Deux fautes stratégiques face à la Covid-19
by Thierry Meyssan
Wednesday 3rd of February 2021
Western countries have succumbed to panic over the Covid-19 epidemic. Tipping into the irrational, they committed two strategic mistakes: confining their healthy population to the risk of destroying their economy, and betting everything on RNA vaccines to the detriment of healthcare, or even at the risk of causing particular disorders due to this new technique. vaccine.
Communication: the Covid and the war
Covid-19 is a viral disease causing the death, in the worst case, of 0.001% of the population. The average age of deaths from Covid-19 in developed states is around 80, with the median age being around 83.
Comparatively, countries at war experience an additional mortality, due to war, 5 to 8 times higher, but mainly affecting men aged 18 to 30. To which must be added an emigration of up to 50.00% of the population.
The Covid epidemic and the war are therefore two situations without common measure despite the apocalyptic rhetoric which confuses them [ 1 ]. Moreover, the response given by those who ventured to this dramatic comparison did not borrow anything, in terms of mobilization, from those of war situations. At most, we needed a mobile military hospital to take some pictures of uniforms in action. Its only real effect was to panic the population and thus deprive it of its critical thinking.
Origin of the communication error
This comparison was made on the basis of erroneous information. A British statistician, whose mathematical models had been used to justify the European policy of reducing hospitals, Neil Ferguson, had in fact predicted more than half a million deaths in his own country and as many in France.
This scientist was unaware that a virus is a living being which does not seek to kill its hosts, but to inhabit them like a parasite. If he kills the man he infected, he dies with him. This is why all viral epidemics are very deadly at their start, then less and less as the virus varies and adapts to humans. It is therefore completely ridiculous to extrapolate its lethality from the devastation it commits in the first weeks of the epidemic.
Political leaders do not know everything. They must have a general culture which enables them to distinguish the quality of their experts in the different fields. Neil Ferguson is one of those scientists who demonstrate what is asked of them, not those who seek to understand unexplained phenomena. His curriculum vitœ is only a long succession of errors sponsored by politicians and contradicted by the facts [ 2 ]. He was ultimately fired from the British Cobra Council ( Cabinet Office Briefing Rooms ), but one of his disciples, Simon Cauchemez from the Institut Pasteur, still sits on the French Scientific Council.
First strategic fault: confinement, a variable for adjusting health policies
Faced with the scourge of Covid, developed states have reacted by decreeing border closures, curfews, business administrative closures, even generalized confinements.
This is a first in history: never before have generalized confinements - that is to say, confinements of healthy populations - been used to fight an epidemic. This political measure is proving to be very costly from an educational, psychological, medical, social and economic point of view. Its effectiveness is limited to interrupting the spread of the disease in healthy families during confinement at the cost of its spread in families where a person is already infected. When containment is lifted, the spread of the virus immediately resumes in healthy families.
As all developed states have gradually restricted their hospital capacity since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, most governments have adopted containment measures, not to fight disease - which they cannot - but to prevent congestion in their hospitals. That is to say, to continue their management system for public health services, governments consider confinement as the only possible adjustment variable. However, the price of these confinements is much higher than more expensive management of hospitals. Above all, the aging of the population in developed states makes the same crisis of hospital congestion predictable every three to four years, the usual cycle of epidemics of all kinds. In practice,
A comparative study from the University of Stanford, published on January 12, 2021, shows that countries that have practiced business closures, curfews and widespread lockdowns, have not ultimately influenced the spread of the disease. disease, which they just postponed, compared to countries which respected the freedom of their citizens [ 3 ].
Contrary to popular belief, the choice was not between the saturation of hospitals or confinement, but between the mobilization, or even the requisition, of private clinics and confinement. All the developed States have in fact, at home, a private health system largely capable of accommodating the overflow of patients.
Origin of the strategic fault
The source behind the containment is the CEPI (Coalition for Innovations in Epidemic Preparedness). This association was created in Davos on the occasion of the World Economic Forum in 2015. It is headed by Dr Richard J. Hatchett. You will not find his biography on Wikipedia, or even on the CEPI website. He had it removed.
