Denial of Early Covid-19 Treatment – A Crime Against Humanity

Americans citizens were recently coerced into being part of the test or control groups of a medical experiment, without adequate knowledge and without their consent. Hundreds of thousands of Americans likely died from the resulting denial of timely and adequate treatment of Covid-19 and more importantly, its preventable secondary conditions.
This was an egregious violation of The Nuremberg Code on human rights. The time has come for jurisprudence and restitution to those harmed.

Warning: you risk being suspended by Facebook if you link to this article inside your account. A government authorized (unchallenged) monopoly, which Facebook is, is bound by the US Constitution just the same – it is not solely and simply a ‘private company’. Only the truth demands active, trained and organized suppression. In a free thought and information society, lies will eventually falsify themselves. Suppression of an idea usually involves fear of some element or form of truth.

You Were Part of an Involuntary Nationwide Medical Experiment

During my initial diagnosis with the Delta variant of Covid-19 back in August 2021, I reasonably inquired of the attending physician as to any candidate or approved therapies and treatments for the condition. In his response, the diagnosing clinician admonished me with the following well-rehearsed quip:

There is no treatment. Go home and sleep it off. You should have gotten the vaccine.

~ Diagnosing Physician at Clinic, Aug 18 2021

As it turned out, this was absolutely the worst advice I have ever received in my life, and from a medical professional no less. This apothegm is what I call a Höchste Mechanism, a fraudulent notion arrogantly passed off as official science – a notion that has become so important to protect, that ignorance is now mandated in defense of its ‘truth’. This misinformation was spun by the clinician as if it were ‘the standard of care’ (both a medical and legal definition)1 for Covid-19, when in fact this was far from the truth.

The notion that one need withhold any and all forms of putative treatment or therapy as one approach in addressing Covid-19 or its symptoms, is a principle which functions under the philosophy of a ‘controlled experiment’ (i.e. medical experimentation to confirm an approach as sound/unsound). As a result of such control-versus-test experimentation, we now know that there exist a variety of viable treatments for Covid-19 and in particular, its dangerous secondary conditions.2 3 4 Treatment not for everyone who tests positive certainly, but rather for those experiencing heavy cytokine storm or who bear a stark risk (dysbiosis, metabolic disorder, dementia, etc.). The antithesis, refusing any and all outpatient treatment or ‘doing nothing’, as it turns out was an unsound approach to the majority of moderate to severe Covid-19 cases. ‘Long Covid’ for instance, is a set of thromboembolic injuries which resulted from exactly this illegitimate ‘there are no treatments – you should have been vaccinated’ control-oriented philosophy (yes, this amphibology is intentional).5 6

The Nuremberg Code of 1947 addresses the context of circumstance wherein the standard of care has not been identified for a medical or therapeutic condition, and various approaches to treatment (including the action of withholding treatment so as to provide for a ‘control group’) are under consideration or testing (aka ‘experimentation’ in 1947).7 In the real life scenario above, I was involuntarily coerced into becoming part of an experimental protocol of withholding all treatment (the control), in favor of testing a vaccine purported to offer certain benefits against Covid-19 infection or severity. The various arguments made as to the efficacy of that vaccine are moot. A decision was made to coerce me, without sufficient knowledge on my part nor my consent, into participating as a control-group member in an experiment evaluating test-group vaccines versus the action of withholding any and all treatment. Much as a healthy beagle might be terminated after starvation for comparative autopsy in a pesticide toxicity study. All this of course as part of various vaccines’ completion of Phase III and IV testing now underway.8

A controlled experiment is one in which every factor is held constant except for one variable per test group.9 In this case, that one variable is the introduction of a particular vaccine (say the Pfizer-BioNTech version) to a test group. The fact that the vaccine was not held to standard against ‘the best alternative medical treatments or therapies’, means that denying me access to those available remedies, constituted indeed a control-test experiment exposing me to a potential of harm through contrived inaction. An experiment which risked my person, well being, health, and life without my knowledge or consent – and nothing else. My diagnosing clinician even stated as much, without fully realizing it.

