We have had almost 18 months of propaganda, incompetence, half-truths and many deaths with the Covid-19 pandemic, the Wuhan virus if we follow the convention. In general, viruses that produce epidemics take their name form the original location where they were identified (i.e. Ebola is a river in Africa where the virus was detected in 1976; Zika is the name of a forest in Uganda where the corresponding virus was first discovered in 1947)
In Spain, the excess of deaths from 2019 to 2020 amounted to 83,000 people that can probably be attributed to the Wuhan virus, 20% more deaths than the previous year. Something similar happened in the USA with an 18% increase in deaths between 2019 and 2020 (from 2,854,000 to 3,358,000). In absolute terms that represents half a million more deaths than the previous year, in relative terms it means 8.64 deaths per 1,000 inhabitants in 2019 vs 10.17 deaths per 1,000 inhabitants in 2020 (assuming that the USA has a population of just over 330 million inhabitants in 2020, there were 1.53 excess deaths per 1,000 people). And this simple mathematical operation, available to anyone who has completed a third year of basic general education, is very important.
The Wuhan virus problem is real, very real, it is not a conspiratory theory, it is here and chances are it will stay for a while. It is curious that the same people who were suspicious of vaccines just a few months ago now that they are in power use those same vaccines as a weapon to establish a “health” dictatorship with the excuse of the virus.
But beyond the details, important but simple consequences of larger problems, what this pandemic has made clear is the need to reinvent our society from the point of view of government.
After decades of peace, with some more or less underground wars, September 11 changed the world, and made it clear that the Western way of life is a threat to many other societal organizations. However, this Western society that has produced enormous advances in all aspects of life simply as a result of the defense of individual freedom and private property, is now under attack from within. Western governments have become elephantiasic bureaucratic structures that serve their own goals and move at their own pace, that of their interests not those of the society they supposedly serve.
If we review the messages that the “institutions” have communicated to the public, there is a multitude of half-truths, inaccuracies and obvious lies. In any case, the objective has always been, in all countries and regardless of political affiliation on paper, “do what I say.”
It began with the promise that the quarantine would reduce the problem a lot, then masks would prevent the spread of the virus, then vaccines would eradicate the disease and in all cases governments assumed extraordinary powers that they have not yet releases. In the USA, the government that now mandates vaccination showed doubts and suspicions about vaccines just 12 months ago and now (and without any scientific data to support it) it was about to start giving third doses that fortunately an advisory committee of experts held by FDA has said no, a resounding no. There is no real strong evidence evidence for it at the moment. It is curious that there was a statistically significant difference if the presence of antibodies after 1 month of the first dose was compared with the presence of antibodies after 1 month of the third dose (inadequate comparison), but if the presence of antibodies was compared one month after the second dose with 1 month after the third dose there is no difference in the presence of antibodies. It is curious that the FDA is always reluctant to base its decisions on what are called pharmacodynamic markers (in this case the presence of antibodies) and they always want relevant clinical data (in this case the percentage of people who are infected after having been vaccinated). Is a double standard being applied here? (Pfizer Briefing Book https://www.fda.gov/media/152161/download). I pay attention to these details because no one has had the scientific and moral decency to say “we don’t know” and “science” has been used as an irrefutable argument. This shows both ignorance at a very deep level and a shameful political use of it since science just narrows corners of uncertainty, it never delineates corners of truth.
When the pandemic appeared, it was possible to say “we do not know” but out of prudence “let’s go home” so we can reduce the number of patients and avoid a collapse of our health care system and hospitals. After that first experience, it was possible to say, we do not know and there is no conclusive scientific evidence, but it is reasonable to wear a mask in closed places, and it is reasonable to start using treatments, which do not yet have randomized double-blind trials, but which come from what we learned with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) caused by a coronavirus in 2003 in Asia. It could have been said that this is an animal reservoir disease and as such it is reasonable to think that it will remain with us.
It could have been said that vaccines will be a great help, but not the final solution, since, although they protect against disease, vaccinated patients can sometimes present the disease with or without symptoms and transmit it. It could have been said that health agencies are working with pharmaceutical companies to develop vaccines on technological platforms on which other vaccines have already been developed (Russian or Chinese or J&J vaccine) or on new technological platforms that have taken decades of research (Pfizer or Moderna), that the speed of approval comes from the fact that the agencies are reviewing phase I, II and III data in real time, but that the process is exactly the same as in other circumstances and the size of the studies similar to other vaccine studies. Once vaccines were available it could have been said that as with any other medication there is a balance of benefit and risk, that there is never zero risk since living is the only “sine qua non” condition for dying. It could have been said that the vaccination effort of planetary proportions with hundreds of millions of people vaccinated in a very short time is going to produce safety signals that will have to be studied. Under normal circumstances, people develop cancer or heart attacks or … and after vaccination these events will occur and the ascription of causality to vaccination is a possibility, but it requires time and more studies to clarify what the risks of vaccination are that have not been detected in phase I, II and III studies.
However, no one has said “I don’t know, we don’t know”. Power always assumes dependence on the citizenry, to whom Power treats as subjects, and that is why they are unable to say “I don’t know.” They believe that little people ( those not invited to the MET gala or those who do not know what “French Laundry” is) need certainties from the omniscient captains. Ignorance is full of facebook, instagram and conversations in the DC beltway, but reading the bible would do some good “for we live by faith, not by sight” 2,Corinthians 5:7.
