Three questions for those managing the Corona Crisis in Croatia
First of all. Then there are other questions.
Croatian citizens are witnessing the introduction of unprecedented restrictive and repressive measures in relation to the virus corona epidemic. These are measures that suspend fundamental human rights and freedoms and will have profound and incalculable adverse effects on physical and mental health, individual and collective wealth, education, interpersonal relations, and social order and democracy.
The decision makers are either medical experts or referred to. The measures introduced, therefore, are based on the views of the medical profession, namely epidemiologists and infectologists presented in the person of the director of the Croatian Institute of Public Health and the director of the Clinic for Infectious Diseases.
After the initial shock and paralysis of the realization that we were overnight in the Orwellian totalitarian dictatorship, disagreements and criticisms are beginning to emerge, which will hopefully be an introduction to public discussion of current events. And the discussion on any topic, because it is the most important condition for its meaningfulness and fertility, must start from the merits. This is a complex and multifaceted problem, but before discussing all other aspects, its basic subject must be clearly and thoroughly explained. And it is the epidemic itself, more precisely the disease that caused the measures to be enacted.
The authorities in charge assure us that the measures, that override those we had during the war, were adopted with the intention of protecting the health of the population. However, they justify this with only a handful of information about the nature of the disease (which is realistically mild), without clear data, explanations and arguments to substantiate and justify the introduction of such major restrictions and drastic changes in behavior and life.
Therefore, as an individual affected by these measures, but also as a physician on whose behalf they were taken, I ask the competent authorities the following questions:
1. WHAT KIND OF ILLNESS IS IT?
What are the characteristics of the disease caused by COVID 19? How dangerous is it in terms of clinical presentation, complications and mortality? How fast is it spreading and how much of the population is susceptible to it? In short, how relevant is it to public health?
Each season, a whole host of viruses cause a respiratory illness called a cold or flu-like illness. A considerable part of these viruses is not known or identified, because the disease is trivial. Corona viruses are known to cause an average of about 10% of all colds. Like other similar viruses, they change (mutate) and new types emerge. Two of those were pretty dangerous SARS and MERS.
The current COVID-19 virus data show that it is a disease that is not highly contagious (as opposed to measles, for example) and is mostly mild - more than 80% of those infected have the common cold or develop no symptoms at all. Complications, most often pulmonary, occur almost exclusively in elderly and severely chronically ill people, and die, according to the most recent study concerning the Chinese city of Wuhan, 1.4% of those who developed the symptoms. Data (by mid-March) from the Hubei province affected by the infection show that the probability of death from the disease in the general population is extremely low - 0.000054 or 5-6 people per 100,000 inhabitants.
It is a low mortality rate among the elderly and the sick, and especially in healthy young and middle-aged people where it is negligible; in other words, is equal to, or insignificantly greater than, mortality rate than any other cold. Specifically, in every season of acute respiratory illnesses, mortality rates are increased because any viral cold in immunologically injured people often complicates and leads to death. What is important to note here is the eventual increase (excess) of morbidity and mortality, which is different from the usual seasonal statistics. So far there are no such indicators for any country. And experts agree that nothing out of the ordinary is happening this spring.
Italy, more specifically its province of Lombardy, has a higher incidence of deaths and deaths than elsewhere. Specific mortality rates of over 7% are mentioned, but they are unrealistic since most severely tested patients have been tested, and more importantly, the authorities there emphasize that they include all deaths in which COVID-19 is proven, which does not mean that all of them died. . Namely, most of them did not die of the virus but with it; causality was proven in only 12% of deaths. It involved almost exclusively elderly and chronically ill people - according to the Italian National Institutes of Health, the average age of deaths was 79.5 years, with 99.2% having at least one concomitant chronic disease, of which nearly half had three or more illnesses . Of the 355 deaths, only three had no concomitant disease.
