Two words that should put the fear of God into every politician in Australia, every highly paid bureaucrat, every chief medical officer, every health administrator, and every unemployed man and woman now looking at lives shattered, careers devastated, dreams obliterated, and futures destroyed. Two words that are also European countries; Sweden and Switzerland.

Sweden and Herd Immunity;

Lets start with Sweden. On April 29, Australian television program Outsiders interviewed Professor Johan Giesecke, former state epidemiologist for Sweden, and mentor to Anders Tegnell, who has been in charge of Sweden’s controversial response to COVID-19.
In that interview, which any Australian politician could have chosen to watch, Professor Giesecke spelled out in crystal clear detail that you can not eradicate the coronavirus, you could only slow it down, and the only people that should be quarantined were the elderly and the vulnerable, as a preventative measure.
A major lock-down he warned, as we saw in the UK and New Zealand, and as we are now seeing in the state of Victoria, Australia, would simply leave the population without heard immunity, and so permanently vulnerable, and in the process completely destroy our economies.

Let me now quote from Friday’s editorial in the UK Telegraph, not some crazy conspiracy rag, but one of Britain’s most respected newspapers;

So now we know: Sweden got it largely right, and the British establishment catastrophically wrong. Anders Tegnell, Stockholm’s epidemiologist-king, has pulled off a remarkable triple whammy: far fewer deaths per-capita than Britain, a maintenance of basic freedoms and opportunities, including schooling, and, most strikingly, a recession less than half as severe as our own.

Our arrogant quangocrats and state “experts” should hang their heads in shame: their reaction to coronavirus was one of the greatest public policy blunders in modern history, more severe even than Iraq, Afghanistan, the financial crisis, Suez or the ERM fiasco. Millions will lose their jobs when furlough ends; tens of thousands of small businesses are failing…vast numbers are likely to die from untreated or undetected illnesses.

The Telegraph, August 12

Sound familiar Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinata Arden, Or Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk?

Also this week, Dr Sebastian Rushgrove, writing for The Spectator Australia coffee house blog, confirms first hand the success of the Swedish approach.
He writes;

All the Covid patients disappeared. It is now four months since the start of the pandemic, and I haven’t seen a single Covid patient in over a month. When I do test someone because they have a cough or a fever, the test invariably comes back negative. At the peak three months back, a hundred people were dying a day of Covid in Sweden, a country with a population of ten million. We are now down to around five people dying per day in the whole country, and that number continues to drop.

…The daily risk per person of getting infected is 1 in 10,000. And remember, the risk of dying is at the very most 1 in 200 if you actually do get infected. And that was three weeks ago. Basically, Covid is in all practical senses over and done with in Sweden.

After four months Sweden ripped the metaphorical band-aid off quickly and got the epidemic over and done with in a short amount of time, while the rest of the world has chosen to try to peel the band-aid off slowly…Covid is over in Sweden. People have gone back to their normal lives and barely anyone is getting infected anymore. I am willing to bet that the countries that have shut down completely will see rates spike when they open up. If that is the case, then there won’t have been any point in shutting down in the first place.

Dr Sebastian Rushgrove – The Spectator Australia, Aug 11.
Sweden’s daily death rate From the CCP virus

And that’s that for Sweden. It appears that the warnings Professor Giesecke made on Outsiders that went largely ignored in Australia may well have been accurate.

The media has been particularly vicious in their criticism of Sweden’s approach which they’ve characterized as overly “relaxed.” Check out this sampling of recent headlines:

  • Sweden becomes an example of how not to handle COVID-19, CBS News
  • Lack of Lockdown Increased COVID-19 Deaths in Sweden, U of V Newsroom
  • Sweden Has Become the World’s Cautionary Tale, New York Times
  • Sweden Stayed Open And More People Died Of Covid-19, But The Real Reason May Be Something Darker, Forbes
  • Sweden hoped herd immunity would curb COVID-19. Don’t do what we did. It’s not working. USA Today
  • Sweden’s coronavirus death toll is now approaching zero, but experts are warning others not to hail it as a success, Business Insider
  • Lack of COVID-19 Lockdown Increased Deaths in Sweden, Analysis Conclude, Virginia edu
  • Sweden COVID-19 Deaths Linked to Failure to Lockdown as Country Prepares for Second Wave, Newsweek
  • Sweden Tries Out a New Status: Pariah State, New York Times

As you can see, the media took a very hard line with Sweden. 
But why? What has Sweden done that has provoked such a hostile response? Nothing really, they’ve just shrugged off the repressive stay-at-home orders and pursued their own independent policy. The Swedish approach stands in stark contrast to the lockdowns which are costly, ineffective and socially damaging.
The media’s push for draconian lockdowns will go down in history as the “fake news” blunder (agenda?) to rule them all.

Bottom line: Lockdowns don’t work, but the media continues to support them, even attacking anyone who suggests otherwise. Why?


Switzerland & HCQ;

And then there’s Switzerland, and the use of the drug Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), which has been banned in Victoria and Queensland for treating the coronavirus.

Comply or it’s a $13,345 court-imposed penalty or 6 months jail.

As I have repeatedly pointed out to all those who won’t listen; there are now dozens of studies showing that the drug, used in the correct combination with other drugs, and the correct dose, is effective, including the latest study that shows countries that use hydroxychloroquine early on have a 79% lower COVID19 mortality rate.

But here’s the clincher; Switzerland briefly banned the drug after the once prestigious medical journal The Lancet claimed HCQ was killing people. That study was completely debunked and two weeks later The Lancet retracted the study, Switzerland immediately reinstated the drug, and guess what happened during the two weeks that Switzerland stopped using the drug hydroxychloroquine? Well according to a study done by Johns Hopkins University;

The consequences of suddenly stopping hydroxychloroquine can be seen by examining a graph of the Case Fatality Ratio Index (nrCFR) for Switzerland…it can be seen that during the weeks preceding the ban on hydroxychloroquine, the nrCFR index fluctuated between 3% and 5%.

The country’s COVID-19 deaths increased four-fold and the nrCFR index stayed elevated at the highest level it had been since early in the COVID pandemic, oscillating at over 10%-15%. Early outpatient hydroxychloroquine was restarted June 11 but the four-fold “wave of excess lethality” lasted until June 22, after which the nrCFR rapidly returned to its background value. 

Johns Hopkins U – Real Clear Politics
Swiss use of HCQ, including a two week ban. Source; Johns Hopkins U.

There are too many similar reports out there now to just simply ignore them for partisan reasons, or because the media said to do so, studies with real results demonstrating very high efficacy rates for coronavirus patients that are administered HCQ as soon as possible, such as this June 25th report from The National Center for Biotechnology Information showing outcomes of 3,737 COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine/Azithromycin and other regimens in Marseille, France, show almost a 100% cure rate, or this study by the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, or the study from April by French virologist Didier Raoult, who demonstrated a 91.7% cure rate, [abstract] and so on.
Incidentally, France also moved to ban to HCQ shortly after that study was released. Why?

HCQ use country by country

But here’s the real joke; advocates for the use of HCQ in the Australian media, and no prizes for guessing it’s only those in the minority conservative-leaning camp, have been denigrated for reporting this news to Australians, and discussing HCQ use around the world.
Bizarrely, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners’ (RACGP) magazine attacked journalists, as well as Federal MP Craig Kelly.
You’d think The RACGP would be concerned with curing COVID patients, and protecting the elderly, rather than sneering at Sky News presenters and politicians who dared to question the narrative;

The RACGP admonishes Australians for gross insubordination.

Still, we really should take our medical practitioners and their lobby groups more seriously, I mean they’re the same mob who are part of the COVID19 recovery that are urging Australia’s Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, to quickly act on climate change to fix the virus;

Huh? You could not make this stuff up.

So allow me remind our political leaders and medical bureaucrats off two little words that will haunt you in the wee hours of the morning: Sweden and Switzerland.

History will record that not only was the destruction of our economies completely pointless, but preventive treatment, such as drugs; Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine in combination with others, was sitting there right under our noses all along. And they banned us from using them.

Why? The answer is simple; there is no money to be made in HCQ, and with several highly profitable treatments and vaccines currently being rushed through trials it’s essential to those with specific interests to suppress the 65 year-old harmless panacea that is hydroxychloroquine.

The likes of Dr Fauci have made it quite clear they want the costly Remdesivir (a failed and repurposed Ebola medication), used as a treatment, despite a 2005 study proving that Fauci is fully aware of the efficacy of HCQ on corona virus’, and as well for the world to stay sick and terrified long enough to start distributing highly questionable and largely untested vaccines, such as Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine without to much resistance from the public.

There is also more than one agenda being played out through these virus lock downs, social engineering tests if you will, political agendas, the implementation of global traceable ID programs and so on, all reasons to keep the proven cure, HCQ, out of reach of the public.
But they’re stories for another day.


Update, August 30; Australia’s Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Nick Coatsworth, gave a interview, August 28, on Channel 9 – an Australian free-to-air mainstream commercial network. His flippancy and general attitude of derision for advocates of HCQ could be construed as medical malpractice in that he claimed that all medical professionals agreed that HCQ was not effective, prior to the results of a trial of HCQ among Melbourne’s healthcare workers being released.

The trial – nicknamed “COVID SHIELD” – will involve half of the participant group being given hydroxychloroquine tablets, while the other half will receive placebo tablets over the course of four months. The study was commenced mid August.

His public statements either are a direct prejudgment of the results of the trial; which is a medical disgrace, or completely compromised it, which is even worse.

Coatsworth showed total disregard for the fundamental principal of medicine; a second opinion.
Instead Dr Coatsworth resorted to patronizing jokes based on two people having the same surname, about who should and shouldn’t be listened to on HCQ;

“I think Australians are very clear on which Kelly should be listened to and that’s (Acting Chief Medical Officer Dr) Paul Kelly,”
“And Paul Kelly, like myself, like all clinicians around Australia, understand that regrettably hydroxychloroquine is not effective for COVID-19.”

Deputy Chief Medical Officer, Dr Nick Coatsworth

I look forward to seeing how this statement from Dr Coatsworth ages.