While there are many lessons from the COVID-19 caper that is ongoing, a key revelation is that modern medicine over-treats millions of healthy people to prevent potentially mortal disease or harmful medical events (strokes, heart attacks, cancer, diabetes, viral infection) in just one patient, while subjecting many to avoidable side effects, some which result in life-long debilitation or even death.
The current rationale is to vaccinate 7.9 billion people on earth to prevent 2.9 million deaths that have accumulated over a 15-month period (Jan. 2020 to March 2021), or 3.7 deaths among 10,000 who died with, but not necessarily of, COVID-19 coronavirus. (Data: Worldometer)
COVID-19 deaths over-reported
However, those death figures are questionable.
When co-morbid conditions (age, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, largely occurring among very old individuals, many on their death beds) are removed, which represents 94% of deaths, only ~174,000 have died of COVID-19 alone, or 2 deaths per 100,000.
Even among non-co-morbid deaths, there may have been other respiratory viruses and mycobacteria (tuberculosis), estimated to be 11-35% of cases, that led to fatal outcomes, not solely COVID-19 by itself.
Targeted treatment of individuals with symptoms
Successful treatment of those few non-co-morbid cases would eliminate the need for problematic mass vaccination, which is why targeted cures like the anti-parasitic drug Ivermectin or zinc therapy with an ionophore (assists zinc to enter virally-infected cells) like hydroxychloroquine have been roundly censored and rejected even in the face of convincing evidence.
The cost of treatment in dollars
The difference in dollars is ~$94.8 billion of vaccines @$12/shot to immunize 7.9 billion people versus an online prescription from America’s Frontline Doctors ($90 physician fee) for Ivermectin and/or zinc+ hydroxychloroquine for ~$150 from an online pharmacy ($240 total), only needed for the few patients who need symptom relief.
Many virally-infected patients are asymptomatic and don’t need medicine. They may develop a mild overnight fever, develop antibodies, and their bout with the virus is over.
Based upon a study in Singapore, only ~1% of quarantined subjects who were infected with COVID-19, as affirmed by blood test, developed symptoms. (The notoriously inaccurate PCR nasal swab test, which produces false-positives, was not used.)
If every person on the planet were infected with COVID-19 at the same time and 1% experienced symptoms, that would amount to 79 million people in need of symptom relief X $240 of medicines at US prices plus professional care = $18.9 billion (not $94.8 billion).
However most symptomatic cases in the world could receive treatment for less than $100. Treatment with Ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine is far less expensive in 3rd-world countries.
How can a third-world country come up with cheap remedies and the US bans them?
Medicine for 79 million symptomatic people @$5.00 would cost $395 million, not $94.8 billion.
Recognize that $94.8 billion tab may need to be repeated annually to address mutated variants of the virus just like annual flu shots address new viral strains. Big Pharma is wringing its hands in anticipation of future profits.
Vaccine makers are said to be “showering Congress with cash.” Elected representatives vote for public money to pay for these vaccines and are working hand-in-hand with vaccine makers to coerce Americans to submit to taking experimental vaccines.
Public health agencies are remiss in not developing cost-effective treatment rather than problematic vaccines. Private enterprise in India produced a more cost-effective approach.
The $2.65 COVID-19 kit from India
Ivermectin + zinc + antibiotic
When 95% efficacy is less than 1% efficacy
The 95% advertised effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines requires explanation. That isn’t 95 in 100, it is among those few who are infected, the vaccine, if proven successful, alleviates symptoms by at least 50%, that is all. There is no data being collected at this time that any COVID-19 vaccine saves lives or even prevents disease transmission.
The vaccine prevents infection in 95 out of 100 infected people, but only among the 1% of the population that is infected at any given time. So, immunization can be no more than 1% effective in the population at large. 99% of those vaccinated will not benefit from vaccination. And new strains of the virus negate any proposed benefit.
Let’s say a vaccine alleviates symptoms among that 1% in about 95 of 100 symptomatic individuals. So maybe one-half of 1% benefit. That is 5 in 1000. Not 995 in 1000.
For that imagined benefit, a person feeling symptoms coming on should maybe start a course of zinc lozenges, vitamin D and lysine pills. These measures inhibit viral replication, boost T-cells and help develop life-long immunity.
Is the side effect rate higher than the rate of effectiveness?
If you were told you have less than 1% chance of benefiting from vaccination, and there is a 2% side effect rate, would you elect to immunize?
How many need to be vaccinated for 1 life to be saved?
The number needed to treat (NNT) indicates how many patients must be treated for 1 patient to benefit. According to one study, an NNT of 5 or below is associated with a meaningful health benefit, while an NNT of 15 or above is associated with, at most, a small or even remote chance of a health benefit.
COMPARISON OF VACCINES
The Number Needed To Treat (NNT) For 1 Patient To Benefit
RELATIVE RISK (%) VS HARD RISK (# per 100)
The FDA allows vaccine makers to publicize misleading information about how (in)effective COVID-19 vaccines are.
Researchers complain that only the relative risk reduction numbers are released by vaccine makers, not the difference between placebo and vaccine in hard numbers.
Pfizer’s press release contains a statement about their company: “Breakthroughs that change patients’ lives.” But no data is being collected about mortality! (False advertising)
Investigator Edward Nirenberg writes that if the attack rate of the virus is low or if the effectiveness of the vaccine is weak, far more people have to be vaccinated to show just 1 patient will benefit.
With COVID-19, the attack rate is very, very low at any given time while the so-called effectiveness is better than 9 in 10 among those who do get infected. So, if only data from infected individuals are analyzed, then out of 94 infections among 40,000 subjects, 86 were in the placebo group and 8 were in the vaccine group. The relative difference between 86 and 8 is 90.7%. But 40,000 had to be vaccinated to find these few who were infected (94 out of 40,000 = 0.00235 or ~2.4 per 1000). That is not even 1 in 100, or less than one-percent. Targeted treatment of the 94 who were infected would be more effective.
Allen S. Cunningham MD writes in the British Medical Journal that “COVID-19 trials are unlikely to show a reduction in severe illness or deaths and be no more effective than seasonal flu vaccination that has actually been shown to increase mortality in the elderly.
For example, among 40,000 subjects enrolled in one trial (Pfizer RNA vaccine), there were 86 cases of COVID-19 infection among 20,000 in the group receiving an inactive placebo shot (saline), and just 8 infections among 20,000 vaccinated subjects.
The attack rate was 0.0043 (4.3 per 1000) in the placebo group and 0.0004 (4 per 10,000) in the vaccinated group. The relative risk is 90.7%, but the absolute risk is calculated as 4/10ths of one percent which means 256 individuals must be immunized to benefit 1 patient who averts infection.
Given that the rate of side effects is higher than 1/256, the dictum to “first do no harm” is violated. However, the reported side effects, while transient, are only recorded for the first 7 days following inoculation. Long-term or lingering side effects are yet unknown.
Indirect benefits of vaccination: yes, but…
Nirenberg, a vaccine advocate, maintains there are indirect benefits of vaccination. The more people that are vaccinated the fewer people transmit the virus to others. Herd immunity develops. Nirenberg argues, since modern medicine uses flu vaccines that are only 40-60% effective, there should be no argument about using COVID-19 vaccines that are 95% effective.
But how is herd immunity created when a virus keeps mutating? Vaccines against influenza and coronaviruses are like chasing the wind. Perpetual vaccination while natural immunity is what is really making vaccines look like they are effective. Andrea D. Branch PhD notes that due to attenuation of the anti-viral response the current COVID-19 RNA vaccines reduce symptoms to the point of almost unnoticeable but the infected patient continues to transmit the virus to others. So that means no herd immunity will ever occur. As if by plan, these RNA vaccines foster the perceived need for perpetual vaccination.
Vaccines work; no polio cases in US
Nirenberg argues that since there are no polio cases in the US and none since 1993, the number needed to treat is infinite because there is no transmission and cessation of polio vaccination would result in this pathogen roaring back in a resurgence. That is why polio vaccination is no longer emphasized in the US. But polio is an enterovirus (an intestinal infection). Public hygiene measures (sewers, floor in houses, clean water) have done more to stifle the spread of polio than vaccines.
However, the argument is public hygiene kept very young infants from being exposed to poliovirus when they derived antibodies from their mothers in breast milk and exposure later in life resulted in the polio epidemic of the 1940s-50s.
But even then, over 90% of people infected with polio exhibit mild overnight symptoms (fever) that are often unnoticed. What modern medicine should have done is track down why the few who did get infected developed paralysis.
The missing piece of the polio puzzle may be the trace mineral zinc. India couldn’t eradicate polio till it began to prophylactically provide zinc to young children. Zinc was given to reduce diarrhea but it is essential for the polio vaccine to produce immunity (T-cells).
The world unvaccinated
Even with imagined fear of mortal consequences combined with political, legal and social coercion, only a small portion of humanity has opted for vaccination.
As of early April 2021, only 150,000,000 have been fully vaccinated in the world, or just 1.9% of the world population (63 million fully vaccinated in the U.S. as of early April 2021– where 19.2% of the COVID-19-related deaths in the entire world have occurred). (Source: Our World In Data).
The Spanish flu of 1918 was a paper tiger
The much-feared return of the Spanish flu is contrived. A re-evaluation of worldwide deaths in 1918 from the flu reveals just 17.4 million deaths, not the 50-100 million deaths widely reported. (American Journal Epidemiology Dec. 2018).
Even with downwardly-adjusted death figures for the 1918 Spanish flu (17.4 million deaths rather than widely quoted 50-100 million), COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic has only raised the overall (all-cause) death rate a smidget.
In the greyscale at the very bottom of the chart shown below, there is no significant change in annual % increase in the world death rate. That increase could be solely from lockdown measures, not the coronavirus itself. See chart below.
The death rate charts don’t reveal a pandemic
A United Nations historical chart reveals the world death rate today (2021) is far lower than in 1950 and is only slightly elevated today, over a 70-year period. (See below). What happened to the catastrophic pandemic that was going to wipe out humanity?
No excess deaths
Around 7700 people die in the US every day. The CDC itself says excess deaths in 2020, over and above the historical death rate, emanated from non-COVID-19 deaths. Go figure.
The narrow approach to all infectious disease is universal vaccination, as if there is a “vaccine deficiency.”
Any challenge to the vaccination paradigm is ridiculed and even punished socially and legally (doctors may lose their license; people may be lose their jobs for refusing to vaccinate).
As untouchable science, vaccination has become a dogma, a belief that is held unquestionably. Vaccines, even if hastily fashioned and without preliminary laboratory and animal testing, must presumably be safe.
In light of the millions of contrived excess deaths now blamed on the mutated COVID-19 coronavirus, the current mantra is any unproven experimental vaccine is better than no vaccine at all.
Hope you get the virus and develop natural antibodies
And why would health authorities want to halt transmission, except to create a need for vaccination? Because once exposed and infected, natural antibodies develop and vaccination becomes needless. Once everyone is infected and develops immunity, the vaccine game may be over (except for new mutant strains that arise, just like new strains of the flu virus).
Lockdown keeps the virus from being transmitted and the masses from developing natural antibodies and T-memory cells against the virus. The lockdowns are to create a population that must solely rely upon vaccination.
Natural immunity, which requires zinc to produce T-cells in the thymus gland, and vitamin D to activate the adaptive immune system, are ignored.
Even though the director of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases says he takes 6000 units of vitamin D a day and some extra vitamin C, that example has not been translated into public health policy.
- But you say your health plan is threatening to cancel your policy if you don’t vaccinate?
- Your spouse says you had better get immunized or you are going to sleep in the garage.
- Your employer says no vaccine, no paycheck.
But the whole pandemic is contrived!
Tell your overlords, employers and spouses you will think about vaccination once there is FDA licensure.
But then again, vaccination will only relieve mild symptoms and will not work for the newly mutated strains in circulation. Vaccines are back to chasing the wind.