Thus, the picture created about the disease in Italy is exaggerated, which does not mean that the disease in the neighboring country was not more serious than elsewhere. And that's probably because of local specifics; Italy has for years had a more pronounced excess deaths from the flu than other European countries. The following explanations are offered - high age of population, higher number of smokers, highest antibiotic resistance in Europe, specificities of the health system and high air pollution and dense 5G network in Lombardy (similar to Wuhan). In Spain, one of the reasons for the increased mortality could be the lack of care in nursing homes; health workers there have admitted they were not prepared to deal with the coronary virus.
Some doctors associate mortality in this epidemic with aggressive therapy - severe patients in China (described in Lancet), as well as in Italy, received toxic cocktails of antibiotics, antiviral drugs (although the WHO's view is that there is no specific drug for COVID therapy 19) and corticosteroids; Chloroquine is also administered, so far without scientific evidence of its efficacy. Respiratory use is common; some research has shown more dying on this device than without it.
In the rest of the world, mortality from COVID 19 is, at least for now, low. According to British epidemiologist Tom Jefferson, it is lower than other virus coronas. Everywhere it is much smaller than the ordinary flu - from several to several tens of times (the flu takes 250,000 - 500,000 lives a year), not to mention other infectious (eg tuberculosis) and non-communicable diseases such as cardiovascular disease and cancer. Therefore, the question arises, what is so special about this cold that it has led those responsible for unprecedented alarm and rigorous treatment, so different and completely contrary to the usual indifference related to colds? It is possible that some similar corona virus circulated last season, but it was not recognized because it was not even sought. I wonder how many more severe patients are in intensive care units these days; is respirator use greater than usual at this time of year? The Croatian medical profession and policy are also obliged to answer the question why, according to a study by the University of Oxford, Croatia is the first in the world in terms of the stringency of measures introduced (the most rigorous in relation to the number of infected).
2. WHAT IS THE CORRECT DATA ON THE NUMBER OF INFECTED, DISEASED AND DECEASED?
The information about infected and deceased coronary viruses presented to us is not reliable. The number of infected people is higher than what we see - the infection often does not cause any problems, so such people are not tested (unless they have been in contact with patients). Not many people with cold symptoms are tested, some of which certainly fall on the corona. Dr. Marty Makary of the Johns Hopkins University of America says that for every positive one tested, probably 25-30 still have the virus. One study, a model made by Oxford scientists, suggests that over the past two months, as many as half of Britons have been infected with COVID 19. It should also be noted that virus infection depends on the population being tested - not the same in the general and severely ill population.
To assess the significance of the disease, more than the infected would speak to the number of patients (because not all of them were sick). This information is not presented to us. But if it were available, it would be imprecise. The disease has no specific symptoms by which it can be recognized and separated from other respiratory diseases. There are doubts that, on the basis of the clinical picture alone, cases are introduced into infected statistics. However, even the evidence of a coronal virus does not mean that it caused the virus; COVID can only be a side effect (colonization) and a disease caused by another virus or bacterium. Macedonian infectologist Velo Markovski believes that the human body does not respond to this virus at all. That the disease, as a result of the body's immune response to the virus, is caused by a specific cause,
Furthermore, the test (PCR) used to prove COVID 19 in the swabs of secretions taken from subjects was novel and not adequately evaluated. He does not know his sensitivity and specificity, which means he is not reliable. Chinese scientists found that nearly half of the respondents gave false positives. The main American institution for public health (CDC) is accused of conducting testing with a completely inadequate test. New types of tests are in the making, this time even less reliable. Thus, the test currently in use often detects what is not a coronary viral disease, and does not seek or measure what it probably is. The question is, what is the purpose of such testing, ie. how much that makes sense at all.
When it comes to the number of deaths, it is interesting that most deaths in France are not proven Chinese, but some other type of virus corona. It has already been mentioned that coronary virus deaths are often identified with coronary virus deaths, not just in Italy. The evidence of COVID in a deceased patient with heart failure or cancer does not mean that he was killed by the virus, but rather by his underlying illness. The extent to which the virus contributed to the fatal outcome, and whether and under what conditions it could be considered a cause of death, is poorly defined and highly stretchable; according to dr. Wolfgang Wodarga in seriously ill and dying people, this court is impossible to bring. The tendency to attribute deaths unjustifiably to the virus gives, of course, a false high mortality from the virus.
