Home Page
Home Page

How I Became A Lockdown Sceptic

by Chauncey Tinker – 25 Jul 2021

At the start of 2020 I was, like most people I think, simply unsure what was going on. I had seen the scary footage on social media that seemed to show that bad things were happening in China, and seen the reports coming from Italy and other places, and it did seem as if something significant was happening.

Quite early on however I began to have doubts about whether the pandemic was really as serious as we were being told by the media. Obviously those of us who had been watching mainstream media (MSM) sources closely in recent years had already become aware of the tactics that these sources were using to manipulate public opinion. We had seen how negative news stories about the migrant crisis were suppressed (a practice that has come to be known as "lying by omission" or "propaganda by omission"). We had also seen how the MSM, that was generally biased against Brexit, had been promoting the idea that Brexit would lead to a major economic crisis, a tactic that became known as "Project Fear"; in the event there was no economic crisis as a result of Brexit. We had also seen the repeated attempts to terrify the public into believing that a major environmental catastrophe was imminent due to climate change. In summary I was already generally a lot more sceptical about MSM sources than most people, but in early 2020 it seemed that right across the board from left to right there was a near consensus in media sources that a serious pandemic was underway (at least that was what they were telling the public anyway).

My suspicions increased substantially in March 2020 thanks to one (almost lone at that time) dissident voice - Peter Hitchens pointed out in articles published that there had been a similarly large number of excess deaths as recently as 2018/19, nobody then had been calling for a lockdown (from the Daily Mail):

I also had the evidence of my own eyes and ears - every time I walked to the shops to buy groceries etc I was struck by the total lack of evidence of illness everywhere I went. I had to stand in very long queues at the supermarket (queues which reminded me of TV footage of queues in Russia during the Soviet era), but nobody in these queues was ill, and the only risk seemed to be from inhaling the cigarette smoke of other customers as we queued. I walked past rows and rows of houses in my home town but I could hear nobody at all inside these houses "coughing continuously" (the official UK government website described this as one of the symptoms of the illness). I walked past a graveyard on my way to the shops, but it seemed to be entirely business as usual for the funeral trade, just the very occasional funeral procession as always.

As the months went by the MSM continued to bombard us with fear inducing reports of huge numbers of cases, and I noticed that the BBC was publishing almost daily articles on their front page about particular cases of quite young people dying from COVID-19. I did notice that in one of these articles they described the deceased person as having "no underlying health conditions", but on reading further into the article I saw the contradictory admission that the person was an asthma sufferer which clearly is not only an "underlying health condition" but also one that would have put them directly at higher risk from a respiratory illness.

Obviously the fact of a single person dying is simply not statistically significant in a country of 60-70 million people (tragic though of course it is for the individual and their loved ones). The overall death rate did not seem particularly out of the ordinary, but it was certainly higher than the average over the last 5 years, and so I was still a little unsure exactly how serious the situation really was, although my scepticism had only increased over time. By 2021 though we had a whole year's data to look at, and now there was simply no avoiding the obvious. Here is the ONS data showing both "Crude mortality rate" and "Age-standardised mortality rate":

I have put this into a graph for your convenience, the graph shows the Age-standardised mortality rate (per 100,000 population) by year:

What we see from this data is that the "Age-standardised mortality rate" was as high as 2020 as recently as 2008 (and was higher than 2020 in every single preceding year). Even the "Crude mortality rate" was as high as 2020 as recently as 2003 (and was higher in every single preceding year). If we accept the claim that there was a pandemic in 2020 then we would logically be forced to admit that EVERY SINGLE YEAR BEFORE 2008 AS FAR BACK AS RECORDS BEGAN was also a pandemic year. If you accept that, and you accept that a lockdown is necessary when a pandemic is underway, then you are going to be calling for a lockdown to occur frequently from now on (probably even every single year), because the probability is that we will see a return to higher annual mortality rates due to our aging population. The United Nations in 2019 predicted just that - a return to the higher mortality rates of earlier years, probably for this very reason. This graph from MacroTrends includes the projection from the UN into the future, which shows the projected line going well above what actually happened in 2020 (and bear in mind this UN prediction was made before anybody was talking about COVID-19):

(note that the line in this graph is a projection starting from 2020 so should not be confused with the graph of the actual data for 2020 from the ONS above).

Some people will try to argue that the death rate would have been a lot higher had it not been for the lockdown, but the same pattern (annual mortality rates around the 30 year average) has been observed in countries such as Sweden that have not had a compulsory lockdown, or that have had limited lockdowns. Even Reuters have published this article admitting that the death rate in Sweden in 2020 was substantially lower than it was in the UK:

The cost for the UK of the lockdown has been absolutely astronomical, the national debt has increased very substantially, the supposedly conservative government have literally been paying large numbers of people not to work for a prolonged period. Obviously it is utterly unsustainable to repeat this every year from now on. The government and the MSM are pushing the vaccinations as the solution which will stop the virus having a significant impact, but many are questioning not only the effectiveness but also the safety of these vaccinations (there are large numbers of reports of adverse reactions to the vaccine recorded on the government's "Yellow Card" reporting system, including many reports of deaths occurring soon after the vaccinations). Given that the average age of people alleged to have died of COVID-19 is above the average UK life expectancy, very serious questions really have to be asked about the necessity of the vaccination program, particularly as the pressure now seems to be on to vaccinate children.

Given all the above information, I completely reject the idea that the lockdown was in any way shape or form necessary. Many have been drawing attention to the role Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab (and the World Economic Forum) and others have been playing behind the scenes in promoting fear of a pandemic, and their influence throughout the media, politics and academia is truly a scandal of epic proportions, with huge conflicts of interest in all directions. The UK's Conservative Party website prominently shows the "Build Back Better" slogan of the WEF - the powers that be are all singing from the same hymn sheet. Worse still, the current UK government has shown itself to be as much an enemy of freedom of speech as all the other recent UK governments; they have made it clear that they intend through the "Online Harms" bill to make it illegal to criticize the World Health Organization. It seems increasingly clear that the real motivations for the lockdown have nothing whatever to do with the public's health, the deeply corrupt globalist totalitarians are taking over the world, and our own government in the UK is clearly in league with these people. I will be taking a closer look at these motivations and conflicts of interest in coming posts.

Unfortunately problems in my personal circumstances arose around the beginning of the lockdown, and I had no choice but to stop writing for a while, and also was only able to really follow the news rather superficially. As time went on however I started to get on top of my own problems and I began to spend more time listening to other dissenting voices, and it was mostly from these various sources that I became aware of the above information. I have been very relieved to see a growing number emerging, most of which I initially became aware of through The Delingpod, The Daily Sceptic (formerly Lockdown Sceptics), and The Conservative Woman, all of which I highly recommend. James Delingpole's style is not for everyone, but he has had his finger on the pulse from near the beginning of this whole unfolding manufactured disaster, and he has interviewed many very important voices. The Telegraph for all its many faults is at least hosting a podcast called Planet Normal which has taken a questioning stance on the lockdown, and interviewed important dissenting voices. I will promote many of these and other sources in individual posts in my "People Are Talking" series. Of course these sources aren't always right about everything (nobody ever is), but at least these people are all trying to get at the truth, unlike most of the media which are clearly in the business of deliberately misleading the public.

What do you think? Pandemic or scamdemic? Please leave a comment below.

Please feel free to share this article on social media sites:

Tweet     Share on Facebook     Google Plus     Reddit     Tumblr