MEDICAL EXPERTS: “REVERSE THE LOCKDOWN”

The Brussels Times published an article on 27 August with the headline, “Hundreds of medical experts question Belgium’s coronavirus policy in 2 open letters.”
The article reported two open letters signed by doctors, medical researchers, lawyers, and economists that call into the question the legitimacy of testing for COVID and the strict lockdowns based on faulty data.
Excerpts from the first letter, published on 27 August and signed by 40 authors, include:

• “The crisis is being managed by a handful of experts appointed on the basis of unknown and unclear criteria. Too many decisions taken in recent months have an unfounded scientific basis. All too often, the direct and indirect impact of the measures has been underestimated.”
• “Citizens have the right to objective and honest information… the current climate of COVIDophobia is completely unjustified and generates harmful anxiety for a large part of the population.”

Excerpts from the second letter, signed on 24 August by hundreds of doctors, nurses, medical researchers, scientists, and other healthcare professionals, include:

• “Based on nine months of scientific data, it increasingly appears the current measures are disproportionate. A recent article in The Lancet clearly states that no link has been found between the measures imposed and the number of deaths. Social distancing appears to be based on dated articles published between 1894 and 1940. Furthermore, the efficiency of face masks is debatable as aerosols (virus particles) move over distances of up to 8 meters even when using them.”
• “We therefore question the current approach and demand on the one hand scientific justification and an evaluation of the collateral damage. On the other hand, we propose to move to a reverse lockdown that can proportionally protect these groups that benefit from this and to phase out actions that negatively influence the socio-psychological well-being of the population and thus cause very great damage.”
• “During the first lockdown, the focus was on hospital admissions and deaths. Now that there are relatively few deaths and hospital admissions to report, communication is being conducted around the increasing number of infections. Infections that say nothing in themselves. A review study clearly shows that ‘positive tests’ can occur in previously experienced illnesses or in patients who are non-infectious. Test patients for strep, staph, cold (corona) viruses and many will test positive. We seem to forget that we live in symbiosis with pathogens.”
• “In addition to the fact that there is still no evidence on the usefulness of open-air face masks, this is massively encouraged. It is plausible that this can contribute when social distancing cannot be guaranteed, although the latter is also a precursor without much scientific basis.

Our society is subject to strict hygiene rules for more than 8 months. For years we have been trying to sensitize the health care sector to abandon over-hygienic measures, since research shows that these have a detrimental effect on our immunity. Physiologically we need contact with pathogens to keep the adaptive immune system active. For several weeks now, the mouth mask obligation has also been introduced. We are in danger of drifting towards possibly a greater susceptibility to all kinds of pathogens. The collateral damage from increases in allergies, myocardiopathies, and higher
susceptibility to influenza and corona strains is likely to cause more damage.”

• “The maligned Sweden has now shown that we can limit this damage. Their death rate of 5,776 on 82,852 tests scores is in any case better than Belgium, and this without mandatory use of mouth mask and over-hygienic measures. The Swedish data is perfectly comparable with Belgium: about the same number of inhabitants, comparable number of inhabitants in the major cities (98% of Sweden is uninhabited). We also differ little in terms of socio-demography, degree of urbanization and medical care.”

The letter concludes:

“In short, protect those who need it, let the rest of the population move freely so that the disease can spread naturally. It will eventually weaken the virus.

Let us set an example for the rest of the world with our country and question ourselves, evolve towards a scientific-critical analysis without taboos and dare to opt for a reverse lockdown. There is no zero risk, let’s live together with Sars-Cov-2 in a healthy way.”

Note: Click here to read the complete letter and view the professional range of signatories.