5 Thoughts on Corruption, GPs, Receptionists, QALYs and Scales
1. Corruption
I was chatting with a work acquaintance this week, he was “on our side when it came to lockdowns but not when it came to vaccines” he said as he pointed to his left shoulder, the site of the injection.
I don’t know why he took it, maybe he was worried about COVID, maybe he just wanted to get it over and done with so “life could get back to normal”, who knows, and I didn’t probe. But I did want to get his sense of how dangerous he thought COVID, so I asked him one of my regular questions “if 1,000 people get the virus, how many do you think will die?”, he thought about it for a couple of seconds and said 2. Bang on! The correct answer is 1.5 but it was 2.3 about a year ago, so he is bang on. He didn’t say 100 as some people are prone to saying. His view of the risk mapped over reality.
I then asked him the same question about the flu, and he said 3, the correct answer is 1 (ish). A very bad flu season might get up to that, but 1-2 is the normal range. Anyway, he had the shape of it right, which is quite rare.
So, through that little exercise we arrived at the conclusion that the “societal impact” of COVID and the Flu was the same, he agreed with that. We also agreed that although the Societal Impact was the same, in terms of number of deaths, COVID was deadlier to the old and less deadly to the young. We agreed to that also. I was hoping to get to this point otherwise we would have discussed something else.
So, then I asked him, “if it has the same societal impact as the flu, can you think of any good reason to do all the things that they have done that does NOT involve corruption?”.
He sat silently for a while and then said “No, point taken”.
This is a key question to ask yourself, if you have doubts about the corruption, and to ask others to help awaken them.
What is a good scientific, moral and principled reason to shut down society, place the population under house arrest, destroy businesses, print $619B to “prop up” the economy, speed release an untested “vaccine” that kills between 1 in 4,000 to 1 in 20,000 in Australia (depending on what your under-reporting multiplier is), compared to the flu shot that kills 1 in 10M, shut down schools, push people to suicide, ban leaving or entering Australia etc etc etc, I could keep going but I’ll stop.
Again, what is a good reason for doing all of that, that does NOT include corruption?
If you cannot think of a good, moral, scientific, and principled reason, then all you are left with is corruption.
But this is where the real problem is. People do not understand corruption. They generally only understand it through the lens of small-scale bribery, and generally believe it to be a problem in “other countries” not really here, you know, those third world places. But when they find out that someone took some cash to approve a property development, they shake their head but at the same time are comforted with the idea that “they were caught, and all is good with the world again”. We are back to being corruption free.
People want to believe their world is corruption free, and what “little” there is, will always get “caught”. They view corruption through the same lens of crime such as shop lifting, theft, and murder.
If you believe that people can be “corrupted” with $50,000 or $2M, then it follows that people could be corrupted with $100M or $1B. Why would you think that those levels of bribes do not exist? Anyway, I digress, money changing hands, or the future promise of money changing hands whether petty, small or sums beyond our imagination is the least of it.
True corruption is something else entirely. Personally, I think of it as that “which is not true”. When someone does something that is UNTRUE then we are in the midst of corruption. We might not figure out why or how the corruption is occurring, but we can “feel” it.
An act can be UNTRUE, but the underlying motive for doing it is always TRUE. I am focusing on the ACT.
The most obvious example is the stereotype of the “used car salesman” that sells you a bomb while smiling and telling you there is nothing wrong with the car. You know that something UNTRUE is occurring and your instincts are sending you warning signals, but you are hypnotised by his wonderful smile and his oh so beautifully blue eyes. His personal motives are all so TRUE, his ACT is not. Anyway, you end up buying the car.
Incentives corrupt. Or put more honestly incentives CAN corrupt and on scale DO corrupt many. It is not a given that a used care salesman has to be UNTRUE. In fact, an honest used car salesman stands to make a fortune by treating clients as fellow humans rather than prey. Telling them what is both good and bad about the car and helping them make a value-based decision with someone they can come to trust. Someone told me many years ago, that if you want to make a lot of money, pick an industry with a bad reputation, and just do the work well and honestly, you will clean up. That was a fundamentally true idea.
