The Secret Cabal Within A Government Agency Who Decide What Information You May Have Access To

Throughout the pandemic this blog and its sibling publications have been doing our best to expose the official narrative on Coronavirus, Lockdowns, Masking and vaccinations as bollocks. Like the rest of the resistance movement in alt_media we knew we were up against the powerful forces of globalism and corporatism, the vast resources of the business communities and the influence of academic institutions and media. But unless we can convince enough people to wake up, question everything and discover that modern neo - liberal thinking is all bollocks civilisation is lost.

Ofcom A Group Within A Group Decided For Themselves What You Could See And Hear With Covid 19

Graham Lear

This is a story of how a secretive Ofcom team ‘off-aired’ the questioning of ‘official’ Covid-19 rules, this small number of unnamed bureaucrats make Orwell’s Big Brother sound tame.

Some 18 months after the Coronavirus hit our shores, we are beginning to see signs that the authorised Covid narratives are finally being questioned by our media. In today’s Sunday Telegraph, for example, a scientist advising SAGE on ventilation requirements in supermarkets has openly ridiculed the wearing of face masks, describing them as no more than “comfort blankets” that do little to reduce the spread of Covid particles. (See below.) It will be interesting to see if Dr Axon is invited onto the BBC to discuss this.

TODAY I turn my own High Definition cameras onto Ofcom, the independent Government agency that controls what we can all see and hear on our televisions and radios and what they pick up is a scandal of epic proportions.

First of all, about Ofcom and Covid

Ofcom says: “We make sure viewers and listeners are protected from harmful or offensive material on TV, radio and on-demand.” Yeah right LOL You could have fooled me with the absolute filth we see on our screens.

However, we are getting off point.

Since the arrival of Covid-19, Ofcom has given itself the task of controlling all Covid content and it immediately made it clear that only the official narrative was expected from broadcasters. It has produced a total of five Covid-specific bulletins, issued an unspecified number of letters to broadcasters, has conducted nine investigations of ‘harmful content’, and has imposed statutory sanctions on seven programmes.

Eamonn Holmes fell foul of Ofcom, as the regulator put down a strong marker early on

In a sign of the level of Covid control that would be exerted by Ofcom on broadcasters, the alarm bells will have gone off in newsrooms across the country when the respected broadcaster Eamonn Holmes was chastised by Ofcom for making what most people would consider a perfectly reasonable comment on ITV’s ‘This Morning’ programme.

On 13 April 2020, Eamonn Holmes briefly responded to comments from ITV’s Consumer Editor Alice Beer ridiculing what she described as fake news. He said. “The only thing I would say, I totally agree with everything you are saying but what I don’t accept is mainstream media immediately slapping that down as not true when they do not know it’s not true.

No one should attack or damage or do anything like that. But it is very easy to say it is not true because it suits the state narrative. That’s all I would say as someone with an enquiring mind.”

Mr Holmes was forced to retract the following day, to head off an official sanction from Ofcom.

Ofcom went ahead with its investigation anyway. Whilst it could not find that its rules had actually been broken, it criticised Mr Holmes anyway on 20 April, saying.

We considered that his statement had the potential to cause harm because it could have undermined people’s trust in the views being expressed by the authorities on the Coronavirus and the advice of mainstream sources of public health information.”

On a personal level regarding Eamonn Holmes, Ofcom said.

“In Ofcom’s view, Eamonn Holmes’ intervention was therefore particularly ill-judged.”

Ofcom Assessment Decision, 20 Apr 2020.

Ofcom’s Covid bulletins and the secret team that decides what you can watch

Ofcom has issued five Covid Bulletins in the last 18 months. The only Bulletin with any mention of actual Covid content is the first one, on 23 March 2020. All others reference the material available on the Ofcom website here.

1. Coronavirus update to broadcast licensees (PDF, 217.9 KB), №424, 12 Apr 2021

2. Coronavirus further update (PDF, 208.0 KB), №414, 09 Nov 2020

3. Coronavirus further update (PDF, 309.0 KB), №403, 26 May 2020

4. Coronavirus further update (PDF, 239.9 KB), №401, 27 Apr 2020

5 Coronavirus (PDF, 198.6 KB), №399, 23 Mar 2020

Ofcom’s control of content comes under what they call its Standards and Audience Protection (“SAP”) Team. The SAP Team sits within the Broadcasting and Online Content Group. In answer to a Freedom of Information request on 30 October 2020, Ofcom declined to say who is in the SAP team, nor did it give any indication of how many they are, and nor did it provide any information about the qualifications for getting this role.

