top of page

Gibberish: COVID distortions

Updated: May 23, 2021

Originally published in Medium on March 21, 2021 before being censored

Photo by Mulyadi on Unsplash

What would you say if an asserted contagion capsized your sense of normalcy, your understanding of your constitutional rights, your plans, your rational predictions of life and livelihood? And what if it’s gravitas was extrapolated from clearly dummied up depictions of people dropping dead on the street, and from its running amok in care homes and elderly populations, and it nevertheless became the Alpha and Omega of all aspects of how we live and operate, determining what our rights actually are?

Contagion curiosity and modeling flaws.

And then, what if you learned that the actual contagion is not even available for re-verification, insofar as a purified sample as per sturdy scientific parameters (Koch’s Postulates), and antibody responses from people who have never allegedly been infected by this particular viral strain show that it may not be that “novel” after all?

The models that have led to the world spinning off its axis don’t work, are flatly and factually refuted by locations that followed none of the panic prescriptions and fared no worse, and in some instances, quite a bit better than those that did. And the lethality predictions initially asserted are resoundingly contradicted by reality (represented by both actual mortality data as well as seroprevalence studies, most recently by John Ioannidis of Stanford, peer-reviewed for WHO).

Masks don’t work.

Cloth masks and even surgical masks in terms of their utility here are challenged in terms of claimed efficacy by even the CDC and the European CDC (albeit in their small print), on the basis that the size of particles by which C-19 is allegedly transmitted are too small to be interdicted by these masks, the gap between face and mask and the eyes provide clear access, once they get damp they are anyway useless, they can themselves become breeding ground for infection, and they impair quality of oxygen flow.

Respirators are neither practical, and after two hours, oxygen issues there too, but by sealing off the face, and being “fitted,” they are at least minimally plausible. But we can, of course, opt to ignore all this prosaic rationality, and studies confirming this in Vietnam, Hong Kong, by WHO (who admit they only changed their “masking” guidelines due to political lobbying) and then the recent peer-reviewed study out of Denmark. In fact, let’s totemically wear them anyway, and then, auditioning as poster children for insanity, let’s double up!

Children aren’t at risk.

Yet, that being established, we anyway close schools and insist on masks! We know that virtually all who perish “from” this pathogen, or even most of those who are force-fed into its statistical maw but clearly passed due to a slew of other comorbidities, have a median age of around 82.

There are virtually no instances of young children passing on the infection, getting seriously infected, or being at risk. Teachers in schools around the world that are open have a better statistical health profile virus-wise than adults in other work environments. All clearly demonstrated and ratified.

And our response to this “good news?” Genuflect to teachers’ unions, irrationally rush to shut schools, or open and shut them, then keep them closed, and fail to at all “justify” what is equivalent to a human rights violation by depriving children of education, and what is also certainly the equivalent of abuse by force “masking” them.

The latter is rife with all the emotional scars of prison camp like oversight, a perpetual environment of fear, fuzziness in terms of functioning from impaired oxygen flow, inhaling their own exhaled waste, all in subservience to what is now tantamount to a pagan religious symbol with no demonstrated medical efficacy for anyone, and certainly not children.

There are heart-shattering tales of doctors asking children to take their masks off so they can listen to their lungs, doctors even who assure the children they themselves are vaccinated and there is no risk, running into trembling youngsters manically looking over to “Mom” (who is not a source of rarefied medical wisdom per se) for approval to oblige!

This contrasts with Sweden, where a child in school was recently asked to go home for wearing a mask!

Other illnesses need attention.

Yet we have decided to ignore them. People with chest pains, stay home. Those needing cancer screenings, stay home. Anyone needing blood sugar tested, forget that. What is that compared to the “phantom menace?” If you need vaccinations, from real, tested vaccines, for illnesses we can address, oh defer that, just as 94 million children worldwide have had to re measles vaccinations. And it will render you positively delirious trying to fathom the “quality” and “quantity” of potential life years lost from that equation.

