My Hypothesis on the Planned Response to the Pandemic
I’m taking a page from Mike Yeadon, the former Pfizer scientist who’s been vocal about the COVID-19 pandemic being overblown. My view is that the response to the pandemic was planned, even if the virus’s release wasn’t (at least for now). I’m not saying the virus itself was cooked up in some lab—at this point, I see it as a natural event, maybe a zoonotic jump or an accident. But the way the world reacted? That feels orchestrated to me. The lockdowns, mask mandates, vaccine pushes, and all those public health policies didn’t just happen organically. I think they were deliberately rolled out, maybe with motives that had little to do with saving lives—more like control, profit, or reshaping society.
Key Elements of My Hypothesis
The Virus Wasn’t Planned, But the Response Was
I’m clear on this: I’m not claiming the virus was some grand conspiracy (yet). It could’ve been a natural outbreak or a fluke. But the response? That’s where things get fishy. The coordinated clampdowns, the global push for vaccines, the way every government seemed to sing from the same hymnbook—it feels too neat, like it was planned or at least steered toward specific goals. I’m not buying that it was all just a reaction to a virus.
Yeadon’s Skepticism Fuels My Thinking
Yeadon’s been shouting from the rooftops that the virus wasn’t as deadly as we were told and that the measures—like shutting down economies or jabbing everyone—were way over the top, maybe even harmful. I vibe with his doubts. His take makes me wonder if the response was hyped up to serve some bigger agenda, not just to stop a virus. It’s like the severity was dialed up to justify extreme actions.
What Were They After?
If the response was planned, someone had a goal. Maybe governments wanted more power—think emergency laws or tracking apps. Or maybe Big Pharma saw dollar signs, pushing vaccines while sidelining cheap fixes. I can even imagine social engineering—getting us used to remote work or digital IDs. The response feels like it was about more than health; it was about shifting the world in ways that suited certain players.
My Own Experience Backs This Up
Look at me: I’ve been taking 30,000 IU of vitamin D, plus zinc and quercetin, and it’s turned my winter-long bronchitis into one-day colds. Most people are low on vitamin D—studies show it’s super common—so why wasn’t this pushed? My success screams that simple, cheap solutions could’ve saved lives, but the planned response went for flashy, expensive ones instead. That’s not an accident; it’s a choice.
My Take on Credence
So, how much do I believe this? Honestly, it’s not airtight. The response was messy—flip-flopping rules, bad science early on—which looks more like panic than a master plan. The virus hit hard; hospitals were swamped, and millions died. That’s real. But I can’t shake the feeling that parts of the response were exploited. Pharma made bank, governments grabbed power, and my vitamin D win shows we ignored easy fixes. A full-on conspiracy feels like a stretch without hard proof—say, leaked plans or insiders spilling the beans.
I’d give my hypothesis—that the response was planned for ulterior motives—a 20-30% chance. It’s plausible that some players shaped the response for their own ends, but I lean toward it being a real pandemic with opportunistic tweaks, not a scripted show. Still, I’m keeping my eyes open for evidence that tips the scale.
