Since time immemorial, human beings have been a very curious species. People are always driven to explain the unknown, which can sometimes be a double-edged sword. In the world of science, curiosity has led to lots of amazing discoveries. The flip side of this is, it is also rife with all sorts of conspiracy theories. The novel coronavirus, SARS-COV 2, being a new virus, has come with an abundance of conspiracy theories, in addition to a healthy amount of disagreement even amongst professionals. A lot can be said about the reasoning or motivation behind some of these theories, but really the one common denominator is that a lot about the virus-and the disease it causes- is still not fully understood.
Having said that, I must say that some of the theories and opinions I have come across are quite intriguing. The most recent being a documentary-type interview of a researcher who once worked with Dr Anthony Fauci. Long story short, if you haven’t already seen it, her theory is that SARS-COV2 was manufactured in a lab, that Hydroxychloroquine works in COVID 19 and is deliberately being withheld (by big pharma) in order to push a vaccine. At some point, she even says the flu vaccine is laced with SARS-COV2. It’s a lot.
Now, before I get into the science of it, a disclaimer: I am not privy to the lawsuit and the dispute between her and Dr Fauci, so I will avoid any speculation on it. They both have had impressive records in the past when it comes to research. It is a good thing to question something you don’t agree with; this is how many false theories are disproved, after all. But in doing this, we must always listen to what the science says. That doesn’t change regardless of who says it.
So, the question a lot of people are asking- is there any truth to what she says? And the short answer- yes, there is some truth. She is after all, a renowned scientist. But there are also some half-truths and unsubstantiated claims in there. Key word- unsubstantiated. Remember my statement about listening to the science? Stay with me for a little bit.
The (main) bits of her statement that I agree with, in summary:
- There has been a lot of research into similar Coronaviruses in China and the USA. There is a big virology laboratory in Wuhan that has been involved in this field, and one of the senior virologists there published an article in Nature (I forget when exactly) documenting how one such virus, very similar to SARS-COV 2, had been manipulated to enable it to infect humans. This obviously raises a question about whether the origin of the current pandemic may have been a leak from one of the laboratories. There has since been genetic analysis done on SARS-COV 2 which showed that the virus in circulation wasn’t the same one that was studied in that trial. The general feeling that China deliberately withheld information on the outbreak does little to help the credibility of this particular research, though.
- It is indeed, very difficult to manufacture a vaccine that works against an RNA virus. It takes ages and a lot of money to manufacture any vaccine, really. This bit for me actually works against her theory. According to her, it is impossible to manufacture a vaccine against an RNA virus. So then, why all this hullabaloo to push for a vaccine, only for it to be an exercise in futility?
- There is a question about the reporting of COVID-19 death rates. There have been reports -which I cannot confirm obviously without access- of some countries where any home deaths are labeled as COVID even when they appear to be something else. The motivation behind this is unclear, as on face value, it appears as though they are intentionally inflating the numbers. Another possibility though, is that it just isn’t worth the risk to go around doing post mortem examinations on everyone while there are still thousands of sick people requiring attention.
And now, the parts I disagree with:
- The idea that scientists worldwide are withholding treatments that work from people who are severely sick or even dying. Yes, Dr Fauci may be a bigshot in the USA, but he is not advising the whole world. I said to someone earlier- Science is based on evidence, and evidence takes time to generate. One of the main reasons why, is there are so many checks and balances to ensure that people follow the rules and to avoid rushing into giving something that may later be found to be harmful. In the current situation, everyone is feeling the pressure. People want a quick fix solution but unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that. Give people HCQ+Azithromycin today, if someone dies from a resulting arrythmia they’re the same ones who will be back to sue you.
- There are two gentlemen who come on towards the end and talk about masks. Their whole discussion is based on the premise that wearing masks is meant to protect the wearer from contracting the disease. This is inaccurate because as a public health measure, masks have been recommended in order to prevent droplet aerosolisation. Looking at studies comparing countries where masks have been used by the general public against those where masks haven’t been used, the rate at which the number of cases increased was lower in the places where masks were used.
- Her main focus is on the fatality rate of COVID-19, claiming that the world is being fooled into thinking that the disease is more serious than it actually is. I disagree with this because the information about COVID is everywhere. A simple Google search will tell you that only about 15% of COVID patients develop severe disease. Anywhere you look, you will come across the phrase “flatten the curve”. Now, I may not fully agree with the 100% lockdown strategy especially in countries like Kenya (story for another day), but the reasoning behind it is not to reduce the number of deaths. It is simply to keep the number of sick people at a level below the capacity of health (intensive) care facilities.
So what am I saying, or rather, what is the science saying? I will re-iterate here that a lot about this illness is not known- or more accurately- has not been proved. What we do know, is that:
- Early trials suggested that Hydroxychloroquine on its own or in combiantion, may be effective in treating COVID. Subsequent results have been disappointing, though. But there are still clinical trials evaluating this, including one in Kenya.
- Vaccines work. Many of you reading this grew up in a world free of smallpox, because- vaccines. Also, remember the famous “Kick polio out of Kenya” campaign? And the recent measles outbreaks in Kenya and elsewhere in the world? A result of new infections introduced into the community from unvaccinated cohorts. I know someone will want to jump in here and ask “But what about the outbreak that was caused by shedding in stool from a vaccine?” To answer that, you need to understand what a vaccine is- a part of the contagion that is altered to induce an immune response. So yes, for some vaccines, you may get the disease, but a milder form if you are immunized.
- Herd immunity may come about in two ways: either through vaccination, or infection, of a large enough percentage of the population. Development of a vaccine for COVID 19 may take months, years even, if we ever get one that is. So the real question for me is, are we willing to go through the (potential) pain of allowing the virus to run unchecked through our population, knowing what the Kenyan health system is? Yes, it has a low case fatality rate, but are we really OK with “letting go” of our aging (grand)parents, our cancer-suffering, diabetic or other chronically ill relatives or friends? For those who agree with Dr Mikowitz (sic), how far are you willing to go to test her theory?
My parting shot: Nobody has the answers yet. All I can say is, it is not an easy decision, certainly not one to be taken lightly. What appears to be indecision or a lack of transparency, is for many, a professional and moral dilemma.
A rock and a hard place .