Meanwhile in the print media, here are excerpts from the Telegraph article ridiculing face masks

Dr Colin Axon, who has advised the government on minimising the risk of cross-infection in supermarkets, accused medics of presenting a “cartoonish” view of how tiny particles travel through the air. He warned some cloth masks that have gaps that are invisible to the naked eye but are 500,000 times the size of viral Covid particles.

“The small sizes are not easily understood but an imperfect analogy would be to imagine marbles fired at builders’ scaffolding. Some might hit a pole and rebound, but obviously, most will fly through,”

As told to The Telegraph. The full article is available here (paywalled).

Television — and to a lesser extent radio — still exerts a considerable influence over people’s lives. It remains, despite the Internet, most people’s primary source of news each day. It is therefore perhaps reasonable to say that some basic standards are desirable and that there should be some form of control to ensure the public can access good quality news programming.

This, however, is a very long way from what Ofcom has been doing, particularly since Covid appeared. It seems that Ofcom decided very early on that only the official, orthodox version of the Covid story should be broadcast. It underlined this in the high profile report it made on Eamonn Holmes, a respected and much-loved presenter and journalist. If that didn’t alert news executives not to go near anything questioning the Government and NHS orthodoxy, I would be very surprised.

In Eamonn’s case, all he did was to say that alternative views and reports should not be slapped down out of hand. Another way of putting this is that Eamonn Holmes simply re-stated the job of every journalist — to question and report. Something I have noticed very few do now. I would say most of the ones we see just report what they are told to report.

Eamonn, old son, there’s no question that you were right and Ofcom was wrong

Sadly, Ofcom only seems to agree with the “no question” part. It does not agree with questioning the official narrative. Despite all the worthy and woolly words on its website about freedom of speech, Ofcom clearly does not believe in it.

Ofcom specifically cautions against broadcasting any words that “do not align with the advice of the NHS or other public health authorities, and statements that seek to question or undermine the advice of public health bodies on the Coronavirus, or otherwise undermine people’s trust in the advice of mainstream sources of information about the disease.”

Ofcom brings to mind the late Henry Ford’s classic statement on his early car production models. “You can have any colour you want as long as it’s black”. Mr Ford’s policy suited the earliest days of mass automotive production over a century ago. I suggest it is wholly inappropriate for the nuanced world of news reporting in the 21st Century.

For Ofcom — the statutory regulatory authority for broadcasting in the United Kingdom — to determine that only the official line on Covid should be followed and broadcast, and that effectively it should not be questioned, is a disgrace. The irony, of course, is that no broadcaster would run a report like the one above. They will be far too worried about upsetting their controllers at Ofcom’s HQ at Southwark Bridge Road, London.

I will end by asking you all a simple question. Is it right that a few unnamed bureaucrats effectively have their hands on your remote control?

[ Sources: Ofcom ]

RELATED:

 

 

 

Extinction not relellion
Extinction rebellion? If the media, academia, cultural institutions, corporations and celebs are all amplifying your message, and the government is literally enacing your demands you're not the rebellion you are the establishment

Facebook Negotiating Multibillion-Dollar US Fine As UK Labels "Digital Gangsters"
Facebook and its executives were labeled "digital gangsters" by a UKParliamentary inquiry into the social media giant's abuse of users privacy. The company should immediately be subject to statutory regulation the report published at the conclusion of the 18-month investigation by the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport  parliamentary committee recommended ...
also read at Boggart Abroad

The Yellow Vests, Deplorables and Gammons Are Here To Stay

The Gilets Jaunes (yellow vest)movement, which began as a Facebook group for dissatisfied French drivers almost a year ago and since the Macron government proposed a hike in fuel taxes for petrol and diesel cars spakred the first street protests, has mushroomed into a people's rebellion against globalism and corporatism. It has worried the French establishment and succeeded in forcing the usually arrogant and imperious President Macron into offering what globalist fellow travellers in mainstream media call major concessions from the government,

Censorship Comes To The Internet - Goodbye Free Speech
Censorship has always been a sore point in democratic societies, without the right to free speech democracy does not exist. So why have we for years now been willing to tolerate the efforts of Silicon Valley high tech corporations and their left - leaning (that's left as in Chairman Mao or Pol Pot,) been willing to tolerate this.

