Have our experts and leaders compounded the Biggest Mistake in History, namely lockdowns, and then by not adding Vitamin D to our diets, plus refusing to consider repurposed drugs like Ivermectin and others that could have reduced the mortality from SARS-CoV-19?

Could it be that our preventions such as not touching surfaces, obsessive hand sterilising and washing were almost futile?
Could wearing masks outdoors, for children and even in many indoor circumstances be counter productive?

Even if our responses to reduce infection were correct, which some research questions "Full lockdown policies in Western Europe countries have limited impacts on the COVID-19 epidemic, 1 May 2020." plus the deaths from Covid-19 are comparatively modest when compared to mortalities from other causes where our reactions have been pitiful.

Shelter-in-place orders didn’t save lives during the pandemic, 3 July 2021 research paper concludes. Researchers from the RAND Corporation and the University of Southern California studied excess mortality from all causes, the virus or otherwise, in 43 countries and the 50 U.S. states that imposed shelter-in-place, or “SIP,” policies. In short, the orders didn’t work. "We fail to find that SIP policies saved lives. To the contrary, we find a positive association between SIP policies and excess deaths."

In most countries, 80% of the deaths with or from Covid-19 were over 80 or in poor health. Sadly, their life expectancy would have been measured in months rather than years. Although every day of every life is important, possibly saving these lives should have been considered against the terrible damage done to our society. See also the link Deaths Ignored.

Dramatically mention “plague”, and we act irrationally destroying our economies and billions of lives based on unproven data and procedures.

Imposing other restrictions while ignoring data on their futility, limited vaccine and acceptable cures.

For website on repurposed drugs for coronaviruses go to https://www.about-ivermectin.com/index.html

What have the lockdowns achieved?
Peru proves that lockdown barely stops death, but destroys the country. Source, 14 July 2020.

We don't learn. Read about how the relatively harmless swine flu in 2009 caused unnecessary panic.

The 1968 Hong Kong flu pandemic resulted in an estimated one million to four million deaths, but no global lockdowns.

There have recently been more excellent presentations on the futility of lockdowns.
Click here to watch actuary Nick Hudson of Panda in discussion with Prof Alan Whiteside on the in-effectiveness of lockdowns dated 23 November 2020.

This 1 November 2021 opinion piece in Newsweek discusses how wrong Dr Fauci has been in his advice and how disasterous this has been. "Dr. Fauci ignores naturally acquired immunity among the COVID-recovered, of which there are more than 45 million in the United States. Mounting evidence indicates that natural immunity is stronger and longer lasting than vaccine-induced immunity." "Protecting the elderly. While anyone can get infected, there is more than a thousand-fold difference in mortality risk between the old and the young." School closures. Sweden kept daycare and schools open for all its 1.8 million children ages 1 to 15, with no masks, testing or social distancing. The result? Zero COVID deaths among children and a COVID risk to teachers lower than the average of other professions. Masks. The gold standard of medical research is randomized trials, and there have now been two on COVID masks for adults. For children, there is no solid scientific evidence that masks work.
More publications questioning lockdowns.
Lockdowns had little or no impact on COVID-19 deaths, new study shows. The Washington Times - January 31, 2022.
Lockdowns in the U.S. and Europe had little or no impact in reducing deaths from COVID-19, according to a new analysis by researchers at Johns Hopkins University. The lockdowns during the early phase of the pandemic in 2020 reduced COVID-19 mortality by about 0.2%, said the broad review of multiple scientific studies.

"We find no evidence that lockdowns, school closures, border closures, and limiting gatherings have had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality," the researchers wrote. But the research paper said lockdowns did have "devastating effects” on the economy and contributed to numerous social ills.

"They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence, and undermining liberal democracy," the report said.
"Such a standard benefit-cost calculation leads to a strong conclusion: lockdowns should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument," the paper concluded. Updated 26/5/2022.

The reckoning has begun - The West’s Covid strategy is crumbling - Spectator Australia 22 January 2022
The West’s Covid-19 strategy of lockdowns, mass vaccinations and extreme curbs is losing credibility by the moment, even if various wannabe-despots are slow to realise it. Despite vaccination levels running at 70 per cent and above in many Western nations, Covid cases have been at record levels across the U.K., Europe, Australia, the US, Israel and more.

This is not an anti-vaccine website, understanding but questioning and concerned with unfolding information.

Click this link to https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/30-facts-you-need-know-covid-cribsheet which is a well researched article that is slanted but basically correct. For example, although it notes the perceived fears concerning vaccinations, it does not mention their proven prevention of severe sickness and death.

This website does not reject, but questions the degree, supported by unfolding statistics, that lockdowns, masks, restrictions and social distancing may slow virus spread not only for Covid-19 but flu and other diseases. It does absolutely believe that the damage of these restrictions to our society were the worst choices.

What this website originally suggested when created in March 2020 is that effective care for the vulnerable and possibly simpler less destructive remedies such as masks worn properly and possibly shields, (see Preventions for reasoning,) would have had similar or better virus inhibiting effects than destructive lockdowns. However, recent statistics comparing different countries show that these other remedies had little or no effect on mortality.

Covid-19 is not going away and will spread and kill mainly the vulnerable, as does influenza until we have greater resistance and immunity, which is happening in most countries. Effective, tested mass-produced vaccines should allay fears and allow the lifting of restrictions, especially those on travel.

“COVID-19 will go down as one of the political world’s biggest, most shamefully overblown, overhyped, overly and irrationally inflated and outright deceptively flawed responses to a health matter in history, one that was carried largely on the lips of medical professionals who have no business running a national economy or government.” Source. See Ivor Cummins very plausible graphics that indicate the futility of lockdowns and masks.

So what about the high infection rates and falling mortality in the USA, South American and European countries in the Fall?

Much of the higher "infection rates" can be attributed to false positives from excessive testing using unreliable PCR technology. The lower mortality can be attributed to younger patients. Many vulnerable people would have previously succumbed, better treatment and stronger resistance due to some exposure to the virus.

Coronavirus's such as Flu and SARS-CoV-19 are seasonal and infect mostly in colder weather, spread in enclosed spaces and when close to each other.

In areas that previously had low infection rates, many would have little resistance to the virus. Additionally, the level of public health may have declined due to earlier restrictions.

The public is frustrated, tired, confused by conflicting advice, such as the WHO and the CDC changes in mask-wearing and hand sterilising advice, suspecting that the fears were exaggerated and are now sceptical of "expert" advice.
Due to early overstated mortality predictions, many now accuse their governments and certain others of conspiracies and refuse to take precautions.

Intuitively, mask-wearing should help, but there is still limited scientific evidence that the types of masks in plentiful supply are effective.

Answers could be clearer in 2022 as trends emerge, especially whether lockdowns that barely made a difference before making a difference this time. However I am pleased to note that others feel the same that those who promoted these restrictions without proof should be held responsible. See Lawyers to sue WHO for 'misleading world over COVID-19 outbreak' Consumer protection trial lawyer Reiner Fuellmich says agencies 'knowingly misled governments across the world.'

For some 1993 prophetic(?) satire see "How Deadly diseases are created and released to the public".

COVID-19 Origins: Investigating a “Complex and Grave Situation” Inside a Wuhan Lab. The Wuhan lab at the center of suspicions about the pandemic’s onset was far more troubled than known, documents unearthed by a Senate team reveal. Tracing the evidence, Vanity Fair and ProPublica give the clearest view yet of a biocomplex in crisis.

I don't get it, hence this website, first published late March 2020 and updated regularly.

Ivor Cummins graphs prove that lockdowns, masks and social distancing had negligible if any effect, and might cause more Covid-19 deaths in the future. YouTube LINK

  1. Updated 9 September 2020. Ivor Cummins is an analytical thinking engineer who has published graphs taken from official statistics based on previous influenza attacks that indicate that there will be a limited second wave, even a third wave. He shows that restrictions make barely any difference to the progress of the coronavirus, how seasons and climate make a difference to the disease’s spread, and much more.
  2. Click here to watch the 37 minute video and change your perceptions and fears about COVID-19. As it appears that YouTube banned it, if someone tells me where it can be viewed, I will add a link here.
  3. A fascinating discussion between Ivor Cummins and Swedish E.R. Dr Sebastian Rushworth, about the response to Covid-19, value and cost of life, whether to put extremely aged and sick patients into intubation and other philosophical ideas. I love the thought that if we did not have PCR testing, we might have thought this was just another awful flu virus and no plaque fear.
  4. Links that support the Covid-19 deaths relationship to previous years flu deaths
    Are Covid-19 death rates correlated to the intensity of previous flu seasons?