In the US, informed estimates indicate 40% of people who needed it, didn’t get chemotherapy. And then there are the ripple effects. A surge in depression, opioid abuse, child and teenage suicide attempts, domestic abuse, and more.

So, someone, somewhere, somehow has decided none of this matters, only COVID deaths matter (because we have built a for-profit cottage industry around it), and everything and everyone else is “disposable?”

Citizens want liberties.

How dare they? Let’s harass and arrest them. Government with a clearly “novel” coronavirus, firing blind, even if well-intentioned, takes it upon themselves to decide what work is “essential” (the rest go home, go bankrupt, and say thank you for the privilege of our enforcing our uninformed paranoia). Governmental masters will determine what activities you are “allowed” to do as a free person, what liberties you can be left with. So, stroll outside and get a fine, protest, and be smacked and wrestled to the ground (instances reminiscent of totalitarian state outrages that once we passionately rallied against, and now stooge-like, just avert our gaze from).

Remember, this is not Yellow Fever with a 30% mortality rate. Here, 99.6% recover below 65, and even above 75, 95% recover. So, for the “crime” of wanting your child educated, to be with and comfort a loved one, or earn a living, you can be fined, imprisoned, and physically barred? For an illness virtually no one even knows they have and virtually everyone recovers from? Yes! Andrew Lloyd Weber didn’t know how apt his song title would be in a different context, “Oh What a Circus.”

And even if all the “ascribed” deaths were actual COVID fatalities, that’s less than 3% impact on global mortality since this came crashing onto the screen. How can that plausibly justify the above, when other sources of mortality far more consistent, persistent, and even lethal, leave us relatively unstirred? And none of the silly remedies prescribed here (lockdowns, masking) work. They’ve proven that in cycles of futile, human liberty constraining stupidity.

PCR tests are preposterous.

That’s been demonstrated, so never mind, keep applying them. These tests were rushed through a “peer review” in two to three days, a precursor to shoving vaccines out the door in a fevered rush. The test was based on SARS, as no mapping of SARS-CoV-2 genomically was available. This has never been updated. Repeated requests for purified samples for study or verification continue unanswered.

As Dr. Thomas Binder of Switzerland says, when you only test for one respiratory illness, what a shock if others seemingly “disappear” via a test that is not precise, or specific, and looks via amplification for family resemblances. You can decide what is more plausible. Virtually all influenza and flu disappeared because people “caught” COVID instead? Or they are still there, as I’ve written, “baked in” to the C-19 stats?

Apply the “precautionary principle” to COVID, not vaccines?

So, if the vaccine festival is interrupted, we generate “learned” outrage yet continue to use the same risk-averse principle to terrorize and paralyze the planet from a far from unprecedented viral strain.

Some statistics are now pretty well known re the vaccines. Almost every instance of mass vaccination seems to be followed by a surge of infections and related adverse effects after the first dose. After the second dose, there is a tapering off, through a combination of symptom suppression (which is all the vaccines claim to have been tested for), and possibly just Farr’s law (natural tapering off) after a newly instigated surge. But mass vaccinated Israel still has worse stats than less vaccinated Sweden which has an older population! And there is no demonstration otherwise either that those with mass vaccination have overall better results globally and locally than those that don’t.

When countries temporarily suspended Astra Zeneca (AZ), though its adverse effects are far less (based on incidents reported in the respective databases) than the mRNA “vaccines”, regulators were mum on the rest. When the European medical regulators “cleared” the AZ vaccine, they said the “benefits outweighed the risks” never that it was “safe” per se, in their review.

Causation is very hard to establish as the main complaint related to blood clots, something associated with COVID. Nevertheless, the correlation can’t be ignored, even if not definitive. However, the conclusion is bizarre, because fatality is anyway so low, so how are they assessing the “benefits?”