In other words, I was allowed to choose whether I would be a member of
the ‘no treatment allowed’ control group or alternately one of the vaccine test groups;
however, through denying me timely treatment,
I was not offered the ethical choice of not participating in the experiment altogether.

Neither was I informed as to the nature of this experiment, nor was I made aware that other treatments or therapies were at my avail, should I decline participation.

Nor was I allowed to be made aware of the comparative strength of natural immunity versus the vaccine, nor to see critical cohort testing data indicating the adverse effects risk quotients of the vaccine itself (both very basic ethical information sets), so that I could make an informed choice.

I was fraudulently coerced by medical professionals (and by advising health officials) into the belief that I had no choice, I had to participate. My life was endangered and I was exposed to unnecessary amounts of suffering and expense as a result of this coerced experiment. I was not offered the remedies or recourse to address the situation in the instance where the experiment failed or failed to ensure my safety (the experiment failed in both these regards), nor was I given the opportunity to bring the experiment to an end.

This set of actions constituted a violation of my human rights, subject to The Nuremberg Code of 1947. The following excerpts from that Code apply to the specific offenses outlined in my circumstance.10

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur;

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.

9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

~ The Nuremberg Code of 1947 (see footnote 10)

A seven-count violation of my human rights. I lost loved ones to this experiment. My family suffered extensive career and financial losses, we all suffered physically and mentally beyond reason, and any member could have died inside this experiment.

One elder family member who underwent a severe cytokine storm, very nearly died of blood clots in her lungs and other organs twelve days later (right on time as per Exhibit 1 below), solely because she was actively refused treatment by her general physician until she was actually dying – a tortiously late intervention in an otherwise foreseeable and treatable condition.

Each of us fell victim to contrived ignorance, fully unaware that our lives were being exploited for experimental (and political) purposes. Millions of American citizens each bore a similar drama inside this crime against humanity.

The time has come for jurisprudence and restitution regarding this crime.

How Many Persons Were Impacted by this Unethical Experiment?

But how can we even begin to quantify just how large a crime it was? In researching the mechanisms of death involved in either Covid-19 itself, or its even more dangerous secondary effects, I sought out medical publications and studies which would serve to parse Covid deaths into their actual root physiological cause. What I found disturbed me greatly. Covid-19 itself, comprising the indicators and symptoms of fever, cytokine storm, cough, and diarrhea, was rarely the cause of actual death in most Covid mortality. Most mortality occurred a good eight days after all these maladies were well over. Instead, the primary cause of death was ‘venous and arterial thromoembolic events’ (see the black arrow in Exhibit 1 below). That is to say, that 50 to 75% of all Covid deaths came from blood clots.11 12 Blood clots (as well as endothelial dysfunction) are conditions which are eminently treatable, provided they are addressed in a timely manner. If they are left untreated for long, myriad systems and organs within the human body will be negatively impacted.

This circumstance was akin to telling potential cancer patients to
‘Check back in with us next year and we’ll take a look at your growing lump then.

In the meantime, if you find yourself starting to die, go to the emergency room’.

This set of events constituted a highly unethical, nay monstrous, set of decisions on the part of American health officials. One which has resulted in death and immeasurable harm, from delayed treatment which was administered only under the extreme condition wherein the sufferer was dying. A dying person literally had to force their way into an ER or hospital’s care, just to get access to Heparin or a simple lifesaving novel oral anticoagulant (NOAC) pill13 which could have prevented the entire tragedy (as well as offset hospital/ICU overloading) if it had been administered twelve to fifteen days earlier as an outpatient instead.

50 to 75% of all Covid-19 deaths were a result of endothelial dysfunction and blood clotting. Conditions that would not have been fatal if timely treatment had been made available to the victims.

Such readily available treatments were denied to patients, under a contrived ignorance and the unethical protocol of an involuntary experiment that placed them at risk of harm and death.

