David Leyonhjelm. Stop listening to public health doctors

It is now clear that Australia’s response to the corona virus outbreak was a massive over reaction. Keeping the surge of infections below the capacity of our health system could have been achieved by moderate social distancing and personal disinfection.  The forced closure of businesses and offices and movement restrictions were unnecessary.

The pattern of infection would have been different, no doubt, and more cases would probably have occurred by now. But like jumping out of a tall building, you cannot claim things are going well on the way down. The endpoint – herd immunity from either infection or vaccination – can be deferred but not avoided. Overall, no additional lives will have been saved by the lockdown.

By contrast, it is becoming painfully clear that the lockdown has cost lives and ruined careers through unemployment, business failure and educational disruption, while taxpayers will be funding a massive debt for decades to come. Moreover, many other countries have similarly trashed their economies, which will not only make the recession global, deep and painful but also long-lasting.

Such poor public policy should not be without consequences. To borrow a phrase from Greta Thunberg, it is appropriate to consider who should be metaphorically put against the wall for it.

In terms of strict accountability it is politicians, specifically senior ministers, who made the lockdown decision. It occurred at the federal level initially, although state leaders endorsed it and are now basking in prolonging the misery.

In Australia and other democracies, voters will ultimately pass judgement on them. But in reality it was not politicians who made the call; it was those advising them. On something as major as a disease epidemic, politicians will only ever act on advice.

That advice came from public sector doctors; that is, doctors employed directly by the Government or funded by the Government via a university or research organisation. It was the same in other countries that embarked on lockdowns – the UK with its wildly inaccurate modelling, in New Zealand, Spain and New York city, and at the WHO, which recommended them.

I know these doctors, at least in Australia. They regularly tried to influence me in the Senate, including in evidence to my nanny state inquiry. They are the ones who argue in support of higher taxes on alcohol, who opposed any relaxation of Sydney’s lockout regime, and who advocate lower speed limits, a tax on sugar and further prohibitions on smoking. In my inquiry they even defended compulsory helmets for cyclists because it might prevent a single case of traumatic brain injury.

They are, overall, intelligent but not wise, knowledgeable in their field but not about the world, secure in their employment but ignorant about those who are not. As they see it, public policy must prevent all deaths, no matter what the consequences. They have no comprehension of individual liberty and responsibility or fundamental rights, ignore basic economics, and never acknowledge that trade-offs in public policy are unavoidable.

Politicians who receive their advice ought to be highly sceptical. At the very least they should seek alternative opinions. Members of my former profession, veterinarians, might be among those from whom a second opinion is sought.

Managing respiratory infections is high priority whenever animals are crowded together, such as pig and poultry farms and cattle feedlots. The preferred solution is vaccines, of course, but not all diseases can be prevented in this way. Moreover, vaccines are not always fully protective. Among the other measures employed though, closing down is not contemplated. The private sector does not do that.

Instead they enlist nature for assistance. For example, viruses are killed by sunlight and dispersed by fresh air, so outdoor facilities and natural ventilation are maximised.  Indoors, ventilation systems change the air frequently and ultra-violet light sanitisers are used to kill viruses.

This is potentially relevant to how the virus epidemic could have been managed. Transmission in outdoor cafes, restaurants and beer gardens, or on beaches and in parks, is very unlikely. Solo activity, by definition, cannot infect others. Indoors, buildings with appropriate air conditioning and filtering systems can be low risk.

In fact, a risk-based approach should have been adopted across the board.  Instead, on the advice of the doctor advisers, in just two months our prosperity has been crippled and countless lives ruined. These same people are now warning of reimposing restrictions based on predictions of fresh waves of infection.

The economic and social cost of heeding the advice of public health doctors is simply too high. The prism through which they view the world is too distorted.

David Leyonhjelm is a former senator for the Liberal Democrats.

 

This entry was posted in COVID-19, Guest Post. Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to David Leyonhjelm. Stop listening to public health doctors

  1. Some History

    Public Health has long become a serious public menace.

  2. wal1957

    I’m highly skeptical of anything that is said by either a bureaucrat or a politician.

    Let me rephrase that…I don’t believe anything that a politician or bureaucrat says.

  3. Sunbird

    Yes David I agree.

    The recommendations of these CHO’s and the subsequent over reaction have been pure nanny state all along.

