Sandra Ferrante & Juan Peris-Mencheta
January 27, 2021
This is the first of a series of ALO
entries entitled "Light in the dark" in which we recover the voices of
scientists silenced by the institutions of the current scientific
hegemony; our modern Galileos. Men
and women who are risking their professional careers, their prestige
and surely also their lives to reveal the lies and fabrications and to
denounce the dogmas upon which the New Normal has been built in the wake
of the Covid 19 phenomenon.
By way of introduction
"Sun, stand still over Gibeon and you, Moon, over the valley of Ayalon!" This biblical phrase supports and synthesizes the scientific debate of the 15th and 16th centuries. What
would happen to the authorised source of truth in the midst of the
fundamentalist Counter-Reformation if it were the Earth and not the Sun
that were in motion? Being an incontrovertible source of scientific data, all of the Bible's content had to be true, and its deniers were therefore worthy of judgment and, at the very least, excommunication. On the basis of this geocentric dogma, it was not difficult to eliminate, by way of the Inquisition,
the heliocentric theses formulated by Copernicus and Kepler and
defended by a vehement Galileo. The latter was censored, prevented from
teaching by 1616 for relating his astronomical observations, and twenty years later he was forced to renounce his convictions and writings.
Now,
what would happen today if in the inaugural year 0 of this pandemic
era, it turned out that there had been no excess mortality and that, if
there had been in certain countries and certain periods, this could not
be associated with the disease called Covid 19, based on verifiable and
testable evidence? Would it even be possible to doubt in the current
state of the collective imagination a "truth" so heavily promoted by
scientific, political and media centres and so manifestly assumed
without effective resistance by a majority of the global population that
is confined and masked, with all its rights restricted? Well, the truth
is that today there is a minority of scientists (considerable and growing) who have raised critical voices against the official pandemic narrative
(OPN, hereinafter), and who have expressed their discrepancies both
through conventional media and the new social networks (YouTube,
Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, WhatsApp ...) . Curiously, the latter have
been and are: 1) discredited by the defenders of the OPN as a source of
information contrast; 2) used by these same operators to spread their
attempts to discredit dissidents; 3) left as the last and only resource
of expression available to the dissidents, having been denied any
participation in the mainstream media, and 4) at the same time censored
by the owners of those platforms on the grounds that these dissenting
voices are not true and that they would likely cause harm to societies
and their health systems.
The
truth is, however, that none of these dissident scientific discourses
1) has called to disobey the unfounded measures adopted by governments,
despite being dissenting, 2) have been based on unofficial and/or
controversial data, 3) have been integrated into the decision-making of
any country 4) have been incorporated in a standardised way in the
conventional media sphere.
It
is also evident and true that the so-called bloc of dissent is
absolutely heterogeneous at all levels (social classes, educational
levels, professional fields, ages, ideologies, creeds, administrative
origins ...) and that within this dissent there is enormous diversity
that operates with completely different motives (foundations) and
degrees of scepticism. It is also true that the dissident scientific
discourses (firmly distinguished from those derived from social
ideologies, groups and people without any scientific training) proceed
from a genuinely rational and scientific attitude. Additionally, these
discourses are far from being as unitary as claimed by those who live
directly or indirectly from the new Covidian dogma. We could in fact and
before presenting our first dissident figure (Wolfgang Wodarg), venture
to anticipate some lines of what would be a typology of scientific scepticism towards Covid 19, since
there are moderately sceptical attitudes and highly sceptical attitudes
towards the OPN and / or of any of its components, and then directly
rebellious attitudes of everything narrated and acted upon by the public
powers and supra-governmental organisations. Just to account for some
dissident attitudes from across the range, we recover some of the most
relevant:
- scientists
who deny, in the absence of verifiable purification and isolation
processes, the existence of a new pathogen, although they do not deny
the occurrence in March, April and May of 2020 of a peak of mortality in
some countries;
- scientists
who do not doubt the existence of a new pathogen, but do doubt the
existence of a new disease, distinguishable from other pre-existing ones
both in clinical pictures and in the few autopsies carried out
internationally;
- others
who do not doubt the existence of the virus or the disease, but who
radically question the alleged zoonotic origin of it;
- those
who, without doubting the disease or the virus, question the
extraordinary lethality of this new disease and, therefore, the lack of
proportionality in the measures adopted for the entire population;
- those,
such as the man we present in this first entry in the series, who do
not (at least publicly) reject the existence of C19 or a new pathogen,
but rather focus on its political and business-oriented over-hyping, as
well as upon the inconvenience of the responses operated, which would be
more harmful to people and societies than the threat against which
these measures are deployed;
- those
who, irrespective of the existence or otherwise of Covid-19 and Sars
Cov 2, search for other explanatory causes of the mortality spikes that
have been detected at certain times and in certain countries...