2. A finger on the scales
Incentives put a finger on the scale of ideas, beliefs, and behaviour.
Here’s just one example of an incentive. All Australian doctors are under strict instructions to support the current vaccine narrative. If a doctor is found to be causing vaccine hesitancy, his license to work could be revoked.
Ok, so let’s think about that. Is that an INCENTIVE? Yes.
Will it impact behaviour? Yes.
If a doctor believed that the jab was too risky and not tested enough, would he say so, at the risk of losing his career? No. And exceptions do not make the rule.
If a doctor had some suspicions, but needed to inform himself more, is he now incentivised to do the work and inform himself, of is he incentivised to remain WILLFULLY IGNORANT? The latter.
Doctors are meant to look after their patients, that is TRUE. Is what is now happening in Australia true? No.
Is it corrupt? Yes.
3. The GP
A good friend of mine, who had a heart attack and heart surgery and who can struggle with his breathing when wearing a mask, went to his doctor of many years to get a medical mask exemption as he has difficulty breathing with a nappy on his face. His doctor said that he couldn’t give him that exemption and that he would need to refer him to a lung specialist.
Do you think what the doctor did was true or untrue?
Do you think he was more interested in my friend’s well-being or in him avoiding a call from the authorities asking why he was handing out mask exemptions?
Has his behaviour been corrupted. Yes.
Has the doctor allowed the corruption to “flow through him” to reduce the risk to himself? Yes.
4. The Receptionist
Another person that I know well, has had cancer and is now terminal, with 6-12 months to live. She has a blood clotting problem and calls her oncologist to ask whether she should take the vaccine or not, as she had heard about the blood clotting risks. The receptionist asked what the call was about, and she said that she wanted to chat with the doctor about the vaccine and whether to take it, at which point the receptionist said, “He has told me to tell all patients to take the vaccine”.
So, think about that again.
Is what the doctor is doing right? Is it true? No.
Why is he doing it? So, that he doesn’t have to have uncomfortable discussions with any patients, most of whom might be at heightened risk from the vaccine.
Has a corruption occurred? Yes.
So, back to where all this started, if you cannot think of a good reason for the destruction of society because of a virus that has the societal impact of the flu, that does not involve corruption, then you are left with corruption as your only answer.
The fact that you may not, or never, know the exact mechanics of the corruption, doesn’t matter, that is another issue and for another day.
5. Flu QALYs
As an aside, although COVID and Flu both have the same society impact with around 1-2 deaths per 1,000, the average age of PCR+ death in Australia is 85, way past normal life expectancy which is 80 for men and 84 for women.
QALYs is a public health measure that used to be used to determine how to allocate limited funds and resources to different age groups and different illnesses, obviously all of that has been thrown out of the door. It stands for Quality Adjusted Life Years, so how many QALYs would you say an 85-year-old has, I think 0.5 would be generous but let’s say its 1.
The flu effects young and old, more very young kids die from the flu than they do from COVID.
Between 1997 and 2016, influenza caused 2,316 deaths in Australia, 80% (1,847 deaths) of which were in people aged 65 and over. Over this period, there was an average of 31 influenza deaths per million population per year in older Australians, compared with 2 per million population per year in children aged under 5. These data may under-estimate the real impact of influenza on deaths in Australia, as many of the people who die will not have been tested for influenza.
This doesn’t tell us the average age of a flu death, but it is certainly far lower than 85.
Is does tell us that 2 per million deaths were under 5, based on 25M population that means 50 deaths is little kids and babies under 5.
How many deaths have there been in Australia from COVID in the under 5 group. Zero.
Worldwide PCR+ deaths are far lower than flu.
The point is that the average age of death from flu is much lower than 85, I don’t know what the number is, but I am going to guess that it’s around 70 (ish) to take the very young into account.
The average life expectancy is 82, so that means that the average QALYs lost to society from a flu death is 12 vs 1 from COVID.
That means that on these numbers it’s true to say that the societal impact of flu is 12 times worse than that of COVID as it strips society of far more QALYs.
Anyway, its just another way to look at all this madness and might be another tool to try and help someone wake up from the mass hypnosis/psychosis.