Considerations of a Concerned Swiss Citizen
[originally published on 7 April 2020]
Foreword: Why I am taking a position?
Five reasons:
1. I have been working with EurAsia Heart – A Swiss Medical Foundation in EurAsia for more than 20 years, worked in China for almost a year and had a continuous connection to the Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College / Huazhong University of Science for 20 years and Technology in Wuhan, where I have one of my four visiting professorships in China. Over the last 20-years I have been able to maintain a constant connection to Wuhan.
2. COVID-19 is not only a mechanical ventilation problem, it affects the heart in a similar way. 30% of all patients who do not survive the intensive care unit die for cardiac reasons.
3. The last possible therapy for lung failure is an invasive cardiological or cardiosurgical one: the use of an «ECMO», the method of «extracorporeal membrane oxygenation», i.e. the connection of the patient with an external, artificial lung, which in this clinical picture can take over the function of the patient’s lungs until it works again.
4. I was asked – quite simply – for my opinion.
5. The media coverage and a large number of reader comments require a response with regard to facts and questions of morality, racism and eugenics that is based on reliable data and information.
The facts that I present here come from peer-reviewed scientific papers published in the best medical journals. Many of these facts were known by the end of February. If these medical facts had been heeded and if ideology, politics and medicine would have been kept apart, Switzerland would arguably be today in a better position. It would have in this pandemic a significantly smaller number of deaths per capita and not the second highest count of COVID-19-positive cases worldwide. In addition, we would most likely not have a partial, incomplete lockdown of our economy and no controversial discussions about how we can “get out of here”.
Finally, I would like to note that I can provide [upon request] all original scientific works mentioned here.
1. The numbers in the media
Clearly, everybody wants to understand the extent of this pandemic in one way or another. However, the daily numbers are of little help because we do not know how many people have had contact with the virus without showing symptoms and how many people have actually gotten sick.
The number of asymptomatic COVID-19 carriers is important in order to make assumptions about the spread of the pandemic. To get usable data, however, one should have carried out broad mass testing at the beginning of the pandemic. Today one can only guess how many Swiss had contact with COVID-19. A paper with an American-Chinese authorship already published on March 16, 2020 stated that for every 14 documented cases, we can expect 86 undocumented COVID-19-positive cases. With regard to Switzerland, we must therefore expect to have 15 to 20 times more COVID-19 positive cases than shown in the daily calculations. For an assessment of the severity of the pandemic, we would need different data:
1. A globally valid definition of the diagnosis “suffering from COVID-19”
a) positive laboratory test + symptoms
b) positive laboratory test + symptoms + corresponding result in lung CT or
c) positive lab test, no symptoms, but corresponding findings in lung CT.
2. number of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the general ward
3. number of COVID-19 patients in the intensive care unit
4. number of ventilated COVID-19 patients
5. number of COVID-19 patients at the ECMO
6. number of COVID-19 deceased
7. number of infected doctors and nurses
Only these numbers can provide a clearer picture of the severity of the pandemic and the danger of the virus. The current presentation of numbers is so fuzzy and has a touch of “sensationalism” – the last thing we need in this situation.
2. “A common flu”
Is it just “a common flu” that comes every year and we usually do nothing about it, or is it a dangerous pandemic that requires rigid measures?
To answer these questions, we definitely don’t need to ask statisticians who have never seen a patient. A purely statistical assessment of this pandemic is immoral anyway. We have to ask the people at the front.
Neither I nor any of my colleagues and nursing staff can remember that the following conditions have ever occurred in the past 30 or 40 years:
1. clinics are filled with patients who all have the same diagnosis;
2. entire intensive care units are filled with patients who have the same diagnosis;
3. 25% to 30% of nurses and health care workers have acquired the same disease of the patients they care for;
4. lack of ventilators;
5. patients had to be triaged not for medical reasons but because of the sheer lack of medical supplies;
6. seriously ill patients had the same, uniform clinical picture;
7. the mode of death of all those who die in intensive care is the same;
8. Medicine and medical supply is running out.
Based on 1-8, it is clear that we are dealing with a dangerous virus causing this pandemic.
Claims that “influenza” is equally dangerous and causes every year the same number of deaths is wrong. Likewise, the claim one doesn’t really know what causes the deaths, whether they are caused “by”or “in connection with” a COVID-19 infection is out of thin air.
