Civil Defense Perspectives, vol. 35 #4
If we speak of “science” today, we are speaking mostly of government-funded science. Since 1940, the U.S. population has expanded less than 3-fold, while the federal government has exploded 28-fold (Richard Maybury, Early Warning Report, December 2020) and dominates most enterprises. Academic centers are dependent on federal funding for their research, even if they also have a private endowment, and faculty dare not take a politically incorrect position. “Science in the public square” has led to Lysenkoism in “climate science” (tinyurl.com/yyhn95mn). What about medicine? During the COVID-19 pandemic, attempts to post information on social media, even “nextdoor” neighborhood news, may be blocked or require a link to official sites.
While patients have been dying since January or even earlier, a report on autopsy results appeared only in May. A startling 58% of 12 patients examined in Hamburg had undiagnosed deep vein thrombosis, and the direct cause of death in four was massive pulmonary embolism (https://tinyurl.com/y8xenf4x). Of course, mechanical ventilation cannot oxygenate the blood if the blood can’t get to the lung.
Previously, hospitals were required to perform a certain number of autopsies to maintain accreditation. Now very few patients are taken to the “altar of truth”; rates have fallen from 25% to less than 5% over the past four decades. The autopsy after all is not “reimbursed,” and who needs it with advanced technology? In fact, nearly 20% of autopsies still show major missed diagnoses or major discrepancies with the final clinical diagnoses, despite advances in imaging techniques.
It was rumored that the World Health Organization (WHO) “banned” autopsies. In fact, it set “safety guidelines” (https://tinyurl.com/y357fvy6) that may have made them impractical. Similar guidelines might have blocked the angiograms that might have revealed the pulmonary emboli and thromboses.
As of Jan 12, 2021, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Treatment Guidelines still state: “In nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19, there are currently no data to support the measurement of coagulation markers” (such as D-dimers), and “in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, hematologic and coagulation parameters are commonly measured, although there are currently insufficient data to recommend for or against using this data to guide management decisions” (tinyurl.com/y4fmh9zf).
This is the “science”—with its therapeutic nihilism—doctors are to follow. Practicing physicians from many nations, on the other hand, emphasize the need for early awareness of this complication and early treatment to prevent the inflammation that likely causes it (tinyurl.com/y5u9eas4). Such physicians are accused of being “anti-science,” as by Democrat senators who boycotted the hearings on early treatment before the Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs (https://tinyurl.com/yc3kqqwy and https://tinyurl.com/yyqx7rsv).
Trusted Sources
A continually updated compilation of studies on proposed treatments for COVID-19 is maintained at c19study.com. It includes a brief summary of each study and a link to the publications. Tabs now available are: ivermectin, vitamin D, vitamin C, hydroxychloroquine, zinc, REGN-C0V2 (a mixture of two monoclonal antibodies), LY-CoV (neutralizing antibodies that bind complementary regions of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein), and remdesivir. Physicians prominent in organized medicine, who may call themselves “scientific intellectuals,” have declined to view the site because the content creators remain anonymous:
“We are PhD researchers, scientists, people who hope to make a contribution, even if it is only very minor. You can find our research in journals like Science and Nature. For examples of why we can’t be more specific search for ‘raoult death threats’ or ‘simone gold fired’” (https://tinyurl.com/y39syz36).
Skeptics about c19study.com cite concern about a possible conflict of interest, perhaps in profiting from cheap, long-out-of-patent drugs. But what about the conflicts in “trusted sources”? People have apparently forgotten that Lancet and NEJM had to retract articles based on fraudulent data from Surgisphere that their vaunted editors and peer reviewers had failed to detect (https://tinyurl.com/y44obqn8). The highly publicized negative results had already done their damage in stopping both studies and treatment with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ).
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the supposed pinnacle of science, is in fact a “public-private partnership” that accepts millions of dollars in “conditional funding” from entities including pharmaceutical companies. CDC has “a long history of bias and troubling conflicts of interest,” writes Dr. Lawrence Huntoon, which “calls into question the scientific validity of recommendations.” He cites the “fudging” of COVID-19 death numbers (tinyurl.com/y4985ahf). Maybury notes that COVID-19 handouts can total more than $40,000 per patient. “In effect the federal bureaucracy is paying hospitals all over the world to lie about the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths.”
Tyranny of the Randomized Controlled Trial
From the NIH and the American Medical Association down to state and local medical societies, officials claim they want nothing more than effective treatments but there is simply not enough evidence in the form of “gold standard” RCTs to justify using re-purposed old drugs. And there have been negative RCTs on HCQ—with flaws such as starting treatment too late and using toxic doses (tinyurl.com/yy68a3hn).
The RCT is actually a fairly recent development, and most accepted medical treatments pre-date it. Hundreds of drugs have been approved by the FDA on the basis of observational studies similar to those showing benefits of HCQ for COVID-19 (https://tinyurl.com/y2fx6l6z). Properly adjusted results from observational studies give effect estimates comparable to those in RCTs (https://tinyurl.com/y4ugbdfb). The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 191 studies to date is about 1 in 2 quadrillion (p = 0.00000000000000042).
The double standard is shocking: no RCTs for unprecedented lockdowns and quarantines—and no cost-benefit analysis despite undoubted devastating harms (tinyurl.com/y2hmftno).
The estimated worldwide count of lives lost from not using HCQ is 971,462 at this moment and constantly increasing, according to c19study.com. A sacrifice to the “science” idol?
Ivermectin
Ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug extensively used in veterinary and human medicine since 1981, is being used prophylactically in many nations, e.g. Central America, but some U.S. hospitals refuse to allow it. South Africa has criminalized importation, and police raided a private hospital suspected of dispensing it (https://tinyurl.com/y6983cp5).