The answer in the end lies in beauty as truth and through beauty in freedom. In Hegel, beauty has the brilliance of truth, the idea of beauty comes from the immediate unity of the concept with its reality, and in that aspect, truth becomes freedom.
The truth reduces entropy, the background noise that makes it difficult to distinguish the real from the other. Truth occurs infrequently and is distilled from theory, from hypothesis. We have replaced theories with data and that is why we cannot really discriminate in what they tell us. There is no narrative, no theories, no truth, only data.
In our circumstances the truth is the existence of ignorance and the need to study to diminish that ignorance; that’s where the trust in those who speak to us comes from. They flood us with data do not mean anything. Now that children under 12 years old are going back to school, they say ” There is a X00% increase in cases”…. What does it mean? How many children have been hospitalized? How many have died?
In the USA, the year 2017-2018 there were 643 deaths due to seasonal flu in children (115 in 0-4 years and 528 in 5 to 18 years) with an incidence of 0.008 cases per 1,000 people in that age group ( there are just over 80,000,000 inhabitants in the 0-18 years of age in the USA). On the same website (www.cdc.gov) it is shown that in 2019 there were 516 deaths attributed to Covid-19 in the age group (159 in 0-4 years and 357 in 5-18 years) with an incidence of 0.006 cases per 1,000 people in that age group. Most of these deaths, both in influenza and Covid-19, occurred in patients with previous pathologies (cancer, cystic fibrosis, etc.). For the snowflakes, I will say that each person is a treasure, and that one of the hardest things I have done is to tell a mother that her adolescent son is brain dead, the desperate cry of that mother is still in my memory. By way of review I will say that this article talks about an incidence of death by firearm in the age group 0-18 years in the USA of 1.8 per 100,000 (that is, 0.018 per 1,000 people in that age group, https: // pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/140/1/e20163486#T1). Following the kids and adolescent topic. In May 2021, FDA expanded the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine to include adolescents aged 12–15 years. That was based on a study of 2,260 children. That sample size allows you to detect events with a frequency of 3.2 cases per 1,000 patients exposed or higher (assuming a Poisson distribution and a 95% Confidence interval) but not events with lower frequency. On July 6th CDC issues a document where they review the safety profile of the vaccine with the adverse events reported. This is the data they provide: As of June 11, 2021,Within the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) 1,226 reports of myocarditis after mRNA vaccination were received during December 29, 2020–June 11, 2021. Among 1,194 reports for which patient age was known, 687 were among persons aged <30 years. At the time of the report ( July 2021), 323 of these 484 cases were determined to meet criteria in CDC’s case definitions for myocarditis, pericarditis, or myopericarditis by provider interview or medical record review. The median age of the 323 patients meeting CDC’s case definitions was 19 years (range = 12−29 years); 291 were male, and 32 were female. The median interval from vaccination to symptom onset was 2 days (range = 0−40 days); 92% of patients experienced onset of symptoms within 7 days of vaccination. Of the 323 persons meeting CDC’s case definitions, 309 (96%) were hospitalized. Myocarditis reporting rates were 40.6 cases per million second doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines administered to males aged 12−29 years and 2.4 per million second doses administered to males aged ≥30 years; reporting rates among females in these age groups were 4.2 and 1.0 per million second doses, respectively. The highest reporting rates were among males aged 12−17 years and those aged 18−24 years (62.8 and 50.5 reported myocarditis cases per million second doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administered, respectively).
So according to official data the probability of having a severe myocarditis if you receive the vaccine is 62.8 per million males 12-17 people vaccinated with the 2 doses. (https://www.infoplease.com/us/census/demographic-statistics) . As per data from CDC from January 1, 2021–March 31, 2021 there were 204 hospitalizations in children 12-17 years of age due to Covid-19 which results in a hospitalization rate of 8.12 cases per million children in the 12-17 years of age. Are these exactly comparable? Not exactly because they belong to different times but they give an idea of the magnitude of the risks and benefits that only information (not mandates) can help in decision making.
Many parents are reluctant to vaccinate their children because the benefit-risk ( extremely clear in adults) in that age group is not clear. Parents should be the ones making decisions, not governments.
Meanwhile, the medical class has clung to its 15 minutes of fame and daily television.
But, just as I believe that the government is at the service of citizens and must provide services and information, not the current dictatorship with propaganda that the Western world has become, we must also ask citizens for citizen-like behavior. The quality of our democracies is worth as much as their citizenship and that requires an effort of information and personal decision. The exercise of freedom is a moral imperative, and all those who believe they are making a crusade for freedom should think about whether they are making an honest decision with all the information at their disposal and the repercussions of their decision on their fellow citizens.
And this reminds me of Winston Churchill’s first speech, in May 1940, as prime minister in the middle of the Second World War “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat.” which is similar to what Giuseppe Garibaldi said to his troops in 1849“ I offer you hunger, thirst, long marches, battles and death ”. Or what Enrique V said on Saint Crispin’s day “If we are mark’d to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God’s will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.. “
The legitimacy of our democracies is in question, it has been in question for a long time, because the political caste has become that, a caste that seeks income from the workers of power. There are obvious examples in all “democratic” countries. And legitimacy is the fundamental characteristic that a democracy needs to survive. It would have been nice if someone had told the truth. “We don’t know.” Citizens always follow those who have the courage to honestly lead in uncertain times.
References
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7023e1.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7031e1.htm
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7027e2.htm?s_cid=mm7027e2_w
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2017-2018.htm#table1
https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Deaths-by-Sex-Ages-0-18-years/xa4b-4pzv