Let’s compare influenza and COVID19. Did we ever have the impression that patients use to die “because of” and never” in connection with” influenza? Have we medical doctors in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic suddenly become so stupid that we are unable to distinguish whether someone dies “in connection with” or “because of” COVID-19 after patients have a typical clinical picture, typical laboratory findings and a typical lung CT? Aha, with regard to “influenza”, everyone was of course always very conscientious using the entire toolbox of diagnostics, so we can now with certainty say that in the case of influenza everybody dies “because of” but in the case of COVID-19 many “in connection with”.
Moreover, when we talk about supposedly 1,600 influenza deaths in Switzerland in one year, we are talking about 1,600 deaths over a period of 12 months without preventive measures. With COVID-19, however, we have 600 deaths in 1(!) month alone, despite massive countermeasures. Radical countermeasures can reduce the spread of COVID-19 by 90%, so one can imagine which scenario would exist without countermeasures.
Besides, more than 2200 patients were hospitalized for COVID-19 in Switzerland in one month and up to 500 patients in different intensive care units simultaneously. None of us has ever seen such conditions within an «influenza» outbreak.
About 8% of caregivers also acquire influenza as part of an “common” influenza, but no one dies from it. With COVID-19, 25% to 30% of caregivers are infected and this is associated with significant mortality. Dozens of doctors and nurses who have cared for COVID-19 patients have died of the same infection.
Let’s also look for the hard numbers on «influenza»! We won’t find any. What can be found are estimates: approx. 1000 or 1600 in Switzerland; about 8000 in Italy; approx. 20,000 in Germany. An FDA study (US Food and Drug Administration) examined how many of the 48,000 influenza deaths in one year in the United States really died from classic influenza pneumonia. Result: all possible clinical pictures were subsumed under “death from pneumonia”, e.g. including pneumonia in a newborn who has amniotic fluid aspirated into the lungs at birth. In this analysis, the number of patients who effectively “died from influenza” dropped dramatically below 10,000.
In Switzerland, too, we do not know the exact number of patients who die from influenza each year. And this despite dozens of massively overpriced data acquisition systems; despite senseless double and triple data entry by clinics, health insurance companies and health departments; despite a senseless and overpriced DRG [diagnosis related group – a classification method of hospital cases to determine the costs] system that only produces nonsense. We cannot even provide the exact number of hospitalized influenza patients per month! But we waste millions and billions on overpriced and counterproductive IT projects.
Based on the current state of knowledge, we cannot speak of a “common flu”. And that is why an unrestrained infection of society [to gain “herd immunity”] is not a recipe. It is worth mentioning that Great Britain, the Netherlands and Sweden tried it and gave it up one after the other.
Due to the current, inadequate level of knowledge, the figures for March are likewise not very meaningful. We could get off lightly or experience a disaster. Rigid measures mean that the curve is flattening. But the height of the curve is not all that matters; it is also the area underneath, which ultimately represents the number of deaths.
3. «Only old and sick patients die»
Percentages, secondary diagnoses, morality and EUGENIK
The age of those who died [of Covid-19] in Switzerland is between 32 and 100 years. Some studies and reports show that children have also died of COVID-19.
Whether 0.9% or 1.2% or 2.3% die of COVID-19 is secondary and just food for statisticians. The absolute number of deaths caused by this pandemic is relevant. Are 5000 deaths less bad if they represent 0.9% of all COVID-19 carriers? Or are 5,000 dead worse if they represent 2.3% of all COVID-19 carriers?
The average age of the deceased patients is said to be 83, which many – too many in our society – tend to dismiss as negligible.
It can be hardly missed that we as a society tend to treat the death of others rather nonchalantly. But from my own experience I know very well how quickly people start to scream and assign blame when it threatens to hit themselves or someone close.
Age is relative. One US presidential candidate is 73 and the other is 77. Reaching a high age with a good quality of life and autonomy is a valuable asset for which we have invested a lot in health care in Switzerland. And it is the achievement of medicine that we can live to an old age with chronic conditions and have a good quality of life. Are these positive achievements of our society suddenly no longer worth anything, or just a burden?
Furthermore, if 1000 people over 65-year-old or 1000 over 75-year-old who previously thought they were healthy would receive a thorough check up, over 80% would get at least three additional “secondary diagnoses”, especially those connected to such widely spread as “high blood pressure” or “diabetes”.
