Photo by Anna Shvets from Pexels

I have always marveled at how gullible the American people can be. I go to Walmart and the grocery store (without a mask—try and stop me) and almost everyone is wearing a mask or a bandana. When I was in line at the post office the other day, I walked over to the forms counter and the lady behind me jumped back in panic as if I was radio-active. When you are cruising through the aisles of the stores you can hear a voice on the overhead urging us to maintain social distancing rules, wash your hands for 20 seconds, and only leave your home if it is absolutely necessary. For the life of me I can’t tell the difference between that propaganda and the voice on the monitor in Orwell’s “1984”—big brother programming our minds to conform to the constant drumbeat from the Ministry of Truth.

Too extreme? Consider the recent announcement from YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki that any dissent from the advice and indoctrination of the World Health Organization will not be tolerated and will be summarily deleted from the YouTube platform. This is based on the pretense that anyone who disagrees with the almighty WHO is spreading “medically unsubstantiated” information. I don’t suppose it ever occurred to Wojcicki that the WHO’s information could be equally unsubstantiated. But never mind. We aren’t supposed to ask such questions. The Ministry of Truth frowns on it.

Wojcicki and the other voices played back in an endless loop all around us day in and day out are essentially practicing what is known as “thought control.” No dissent from the approved narrative is permitted. Opposition to the “truth” given from on high will be silenced. The people will believe what they are told, and they will only hear what we want them to hear. If you tell them something different, you are an enemy of the state, and an enemy of the “truth.” Believe the myth, or else. Leave your house, and people will die—it will be your fault.

So, what is this myth? It’s the idea that for the healthy population at large, containment is the correct strategy to follow in order to deal with the situation. The world’s foremost epidemiologists are trying to teach us that it is not true. But they don’t get media coverage. They don’t conform to the “truth.” 

The real truth is we should apply the model of immunity, not containment. The only way a virus can be killed is through mass immunity (what some people call “herd immunity”). The only way mass immunity can be achieved is through mass exposure, not containment. Human beings themselves are the most powerful weapons against this virus. Each one of us is a walking talking assault weapon that can blow it away like Clint Eastwood as he mows down another San Francisco punk. But hordes of ignorant stooges are doing everything possible to see to it we are not loaded. If masks, lockdowns, and social distancing (which is a pathetic joke) are effective, they are delaying and blocking that push toward large-scale immunity, and therefore they are prolonging the life cycle of the virus, which means more people will die. Those who are elderly and have pre-existing medical conditions are the exception to this. But those people shouldn’t be wearing masks in public, they shouldn’t be in public at all. They should be in isolation.

Another of the pathetic jokes in this whole charade is the idea that you are under house arrest but can leave home if your purpose is arbitrarily decreed by the totalitarian governors as “essential.” Apparently no one has the intelligence to realize that the fact that something is essential doesn’t make it any less dangerous. We are “allowed” (creepy, huh?) to go to the grocery store in Colorado, because buying food is “essential.” But what do you think is happening at the grocery store? People are spreading the virus. And don’t give me this nonsense about social distancing and wearing masks at the grocery store to minimize exposure. These masks don’t seal your face completely. Do you really think a mask that doesn’t even seal your face is going to prevent a microscopic pathogen from entering and exiting your respiratory system? And six feet? Don’t insult my intelligence. Six hundred feet wouldn’t make any difference. Air circulates throughout a grocery store to such a degree that a virus, if airborne, will fly from one end of the store to the other, laughing all the way at our six feet absurdity and our silly little masks. 

If containment is the objective of these lockdowns, then they have to be true lockdowns. In other words, true quarantine, not occasional isolation interrupted by excursions that completely defeat the purpose of the lockdowns. But no one talks about this, and maybe no one is even thinking about it. Because almost everyone has lost their minds. Mystery solved.

Containment is not only the wrong strategy, it is impossible. The right strategy is not only possible, but mind-bogglingly easy. Let the young and healthy expose each other to their heart’s content. Exposure leads to immunity, and immunity kills the virus. Problem solved. In other words, do nothing. Live your lives as you always have. But this strategy doesn’t give our politicians an excuse to transform our society into a communist dictatorship, so it will be mocked and ridiculed enough to make the media’s treatment of president Trump look like fawning admiration.

