Truth about Fauci told by me many times

Articles by me started in 2020; long before Robert Kennedy getting so much coverage for his new anti-Fauci book; and Pandemic Blunder also has much truth about the awful Fauci.

[Dear Subscribers: For those of you with time and a deep interest in the evil Fauci, here are just three of my articles that went after him.]

Article 1: August 13, 2020

Dr. Anthony Fauci: A New Kind of War Criminal

Joel S. Hirschhorn

To understand that President Trump is a war time president is also to understand that Dr. Anthony Fauci is a war criminal undermining Trump’s battle against the pandemic virus.

The current war on the COVID-19 pandemic virus is a battle against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) virus.  Why? Because the CCP intentionally decided to spread the virus worldwide and create the pandemic so that all nations would suffer economically just as they suffered.  Moreover, they knew that they could make huge sums by selling the inevitably needed personal protective equipment (PPE) and, eventually, possible drugs and vaccines.  All this is not surprising because the CCP controls China, subjugates its enormous population, and oppresses minorities and dissidents through what is a criminal civilian and military enterprise that enriches itself and that has never been voted into office through a national popular vote. 

Recent Chinese scientists, notably physician Li Meng Yan from Hong Kong University, have made it clear that the CCP not only created the pandemic but also engineered the virus to make it exceptionally contagious and lethal and that this was known far earlier than most have recognized – in late 2019.  She maintains that the virus “originated in a military laboratory overseen by the People’s Liberation Army.”  The virus escaped the laboratory in Wuhan, probably accidentally.

Steven Mosher has been spreading the results of a study by an esteemed Italian scientist and given this conclusion: “It was genetically engineered in the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s P4 (high-containment) lab in a program supervised by the Chinese military.”

So why consider Dr. Anthony Fauci, as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the U.S. National Institutes of Health for 36 years, a new kind of war criminal?  President Trump has been correct in talking about a war against the CCP pandemic.  Here are a number of Fauci actions or lack of them that support my characterization as both god-like and a war criminal who has violated public trust in him and willfully deceived the public.

The first thing to emphasize is that diverse actions have made Fauci far more immune from criticism than the public is immune from the CCP virus.  The U.S. mainstream news media have helped Fauci create an image as a unique, nation-saving neutral, scientist, physician and public health expert working as a main advisor to President Trump.  Fauci, in fact, has been a remarkably successful bureaucrat for his multi-billion dollar operation and brilliant manipulator of the media to create and sustain a popular image that hardly anyone is willing to attack.  He is a master of staying in the public limelight through television, radio and newspaper interviews.

What few people understand is that Fauci also has a political agenda.  So much of what he does and says in a very public way supports the massive anti-Trump movement, especially in the mainstream news media that is remarkably liberal and Democrat Party oriented.  Anti-Trump media have successfully made Fauci cloaked in a myth of a public health defender when in fact his views and actions have resulted in tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands deaths from the CCP virus, countless numbers of people suffered awful medical distress, and also the remarkable, widespread economic disaster inflicting harm and just about all Americans and millions of others worldwide. 

But it is far more unlikely that Fauci will ever admit to what amounts to criminal behavior in preventing the widespread use of life-saving hydroxychloroquine.  The thousands of American lives that have been saved by courageous front-line physicians will eventually be better appreciated, as well as doctors also using hydroxychloroquine worldwide.  As some have noted the use in India with over a billion residents explains why the number of deaths from the CCP virus is roughly the same as the number of fatalities in New York State.  Similarly, the statistics for Turkey are very good, far better than the U.S.  An official said “Doctors prescribe hydroxychloroquine to everyone who is tested positive for coronavirus."  The same is true for Costa Rica where this cheap medicine is widely used.  In some 80 nations this medicine is sold over the counter without the need for prescription.

Of all the many clinicians supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine perhaps the best who has successfully received public exposure is Dr. Harvey Risch.  After publishing in a medical journal he wrote in Newsweek and said:

“As professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, I have authored over 300 peer-reviewed publications and currently hold senior positions on the editorial boards of several leading journals. I am usually accustomed to advocating for positions within the mainstream of medicine, so have been flummoxed to find that, in the midst of a crisis, I am fighting for a treatment that the data fully support but which, for reasons having nothing to do with a correct understanding of the science, has been pushed to the sidelines. As a result, tens of thousands of patients with COVID-19 are dying unnecessarily. Fortunately, the situation can be reversed easily and quickly.

I am referring, of course, to the medication hydroxychloroquine. When this inexpensive oral medication is given very early in the course of illness, before the virus has had time to multiply beyond control, it has shown to be highly effective, especially when given in combination with the antibiotics azithromycin or doxycycline and the nutritional supplement zinc.”

