covid-19 vaccines.
• The misinformation message pointed out that the measures being adopted by government, on the advice of conventional medicine, was caused damage to business, industry, social life, mental health, and family relationships. Other than having an interest to maintain normal life, whilst protecting the immuno-compromised, it was not selling anything.
  

The Introduction of Covid-19 Vaccines 

The ultimate message of the pandemic narrative was that only Covid-19 vaccines could save us from the Covid-19 virus, that only vaccination would protect us, and return us to normal life. So experimental vaccines were quickly rushed to the market, and offered immediately to the most vulnerable. 

• Drug companies are notoriously reluctant to develop new drugs and vaccines, unless and until they know there are large profits to be made. The Covid-19 vaccines were developed, tested, approved, and came to the market within a year of the start of the pandemic, and it was the official narrative, the promotion of vaccines as the means of returning to normal life, that paved the way for their widespread acceptance.
  

• Those people spreading 'misinformation' were concerned that the vaccines had been introduced too quickly, that they were insufficiently tested, and therefore it was not possible to ensure their effectiveness and safety, and to properly protect the public. They warned of the potential harm that might be caused to those who accepted the vaccines.

The Roll-Out of Covid-19 Vaccines

Once the vaccines became available the narrative engaged in a frantic programme of sales promotion. It was quick to point out that it was essential for everyone to accept vaccination; indeed, it promoted the novel ideas that it was anti-social for anyone to refuse to be vaccinated as this would put vaccinated people at risk. We were told that a double vaccination was required, and that this would give people 95% protection from the virus.

The die-hard spreaders of 'misinformation' continued to offer caution, that the vaccines were 'experimental' and had not been properly tested. They wanted to slow, even to stop the roll-out of the vaccines until they were properly tested; and for doing so they were were roundly condemned for continuing to resist the narrative.

• The narrative has been hugely successful in persuading the larger majority of people to accept the Covid-19 vaccines. These vaccines are proving to be a very profitable enterprise for the companies involved in their manufacture and distribution; and the medical staff who put the vaccines into the arms of patients.
• The 'misinformation' campaign was not trying to sell anything, nor was it paid by anyone for its views, or its advice. It gained no financial advantage to from opposing the vaccines. Its only interest, from the beginning, was patient safety, and the use of innate and natural immunity to deal with the virus.
  

Reports of Serious Adverse Reactions to the Vaccines

The Covid-19 vaccines were rolled out very quickly, supported by the official narrative. However, national drug regulators soon began to publish reports of serious adverse reactions to the vaccines, including a large and growing number of deaths. It was important that the official narrative censored this information. It was, after all, the reason for most people accepting the vaccines. Moreover, the vaccine manufacturers had insisted on government giving them immunity from prosecution for any patient harm caused by the vaccines. 

So the drug companies had ensured their own safety; but it meant that the public should not know about the serious adverse reactions being caused by the vaccines. If people knew it would almost certainly restrict future vaccine sales. 

For its part, governments would have realised that they had assumed liability for any patient harm caused by the vaccines, so it was in their interests to avoid the public getting to know about them.

So the narrative was not changed. Adverse vaccine reactions have not been mentioned by government, the conventional medical authorities, or the MSM - except on a few occasions when it could not avoid doing so.

• The official narrative continues to censor information about adverse vaccine reactions. They were not good for the promotion and sale of the vaccines. The public would not be told. Medical authorities would discount the seriousness of the reports. The MSM would not question or investigate what was going on. So most people would never know; and the profitable vaccine roll-out could continue, unabated.
• The 'misinformation' campaign continued to threaten the sale of the vaccines, and drug company profitability. It has remained largely unheard. It was not speaking for any vested interest.
  

Information Blight

The peddlers of misinformation did see the growing number of adverse vaccine reactions in the official reports by national drug regulators. They had the audacity to insist that the public should be warned about them, without realising what this information could do to vaccines sales, and drug company profitability. They continued to criticise the government's narrative, the lack of concern of conventional medical authorities (who either denied or discounted the reports of patient harm), and the refusal of the MSM to inform the public, or challenge the government, or the conventional medical establishment. 

Indeed, the misinformation campaign began to talk about information blight, and claimed that their message was being censored, dismissed without justification as 'misinformation'. Their message was not conducive to selling vaccines, or indeed to the reputation of government, the honesty of conventional medical authorities, or the professionalism of the MSM. 

So they had to be stopped. They were spreading their misinformation through social media, so it was important that social media organisations, like Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin, YouTube, Twitter, et al., had to be brought into compliance with the official narrative. They must begin to censor the disinformation that was threatening the roll-out of profitable vaccines, and risking the standing of government, public health bodies, and the MSM, alike.