    Its like they believe its the duty to government to ensure every one dies a long lingering death in a geriatric care facility.

  4. garry b

    Maybe medical graduates who are below par at dealing with patients ailments, or wish only to have 9 to 5 hours in an office, at good pay/holidays, etc., are attracted to being a Government Medical Officer. Certainly better being a G.M.O., than setting up your own practice, and taking the risks of being found out, if all you want is an easy ride through life. Perhaps those who are G.M.O.’s, enjoy the prestige normally attached to being a medical doctor, but are they the “cream of the crop” ? Particularly when one considers the immense harm to peoples lives, the cost of this past 3 months (and counting) lockdown, and for what? Yes Rafe, better advisors needed-please. Of course better leaders might seek out better advisors

  5. Hasbeen

    I have often felt I would rather be treated by a veterinarian than a medical doctor. It is my experience that too many doctors spend their time giving you a verbal cross examination, rather than a medical examination.

    Vets on the other hand, have to rely on an actual medical examination

  6. BoyfromTottenham

    If fresh air and sunlight reduce the risk of coronavirus, should the windows be removed from buses, trains and ferries to make them safer for commuters?

  7. Mark M

    February 2020, the Australian CMO announced face masks were ineffective.
    April 2020, WHO announced face masks were ineffective.
    June 2020 and Australia’s CMO says masks reduce cv-19 risk.

    Feb, 2020: No need for face masks says Australia’s chief medical officer, as Victoria braces for pandemic

    https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/no-need-for-face-masks-business-as-usual-says-australia-s-chief-medical-officer-20200223-p543gf.html

    WHO announced in April that face masks were ineffective …
    Face masks DO NOT stop healthy people from catching coronavirus and should only be worn by healthcare workers and patients, says WHO

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8199959/Face-masks-NOT-stop-healthy-people-catching-coronavirus-says.html

    Face masks, physical distancing drastically reduce coronavirus risk
    On Health Report with Dr Norman Swan

    https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/healthreport/coronavirus-face-masks-physical-distancing-reduce-risk/12326902

    Next time Australian health officials fact check and debunk at their abc, you might want to do it immediately, and not wait 3 months.
    They have no idea what is going on, or they deliberately deceive.

  8. Crossie

    wal1957
    #3485433, posted on June 14, 2020 at 10:17 pm
    I’m highly skeptical of anything that is said by either a bureaucrat or a politician.

    Let me rephrase that…I don’t believe anything that a politician or bureaucrat says.

    I add media to that list.

  9. theleftfootkick

    Many egos to be massaged before any real consideration of enforced consequences.

  10. Crossie

    garry b
    #3485466, posted on June 14, 2020 at 10:56 pm
    Maybe medical graduates who are below par at dealing with patients ailments, or wish only to have 9 to 5 hours in an office, at good pay/holidays, etc., are attracted to being a Government Medical Officer. Certainly better being a G.M.O., than setting up your own practice, and taking the risks of being found out, if all you want is an easy ride through life. Perhaps those who are G.M.O.’s, enjoy the prestige normally attached to being a medical doctor, but are they the “cream of the crop” ? Particularly when one considers the immense harm to peoples lives, the cost of this past 3 months (and counting) lockdown, and for what?

    So that Anastasia can smugly keep Queensland locked, claim that she saved the state and get re-elected. That she will have bankrupted the state – a mere bagatelle.

    As for the rest of them, complete cowards in the face of the bureaucratic left, the very same bureaucrats who are still keeping the charade of punitive social distancing for businesses, schools, churches and everyone else except rampaging protestors and rioters who are exempt. I have nothing but contempt for all three groups.

  11. 132andBush

    They are, overall, intelligent but not wise, knowledgeable in their field but not about the world, secure in their employment but ignorant about those who are not.

    Exactly; No skin in the game.

    Same applies to ABC staff.

  12. Entropy

    They are, overall, intelligent but not wise, knowledgeable in their field but not about the world, secure in their employment but ignorant about those who are not. As they see it, public policy must prevent all deaths, no matter what the consequences. They have no comprehension of individual liberty and responsibility or fundamental rights, ignore basic economics, and never acknowledge that trade-offs in public policy are unavoidable.