On national television Risch said “75,000 to 100,000 lives will be saved" with use of the controversial medicine and that "we're basically fighting a propaganda war against the medical facts."  More recently he made this important observation: “a third of [FDA] funding comes from drug companies, [and] is under intense pressure from those companies to be extremely conservative in its handling of hydroxychloroquine.

Dr. Simone Gold has also made an extensive review of the evidence for using hydroxychloroquine.  Another important review by several physicians is also available.  Dr. James Todaro has an excellent website on this issue with great resources.

An article in The Daily Mail that noted: “The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) presented data on 2,333 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine …across the globe that shows 91.6 percent of those who got the drug fared better after treatment.”

A most important analysis “An Effective COVID Treatment the Media Continues to Besmirch” by Steven Hatfill, a physician and veteran virologist, noted that “the ‘Fauci Strategy’ was to keep early infected patients quarantined at home without treatment until they developed a shortness of breath and had to be admitted to a hospital. ... The Food and Drug Administration cluelessly agreed to this doctrine and it stated in its hydroxychloroquine Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that “hospitalized patients were likely to have a greater prospect of benefit (compared to ambulatory patients with mild illness).  In reality just the opposite was true. This was a tragic mistake by Fauci and FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn and it was a mistake that would cost the lives of thousands of Americans in the days to come.  Here in our country, Fauci continued to ignore the ever accumulating and remarkable early-use data on hydroxychloroquine and he became focused on a new antiviral compound named remdesivir.  Why is the American media trying to run the U.S. pandemic response with its own misinformation?”  Hatfill shows why some nations have performed better than the U.S. because hydroxychloroquine has been used.

Fauci has dismissed a great many studies and test results showing the efficacy and safety of hydroxychloroquine by only supporting extensive, lengthy randomized, placebo controlled, double blind studies.  As many doctors have noted there are countless highly used prescription medicines that have never gone through such lengthy and expensive three-phase testing.  Why has Fauci stubbornly refused to acknowledge and accept the positive findings from all kinds of other studies by clinicians in the U.S. and a number of other countries?  He recently said that health experts are unanimous about this medicine – a total lie.  You have to wonder why he would proclaim such a wrong statement in the face of many published writings indicating just the opposite.  The obvious explanation is that he wants to purposefully mislead the public and attack the great many physicians advocating the use of hydroxychloroquine.

Frontline doctors successfully treating their patients with hydroxychloroquine have been appearing on many “conservative” news outlets, including several shows on Fox News and the Warroom Pandemic show.  The point being that too many Americans have been deceived about this therapeutic that has been used safely for many decades to fight malaria and address several serious diseases.

An inevitable, logical and necessary question to consider is exactly why has Fauci chosen to sacrifice the lives of perhaps millions of people by continually dismissing the benefits of hydroxychloroquine?

The answer is twofold.  First, Fauci has a long history of being very close to the CCP and the World Health Organization (WHO).  WHO has been in the pocket of the CCP and played a key role in creating the pandemic.  It also has not done what it could have in promoting global use of hydroxychloroquine.  Fauci helped steer U.S. funding for creating the Wuhan lab that let loose the CCP virus and has been proud of working with Chinese scientists while ignoring that they are beholding to the CCP.

Also note on January 21, 220 Fauci said the CCP virus “is not a major threat for the people of the United States and this is not something that the citizens of the United States right now should be worried about.”  In fact, towards the end of December 2019 and early in January 2020 there was evidence that a very dangerous contagious virus had been unleashed from China, though WHO ignored the evidence.

Second, the only way to fully understand the political motive of Fauci is that for decades he has had close relationships with the largest global pharmaceutical companies.  A main reason was his work on fighting the AIDS epidemic.  Blocking widescale use of the extremely low-cost hydroxychloroquine is key to safeguarding what will be trillions of dollars to be made for treatment drugs, therapeutics, and vaccines. 

For example, “Gilead Sciences Inc., which produces remdesivir, said it would charge U.S. hospitals $3,120 per patient with typical commercial insurance.”  And this therapeutic is in limited supply for critically ill patients in hospitals only.  As noted by Steven Hatfill “Hydroxychloroquine, by contrast, costs 60 cents a tablet, it can be taken at home, it fits in with the national pandemic plan for respiratory viruses, and a course of therapy simply requires swallowing three tablets in the first 24 hours followed by one tablet every 12 hours for five days.”

Fauci’s group ran the key study on remdesivir and publicly proclaimed positive results before the results were peer reviewed and published in a medical journal.   Fauci’s group also developed one of the currently tested vaccines in cooperation with the drug company Moderna, which has received nearly $500 million in federal funding for its work.

One final point to illustrate the political leanings of Fauci.  While he has frequently opined on what government should do, such as making Americans wear masks (after initially saying they were unnecessary), he stubbornly refused to take a public stand against the government allowed massive protests and riots in countless cities that involved huge numbers of people in close proximity.  All these mass activities are a main cause of the spreading of the CCP virus.  But Fauci refused to opine that governments should have taken strong actions to prevent and limit such protests and riots that are correctly seen as part of the broad anti-Trump, pro-Democrat Party movement.

It is hard to understand Fauci’s recent public praising of New York State’s handling of the pandemic on a National Public Radio interview, long after widespread condemnation of its incredibly high death rate, other than to appreciate his leftist leaning.  This also illustrates the sheer ego and belief of being immune to public criticism that defines Fauci.

At the end of July 2020 it was reported that one major American politician had done the right thing.  “The Ohio Board of Pharmacy withdrew a ban on dispensing the drug for treatment or prevention of COVID-19 at the request of Gov. Mike DeWine, a Republican.”

Soon after, in response to an open criticism by Fauci at a congressional hearing, doctors at Henry Ford Health System released a letter on the hospital's successful use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19.  “Unfortunately, the political climate that has persisted has made any objective discussion about this drug impossible, and we are deeply saddened by this turn of events,” they said.

If you accept the abundant evidence that hydroxychloroquine is both an effective preventive as well as a cure when prescribed by doctors at an early point, especially before hospitalization, then you begin to understand why Fauci has blood on his hands.  I believe an accurate historical analysis of this pandemic will show this.

Eventually President Trump may admit that it was a big mistake to elevate Fauci by having him play such a major role in the White House activities on fighting the pandemic.  He may also regret his early and open support for hydroxychloroquine which he proudly said he had taken as a preventive action.  This mobilized leftist forces and as Dennis Prager has aptly said they “weaponized medicine.”  And “people are dying because of the left.”

Meanwhile, every day more and more Americans and others globally are dying unnecessarily from the CCP virus.  So far Fauci has won.  Made possible by the intentional actions by leftist anti-Trump mainstream media.  The federal government's stockpile of hydroxychloroquene sits unused.  Dr. Risch was correct in saying that Fauci has waged a “misinformation campaign” for political purposes  When such a campaign costs thousands and perhaps millions of lives it is a war crime.  Daniel John Sobieski concluded: “Hydroxychloroquine can save lives -- lots of lives. The question then is how many lives have been lost and will be lost due the words and actions of Dr. Anthony Fauci.”

All those straining to overcome the many obstacles to easily using hydroxychloroquine must understand that until Fauci is knocked off his lofty pedestal they will continue to lose the war on the pandemic.

Article 2: The indictment of Anthony Fauci for his Big Lie

September 2020

With a grand jury approach, the revealing of evidence herein shows that Dr. Anthony Fauci has deliberately ignored massive amounts of data showing that hydroxychloroquine is a safe, cheap and effective remedy for COVID-19. By ignoring his ethical responsibility as a physician to first do no harm, his behavior continues to cause preventable pain, suffering and death. Evidence also vindicates what President Trump said and did early on to inform Americans about the benefits of hydroxychloroquine.

1. The Case

Mounting COVID-19 cases and deaths result from limitations on physicians using a safe, effective and low-cost treatment medicine. This, despite many studies and data from other countries showing that HCQ really works to lower death rates and keep affected people from needing hospitalizations and expensive care.

Missing from discussions of hydroxychloroquine use is explicit acknowledgment that Anthony Fauci has used his considerable power and influence to block use of the drug and prevent physicians from using their best judgment. The media have failed to connect two death-causing actions: 1. Some state governors forcing nursing homes to accept virus-infected elderly people; and 2. Government preventing wide and early use of HCQ.

2. Reluctance to condemn Fauci

Nearly everyone seems afraid to openly condemn Fauci's behavior and demand a reversal of his position on HCQ, which would also impact CDC and FDA.

He has made himself the king of virus medicine through constant media appearances far beyond what is normal for a medical researcher. He is part of is a research organization, not a public health or drug approval agency. As much a tyrant as a virus expert, Fauci has stubbornly refused to admit his mistake. We need public outrage against a leftist, media collusion that allows one man to block a lifesaving medicine.

In this vein, an Australian government official has recently condemned the ban on using HCQ: "Health bureaucrats have 'violated the very first principle of the Hippocratic oath' which is to 'do no harm.' … and they must lift their bans. Otherwise they are engaged in crimes against humanity, and they should be taken to the criminal court in The Hague."

Some Americans blame President Trump for the high levels of cases, hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19. But they have more reason to blame Fauci and his pandemic of lies about HCQ. At the end of this article is a "political" solution. It could make stockpiled HCQ broadly available.

3. The Evidence

As in a grand jury, this article cites many publications and detailed information demonstrating the proper and effective use of HCQ that has already saved millions of lives worldwide in this pandemic and could save millions more.

In sum, evidence shows that HCQ should be taken very early, either at home in the first few days after a positive test or after symptoms deemed signficant by a physician, or in the first days of hospitalization. Also, evidence shows that HCQ should be taken along with zinc and an antibiotic, such as doxycycline. Such a "cocktail" can stop the virus at its earliest stage before the very severe second stage.

The Economic Standard's new white paper argues that "HCQ has met the appropriate burden of proof and urges members of the U.S. news media, public health community, and regulatory agencies to stop politicizing the use of this medicine. … opponents have deprived many tens of thousands of Americans of a potentially life-saving treatment." But like other reports, the critical role of Fauci in blocking broad use of HCQ is missing.

A just released Italian study of 3,451 hospitalized patients found 30% less mortality, better than that reported for the very costly remdesivir in hospitals, touted by Fauci. An earlier, smaller Italian study found a 66% reduction in death in hospital patients. A Belgium study of 8,075 hospitalized patients found a 65% reduction. Likewise, a recent study from Saudi Arabia found 43% fewer hospitalizations and 45% fewer ICU admissions. For high-risk nursing home patients in Spain HCQ cut the risk of a bad outcome in half.

A large Henry Ford Hospital System study found a mortality rate for 2,541 patients of 13.5% for HCQ alone, 20.1% for HCQ plus azithromycin, and 26.4% for neither.

A new analysis by R. Clinton Ohlers is title, "Effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine was hiding in plain sight." An early widely publicized study concluded that HCQ was not effective in New York patients. In truth: "Survival rates for hospitalized patients who received the drug approached 85%" and "with azithromycin the survival rate rose as high as 90%." Without either drug, "survival fell to levels as low as 53%." Conclusion: "a highly effective, inexpensive, and widely available treatment for COVID-19 is already in hand."

Similarly, Dr. Watanabe from Brazil reanalyzed a Minnesota study that had a negative conclusion. For very early HCQ use, he found that "reduction in symptomatic outcomes is 72% after 0 days (first day of infection), 48.9% after 1 day and 29.3% after 2 days" – all compared to a placebo group. Conclusion: "Infected patients may have a large benefit if treated as early as possible."

Clearly, many media-hyped studies saying HCQ has no benefits are not credible. Some medical journal papers were retracted.

An article by physician Norman Doidge is "Hydroxychloroquine: A Morality Tale – A startling investigation into how a cheap, well-known drug became a political football in the midst of a pandemic." Conclusion: "Worldwide [HCQ] might save a million or more people before COVID is tamed." Some studies were poorly designed. In one case "the patients were given the medication late – on average 16.6 days after the first symptoms."

Another important study is: "Early treatment with hydroxychloroquine: a country-based analysis." Critical conclusion: The death rate from the virus in a number of nations where HCQ has been made widely available (the treatment group) is about 74% less than in those nations, including the U.S., where it has not been made available (the control group).

Many physicians and experts on viruses have published strong pro-HCQ articles, notably Dr. Harvey Risch from Yale University. He has repeatedly argued for using HCQ as the standard outpatient therapy. This article is for a general audience. In a medical journal article, he warned against "sitting by and letting hundreds of thousands die because we did not have the courage to act according to our rational calculations."

Experienced pro-HCQ front-line doctors have appeared on Fox News shows, including Dr. Stephen Smith, Dr, Marc Siegel (whose 96-year-old father was saved with HCQ), Dr. Janette Nesheiwat, Dr. Mehmet Oz and Dr. Risch who noted, "We're basically fighting a propaganda war against the medical facts" and that "75,000 to 100,000 lives will be saved" if the national HCQ stockpile were used. Fox's Sean Hannity had Dr. George Fareed, an early user of HCQ, on a recent radio show.

A new CDC publication reveals prescriptions for HCQ at retail stores (not mail order). In March through June this year there likely were 680,000 prescriptions for treating the virus. After the government clamp down, prescriptions in May and June averaged 80,000 a month. This limited use may help explain many reduced death rates.

And despite negative actions by some governments and the World Health Organization, the Sermo survey of physicians in 30 countries found for this September that HCQ is being used for 22% of patients outside hospitals, 21% inside them and even 14% in ICUs.

4. Problems with Fauci's Positions

Dr. Fauci is only satisfied with randomized control trials (RCTs). This position has been sharply debunked, as has the assertion of negative health effects and that HCQ risks outweigh its benefits.

Thomas R. Frieden, former head of the CDC, concluded in 2017: "Despite their strengths, RCTs have substantial limitations." He supported using many other kinds of data that now constitute the evidence for using HCQ.

Similarly, Norman Doidge observed: "RCT is best understood as standing not for Randomized Control Trials, but rather 'Rigidly Constrained Thinking.' in the current COVID-19 situation … we cannot simply, as so many are insisting [namely Fauci], rely only on the long-awaited RCTs to decide how to treat COVID-19."

Importantly, hundreds of drugs have been approved without RCTs, including hydrocortisone, Lasix, tetanus vaccine, insulin, tetracycline, warfarin, heparin, prednisone, half of chemotherapy drugs used in cancer and uses of HCQ for many diseases, such as malaria and lupus.

Another false criticism has recently been debunked: "HCQ decreases cardiac events. HCQ should not be restricted in COVID-19 patients out of fear of cardiac mortality." Another study concluded: "HCQ administration is safe for a short-term treatment for patients with COVID-19 … causing … no directly attributable arrhythmic deaths." Dr. James Todaro concluded: "It is highly unlikely that fatal cardiac cases are from hydroxychloroquine use. It is far more likely that the disease itself is the cause of arrhythmias and cardiac injury during the hyperinflammation phase of severe cases of COVID-19."

An article by Steven Hatfill, "Why Is The Media Suppressing Information About Hydroxychloroquine's Effectiveness Against COVID?" noted, "There are now 53 studies that show positive results of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 infections." It also highlights the early Fauci and FDA strategy that promoted use of HCQ for hospitalized patients (when it was mostly too late) rather than early outpatient use.

The Doidge article noted that for a major study that found a 66% reduction in hospital deaths from use of HCQ, Fauci "didn't seem excited." The key question: "Why should anyone facing a pandemic wish to discredit potentially lifesaving medications?" The answer: The billions of dollars to be made from selling medications and vaccines. Fauci has had a very close relationship with pharmaceutical companies and has patents for one of the leading vaccines being tested by Moderna.

In August three-front line physicians wrote a detailed open letter to Fauci making the medical case for unblocking widespread use of HCQ. "You are largely unchallenged in terms of your medical opinions. You are the de facto COVID-19 Czar. … Americans must not continue to die unnecessarily. Adults must resume employment and our youth return to school. Locking down America while awaiting an imperfect vaccine has done far more damage to Americans than the coronavirus."

An important article by an epidemiologist rebutted the explanation by Fauci of why he rejects the incredible amount of evidence supporting use of HCQ. Conclusion: "I earnestly hope that Dr. Fauci reconsiders his opposition to HCQ and restores his hitherto considerable reputation."

Schachtel noted, "Mad scientist: Fauci demands total U.S. shutdown until COVID vaccine arrives: There is no basis for Fauci's claim that he can manipulate society into stopping the virus. He is either a victim of the illusion of control, or he has embraced total deception as part of his power drunk campaign to stay in the spotlight."

Dr. Lee D. Merritt unraveled the question of why Fauci has been so negative about HCQ: "Why is he so strongly promoting the $3,600 remdesiver and almost totally ignoring the $20 HCQ regimen, other than to say the latter is of 'unproven benefit'?" Are there conflicts of interest? She noted that Fauci is an integral part of a vaccine coalition, specifically the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP), a collaboration of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Fauci's group. Fauci is also in the Leadership Council of the 'Decade of Vaccines' Council. Large sums of money flow from the Gates Foundation to and around Fauci's projects.

5. Indictment justified

The continued use of crippling lockdowns advocated by Fauci is sheer lunacy when, in fact, we have an effective therapeutic. Early use of HCQ coupled with understanding the low impact of the virus on younger and healthy people would have blocked local and state lockdowns.

Waiting for large-scale use of a proven vaccine to justify restoring our society and economy is just plain stupid. If Fauci were a genuine public health official and not just a medical researcher, then he would have recognized the great many negative health impacts of lockdowns and waiting for a broadly used vaccine. He has not.

In sum: Every single day people are suffering and dying unnecessarily because Fauci refuses to accept HCQ facts. Instead, in endless media statements and appearances he pushes masks, lockdowns and vaccines.

Anthony Fauci benefits from incorrect views of HCQ in the mostly leftist press. From The Washington Post: "There is no solid scientific evidence hydroxychloroquine should be used to treat COVID-19." Similarly, Twitter recently issued a warning "about the potential risks" of HCQ use. USA Today claimed science "has shown [HCQ] does not have a clinical benefit for COVID-19 patients and even has increased risks."

6. Indictment specifics

For this grand jury proceeding, substantial evidence supports the indictment of Fauci on these counts:

A. Violating his physician oath to first do no harm.

B. Using his substantial influence to block widespread use of the proven safe, cheap and effective HCQ and, consequently, causing preventable pain, suffering and death for many thousands of Americans directly and through crippling lockdowns with their own negative health impacts.

C. Blocking traditional medical freedom and preventing physicians from using their best judgment in selecting for their patients the best treatment for COVID-19.

7. Solution

As a form of trial for the indicted Fauci, here is a practical way to defeat anti-HCQ efforts and the leftist, anti-Trump media and, more importantly, help Americans.

Immediately create a special work group under the White House Pandemic Task Force. Have it co-chaired by Dr. Scott Atlas, now a member of the Task Force, and the eminent Dr. Harvey Risch of Yale University. Have them select 10 additional members. Mandate them to deliver to the Task Force and President Trump within 30 days a recommendation to remove government restrictions on the use of HCQ or maintain the status quo. Let truth prevail.

