Modern False Idol Worship

Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist and Co-Chair of the Health Advisory and Recovery Team (HART), delivered a critical analysis of the societal and policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, framing the period from 2020 onwards as driven by a combination of pathological pessimism about the virus and pathological optimism about solutions like lockdowns and vaccines. Her presentation critiques the fear-driven policies, their consequences, and the quasi-religious fervour surrounding certain public health measures.

Introduction and Context

Dr. Craig begins by thanking the organiser and the audience for the opportunity to speak. She sets the stage by framing the last five years (2020–2025) as a period dominated by pathological pessimism about the virus, which led to pathological optimism about achieving zero COVID and later about vaccines as a miraculous solution. This duality, she argues, shaped the global response to the pandemic in ways that were often misguided and harmful.

The Climate of Fear in March 2020

Dr. Craig describes the early days of the pandemic in March 2020 as marked by unprecedented fear, deliberately amplified by government behavioural scientists. She cites their strategy of increasing the “perceived level of personal threat” through “hard-hitting emotional messaging” to ensure compliance. This fear affected everyone, including herself, and had profound consequences, particularly for vulnerable groups like children and the elderly. The messaging instilled fear of the virus, other people, and even the air itself, leading to prolonged social isolation and anti-social distancing that persisted into mid-2021 and beyond for some.

She highlights how this fear led to multiple lockdowns, even after evidence of harm emerged, and how the media and politicians globally spoke in unison, raising questions about coordinated narratives. This fear also fostered a form of societal “worship” of the NHS, exemplified by public displays like clapping for healthcare workers and the awarding of the George’s Cross to the NHS in 2022 for acts of “greatest heroism or courage.” Dr. Craig questions the narrative of overwhelmed hospitals, pointing to TikTok dances by NHS staff as evidence that wards were not consistently full.

Misconceptions About Virus Transmission

Dr. Craig challenges the government’s early claim that COVID-19 spread primarily through large droplets falling within two metres, calling it a “lie.” She explains that the virus spreads via aerosols, which are tiny, evaporate quickly, and can remain suspended in the air indefinitely, travelling long distances. This was acknowledged by the government only in 2022, long after policies like social distancing and masking were implemented. She likens infected individuals to “Pig Pen” from the Peanuts comic, surrounded by a cloud of aerosols that linger after they leave a space.

This aerosol transmission, she argues, renders measures like lockdowns and masking ineffective, as nothing can stop an airborne virus. She cites wastewater data from the USA showing consistent, steep waves of infection, unaffected by interventions, as only a fraction of the population is susceptible to each wave. These waves, she notes, peak seasonally (January, late October, April, and occasionally summer), driven by susceptibility rather than close contact, contradicting predictive models.

Impact of Fear-Driven Policies

Dr. Craig details how fear led to reduced healthcare access:

• Emergency department attendance dropped sharply before lockdowns, as people with symptoms like coughs or fevers were told to stay home or were barred from hospitals.

• Healthcare staff shortages exacerbated the issue, with one in nine NHS workers sent home for minor symptoms like coughs or fevers, and others staying away due to perceived vulnerability.

• Antibiotic prescriptions plummeted, as shown in a graph comparing expected versus actual prescriptions, leading to untreated pneumonias and increased mortality.

She references a 2020 Sunday Times investigation that revealed a scoring system for rationing intensive care, which excluded those over 80 or over 60 with comorbidities. This system, circulated with an NHS logo, was misinterpreted by some professionals as a directive to deny care, resulting in 11,800 care home residents in England being turned away from hospitals. Of the 59,000 excess deaths in England and Wales in 2020, only 8,000 occurred in hospitals, with the rest in care homes, homes, or even hotels.

Dr. Craig shares harrowing accounts from the UK and Scottish COVID inquiries, including:

• A GP pressured to add patients to a “do not resuscitate” (DNR) list, accessible by ambulances to deny hospital admission.

• Cases of blanket DNR orders applied to elderly or disabled individuals without consultation, such as a 49-year-old with Down syndrome who died after being denied care.

• A care home resident prescribed end-of-life drugs instead of oxygen or antibiotics, with families barred from visiting due to COVID restrictions.

She criticises the use of respiratory depressant drugs like morphine and midazolam in care homes, administered without medical oversight or family advocacy, contributing to deaths. These policies, she argues, created a positive feedback loop where fear-driven measures increased mortality, which was then used to justify the virus’s perceived deadliness.

