The Proof is in the Pudding

Three days ago I published a post warning of increasingly tyrannical measures being taken around the world to stifle dissent. I also wrote that COVID-19 vaccinations are actually increasing the number of COVID-19 cases. I didn’t need confirmation of the tyrannical piece of that post. We see it everyday in all our media. But I did go out on a limb suggesting that the vaccines are making the pandemic worse. Yesterday I learned of a study confirming this. However, the title is somewhat misleading. “Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States.”

This reminds me of another study with an ambiguous title I discussed in my book Beyond Mental Illness. Permit me a short detour. In my book, I challenge the existing paradigm of mental illness and suggest the need for a biological based diagnostic system, such as one I humbly propose. Quoting from the book:

“A best-practice for depression had an unintended side effect, death. The “disease” of depression is known to compromise recovery from heart disease. Antidepressants treat the “disease” of depression. Therefore, Fosbøl and others prescribed antidepressants for depression in heart failure patients. The study reported that both tricyclic antidepressants (TACs) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) with beta-blockers increased risk of death, but SSRIs more so. The article concludes, ‘To further clarify this, clinical trials testing the optimal antidepressant strategy in heart failure patients are warranted.’ Didn’t the authors just state that both TACs and SSRIs increase risk of death with beta-blockers? If so, why would researchers want to study this further? Do they want to know which is less effective in causing death, which is more effective? Best practices appear to trump the data. Note the title of the article. It is not “Antidepressants associated with death of heart failure patients.” It is this: “Prognosis in heart failure and the value of beta-blockers are altered by the use of antidepressants and depend on the type of antidepressants.

In other words, “We killed the patients. Now we need to learn how to kill fewer patients.” The dynamics are the same. Psychiatric meds, like COVID-19 vaccines are sacrosanct. The zeitgeist wins.

Getting back to the study:

“At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days. In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people. Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days. The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated”

Did they just say “marginal positive association between being fully vaccinated and having more cases?” Israel, the same country I discussed in my last post, has a massive, not marginal higher number of cases. There goes that zeitgeist again.

Fig. 1

“The sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19 and its adverse consequences needs to be re-examined, especially considering the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the likelihood of future variants. Other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions may need to be put in place alongside increasing vaccination rates. Such course correction, especially with regards to the policy narrative, becomes paramount with emerging scientific evidence on real world effectiveness of the vaccines….” Even though vaccinations offers protection to individuals against severe hospitalization and death, the CDC reported an increase from 0.01 to 9% and 0 to 15.1% (between January to May 2021) in the rates of hospitalizations and deaths, respectively, amongst the fully vaccinated.”

Here is the concluding summary.

“In summary, even as efforts should be made to encourage populations to get vaccinated it should be done so with humility and respect. Stigmatizing populations can do more harm than good. Importantly, other non-pharmacological prevention efforts (e.g., the importance of basic public health hygiene with regards to maintaining safe distance or handwashing, promoting better frequent and cheaper forms of testing) needs to be renewed in order to strike the balance of learning to live with COVID-19 in the same manner we continue to live a 100 years later with various seasonal alterations of the 1918 Influenza virus.”

Notice in their concluding summary how the authors do not go where the facts dictate they go. How about a recommendation that the billion dollar vaccines are counterproductive, that vaccine mandates are counterproductive. How about recommending that cheap early treatments with existing drugs be encouraged? Call it zeitgeist, system determinism, group think, but nobody seems to want to go there. The proof is in the pudding but you have to dig for it.

Mr Biden, are you or your staff reading the literature?