Of course, I am not even going to venture a guess as to the financial losses incurred by American citizens under this barbaric method of managing a pandemic. The restitution numbers will be staggering. More appropriate for this analysis however, is a quantification of the human loss in terms of injury, suffering, and life. In particular, we estimate that

  • 20+ million citizens experienced negative life-impacts/injuries/long-Covid aside from the mere pandemic virus itself,
  • 6.5 million citizens experienced excessive suffering, hospitalization, injury, and expense, and
  • 420,000+ citizens died from being denied early and timely treatment of endothelial and thromboembolic conditions (click on the image to expand Exhibit 1 below).
Exhibit 1

As one may observe in Exhibit 1 above, the median day of Covid mortality (day 18.5) falls right in the middle of the disease progression timeframe in which venous and arterial thromboembolic events were almost exclusively occurring on average. In fact, the majority of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality events associated with Covid-19, were a direct result of otherwise treatable endothelial dysfunction and blood clots.14 15

Also take note, that the majority of this knowledge shown in Exhibit 1 was held by April 2020. Medical authorities had ample time to distribute, control, and monitor treatments for endothelial and thromboembolitic conditions. They simply chose not to.

An action which resulted in the USA holding a #1 ranking in national deaths, a full 37% higher than even the #2 ranked nation (Brazil) in terms of total deaths.16

Most people did not die of the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself, nor even its primary Covid-19 symptoms. They died at the hands of obdurate-minded and unaccountable public health officials. They died as the result of a horrendous experiment in humanity on the part of The Party – one conducted gleefully on their political opponents. While at the same time rubbing their noses in the destruction of their children’s lives, shuttering of their small and medium-sized businesses, and overall impingement upon their quality of life.

We, the American citizens, seek remedy for this crime against humanity.

The Ethical Skeptic, “Denial of Early Covid-19 Treatment – A Crime Against Humanity”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 30 Dec 2021; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=59250

Our Household ‘Covid Kit’ Item Listing

Things which my family learned to keep on hand in case of severe Covid-19, especially if your genome includes the homozygous variant of the MTHFR C677T gene.

I am well into my third bout with Covid-19 now. A mere three months after recovering from the Delta variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, I am sick again. As of this writing, I have a 99.5o fever, a touch of fatigue, and head cold symptoms – all consistent with the Omicron variant of the same virus. As well, an immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody blood test in mid-2021 showed that I had undergone an exposure to Covid-19 well prior to either of these cases. Since I was monitored for Covid-19 constantly all through 2020 and early 2021 as a requirement of the efforts I supported at that time, then this first run-in with Covid had to have occurred prior to January 2020. But that is the subject of another article entirely.

12/31/21: An an anecdotal note, I noticed a curious effect resulting from my bout with Omicron. After Delta, my normal doctor-diagnosed allergies to mold and ragweed pollen were amplified – resulting in the worst fall-into-winter allergy season I have ever had. As soon as I developed the first fever of Omicron (99.5 degrees off and on throughout), my allergies which had been incessant since my recovery from Delta, completely disappeared. I have recovered from Omicron after 4 days, but the allergies I had for three full months have not come back. Omicron served to adjust my immune system in some positive fashion as it relates to the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

My household family, as well as 13 members of extended family in other nearby households, experienced a struggle with the Delta variant of Covid this July through September of 2021. Through this process, in coordination with a variety of supporting doctors and medical professionals, I have become a student of how the virus works along with its array of symptomatic challenges. Upon arrival of yet another Covid outbreak in our area, this time we were ready.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus is primarily dangerous to our elder folks, those who suffer from metabolic disorders, or who possess the C677T homozygous (rs1801133 A/A) MTHFR mutation.1 2 Why? Because this is a malady of the blood and endothelial system – and those who suffer from red blood cell anemia, mitochondrial dysfunction, and metabolic compromises (all related to the MTHFR mutation as well) are more vulnerable to Covid-19 pathogenesis. One can be in good shape, working hard daily to keep their metabolic disorder from impacting their quality of life – but that in no way means that Covid cannot exploit that disorder.

Endothelial dysfunction, microvascular inflammation, oxidative stress, and coagulopathy (blood clotting) play the central role in most COVID pathogenesis.

