Published On: Sat, Aug 22nd, 2020

A twitter encounter with a zealot from the cult at the forefront of tyrannising the country (an equivalent of the Nazi SS)

The UK Government is toying with a new way to move lockdown goalposts: “Zero Covid” strategy. It means more and harsher lockdown until there are very few cases of infection in the population. Of course, putting aside the fact that rates and quantities of SARS-COV-2 infection are meaningless in terms of endangerment to life from Covid-19, and that the PCR test is flawed (a well established fact) so that more testing is bound to return the results that UK Government desires, we don’t have to believe a single word that we are told about Covid-19 cases numbers. As many have now pointed out, the “casedemic” toll replaces one that counts death as a gauge for UK Government and its deployment of mitigation measures (although, of course, lockdown was introduced by a model that crucially had trigger-offs measured by low rates of death). As such, it should be clear even to the naïvest Lockdown Sceptics reader that UK Government, by making case numbers (which can be invented, let’s face it) serve as a pretext, has given itself huge scope for dishing out abuse.

As it happens, a doctor (at least, s/he claimed to be) was discovered by the author on Twitter advocating “Zero Covid”, and because the author wanted to find out if this doctor – who, with all the gravitas one might expect, called him/herself @footiefan1964 – was a typical NHS technician with no more understanding of Covid-19 than a turnip, a challenge was issued to the individual in question. A query was put to him/her: could s/he explain what Covid-19 was, with reference to the specific mechanics and how they relate to symptoms and apparent type of illness and treatment.

Events took a turn for the weird, because the doctor did not respond. Instead, another Twitter user happily butted in to do the job for the doctor, and with a good deal of gusto (that the doctor might not have mustered him/herself). The user who had imposed him/herself went by the handle, @missclairabella. True, the doctor showed up later with a lame excuse, but nevertheless was thereafter ignored, although it was noticed that s/he readily admitted to the NHS Nightingale hospitals being a “publicity stunt”.

The other user came firing tweets rapidly (indicating that s/he was either adequately knowledgeable, or very prepared), and in fact was rather helpful towards a new end that the author had decided to try to achieve. Unfortunately, s/he did at the end (and in his/her final tweet) resort to sloganising, giving the impression that having checked all the talking point boxes, there was nothing else to do but give the rallying cry. At this point the author recognised he was dealing with the type described in the title of this article – the fact that this individual wanted a “a super harsh lockdown like New Zealand and Wuhan in China” was also indicative of a rabid goose-stepping totalitarian.

As the FBEL reader will know, Covid-19 is an illness that requires hospitalisation at an escalated level of treatment; i.e. patients will need to be admitted to intensive care. There appears to be a distinct and polarising separation between being an asymptomatic Covid-19 sufferer (so, arguably, someone who isn’t in fact infected), and a Covid-19 sufferer with symptoms that rapidly deteriorate so that emergency life-saving measures are required. Moreover, it appears that becoming ill with Covid-19 is purely a matter of having a health terrain that would make one most susceptible – and this has been discussed in the previous article, SARS-COV to ACE2 binding and the dangerous Covid-19 truth, which the reader is advised to read in conjunction with this piece.

Indeed, such evidence was discussed in said piece whereby the author was able to state the following:

Covid-19, when it is not countered by an immune response, is a rare illness requiring hospitalisation to prevent deterioration to death, and so the ICU figures produced by ICNARC (where some 4400 people have died of Covid-19 in and after critical care) are indeed the best indicator of a real Covid-19 death toll.

Moreover, when ICNARC reports that there have only ever been 13,379 admissions for Covid-19 patients in ICUs in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, then the real scale of Covid-19 is demonstrated. And further to that, because it was in the week before 5th April when a peak in ICU occupancy occurred, and because ICNARC reported on 10th April that 2194 patients were still in ICUs at that time, it is quite clear that critical care beds (with the UK maximum, before enlargement, being 5000) were never in danger of coming into short supply. The resource, as it is put below, was never tested. In fact, in a piece of good fortune, the article that appeared at FBEL at the time (titled, A coronavirus peak nears (ahead of time), the modelling is clearly wrong, and lockdown unjustified) – published on 11th April, to be precise – was convenient to record, in real time as it were, the circumstances by which lockdown was being justified (and wouldn’t be).

In any case, it has been the hope of the author to engage a (roughly) knowledgeable “health professional” over social media so as to gain a demonstration of what is asserted above: because Covid-19 is an illness that requires especial treatment (and confirmation of this is what would be being sought), its true scale can be measured by the figures collated by ICNARC (a fact that one shouldn’t expect a zealot in the cult to admit to).

