Written evidence submitted by Christopher King MSc DipM DMS

(C190118)

 

 

 

Committee Evidence Hearing of 16 June 2021

 

You asked the three scientists who gave evidence what we might expect from the new varients of SARS-CoV-19. I would ask you to kindly consider some additional information.

 

The single most important indication of what we might expect is that it has been found to incorporate fragments of itself into the human genome as HIV does.  That is why HIV cannot be cured.  Please see this paper by Jaenisch and Young, May13 2021:

 

https://www.genengnews.com/insights/eminent-mit-scientists-defend-controversial-sars-cov-2-genome-integration-results/

 

If SARS-CoV-2 should achieve this capability together with its existing air-borne infection, our way of life would collapse and humanity would be fortunate to survive.  There are doubtless other equally lethal possibilities yet to emerge.

 

In general, we should expect the worst and that could be anything at all.  There is a high probability that this is a manufactured virus that is ‘alien’ to us in that it would not have occurred in nature.  It is conservative and prudent to treat is as such.  You are aware that mutation numbers are directly related to infection numbers.  There is a very large number of infections world wide and a correspondingly high probability of mutations, many of which will be unpredictably lethal.  This is what one might expect and is what we are seeing in a very short time.

 

Professor Wendy Barclay was mistaken in the example of convergent evolution that she gave to the Committee.  Her example was not of convergent but of parallel evolution because her spatially separated centres of virus evolution have the same progenitor.  Convergent organisms have different progenitors.  I suggest that Professor Barclay was confused because of her anxiety on behalf of SAGE to assert that SARS-CoV-2 had an animal host as intermediary to a human host.  Hosts are not relevant to convergent evolution.  Professor Barclay and SAGE are desperate to have you and the public believe that this is a naturally occurring virus despite compelling evidence to the contrary.  Dr Barclay’s error illustrates how fixation on a desired outcome despite contrary evidence distorts one’s thinking.  It is a departure from honesty and rationality into chaotic thinking. For this reason the SAGE Committee, ministers and the Prime Minister who deny that they ever had a ‘herd immunity’ policy and insist on an animal-mediated virus cannot be allowed to participate in future development of strategy and management of the pandemic in the UK.  Their thinking is flawed because they have killed tens of thousands of people and are denying it.  They are denying fact.  Their minds were already confused in adopting their homicidal policy contrary to medical principles.  They are now sick and unreliable. 

 

Sir Andrew Pollard has predicted a time when we will have a stable relationship with the virus.  Hospitalizations will be controlled by vaccines.  This prediction is based on hope, not evidence.  It is not a stable relationship when, as Sir Andrew has said, the virus will always escape vaccinated resistance.  It is a situation always on the brink of disaster.  The logistics of regular whole-country vaccinations to maintain such a state are impossible together with the possible breakout of much more lethal variants such as an airborne HIV-type variant of which we already have hints.  We should recall that SAGE’s initial evaluation of of the virus was mistaken, its herd immunity policy was disastrous, it failed to keep infection numbers down following lockdowns and it let the Indian variant into the country to begin a new series of increasing infections.   SAGE, the government and Sir Andrew all have passive, reactive policies.  Such reactive policies do not extinguish the virus, or prevent infections, mutations and deaths.  We need the aggressive, proactive strategy that should have been organized in January 2020 according to the East Asian examples and normal medical principles.  It is not valid for those responsible to say that those countries had experience of pandemics while we did not.  Dominic Cummings said that they were not appropriate to our (superior?) cuture.

 

I have been through the SAGE minutes and found them to be a story of obsessive modelling, proposals, reviews, lists, waiting for data, postponements, lack of evidence, etc. but no action. There are no references to ‘herd immunity’ in the minutes.  The minutes are falsified since this policy was publicly announced and explained by Sir Patrick Vallance, Chris Whitty and Boris Johnson, with diagrams of imaginary infection peaks on televsion in mid-March 2020.  Nevertheless, on 23 May 2021 at about 9:30 am on the BBC Andrew Marr show Dr Jenny Harries, Chief Executive of the UKHSE said that “...herd immunity had never been on the table”.  These people cannot face what they have done; they are in denial and think that a lie or semantic twists will erase it from the reality of perhaps 100,000 deaths that they have caused and their own minds.  It is not possible.

 

We need to know who introduced ‘herd immunity by infection’ to SAGE and the government.  We need to know what inducements led them to accept it and the motivation of the person who introduced it.  SARS-CoV-2 has changed our society and world.  Many do not understand this because the government has not explained it to them.  It is impossible to trust those who deny physical reality.  The reality of their policy is killing people at this moment when the obvious need was to keep infections, mutations and deaths down.

 

We need a proactive policy to extinguish the virus based on Australian and SE Asian experience.  Parliament cannot maintain confidence in the Prime Minister in view of his participation in this disaster.  A completely new team is needed.  Parliament will seek some sort of compromise.  That would be to compromise with the virus which as Sir Andrew has implied, will never compromise.

 

A strategy to extinguish the virus should commence well before winter when as the ‘experts’ say the virus ‘comes back’.  It does not come back.  It will be continuously present until we extinguish it. It spreads in winter due to our behaviour of congregating in unventilated venues for extended periods.  We need to learn safe behaviour for ourselves and others and about environmental safety.  That is how SARS-CoV-2 will be extinguished.

 

June 2021