My take on 'Covid-19'

"Coughs and sneezes, spread diseases."

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1ARAB_enGB463GB464&sxsrf=ALeKk03RSbE1PthVHNin2D5-x08HyFbDWA:1584536607072&q=coughs+and+sneezes+spread+diseases+poster&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjhiuTsiqToAhVClFwKHeowDRkQ7Al6BAgJEEU&biw=1248&bih=844#imgrc=XeQjQ2QcC54QJM

Fact-check: The WHO estimates that in a NORMAL year, there are between 290,000 and 650,000 respiratory deaths globally each year associated with seasonal influenza. So far Corona virus has killed  13,071 !!!!! Contrast and compare.


Once upon a time, and not that long ago, it was thought bad air, from which the term 'Malaria' arose, caused ill heath and premature death. This was not altogether surprising as stinking towns and cities appeared to be associated with regular outbreaks of disease. What was offensive to the nose and other senses, was reasonably assumed to be the cause of the illness.

Not until Pasteur and others in the 19th Century, imbibed with a novel scientific and epidemiological  approach, facilitated by the microscope and petri-dish, was this belief system challenged. Increasingly it was realised that there was a microscopic world of organisms specific to the diseases they caused, and progressively these were identified and catalogued.

The next stage was to look for ways in which the bugs could be controlled so that their harm could be limited, and for methods of treatment either to prevent infection or to remedy it, frequently without knowing how the intervention actually worked. 

Thus inoculation from the time of Jenner's successful Gloucestershire experiment of using Cowpox to prevent Smallpox, was employed effectively and still forms the basis of the global reliance on vaccination, though using attenuated strains of the disease they are designed to prevent. 

Not until the mid-20th Century and the largely accidental discovery of antibiotics, was any effective treatment available to tackle bacterial diseases, once they had gained hold. 

However it is a popular misnomer that the decline in killer infectious diseases, particularly Tuberculosis, were down to treatments such as Penicillin and Streptomycin. In fact it was the economic, social and environmental improvements, harking in fact back to the inaccurate theories of 'malaria', that had already brought infection related deaths down. Anti-biotics saved many lives in essentially a mopping up exercise. 

In extreme bacterial infections they have proved life savers but over-use both for animals and humans, has meant their efficacy has decreased to an alarming extent, rendering both groups vulnerable as never before. Anti-biotics are ineffectual against viruses such as the one being discussed but may still be applied if bacterial complications set in subsequently.

Better nutrition, less contaminated food and water, drainage, better housing, cleaner air, education and leisure, were the keys to a healthier society, not essentially medical or surgical interventions, although of course these helped in extreme cases where prevention had failed.  

One might have expected that with the wealth of experience and expertise gained over two-hundred years or so, we as humans and society, might be in control of health threats, but in fact here we are again reacting hysterically to a new one - the dreaded Corona Virus or 'Covid- 19', which we are assured emanated from Wuhan Province, China, and is now sweeping the world. 

The question we must all ask ourselves is whether it is really as dangerous in historic terms as it is being portrayed and whether all the measures the Government is imposing on the population are reasonable, rational and proportional to the specific risks posed? 

Doctors in these two videos beg to differ: See -  http://veaterecosan.blogspot.com/2020/03/dr-vernon-coleman-explains-hidden.html
http://veaterecosan.blogspot.com/2020/03/stunning-insights-into-corona-panic-by.html

I will leave aside for the moment worrying features that might suggest either this was intentionally facilitated, or subject to manipulation by the media to ensure an irrational mass response. What is clear from the public reaction, the message of fear has hit home, and people have changed their habits and actions without demur. We may wonder why certain, largely western governments, have reacted in the coordinated way they have, whilst others that might be expected to have been worse affected, have taken a much less drastic approach? 

Has our government over-reacted or under-reacted that is the question? If it were to be an exercise in public mind control or an experiment in fundamental behavioural change, it has certainly worked. 

The elderly are being advised to stay at home - only a step away from curfew the Prime Minister has hinted - mass association effectively banned, travel restricted, normal social and occupational intercourse interrupted, business disrupted and share prices devastated. The pound has devalued yet again and the government commits to increasing debt, affecting everyone. The full economic consequences are yet to be evaluated but are likely to be severe. All these things are not without their adverse health consequences, and must be weighed against the viral threat. 

It is quite conceivable that the cure is more dangerous than the disease. In the famous phrase of the letter to the Times in 1854 , "We prefer to take our chance with cholera than be bullied into health." Politicians may have learned the subtle lesson: Nowadays we are not so much bullied as 'influenced' and 'nudged' in the preferred direction, but behind the carrot there is always the stick and the stick is often used for ulterior purposes. 

Nothing it seems is more powerful in changing mass-behaviour than those little words of 'epidemic' or 'pandemic' that hark back to atavistic fears of plague, Black Death or even 'Spanish Flu' after the First World War. Is this a fact known to those that control the world economic system and is it possible it might be used to that end? Who we might ask is actually benefiting from the economic turmoil created by the fear?



https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1ARAB_enGB463GB464&sxsrf=ALeKk01PPlJEo_BBfSZzASY_zjxsvQpolQ:1584536399540&q=plague+of+London+images&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiPsOmJiqToAhXTnVwKHaOfB8AQ7Al6BAgKECM&biw=1248&bih=844#imgrc=w7JA1bflYnBX8M


Once an irrational fear is seeded and continually pressed home by blanket media coverage, it is hard to impose a sense of perspective. In recent years, time and time again with high profile events, only one narrative - the Government's - is allowed to circulate. All other views that question the accepted line are pooh poohed or labelled 'extreme', 'crank' or 'conspiracist'. Increasingly social media companies such as Facebook and Twitter block or interfere with alternative views on the specious grounds that they break their 'standards' or promote 'fake news'. 

There is little doubt that the monopolistic media machine, in cohort with Government, promotes an agreed line, particularly as regards foreign interventions and notable terrorist events, frequently unsupported by the unreported facts of the case. The question arises whether this Corona virus incident and its dangers are being accurately reported? Has the fear and interference with normal life been proportional to the risk posed?

The important issue is not how many die WITH Corona virus, but how many die FROM it. We all carry anti-bodies to viruses, but showing positive usually infers immunity, not the disease. Therefore evidence of Covid 19 antibodies in pre fatal cases, is not proof that Covid 19 was the cause of death.

The Government places great reliance on TESTING and is rolling out a massive programme to do so. Doesn't the test depend on anti-body identification? Anti-bodies indicate exposure to the virus and a degree of immunity. So how does testing help to control the spread of the disease? Symptoms are self explanatory indication that the body is not immune and is responding to infection. The test in those circumstances only confirms the obvious. So really, what is the scientific and social rationale behind testing and how is it supposed to help?

In a normal winter many thousands suffer from the various strains of flu - including Corona virus - and around six hundred deaths associated with it, largely pneumonia, are recorded. So far fourteen deaths have been ascribed to flu-like illness, where there was already an underlying heath or vulnerability issue. 

So we may say with some certainty that the virus infection so far is neither extreme or unusual. Severe cases have it would seem, been limited to the elderly or otherwise ill. In these circumstances it is questionable whether the measures recommended are really justifiable. 

Surely it would be far more prudent to direct prevention to those most at risk, namely the elderly, those with existing bronchial and lung conditions, patients in hospital and residents in an institutional care setting, leaving the rest of the population to natural resistance. 

The flu is uncomfortable and debilitating but seldom for more than a week. The body is very clever at responding to infection in its own way which secures future immunity to that particular strain.

Italy it appears, has so far been the worst country affected with over a thousand deaths attributable to the virus. The reality is somewhat different although indeed Corona virus was a factor. 

Coronavirus is not the bubonic plague. It is the flu. We have always had winter flu and vulnerable people have died EVERY year but never before has the ultra hype been attached to it. Even in worse case Italy, the death rate of even a relatively limited cohort is only 2%, with an average age of 79 and virtually all with one, two or three pre-existing dangerous medical conditions. Overwhelmingly people infected RECOVER. The physical and mental health risks from a lock down of everyone, besides the catastrophic economic consequences, may well be worse than the virus. There is a danger that you are just adding to irrational and unnecessary panic

The following extract of the official analysis comes from: 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says?fbclid=IwAR1ZAHXT7vrKQr_1zgALxTEBfsimRP9c5hdEcKspFTKgfEBNnya34VgOos0

"The average age of those who’ve died from the virus in Italy is 79.5. As of March 17, 17 people under 50 had died from the disease. All of Italy’s victims under 40 have been males with serious existing medical conditions. 

The Rome-based institute has examined medical records of about 18% of the country’s coronavirus fatalities, finding that just three victims, or 0.8% of the total, had no previous pathology. Almost half of the victims suffered from at least three prior illnesses and about a fourth had either one or two previous conditions.

More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease."
The next important consideration is not the number dying with an indication of Coronavirus, but the number in relationship to the NORMAL death rate from influenza type infections, which of course gives a very different picture, as without all the hype, these figures are hardly reported. 

To report them now day by day creates a totally unrealistic picture. Imagine if cancer deaths, or heart disease, or renal failure, or alcohol related liver disease, or accidental deaths were reported in the same way. Wouldn't we all be in a constant state of panic? Who will report the suicides and other deaths directly related to the isolationist policies now being promulgated by government. Sometimes, as in this case, the cure can be worse than the disease!