Article 3: How Fauci’s BIG LIE Created the Covid Pandemic

October 2021

Sometimes it pays to step back in history to understand exactly how something monumental was created.  This is the story of how one Big Lie turned our world upside down and ruined the lives of millions of people.

Hard to believe that one Big Lie could have created all the pandemic controls, especially lockdowns, school closings and quarantines, that devastated our lives, our economy and our society.  But it happened.

A very powerful, influential person told the world in early 2020 that the new China virus that leads to COVID-19 infection was especially lethal.  It quickly pushed a fast, enormous response to protect public health.  Was the truth was being told?  It was not.  There was an exaggeration of the new vaccine lethality for the entire population.  In truth, it was only severe for the oldest age category.  Helped by corrupt data from CDC, overstatement of COVID lethality continues today to maintain public fear.

But first we must discuss the meaning of critically important terms.  What the Big Lie was all about had to do with the fatality or death rate of what early in 2020 was seen as an invading new virus coming from China.  How should we think about the fatality rate of a virus?

Terminology

One simple and correct way is how many people die from the infection caused by the virus: the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR).  But another possible way would be to invoke the Case Fatality Rate (CFR); the fraction of documented cases of people with the virus that resulted in death.

How can you know how many people are infected?  A lot of testing would be necessary.  For our COVID pandemic there has been, surprisingly, very little wide blood testing across the whole population.  Many people with infections have no symptoms or just mild ones and do not seek testing or medical attention.  The CDC has done a terrible job of getting good data on infection numbers.

Fauci exaggerated to create a crisis simply by implying great lethality for everyone infected by the new COVID virus.

As to cases ascribed to COVID, there are reasons why that number surely underestimates how many people are really infected.  Why?  Because only some people, usually with symptoms, get tested and if found positive become a case.  On the other side, the PCR test method most widely used has often been implemented in a way to get false positive results, mainly because the number of cycles the test is run is far too high (above 25) and picks up fragments of the virus (or any coronavirus) that does not document real COVID infection.  Thus, the CFR is not a reliable or accurate measure of the real death rate despite widely published case numbers.

Key moment in history

During a March 11, 2020 hearing of the House Oversight and Reform Committee on coronavirus preparedness, Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, put it plainly: “The seasonal flu that we deal with every year has a mortality of 0.1%,” he told the congressional panel, whereas coronavirus is “10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu,” per STAT news.  [0.1% also expressed as .001]

He also said: “The bottom line: It is going to get worse.”  And this: “The stated mortality, overall, of [the coronavirus], when you look at all the data including China, is about 3%.”

That figure of 3%, far from reliable, is 30 times greater than the figure given for the seasonal flu.  Fauci exaggerated to create a crisis simply by implying great lethality for everyone infected by the new COVID virus. And it should be noted that CDC has found the flu IFR ranged from 0.1% (the figure cited by Fauci) to 0.17% [.0017] from 2014 to 2019, because seasonable deaths vary significantly.

What Fauci said put the country, with the help of big media, into convulsions.  It created the foundation for authoritarian contagion controls driving a spike into the lives of Americans.  Fauci intentionally created the pandemic by creating fear.

Great analysis

Now consider the detailed analysis “Public Health Lessons Learned From Biases in Coronavirus Mortality Overestimation” by Ronold B. Brown published in August 2020.  He has a doctoral degrees in public health and organizational behavior. Here are highlights from this article that focused on what Fauci said.

“The validity of this estimation could benefit from vetting for biases and miscalculations.  The main objective of this article is to critically appraise the coronavirus mortality estimation presented to Congress.”

[What Fauci said] “helped launch a campaign of social distancing, organizational and business lockdowns, and shelter-in-place orders.”

“Previous to the Congressional hearing, a less severe estimation of coronavirus mortality appeared in a February 28, 2020 editorial released by NIAID [Fauci’s department] and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).  Published online in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM.org), the editorial stated: ‘…the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%).’  Almost as a parenthetical afterthought, the NEJM editorial inaccurately stated that 0.1% is the approximate case fatality rate of seasonal influenza.  By contrast, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that 0.1% or lower is the approximate influenza infection fatality rate, not the case fatality rate. “

Brown correctly hit the key semantic issue: CFR versus IFR.

“IFRs are estimated following an outbreak, often based on representative samples of blood tests of the immune system in individuals exposed to a virus.  Estimation of the IFR in COVID-19 is urgently needed to assess the scale of the coronavirus pandemic.“   [Now, over a year later this has not happened.]

Brown correctly emphasized “it is imperative to not confuse fatality rates [CFR and IFR] with one another; else misleading calculations with significant consequences could result.”  [That is exactly what Fauci engineered.]