If you start with a faulty, factually dubious premise like “COVID is desperately lethal” then perhaps you can arrive at that conclusion. If you tell the truth, namely “most people recover” and the large bulk of global deaths came from care homes from not protecting those known to be most vulnerable and tragically herding them together… then the statement of “benefits outweighing the risks” does not seem nearly as beguiling.

And then there’s the irony lost only on the rabidly pro-narrative, that the “precautionary principle” argument for pulling back on certain vaccines is the same as the only philosophical basis asserted by which the entire planet has been plunged into cultural decay, social crisis, stockpiling economic debts that we refuse to think about, and the greatest mass abridgment of human rights globally in half a century.

Given all the collateral damage, mushrooming of child weddings in parts of the world alongside mass starvation and poverty, we cannot sanely be saying we couldn’t have fielded a saner, less blundering, narcissistic, absurd, and thuggish response for a median brand of flu (more dangerous to the elderly with comorbidities than influenza, yet hugely less dangerous to children, and along with them, virtually of no danger at all to other age bands).

So, when we said, “life first,” we meant only the “lives” of those affluent enough or in industries that enable them to be able to work from home and have the less privileged operate things and deliver things and be thrown proverbial farthings to, so they could just about stay solvent and have to desperately fawn over our terrified lunacy. Those people too were disposable, as they could not serve the rest of us while locked up, and had to interact, and travel, and provide “essentials” to the self-aggrandizing, privileged contingent.

Crazy responses.

My God, imagine if these had been our reflexive responses to terrorism, natural disasters, other pandemics (Hong Kong Flu, for example, is cited as having led to 1–4 million deaths, quite a band, but the world population was also much less, and those outbreaks did not follow the trend line for normal mortality as in the current instance, where the bulk of those who sadly passed away, were at or just beyond life expectancy).

Instead of Woodstock and civil rights legislation and a moonwalk in the late ‘60s having been pulled off in the midst of the pandemic, with our playbook, the planet then could just have completely unraveled. Oh, but then, we did not have the means to “click” our way through some semblance of “life”. So, we had to face reality and took the world forward in doing so.

And how did we land on the assumption that durable, natural immunity would not be the deliverance it usually is, this time? When we didn’t know much about C-19, the natural, logical starting point, knowing it’s a coronavirus, would be to have started there.

There were and are four other currently circulating coronaviruses we are advised by Dr. Sunetra Gupta. And as she reminds us, extensive studies of those demonstrate immunity achieved in a similar manner, antibodies are produced to the spike, T-cell responses occur, and you are then protected not necessarily from “all” reinfection, but severe disease and death, almost certainly. Subsequent bouts, if you ever have them, are increasingly mild. And we have about six known global cases of reinfection, and so vaccines conferring greater, longer-lasting immunity as touted, seems (according to a number of specialists), medically and scientifically illiterate.

Why did we opt out of applying knowledge from benchmarking other coronaviruses when we found the response from those who were infected by them, was cross-protective? WHO now has had to change back to the inevitable definition of “immunity” coming from either infection recovery or vaccine, though they had briefly, erroneously, and in egregious violation of everything we know on the topic, indicated immunity came exclusively from vaccines. Really? Everyday human experience, as well as evident medical history, glaringly testifies otherwise.

And the ever quacking (more recently quaking) Fauci, in his bout with Senator Rand Paul recently, suggested that each variant could be “so” unique, that we have to suspend everything we know about virology, biology, and immunology, and revisit it, blank slate, Hazmat suit at the ready. The open contempt this has been met with is hardly surprising, given that viruses constantly mutate, and only now is this “scariant” narrative clearly the “last straw” being grasped at when masks and lockdowns have failed, and rushed through vaccines seemingly cannot commit to their own benefits, and “positive tests” posing as “cases” and “ascribed” deaths even, are nosediving in so many places.

The asymptomatic canard.

