Jun 5, 2021Liked by Mathew Crawford

All kinds of difficult questions here. You make one point that hadn’t occurred to me due to my own biases. If remdesivir is an antiviral, why in the world would it be tested on patients after the virus replication cycle has completed(or nearly so)? What’s even more confounding is many had complained early on that many treatments were “studied” at that same point in the cycle ensuring that the treatment would fail. That is a “conspiracy” in my mind but if it is, why would Gilead allow themselves to fall into that same conspiracy? I know it’s expensive but nobody even tried to see how it would perform under ideal early conditions? Makes my head spin.

OTOH, it is really easy to see how this should never have been a “pandemic”. If any early treatment was allowed to demonstrate efficacy, the emergency would have been instantly over - even if it was remdesivir. The cost and limited supply would have accelerated investigation into other known or suspected treatments and ballgame over. It was the suppression of any early treatment that allowed this to spread throughout the world. A lot of very bad people benefitted enormously from this.

Also, I think you made an error in classifying ivermectin as an antibiotic early on in the article.

Expand full comment
Jun 7, 2021Liked by Mathew Crawford

Hi Mathew - Other possibilties explored:

Echinacea - whopped the virus in vitro - in Switzerland (I used a combination Ech + Zinc + Vit C any time I am under stress and run down) https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210117/Research-suggests-St-Johns-Wort-and-Echinacea-could-protect-against-COVID-19.aspx ;

Artemesia - trials were going on but have not heard the results - but see Madagascar (it is part of my arsenal). Anti-malarials in general (as said by Dr Raoult in one of his earlier videos - also a friend who caught Covid in Gabon, was told that anti-malarials was their way of combatting Covid. And Apirivine - an antiviral produced by pharmicist in Benin, a small clinical trial in Burkina. Can send you docs on this, if interested. A lot of our high level politicians have used it and none have died. - will send links for the rest later.

Expand full comment

I was surprised to discover last fall that relatively cheap HEPA filter air purifiers are effective at removing coronavirus from the air (if the info that various manufacturers provide is correct, but it seems legit, because like with masks diffusion causes 'rona virions to get caught).

Imagine, for instance here in Los Angeles county, if people _knew_ this, and enough people bought $50-$100 air purifiers (or perhaps were given them which may have saved money in the long run) and for small businesses we could have prevented 1 million cases.

Expand full comment

For me it was clear from start that everything done was not for any good. It seems they wanted to in any way possible try to make the virus stronger than it is.

If you lower peoples immune systems the virus will look stronger.

Then all the propaganda in media and hysteria it creates. That you dont do if its a deadly disease so this is also just a trick to make the virus look stronger than it is.

This has been planned for a long time. WHO changed the definition for a pandemic after the bird flue 2005. With old definition this would never been pandemic.

If they didnt do all these tricks this would have never been.

It has nothing to do with the virus, its not a threat. Its just about the outcome. They wanted to create this chaos for some reason.

It will be an interesting fall when the flue season starts, more chaos to come.

Expand full comment

The answers to all of these questions to me are painfully obvious: they threaten the revenue to be gained from the vaccination campaign.

Expand full comment

How can anyone trust what you say when you misrepresent the content of articles? I got as far as these two links: "dies quickly to UV light and even ordinary light" and "there are wavelengths that kill the virus and are safe for human exposure". I looked, and they did not say what you say they do. Either you are not clever enough to understand them (but they are not hard); do not care enough about being accurate; or you are deliberately creating propaganda. Which is it?

Expand full comment

Would be nice if they could prove existence and characterisation of SARS-Cov-2. All we have is a digitally assembled sequence from a computer viral database (that is also questionable as to the sequences are built by ASSUMPTIONS (not evidence) embedded in the algorithms. Now there was at this stage no proof of Isolation yet there is now a sequence?

The tool RT-PCR maybe the problem that is creating all the confusion. We know full well that is cannot determine infection or non-infection. We know it cannot determine any specific virus if one actually exists. We know the Corman-Drosten PCR protocol has been questioned and no response is forthcoming as yet. We also know the tool used is not a diagnostic tool in the first place but is being used for that purpose.

The same tool generates the "cases" which are in fact a meaningless number.

It is the same tool being used by Governments to determine their response. One of them was lockdowns. Another was masks? Masking healthy people. isolating healthy people? Destroying economies?

Are we not chasing tails? Misdiagnosing and applying the wrong treatment protocols because of this? The umbrella created term COVID19 points to this.

What are the HEPA filters removing? Toxins from pollution? How do we know they are removing the "virus"? That is assumed not proven.

What is the UV light doing? Destroying a virus or breaking down the structure or binding(weak boundaries) of the toxic chemicals.

Every year we get Influenza like illness and colds during winter, Did we all die and did we destroy our livelihoods then?

Maybe we need to remove the Virtual Reality headsets, switch of the TV's and stop fear panic and groupthink hysteria.

Expand full comment