Presented below, then, is a transcript of a Twitter conversation between the @FBEnemyLines account (operated by the author), and a cult member for the medical tyranny, who was tolerated only by appearing to be sufficiently proficient to meet the above stated requirements. As some point in the future there will be further and fuller discussion of the claims made by this so-called “health professional”, with attention paid to certain alleged aspects of Covid-19 that haven’t been confirmed in the literature so far looked at by yours truly, and also to some glaring errors or lack of precision.


@missclairabella 1):

It enters cells through two types of cellular receptors – toll and ACE. ACE are mainly found in vascular lining (endothelial) cells, of which there are lots in the lungs to carry oxygen. Like every virus it replicates by hijacking the cell machinery and then bursting the cell.

@missclairabella 2):

All those blood vessel cells bursting around the lungs are going to have various effects – firstly the obvious lung damage and difficulty breathing, a general decrease in oxygen getting into the blood, and an exaggerated local immune response – so that explains the lungs.

@missclairabella 3):

Because all those viruses are bursting out of blood vessels, they’re therefore in the blood and can get everywhere else. As every organ is full of blood vessels, and this virus attacks blood vessel lining cells, every organ can suffer – hence ICU treatment for sepsis.

@FBEnemyLines 2):

1/2 Complications are actually from the pneumonia, are they not? In any case, why do you think that when ICNARC reports that 13,379 have been admitted to ICUs in N.I, England and Wales, and of them around 4000 have died of Covid-19 – and given disease is as specific as you say –

@FBEnemyLines 3):

the official reckoning for Covid-19 death is around 40,000?

@missclairabella 14):

So the 40k figure is excess deaths. Ie the number of people that have died extra this year compared to recent years. In some ways it will be inflated – not everyone who died in that 40k will have been killed by Covid. BUT a lot of those may be indirectly related.

@FBEnemyLines 11):

On average, over the longer duration, excess death is down now, is it not? No [i.e. the 40k is not excess deaths]. Exactly correct [i.e. not everyone who died in that 40k will have been killed by Covid-19]. Less than 20 thousand, a lot less, went through the treatment necessary for a deteriorating Covid-19 case. ICNARC’s figure reflects real Covid-19 death: no more than 50000

@FBEnemyLines 20):

That should be 5000. No more than 5000 dead with actual Covid-19. Thanks for your replies. The truth will out.

@missclairabella 18):

Don’t forget there will be a number of people who won’t have been deemed severe enough for hospital admission by the 999/111 operator on calling and will have been told to stay home to “battle through” and died.

@FBEnemyLines 14):

Well, that was very heroic of the NHS – especially with all those ICU beds empty (according to ICNARC).

@missclairabella 21):

So the reason ICU beds didn’t fill was intentional. I’m a med researcher rather than a clinical doctor – I deal in numbers and science rather than anything political. The NHS trust my dept is affiliated with actually “built” more ICU beds. If they hadn’t, they would’ve been full

@missclairabella 22):

They started with the regular ICU departments and then added/moved equipment around to create more ICU space in what would normally be a care-level down. They also converted operating theatres to ICU wards too as they were already well equipped due to nature of anaesthetic

@FBEnemyLines 18):

The capacity previous to the NHS Movieset hospitals was never tested. ICNARC

@missclairabella 23):

I actually disagreed with the Nightingale hospitals. They were under equipped and too far out of town. They should’ve been set up to act as rehabilitation facilities for those recovering from ICU rather than as being a makeshift ICU

@FBEnemyLines 19):

If they weren’t taken seriously, it’s probably because they were never needed. ICNARC tells me that ICU bed capacity in ENgland Wales and NI was never tested.

@missclairabella 24):

The biggest issue is they assumed it was like SARS – predominantly lung based and so built them accordingly, when it turned out to have huge cardiovascular involvement and therefore they weren’t fit for purpose.

@missclairabella 25):

This is my field – I’m a CVD researcher and I keep yelling about it everywhere so let’s have it again: FOR EVERY 1 DEATH, 20 MORE LIVE WITH THE AFTER EFFECTS OF STROKES, HEART ATTACKS, AMPUTATIONS, LUNG FAILURE, HEART FAILURE AND MORE.

@FBEnemyLines 21):

ICNARC says that even 20,000 have not been in ICUs with Covid-19. A disease that requires escalated hospitalisation at the stage when it deteriorates so that it can cause lasting injury, if the patient survives.

@missclairabella 15):

For example we know there’s cancer patients who’s treatment was cancelled/postponed/reduced or who decided to not go forward with it given circumstances and who have died as a consequence. Heart patients have declined appointments too and again likely to be some deaths from that

@FBEnemyLines 12):

They had their “death pathway” treatment interrupted, and then they died.

