Did the CDC just end COVID-19?
Many individuals believe the COVID-19 pandemic has been largely from a litany of bad public health policies. For example, in this article, I showed how most of the guidelines the CDC proposed were completely arbitrary rules that had no value in reducing COVID-19 deaths and were primarily psychological theater designed to engineer social compliance.
The CDC’s guidelines have largely served as the framework almost everyone else has adopted for their guidelines throughout the pandemic so changes to these guidelines are highly significant. In my eyes the biggest problems with the CDC’s guidelines (and the lockdowns that resulted from them) were that:
•They created the illusion the pandemic was much worse than it was due to a large number of meaningless tests that provided false positive and the disruptions the pandemic policies created throughout everyone’s daily lives.
•They were extremely damaging to the economy and thrust many into poverty.
•They prevented countless sensible approaches that could have ended the pandemic from being utilized.
•They enabled vaccination mandates that have been extremely harmful to millions.
•They provided a justification to have mass mail-in voting which has made many doubt the integrity of the electoral system and undermined the public’s confidence in our Democracy.
These guidelines were primarily political rather than scientific and the result of zealous politicians who were highly incompetent, corrupt and likely malicious (detailed here). Since the time those policies were enacted, a federal investigation confirmed that political influences superseded sound scientific policies in the agencies responsible for overseeing the pandemic response and the individual most responsible for the COVID-19 lockdowns and vaccine mandates, Deborah Birx, admitted that the vaccines she relentlessly pushed were a scam.
Because we have gone through years of this, it is not surprising that the only thing that could actually change these guidelines were political forces. It has long been theorized one of four circumstances each of which is particularly pertinent to the 2022 midterms would emerge to at least end the pandemic:
•An upcoming election would require temporarily rescinding the pandemic policies due to widespread public dissatisfaction with complying to the guidelines and the abject failure of the government to address the pandemic (due to the policies creating the illusion of an unanswered pandemic, so revoking them to some extent “solves” the pandemic).
•A political change in Washington DC (such as the Republicans sweeping the midterms) would result in the new party rescinding the policies.
•A need to drastically increase mail-in voting for an election would result in an increase rather than decrease of the pandemic policies.
•The economic costs of the pandemic policies were no longer sustainable for the ruling interests.
The Recent COVID-19 Policies
Prior to today, the CDC’s guidelines had been largely structured to pressure workers and students to be vaccinated and to maintain a continual fear of COVID-19 (in many cases public health figures and elected officials directly admitted to doing this). These guidelines in turn have been extremely aggravating for unvaccinated workers and students to follow, but most of us have been committed enough to not vaccinating that we have found ways to deal with them.
Some of the key aspects of the CDC’s recently abandoned guidelines were:
•Going insane with highly invasive contact testing.
•If you were unvaccinated, you needed to test yourself 1-2 times a week for COVID. If you were vaccinated, you did not.
•If you were unvaccinated, you needed to wear masks at all times you were indoors. If you are vaccinated, you did not.
•If you were unvaccinated, you needed to isolate and quarantine yourself anytime you were around someone you suspected was ill and to repeatedly test yourself when this happened. If you were vaccinated, you often did not.
•You are always expected to socially distance while indoors and often to do so outdoors.
Many of the guidelines were based on the naively optimistic assumption that vaccination would result in permanent immunity in each individual to COVID-19, herd immunity rapidly developing to COVID-19, and the pandemic becoming a distant memory. These were highly flawed assumption and many knew from the get go the vaccination campaign was likely to do the exact opposite (this is important to understand so please consider reading the article below).
It has now become clear the vaccines have failed abysmally and have:
•Failed to prevent the population from developing herd immunity to COVID-19.
•Spawned a large number of variants.
•Caused vaccinated individuals to be unable to develop permanent immunity to COVID-19 resulting in them being repeatedly infected and over time comprising the majority of individuals infected with COVID-19 and needing to take time off work.
New COVID-19 Guidelines
Since I do not work at the CDC, I cannot state why they chose to radically change their guidelines today, but I’ve outlined my suspicions in this article.
That said, in the new guidelines (which at long last appear to be focused on preventing COVID-19 in high risk individuals rather than a blanket approach to everyone) the following changes have been made:
•No more contact tracing (outside of special settings).
•No more asymptomatic testing.
•No more isolating unless you are sick.
•No more social distancing.
•No more masking if you are unclear if you have COVID-19.
•Axing all the highly problematic policies that have been used to keep kids out of schools.
Unlike the old ones, none of these recommendations discriminate based on vaccination status.
Instead much more reasonable suggestions have been implemented such as:
•Test yourself if you suspect you may have COVID-19 or were exposed to someone you knew had it.
•After you have had COVID-19 for 5 days, if you are mostly well, get back to living your life.
•Encouraging have people gather outdoors and to improve indoor air circulation where they gather.
•Only socially distance if you at high risk for COVID-19.
•Mentioning the importance of early treatment (although at this point in the conventional medical system that is primarily Paxlovid which I do not support, but to their credit the CDC did not specify what early treatment should be provided).
That said, the CDC is still holding onto many of its problematic policies such as:
•Continuing pleas for individuals to get vaccinated.
•Encouraging masking in high risk individuals and high risk areas.
Even mainstream outlets like CNN (and many others) are suddenly admitting the old guidelines are a joke that need to go and the CDC is trying to do something more reasonable to stay relevant. Put differently, the pandemic is likely to be with us for a long time and the existing policies that seek to contain a mitigate epidemic are pointless if it is not going away. I will also note that when you see identical messaging from a large number of mainstream news outlets, that almost always reflects that a policy has been centrally decided upon and will be followed through on.
I recognize all this had to happen at some point in time, but I am nonetheless quite surprised to see it actually happened. If there is a way I could find out, I would also really like to know how this was actually decided by the CDC’s leadership (or their bosses at the White House). For example, there are many signs employees throughout the federal government (particularly within the Department of Health and Human Services) are becoming extremely demoralized by the non-scientific COVID-19 policies they are being forced to enact and I am wondering if losing the rank and file has played a role in the CDC’s about face.
I believe there are a major lessons should be taken from all of this.
First, all of us are making a big difference. If the anti-mandate movement was not as strong as it is (such as the thriving community we belong to on substack), there would not have been enough political pressure to have the CDC reverse these policies.
Second, this should once again illustrate how arbitrary and subjective most of the CDC’s guidelines were. Many of the medical guidelines were are forced to follow are a product of corruption and are treated as law even though they have no legal basis for being law. If the guidelines are nonsensical, do not comply with them.
Third, this is most likely a strategic retreat. If we let our guard down and become complacent, it is very likely they will be brought back during the winter (as respiratory viruses always get worse at this time, largely due to decreases of vitamin D throughout the population). I have seen anti-mandate groups I have worked with splinter apart from personal agendas taking over the direction of the group once the fear of a biosecurity state waned because some of the pandemic policies were relaxed. In the CNN article, it was even acknowledged that many of the more pandemic obsessed states like California will continue to require much stricter COVID-19 policies.
Lastly, are some other changes that also were found in the new CDC guidelines, but I refrained from adding them to keep this article concise. Similarly, since I shared on article that places CNN’s discussion of this topic in a positive light, I will also note they repeatedly made fun of the previous president for suggesting the pandemic could end or the policies could be arbitrarily rescinded.
Let me know what you think of their sudden about face (part of why I wrote this article was to provide a forum to discuss it). A lot of the context behind this decision is difficult to fully appreciate without reviewing some of the other articles linked to within here. Thank you for support of this Substack, the part each of you has done to fight the mandates, and if you do, in sharing this article.
Thanks for reading The Forgotten Side of Medicine! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.