    Italy’s Mild Flu Season May Give Clues to Virus Death Rate Bloomberg 31 March 2020.
  5.  Link to Bernhard Kirschner's comments and a summary of Ivor Cummins video in pdf form for reading on screen or printing.

Let's get it into perspective

Every life is valuable, and none should ever be wasted. However, when it comes to a choice between losing some, maybe many of our old, our sick, choices have to be made.

We destroyed our economies, to MAYBE save a relatively few lives compared to the lives lost to vehicle accidents, T.B., Aids, and even flu by introducing lockdowns and compulsory restrictions like masks, hand washing and distancing.

Our leaders, and supported by a mislead public choose the “saving lives” because it sounded so noble, but damaged our society, maybe for a generation, precipitating the worst economic downturn in history.

We are beginning to see the results of our stupidity.

The below graph from an excellent set of statistics by PANDA, a collective of leading actuaries, economists, data scientists, statisticians, medical professionals, lawyers, engineers and business people working as a collective to replace bad science with good science. Link to table source here..

Click here to watch actuary Nick Hudson of Panda in discussion with Prof Alan Whiteside on the in-effectiveness of lockdowns - 23 Nov 2020.

Is Covid-19 already far more widespread?

In April 2020 this was a hotly disputed question. By July 2020 most experts agree that were many Covid-19 cases without symptoms, so many more people than expected have unknowingly had Covid-19, with the mortality and severe reaction rates far lower than originally predicted.

  1. Literature published 20 April 2020 showed COVID-19 much more widespread than thought a An April 2020 Stanford study suggests, although probably twice more deadly than flu in a bad year. See "How deadly is the virus?" NY Times July 4, 2020.
  2. The study showed that the WHO estimated mortality rate was based on testing mainly possibly COVID-19 infected people.
  3. If the tests had been widespread, i.e. random, the calculated mortality rate would have been much lower than estimated.
  4. Many people with Covid-19 have had symptoms so mild that they didn’t seek medical treatment, were never tested and recovered relatively quickly.
  5. “The study used an antibody blood test to estimate how many had been infected with Covid-19 in the past. The infection rates used for the WHO estimates were based on testing for the virus’ genetic material, which does not persist long after recovery, while antibodies do.”
  6. As at 5 September 2020 these numbers have been supported in results many studies, including one from South Africa "Covid-19: High antibody prevalence found in Cape Town study". Prof Mary-Ann Davies, a public health medicine specialist with the Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Research at the University of Cape Town, says; “The results suggest there is some level of immunity, but there are people in these communities, like the elderly and people with comorbidities, who have shielded themselves during the last five months and who are still susceptible to infection.”
    Does this mean that being locked down is only a temporary safety since those who have been in lockdown will be more vulnerable when they emerge into society since then have no developed resistance or immunity from even small doses of virus?
  7. With the recurrent Covid-19 waves, a currently heretic question comes to mind. Would it be better for a country, its economy and the greater number of its citizens to lift most restrictions and allow the virus to burn through the community and get over it? That is what we usually do with flu, HIV and other diseases, which often cause even greater loss of life. Nothing seems to stop transmission; at best, we can only slow it down, usually at a huge economic cost. See the Sweden death rate trending to ZERO, although from October 2020, the case numbers were four times the peak, while deaths were 1/4 of that same peak.
Source CDC, Atlanta USAThis table show the estimated number of deaths, about 61,099 in the USA in 2017/8 from influenza. The death rate that year was higher than usual.

Did you know it was so high? Even though the deaths were high, there was no pressure to close the economy to "save lives".

The WHO - World health Organization - estimated the COVID-19 death rate at 3.4%, while the early Stanford study puts it at 0.14, about the same as flu which is 0.1%, or one in a thousand.
As at 5 September the USA death rate is just under 3%, which is low considering the number of its overweight and diabetic citizens, possibly accounting for nearly half of all deaths there.