Brown said the 1% figure in the testimony was consistent with the “coronavirus CFR of 1.8-3.4% (median, 2.6%) reported by the CDC.”  [As I write this data in The Washington Post shows a CFR of 1.6%.  This substantiates that the health care system has made progress in curbing COVID deaths.  But this current CFR is still 16 times higher than the IFR figure for the seasonal flu.  IFR remains the issue.]

Now Brown gets to the heart of the problem: “A comparison of coronavirus and seasonal influenza CFRs may have been intended during Congressional testimony, but due to misclassifying an IFR as a CFR, the comparison turned out to be between an adjusted coronavirus CFR of 1% and an influenza IFR of 0.1%.”  [Did Fauci, the widely lauded expert, not know what he was doing?  Hard to believe this.  If he knew, then we have the explanation for the Big Lie.]

By May 2020 “it was clear that the coronavirus mortality total for the season would be nowhere near 800,000 deaths inferred from the 10-fold mortality overestimation reported to Congress [emphasis added].  Even after adjusting for the effect of successful mitigation measures that may have slowed down the rate of coronavirus transmission, it seems unlikely that so many deaths were completely eliminated by a nonpharmaceutical intervention such as social distancing, which was only intended to contain infection transmission, not suppress infections and related fatalities.”

As to getting good data to determine IFR, Brown noted: “A revised version of a non–peer-reviewed study on COVID-19 antibody seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California, found that infections were many times more prevalent than confirmed cases.   As more serosurveys are conducted throughout the country, a nationally coordinated COVID-19 serosurvey of a representative sample of the population is urgently needed, which can determine if the national IFR is low enough to expedite an across-the-board end to restrictive mitigating measures.”  [In other words, with systematic blood testing, if we have an IFR for COVID similar to the IFR for the seasonal flu, then the many disruptive and costly actions by the public health establishment are not justified.  And they never were!]

Another analysis

The title of this September 2020 article by Len Cabrera is “Mistake or Manipulation.”  An initial point made was: “A review of the early events mentioned in Dr. Brown’s paper and the lack of any corrections to the record suggest that the misstatement [by Fauci] before Congress was not a mistake.” If not a mistake, then it was intentional.

This point was dead on: “In his testimony, Dr. Fauci claimed the mortality of flu was 0.1% and that the case fatality rate of COVID was 3% but could be as low as 1% with asymptomatic cases.  This is an apples-to-oranges comparison of the flu’s infection fatality rate (IFR) to COVID-19’s case fatality rate (CFR).”

And this critical point was made: “All cases are infections, but not all infections are confirmed cases, so the number of infections always exceeds the number of cases, making IFR less than CFR.”  In other words, if the number of deaths is the same, then a lower denominator for calculating CFR compared to that for getting the IFR results in a higher number for CFR.

Are we to believe that the esteemed Fauci did not know this?  Or is it reasonable to conclude that Fauci knew exactly what he was doing, namely using some simple data to create a pandemic crisis that required massive authoritarian government actions?  Fauci set the stage for his wait-for-the-vaccine pandemic strategy that he sold to President Trump.  This required that the government establish blocks to wide use of the safe, cheap, effective and FDA approved generic medicines already found to cure COVID in early 2020, namely ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.  Details about these early treatment protocols are given in Pandemic Blunder.

Here is another point made: “A careful viewing of the testimony suggests the line [COVID being 10 times worse than flu] was not a mistake.  Dr. Fauci was specifically asked if COVID was less lethal than H1N1 or SARS.  Rather than refer to his own NEJM article saying SARS had a case fatality rate of 9-10% (3 to 10 times worse than COVID), Dr. Fauci said, “Absolutely not… the 2009 pandemic of H1N1 was even less lethal than regular flu… this is a really serious problem that we have to take seriously.” He repeated that COVID’s “mortality is 10 times that [of influenza]” and concluded with, “We have to stay ahead of the game in preventing this.”

This also was a prescient view: ”This was a perfect series of switches: IFR to CFR, voluntary isolation for the sick to mandatory isolation for everyone, two weeks to flatten the curve to indefinite lockdown until there’s a vaccine. (If you think it will be voluntary, you’re not paying attention.)”

Add this to the quest for truth: “A study in France looked at all-cause mortality data from 1946 to 2020 and concluded that ‘SARS-CoV-2 is not an unusually virulent viral respiratory disease pathogen” because there is no significant increase in mortality.  Of the deaths in 2020, the study said, ‘unprecedented strict mass quarantine and isolation of both sick and healthy elderly people, together and separately, killed many of them.’”

Here is the article’s correct conclusion: “Sadly, many politicians were duped and went along with the recommendations for lockdowns and masks that followed from Dr. Fauci’s 10-times-deadlier testimony. Don’t expect them to admit their mistakes, either.  Perhaps the only thing harder for a politician than telling the whole truth is admitting a mistake.”

