The Alternative Covid Inquiry

I’m a little surprised that Mr. Fazi couldn’t find a reason (or source) for the adoption of one narrative after investigation and writing 500 pages. I generally agree with Ms. Gupta’s position, and there are many fundamental inconsistencies of logic, as she puts it, that remain unchallenged.
Before I illustrate just three of these issues, some context: I was first in my community to wear a mask and one of the first to stop wearing a mask when the information changed.
Ivermectin
I have no proof – either way – of Ivermectin’s possible effectiveness against Covid, but as it has been used 100’s of millions of times safely for other illness I couldn’t see any harm in having it around in case. I asked my Doctor and she told me that she had been told (all Doctors had been told) that they could not prescribe it. There then followed a smear campaign falsely aligning the use of Human Ivermectin (no longer available) to Horse Ivermectin. Who was behind this?
Impossible rates of non-infection
Initially, the earliest USA based case was identified in Santa Clara, California, later another case even earlier in Washington State. The initial rates of infection – described as “exponential” – and graphed by the British university were accepted by most as a scary reality. Yet 3 months after the first West coast infection very few people were infected (under 2% of what would have been predicted) What could explain this huge anomaly – I wrote to several media organisations with detailed mathemmatical explanation and graphs and recived only one reply from the LA Times (who said that they too were puzzled). ZERO reportage on this and later (when a possible explanation around “strains” of virus came to light) again ZERO discussion/media
Wearing a mask outside
Aware of bias, I read and listen to media from many perspectives, including NPR – who must have repeated the “follow the science” mantra dozens of times a day. A year and a bit in the science was clear that the virus – a) spread by small droplets so masks were largely ineffectual and b) was exceedingly difficult to catch outside while walking or running (many scientific reasons). Yep NPR continued to have officials on categorically lying about this for more than 9 months afterwards.
There are so many more of these matters – vaccinating Children for example….
Shouldn’t an inquiry focus on each of these in detail and get to the bottom of who pushed the false narratives?

Had traditional means been relied upon to define active SARS-CoV-2 infection i.e. tissue-culture or microscopy and disease i.e. a host response with contemporaneous signs and symptoms consistent with either severe acute respiratory syndrome, milder lower respiratory tract disease or a severe systemic inflammatory response there would have been no pandemic at all. Instead, medicine was mesmerised by molecular microbiology and came to believe in the infallibility of RT-PCR tests of which there are many variants, manufacturers and methods all done without an international standard, no means of assuring quality and no proper calibration of the genomic load versus the proper reference methods. But then, I am an old-school microbiologist.