The
typology we are pointing to is not exclusive among the subtypes it
presents and is by no means complete, but it sufficiently accounts for a
heterogeneity that cannot be reduced to one category (denialism), as
the totalising media crudely claim. We note that, far from starting from
common assumptions and findings, the only thing these sceptics share
are two elements: firstly, their requirement for more data, more voices
to be heard, more
light to be shed, and more freedom to contradict. And secondly, the fact
that all of them have been or are despised, censored and/or
disqualified and persecuted by the supporters of the OPN, in what
can already be considered as a true Tribunal of the New Inquisition
which, since May has attempted to establish an informative
sanitary cordon, and close all possible argumentation, all controversy
and
therefore all scientific and social debate. This closure has not
occurred because the sceptical or denialist
theses of Covid 19 have been refuted, nor because of a victory by the
hegemonic scientific
discourse (manifested by the OPN). Rather, it has built its dominance in
the absence of a contender.
That is why we open this space for voices, reflections and debate. Because
amidst the current dogmatic obscurity, it is important to keep in mind,
to know and to at least understand the arguments of those people who, despite
having renowned and impeccable scientific and professional careers,
have been excluded from any debate or decision-making process, their
voices silenced and their professional prestige and personal dignity
attacked for simply questioning the official truths of the moment. If
there is anything more worrying about this dark time than the
impacts of the anti-sanitary, anti-scientific, anti-social and
anti-economic measures that Western countries are applying, it
is without a doubt what is happening to Truth and to the foundations and freedom of science.
Wolfgang Wodard, the scourge of the pharmafias
Wolfgang
Wodarg was born in 1947. He practiced as an internist and pulmonary
physician, specialist in hygienic and environmental medicine, as well as
in public health and social medicine. After his clinical work, he was
among other things a public health officer in Schleswig-Holstein for 13
years, at the same time as a professor at universities and technical
schools and chairman of the Expert Committee for the protection of the
environment related to health in the Schleswig-Holstein Medical
Association. In 1991 he received a fellowship to study epidemiology at
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA. As a member of the German
Bundestag from 1994 to 2009, he was initiator and speaker at the
Research Commission "Ethics and Law of Modern Medicine", a member of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, where he was president
of the Subcommittee on Health and vice-president of the Committee on
Culture, Education and Science. Since 2011 he has worked as an
independent university professor, doctor and health scientist and was a
volunteer member of the board and head of the Transparency International
Germany health working group until 2020. Throughout his career both as a
health professional and as a politician and public official, his main
concern has revolved around the quality of health and the necessary
independence of science with respect to the chrematistic interests of
the pharmaceutical industry, and considering how to make the right decisions.
Consistent with this and in his role as the highest representative of
the Health Commission of the Council of Europe, in 2009, he started the
Research Commission on the role of the WHO in H1N1 (swine flu) in
Strasbourg, where he remained as a scientific expert after leaving
Parliament (1). Wodarg denounced the lack of scientific rigor in
Imperial College's alarmist projections and the World Health
Organization's reliance on conditional funding for the pharmaceutical
industry. Subsequently, many doctors and scientists joined the complaint
in what became known as the “Tamiflu scandal” [2; 3].
“We
have had a mild flu and a false pandemic set up by Big Pharma and the
WHO. This is one of the biggest medical scandals of this century." These surprising and forgotten phrases, pronounced by our protagonist
exactly 11 years ago, summed up what happened with the so-called "Swine
Flu" of 2009. The outbreak of swine flu (H1N1) came five years after the
also famous outbreak of the "avian flu" (H5N1), an experience that
served to generate a memory and a reflection of the States in the face
of the possible reissue of that first event: this is what is known as
positive priming (priming) by repetition, a basic technique of political
propaganda and marketing. Wodarg explained this preparatory logic in an
interview with the newspaper La Voz de Galicia: “It all started with
bird flu in 2005, when the WHO began to prepare its plan against it. The
industry pledged to produce vaccines if governments agreed to buy their
entire production in the event that the WHO declared a pandemic. So,
they prepared their business for the next five years. In June 2009, the
WHO chose a mild influenza outbreak that had been observed in April
in Mexico, to pull the trigger and declare that it met the criteria for
declaring a pandemic that had just been approved." And in this simple
way, the big pharmaceutical companies (Glaxo, Novartis and Bayer,
mainly) secured "huge profits", while countries, including the United
Kingdom, "squandered" their meagre health budgets, vaccinating millions
of people against a relatively mild disease. At that time, Spain
purchased 37 million doses of influenza A vaccines and 3 million
antiviral treatments [4]. Other countries did the same: in Germany 50
million doses of these vaccines were bought, of which only 10% would
have been used; the UK stockpiled the drug worth $ 710 million for 40
million treatments; The United States spent $ 1.3 billion to store
Oseltamivir (Tamiflu) for 65 million doses. India also multiplied its
stocks by 10. Its sales increased 84% with Oseltamivir during the 2013
flu season in the United States.
