It is clear that many are now waking up to the realisation that much of the Government narrative on the pandemic was wrong and that many of the COVID-19 preventive measures did more harm than good. Both candidates for U.K. Prime Minister have recently admitted that the lockdowns were a mistake. In particular, many of the unsuspecting public who submitted to the vaccinations are now beginning to question the need for them. Vaccinations have not fulfilled the claims of manufacturers and governments and few in mainstream science seem to have anticipated the frequent mutations which render the early vaccines largely useless. More are now starting to question the unexpected, and sometimes fatal, conditions which some of the vaccinated mysteriously develop soon after vaccination. Others simply have ‘vaccine fatigue’ and can’t be bothered going for any more jabs.
Furthermore, there are those who know something about immunology and can see that natural immunity from having contracted the virus sets them up with excellent protection (not just antibodies but also the longer-lasting T cell immunity) against many future variants. They have also long recognised that you cannot stop a highly infectious virus spreading, as was acknowledged in the evidence-based U.K. pandemic plan, capriciously jettisoned by Boris Johnson and his ‘expert’ advisors. They can also see that these experts’ recommended means of avoiding the virus (masks, lockdown, social distancing) have not worked, and we are now seeing the results of the ‘Zero Covid’ policy in China, where successive cities are being placed back in lockdown. Meanwhile news is beginning to creep out of the success of natural remedies as well as banned drugs such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, which can protect against the infection and keep it from becoming serious.
Interestingly, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), which provided the official recommendations on lockdown, masks and social distancing throughout the pandemic, followed slavishly in the U.K. and elsewhere, has now quietly changed its guidance to advocating personal responsibility by stating that “Persons can use information about the current level of COVID-19 impact on their community to decide which prevention behaviours to use and when”. They are now recommending the individual risk assessment and risk-based countermeasures which many of us have been advocating from the start of the pandemic, since the elderly and those with co-morbidities have always been at much greater risk than healthy children and young adults. Indeed, much of the revised CDC guidance could have been cut and pasted from the Great Barrington Declaration. It’s just such a pity that so many of us have been attacked, cancelled and sacked from our jobs for saying this from the beginning.
Although there was much talk early in the pandemic of achieving ‘herd immunity’ through infection or vaccination, we no longer hear anything about this, since it has become clear that vaccination does not bring about herd immunity; achieving herd immunity through infection would negate the validity of the vaccine roll-out. Of course, since vaccinations were introduced, it has become impossible to assess natural herd immunity but there is no reason to suppose that it would not have been achieved in the absence of vaccines; there is plenty of evidence of pre-existing immunity from other coronaviruses.
It’s not clear exactly how many of us are completely unvaccinated; figures range from 5 million (official Government sources) to over 23 million (other sources). This matters, because over 23 million represents around 35% of the U.K. population, a not insubstantial proportion. Interestingly, this 35% is the exact same proportion as the official number of unvaccinated globally. So much for the unvaccinated being a tiny and insignificant minority! We can all remember how governments around the world have tried to stigmatise the unvaccinated as pariahs for the last 18 months because of their ‘selfishness’ in refusing the vaccine, thereby placing others at risk by potentially transmitting COVID-19. Yet all the evidence indicates that vaccination does not prevent transmission of COVID-19, a point that even the vaccine manufacturers now acknowledge. The CDC has also tacitly acknowledged this by stating that “prevention recommendations no longer differentiate based on a person’s vaccination status because breakthrough infections occur”. It even grudgingly allows for natural immunity by stating “persons who have had COVID-19 but are not vaccinated have some degree of protection against severe illness from their previous infection”. And who, after at least two and a half years of exposure to a highly transmissible virus, has not had COVID-19, even asymptomatically? So why bother getting vaccinated at all?
So what are the experiences of the unvaccinated? A recent study led by Dr. Rob Verkerk of the Alliance for Natural Health International, evaluating survey results from 18,500 completely unvaccinated respondents to a survey by the international, U.K.-based, Control Group Cooperative, found that reasons for avoiding COVID-19 vaccination included distrust of health authorities, governments or the pharmaceutical industry, insufficient evidence of safety or effectiveness and concerns over potential injuries or adverse reactions. Over 70% relied on natural remedies for prevention and treatment, while two thirds also used repurposed, generic, off-patent drugs such as ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, sales of which provide no revenue to the world’s leading pharmaceutical companies.