Certain media articles and comments of readers – far too many in my opinion – have crossed all boundaries in this discussion and carry the bad smell of eugenics that remind us of times past. Do I really have to mention that time? I am amazed that our media has made no effort to be straight on this matter. It is our media that publishes such pathetic opinions in comment sections without any scrutiny. And it is just as surprising that the politicians do not consider it necessary to give a clear opinion on this point.
4. This pandemic was anticipated
Was Switzerland somehow prepared for this pandemic? NO.
Have precautions been taken when COVID-19 broke out in China? NO.
Could we know that a COVID-19 pandemic would spread across the world?
Yes, it was anticipated and the data were known by March 2019.
1. SARS outbreak 2003.
2. MERS outbreak 2012.
3. In 2013, the German parliament discussed disaster scenarios, how Germany was prepared for disasters, e.g. floods etc. In this context, it was also discussed how Germany would respond to a SARS pandemic! Yes, in 2013 the German Bundestag simulated a SARS corona pandemic in Europe and Germany!
4. In 2015, an experimental collaborative effort was published by researchers from three US universities, Wuhan and an Italian researcher from Varese, who has a laboratory in Bellinzona. These produced synthetically produced corona viruses in the laboratory and thus infected cell cultures and mice. The reason for the research: they wanted to produce a vaccine or monoclonal antibody in order to be prepared for the next corona pandemic.
5. At the end of 2014, the U.S. government suspended research on MERS and SARS for one year because of the danger to humans.
6. In 2015, Bill Gates made a widely regarded speech and said that the world was unprepared for the next corona pandemic.
7. In 2016, another research paper appeared that dealt with corona viruses. The «summary» of this publication described perfectly what we currently face:
“Focusing on SARS-like CoVs, the approach indicates that viruses using the WIV1-CoV spike protein are capable of infecting human alveolar endothelium cultures directly without further spike adaptation. In vivo data indicate attenuation relative to SARS-CoV, the augmented replication in the presence of human angiotensin converting enzyme type 2 in vivo suggests that the virus has significant pathogenic potential not captured by current small animal models. ”
8. In March 2019, Peng Zhou’s Wuhan epidemiological study said that based on the biology of the corona viruses in the bats (“bat”) in China, it can be predicted that there will be another corona pandemic shortly. That’s for sure! One just can’t say exactly when and where, but China will be the hot spot.
In principle, there were 8 CONCRETE, CLEAR WARNINGS WITHIN the last 17 YEARS that something like what we see today would happen. And then it actually happened in December 2019, 9 months after Peng Zhou’s warning. The Chinese informed the WHO after seeing 27 patients with atypical pneumonia without death. The Taiwan reaction chain, which consisted of a total of 124 measures, begins on December 31 – all published by March 3, 2020. And no, it was not published in Taiwanese-Chinese in an Asian medical journal, but with the collaboration of the University of California in the “Journal of American Medical Association”.
The only thing one had to do since December 31, 2019 is to enter the key terms “bat + coronavirus” in “PubMed” online, the U.S. National Library of Medicine, where all data was available. If one followed the publications until the end of February 2020 one would know 1) what to expect and 2) what to do.
In December, Uzbekistan ordered its 82 students from Wuhan back and put them in quarantine. On March 10, while in Uzbekistan, I was asked for my opinion and warned Switzerland, parlamentarians, the Bundesrat, BAG [Bundesamt fuer Gesundheit = Federal Office of Public Health FOPH], the media.
And what has Switzerland done since China had notified the WHO on December 31, 2019? Our state government, our BAG, our experts, our pandemic commission? It looks as if they hadn’t a clue. Of course, the situation is difficult. Should you inform the population? Spark panic? How to proceed? At least what could have been done was to study the excellent scientific work of the Chinese and American-Chinese scientists that have been published in the best American and English medical journals.
At least – and that would have been feasible without informing the population, without sparking panic – one could at least have stocked up necessary medical material. The fact that Switzerland, with its health care sector worth 85 billion, in which an average middle-class family of four can no longer pay the health insurance premiums, is already hitting the wall after 14 days of headwind: a shameful lack of masks, disinfectant and medical equipment. What did the pandemic commission do? If this doesn’t need a parliamentary investigation, but one not only filled with politicians.
And so the official failure has continued to this day. None of the measures successfully used by Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong or China have been applied. No border closure, no border controls, everyone could and can still easily immigrate to Switzerland without being checked (I learned this myself on March 15).
It was the Austrians who closed the border with CH and it was the Italian government that finally stopped the SBB [Swiss Federal Railways] at the end of March and so on. And there is still no quarantine for people entering Switzerland.
Was Antonio Lanzavecchia’s research group consulted in Bellinzona, who co-authored the research on synthetic corona viruses mentioned above? How is it possible that on March 20 Mr. Lanzavecchia says on Ticino TV that this virus is extremely contagious and extremely resistant but 2 days later on March 22 the BAG writes about a “silver lining”?
How is it possible that American and Chinese authors publish in Science on March 6 that only a combined border closure and a local curfew are effective, and can curb the spread of the virus by 90%, while the FOPH [Federal Office of Public Health =BAG] and the Federal Council claim that border closures are useless, “because most people would be infected at home anyway”?
Mask wearing was not considered necessary but not because its effectiveness was in question. No, because they simply couldn’t provide enough masks. It would be laughable if it wasn’t so tragic. Instead of admitting omissions and correcting them immediately, they called in the German ambassador. What did they tell him? That the 85 billion Swiss healthcare system has no masks to protect its citizens, nurses and doctors?
The series of embarrassing failures can be expanded. Hand disinfection is recommended because it is effective and was evidentially already effective and used during the Spanish flu. Have we ever heard from our decision-makers which disinfectants are effective and which are not? No. Although a summary of 22 papers was published in the Journal of Hospital Infection on February 6, 2020 reporting that corona viruses could survive up to 9 days on metal, plastic and glass, and which disinfectants are killing the virus within 1 (!) minute and which don’t. Of course, the right disinfectant could not be specifically recommended since the citizen would have noticed that there wasn’t enough supply, because the pandemic [emergency] stock, which contained ethanol (62% to 71% ethanol kills corona viruses within a minute) had been dissolved in 2018.
When the difficulties of the pandemic also became apparent to the FOPH, it was announced that patients admitted to the intensive care unit would have bad chances anyway. This is in clear contradiction to four previously published scientific papers, which all agreed that 38% to 95% of all patients who had to be admitted to the intensive care unit could eventually be discharged home.
I do not want to go on with other points here. So far two things are clear: the pandemic has been announced at least 8 times since 2003; and after the outbreak was reported to the WHO on December 31, 2019, they had two months to study the data and draw the right conclusions. Taiwan, for example, who early on published its 124 measures and had not to “lock down” the economy, has the least number of infected and fatalities.
The measures taken by Asian countries were considered as not practical for political and other fuzzy reasons. One of them is the tracking of infected people. This is supposedly impossible in a society that willingly transfers private data to iCloud and Facebook. Tracking? If I get off the plane in Tashkent, Beijing or Yangon, it takes 10 seconds and Swisscom [telecommunication provider in Switzerland] welcomes me to the respective country. Tracking? No, we don’t have something like that.
If better informed, they would have realized that certain countries could handle the crisis with a less strict approach. Switzerland took half-way measures or none at all and actually let the population be infected. More stringent measures were applied too late. If they had reacted immediately, no such measures might have been necessary; we would have been spared the current discussions about an “exit” strategy, not to mention the economic consequences.
5. Political aspects – propaganda
Why did they not look to Asia? There was enough time. Or rather, how did they look at Asia? The answer is clear: with arrogance, ignorance and a know-it-all attitude. This is typically European, or should I say typically Swiss?
Xi Jinping was rather nice when he said that due to its “narcissism” Europe had quickly become the epicenter of the pandemic. I would add, because of its arrogance, ignorance and unspeakable know-it-all attitude.
In comment sections of the media, more and more readers have noted that given the highest rate of COVID-19-positive people [in Europe] and one of the highest death rates per person in Spain, we better stop to try to constantly teach other people.
Europe seems unteachable. America – at least its scientists and some of its political journalists – reacted differently. America has recognized the excellent scientific work of Chinese authors and published it in their best medical journals. Even “Foreign Affairs”, the most important essay journal on international politics, published articles with headings such as: “What the world can learn from China”; and “China has an app and the rest of the world needs a plan”; furthermore, it wrote that “international cooperation between scientists is an example” of how one has to “work together multipolarly” in other areas and how the world is “interconnected”. Even the often quoted Anthony Fauci, Trump’s chief virologist, praised the collaboration with his Chinese colleagues in “Foreign Affairs”.
The fact that the US political leadership has not implemented this is not the problem of scientists who, including the WHO, praised the excellent work of the Chinese on the ground: “the Chinese know exactly what they do”; “And they are really, really good at it”.