The best benchmark we have available is the flu. You don’t have to be a brilliant scientist to simply observe the outcomes of these viral events. In 2017/18 the flu infected 45 million people in the U.S. (No, that’s not a typo.) That infection quantity is far greater than COVID-19, which according to the CDC has infected far fewer people. The flu killed over 60,000 people in the U.S. during that season. Yet no one went around shaming other people for not wearing masks because of the flu, and neither did any despotic government officials force the country to commit economic suicide out of irrational panic. Someone may say the flu is not identical to C19. But the same epidemiologists who are trying to train us to adopt the strategy of immunity are also telling us that the two pathogens are more similar than they are different. This is becoming more and more obvious as the “experts” are reducing the numbers and we are not seeing them approach the numbers we got from the flu by a country mile.

The other glaring fact we should not overlook is that we breathe in millions of microscopic pathogens every time we inhale. Our immune systems know how to pulverize them, and if they’re new, our immune systems will eventually learn how to do the same with them. But this won’t happen if we practice the paranoid perversion of social interaction known as containment. So we are fighting hard to protect the virus, not the people. We are doing everything in our power to become weak and vulnerable. This is madness. If we run and hide every time a threat comes along, it will wipe us out without a second thought. Why? Because we have trained ourselves to be both weak and subservient all at the same time. And for that, the totalitarian dictators sitting in the governor seats of the U.S. love us.

Why is a virus that is less dangerous than the common flu being used as an excuse to impose such destructive totalitarian measures on untold numbers of people? Why is it being used to justify taking away our 1st Amendment rights indefinitely? I don’t fall for conspiracy theories. I identify the current behavior on the part of our governments and corporations as orwellian, because it is essentially identical. But that’s not a matter of giving credence to conspiracy theories. Theories and behavior are not the same thing. So I’m not going to speculate on why this is happening. I merely offer the plain observation that state governors have become dictators—the kind of tyrants the American Revolution fought tooth and nail to oppose. 

Whenever I make my trips to Walmart and the grocery stores, which are as frequent as I can make them, and I see everyone mindlessly and dutifully being obedient to the current paradigm of paranoia like children who have been lobotomized, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. No one ever behaves like this during the flu season, which infects and kills far more people. But something tells me this is the new normal whenever another one of these cherished pathogens begins to spread throughout the American population. Government agencies will have to take the same draconian measures for the flu next year that they did for COVID-19 this year. If they don’t, it will be embarrassingly obvious to all, if it isn’t already, that almost everyone drank the Covid Kool Aid.

13 comments
  1. I share your concern about many of the stay-at-home/shelter-in-place policies implemented by state governments, as well as, the shutdown of our economy. That said, your statement that this is not as bad as the flu is simply not factual. Currently, the number of deaths are lower yes, but you have to consider 1. social distancing measures implemented, and 2. the time frame. The flu kills about 61,000 Americans per year on average. Between late February when the first death was recorded and now we have seen over 45,000 deaths – less than two months. The hospitalization rate is also higher, all of this is on top of influenza cases which is why people are concerned about the health care system being overwhelmed which is what is ultimately driving the social distancing protocols. They are not trying to contain the spread. That has never been the goal. They are trying to slow and spread it out so we don’t overwhelm our health care system. I’ve talked with a number of nurses and doctors and they could tell you in terms of hospitalizations, COVID-19 has been worse than the peak flu season. So while you are entitled to your opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts.

    Certainly, we are going to learn more about this, and shutting everything down is not sustainable, but in your zeal don’t diminish the seriousness of this disease for those who are most at risk. This is not the flu.

    1. The statement that this is not as bad as the flu is factual. The number of deaths counted for C19 is being substantially exaggerated. This is because pathologists are being told to report C19 as the cause of death when it in fact was not. If a patient dies of cancer but has C19, it is reported as a C19 death even if it was not the primary cause of death. As Brit Hume commented, there’s a difference between people dying “with” C19 and dying “from” C19.

      In addition, the number of reported infections is often claimed to be lower than the actual number, due to a lack of adequate testing. This means the number of people infected is much higher than reported if the claim is accurate. That substantially lowers the mortality rate of C19, which again suggests the flu has a higher mortality rate. By how much, we don’t know.

      The hospitalization rate is an unreliable figure as well. Most of the time when someone is diagnosed with C19 and hospitalized, this is based on symptoms, not on actual tests. The tests are expensive, and it is far more convenient for the physicians to assume their symptoms are related to C19 when in fact they may be the flu. The idea that this is more serious than the flu is coming from the media, not the scientists.

      The healthcare system being overwhelmed did not turn out to be a meaningful concern either. That was one of the primary reasons for the containment efforts. Containment is absolutely the objective, otherwise people wouldn’t be ordered to stay home and wear masks when they’re out in public. The idea is to slow the spread of the virus so that the healthcare system wouldn’t be overwhelmed. The healthcare system was not overwhelmed as most people thought it would be, and they are crediting the stay at home orders and the containment efforts for that outcome. That is called the “fallacy of false cause.” Higher exposure rates have not been proven to cause higher rates of serious sickness requiring hospitalization. And you can’t give credit to a strategy that doesn’t work.

      This is not a matter of being “entitled to my own facts.” The so-called facts cannot be trusted when it comes to the claims of the “experts.” They’re being cooked, possibly to serve a political agenda. But whatever the reason, we need to be discerning and not gullible.

      1. 1. If someone has underlying issues or elderly, unless they were already at death’s door, dying with COVID-19 and dying of COVID-19 is a distinction without a difference. Even a patient with cancer, unless they were terminal and in hospice care it’s reasonable to assume that COVID-19 hastened their death. In regards to testing, CDC guidance to claim a COVID-19 death is either symptoms and test or exposure to COVID-19 and symptoms. Are some people counted who may not be a COVID-19 death? Possibly, but there are also people who have died at home who were ill that are not being counted as a COVID-19 death so that’s likely a wash.
        https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/21/world/coronavirus-missing-deaths.html

        2. You also can’t prove that the health care system wouldn’t have been overwhelmed or at least stressed without mitigation efforts either.

        3. New York City’s death rate has doubled what is normal for this time of year. They don’t see that spike with the flu.
        https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/10/upshot/coronavirus-deaths-new-york-city.html

  2. 1. This is not a “distinction without a difference.” Whether it’s reasonable to assume that C19 hastened their death is irrelevant. What matters is that it is being assumed whether it is reasonable or not. Pathologists have been instructed to list C19 as the primary cause of death whether it was a contributing factor or not. The fact remains that the death counts due to C19 are grossly exaggerated. Aside from the fact that the NY Times is a part of the fear-mongering media, there is no data on people who have died at home because of comorbidity. There is no evidence that it is “likely a wash.” Speculation does not equal evidence. But it is a fact that pathologists are incorrectly reporting the C19 death counts. You would have to provide documented evidence that this is a wash. Until then, it’s not a valid argument.

    2. I never said I could “prove that the health care system wouldn’t have been overwhelmed.” What I said was 1. there is no evidence that it would have been, and 2. you can’t give credit to a measure that is clearly ineffective given all the arbitrary exceptions. As I said, the idea that containment prevented the health care system being overwhelmed is an example of the fallacy of false cause. The burden of proof is on those who insist that it would have been, not those who point out that there’s no evidence that it would have been.

    3. New York City’s death rate is an unreliable figure. Therefore there is no evidence of a “spike” at all. Furthermore, the death counts could very well have been related to the flu and not C19. Due to the spurious nature of the reporting methodologies, we have no confidence whatsoever that there was a spike due to C19. There may have been an increase, but that is simply due to the fact that there is another cause involved. That hardly justifies the term “spike.”

    Most people are unaware of the fact that there has been a litany of coronaviruses spreading around our country and around the world for years. They have received pretty much zero media attention, hence the lack of widespread awareness. No one has proven that C19’s hazard potential is any greater than any of the other variations we have been infecting each other with and become immune to for all this time. If its hazard potential is no greater, the countermeasures are unwarranted.

    1. “Deaths are grossly exaggerated…”

      Your proof beyond calling the New York Times names? New York City has experienced a spike in the number of deaths they normally experience. That is a fact, period. They experienced more deaths in one month than the city experienced in September 2001. Now we know what caused the deaths in that particular, but I think it’s pretty evident what caused the spikes in March and April in NYC. But yeah, it’s just liberal fear mongering. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