The Need for Boaster Vaccination

The misinformation campaign had been right it's opposition to safety of the Covid-19 vaccines. Then it became apparent that the Covid-19 vaccines were not as effective as previously promised by the narrative. Vaccinated people were going down with the virus. The virus was actually 'spiking' in the most highly vaccinated countries (Israel, Iceland, Singapore, and others). 

Suddenly the narrative was telling us that a 'boaster' vaccine was necessary. Again, follow the money! This was not because of the disinformation - that the vaccines were ineffective. A boaster was necessary. Better still, perhaps an annual injection might be necessary. And the narrative would pave the way to the acceptance of this new awareness. 

This would, of course, increase the sales of the vaccines, whilst at the same time hiding the ineffectiveness of the vaccines. If the vaccine was to be given annually in future this would certainly be ideal for the profitability of the pharmaceutical industry.

Yet the misinformation peddlers continued to suggest the Covid-19 vaccines were not effective, that if they were failing to stop vaccinated people contracting the virus, or to stop vaccinated people passing the virus on to other people, in what way could they be considered useful? Again, vaccine misinformation was putting vaccine promotion in serious jeopardy.

Vaccine Mandates and Health Passports

Vaccine passports were the ultimate goal of the narrative, and the financial prize for the pharmaceutical industry, and the conventional medical establishment generally. The passports would ensure that more people could be cajoled, obliged, forced to take the vaccines if they wanted to continue their employment, and their social life. The  narrative framed them within the guise of 'public health', but they would greatly boast pharmaceutical sales. After all, the vaccine passports would need to be kept up-to-date: first the double dose; then the 'boaster' shots; then annual top-ups - all deemed necessary in order to qualify for the passport. Moreover, other vaccines could be added in time. And then pharmaceutical drugs for other illnesses too. The introduction of vaccine mandates, and health passports was prove to be an unprecedented commercial coup d'etat for the drugs industry.

The 'misinformation' campaign, in contrast, continued to talk about personal liberty, patient choice, health freedom, even mentioning the Nuremberg Trials, and other concepts that made absolutely no money for anyone!

So when we "follow the money", does the narrative, or the disinformation campaign have most to gain from the Covid-19 pandemic? It's really not such a difficult question! Is it?

The Covid-19 Pandemic. Could someone please explain these peculiarities so we can understand what is going on?

This piece asks some pertinent question about the Covid-19 pandemic, and the health policies we have all been put through during the last year and more. I don't know where this piece comes from, so I cannot make the appropriate references and attributions. If anyone knows the source, let me know; I will gratefully acknowledge it! 

The questions highlight most of the 'unexplained peculiarities' of the pandemic, and they will all need to be answered at some point in order to explain and justify what our governments, guided by conventional medical science, have put us through, and which the mainstream media (MSM) has never asked about.

    Explain how the flu disappeared but has been replaced with something which has the EXACT same symptoms.



    Explain how the only proof that Covid exists is a computer modelled genome with zero physical proof.



    Explain how you prove something into existence without going through an isolation or purification process.



    Explain why no government agency has any quantifiable proof that “it” even exists.



    Explain why they downgraded “Covid 19” to a non consequential infectious disease days before they declared a pandemic.



    Explain how they pulled the Coronavirus Act 2020 legislation out of (nowhere, so rapidly,) in a matter of days, despite the act being several hundred pages long.



    Explain why they have to use criteria like “deaths for ANY reason within 28 days of a positive test”.



    Explain why they banned autopsies.



    Explain why they changed the law to allow any practitioner to diagnose covid through observation alone, even if it is done through video consultation.



    Explain why undertakers have seen no difference in custom.



    Explain how all cause mortality is at an all time low.



    Explain how millions of protesters across the globe aren’t getting sick with “Covid.”



    Explain how this is the only crisis that needs an advertising campaign paired with a constant barrage of repetitive brainwashing propaganda on the TV and in the streets.

    

Explain how tens of thousands of people stood on the streets of London last Saturday but it wasn’t once shown on ANY TV channel.



    Explain how thousands were yelling “shame on you” outside the BBC HQ in both London, Manchester and Cardiff but it wasn’t shown on the TV?



    Explain how the people who are wearing the masks and following the rules are the only ones who are catching “COVID”.



    Explain how the creator of the PCR amplification tool is on record for stating that the PCR was not designed as a test for infectious diseases.



    Explain why they are using the PCR to diagnose an infectious disease.



    Explain why it’s been changed from Covid deaths, to covid infections to covid “cases” .



