Why do so many believe Covid was a plandemic?

This is primarily a matter of trust – and the lack of it.

If it looks like a conspiracy, and quacks like a conspiracy … or, to change focus slightly to Covid. If it looks like 1984, and quacks like 1984 – it’s probably 1984. What happened with Covid I found extraordinary and scary. Within a very short time, longstanding individual rights and freedoms which people fought and died for, over hundreds of years, had gone.

At the very start of the pandemic, I remember driving to work along deserted roads with no traffic at all. Which was actually rather nice. At one point, the only vehicles I recall seeing were police cars with policemen in the front, brooding, watching. Not quite the thought police, but you know, scary.

I was never pulled over. Perhaps they checked my registration plate, looked up owner details, and found out that I was Dr Malcolm Kendrick, tootling about to save patients. Perhaps not, I have no idea, I never stopped to ask.

As a natural born rebel, I decided I would go out walking in the nearby countryside – when we were not allowed to. I was uncomfortably aware of being observed as I walked past farms in the Peak District, net curtains twitching? Maybe that was just my fevered imagination. Car parks in the middle of nowhere were closed off using “- Police Do Not Enter” tape. The type they use for crime scenes.

My local golf club was closed. No-one could play. You could walk across the golf course with friends and family, as many did, but swinging a golf club obviously stirred up the atmosphere, attracting the Covid virus towards you. Like midges in Scotland, or something.

Then there were the fact checkers who sprang up out of nowhere. These titans who we suddenly found walking among us, bestriding the world like intellectual colossus(es)/colossi knowing that they, and only they, could determine what constitutes a fact.

They regularly stomped on anyone who dared raised their head above the parapet. Suggest, for example, that Ivermectin may actually have some benefit in Sars-Cov2, and watch the empurpled rage descend, along with the mockery.

‘Ahead of full US authorisation of the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine, the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had a simple message for Americans contemplating using ivermectin, a medicine used to deworm livestock, instead of getting a Covid shot.

 “You are not a horse,” it said. “You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.” https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/aug/23/fda-horse-message-ivermectin-covid-coronavirus

Well, thanks for the explanation that humans are not horses, or cows, with all the implied mockery that the public are so easily led and plain stupid. You know, many of us had been looking at the anti-viral properties of Ivermectin for a long time. When Sars-Cov2 came along it appeared promising – even in people, who are not cows. Who knew.

The FDA-approved drug ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro

‘We report here that Ivermectin, an FDA-approved anti-parasitic previously shown to have broad-spectrum anti-viral activity in vitro, is an inhibitor of the causative virus (SARS-CoV-2), with a single addition to Vero-hSLAM cells 2 h post infection with SARS-CoV-2 able to effect ~5000-fold reduction in viral RNA at 48 h. Ivermectin therefore warrants further investigation for possible benefits in humans.’ The FDA-approved drug ivermectin inhibits the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in vitro – PubMed

Those of us, who actually look at research, find comments such as ‘Seriously, y’all. Stop it’ to be just a teensy-weensy bit on the patronising side.It was a phrase almost certainly created by someone who hasn’t a clue about medicine or science. ‘Aspirin was created to reduce pain and temperature, not to reduce the risk of heart disease. Seriously y’all, trying to use it in heart disease, just stop it y’all.’

On a more serious note, I was threatened by the General Medical Council on a couple of occasions for criticizing the lack of safety research on the new vaccines. There were widespread attacks going on, all over the place, to silence anyone questioning the official narrative.

Lord Sumption, once head of the Supreme Court in England, had this to say about it all:

“The sheer scale on which the government has sought to govern by decree, creating new criminal offences, sometimes several times a week on the mere say-so of ministers, is in constitutional terms truly breathtaking.”

“This is how freedom dies. When societies lose their liberty, it is not usually because some despot has crushed it under his boot. It is because people voluntarily surrendered their liberty out of fear of some external threat.”

Sweden, alone amongst European countries, decided not to lockdown, or perhaps you could call what they did lockdown ‘lite’. Schools, restaurants and bars remained open. People travelled on public transport. This approach was universally condemned. It was said that Dr Anders Tegnell (chief epidemiologist) and Stefan Löfven (the prime minister), were…

‘…playing Russian roulette with the Swedish population,” Carlsson said. “At least if we’re going to do this as a people … lay the facts on the table so that we understand the reasons. The way I am feeling now is that we are being herded like a flock of sheep towards disaster…

… Leading experts last week were fiercely critical of the Swedish public health authority in an email thread seen by state broadcaster SVT, accusing it of incompetence and lack of medical expertise.’

I went to speak at an anti-lockdown rally in Edinburgh, September 2020. It had been approved by the police. However, the organiser was dragged in for questioning and was told he could face up to five years in jail for endangering public health. Five years in prison… It did feel as if some totalitarian regime had taken over. It most certainly felt as though big brother was watching you, everywhere.

Although, from what I could see, most people seemed to welcome this with open arms. The State stepping in to take control and keep us all safe. Fellow doctors were very much of the ‘we should lock down harder, and longer and silence anyone who objects’ brigade. And, by the way, make vaccination mandatory, for everyone.

