I am becoming increasingly concerned about how the polices adopted by our government in response to COVID-19 will negatively impact the economy and erode, to the point of extinction, our civil liberties. I do not dispute that, as a disease, COVID-19 exists, and that people have indeed died from the infection. However, I believe that the policy response we have seen is disproportionate to the risk and that the impact of this response will prove to be much worse than the disease itself. It is on this point that the interests and the rights of the wider population need to be championed and protected and, to do that, we need to see through the mirage that has been presented.
The fallacy of the COVID-19 crisis
It is important to understand and accept that COVID-19 is not a life-threatening condition to the majority of the population. Approximately 98% of cases worldwide are classed as having “mild symptoms” [1]. Of the remaining 2%, potentially requiring hospital admission, 33% of these subsequently died [2]. This gives a very crude estimated mortality rate of less than 1%. There has also been additional research that suggests that between 25% to 50% of people with COVID-19 are asymptomatic [3]. The inclusion of such people into the mortality rate calculation would significantly reduce it further. Professor Carl Heneghan of Oxford University has estimated the actual mortality rate of COVID-19 to be between 0.1 and 0.41% [4]. This represents a vast difference from the initial 3.4% estimate put forward by the WHO, which has been a driver of the global hysteria surrounding COVID-19. In fact, we are only slightly above the widely accepted mortality rate of influenza at 0.1%.
The government mantra has been about saving lives, which is laudable. However, 92% of people whose deaths have been attributed to COVID-19 are over 60 years old [5]. If the government objective was to save lives, then it seems reasonable to suggest that the policy adopted should have principally been directed toward this segment of the populace, rather than to every member of society.
As the COVID-19 situation has unfolded, there has been a significant amount of ambiguity surrounding what should be a simple statistic – deaths from COVID-19. In one of the few studies of its kind, conducted in Italy, Professor Walter Ricciardi (scientific advisor to the Italian government) reported that a National Institute of Health study found that only 12% of death certificates have shown a direct causality (with no other terminal health condition) to COVID-19 [6]. If we extrapolated these statistics in relation to the 31,855 UK deaths, those under 60 (8%) and with no other health condition (12%) this would result in 306 deaths!
In addition to this, the Chief Scientific Adviser, Patrick Vallance, himself admitted that not all people whose deaths were attributed to COVID-19 had been tested for COVID-19. At the daily briefing on 30th April he said, “It is worth remembering again that the ONS rate of people who have got COVID on their death certificate, doesn’t necessarily mean they were infected because many of them haven’t been tested…” Furthermore, I, and many of the people I know, have heard of first-hand accounts of individuals who died in hospital whilst being admitted for non-respiratory conditions and whose cause of death was then wrongly recorded as COVID-19. One should rightfully question the statistics that are being reported, as they are clearly inaccurate and misleading.
Lockdown – is it worth it?
The arguably low volume of global deaths (276,884 out of the planet’s 8bn population [1] – bearing in mind the dubious nature of the data), the infection mortality rate marginally above normal influenza [4] and age demographic of COVID-19 deaths [5] should have all led to a response that did not result in the wholescale destruction of our economy. Whilst the government’s slogan has been about “following the science”, this should not hide the fact that the decision to apply lockdown was a political one. Other countries have adopted different approaches, and there was, and still is, a choice.
One thing which stands out in the UK’s story was the apparent U-turn within the initial policy response to COVID-19. “Herd immunity” was the approach initially adopted by the government, however, this was being poorly executed and communicated. Comparisons with Sweden show how this could have been done better and possibly would have achieved a more favourable outcome.
There was and there remains a media frenzy surrounding COVID-19 which has exaggerated beyond all reason the likely impact of the disease. Within this, there are two points to be made:
The first is that, of all the “experts” to follow, the UK government chose Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London. Even the most basic examination of this individual’s past record of data modelling data and forecasting should have raised questions as to the validity of the forecasts he was producing. These include [7]:
- Bird flu estimated 2m deaths globally – actual deaths 282
- Swine Flu estimated 65,000 UK deaths – actual deaths 457
- Mad Cow Disease (BSE) estimated 50,000 deaths – actual deaths 177
One can only suppose that his forecast originally estimating UK COVID-19 deaths at 500,000 fitted the narrative required in order to enforce lockdown [24].
The second is the astonishing admission at the daily briefing on 22nd April by General Sir Nick Carter of the involvement of the 77th Brigade. This is a unit of 4,000 military personnel (with another 16,000 in reserve) whose role is to remove dissenting opinion of the official narrative on social media platforms [8]. It is a sad function of the illusory right to free speech that whoever controls the media and social media narrative now controls the domineering political ideology of the day. With that, the people are “guided” to what they should believe and any dissenting opinions or opposing views, which are against the government narrative, are being shut down or ridiculed.
The mass consent to house arrest is most alarming. To voluntarily acquiesce to restriction of movement only serves to illuminate the degree of control the government is exercising. Yet the Coronavirus ACT 2020 legislation, enacted without due process in the context of the “emergency” situation, has still to reveal its teeth. By this, we are talking about the consequences of noncompliance. More than 9,000 [9] fines have already been issued by police in maintaining lockdown. Where does this end? The fact that articles trying to dispel the notion of implanted digital certificates are now being published [10], whilst acknowledging the technical feasibility, does little to reassure.
