The Fool on the Hill

The Fool on the Hill is a song by the Beatles which appeared on their 1967 album Magical Mystery Tour. The words describe the titular "fool" - a solitary figure who is not understood or appreciated by others, although on some counts he appears to be wiser than his detractors.

These lyrics have resonated poignantly with me over the past few months. They gave me a level of comfort in times when I was about to give up, and strength to carry on as I sought to remain emotionally detached from a situation I had never previously experienced. Hatred.

Even as a child, when I was disliked and bullied by most of my peers, I did not suffer to the extent that I have over the past few weeks. I have been labelled a quack. Accused of treachery and dishonesty. Members of my family have been threatened with physical violence if I do not desist from speaking my mind. One Facebook “friend” even suggested he would “knife” me as soon as I returned to Australia.

I was na?ve to believe that my investigation would matter that much. In wanting to get to the crux of the situation in which we now find ourselves, simply so as to be able to communicate the truth as excavated from a residue of lies, half-truths, and deliberate obfuscations, I found that most people only want to march in lockstep behind the official story. They do not want anyone to point out the inconsistencies in that story – least of all to proclaim it a sham.

At least I now understand why the Nazis came to prominence in pre-war Germany, how the general public remained ignorant of the holocaust, and why nobody - not a single journalist, artist, or leading community figure - spoke out against the politically-contrived narrative.

Since early January I have worked intensively, though not exclusively, to separate facts from fiction regarding the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the ensuing pandemic. My aim was simple: to set aside personal opinion and inbuilt biases as much as I could in order to examine medical and epidemiological evidence. I wanted to make sense of messaging from various media outlets, sort through conflicting views and explanations, and study the unprecedented fear this crisis unleashed around the world. Only then would I be able to fully grasp the complete picture.

So I spoke with medical experts in order to access a diverse range of views, including three healthcare professionals in Wuhan – the assumed source of the outbreak. I listened to hours of recorded conversations with some of the world’s most highly qualified epidemiologists and immunologists. I viewed numerous video clips exploring the pandemic from diverse vantage points, including several that have now been removed from media channels like YouTube.

Because of my extensive network of contacts in China I was able to interrogate many front line doctors and nurses to gauge the temperature of local feelings. I used AI to surface and analyze hundreds of online papers, studies, statistics, and reports, including the discredited and wildly inaccurate Imperial College modelling undertaken by Neil Ferguson that led to the assumed imperative for urban and countrywide lockdowns. And I posed question after question to trusted sources around the world until I was exhausted...

Midway through my inquiry, on Monday 30th April to be precise, I was invited to talk about the pandemic on Channel 9’s Today Extra breakfast show in Australia. By now I had reached some degree of clarity regarding several contentious issues. I realised that wildly diverse opinions, based on equally specious assumptions, were replacing reasoned argument in most of the public discourse taking place.

I decided to speak my mind, that with the agreement of a producer who was only too aware of my notoriety, even though it was evident that my findings deviated considerably from the official narrative most people had already accepted without challenge.

Of course, just because a story is accepted as factual by a majority of people, does not make it the truth. My research, even at that stage, indicated we were being sold a pack of ambiguities wrapped up in propaganda. Nothing I have learned since has convinced me otherwise.

My top 24 points are not contentious when weighed against triangulated evidence. Although research is still continuing in attempts to understand the unique characteristics of the SARS-CoV-2 virus each point below can be scientifically validated to an extent that is compelling - or otherwise has been standard clinical practice with proven results over several decades:

1.    Given what we already knew about the coronavirus family – a coronavirus detection technology was patented in the US in November 2003 - we could have been far better prepared for an outbreak of this nature. Being better prepared does not mean having access to a vaccine. It means studying the unique qualities of the virus, identifying those most likely to fall sick, isolating them, and ensuring they have access to adequate care and treatment.

2.    Millions of viruses exist and are necessary for the evolution of life. Around 150 viruses are in general circulation at the moment. Conveyed by trans-continental air currents, they proliferate rapidly, constantly mutating to infect animals and birds - which can then spread to humans. Humans are hosts to numerous bacteria and viruses, most of which are benign.

3.    It is most unhelpful to use the semiotics of war or combat in the context of identifying and treating viral infections as it transmits and ramps up fear too easily among groups reliant upon accurate information (or certainty) from subject experts.

4.    It is still too early to know conclusively how or when the initial outbreak occurred. This is one of the reasons the international community has called for a review. However, the consensus among those studying the spread of the virus locates its probable origin to Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China.

5.    We can say, more or less conclusively, that the virus was not synthesized in the Wuhan Institute of Virology - a Biosafety Level 4 laboratory in mainland China, nor accidentally released from that laboratory as some have vigorously claimed.

6.    The SARS-CoV-2 pathogen might have been brought to the Huanan wet market by an already infected person but that is also considered unlikely. Gene sequencing analysis strongly suggests the virus originated in bats and was transferred to humans through a yet-unidentified intermediary species, in this case probably a scaly anteater.

7.    It is generally accepted within the scientific community that the existence of zoonotic viruses is inevitable, and will continue to infect humans, while the slaughter of other species for food continues – regardless of whether the killing is done in industrial abattoirs or wet markets.

8.    Because of the way viruses typically spread and then subside we know that the most effective way of treating most viral outbreaks in the past was by way of herd immunity.

9.    In December 2019 and early January 2020 the optimal strategy would have been to test, quarantine, and treat those most susceptible to infection by COVID-19 - including the elderly and patients with pre-existing respiratory and heart conditions like asthma, cardiovascular disease, and cystic fibrosis, for example. Untried emergency strategies only became necessary when that initial opportunity was missed.

10. A mixture of vitamins C, D, and Zinc with small doses of low-cost, readily available, chloroquine (used to treat malaria successfully for the past seven decades) has been effective in treating infections in some cases of COVID-19.* However this treatment is still unproven in a formal sense and some physicians consider it dangerous in the case of COVID-19. Remdesivir - a broad-spectrum antiviral developed by Gilead Sciences in the US - is also thought to be effective in treating this disease.

11. China recently approved the use of the antiviral drug favilavir - initially developed to treat inflammation in the nose and throat – to treat symptoms of COVID-19. Although the results of this study have yet to be released, anecdotal evidence suggests the drug was effective in treating COVID-19 symptoms in a clinical trial of 70 people.

12. COVID-19 is not simply a respiratory disease. It is capable of attacking the whole body resulting in blood clots, pulmonary embolisms, strokes, multi-system organ failure, and heart inflammation. This has led to a theory that the virus is also vasculotropic and can infect the endometrial cells that line the inside of blood vessels.

13. Some treatments originally prescribed for COVID-19 (based upon experience with the original SARS outbreak) actually make infections worse. Intubation, for example, can lead to more deaths than should otherwise be the case. Although clinicians are still scrambling to find answers to this problem it seems as though COVID-19 causes a type of lung damage that differs from that normally seen in patients suffering acute respiratory distress.

14. While the most obvious symptoms of infection are classic respiratory symptoms - fever, pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome, immune complications such as a loss of tissue oxygen, seems to indicate that hypoxia is also present. Thus the presence of air pollution could be a contributing factor in determining those most at risk.

15. There is still no vaccine available for those contracting SARS, which occurred 17 years ago. It is therefore unlikely we will find a vaccine for COVID-19 unless that is, there is a fortune to be made for some individuals and corporations through, for example, government-mandated vaccination programs. Although this claim nudges close to a conspiracy theory it warrants monitoring closely given recent authoritarian activities.

16. Conventional medical wisdom cautions against many of the tactics being mandated by governments – particularly the wearing of masks and the strategy of social distancing. There is little scientific evidence to show that medical face masks, or other forms of facial protective gear alone, are effective in keeping healthy individuals from inhaling infectious particles. Indeed there is a slight possibility that the wearing of face masks by healthy people increases the risk of hypoxia. [See reference in #14 above]

17. A lockdown or stay-at-home order was initiated in Wuhan province on 23rd January 2020. Following that original decision many other governments followed suit, even though the only available “evidence” at the time was a flawed and highly inaccurate model from Imperial College London, which predicted millions of deaths in the UK without widespread mandatory isolation.

18. There is no scientific evidence to prove the strategy of quarantine prevents the spread of a virus in healthy populations with adequate hygiene and access to a good sanitary public infrastructure. There is, however, much anecdotal evidence that social distancing works to prevent the spread of the infection.

19. The practice of quarantine began during the 14th century in an effort to protect coastal cities from the importation and spread of plague epidemics. While some countries still maintain quarantine stations to isolate those suffering from communicable diseases like cholera or tuberculosis, never before have we quarantined healthy populations.

20. The WHO confirmed that many deaths being recorded are from those dying with COVID-19 not necessarily from COVID-19. In spite of figures being published daily by the press, we do not have accurate data about the number of infections, morbidity rate, or deaths directly attributed to COVID-19.

21. It is impossible to compare the statistics released by different countries who are using different strategies to cope with the disease. Factors such as population density, levels of air pollution, the relative age of the community, and cultural factors all come into play. This is why it is futile to suggest that “success” in one territory (as in keeping numbers of deaths low) should be adopted by others. In Sweden, for example, though some claim the number of deaths proves the strategy of herd immunity did not work, the average age of COVID-19 related deaths is more or less equivalent to average life expectancy in that country.

22. While some governments have been forced to backtrack on their orthodox ideological positions, with the conservative coalition in Australia, for example, subsidizing workers and small businesses during this time, it is undeniable that nefarious activities continue unabated, using the pandemic as a smokescreen. The $6.2 trillion coronavirus bailout in the US is a euphemism for the massive transfer of wealth from workers to banks and large corporations. China is using the distraction to legislate matters in its favour with Hong Kong.