I have always been more of a ‘Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty, nor safety.’ Kind of a guy. Which appears to place me very firmly in the minority in the UK, and most of Western World. And most certainly a minority of one within the medical profession. At least it felt that way.

I found that, taken as a whole, the actions taken had the feel of ‘they’, whoever they may be, coming together to form some great all-powerful Oligarchy to rule us all. The great and the good gathering power around themselves. The WHO, the World Economic Forum, prime ministers and presidents, billionaires such as Bill Gates.

Of course, all of them fervently deny the ‘grabbing power’ thing. ‘We were doing it for you own good, can’t you see.’ Yes, the defence of coercive controllers since time immemorial. Democracy was suspended – perhaps indefinitely – and at times ‘they’ seemed to be getting a taste for it. The thin veneer of Western Liberal democracy stripped away to reveal what lies underneath. Usually, not nice.

So, I can see exactly why it all had the look and feel of some great worldwide conspiracy. And once you start to view the Covid pandemic through the conspiracy lens, all actions can seem sinister.

Bill Gates was trying to inject nanotechnology into us with the vaccines. 5G masts had been set up to control us all and activate the virus (not sure I remember that right). Vaccines were designed to kill people and reduce human population. The World Economic Forum was going to turn us into powerless economic units “you will own nothing and be happy.’’

All nonsense those involved cry. True, I reply. Because I don’t believe there was a great conspiracy. Nothing could be that well planned or organised. People are generally pretty useless at such things.

Instead, I believe that the motivations behind (most) of those in charge were benign, if paternalistic.  ‘They’ did not wish to defenestrate democracy around the world, and transfer power to themselves. What we had was more of a: ‘We, the mighty leaders, are here to look after you. Only we know the great and complex plan. You, on the other hand, the lumpen proletariat, cannot be trusted to make the correct decisions, so do as we say.’

In essence ‘they’ will tell you what to do, and what to think about the entire pandemic. This form of parent/child social interaction was best described by Eric Berne in his seminal book ‘Games People Play.’ The theory of transactional analysis.

Here is a good description of this dynamic, and the situation that can develop (in this case, within a company)

‘Whenever a paternalistic leadership style is enacted, an asymmetry is established. The leader (or superior of some sort) exhibits behaviour that resembles a parent while the subordinate exhibits behaviour that resembles a child. 

There is an entirely different interaction between the members of a leadership team. The ‘Parents’ (leaders) engage in truthful esoteric conversations with each other, discussions that are designed for them alone. They then pass down a filtered subset of exoteric knowledge, only that which is deemed suitable for ‘Children’s’ (subordinate’s) consumption. 

Thus, paternal leadership becomes a form of domination: it imposes the ‘Parent’s’ rationality upon the ‘Children’. The ‘Children’ are excluded from participating in the ‘Parent’s’ world.

In this dynamic, both ‘Children’ and ‘Parents’ avoid Adult-to-Adult conversation. Paternalistic leaders effectively create a chasm between themselves and their infantilised employees. The employees are relegated to a ‘nursery’ where they can be seen but not heard.’ https://postbureaucracy.substack.com/p/dialogue-over-paternalism?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Sound familiar in any way?

I always find it ironic that, as a doctor, I was taught about transactional analysis at medical school and warned to avoid a paternalistic approach. In retrospect, I think I must have remembered that wrong. ‘You will take on a paternalistic approach.’

But I diverge. The point I want to make here is that, when you treat people like children, you can expect two results. One, people take shelter behind the parent figure, trusting in everything they are told, which is the result the authorities are hoping for. Two, people get angry and fight back. The truculent child.

I usually take on the truculent child position when people try to tell me what to do. Arms crossed, grumpy face. I always prefer adult/adult conversations, but this is often tricky when ‘experts’ propound their truth, and ‘facts’, and will brook no dissent. ‘Do you not know who I am? I am an expert in [insert expertise here], and you are but a General Practitioner. You know nothing.’

The truculent child certainly takes over when it becomes clear that a great deal of what we are being told is nonsense. Or, as close to nonsense as makes no difference. The virus is spread though droplets, not aerosols. This was clearly nonsense from day one. Look up ferrets.

Or, try this one. You can take masks off whilst eating in a restaurant, but you have to put them back on when standing up and walking in a restaurant. Take me through the evidence behind this again, slowly? I promise not to laugh this time. Cross my heart and hope to die.

At the very beginning, staff in hospital and nursing homes were told that they could not wear masks or PPE as it might upset the patients. Oh, yes, we remember that, or at least I certainly do. Then, once there actually were masks, and PPE, we were told we had to wear them, for our safety, and the protection of patients.  Four legs good, two legs bad became …

The first masks I received had a little sticker on them to inform me that they were in date until 2022. When I peeled back the, rather crudely applied, sticker, it revealed something else beneath. Information stating that the masks had gone out of date in 2017. Yes, we were sent out-of-date equipment. Which had been deliberately disguised to look as if it was still in date.