    Explain how the “anti- vaxxers” are being blamed for the rise in “cases” when the only people who could possibly be contributing to the statistics are the people who are getting the “test” in the first place.



    Explain why the hospitals were empty during the height of the “pandemic.”



    Explain why 1000s of nurses are getting fired for saying that their hospitals were empty.



    Explain why the hospitals are now filling up with vaccine adverse reactions but the MSM aren’t reporting it.



    Explain why kids need to be vaccinated when, by your own definitions, covid isn’t dangerous to children.



    Explain, if all the vulnerable people have already been vaccinated, why do all the healthy people need to get vaccinated if you’re already protected and the recovery rate was already 99.96% without the vaccine.



    Explain why the average age of death with “Covid” is higher than the average age of death without.



    Explain how you can get banned from Facebook and Twitter for sharing official government links.



    Explain why there are several class actions in progress, taking governments across the globe to court for crimes against humanity, but there is zero MSM coverage.



    Explain why most government leaders are reading from the same script.



    Explain how all the things that you were laughing at us for talking about last year are now becoming a reality this year.

I have asked similar questions, in greater detail, on this blog during the last 15 months (do a search on 'Covid-19' above). It is now time that we demand some answers!

The conventional medical establishment, which on the government's own admission has dictated its policies, and which has apparently neutralised and enslaved the mainstream media, the so-called 'free press', cajoling it into meek "promotional compliance" to its agenda, are going to have a lot of explaining to do over the coming months and years.

THE FAILURE OF CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE. NHS England needs £12billion a year extra to recover from Covid-19

NHS England (note, just England, not the whole of the UK) "needs £12 billion a year boost" to recover from Covid-19, according to a report from a leading think tank, the IPPR, and reported exclusively by Channel 4 News. It highlights the horrific legacy left by a medical system that has been completely overwhelmed by a virus.

> millions of GP appointments have been missed

> there are now record waiting lists for Mental Health treatment

> cancer deaths predicted to rise

 

Channel 4 News describes this, quite accurately, as "The True Price of the Pandemic"

Yet I described the antecedents of this situation 13 year ago when I wrote the first edition of my E-Book, THE FAILURE OF CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE. In the introduction to his book I asked an important, if not fundamental question: 

            .... if we spent our money purchasing something (anything) that did not work, would we continue to spend more money buying more of it?

Clearly we would not! We would look for another product, and continue doing so until we found something that worked! 

The exception to this for the last 70-100 years is that we have been buying into a medical system that quite simply does not work, and is actually harming our health.

Moreover, any government, any national health service that was focusing on patient health, any mainstream media that was prepared to ask question, and investigate, should have been able to see this situation coming. Every year, since early 2011, I have been writing at least one blog every year on "the NHS in crisis". You can see them all if you go to the top of this page and search "NHS in Crisis". This will bring up most of these blogs, whose message can be simply outlined here:

• We have allowed the NHS to be dominated by one single form of medicine, conventional medicine, which is itself dominated by pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.
• Since 1948, when the NHS began to offer free conventional medical treatment, the incidence of chronic disease, all chronic disease, has grown to epidemic proportions; and they are continuing to rise even now.
• Conventional medical treatment has not been able to make us well: indeed it is making us sicker; and as a result the demand for medical treatment has been rising, year by year.
• Natural medical therapies, notably homeopathy, has been increasingly sidelined and virtually excluded during this entire period.
  
• So as patient demand for medical treatment has risen over the years, the NHS has regularly demanded more money, more resources, to spend on more and more of the same, or similar treatment.
• Each and every winter the NHS finds itself in a serious crisis, it struggles to cope with high levels of patient need; and each winter I have described these crises.
• As a result of NHS, and patient pressure, every year, the UK government increases the NHS budget. It has risen in every respect, including the percentage of national wealth that we are now spending on health, a specifically on conventional medicine.
  
• Invariably the NHS budget spends all its additional money on more of the same; more pharmaceutical drugs, more vaccines; more surgery arising largely from the failure of these drugs to treat illness and disease at an earlier stage.
• And as the NHS offers more and more treatment, we have got sicker - there is more chronic disease than ever before - more demand for medical treatment - more pressure on the NHS - and more demand on for more spending.

The current crisis should be seen within this history of conventional medical failure. So, what is happening now might indeed be "The True Price of the Pandemic" but it is actually much more than this, at least, for anyone who is prepared to look beyond the hype and propaganda of the conventional medical establishment. The current situation, arising from the pandemic, is is just another nail in the coffin of conventional medicine, another chapter in the long-running saga of "the NHS in Crisis". Just as I predicted, back in 2007, it is the latest indication of "The Failure of Conventional Medicine".

So will the NHS be given another £12 billion, on top of the £200 billion it is already spending every year? Very probably! 

Will the new money enable the NHS to cope with the rising levels of ill-health, sickness and disease? Certainly not if past performance is an adequate predictor of future performance.

In dealing with one illness, Covid-19, with a spectacular lack of success, the drug/vaccine dominated NHS has not only been unable to cope with the virus, it has neglect other illnesses, including some of the most serious diseases. It has prejudiced the health of millions of people. And it has done so to an extent that makes it difficult to see how the NHS (in its present form, dominated as it is by conventional medicine) will be able to cope with the backlog of ill-health that has been generated over the last 70+ years.

Covid-19 (or rather the failure of the NHS to cope with it) has virtually bankrupted our economy, whole industries ruined, people losing their jobs and livelihoods, social life decimated, the creation of (what is likely to be) a mental health catastrophe, et al, it is difficult to see how the government is going to be able to continue feeding the NHS with the kind of money it is now demanding.

We have been trying to feed a bottomless hole, a insatiably greedy monster.

It is time we stopped.

 

Coronavirus COVID-19 and Homeopathy. Early evidence from India that it has been effective

There is early evidence coming through that the use of homeopathy in parts of India has been successful in the prevention and treatment of Coronavirus COVID-19. The research can be found here, and its conclusions are as follows:

               "The major objective of the study was to find out the efficacy of Arsenicum album 30C for upregulating the immunological markers among residents of COVID-19 related hot spots in Pathanamthiatta district of Kerala state. The study found out that, the potentized homoeopathic medicine, Arsenicum album 30C is effective for upregulating the immunological markers such as absolute CD4 count, absolute CD8 count, absolute CD3 count, absolute lymphocyte count and CD4:CD8 ratio among the residents of COVID-19 related hot spots. It also found that, COVID-19 pandemic has created different levels of subjective distress as a result of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at residents of hot spot areas in Kerala. The study recommends that, the homoeopathic medicine, Arsenicum album 30C can be used as a preventive and as an immune booster against COVID-19 prophylaxis in the state. It can be also employed as a medicine in the COVID-19 First Line Treatment Centres (CFLTC) in the state."

The Pharmaceutical Medical Establishment will now have to seek to deny, dismiss, discount, ignore such information, and be assured it will do just this over the weeks and months to come!

If they fail to do so there are important and difficult questions that will be asked

• why did conventional medicine, in most other parts of the world, not seek assistance from homeopathy (and other natural medical therapies) in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19? 
• and why did they prefer to watch, and allow 100's of 1000's people die of the disease when they admitted they had no effective treatment?

The answer is obvious to anyone who thinks about what has been happening to us during the past few months. 

• We are prepared to wreck the world economy in order to prevent difficult questions being asked about the number of people who have died under conventional medical care. 
• But the conventional medical establishment (which includes government, and the mainstream media in most countries of the world) are not prepared to admit that natural medical therapies are effective, and can save lives - IF this highlights the failure of conventional medicine to do the same.

And of course this new evidence does highlight just this.

The Coronavirus Pandemic. Why is the advice of the Indian government so different from advice we receive in 'advanced' western world? Are better treatments available?

Imagine, if you are able, that there is a pandemic of Coronavirus influenza, a new, unknown strain, which is spreading around the world, with the prospect that millions will be infected and thousands will die! What do you expect your government to do for you?

• to search for and make available to you the best preventative strategy?
• to search for and make available to you the best treatment?

Surely we might assume that this is what our governments are doing - by investing millions in a new vaccine that should be with us in 18 months time (!) - telling us that we must all wash our hands regularly for at least 20 seconds - to wear masks - to self-isolate - quarantine - et al. This is medical advice that seems to be bringing the world to an abrupt halt - the economy is struggling - public events, including large sporting events, are being threatened with postponement - and there is general panic in the air.

So surely this must be the best advice? Perhaps even the only advice?

We must all be delighted that we do not live in India, with its high population density, extensive internal migration, and limited access to healthcare services. If countries with more fully developed infrastructure, such as China, Europe, America and Iran are struggling, what about poor India?

Well, India actually seems to be doing well. India has reported (2 March 2020) that it has 23,531 people under observations, but has no current infections or deaths. Three cases had been detected, but all three have now fully recovered. So how on earth have they done this? The article to which I have referred makes this comment, and asks an interesting question.

               "How is this possible when we see such alarming rates of infection in countries with more fully developed healthcare systems? Could India’s dependence on homeopathy be one reason for the difference?"

