Nature saved us from ourselves (Once more!)

It is becoming increasingly clear that the response to the covid virus has done the vast majority of the damage, and that at least ten times as many people have already died from lockdowns and incorrect medical treatment – including vaccines – than directly from the virus.

It is also becoming increasingly clear that not only was the virus designed as an unstoppable biological weapon (as explained in detail in the famous 2015 paper by Menachery, Baric et al.) but that most governments were informed by their own secret services or by foreign secret services that the virus was a very dangerous weapon. This may explain why government reactions were so extreme and unprecedented, and associated with a stubborn denial of the military nature of the virus. For if governments could continue to give their trust to the people who built the virus and who now offered a series of miracle cures - the vaccine being the icing on the cake - it was doubtful that the public would have been ready for such a bold gamble: Trusting the poisoner for offering a cure...

Ignoring the rational explanations of the most renowned scientists, such as for example Luc Montagnier, governments have therefore actively put forward all kinds of "influential" people, provided their theories could reinforce an alternative story about the virus.

One of these alternative theories was the idea that man had so destroyed the natural equilibrium of the planet that more and more dangerous viruses were now going to "escape" (as if nature was a "reservoir" as per the term employed by these people, of dangerous germs), and attack the human species, out of a sort of revenge maybe. An extreme case of this thesis was even put forward: That humans should from now on limit their personal interactions with "wildlife", so as not to "disturb" it in any way. The "personal" aspect and the notion of "wild" were crucial: First of all, it was not a question of stopping the production of pesticides or nuclear waste, nor the electric cars, mobile phones and mines necessary for the production of batteries. This nature was not "dangerous" because it was not "wild" or "virgin", but "humanized" and "domesticated" in a way. The danger came from the "wild" nature or from what is left of it, and which it was advisable not to approach, because it could, who knows, have the desire to "revenge" itself, for example of the collective sins of our species. That the "wild" areas of the planet have not changed for 12,000 years did not matter. It was more a modern dream, a nostalgia, than a scientific notion.

British filmmaker David Attenborough even made a video on this theme, a contemporary adaptation of the old “angry god” theme, funded by the British government channel BBC.

Another theme was that of sacrifice and obedience. Justin Trudeau, Emmanuel Macron, Jacinda Ardern and Narendra Modi were popular champions of this theme of the leader who punishes his people harshly because he loves them deeply. The Pope joined them, declaring, somewhat awkwardly, after a private visit from Albert Bourla, that getting vaccinated was "an act of love". A little awkward because love being in Christianity traditionally associated with sacrifice, it was a bit too visible suggestion that the vaccine could perhaps have ambiguous effects.

A variation on the theme of obedience was the respect for experts. It was a bit rich because top experts were actively ignored, and the government narrative was carried only by third-rate scientists, beginners, civil servants, students, unknown people from associated disciplines, journalists, and figures in the arts, sports, and entertainment. Obviously that was a lot of people, but solid scientists, those who had published a lot or made discoveries, were curiously missing.

A particularly divided profession was the medical profession. So many doctors and nurses were fired in France because they refused the vaccine or the administration of dangerous treatments, that Emmanuel Macron had to replace them with Lebanese doctors, attracted by a higher salary, with the condition that they obey and get vaccinated. There were no more doctors in the hospitals in Lebanon. This anecdote shows that the medical profession should not be collectively suspected of misbehaving. A large number of caregivers had the discernment and also had the courage to defend their Hippocratic oath even at the cost of their careers.

Now that the passions are subsiding, the dust is settling and we are beginning to realize the incredible extent of the damage, we can ask ourselves the question: Can this tragedy of covid shed light on our relationship with nature?

The virus was designed as a weapon. Top scientists and engineers, backed by immense funds, have been working on this weapon for decades. And then, probably during the world military games in Wuhan at the end of October 2019, the virus was released into the public. After that, it is not yet known who knew and who did not know that the vaccines were even worse than the virus. The United States Army has been fully vaccinated. It is hard to imagine that those who gave this order really knew the consequences, especially cardiac ones. No military leader, for example, would want the pilot of a fighter plane to have a heart attack when landing on an aircraft carrier. So it's likely that those who gave this type of order really thought that vaccines protected soldiers instead of disabling them.

But what is most interesting is that, even setting aside the catastrophic effects of lockdown on public health, even ignoring that many people have been routinely declared dead of covid even when the cause was not covid (like a car accident) simply because the RT-PCR test (which we now know is essentially incorrect) reported the presence of the virus, most people who died of covid died in hospital, following treatments that are now known to be often fatal. For example, 97% of people put on a ventilator died.

So the bioweapon didn't work that well. The government "response" did most of the killing.

More remarkably, its "efficacy" (a term used by Menachery et al. in the 2015 paper) deteriorated very quickly and its virulence decreased very rapidly, with each successive variant, to the point of becoming almost unnoticeable. As it spread more and more, the virus made people less and less sick.

To give a comparison, it is as if scientists had worked tirelessly, for decades, with a wealth of means and extreme confidentiality and security precautions (entire laboratories were built for this purpose, funding mechanisms were put in place to preserve confidentiality, international barriers were put in place to isolate political risks) to make the biological equivalent of the atomic bomb, a virus that is 90% lethal and without cure, and that the bomb, dropped on its victims, decides to transform on its own and becomes harmless.

Worse still for its inventors, the antidote designed in parallel, the mRNA injection, turns out to be much worse than the virus, and unlike it, shows little sign of improving over time.

It looks like a sort of repeat of the chemical weapons debacle on European battlefields in World War I, when we realized that the wind was unpredictable and could turn the weapon against those who deployed it.

The lesson of covid for ecology:

Nature saved us from ourselves. Nature is not a heritage that comes to us from the past, it is very much alive and evolving very quickly. And we are part of it. If only we want to.