The stress of being in the hot seat is obviously getting to Boris. You can see it in his face. Although the 1920 epidemic is instructive, it is not necessarily directly applicable. It followed four years of unequalled physical and mental trauma and privation. It seems to have affected a different cohort. Medical intervention techniques were not comparable. 

Somehow this latest virus is already widely spread across the country if the anti-body tests can be relied upon. Only 14 deaths have been attributed to to the virus and it is very unclear whether this was the primary cause, a contributory factor or just that the deceased reacted positively to the test. Clearly these are very different scenarios. Shutting down the country with everyone 'self isolating' may slow the progress of the disease, but viruses have their own momentum and facilitation that is almost impossible to prevent.

The advice to wash hands (for as long as it takes to sing Happy Birthday twice) and not to shake them with others, as a means to control spread is pretty laughable. Remember how many cattle had to be slaughtered to get Foot and Mouth eradicated, and that is not yet an option for humans. And then again contrast the advice with that for the fairly recent 'Novichok' incident in Salisbury, with it was claimed a military grade chemical poison, the tiniest pinprick of which would be fatal. For that the Chief Medical Officer merely recommended 'wet wipes'! 

We continually need to pose the question whether the current advice is appropriate and rational and whether the consequences of it might actually be more dangerous than the threat it seeks to protect us from.

It appears that the virus is a dangerous complicating factor for those with other dangerous illnesses and increases with age. In this context generalised panic and total disruption of economic and social life, with all its concomitant physical and mental dangers, seems to me to be misguided. Rather attention and measures should be directed towards those at risk, if the saving of life is the main objective. Paradoxically the most dangerous locations are those with medical or institutional purposes. In short the old and ill should as far as possible stay clear of the doctor's surgery, care home and hospital!

• 
  

  
  

  
  

International finance is in melt-down. The British government is committing itself to a bottomless pit of compensation to all and sundry, trade and commerce is being disrupted with probable disastrous consequences, people's freedom of movement is subject to unprecedented levels of interference, and all on the back of an over-hyped flu bug epidemic that happens every year. Meanwhile the docile British public take it all at face and are helpfully compliant. Is the virus and the economic consequences being used to force the hand of the political establishment towards more draconian measures and totalitarian government? We shall see.

https://veaterecosan.blogspot.com/2020/03/


My advice (for what it is worth) is as follows:

• All the indications are that the virus alone is not a killer and although symptoms of dry cough and high temperature are uncomfortable, in the vast majority of cases, bed, rest, isolation, nutrition, hydration and if necessary aspirin, will result in full recovery and provide immunity against further infection. This process should be limited to about a week, although some debilitation may last longer.
• The real danger arises when secondary physiological reactions are caused, such pneumonia or complications to pre-existing medical conditions such as diabetes, heart, lung or renal disease, or where patient's immune systems are already depleted by treatments or illness.
• For this reason the elderly, infirm or ill are particularly at risk and require special precautions to lessen the risk of being infected. This is particularly difficult in the hospital or care environment but turns on standard anti septic procedures. Visitors from outside should be kept to a minimum and as far as practical (paradoxical I know) should endeavour to avoid groups, hospitals, institutions, and surgeries unless absolutely necessary.
• Obviously if serious complications arise as a result of infection, hospital admission and treatment will be necessary but this carries with it infection risk for others. There is longstanding experience of isolation hospitals and procedures, although most have closed. This requires urgent government attention.
• Basic hygiene, such as washing hands and using tissues to capture sneezes, in the general population is clearly advisable. For those at high risk, i.e. dealing with infected patient, masks will be used but in the main, obsessive application of these recommendations are fairly pointless. The virus will pass from person in the normal course of events and there is little the individual can do to stop it, other than totally isolating themselves. Those not already immune will contract symptoms to greater or lesser degree, depending on circumstances.
• I see no reason to close all schools or interdict large social gatherings, subject to the vulnerable or those with early symptoms, avoiding them. Indeed there is a strong argument to keep them open so that children and adults gain immunity in the normal way.
• We should all appreciate the devastating economic and social consequences of drastic interference with work and other activity. The point is that people should react rationally and sensibly and realise that this is just another wave of winter flu that happens every year but that for some reason has been hyped up internationally this year out of all proportion to the actual or relative risk. In other words, keep calm and carry on, whilst applying sensible precautions.
• I have heard little or nothing from the government on what individuals can do to bolster their own bodily protections, in other words how to stay healthy and optimise their immune systems. The attitude appears fatalistic and submissive. Vitamin D as in Cod Liver Oil and other sources, has been found to lessen susceptibility to respiratory infections as demonstrated in this video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5yVGmfivAk  Why then, as part of a prevention initiative, are not multi vitamin supplements recommended, especially to vulnerable groups?
• In addition we should also all be alert to and resist the possibility that this crisis has been engineered for an ulterior purpose.