Even though our civil liberties have been sacrificed, it is debatable whether the lockdown policy has even achieved its publicly stated cover story of “saving lives”. The easiest comparison to make is with Sweden, which competently implemented a non-lockdown approach that has protected employment and businesses. The financial consequences of COVID-19 are much less severe, and their death rate is lower than that of the UK. If you compare statistics from ‘non-lockdown countries’ with ‘lockdown countries’, the death rates are never in excess of the ‘lockdown countries’. Other factors will of course be at play, but the data is now starting to show that lockdown is counterproductive to its publicly stated aim.
Whilst it is true that the UK has experienced “excess deaths” in April, given what has already been stated in this letter, it is by no means certain such deaths are attributable to COVID-19. Even Professor Neil Ferguson has commented that it is his view, that 30 – 50% of the excess deaths are not caused by COVID-19 [23]. This is a critical admission because it suggests that a significant proportion of excess deaths could be attributable to the impact of the lockdown policy itself [24]; cancelled operations, delayed treatments, limited GP appointments and a reluctance for people to seek medical treatment have directly contributed to UK deaths. It is also entirely probable that lockdown has caused a great deal of harm as a result of the impact that isolation has had on mental health [25] and the increased threat to those living in abusive situations [26]. The fact that the real killer, the lockdown policy, is being justified by the over reporting of COVID-19 deaths appears to be blatant and systematic. It is corruption and subterfuge of the highest order.
“Herd immunity” is the natural response to mass infection. The artificial lockdown policy has imprisoned us within a new world order that has destroyed personal freedom and left us under the control of an increasingly totalitarian government. Parliament has failed to protect the people by providing democratic accountability and the masses are left craving the new drug; the COVID-19 vaccine. Whilst this will be a boon for “big pharma”, with a £20bn [11] price tag that comes with it, the rush to get this product on the market means that it is likely that there will be significant mistakes made in producing it, inadequate testing and little opportunity to fully understand the consequences of accelerating its development. Conversely, our natural immune systems would have naturally responded and adapted to this new virus and, based on the aforementioned information, a vaccine is not required for the overriding majority of the population. In this context, such a vaccine should never be mandatory, and we should resist all attempts to make it so.
The “New” Economic Reality
In simple terms, the new economic reality we are facing is the destruction of small and medium sized businesses across the UK. Over 1 in 5 – nearly 1m – businesses [12] are expected to fail as a result of the COVID-19 crisis. The Bank of England has estimated unemployment to increase to 8% [13]. There are currently 7.5m on “furlough” via the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme at an expected cost of £80bn [14], but how many of these people will return to work is questionable. Some reports estimate that 6 million will be unemployed [15] once this scheme ceases. I rather suspect the consent we have seen so far within society for the government policies will evaporate at this point. Despite this intervention, there have been an additional 1.8m Universal Credit applications [16] since mid-March when lockdown commenced.
Whilst the UK is on course for the deepest recession in 300 years with a 14% drop in GDP [13] there are some winners. Jeff Bezos of Amazon notoriety has seen his fortune increase by $24bn [17] since January. Things are also looking good for Bill Gates who just purchased a new house at $43m [18]. Global business is prevailing at the expense of UK SMEs and arguably more meaningful UK jobs. Is the low skill, low wage, “pick, pack and dispatch” job in an Amazon warehouse the height of future aspiration in the new economic reality? I hope not but it is abundantly clear that independent UK businesses needs protection if we are to avoid this seemingly unstoppable outcome of globalisation.
In this context, it is perverse that a key tenet of the government response to independent business is to encourage indebtedness – as if this is a solution to anything. Firstly, we had the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CBILS) which was initially valued as a £350bn package; this has seemingly failed as only £2.8bn was borrowed by mid-April and only 46% of applications have been successful. The government 80% of loan value security guarantee does not appear to have been enough [19]. Next, we had the Bounce Bank Loan which was launched after the failure of CBILS; this has been much more successful in increasing debt levels by a further £2bn. Whilst these loans were capped at £50,000 they most notably came with a 100% government security guarantee [20]. However, both hardly touch the surface given that the Bank of England has estimated that Bank Lending generally (including the government backed schemes) will increase by £55bn as a result of COVID-19. It is further noted that this was in the “collective interest of the banking system…” [13]. It is now starting to become clearer who the winners of the COVID-19 crisis are!
There are other schemes like the Small Business Grant Fund (SBGF) and the Retail, Hospitality and Leisure Grant Fund (RHLGF) that have so far cost over £12bn [21]. This was critical for many businesses that were struggling to survive, and it is notable in that it does not have to be paid back, or does it?
We have all lived through the austerity of the post 2008 banking crisis and the harm that this inflicted. I am concerned that the COVID-19 response will drive further cuts to public services and justify increasing individual tax burdens. Yet, in the background, there has been £200bn of Quantitative Easing that has taken place in response to COVID-19. This takes the total amount to £645bn! There is a current debate to increase this by a further £100bn [22]. Apparently, the “magic money tree” does indeed exist!
