Decent public health has been destroyed by appalling journalism. Centralised media conglomerates control a consensus viewpoint, convincing the general public with ease. One example of many is an article published yesterday in a leading NZ newspaper owned by Fairfax Media, a major owner of newspapers, magazines, radio and digital media across Australasia. The ease with which the populations of NZ and Australia can be taught a single narrative on any issue is astounding and supports the idea that subsidiarity is required for society to function fairly.
The article focuses on an epidemiologist in New Zealand who has argued against the global consensus of lockdowns being a public health policy. They are not, or at least they were not, until March of 2020. Public health was turned on its head by Bruce Aylward of the World Health Organisation, returning from China and announcing that the lockdown of Wuhan was an admirable success and that we must all follow suit for the sake of safety. Ten days later the same “epidemiologist” was unable to engage with a journalist asking for his opinion on Taiwan’s pandemic response. But WHO are a public health agency, with no political influences at play. Right?
Obvious points of contention in the New Zealand article include, but are not limited to:
- Horrors in India prove that lockdown is the only way forward for addressing the COVID-19 pandemic.
These horrors in fact play out frequently in Delhi (India’s pandemic Ground Zero), whose air quality is reportedly the worst in the world. Surges of respiratory problems rise and fall concurrent with pollution waves. This year India’s limited ability to respond to a surge of respiratory problems was worsened by lockdown blocking access to medical supplies, only ever available to those with money to pay for services. Usually these distressing circumstances are treated as inconsequential by disinterested media. COVID-19 is labelled the reason for their recent wave of respiratory infections based on PCR testing, well known to be unfit for purpose but persistently promoted as a reliable diagnostic tool. - A claim that the infection fatality rate (IFR) for COVID-19 is 0.5% to 1%. WHO’s own publication identifies an IFR far lower than this, and in general similar to influenza, but with different demographic ranges than influenza. The elderly, at higher risk than influenza, deserve to be protected but anything other than lockdown is labelled “granny killing”. Infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data.
- The article then goes on to state that if Sweden’s infection fatality rate were as low as 0.03%, then every Swede would have to have been infected three times. This suggests fatality rates are calculated by PCR testing results : an easy but serious error, misinforming thousands of readers. Similar errors are made throughout the article, for example claiming that an increase in “cases” (determined by the unfit-for-purpose PCR tests) proves Sweden had not reached herd immunity when it was initially considered they had. Sweden’s death rate for the decade up to and including 2020 looks like this. The only thing upholding the established myth that Sweden has been decimated by a raging pandemic is PCR testing.
- The article implies modeling which claimed New Zealand could see up to 80,000 deaths from COVID-19 was correct. An epidemiologist arguing otherwise is asserted to be very obviously, even dangerously, incorrect. Yet “proof” that New Zealanders could not possibly have pre-existing immunity is based on a seroprevalence study which showed 0.1% of blood samples from 9,000 people collected between December 2020 and January 2021 had specific antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. This ignores the enormous complexities of human immunity. For example, antibody levels become undetectable (which does not equal absent) over time and mucosal T-cells play a significant role against respiratory infections. Many with robust T-cell immunity will not even develop antibodies as they are able to stop the virus before it passes beyond the superficial layers of the respiratory tract. Last year “T Cell Immunity” was a phrase which led to mass pillorying of many experts as immunity against COVID-19 was vehemently denied by fearmongers and their fearful followers. However without looking at T-cell immunity, which is harder to test for, the immune status of populations against this disease remains unknown. How did an estimated 5,000 New Zealanders develop antibodies against a disease which was “locked down in time”? How did the nation’s first detected “case” of COVID-19 come to be a local person living on the West Coast of the South Island, hundreds of miles from the nearest international border? In normal times these would not be contentious questions to ask.
- People speaking against the consensus narrative are criticised for choosing small, off-grid and alternative media sources to speak with. This ignores the fact that mainstream media have established powerful censorship against anyone with “alternative” (pre-2020 established public health) ideas as to how a pandemic might be mitigated. Even the world’s most eminent scientists can be painted as “fringe” when given little choice as to who is willing to speak with them. Conglomerate power has captured the world and anyone speaking out is “fringe” now, as first experienced by Dr Wolfgang Wodarg more than a decade ago. **Postscript below**
- The article claims that the experimental vaccine being rolled out in New Zealand “has gone through standard clinical trial processes”. It omits to state that these clinical trials are ongoing and the experimental vaccines are only available under “emergency use” laws.
_______________________
** Dr Wolfgang Wodarg describes his experience of censorship following 2009 when he dared to challenge World Health Organisation and their partnership with pharmaceutical companies which became apparent during the Swine Flu pandemic. As shown here, in 2009-2010 Professor Wodarg had access to mainstream news sources and he used this access to speak out articulately and honestly in advocacy of authentic public health. Soon after this interview he was vilified and eliminated from all media outlets in their pursuit for expert opinion. He describes how he became alert to the extreme levels of corruption playing out in public health in this interivew with Planet Lockdown in March 2021.
Around the same time as Wodarg was cancelled, Bill Gates began to appear more regularly, opinionating on public health matters. This has included surprisingly accurate predictions of looming pandemics and his range of skills to provide infinite solutions to the modern world’s soaring infectious disease emergencies. There are many examples but this ten minutes of Gates Delight is definitely my current favourite. The Corbett Report feature on Bill Gates is a two hour documentary covering his powerful interference in public health.
alicespringstomind 