Quintessential gibberish here. “Asymptomatic” means “not sick” by virtually any established medical standard. We are all teeming with “potential infections” and viral or bacterial interlopers often bypass us or are successfully subdued by our immune systems having gone onto others. And so, we usually keep some sane distance, try not to hack in people’s faces, stay away when symptomatic, practice good hygiene. Nothing earth-shattering or nerve-wracking here. But Fauci, before he found Mammon, rightly said too, most of the “spread” would be via the symptomatic. So, it always has been, and as best we know, so it will continue to be.

The British Medical Journal has cast aspersions on this mass testing of the healthy, rightly so. JAMA meta-analysis found a seven out of 1,000 chance from the asymptomatic of “some” transmission in homes, no masks, no distancing, no nothing.

Let us note “presymptomatic” is not “asymptomatic” and “mild symptoms” you don’t notice are not “asymptomatic” either, and one wonders about even this number on that basis. But a palpably symptomatic person infected, in the same circumstances, at home, no masks or distancing, infects 200 out of 1,000 times. The differential is dizzying, and certainly not a basis (as most people aren’t living with you on a sustained basis in intimate surroundings) for shutting down the planet.

And regardless, most people recover, overwhelmingly, so once more, why apocalyptic reactions? Either way, logic says, protect the vulnerable, let the others live, earn, keep societies afloat, and very safely (to the tune of 99%+) gather natural immunity and stop the faux “pandemic” (as it’s not proliferating in alarming numbers globally now) in its tracks.

The assault on humanity.

I alluded to this in my last article, Parades and Charades. This smorgasbord of silliness, this pathetic collection of epidemic imbecilities amount to a concerted attack on humanity, not biologically, but paradigmatically, philosophically, emotionally, culturally, in terms of our human appetites, aptitudes, and capabilities.

Human beings aglow with abundance in terms of potential are left pleading for pittances from incompetent political masters. The purpose of such governments is to theoretically do that which perhaps the private sector wouldn’t or couldn’t. Fair enough, but why does it seem part of their charter to ensure these “services” are undertaken so grudgingly, incompetently, and with such unassailable ignorance?

By comparison, it seems shutting down life is a skill they’ve mastered readily. Add to that the technocrats who wish to stop normal interactions and reduce all interaction and commerce to digital platforms that can be overseen and surveilled. Then add big pharma who can “pathologize” every grievance and “somatize” us (oh, Aldous Huxley, were you right!), and we will be left vainly wishing to just be left alone.

And here’s the rub. Elections ensue. If enough people say “stop,” it will.

Politically capitulate and be bought off with idiotic celebrity culture, mass distraction, fake credit, and the infantile desire to be “looked after” by some benevolent overseer, and we will never marshal our sense of ourselves, our convictions, our autonomy, our desire to transcend the dross of mindless commercialism, and truly adventure out again, and fully experience again, and tune into our own inner muse, and be edified by the marvelous diversity of the world.

So, getting “them” to change and suddenly shower us with freedom (already ours) and rights (part of the fabric of our humanity) is silly. Why are we pining for their Damascene conversion? Why not convert ourselves from being offal and step forward as thriving, passionate humans, constructive activists, and agents of history?

There is a multiplier opportunity here if we act and communicate in concert, “Sorry, you can’t have my humanity.”

Aldous Huxley in a different mood:

“The choice is always ours. Then let me choose the longest art, the hard Promethean way. Cherishingly to tend and feed and fan, that inward fire. Whose small, precarious flame, kindled or quenched, Creates the noble or ignoble people (my edit) we are, The worlds we live in, and the very fate, our bright or muddy star.”

Our fates will flow from our choices. It’s high time we gathered our outrage at having been swindled, and gulled, and manipulated, and move on from impotent outrage to courageously and imaginatively taking a stand, for a future more worthy of humanity’s torch.

1,144 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

So, here we are, in the aftermath of aftermaths. A world ruptured. The UK in an economic tailspin. The US dealing with public health meltdowns as mRNA “vaccines” reveal their dangerous inefficacy. Eur

bottom of page