Personally, I wasn’t that bothered about the risk of out-of-date masks. I didn’t think the PPE we were given had the slightest effect, on anything. Certainly not surgical masks. The air comes in the side and goes out the side.  As far I was concerned all that masks would ever achieve was to turn droplets into aerosols as you breathed in and out. Thus, increasing infection risk.

However, the sheer duplicity of changing the use by dates on, supposedly, lifesaving equipment was outrageous. If they could do that … what else?

Oh, you don’t remember them doing this. Well, I bloody do. And as you can see, I took photographs just to remind me that I hadn’t been hallucinating. Because, to believe they actually did this, means you will end up at the following place with your thinking:

Someone, somewhere, made the decision to provide health care staff with out-of-date equipment.

At which point they had to pay someone else, somewhere, to print out millions of little stickers with a new, false, date printed on them.

Then a small army of workers had to be paid to take the boxes containing masks out of their cartons, and place new stickers over the old ‘use by’ date. Then put the boxes back in the cartons. Then send them out.

This wasn’t some ‘oops, how careless, silly little me’, mistake. Meetings will have been organised, at which senior managers got together and agreed the workload, timings, and costs. And someone, somewhere, signed all of this off.

Then I took a photograph to remind me of the utter, utter, bast….

‘Now, you expect me to believe everything you say?’

But this was just a little thing, you may say. No, it was not a little thing. It was a symptom of something very big and malignant underneath. Clear evidence that those in charge were willing to lie through their teeth – to staff who were working on the front line. Happily exposing them to an increased risk of death by sending out faulty equipment – and then quite deliberately hiding that fact.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

‘Oh yes, we admit we lied about this. But as for everything else. We told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help me …’ Stop, just don’t say that last bit. A bolt of lightning may strike you down. And I may stand cheering on the side lines. Of course, there was much more, so much more. Things we were told that were utter scientific bollocks, or direct misinformation, or just plain lies, with heavy handed threats to those who tried to point it out.

Just to give one more example. I wrote a blog suggesting that mRNA vaccines may increase the risk of myocarditis (inflammation and damage to the heart), I got a threatening phone call from NHS England to tell me to cease and desist, or else.

Another doctor contacted me about the same issue. I discussed this on my blog:

‘My last blog discussed the possibility that mRNA COVID19 vaccines significantly increase the risk of myocarditis. Following this, a fellow doctor reached out to tell me about what has happened to them. They too, had questioned some aspects of the safety and efficacy of the vaccines.

As a result, they have been sent two threatening letters, which are both of the ‘iron fist in a velvet glove’ variety. I asked their permission to reproduce them here. One is from the General Medical Council (GMC). The other from their responsible officer – I shall explain what this title means a bit further on.

Below is the letter from the GMC:

Dear Dr….

The GMC have received several complaints regarding your recent social media posts.

All doctors have a right to express their personal opinion regarding the Covid-19 vaccine, and while the GMC in no way supports this opinion, we don’t consider your comments are sufficiently strong to open a fitness to practice investigation at this stage.

However, we are referring this matter to your Responsible Office for your reflection through the appraisal process.

We ask that you consider what implications this complaint might have for your practise when you are discussing this with your appraiser. We would also like to remind you of GMC guidance, in particular ‘Doctors’ use of social media, and of the requirement of doctors to act with honesty and integrity to justify the public’s trust in them

What we will do now

We will share the complaint with your responsible officer for them to consider in the wider context of your practice and revalidation.’  https://drmalcolmkendrick.org/2022/02/27/vaccination-silencing-doctors-in-the-uk/

What a creepy, creepy, creepy letter. The GMC was sharing the complaint with the responsible officer (RO). This is, essentially, a very thinly veiled threat that, if you don’t shut up, the RO will remove you from the medical register. Which means that you cannot work as a doctor in the UK or anywhere else in the world. Potentially, forever.

It is now widely accepted the mRNA vaccines do increase the risk of myocarditis. So, we were both right. And we were both threatened with removal of our licences to practice medicine. Lies and threats, threats and lies.

Now, to return to the question I posed as the title to this blog. ‘Why do so many people continue to believe Covid was a ‘plandemic.’ It is because dear reader, and dear ‘expert,’ and dear – all those carrying out the deliberately designed to be pointless UK Covid enquiry. We were quite clearly lied to, many times.

In addition, those raising medical concerns e.g. myocarditis, were squashed, with additional intimidation thrown in. People organising legal demonstrations against lockdown were threatened with, in one case, five years in jail.

Trust. Takes a lifetime to build, seconds to break.

You broke it.

No wonder a large number of people don’t believe anything you have to say. Now, we have many who claim there was no virus at all. The deaths were just made up, or caused by the very actions designed to save people … I don’t agree with this. But I can see why some people do.

When people despair of so-called ‘conspiracy theories, or theorists, and why do they seem to be taking over the world.’ I say. You caused it, and your actions and denials of facts just make it worse. Do you think people don’t notice when you talk utter unscientific bollocks, or threaten to throw people in jail, or remove their license to practice medicine for stating verifiable facts? Actions have consequences. So, could you just stop it y’all.

And breathe.

Next. The cover-up.