Blog

The Ultimate Guide to COVID-19: A Transparent Look at the Pandemic

By drawing on the investigative journalism of Sharyl Attkisson and the expertise of Professor Jay Bhattacharya, this guide aims to provide a clear, factual, and balanced account of the COVID-19 pandemic. Below, we break down the critical events, scientific findings, and policy decisions that shaped the global response.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic, which officially began in late 2019, has been one of the most significant global crises in modern history. The virus impacted public health, economies, and civil liberties worldwide. Understanding what happened and why is crucial for future preparedness and accountability.

Timeline of Key Events

2019: The Emergence of SARS-CoV-2

• November 2019: Reports emerge of unusual pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China.
• December 2019: Chinese health officials notify the World Health Organization (WHO) of a new virus. Reports suggest human-to-human transmission may be occurring.

2020: Global Spread and Response

• January 2020:
  • WHO confirms human-to-human transmission.
  • Travel restrictions begin, starting with China.
• March 2020:
  • WHO declares COVID-19 a global pandemic (March 11).
  • Widespread lockdowns begin worldwide.
• April – May 2020:
  • Scientists, including Professor Bhattacharya, warn of the economic and health risks of lockdowns[1].
  • The controversial Imperial College model predicts millions of deaths without strict measures.
• July 2020:
  • Studies suggest a significant proportion of infections are asymptomatic, raising questions about public health policies[2].

2021: Vaccines and Policy Shifts

• January 2021: COVID-19 vaccines are rolled out globally.
• Spring 2021: Debates intensify over vaccine mandates and passports.
• November 2021: Natural immunity is acknowledged as a factor in pandemic policy[3].

2022-2023: Post-Pandemic Reflection

• Governments begin reassessing lockdown efficacy.
• Studies confirm that prolonged restrictions had significant economic and psychological effects.
• Documents reveal concerns over suppression of alternative views on COVID-19 policy[4].

Key Issues and Controversies

1. Lockdowns and Their Impact

Professor Jay Bhattacharya was a leading voice questioning the broad lockdown strategy, arguing it had severe economic and health consequences, particularly for the poor. The Great Barrington Declaration, which he co-authored, proposed focused protection instead of blanket restrictions[5].

2. Vaccine Policies and Mandates

The rapid rollout of vaccines was initially hailed as a triumph, but concerns over adverse effects, mandates, and waning immunity led to debates over public health ethics. Attkisson’s investigations highlighted inconsistencies in public messaging and data transparency[6].

3. The Role of the Media and Censorship

Sharyl Attkisson has extensively documented the suppression of dissenting voices in the COVID-19 discourse, from social media censorship to pressure on scientists and doctors who questioned mainstream narratives[7].

4. Natural Immunity vs. Vaccination

Initially downplayed, natural immunity was later acknowledged as a key factor in pandemic control. Studies showed its effectiveness, yet many policies ignored it in favor of mass vaccination strategies[8].

Lessons Learned and Moving Forward

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed weaknesses in global health governance, public policy, and media integrity. The future response to pandemics should emphasize:

• Transparent data sharing
• Balanced public health policies
• Respect for scientific debate and dissent
• Protection of civil liberties

Footnotes and References

1. Bhattacharya, J. et al. “The Economic and Social Impact of Lockdowns.” Journal of Public Health, 2020.
2. CDC, “Asymptomatic Spread of COVID-19.” Report, 2020.
3. European Journal of Immunology, “Natural Immunity and COVID-19,” 2021.
4. Attkisson, S. Slanted: How the News Media Taught Us to Love Censorship, 2022.
5. The Great Barrington Declaration, October 2020.
6. Attkisson, S., “Investigating Vaccine Efficacy and Policy,” 2021.
7. Attkisson, S., “Big Tech and COVID-19 Misinformation Control,” 2021.
8. Bhattacharya, J. et al., “Comparing Natural and Vaccine-Induced Immunity,” 2022.

This guide provides a comprehensive and transparent analysis of the pandemic based on available data and expert insights. The goal is not to provoke but to inform, ensuring that future policies reflect both science and public interest.

The Biden-Harris Administration is requiring insurance companies and group health plans to cover the cost of over-the-counter, at-home COVID-19 tests, so people with private health coverage can get them for free starting January 15th. The new coverage requirement means that consumers with private health coverage can go online or to a pharmacy or store, buy a test, and either get it paid for up front by their health plan, or get reimbursed for the cost by submitting a claim to their plan.

Beginning January 15, 2022, individuals with private health insurance coverage or covered by a group health plan who purchase an over-the-counter COVID-19 diagnostic test authorized, cleared, or approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will be able to have those test costs covered by their plan or insurance. Insurance companies and health plans are required to cover 8 free over-the-counter at-home tests per covered individual per month. That means a family of four, all on the same plan, would be able to get up to 32 of these tests covered by their health plan per month. There is no limit on the number of tests, including at-home tests, that are covered if ordered or administered by a health care provider following an individualized clinical assessment, including for those who may need them due to underlying medical conditions.

This coverage is for a limited period of time, please click here for Public Emergency Declarations.

White House press statement is here.

CMS is here.

United Health Care is here.

Anthem BCBS is here.

Aetna is here:

Cigna is here:

Any further questions or concerns please contact me.

 

Many hospital systems are set up as not-for-profit systems or incorporate or charter themselves originally as a benefit to the community’s general good, later lose their way.  I remember living just outside of Winchester, Virginia many years ago coming home from work late one evening receiving a collection letter from Valley Health Systems regarding an unpaid medical bill. A health care episode I did not recall but would have been fine paying my bill and had the ability to pay, obviously some confusion that I would later straighten out. What I found most odd about that evening’s mail was while I had the hospital’s aggressive collection letter threatening to sue and use the full force of the law to collect on its self-interests  it was also accompanied within that same day’s mail delivery a letter from the same health care system asking me to donate to their hospital’s fund to help pay for things such as uncompensated care; most of us understand that to be accounts receivables.  All I could think about is how strange a system the nation’s health care had become.

I cannot help feel for individuals such as Heather Waldron and John Hawley who are losing their 4-bedroom home thanks to efforts by University of Virginia Health System.  Read: “UVA has ruined us’: Health system sues thousands of patients, seizing paychecks and putting liens on homes”