It would appear that the WHO estimate was based on information supplied by China. Based on this estimate, the world went into panic, calculating millions of deaths.
It was also not disclosed or realised by China that many unknown asymptomatic cases skewed the statistics, and about 90% of the deaths were the elderly and those with pre-existing diseases.
Due to the novelty of coronavirus, there was insufficient testing to determine the actual numbers of Covid-19 patients, with most of the testing being those who showed symptoms.
With limited testing, the ratio of deaths to known patients would be too high, indicating a false high fatality rate.

If the Stanford study was correct, which was challenged both for its assumptions, methodology and mathematics, then the predictions of mass deaths and mass hospital overloading was overestimated by a factor of more than 25 and would explain the empty U.S. hospitals at the end of April 2020.
Even if correct, this Stanford study does not mean that there will not be many deaths and many hospitalisations, as in a bad flu season, especially amongst the elderly. LINK.

It does mean that many of the measures imposed by governments were excessive.
The Stanford report would also mean that there is already greater immunity in the populace.
With this and other evidence there is a strong argument for lifting restrictions, but to continue them for those Vulnerable and applying Preventions as suggested on this website.
Link to response 16 May 2020 of Dr. John Ioannidis one of the authors of the Stanford Covid-19 Prevalence report.
Link 'The sky is not falling and coronavirus models are wrong'.
Link National Review 'Under counting COVID-19 cases likely'.
Link to 'Stop the Panic and End Total Isolation'.
Link to 'Infections exceed confirmed cases by a Factor of 16.

Sweden says leaving businesses and schools open might be working     

Sweden did not close down in the way much of Europe did. Picture taken last April. © Sebastian Shukla-CNN
Note the lack of masks and lack of social distancing.

Note how the deaths to 5 September in Sweden trending to ZERO.
Could this mean that the Swedish response was correct?

Sweden has stood firm as at 20 April 2020 against pressure to introduce more limits on its citizens, thanks to Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell.

It has currently asked people over 70 to stay home, banned retirement homes visits, banned gatherings of more than 50 people and closed high schools and universities since mid-March.
CLICK here for report on how normal life is in Sweden.
Sweden tested originally only probable cases and health workers.

Per Bergfors Nyberg told Good Morning Europe that “the government’s response has been focused on trying to limit the spread to elderly people,” with 45 per cent of deaths were those living in nursing homes..

“Sweden does not want a general lockdown because they would lose 20-25% of general health care workers, who are so badly needed”.
Sweden’s apparent high death rate is due to a low Covid-19 testing rate.
Additionally, there are complaints that care workers are under-equipped, resulting in growing numbers of deaths among the elderly.
Sweden registered very unfortunate outbreaks of the coronavirus around care homes for older people. This accounts for Sweden’s higher death rate, compared with our neighbors.” said Swedish Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, the main behind the policy. Source.

Does this mean Sweden will be better able to stem, stop or see less of an impact from the second or third waves when they inevitably come? As at 21 April 2020.
Sweden defied zealots and never met its Waterloo 6 Oct 2020.

Not a shred of doubt: Sweden was right.

Malaria deaths might multiply in the shadow of coronavirus

The number of malaria-related deaths in sub-Saharan Africa could double this year if the Covid-19 pandemic completely disrupts efforts to control the disease, the World Health Organisation warned on Thursday.
This will mean 769,000 deaths from malaria alone.

It cautioned that disruption in the access to anti-malaria medicines, insecticide-treated bed net distribution and case management could lead to this dramatic spike.

It warned that more people died from other diseases than from Ebola itself during the Ebola outbreak. Daily Maverick 24 April 2020.

The best analogy I've heard for lockdown:

The wildebeest in Africa migrate every year, as we know, in search of food to survive. When they reach the Mara River, the crocodiles are waiting.

They know this, and they know they will lose a few when they cross, but for the sake of the survival of the herd, they cross anyway. They have done this successfully for hundreds of years and survived.

Implementing lockdown is like putting up a fence to prevent the wildebeest from crossing the Mara river to save those that would be eaten by the crocodiles, and as a result, the whole herd dies of starvation!

What are the underlying conditions?


Chronic lung disease or moderate to severe asthma.
Serious heart conditions.
Conditions that can cause a person to be immunocompromised, including cancer treatment, smoking, bone marrow or organ transplantation.


Immune deficiencies, poorly controlled HIV or AIDS, and prolonged use of corticosteroids and other immune weakening medications.


Severe obesity (body mass index [BMI] of 40 or higher) cause of almost 50% of deaths!!!
Chronic kidney disease and who are undergoing dialysis
Liver disease

Other Options

Continuing isolation and hoping that the virus will disappear is wishful thinking.
The earlier we allow the virus to run its course through the “LESS VULNERABLES”, the earlier we will have community protection. See this video called the The Great Barrington strategy that is proposing 6 months after Plan-B described below at https://gbdeclaration.org/video/.

Coronavirus has mutated to become far deadlier in Europe than the milder strain that made its way to the U.S. west coast, Chinese study claims. Researchers in China have found at least 30 strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Source April 2020. Could have been false news to create even greater fear.

A new strain of the novel coronavirus which researchers call G614, the previous strain is D614, that’s spreading from Europe to the U.S., is more infectious than its predecessor, according to a new global study published in the journal Cell and first reported on by CNN. Source 8 July 2020. This could explain the increase in infection detections.

A thought too horrible to contemplate is that as more time passes, COVID-19 could mutate into a more deadly form so that the effects would be much worse for those without immunity who get infected later! Recent disputed studies seem to show that the virus is neutral growing or weakly deleterious, which could be great news..

An early vaccine would be great but is unlikely in any significant quantity before late 2020, and the virus is not going away.


About Children
Changing the present mindset means that schools can reopen, parents can get back to work, and all businesses that wish to can operate.
There have been suggestions that children seldom get COVID-19, but it instead appears that their symptoms are mostly very mild.
Most cases of children with COVID-19 were found to have caught the disease at home, not at school.
Of 2,000 children diagnosed with the virus in China, there was one death among the sample - a 14-year-old. Unfortunately, there is no information about any possible underlying health conditions in that case. 
What we know about Covid-19 in children is that they rarely develop a severe illness. As an example, in Italy, there were 30,000 deaths from Covid-19, of which none were children younger than 18. In the United States, less than 2% of cases were children and only three died. All three had underlying medical conditions.
See link for COVID-19 updates on multiple subjects.

PLAN-B was:


Voluntary isolation for the over 65s, the sick and the diabetic, the "VULNERABLES", who probably account for well over 90%, possibly 99% of Covid-19 deaths. 


Ten to fourteen days isolation those with Covid-19 or had recent close contact with a Covid-19 confirmed person.


Sensible social distancing, hand sterilisation, and face touching prevention measures the rest of us, the "LESS VULNERABLES" and the Recovered Patients.


Freedom to work and movement for all who want who should observe sensible social distancing, hand sterilisation, and avoiding face touching.

PLAN-B is more compelling now that it is becoming apparent that a factor of 25 or more overestimated the estimated death rates.

  1. As of 30 April 2020, the question has been whether to lift the restrictions damaging each country piecemeal or together.
  2. Voluntary restrictions on the VULNERABLES should remain. In contrast, the LESS VULNERABLES should have the freedom to work as long as they follow reasonable precautions, especially wearing shields to prevent touching faces.
  3. Maybe we should consider that in the absence of a vaccine, most will get the Covid-19 virus irrespective of the restrictions.
    Since most will only show similar effects to the flu, is it not logical to let the virus take its course through the LESS VULNERABLES creating earlier herd immunity, making it safer for the protected VULNERABLES sooner?

"The majority of the country will probably experience getting Covid-19 at some point over the next year." Dr Jody Boffa, Epidemiologist and Research fellow at Centre for Rural Health - University of KwaZulu-Natal

Link to https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/25/you-are-not-going-to-die-from-covid-19/

We need brave wartime type leadership that decides to end general lockdowns and unnecessary restrictions on all except for the VULNERABLE, as against destroying the livelihoods and futures of millions.