Leaked Documents Reveal Facebook’s Biased, Convoluted Censorship Policies

December 31, 2018
Since the 2016 US Presidential election, when the phrase ‘fake news’ entered the vernacular, Facebook has employed thousands of human moderators tasked with identifying what is and is not acceptable content to be posted on the censorious social media website. These humans were not employed to replace the ‘Artificial Intelligence’ automated moderation system the nerdocracy … Continue reading

---

While we are tearing Facebook apart, don't forget to look at our Google being evil catalogue

---

E.U. Parliament Members Call for Facebook Audit, Competition Law Overhaul
Though not widely reported (well the proceedings were boring,) a number of parliamentary hearings in the European Parliament and the elected assemblies of member nations, have investigated Facebook’s user data breach scandal involving the data thieves Cambridge Analytica. European Union MEPs, including those from Britain have called for a full audit of the social media company and an overhaul of E.U. competition law.

In Private Meeting, Top Facebook Exec Threatened News Outlets That Do Not Coperate With Censorship Policy

During a meeting held behind closed doors last week, Facebook's Campbell Brown, according to several people present, warned news publishers that refusal to cooperate with the tech behemoth's efforts to "revitalize journalism" (i.e. ensure nothing is published Zuckerberg does not like,) will leave media outlets dying "like in a hospice." Initially reported by The Australianunder a headline which read Work With Facebook or Die: Zuckerberg"

Facebook Bans All Content On Vaccine Awareness
Authored by Mike Adams via NaturalNews.com,
Just as we warned would happen, the tech giants are now moving aggressively to ban all speech that contradicts whatever “official” position is decided to be “the truth” by the corrupt establishment. This week, Facebook announced it would block all content on Facebook that questions the official dogma on vaccines,

Facebook's Censorship Drive Backfires As Advertisrs Dump Platform
 Mark Zuckerberg's bid to set up Facebook as official censor by appointment to The New World Order has backfired spectacularly as major brands are feeing the social media giant's advertising platform. CrossFit just announced they are shuttering their Facebook and instagram ad campaigns due to censorship, which filters out conservative and libertarian flavoured content and promotes only far left propaganda.

Facebook Negotiating Multibillion-Dollar US Fine As UK Labels "Digital Gangsters"
Facebook and its executives were labeled "digital gangsters" by a UKParliamentary inquiry into the social media giant's abuse of users privacy. The company should immediately be subject to statutory regulation the report published at the conclusion of the 18-month investigation by the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport  parliamentary committee recommended ...
also read at Boggart Abroad

Have Mainstream Media Seen Through Facebook And Google At Last Mainstream media has seen through Google and Facebook at last, it seems. For years print and broadcast news have heaped praise on digital media while tech corporations like Google and Facebook censored content and filtered their rivals pages out of search results.

Anti-Trump Fascists Plan "Democracy Spring"
Following their apparently delusional belief in the "success" of Tuesday night's violent protests, anti-Trump groups are plotting "Democracy Spring" threatening "drama in Washington" with the "largest civil disobedience action [in the USA] of the century."

France Moves to Make ‘Conspiracy Theories’ Illegal by Government Decree
I have little time for people who yell 'conspiracy theory'. These emotionally crippled, intellectually retarded, conformity addicted, delusional, left leaning, low - information sucklers of Nanny State's bitter pap might fancy themselves the voices of reason but in reality they never think anything through. German politician calls on facebook to abolish free speech
A German politician has given the clearest indication yet that the political elites of the free world are ideologically much closer to Adolf Hitler's National Socialists than the social liberalism they claim to support. Free speech is the basis of all liberal democracy. Heiko Maas, the German justice minister has has written to the Facebook it removes “xenophobic and racist” anti-migrant posts from its website and apps., has written to the company to demand an urgent review of its policy over hate messages.

Free Speech Is Being Murdered By The Media And Left Wing Authoritarianism
Without free speech there is no democracy. Without democracy there is no freedom. But all over the developed world free speech is under attack from politically correct politics. It is time to start resisting, do not believe the propaganda published by mainstream media, question everything and make up your own mind. as The Buddha said, "Believe nothing you read or are told unless it agrees with your own experience and common sense."

Farage Reckless Facing Rabid Left Wing Fanatics
Following the defection to UKIP of Conservative MP Mark Reckless, who yesterday shocked the media and political establishment (everyone else knew it was on the cards.) by announcing his switch from con to Kipper from the podium at the closing session of UKIP's conference, the Kippers latest recruit and his new leader yesterday faced angry but ineffectual protests

Farage Reckless Facing Rabid Left Wing Fanatics
Following the defection to UKIP of Conservative MP Mark Reckless, who yesterday shocked the media and political establishment (everyone else knew it was on the cards.) by announcing his switch from con to Kipper from the podium at the closing session of UKIP's conference, the Kippers latest recruit and his new leader yesterday faced angry but ineffectual protests

Obama administration ‘blocking' information from the press
Uncovering information that should be available to the public has become increasingly difficult under the presidency of Barack Obama, an Associated Press bureau chief says. In some cases, it surpasses the secrecy of the George W. Bush administration. The White House's penchant for secrecy does not just apply to the federal government, according to AP's Washington bureau chief, Sally Buzbee.

Western Hypocrisy In Reporting News about Ukraine And Russia
The opening paragraph of a CNN report on the latest developments in the crisis in Ukraine illusrate perfectly the hypocrisy of Western media in the way they cast Russia as the danger to world peace and America as bringer of freedom and democracy. In fact in the crisis over the US attempt to draw Ukraine into NATO the positions taken by the USA abd Russias are the opposite of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.

Vaccine passports are a conspiracy against freedom

 Turning Britain into a 'papers please' society is a slippery slope that ought to worry us all

For almost the whole of the past twelve months, as we poor, downtrodden ordinary mortals have struggled to hold on to our sanity through months of house arrest and wave after wave of project fear propaganda aimed at scaring us into getting vaccines that may kill us but will not make us immune to a disease which will not kill us unless we are older than Methusala and have more diseases than a medical dictionary. Many of us felt the government we elected to serve us had turned its back on its benefactors and dedicated itself to boosting the profits of the Big Pharma cartel and vaccine makers like Pfizer.  spite of government

Eventually the vaccine roll out began, and in spite of government ludicrous government claims that take up of the vaccine was almost 100%, the public response was a long way short of wildly enthusiastic which is why the government  resorted in turn to even more ridiculous levels of scaremongering, bribery, coercion, peer pressure and finally outright bullying to force the determinedly sceptical to accept the killer vaccine (right now, in July 2021, if you are reasonably fit and have no long term heath problems such as diabetes yor chances of dying from the vaccine are greater than of dying from COVID.

As one of their coercive tactics earlier this year the government had threatened to introduce "vaccine passports", digital documents which we would have to present in order to gain entry to sports stadiums, music venues, theatres and cinemas and even pubs, thus ghettoizing the unvaccinated. This was not the first echo if Aktion T4, the genetic cleansing programme introduced in 1930s Germany during the course of this pandemic.

Half the government took against this illiberal, undemocratic and downright fascistic idea and were at pains to quash rumours that domestic vaccine passports would ever feature in English daily life. Again and again, vaccines minister Nadhim Zahawi ruled out the introduction of a system he branded “discriminatory”. “That’s not how we do things. We do them by consent,” he said back in February.

Prime Minister Johnson dismissed the idea too too, before inserting the mandate into his risibly named “Freedom Day” address, delivered from his official country residence, Chequers while he was self isolating having been pinged by the NHS' far from infallible Track and Trace app which detected he had been within spitting distance of someone who had had a cold (another coronavirus variant) in the past 20 years or something. From September, double vaccination would be required to enter nightclubs and other “crowded events”. “Proof of a negative test will no longer be enough.” It also proved that his Government’s aims now stretch beyond merely “protecting” the NHS during a pandemic and into the realm of long-term coercive control,  of the entire population in the style made popular by Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Chairman Mao, Fidel Castro and Pol Pot to name but a few.

Those who warned against vaccine passports; whether on grounds of discrimination, ethics or practicality, were repeatedly told not to worry, that the whole thing was a madcap conspiracy theory. Even now, many are convinced the move will never happen – it’s just a bluff to get the young double-vaccinated, copying Emmanuel Macron’s interventions in France.

In order to implement this policy, the Government must know that it would encounter serious resistance from Parliament, plus legal challenges from various libertarian pressure groups. An unholy alliance of far left, extreme right and dead centre pressure groups oppose the idea; Corbynites, Greens, Lib Dems rank and file Tories and most significantly perhaps, Nigel Farage, the most successful political campaigner we have seen in the past 30 years.. There is even a growing faction of Conservative backbench Members of Parliament led by former leader Iain Duncan Smith determined to vote down the plan. These people, the nearest thing we have to an official opposition as Kier Starmer's Labour Party continues trying to pull off the trick of simultaneously sitting on the fence and riding two horses with one arse. The Conservative COVID sceptics have supported the Government so far; but only on the understanding that things like domestic Covid passes wouldn’t happen. So ministers may never follow through on this cynical ultimatum for fear on seing Boris booted out of office by his own party. 

But what an appalling way to run a country; lying to the public, treating them less as rational citizens than credulous lab rats to be “nudged” (or coerced or bulllied) by the biggest pstop the world has ever witnessed, into compliance. It may achieve short-term aims, but at a price: the erosion of trust.

If however, and ministers really intend to push this policy through – and previous examples of governments not so much moving the goalposts as relocating the entire fucking stadium suggest we should take this rush towards fascism seriously because the consequences are unthinkable. For the first time ever in a democracy, we would be granting domestic privileges based on a kind of social credit system; transforming the relationship between individuals and the state to that of slave and owner.  Limp - dicked little losers with tablet computers would have total power over every aspect of our lives. Personal liberty would be a folk memory. Everyday activities like shopping or sitting down to have a coffee with friends would become privileges contingent on a complience with an experimental medical procedure. Free association would no longer be a right or a personal choice, but a government-conferred privilege. It would usher in a “papers please” mentality previously unheard of in peacetime.

No 10 has provided worryingly little detail so far suggesting this is another knee jerk raction by those tinplate tyrants on the government's scientific advisory panel, SAGE, but the PM’s intervention raises big questions. How would such a scheme operate, and where would it end? 

History has shown time and again that having snatched powers during an emergency, governments are reluctant to relinquish them, inded it usually requires blood on the streets before the tyrants get the message. It seems highly unlikely that after assembling a vast surveillance and certification infrastructure at great cost, it will simply be dismantled when the “crisis” is over. More likely it would be used for further data gathering and sharing schemes; perhaps even ID cards, something Britain has always resisted.

What would stop it being extended to other health conditions? Once Covid status is relevant, why not other infectious diseases that kill thousands each year, like flu? Will the state, or whichever firms run the app, be able to track our movements? And if so what would be the fate of those who do not have the app installed on their smartphone or do not even have smartphones. 

 * 

The existing NHS app already demands personal data with no relevance to users’ vaccination status. How would they protect our privacy, a pertinent question given the NHS’s history of data breaches? Throughout the pandemic, legislation has come into force without debate or parliamentary vote. How quickly this too could become Orwellian, with little proper scrutiny.

It’s a slippery slope. Nightclubs are an easy starting point; young clubbers bopping until dawn will be low priority to most, but once established, the principle will become harder to resist elsewhere. Places of worship, weddings, and busy pubs might not be far behind. Just yesterday Tory minister Paul Scully insisted Covid passes would never be required for pubs, only for No 10 to issue a speedy contradiction, confirming it “hadn’t been ruled out” – so watch this space.

As a low-risk 20-something, I was pleased to get my first jab last month, seeing it as a small (and voluntary) contribution towards herd immunity. But I certainly didn’t do so in order that a small, unvaccinated minority could be excluded from the public sphere or browbeaten into compliance. And to what end? Though vaccines are brilliant at protecting against hospitalisation and death, they are less effective at reducing transmission – hence why some double-vaccinees have since been reinfected. We’d be upending social and public health norms on an illogical premise.

The Government may not be staging some grand conspiracy to turn Britain into a Chinese-style social credit system, zealously monitoring citizens’ behaviour to permit or prohibit basic rights. But sometimes weakness and incompetence can send a country in a similar direction. People may not care about clubs, or the young who frequent them. But they should care about a paradigm shift that undermines all our liberties.

RELATED:

London Freedom Rally:Tens Of Thousands In Trafalgar Square To Protest Against  Covid Passports
As the UK government stepts up its push to introduce vaccines passport which would exclude unvaccinated people from many basic, everyday activities,  huge crowds gathered in London and other UK cities to protest against lockdowns, track and trace apps, coercive measures to force unwilling people to accept experimental vaccines, mask mandates, social distancing and all the other oppressive and fascistic measures imposed by Boris Johnson's authoritarian government in their so far futile campaign to halt a viral illness that only makes ill or kills people who are very old, very ill or both.

 

Coronavirus: Why everyone was wrong

 via Back to Reason ( backtoreason.medium.com )

Reproduced here in the public interest.

The immune response to the virus is stronger than everyone thought

Back to Reason

Jul 2, 2020·12 min read

The original article was published in the Swiss magazine Weltwoche (World Week) on June 10th. The author, Beda M Stadler is the former director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Bern, a biologist and professor emeritus. Stadler is an important medical professional in Switzerland, he also likes to use provoking language, which should not deter you from the extremely important points he makes.

This article is about Switzerland and it does not suggest that the situation is exactly the same globally. I am advocating for local measures according to local situations. And I advocate for looking at real data rather than abstract models. I also suggest to read to the end, because Stadler makes crucial points about testing for Sars-CoV-2.

Warum alle falsch lagen

Das Coronavirus verzieht sich allmählich. Was hat sich in den vergangenen Wochen eigentlich abgespielt? Die…

www.weltwoche.ch

Why everyone was wrong

The coronavirus is slowly retreating. What actually happened in the past few weeks? The experts have missed basic connections. The immune response against the virus is much stronger than we thought.

