Softpanorama

May the source be with you, but remember the KISS principle ;-)
Home Switchboard Unix Administration Red Hat TCP/IP Networks Neoliberalism Toxic Managers
(slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and  bastardization of classic Unix

COVID-19 fearmongering

MSM dirty dance around human mortality

 

News Programmers and sysadmins health issues Recommended Links  COVID-19 prevention measures The threat of "Coronavirus recession" COVID-19 hoarding epidemics COVID-19 as a bioweapon hypothisis
COVID-19 fearmongering COVID-19 epidemic as the second stage of the crisis of neoliberalism  COVID-19 epidemic handing in the USA Absurdity of bureaucracies US Presidential Elections of 2020 Trump's impulsivity and incompetence The Real War on Reality
Media as a weapon of mass deception  Stability is destabilizing: The idea of Minsky moment Manufactured consent Groupthink The importance of controlling the narrative Trumpcare scam Nation under attack meme
Soft propaganda Nineteen Eighty-Four Casino Capitalism   Propaganda Quotes Humor Etc

It looks like healthy people younger then 60 have little to fear but fear itself. But fear is addictive and it looks like panic, including panic buying had spread in the USA, fueled by irresponsible and often evil MSM fearmongering. 

Fauci and friends comletly failed us: he was unable or unwilling to provide relevant information about the virus. Also highly questionable was his role in gain of function experiments, which put him is a very dangerous position of biological war criminal.  Please not that information about so called "vaping epidemic" was suppressed and genome of the pathogen that couse it, if such exists,  was never sequenced.

CDC attributed it to E-cigatettes, but there were cases when a single time users got the disease. X-ray picture is suspiciously common with COVID-19.[ CDC ] Chinese did some research and published X-ray pictures of waping patients were attributed to COVID-19 my the supercomputer running a spcial program of images recognition and classification.  That does not prove anything, but it increases the plausibility of the hypothesis that waping epidemic in the USA in August 2019 has some relations to COVID the epidemic of 2020 and might be its precursor, with early, less contagious,  mutation of the same virus.

Statistic reported about COVID-19 was distorted by MSM to induce fearmongering and increase profits (MSM provide positive feedback loop in such cases and their role probably is negative not positive as they provoke overreaction). The only reliable statistics about COVID-19 epidemics are so called "excessive deaths" statistics and it shows that 2020 is not that different from 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm

ther are higher not not dramatically so and it is unclear how many of excessive death occurred because of panic with people dying at home from heart attacks and similar mass killers of older people. Isolation definitely increases the mortality among old people and may be not less then COVID-19 itself.   Total number for the year probably will be less then 10% above the average. Here’s how many extra deaths over normal numbers have occurred during coronavirus pandemic, according to a statistician - oregonlive.com

The coronavirus killed tens of thousands in the United States during the pandemic’s first months, but it also left a lesser-known toll: thousands more deaths than would have been expected from heart disease and a handful of other medical conditions, according to an analysis of federal data by The Washington Post.

Fr example, reporting deaths from the virus neoliberal MSM do not split it by age groups as this would decrease the level of fear in the population ( and their profits ). Also reporting just the number of death from the virus, not the deviation form the average number of deaths for a week or a month or so artificially increases panic.

Reporting  deaths from the virus neoliberal MSM do not split  it by age groups as this would decrease the level of fear in the population ( and their profits ).   Also reporting just the number of death from the virus, not the deviation form the average number of deaths for a week or a month or so artificially increases panic.

Panic and fear artificially incited by neoliberal MSM and cowardice to face the risks immanent in any epidemics (as well as driving the  car) is doing more damage than the disease itself.  They provoked the wave of panic hoarding in the USA which started in February with  isopropyl alcohol and hand sanitizer (which in early March reached $60 fro 8 ounces bottle on Amazon ;-)  but spread starting from March 10 to many other products categories including paper towels, bathroom tissue, all types of sanitizers and non perishable food.

Sometime media coverage looks like a complete 100% departure from reality.  More people will die in Yemen and Syria each day going forward, and no one cares. Many old people will serious chronic condition who are die from coronavirus induced pneumonia would die from flu induced bakterial pneumonia the same year as they are too weak to resist even flu.  Winter is a very bad season for such people in any case.

Of course, another extreme is fatalism as expressed by Paul Bogdanich in his post at moonofalabama.org (Mar 11 2020 )

I should have clarified, I'm an American living in the United States. That said, it bothers me. The absolute lack of any detectable level of courage or fortitude in the face of diversity (hard times) is just stunning. Old people die. Everyone dies over time. Viruses like the flu or SARS, or COVID-19 accelerate that process from time to time. It's just what viruses do. There is no cure for either death or viruses. If you want, the biblical "Ye shall surely die."

Even in advanced age life has meaning and is exciting when you're solving concrete problems heling your family or community, or humanity as a whole. Many outstanding achievements were made people over 70 year old (Verdi wrote Otello at 74  and Falstaff (1893) being 80) People over 70 now dominate presidential race in the USA ;-) And unlike fatalists thinking, we do not need to apply to our life the moral metrics which are appropriate only to communities who live on a verge of survival. Loosing some part of annual national income to save lives via quarantine is affordable. Mass testing is a sure way to improve cost efficiency of quarantines and similar measures during virus epidemics. Retired people can and should stay home and avoid situation where they can catch the infection. Reckless behaviour during  virus epidemics is a crime and need to be punished appropriately.

But it is true that the panic can do more damage than the virus itself. And that we need an objective perspective to access the level of threat inherent in this virus epidemics. In the USA a reasonable threshold for classifying the treat as serious  are probably events that exceed car fatalities. In 2016  National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) registered 37,461 killed, an average of 102 per day.

In the USA a reasonable threshold for classifying the treat as serious  are probably events that exceed car fatalities. Which means around 40K people killed per year with the average over 100 per day. The society accepts this level of fatalities as normal, so why this virus epidemics should be treated differently ? Nobody stops driving cars because of this level of risk.

We are still in single digits of victims per day with COVID-19. It did proved high infectious. But there is highly infectious and highly deadly pathogens are two distinct group that do not mix. It is as if viruses  need to make choice between high mortality and high transmission: viruses that kill their host, before the host infects others,  die with the host and this can't kill many hosts without eliminating themselves as well.

With this coronavirus, there seems to be a larger then usual window (aka incubation period) during which a person can be infected and transmitting the virus, without having symptoms. In a way this is a rather "clever" virus. But long incubation period does not eliminates biological reason why highly infectious viruses should evolve to become less deadly in order to succeed.

While the US government of Mar 13 declared  the coronavirus a US national emergency and offered $50 billion for support of state and local governments to fight the virus with FEMA,  additional measures will not have an immediate effect.  But they will definitely slow down the spread of virus "flattening" the epidemics curve and this allowing more paciet to survive.

The current dynamic of epidemic in the USA and the world so far is exponential growth of cases with most infections clustered in just  half-dozen countries. Which is typical for an early stage of virus epidemic. Excluding China which now is past its peak and is in decline, the other fastest growing  hotspots are Italy, Iran, Spain and France. As of Mar 10, 2020 in the USA -- only three states  --  Washington State, New York, and  California have over 100 cases: 

Confirmed cases for the past 10 days for countries and U.S. states with >100 new confirmed cases as of March 10:

Country/State   3/1   3/2   3/3   3/4   3/5   3/6   3/7   3/8   3/9  3/10

Italy           566   342   466   587   769   778  1247  1492  1797  1977
Iran            385   523   835   586   591  1234  1076   743   595   881
Spain            39    36    45    57    37   141   100   173   400   622
France           30    61    13    81    92   276   296   177    83   575
Germany          51    29    37    66   220   188   129   241   136   281
US, Washington                                                        267
Norway            4     6     7    24    31    21    39    29    29   195
US, New York                                                          173
Denmark           1     0     2     4     0    13     0    12    55   172
US, California                                                        144
Switzerland       9    15    14    34    24   100    54    69    37   117
Sweden            2     1     6    14    59     7    60    42    45   107

Posted by: S | Mar 11 2020 18:43 utc | 42 

A a typical flu epidemic in the USA infects tens of million people and cause approx 20-50K fatalities per year (somewhere between 0.1% and 1%)  but does not create any headlines in neoliberal MSM.  According to the CDC’s weekly US flu report of February 22, 2020,

“So far this season there have been at least 32 million flu illnesses, 310,000 hospitalizations and 18,000 deaths from flu.”

For comparison the mortality rate in South Korea, where more than 1,100 tests have been administered per million residents, comes out to just 0.6% and concentrated in the old and/or with chronic conditions. In view of USA media hysteria about Coronavirus COVID-19, we need to concentrate on facts, not fears.  Here is Craig Murray comparison with the Hong Kong flu pandemic of 1968/9:

The Hong Kong flu pandemic of 1968/9 was the last really serious flu pandemic to sweep the UK. They do seem extraordinarily regular – 1919, 1969 and 2020. Flu epidemics have much better punctuality than the trains (though I cheated a bit there and left out the 1958 “Asian flu”). Nowadays “Hong Kong flu” is known as H3N2. Estimates for deaths it caused worldwide vary from 1 to 4 million. In the UK it killed an estimated 80,000 people.

If the current coronavirus had appeared in 1968, it would simply have been called “flu”, probably “Wuhan flu”. COVID-19 may not be nowadays classified as such, but in my youth flu is definitely what we would have called it. The Hong Kong flu was very similar to the current outbreak in being extremely contagious but with a fairly low mortality rate. 30% of the UK population is estimated to have been infected in the Hong Kong flu pandemic. The death rate was about 0.5%, mostly elderly or with underlying health conditions.

But there was no massive panic, no second by second media hysteria, over Hong Kong flu. Let me start being unpopular. “Man in his 80’s already not very well from previous conditions, dies of flu” is not and should not be a news headline. The coverage is prurient, intrusive, unbalanced and designed to cause hysteria.

Diamond Princess liner  represents the perfect environment for the spread of the virus.  Thousands of people jammed in a small place serviced by a single ventilation system…..it’s virus heaven. Surely all on board are dead by now? Well no.

The reality is that most of the deceased presented with existing pathologies, for example, chronic lung disease (often due to smoking), impaired immune response, pre-existing age related illness and disability, latent infections (esp. TB), use of pharmaceutical product (whether prescribed or not), other infection types, poor nutrition (never, ever underestimate the deleterious effects of junk food), etc. Not all the patients were tested for the corona virus either - so how do we even begin to think we know what they had going on?

As Trump tweeted ‘So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu. It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year. Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on. At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus, with 22 deaths. Think about that!’

He made a fair point, but that does not excuse him sleeping for two months and not preparing to the  epidemics. Several factors determined the USA response:

All in all it is clear the that US administration do not have any plan and improvised as infection unfold. Here we can mention a highly negative, unprofessional  role of National Institute of Allergy and Infections Diseases (NIAID) Director Dr. Anthony Fauci. It looks like he is one trick poly, an advocate of vaccinations (does he hold stocks related to vaccination is unknown) . In context of this epidemic after sleeping two months, he started advocating taking drastic measure in order to "flatten the curve" without providing any data that can convince us that such a flattening is needed  (The Last Refuge ):

The concept of “flattening” the virus curve; the presumptive reason for social distancing; is based on a theory to extend the spread of COVID-19 to a lesser incident rate over a longer duration, thereby lessening the burden on the U.S. healthcare system.  Hence, ‘flatten’ the spike in infections.

Put another way: “Flattening” means the same number of people eventually contract the virus, only they do so over a longer period of time, and the healthcare system can treat everyone because the numbers do not rise to level where the system is overloaded.  In theory that seems to make sense.

However, no-one is asking: what is the current stress level on the healthcare system right now?  Where are we in that capacity?… and what is normal capacity level during a high-level flu outbreak?… and Where are we when compared against that baseline?

Again, Dr. Fauci slept like the rest of Trump administration for two months and suddenly in mid March started to give alarmist  interviews, several a day,  provoking overreaction.  Later he admitted that his based on zero facts fearmongering "worst case scenario" about several million victims was wrong and was exaggerated at least ten times, but it was too late. A SHOCKING CORRECTION Dr. Fauci Went from a Possible 1.7 Million US Deaths Due to Coronavirus to a Possible 200,000 US Deaths. In reality, there probably will be less then 60K deaths in the USA. The damage tot he economy was already done. Instead of establishing in January a mission in Korea and studying the disease,  he was caught without pants. 

The reaction of neoliberal MSM seems to be utterly and totally disproportionate to the risk. When  all official information sources march in lock-step you can reasonably assume some sort of mind-fuck is underway.

But how high risk and what kind of risk could COVID-19 represent? I can only speculate but a few possibilities present themselves. (Remember I’m referring to the reaction here, not the virus itself).

For a start the economic impact of the panic will be considerable. Stocks and bonds will crash precipitously. Millions of investors will be ruined. Nobody knows how far the drop can go.

Wealthy investors could end up buying assets for a fraction of their true worth. It’s happened before on multiple occasions. Then there’s Big Pharma which is sitting on a potential gold mine

MSM dirty dance around human mortality is very annoing.  Risk is clearly tolerated less these days, safety measures are everywhere. But life of ordinary people under neoliberalism is not valued. BS jobs, junk food, subprime and expensive healthcare, crude “entertainment”.

Also significant percentage of those who will die from COVID-19 would die from flu too.

  • utu says:Show Comment
    @Anonymous (n)
    60,000 people die every month in Italy. Many of them old. Now we have 1,000 reported dead due to the Covid-19. Most of them old. Many of them would have died anyway from some cold or flu that would further aggravate their poor state of health. This year Covid-19 got there first.

