Lancet Commission Report: 6 Reasons COVID Response ‘A Massive Global Failure’

The recent commission report that was published by the Lancet lists six reasons why the COVID response was a massive failure worldwide.

On September 14, 2022, the Lancet COVID-19 Commission published an article discussing the lessons learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic. According to data from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington, there have been 6.9 million reported deaths from COVID-19 as of May 31, 2022, but 17.2 million additional deaths are thought to have occurred as a result. The report states that “this staggering death toll is both a profound tragedy and a massive global failure at multiple levels.”

Failures in prevention, rationality, transparency, adhering to accepted public health practises, operational cooperation, and international solidarity were the six main failure areas that the Commission identified.

Social sustainability goals were thrown back a few years as a result of these failures, and 17.2 million lives were lost.

What lessons can we draw from these mistakes? On the basis of Lancet’s six failure reasons we can look more into that.

First Lesson Learned: Failure of Prevention

Many nations used harsh tactics, such as vaccinations, lockdowns, and social isolation, to stop the virus from spreading. But none of the approaches, so to say, hit the mark.

Researchers in the UK conducted an experiment with young people using the SARS-CoV-2 human challenge strain. Their research was published (pdf below) in Nature’s March 2022 edition.

36 healthy volunteers between the ages of 18 and 29 who had never been vaccinated or exposed to SARS-CoV-2 participated in the study. They received an intravenous SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Two were not included in the Per-Protocol analysis because baseline antibodies were found during the experiment. 34 individuals’ results showed that 3 people were sick but asymptomatic, 16 people had minor signs of infection (PCR testing confirmed this), and 15 people were still uninfected.

The secret to prevention should be found in the reason that the 15 participants were not afflicted. This key, in my opinion, is to boost people’s immune systems.

Humans have a complex immune system and a wide-ranging network of defences against outside invaders. The physical barriers, such as skin, nose hair, tears, etc., are the first line of protection. Most pathogens can be stopped from entering the body by them.

The epithelial interferon barrier serves as the second line of defence. An epithelial cell naturally activates its antiviral system and releases interferon when a virus enters the cell. Interferon, a virus’ natural nemesis, gives instructions to cells so they can work together to combat the virus and stop it from multiplying.

We are protected by innate and adaptive immune cells even if the virus gets into the blood. These include the blood’s macrophages, dendritic cells, and natural killer cells, all of which are crucial to the body’s ability to fight viruses.

Regardless of the sickness we are dealing with, it is crucial to understand that the infections are outside influences, and that the human body itself determines whether we get sick or not. These outside elements won’t have much of an impact once we locate and address the immune system’s issues.

Therefore, the best way to stop the spread of pandemics is to strengthen our innate immune systems.

Second Lesson Learned: Failure of Rationality

The capacity to make decisions based on facts is referred to as rationality. Irrationalities in the vaccine development process included pushing the vaccine blindly into the population without doing a thorough assessment of its efficacy and safety.

The vaccinations have numerous drawbacks.

1. Inability to prevent infection: Neutralizing antibodies are mainly produced in the human bloodstream, but not in the epithelial cells. Therefore, if the first two lines of defense were weakened, the virus could still enter the blood and cause infection. That is why the vaccine and antibody strategy is unable to prevent infection.
2. Needs to be renewed: Vaccines need to be renewed along with the virus variation, and the current vaccine is designed based on the genetic code of the old strain in 2020.
3. Needs time to develop: On average, it takes five to 10 years to develop a vaccine. It requires a significant amount of animal trials and human trials to ensure the vaccine’s safety and prove its efficacy. Viruses mutate quickly. The speed of vaccine development can never match that of the viral mutation. If the vaccine is injected frequently for different variants of the virus, it will generate the antibody-dependent enhancement effect (ADE effect), which makes the vaccine ineffective.
4. Inferior to our natural immunity: Numerous studies have shown that the immunity produced by the human body against viruses after natural infection is much longer lasting and stronger than the antibodies produced by simply stimulating T cells with vaccines.

The spike protein on the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is a component of the vaccine, has also been discovered to harm cardiac cells, vascular tissues, mitochondria, and produce chronic inflammatory states, according to a growing body of basic research. This protein is toxic.

It is unreasonable and maybe harmful to use spike protein to stimulate the body in these conditions.

Furthermore, people are stressed and anxious due to the rapid development of vaccines and the ambiguity surrounding vaccination safety issues. This might result in an overproduction of stress hormones and lower the body’s immune resistance to viruses.

Being proactive is a good thing, but we should treat individuals as fellow humans rather than “living beings” in accordance with the nature of the disease. Prior to implementing a pandemic response, we should make sure that everyone is mentally stable, gets enough food, water, and rest. We must avoid overmedicating and overreacting.

The Third Lesson Learned: Failure of Transparency

A six-month study of the Pfizer BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was published in the September 2021 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine. There was one case of cardiac arrest in the placebo group, but 4 cases in those who received the vaccine. However, this information was not openly discussed in the main article; rather, it was in the supplemental appendix.

Despite the fact that the numbers are too tiny to be statistically significant, from the perspective of pharmacovigilance, this is an unexpected safety signal, and more investigation should be done.

The VAERS COVID Vaccine Adverse Event Reports database, as of September 23, 2022, had 1,424,789 cases of adverse events with 31,214 deaths, the majority of which happened one to seven days after vaccination. The very short time to death strongly suggests that vaccines played a causal role in those death cases.

Only 1% of negative effects, according to a Harvard Pilgrim research, are reported to the VAERS database.

Unfortunately, people disregard the red flags. As the vaccine’s development went on, more negative side effects appeared.

In a study of clinical records from 40 hospitals, a research letter found instances of myocarditis or pericarditis following immunization. According to the study, myocarditis and pericarditis instances were consistently low in 2019 and 2020, but they began to significantly increase starting in the spring of 2021 when the global COVID immunisation programme was implemented.

According to a Nordic study released in April 2022, the mRNA vaccine was linked to a higher risk of myocarditis, with the risk being highest in young males between the ages of 16 and 24. Within 28 days of the second Pfizer vaccination and within 28 days of the second Modena vaccination, respectively, the number of myocarditis episodes increased from 4 to 7 cases per 100,000 young men and from 9 to 28 instances per 100,000 young men.

According to a research that appeared in the July 2022 issue of JAMA Internal Medicine, heart disease was the main reason people died in the United States during the pandemic period of March 2020 to October 2021.

A study that appeared in Nature in April 2022 discovered a 25% rise in cardiac arrest and acute coronary syndrome among young persons between the ages of 16 and 39. Although the COVID-19 infection is unrelated to this occurrence, mRNA vaccines are.

The mRNA vaccination was formerly supported by renowned British cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra, who wrote two articles in the Journal of Insulin Resistance asking for its discontinuation. What made him reconsider?

Dr. Malhotra was one of the first individuals to receive two doses of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine as a supporter of the vaccine and volunteered at vaccination facilities. He also recommended getting the shot to everyone around him and his patients.

On July 26, 2021, six months after receiving two doses of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, his father, Dr. Kailand Chand, a general practitioner and former vice president of the British Medical Association (BMA), experienced a cardiac attack at home.

Two of his father’s three major coronary arteries were severely obstructed, with the left anterior descending branch being 90% blocked and the right coronary artery being 75% blocked, according to the autopsy results.

His father was healthier than most guys his age and lived an active lifestyle. He continued to meditate frequently and walk between 10,000 and 15,000 steps each day even while the world was under a pandemic lockdown.

Malhotra realised there was an issue with the vaccine after learning that his father’s death might have been caused by the vaccination. Although he requested that the vaccine stop, it was already too late.

The Truth About ‘95% Effectiveness’: 95 out of 100 Protected?

According to news sources from all over the world, the vaccination is “95 percent effective” in preventing infection. “If 100 people are vaccinated, then 95 will be protected from infection,” most doctors tell the public.

But it is absolutely not the case.

According to a research that was published on December 10, 2020 in the New England Journal of Medicine, Pfizer’s BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 vaccine was examined for safety and effectiveness. 162 symptomatic infections were present among the 18,325 unvaccinated individuals. 0.88 percent of people had an infection. There were 8 infections among the 18,198 recipients of vaccinations. 0.04 percent of people had an infection. “The vaccine was 95% effective in preventing Covid-19,” the report’s conclusion read.

Although 99.12% of the population was unvaccinated, most people failed to notice that they were not infected.

The vaccination only truly protects 0.84 percent of the population overall, which is the true absolute protection rate.

Therefore, only 84 (0.84%) of the 10,000 persons who received the vaccine will actually experience “absolute protection,” as opposed to the relative protection of 95 out of 100.

Would we have been so concerned about developing a vaccine if we had known the truth about absolute protection? Without a vaccine, we wouldn’t have such strong expectations that it will end the pandemic. The requirement for vaccinations would not be as strong at first.

Instead, it would be more logical for us to look for natural ways to increase immunity in order to stop the virus in a more practical and simple manner.

The World Health Organization (WHO) responded on September 15 by stating that they agree with the Lancet report’s general recommendations because they are in line with their stated goal of “strengthening outbreak preparedness, prevention and response capacity.”

But for the general population, a practical strategy for pandemic preparedness that can be put into practise in the future is more important than official lip service.

While vaccines shouldn’t be required, immune-boosting practises like meditation, exercise, eating natural foods, and vitamin D supplements should be promoted.

Read the study below:

s41591-022-01780-9