In the UK, but also in many European countries, cases of apparent infection as classified by a positive PCR swab test, seem to be going up but deaths aren’t. Why is this?Firstly, in many countries including the UK the number of PCR tests has increased and there’s a very high level of ‘false positives’ creating the impression of more risk. Also, many ‘at risk’ groups are protected by social distancing, a proportion of which have either had the virus and are now immune and some have died. Also, you can test PCR positive but be apparently asymptomatic, or have very minor symptoms because your immune system deals with the viral exposure so effectively. So, the actual number of people getting infected and checking in to hospitals and Intensive Care Units (ICU) and dying remains extremely low. Hence, your actual risk if you’re not in a high risk group and have healthy immunity is very low whether or not you wear a mask. This state of affairs will probably change from October as we enter the flu season but is unlikely to be a big ‘second wave’.
The reason for this is that there is almost certainly much more immunity in the general population than is being given credit for. This is because we don’t yet know how to prove immunity. The first wave of antibody testing (IgG) established that many people exposed to the virus tested negative but were immune. This is a bit like a ‘false negative’ but not because the test is faulty but that it’s not necessarily measuring the right thing. Although not yet commercially available one can have t-cell memory and be immune without being IgG antibody positive. Then there’s all the people who have been exposed to the virus, and developed immunity, whether they suffered badly or barely. Even of those that do test antibody positive a small proportion remained asymptomatic. The science hasn’t really caught up with the actualities yet so it’s still really hard to predict but certainly a degree of immunity now exists in the population at large. There’s a good article on this, headed ‘ why everyone was wrong - The immune response to the virus is stronger than everyone thought’. When rates of flu infection in the winter months do pick up, coinciding with both drops in vitamin D levels, temperature and humidity (viruses survive better in cold,wet climates like the UK in winter months) the death rates will be less because ICUs have got better at treating it – and that’s without vitamin C. To give you a measure on this the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) reported 48% mortality in ICUs at the end of March and 41% at the end of July.
However, the best results are being reported in ICUs using intravenous vitamin C with both steroids and anticoagulants. In the US two such ICU’s have reported 6.5% and 3.5% mortality using 12 grams of vitamin C, plus steroids and anticoagulants. In the UK only one ICU that I know of has used vitamin C (2 grams) and has reported 32.7% mortality – the lowest of all ICUs in the UK. That equates to saving one in five lives. There’s a very good report on this by Jerome Burne headed ‘there is a case for treating virus victims with vitamin C, say ICU experts’ So, why is this being totally ignored by the media and the medical journals? There’s a very good article that shows just how much funding is going into influencing the mainstream media, from the BBC to the Guardian, by the Bill Gates Foundation, headed ‘Journalism’s Gate Keepers’. Bill Gates, of course, is pushing the vaccine agenda and has also funded many key decision makers including the ‘independent’ government agency who decides what can and can’t be used, and said, about treatments from vitamins to vaccines.
The same kind of political influence is happening on the medical journal front. This is no surprise. Most of the main medical journals are part-owned and largely funded by pharmaceutical companies. That is why it is extraordinarily difficult to get vitamin studies published and very easy to get ‘anti’ vitamin studies published. Another example is the randomized-controlled trial on intravenous vitamin C by professor Zhiyong Peng at Wuhan’s Zhongnan University who has so far failed to get his results showing a third less deaths in those given vitamin C versus placebo published despite finishing the trial back in May.
We, that is Professor Iain Whitaker and colleagues in NHS Wales and I managed to get a systematic review entitled ‘Could Vitamins Help in the Fight Against COVID-19?’ published in the international journal Nutrients last month (see https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/12/9/2550) but even so the ‘meaty’ bits on vitamin C got edited out.
It is no coincidence that medical schools the world over teach next to nothing on nutrition and thousands of hours on drugs. It is an intent. Medical schools are linked to medical departments who get their funding from big pharma – funding that buys their influence. This influence helps maintain the sceptical attitude towards vitamins and supplements supporting the mindset that they couldn’t possibly have a role to play in something so serious as this pandemic.
All this influence – media, medicine, governments – paves the golden way for patented and profitable vaccines that probably won’t work very well at all since no previous coronavirus vaccines have and probably will have significant adverse effects that will be obfuscated, denied and any action delayed. We saw this with Tamiflu the anti-viral drug that didn’t work well at all with high rates of adverse effects and Pandemrix, the swine flu vaccine that had to be withdrawn due to the adverse effect of inducing narcolepsy. If big pharma and the Gates Foundation get their way we’ll soon be hearing the cry for mandatory vaccines even before the ink dries on any independent placebo controlled trials or proper post-surveillance of adverse effects. Mandatory medication is a big line to cross.
That is why I signed the parliamentary petition to ‘Prevent any restrictions on those who refuse a Covid-19 vaccination’ which received over 100,000 sign ups in under a month.