The paper was published Open Access (meaning free for all to read) and online first, indicating the authors want as many eyeballs on this research as possible so as to generate media interest. And it has done that, racking up over ten thousand social media impressions so far. But don’t expect any scrutiny or analysis of the findings in the MSM write-ups; they are happy to take the Lancet paper at face value.
The headline finding from the large-scale analysis of primarily US patients’ digital health records found that 34% of Covid-19 ‘survivors’ (as they are apparently now known) were diagnosed with a neurological or psychiatric condition within six months of infection. But there is an obvious problem with this figure in isolation: surely almost everyone’s mental health has suffered severely due to the lockdowns?
Attributing an uptick in disorders of mood and substance abuse to the alleged after-effects of an otherwise conventional respiratory virus is ignoring the elephant in the room. The state-mandated end of normal human contact for large parts of the past 13 months has wreaked unprecedented damage on the psyches of people all around the world. Is this not the more likely cause for ill mental health?
The ‘f’ word
Indeed, ignoring the unfathomable harmful effects of lockdowns is standard practice for the Lancet and the other house journals of the socio-medical establishment that now micromanages our lives. But in this particular paper they use a neat trick to try to prove their point: they compare the mental health of people after recovering from Covid with those who recovered from flu.
This is truly ironic. Dare to bring up the ‘f’ word in most Covid discussions and risk immediate censure and admonishment from Branch Covidians. ‘Covid is NOT the flu!’ they screech, despite the fact that both are viral respiratory diseases with identical modes of transmission. It is an article of faith within Covidology that any comparison between the two diseases is facile, unscientific and tantamount to disinformation. But when they do it to suit their own agenda, it’s OK. You see how this works?
This is not to mention that the flu is supposed to have largely disappeared since anti-Covid measures were brought in! But somehow the study has managed to conjure 100,000 patients diagnosed with flu last year to compare with the Covid patients, and finds that the various mental and physical health conditions were present at a 44% higher rate after Covid. You see?! Proof positive of Long Covid, and that the coronavirus is particularly nasty and octopus-like in its attack on the human body!
The hypochondriac’s oath
This figure of 44% does seem to suggest that there is something about Covid that wears on the body long after infection. But I have a theory that might explain this flashy stat. One of Covidology’s foundational tenets is that most people still have never had the disease. I have never subscribed to this view for reasons I have outlined elsewhere. A large amount of evidence suggests significantly more people will have had Covid than have ever tested positive and certainly far more than ever darkened a hospital door.
If I am right, then the database of “Covid survivors” contains only the small group of Covid sufferers who went to hospital for their Covid symptoms, believing (no doubt reasonably in some cases) their life to be in danger. In other words, the study includes every hypochondriac under the sun. And hypochondriacs, who constantly focus on their own perceived ill health, are far more likely to report all of these wishy-washy “Long Covid” symptoms, whether real or imagined, to a sympathetic nurse.
So long, Covid
This hysteria is nothing new. Last summer a study linked mental ill-health in young people to Covid, and another warned of a higher risk of brain damage and strokes. At the time I sounded a note of caution on these claims, saying we should wait to see whether strong evidence emerges that Covid causes neurological damage. Well, it hasn’t, and here we are almost a year later reading the same frenzied reporting based on the same flimsy association studies.
Perversely, the longer this charade goes on the more evidence for “Long Covid” there will be. Hale and hearty Covid ‘’survivors’’ will, as they age, acquire all sorts of conditions that have nothing to do with Covid, but can often be linked to it. Just think: one day Covid will have a 100% correlation with death, as eventually every Covid “survivor” kicks the bucket. Of course, the researchers who produce these results know this, and would not deny it if challenged. But they also know that their job is to fuel an insatiable media machine, constantly needing more fire to frighten the public into continued submission. Are you fed up with it yet?
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
© 2021, paradox. All rights reserved.