The
Council of Europe, the Strasbourg-based "senate" responsible for the
European Court of Human Rights, passed a resolution proposed by Dr.
Wodarg calling for an investigation into the role of pharmaceutical
companies. The text of the motion drafted by Wolfgang Wordarg as
chairman of the Subcommittee on Health and signed by 13 other members of
the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe was as strong as it
was unequivocal:
“To promote their patented flu drugs and vaccines, pharmaceutical
companies have influenced scientists and government agencies responsible
for public health standards to alarm governments around the world. They
have squandered scarce healthcare resources on ineffective vaccination
strategies and have unnecessarily exposed millions of healthy people to
the risk of unknown side effects from insufficiently proven vaccines.
The "bird flu" campaign (2005/06), combined with the "swine flu"
campaign, appears to have caused great damage not only to some
vaccinated patients and public health budgets, but also to credibility
and responsibility of important international health organizations. The
definition of a serious pandemic should not be under the influence of
drug sellers. The member states of the Council of Europe should call for
immediate investigations into the consequences, both at national and
European level."
Wodarg's
disclosures and whistleblowing was ratified years later by a scientific
study signed by Indian researchers, entitled "The Tamiflu fiasco and lessons learned", in which the adverse effects of an ineffective drug with a proven toxicity not reported by the manufacturers,
but which passed all approval processes of the international health
authorities, and several national ones. Dr. Gupta and his co-authors
speak of a multisystemic failure of the regulation and control system of medicines:
“Oseltamivir
(tamiflu) has been identified as a classic case of multiple and
linearly aligned errors and omissions; in which rigged tests, targeted
disclosures, and a favourably-timed pandemic disease have secured
windfall profits for drug companies. We have to devise ways and means so
that wasteful exercises like this are kept to a minimum, and patients
are not forced to take drugs of dubious risk-benefit ratio ”[5].
As
at present with the purchase of drugs from Pfizer and Moderna,
countries at that time were prepared to anticipate mass purchases
through emergency procedures. The Tamifú scandal did not go unnoticed by
Spanish society, and was even disseminated through a channel with
substantial reach, such as CNN+, then led by Iñaki Gabilondo.
It is a multimillion dollar business but also something much more worrying: an
episode of massive pharmacological iatrogenesis from which it seems that
we have learned nothing, since the scheme has been repeated again in a
rudely identical, although amplified way; the declaration of a pandemic
by the WHO (even though the virus had not been isolated and purified to
analyse its pathogenicity and when the supposed disease was
located in two countries) was followed by a whole media bubble of
over-hyping that caused a hospital collapse due to the social
panic that it unleashed; a political-administrative overreaction to
adopt the most restrictive measures ever implemented with this extensiveness and level
of intensity. And finally, there is a vaccination race, with countries massively purchasing these experimental
gene products, even prior to their emergency authorisation, and without sufficient
guarantees on safety and efficacy (the adverse effects that
we see daily are overwhelming).
In
a recent interview, the main elements of which we repeat here, Dr.
Wodarg [6] states that we are witnessing the same alarmist and
fraudulent model of the avian flu (2003) and influenza A or swine flu
(2009) pandemics,
except that the stakes and complexity are even greater than in those
years. According to the renowned epidemiologist, Sars Co-v 2 together
with other coronaviruses are responsible for between 5 to 15% of the
symptoms of respiratory infections and act together with other viruses,
such as influenza or rhinoviruses, year upon year. The severity of the
symptoms that any of these viruses can produce is obviously linked to
the patient's immune status. Hence, in people over 80 years of age and,
especially, in the presence of other diseases, the situation can be
aggravated. However, the doctor insists that practices such as the use
of respirators or high doses of hydroxychloroquine, antivirals and
corticosteroids could have produced more lethal conditions than those of
the virus itself.
Many people wonder, as does the interviewer, why, if coronaviruses are
not new, is the current situation so different from previous years?
According to Dr. Wodarg, two key elements converge to explain this: the
panic spread by the mass media and the generalized use of PCR tests
whose formulation, elaboration and protocols have been left to the
discretion of each manufacturing laboratory. How is it possible to trust
some statistics on infections that are being fed based on tests so
heterogeneously produced and applied? Additionally, the lower the
prevalence of the disease (as is currently the case), the higher the
proportion of false positives (that is, people who test positive for PCR
while healthy). The tests are useful in people with symptoms to
indicate what type of virus is present (e.g., coronavirus, influenza or
adenovirus), as long as they are done carefully. If, as happens in
Germany, 1.5 million tests are carried out each week, it is practically
impossible to process so many tests adequately, and what the
epidemiologist calls "a test pandemic" occurs. ALO has already given
sufficient notice here, here and here of the evidence that invalidates
detection and diagnosis with the cardinal test of PCR.
