27th November 2020
Italy’s performance has been a big mystery – and I’ve not had time to study it. This is a placeholder post on this topic.
Italy has been a mystery but Wolfgang Wodarg has provided some helpful clues (this is from May 2020).
I'm also compiling a blog post on Italy's covid experience – do send me any relevant info you find.
— Sanjeev Sabhlok, Pope @Church of Reason & Liberty (@sabhlok) November 23, 2020
INFO COMPILED BY IRENE ROBINSON
Medic’s own experience in Bergamo – citing potential increase of hospitalisations of cardiovascular patients and heart failure to be expected following pandemic. Also limitations within own hospital system:
This has a slide that shows timeline of events in Italy
Deaths in nursing homes labelled as “the silent massacre” due to mishandling:
Forced prioritisation of young over elderly in Italy:
26th November 2020
Someone asked me to do a similar analysis to my Sweden analysis, for the UK.
It is crucial to recognise that we can’t do similar analysis for ANY other country. Any such analysis will be far more complicated.
The following extract from my email response to this person outlines the reasons why we can’t simply extrapolate total mortality data for other countries.
One can do similar analysis for other nations like the UK but that will require more sophistication than simply projecting the data.
That’s because the data of these other countries is contaminated by additional deaths caused by lockdowns (that are crimes against humanity in my dictionary). These are not just additional heart attacks and the range of other deaths I’ve alluded in my ICC complaint. Instead, there is a high likelihood that lockdowns also increase covid deaths because resources are misallocated (this has happened in Victoria in Australia where resources were not allocated to aged care centres – and so, around 800 elderly died unnecessarily from or with covid). So we’ll need a customised analysis for each nation based on what exactly the government of that nation did.
Sweden is a superb control for analytical purposes – and we should stick to it – since it did not have coercive lockdowns. In summary, it will take advanced analytical skills to comment on non-Swedish total mortality data: any quick analysis will likely be misleading.
BBC has done one such early report: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54976362. it estimates that the UK has had 70k additional deaths in 2020 over a normal year, to date. But here’s the problem. I’m quite certain that most (at least more than 70%) of these additional 70k UK deaths are due to lockdowns and ill-targeted policies- not from covid.
The UK deaths data are available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales and time permitting I’ll have a look – but it will need a serious research project to disentangle various causes (including the crimes committed by governments). This needs to be a major multi-national project with the best expertise the world has on statistical and policy analysis.
25th November 2020
This is an extract from the current draft of the book I’m writing on pandemics.
In this book I will not be discussing or debating the merits of lockdowns. I have discussed that issue at length in my complaint to the International Criminal Court. In that complaint I showed that there is no basis for a lockdown even for Ebola, let alone for a flu-like virus. Even if this was Spanish flu, there would be no basis to impose a lockdown.
In this book I want to discuss something much more sinister – the massive fraud being perpetrated on mankind by the science establishment (and I include both universities and private companies here) in collusion with politicians and the media.
The covid scam is not the only such example. Vast swathes of science have been captured by criminal scientists. The climate science fraud has been going on, unabated, for over three decades. But at least there are a number of good writers and commentators who provide alternative views to keep that scam at least under some check. In fact, if people simply read the IPCC’s technical reports they will find out that, like Bjorn Lomborg repeatedly emphasises, there is simply no basis for the exaggerated climate claims made by corrupt scientists. The data do not even remotely support the claims of “runaway” global warming.
But there are very few people who educate us regarding pandemic scams. As a result, many otherwise diligent people, like me, who study every issue in considerable detail before forming an opinion, have been taken by surprise.
The last such fraud was the 2009 swine flu “pandemic” but because it did not involve mass disruption of everybody’s life through lockdowns and mandatory masks, its learnings slipped below the radar. Most of us did not pay attention to the academic debates and ignored the lessons the scientists were supposed to have learnt from the swine flu scam.
But having personally suffered from the crimes being perpetrated by politicians and scientists in 2020 in the name of the covid pandemic (which it is not: i.e. not a pandemic), it has become necessary for me to study this matter. Just like we disbelieve “climate science” we must learn to disbelieve “public health science”. In fact we must learn to disbelieve all science and check out everything. We must never “follow the science”. We must “do” science, and that means applying a blow torch to every claim, demanding proof to back up every assumption. Where is the virus? Where is the proof that it causes the disease? What is the PCR test actually measuring? And so on. Proof for everything!
This much is clear as daylight now that the science establishment has been deeply criminalised, like a Mafia. Yes, we have a few honest scientists, people who are committed to principles, but they are getting as scarce as a hen’s teeth.
Most of this corruption has to do with the fact that government funding has intruded into scientific research which was earlier managed by the private sector (i.e. we the citizens in our private capacity). Private science necessarily had to be authentic because someone could profit only based on the truth. Falsehoods did not take anyone very far.
But the government’s intrusion into science changed everything. Terence Kealey’s analysis (Sex, Science and Profits) warns us against government funding of science. The fact is that today, universities, companies and government agencies collude behind the scenes to decide what is to be funded. This collusion operates like a Star Chamber: a black box which no one can pierce. This collusion should send shivers down our spine. The incentive structure for science no longer has anything to do with the truth but everything to do with politics, power and money. The biggest pile of research money doesn’t go to scientists who are looking for the truth. It goes to scientists who are best able to mislead the people and politicise issues through their “friends” in the media and big business.
Corruption in science has reached astronomical proportions. The very survival of mankind is endangered by this criminal “scientific establishment” that has captured taxpayers funds and is now also able to get the government to point its guns (police) against anyone who raises any question. This is not any conspiracy theory: it is just the plain and obvious nature of incentives that are embedded into the current government funding system for science. The truth is the greatest fatality in this process. But also, as we have seen, our liberty itself.
22nd November 2020
This is a placeholder post – I’ve started this publicly today (22 November 2020) but expect this project to take many months to finish. In the meantime, I’ll be uploading a current version ever few hours or days and you can come by to fetch the latest version.
I would like to invite people to join this work – it will be a public domain project in perpetuity. Contributors will be acknowledged for their effort and time. You can contribute in any way you wish – by writing text, by editing it, by providing links, and so on.
Here’s an associated spreadsheet created by Irene Robinson. Irene has also provided many initial links to relevant documents.
The audience for this book is the common man.
I’d like the earlier chapters to provide a readable summary. The later chapters can have more detail. I don’t mind if this book goes into 100s of pages – with all detailed papers/ references provided in full to the curious reader who may not have time to search for them.
This book should serve both as an introduction and as an encyclopedia – a one-stop-shop on this topic: researchers, media, the governments should all benefit from this book.