      1. I didn’t say calling NYT names was my proof.

        There is a new ICD (International Classification of Diseases) code for C19 that carries the following instructions from the CDC: “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death. If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II.” In other words, the new code supersedes the standard ICD codes for other conditions, which are to be listed as “contributory.” So instead of other diseases being the primary cause of death, C19 is now to be treated as the primary cause of death with the other diseases being treated as secondary. Notice the language “where the disease caused OR IS ASSUMED to have caused or contributed to death.” This is a fundamental shift in how the cause of death is determined by pathologists, and is a novel pivot from the normal procedures that are still being followed for the flu. So if a patient died of a heart attack and it was determined that they were C19 infected, C19 will be listed as the primary cause of death. Even if it isn’t, it is still being reported as a C19 related death according to Sally Aiken, president of the National Association of Medical Examiners. So the C19 death “counts” do not differentiate between C19 being present but not contributory, present and contributory, or primary. The fact that the counts include C19 being present but not contributory is mainly what distorts the death counts. But even the cases where it is present and contributory are distorting the death counts, since that category is not being reported for influenza.

  3. Another important idea we should be aware of is that no one is saying no one will get sick and no one will die from C19. Whenever a “new” virus shows up, there will be four possible outcomes: 1. People will get infected and will show no symptoms. This is the vast majority. 2. People will get infected and will show moderate symptoms but not serious ones requiring hospitalization. This is a smaller proportion. 3. People will get infected and will have serious illness as a result that will require hospitalization. This is a smaller proportion still. 4. Some people will die from the virus. This is an extremely tiny proportion.

    When a virus emerges, it is impossible to prevent sickness and death altogether. It is possible only to do everything we can to reduce those numbers. The question is, what is the most effective strategy to accomplish that reduction? We only have two options: containment and immunity. Containment is virtually impossible and therefore ineffective. But if it is even partially effective, containment prolongs the life cycle of the virus because it protects the virus from the most effective weapon against it: our immune systems. If you prolong the life cycle of a virus, the body count goes up. If we adopt the strategy of immunity, the life cycle of the virus will be shorter, and the number of deaths will be smaller. Which is the best option? It should be obvious. But to the majority of Americans and American politicians, it’s not. That is the real tragedy here. People are dying needlessly. We are not suffering from a virus, we are suffering from ignorance and political opportunism.

    1. Just want to be clear, I was only responding to your comment that this is no worse than the flu. I think how we deal with it going forward (and new viruses) should very much be up for debate.

  4. Refreshing article from Bair that makes a lot of great points. Two MIT scientists make similar points in a couple of interviews on YouTube, which I would highly recommend: 1) “Medical Doctor Blows C-Vi-Rus Scamdemic Wide Open” (with Dr. Andrew Kaufman) and 2) “V.A. Shiva Ayyadurai Crushes Dr. Fauci For Being Part Of The Deep State.” Both of these doctors seem to really know their stuff.

    1. “Know their stuff” = I agree with them.

      I’m not saying they’re wrong. But there are a lot of epidemiologists who also “know their stuff” who disagree.

      1. Well, it’s more than just that. 🙂 If you watch the videos, their arguments are very coherent and logical. In particular, Dr. Kaufman doesn’t show any trace of emotionalism. As he says in the video, he’s also putting his reputation on the line and risking his livelihood as a physician by saying the things that he is. What’s in it for him to do that?

        Does that mean I agree with 100% of what he says? No—no “expert” is right about everything. But most of what he—along with Dr. Ayyadurai—says comes across as extremely well-reasoned.

      2. The phrase “know their stuff” has nothing to do with whether we agree with them. You’re committing a fallacy of relevance. The fact that someone happens to agree with someone else doesn’t mean the arguments aren’t sound.

Comments are closed.

Caffeinated Thoughts provides free news and commentary on culture, current events, faith, and politics, and we are dependent upon readers like you to keep us going. Please consider becoming a monthly patron or making a one-time donation. Every little bit helps!

Get CT In Your Inbox!

Don't miss a single update.

You May Also Like

Planned Parenthood: 100 Years of Moral Bankruptcy

Kelvey Vander Hart: Planned Parenthood is celebrating 100 years of existence, we are mourning 100 years of moral bankruptcy and lives being slaughtered.

C.S. Lewis: Atheism is Too Simple

British apologist and professor of literature at Oxford University, Clive Staples Lewis…

Planned Parenthood in Ankeny Stops Doing Telemed Abortions

Iowa Right to Life has learned that the Planned Parenthood satellite location in Ankeny, IA no longer offers telemed abortions.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Cheap Grace vs. Costly Grace

From The Cost of Discipleship by Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945): Cheap grace is…