    Quite so.
    But any discussion of risk management in public health policy, or questioning of the model assumptions, labels one a callous individual and something is wrong with you.

  13. Entropy

    Best article you have ever written David.

  14. Nob

    They are, overall, intelligent but not wise, knowledgeable in their field but not about the world, secure in their employment but ignorant about those who are not. As they see it, public policy must prevent all deaths, no matter what the consequences. They have no comprehension of individual liberty and responsibility or fundamental rights, ignore basic economics, and never acknowledge that trade-offs in public policy are unavoidable.

    Best paragraph you’ve ever written.

    If you could’ve distilled some of your speeches or press releases down to such effective soundbites, you might have got better results.

    Nevertheless, good work.

  15. pete m

    Well said David.

    The Qld Gmo is a perfect example and our dumb Premier follows her blindly.

  16. Roger

    Disconnect from the WHO.

    Whatever their degree of competency or otherwise, while we remain a member of the WHO our chief health/medical officers will always feel bound to follow WHO guidelines rather than make recommendations in the interests of Australians.

  17. This is why I condemn all health experts who try and impose their views on my lifestyle choices, especially everything they consider sinful.

  18. Anonandon

    Skin in the game is what this is about. The various public servants and advisers have nothing to gain and everything to lose if they suggest a risk based approach and they get it wrong. Therefore they are pathologically risk averse. It is not a bug, it is a feature.

    Politicians on the other hand are judged both ways and need to make decisions, not blindly rely on the advice. A pathetic failure of political judgement and will that is amplified by the media and social media who give a disproportionate voice to the shit scared at the expense of the rest of us.

  19. Perfidious Albino

    Spot on David. But this contrary perspective would have been more useful 3 months ago…

  20. Bruce

    Firstly; regarding”dumb” premiers and GMO’s (Genetically Modified Organisms???); THEY said it first:

    “WE’RE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER!!”.

    As Tonto once famously remarked “Who’s WE, white man?”

    Then there is THAT oath:

    ” I swear by Apollo Physician, by Asclepius, by Hygieia, by Panacea, and by all the gods and goddesses, making them my witnesses, that I will carry out, according to my ability and judgment, this oath and this indenture.

    To hold my teacher in this art equal to my own parents; to make him partner in my livelihood; when he is in need of money to share mine with him; to consider his family as my own brothers, and to teach them this art, if they want to learn it, without fee or indenture; to impart precept, oral instruction, and all other instruction to my own sons, the sons of my teacher, and to indentured pupils who have taken the physician’s oath, but to nobody else.

    I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgment, but never with a view to injury and wrong-doing. Neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course. Similarly I will not give to a woman a pessary to cause abortion. But I will keep pure and holy both my life and my art. I will not use the knife, not even, verily, on sufferers from stone, but I will give place to such as are craftsmen therein.

    Into whatsoever houses I enter, I will enter to help the sick, and I will abstain from all intentional wrong-doing and harm, especially from abusing the bodies of man or woman, bond or free. And whatsoever I shall see or hear in the course of my profession, as well as outside my profession in my intercourse with men, if it be what should not be published abroad, I will never divulge, holding such things to be holy secrets.

    Now if I carry out this oath, and break it not, may I gain for ever reputation among all men for my life and for my art; but if I break it and forswear myself, may the opposite befall me.”

    – Translation by W.H.S. Jones.

    “First, do no harm” is a later addition; an 18th century “precis”, of sorts.

  21. PB

    “while taxpayers will be funding a massive debt for decades to come”

    Bug for some, feature for others.

  22. Mother Lode

    Public toilets, public intellectuals, public service, and now public health officers.

    All stinking, unsightly, poor quality, and I am convinced that the word ‘public’ does not indicate that it is available to everyone as much as meaning that everyone must equally partake the blame for them.

  23. Mark M

    Sweden’s epidemic is ending. What will team doomsday now say?

    “Sweden last week recorded no excess mortality compared to the average of the past five years for the first time since COVID-19.”

    Sweden records first week with no excess mortality since pandemic struck
    https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN23F1WK

  24. Googoomuck

    It’s refreshing to read a measured and sensible view on the pandemic. The response to the virus is typical of most public policy; there cannot be any “losers”, however small the neative effect might be. It is vital that everyone take calculated risks or our civilisation will stagnate. Yes, there will be some people badly affected but it is better to remediate for those few (or tell them to fix it themselves if the effect is minimal) rather than stymie the many. The current aversion to risk is a signpost that we are into the “good times create soft people” phase of the social cycle.

