More Simple, Honest Questions About COVID-19
January 11, 2022
In July 2021, I wrote about the quest for truth in our worldwide battle against the SARS CoV-2 virus and the resultant COVID-19 illness I am neither a physician, medical professional, nor a scientist, so nothing I write should be construed as medical advice or peer-reviewed opinion. I am a college-educated, “mature” American citizen who strives to stay informed and actively seeks alternative sources of information, and occasionally consumes the evening’s propaganda ministry broadcasts to keep up with their side of the story. I consider myself able to understand and apply fundamental scientific concepts, principles, and laws to daily life. After observing what is happening—the never-ending hysteria, the fearmongering, the stifling of any dissent to the approved “narrative”—it is time to start asking more simple, honest questions.
I cannot begin to tell you how many times I have engaged those who tenaciously adhere to the approved narrative about our medical establishment’s response to the pandemic and have been told “you are not a scientist, you don’t understand.” I conversed with a doctoral degree candidate at a major university. She disagreed so vehemently with the medical doctors who have decades of experience and are in positions of immense responsibility at medical centers across the country, that she called them “quacks” because they supported the preventive and therapeutic use of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Ivermectin (IVM). To this Ph. D candidate, who called herself a “scientist,” IVM is an antiparasitic only and a “horse de-wormer” that should never, ever be prescribed to humans.
Would the reader agree that it has become particularly tiresome hearing from all the “experts” who continue to be wrong and continue to move the goalposts? For me, it is especially infuriating that the responses to the simple, honest questions are usually ad hominem attacks instead of rational, reasoned, respectful, and honest discussions about the issues at hand.
Since when is “the science” ever “settled?” Since when is “the science” a consensus? Since when does a scientist ever—ever!—stop asking questions, not only to prove a hypothesis, but also in an honest and courageous attempt to disprove it and, by proving that hypothesis wrong, to advance scientific inquiry? Doesn’t the scientific method employ both strategies to arrive at the most accurate outcomes and the more certain knowledge? Isn’t that the best “science?”
Given that our knowledge is neither infallible nor immutable, why are we routinely expected to accept “the science” as infallible and immutable, i.e., “settled?”
It is a fact that those who have had both shots, plus the booster, are testing positive for COVID and are getting sick.
Can we now conclude the virus has mutated and is escaping the “vaccine?” Can we now conclude that widely administering the mRNA vaccines to the general population, instead of limited distribution to those at highest risk, has been a failed strategy? Can we now conclude that the SARS CoV-2 virus has mutated and each successive variant is less susceptible to the “vaccine,” and may be making vaccine recipients more susceptible to becoming sick with COVID?
Since when, in the course of the history of medical science, has a patient been required to get three doses of a vaccine, yet he still remains at risk of contracting the very illness for which the patient has been… umm… vaccinated?
Were three doses of the polio vaccine required, while still leaving the person at risk of contracting polio? Smallpox? Measles? Mumps? Yellow Fever?
Bueller? Bueller? Anyone? Anyone?
Image: Question mark created by starline – www.freepik.com (edited by Andrea Widburg).
Why has the FDA rushed the Emergency Use Authorization of the vaccine for children? Children are among those who are the least at risk of becoming seriously ill or dying from the Wuhan lab virus and its variants. Does anyone know why?
Why would we as a nation, or as parents, allow our children to be injected with an experimental “vaccine,” for an illness that poses a less than a one-in-a-million chance of serious illness or death among children, even as it has been proven not to be effective against the latest, most widespread variant?
The current White House occupant continually refers to “the pandemic of the unvaccinated” and has mandated that all federal employees and 85 million other employees get the “vaccine.” Yet, those who have dutifully been fully “vaccinated” and “boosted” are now becoming ill with COVID. How then, can it be a pandemic of the unvaccinated?
Is the White House occupant referring to his own “super spreader” campaign and the nearly 2 million unvaccinated and untested illegal immigrants who entered our country since 20 January 2021, who have then been stealthily spirited by his administration to locales and municipalities across the country? Does he mean those unvaccinated? Umm… no.
If this administration was serious about “shutting down the virus,” Biden would secure the border.
Please allow me to offer an analogy: Those who serve now and have served in the Armed Forces of the United States have been trained to fight America’s enemies; to fight and never surrender of our own free will while we have the means to continue fighting. This means that, while there are weapons, ammunition, and the warriors to use them, it is our duty to fight. As a Veteran then, I look at every dietary supplement, every vitamin, and every medicine that has the potential to be effective as a weapon in the fight against the SARS CoV-2 virus and I want all who are able to use them in this fight.
Why have the CDC, NIH, FDA, and every other agency in the alphabet soup of our big-government medical bureaucracies not focused at all on prevention, i.e., diet, fitness, reducing obesity, and educating the public about how to strengthen and fortify their natural immunity so as not to get COVID in the first place?
We must effectively employ the preventative measures, therapies, and medicines (the “weapons”) we have now. When people are dying, physicians must not be restricted to only those medicines that have completed a peer-reviewed, double-blind, blue-ribbon study, and then are authorized only for narrowly-defined and specific use. Does anyone remember that, in 2020, we were facing the “novel” (meaning new) coronavirus? Now, as then, we need to fight against the variants of this new virus with the weapons/medicines that are effective, as the off-label use of HCQ and IVM has demonstrated in the United States and in other countries?
Why are these FDA-approved medicines, both of which have been safely prescribed for decades, restricted from our general use in the fight against COVID?
Why are we myopically insisting that we use only one weapon? In hindsight, the vaccines have not been employed as they should have been and have now been rendered largely ineffective at reducing the spread of COVID-19. Why do we continue with this failed strategy?
We have always known it is in any and every virus’s nature to evolve and mutate to survive. How have we lost sight of this basic lesson of medical science?
I am sure the reader also has many simple, honest questions of their own. There are many doctors and scientists of goodwill and intention working in good faith to answer simple, honest questions. We must be persistent in asking them. We must be persistent in demanding answers.
Jeff M. Lewis is a Christian, a Veteran, a husband and father, and a small business owner who resides in South Texas.
