Pyramid Comment

This journal takes an alternative view on current affairs and other subjects. The approach is likely to be contentious and is arguably speculative. The content of any article is also a reminder of the status of those affairs at that date. All comments have been disabled. Any and all unsolicited or unauthorised links are absolutely disavowed.

Tuesday, June 02, 2020

Coronavirus 41 - 45

41. Reasons to be positive

42. A potential false sense of security

Incomplete information provides a false message and this does paradoxically show a'consistent ethos' of selling bad news. Truth? Who cares but it's a good story. Any gains that could have been made long ago fell over the tipping point.
Sanitiser (alcohol-based) gels are being promoted as effective protection causing the mad rush to clear shelves of the product which has led to a famine in the shops. Logically, soap and water is a better approach. Alcohol is assumed to 'kill' the virus but whatever was on the hands has just been moved around. It remains on the hands. Soap and water will mobilise skin contamination and flowing water will remove it completely. It probably won't 'kill' (neither does alcohol - DA) any potential contamination but will remove it from the skin. Coronavirus can cause diarrhoea, but toilet roll frenzy is unnecessary due to misinformation or unreasonable 'assumption'. The human-animal transmission has still not been established. People are scared into believing there will be a real problem.

Toilet roll manufacturer

'no need for panic'

The use of face masks in public continues to be 'recommended' (threatened? - DA) in the UK but the advice about the effectiveness of facemasks is confusing. Is the mask only a partial 'solution'? Would a HEPA filter facemask (HEPA = High Efficiency Particulate Arrester) be more useful; though impractical (cost and industrial-scale manufacture) for general use?
Facemasks are particularly beneficial so the wearer is less likely to infect anyone nearby in the event of a sneeze or cough. Social distancing is a sensible precaution (2m should place another person out-of-range of airborne particles - the coronavirus particle is relatively heavy and should fall to the ground - unless it is a windy environment). If this is the case then why has the wearing of a facemask on public transport (trains/coaches) not been suggested? The coaching industry in Northern Ireland is an example to illustrate the non-viability for operators if social distancing is implemented. Only a few people could occupy seats to maintain distancing rules and on a coach, it is unavoidable to use an aisle and not pass by someone seated.
   There is no evidence that human-animal transmission is possible and this is in direct conflict with the zoonosis pathway proposed for SARS-CoV-2. More confusion.

43. The stomach: a shared gateway

During the SARS and MERS outbreaks, nearly a quarter of patients had diarrhoea - a significant feature of those zoonotic coronaviruses. Whether gastrointestinal symptoms play a major part in the latest outbreak is still not clear, since cases of diarrhoea and abdominal pain have been rare. Why does a respiratory virus affect the gut? When any virus enters the body, it searches out human cells, looking for receptors - proteins on the outside of the cell. If a suitable receptor exists it engages and invades.
Some viruses are very selective and others less so. Penetration of all cell types results. Both viruses (SARS and MERS) can penetrate cell linings of the intestines and small/large colon. Those infections can then flourish in the gut, potentially causing damage that results in leakage of fluid leading to diarrhoea. Whether coronavirus behaves in a similar way is unknown. So far, the incidence is low. These same receptors are believed to be found in the lungs and small intestine.
The virus has also been detected in stool samples (New England Journal of Medicine and one preprint: medRxiv involving 1099 cases). This may indicate the spread of the virus via faeces though it is not conclusive and it is not known if this kind of transmission occurs with the Wuhan virus. It does, however, look like it exists in the stool and that people have GI symptoms associated with this.

44. Considerations

It's fascinating to further explore any underlying reasons for a scaremongering campaign. Consider connecting coronavirus with climate change. Apart from increasing the level of fear being dumped on an unsuspecting global population the issue of climate change has become a lesser concern over recent months. People are 'losing interest' and becoming used to the persistent 'meltdown' message. It is almost as though people need another good dose of fear to unsettle them again. It would be timely.
   Boris Johnson (BoJo - UK PM) is to update the British people daily to remind them why they should be scared. As if they need reminding. The current overkill has caused widespread panic already. Not enough? Plenty more where that came from.
Now mental health is targeted. Is there really to be no end to this onslaught? It is no surprise that some are struggling with the stress.
   A continued energy issue based on man-made pollution (carbon dioxide which all mammals respire) for which all mankind should be punished (anthropogenic). This has caused a potential crash of the stock market - a spider's web or a nest of vipers? And all based on a convenient lie.
Carbon dioxide was never the culprit. It's methane. The out-of-control population growth has been a double-edged sword. The growing market place (consumers = profit) needs to be protected but too much death is happening: wars, famine, social violence...
   A tipping point has arrived: the marketplace will actually shrink as it is killed off and consumer numbers will not be sustainable. However, sustaining the market place and its consumers are both desirable. Ideally in the long-, long-, long-term. A short-term solution may be to kill off a small part of the population - the very old liability (a growing burden on societies). Numbers would recover. In perspective, deaths are to be expected. But how many? The very old population (living longer as a result of 'life-enhancing' drugs and medical advancements - DA) are not conducive to the market economy. Simply an older population is better. They still have greater needs and wealth. Spending power. This is the sector that needs protection. To conserve the consumer base. As youth matures into a more aged population, it continues to be a group of consumers. Old becomes very old and this sector will die off anyway. It's unwanted, a burden (that's cynical, Louis - DA).
Money, money, money continues to be the death knell of Earth. It's only when. Is it possible a cure is already just waiting 'in the wings' for a man-made entity (coronavirus = COVID-19)? It could be supplanted by a more natural [out of human (government - DA) control] occurrence.

An asteroid impact?

45. Conclusions

It is not possible to draw any concrete conclusions from the information deluge. The inconsistency and clear massaging of figures (of deaths) by the British Government raise grave doubts about the accuracy of any announcement. A 'hidden' agenda can easily be suspected. Confidence in any comment from the government is absolutely absent.

Challenge and give very careful consideration
to any event. This is essential

   Actual lies cannot yet be ascertained but certainly, the narrative being told is designed to be as bleak (and frightening to many) as possible. Reasons for this can only be guessed at. If honesty was evident then true death-rate figures would take into account expected deaths in any year/month/week/day. By ignoring that death does occur all the time (especially in the +75s and who have undeclared chronic health issues - DA) makes the recorded deaths solely linked to the coronavirus - and NOTHING else. It is only necessary to confirm the presence of at least (only) ONE case of infection to strongly imply that everyone died because of COVID-19. Actually, it is very revealing that the disease (COVID-19) is usually NOT mentioned, only the group of viruses (coronaviruses) of which the common cold is one. It is always present when somebody dies. So, logically, people should never have died ever, before the (‘a’ - DA) coronavirus appeared.


   Being transmitted by close contact to infection (not carried in by the wind - airborne) defines that an infected individual is responsible for many deaths. And if someone is and had not been 'tested', there is no way that such an individual could ever know that they may be the reason people died.
   Worryingly, a postmortem to determine actual cause of death is no longer required for an unexpected death. Justified by the HUGE numbers of deaths - assumed to be due to COVID-19 if 'tested' positive: for any coronavirus or specifically SARS-CoV-2?

01.06.2020 - To be continued