This man was the designer of the containment of healthy people on behalf of the US Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld [ 4]. In 2005, this member of President George W. Bush's National Security Council was tasked with adapting the procedures of the US armies to the civilian population as part of a plan to militarize US society. The GI's posted abroad being instructed to confine themselves to their bases in the event of a biological terrorist attack against them, he advocated confining at home the entire civilian population in the event of a biological attack on US soil. This military project was unanimously rejected by US doctors, led by Professor Donald Henderson of Johns Hopkins University. The latter stressed that doctors had never confined healthy populations.
Professor Richard J. Hatchett is the first to draw a comparison between the Covid-19 epidemic and a war, in an interview on Channel 4a few days before President Macron. Of course, the first donation he made by CEPI was for the benefit of Imperial College London. The director of this venerable institution is not a British, but an American, Alice Gast. Besides being a director of the transnational oil company Chevron, she worked with Dr. Richard J. Hatchett in the United States to mobilize scientists against terrorism. She thus supported propaganda work aimed at ensuring that I had written anything about the September 11 attacks. In addition, one of Imperial College's most famous professors is Neil Ferguson, the author of the storytelling curves projecting the spread of the epidemic.
Second strategic fault: the exclusive orientation of Research towards vaccines
Faced with this new epidemic, doctors found themselves without treatment. Western governments from the start directed medical research towards the discovery of suitable vaccines.
In view of the sums involved, they have directed all budgets towards genetic vaccines and closed research on pathology and care.
The use of the RNA-based vaccine technique, chosen by Moderna / NIAID, Pfizer / BioNTech / FosunPharma and CureVac, should not involve classic side effects, but it is not without danger. Until now this technique has been considered with great caution because it affects the genetic heritage of patients. This is the reason why, in the absence of sufficient studies, these companies have demanded that their state clients release them from any legal liability.
Doctors who try to practice their art by treating their patients according to the Hippocratic Oath have been prosecuted by their disciplinary bodies. The treatments they experienced have been ridiculed, even banned, instead of being evaluated.
This is the second strategic fault.
Western physicians who, with rare exceptions, have never faced the demands of war and disaster medicine, have sometimes panicked. At the start of the epidemic, some did nothing during the first symptoms, waiting for the onset of a cytokine storm, of sudden inflammation, to plunge their patients into an artificial coma. As a result, it was more often inappropriate care than illness that killed the first patients. The disastrous results of some hospitals compared to others in the same region attest to this, no offense to the fraternal prohibition of criticism of incompetent doctors.
The pharaonic budgets allocated to vaccines make it necessary not to find a cure without risking bankruptcy of multinational pharmaceutical companies.
This is why an intractable censorship fell on all research in the matter. However, a cocktail of blood-liquefying, immune-stimulating, antiviral and anti-inflammatory drugs is being tested in Asia which cures almost all patients if it is administered at the first symptoms. Similarly, in Venezuela, the medical and pharmacological authority approved a drug, Carvativir, which, according to it, cures almost all patients if it is administered at the first symptoms [ 5
Not being competent in this matter, I will not comment on these treatments, but it is scary that Western doctors are not informed and have not had the opportunity to evaluate them.
In September 2020, the Institut Pasteur de Lille and the company APTEEUS identified a drug that had fallen into disuse, clofoctol, as preventing the replication of the virus [ 6 ]. They were careful not to publicize it so as not to have to face the rivalry of the vaccine industry. Their experiences are now coming to an end. The manufacture of this drug, originally a suppository for children, has resumed in France so that it could be publicized soon.
Moreover, the censorship of non-Western drugs is not only inadmissible because it operates to the detriment of human health, but also because it is the result of unelected authorities (Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. .). The problem here is not to know if these treatments are effective or not, but to free the research so that it can study these molecules to reject them, to approve them or to improve them.
Origin of the second strategic fault
Let us observe incidentally that there is a strategic contradiction between slowing down contamination by the practice of confining healthy people and accelerating it by the generalization of live or inactivated vaccines. However, this remark is not valid in the case of RNA vaccines, which are set to become predominant in the West.
The second strategic fault has its origin in group thinking. Politicians imagine that only technical progress will bring solutions to problems that cannot be solved. Thus, if we succeed in discovering vaccines using a new technique based no longer on viruses, but on "messenger RNA", we should succeed in defeating the epidemic. It no longer occurs to anyone that we can treat Covid and do without heavy investments.
This ideology is that of the World Economic Forum in Davos and CEPI. It is therefore in the order of things that governments do not react when transnationals censor the work of Asian or Venezuelan doctors, blocking the freedom of scientific research.
VOLTAIRE NETWORK