  25. Gilas

    I have the misfortune of having worked with doctors, as well as other health professsionals, for decades.
    Doctors, generally, are high-functioning Asperger’s-types, mostly inadequate in inter-personal relationships (hence the propensity for marrying nurses, well below their social status), and with a higher-than-average probability of having sociopathic personality disorder.

    Medical training favours rote-learning and memory work over critical or rational thinking. In my experience, common sense is in desperatly short supply at medical meetings.

    When quizzing young graduates on general knowledge these days, the level of ignorance is astounding. This is undoubtedly the product of decades of Marxist education, however, the lack of curiosity and enquiry after graduation is not.

    What they have learnt, however, is how essential it is to follow protocols blindly, protocols that have been mostly written by hateful, Communist, dumb-as-dogshit harridan ex-nurses in the various Health depts.

    As I’ve written previously, infection control methods have been known for almost two centuries, even before the germ-cell theory (Koch’s posulates) was widely accepted.

    What has happened in the last three months is nothing short of a national scandal, completely unscientific, picked-out-of-my-a.se advice defecated by sociopathic incompetents with a God complex.

    Excellent evidence of Richard Feynman’s famous quote “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.”

    We have witnessed unscientific, criminal ignorance given the power of policy.

  26. Nighthawk the Elder

    The medical profession is risk averse by it’s very nature, being all caring and mothering and wanting to wrap the world in cotton wool and such. And during the shutdowns they had their cheer squads of Karens and Brads out in force. You know the type of extreme scenarios; how golf and fishing would wipe out the elderly, how taking a driving lesson with mum was akin to genocide.

    The trouble of course is we don’t live in a risk averse world, we live in a risk managed one.

  27. Everyone: stop listening to David Leyonhjelm.

  28. Catcalling Inebriate

    “It is now clear…..” Famous last words.

  29. Yeah monty, we should really listen to doctors whose health directives make no sense and are based on the advice of a hypocrite who predicted 200 million deaths from the Bird Flu.

  30. flyingduk

    Spot on David! as was my neighbour, a retired Vet, who had been worrying about a pandemic for a decade. The other thing we can learn from Veterinarians is the true cost of treatments and the price of alternatives: If you take your aging, limping, german shepherd to the vet you get the choice of a 10k operation (which may or may not work, and wont keep the dog alive any longer anyway) or a $35 bottle of anti-inflammatories. If you take your aging, collapsing, dementing, bedbound grandmother to the ER, she gets a $15k pacemaker and you never even know the cost … but ‘society’ – including you – is paying it.

  31. H B Bear

    Public health officials should be everywhere and always ignored. Smoking, drinking, weight, food you name it.

  32. egg_

    No.skin.in.the.game

    Risk assessment is to be done by the participants, not overlords with motherhood statements like it’s for your own good

    Do the cvnts have distant relatives in hospitalities and private enterprise?

    The proverbial Doctors Wives.

  33. egg_

    By contrast, it is becoming painfully clear that the lockdown has cost lives and ruined careers through unemployment, business failure and educational disruption, while taxpayers will be funding a massive debt for decades to come. Moreover, many other countries have similarly trashed their economies, which will not only make the recession global, deep and painful but also long-lasting.

    SloMo asleep at the wheel* – the Economy was his responsibility, not boffins-in-a-bubble.

    *Speaking of risk management.

  34. egg_

    Everyone: stop listening to David Leyonhjelm.

    From the Chief Wrongologist.

  35. egg_

    The medical profession is risk averse by it’s very nature, being all caring and mothering and wanting to wrap the world in cotton wool and such.

    Tut tutting hypocrites, you mean:
    – Doctors on a cruise during the alleged pandemic
    – Non quarantining Doctors
    – Disembarking of the Ruby Princess

  36. pbw

    I was able to observe at close hand the preparation of a paper on the response, especially the public health response, to the H1N1 pan(dem)ic. The perception of the disease followed a similar pattern: grossly exaggerated mortality estimates initially, plummeting as more information became available.

    The attitude of senior public health figures appalled me. It was considered more important to tell a consistent story, than that the story be accurate. Essentially, it was a call for the suppression of all alternative perspectives.

    During the “pandemic,” some doctors were offering were offering such alternative views. It was felt to be outrageous that the hoi polloi might be diverted from slavish acceptance of the approved narrative. This has been exactly the approach of the Qld CMO.

  37. cuckoo

    Transmission in outdoor cafes, restaurants and beer gardens, or on beaches and in parks, is very unlikely.

    And yet fellow-pedestrians I pass in Melbourne still flatten themselves against a wall as we pass, or step out onto the road to avoid me. As if a less-than-one-second moment of proximity will somehow transmit the disease. They won’t come out of their mental bunkers until Emperor Dan and his auslan signer tell them it’s safe to do so.

  38. cuckoo

    Doctors, generally, are high-functioning Asperger’s-types, mostly inadequate in inter-personal relationships

    Surely a bit harsh Gilas. One of the finest people I’ve known was a female GP. I would have gone to her for life advice on anything. And I was sitting in her waiting room on the morning Turnbull rolled Abbott. You could hear the storm of rage all the way from her consulting room.

  39. egg_

    Non quarantining Doctors

    The Doctors were reported as having ignored Officials’ instructions to immediately quarantine upon disembarking, yet a Doctor on a Video call said they were waved through by Officials to self isolate at their home destinations.

    Who do you believe, the Official reports or the Doctors**?

    Smells of the Ruby Princess hypocrisy, where the Govt tried to blame the Operator.

    Are adults in charge?

    Methinks not.

    **CMO Fraser then tried to blame a Tasmanian outbreak on said Medicos.

  40. Robber Baron

    Defund public health.

  41. egg_

    **CMO Fraser then tried to blame a Tasmanian outbreak on said Medicos.

    The High Priests sh1tting on their own, as well as Joe Public.

  42. Beachcomber

    The “pandemic ” in Sweden.

    April was also the deadliest month, adjusted for population since 2000, when Sweden had a bad flu season.


    In other words, it’s the ‘flu. The “pandemic” was always fake. There was never a new deadly virus that would cause a plague. The whole frenzy of Statist excesses is based on a corruption of reason, logic, and truth. We have been crushed by the government and ruling class as they impose ever-increasing control systems. Decades of indoctrination by the Media, schools and Universities have conditioned us to meekly accept the “Brave New Normal”.

  43. But in reality it was not politicians who made the call; it was those advising them. On something as major as a disease epidemic, politicians will only ever act on advice.

    It must be borne in mind that the final decisions were the responsibility of the heads of governments – not the medical people. The medical people were free to give the most ridiculous, self-serving advice that they could muster, but it was up to the governments to treat that advice accordingly and then … drum roll … show leadership.

  44. If anybody would like to see proof that this virus was just a bad case of the ‘flu, please see this page. The author demonstrates that for the UK, this virus was no worse than their bad ‘flu seasons of 98/99 and 99/00:

    https://hectordrummond.com/2020/05/09/alistair-haimes-the-virus-that-turned-up-late/

  45. Kneel

    “But in reality it was not politicians who made the call; it was those advising them. ”

    Wrong.
    Politicians in ministerial positions are responsible – period.
    It is their job to listen to all advise from all fields, then make a judgement call about what is least harm/most benefit. Advisors are specialists in their field (one hopes!), not ALL fields. In this case, the medical advice is important, but so is the economic advice, psychological advice etc etc. Listen to all of it and make a call. If you think you can dodge your responsibility by handing control to experts, you better start looking for a new job because you’ll lose your current one – or should.

  46. egg_

    It must be borne in mind that the final decisions were the responsibility of the heads of governments – not the medical people. The medical people were free to give the most ridiculous, self-serving advice that they could muster, but it was up to the governments to treat that advice accordingly and then … drum roll … show leadership.

    Nailed it.

    Scotty-from-Marketing flubbed it.

  47. egg_

    Politicians in ministerial positions are responsible – period.

    The current draconian States’ Health legislation was drafted/approved/enacted by Politicians.

  48. Russell

    Great summary of the state of medical doctoring in Oz.
    For long time, I have wondered why doctors who used to run their own practices (up till about the 1980s), all have now moved to operating within Group practices. Sure, there are economies of scale and better cover for insurances and downtime, but I really think it’s because they individually couldn’t run a chook raffle. Very few have any skill beyond their very tight professional field.

