Emerging information on COVID-19 cast doubt on the evidence-based scientific basis of establishment of the current intervention measures

The widely used current intervention approaches against COVID-19 which include lock-downs, social distancing, face masks, etc. are a serious source of inconveniences on routine day to day life activities, other disruptions, and are a significant source of stress and therefore should not be accepted as the “new normal.” In any case, the establishment of these current intervention measures raises a lot of doubt on their scientific basis, and therefore their usefulness, as more emerging knowledge on this pandemic, such as that from Ioannidis (2020) and Kupherschmidt (2020), point out to the fact that, there are some inadequacies on the currently available data as well as deep-seated obscurities in the philosophical worldviews and assumptions from which the these current intervention measures might have been conceived.

The framers of these current intervention measures did not seem to have considered the host (humans) as active living entities in the pathogen-host interactions, which is a position characteristic of the classic “medical model” which, in its most extreme form, as clearly put across by Marcum (2008), views the body as a machine (passive and/or nonliving entity), to be fixed when broken. The current intervention measures are therefore most likely based on, and/or dictated by unfounded assumptions that this “machine” i.e. the human body is defenseless to attack from microbes, toxins, or any other internal or external insults. In this COVID-19 pandemic, this modern medical view is reflected in the use of ventilators, face masks, partitioning protective plastic glass barriers, exploration into potential vaccines and antiviral drugs, which is indicative of the notion that any contact of the host (humans), with the virus is a sure case of infection and/or spread of the disease. It is therefore clear that current intervention measures and proposed further strategies were formulated on  unfounded and/or misguided philosophical assumptions, which can be made more clear in the contrasting alternative philosophical view highlighted below.

The medical model view (grounded in the philosophy from which the assumptions which helped generate current intervention measure against COVID-19 were formulated) contrast the views of the alternative health models (e.g. natural hygiene), grounded in classic philosophical worldviews, such as those defined in course materials by Transformation Institute (2000), and in particular the following

Natural Hygiene recognizes that the human body is a fully self-sufficient organism, that it is self-directing, self-constructing, self-preserving and self-healing, and that it is capable of maintaining itself in superb functioning order, completely free of disease, if its inherent needs are met. Foremost among these needs are fresh air, pure water, rest and sleep, wholesome foods, cleanliness, comfortable temperature, sunshine, exercise, constructive work, emotional poise, self-mastery, recreation and pleasant environment. 

It appears logical that the natural health model(s), which share common philosophical views as highlighted above, would offer opportunities to formulation of socially and environmentally more acceptable intervention measures against COVID-19, such as long-term solutions of boosting host immune defense system, or direct use of food as medicine to fight the coronavirus infection. I sincerely believe that these approaches are  very effective if done properly. From my own personal experience, I used to have seasonal common colds but that ended in 2013, that’s about 7 consecutive years to date, without a single day of the common cold and any form of a fever for that matter, since I started on my health lifestyle choices program (health food choices and religious engagement with my nutritional supplements), but surprisingly with no use and/or the need to use vaccines, pain killers, antibiotics or any prescription drugs. In this COVID-19 pandemic, I therefore have no reason to believe that coronavirus would pose any threat to my health. In my view, pursuing the alternative natural health approaches is the ultimate right direction to take in order to end the COVID-19 pandemic nightmare.

In good health!

Comments and questions are welcome.


Ioannidis J.P.A. (2020). A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. First Opinion, STAT. Available at: https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/a-fiasco-in-the-making-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-takes-hold-we-are-making-decisions-without-reliable-data/

Kupherschmidt, K. (2020).Why do some COVID-19 patients infect many others, whereas most don’t spread the virus at all? ScienceMag.org. Available at: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/05/why-do-some-covid-19-patients-infect-many-others-whereas-most-don-t-spread-virus-all  

MARCUM, J. A. (2008). An introductory philosophy of medicine: humanizing modern medicine. [Dordrecht], Springer. Available online at: http://tagso.bpums.ac.ir/UploadedFiles/xfiles/File/tagso/8%20olympiad/Philosophy_and_Medicine_99.pdf


Popular posts from this blog

Be the Boss of Your Own Health Through the Nature Cure Approach

The Combined Hydroxychloroquine Zinc COVID-19 Treatment Buzz - A Misunderstanding and/or Misinterpretation of Science.

Where is the Science? Where is the Evidence in the COVID-19 Pandemic?