     

  • Monotonous Languor says:Show Comment
  • March 13, 2020 at 7:03 am GMT • 300 Words

    After sober analysis, extensive reading, and careful assessment of each and every fact either directly or indirectly related to COVID19, I am now fully convinced of the following:

    – The virus was deliberately created by aliens from the Betelgeuse solar system, who have been secretly spying on our planet for the last 200 years.
    – The Betelgeusians have developed a supremely accurate quantum computer model (“It’s Quantum!”) of our species, which predicts what various factions of humanity will do given any set of specific circumstances and inputs.
    – The Betelgeusians, in their infinite wisdom, have decided to re-balance various factions of humanity here on earth, depending on their projected threat to other populations and the planet in general.
    – After running various scenarios through their quantum computer (“It’s Quantum!”), the results for advancing an optimal future became obvious.
    – The COVID19 was created specifically to attack Italians, Iranians, and Han Chinese.
    – In their computer simulation (“It’s Quantum!”), those three groups were considered most egregiously able to perpetrate negative effects on the rest of humanity in the future.
    – Therefore, the Betelgeusians made the onerous decision to create and release the virus.
    – Various intended consequences were also the result of the simulation (“It’s Quantum!”); these include vituperation and blowback on the US Deep State embedded for lo! these many years.
    – A popular mass uprising will take effect against the Derp State, and leftism/progressivism will finally be tossed out on its collective ear all over Western Civilization. It will be so thoroughly maligned, that it will finally end up on the ash heap of history, never to return.
    – The Betelgeusians will surreptitiously introduce an antidote into the ecosphere, thereby eradicating all further related susceptibility and deaths.
    – The Betelgeusians will look down on their handiwork with benign satisfaction.
    – Western Civilization will again have a chance to flourish like never before, entering a new Renaissance, and everybody will live happily ever after.

    There… don’t you like my story much better than all the other nonsense you’ve been pummeled with lately? (You can thank me later.)


    Top Visited
    Switchboard
    Latest
    Past week
    Past month

    NEWS CONTENTS

    Old News ;-)

    [May 15, 2021] COVID Deaths Plummet As Excess Mortality Falls To Pre-Pandemic Levels - ZeroHedge

    May 15, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    MAY 15, 2021

    Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

    In any given year during the past decade in the United States, more than 2.5 million Americans have died - from all causes.

    The number has grown in recent years, climbing from 2.59 million in 2013 to 2.85 million in 2019. This has been due partially to the US's aging population, and also due to rising obesity levels and drug overdoses . In fact, since 2010, growth rates in total deaths has exceeded population growth in every year.

    In 2020, preliminary numbers suggest a jump of more than 17 percent in all-cause total deaths, rising from 2.85 million in 2019 to 3.35 million in 2020.

    The increase was not all due to covid. At least one-quarter to one-third appear to be from other causes. In some cases, more than half of "excess deaths" were attributed to "underlying causes " other than covid. But whether due to untreated medical conditions (thanks to covid lockdowns), or drug overdoses, or homicides, total death increased in 2020. In other words, total excess mortality is a partial proxy for covid deaths. Whatever proportion of total deaths covid cases may comprise, it stands to reason that if total deaths decline, then covid deaths are declining also. Moreover, looking at total deaths helps cut through any controversies over whether or not deaths are properly attributed to covid.

    What has been the trend with these "excess deaths" in recent months?

    Well, according to data through mid-March reported by Our World in Data and by the Human Mortality Database, excess mortality began to plummet in early January and is now back to levels below the 2015-2019 average:

    Excess mortality peaked the week of January 3 and then it began to collapse, dropping back to summer 2020 levels by mid February. By March 14, excess mortality was at 1 percent above the 2015-2019 average. All this occurred even as very few Americans were vaccinated. When excess deaths began to drop, less than one percent of Americans had been fully vaccinated . At the end of January, less than tw o percent of Americans had been fully vaccinated. By the end of March, when excess mortality returned to 2019 levels, 15 percent of the population had been fully vaccinated.

    As of May 11, only one-third of Americans had been fully vaccinated, although "experts" insist 60 to 70 percent of the population must be vaccinated before we can expect to see a drop-off in deaths like that which occurred earlier this year.

    Yet, as of the week of March 22 -- excess mortality was below both the 2015-2019 average and below the total for the last year before the official beginning of the covid pandemic (2019).

    It's likely these facts won't stop "public health" bureaucrats from continuing to insist that another "wave" of covid deaths and cases is right around the corner. These activists have many strategies for pushing vaccine passports, mask mandates, and even continual precautionary business closures. They'll tell us that new covid variants are sweeping the globe. This is what they were saying in January, for instance, when Vox was telling us it was too dangerous to even visit the grocery store . At least one expert in late January warned us that the coming weeks would be " the darkest weeks of the pandemic ."

    It's now clear such predictions were spectacularly wrong. By late January, totals deaths were already in precipitous decline.

    But what about the lag in data? We're only looking at data up to mid-March because it tends to take several weeks for estimates of total deaths to become reasonably reliable. Yes, that data shows a big drop off. But what about the numbers for April and May? Should we expect those death totals to surge again with a promised "fourth wave" of new covid death?

    If we consider the more recent case and death totals attributed to covid, we see few signs of a new surge.

    Although Anthony Fauci and other government employed technocrats have been unable to provide any explanation at all for it , the fact remains that months after Texas and Florida and Georgia have either abolished or greatly scaled back all social-distancing and mask mandates, cases and deaths are generally declining, and total deaths per million (attributed to covid) remain below what we've seen in states with severe lockdowns.

    The trend in the United States overall is similar. Indeed, it appears that nearly all states have seen sizable drops in both cases and deaths, regardless of the mask or social-distancing policies in place.

    Notably, it's only in recent weeks that "CDC guidelines" are beginning to admit the reality. It wasn't until April 26 that the CDC declared that fully vaccinated Americans are allowed to venture outside without masks on . The CDC states these "recommendations" unironically as if it weren't the case that most Americans -- outside of true-believer hotspots like San Francisco and Chicago -- stopped wearing masks outside a long time ago. The hermetically sealed world of government employees and corporate journalists appears unaware that at least half the country pretty much went back to normal last fall.

    So now what?

    The technocrats know that they need to keep pressing hard for more de facto vaccine mandates -- pushed mostly by corporate America for low-risk younger populations. Most Americans can already see that covid numbers are already in decline in spite of months of Americans flouting mask mandates and social distancing guidelines. People can see that children -- an increasing number of whom are returning to schools -- aren't a significant factor in the spread of disease. So it will be important for the regime to push vaccines for children more aggressively before people stop listening to the "experts" completely.

    Don't expect the regime to admit it has been wrong about anything. If anything, it will double down on the usual narrative. It's worked pretty well so far.


    man_hammer 2 minutes ago (Edited) remove link

    What excess death rate ?

    2020 8.9 1.19 %

    2019 8.8 1.29 %

    2018 8.7 1.35 %

    2017 8.6 1.37 %

    2016 8.5 1.31 %

    2015 8.4 1.21 %

    2014 8.3 1.02 %

    2013 8.2 0.82 %

    2012 8.1 0.54 %

    Net increase of deaths is zero

    alexcojones 1 hour ago remove link

    Covidiots (noun)

    So-called experts, pseudo scientists, and fake media pundits were on TV, comparing Covid-19 to the Spanish Flu of 1918 when the lockdowns began. Compare:
    The so-called Spanish Flu of 1918: Went from February 1918 to April 1920 or 26 months. It killed an estimated 50 million war-weakened people in a world with a then population of 1.8 billion.

    If we adjusted for the world population increase and for Covid-19 to be as deadly as the Spanish Flu, C-19 would have killed roughly 216 million people (50 million x 4.3 to offset for the increase of population = 216 million).
    At present and using population increase it appears that Covid-19 is only 1% as deadly as the Spanish Flu. Even if not adjusting for the massive population increase its still only about 4.2% as deadly as the Spanish Flu.

    Plandemic or Scamdemic, you choose

    JaxPavan 1 hour ago

    Take a look at the CDC total death figures for 2020. It's the only year they publish CDC "predictions" instead of what the states actually reported. That's right, CDC is "predicting" the past in 2020. Fact is the real overall mortality probably didn't budge much in 2020.

    Lying sacks of excrement.

    2thelastman 8 minutes ago

    I wouldn't believe anything "science" tells us any longer. Throw all the charts at me you want to, you've lied so often about so much so completely that you have zero credibility left. None, nada, nicto.

    The communists have accomplished that much.

    [May 14, 2021] Wuhan Mistake (Honest Mistake Parody) - Louder With Crowder

    May 14, 2021 | www.youtube.com


    Cathy Snyder , 11 months ago

    That was pretty excellent...loved the little clips of President Trump saying "China" and "Chinese"! The media's reactions are priceless!

    Thong Slapping V8 , 11 months ago

    The Crowder team has some serious musical talent


    Shadow Banned
    , 11 months ago

    I would love to see a "HOTEL CHINAFORNIA" parody! 😆

    XSquibX , 1 month ago div class="style-scope ytd-comment-acti

    on-buttons-renderer">

    Wuhan
    Where I keep a bio lab
    Next to wet markets
    That's how we do
    
    But this time
    Something just escaped
    And I just wanted to
    Just I thought you'd wanna know
    Oops my bad
    
    I swear I never meant for this
    I never meant
    
    Don't look at me that way
    It was a Chinese mistake
    Don't look at me that way
    It was a Chinese mistake
    An honest mistake
    
    Sometimes
    When I'm in the lab
    I F up
    And pathogens get away
    Chinese flu
    
    I swear I never meant for this
    I never meant
    
    Don't look at me that way
    It was a Chinese mistake
    Don't look at me that way
    It was a Chinese mistake
    An honest mistake
    
    Don't look at me that way
    It was a Chinese mistake 
    Don't look at me that way
    It was a Chinese mistake
    

    [May 13, 2021] CDC slaps Fauci face: Fully Vaccinated People Can Stop Wearing Face Masks, Physical Distancing in Most Settings by Brianna Abbott

    May 13, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    People who have been fully vaccinated should still follow precautions in doctor's offices, airports, nursing homes, the agency recommends

    Fully vaccinated people don't need to wear a mask or physically distance during outdoor or indoor activities, large or small, federal health officials said, the broadest easing of pandemic recommendations so far.

    The fully vaccinated should continue to wear a mask while traveling by plane, bus or train, and the guidance doesn't apply to certain places like hospitals, nursing homes and prisons, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Thursday.

    The fully protected can, however, resume doing many of the things they had to give up due to the pandemic, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said.

    "We have all longed for this moment, when we can get back to some sense of normalcy," Dr. Walensky said. "That moment has come for those who are fully vaccinated."

    The CDC considers people fully vaccinated either two weeks after receiving their second dose of an mRNA vaccine, such as the one from Pfizer Inc. PFE 1.03% and partner BioNTech SE or Moderna Inc., MRNA -1.84% or two weeks after getting the single-shot vaccine from Johnson & Johnson .

    [May 11, 2021] The German Corona Investigation. -The PCR Pandemic

    May 11, 2021 | www.globalresearch.ca

    First published in October 2020

    The German Corona Investigative Committee has taken testimony from a large number of international scientists and experts since July 10, 2020.

    Scroll down for the Video and Full Transcript of Dr. Reiner Fuellmich 's presentation.

    Their conclusions are the following:

    Full Transcript

    Hello. I am Reiner Fuellmich and I have been admitted to the Bar in Germany and in California for 26 years. I have been practicing law primarily as a trial lawyer against fraudulent corporations such as Deutsche Bank, formerly one of the world's largest and most respected banks, today one of the most toxic criminal organizations in the world; VW, one of the world's largest and most respected car manufacturers, today notorious for its giant diesel fraud; and Kuehne and Nagel, the world's largest shipping company. We're suing them in a multi-million-dollar bribery case.

    I'm also one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee. Since July 10, 2020, this Committee has been listening to a large number of international scientists' and experts' testimony to find answers to questions about the corona crisis, which more and more people worldwide are asking. All the above-mentioned cases of corruption and fraud committed by the German corporations pale in comparison in view of the extent of the damage that the corona crisis has caused and continues to cause.

    This corona crisis, according to all we know today, must be renamed a "Corona Scandal" and those responsible for it must be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages. On a political level, everything must be done to make sure that no one will ever again be in a position of such power as to be able to defraud humanity or to attempt to manipulate us with their corrupt agendas. And for this reason I will now explain to you how and where an international network of lawyers will argue this biggest tort case ever, the corona fraud scandal, which has meanwhile unfolded into probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed.

    https://www.bitchute.com/embed/lWSuvM5MjV2r/

    Crimes against humanity were first defined in connection with the Nuremberg trials after World War II, that is, when they dealt with the main war criminals of the Third Reich. Crimes against humanity are today regulated in section 7 of the International Criminal Code. The three major questions to be answered in the context of a judicial approach to the corona scandal are:

    1. Is there a corona pandemic or is there only a PCR-test pandemic? Specifically, does a positive PCR-test result mean that the person tested is infected with Covid-19, or does it mean absolutely nothing in connection with the Covid-19 infection?
    2. Do the so-called anti-corona measures, such as the lockdown, mandatory face masks, social distancing, and quarantine regulations, serve to protect the world's population from corona, or do these measures serve only to make people panic so that they believe – without asking any questions – that their lives are in danger, so that in the end the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, as well as the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints?
    3. Is it true that the German government was massively lobbied, more so than any other country, by the chief protagonists of this so-called corona pandemic, Mr. Drosten, virologist at charity hospital in Berlin; Mr. Wieler, veterinarian and head of the German equivalent of the CDC, the RKI; and Mr. Tedros, Head of the World Health Organization or WHO; because Germany is known as a particularly disciplined country and was therefore to become a role model for the rest of the world for its strict and, of course, successful adherence to the corona measures?

    Answers to these three questions are urgently needed because the allegedly new and highly dangerous coronavirus has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world, and certainly not here in Germany. But the anti-corona measures, whose only basis are the PCR-test results, which are in turn all based on the German Drosten test, have, in the meantime, caused the loss of innumerable human lives and have destroyed the economic existence of countless companies and individuals worldwide. In Australia, for example, people are thrown into prison if they do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, as deemed by the authorities. In the Philippines, people who do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, in this sense, are getting shot in the head.

    Let me first give you a summary of the facts as they present themselves today. The most important thing in a lawsuit is to establish the facts – that is, to find out what actually happened. That is because the application of the law always depends on the facts at issue. If I want to prosecute someone for fraud, I cannot do that by presenting the facts of a car accident. So what happened here regarding the alleged corona pandemic?