    Medical Doctoring does seem a perfect candidate for automation by disruptive technology.

  49. John A

    Entropy #3485562, posted on June 15, 2020, at 6:54 am

    They are, overall, intelligent but not wise, knowledgeable in their field but not about the world, secure in their employment but ignorant about those who are not. As they see it, public policy must prevent all deaths, no matter what the consequences. They have no comprehension of individual liberty and responsibility or fundamental rights, ignore basic economics, and never acknowledge that trade-offs in public policy are unavoidable.

    Quite so.
    But any discussion of risk management in public health policy, or questioning of the model assumptions, labels one a callous individual and something is wrong with you.

    Sadly those medicos need to be reminded of the wise words of Colonel Dr Henry Blake (MASH)
    [HB to Hawkeye Pearce] Why do I have to remind you of the Rules of War?
    Rule No. 1: In war, young men die.
    Rule No. 2: Doctors can’t change Rule No. 1

    And the political responses have been as draconian as any wartime measures. They treated it as a war against the virus. So the National Cabinet Joke also needs this reminder.

    That means YOU, Mad Dan and Autocrat Annie!!

  50. Hay Stockard

    At least the Government medicos had their scones on tv so we could see what fools look like.

  51. Hay Stockard

    Monty doesn’t want that time he spent cowering in his basement cowering in abject terror to be wasted.

  52. Justinian the Great

    Good post in pretty much in agreement with what a number of contributors have been saying from day one.

    However, I don’t agree with this point:

    “In Australia and other democracies, voters will ultimately pass judgement on them. But in reality it was not politicians who made the call; it was those advising them. On something as major as a disease epidemic, politicians will only ever act on advice.”

    It is the job of government to make policy decisions not medical experts. Sure they are an important input into policy decision-making but a competent government would seek competing advice before meekly going along with the groupthink.

    A competent government would balance the medical advice against other economic and social policy issues and advice. A competent government would have set metrics and made evidenced based policy decisions.

    Only an incompetent government unfit to lead would abdicate decision making impacting the entire nation and entire economy to medical officers and hide behind them as human shields.

  53. Squirrel

    Closing the borders and quarantine was the key to it – they were relatively quick on the former and slow on the latter. But for the latter we could have made it through with lighter restrictions and much less social and economic pain.

  54. David:
    We could have learnt a lot about how a pandemic spreads by studying the the facts of the Wuhan Zombie Virus, but the mechanism to collect the data and study it was rendered ineffective by government fiat.
    We used to have a Civil Defence department, but it was subsumed into some other empire and is now the property of the anti smokers.
    The other problem is the quality of the information gathered. Due to political interference, the numbers are just rubbish.
    What a wasted opportunity.

  55. Aynsley Kellow

    I have an essay with a similar theme that has just been made available in front of the paywall. I wrote it about a month ago, but I would stand by its factual base:
    https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2020/06/covid-19-and-the-problem-with-official-science/

  56. Dasher

    The cure was always going to be worse than the ill…..this seems to be the way these days, we have lost our way. When one compares previous pandemics including the flu the numbers of deaths worldwide are not extraordinary by any means…eg Hong Kong flu 1969 around one million deaths, bad flu season, some 600000 deaths, COVID19 400000 so far. We did not destroy our economy on the other examples. In my view this is biggest overreaction and example of community hysteria perhaps in recorded history. The way the press report a single case you would think a thousand people had died of the bubonic plague. Why or why we did not apply risk management and take care of the vulnerable and let rest just catch the disease (which in the vast majority of cases would be no worse than a flu) is beyond me. Madness.

  57. Bruce

    “The medical profession is risk averse by it’s very nature, being all caring and mothering and wanting to wrap the world in cotton wool and such”

    That’s when they are not killing and maiming in bulk by abortions, “creative” euthanasia and “medical misadventure”, (iatrogenic injuries and deaths, for the interested).

  58. Kneel

    “iatrogenic injuries and deaths, for the interested”

    About 200k p.a. in the USA.
    Twice as many as Covid-1984 to date.
    That means: BAN DOCTORS!
    You know it makes sense…

Comments are closed.