“How very little can be done under the spirit of fear.” – Florence Nightingale (1820-1910)
“But why should we listen to you? Why are you writing about this? This isn’t your field. Why do you bother writing at all?” I get these questions a lot, either explicitly stated or implicitly in the silence of friends who respectfully choose to ignore what I’ve been writing. My response is that I have exactly the same medical qualification as Bill Gates, and if you want to push the matter, I have two more university degrees than he does–though I don’t suggest that a university degree is reason enough for someone to be listened to.
From the beginning of the official reactions to the Covid-19 crisis, I have been suspicious of the sudden willingness of governments everywhere to provoke one public health emergency—through destruction of the economy and the creation of mass hysteria—all for the sake of hopefully alleviating another public health emergency. This never happened before during other pandemics, and never before have governments taken drastic action to save people from other preventable causes of death, such as endemic diseases, hunger, homelessness, addiction, industrial pollution, vehicle accidents, and so on. There have never been boycotts, strikes, or economic sanctions against the nation gave the world the nuclear “sword of Damocles” hanging over its head—a nation that for seventy-five years has refused to give up its nuclear and conventional weapons supremacy. One might think that this dreadful fear imposed on humanity might inspire drastic action to eliminate the cause of it.
Furthermore, never before have I seen such a deliberate effort to constantly emphasize the worst of a situation while neglecting reasons to be hopeful whenever they emerge. There is good news out there about emerging herd immunity and simple, effective ways to prevent and treat infection (hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin, for example). The rate of people dying has dropped dramatically since March 2020, but the level of panic and discord has been maintained. It is known now that people under age thirty have always been more threatened by influenza than they are by SARS-Cov-2—which poses almost no risk to them—yet there is a great uproar when it is suggested by esteemed institutions such as the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto that schools should be open and children should be exempt from wearing masks and social distancing. Medical experts have even pointed out that they cannot find evidence of children passing the disease to older, vulnerable people, but still the fear of school reopening persists, in spite of all the well-known downsides of keeping schools closed.
This pandemic could have been managed with more precision, without the major disruption to all of society. It is enough to make one wonder if there was an unstated agenda behind all of it. But heaven forbid I should say such a thing. People might call me a conspiracy nut, or they might think I’m one of those nasty people with “tendencies toward sociopathy” simply because they question whether wearing masks does more overall harm than good, or whether the best way to defend oneself from a virus involves other methods. But just wait until the economic damage is complete and we see the venture capital vultures coming around to buy up all the bankrupt small businesses. Perhaps then people will see the vaccine needle and the damage done. Things will return to “normal” eventually. Demand for products and services will return, but the previous owners will have jobs under the new management, if they get anything at all for what they lost.
Once again, I’ll devote the rest of the post to one of the thousands doctors and medical and scientific experts who have also gone on the record as being very skeptical of the way the Covid-19 emergency has been handled. So you don’t have to listen to me. This isn’t my field, but you can listen to Dr. Alexandra Henrion-Caude, a geneticist specializing in epigenetics, director of research center Simplissima, member of ethics committee for Île de France (Mauritius), and former research director at France’s INSERM [Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale]. She was interviewed on July 31, 2020 by TVLibertés, a donor-supported independent media organization in France that has 2.5 million monthly views on its channel.
Excerpts from the interview:
Introduction: Ever since Covid-19 came into our lives, we’ve been talking about nothing else. However, many questions remain unanswered today. Sometimes there are questions that people are afraid to even ask. Alexandra Henrion-Caude, former research director at INSERM [Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale], speaks freely in this interview about the following questions. Is the virus from an animal or from human manipulation in a laboratory? What should we think of the increasing emphasis on vaccination around the world? Have conflicts of interest taken away the freedom of scientific inquiry? With a humanity that shines through every word, Alexandra Henrion-Caude cuts through the obfuscating language of the pseudo-specialists of the governmental scientific committee and clarifies the certainties and questions that emerge from this unprecedented crisis. She exposes the global deception and false information, the unjustified media hysteria around counted “cases,” the consequences of containment, the danger of the COVID vaccine and the vaccine crimes of Bill Gates in Africa through his company Moderna. Some will label her another “conspiracy nut” scientist. How many more of them have to speak up to make us realize they should be taken seriously?