By Beda M Stadler

This is not an accusation, but a ruthless taking stock [of the current situation]. I could slap myself, because I looked at Sars-CoV2- way too long with panic. I am also somewhat annoyed with many of my immunology colleagues who so far have left the discussion about Covid-19 to virologist and epidemiologist. I feel it is time to criticise some of the main and completely wrong public statements about this virus.

Firstly, it was wrong to claim that this virus was novel. Secondly, It was even more wrong to claim that the population would not already have some immunity against this virus. Thirdly, it was the crowning of stupidity to claim that someone could have Covid-19 without any symptoms at all or even to pass the disease along without showing any symptoms whatsoever.

But let’s look at this one by one.

1. A new virus?

At the end of 2019 a coronavirus, which was considered novel, was detected in China. When the gene sequence, i.e. the blueprint of this virus, was identified and was given a similar name to the 2002 identified Sars, i.e. Sars-CoV-2, we should have already asked ourselves then how far [this virus] is related to other coronaviruses, which can make human beings sick. But no, instead we discussed from which animal as part of a Chinese menu the virus might have sprung. In the meantime, however, many more people believe the Chinese were so stupid as to release this virus upon themselves in their own country. Now that we’re talking about developing a vaccine against the virus, we suddenly see studies which show that this so-called novel virus is very strongly related to Sars-1 as well as other beta-coronaviruses which make us suffer every year in the form of colds. Apart from the pure homologies in the sequence between the various coronaviruses which can make people sick, [scientists] currently work on identifying a number of areas on the virus in the same way as human immune cells identify them. This is no longer about the genetic relationship, but about how our immune system sees this virus, i.e. which parts of other coronaviruses could potentially be used in a vaccine.

So: Sars-Cov-2 isn’t all that new, but merely a seasonal cold virus that mutated and disappears in summer, as all cold viruses do — which is what we’re observing globally right now. Flu viruses mutate significantly more, by the way, and nobody would ever claim that a new flu virus strain was completely novel. Many veterinary doctors were therefore annoyed by this claim of novelty, as they have been vaccinating cats, dogs, pigs, and cows for years against coronaviruses.

2. The fairy tale of no immunity

From the World Health Organisation (WHO) to every Facebook-virologist, everyone claimed this virus was particularly dangerous, because there was no immunity against it, because it was a novel virus. Even Anthony Fauci, the most important advisor to the Trump administration noted at the beginning at every public appearance that the danger of the virus lay in the fact that there was no immunity against it. Tony and I often sat next to each other at immunology seminars at the National Institute of Health in Bethesda in the US, because we worked in related fields back then. So for a while I was pretty uncritical of his statements, since he was a respectable colleague of mine. The penny dropped only when I realised that the first commercially available antibody test [for Sars-CoV-2] was put together from an old antibody test that was meant to detect Sars-1. This kind of test evaluates if there are antibodies in someone’s blood and if they came about through an early fight against the virus. [Scientists] even extracted antibodies from a llama that would detect Sars-1, Sars-CoV-2, and even the Mers virus. It also became known that Sars-CoV-2 had a less significant impact in areas in China where Sars-1 had previously raged. This is clear evidence urgently suggesting that our immune system considers Sars-1 and Sars-Cov-2 at least partially identical and that one virus could probably protect us from the other.

That’s when I realised that the entire world simply claimed that there was no immunity, but in reality, nobody had a test ready to prove such a statement. That wasn’t science, but pure speculation based on a gut feeling that was then parroted by everyone. To this day there isn’t a single antibody test that can describe all possible immunological situations, such as: if someone is immune, since when, what the neutralising antibodies are targeting and how many structures exist on other coronaviruses that can equally lead to immunity.

In mid-April, work was published by the group of Andreas Thiel at the Charité Berlin. A paper with 30 authors, amongst them the virologist Christian Drosten. It showed that in 34 % of people in Berlin who had never been in contact with the Sars-CoV-2 virus showed nonetheless T-cell immunity against it (T-cell immunity is a different kind of immune reaction, see below). This means that our T-cells, i.e. white blood cells, detect common structures appearing on Sars-CoV-2 and regular cold viruses and therefore combat both of them.

