UK Covid-19 Inquiry Application for Core Participant Status

Many serious errors were made by the W.H.O. that caused the British Medical Advisers, to advise erroneous political decisions. These errors need to be highlighted. I am the G.P. who first identified successful treatment of Covid with small doses of steroid. I wish to call to attention:

1. Problems caused by the WHO.

2. Problems caused by intransigent physicians and medical advisors.

3. Manipulation of National Statistics.

4. Untruthful information regarding vaccines.

5. Early treatment in the community, combined with reinstitution of Isolation Hospitals, would have made it entirely un-necessary to institute any degree of lockdown.

6. Actions regarding children have been incorrect and damaging. The World Health Organisation should never have declared a pandemic. The criteria for a pandemic were not reached, since the virus has a 99.98% survival rate, as well as successful treatment. The WHO had previously trialled treatment of SARS with high doses of corticosteroids, with the result that many patients thus treated, were fatally affected by diabetes and renal failure. Physicians in practice during the 1970’s and 1980’s had established that small doses (10-15mg prednisolone or equivalent) of corticosteroid were effective in viral respiratory distress and completely safe if given for periods not exceeding three to four weeks. In contrast, at some time in recent years, chest physicians had commenced using very high doses of corticosteroid in viral pneumonia. The net result was that the WHO declared that corticosteroids must not be used in Covid, although they had never been tested. By chance I was able to demonstrate that a small dose of corticosteroid given early was immensely effective in relieving inflammation in the lung caused by covid. I passed this information to Medical Journals, Royal Colleges of Physicians, national newspapers, and to the Government, also local physicians, who entirely ignored me. I published a video on YouTube, that was only taken down. However, via my M.P., the research group at Oxford did in fact test and confirm my findings. The medical profession for a long time remained adamant that such treatment was wrong and ineffective, and large numbers of patients died from being put on respirators without any other treatment. Many were discharged to nursing homes whilst remaining infectious. I wrote many times to the Government to make the case that if proper isolation facilities were built with positive pressure ventilation, then patients could be treated outside of the general hospitals. If investment had been made with sufficiently attractive pay, those isolation hospitals could have been staffed, allowing the General Hospitals to function normally. Investing in the NHS in that way would have been many-fold less expensive than shutting down the entire economy. There should have been no declaration of a “Pandemic”. General Practice should have been treating patients in the community with 1-2 weeks of low dose steroid and an antibiotic to prevent secondary infection. Few patients would have needed to be admitted to the isolation units. Normal function of the Hospitals would have been possible. However, medicine in the community effectively ceased, and most regular hospital care was put on the back burner. The public was induced to a state of fear by false accounting. The actual total death rate for both 2020 and 2021 was less than the total death rate in previous years. It is completely false to suggest that the disease was ever widely fatal in the UK. (This is likely not the same in countries with poor nutrition and no medical care whatsoever.) Doctors were obliged to record Covid as the cause of death in all cases that had a positive test in the previous 28 days. One might as well have said that Margarine was the cause if it had been eaten in the previous 28 days. The death rate does not support Covid as the overriding cause of death since the rate of death was no more than in other recent years.

Total deaths (all causes England and Wales) 2015 602780 2016 597210 2017 607172 2018 616000 2019 530841 (only 2019 has a lesser number) 2020 602215 2021 586772

