How much of the past year was about the actual coronavirus rather than a political weapon to damage President Trump and remove him from office? The answer is obvious. We have had viral pandemics before, including a seasonal influenza, without mask mandates, social distancing, business closures, travel restrictions, and hysterical media coverage.
Much of the hair-on-fire reporting is over cases and deaths. 状语从句As I have previously written, a positive test is not the same as a case, and a death with COVID is different than death from COVID.
What if these definitions suddenly change in the upcoming weeks, once Joe Biden is in the White House, 分词状语creating the impression 同位语从句that getting rid of the Orange Man caused the case and fatality numbers to suddenly plummet, not because of anything定语从句 Biden did, but simply 状语从句because he isn’t Trump?
Rewriting history is a popular pastime for the left. Just ask George Orwell or observe current events including the social media purge and cancel culture. How might this play out with COVID?
Start with testing — the PCR test 定语从句which is overly sensitive. From that bastion of right-wing conspiracy, the New York Times,
The PCR test amplifies genetic matter from the virus in cycles; the fewer cycles required, 比较句the greater the amount of virus, or viral load, in the sample. The greater the viral load, 比较句the more likely the patient is to be contagious.
This number of amplification cycles 分词定语needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results 分词定语sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.
In three sets of testing data 定语从句that include cycle thresholds, 分词定语compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.
In addition, a positive PCR test is not necessarily a case of COVID. There is a “case definition,” something the corporate media is willfully ignoring. According to the CDC, a case requires, “presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence.” Notice the AND, 分词状语meaning not simply a positive test.
The result is 名词从句that case counts are wildly inflated and are being used to drive lockdowns, business and school closures, mask mandates, and other measures定语从句 that may not be necessary or even helpful.
What if the definitions conveniently change in the upcoming weeks?
As reported by Zero Hedge last week, “The FDA today joined The WHO and Dr. [Anthony] Fauci in admitting 宾语从句there is a notable risk of false results from the standard PCR test 分词定语used to define宾语从句 whether an individual is a COVID case or not.”
Did Dr. Fauci just realize this? After decades working in public health and infectious diseases, test sensitivity is something 定语从句he understands only too well. 状语从句If he knew, did he say or do anything?
In an interview last July, Dr Fauci acknowledged 宾语从句that the PCR test is overly sensitive,
“What is now sort of evolving into a bit of a standard,” Fauci said, is 名词性从句that “状语从句if you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more … the chances of it being replication-confident are minuscule.”
状语从句If true, a sizable proportion of patients may have been unwittingly receiving positive test results定语从句 that have little bearing on either their individual health or their risk of spreading the virus to others — suffering, in the process, much avoidable anxiety and disruption to everyday life.
Why didn’t Dr. Fauci make this case early during the pandemic, 状语从句when he was active in the coronavirus task force and appearing almost daily with President Trump briefing the media and the nation?
Any bets that once Biden is ensconced in the Oval Office these test criteria are suddenly deemed overly sensitive and revised, 分词状语miraculously reducing the case counts 定语从句which are breathlessly reported daily on cable news? All of a sudden, COVID will be going away, only 状语从句because the Orange Man is out of the White House and Brilliant Biden is now in charge, with no mention of the rule change.
Will COVID death criteria change in a similar manner? I predict 宾语从句they will. Early in the pandemic, Dr. Deborah Birx acknowledged宾语从句 that there was no distinction made between death with COVID versus death from COVID.
So, I think 宾语从句in this country we’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality. There are other countries 定语从句that 状语从句if you had a preexisting condition and let’s say the virus caused you to go to the ICU and then have a heart or kidney problem some countries are recording as a heart issue or a kidney issue and not a COVID-19 death. Right now…状语从句if someone dies with COVID-19 we are counting that as a COVID-19 death.
How soon until the CDC suddenly realizes the distinction and starts reporting deaths more realistically, as other countries do? Again this will support the narrative 同位语从句that all the 2020 COVID deaths were due to President Trump and it took a change of presidential leadership to miraculously reverse the death toll.
The dropping case and death numbers will also be attributed to Biden’s vaccine rollout, 定语从句which he had nothing to do with, 分词状语ignoring Trump’s organization and facilitation via Operation Warp Speed. 动名词Changing the rules mid-game creates new winners and losers, 状语从句just as we saw in the 2020 presidential election.
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is providing a preview of the great COVID shift. After locking down his state for most of the past year, 分词状语destroying the economy, he now sounds like President Trump.
He recently tweeted a reversal, just in time for the new Biden administration:
We simply cannot stay closed 状语从句until the vaccine hits critical mass. The cost is too high. We will have nothing left to open. We must reopen the economy, but we must do it smartly and safely.
What changed? A Democrat replacing a Republican in the White House, meaning new rules and gaslighting.
Although this is the likely media narrative, perhaps the numbers won’t shift quite yet. Many on the left are using the inflated death and case numbers to their political advantage, imposing draconian lockdowns, business closures, and ultimately control over the people 定语从句they supposedly represent, of course 分词状语exempting themselves from the rules 定语从句they impose on their subjects.
They travel, dine, and get their hair done 状语从句as if we live in normal times, 分词状语while forcefully preventing those 定语从句they govern from enjoying the same freedoms. Perhaps this taste of absolute power will be difficult for American politicians to give up.
Let’s see what happens during a potential Biden administration. Once the pandemic has served its purpose, Democrats using COVID as an excuse to finish fundamentally transforming America, the rules of the game may change, providing “proof”同位语从句 that the new rules, ushered in under wise Joe Biden, have finally tamed the COVID beast.
As George Orwell said, “主语从句Who controls the past controls the future. 主语从句Who controls the present controls the past.” Watch the past year’s COVID tragedy suddenly pivot to a new and more useful narrative.
Brian C. Joondeph, M.D., is a physician and freelance writer. Follow him (while you can) on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Parler, and QuodVerum.
Follow Me 👉🏿