    The facts laid out below are, to a large extent, the result of the work of the Corona Investigative Committee. This Committee was founded on July 10, 2020 by four lawyers in order to determine, through hearing expert testimony of international scientists and other experts:

    1. How dangerous is the virus really?
    2. What is the significance of a positive PCR test?
    3. What collateral damage has been caused by the corona measures, both with respect to the world population's health, and with respect to the world's economy?

    Let me start with a little bit of background information. What happened in May 2019 and then in early 2020? And what happened 12 years earlier with the swine flu, which many of you may have forgotten about? In May 2019, the stronger of the two parties which govern Germany in a grand coalition, the CDU, held a Congress on Global Health, apparently at the instigation of important players from the pharmaceutical industry and the tech industry. At this Congress, the usual suspects, you might say, gave their speeches. Angela Merkel was there, and the German Secretary of Health, Jens Spahn. But, some other people, whom one would not necessarily expect to be present at such a gathering, were also there: Professor Drosten, virologist from the Charite hospital in Berlin; Professor Wieler, veterinarian and Head of the RKI, the German equivalent of the CDC; as well as Mr. Tedros, philosopher and Head of the World Health Organization (WHO). They all gave speeches there. Also present and giving speeches were the chief lobbyists of the world's two largest health funds, namely the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust. Less than a year later, these very people called the shots in the proclamation of the worldwide corona pandemic, made sure that mass PCR tests were used to prove mass infections with Covid-19 all over the world, and are now pushing for vaccines to be invented and sold worldwide.

    T hese infections, or rather the positive test results that the PCR tests delivered, in turn became the justification for worldwide lockdowns, social distancing and mandatory face masks. It is important to note at this point that the definition of a pandemic was changed 12 years earlier. Until then, a pandemic was considered to be a disease that spread worldwide and which led to many serious illnesses and deaths. Suddenly, and for reasons never explained, it was supposed to be a worldwide disease only . Many serious illnesses and many deaths were not required any more to announce a pandemic. Due to this change, the WHO, which is closely intertwined with the global pharmaceutical industry, was able to declare the swine flu pandemic in 2009, with the result that vaccines were produced and sold worldwide on the basis of contracts that have been kept secret until today.

    These vaccines proved to be completely unnecessary because the swine flu eventually turned out to be a mild flu, and never became the horrific plague that the pharmaceutical industry and its affiliated universities kept announcing it would turn into, with millions of deaths certain to happen if people didn't get vaccinated. These vaccines also led to serious health problems. About 700 children in Europe fell incurably ill with narcolepsy and are now forever severely disabled. The vaccines bought with millions of taxpayers' money had to be destroyed with even more taxpayers' money. Already then, during the swine flu, the German virologist Drosten was one of those who stirred up panic in the population, repeating over and over again that the swine flu would claim many hundreds of thousands, even millions of deaths all over the world. In the end, it was mainly thanks to Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and his efforts as a member of the German Bundestag, and also a member of the Council of Europe, that this hoax was brought to an end before it would lead to even more serious consequences.

    Fast forward to March of 2020, when the German Bundestag announced an Epidemic Situation of National Importance, which is the German equivalent of a pandemic in March of 2020 and, based on this, the lockdown with the suspension of all essential constitutional rights for an unforeseeable time, there was only one single opinion on which the Federal Government in Germany based its decision. In an outrageous violation of the universally accepted principle " audiatur et altera pars ", which means that one must also hear the other side, the only person they listened to was Mr. Drosten.

    That is the very person whose horrific, panic-inducing prognoses had proved to be catastrophically false 12 years earlier. We know this because a whistleblower named David Sieber, a member of the Green Party, told us about it. He did so first on August 29, 2020 in Berlin, in the context of an event at which Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. also took part, and at which both men gave speeches. And he did so afterwards in one of the sessions of our Corona Committee.

    The reason he did this is that he had become increasingly sceptical about the official narrative propagated by politicians and the mainstream media. He had therefore undertaken an effort to find out about other scientists' opinions and had found them on the Internet. There, he realized that there were a number of highly renowned scientists who held a completely different opinion, which contradicted the horrific prognoses of Mr. Drosten. They assumed – and still do assume – that there was no disease that went beyond the gravity of the seasonal flu, that the population had already acquired cross- or T-cell immunity against this allegedly new virus, and that there was therefore no reason for any special measures, and certainly not for vaccinations.

    These scientists include Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University in California, a specialist in statistics and epidemiology, as well as public health, and at the same time the most quoted scientist in the world; Professor Michael Levitt, Nobel prize-winner for chemistry and also a biophysicist at Stanford University; the German professors Kary Mölling, Sucharit Bhakti, Klud Wittkowski, as well as Stefan Homburg; and now many, many more scientists and doctors worldwide, including Dr. Mike Yeadon. Dr. Mike Yeadon is the former Vice-President and Scientific Director of Pfizer, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world. I will talk some more about him a little later.

    The Covid-19 Numbers Game: The "Second Wave" is Based on Fake Statistics

    At the end of March, beginning of April of 2020, Mr. Sieber turned to the leadership of his Green Party with the knowledge he had accumulated, and suggested that they present these other scientific opinions to the public and explain that, contrary to Mr. Drosten's doomsday prophecies, there was no reason for the public to panic. Incidentally, Lord Sumption, who served as a judge at the British supreme court from 2012 to 2018, had done the very same thing at the very same time and had come to the very same conclusion: that there was no factual basis for panic and no legal basis for the corona measures. Likewise, the former President of the German federal constitutional court expressed – albeit more cautiously – serious doubts that the corona measures were constitutional. But instead of taking note of these other opinions and discussing them with David Sieber, the Green Party leadership declared that Mr. Drosten's panic messages were good enough for the Green Party. Remember, they're not a member of the ruling coalition; they're the opposition. Still, that was enough for them, just as it had been good enough for the Federal Government as a basis for its lockdown decision, they said. They subsequently, the Green Party leadership called David Sieber a conspiracy theorist, without ever having considered the content of his information, and then stripped him of his mandates.

    Now let's take a look at the current actual situation regarding the virus's danger, the complete uselessness of PCR tests for the detection of infections, and the lockdowns based on non-existent infections. In the meantime, we know that the health care systems were never in danger of becoming overwhelmed by Covid-19. On the contrary, many hospitals remain empty to this day and some are now facing bankruptcy. The hospital ship Comfort , which anchored in New York at the time, and could have accommodated a thousand patients, never accommodated more than some 20 patients. Nowhere was there any excess mortality. Studies carried out by Professor Ioannidis and others have shown that the mortality of corona is equivalent to that of the seasonal flu. Even the pictures from Bergamo and New York that were used to demonstrate to the world that panic was in order proved to be deliberately misleading.

    Then, the so-called "Panic Paper" was leaked, which was written by the German Department of the Interior. Its classified content shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that, in fact, the population was deliberately driven to panic by politicians and mainstream media. The accompanying irresponsible statements of the Head of the RKI – remember the [German] CDC – Mr. Wieler, who repeatedly and excitedly announced that the corona measures must be followed unconditionally by the population without them asking any question, shows that that he followed the script verbatim. In his public statements, he kept announcing that the situation was very grave and threatening, although the figures compiled by his own Institute proved the exact opposite.

    Among other things, the "Panic Paper" calls for children to be made to feel responsible – and I quote – "for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the corona rules", that is, if they do not wash their hands constantly and don't stay away from their grandparents. A word of clarification: in Bergamo, the vast majority of deaths, 94% to be exact, turned out to be the result not of Covid-19, but rather the consequence of the government deciding to transfer sick patients, sick with probably the cold or seasonal flu, from hospitals to nursing homes in order to make room at the hospitals for all the Covid patients, who ultimately never arrived. There, at the nursing homes, they then infected old people with a severely weakened immune system, usually as a result of pre-existing medical conditions. In addition, a flu vaccination, which had previously been administered, had further weakened the immune systems of the people in the nursing homes. In New York, only some, but by far not all hospitals were overwhelmed. Many people, most of whom were again elderly and had serious pre-existing medical conditions, and most of whom, had it not been for the panic-mongering, would have just stayed at home to recover, raced to the hospitals. There, many of them fell victim to healthcare-associated infections (or nosocomial infections) on the one hand, and incidents of malpractice on the other hand, for example, by being put on a respirator rather than receiving oxygen through an oxygen mask. Again, to clarify: Covid-19, this is the current state of affairs, is a dangerous disease, just like the seasonal flu is a dangerous disease. And of course, Covid-19, just like the seasonal flu, may sometimes take take a severe clinical course and will sometimes kill patients.

    However, as autopsies have shown, which were carried out in Germany in particular, by the forensic scientist Professor Klaus Püschel in Hamburg, the fatalities he examined had almost all been caused by serious pre-existing conditions, and almost all of the people who had died had died at the very at a very old age, just like in Italy, meaning they had lived beyond their average life expectancy.

    In this context, the following should also be mentioned: the German RKI – that is, again the equivalent of the CDC – had initially, strangely enough, recommended that no autopsies be performed. And there are numerous credible reports that doctors and hospitals worldwide had been paid money for declaring a deceased person a victim of Covid-19 rather than writing down the true cause of death on the death certificate, for example a heart attack or a gunshot wound. Without the autopsies, we would never know that the overwhelming majority of the alleged Covid-19 victims had died of completely different diseases, but not of Covid-19. The assertion that the lockdown was necessary because there were so many different infections with SARS-COV-2, and because the healthcare systems would be overwhelmed is wrong for three reasons, as we have learned from the hearings we conducted with the Corona Committee, and from other data that has become available in the meantime:

    A. The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating. By the time the lockdown was imposed, the alleged infection rates were already dropping again.

    B. There's already protection from the virus because of cross- or T-cell immunity. Apart from the above mentioned lockdown being imposed when the infection rates were already dropping, there is also cross- or T-cell immunity in the general population against the corona viruses contained in every flu or influenza wave. This is true, even if this time around, a slightly different strain of the coronavirus was at work. And that is because the body's own immune system remembers every virus it has ever battled in the past, and from this experience, it also recognizes a supposedly new, but still similar, strain of the virus from the corona family. Incidentally, that's how the PCR test for the detection of an infection was invented by now infamous Professor Drosten.

    At the beginning of January of 2020, based on this very basic knowledge, Mr. Drosten developed his PCR test, which supposedly detects an infection with SARS-COV-2, without ever having seen the real Wuhan virus from China, only having learned from social media reports that there was something going on in Wuhan, he started tinkering on his computer with what would become his corona PCR test. For this, he used an old SARS virus, hoping it would be sufficiently similar to the allegedly new strain of the coronavirus found in Wuhan. Then, he sent the result of his computer tinkering to China to determine whether the victims of the alleged new coronavirus tested positive. They did.

    And that was enough for the World Health Organization to sound the pandemic alarm and to recommend the worldwide use of the Drosten PCR test for the detection of infections with the virus now called SARS-COV-2. Drosten's opinion and advice was – this must be emphasized once again – the only source for the German government when it announced the lockdown as well as the rules for social distancing and the mandatory wearing of masks. And – this must also be emphasized once again – Germany apparently became the center of especially massive lobbying by the pharmaceutical and tech industry because the world, with reference to the allegedly disciplined Germans, should do as the Germans do in order to survive the pandemic.

    C. And this is the most important part of our fact-finding: the PCR test is being used on the basis of false statements, NOT based on scientific facts with respect to infections . In the meantime, we have learned that these PCR tests, contrary to the assertions of Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, do NOT give any indication of an infection with any virus, let alone an infection with SARS-COV-2. Not only are PCR tests expressly not approved for diagnostic purposes, as is correctly noted on leaflets coming with these tests, and as the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, has repeatedly emphasized. Instead, they're simply incapable of diagnosing any disease. That is: contrary to the assertions of Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, which they have been making since the proclamation of the pandemic, a positive PCR-test result does not mean that an infection is present. If someone tests positive, it does NOT mean that they're infected with anything, let alone with the contagious SARS-COV-2 virus.

    Even the United States CDC, even this institution agrees with this, and I quote directly from page 38 of one of its publications on the coronavirus and the PCR tests, dated July 13, 2020. First bullet point says:

    " Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019 nCOV [novel coronavirus ] is the causative agent for clinical symptoms ."

    Second bullet point says:

    " The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019 nCOV infection ." Third bullet point says: " This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens ."

    It is still not clear whether there has ever been a scientifically correct isolation of the Wuhan virus , so that nobody knows exactly what we're looking for when we test, especially since this virus, just like the flu viruses, mutates quickly. The PCR swabs take one or two sequences of a molecule that are invisible to the human eye and therefore need to be amplified in many cycles to make it visible . Everything over 35 cycles is – as reported by the New York Times and others – considered completely unreliable and scientifically unjustifiable. However, the Drosten test, as well as the WHO-recommended tests that followed his example, are set to 45 cycles. Can that be because of the desire to produce as many positive results as possible and thereby provide the basis for the false assumption that a large number of infections have been detected?

    The test cannot distinguish inactive and reproductive matter. That means that a positive result may happen because the test detects, for example, a piece of debris, a fragment of a molecule, which may signal nothing else than that the immune system of the person tested won a battle with a common cold in the past. Even Drosten himself declared in an interview with a German business magazine in 2014, at that time concerning the alleged detection of an infection with the MERS virus, allegedly with the help of the PCR test, that these PCR tests are so highly sensitive that even very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive . At that time, he also became very much aware of the powerful role of a panic and fear-mongering media, as you'll see at the end of the following quote. He said then, in this interview: " If, for example, such a pathogen scurries over the nasal mucosa of a nurse for a day or so without her getting sick or noticing anything, then she's suddenly a MERS case. This could also explain the explosion of case numbers in Saudi Arabia. In addition, the media there have made this into an incredible sensation ."

    Has he forgotten this? Or is he deliberately concealing this in the corona context because corona is a very lucrative business opportunity for the pharmaceutical industry as a whole? And for Mr. Alford Lund, his co-author in many studies and also a PCR-test producer. In my view, it is completely implausible that he forgot in 2020 what he knew about the PCR tests and told the business magazine in 2014.

