Tag Archives: Coronavirus

Editorials, Liturgy

The Fault is not the Faithful, it’s the ministers not distributing correctly

3 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Good liturgical practice is both prudence and charity. It is also respect. There was once a time when priests were properly trained in distributing the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar, and it needs to be brought back.

Closing Churches because you, as a Bishop, believe it is or could be the source of spreading Coronavirus is simply ignorance, sloth and unbelief all wrapped up into one. So since I make such a grave charge, it behooves me to explain why.

First, there is more risk in the doorknobs of the Church which are touched by everyone, than in the Sacrament which is touched only by the priest. I think an elementary student can understand this concept. Have doormen open and close doors, wearing gloves, so that no one needs to open any door with their own hands. Sanitize the pews after each mass and get rid of missalettes, teaching everyone to pray not read.

Second, if the priest does not know how to place the Sacrament in the mouth without touching the communicant, he should not be distributing, he should be taking a course on how to distribute.

Third, the clergy brought this problem on themselves by abolishing the communion rail, where the faithful who wait patiently in a stable position, and when those priest would have an acolyte follow him with a patent which would duly indicate to the communicant to keep his distance as it was placed near the throat.

Fourth, the failure to preach that no one should receive without first confessing has produced innumerable sacrilegious communions, in addition to the idea that everyone has to go up for communion to make Sunday Mass worthwhile. This is causing the priests to be overwhelmed at communion.

Fifth, everyone needs to be patient and the communicants need to learn how to receive. Most stick out their tongue. But I believe that opening the mouth wide and keeping the tongue inside is the better practice. Tilting the head backwards slightly, and receiving on the knees, because that way the priest is in total control: he needs only drop the Sacrament in the mouth. And the priest should not be ashamed to instruct each faithful who is not doing it correctly, at the time of communion. The faithful will listen and good hygienic practice in this manner redounds to the good of all.

Sixth, a priest should have a sacred respect for his own hands, and the faithful too, for his hands. He should touch nothing but what is sacred and no one should be shaking his hand before or after mass. Mass is not a time for social networking with your priest. It is the time to worship God Almighty.

Seventh, temporarily suppress altar servers who are minors. Only have adult men who observe high levels of hygienic protocol. Let them use a bathroom different from the priest. Let them touch nothing which a priest touches, without holding it by means of a linen cloth.

Eighth, air our your Churches! One of the biggest problems in North America, for example, is that the same air remains in the Church for months  on end. They are not designed to be aired out. But this is a problem which can be solved in a week by a window expert, and by opening doors on a regular basis.

Ninth, and most importantly, we need to recognize that Our God is the Author of Life and He knows more about medicine than anyone. In fact, no microbe can do anything unless He will it. We need to have faith that the Sacraments are hygienic because they come from the God of Life. If there is anything not hygienic at your local parish, its man’s fault, not the fault of God. But since it is man’s fault, it can be solved.

Tenth, if the problem is the lack of sufficient space between persons at your parish Church, then the priest can solve this quickly by celebrating outdoors. The Faithful who really believe will come and if the priest needs it, he can put a space heater near the altar to see that the wine and water do not freeze. The Orthodox use hot water and use a low temperature heater to keep the wine warm before use.

So for all these reasons, there is no reason to close Churches or stop the celebration of the Sacraments. Just an occasion to use some common sense and pro-active measures, like this intelligent and charitable priest is doing:

https://twitter.com/catholiccam17/status/1239528459828854786

__________

CREDITS: The Featured Image is a photo by Br. Bugnolo of a chancel grate at a side chapel of Saint John Lateran’s, here at Rome.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

 

Editorials

Br. Bugnolo: FromRome.Info will take a stand against the hype and panic of Coronavirus

7 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

Mass panic is one of the greatest evils that can befall a society. It causes people to act irrationally, not out of facts or evidence, but out of fear and precieved necessity to preserve self interest. As panic increases people become inclined to do even more an more exaggerated things in response to what they perceive in the short term to be a solution to some need they have.

Since mass panic can cause civil unrest and mass murder and mayhem, it is the greatest moral failure of leaders and media to promote panic. It is a sign of not just a failure of leadership, but the complete lack of moral capacity to lead.

The constant harping on numbers of victims from a disease which has not yet even killed 10% of those who die of the winter flue each year, is totally irresponsible.

The reactions to such irresponsible reporting are also irresponsible.

For this reason, as editor of FromRome.Info I am going to pledge to all my readers to reject calls to panic and publish  series of articles which show what the facts say, as I have already begun to do.

My assessment of Coronavirus is that it is complete hype to turn this into a pandemic or plague. The causes may be because the ruling elites have no immune systems with strong responses. The motives may be also because they want to grab power and impose tyranny.

But whatever is the cause of their irrational behavior, as Catholics we should oppose their mistaken approach with Faith in God and confidence that if we respond rationally we will overcome whatever minor threat Coronavirus 19 presents, while not loosing track of the more important things of our Religion, our human lives and the needs of society.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

 

News

Why 80% men, 20% women victims of Corona Virus in Italy?

7 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

First, let me ask everyone to pray for the dead and for the living. This is our first duty as Christians and human beings.  The articles I am publishing on mortality rates should not be but a passing observation or interest. Our real interest should always be in caring for others, body and soul, as much as we can, but especially with those whom we have an obligation.  If you have grandfathers and grandmothers, or aged parents, you should be making time or plans to make time, to help them and be near them, or take them into your own home if they have no one to care for them where they live.

Gender ratios

The ratio I reported yesterday from Ramuzzi and Ramuzzi regarding the victims of Corona virus being 80% male and 20% female has sparked my curiosity as an Anthropologist who was trained in the statistics of social phenomena.

The reason why this ratio merits attention, is that it tells us something about the virus which has not yet been reported and which will help us react to this crisis rationally. And I am not the only one who has noticed anomalies in the statistics for Coronavirus in Italy.

Scientifically, we know that a virus has no brain and therefore cannot willingly chose men over women.  So there has to be something about the virus genetically or about its manner of transmission or about the medical conditions of men and women which put men at higher risk than women by a 4 to 1 ratio overall.

Overall is a hard number to be imbalanced

This ratio of 4 to 1 is way out of balance for an overall statistic.  To arrive at such a balance there has to be factors which are much higher than 4 to 1, which impact this statistic in a partial way, so that when averaged out with all the other causative factors, the ration falls to 4 to 1.

So this has put me on the path to search for them.

Ratio of males to females in Italy

Obviously the first statistic to look at is the ratio of men to women in Italy, to determine if this fundamental ratio has anything to do with what we are seeing in this imbalance.  This is because if a town has 50 men and 50 women, then you are likely to see even ratios for any accident or disease which is not associated with gender. But if the town has 80 men and 20 women, you are apt to see that same ratio in all accidents and diseases which are not associated with gender.

In Italy there are 30.974 million women and 29.384 million men, according to Statista.com. Not a perfect balance, but obviously a ratio which cannot be causing the imbalance we are looking at in Coronavirus victims.

Ratio of males to females in Infected Areas

However, one cannot discount this demographic ratio all together, because in all parts of Italy this ratio will not prevail. There will be local variations. Perhaps some are causitive.

Lombardy, the epicenter of Coronavirus infection in Italy — on account of an Italian citizen bringing it back from Munich, Bavaria in the 3rd week of January, is the first place to consider, especially because for the common winter influenza it is also the epicenter in Italy for numbers of infections.

In Lombardy, then, let us look to see what that ratio is, because Lombardy is the region most affected by Coronavirus. According to TuttaItalia.com, in 2019 the gender ratio in Lombardy is 4.9 million men and 5.1 million women. Not much different than the national ratio.

HIV infections by gender

The first presumption I have is that this ratio of 4 to 1, which I am investigating, has a lot to do with HIV infections in the Italian population. And in fact, in a peer reviewed Journal paper at BioMed Research International, authored by Dr. Camoni et al. in 2014, it was reported that the ratio of HIV infection in the general population is 0.10 per 100 for males, and 0.02 per 100 for females, or a ratio of 5:1. The total population of those infected over 15 years of age is 115,000 to 150,000. Lacking immune system health on account of the ravages of this virus, these individuals will be highly prone to risk from coronavirus. The fact that those who contract HIV have high levels of personal interaction in an unprotected manner with others who act similarly — this is the primary cause of HIV infection — also means that one is likely to expect that members of this population will be rapidly infected with Coronavirus as soon as it becomes prevalent in their locale.

Since this ratio is 5:1, greater than the anomaly we are seeing in Coronavirus 19 deaths in Italy, then it is a likely candidate to be a causative factor, because it is more imbalanced, and that is necessary because there will be undoubtedly many factors causing this imbalance, but of them all there will be those with more or less the same ratio, so when you find a possible causative factor which is more imbalanced, of which there are few such factors, it becomes more probable a fact which is producing the anomaly — though this is pure speculation on a merely statistical factor. However, when one considers that HIV reduces immunity response and that immunity response is essential to defending against Coronavirus 19, then one cannot discount it.

Mortality by gender for known risk factors

Another aspect to look at is whether the mortality rates for known risk factors for Coronavirus, such as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus or cancer have an imbalance among men and women, because if they do, they could be causing the imbalance we are seeing among Coronavirus victims.

According to the Instituto Nazionale di Statistica (National Institute for Statistics), the  gender ratios for for Cardiovascular disease mortality in 2012, for persons ages 65-84, was 158,000 men to 124,000 women. This is a ratio of 5 to 4, and thus might be influential, but not as other factors.

According to the Ministry of Health report Genere come determinante di salute, published in 2016, p. 39. the ratio in 2009 of those who smoke tobacco, is was 28.9% of all men and 22%  of all women.  This is nearly a ratio of 4:3. However, if you look at the graphs on p. 40 of that report, you see that the mortality for chronic smokers increases exponentially for both age groups at similar ratios.  This is unlike Coronavirus 19, which peaks at 70-79 years of age and then falls for those who are 80-89 or older.

Mortality for Cardiovascular disease by gender

As can be seen, specific conditions can have different ratios of mortality according to gender. This is even more true in cardiovascular diseases, the ratios of mortality of which, by gender, vary wildly. Here is just one graphic, which I excerpt from the European Journal of Preventive Cardiology, from a paper entitled, Cardiovascular Health in Italy etc.., published in 2015:

Screenshot_2020-03-16 Cardiovascular health in Italy Ten-year surveillance of cardiovascular diseases and risk factors Osse[...]

Such conditions as myocardial infraction and left ventricular hypertrophy show ratios nearing 4:1 for men to women.

Conclusion

As can be seen, this simple statistic of Coronavirus mortality being 80% among men and only 20% among women can lead to the discovery of not only who is at risk but why those who are infected die. While a rigorous scientific study cannot yet be done, the data I have reported here can give us perhaps a preliminary look at what might be likely.

As regards to the response to the Coronavirus, the extremity and panic among journalists, politicians and clergy — three groups known also to have high rates of HIV infection — also seems to indicate that this crisis is very personal to them, though are not telling the public why that it is the case.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

 

 

 

Anthropology, News

Why that 3.4% Mortality rate is a lie

8 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The Hype is a lie. The Big Lie.  We have been bombarded for several weeks now with the claim that the mortality rate from Coronavirus 19 is 2.4, 2.8, 3.4 or 3.8%

This is a lie, and I will demonstrate it.

The mortality rate from any viral infection has to be calculated over the entire population which becomes infected.  But this statistic — I will take the latest — of 3.4% does NOT apply to the entire population. It applies only to the population of serious cases which enter health facilities where their infection is recorded.

As I reported the other day, Medical authorities admit that 80% of those who are registered as infected by Coronavirus 19 never develop serious conditions.  And the symptoms of Coronavirus 19 are no different in such cases than the common cold.

That means that a very large population will contract and has contracted Coronavirus, but does not know it.

And since only those who go to hospitals or medical facilities go there when they fear they have something serious.  Now, publish reports say that 2 to 5 percent of the population are prone to fear being ill when they are not. This condition is called hypochondria.  Certainly a panic can increase this kind of psychological response. As I reported the other day, there has been a 250% increase in the number of patients going to walk in medical services in the United States during the Coronavirus 19 scare.  So I seems safe to say that that 2 to 5 percent is 5 to 12.5% right now.

If those are the persons who are being recorded as the 80% who never get really sick from Coronavirus 19, then we can downplay significantly the real mortality rates.

But as I reported yesterday, the surprising statistic is that 66% of those who actually die from Coronavirus 19 and who succumb due to respiratory failure are thoee who were smokers or have lung problems are at high risk, as well as those who suffer from diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.

Also, 80% of those who die are men. So women have only 25% the risk that men do.  This statistic is amazing to me as an Anthropologist, because women are the ones who are more likely to enter into intimate proximity to family members when they are sick. So this statistic does not make sense. It is telling us something important. Perhaps, that proper nutrition is the best defense against Coronavirus, or being a person in the family who is more likely to get care from those around them.

But the statistics which really downplay the mortality risk are those which I reported yesterday, namely that only 0.2% of those who die from Coronavirus 19 are under 50 years of age.  This is a disease which is of minimal risk to most of the population. So calm down.

Calculating the Real Mortality rate

So with all these statistics I will here calculate the mortality rate for all those who get infected, by age group and sex and existing medical condition, to show you what your real risk is, and how this is not a pandemic destined to wipe out humanity.

M = Male       F=Female

Percentages of those who died
from Corona Virus by age and condition

Explanation:  In this first table I took the actual mortality by age group and broke it out by the reports that 80% of victims are men and 66% of victims have risk factors, presuming that these two percentages hold evenly through each age group and risk category.

Age M no Risk M at risk  F no risk F at risk
90+ 3.13% 6.25% 0.94% 1.88%
80-89 14.033% 28.067% 3.508% 7.017%
70-79 8.64% 17.28% 6.48% 4.32%
60-69 2.1% 4.2% 0.7% 1.4%
50-59 0.7% 1.4% 0.233% 0.467%
under 50 0.034% 0.067% 0.016% 0.034%

Now I will take the reported overall mortality rate of 3.4% for all who are identified as infected, presuming that just as 80% never get serious symptoms, so those 80% represent 5 to 12.5% of the actual infected population, on account of the effect of a hypochondriac response. This means the infected population is actually 640% greater than the identified population.  So the 3.4% get diluted to 0.51325%, and then is diluted according to the statistics in the table above, to produce

Truer risk of death for all age groups and conditions

These numbers are so small I will list them as persons per 10 thousand infected

M no Risk M at risk  F no risk F at risk
90+ 1.60 3.2 0.482 0.964
80-89 7.19 14.28 1.796 3.52
70-79 4.43 8.86 2.208 4.416
60-69 1.07 2.15 0.27 0.54
50-59 0.35 0.72 0.0875 0.175
under 50 0.017 0.034 0.004 0.009

So when you are considering whether YOU should panic or not, remember, the real chance of dying from Coronavirus 19 is for many of us is insignificant.

To explain, look at Women under 50 years of age who have high risk factors. Only 9 out of every 10 million who contract Coronavirus 19 will die from it!

Or take Men with risk factors who are 80 to 89 years of age. Only 14 out of every 10,000 infected will die from it.  That means your grandpa who smoked his whole life, or has diabetes, or a heart condition, has a very low chance of risk. Watch over his health and make sure he eats well and stays warm and calm.

I must conclude then that the Coronvirus 19 Panic is a Main Stream Media engineered event for the political manipulation of nations. And that China and the World Health Organization have a lot of responsibility for not giving the public the true rates of mortality, categorized has I have done over the whole population of those infected.

Show this to your pastors

This analysis shows that there is no risk for the Catholic Church in opening Her churches and celebrating Her Sacraments. It is not going to cause a plague or significantly put anyone at risk. The Church should only advise those with compromised immune systems to stay away. But if the Bishops did that, it would be obvious to the faithful, how many of the clergy are not faithful to Christ, I think.

The statistics presented here are not scientific nor rigorous but are estimations and derivatives based on the assumptions in the article. Use them only to assess whether you should be entertaining panic, but not to put yourself at risk.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]

 

 

News

Acies Ordinata Munich & Corona Virus: De Mattei needs to respond

7 Comments

by Br. Alexis Bugnolo

The Italian press has identified how Corona Virus came to Italy, and it was not from China.

Amazingly it was brought to Italy from Bavaria: Munich to be precise. Patient 1, the first Italian identified as infected, was infected by a viral strain subsequently also found at Munich, which led researchers to do a forensic study of person to person contact.

The first Italian to catch Corona Virus, however, does not live at Munich. He lives at Codogno, a small town north of Piacenza, in the Italian region of Lombardia, now the epicenter for contagion for the entire nation.

He reported the first symptoms appeared around January 25, according to a report in La Veritá on March 5, which summarized a study by Dr. Trevis Bedford, of the Fred Hutch Institute in Seattle Washington,  published in the New England Journal of Medicine on . He had visited Munich for a short trip and then returned to Italy.

Who this Italian patient is the press cannot reveal for health privacy reasons.

Likewise, the first patient in Germany reported his first symptoms on January 24, according to IL Sole 24, the largest newspaper of Southern Italy. According to DW, He suspects he contracted it from a colleague at his place of work, Webasto, who had come from Shanghai, China to a mutual training course for the automobile parts supplier. This colleague contracted it from her parents who are from Wuhan.  A number of other cases subsequently appeared at his place of work, which health authorities immediately shut down.

The incubation period for Corona Virus 19 is 2 to 14 days according to the US Center for Disease and Control, as Healthline is reporting. But the median or average rate of the appearance of infection by symptoms is 5 days.

That means both patients were infected by someone between January 11/12 and January 22/23.  And the most likely date for infection at Munich by both these men was January 19/20.

Acies Ordinata, the media stunt group of Traditional Catholics who stand in lines in public places and pray the Rosary as a sign of disagreement with Church leaders, held an impromptu event at Munich on Saturday, January 18, 2020. All the public faces of Trad. In were present: Dr. Roberto de Mattei of the Lepanto Foundation, here at Rome, Mr. Michale Matt Jr, of The Remnant, in St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, Mr. John Henry Westen, of LifeSite News, etc.. (Source). (And Alexander Tschugguel, who subsequent to this report, was reported by Dr. Marshall on March 15, 2020 to have been in hospital for Corona virus.)

Father Z, a popular blogger on all things regarding the Ancient Latin Mass was irate that he was not invited, and posted about the event on the same day.

Whether the first Italian to contract Corona Virus 19 at Munich attended the Acies Ordinata Event is not known. But I think Dr. Roberto de Mattei should give a public answer, whether anyone from Northern Italy attended this event. And were they from Codogno? I think this is necessary simply because of the health risk to others who attended and for the sake of national security here in Italy.

Even if patient 1 did not attend the event, Dr. de Mattei has a grave moral obligation, I think, to notify all who did attend, because they were in Munich when the infection was being spread.

I do know from a friend, that as soon as Michael Matt, Jr. returned from Munich, he announced that he was taking a 2 week vacation. I assume that it was to be with his son, who had just lost a foot in an accident, but now I am not so sure.

__________

CREDITS:  The Featured Image is a screen shot of the Acies Ordinata Event Home Page, taken by Father Z and copied from his blog, in accord with fair use standards for editorial commentary.

+ + +

[simple-payment id=”5295″]