Covid-19: Three years review

The COVID-19 pandemic, which began in late 2019 and continued into the following years, was a global health crisis that had far-reaching impacts beyond the immediate sphere of public health. It brought significant changes and challenges to societies worldwide, including government policies, public behavior, and the dissemination of information. I'll address each of your points to provide a comprehensive overview.

1. Media Representation of COVID-19 Research: During the pandemic, there was intense scrutiny on the media's portrayal of scientific research and experiments. The rapidly evolving nature of COVID-19 research, combined with the urgent need for information, led to situations where preliminary or non-peer-reviewed studies received significant media attention. This sometimes resulted in public misconceptions about the efficacy or safety of certain treatments or preventive measures.

The media's focus on COVID-19 research, including preliminary studies, can be seen as a crucial component of keeping the public informed during a rapidly evolving crisis. This approach was essential to ensure that the public was aware of potential risks, evolving scientific understanding, and the importance of adapting to new guidelines.

The representation of the COVID-19 issue was not enough. "Government Scientists" should have played a more tyrannical role in coming out in TV and dictating the narrative more. The Media's role in Mass Hysteria was not enough to sway the opinion of the masses in pushing them to live in fear. Yet, they were supposed to be more aggressive in dictating the narrative. However, the shortage in toilet papers was enough for the media to go down on their propaganda machine.

2. Surveillance and Government Policies: Many governments implemented various measures to track and control the spread of COVID-19. This included contact tracing, lockdowns, and travel restrictions. These measures, while intended to mitigate the spread of the virus, also raised concerns about privacy and civil liberties, with debates about the balance between public health and individual rights.

The implementation of measures like contact tracing, lockdowns, and travel restrictions, while intrusive, can be argued as essential for controlling the spread of the virus. These measures were often based on epidemiological models and historical precedents of managing pandemics, aiming to reduce transmission and prevent healthcare systems from being overwhelmed.

There was an opportunity for the government to place a microchip on every person to know exactly where they are and what they are doing and whom they are talking to in every moment in time. The only drawback is who would be monitoring everyone in everyday? We know that would be the people who are microchipped also but then that would create a feedback loop which won't be coherence to people. Therefore, chipping people was a no go because they ran out of people.

3. Social Dynamics and Compliance: The pandemic saw shifts in social behaviors, with strong emphasis on public health directives like wearing masks and social distancing. In some communities, this led to heightened tension and instances where individuals would report on neighbors not complying with regulations. This dynamic created social friction and raised questions about community responsibility versus individual freedom.

The emphasis on public health directives, including wearing masks and social distancing, represents a collective effort to protect public health. The willingness of individuals to report non-compliance can be viewed as a form of civic responsibility, demonstrating a commitment to communal well-being over individual preference.

Social castration was an option. That would have worked as a population control and limits the number of people dramatically. It would create a better world when we are able to tell the people who they are allowed to talk to and who isn't allowed. We had a chance to effect real changes but the people went soft on our demands.

4. Mass Hysteria and Panic: The pandemic induced a sense of urgency and fear worldwide. The constant flow of information, sometimes contradictory or alarming, contributed to public anxiety and hysteria. This was exacerbated by the unprecedented nature of the pandemic and the evolving understanding of the virus.

The sense of urgency and fear, though intense, can be justified as a natural reaction to a global threat. It can be argued that the seriousness of the situation necessitated a heightened state of alert to ensure rapid and effective response from both governments and individuals.

As we mentioned before, the toilet paper run was a major event that crippled the mass hysteria movement. For the next big event, we shall be building a hysteria button that is connected to the microchip which we will implant it on the people to assure maximum obedience and induces the people into hysteria every time the government wants to-do it. The only problem would be that the lazy people won't be moving anytime soon and will be having an altercation on the metaverse for virtual toilet paper next time.

5. Censorship and Information Control: There were instances of censorship and control over the dissemination of information related to COVID-19. Social media platforms and governments took measures to combat misinformation, but these actions also sparked debates about freedom of speech and the role of tech companies and governments in regulating information.