    In short, this test cannot detect any infection, contrary to all false claims stating that it can. An infection, a so-called "hot" infection, requires that the virus, or rather a fragment of a molecule which may be a virus, is not just found somewhere, for example, in the throat of a person without causing any damage – that would be a "cold" infection. Rather, a "hot" infection requires that the virus penetrates into the cells, replicates there and causes symptoms such as headaches or a sore throat. Only then is a person really infected in the sense of a "hot" infection, because only then is a person contagious, that is, able to infect others. Until then, it is completely harmless for both the host and all other people that the host comes into contact with.

    Once again, this means that positive test results, contrary to all other claims by Drosten, Wieler, or the WHO , mean nothing with respect to infections, as even the CDC knows, as quoted above.

    Meanwhile, a number of highly respected scientists worldwide assume that there has never been a corona pandemic, but only a PCR-test pandemic . This is the conclusion reached by many German scientists, such as professors Bhakti, Reiss, Mölling, Hockertz, Walach and many others, including the above-mentioned Professor John Ioannidis, and the Nobel laureate, Professor Michael Levitt from Stanford University.

    The most recent such opinion is that of the aforementioned Dr. Mike Yeadon , a former Vice-President and Chief Science Officer at Pfizer, who held this position for 16 years. He and his co-authors, all well-known scientists, published a scientific paper in September of 2020 and he wrote a corresponding magazine article on September 20, 2020. Among other things, he and they state – and I quote:

    " We're basing our government policy, our economic policy, and the policy of restricting fundamental rights, presumably on completely wrong data and assumptions about the coronavirus. If it weren't for the test results that are constantly reported in the media, the pandemic would be over because nothing really happened. Of course, there are some serious individual cases of illness, but there are also some in every flu epidemic. There was a real wave of disease in March and April, but since then, everything has gone back to normal. Only the positive results rise and sink wildly again and again, depending on how many tests are carried out. But the real cases of illnesses are over. There can be no talk of a second wave. The allegedly new strain of the coronavirus is "

    – Dr. Yeadon continues –

    " only new in that it is a new type of the long-known corona virus. There are at least four coronaviruses that are endemic and cause some of the common colds we experience, especially in winter. They all have a striking sequence similarity to the coronavirus, and because the human immune system recognizes the similarity to the virus that has now allegedly been newly discovered, a T-cell immunity has long existed in this respect. 30 per cent of the population had this before the allegedly new virus even appeared. Therefore, it is sufficient for the so-called herd immunity that 15 to 25 per cent of the population are infected with the allegedly new coronavirus to stop the further spread of the virus. And this has long been the case ."

    Regarding the all-important PCR tests, Yeadon writes, in a piece called " Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics: The Deadly Danger of False Positives ", dated September 20, 2020, and I quote

    " The likelihood of an apparently positive case being a false positive is between 89 to 94 per cent, or near certainty ."

    Dr. Yeadon, in agreement with the professors of immunology Kamera from Germany, Kappel from the Netherlands, and Cahill from Ireland, as well as the microbiologist Dr. Arve from Austria, all of whom testified before the German Corona Committee, explicitly points out that a positive test does not mean that an intact virus has been found.

    The authors explain that what the PCR test actually measures is – and I quote:

    " Simply the presence of partial RNA sequences present in the intact virus, which could be a piece of dead virus, which cannot make the subject sick, and cannot be transmitted, and cannot make anyone else sick ."

    Because of the complete unsuitability of the test for the detection of infectious diseases – tested positive in goats, sheep, papayas and even chicken wings – Oxford Professor Carl Heneghan, Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, writes that the Covid virus would never disappear if this test practice were to be continued, but would always be falsely detected in much of what is tested. Lockdowns, as Yeadon and his colleagues found out, do not work. Sweden, with its laissez-faire approach, and Great Britain, with its strict lockdown, for example, have completely comparable disease and mortality statistics. The same was found by US scientists concerning the different US states. It makes no difference to the incidence of disease whether a state implements a lockdown or not.

    With regard to the now infamous Imperial College of London's Professor Neil Ferguson and his completely false computer models warning of millions of deaths, he says that – and I quote: " No serious scientist gives any validity to Ferguson's model." He points out with thinly veiled contempt – again I quote:

    " It's important that you know, most scientists don't accept that it " – that is, Ferguson's model – " was even faintly right. But the government is still wedded to the model ." Ferguson predicted 40 thousand corona deaths in Sweden by May and 100 thousand by June, but it remained at 5,800 which, according to the Swedish authorities, is equivalent to a mild flu. If the PCR tests had not been used as a diagnostic tool for corona infections, there would not be a pandemic and there would be no lockdowns, but everything would have been perceived as just a medium or light wave of influenza, these scientists conclude. Dr. Yeadon in his piece, " Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics: The Deadly Danger of False Positives, writes: " This test is fatally flawed and must immediately be withdrawn and never used again in this setting, unless shown to be fixed ." And, towards the end of that article, " I have explained how a hopelessly performing diagnostic test has been, and continues to be used, not for diagnosis of disease, but it seems solely to create fear ".

    Now let's take a look at the current actual situation regarding the severe damage caused by the lockdowns and other measures. Another detailed paper, written by a German official in the Department of the Interior, who is responsible for risk assessment and the protection of the population against risks, was leaked recently. It is now called the "False Alarm" paper. This paper comes to the conclusion that there was that there was and is no sufficient evidence for serious health risks for the population as claimed by Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, but – the author says – there's very much evidence of the corona measures causing gigantic health and economic damage to the population, which he then describes in detail in this paper. This, he concludes, will lead to very high claims for damages, which the government will be held responsible for. This has now become reality, but the paper's author was suspended.

    More and more scientists, but also lawyers, recognize that, as a result of the deliberate panic-mongering, and the corona measures enabled by this panic, democracy is in great danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models. As I already mentioned above, in Australia, people who do not wear the masks, which more and more studies show, are hazardous to health, or who allegedly do not wear them correctly, are arrested, handcuffed and thrown into jail. In the Philippines, they run the risk of getting shot, but even in Germany and in other previously civilized countries, children are taken away from their parents if they do not comply with quarantine regulations, distance regulations, and mask-wearing regulations. According to psychologists and psychotherapists who testified before the Corona Committee, children are traumatized en masse, with the worst psychological consequences yet to be expected in the medium- and long-term. In Germany alone, to bankruptcies are expected in the fall to strike small- and medium-sized businesses, which form the backbone of the economy. This will result in incalculable tax losses and incalculably high and long-term social security money transfers for – among other things – unemployment benefits.

    Since, in the meantime, pretty much everybody is beginning to understand the full devastating impact of the completely unfounded corona measures, I will refrain from detailing this any further.

    Let me now give you a summary of the legal consequences. The most difficult part of a lawyer's work is always to establish the true facts, not the application of the legal rules to these facts. Unfortunately, a German lawyer does not learn this at law school but his Anglo-American counterparts do get the necessary training for this at their law schools. And probably for this reason, but also because of the much more pronounced independence of the Anglo-American judiciary, the Anglo-American law of evidence is much more effective in practice than the German one. A court of law can only decide a legal dispute correctly if it has previously determined the facts correctly, which is not possible without looking at all the evidence. And that's why the law of evidence is so important. On the basis of the facts summarized above, in particular those established with the help of the work of the German Corona Committee, the legal evaluation is actually simple. It is simple for all civilized legal systems, regardless of whether these legal systems are based on civil law, which follows the Roman law more closely, or whether they are based on Anglo-American common law, which is only loosely connected to Roman law.

    Let's first take a look at the unconstitutionality of the measures. A number of German law professors, including professors Kingreen, Morswig, Jungbluth and Vosgerau have stated, either in written expert opinions or in interviews, in line with the serious doubts expressed by the former president of the federal constitutional court with respect to the constitutionality of the corona measures, that these measures – the corona measures – are without a sufficient factual basis, and also without a sufficient legal basis, and are therefore unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately. Very recently, a judge, Thorsten Schleif is his name, declared publicly that the German judiciary, just like the general public, has been so panic-stricken that it was no longer able to administer justice properly. He says that the courts of law – and I quote – "have all too quickly waved through coercive measures which, for millions of people all over Germany, represent massive suspensions of their constitutional rights. He points out that German citizens – again I quote – "are currently experiencing the most serious encroachment on their constitutional rights since the founding of the federal republic of Germany in 1949". In order to contain the corona pandemic, federal and state governments have intervened, he says, massively, and in part threatening the very existence of the country as it is guaranteed by the constitutional rights of the people.

    What about fraud, intentional infliction of damage and crimes against humanity?

    Based on the rules of criminal law, asserting false facts concerning the PCR tests or intentional misrepresentation , as it was committed by Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and WHO, as well as the WHO, can only be assessed as fraud. Based on the rules of civil tort law, this translates into intentional infliction of damage. The German professor of civil law, Martin Schwab, supports this finding in public interviews. In a comprehensive legal opinion of around 180 pages, he has familiarized himself with the subject matter like no other legal scholar has done thus far and, in particular, has provided a detailed account of the complete failure of the mainstream media to report on the true facts of this so-called pandemic. Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and Tedros of the WHO all knew, based on their own expertise or the expertise of their institutions, that the PCR tests cannot provide any information about infections, but asserted over and over again to the general public that they can, with their counterparts all over the world repeating this. And they all knew and accepted that, on the basis of their recommendations, the governments of the world would decide on lockdowns, the rules for social distancing, and mandatory wearing of masks, the latter representing a very serious health hazard, as more and more independent studies and expert statements show. Under the rules of civil tort law, all those who have been harmed by these PCR-test-induced lockdowns are entitled to receive full compensation for their losses. In particular, there is a duty to compensate – that is, a duty to pay damages for the loss of profits suffered by companies and self-employed employed persons as a result of the lockdown and other measures.

    In the meantime, however, the anti-corona measures have caused, and continue to cause, such devastating damage to the world population's health and economy that the crimes committed by Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO must be legally qualified as actual crimes against humanity , as defined in section 7 of the International Criminal Code.

    How can we do something? What can we do? Well, the class action is the best route to compensatory damages and to political consequences. The so-called class action lawsuit is based on English law and exists today in the USA and in Canada. It enables a court of law to allow a complaint for damages to be tried as a class action lawsuit at the request of a plaintiff if:

    1. As a result of a damage-inducing event
    2. A large number of people suffer the same type of damage.

    Phrased differently, a judge can allow a class-action lawsuit to go forward if common questions of law and fact make up the vital component of the lawsuit. Here, the common questions of law and fact revolve around the worldwide PCR-test-based lockdowns and its consequences. Just like the VW diesel passenger cars were functioning products, but they were defective due to a so-called defeat device because they didn't comply with the emissions standards, so too the PCR tests – which are perfectly good products in other settings – are defective products when it comes to the diagnosis of infections. Now, if an American or Canadian company or an American or Canadian individual decides to sue these persons in the United States or Canada for damages, then the court called upon to resolve this dispute may, upon request, allow this complaint to be tried as a class action lawsuit.

    If this happens, all affected parties worldwide will be informed about this through publications in the mainstream media and will thus have the opportunity to join this class action within a certain period of time, to be determined by the court. It should be emphasized that nobody must join the class action, but every injured party can join the class.

    The advantage of the class action is that only one trial is needed , namely to try the complaint of a representative plaintiff who is affected in a manner typical of everyone else in the class. This is, firstly, cheaper, and secondly, faster than hundreds of thousands or more individual lawsuits. And thirdly, it imposes less of a burden on the courts. Fourthly, as a rule it allows a much more precise examination of the accusations than would be possible in the context of hundreds of thousands, or more likely in this corona setting, even millions of individual lawsuits.

    In particular, the well-established and proven Anglo-American law of evidence, with its pre-trial discovery, is applicable. This requires that all evidence relevant for the determination of the lawsuit is put on the table. In contrast to the typical situation in German lawsuits with structural imbalance, that is, lawsuits involving on the one hand a consumer, and on the other hand a powerful corporation, the withholding or even destruction of evidence is not without consequence; rather the party withholding or even destroying evidence loses the case under these evidence rules.

    Here in Germany, a group of tort lawyers have banded together to help their clients with recovery of damages. They have provided all relevant information and forms for German plaintiffs to both estimate how much damage they have suffered and join the group or class of plaintiffs who will later join the class action when it goes forward either in Canada or the US. Initially, this group of lawyers had considered to also collect and manage the claims for damages of other, non-German plaintiffs, but this proved to be unmanageable.

    However, through an international lawyers' network, which is growing larger by the day, the German group of attorneys provides to all of their colleagues in all other countries, free of charge, all relevant information, including expert opinions and testimonies of experts showing that the PCR tests cannot detect infections. And they also provide them with all relevant information as to how they can prepare and bundle the claims for damages of their clients so that, they too, can assert their clients' claims for damages, either in their home country's courts of law, or within the framework of the class action, as explained above.

    These scandalous corona facts, gathered mostly by the Corona Committee and summarized above, are the very same facts that will soon be proven to be true either in one court of law, or in many courts of law all over the world.

    These are the facts that will pull the masks off the faces of all those responsible for these crimes. To the politicians who believe those corrupt people, these facts are hereby offered as a lifeline that can help you readjust your course of action, and start the long overdue public scientific discussion, and not go down with those charlatans and criminals.

    Thank you.

    *

    Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    [May 11, 2021] The German Corona Investigation. -The PCR Pandemic

    May 11, 2021 | www.globalresearch.ca

    First published in October 2020

    The German Corona Investigative Committee has taken testimony from a large number of international scientists and experts since July 10, 2020.

    Scroll down for the Video and Full Transcript of Dr. Reiner Fuellmich 's presentation.

    Their conclusions are the following:

    Full Transcript

    Hello. I am Reiner Fuellmich and I have been admitted to the Bar in Germany and in California for 26 years. I have been practicing law primarily as a trial lawyer against fraudulent corporations such as Deutsche Bank, formerly one of the world's largest and most respected banks, today one of the most toxic criminal organizations in the world; VW, one of the world's largest and most respected car manufacturers, today notorious for its giant diesel fraud; and Kuehne and Nagel, the world's largest shipping company. We're suing them in a multi-million-dollar bribery case.