Thus, the figures we track daily in the media are only approximate. Their importance, especially in real time, is limited and debatable. Until they are accurate and reliable, the daily bombardment of infected and deceased figures should be considered not only inappropriate and unnecessary, but a form of psycho-emotional abuse.
3. WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE MEASURES INTRODUCED?
When measures are taken that have a major impact on people's lives, they must have firm and clear footing. Competent authorities were required to provide scientific or empirical evidence of the effectiveness of epidemic control for each individual measure adopted.
In their public address, they referred to the recommendations of the World Health Organization. In a document titled "Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan" (2019 Novel Coronavirus: Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan) issued in February this year to end the COVID epidemic 19 and mitigate its effects, the WHO estimates that it is "very high risk ”for China and“ high risk ”for the rest of the world. When he talks about the potential health impact, he cites "many unknowns." The measures it recommends refer to the Chinese experience of introducing stringent measures, but their effects were not yet known at the time of publication of the document ("It will be important to continuously evaluate the effectiveness of the measures"). For example, a traffic section states that restricting the movement of people and goods can be ineffective, even harmful, however, in circumstances of uncertainty, it may temporarily be useful to obtain time for other activities and limit the spread of the disease. "In such situations, before implementing the restrictions, countries need to make risk and benefit-cost analyzes to determine that the benefit outweighs the damage." .
This and other WHO related documents do not cite any scientific literature to support the evaluations, views and recommendations.
But in mid-March, WHO and several other organizations, including London-based Imperial College, published a paper in the form of a scientific paper entitled "Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions to reduce COVID19 mortality and healthcare demand). In a mathematical model, a larger group of authors estimated that 81% of the UK and US population would be infected and 510,000 would die in the UK and 2.2 million in the United States if they did not take restrictive measures and behavioral change.
They offered two strategies - a) mitigation, which slows the spread and reduces the effects of the epidemic; and b) curbs, which stops the spread of the epidemic, the number of infected persons to a low level and maintains it until further notice.
Restraint is recommended as a better option. It involves rigorous and multiple restrictions, such as maintaining social distance for the whole population, the isolation and quarantine of infected persons and their families, and the closure of schools and universities. These measures should be maintained for 18 months during which time the vaccine will be made available.
So, instead of recommending observational, lenient measures, or protecting and isolating vulnerable groups in the circumstances of many uncertainties and uncertainties, the authors of this influential work propose aggressive and indiscriminate practices that represent large-scale social engineering. And this is based on an unreliable, theoretical mathematical model. In whose report the words "assume", "predict", "estimate" and "expect"), or derivatives thereof, have been mentioned no less than 67 times. Nonetheless, work has been instrumental in tightening restrictive measures in the US and Britain. It influenced the British government, which abandoned the previous view that free spreading of the virus in the population is desirable because it raises the collective immunity and ability to adapt to the population and makes it more prepared for future confrontation with the virus corona.
In conclusion, it should be emphasized that in this serious situation as a society, and where journalists are particularly important, we must insist on answering these basic questions. Only then can we begin to discuss the rest. In order not to prevent repression and destruction to continue indefinitely, or to relinquish in order to re-emerge with a new, even more "deadly" virus and new, even harsher measures - compulsory vaccination, for example.
For years, I have sought from the competent authorities evidence for the benefit of the vaccine and evidence for the need for mandatory vaccination of children in Croatia. And for years I have not received an answer. And as hypnotized parents, parents go over this knowledge gap and expose their children to a process for which we are not provided with basic credible information.
Let us not be hypnotized in this case either. And that because of an illness about which there is much ambiguity and which does not seem significantly more dangerous than the common cold, let us accept a social experiment with inevitable destructive consequences. And to turn the nonexistent corona crisis into a very real and devastating one.
The responsible medical profession and the state administration are not guided in their decisions by fear and uncritical assumption of others' orders, but by rational and comprehensive deliberation motivated by the interest and well-being of the people entrusted with their governance. We clearly and decisively ask the necessary questions and demand precise answers. Let us realize that this may be a crucial moment for the survival and future of our entire civilization. It is the responsibility of each of us.