The German magazine DER SPIEGEL published an article entitled “Deadly Arrogance” and by that they did not mean America, but arrogant Europe.
What are the facts?
1. After the SARS epidemic, China established a monitoring program that reports a conspicuous cluster of atypical pneumonia as early as possible. When 4 patients in the country with its gigantic population show atypical pneumonia in a short time, the monitoring system triggers an alarm
2. On December 31, the Chinese government informed WHO that 27 (other sources say: 41) patients in Wuhan had been diagnosed with atypical pneumonia but no death yet.
3. On January 7, 2020, the same team at Peng Zhou, which warned of a corona pandemic in March 2019, released the fully-defined genome of the causative virus to the world so that test kits could be developed worldwide as quickly as possible, vaccination researched and monoclonal antibodies produced.
4. Contrary to the opinion of the WHO, the Chinese put Wuhan under a total lock down in January including a travel ban and a curfew. I don’t have to go into the other measures that have been taken in China. According to international research teams, China saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of patients with these early and radical measures.
5. On December 31, 2019, Taiwan stopped all flights from Wuhan. The other 124 measures taken in Taiwan have been published in the Journal of American Medical Association in timely manner. One should have taken note of them.
Without a doubt, China’s command and control structure initially led to the suppression of relevant information, but on the other side it worked later on more effectively in limiting the pandemic. The treatment of ophthalmologist Li Wenliang is terrible though in no way uncommon in such situations. When in 1918 the American country doctor Loring Miner in Haskell County in the US state of Kansas saw several patients with flu symptoms who exceeded the severity of all previous symptoms, he turned to the United States Public Health Service and asked for support. This was refused. Three Haskell County patients were drafted into military service. Albert Gitchell, the NCO – the patient NULL – spread the virus to the company for which he cooked and which was transferred to Europe. 40 days later there were 20 million infected and 20,000 dead in Europe. The 1918 pandemic caused more deaths than World War I.
Western complaints about Li Wenliang’s “treatment” are justified, but oozing with double standards; after all we know too well what fate whistle blowers are facing in the West with its great values. The United States government also attempted to filter medical information. According to a publication in the magazin Science under the title “Do us a favor” America’s leading virologists had been asked to discuss any public statements first with vice president Mike Pence. This was described as “unacceptable” and compared to China.
Politics is one thing, scientific work is another. By the end of February 2020, so many excellent scientific papers with Chinese and American-Chinese authors had appeared that one could have known what to expect and what should be done.
Why was this missed?
Because politicians, the media and the majority of citizens are unable to separate ideology, politics and medicine even in such a situation. Viral pneumonia is a medical and not a political problem. Thanks to a politically and ideologically driven ignorance of medical facts, Europe has become in no time the epicenter of the pandemic – with Switzerland and its second highest infection rate per capita right in the middle.
Politics and the media play a particularly inglorious role here. Instead of focusing on their own failures, the population is distracted by continued, stupid China bashing, and followed as always by Russia bashing and Trump bashing. You don’t have to like Trump at all, but in terms of COVID 19 deaths per capita, the US has to have 30,000 death until it is on a par with Switzerland.
How can a country with the second most expensive healthcare system per capita in the world constantly criticize other countries while having the second most infected people, not enough supply of masks, disinfectants and medical equipment? Switzerland was not taken by surprise by this pandemic. After December 31, 2019, they had at least 2 months to take urgently needed measures. The media has contributed to this failure. Their coverage exhausted itself in talking the talk, about legislative measures of the Federal Council and FOPH and criticizing other countries.
There are more than enough examples of a stupid China-bashing: “The Chinese are to blame”! Anyone who makes such statements knows nothing about biology and life in general. “All pandemics come from China”. Well, the Spanish flu originated in the US, HIV came from Africa, Ebola came from Africa, swine flu from Mexico, the cholera epidemic of the 1960s with millions of deaths from Indonesia and MERS from the Middle East with its center in Saudi Arabia.
Yes, SARS came from China. But the Chinese, unlike us, have learned as mentioned in “Foreign Affairs” in March 27, 2020: “Past Pandemics Exposed China’s Weakness. The Current One Highlights Its Strengths ”.
What do we do with the often stated claim that the figures published by China on the COVID 19 pandemic are all glossed over anyway? Does that mean we don’t have to do anything about it? If these figures are really glossed over, does it not mean that it is an even more dangerous pandemic for which we should be prepared for in Europe? So much for the logic of senseless, political chatter.