    I'm also one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee. Since July 10, 2020, this Committee has been listening to a large number of international scientists' and experts' testimony to find answers to questions about the corona crisis, which more and more people worldwide are asking. All the above-mentioned cases of corruption and fraud committed by the German corporations pale in comparison in view of the extent of the damage that the corona crisis has caused and continues to cause.

    This corona crisis, according to all we know today, must be renamed a "Corona Scandal" and those responsible for it must be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages. On a political level, everything must be done to make sure that no one will ever again be in a position of such power as to be able to defraud humanity or to attempt to manipulate us with their corrupt agendas. And for this reason I will now explain to you how and where an international network of lawyers will argue this biggest tort case ever, the corona fraud scandal, which has meanwhile unfolded into probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed.

    https://www.bitchute.com/embed/lWSuvM5MjV2r/

    Crimes against humanity were first defined in connection with the Nuremberg trials after World War II, that is, when they dealt with the main war criminals of the Third Reich. Crimes against humanity are today regulated in section 7 of the International Criminal Code. The three major questions to be answered in the context of a judicial approach to the corona scandal are:

    1. Is there a corona pandemic or is there only a PCR-test pandemic? Specifically, does a positive PCR-test result mean that the person tested is infected with Covid-19, or does it mean absolutely nothing in connection with the Covid-19 infection?
    2. Do the so-called anti-corona measures, such as the lockdown, mandatory face masks, social distancing, and quarantine regulations, serve to protect the world's population from corona, or do these measures serve only to make people panic so that they believe – without asking any questions – that their lives are in danger, so that in the end the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, as well as the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints?
    3. Is it true that the German government was massively lobbied, more so than any other country, by the chief protagonists of this so-called corona pandemic, Mr. Drosten, virologist at charity hospital in Berlin; Mr. Wieler, veterinarian and head of the German equivalent of the CDC, the RKI; and Mr. Tedros, Head of the World Health Organization or WHO; because Germany is known as a particularly disciplined country and was therefore to become a role model for the rest of the world for its strict and, of course, successful adherence to the corona measures?

    Answers to these three questions are urgently needed because the allegedly new and highly dangerous coronavirus has not caused any excess mortality anywhere in the world, and certainly not here in Germany. But the anti-corona measures, whose only basis are the PCR-test results, which are in turn all based on the German Drosten test, have, in the meantime, caused the loss of innumerable human lives and have destroyed the economic existence of countless companies and individuals worldwide. In Australia, for example, people are thrown into prison if they do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, as deemed by the authorities. In the Philippines, people who do not wear a mask or do not wear it properly, in this sense, are getting shot in the head.

    Let me first give you a summary of the facts as they present themselves today. The most important thing in a lawsuit is to establish the facts – that is, to find out what actually happened. That is because the application of the law always depends on the facts at issue. If I want to prosecute someone for fraud, I cannot do that by presenting the facts of a car accident. So what happened here regarding the alleged corona pandemic?

    The facts laid out below are, to a large extent, the result of the work of the Corona Investigative Committee. This Committee was founded on July 10, 2020 by four lawyers in order to determine, through hearing expert testimony of international scientists and other experts:

    1. How dangerous is the virus really?
    2. What is the significance of a positive PCR test?
    3. What collateral damage has been caused by the corona measures, both with respect to the world population's health, and with respect to the world's economy?

    Let me start with a little bit of background information. What happened in May 2019 and then in early 2020? And what happened 12 years earlier with the swine flu, which many of you may have forgotten about? In May 2019, the stronger of the two parties which govern Germany in a grand coalition, the CDU, held a Congress on Global Health, apparently at the instigation of important players from the pharmaceutical industry and the tech industry. At this Congress, the usual suspects, you might say, gave their speeches. Angela Merkel was there, and the German Secretary of Health, Jens Spahn. But, some other people, whom one would not necessarily expect to be present at such a gathering, were also there: Professor Drosten, virologist from the Charite hospital in Berlin; Professor Wieler, veterinarian and Head of the RKI, the German equivalent of the CDC; as well as Mr. Tedros, philosopher and Head of the World Health Organization (WHO). They all gave speeches there. Also present and giving speeches were the chief lobbyists of the world's two largest health funds, namely the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust. Less than a year later, these very people called the shots in the proclamation of the worldwide corona pandemic, made sure that mass PCR tests were used to prove mass infections with Covid-19 all over the world, and are now pushing for vaccines to be invented and sold worldwide.

    T hese infections, or rather the positive test results that the PCR tests delivered, in turn became the justification for worldwide lockdowns, social distancing and mandatory face masks. It is important to note at this point that the definition of a pandemic was changed 12 years earlier. Until then, a pandemic was considered to be a disease that spread worldwide and which led to many serious illnesses and deaths. Suddenly, and for reasons never explained, it was supposed to be a worldwide disease only . Many serious illnesses and many deaths were not required any more to announce a pandemic. Due to this change, the WHO, which is closely intertwined with the global pharmaceutical industry, was able to declare the swine flu pandemic in 2009, with the result that vaccines were produced and sold worldwide on the basis of contracts that have been kept secret until today.

    These vaccines proved to be completely unnecessary because the swine flu eventually turned out to be a mild flu, and never became the horrific plague that the pharmaceutical industry and its affiliated universities kept announcing it would turn into, with millions of deaths certain to happen if people didn't get vaccinated. These vaccines also led to serious health problems. About 700 children in Europe fell incurably ill with narcolepsy and are now forever severely disabled. The vaccines bought with millions of taxpayers' money had to be destroyed with even more taxpayers' money. Already then, during the swine flu, the German virologist Drosten was one of those who stirred up panic in the population, repeating over and over again that the swine flu would claim many hundreds of thousands, even millions of deaths all over the world. In the end, it was mainly thanks to Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and his efforts as a member of the German Bundestag, and also a member of the Council of Europe, that this hoax was brought to an end before it would lead to even more serious consequences.

    Fast forward to March of 2020, when the German Bundestag announced an Epidemic Situation of National Importance, which is the German equivalent of a pandemic in March of 2020 and, based on this, the lockdown with the suspension of all essential constitutional rights for an unforeseeable time, there was only one single opinion on which the Federal Government in Germany based its decision. In an outrageous violation of the universally accepted principle " audiatur et altera pars ", which means that one must also hear the other side, the only person they listened to was Mr. Drosten.

    That is the very person whose horrific, panic-inducing prognoses had proved to be catastrophically false 12 years earlier. We know this because a whistleblower named David Sieber, a member of the Green Party, told us about it. He did so first on August 29, 2020 in Berlin, in the context of an event at which Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. also took part, and at which both men gave speeches. And he did so afterwards in one of the sessions of our Corona Committee.

    The reason he did this is that he had become increasingly sceptical about the official narrative propagated by politicians and the mainstream media. He had therefore undertaken an effort to find out about other scientists' opinions and had found them on the Internet. There, he realized that there were a number of highly renowned scientists who held a completely different opinion, which contradicted the horrific prognoses of Mr. Drosten. They assumed – and still do assume – that there was no disease that went beyond the gravity of the seasonal flu, that the population had already acquired cross- or T-cell immunity against this allegedly new virus, and that there was therefore no reason for any special measures, and certainly not for vaccinations.

    These scientists include Professor John Ioannidis of Stanford University in California, a specialist in statistics and epidemiology, as well as public health, and at the same time the most quoted scientist in the world; Professor Michael Levitt, Nobel prize-winner for chemistry and also a biophysicist at Stanford University; the German professors Kary Mölling, Sucharit Bhakti, Klud Wittkowski, as well as Stefan Homburg; and now many, many more scientists and doctors worldwide, including Dr. Mike Yeadon. Dr. Mike Yeadon is the former Vice-President and Scientific Director of Pfizer, one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world. I will talk some more about him a little later.

    The Covid-19 Numbers Game: The "Second Wave" is Based on Fake Statistics

    At the end of March, beginning of April of 2020, Mr. Sieber turned to the leadership of his Green Party with the knowledge he had accumulated, and suggested that they present these other scientific opinions to the public and explain that, contrary to Mr. Drosten's doomsday prophecies, there was no reason for the public to panic. Incidentally, Lord Sumption, who served as a judge at the British supreme court from 2012 to 2018, had done the very same thing at the very same time and had come to the very same conclusion: that there was no factual basis for panic and no legal basis for the corona measures. Likewise, the former President of the German federal constitutional court expressed – albeit more cautiously – serious doubts that the corona measures were constitutional. But instead of taking note of these other opinions and discussing them with David Sieber, the Green Party leadership declared that Mr. Drosten's panic messages were good enough for the Green Party. Remember, they're not a member of the ruling coalition; they're the opposition. Still, that was enough for them, just as it had been good enough for the Federal Government as a basis for its lockdown decision, they said. They subsequently, the Green Party leadership called David Sieber a conspiracy theorist, without ever having considered the content of his information, and then stripped him of his mandates.

    Now let's take a look at the current actual situation regarding the virus's danger, the complete uselessness of PCR tests for the detection of infections, and the lockdowns based on non-existent infections. In the meantime, we know that the health care systems were never in danger of becoming overwhelmed by Covid-19. On the contrary, many hospitals remain empty to this day and some are now facing bankruptcy. The hospital ship Comfort , which anchored in New York at the time, and could have accommodated a thousand patients, never accommodated more than some 20 patients. Nowhere was there any excess mortality. Studies carried out by Professor Ioannidis and others have shown that the mortality of corona is equivalent to that of the seasonal flu. Even the pictures from Bergamo and New York that were used to demonstrate to the world that panic was in order proved to be deliberately misleading.

    Then, the so-called "Panic Paper" was leaked, which was written by the German Department of the Interior. Its classified content shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that, in fact, the population was deliberately driven to panic by politicians and mainstream media. The accompanying irresponsible statements of the Head of the RKI – remember the [German] CDC – Mr. Wieler, who repeatedly and excitedly announced that the corona measures must be followed unconditionally by the population without them asking any question, shows that that he followed the script verbatim. In his public statements, he kept announcing that the situation was very grave and threatening, although the figures compiled by his own Institute proved the exact opposite.

    Among other things, the "Panic Paper" calls for children to be made to feel responsible – and I quote – "for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the corona rules", that is, if they do not wash their hands constantly and don't stay away from their grandparents. A word of clarification: in Bergamo, the vast majority of deaths, 94% to be exact, turned out to be the result not of Covid-19, but rather the consequence of the government deciding to transfer sick patients, sick with probably the cold or seasonal flu, from hospitals to nursing homes in order to make room at the hospitals for all the Covid patients, who ultimately never arrived. There, at the nursing homes, they then infected old people with a severely weakened immune system, usually as a result of pre-existing medical conditions. In addition, a flu vaccination, which had previously been administered, had further weakened the immune systems of the people in the nursing homes. In New York, only some, but by far not all hospitals were overwhelmed. Many people, most of whom were again elderly and had serious pre-existing medical conditions, and most of whom, had it not been for the panic-mongering, would have just stayed at home to recover, raced to the hospitals. There, many of them fell victim to healthcare-associated infections (or nosocomial infections) on the one hand, and incidents of malpractice on the other hand, for example, by being put on a respirator rather than receiving oxygen through an oxygen mask. Again, to clarify: Covid-19, this is the current state of affairs, is a dangerous disease, just like the seasonal flu is a dangerous disease. And of course, Covid-19, just like the seasonal flu, may sometimes take take a severe clinical course and will sometimes kill patients.

    However, as autopsies have shown, which were carried out in Germany in particular, by the forensic scientist Professor Klaus Püschel in Hamburg, the fatalities he examined had almost all been caused by serious pre-existing conditions, and almost all of the people who had died had died at the very at a very old age, just like in Italy, meaning they had lived beyond their average life expectancy.

    In this context, the following should also be mentioned: the German RKI – that is, again the equivalent of the CDC – had initially, strangely enough, recommended that no autopsies be performed. And there are numerous credible reports that doctors and hospitals worldwide had been paid money for declaring a deceased person a victim of Covid-19 rather than writing down the true cause of death on the death certificate, for example a heart attack or a gunshot wound. Without the autopsies, we would never know that the overwhelming majority of the alleged Covid-19 victims had died of completely different diseases, but not of Covid-19. The assertion that the lockdown was necessary because there were so many different infections with SARS-COV-2, and because the healthcare systems would be overwhelmed is wrong for three reasons, as we have learned from the hearings we conducted with the Corona Committee, and from other data that has become available in the meantime:

    A. The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating. By the time the lockdown was imposed, the alleged infection rates were already dropping again.

    B. There's already protection from the virus because of cross- or T-cell immunity. Apart from the above mentioned lockdown being imposed when the infection rates were already dropping, there is also cross- or T-cell immunity in the general population against the corona viruses contained in every flu or influenza wave. This is true, even if this time around, a slightly different strain of the coronavirus was at work. And that is because the body's own immune system remembers every virus it has ever battled in the past, and from this experience, it also recognizes a supposedly new, but still similar, strain of the virus from the corona family. Incidentally, that's how the PCR test for the detection of an infection was invented by now infamous Professor Drosten.

    At the beginning of January of 2020, based on this very basic knowledge, Mr. Drosten developed his PCR test, which supposedly detects an infection with SARS-COV-2, without ever having seen the real Wuhan virus from China, only having learned from social media reports that there was something going on in Wuhan, he started tinkering on his computer with what would become his corona PCR test. For this, he used an old SARS virus, hoping it would be sufficiently similar to the allegedly new strain of the coronavirus found in Wuhan. Then, he sent the result of his computer tinkering to China to determine whether the victims of the alleged new coronavirus tested positive. They did.

    And that was enough for the World Health Organization to sound the pandemic alarm and to recommend the worldwide use of the Drosten PCR test for the detection of infections with the virus now called SARS-COV-2. Drosten's opinion and advice was – this must be emphasized once again – the only source for the German government when it announced the lockdown as well as the rules for social distancing and the mandatory wearing of masks. And – this must also be emphasized once again – Germany apparently became the center of especially massive lobbying by the pharmaceutical and tech industry because the world, with reference to the allegedly disciplined Germans, should do as the Germans do in order to survive the pandemic.