Notable quotes from the 49-minute interview:
“I feel terrified when I think about the COVID vaccine.”
“Even if, through the tests, we find there are more and more cases, we must not make the mistake of thinking that we are still in an epidemic.”
“I don’t understand why we are doing so much. One can reasonably doubt the use of the word ‘pandemic’ when we see, at the global level, compared to the equivalent months over previous years, that we have not witnessed the excess mortality that is expected for a pandemic.”
“When we are told that scientists are talking about a second wave, I would like to confront them on this issue. Personally, I have never encountered a bell-shaped epidemic curve followed by a second bell-shaped curve in its wake. I’ve been looking for one, but there are none. We have to stop talking about this idea of a second wave.”
“Annually there are 1.5 million deaths from tuberculosis, compared to 600,000 COVID deaths. You never hear about fighting tuberculosis, even though it is highly contagious.”
“This episode of collective madness is leading us all into a colossally and profoundly damaged economy.”
“I appeal to common sense. It is well marked on each box of masks that the material does not protect at all from COVID. I’m not skeptical about masks. I’m for a proper evaluation of their use.”
“The idea of a mandatory vaccine is being implemented. If you are not vaccinated, you will no longer be allowed to travel, to vote. I do not know how far they will go.”
“I am very unhappy and stunned by the fact that our global intellectual elite has dared to speak out so little. But I understand this because exceptional colleagues are muzzled by conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies. Out of politeness, they do not bite the hand that feeds them.”
“The essence of what it is to be human is being erased in two fundamental ways. The first amid all the chaos, because it is the most obvious, is the richness of communication. The richness that makes me happy to see not only your beautiful eyes but also your smile beneath them. I see your smile, the fact that you’re starting to laugh or not laugh at what I’m about to say. And that’s still very important because when I put a mask on you, I muzzle you, and finally I forbid you from seeing my face and interacting with strangers. This interaction was part of the encounters I’ve had in my life and it’s very enriching to meet and chat with strangers, one of whom I ended up marrying. Fortunately, he and I weren’t wearing masks because I’m sure we wouldn’t have got to know each other if we had been wearing masks. These interactions are important also for small children, to understand smiles and facial expressions. So there is the issue of communication, obviously, but also there is the issue of life itself, the very essence of life. Society will be haunted by the fact that we will soon be exploiting “baby-drugs.” It will soon be possible kill embryos for experiments at fourteen days. The limit has gone up to 21 days, but it could, potentially, go back to 14 days. Does that make me feel better? Certainly not. There is a continuity of life, so that is not reassuring. And there are other aspects of this such as of mixing of species. I have my animal rights friends who are screaming about it. They are the only people who are screaming about the fact that we are making chimeras, that we are legalizing human-animal chimeras, which is an abomination. So we are on a slope on which there is no limit at all to human cloning. That is why I speak of the erasure of what it is to be human, the richness of our unique nature, the richness of communication. I really have the impression that the two are connected.”
END of QUOTES
TVLibertés is infamous in France for being a channel of the “extreme right,” giving voice to supporters of the National Front, and being “pro-Russian,” but Dr. Henrion-Caude doesn’t seem to be saying anything very radical here. Unfortunately, the liberal, moderate media in many countries has abandoned moderate views like hers, so it is only on the alternative right and alternative left media where one can find dissenting opinions on the Covid-19 social upheaval. What a disgrace that it is now so radical to make a simple argument for individual rights and a rational evaluation of emergency measures. Dissidents of the right and left are finding points in common during this crisis, but that does not mean that the self-righteous and complacent in the political center can accuse them all of deplorable tendencies. People on the right and the left may rationally analyze the situation and make similar observations, but they still have widely different ideas about systemic change.