in Health Reform , 809 references
You ought to read this; I've pointed it out before, at the beginning of the Covid crap, but it bears another look.
Since the introduction of antibiotics "pandemics" from viral agents have never mattered materially to society. We will eventually, by the way, likely find ourselves in serious trouble in this regard once again because of antibiotic resistance, which we caused, but whether that's worth it or not is an open question. Certainly, for the people who don't die but would have otherwise, they will tell you it is -- and was.
The poor bastards who find themselves with a resistant strain of some invasive bacteria that kills them will likely disagree.
So be it.
It is a fact that most of the people that the 1918 flu pandemic killed died as a result of secondary bacterial infections. This is not in dispute. What is also not in dispute is that doctors killed a huge number of the remaining people that died by handing out aspirin like literal candy. They choked on their own blood and secretions which the aspirin, in huge doses that we now know are well beyond the LD50 dose (that which kills half the people who take it) caused.
In other words the doctor killed them. We even have a "pleasant" name for this so we don't have to call it by its proper name ("murder" or "manslaughter") -- iatrogenic disease or death.
"Iatrogenic" is a pleasant name for caused by the physician or medical "treatment."
Why don't we just call it manslaughter or negligent wounding?
Let's cut the crap -- the evidence is overwhelming that every single Covid death was in fact iatrogenic. All of them. Why? Because the virus was man-made, not a fluke of nature and this was known within days after it supposedly showed up, which was also a lie as to the "date it appeared." We now know this to be factual and in fact knew it pretty early on because blood donations made in the latter part of 2019 had antibodies to Covid-19 in them, an impossibility unless the virus existed and was circulating in people prior to the claimed "appearance" in early 2020.
We know the virus was man-made because a patented sequence of proteins is in it and you can't patent something that nature creates. This is proof that the virus was in fact manufactured -- whether directly or a precursor does not matter; without said manufacturing there would have been no Covid-19 at all. None of this can be disputed; it is fact. Further, everyone in the so-called "scientific community" knew this within days of the original announcement that Covid-19 existed and the so-called "community of doctors and scientists" intentionally lied about it. This should not surprise given that a huge number of said people were implicated personally in either being part of it (directly and indirectly) or funding the work that led to it. When was the last time someone who did a particularly stupid thing that led to a really bad outcome came forward and admitted it?
Yeah, that's what I thought.
Would you tolerate the engineering profession redefining the collapse of a design to be enlogenic -- a mish-mash for "I didn't calculate elongation -- that is, expansion due to changing temperatures -- correctly and thus you died"? Why no, you wouldn't. So why don't we force the medical and pharmaceutical industries to call death by drug or doctor manslaughter -- which it is, incidentally -- instead of a mismashed term that 99% of the population will not relate to "that asshole should hang for what he gave you -- or withheld -- and was the cause of your death."
Can we get rid of the "what he gave you" part? Maybe not; humans have a pretty insane capacity to believe in what amounts to witchcraft and it has very little to do with intelligence whether or not you fall under said spell. There are multiple areas of cognitive bias that come into this; Semmelweis was drummed out of the medical profession for his correct deduction that deaths in maternity wards were due to doctors not washing their hands between patient examinations. That happened in the mid-1800s so please save me the sanctimonious nonsense about how "the best and brightest don't do things like that" because they most certainly both did and do.
Money only adds to the list of said cognitive bias that weighs upon the scale, never mind fear of being caught when you realize that a grant you underwrote a few years prior has now led to a global viral outbreak. If there was ever a reason to hang someone that would be it so if you think such a person has no reason to fear being held accountable and thus lie through their teeth you're certifiable.
The simple reality is this:We have repeatedly made viral outbreaks worse by "intervening." We killed over 60,000 gay Americans by withholding Bactrim from those with AIDS who had PCP, claiming there was no evidence it worked and instead prescribing AZT, a drug that we had little experience with and, of the experience we had, we knew it was toxic as it had failed trials for cancer on safety. The claim that Bactrim was unproved was a lie; we knew it worked because ten years earlier it was discovered to work in Leukemia patients and to this day stands as the single largest advance in Leukemia survival by making PCP a non-issue, where it used to routinely kill those undergoing treatment for said cancer. We killed god-knows-how-many people in 1918 by wildly overdosing them with aspirin, a "new fangled" drug that had just shown up and we had little experience with. This time around we did the same thing we did with AZT with Remdesivir, a drug that was "new fangled" and had twice previous failed on safety, yet it was touted as "an answer" to Covid pneumonia. In those previous trials it failed because it destroyed kidney function. Someone I knew here in town died exactly that way, allegedly of "Covid", after being given the drug. Now we have people dropping dead or coming up with crazy non-previously-existent maladies after giving them a lightly-tested, unproved injection to, it was claimed, prevent Covid and we now know it does not prevent infection nor passing the virus to others.
All of these events featured one thing in common: They were all new and wonderous alleged "answers" to some medical problem caused by a virus, all of them made the peddlers a crap-ton of money, none of them had any track record proving they were safe to use over decades of prior use and every one of them killed a huge number of people because, in fact, they neither solved the problem or were safe.
We learned all the way back to 1918 that allowing money into the game adds trouble on top of even the allegedly most-educated person's addiction to magical thinking. We do this with many other areas of medicine as well; we cannot even formally describe in detail the full interactions and functionality of the immune system yet we think we can design other than by pure mimicry an effective "prophylaxis" (e.g. vaccine) that uses same. That's wild-eyed arrogance without a shred of evidence to back it up.
Mimicry (e.g. the traditional measles shot) works despite our ignorance because it mimics where a natural infection shows up and thus even though we do not have anywhere near a complete understanding of how immunity works it gets "close enough" and in nearly every case provides durable and stable protection.
Such is not true for any non-regularly-viremic, short-latent-period viral infection including RSV, influenza and all coronaviruses, including but not limited to Covid.
The evidence is that the work being done before the virus got out was likely related to an attempt at a coronavirus vaccine. I've gone over in some detail why this is the most-likely explanation, including the fact that if you were actually trying to come up with a weapon you wouldn't choose a coronavirus; their rapid and unstable mutational pattern makes them a poor choice. Never mind that the No Time to Die (e.g. James Bond film) scenario of targeting requires a level of understanding that we are nowhere near achieving and almost-certainly won't achieve in our lifetimes. Such a view is fantasyland nonsense and while striving to gain knowledge of the immune system in full is a good goal to have the facts are we're not in any danger of pulling that level of understanding off at any time in the foreseeable future.
The best we can do is to demand that the "white lab coat" folks, when it comes to health, be relegated to advisory roles and destroy their gatekeeping capacity in all respects -- whether it be at the pharmacy (e.g. you can buy what you want and are responsible for the outcomes individually) or in the realm of so-called "public health." The facts are that all elements of this so-called "profession" have not only failed to help they have made many diseases and conditions worse, presiding over an explosion of diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure and death. Their nostrums, "recommendations" and even mandates have done nothing to reverse or prevent any of these outcomes, all of which claim a huge percentage of human lives in the Western world.
Absent their immediate consent to that change, backed by immediate legislation barring them from any role extending beyond advice we must hold every one of them to an engineering standard and then hang every single one responsible for even a single iatrogenic death.
Whether the jackass shoots with a gun or a hypodermic needle - or for that matter a pill - does not change the essence of the act.