~ Fodor, Adriana et al. “Endothelial Dysfunction, Inflammation, and Oxidative Stress in COVID-19-Mechanisms and Therapeutic Targets.” Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity vol. 2021 8671713. 21 Aug. 2021

Therefore those things which treat endothelial inflammation and serve to mitigate blood coagulation are essential tools in countering Covid-19. As a result of what my family learned through this hard process, I present for your consideration our Covid Kit inventory.

Our Kit

The reason one should keep this kit on hand is because the prevailing medical wisdom regarding Covid-19 is to administer treatment protocols only when a person is about to die, and only in a hospital setting – which is often too late. The following protocols however should still be conducted only under your doctor’s advisement and care. He or she may see fit to modify or add to this protocol based upon your specific medical needs. That being said, this kit loosely follows the Zelenko Protocol, with some add-ins from our own experience and discussions with our medical professionals. Given that Omicron is turning out to be a much weaker form of Covid for us, I am not using all of the below items right now of course, saving the hardest-to-get for another Delta-like outbreak.

Nonetheless, those items which we found essential for the Delta variant are in bold below, and those which require a prescription in the U.S. (and in several cases can be bought over-the-counter in the rest of the world) are in red. Of those, if the illness is severe, the red bold ones are the priority. If you are MTHFR homozygous (rs1801133 A/A) C677T, then this virus is designed for you. You will need the special protocol as modified or marked as a preference in blue herein as well.

We begin with the most important items:

  • Ivermectin, 6 mg, 2x / day, 12 days from first major symptoms
  • Eliquis, 5 mg, 2x / day, from first symptoms for 60 days – (note: if MTHFR homozygous (A/A) C677T 4x / day for 30 days, then 2x / day for another 30 days). In absence of Eliquis – Nattokinase, or Serrapeptase, or a mix of ginko-biloba, curcumin, and piperine.
  • Zinc Suflate, 15 mg, 2x / day, for 90 days from first symptom
  • Niacin (flush), 500 mg, 1x / day, from first symptoms to 60 days after illness
  • Vitamin D3, 10,000 IU, 1x / day, for 90 days from first symptom
  • Quercetin, 800 mg, 2x / day, for 90 days from first symptom

Following these, also important are (in no particular order):

  • Azithromycin, 500 mg, 1x / day, 5 days from first lung congestion
  • Diphenhydramine, 25 mg, 1x / day, from first symptoms to last, and as needed
  • Melatonin, 10 mg, 1x / day at bedtime, from first symptoms to 30 days after illness
  • Calcium Lactate, 210 mg, 2x / day, while fever persists
  • Pepcid AC, 20 mg, 1x / day for 30 days from first symptoms
  • Prednisone, 5 mg, 3x / day for 5 days, then 2x / day for 5 days, then 1x / day for 5 days from first lung congestion
  • Cough suppressant, as needed
  • Budesonide and Formoterol Fumarate Dihydrate Inhalation Aerosol, 160 mcg/4.5 mcg, 2x / day for 30 days
  • L-methylfolate, 1700 mcg, 1x / day, (note: 2x / day if MTHFR homozygous (A/A) C677T)
  • Methylcobalamine, 1000 mcg, 1x / day, (note: 2x / day if MTHFR homozygous (A/A) C677T)
  • N-Acetyle L-Cysteine, 600 mg, 1x / day, from first symptom to 60 days after
  • Glutathione, 50 mg, 1x / day, for 30 days after first symptom
  • Vitamin C, 1000 mg, 1x / day, for 90 days from first symptom
  • Bromelain, 165 mg, 2x / day, for 90 days from first symptom
  • Pre-biotic (usually a form of fruit saccharide or inulin), 1x / day, for 120 days from first symptom
  • Pro-biotic, 1x / day, for 120 days from first symptom (containing most of these strains: b. clausii, l. plantarum, s. boulardii, b. bifidum, b. coagulans, l. bulgariicus, s. thermophilus, b. longum, l. rhamnosus, l. paracasei)
  • Green Tea Extract, 1000 mg, 1x / day, for 30 days after first symptoms, none after 6:00pm

The Ethical Skeptic, “Our Household ‘Covid Kit’ Item Listing”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 29 Dec 2021; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=59295

The Riddle of Certainty

The astute investigator is much more effective in seeking to increase the reliability of probative information, than by attempting to increase the probative nature of reliable information. This is a key tenet of Ethical Skepticism.