And as the article goes on to describe there is reason to think that this could be so.

               "India is a country in which homeopathy has flourished. For almost 200-years, homeopathy has been used by all sectors of the population as a primary form of healthcare. More than 100 million Indians depend solely on homeopathy for their medical treatment, and it is recognised by the Indian government as a National System of Medicine through the Homeopathy Central Council Act. More than 224,279 homeopathic doctors (with about 12,000 being added each year), 7856 Government dispensaries and 207 of Government hospitals provide homeopathic treatment throughout the nation with services fully utilised and room for expansion. Recent years have seen a 50% rise in patients seeking homeopathic treatment  with many transferring from allopathy (orthodox medicine) in the belief homeopathy has better long-term benefits. India also has a long history of using homeopathy to curtail epidemics such as chikungunya, avian flu, Dengue fever, epidemic fever, influenza, Japanese encephalitis, and malaria."

So in India there is a government capable of doing more than developing an expensive vaccine in 18 months time (when the epidemic will almost certainly be done), beyond hand washing, self-isolation and quarantine. As the article explains it is offering its citizens both prevention and effective treatment - far more than any 'western' government is doing.

Note. I have attached a photograph taken in India (Manipur) in which the health authority is offering the homeopathic remedy Arsenicum Album 30c to its citizens.

Perhaps this should not be too much of a surprise. Homeopathy has an excellent track record in dealing with influenza epidemics, such as the Spanish Flu epidemic in 1918.

So how are western governments responding? Surely they would want us to know that there was something beyond hand washing that we could do to protect ourselves? But no, there is silence. Instead, the conventional medical establishment, and its allies, are castigating the Indian government.

               "That a government should even consider homeopathy as a preventative for COVID-19 drew condemnation and criticism. Claims that it was “profoundly irresponsible”, “inappropriate and premature”, and “fraught with serious risks” were frequent and loud. The Indian Medical Association reportedly weighed in by saying it was “immature, premature, and irresponsible” to promote “untested” homeopathic remedies. Groups routinely antagonistic toward homeopathy also took to social media to lambaste it while some journalists, true to their craft, presented a more balanced picture."

It is these 'groups routinely antagonistic towards homeopathy" that control our governments, our national health services, and our mainstream media. So we, in the 'advanced' west, are unlikely to hear about what is happening in India (who, as can  be seen here, are certainly doing more than our governments to deal with the situation). We are condemned to the best that conventional medicine can offer - which apparently is limited to washing our hands regularly with soap for at least 20 seconds.

Undoubtedly some people who read this blog will agree with these homeopathy denialists. But actually this is not the point.

• Surely our government, our national health service, our doctors, and the mainstream media would want to share what is happening in India with us - even if there is only the smallest grain of truth in what is being suggested.
• Surely patients should be given the information about homeopathy so that we were all able to make an informed choice about whether we should take a simple homeopathic remedy in addition to washing our hands.
• Surely the conventional medical establishment knows that if just one person can be saved from this nasty acute disease, and just one person did not die as a result, it would be worth informing everyone?.

After all what is happening in India is potentially a good news story. At least it is a good news story for most people. It is potentially a bad news story for the pharmaceutical medical establishment, who are loathe to admit that homeopathy has both preventative and curative treatments when they don't.

So perhaps it is unlikely that we will EVER get to know about the Indian experience through our governments, our national health services, our doctors, or our mainstream media. They are all dominated and controlled by the pharmaceutical establishment. 

There are other similar things happening, potential good news stories, that we are not being told about. For instance, few people will know that tons of vitamin C has been deliver to Wuhan, China, for use against the Covid 19 virus. Does vitamin C work against influenza? There are three studies that demonstrates that it does. So why aren't our doctors telling us that vitamin C is protective? No doubt the same answer - it might be good news for us - but not for the pharmaceutical industry. They don't want us to know about simple protective measures, beyond hand washing!

Anyone who is genuinely concerned about this coronavirus pandemic should examine what homeopathy (and vitamin c) is able to offer, both to prevent and to treat it; and above all, to relax in the knowledge that no-one has to be completely beholden to pharmaceutical medicine.


For more information on Coronavirus see my other blogs

* https://safe-medicine.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-coronavirus-panic-what-every.html
* https://safe-medicine.blogspot.com/2020/02/coronavirus-covid-19-conventional.html

And these websites give some indication of the kinds of homeopathic treatment that is being used

*  https://www.iqhomeopathy.com/coronavirus-homeopathic-care-2020/
*  https://alanfreestone.com/coronavirus-treatment-with-homeopathy/