Vaccines have never had any effect upon the spread of disease. A vaccine stimulates the immune system and provides increased resistance to an organism. When an immunised person is in contact with disease, they must contract it before the immune system can act against it. During that initial phase the virus (or bacteria) multiplies exactly the same as in the unimmunised person, before the immune system kicks in to counter the infection. During the first few days of infection an immunised person is spreading the disease exactly as in the unimmunised person. Their own outcome is improved, but there is no difference whatsoever in terms of incubating the virus and spreading the disease. Not only was the totally false idea that immunisation somehow prevents spread of the disease used to promote vaccination, but persons were vilified if not vaccinated, whereas the benefit from vaccination is entirely to the vaccinated person themselves. Furthermore, the false idea that vaccination prevents spread, encourages those vaccinated to act in ways that spread the virus more, whilst thinking that they cannot do so. They commonly are infected with no symptoms and act as super-spreaders. In addition to this false propaganda, the adverse effects of vaccination have been suppressed. Whereas statistics were made to show high levels of death from disease, the statistics concerning adverse effects of immunisation were entirely absent. Children Children were almost unaffected by the disease, yet were caused to suffer all sorts of deprivation and hardship. They were made to hand wash incessantly, causing much discomfort and distress when it was entirely un-necessary. Covid is a respiratory virus, not an enteric virus, and spread by inhalation, not by contact or touch. They had to wear masks when they were not at risk. Masks themselves have adverse effects. Natural immunity to all kinds of infections was not acquired in the normal course of life. Their schooling was grossly interfered with, yet they were not at risk, whilst their teachers were also at very low risk. If they had all obtained natural immunity in a short time, whilst continuing normal education, that would have been much preferable. Those very few children with extreme vulnerabilities would have been in a different situation to the vast majority. There was no reason to withhold normal schooling from that majority. The small number of extremely vulnerable children should have been home-schooled, whilst the schools themselves continued as normal.

RULE 5.2 I personally passed the information on Steroids, statistics, and Isolation Units to the Government, and have copies of all correspondence.

Although relevant to module 2, this information appears relevant to module 3:

1. (I consider last)

2. Core decision-making and leadership within healthcare systems during the pandemic:

My evidence is a series of letters sent to the Government, pressing for a different approach in terms of keeping Covid cases out of General Hospitals, using community teams and isolation hospitals. These letters, direct to a Cabinet Minister, were acknowledged throughout, thus have received consideration.

3. Staffing levels and critical care capacity, the establishment and use of Nightingale hospitals and the use of private hospitals:

This is at the heart of my submissions to the Government, that an entirely different approach was needed. I made detailed submissions that if acted upon, would have ensured very different outcomes. If instead of spending billions upon a lockdown, the investment had been made in the manner that I proposed, then the Health Service would now be in no difficulty, and no backlog, whereas the money spent would have been substantially less. These proposals need to be presented to the Inquiry.

4. 111, 999 and ambulance services, GP surgeries and hospitals and cross-sectional co-operation between services:

General practice was never really involved at all in the epidemic, whereas I proposed the setting up of community teams so that patients in the main could be managed in the community. Cases could have been kept entirely out of existing general hospitals. I volunteered to set up and train such a team as a trial, but this as with other proposals was ignored.

8. Preventing the spread of Covid-19 within healthcare settings, including infection control, the adequacy of PPE and rules about visiting those in hospital:

Covid should never have been treated in General Hospitals. If my proposals had been acted upon, then the normal functions of those hospitals would have continued uninterrupted. My proposals need to be presented to the Inquiry in detail and the reasons why they were not given serious consideration should be ascertained and examined.

10. Deaths caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, in terms of the numbers, classification and recording of deaths, including the impact on specific groups of healthcare workers, for example by reference to ethnic background and geographical location:

My evidence presents an entirely different aspect of this problem. I submit that the evidence so far submitted is erroneous and that the correct analysis has never been made. This needs detailed consideration.

1. The impact of Covid-19 on people’s experience of healthcare:

I have placed this item last, since the submission throughout will show that the failure to adapt to the epidemic using the information in a correct manner, and the failure to retain patients in the community; the failure of participation by General Practice; the failure to provide and staff isolation units; the refusal of Consultants to listen to others; the incorrect assessment of data; all caused widespread panic by the General Public, the wrong direction in terms of management, and led to the failure of normal function and treatment in the Health Service. People’s experience of healthcare has been that care has been in the main, lacking, and there are now huge backlogs in all aspects of investigation and treatment across the Health Service, with great dissatisfaction within the professions.

I have no legal interest.

Dr. Mark Rumble M.B., Ch.B., M.A