The NIH “recommends against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in a clinical trial.” The FDA issued a warning in April 2020 that ivermectin intended for use in animals should not be used to treat COVID-19 in humans. Feed stores have large warning signs, but are selling out of ivermectin. Perhaps there is an epidemic of heartworm in dogs.
Dr. David Scheim (https://tinyurl.com/y4qvpeq6) gives an interesting explanation of ivermectin’s ability to block cellular entry via attaching to sialic acid receptor sites on the cell’s surface. It’s not actually virucidal at the level achieved by typical dosing of 0.2mg–0.3mg/kg. However, it seemingly demonstrates complete viral blockage of cellular entry at blood levels achieved by these doses. The virus then dies because it can’t take over cells and replicate. More aggressive dosing and combination therapy with zinc and doxycycline or azithromycin can kill it.
Some veterinary preparations contain other dewormers such as clorsulan or closantel, which is poisonous to humans. The pour-on formula contains isopropyl alcohol. The injectable form is a 1% (10mg/cc) solution containing propylene glycol and glycerol as diluents; it has been given orally to dogs and other species. Dosage is by weight, but differs by species.
Ivermectin has been a miracle drug in Africa against such diseases as onchocerciasis (river blindness) and lymphatic filariasis. In the U.S. it is used for scabies and head lice.
Aerosols
Videos about droplets from people’s mouths when coughing, singing, talking, or breathing are popular, and are used to promote mask-wearing—even by asymptomatic people. One recent study from Wuhan claimed that asymptomatic cases may not be infectious (https://tinyurl.com/y2tfzch7). But a study published by JAMA News Network estimated that more than half of transmissions may come from asymptomatic persons (https://tinyurl.com/y2kh47b7). Are masks the answer?
What is the most efficient aerosol generator in your home? Probably the toilet, especially the energetic, water-conservation kind. Coronavirus can be detected in stool samples and anal swab samples for weeks. In fact, wastewater is used as an early tracking system for outbreaks. Chinese investigators discovered aerosols generated from flushing in the 15th-floor apartment, where a sick patient lived, reached the 25th and 27th floors of the building (https://tinyurl.com/yyss75ya). This likely explains why flight attendants on Chinese airlines are asked to wear diapers, to avoid using the restroom if possible. Toilet lids, disinfecting the water and surfaces, ventilation, and possibly ultraviolet air disinfection may be important but neglected infection-control measures.
Several air-purifying technologies are under development in Israel. ProtectAir (available commercially) slowly releases chlorine dioxide (ClO2) at levels far below those approved for purifying water. Aura Air uses filters and UVC LED lights. Nanotechnology derived from laser-induced graphene (LIG) water filters is under development (https://tinyurl.com/y3fgyh79).
Engineering vs. Social Controls
Lockdowns and other social control methods have failed to defeat the coronavirus—and there is no end in sight even after mass vaccination is underway. “Engineering solutions are responsible for stopping most pandemics and most of the increases in life expectancies,” writes James Conca. “For air-borne viruses, we have created the equivalent of cities with contaminated water and sewage running down the streets. It’s a safe bet this will not be the last virus to find this environmental niche and take advantage of it.” Proper air circulation and purification in mass transit and crowded areas does not require the ability to predict which new respiratory virus will emerge (https://tinyurl.com/y48l5tbm).
Marlaina’s restaurant in Seattle featured a sign announcing “Coronavirus Disinfected Here!” Its “upper-room germicidal UV” setup features ultraviolet fixtures mounted high and angled away from humans, with ceiling fans to circulate the air. Technical assistance came from customer Bruce Davidson, a pulmonary physician who was Philadelphia’s “tuberculosis czar” in the mid-1990s, when UV light proved to be a key strategy (https://tinyurl.com/yyawta5d). The government still forced it to close.
While some hospitals have considered using commercially available upper-room germicidal air disinfection (GUV), no published studies have demonstrated efficacy and it is not currently recommended by CDC or WHO (tinyurl.com/y56ztbn8).
Lockdown Natural Experiment
“The pro-lockdown evidence is shockingly thin,” states the American Institute for Economic Research, “and based largely on comparing real-world outcomes against dire computer-generated forecasts derived from empirically untested models, and then merely positing that stringencies…account for the difference between the fictionalized vs. the real outcome. The anti-lockdown studies, on the other hand, are evidence-based, robust, and thorough, grappling with the data we have (tinyurl.com/ycdompcc).
A new mutation of SARS-CoV-2 virus in mink farms in Denmark presented an opportunity to compare outcomes in seven municipalities that imposed very strict lockdowns with four, which are very similar in every respect, that remained under moderate rules prevailing in the rest of Denmark. In total 280,000 people and 126,000 jobs were affected by the extreme lockdown, as people were banned from crossing municipal borders to go to work. There were no statistically significant differences (https://tinyurl.com/y2os4ecg).
“What the new study from Northern Jutland shows is that an extreme form of lockdown didn’t work in one of the most law-abiding societies in the world. Why, then, should we expect lockdowns to be effective anywhere else?” asks Joakim Book (https://tinyurl.com/yxcnd9nk).
A Miracle You Can See: Bailey’s Beads
During a total eclipse of the sun, you can see sunlight peeking through the mountain valleys of the moon, giving the moon a necklace of bright beads of light. The moon’s orbit moves away from Earth at 1.5 inches per year. The spot-on alignment that creates this effect has occurred during the brief 50,000 years when we were here to observe it. What are the odds?
“Does someone out there want us to know that we are not alone?” asks Maybury (op. cit.).