So were these unvaccinated individuals all Covid-free? No, and that was neither expected nor desired – one cannot build up natural immunity without contracting the infection. Among those who contracted COVID-19 during the reporting period, only 0.4% reported hospitalisation (as either in- or out-patients). Since this was an international cohort, it is not possible to compare this figure to national hospitalisation rates, which are often not available. However, a rate of 0.4% is sufficiently low to suggest that the unvaccinated have not placed a significant additional burden on healthcare systems. While there have been plenty of media headlines mentioning the ‘pandemic of the unvaccinated’, the actual evidence for this was always thin on the ground and has since evaporated altogether. This is particularly so when bearing in mind that anyone who contracts COVID-19 within two weeks of vaccination is labelled ‘unvaccinated’. Instead, a recent study showed that, in the U.K., there are an increasing number of COVID-19 cases, hospitalisations and deaths among the vaccinated elderly.
Furthermore, the vast majority of hospitalised Control Group respondents reported no use of natural remedies or repurposed drugs in hospital, reflecting the mainstream belief that these products don’t work and should not be used in a healthcare setting. This meant that any ongoing benefit they might have experienced from these remedies was immediately curtailed. Although not mentioned by the authors, another factor potentially affecting severity of disease in this cohort of individuals who believed in self-care, was the likely lower incidence of comorbidities (obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease etc.), which have been found to predict more severe disease.
Disturbingly, the respondents reported a high incidence of mental health issues. Much of this is likely because of the legalised sacking from jobs due to being unvaccinated (reaching a peak of 29% in respondents from Australia and New Zealand), the personal hate campaigns experienced by many and being a target of governmental victimisation (57% to 61% in Australia, New Zealand, Western and Southern Europe and South America). Other useful nuggets from the survey included the fact that those who reported never wearing facial coverings or masks also experienced the lowest incidence of suspected or confirmed COVID-19, indicating once again that masks are ineffective in stopping a virus.
This paper was originally placed with the preprint server ResearchGate but was removed on the grounds that “the content may expose [ResearchGate] to harm, potential legal liability, or [was] in breach of [its] Terms”. Happily, Dr. Verkerk’s team and the Control Group Cooperative persevered and the analysis and interpretation, in revised and even expanded form, has now been successfully peer-reviewed and published in the much bolder International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research. An excellent commentary on this study has been put out by the Alliance for Natural Health.
Dr. Rachel Nicoll is a medical researcher, lecturer and writer.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Who isn’t sceptical now? Today’s YT publication by J Campbell is worth watching (about 27 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckD6qL76uA
Covers the same ground as the article above, in effect.
I struggle to forgive that man for the damage he has done. Although he is leading the normie flock along his gradual u-turn to the ‘conspiracy theorists’ (intelligent) views.
He appears to be demonstrating the fact that millions have been conned. He’s also shown what can be done to express certain things on that publishing system!
This isn’t simply a case of ‘who to blame’.
If the lab leak theory hadn’t been so ruthlessly suppressed in early 2020 then pressure could have resulted in the lab releasing data on the nature of the work being done and the stage they’d reached by that point. This could have helped medical experts find effective treatments (and exclude treatments that would go on to be seen as harmful), and could have informed about the effectiveness of NPI.
It is likely that both the lab/China and Western authorities are partly responsible for large numbers of deaths that could otherwise have been prevented.
Didn’t the west instruct the research and pay for it?
Yes, Fauci himself funnelled money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology via Peter Daszak of Ecohealth Alliance. That’s why the email trail is so revealing, he knew even while he was lifting the carpet to hide the evidence.
I think I know what you mean but it rather looks like they knew all the NPIs were worse than useless, that the “vaccines” were not safe and effective, and that alternative cheap treatments existed that were ignored/suppressed. That’s kind of irrespective of any theory or knowledge about the origins.
You have to be seriously gullible and naive to believe that a novel virus, which suddenly appeared in a Chinese city where there just happens to be a Government establishment carrying out virus research, was the result of a natural evolutionary process.
The desperate attempts to suppress and silence the “conspiracy theory” just made it even more credible.