23. As democratic governments enact increasingly authoritarian agendas in the name of security and public health, fortunes are being invested opportunistically in the race to find a vaccine for COVID-19. This is partly based on the gamble that fear will persist for the foreseeable future and that many governments will enforce mandatory wholesale vaccination. On the other hand we should not underestimate the task. There is still no vaccine for SARS which occurred 17 years ago. In any case, it is probable that the current virus will have swept through the entire population by the time a vaccine does become available.

24. The current best estimate for the fatality rate globally from COVID-19 is less than 0.3 percent of those infected with it. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention in the US has also estimated that around 35 percent of people infected by the virus never develop symptoms. It could be higher than that in some other countries. These figures stand in stark contrast to the alarming projections that drove initial government responses to the epidemic.

These 24 points really only précis a fairly superficial examination of surface data in what has become a unique universal experience. Together they represent a litany of arbitrary and purposeful decisions, trends, and events, which have shaped our response to the COVID-19 disease. At a deeper level of inquiry they could well anticipate the future course we take. If that turns out to be the case I find it alarming for several reasons.

Too much of the official narrative is based on fiction and a lack of real scientific evidence of what has and is working in this situation. Assumptions are running wild. Some factors, like the number of infections and deaths, seem to have been inflated and embellished in order to be used for commercial gain or to justify government edicts. I have no doubt that the same people who run democratic states, and who urged and mandated lockdown strategies, will use whatever statistics become available in months to come to justify their actions.

There is no doubt that the politics of fear has allowed governments to assume an authoritarian stance that would normally cause outrage in less compliant societies. It is an extraordinary phenomenon that lockdowns have occurred in otherwise democratic societies. The real problem facing those countries now is how to beat a healthy retreat from what was always the wrong strategy. It will need to be a gradual withdrawal and the slightest hiccup will cause restrictions to be reimposed.

From out of the shadows of the official narrative an alternative tale is emerging. And with each new theme the plot thickens. I should caution this is not so much conspiracy, nor is it centrally organized by some secret and affluent Illuminati. However I do interpret the situation we are encountering as an opportunity by some to further embed their control, wealth, and power.

As numbers of trustworthy sources have testified - from David Martin in the US to Dolores Cahill in Ireland and Johan Giesecke in Sweden, in addition to those disparaged for their much-publicized counterclaims and predilections, like Judy Mikovits and Zac Bush – a lot of what we are being told simply does not make sense. Unless, that is, alternative motives are steering overt behaviours as well as the reporting of events.

In the US, for example, we now know that the declaration of a state of emergency by some state governors and city mayors was not within their legal authority to call, given that it was based on a conviction rather than validated evidence of a clear and present danger to the community. Not only did these officials overstep the mark, but their actions may also well have been unconstitutional. Agencies ranging from the CDC to the WHO also perpetuated confusion.

Meanwhile, publicly-elected officials stand accused of profound negligence through a deliberate misinterpretation the facts, either not telling or distorting the truth, while instilling fear and dread. As a result the global economy is in tatters and will take a long time to fully recover. Defects within globalization, such as the extended web of supply chains and the ethos of just-in-time inventories, have been exposed for their vulnerability.

Many countries are already in a recession with high levels of unemployment, small businesses going to the wall, and even larger companies, such as Hertz, Virgin Australia, Nordstrom, Thai International, and Best Buy, for example, already in administration or preparing to file for bankruptcy.

Even given the shocking nature of our predicament, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Below the churning surface, undercurrents of unprecedented volatility and potential destabilization are converging. While the world deals with the consequences of inconsistent antiphons to the very idea of a pandemic, a rare surge in the metabolism of human awareness has injected new meaning into a future characterized less by economic growth and industrial production than health and wellbeing. This great pause we are encountering has allowed us a glimpse into a world we thought long past. This has left many of us with a distinct impression that a return to business-as-usual would be a retrograde, damaging step.

Meanwhile, the imminent energy crisis, high levels of debt, continuing US-China tensions, a rapid collapse in consumer confidence, disposable income, and trust in the established order, rising social discontent, unresolved issues of corruption and incompetence, and the ongoing shut-down of a broad swathe of small enterprises, will all contribute to a further upsurge of default rates and bankruptcies. Another chance to look in the rearview mirror and take a deep breath.

It is possible we are reaching a bifurcation point in societal vitality. Whether we see some form of community reprisal following such delusions and apparent recklessness, or greater levels of social conformity in an environment of dread and misgiving, depends on several unknowable factors.

There is a slight possibility we are sowing the seeds of a quiescent revolution. How officialdom and our dominant power structures deal with that possibility over the next decade will likely shape the fate of our civilization.

*[1] It is possible that people on ACE inhibitors such as statins and prescriptions for blood pressure would need to temporarily change medication during treatment to avoid additional cardiac problems