Panocracy 15
Careless Health
“A ruse by any other name would still smell of cheating” – Not Shakespeare
This time we're looking at Health and despite my dictum of minimal moaning there will be a lot of it here – because there's an awful lot to complain about. We'll see later how we might have avoided some of, if not most of, the unnecessary deaths, injuries and other harms that have befallen us. No prizes for guessing that a Panocracy would have protected us far better.
So let's wade in! First, a few of quotes from some of those associated with the health leviathan. I've chosen these because they seem to represent the many similar views from the profession and outside it.
In the early days, not much was known about how to treat the novel coronavirus so one might have thought that listening to experienced and respected clinicians would be sensible.
The Clinician
At the start of the Covid19 pandemic, many medical doctors offered their clinical advice to the health authorities. In the USA Paul Marik, a well-respected clinician, wrote to the governor of New York detailing safe and potentially lifesaving treatments.
Needless to say, New York went its own way with mechanical ventilation
and the results were not pretty.
We should have been able to find open minded and reasoned discourse in respected scientific publications ...
The Science Journal Editor
The New England Journal of Medicine is one of the world's most prestigious and trusted medical science journals. After 20 years as its editor Dr. Marcia Angell resigned just 3 months into the 'pandemic' in June 2020:
“Now primarily a marketing machine to sell drugs of dubious benefit, big Pharma uses its wealth and power to co-opt every institution that might stand in its way, including the US Congress, the FDA, academic medical centers and the medical profession itself
...
It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine.”
Her analysis was justified. The response progressed from failure to treat the disease with widely available safe and cheap (out of patent) drugs, through totalitarian interventions like lockdowns and mask mandates, to coerced mass vaccination with poorly understood products.
The United Kingdom's flagship NHS was already suffering from the malaise of bureaucracy (see Panocracy 13) and poor management. The Covid episode has simply exposed the sores.
The Nurse
“Although I have been in post as a nurse with NHS Grampian since 2004, I now feel that I can no longer continue to work for the NHS with its current allopathic model of medicine. Over the later decade of my nursing career, I have watched as the NHS has turned into a service that condones and promotes a ‘pill for every ill’. I have watched as countless good nurses, myself included, have struggled to look after patients in a holistic way—providing them with much needed care, time and support—due to increasing service demands, staffing pressures and misguided management.
Since early 2020, I have become more and more disillusioned with the NHS following its response to Covid-19, whereby evidence-based, existing, effectual, cheap and widely available medicines were not used as treatment. However, multi-million-pound-making novel genetic therapies were, that were given rushed approval under the guise of being vaccines and having supposedly completed efficacious trials.” - Frances Adamson
The NHS Clinician
“The (UK National Health Service), not just A&E, is at breaking point. The answer is straightforward: because senior management and civil servants routinely gaslight clinicians whenever we flag up critical issues to do with resourcing, bureaucracy and waste. We point out that countless lives are being lost unnecessarily because of systemic breakdown. Shoulders are shrugged. Charges of “oversensitivity” are levelled at us. Meanwhile, the small number of six-figure-salaried civil servants who oversee our organisation of 1.4 million people continue to hold us in contempt.” - Emma Jones, Unherd
We were encouraged to ostracise the unvaxxed and to hate them. Some people even wished them dead.
The Penitent
“Most of us who pilloried the noncompliant did it because it seemed like certain victory, like the unvaccinated would never make it through unbroken. Indeed, the promised new normal looked unbeatable, so we sided with it and made punching bags out of the holdouts.
But betting against them has been a scathing embarrassment for many of us who’ve now learned that the mandates only had the power we gave them. It was not through quiet compliance that we avoided endless domination by pharmaceutical companies and medical checkpoints at every doorway. It was thanks to the people we tried to tear down.” - Susan Dunham
The Fallout
In the US, the CDC (Center for Disease Control) developed an app, called v-safe,
that allowed US citizens to report vaccine adverse events. 10 million of them voluntarily used it. The CDC initially refused to release the data but was compelled to as a result of legal action.
“Among numerous alarming results, out of the approximate 10 million individuals that registered and submitted data to v-safe, 782,913 individuals, or over 7.7% of v-safe users, had a health event requiring medical attention, emergency room intervention, and/or hospitalization. Over 25% had an event that required them to miss school or work and/or prevented normal activities.”