A study by John P A Ioannidis of Stanford University — according to the Einstein Foundation in Berlin one of the world’s ten most cited scientists — showed that immunity against Sars-Cov-2, measured in the form of antibodies, is much higher than previously thought. Ioannidis is certainly not a conspiracy theorist who just wants to swim against the stream; nontheless he is now being criticised, because the antibody tests used were not extremely precise. With that, his critics admit that they do not have such tests yet. And aside, John P A Ioannidis is such a scientific heavy-weight that all German virologists combined are a light-weight in comparison.

3. The failure of modellers

Epidemiologist also fell for the myth that there was no immunity in the population. They also didn’t want to believe that coronaviruses were seasonal cold viruses that would disappear in summer. Otherwise their curve models would have looked differently. When the initial worst case scenarios didn’t come true anywhere, some now still cling to models predicting a second wave. Let’s leave them their hopes — I’ve never seen a scientific branch that manoeuvred itself so much into the offside. I have also not yet understood why epidemiologists were so much more interested in the number of deaths, rather than in the numbers that could be saved.

4. Immunology of common sense

As an immunologist I trust a biological model, namely that of the human organism, which has built a tried and tested, adaptive immune system. At the end of February, driving home from the recording of [a Swiss political TV debate show], I mentioned to Daniel Koch [former head of the Swiss federal section “Communicable Diseases” of the Federal Office of Public Health] that I suspected there was a general immunity in the population against Sars-Cov-2. He argued against my view. I later defended him anyway, when he said that children were not a driving factor in the spread of the pandemic. He suspected that children didn’t have a receptor for the virus, which is of course nonsense. Still, we had to admit that his observations were correct. But the fact that every scientist attacked him afterwards and asked for studies to prove his point, was somewhat ironic. Nobody asked for studies to prove that people in certain at-risk groups were dying. When the first statistics from China and later worldwide data showed the same trend, that is to say that almost no children under ten years old got sick, everyone should have made the argument that children clearly have to be immune. For every other disease that doesn’t afflict a certain group of people, we would come to the conclusion that that group is immune. When people are sadly dying in a retirement home, but in the same place other pensioners with the same risk factors are left entirely unharmed, we should also conclude that they were presumably immune.

But this common sense seems to have eluded many, let’s call them “immunity deniers” just for fun. This new breed of deniers had to observe that the majority of people who tested positive for this virus, i.e. the virus was present in their throats, did not get sick. The term “silent carriers” was conjured out of a hat and it was claimed that one could be sick without having symptoms. Wouldn’t that be something! If this principle from now on gets naturalised into the realm of medicine, health insurers would really have a problem, but also teachers whose students could now claim to have whatever disease to skip school, if at the end of the day one didn’t need symptoms anymore to be sick.

The next joke that some virologists shared was the claim that those who were sick without symptoms could still spread the virus to other people. The “healthy” sick would have so much of the virus in their throats that a normal conversation between two people would be enough for the “healthy one” to infect the other healthy one. At this point we have to dissect what is happening here: If a virus is growing anywhere in the body, also in the throat, it means that human cells decease. When [human] cells decease, the immune system is alerted immediately and an infection is caused. One of five cardinal symptoms of an infection is pain. It is understandable that those afflicted by Covid-19 might not remember that initial scratchy throat and then go on to claim that they didn’t have any symptoms just a few days ago. But for doctors and virologists to twist this into a story of “healthy” sick people, which stokes panic and was often given as a reason for stricter lockdown measures, just shows how bad the joke really is. At least the WHO didn’t accept the claim of asymptomatic infections and even challenges this claim on its website.

Here a succinct and brief summary, especially for the immunity deniers, of how humans are attacked by germs and how we react to them: If there are pathogenic viruses in our environment, then all humans — whether immune or not — are attacked by this virus. If someone is immune, the battle with the virus begins. First we try to prevent the virus from binding to our own cells with the help of antibodies. This normally works only partially, not all are blocked and some viruses will attach to the appropriate cells. That doesn’t need to lead to symptoms, but it’s also not a disease. Because the second guard of the immune system is now called into action. That’s the above mentioned T-cells, white blood cells, which can determine from the outside in which other cells the virus is now hiding to multiply. These cells, which are now incubating the virus, are searched throughout the entire body and killed by the T-cells until the last virus is dead.

So if we do a PCR corona test on an immune person, it is not a virus that is detected, but a small shattered part of the viral genome. The test comes back positive for as long as there are tiny shattered parts of the virus left. Correct: Even if the infectious viruses are long dead, a corona test can come back positive, because the PCR method multiplies even a tiny fraction of the viral genetic material enough [to be detected]. That’s exactly what happened, when there was the global news, even shared by the WHO, that 200 Koreans who already went through Covid-19 were infected a second time and that there was therefore probably no immunity against this virus. The explanation of what really happened and an apology came only later, when it was clear that the immune Koreans were perfectly healthy and only had a short battle with the virus. The crux was that the virus debris registered with the overly sensitive test and therefore came back as “positive”. It is likely that a large number of the daily reported infection numbers are purely due to viral debris.

