“Never before [had] the search for traces of a virus [been] carried out so broadly and intensively… besides, many cases of death, that happened to coincide with seropositive H1N1 lab-findings, were simply attributed to “swine flu” and used to foster fear“. ~ Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, EU Parliamentary Health Committee, 2009
It took me many months last year to come to the realisation that the Swine Flu pandemic response, and smaller epidemics since, were harbingers for big players with corrupt motives to wreak havoc on the world for personal gain. In hindsight, clues appear to be everywhere. Public health – trained to promote calm and common sense during times of serious population level health threats – were innocently embroiled in fear campaigns in 2009. Pressure to respond quickly with multiple new procedures occurred in a climate of apparent urgency leading to massive staff increases. Departments were flooded with new, inexperienced and overwhelmed staff following newly devised processes and reporting constantly to media-driven ministerial demands for data. After years of working in disease surveillance and outbreak control I had never previously, nor since, worked in such a chaotic environment as those few months in 2009. When it came to an abrupt end, I now realise that I didn’t ask enough questions, choosing instead to forget it with the exception of occasional references to having survived such an unsettling experience.
This two minute news item from January 2010 Drug firms made false H1N1 claims, describes the Swine Flu fiasco briefly. Health officials, believing Swine Flu could kill millions, introduced emergency measures and spent billions of dollars on vaccines which then became difficult to peddle to a public who did not remain fearful for long enough. One of the Swine Flu vaccines, Pandemrix, triggered an auto-immune reaction leading to 1300 cases of incurable narcolepsy. Glaxo-Smith-Kline awarded some compensation payouts to victims and their families, although others allegedly received nothing.
Eleven years later, drug companies sought and were granted indemnity from legal challenges relating to harms caused by Covid-19 vaccinations. Today, the Gates Foundation who have increased their wealth by 20% in less than a year, have 19.42% of their empire invested in BioNTech, who partnered with Pfizer to make one of the Covid-19 vaccines. Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, who led the charge which ultimately quelled the Swine Flu panic in 2009 has survived a relentless smear campaign such that any attempts to expose corruption this time around were discredited before he even spoke. In 2020 many more scientists faced similar attacks intended to silence dissent from the panic narrative. Scott Atlas, John Ioannidis, Sunetra Gupta, Clare Craig and countless others have faced accusations of the “granny killer” variety for speaking on evidence based public health.
The public were gaslighted constantly: China’s lockdown was a human rights travesty, but then we were told to lockdown if we wanted to save lives; masks were of no benefit, but then masks were recommended with zero new evidence supporting their use in this way; three weeks to flatten the curve is today celebrating its one year anniversary. Mechanical ventilation and high dose treatments which killed people were promoted directly by WHO. Emergency powers granted to politicians relying on questionable advice which prevails unquestioned remain in place long after any sense of emergency has passed.
Those speaking out in favour of following established public health practices have been silenced, maligned, some have lost their jobs, some retreated to save their careers and others resigned in protest. Still others have stood firm and been protected by courageous institutions willing to protect scientific dialogue. A massive campaign of well funded propaganda continues to this day against teams reorganising in response to what Dr Roger Hodkinson, representing the views of many who are similarly qualified without political or institutional connections, called “utterly unfounded public hysteria“. Nick Hudson, co-founder and public face of PANDA, has frequently stated that offers to debate pro-lockdowners are persistently declined whilst ad hominem attacks are used as a substitute for scientific discourse. The silencing has itself brought to light the problem with paid “fact checkers” used to censor social media, being often far less qualified than many who they “fact check”. Scientists speaking out against the mainstream narrative are de-platformed regularly on mainstream services so that independent platforms have to be used instead.
A year ago WHO began their “Test, Test, Test” campaign targeting healthy people. At no time in history has it previously been a part of public health, for healthy people to be tested en masse. Someone presenting to their GP a year ago and asking for an Influenza test “in case I might be sick” may have attracted psychiatric concern. In today’s lockdown climate Covid testing of healthy people is sold as a normal practice and even promoted, with some suggesting twice weekly testing as a way of allowing citizens certain freedoms. An example of the outcomes of such extensive testing is the UK laboratory testing system which started out with capacity for 20,000 tests per day and now tests up to almost a million samples daily, for this single virus, mostly in people who have no or mild symptoms. Massive profits are connected to this process for companies producing the testing products.
Christian Drosten, the man behind the highly unreliable PCR test promoted in WHO’s “Test, Test, Test” campaign, said himself in 2014 that “the [PCR] method is so sensitive that it can detect a single <molecule> of this virus. For example, if a nurse has such a pathogen scurrying over the nasal mucosa for a day without getting sick or noticing anything else, then suddenly it is a MERS case“. This scenario in fact describes immunity, not infection and not infectiousness. His quote is in relation to MERS, yet it is equally relevant to the PCR test used to “diagnose cases” of Covid-19. It almost appears as a seeded idea leading to events playing out now. Scientists are asking serious questions about this test, citing multiple concerns as described in the November 2020 peer review. Similar problems exist with other tests being used, as described in this letter to the editor at the British Medical Journal.
New Zealand and Australia remain upheld as paragons of virtue who knew how to implement lockdowns properly unlike their European and American counterparts who couldn’t follow China despite impressively draconian attempts. Yet evidence based public health exploration looking beyond lockdowns as the new panacea for public health suggests otherwise. A reviled opponent of lockdowns, Ireland-based Ivor Cummins presses on with epidemiological examinations of the pandemic. For example his short lesson in basic public health at Zero Covid Island Enigmas: Addressing the New Zealand Question.
All the while so much societal harm has occurred in the name of this.
Nowhere in Europe has excess death in 2020 exceeded that of the five year average. Including Sweden, who were pummelled relentlessly when they chose established public health practice over lockdown. Those promoting fear of the virus in this ongoing crisis will not come out on the right side of history. The time to reconsider is long overdue.