The lurch towards technocratic totalitarianism
But
in addition, the absolute lack of evidence and scientific rigour in
diagnosis, the absence of a minimum standardised protocol for hospital
treatments, the imposition of indiscriminate pseudo-sanitary measures
(masks and confinements) and measures restricting human rights in
general (mobility,
meeting, association, demonstration, right to work and right to access
standardised public services) all occur as a kind of decree, with the
total absence of debate. In
the words of our German epidemiologist: "the State has decreed that we
all agree with the pandemic...the mass media have suspended the
debates and say the same thing, exactly the same, just like the
governments."
Even
though the profiteering from the pandemic is enormous, there are clear
signs that the goals are not solely financial. For this reason, Dr.
Wodarg, calls our attention to recent publications of the World Economic
Forum, coinciding with the statements of the President of the European
Commission, Dr. Ursula von der Leyen, on the existence of a Trilemma to
combine three elements that are not simultaneously compatible: nation
states, democracy and globalisation. In this framework, the pandemic
would make sense by displaying its ability to stop practically
everything and facilitate the implementation of globalist plans in the
style of "The Great Reset", by tycoon Klaus Schwab, founder of the World
Economic Forum [7]. Such a reboot could lead humanity to a dystopian
reality similar to the one already experienced in countries like China,
where control of citizenship and intrusion into people's privacy is
extreme and completely normalised. If this model was enlarged,
hyper-globalisation and widespread digitalisation would allow the planet
to be governed as a large company, putting at risk one of the main
mechanisms of anti-authoritarian regulation that we have, democracy,
and positioning science as an instrument of human
subjection (and not of emancipation), undermining our rights and above
all condemning future generations to a life without autonomy and
without dignity.
Faced
with this picture, the question of what can we can do is all the more
urgent. For Dr. Wodarg, one of the rare public figures who has dared to
question this episode of human history and its handling by the world's
political and scientific players,
the possible answers lie at different scales of intervention. Thus, on
the one hand, the protection of our elders and the most
vulnerable can and should be met at the local or community level, with
sufficient resources and with due proportionality and funding. And, on
the other hand, scientific knowledge and the approach to global public
evils can only occur in the global sphere and always through more (and
never less) democratic participation. The population has the duty and
the right to be able to count on evidence and take charge of its
problems, without having to entrust its resolution to the exclusive and
opaque performance of experts who are rarely accountable. In that acting
locally and thinking globally and always expanding human freedoms and
capabilities, the key to navigating globalization with minimal success
seems to continue to lie. Those who seek today from the highest spheres
of power and outside of public scrutiny and control, to remove the
population from the decisions that affect them and that shape their
future, are not only wrong, but will have to bear the consequences of
their autocratic and unscientific behaviour.
References
1- El Consejo de Europa investigará a la OMS por anunciar pandemias falsas. Infosalus. 26/01/2020. Disponible en https://www.infosalus.com/actualidad/noticia-consejo-europa-investigara-oms-anunciar-pandemias-falsas-20100126103200.html
2- Casado, S. El escándalo del Tamiflu. 28/04/2014. Disponible en https://www.huffingtonpost.es/salvador-casado/el-escandalo-del-tamiflu_b_5185894.html
3- La verdad sobre Tamiflu: poca eficacia y muchos intereses. 11/04/2014 Disponible en https://www.ocu.org/salud/medicamentos/noticias/tamiflu
4- Herrero, R. El Gobierno compra 37 millones de vacunas contra la
gripe A y tres millones de tratamientos antivirales. Heraldo 11/07/2009.
Disponible en https://www.heraldo.es/noticias/nacional/el_gobierno_compra_millones_vacunas_contra_gripe_tres_millones_tratamientos_antivirales.html
5- Gupta YK, Meenu M, Mohan P. The Tamiflu fiasco and lessons learnt. Indian J Pharmacol. 2015;47(1):11-16. doi:10.4103/0253-7613.150308; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4375804/
6- Burunat, P. La Era de las pandemias con Wolfgang Wodarg La
entrevista del año. 23/11/2020. Disponible desde el 27/12/2020 en: https://lbry.tv/@pedroburunat:3/La-Era-de-las-pandemias-con-Wolfgang-Wodarg-La-entrevista-del-a%C3%B1o:6
7- The Great Reset Initiative. Foro Económico Mundial. 24/09/2020. Disponible en: https://www.weforum.org/great-reset
Translation: David Montoute
Original en castellano: https://abrelosojos.xyz/uncategorized/luces-en-la-penumbra-wolfgang-wodarg/
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário