Where we’re heading

So, further meltdown abounds in the global COVID cuckoo narrative. Despite doubtless the best masking and boosting protocols imaginable, the Queen of England has COVID, and not only the Surgeon General of the United States, but his entire immediate family – wife and children! So much for the farce of jabbing and masking.

And then fresh disclosure, straight from the hallowed NY Times, the US CDC admits it withheld a large portion of the COVID data it collects! So, they don’t trust the public, whose tax dollars fund them, to be “treated” to the truth, without vetting and editing. The article cites a federal official familiar with the effort saying the agency was reluctant to make the data public “because they might be misinterpreted as the vaccines being ineffective.” Presumably that interpretation would only be forthcoming if the data conveys that!

So, we have data sieving on top of everything else. Hardly how one wants a balanced approach to a pandemic to be generated. 

The multi meltdown

More than 150 studies now testify to how natural immunity to COVID is clearly superior to the temporary immunity conferred by the “vaccines”, in terms of both efficacy and longevity. During the current Omicron wave, in terms of efficacy, the two-dose mRNA “vaccines” dropped to zero; a third booster buoyed that temporarily to 37%, still well below the purported FDA 50% threshold. Natural immunity dipped slightly, but has rebounded, clearly above 50%, and anyway, without adverse effects, or flooding the body with torrents of spike protein. And rebounding from Omicron that way tops up fresh immunity. 

In highly “vaccinated” regions, for example the UK, Ontario, Israel, we are seeing “negative” efficacy – higher infection numbers among the “vaccinated”. This may be due to the forecasted antibody dependent enhancement from excessive “vaccination” or “antigenic escape”, but the data is categorical. Even prior to Omicron, it was clear there was no sterilising immunity from the “vaccines” (they did not prevent infection or transmission). Therefore, there was no sane duty to get “vaccinated” on behalf of others, and immediately, it should have reverted to personal autonomy, particularly given the increasingly mild variants coming into play. 

And the silly one-size-fits-all mandates also ignored the most elemental epidemiological reality that we knew almost from the outset based on data about COVID, namely morbidity and mortality risks are more than a thousand-fold different between say a healthy child or adolescent and an elderly person with multiple illnesses. 

Public trust was squandered, lives ruined, in the wake of this and the multitude of other failed pandemic policies like the face muzzles that clearly do nothing but choke off oxygen supply, social distancing which hardly works with an airborne pathogen, manic disinfecting (words fail) and most disastrously, the destructive lockdown policies whereby we locked people “away” from disinfecting fresh air and sunshine, and locked the healthy up with the sick, thinking we were going to somehow “rein in” something that had already spread. 

More than 70% of Americans for example, “vaccinated” or not, have been infected by now. The real distinction should always have been “more or less immune” (based on age, health, natural immunity from recovery, etc.).

The medical fiasco

Globally, hospitals in 2020 sat empty as staff were sent home, awaiting an influx of patients that did not materialise until months later. Perverse payment incentives in numerous jurisdictions focused on a single disease, biasing diagnosis and death certificates and massively ignored (the stockpile is terrifying in the UK for example) patients with other medical needs. 

We are seeing a surge in all-cause mortality unassociated with COVID in quite a bit of the US and Europe, shockingly high numbers. Is this collateral impact from lockdowns? “Vaccine” adverse effects? The ethical principle of free and informed medical consent (guaranteed by the Nuremberg Code, the Helsinki Declaration, and many others) were suddenly ditched when we “needed” experimental EUA “vaccines.” Somewhat unsettling to treat our medical ethics as utilitarian taffy!

As medical specialists sought clarity, they had to file an official request (FOIA) to get Pfizer “vaccine” clinical trial data from the FDA. FDA initial reaction was they wanted 75 years to release data they claimed they “reviewed” in 108 days. Fortunately, a judge has intervened, requiring this be made available in eight months. So, we are vilifying people and firing them for declining a treatment whose safety and efficacy data cannot be independently reviewed?

And controlling what would be published or broadcast, a faux consensus was manufactured, an echo chamber of those influenced economically, politically or both, to be mouthpieces of this perverted evangel. This bastardisation of true scientific inquiry became anointed as “The Science.” 

Social meltdown

Clearly the puppet masters have sought to reconfigure social arrangements and how we interact with each other. The “new normal” is an ugly debasement of our social contract. This hyped public health alarmism was to justify the expansion of state powers beyond all prior limits, scuttling constitutional guarantees without defining any plausible “thresholds” for the perpetual “emergency” which was to legally justify these onerous, life annulling COVID countermeasures (which conjures a military campaign not medical care). 

Civil liberties became disposable, and eminent voices of dissent being censored somehow became acceptable in an allegedly “democratic” framework. These emergency powers, being clutched to the authoritarian bosoms of those in power, including unelected medical mafioso and bureaucrats, wrecks education, imposes costs and uncertainty on travel, segregates people and more.

Years later, the hoax is evident, after those following the silly strictures continue to be infected, after it’s clear the infection fatality rate is so mild -- influenza in difficult years can be far more deadly, ditto dengue, ditto car accidents, not to mention the mortality scourges of diabetes, heart disease and cancer – we continue to neglect these both in terms of screening and care.

No critical scrutiny over the powers of governments, who asserted they were a tribunal of probity, no checks and balances (to question was illicit as the world allegedly teetered facing a highly treatable viral strain that over 99% recover from). And as indicated, the lunatic lockdowns represented the first time in history we quarantined healthy populations.

Those who benefited, online services, Amazon, the “laptop class”, those who could avail of this as long as working-class people took the risks and delivered everything they needed to them, lobbied capriciously for these untested measures. The business owners, entrepreneurs, families, the working class bore the brunt of the insanity and watched helplessly as massive upheavals devastated their livelihoods, their children’s education, the social fabric, and were positioned to further enrich already ultra-rich elites.

Seismic decisions like lockdown should be accompanied by a cost/benefit assessment, it is the essence of the precautionary principle. Here, no evidence of any “debate,” just a mad dash to implement a playbook. No overall consequences have been assessed, and even Johns Hopkins has finally pointed out that there may have been a nominal (around 1%) positive effect from lockdowns at large, but catastrophic collateral impact. No sane policy maker could or would have, on the merits, gone forward. 

The collateral impacts are “The Other Pandemic.” This refers certainly to the mental health crisis, engendered and exacerbated, with skyrocketing rates of depression, anxiety, trauma, addictions and suicide, particularly acute among the young. Already in the US, we had roughly 44,000 deaths from opioid overdose in 2018. In 2021 that swelled to 100,000.

Locked down, terrified people, reduced to government pronouncements and carefully vetted propaganda on flashing computer screens from mainstream media, are easier to control. An anthem of ‘social distancing’ (incoherent once more with an airborne pathogen) drives a stake into civil society, it is the quintessence of “anti-society.” 

And how were we invited to contribute, to signal our positive citizenship? Basically, to mindlessly comply, stay locked in, watch as your family, business, society, all disintegrate. This, even though Sweden as a frustrating outlier for the orthodoxy, and later open US States like Florida, demonstrated an open society could still flourish and nothing apocalyptic would befall. Our “non-participation” in society was to be the highest civic art. And also, the utterly unsubstantiated (to this day, on any data) specter of “asymptomatic viral spread” could impose testing hysteria and masking hysteria and convert everyone we encountered, perceptually into a waking biohazard. 

Beware biosecurity 

As the whole “vaccine” passport and “vaccine” mandate apparatus was sprung, it was enabled by a biosecurity surveillance regime, again set up and overseen by unelected technocrats, with no clarity provided. Digital tech, public health, police power all collude to trample on our privacy and initiative. Our inherent dignity is stripped away, as we become a cog, fungible parts of some undifferentiated “mass.” “Benevolent” health and safety experts will hereafter order our existence. Doesn’t that sound fun? After this mass mess, who could doubt them?

Lives and bodies are all up for grabs. Intrusive, burdensome interventions will keep us tethered to whatever “reset” is either being centrally planned as some fear, or which is just being cobbled together through a lattice work of vested interests. Consider the sway of novel digital technologies, personal data extraction, information flow, and how everything, from bank accounts to personal information can be controlled and manipulated if we do not more ardently resist this. And as overtly all of this would be clearly unpalatable to sentient citizens everywhere, hence it has to seep in via “pandemic management.” 

The euphemistic term for this is “stakeholder capitalism,” replete with bio-digital convergence, omnipresent surveillance, and technological oversight over an ever-wider range of human activities. Monetary exchange is one of many such areas of commerce and life to be brought under this scrutiny and “management.” There will be “social credits” it is envisaged with conformity rewarded and prized, and lack of it (via mandates and “passports”) will lead to exclusion, accounts potentially frozen, life prospects potentially neutered.

Without suggesting Nazis are rampaging through governments, there are clear parallels between protocols used then and those being applied today. Article 38 of the Weimar Constitution, which governed Nazi Germany for most of its existence allowed for the suspension of German law in times of emergency. A handy mechanism to have on hand. 

And further back in history, we find the infamous Reign of Terror in the French Revolution was presided over by the, what else, “Committee on…Public Safety.” The concern, unless we take inspiration from the spirit if not all of the tactics of the Ottawa truckers, is that this is not an “exit strategy” being sought, but an “entry ramp” into a dystopian inhumane future stripped of art, human zeal, nuance, autonomy or community.

Cowardice is never civil. It’s time to galvanise sustained engagement worthy of our aspirations as leaders and citizens.

Continuing “masquerade”

The indefatigable Steve Kirsch highlights the letter sent by eight industrial hygienists, who have filled 27 fact-filled pages of passionate ire, addressed to the US CDC, NIH, excoriating serious flaws in the CDC mask guidance. CDC has now said cloth masks essentially don’t do much good, but we are still clinging to them as quasi-religious symbols it seems.

The specialists write, “We the undersigned, professional experts in the field of industrial hygiene, with combined experience of nearly 150 years, are highly concerned with the inaccurate and misleading guidance being promoted by the CDC on its website regarding efficacy of masking to prevent COVID-19 and now similar guidance regarding respirators and request for immediate correction to said guidance. The guidance is overly broad, inaccurate and especially inappropriate for children and the general public.” (The link to the full letter can be found on “tyscienceguyy.com” on SCRIBD).

There are four key points: N-95 type masks are inappropriate for long term use for the general population and children; CDC has issued harmful guidance for masking children that contradicts manufacturer’s recommendations, world-wide standard practice and CDC’s own overall guidance, with no risk-benefit analysis; CDC continues to ignore that C-19 is overwhelmingly spread via aerosols (not droplets) making mask use mostly ineffective; CDC’s assertions re masks have no scientific justification and are not supported by global results and create potential harm from a false sense of security. The letter finishes by offering to help rather than simply criticise. The highest impact known to address viral spread is fresh air, ventilation and destruction. The latter is already cited as “n/a” for COVID except through therapeutics that allow the human immune system to make this already mild threat even more inconsequential. 

They also detail numerous health, educational and developmental pitfalls of masking. Surely, here in Lanka, this mad, sad religion can be ditched. As everywhere it is not applied globally, including larger events, mass protests (like Ottawa for 3 weeks with teeming crowds, unmasked in close proximity), nothing seems to happen, and any “infection spikes” do not translate to corresponding mortality fortunately, and those “spikes” are happening seasonally anyway.

Continuing “vaccine” follies

On the “vaccine” front, news is no less confounding. Pfizer and Moderna had built their “vaccines” to tackle the original strain in Wuhan. More than two years later, no sign of that strain anywhere in the world. So, multiple mutations later, all we have in our trove is the original shot formula, in EUA form (for some reason the FDA “approved” version is unavailable in the US!).

For reasons still evading public scrutiny, the shots have never been updated, becoming more and more irrelevant with each variant. So, we have “copy paste” “vaccines” at present. Omicron “vaccines” were being developed, though why no one knows. Omicron is fastidiously mild, and there will likely be a new variant by the time these shots are available. But the latest news is Big Pharma’s specially designed “Omi” shot is now “indefinitely delayed” (reported by Reuters, whose past support for the narrative had some tempted to rename it “Rooters”).

So, in the meantime, billions of the useless original shots are flooding markets. We know they do not offer immunity, or even long-term efficacy. So the snake oil exhortation to be “protected,” must be increasingly totemic, and like masking, ideological rather than medically helpful.

The latest study out of Israel (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.02.15.22270948v1) catalogues the findings of 20 doctors and scientists, who studied 274 healthcare workers, and confirmed “shot four” had a mere 30% efficacy against infection for Pfizer, and just 11% for Moderna. Shot 5 anyone? Keep barraging the body with untested spike proteins and hope for the best? The level of temporary efficacy doesn’t kick in for two weeks, and the trend lines suggest it goes to zero in a few months.

The study states “local and systemic adverse reactions were reported in 80% (Pfizer) and 40% (Moderna). So, with the efficacy stats, the cost-benefit analysis redefines insanity on its face virtually.

Across the way, a new CDC study, published mid-February, shows booster three efficacy plummets to 31% after five months. Remember, these are people who admitted they don’t share all their data, are part of the “cartel”, desperate to peddle positive propaganda. So, this “confession” must have been inescapable. 

Nor can anyone say, “It would be worse without them.” All of Africa, and for Omicron, South Africa and Botswana, with less than 30% “vaccination” show that’s not the case. Anyway, how much “worse” can it be when an intervention provides little to no immunity, the jabs are not effective, and their risk profile seems to grow worse with every additional dose?

Even more worryingly, a Malaysian study in the journal JAMA reads like a hit job on Ivermectin (clearly for something that doesn’t “work”, they have a hard time leaving it alone, don’t they?), claiming it did little to defend against onset of serious illness. There are so many flaws in the design and execution of the study, but their own data is what is most damning, if you can pry yourself away from the spurious summary.

Published in the journal of AMA (JAMA), it shows the old “horse dewormer”, scourge of pro-narrative mainstream medical advice, can make a superstar showing (even though it is ideally used as part of a “cocktail” of early treatment therapeutics). 

This was a randomised trial, and it says, “The study findings do not support the use of ivermectin for patients with COVID-19.” Then, you read their data (they pray you don’t). 

The data findings: “vaccine efficacy” may reduce your chances of death by 24% (this is 24% of .25% = 0.6% benefit). This doesn’t even look at the all-cause mortality of the “vaccines.” Ivermectin by contrast, from their own data, reduced your chance of death by 72%. It has killed no one in this arena, so 3 times benefit, with staggeringly nominal risk. There is no rational choice to be made on these numbers!

But when multi-drug remedies are used, that is magnified further. In this study 1 in 75 of the unvaccinated treated with IVM died. On the Fareed-Tyson protocol in the US and the Chetty protocol in South Africa, close to 20,000 patients including those severely ill (between the two protocols) were treated with no deaths at all.

Learnings?

We hope we can “bake” these in.

Do not allow lab-based scientists to rip up established hierarchies of evidence in advising on policy interventions and certainly do not allow policymakers to “improvise” with human lives and fortunes, never publicly evaluating social and economic interventions.

Eschew those blunt instruments, law and fear and vague medical nostrums to intimidate the populace along for the long haul. And countries like Lanka, now in economic free fall, can ill afford such larks when already the economic footing was far from secure.

Do not allow, as in the US or UK, the sad, tragic drift to a quasi-elective dictatorship. We have to strengthen the review of government actions. And if you create government task forces, prune them of vested interests.

We need humility as we face and embrace nature. We must aspire to a rich, robust life, not delusions of deferring death indefinitely. There are better agendas we can endow. It is high time to re-examine them and vitalise them.

(The writer is the founder and CEO of EPL Global and founder of Sensei Lanka, a global consultant with over 30 years’ strategic leadership experience and now, since March 2020, a globally recognised COVID researcher and commentator.)