Following from: https://www.criticalcomms.com/news/coronavirus-huawei-installs-5g-network-in-wuhans-huoshenshan-hospital

Huawei deployed a 5G network in the new hospital in Wuhan that was built to manage coronavirus.

Huoshenshan hospital was built in the city in ten days to accommodate a rapid rise in infections, and Huawei installed its 5G network. That included the completion of network planning, a survey, design, fibre installation, base station deployment, and commissioning in just three days.

This meant the hospital could carry out day-to-day functions as well as digital services that are beneficial during an outbreak of an infectious disease – such as data collection, remote diagnosis and remote monitoring. Huawei is also supporting local operators in delivering 5G and guaranteeing high-speed Internet access in another Wuhan hospital.

Writing on Huawei’s blog, Kevin Zhang said, “We aren’t at the frontlines, we aren’t taking the risks that many people are. But ICT still has a role to play. At a basic level, digital connectivity is helping to make the management and containment of the virus more efficient.

“Apps and network connectivity are ensuring that food supplies reach the homes of hundreds of millions of house-bound Chinese each day. Self-reporting of health status, getting information about the condition, and receiving guidance on handling the virus are digitalised in a way that we’ve never seen before.”

Coronavirus is a threat to life, but people are also concerned about the knock-on effects on livelihoods and the economy. Zhang also discussed the situation in Shenzhen, where numerous restaurants, shops, businesses, and schools have been closed since Chinese New Year in late January. People have instead been using delivery apps to have food delivered.

Huawei says it has been helping through providing Huawei Cloud to SMEs for free in China. Its work platform Huawei Cloud WeLink provides a range of functions, including instant messaging, electronic whiteboard for remote collaboration, and mobile approval processes. The video conferencing function lets companies with fewer than 1,000 employees open free online accounts and run real-time online meetings with up to 100 participants.

The Learn Anytime Education Alliance, launched by Huawei Cloud, provides online teaching and learning services for primary and secondary schools, training centres, and higher education. The platform has served millions of students to date, and Huawei hopes that it can help minimise the impact of coronavirus on students across China. Huawei Cloud WeLink is currently serving more than 10,000 healthcare centres, hospitals, government departments, and schools and training centres.

With the wave of announcements of similar measures – such as school closures and limits on public gatherings – being put in place in countries across the world this week, other communities could consider whether similar networks and platforms could help.

Author: Charlotte Hathway

Following from: https://www.presstv.com/Detail/2020/03/05/620213/Coronavirus-was-produced-in-a-laboratory?fbclid=IwAR1KTq28T_Nyb-1g5cX_QfQc6p5nJ20MROHzbuccKJ5fVedJKJnAAdc5CSc

Coronavirus was produced in a laboratory: Former CIA intel officer Philip Giraldi says

Friday, 06 March 2020 2:18 PM

 “In 2005-9 the American and Israeli governments secretly developed a computer virus called Stuxnet, which was intended to damage the control and operating systems of Iranian computers being used in that country’s nuclear research program. Admittedly Stuxnet was intended to damage computers, not to infect or kill human beings, but concerns that it would propagate and move to infect computers outside Iran proved to be accurate as it spread to thousands of PCs outside Iran, in countries as far flung as China, Germany, Kazakhstan and Indonesia,” he added.

“If one even considers it possible that the United States had a hand in creating the coronavirus at what remains of its once extensive biological weapons research center in Ft Detrick Maryland, it is very likely that Israel was a partner in the project. Helping to develop the virus would also explain how Israeli scientists have been able to claim success at creating a vaccine so quickly, possibly because the virus and a treatment for it were developed simultaneously,” he noted.

Israeli scientists have claimed to be close to developing a vaccine for coronavirus that could be available in about 90 days, saying they have developed an effective vaccine against avian coronavirus Infectious Bronchitis Virus (IBV), which is to be adapted soon and create a human vaccine against COVID-19.

John Seaworth

19 hrs · 

 

Bexar county Texas. Over 400 deaths this season for flu or flu like illness in last five months. Most flu illness not reported and I cannot remember putting it on a death certificate for somebody who died of an acute MI while ill with the flu. Likely underreported and the number of flu related deaths is likely to be much higher. 75% are patients over 75 with multiple medical problems. So far, 2 deaths related to COVID. One 80 yo and one 40 yo. 80 yo passed in hospice with other medical problems and listed as COVID death. Three of our flu deaths were in infants. Despite this, half of us were not vaccinated against the flu. Your vaccination helps protect grandma too. If her vaccine was 50% effective, but yours works and she was not exposed, you are both protected. Will we close the country next year for influenza?