Murder Motivation

To accept the entire argument for a Big Lie it is necessary to explain the motivation for Fauci to intentionally tell the public that the new China virus was extremely lethal.  So much worse than seasonal flu.  So awful that extreme government action was needed.

It is relevant to note that in January 2017 Fauci warned the Trump administration, in a public talk, that no doubt there would be a “surprise outbreak” of a new infectious disease pandemic.  “The thing we’re extraordinarily confident about is that we’re going to see this in the next few years,” he said.  He got what he wanted.  Maybe all the talk about a “plandemic” was spot on.  And maybe Fauci had insights because he was funding the work at the Wuhan Laboratory to develop extremely toxic viruses.

What Fauci said about high lethality set in motion an onerous set of government actions justified on the basis of protecting public health.  Why would anyone want to overstate the lethality of the new COVID-19 virus?  It was the only way to use onerous pandemic control and management methods that Fauci favored.  It was necessary to set in motion a COVID vaccine program.  Most of all, his strategy was used to create very high levels of FEAR in the public so that they would accept his favored government actions.

Understand this.  Fauci is not a trained public health expert, nor a trained epidemiologist or virologist.  He was a plain physician who over many decades as a top NIH bureaucrat accumulated enormous power.  He never did what true public health experts have an ethical obligation to do.  That is to tell the public both the positives and negatives of public health policies and actions.

The point is this: By pushing the need for pandemic actions to address a very lethal virus a host of government actions produced so much economic, social and personal hardships and dislocations.  And many analyses have concluded that more Americans died from the government actions than from the COVID virus.  Perversely, pandemic public health actions actually harmed public health.  But with widespread mainstream media support Fauci got away with everything.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans died unnecessarily.  Fauci is guilty of criminally negligent homicide stemming from his initial and very public overstatement of the lethality of the COVID virus.  Those who have screamed for his prosecution have a valid case.

With his power he created policies that created data to support this lethality claim.  One big action was to create a testing protocol using the PCR technology in ways that created very high case levels.  The inventor of that technology said it was inappropriate for diagnosing the viral infection.  Millions of COVID cases resulted from running PCR equipment at very high cycle rates [high than 25].  Meanwhile the government never did widespread blood testing to get data for knowing the IFR.

The other major way to keep up public support for pandemic controls was to ensure high numbers of COVID deaths.  This was done through directives on how death certificates should be filled out and through financial incentives for hospitals to certify deaths as COVID ones.  Recent analysis that in March 2020 CDC changed guidelines on how death certificates were to be filled out.  Different than the procedure used for 17 years prior to this change.  This study found a COVID fatality figure of 161,392 with the new reporting versus 9,684 for the older procedure.  There is little doubt that COVID death data, even accounting for some overcounting because of people dying not from any COVID influence, have been too high.  This means that IFR data have been too high.

The combination of false high levels of cases and deaths helped maintain public fear of a very lethal virus.  That is not correct for nearly all people younger than 70 years old.

Conclusions

To sum up: COVID was intentionally over hyped by Fauci as a very deadly disease to justify the most extreme public health actions.  This was the Big Lie.  Most valid data now show COVID lethality is similar to that for seasonal flu for the vast majority of people.  But accepting that truth would not have justified the array of excessive government actions used for the false pandemic.

Yes, many people have died from COVID, but deaths have been overreported and infections underreported.  And most deaths – at least 85% – could have been prevented by using generic medicines, such as ivermectin.  There is no doubt that a great many people die with COVID but not FROM COVID, also arguing for a low IFR.  At one point CDC said that only 6% of deaths resulted only from COVID, making the IFR much lower than the flu IFR.

Finally, recognizing the true lower IFR for COVID the whole rationale for mass vaccination collapses, especially in view of very high levels of adverse effects and deaths from the vaccines themselves. This makes perfect sense if you appreciate that the COVID IFR is now similar to the flu IFR for most people, especially if you recognize that CDC has found the flu IFR ranged from 0.1% (the figure cited by Fauci) to 0.17% from 2014 to 2019.

Understanding that the lethality of COVID is far from the terrible picture painted by Fauci at the very beginning of the pandemic is key to weighing the risk/benefit ratio when deciding to get vaccinated.  For most people the risk from the vaccine is greater than the benefit.  Only the elderly have a good reason to get the shot.  Some 81 percent of COVID deaths are for people over 65.  As has been pointed out by many people, the average age of most COVID deaths for elderly victims have been consistently higher than average life expectancy ages.

A new article has made important observations.  The main one is that countries with low vaccination levels have been doing better than those with mass vaccination programs, like the US.  The results are consistent with a widely accepted understanding that the vaccines do not effectively stem virus infection or transmission.  More vaccination equated to more viral spreading.

The new study ended with advice to learn “to live with COVID-19 in the same manner we continue to live a 100 years later with various seasonal alterations of the 1918 Influenza virus.”