With constant statements like, “the Chinese are always lying”, “You can’t believe anything from Taiwan”; “Singapore, a family dictatorship, is lying anyway”, one cannot cope with this pandemic. The US magazine “Foreign Affairs” – certainly not China-friendly per se – is in this respect also acting smarter. It writes on March 24, 2020: “The U.S. and China Could Cooperate to Defeat the Pandemic. Instead, Their Antagonism Makes Matters Worse ”. And on March 21st: “It Takes a World to End a Pandemic. Scientific Cooperation Knows No Boundaries – Fortunately ”.
I support Lukas Bärfuss’ criticism. In particular his questions, why the relevant factories are no longer in Biberist, but in Wuhan? And whether allocation problems may not only affect cellulose, but also information, education, food and medication?
This hits the mark and unmasks our arrogance and ignorance.
Isn’t it enough that at the beginning of this pandemic, the West looked snotty and with a certain glee at China? Does China’s support for Western countries now have to be maliciously defamed? To date, China has supplied 3.86 billion masks, 38 million protective suits, 2.4 million infrared temperature measuring devices and 16,000
ventilators. Not China’s alleged claim to world power, but the failure of Western countries has led to the West literally hanging on China’s medical drip
6. Where does the virus come from?
Approximately 6400 mammal species inhabit our globe. Bats and fruit bats make up 20% of the mammalian population with 1000 different types of bats and fruit bats. They are the only mammals that can fly, which explains their huge dispersion [in the world].
Bats and fruit bats are home to a myriad of viruses. In the history of development bats and fruit bats have probably been the entry point for viruses in the pedigree of mammals.
There are numerous dangerous viruses that have spread from “bats” to humans and are responsible for several diseases: measles, mumps, rabies, Marburg fever, Ebola and other, less common, but no less dangerous diseases. In other mammals, viruses derived from “bats” have repeatedly led to mass deaths in pigs, chicken or birds.
These are biological processes that are millions of years old. The DNA of healthy people also contains remnants of viral gene sequences that have been “built in” over millennia.
SARS and MERS have intensified research on corona viruses, precisely because a new corona virus epidemic or pandemic was expected soon. 22 of the 38 known -and by no means definitely classified- corona viruses have been extensively studied by Chinese researchers, see u.a. Peng Zhou’s publication on the epidemiology of “bat coronaviruses in China” and the other publications by American authors mentioned above. Peng Zhou predicted an upcoming new corona epidemic in March 2019 for the following reasons:
1. high biodiversity in China;
2. high number of “bats” in China;
3. high population density in China = close coexistence between animals and humans;
4. high genetic variability of the “bats”, i.e. a high probability that the genome of individual types of coronavirus can change spontaneously as a result of random mutations;
5. high active genetic recombination of corona viruses means: Corona viruses of different types exchange genome sequences with each other, which can make them more aggressive for humans; many of these viruses – corona viruses, but also Ebola or Marburg viruses – live together in these «bats» and can accidentally exchange genetic material.
Although not proven, Peng Zhou also addressed Chinese eating habits as a likelihood that these viruses can be transmitted from animals to humans. He warned of a corona pandemic in his March 2019 article. And he wrote that he could not say exactly when and where this pandemic would break out, but that China would very likely be a “hot spot”. So much for scientific freedom. Peng Zhou and his group from Wuhan continued to research, and it was this group of researchers that identified the genome of COVID-19 on January 7 and shared it with the world.
There are 4 theories on how this virus spread to humans:
1.The COVID-19 virus has been transmitted from a bat directly to humans. However, [unlike Covid 19] the Virus that has been identified and genetically matches 96% of the current “COVID-19” virus cannot -due to its structure- dock to the “angiotensin converting enzyme” (ACE) type 2 in the lungs. This enzyme is however needed in order to be able to penetrate into the lung cells (and into the cells of the heart, kidney and intestine) and destroy them.
2. A COVID-19 virus jumped onto humans from pangolin, a Malaysian dandruffed mammal that had been illegally imported into China, and was initially not disease-causing. As part of consecutive human-to-human transmissions, this virus has adapted to the general human conditions thanks to mutation or adaptation and was finally able to dock onto the ACE2 receptor and penetrate the cells, which “started” the pandemic.