The reliability of an observation is established through its ability to be corroborated, and not necessarily by its precision nor sourcing reputation. This is the central tenet of The Riddle of Certainty. The key indicator of certainty is not the assumed reliability of the data you are handling (remember this is a stacked or even worse, circular assumption), but rather the consilience in observation which can be drawn from additional sources, types of sources, disciplines, and analytical perspectives which can be brought to bear. This involves answering more than simply one question, regardless of that one question’s relevance or the confidence interval which may serve to bound its single answer. Both of these artificial forms of certainty can serve to falsely reassure the person conducting inquiry – rendering them essentially nothing more than a lab tech. One who dazzles outsiders through proprietary practice notation and jargon, and not a true investigator questioning why a specific line of prosecution is being followed.

Possibly the most common error of smart engineer, is to optimize a thing which should not exist. Everyone’s been trained in high school and college that you’ve got to answer the question, convergent logic. You can’t tell the professor, ‘Your question is dumb’. You’ll get a bad grade. You have to answer the question. So everyone’s basically, without knowing it, got a mental straight jacket on. That is they will continue to work on optimizing the thing, that simply should not exist.

~ Elon Musk, Tik-Tok, 23 Dec 2021

Once the investigator has achieved successful consilience through a series of differing perspective questions, he or she should eventually arrive at the point where they are able to predict the next avenue of anticipated consilient observation. Once this is repeated several times, one has established reliability from out of probative information – but not by means of the self-gratifying comedy of confidence intervals and p-values. When applied solely for technical dazzle or as truth-panacea, these tools are rendered mere club-costume accoutrements – bearing little in common with probative inquiry. After this achievement is the context where p-values and confidence intervals begin to add value to certainty, not before.

One trick I have employed with specific clients is to assign a difficult analytical task to the team at the very start, in order to see who attacks the problem without asking why we are addressing it in the first place.

For instance, I once asked a team to conduct a constrained least squares optimization on a set of process nodes, complete with the set of differential vectors separating each functional node from its value chain. The answer was actually irrelevant because the one node which imparted the value, bore a standard deviation of over 100% of its average value to begin with.

This distracted the ‘I am the smartest person in the room’ types so that the team had time to undertake ‘a critical path of salient questions seeking consilience’, as opposed to ‘an analytical path of relevant-but-trivial questions seeking irrelevant levels of precision’. Before they finished, the rest of the team had already determined the answer to the project’s challenge.

If you have five low error-tolerance (reliable) principal inputs to a challenge, along with one wild-ass guess principal input – your answer will constitute nothing more than a wild-ass guess. Therefore, most of the time it is something other than precision which is critical to determining the answer. Unwise is the investigator who does not understand this.

The Riddle of Certainty

Zone IV or ‘Precise Accuracy’ is a fantasy as regards most nascent or little-understood arenas of study.

Most of science and skepticism dwells in Zone I, moving into Zone II, but falsely believe that they reside in Zone IV (Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy). They are not allowed a viewpoint outside the cage of precision, as that flags a lack of club-enforced traits.

This constitutes trees blinding one to the forest.

The astute intelligence professional seeks to work inside Zone III instead, drawing consilience from a variety of sources and analytical perspectives – realizing that answers are more difficult to come by than one might presume.

An investigator is much more effective in seeking to increase the reliability of probative information, than by attempting to increase the probative nature of reliable information.

Wrong answers under the right approach, serve to inform. Right answers under the wrong approach result in an endless parade of paradox and naked emperors.

This is critical for the astute professional to understand. For examples of these principles in action, please see the following articles.

The Climate Change Alternative We Ignore (to Our Peril)

The Peculiar Schema of DNA Codon’s Second Letter

China’s CCP Concealed SARS-CoV-2 Presence in China as Far Back as March 2018

The Ethical Skeptic, “The Riddle of Certainty”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 24 Dec 2021; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=59117