The coronavirus pandemic has brought a devastating amount of death to the world. There is already much debate today about the causes of the pandemic. But a more controversial question is whether or not the standard responses to the pandemic have been more productive or destructive. The entire question of lockdowns has been questioned by many. Sharyl Attkisson uncovers a community that dealt with the pandemic in a completely different manner than so many other communities. This report does not focus on treatments that worked or did not work. It does not even focus much on vaccines. It focuses more on the whole idea of lockdowns to avoid spread of the virus.
In the coming years, a few issues about the coronavirus pandemic will be explored in greater depth. The source of the virus will almost definitely be traced to the Wuhan Lab. But whether or not the Chinese government consciously tried to spread the virus to the rest of the world will probably be debated for decades.
A more interesting and probably consequential debate has already begun concerning treatments for the coronavirus. Even before President Trump mentioned the word hydroxychloroquine, that treatment was being shouted down by many in the medical establishment, despite reports that it was helping many patients. Subsequent treatments such as Ivermectin were also shouted down by many leaders in the medical field, despite showing even better results for so many patients. Some questioned shy Ivermectin was so useful in India, yet not offered to everyone else outside of India.
Since these treatments were not authorized as effective for the coronavirus, it became close to impossible for thousands of doctors around the world to proscribe these drugs. This spawned a large group of doctors quietly recommending these drugs to thousands of patients who preferred this alternative over the vaccine options. A not insignificant number of people have opted to take a vaccine shot but to also be open to using the unofficial drugs in case they did contract Covid-19 after being vaccinated.
The one thing that is clear now is that there is a lack of clarity as to what the best path ought to be. Most doctors and patients certainly seem to have taken the vaccination option as the best path. But the questions remain as to why any other option is dismissed? Perhaps, thousands of lives could have been saved?