And especially gullible and naive when one of the first actions was to remove the database covering Wuhan’s activities from view
So now we know the “virus,” modified ‘flu,came from a lab – no shit Sherlock. We are now expected to believe that some of the primary culprits for what developed were acting in haste. Let’s not forget that “Pandemic” plans had been drawn up across the world for just this sort of scenario, who then decided to overule these plans and let loose all the Agenda 21/30 plans?
Ok we know but the story ATL has that part to confirm. I suppose it does usefully illustrate the sheer second-rankness of the likes of Fauci and Farrar. Who pushed their buttons and gave them their orders which set in train the murder and mayhem of the last three years? What holds have TRPTB got over these people? At least it confirms they are being controlled.
Were the lab leak theatrics merely the Trojan horse to introduce mRNA jabs and the ensuing dark agenda?
Throwing a few scientists under the bus and maybe a few politicians for gain of function shenanigans will be all it will take. And the vaccine uptake opportunity to end all vaccine uptake opportunities will have worked very nicely. Except for your gran is course and the future of mankind.
Great article.
“Where the self-delusion stops and conscious lying begins is hard to say. The Fauci emails show us scientists simultaneously assessing evidence ‘objectively’ and aiming at a particular conclusion.”
Fauci emails do indeed ‘show us’ a discussion. But this layer of communication would always emerge eventually and was probably constructed with a little care.
Farrar’s burner phone chats, illegibly transcribed by his wife, in the wee small hours would perhaps shed more light on the subject. Burner phone discussions are probably burner phone discussions for a reason. The Biodefence network is entirely indifferent to your granny and even their own.
Yes it’s entirely possible a lot of this content was consciously constructed with posterity in mind.
https://amzn.to/3gtYDer
And what happened to the ominous pangolin, the data, the thesis etc.?
Another most useful article from Will. His efforts to delve into the mindset of the email correspondents are laudable and revealing.
The Fauci emails show us scientists simultaneously assessing evidence ‘objectively’ and aiming at a particular conclusion. They appear to be trying to convince themselves as much as anyone else, and they may well have succeeded in convincing themselves …
Were I an historian reading these documents I would probably conclude the same.
If it was lab leaked and we don’t know how/where exactly it happened, it’s bound to happen again, for sure. How many of those bio labs are around the world including in some dodgy or war-torn places.
It’s not an accident (no pun intended) that air travel is one of the safest means of transport, but rather a result of meticulous learning on mistakes. Will we learn anything from COVID? or only that it has made some companies and people filthy rich and that governments can exercise any level of authoritarianism they want.
It might be a rhetorical question, but you could tot up the number of national governments that have state funded departments, like the Ministry of Defence (or War Department). No doubt a fair bit of it has been privatised as well. However, the concept of using a human or animal virus as a weapon doesn’t seem credible, with the one in question being so indiscriminate – unless it really was intended to wipe out certain age groups.
it doesn’t have to be a bio weapon to cause catastrophic damage directly or indirectly (through NPIs). Wuhan lab is a non military one although I read there is evidence Chinese military were doing some ‘research’ there.
Agree a virus is probably not the best choice to use as a weapon as it’s too indiscriminate and difficult to control.
There didn’t have to be a virus. Think about it, lots of colds and ‘flu about, ok we will call it C1984. Ramp up the (already bought) presses and let’s go with probably the biggest and most malignant propoganda exercise in world history and to what end?
“Vaccines.”
‘The only way out of this and a return to normal’ is for everybody to roll their sleeves up.
Ok.
Bingo and Depopulation is on its way.
Quite simple really.
I hold a view that C19 was slightly more dangerous than flu for certain categories of people (old or/and very sick), but it was definitely deliberately amplified out of all proportions to exercise control and to rush experimental vaxxes and treatments to make money. but this is just me.
Great article. Another somewhat enormous question is how Klaus Schwab managed to conceptualise a 280 page book called Covid 19: The Great Reset a few weeks after “the first hazy reports of a coronavirus outbreak were emerging” when he first apparently had the idea, then write, publish, print and release it by the end of June.
I don’t know much about the publishing industry but this seems a historically remarkable, some might say impossible achievement.
“new light on what they have been conspiring about”
Will said the C word. Is that allowed?