3. There is a parent strain of these two COVID-19 viruses, which unfortunately has so far remained undetected.
4. It is a synthetic laboratory virus, because it was exactly this virus and its biological mechanism to trigger the disease that had been researched and described in detail in 2016. The virologists involved in the research of course denied this possibility but could also not completely exclude it, as was recently described in the article “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” by Kristian Andersen, published in “Nature Medicine“.
What makes the corona viruses so special is that they can live together with the Ebola virus on the same «bat» without the bat becoming ill. On the one hand, this is scientifically interesting because this could hint at the immune mechanisms that explain why these bats don’t get sick. These immune mechanisms against corona viruses and the Ebola virus could provide insights that are important for homo sapiens. On the other hand, these facts are worrisome, because due to the high, active, genetic recombination, there is a possibility that a supervirus can be formed that has a longer incubation period than the current COVID-19 virus, but the lethality of the Ebola virus.
SARS had a 10% and MERS 36% mortality rate. It was not due to homo sapiens that SARS and MERS did not spread as quickly as COVID-19. It was just luck. The claim that a virus with a high mortality rate could not spread because it kills its host far too quickly, was correct at the time when an “infected” camel caravan had left X’ian towards the Silk Road and thus not longer arrived at the next caravan station. Today everything happens in a snap. Today everyone is interconnected. A virus that kills in 3 days still goes around the world. Everyone knows Beijing and Shanghai. I have known Wuhan for 20 years. None of my colleagues and acquaintances have ever heard of Wuhan. You might have noticed how many foreigners lived in Wuhan – in a city that “nobody knows” – and how quickly they traveled to all regions of the world at lightning speed? That is the situation today.
7. What we know and don’t know
We know
1. that we are dealing with an aggressive virus whose mean incubation period lasts 5 days; the maximum incubation period is not yet clear;
2. that asymptomatic COVID-19 carriers can infect other people as this virus is “extremely contagious” and “extremely resistant” (A. Lanzavecchia);
3. which population is at risk;
4. that in the past 17 years it was impossible to develop a vaccination or a monoclonal antibody against corona viruses;
5. that any attempt to develop a vaccine against whatever corona virus has so far never been successful;
6. that the so-called “flu vaccination” has only a minimal effect, contrary to popular advertising.
We don’t know
1. whether people acquire immunity after being infected. Certain data indicate that humans can develop immunoglobulins of the G class from day 15, which should prevent re-infection with the same virus. But it has not yet been definitely proven;
2. how long a possible immunity can protect;
3. whether the COVID-19 virus remains stable, or whether a slightly different COVID-19 spreads again around the world in autumn, analogous to the usual flu wave, against which there is no immunity;
4. whether the higher temperatures in summer will help us because the casing of the COVID-19 is unstable at higher temperatures. It must be mentioned here that the MERS virus spread in the Middle East from May to July, when the temperatures were higher than we have ever experienced;
5. how long it takes for a population to be infected and reach a R value is <1. Of 1 million people in Zurich, 12% to 18% would currently test postitive with COVID-19. In order to deprive the pandemic of its pandemic character, the R value must be below 1, i.e. around 66% of the population must have had contact with the virus and have developed immunity. Nobody knows how long, how many months it will take until the infection, which is currently supposed to be 12% to 18%, has reached 66%! But it can be assumed that the spread of the virus from 12% to 18% to 66% of the population will continue to generate seriously ill patients.
6. how long we’ll be dealing with this virus. Two reports, which were not made accessible to the public (U.S. Government COVID Response Plan and a report from Imperial College London) independently came to the same result of a “lock-down” phase of up to 18 months;
7. whether this virus will remain epidemic / pandemic or maybe even endemic;
8. we don’t know any recognized and widely applicable, defined therapy. Even with influenza, we have never been able to present such a therapy.
In fact, authorities and the media should put the facts on the table instead of reporting every other day that a seemingly successful vaccination is within reach.
8. What can we do now?
I have no answer to the question what could be the solution. Is it possible that Switzerland can contain the pandemic or will the infection continue to spread unrestricted because crucial measures have been not taken at the beginning?
We can only hope that we will not have to pay this “policy” with too many deaths and critically ill; that not too many patients suffer from the long-term consequences of COVID-19 infection, due to pulmonary fibrosis acquired “thanks to” COVID-19, a disrupted glucose metabolism and new cardiovascular diseases. The long-term consequences of a SARS infection up to 12 years after the alleged healing have been sufficiently documented . Let’s hope that COVID-19 will be differently.
