Nobody in their right mind would accept a whole-pandemic, three year rate of death due to malfeasance, stupidity and error resulting in either death or permanent disability every single year as a result of the medical system itself. Yet this is exactly what that study shows does in fact occur right here in America.
.... in the context of a recent virus, right?
An estimated 795 000 Americans become permanently disabled or die annually across care settings because dangerous diseases are misdiagnosed.
The rates cited were 11% of significant error and 4.4% serious harm.
Think about this one folks -- you go into a hospital for one of the "big three" problems that can kill you, and which is responsible for the lions share of medical "bad things" that do kill people. Infections, vascular events (heart attacks and strokes, mostly) and cancer. Roughly one time in 20 the hospital screws you instead of helping you and about 1 time in 10 they get it wrong and thus fail to help.
Consider the implications of this. It is claimed 1 million Americans were killed by this virus. I dispute that number as "caused" but not that the people are dead because counting bodies is easy -- and pretty damn hard to fake. So contemplate this question for a minute: What was the error rate in terms of actions during the pandemic? While you're letting that roll around in your head do realize that for every other condition and disease if the hospital does this you can sue and, if you or your loved ones are right, have at least some odds of winning that lawsuit. In other words there is pushback against laziness, malfeasance, money-grubbing irrespective of outcome and hubris.
Except this time where everyone was given blanket immunity provided they followed instructions from the CDC, NIH and HHS, including the widespread and in fact near-universal (in hospitalized persons) use of a drug that had twice previously failed trials on safety including for both cancer and Ebola, two conditions that were and are wildly more-dangerous than Covid, and despite the fact that a huge international clinical trial for that drug, which did not focus on safety but rather on effectiveness, had found it worthless. They kept using it anyway at several thousand dollars a crack plus the bonuses for "using their protocols" and this was not a small amount of money either; tens of thousands of dollars per-person, in fact, and that money was paid whether you were helped or not.
In addition these "approved protocols" often precluded the use of antibiotics and may I remind you that in the flu pandemic of 1918 the majority of people killed did not die of influenza; they died of secondary infections as we had no antibiotics, so if you had a secondary infection there was nothing they could do and that turned out to be extraordinarily lethal. We know this happened because we have preserved tissues and have studied it, yet deliberately ignored it this time around by refusing to look in admitted persons once a covid test was positive. In any other context, where no legal immunity exists, that certainly would look like solid evidence of intentional misconduct -- gross negligence, not just ordinary negligence (malpractice.)
While I can't prove that killed the majority of the alleged "covid deaths" you can't prove it didn't because in virtually every case we deliberately did not autopsy the dead and thus there was no pathology done on their lungs and other organs to prove that it was direct viral damage and not a bacterial infection that the virus made them more-susceptible to and which could have been treated successfully but deliberately was not.
Let me point out that at this rate of error resulting in death the entire pandemic's death count can be accounted for over three years time. In other words it is entirely within the statistical boundaries of this study that the virus killed zero people and medical stupidity was responsible for every single death.
I remind you that if something is worthless no amount of risk is medically acceptable because there is no benefit. For that from which you cannot benefit there is utterly no medical reason to give it to you whatsoever. Such, by the data in said huge international trial, was shown to be true for Remdesivir. It is on this very argument that doctors refused to issue a prescription for Ivermectin; they claimed the data they had showed it didn't work. That the drug is known, by forty years of data, to be safer than aspirin which you can buy in unlimited quantity over the counter was immaterial. In fact it is handed out like candy in parts of the world as a prophylaxis against river blindness -- and has nearly eliminated that as a serious disease which used to rob people's sight on a regular basis.
Our medical system today is entirely backwards and I argue that is on purpose; the first, second and only consideration, absent the threat of being sued, is money.
We now know, for example, that there were more deaths over the six months from the initiation of the covid jab trials in the drug group than in the control group. These were dismissed as "not related" to the study medication but that is immaterial to the validity of the trial: The trial is always invalid and must be thrown out if that happens -- no exceptions.
Why?
Because to conduct a legitimate trial you must match cohorts. That is, if you run a null trial (where nobody got anything but one side thought they were) the two outcome groups must match. If they don't then your cohorts were not matched. It does not matter whether you intentionally mismatched them or not; what matters is that you have not learned anything statistically valid because the two groups are not the same.
Thus when that sort of item shows up one of two things is always true:
- The drug caused the bad thing to happen. This obviously could be the cause -- but it might not be.
- The cohorts were not matched and in this case the entire study is void because there is in fact no valid control.
It does not matter which is the case; the statistical case for a conclusion has been invalidated. Any time you have a mismatch in outcomes (especially serious outcomes) you cannot attribute to the study medication the trial is void no matter which arm of the trial has the bad outcome; either you mismatched the cohorts or the drug was responsible -- every time.
Yet when this happens in drug trials the usual result is for "investigators" to try to find some reason that they can claim the drug didn't cause the skew. It doesn't matter whether it did or didn't and it is intentional fraud to excuse the outcome in this way; the lack of matched cohorts always invalidates the results even if the drug is not at fault because either the drug did it or the cohorts were not matched.
But for these excuses if the trials were thrown out there would have been no sales, no distribution and no profit beyond that which the government committed to buy in advance.
Incidentally there is evidence of this in some of the "booster" trials as well; non-matched cohorts. If it happened once (and it clearly did), well.....
Again the headline study has nothing to do with covid or any other virus; it in fact speaks to the entirety of the medical system as a whole and alleges that nearly 800,000 people a year are either killed or seriously harmed by the medical system itself -- not by the underlying condition they might have had.
Nobody in their right mind would accept a whole-pandemic, three year rate of death due to malfeasance, stupidity and error resulting in either death or permanent disability every single year as a result of the medical system itself. Yet this is exactly what that study shows does in fact occur right here in America.
One in ten odds of the hospital being wrong is terrible folks, and one in 20, roughly, of being killed or permanently injured not because there's nothing to be done and you just drew the short straw but rather because the people treating you are idiots is beyond hideous.
Would you accept that if your car has failing brakes and you take it to the mechanic one time in 20 when you get it back you run over a kid and kill him because now you can't stop at all?
How many over the last three years are dead because there was no price, due to government-granted immunity, for getting it wrong?
The system is intentionally corrupt and cannot be "reformed" as it presently exists. It is fixable, however: This proposal will rectify the economic elements of screwing people blind, we can forbid "liability free" medicine without exception and we can force drug and device trials to be run by adversely-interested parties and force all data to be made public immediately both so hiding the information cannot be done and the incentives are to disprove the hypothesis rather than excuse failure in the name of making billions of profit at the expense of human suffering and lives.