  1. The WHO has said that the novel coronavirus will be with humankind until we find a vaccine to destroy it forever, so let us get back to work and living normally with taking precautions.
  2. PLAN-B, published here on 3 April 2020, protects the “VULNERABLES” and should continue to reduce the mortality numbers without the horrific economic and social consequences of a total or even partial lockdown!
  3. We can concentrate our resources on protecting the estimated 99% of Covid-19 deaths, which are from the “VULNERABLES” with underlying conditions.
  4. Under PLAN-B, there could be a surge in Covid-19 infection amongst the “LESS VULNERABLES”, almost all of whom will survive Covid-19, while over 80% will have no or relatively minor reactions, similar to a flu attack.
  5. We know about Covid-19 in children that they rarely develop a severe illness. As an example, in Italy, there were 30,000 deaths from Covid-19, of which none were children younger than 18. In the United States, less than 2% of cases were children and only three died. All three had underlying medical conditions.
  6. Experience From Other Countries Show Lockdowns Don't Work.

To understand why you must never touch your face when away from home and why a shield is better protection than a mask click here.

Experience From Other Countries Show Lockdowns Don't Work

Alan Jones on alarmism in Australia and its damaging effects.

COVID-19 treatments staring us in the face but being ignored in Australia such as Ivermectin, Doxycycline and Zinc.

Treatment suggestions
Here is a safe treatment plan that will show quick and effective response in symptomatic patients (for adults): – Vitamin D & C and Zinc daily in usual recommended doses + Virostatic drug Ivermectin 12mg daily for 3 to 5 days + Senolytic antibiotic Azithromycin 250mg to 500mg daily for 5 days to 10 days. This treatment plan ushers in prompt response. Serious indoor patients would get these medicines + necessary supportive measures + Hydroxychloroquine (HCQS)
To treat Covid-19, Ivermectin should be given orally in empty stomach – 200mcg to 600mcg per Kg body weight daily for 3 to 5 days; and Azithromycin 250mg to 500mg orally in empty stomach for 10 days. This is the best treatment plan for Covid-19 patients with mild-to-moderate symptoms. To prevent Covid-19 one should take only Ivermectin in empty stomach 200mcg per Kg body weight once in a week. Clinical trials with inadequate doses of Ivermectin do not give desired results.

Click here for Eight reasons to end the lockdowns as soon as possible.

Prevention Measures

Questions / Predictions

Masks &/or Shields

  1. This website https://.endco19.com was set-up to encourage discussion on options of government responses to the coronavirus, soon after countries started lockdown or 'shelter in place' orders. I had the futile hope that before too much damage was done, some in authority might consider options to the enforced and destructive restrictions.
  2. I sent out press releases, phoned talk-back radio stations but was shut down quickly when they realised my subject. Barely anyone was willing even to consider my opinions, so sure were they that the authorities knew what they were doing, so sure were they that this virus was a mortal threat to so many, like a stampede heading to a ravine, considering me as a fringe loony.
  3. Originally the website was at https://covid-19-plan-b.com, but with the effect of my website being minuscule, I changed it to the present.
  4. Authorities have realised that they could not maintain such strict restrictions indefinitely and have too slowly started lifting them. The damage has been done.
  5. The now obvious PLAN-B was effectively being introduced.
  6. In all my research I also came to some conclusions, most based on advice from the WHO and the CDC, many of these suggestions I added to the site since there was such a lack of researched information. However much of this considered information was changed, and I now consider any official advice with a spoon full of skepticism.
  7. You can copy any non-copyright information, on this website, and be kind enough to show the source.
  8. Website conceived late March 2020, by Bernhard Kirschner, Mathematics and Economics lecturer, accountant, computer programmer, systems analyst and 60 years as an entrepreneur specialising in pioneering new business models.
  9. I remained in lockdown as a VULNERABLE until September, and have been horrified at the current suffering caused by indiscriminate lockdowns on workers, the destruction of a lifetimes of building businesses, general emotional stress, the economies, and the damage to the future of so many.
  10. Should you have found this web page interesting enough to read this far, then you might want to sign my Change.org petition at http://chng.it/pbrmD7JQPy 
  11. Statistics, suggestions and comments, either supporting or contradictory comments will be welcome and if pertinent published on this website. Email info@endco19.com.

Statistics, suggestions and comments

Official Email


Link to information on ivermectin and other repurposed drugs


sign the Change.org petition at