@missclairabella 19):

There’s also COVID induced heart attacks/cardiac arrests – survival of those is <10% normally, add a viral infection to that? Some of those people will have died before even calling for help/advice.

@FBEnemyLines 15):

They’ve had heart attacks, but a PCR test, or clinical diagnosis, has implicated Covid-19 (that’s its name).

@missclairabella 20):

Plus we know other traumatic causes of death, like car crashes, being run over, cyclists being hit by cars, dangerous sports, etc – were all decreased drastically in lockdown. So the excess deaths is actually pretty accurate.

@FBEnemyLines 16):

Classified as Covid-19 in event of a recent (flawed) diagnosis of “infection”?

@FBEnemyLines 17):

And as you have admitted, not all Covid-19. As I have shown, mostly not Covid-19 (which is an illness that requires intensive care treatment).

@FBEnemyLines 10):

2/2 the official reckoning for Covid-19 death is around 40,000? Please answer this question.

@missclairabella 17):

I have answered the question. Asking it twice won’t get you a different answer?

@FBEnemyLines 13):

And thank you. I hope the doctor will learn a thing or two. Might help when he’s signing those death certificates.

@missclairabella 4):

ACE inhibitors could work short term but the biggest problem is that they’d need a high dose and the body compensates for those receptors being capped off by the drug by producing more receptors. So there’s a limit to the benefit.

@FBEnemyLines 1):

I’m in the school of thought that thinks that ACEIs are the problem. But the question was directed at the doctor “Footiefan1964”.

@missclairabella 10):

I thought you were being sarcastic but also wanting to hear what the issue is. ACEIs are a tricky one. They would almost definitely work in patients who don’t typically have high blood pressure and who aren’t genetically prone to it. But those aren’t the sickest.

@FBEnemyLines 4):

No. The research has not been done.

@missclairabella 13):

It’s not been done here. It is being done abroad.

@FBEnemyLines 8):

So, it’s not been done.

@missclairabella 11):

ACE receptors increase with age and are higher in men than women too and that’s why older men are most adversely affected. Inhibitors could help but risky trying because of the compensation mechanism.

@FBEnemyLines 7):

Maybe its because older men are most likely to be prescribed ACE2 inducing prescription drugs (ACEIs and ARBS and other (allegedly)) ?

@missclairabella 16):

Actually ACEIs aren’t standard first line hypertension treatment anymore because of the fact they stop working. They’re pretty much only used acutely now – so prescribed where someone has a sudden increase in blood pressure or it’s dangerously high and needs immediate reduction.

@missclairabella 5):

Likewise we can dampen some of the immune response with steroids and other drugs to help reduce the pneumonia but again we actually want the body to fight this infection so there’s only so much of that you’d want to give before it’s negative effects our weigh benefits

@missclairabella 6):

So we’ve got a conundrum that the currently available drugs can be used to an extent but none of them will do the job properly. It’s like using ventilators – they can help force oxygen into the damaged lungs, but that pressure can also damage lungs. It’s a real shit one to treat

@missclairabella 7):

Herd immunity isn’t a strategy we can take either. The medically vulnerable (including my household) have basically been imprisoned for 5 months and it’s not fair to shut them/us in for longer – it’s like doing the time for what crime exactly?? House arrest is less restrictive.

@FBEnemyLines 6):

Isn’t it the case that Covid-19 is a rare condition whereby treatment of it should not impact on the very very many who would not have the health terrain to make them susceptible?

@missclairabella 8):

And a vaccine isn’t guaranteed to work. In fact, we have to be braced for the very very real possibility that it won’t work, even for a short time. Coronaviruses are coated in a protective fat layer which helps them merge with cells and hides them from the immune system.

@FBEnemyLines 5):

Vaccines generally don’t work.

@missclairabella 12):

Vaccines generally do work except for viruses with lipid coats like coronaviruses and for rapidly mutating single-strand RNA viruses like flu where honestly the scientists are trying their best to predict what’s next with varying success rates – a tough job to beat evolution!

@FBEnemyLines 9):

No they generally don’t work.

@missclairabella 9):

Which means scientifically – a super harsh lockdown like New Zealand and Wuhan in China is realistically the best, quickest, and fairest option to elimination.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
Displaying 2 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Mike Hughes says:

    Used correctky, HCQ would have reduced the death toll dramatically.

    • P W Laurie says:

      But this article is partially about the death toll actually being a lot less than officially reckoned (with entirely no reference to Hydroxychloroquine). To roll up at the end of this article and say that Hydroxychloroquine would dramatically reduce the death toll appears to pay no attention to that. In fact, it is clear to me that Hydroxychloroquine is a talking point that reinforces the official narrative. As such it will get short shrift here.