The PCR test with its extreme sensitivity was initially perfect to find out where the virus could be. But this test can not identify whether the virus is still alive, i.e. still infectous. Unfortunately, this also led some virologists to equate the strength of a test result with viral load, i.e. the amount of virus someone can breathe out. Luckily, our day care centres stayed open nontheless. Since German virologist missed that part, because, out of principle, they do not look at what other countries are doing, even if other countries’ case numbers are falling more rapidly.

5. The problem with corona immunity

What does this all mean in real life? The extremely long incubation time of two to 14 days — and reports of 22 to 27 days — should wake up any immunologist. As well as the claim that most patients would no longer secrete the virus after five days. Both [claims] in turn actually lead to the conclusion that there is — sort of in the background — a base immunity that contorts the events, compared to an expected cycle [of a viral infection] — i.e. leads to a long incubation period and quick immunity. This immunity also seems to be the problem for patients with a severe course of the disease. Our antibody titre, i.e. the accuracy of our defence system, is reduced the older we get. But also people with a bad diet or who are malnourished may have a weakened immune system, which is why this virus does not only reveal the medical problems of a country, but also social issues.

If an infected person does not have enough antibodies, i.e. a weak immune response, the virus slowly spreads out across the entire body. Now that there are not enough antibodies, there is only the second, supporting leg of our immune response left: The T-cells beginn to attack the virus-infested cells all over the body. This can lead to an exaggerated immune response, basically to a massive slaughter; this is called a Cytokine Storm. Very rarely this can also happen in small children, in that case called Kawasaki Syndrome. This very rare occurrence in children was also used in our country to stoke panic. It’s interesting, however, that this syndrome is very easily cured. The [affected] children get antibodies from healthy blood donors, i.e. people who went through coronavirus colds. This means that the hushed-up [supposedly non-existent] immunity in the population is in fact used therapeutically.

What now?

The virus is gone for now. It will probably come back in winter, but it won’t be a second wave, but just a cold. Those young and healthy people who currently walk around with a mask on their faces would be better off wearing a helmet instead, because the risk of something falling on their head is greater than that of getting a serious case of Covid-19.

If we observe a significant rise in infections in 14 days [after the Swiss relaxed the lockdown], we’d at least know that one of the measures was useful. Other than that I recommend reading John P A Ioannidis’ latest work in which he describes the global situation based on data on May 1st 2020: People below 65 years old make up only 0.6 to 2.6 % of all fatal Covid cases. To get on top of the pandemic, we need a strategy merely concentrating on the protection of at-risk people over 65. If that’s the opinion of a top expert, a second lockdown is simply a no-go.

On our way back to normal, it would be good for us citizens if a few scaremongers apologised. Such as doctors who wanted a triage of over 80 year old Covid patients in order to stop ventilating them. Also media that kept showing alarmist videos of Italian hospitals to illustrate a situation that as such didn’t exist. All politicians calling for “testing, testing, testing” without even knowing what the test actually measures. And the federal government for an app they’ll never get to work and will warn me if someone near me is positive, even if they’re not infectious.

In winter, when the flu and other colds make the rounds again, we can then go back to kissing each other a little less, and we should wash our hands even without a virus present. And people who’ll get sick nonetheless can then don their masks to show others what they have learned from this pandemic. And if we still haven’t learned to protect our at-risk groups, we’ll have to wait for a vaccine that will hopefully also be effective in at-risk people.

Medinside.ch, Beda M Stadler

Addendum: I am not the original author of this article, I translated it from German, as indicated at the very beginning. The original author is Beda M Stadler, the original article is linked at the top. I apologise for any typos, as noted in some of your comments. I have corrected hopefully most of them now.

 

Greenteeth Digital Publishing sites:

[ The Original Boggart Blog] ... [ Writerbeat ] ... [ Daily Stirrer.shtml ]...[Little Nicky Machiavelli]... [ Ian's Authorsden Pages ]... [ It's Bollocks My Dears, All Bollocks ] ... [ Minds ] ... [ ] ... [Scribd]...[Wikinut] ... [ Boggart Abroad] ... [ Grenteeth Bites ] ... [ Latest Posts ] [Ian Thorpe at Flickr ] ... [Latest Posts] ... [ Tumblr ] ... [ Authorsden blog ] ... [Daily Stirrer Headlines]
[ Ian at Facebook ]