    C. And this is the most important part of our fact-finding: the PCR test is being used on the basis of false statements, NOT based on scientific facts with respect to infections . In the meantime, we have learned that these PCR tests, contrary to the assertions of Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, do NOT give any indication of an infection with any virus, let alone an infection with SARS-COV-2. Not only are PCR tests expressly not approved for diagnostic purposes, as is correctly noted on leaflets coming with these tests, and as the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, has repeatedly emphasized. Instead, they're simply incapable of diagnosing any disease. That is: contrary to the assertions of Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, which they have been making since the proclamation of the pandemic, a positive PCR-test result does not mean that an infection is present. If someone tests positive, it does NOT mean that they're infected with anything, let alone with the contagious SARS-COV-2 virus.

    Even the United States CDC, even this institution agrees with this, and I quote directly from page 38 of one of its publications on the coronavirus and the PCR tests, dated July 13, 2020. First bullet point says:

    " Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019 nCOV [novel coronavirus ] is the causative agent for clinical symptoms ."

    Second bullet point says:

    " The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019 nCOV infection ." Third bullet point says: " This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens ."

    It is still not clear whether there has ever been a scientifically correct isolation of the Wuhan virus , so that nobody knows exactly what we're looking for when we test, especially since this virus, just like the flu viruses, mutates quickly. The PCR swabs take one or two sequences of a molecule that are invisible to the human eye and therefore need to be amplified in many cycles to make it visible . Everything over 35 cycles is – as reported by the New York Times and others – considered completely unreliable and scientifically unjustifiable. However, the Drosten test, as well as the WHO-recommended tests that followed his example, are set to 45 cycles. Can that be because of the desire to produce as many positive results as possible and thereby provide the basis for the false assumption that a large number of infections have been detected?

    The test cannot distinguish inactive and reproductive matter. That means that a positive result may happen because the test detects, for example, a piece of debris, a fragment of a molecule, which may signal nothing else than that the immune system of the person tested won a battle with a common cold in the past. Even Drosten himself declared in an interview with a German business magazine in 2014, at that time concerning the alleged detection of an infection with the MERS virus, allegedly with the help of the PCR test, that these PCR tests are so highly sensitive that even very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive . At that time, he also became very much aware of the powerful role of a panic and fear-mongering media, as you'll see at the end of the following quote. He said then, in this interview: " If, for example, such a pathogen scurries over the nasal mucosa of a nurse for a day or so without her getting sick or noticing anything, then she's suddenly a MERS case. This could also explain the explosion of case numbers in Saudi Arabia. In addition, the media there have made this into an incredible sensation ."

    Has he forgotten this? Or is he deliberately concealing this in the corona context because corona is a very lucrative business opportunity for the pharmaceutical industry as a whole? And for Mr. Alford Lund, his co-author in many studies and also a PCR-test producer. In my view, it is completely implausible that he forgot in 2020 what he knew about the PCR tests and told the business magazine in 2014.

    In short, this test cannot detect any infection, contrary to all false claims stating that it can. An infection, a so-called "hot" infection, requires that the virus, or rather a fragment of a molecule which may be a virus, is not just found somewhere, for example, in the throat of a person without causing any damage – that would be a "cold" infection. Rather, a "hot" infection requires that the virus penetrates into the cells, replicates there and causes symptoms such as headaches or a sore throat. Only then is a person really infected in the sense of a "hot" infection, because only then is a person contagious, that is, able to infect others. Until then, it is completely harmless for both the host and all other people that the host comes into contact with.

    Once again, this means that positive test results, contrary to all other claims by Drosten, Wieler, or the WHO , mean nothing with respect to infections, as even the CDC knows, as quoted above.

    Meanwhile, a number of highly respected scientists worldwide assume that there has never been a corona pandemic, but only a PCR-test pandemic . This is the conclusion reached by many German scientists, such as professors Bhakti, Reiss, Mölling, Hockertz, Walach and many others, including the above-mentioned Professor John Ioannidis, and the Nobel laureate, Professor Michael Levitt from Stanford University.

    The most recent such opinion is that of the aforementioned Dr. Mike Yeadon , a former Vice-President and Chief Science Officer at Pfizer, who held this position for 16 years. He and his co-authors, all well-known scientists, published a scientific paper in September of 2020 and he wrote a corresponding magazine article on September 20, 2020. Among other things, he and they state – and I quote:

    " We're basing our government policy, our economic policy, and the policy of restricting fundamental rights, presumably on completely wrong data and assumptions about the coronavirus. If it weren't for the test results that are constantly reported in the media, the pandemic would be over because nothing really happened. Of course, there are some serious individual cases of illness, but there are also some in every flu epidemic. There was a real wave of disease in March and April, but since then, everything has gone back to normal. Only the positive results rise and sink wildly again and again, depending on how many tests are carried out. But the real cases of illnesses are over. There can be no talk of a second wave. The allegedly new strain of the coronavirus is "

    – Dr. Yeadon continues –

    " only new in that it is a new type of the long-known corona virus. There are at least four coronaviruses that are endemic and cause some of the common colds we experience, especially in winter. They all have a striking sequence similarity to the coronavirus, and because the human immune system recognizes the similarity to the virus that has now allegedly been newly discovered, a T-cell immunity has long existed in this respect. 30 per cent of the population had this before the allegedly new virus even appeared. Therefore, it is sufficient for the so-called herd immunity that 15 to 25 per cent of the population are infected with the allegedly new coronavirus to stop the further spread of the virus. And this has long been the case ."

    Regarding the all-important PCR tests, Yeadon writes, in a piece called " Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics: The Deadly Danger of False Positives ", dated September 20, 2020, and I quote

    " The likelihood of an apparently positive case being a false positive is between 89 to 94 per cent, or near certainty ."

    Dr. Yeadon, in agreement with the professors of immunology Kamera from Germany, Kappel from the Netherlands, and Cahill from Ireland, as well as the microbiologist Dr. Arve from Austria, all of whom testified before the German Corona Committee, explicitly points out that a positive test does not mean that an intact virus has been found.

    The authors explain that what the PCR test actually measures is – and I quote:

    " Simply the presence of partial RNA sequences present in the intact virus, which could be a piece of dead virus, which cannot make the subject sick, and cannot be transmitted, and cannot make anyone else sick ."

    Because of the complete unsuitability of the test for the detection of infectious diseases – tested positive in goats, sheep, papayas and even chicken wings – Oxford Professor Carl Heneghan, Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, writes that the Covid virus would never disappear if this test practice were to be continued, but would always be falsely detected in much of what is tested. Lockdowns, as Yeadon and his colleagues found out, do not work. Sweden, with its laissez-faire approach, and Great Britain, with its strict lockdown, for example, have completely comparable disease and mortality statistics. The same was found by US scientists concerning the different US states. It makes no difference to the incidence of disease whether a state implements a lockdown or not.

    With regard to the now infamous Imperial College of London's Professor Neil Ferguson and his completely false computer models warning of millions of deaths, he says that – and I quote: " No serious scientist gives any validity to Ferguson's model." He points out with thinly veiled contempt – again I quote:

    " It's important that you know, most scientists don't accept that it " – that is, Ferguson's model – " was even faintly right. But the government is still wedded to the model ." Ferguson predicted 40 thousand corona deaths in Sweden by May and 100 thousand by June, but it remained at 5,800 which, according to the Swedish authorities, is equivalent to a mild flu. If the PCR tests had not been used as a diagnostic tool for corona infections, there would not be a pandemic and there would be no lockdowns, but everything would have been perceived as just a medium or light wave of influenza, these scientists conclude. Dr. Yeadon in his piece, " Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics: The Deadly Danger of False Positives, writes: " This test is fatally flawed and must immediately be withdrawn and never used again in this setting, unless shown to be fixed ." And, towards the end of that article, " I have explained how a hopelessly performing diagnostic test has been, and continues to be used, not for diagnosis of disease, but it seems solely to create fear ".

    Now let's take a look at the current actual situation regarding the severe damage caused by the lockdowns and other measures. Another detailed paper, written by a German official in the Department of the Interior, who is responsible for risk assessment and the protection of the population against risks, was leaked recently. It is now called the "False Alarm" paper. This paper comes to the conclusion that there was that there was and is no sufficient evidence for serious health risks for the population as claimed by Drosten, Wieler and the WHO, but – the author says – there's very much evidence of the corona measures causing gigantic health and economic damage to the population, which he then describes in detail in this paper. This, he concludes, will lead to very high claims for damages, which the government will be held responsible for. This has now become reality, but the paper's author was suspended.

    More and more scientists, but also lawyers, recognize that, as a result of the deliberate panic-mongering, and the corona measures enabled by this panic, democracy is in great danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models. As I already mentioned above, in Australia, people who do not wear the masks, which more and more studies show, are hazardous to health, or who allegedly do not wear them correctly, are arrested, handcuffed and thrown into jail. In the Philippines, they run the risk of getting shot, but even in Germany and in other previously civilized countries, children are taken away from their parents if they do not comply with quarantine regulations, distance regulations, and mask-wearing regulations. According to psychologists and psychotherapists who testified before the Corona Committee, children are traumatized en masse, with the worst psychological consequences yet to be expected in the medium- and long-term. In Germany alone, to bankruptcies are expected in the fall to strike small- and medium-sized businesses, which form the backbone of the economy. This will result in incalculable tax losses and incalculably high and long-term social security money transfers for – among other things – unemployment benefits.

    Since, in the meantime, pretty much everybody is beginning to understand the full devastating impact of the completely unfounded corona measures, I will refrain from detailing this any further.

    Let me now give you a summary of the legal consequences. The most difficult part of a lawyer's work is always to establish the true facts, not the application of the legal rules to these facts. Unfortunately, a German lawyer does not learn this at law school but his Anglo-American counterparts do get the necessary training for this at their law schools. And probably for this reason, but also because of the much more pronounced independence of the Anglo-American judiciary, the Anglo-American law of evidence is much more effective in practice than the German one. A court of law can only decide a legal dispute correctly if it has previously determined the facts correctly, which is not possible without looking at all the evidence. And that's why the law of evidence is so important. On the basis of the facts summarized above, in particular those established with the help of the work of the German Corona Committee, the legal evaluation is actually simple. It is simple for all civilized legal systems, regardless of whether these legal systems are based on civil law, which follows the Roman law more closely, or whether they are based on Anglo-American common law, which is only loosely connected to Roman law.

    Let's first take a look at the unconstitutionality of the measures. A number of German law professors, including professors Kingreen, Morswig, Jungbluth and Vosgerau have stated, either in written expert opinions or in interviews, in line with the serious doubts expressed by the former president of the federal constitutional court with respect to the constitutionality of the corona measures, that these measures – the corona measures – are without a sufficient factual basis, and also without a sufficient legal basis, and are therefore unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately. Very recently, a judge, Thorsten Schleif is his name, declared publicly that the German judiciary, just like the general public, has been so panic-stricken that it was no longer able to administer justice properly. He says that the courts of law – and I quote – "have all too quickly waved through coercive measures which, for millions of people all over Germany, represent massive suspensions of their constitutional rights. He points out that German citizens – again I quote – "are currently experiencing the most serious encroachment on their constitutional rights since the founding of the federal republic of Germany in 1949". In order to contain the corona pandemic, federal and state governments have intervened, he says, massively, and in part threatening the very existence of the country as it is guaranteed by the constitutional rights of the people.

    What about fraud, intentional infliction of damage and crimes against humanity?

    Based on the rules of criminal law, asserting false facts concerning the PCR tests or intentional misrepresentation , as it was committed by Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and WHO, as well as the WHO, can only be assessed as fraud. Based on the rules of civil tort law, this translates into intentional infliction of damage. The German professor of civil law, Martin Schwab, supports this finding in public interviews. In a comprehensive legal opinion of around 180 pages, he has familiarized himself with the subject matter like no other legal scholar has done thus far and, in particular, has provided a detailed account of the complete failure of the mainstream media to report on the true facts of this so-called pandemic. Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and Tedros of the WHO all knew, based on their own expertise or the expertise of their institutions, that the PCR tests cannot provide any information about infections, but asserted over and over again to the general public that they can, with their counterparts all over the world repeating this. And they all knew and accepted that, on the basis of their recommendations, the governments of the world would decide on lockdowns, the rules for social distancing, and mandatory wearing of masks, the latter representing a very serious health hazard, as more and more independent studies and expert statements show. Under the rules of civil tort law, all those who have been harmed by these PCR-test-induced lockdowns are entitled to receive full compensation for their losses. In particular, there is a duty to compensate – that is, a duty to pay damages for the loss of profits suffered by companies and self-employed employed persons as a result of the lockdown and other measures.

    In the meantime, however, the anti-corona measures have caused, and continue to cause, such devastating damage to the world population's health and economy that the crimes committed by Messrs. Drosten, Wieler and the WHO must be legally qualified as actual crimes against humanity , as defined in section 7 of the International Criminal Code.

    How can we do something? What can we do? Well, the class action is the best route to compensatory damages and to political consequences. The so-called class action lawsuit is based on English law and exists today in the USA and in Canada. It enables a court of law to allow a complaint for damages to be tried as a class action lawsuit at the request of a plaintiff if:

    1. As a result of a damage-inducing event
    2. A large number of people suffer the same type of damage.

    Phrased differently, a judge can allow a class-action lawsuit to go forward if common questions of law and fact make up the vital component of the lawsuit. Here, the common questions of law and fact revolve around the worldwide PCR-test-based lockdowns and its consequences. Just like the VW diesel passenger cars were functioning products, but they were defective due to a so-called defeat device because they didn't comply with the emissions standards, so too the PCR tests – which are perfectly good products in other settings – are defective products when it comes to the diagnosis of infections. Now, if an American or Canadian company or an American or Canadian individual decides to sue these persons in the United States or Canada for damages, then the court called upon to resolve this dispute may, upon request, allow this complaint to be tried as a class action lawsuit.

    If this happens, all affected parties worldwide will be informed about this through publications in the mainstream media and will thus have the opportunity to join this class action within a certain period of time, to be determined by the court. It should be emphasized that nobody must join the class action, but every injured party can join the class.