Given this level of quantitative easing, I would like some justification why I, as a taxpayer, must pay back what the government does not have to.
The financial system as it stands is fatally flawed. The deregulation of the financial markets, the removal of the gold standard (meaning our paper money has no real basis for its value) and implementation of fractional reserve banking (where banks are able to lend, for a profit, money they do not have) only serve to prolong the consumerist myth that growth is good. The damage being increasingly done to our environment as a result of this “pumped up” financial system testifies that this is not the case [27]. It is this corruption, hidden behind all others, that has the capability to negatively impact humans above all others. The modern banking system and globalised business are the true cancers of our society. In relation to this, COVID-19 is nothing more than a cold. In the quest for our “New Normal” it is about time we addressed the real issues impacting all our lives.
A “New Normal” that sets people free
There is a real opportunity for us to change the status quo and establish a “New Normal” which is equitable, fair and based on tangibles rather than “magic money trees”, over-reliance on the state and oppressive control of the people. I would like to advocate:
- An end to lockdown now but in a way that still protects those at risk, i.e. those with underlying health conditions and those over 60.
- Establish a Bill of Rights that restricts state interference and protects individual rights such as free movement, the right to worship, the right to work and the right to protest. Government should never be able to curtail the established freedoms of its citizens.
- Regulation of social media: The commercialisation of political content, often false, has distorted numerous elections and has become a means of control. Accounts can no longer be anonymous and should require user authentication, verified externally. News and political advertisements should be banned.
- Support for Small Businesses by empowering the development of real trades and local businesses that provide livelihoods to people rather than simply profiting shareholders. Globalised businesses that create monopolies only serve to limit real opportunity within our society. Government should use protectionist measures to limit their access to UK markets.
- A complete overhaul of the financial system so that the money we have has real value. The creation of money ‘out of nothing’ be it by the fractional reserve model or quantitative easing is enslaving a population in debt and facilitates over-consumption that is literally killing our planet. If we are to really address the very real environmental issues that affect us all, then this is where we should start.
- National government no longer protects the interest of its citizens above all others. A choice between ‘Red or Blue’ is no choice at all. The solution lies in the development of local administrations with real accountability that are dedicated to serving its people.
This view of the future will not happen by chance. If you want to define a new normal that sets you free, then it is incumbent upon you to act! The struggle for real freedom starts now.
I wish you every success in this endeavour.
Paul Beswick
12th May 2020
References:
[1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/apr/29/study-finds-a-third-of-uk-covid-19-
patients-taken-to-hospital-are-dying
[3] https://www.healthline.com/health-news/50-percent-of-people-with-covid19-not-awarehave-
virus
[4] https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/
[5] https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2020/04/09/adjusting-covid-19-expectations-to-theage-
profile-of-deaths/
[6] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/everyone-wantscoronavirus-
data-should-treat-numbers-caution/
[7] https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1278465/neil-ferguson-coronavirus-imperial-collegelondon-
epidemiology-sage-spt
[8] https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/77-brigade-is-countering-covid-misinformation/
[9] https://www.itv.com/news/2020-04-30/more-than-9-000-fines-for-coronavirus-lockdownbreaches-
in-england-and-wales/
[10] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-coronavirus-bill-gates-micr/false-claimbill-
gates-planning-to-use-microchip-implants-to-fight-coronavirus-idUSKBN21I3EC
[11] https://www.ft.com/content/bd28d79f-8a0a-44c6-ac74-1abb17344c5b
[12] https://smallbusiness.co.uk/nearly-1m-businesses-on-brink-of-collapse-warnaccountants-
2550079/
[13] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/07/uk-economy-to-shrink-by-25-
percent-and-unemployment-to-double-warns-bank-of-england-coronavirus
[14] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/12/uk-furlough-scheme-extended-rishisunak-
coronavirus
[15] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/apr/21/uk-furlough-schemeunemployment-
rise-coronavirus
[16] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52536210
[17] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/15/amazon-jeff-bezos-gains-24bncoronavirus-
pandemic
[18] https://www.businessinsider.com/billionaire-bill-gates-net-worth-spending-2018-
8?r=US&IR=T
[19] https://www.bkl.co.uk/insights/coronavirus-business-interruption-loan-scheme-cbils/
[20] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/06/small-firms-bounce-back-loansbusinesses-
coronavirus
[21] https://www.accountancydaily.co/covid-19-extra-funds-fixed-property-related-costs
[22] https://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2020/05/06/bank-to-decide-on-morequantitative-
easing-as-covid-19-batters-uk-economy/
[23] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XON2XeGDE6A&feature=youtu.be (Professor Neil
Ferguson at 7mins 33)
[24] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/10/back-to-work-johnsonseconomic-
hardship
[25] https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/news/almost-quarter-adults-living-under-lockdown-ukhave-
felt-loneliness
[26] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-uk-lockdowndomestic-
abuse-victims-support-a9458346.html
[27] Please read Fazlun Khalid’s Signs on the Earth
Comments
Post a Comment