The lifting of the “lock-down”, or the return to what we perceive as normal, is certainly everyone’s wish. Which steps toward a return to normal will have negative consequences i.e. with a flare-up of the infection rate – can nobody predict. Every step towards easing is basically a step into the unknown.
We can only say what cannot be done: an active infection of the non-risk groups with COVID-19 is surely an absolute fantasy. It can only come to mind to those who lack knowledge in biology, medicine and ethics:
1.it is certainly out of the question to deliberately infect millions of healthy citizens with an aggressive virus of which we actually know absolutely nothing, neither the extent of the acute damage nor the long-term consequences;
2. the greater the number of viruses per population, the greater the chance of an accidental mutation, which could make the virus even more aggressive. So we should definitely not actively help to increase the number of viruses per population.
3. The more people are infected with COVID-19, the more likely it is that this virus will adapt “better” to humans and is becoming even more disastrous. It is assumed that this has already happened once before.
4. with government reserves of 750 billion ostensibly, it is ethically and morally reprehensible to infect millions of healthy individuals for economic reasons.
5. The deliberate infection of healthy people with this aggressive virus would acutely undermine one of the fundamental principles of the entire medical history for mere, short-term economic “concerns”: the principle of the “primum nil nocere”. As a doctor, I would refuse to take part in such a vaccination campaign at all.
The determination of the COVID-19 IgM and IgG antibody concentration in the blood apparently goes hand in hand with the neutralization of the COVID-19 virus. The quantitative and qualitative diagnosis of these antibodies has so far only been investigated in a small clinical study with 23 patients. It is currently not possible to say whether the determination of the mass of antibodies in the blood will make a controlled “lock-down” more secure by allowing only people who are no longer infectious and who can no longer be infected. It is also unclear when this method will be clinically valid and widely applicable.
9. Future
This pandemic raises many political questions. “Foreign Affairs” with Donald Trump and Anthony Fauci on the cover wrote on March 28, 2020: “Plagues Tell Us Who We Are. The Real Lessons of the Pandemic Will Be Political ”.
These political questions will be national and international.
The first questions will definitely affect our healthcare system. With a budget of 85 billion, Switzerland – in terms of the number of corona patients per 1 million population – made it to second place worldwide. Congratulations! What a shame! Basic and cheap material is missing in Switzerland after 14 days. These are the consequences when self-proclaimed “health experts” in politics and the economy as well as IT experts invest billions in projects such as e-health, electronic health cards, overpriced clinic information systems (ask the Lucerne Cantonal Hospital!), Tons of computers and “big data» and thus divert billions from the healthcare system for purposes other than intended. And the medical profession and FMH [Foederatio Medicorum Helveticorum – Association of Swiss Medical Doctors] are literally too stupid to finally stand up to it. They rather prefer to be called rip-off artists and criminals. Time is overdue in Switzerland to investigate how much of a million in health insurance funds is actually used for medical services, directly benefits patients or is misappropriated by flowing into lobby associations outside the industry that shamelessly enrich themselves from the 85 billion cake without ever having seen a patient. And, of course, adequate quality control of medical services is urgently needed. I cannot go here into further details about measures needed for a reorganization of the Swiss healthcare system.
The international questions primarily concern our relationship with China and the Asian countries in general. Critical comments are welcome, but a constant, stupid bashing of other nations cannot be the answer for tackling a global crisis much less “solving” it. Instead of parroting senseless propaganda, it is recommended to consult authors who actually have something to say at a high level, such as:
Pankaj Mishra: “From the ruins of the empire”
Kishore Mahbubani: “The Asean Miracle. A Catalyst for Peace “
“Has the West lost it?”
“Can Asians think?”
Lee Kuan Yew: “One man’s view of the world”
David Engels: “On the way to the empire”
Noam Chomsky: “Who rules the world”
Bruno Macàes: “The Dawn of Eurasia”
Joseph Stiglitz: “Rich and poor”
Stephan Lessenich: “The Deluge Beside Us”
Parag Khanna: “Our Asian Future”
Reading does not mean that all these authors are right in everything. But it would be of great value for the West – including Switzerland – to replace a know-it-all-attitude, ignorance and arrogance with facts, understanding and cooperation. The only alternative is to eliminate our supposed competitors sooner or later in a war. Everyone can decide for themselves what to think of this “solution”.
drtunkyawnyein 