    The advantage of the class action is that only one trial is needed , namely to try the complaint of a representative plaintiff who is affected in a manner typical of everyone else in the class. This is, firstly, cheaper, and secondly, faster than hundreds of thousands or more individual lawsuits. And thirdly, it imposes less of a burden on the courts. Fourthly, as a rule it allows a much more precise examination of the accusations than would be possible in the context of hundreds of thousands, or more likely in this corona setting, even millions of individual lawsuits.

    In particular, the well-established and proven Anglo-American law of evidence, with its pre-trial discovery, is applicable. This requires that all evidence relevant for the determination of the lawsuit is put on the table. In contrast to the typical situation in German lawsuits with structural imbalance, that is, lawsuits involving on the one hand a consumer, and on the other hand a powerful corporation, the withholding or even destruction of evidence is not without consequence; rather the party withholding or even destroying evidence loses the case under these evidence rules.

    Here in Germany, a group of tort lawyers have banded together to help their clients with recovery of damages. They have provided all relevant information and forms for German plaintiffs to both estimate how much damage they have suffered and join the group or class of plaintiffs who will later join the class action when it goes forward either in Canada or the US. Initially, this group of lawyers had considered to also collect and manage the claims for damages of other, non-German plaintiffs, but this proved to be unmanageable.

    However, through an international lawyers' network, which is growing larger by the day, the German group of attorneys provides to all of their colleagues in all other countries, free of charge, all relevant information, including expert opinions and testimonies of experts showing that the PCR tests cannot detect infections. And they also provide them with all relevant information as to how they can prepare and bundle the claims for damages of their clients so that, they too, can assert their clients' claims for damages, either in their home country's courts of law, or within the framework of the class action, as explained above.

    These scandalous corona facts, gathered mostly by the Corona Committee and summarized above, are the very same facts that will soon be proven to be true either in one court of law, or in many courts of law all over the world.

    These are the facts that will pull the masks off the faces of all those responsible for these crimes. To the politicians who believe those corrupt people, these facts are hereby offered as a lifeline that can help you readjust your course of action, and start the long overdue public scientific discussion, and not go down with those charlatans and criminals.

    Thank you.

    *

    Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

    [May 11, 2021] Looks like anti-mask and anti-vaxes online communities attract highly educated critical thinkers

    "the group who is most likely to purposefully choose to #not #vaccinate are #highly #educated. In speaking with them, these are people who have read the primary literature themselves, & they're correctly interpreting it, so it's not a misunderstanding." ... "I like the "Defying public health officials..." by reading and thinking for themselves? and these MIT heads live in The Land of the Free? smh"..."It's terrifying because the conclusion is essentially that the "anti maskers" have a better grip on the data, but surely they must be wrong because they challenge orthodoxy."
    May 11, 2021 | twitter.com

    commie lee jones

    @commieleejones

    May 10

    "The lack of transparency within these data collection systems -- which many of these users infer as a lack of honesty -- erodes these users' trust within both government institutions and the datasets they release."

    "In fact, there are multiple threads every week where users debate how representative the data are of the population given the increased rate of testing across many states."

    "These groups argue that the conflation of asymptomatic and symptomatic cases therefore makes it difficult for anyone to actually determine the severity of the pandemic."

    "For these anti-mask users, their approach to the pandemic is grounded in more scientific rigor, not less."

    "These individuals as a whole are extremely willing to help others who have trouble interpreting graphs with multiple forms of clarification: by helping people find the original sources so that they can replicate the analysis themselves, by referencing other reputable studies...

    that come to the same conclusions, by reminding others to remain vigilant about the limitations of the data, and by answering questions about the implications of a specific graph."

    "While these groups highly value scientific expertise, they also see collective analysis of data as a way to bring communities together within a time of crisis, and being able to transparently and dispassionately analyze the data is crucial for democratic governance."

    "In fact, the explicit motivation for many of these followers is to find information so that they can make the best decisions for their families -- and by extension, for the communities around them."

    "The message that runs through these threads is unequivocal: that data is the only way to set fear-bound politicians straight, and using better data is a surefire way towards creating a safer community."

    "Data literacy is a quintessential criterion for membership within the community they have created."

    "Arguing anti-maskers need more scientific literacy is to characterize their approach as uninformed & inexplicably extreme. This study shows the opposite: they are deeply invested in forms of critique & knowledge production they recognize as markers of scientific expertise"

    "We argue that anti-maskers' deep story draws from similar wells of resentment, but adds a particular emphasis on the usurpation of scientific knowledge by a paternalistic, condescending elite that expects intellectual subservience rather than critical thinking from the public."

    And yet in the conclusion they lament "the skeptical impulse that the 'science simply isn't settled,' prompting people to simply 'think for themselves" to horrifying ends." They then compare it to the January 6 Capitol riot. Bizarre and fascinating document.
    Derrick S. @DuLouef · May 10 This paper reads as an appeal to eradicate skepticism and affix in its place, a strict adherence to dogma, absent of critical thinking. Feels like they would just prefer people take it on faith that the church of science is infallible, and stop questioning it.

    [May 11, 2021] MIT researchers found that skeptics place a high premium on daton data analysis and empiricism; they believe that science is a process, and not an institution

    The link to the paper is https:// arxiv.org/pdf/2101.07993 .pdf
    May 11, 2021 | www.reddit.com

    MIT researchers 'infiltrated' a Covid skeptics community a few months ago and found that skeptics place a high premium on data analysis and empiricism. "Most fundamentally, the groups we studied believe that science is a process, and not an institution."

    pi_over_3 18 hours ago

    This is the most amazing thing I've read all week. 41 Reply Share Report Save

    simsonic 5 hours ago

    This paper shows some crazy data about the complexity and stupidity of some people. They know just enough to be "smart" and as a researcher I'll dispute a major premise - that these people act in good faith. They do not. How do I know? Just go talk to them, read what they wrote, and watch what they do. They don't analyze the data. They analyze some data and dismiss a lot of good data that says the opposite. 6 Reply Share Report Save

    ItsKonway 6 hours ago
    · edited 5 hours ago

    We argue that anti-maskers' deep story draws from similar wells of resentment, but adds a particular emphasis on the usurpation of scientific knowledge by a paternalistic, condescending elite that expects intellectual subservience rather than critical thinking from the public.

    Damn they fucking nailed the libs. 18 Reply Share Report Save

    brentwilliams2 17 hours ago

    In my experience, I've seen a lot of people who absolutely look at the data. However, they do not have a science background, so therefore they often misinterpret things. They often see things in the data that really aren't there, or that the data really can't prove. 48 Reply Share Report Save

    WaltzRoommate 15 hours ago

    You've gotta do something.

    You can either try your best, put your ideas out for public scrutiny, and try to be intellectually honest or you can completely outsource your thinking to people who (a) still might have no clue what they're talking about, (b) might not have your best interest at heart, (c) are possibly not using scientific processes so much as appeals to conformity. 19 Reply Share Report Save

    brentwilliams2 6 hours ago

    This is the way I view it: If it is a singular government entity sharing information, then I am generally skeptical. However, in the case of something like covid, you have independent entities across the world with scientists agreeing on several key things. In that instance, the chance of a conspiracy goes so far down that it is more prudent to lean on their scientific expertise than my own analysis, which is probably so corrupted by my personal bias as to not be very accurate. So I'm not sure I agree with the idea that I have to do something - adding my own uneducated opinion in with the massive amount of other uneducated opinions is not adding any value to the world. In fact, I would say it is an active detriment as it muddies the waters, and at least here in the US, I think it is what has pushed us into more anti-scientific thinking. 4 Reply Share Report Save

    WaltzRoommate 4 hours ago

    Why is a dispersed power structure more reliable? It's not like they don't all have powerful incentives to conform.

    adding my own uneducated opinion in with the massive amount of other uneducated opinions is not adding any value to the world.

    Your opinion on who is credible to follow blindly is equally as credible as your opinion on covid.

    Seriously though, just read source material. It's not that hard and when you do, you'll notice it's not written in Latin and filled with PhD math. It's accessible to anyone and it'll become intuitively obvious to you why you should be allowed to enter the discussion. 6 Reply Share Report Save

    brentwilliams2 3 hours ago

    Your opinion on who is credible to follow blindly is equally as credible as your opinion on covid.

    Disagree completely. If you look at the worldwide community of scientists and they agree on several key things, my opinion does not trump that. Now granted, there is a slight chance that system fails. For example, in the US, the sugar lobby successfully placed health blames on fat instead of sugar; however, those instances are in the minority, especially when there are more institutions studying any given issue. As for my opinion, I could have an ego and say that I could read the studies myself and form my own conclusion. I studied at a very well-respected university and consider myself fairly mentally adept; however, my background is not in the sciences and I would undoubtedly misconstrue something. Beyond that, half the world's population is below average intelligence, and to think that they are going to draw conclusions that are both correct and yet different from the scientific community at large is simply laughable to me. But what they can do is misconstrue things, share it with their equally uneducated friends, and build a swell of uninformed opinions that have the same voting power as everyone else. And we are seeing this in action right now because people think that their own opinions are better than someone who has studied the subject for decades.

    And again, to be clear, I'm not advocating for blind following. If something doesn't seem right, then ask questions - that makes a ton of sense. But I think where people get messed up is that they see something that doesn't seem to add up, but rather than ask questions of a subject matter expert, they then try to answer it themselves, and they (laypeople) will almost always be wrong in that situation. 1 Reply Share Report Save

    WaltzRoommate 3 hours ago

    If you don't read the literature then you have no idea if there is a "slight" chance of the system failing. I've literally never met a half decent scientist who had any respect for the institutions today. The system actually fails quite often due to a metric shit load of problems with every aspect of scientific institutionalism from publication biases, to media backlash and public backlash, to unqualified scientists with bad methods, bad research, and bad results.

    Know-nothing normie idiots treat scientists like some sort of intellectual super soldier titans of knowledge, but most of them are midwits who lack passion and do the bare minimum to get by. The only way to be informed is to be an actual part of the process by actually reading the literature and taking an active role in your own thought processes. 1 Reply Share Report Save

    brentwilliams2 2 hours ago

    most of them are midwits

    You think that someone who has advanced degrees in a specific niche is anywhere close to a "midwit"? Sure, scientists are not infallible, but you are going the opposite extreme. 1 Reply Share Report Save

    WaltzRoommate 2 hours ago

    Degrees are more of a measure of how long you're willing to stay in college for than anything else. It used to be 10% of society going, probably approximately the top 10% intellectually, and now there's not only far more and far less impressive people, but their grades are inflated. The private sector knows I'm right, which is why "Hey, I have a degree!" will no longer just instantly land you a job.

    What I'm saying is really not that extreme. Scientists are not excluded from the maxim that 90% of everything is crap. Scientists are not the exception to the fact that most employees phone it in day to day. Scientists are not excluded from social and political pressures, and neither are the institutions that they work for.

    You should not outsource your thinking based on the claims of institutions that those institutions are wonderful. You should read the subject matter well enough to ask intelligent questions and have a web of belief to fall back on that is based on actual information and not based on a game of telephone. You should then put your thoughts up to public scrutiny, ask questions as needed, and develop some working understanding of the world around you. This statement is not extreme. 3 Reply Share Report Save

    brentwilliams2 1 hour ago

    I have to admit that I'm getting so incredibly tired from people saying stuff like this: "Degrees are more of a measure of how long you're willing to stay in college for than anything else." That's just absurd. You have no idea what goes into a doctoral thesis, at least from a reputable school.

    I see a trend in your posts where there is a string of truth, but then takes a much more extreme view of that situation. For example, yes, as more people are pushed into college situations, it will be less that are potentially qualified, but that is a GIANT leap to what you then say. And yes, surely there are well-educated but ultimately lazy scientists, but again, you use that minority to make generalized statements over the entire scientific community.

    At the end, what you say has merit - if you ask questions directed to subject matter experts and not your layperson peers , and continue to educate yourself, at some point you will have an opinion that has validity. But we are talking about years of study to then understand the issues well enough to dispute those who already have those years of experience and study. If you want to go that route, that's completely fine, but that is not the average person, nor anywhere close to it. It frankly is a lot more effective to simply get better at being more discerning who to trust from that existing group of experts. Vote Reply Share Report Save

    the_seraphim 17 hours ago

    I'm a covid skeptic in that I believe it's real, but don't trust my government to tell a) the truth and (b) not sensationalise it for their benefit.

    I like to see the data and evaluate things myself, I'm pretty smart with that and was in the early day "close the borders or were screwed" camp back in December 2018 / January 2019

    Empirical data is the only thing worth anything.

    I do worry for people who don't have my background in science or know when to stop and say "I don't know so let's just do the safe thing" though.

    [May 10, 2021] Inputs, for example, from our CDC, have consistently been wrong, or manipulated to achieve a political end. Masks were necessary, then they weren't

    May 10, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    J

    Inputs, for example, from our CDC, have consistently been wrong, or manipulated to achieve a political end. Masks were necessary, then they weren't J Joe Ross

    Am I the only one amused by the illusion of precision when it comes to defining outcomes associated with "herd immunity". Inputs, for example, from our CDC, have consistently been wrong, or manipulated to achieve a political end. Masks were necessary, then they weren't . Six feet, became three feet, then back to six feet. We will get thru this, because we must.

    [May 10, 2021] Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth

    May 10, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    Conventional wisdom holds this was worth it because lives were saved by shutting workplaces and schools and telling people to stay home. But a new study by University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan shows the opposite


    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth

    Conventional wisdom holds this was worth it because lives were saved by shutting workplaces and schools and telling people to stay home. But a new study by University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan shows the opposite

    J Domingo
    The lockdowns were not supposed stop anything.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth

    Conventional wisdom holds this was worth it because lives were saved by shutting workplaces and schools and telling people to stay home. But a new study by University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan shows the opposite

    J Domingo
    The lockdowns were not supposed stop anything.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth

    Conventional wisdom holds this was worth it because lives were saved by shutting workplaces and schools and telling people to stay home. But a new study by University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan shows the opposite

    J Domingo
    The lockdowns were not supposed stop anything.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth

    Conventional wisdom holds this was worth it because lives were saved by shutting workplaces and schools and telling people to stay home. But a new study by University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan shows the opposite

    J Domingo
    The lockdowns were not supposed stop anything.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth

    Conventional wisdom holds this was worth it because lives were saved by shutting workplaces and schools and telling people to stay home. But a new study by University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan shows the opposite

    J Domingo
    The lockdowns were not supposed stop anything.
    Love it when people unintentionally and accidentally tell the truth.