Vaccine Optimism and Missteps

Dr. Craig critiques the shift from fear of the virus to optimism about vaccines, which were initially targeted at high-risk groups (e.g., those with disabilities, who accounted for 60% of COVID deaths). She notes that people with learning disabilities had a mortality rate 3.7 times higher than their healthy peers, not due to the virus but due to denial of care.

She challenges the narrative of vaccines as a “miracle,” citing:

• A 2000 US Institute of Health report and a 2021 paper co-authored by Anthony Fauci, which stated that injected vaccines cannot provide mucosal immunity to prevent respiratory virus infections.

• Initial caution in 2020 about vaccine safety and efficacy, which gave way to exaggerated claims in 2021, such as Fauci’s assertion that vaccines made individuals a “dead end” for the virus, halting community spread.

Dr. Craig argues that vaccines did not significantly alter mortality patterns, as evidenced by:

• Comparable death waves in Europe and the USA before and after vaccination.

• High mortality in heavily vaccinated countries like New Zealand, Australia, and South Korea during the Omicron wave (400 deaths per million), despite Omicron being a third as deadly as earlier variants.

• Japan surpassing France in total COVID deaths, despite high vaccination rates.

She cites data showing that vaccinated individuals were infected more often than the unvaccinated, with risk increasing with more doses, and references biological explanations for this phenomenon.

Vaccine Mandates and Societal Division

Dr. Craig describes the vaccine rollout as a campaign of manipulation, starting with incentives (e.g., free pizza, lotteries, taxis) and escalating to coercion and mandates. She highlights extreme measures, such as offers of sex in Switzerland and Austria, and threats of prison, fines, or denial of healthcare for the unvaccinated.

She shares cases of unvaccinated individuals denied organ transplants, including a 12-year-old in 2025, and cites surveys showing the vaccinated discriminated against the unvaccinated at levels comparable to societal outcasts like ex-convicts. The unvaccinated faced exclusion from public spaces, such as the Canadian Museum of Human Rights, and were dehumanised as “blasphemers” or a “killing force,” as per a WHO video likening dissent to terrorism.

Dr. Craig criticises the censorship of vaccine injury support groups, which used code (e.g., carrot emojis) to avoid detection. She argues that dismissing these concerns as “worth it for the greater good” ignores the lack of evidence for vaccine efficacy and the harm caused.

A Return to Reason and Faith

Dr. Craig concludes with a call to reject the “cruel theocracy” of fear and vaccine worship, advocating for a return to science grounded in openness, debate, and humility. She praises figures like Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, who rejected vaccine mandates as infringing on bodily autonomy, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has raised awareness about vaccine safety without being “anti-vaccine.”

She frames science as a “window into the world” that requires constant refinement, not dogmatic adherence. Quoting Jesus, she emphasises that truth sets us free and urges a return to God, rejecting the quasi-religious fervour that dominated the pandemic response. Her presentation ends with a call to amplify the voices of those harmed by these policies, which have been underreported despite emerging at inquiries.

Key Themes

1. Fear as a Tool of Control: Government messaging deliberately amplified fear, leading to harmful policies and societal division.

2. Ineffective Interventions: Lockdowns, masking, and social distancing could not stop an airborne virus, and fear-driven policies reduced healthcare access, increasing mortality.

3. Denial of Care: Vulnerable groups, particularly the elderly and disabled, were systematically denied treatment, with blanket DNR orders and end-of-life drugs contributing to excess deaths.

4. Vaccine Overreach: Exaggerated claims about vaccine efficacy, coupled with coercive mandates, ignored scientific evidence and caused harm, including discrimination against the unvaccinated.

5. Quasi-Religious Fervour: The NHS and vaccines were elevated to objects of worship, with dissenters vilified as blasphemers, stifling debate and dehumanising critics.

6. Call for Truth and Humility: Dr. Craig advocates for a return to evidence-based science, bodily autonomy, and faith, rejecting the fear-driven “theocracy” of the pandemic era.

Tone and Delivery

Dr. Craig’s tone is impassioned and critical, blending scientific analysis with moral outrage at the harm caused by policies and the suppression of dissent. She uses emotive language (e.g., “cruel,” “brutal,” “blasphemers”) to underscore the human cost and draws on religious imagery to critique the quasi-spiritual devotion to public health measures. Her presentation is data-driven, referencing graphs, wastewater data, and inquiries, but also deeply personal, sharing stories of individuals denied care and her own susceptibility to early fear.