Why Do We Need a Control Group?

Across history well meaning people have stumbled upon, or developed incredible innovations to improve the quality of life, and reduce the suffering of humans.


Caught up in the passion of the belief in their products, terrible mistakes have happened causing enormous suffering and long term damage to innocent people who were caught up by the fervour and belief of product and treatment manufacturers and salespeople.


This is why Science developed Control Groups as a standard means of proving efficacy.


In living memory, we have the terrible tragedies of DDT and Thalidomide as real warnings of what happens when we ‘believe’ and ‘trust’ scientists and salespeople (Who may well be truly well motivated and well intended.)


With DDT, adverts like this one were used to help people feel safe.  The results of the DDT insecticide long term was poisoning a range of animals including humans and causing DNA and  chromosomal damage long term.

an advert for DDT saying 'its good for me'

Did the scientists who made it know this?  No, because it had not been subjected to long term tests and a monitoring of ‘fallout.’   

Did they believe they were doing good? 


They were eliminating mosquitoes to tackle malaria – a truly worthy and honourable cause.   

Were their promises, assurances and passionate statements like ‘DDT is Good For Me’ accurate?

Undoubtedly No.  


Thalidomide was another ‘wonder treatment’ given to pregnant mothers to alleviate morning sickness. 

In the UK, it was sold as Distaval with this statement : 

baby affected by thalidomide

Distaval can be given with complete safety to pregnant women and nursing mothers without adverse effect on mother or child.” (emphasis added)

Despite babies being born with horrendous limb development issues, it took FIVE YEARS for it to be proven that Thalidomide was the cause.  

All through that time the salespeople, and manufacturers were passionate that it was COMPLETELY SAFE for pregnant women.

Did they believe their own statements? Of course they did!

Were they correct?


Can you imagine if ALL pregnant women had been given Thalidomide?

Can you imagine if DDT was sprayed EVERYWHERE and not just in high malarial zones?

The gene pool of humanity would have been forever altered – en masse.

Thankfully, because of limited distribution, the gene pool was preserved intact (except for those family lines directly affected.) 

So not only can scientists be wrong, no matter how passionately they believe in their products, and no matter how many smiley faces they put on adverts, but it can also take a long time to show and prove their products are responsible (and so are they.)

Why are COVID treatments different?

COVID treatments are NOT different in that they makers and salespeople genuinely believe in the product.


But just like with DDT and Thalidomide, they do not actually know.

What is different  about COVID treatments is that the salespeople and believers in it’s efficacy want to give it to everyone, without proof.


A control group will settle the matter of efficacy, and protect and preserve the gene pool JUST IN CASE we are dealing with another Thalidomide, or worse.


Again, imagine if Thalidomide had been given to ALL pregnant women?  Our species could have been truly wiped out, by our own doing, and by those who sought to do good.

And it’s not just Thalidomide and DDT, here are some other drugs that had devastating consequences, but were sold and defended as ‘safe’ until passionate people meticulously proved ‘you are wrong – your product IS doing the harm.’  This was also the case for :




(thanks Natalie for the list)

What Do The Nuremberg Trials Have to Do With This?

The Nuremberg Trials created a precedent that no one may be subjected to medical treatment for a condition without their consent.

This has not changed, yet some people behave as it it has.

It Is a fact that disease and viruses can injure and kill some people.

It is a fact that medical treatments, including vaccines, can injure and kill some people.

the UK Government recognises that this is so ‘normal’ there is even a standard process to claim if you have been harmed by a vaccine in the past : www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment


In the case of COVID treatments, as with other treatments, the technological/medical interventions seem to injure or kill a different demographic of people than those that would be harmed or killed by the wild viruses/diseases.

This begs the ultimate question :

Who gets to choose if I submit myself to the risks of ‘Natural Selection’ facing wild viruses and diseases, like we have for the entirety of the history of life, or if I subject myself to the newer risks of technological/medical selection by facing the risks of ‘treatment’?

The Nuremberg Trials say that I GET TO CHOOSE.

The people selling COVID treatments, including entirely unqualified politicians and media personnel, seem to think THEY GET TO CHOOSE.

Thalidomide and DDT tell us it is prudent to take a salesperson/innovators word ‘as read’ – NOT because their motives or morality are in question, but because the long term facts are simply not known. 

Science should not have to ‘ask’ for us to ‘BELIEVE it’ or ‘TRUST it.’  Those are the words of religion. 

Science PROVES.

And without a proper long term control group trial, we are dealing with belief, not science.


Science gets to prove itself.

The ones who want to wait for that proof can be in the Control Group until the long term data is in.

What Is The Plan for this Control Group then?