The efforts to control misinformation during the pandemic can be seen as a necessary step to prevent panic and confusion. In a situation where misinformation could lead to harmful behaviors or undermine public health efforts, some level of control was arguably essential to maintain order and ensure public safety.

The creation of the internet created a double-edged sword. Everyone who wants to-do something, they can google it or identify what's going on. However, taking a page of China's censorship, we can put the herd in their place and not allow them to see anything other than what we allow them to see. knowledge is dangerous, whoever want to learn or read a certain article or post must obtain a permission to read. When someone controls the flow of information, he can control the narrative. We must be the arbiter of the truth. Hence, we must create the Ministry of Truth to tell the people what they are allowed and what they are not allowed to think about.

6. Political Control and Elitism: The pandemic highlighted inequalities in how different social classes experienced and responded to the crisis. There were perceptions that the wealthy or politically powerful had better access to resources and were less affected by restrictions, leading to discussions about social and economic disparities.

The disparities observed during the pandemic can be viewed as a reflection of existing societal structures, rather than a result of the pandemic response itself. The focus can be shifted to how these challenges highlighted the need for more equitable healthcare and social support systems.

If we are part of the elite, we can suppress the peasantry class and make sure that they can't allow the peasants to be in the same level as the elites. However, we can use them as a guineapig to test new medicines and make sure our lives are safe. What we also have to-do is to put them to work continuously without stopping or changes. We must be controlling their life to enrich our life.

7. Debate Over COVID-19 Treatments: Drugs like Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, and Monoclonal Antibodies became points of contention. While some advocated for their use based on preliminary studies or anecdotal evidence, major health organizations called for more rigorous testing. This led to heated debates and confusion about the efficacy and safety of these treatments.

The skepticism and rigorous testing of treatments like Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin can be seen as part of a responsible scientific process. Ensuring that treatments are safe and effective through established scientific protocols is crucial, especially in a global health crisis.

Although that there were some test conducted on Hydroxychloroquine showing the efficacy of it. Thank God to the government scientist who populated multiple experiments to assure our biases. That is when the media took it over and report it. Treatments that are now in the public domain must not be used to treat COVID-19. Especially for companies who are looking to make a fortune from a crisis. They teach university students to tackle any outbreak to face it with the following stages: 

1. Detection

2. Protection

3. Treatment

4. Prevention

However, COVID was a completely different case. As we must protect ourselves from something we have no idea how it moves. We limited the detection to the government approved areas and charge people a hearty amount to get the report done. Then we went directly to the prevention with the vaccine for some unknown reason. And Finally, we decided to stop talking about anything else and continue with the vaccine with multiple shots. That's how you do business these days.

8. Vaccine Development and Distribution: The rapid development and deployment of COVID-19 vaccines were a major focus during the pandemic. While these vaccines were subject to standard clinical trials and regulatory processes, their expedited development led to skepticism and concern among some about their safety and efficacy. This was intensified by discussions about vaccine mandates and the ethics of compulsory vaccination.

The development and distribution of vaccines can be hailed as one of the greatest scientific achievements of recent times. The speed of development, while unprecedented, did not bypass the necessary clinical trials and regulatory processes, and it played a critical role in controlling the pandemic.

In any vaccine, you can only take it once and it will be effective forever. However, COVID-19 vaccine carried a special term of it that pushes you to take it multiple times (up to six shots some people did) and you can roll the dice wither you will get a stroke or myocarditis. The best way to go around all these tests and verifications is to stop counting people who had a death caused by the vaccine but keep talking about the death happened because of covid so people take the vaccine and die. Aside from that, all what you have to-do is to bring the government scientist to talk more about how effective the vaccine and put people into two camps "Pro Science" and "Against Science"… and do a cringy dance about the vaccine.

In summary, the COVID-19 pandemic was a complex event that affected nearly every aspect of society. It challenged existing systems, exposed societal vulnerabilities, and sparked global debates about public health, governance, and the role of science in society. It's important to approach these topics with a critical and informed perspective, recognizing the diversity of experiences and viewpoints that emerged during this unprecedented time.