Thursday, April 23, 2020

I Have Been Banned From Talking About Ventilator Treatment Killing COVID-19 Patients

I am going to be appearing on a panel (via video) with some medical doctors and a financial analyst to discuss COVID-19.

We had a preliminary discussion about how the event would take place last Saturday. During that discussion, I casually mentioned that it appears ventilator use is killing COVID-19 patients.

One of the other panelists vehemently objected, "You can't say that without studies."

I replied, "There are initial reports."

 I mentioned them.

He wasn't aware of any of them.

I asked, "How is that I am aware of this stuff and I am an economist and you are in the medical profession and don't?"

After the call, I sent these emails:

Email 1:
Good talking to you all.
Here are a few posts I have put up on ventilators: (Put up more than a month ago!)  (see second video in this post)
Here is a scientific study I linked to:
No thank you, no commentary in response.

No indication as to why these commentaries were off or wrong. Silence.

Then I sent this.

Email 2:
 More From Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell
Still silence. 

Then Email 3, cranking things up because of the silence: 
Oxygen Therapy Appears to be the Solution 
Mainstream focus on ventilators is killing people. 
Fauci is a clown.
This worked but it wasn't a response from the medical professionals who were part of email chain. I got a call from the organizer (a good guy).

"Don't call Fauci a clown during the conference," he said.

The medical guys won't like it, I was told. 

Actually, I was being mild in the email. I think Fauci is a power-freak psychopath who needs to be exposed for a career of lies and distortions.

But, anyway, I  was asked to be on the panel for my views on the economic ramifications of the COVID-19 lockdown and that is what I will discuss. That was always my intention. But it is clear I am not allowed to bash Fauci or comment on a treatment that is killing people.

I sent the group, one more email, a link to this:
I wonder if this last information will be brought up by the medical professionals during the discussion.

In the medical profession, like pretty much everywhere else, most "experts" are not independent thinkers. They are influenced by what Hayek called second-hand dealers in ideas. Many, remarkably, won't even move off their perspective even if the evidence indicates a treatment doesn't help and 80% end up dead.



  1. I had an online debate with my ex-wife’s sister’s husband who is a “moderate Democrat” who hunts, lives in the south and is a PhD science professor at a large state university with an expertise in cotton farming. I’ve been reading the Vitamin D guys at for years, Mercola, Brownstein and Sardi and have been taking their advice. I never looked up the original sources of their claims. It turns out that there are lots and lots of “studies” and “papers” that indicate:

    1. Black people universally suffer from vitamin D deficiency and they require more sunlight than white people to get a vitamin D boost from the sun (acknowledging that white people get a boost and a quicker boost). The problems black people have from high blood pressure and diabetes could be due to vitamin D deficiency;

    2. Nursing home residents are uniformly vitamin D deficient;

    3. Vitamin D is now acknowledged to reduce the severity and length of colds and viral respiratory illnesses;

    4. Black people and nursing home residents should be getting vitamin supplements. There should be programs to take nursing home residents outside into the sun.

    The debate started with the professor noting that there were no double blind studies showing that vitamin D worked specifically on covid-19. Then he said that we should all take the wise advice regarding the shutdown of the epidemiologists and virologist.

    I responded by asking where were the double blind studies showing that college kids were in danger from getting a blast of Florida sun on the Florida beach while not “social distancing”. He responded by saying that there was no time for such a double-blind study. I then noted that “my theories” of vitamin D deficiency seemed to have significant support from double blind studies from approved sources while none of the current political or medical advice or diktats had any such support.

    I asked him why the media was so intent upon suppressing and/or mocking all reference to vitamin supplements and immune system boosting during the current crisis. I showed him where the local Detroit NBC station (still owned by the Katherine Graham family companies) pulled down my comment about their suppression of vitamin D studies.

    I then gave him the link to the Robert Wenzel post on “How Smart are Epidemiologists?” and he disappeared.


    a) All proposals for immune system boosting are bogus until double blind studies show them to be helpful specifically for Covid-19. Anything demonstrating success at providing help against previous viral outbreaks, including earlier corona viruses, are bogus.

    b) All statist proposals for lockdowns and to prevent immune boosting do not need double-blind studies since there is no time for that in an emergency.

  2. RW,
    It's quite interesting that the only non-Dr on the panel understands that the "Emperor (Fauci, Birx, et al.) has no clothes."

    Moreover, I'm a big fan of using the word "clown" to refer to Fauci - I use it all the time when referring SJWs, the Legacy Media, and apparatchik "tools" and their functionaries.

  3. I've driven to Florida from Michigan at least 40 times since 1960. The Florida sun has always cured me of whatever residual respiratory illness I may have had. I had planned to do one of my backroads trips to northern Florida in early April, but the genius Republican government shut down all of the state parks including the 50 long bike trail to nowhere. I turn 70 next year and I am going through sunshine withdrawal as Michigan is just about the cloudiest place in the USA in winter and through April. Do the folks who obsess about the lack of double-blind studies want to kill black people?

    COVID-19 is killing African Americans at a rate 7% to 193% higher than the general population. Understanding why, as well as the reasons behind the wide variation, is paramount to saving lives. Here, we test two potential explanations for this effect. On the one hand, African Americans might be dying more because they have a lower average income (‘the Socioeconomic Hypothesis’). On the other hand, they might be dying more because their skin is more resistant to UV radiation, as we previously showed that COVID-19 infections and deaths decrease with higher irradiance (‘the Irradiance Hypothesis’). The two hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. We show that the overrepresentation of African Americans among COVID-19 deaths shows a significant negative correlation with mean solar irradiance, with a 20% decrease in Global Horizontal Irradiance leading to a 76% increase in the overrepresentation of African Americans amongst COVID-19 deaths. We then show that in Michigan, one of the US states with the lowest irradiance in early April, the % of each county’s population that is black, more than its median income, median age or % of the population above 65 years old, predicts COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates. These results suggest a susceptibility linked to low irradiance may play a large role in African American vulnerability to COVID-19, and that black populations in (darker) locations with lower irradiance may benefit from sunlight exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic.

  4. This is very interesting. Keep the pressure on, RW!!!

  5. Everything about the response to this pandemic stinks.

  6. Dr. Gary Morsch out of NY said they had found that ventilators were making all but the most difficult cases worse and they had switched to oxygen. This was on a radio program last week.

    Seems strange that this would not be a big part of the treatment evolution and widely known. I even told my brother about this because he knows someone put on a ventilator.

    Listen here: