264

Coronavirus: finding the ambiguous reality behind the fear porn headlines

Catte Black

According to the World Health Organisation the latest viral panic – the infamous allegedly ‘new’ coronavirus is ‘stabilising‘, at least a little (see also MoA), though you wouldn’t think so from the fear porn currently being pumped out of every media orifice 24/7.

Today, even though signs are the panic is ebbing in China, the UK has claimed it has 8 cases of this new coronavirus and is declaring, on this basis, a “serious and imminent threat to public health”, which – oh goodness – allows BoJo and chums to assume “additional powers to fight the spread of disease”, including powers to “detain people suspected of having the virus”.

This, let me remind you, because 8 – eight – people have allegedly been identified as carrying the virus.

A virus with a mortality rate of around 2%.

Whatever its reality level, whether it’s a new mutation, a manmade death-bug or a largely invented meme, the alleged Wuhan virus has clearly been hyped for its control/fear potential virtually from day one. Whatever else you take away from it, be assured you are supposed to be afraid.

Very very afraid.

This story is being given a free plausibility pass by many in the alt media simply because it originates from a non-western source. There’s apparently a touchingly naive belief that the elites in China would never ally with their counterparts in the West, or use fear as an intimidation technique – just because.

Nonsense of course. Elites everywhere will use any weapons they have to enforce control. They always have and they always will. We are not justified in overlooking potential agenda with this narrative simply because it originates in China and is reported on by Chinese outlets. Chinese elites understand the value of fear porn too, and Chinese media outlets can also be agenda-bound. And on a broader consideration, Chinese people can panic and overreact. Because they are human.

An additional factor dissuading people from examining this critically is largely faith-based. Because this is medicine, and therefore science and therefore the magic/religion of our age, people tend to believe wholesale any ‘fact’ presented them, even third hand, by the practitioners of this alchemy. We rarely subject such claims to scrutiny.

But let’s not be deterred by such things. Let’s look below the surface of this pervasive narrative. At least a little.

the story

In south-east China in early December 2019, people were presenting with symptoms that were indistinguishable from influenza or gastroenteritis. However for some reason (it is very hard to find out what that reason was) suspicions were allegedly aroused that these people were not just suffering from flu, even though they certainly appeared to be, and steps were quickly taken to isolate a potential new pathogen.

By mid-January, less than six weeks later, a potential new pathogen was indeed found, and DNA sequenced. Almost immediately, even though proven cases at that time numbered in mere tens and we had a mortality rate of maximum 3%, Wuhan and other Chinese cities were placed on lockdown and the fear began pumping out.

Images of people allegedly ‘dying in the street’ from this new flu began appearing on social media and news channels. We were treated to shaky video of Chinese people wearing decorating overalls and paper masks, and told they were in ‘hazmat suits’. Images of Wuhan looking like a ghost town were broadcast to the world.

And the numbers grew. Until it was now.

There are currently alleged to be around 41,000 cases of the ‘new’ virus worldwide. The vast majority of them – over 40,000 – in China.

The mortality rate is apparently holding steady at around 2.2%.

What we don’t know is how reliable these figures are. Or even how they are arrived at.

some basic questions

Has every single one of the 41,000 ‘confirmed’ cases have been tested and the virus isolated? If not, what does ‘confirmed’ mean?

Given that symptoms of the ‘new’ virus are identical to those of severe flu and bacterial/viral pneumonia, it can’t be distinguished from them by simple clinical observation, so ‘confirmation’ by any route except viral isolation would throw up enormous numbers of false positives, correct?

In the current climate if a person presents at a hospital in China with severe flu symptoms – fever, respiratory infection, cough – the staff are probably going to play it safe and assume it’s the ‘new’ scare virus, no? Do these unfortunates get included in ‘confirmed’ cases or not?

It would be nice to see a non-hysterical discussion of that question would it not?

Again, how is the test for this virus performed? Are they finding virus or antibodies? Is it reliable? Does the presence of the virus equate with a load sufficient to cause symptoms?

After all coronaviruses are very very common. We all carry antibodies to numerous strains of them. If antibodies to the ‘new’ strain are present, does this indicate current active infection or past infection and immunity?

What about people who may have acquired immunity to the ‘new’ virus, and present with regular but severe flu? If they are tested they will show antibodies and will become listed as current ‘active’ cases, even though they aren’t.

A lot depends on how new the ‘new’ strain really is. There are literally thousands of viral mutations happening all the time. We can’t keep track of them all. What may be a ‘new’ viral strain in terms of clinical awareness may, in fact, have been widely present but undetected in the population. When you look you may find many many individuals with antibodies to this strain, that you may categorise falsely as signs of new and active disease.

Again, these issues and ambiguities in the process of pathogen identification are nowhere addressed, and we are given mere factoids, statements of ‘truth’ from on high that the numbers are real and unquestionable.

Jon Rappoport remains one of the few alternative voices prepared to express any kind of organised scepticism about the current panic. He may not always get it right, but the mere fact he is almost a lone voice means we should pay some attention, just in pursuance of balance.

His latest blog points out the overlooked difficulties with arriving at clear figures for pathogen infection and distribution. It’s worth reading for this alone.

He points out, citing this source that there are between 2.8million and 17million deaths in China per year from pneumonia. This looks like an alarming figure. And it means that, even without any ‘new’ virus strain, hospitals in China would be seeing many cases of respiratory infection/distress every day. The potential for some or all of these sufferers to become statistics in a ‘new virus’ panic is clearly there, and doesn’t require any ‘conspiracy theory’ beyond ordinary human panic.

He also makes the slightly more sinister point –

If you’re beginning to think it’s easy to declare an epidemic and broadcast propaganda about it, you’re right. Take a conventional set of symptoms present in people all over the world, claim a new virus is causing them, and you’re off and running. You can report 500 or 1000 deaths from this virus and people will believe whatever you say or do next. They won’t realize that this set of symptoms has been present in millions and millions of people, for decades or centuries, without the new virus. They won’t realize millions of people have already died without the “new virus.”

As I’ve pointed out above, this is quite true. Even without any intent to create a ‘fake’ pandemic it’s more than possible to achieve it simply by being too inclusive. Without much more information about how this ‘new’ virus was identified and how its prevalence is being monitored, it remains more than possible that its presence is being exaggerated. And that’s not even factoring in the potential for governments and NGOs to wilfully distort information in order to instill panic.

Let’s clarify. We aren’t claiming the ‘new’ coronavirus strain isn’t new. We aren’t claiming it isn’t dangerous. We aren’t claiming it hasn’t infected 41,000 people and isn’t capable of producing a global pandemic that threatens humanity.

All these things are possible. Of course they are. But few to none are currently proven. All we have are statements, allegations, all couched inside obvious panic narratives that ought to make us wary. And from actors with track records of deception, or at very least gross over-reaction.

Until we have something a lot more solid – let’s remember that fear is a universal weapon and that government narratives always need to be questioned – wherever they originate.

Filed under: China, coronavirus, latest