I don't know to what extent this could be true, or what he bases his claim on.
Do not use steroids, it makes this worse. Push out to your urgent cares to stop their usual practice of steroid shots for their URI/bronchitis.
Could not grasp all details because the doctor speaks so fast - for me... But I find it strange (bizarre) that high ferritin levels are in the mix, as many of us have hemochromatosis or prophyria, etc... As it has been mentionned for other reasons in the transcripts, now another can of worms??? Keeps on giving....
Could you please provide the source of this information?Guys, it looks like they are saying patient zero who brought covid to China was an American service lady by the name of Maatejie Benassi who got it from her uncle who worked at Fort Detrick.
The Chinese want this lady tested. The US is obviously not playing ball
The team has found that the genome sequence of the coronavirus sampled from the first confirmed case in Brazil is different from the one acquired from the second confirmed case in the country. Further, the two complete genome sequences were different from the patients in China.
These people are all working together in these Vaccine stuff - the below is on Fort Detrick and how they are mixing in with all the above in this Vaccine stuff.
My days.... Here is a page if you want to volunteer for the first trials on Covid run by these types... Your Moderna Inc, government and all sorts
Emory University in Atlanta will begin enrolling healthy adult volunteers ages 18 to 55 years in a Phase 1 clinical trial of an investigational vaccine designed to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The trial, supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases...www.niaid.nih.gov
Plus oh my days I just ran into this forum post
US soldier Maatejie Benassi is believed to be patient 0 in Wuhan ,Chinadaily Forumbbs.chinadaily.com.cn
The English-language Chinese state-run newspaper Global Times has been accused of spreading an unfounded conspiracy theory that a U. S. military cyclist was the source of the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19.www.forbes.com
Conspiracy theorist's allegation that US cyclist was coronavirus Patient Zero of Wuhan outbreak sweeps ChinaClaim prompts calls for US servicewoman who competed at October's Military World Games in China to be tested for virusroad.cc
It looks like YouTube has deemed this conspiracy too dangerous it took down the original video!!! HOLY MOLY!
Christopher Lyden QUOTE Yes, Italy has an elderly population. But why are they dying predominantly in Norther Italy, not throughout the country? I was discussing this recently with Italian friends from Bergamo, the epicenter of COVID deaths. Then I read, and they confirmed, that 40 days Before the deaths began there was a meningitis scare in Northern Italy. The government response? Vaccinate every older person with the Meningitis vaccine and the vaccine for pneumococcus pneumonia! All the elderly population (only in the North) received immune-weakening vaccines weeks before getting exposed to corona viruses. They are dying by the thousands around Bergamo, in Lombardy (Norther province), but not much at all elsewhere in Italy. NOT a coincidence. But no one is discussing this. Share this. UNQUOTE
Saw this on FB. Needs to be investigated to find out if it is true:
Here is a follow up by Ken suggesting that what is going on might have similarities to the takeover of the Nazis but this time on a much broader and effective scale. He draws parallels to the times shortly before and after the Nazis took over and that this Virus hysteria presents a perfect tool for just such a thing. In fact it seems to be more effective then anything else that was tried by fascists/elites before. He also reminds the listeners how germans used to wonder and ask their grandparents how it was back then when the Nazis sized power and how it felt and makes the point that now we basically know it because what is going on is pretty similar. In a brilliant sort of exaggerated and hyperbole way he is describing what is happening and how it feels to people both verbally and with his body language. He also describes the Milgram experiment and what he learned from books about the tendency of humans to follow authorities among other things.
He also draws attention on how effective and easy the whole campaigning has been so far and how scary and incredible it is how many people are now actually begging for more government control, imprisonments, rules and punishments. Remember how many people nowadays seem to think (especially germans) that something like back in Nazi germany could never happen today and that they certainly wouldn’t be part of the Nazi machine. Well yeah right.... Famous last words. It is in german:
Niall did a pretty good job digging out those details earlier in this thread, and then, the Croatian scientist was saying about asbestosis as a main co-morbity in some of these regions in Lombardy. It could have been the perfect storm, so to say.