Most western countries have a drug safety monitoring system and they corroborate what has been revealed in the v-safe data. The UK’s Yellow Card, The US’s VAERS, and Europe’s EudraVigilance have all shown unprecedented increases in adverse events since late 2020.
The Analysis
The jury's still very much out on the overall consequences of the covid hysteria and many of the worst harms may not have revealed themselves yet. It may even turn out that the harms attributed to Covid19 were in fact mostly due to the headless chicken responses of health authorities.
For example, do you remember the 10000 ventilators ordered by the UK government?
More than sad, then that intubation was associated with a 97% mortality rate versus 27% for the non-ventilated.
As the penitent said earlier it took ordinary people to stop this iatrocide. The same ordinary people who found themselves locked up, made to wear masks and subjected to an uncontrolled medical experiment by ideologues. Lots of books remain to be written about this infamous period of political bungling in the face of a not unusually serious disease.
Here's a taster for what you can expect.
This analysis shows that the death rate in England is well correlated with the death rate in Sweden – except during the Covid hysteria when England fares much worse. This is likely due to differences in health policy rather than demographics.
In 10 years' time we'll look back at these past few years and wonder what the hell were we thinking.
Panocracy and Covid Mass Hysteria
We've seen how badly representational governments did during the Covid crisis - apart from in Sweden and that's only because it largely stayed out of the health response, providing advice over diktat. Apart from its mishandling of care homes and later on when it became involved in the vaccination fiasco (but that's another story) the Swedes had a relatively good outcome.
The key to dealing with this disease (and what Sweden did) was what the WHO had recommended prior to the pandemic, and what the Great Barrington Declaration said at the time: very little – no masking, no lockdowns, no anti-social distancing, no shutting down schools, no beggaring the livelihoods of millions.
It's hard to see how any of what happened would have been allowed in a panocracy. Yes, there would have been groups of hysterics clamouring for draconian measures but these would have been countered by the rapidly emerging evidence-based advice from capable medics, scientists and from our lived experiences. There was plenty of it available to our governments but they chose to ignore it, preferring to live in their own self-serving echo chambers of received opinion.
In the panocracy there would have been many RFCs calling for measures like lockdowns, masks and even more extreme measures.
Would you have voted to be put under house-arrest?
Would you have voted to force everyone to wear a mask rather than leave it as a matter of personal choice?
Would you have voted to introduce a vaccine passport and to ostracise anyone who didn't have one?
Would you have voted to create internment camps for the unvaccinated?
In a panocracy you would have been asked.
Other RFCs would have called for the introduction of novel vaccines but these would have been subjected to critical analysis by experts who were independent of the drug companies and the health authorities and science journal editors they had captured.
That's the advantage of a panocracy – everyone has a voice.
One big reason that these RFCs would have failed is that Big Pharma, Big Tech and Big Money would not have had that layer of influential people to propagandise and convert to the religion of Vaxx. With no politicians we would have had no 'expert advisors': ex drug company directors and shareholders who just knew the 'right thing to do' was to go along with the Big Narrative.
A Prescription for Better Health
It's become clear over the past few years that our health care systems are in a bad way and declining.
I think this is because of the 'one-size-fits-all' approach to institutions that seems to have evolved as 'efficiency' became the watchword. Generalisations like those which surround health care reduce individuals with unique conditions to mere statistical averages. Everyone is treated equally – and that means equally badly.
Why on earth do we trust health care to ideology, politics and money?
Do you want a socialised health care system that's beholden to political whim, Big Pharma and Big Insurance?
Do you want a privatised health care system that's indebted to Big Money, Big Pharma and Big Insurance?
Both of these extremes neglect the uniqueness of the patient – the kind of thing your family doctor used to keep in his head.
There are people out there with great solutions to these problems. You might be one of them. So why don't we get a chance to hear what they have to say?
Next Time
Next time we'll take a brief look at money and how the elites have fiddled it throughout history to enrich and empower themselves at the expense of the rest of us.
In a panocracy there will still be rich people but their riches will count for less than at the moment. We'll see how the panocracy affects the grafters, grifters, flunkies and free-riders who rip us all off with impunity in today's political environment.