    [May 10, 2021] Lockdowns Didn't Stop Covid

    May 10, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    Covid-19 lockdowns shaved 3.5% off U.S. GDP in 2020 even as the federal government spent more than $2.6 trillion in relief measures. Millions of children fell behind in learning and nearly 100,000 businesses closed for good.

    Conventional wisdom holds this was worth it because lives were saved by shutting workplaces and schools and telling people to stay home. But a new study by University of Chicago economist Casey Mulligan shows the opposite. After the first month of the pandemic, organizations that adopted prevention protocols became safer places than the wider community. Officials who didn't see that coming forgot that organizations are rational and look for cooperative solutions that improve the welfare of the group, such as reducing the risks of communicable disease.

    In "The Backward Art of Slowing the Spread? Congregation Efficiencies during COVID-19," Mr. Mulligan uses empirical data to test the presumption that the workplace was less safe than the home. He recognizes that "absent costly prevention activities, larger groups naturally have more infections per member."

    Yet as he notes, people join firms "in part because they value the group's management of local externalities and public goods." That's an economist's way of saying that the human capital of a company is tied to its capacity to protect employees and serve customers.

    There is little doubt that infection would spread faster in congregations than in smaller groups if both engaged in similar practices. But since larger groups have an incentive to spend on expensive methods of prevention, larger organizations might be better at prevention than households with fewer people.

    This is what happened. "Available data from schools, hospitals, nursing homes, food processing plants, hair stylists, and airlines," Mr. Mulligan writes in the study, "show employers adopting mitigation protocols in the spring of 2020." These were "physical barriers," like masking and air filtering, but also included distancing protocols, pods and screenings. Households were less likely to implement similar precautions.

    According to the study, "per-capita transmission rates on site fell dramatically, usually to levels below household transmission."

    In one example, "an hour worked in the Duke Health system went from being more dangerous than an hour outside work to being more than three times safer." Overall, "both the spread data and the prevalence data suggest that the prevention efforts worked, or at least that something about the organization keeps infection rates below what they are outside the organization."

    [May 09, 2021] Flu Has Disappeared Worldwide During the COVID Pandemic

    May 09, 2021 | science.slashdot.org

    (scientificamerican.com) 306 BeauHD on Thursday April 29, 2021 @11:30PM from the effective-public-health-measures dept. An anonymous reader quotes a report from Scientific American: Since the novel coronavirus began its global spread, influenza cases reported to the World Health Organization have dropped to minuscule levels . The reason, epidemiologists think, is that the public health measures taken to keep the coronavirus from spreading also stop the flu. Influenza viruses are transmitted in much the same way as SARS-CoV-2, but they are less effective at jumping from host to host. As Scientific American reported last fall , the drop-off in flu numbers was both swift and universal. Since then, cases have stayed remarkably low. "There's just no flu circulating," says Greg Poland, who has studied the disease at the Mayo Clinic for decades. The U.S. saw about 600 deaths from influenza during the 2020-2021 flu season. In comparison, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated there were roughly 22,000 deaths in the prior season and 34,000 two seasons ago.

    Because each year's flu vaccine is based on strains that have been circulating during the past year, it is unclear how next year's vaccine will fare, should the typical patterns of the disease return. [...] Public health experts are grateful for the reprieve. Some are also worried about a lost immune response, however. If influenza subsides for several years, today's toddlers could miss a chance to have an early-age response imprinted on their immune system. That could be good or bad, depending on what strains circulate during the rest of their life. For now, future flu transmission remains a roll of the dice.

    [May 09, 2021] Face mask in ubic places mandate couls have saved 5% of GDP in comparison with lockkdowns

    May 09, 2021 | science.slashdot.org

    An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Washington Post: After a late-spring lull, daily coronavirus cases in the United States have again hit record highs , driven by resurgent outbreaks in states such as Florida, Arizona and California. Hospitals in Houston are already on the brink of being overwhelmed, and public health experts worry the pandemic's body count will soon again be climbing in tandem with the daily case load. The dire situation has raised the specter of another round of state-level stay-at-home orders to halt the pandemic's spread and caused a number of governors to pause or reverse their ongoing reopening plans.

    Against this backdrop, a team of economists at investment bank Goldman Sachs has published an analysis suggesting more painful shutdowns could be averted if the United States implements a nationwide mask mandate .

    "A face mask mandate could potentially substitute for lockdowns that would otherwise subtract nearly 5% from GDP," the team, led by the company's chief economist, Jan Hatzius, writes. It's worth noting the authors of the report are economists and not public health experts. Their primary motivation is to protect the economic interests of Goldman Sachs's investors, which is why they're interested in the effects of federal policy on gross domestic product. But their findings are in line with a number of other published studies on the efficacy of masks.

    The Goldman Sachs report notes the United States is a global outlier with respect to face mask use, which is widespread in Asia and currently mandated in many European countries. Though the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention " recommends " the use of masks in public and 20 states plus the District of Columbia have implemented their own mandates, there is no binding national policy, with wide regional variations in mask use around the country. "

    We estimate that statewide mask mandates gradually raise the percentage of people who 'always' or 'frequently' wear masks by around 25 [percentage points] in the 30+ days after signing," the authors write. "Our numerical estimates are that cumulative cases grow 17.3% per week without a mask mandate but only 7.3% with a mask mandate, and that cumulative fatalities grow 29% per week without a mask mandate but only 16% with a mask mandate."

    [May 09, 2021] May 7, 2021 at 9:33 pm

    May 09, 2021 | www.nakedcapitalism.com

    Update CDC/aerosols 5-7-2021

    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/sars-cov-2-transmission.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fcoronavirus%2F2019-ncov%2Fscience%2Fscience-briefs%2Fscientific-brief-sars-cov-2.html

    Some of the References look familiar/

    [May 09, 2021] Economists Disagree Over How Much Covid-19 'Herd Immunity' Needed for Recovery

    There is no or very little (depending of type of vaccine) immunity from South African mutation in the USA for people who already were vaccinated.
    From comments: "Herd Immunity or Heard on the Street immunity? COVID was way over-played in order to get Biden in the WH. Now the shoes on the other foot and the Herd Concept is eroding pretty darn fast"... "Here in the US, it's undeniable that the quantity of covid cases were intentionally over counted -- likely for political reasons."
    "If the re-infection rate is near zero and those who are the most vulnerable are 95% inoculated why should the remaining unvaccinated (mostly youth) be needed to reach herd immunity? Their reaction to COVID-19 is either undetectable or no worse than a mild cold. Some people, journalists, just do not want to think and/or act logically."
    Notable quotes:
    "... For example, there is no herd immunity from South African mutation in the USA for those who were immunized with the Moderna vaccine and Johnson and Johnson vaccine ..."
    "... And more mutations will follow this and the next year. So the concept of "herd immunity" when applied to coronaviruses looks to me fuzzy; in this sense this is the goal that the nation probably can't achieve. Remember the "flattering of the curve" fiasco in NYC. Quarantine measures were completely decimated by Floyd-gate riots and authorities were forced to swallow the bitter pill. Measures they advocated proved to be useless and economically damaging. ..."
    "... Coronaviruses like C19 are a moving target. Moreover, there are large swats of the US population that have weakened immune system (including some seniors) who that does not respond to vaccination, creating no protection. In large cities like NYC they will serve as the reservoir of virus mutations vaccination, or no vaccination. ..."
    "... We have Fauci making unfounded statements that confuse everyone and now economists are going to tell us when herd immunity will become operative. Can't do any worse than the 'media docs'. ..."
    May 09, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    Some view herd immunity -- the point at which a critical mass of a population become immune to a disease-causing virus or bacteria -- as a key factor in determining when Covid-19 will be conquered and economies will return to normal. Until herd immunity is reached, some say, governments will restrict activities to prevent the disease's spread, resulting in fewer goods and services being produced and consumed.

    Other economists say businesses can reopen and economic activity can rebound without full herd immunity, and likely will.

    Part of the challenge for economists is that it is hard to know exactly when a given place will achieve herd immunity, if ever. For Covid-19 , epidemiologists generally believe it will require having at least 60% to 80% of a population develop antibodies, curbing the virus's ability to spread.

    ... ... ...

    Economists at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. have tried to incorporate immunity estimates into their forecasts by looking at daily vaccination progress around the world and take account of estimates of how many people have already been infected.

    According to their calculations, 60% of the population in the U.S. and U.K. are already immune to Covid-19; the biggest economies of Europe will get there by August.

    Serg Bezrukov

    I agree with Umesh Patil.

    For example, there is no herd immunity from South African mutation in the USA for those who were immunized with the Moderna vaccine and Johnson and Johnson vaccine .

    And more mutations will follow this and the next year. So the concept of "herd immunity" when applied to coronaviruses looks to me fuzzy; in this sense this is the goal that the nation probably can't achieve. Remember the "flattering of the curve" fiasco in NYC. Quarantine measures were completely decimated by Floyd-gate riots and authorities were forced to swallow the bitter pill. Measures they advocated proved to be useless and economically damaging.

    Coronaviruses like C19 are a moving target. Moreover, there are large swats of the US population that have weakened immune system (including some seniors) who that does not respond to vaccination, creating no protection. In large cities like NYC they will serve as the reservoir of virus mutations vaccination, or no vaccination.

    Rick Schaler SUBSCRIBER 3 hours ago

    We have Fauci making unfounded statements that confuse everyone and now economists are going to tell us when herd immunity will become operative. Can't do any worse than the 'media docs'.

    Umesh Patil

    SUBSCRIBER

    [May 08, 2021] Only two things are infinite, human stupidity and the universe, and I'm not sure about the universe: The CDC repoted under 2,500 confirmed flu cases for the US for the entire season. In the previous season, the CDC estimated there were 38 million cases, or 99.99% fewer cases.

    May 08, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Im4truth4all 1 hour ago

    "Only two things are infinite, human stupidity and the universe, and I'm not sure about the universe." - Attributed to Einstein: The CDC repoted under 2,500 confirmed flu cases for the US for the entire season. In the previous season, the CDC estimated there were 38 million cases, or 99.99% fewer cases.

    ReadyForHillary 1 hour ago (Edited)

    No different from climate "science". Ferguson repeated the mistake made by the first warming hysterics - making predictions that can be tested empirically. The latter learned to push their predictions out to the year 2100 so they can never be tested.

    JaxPavan 1 hour ago

    "As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK. There are many diseases which can cause serious illness which are not classified as HCIDs.

    The 4 nations public health HCID group made an interim recommendation in January 2020 to classify COVID-19 as an HCID. This was based on consideration of the UK HCID criteria about the virus and the disease with information available during the early stages of the outbreak. Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK HCID criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall), and there is now greater clinical awareness and a specific and sensitive laboratory test, the availability of which continues to increase.

    The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) is also of the opinion that COVID-19 should no longer be classified as an HCID.

    The World Health Organization (WHO) continues to consider COVID-19 as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), therefore the need to have a national, coordinated response remains and this is being met by the government's COVID-19 response .

    Cases of COVID-19 are no longer managed by HCID treatment centres only. All healthcare workers managing possible and confirmed cases should follow the updated national infection and prevention (IPC) guidance for COVID-19 , which supersedes all previous IPC guidance for COVID-19. This guidance includes instructions about different personal protective equipment (PPE) ensembles that are appropriate for different clinical scenarios."

    COVID isn't even on the list

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid

    [May 08, 2021] Imperial College Predicted Catastrophe In Every Country On Earth... Then The Models Failed

    Why this jerk is still listened to? Only because his predictions suit the neoliberal elite. ..completly wrong, never in doubt.....
    May 08, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Phillip Magness via The American Institute for Economic Research,

    The satirist Ambrose Bierce once defined prophecy as the "art and practice of selling one's credibility for future delivery." Covid-19 has produced no shortage of doomsaying prophets whose prognostications completely failed at future delivery, and yet in the eyes of the scientific community their credibility remains peculiarly intact.

    No greater example exists than the epidemiology modeling team at Imperial College-London (ICL), led by the physicist Neil Ferguson . As I've documented at length , the ICL modelers played a direct and primary role in selling the concept of lockdowns to the world. The governments of the United States and United Kingdom explicitly credited Ferguson's forecasts on March 16, 2020 with the decision to embrace the once-unthinkable response of ordering their populations to shelter in place.

    Ferguson openly boasted of his team's role in these decisions in a December 2020 interview , and continues to implausibly claim credit for saving millions of lives despite the deficit of empirical evidence that his policies delivered on their promises. Quite the opposite – the worst outcomes in terms of Covid deaths per capita are almost entirely in countries that leaned heavily on lockdowns and related nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) in their unsuccessful bid to turn the pandemic's tide.

    Assessed looking backward from the one-year mark, ICL's modeling exercises performed disastrously . They not only failed to accurately forecast the course of the pandemic in the US and UK – they also failed to anticipate Covid-19's course in almost every country in the world, irrespective of the policy responses taken.

    Time and time again, the Ferguson team's models dramatically overstated the death toll of the disease, posting the worst performance record of any major epidemiology model . After a year, some of the ICL predictions reach farcical territory. Their forecast of 179,000 deaths in Taiwan, which never locked down, was off by 1,798,000% (as of this writing, Taiwan has just 12 Covid-19 deaths). A similar story played out in other countries that eschewed the lockdown approach for the first year of the pandemic. Imperial overstated the predicted mortality of Sweden (392%), South Korea (17,461%), and Japan (11,670%) in the absence of heavier-handed NPIs than any of these countries actually imposed.

    But what about the rest of the world? Most other countries experimented with some form of Neil Ferguson's prescriptive advice over the last year, although for different degrees of severity and duration. Despite widely different mortality outcomes of their own, no other country provides anything approaching a clear validation of the ICL model.

    The searchable results above ( please view on desktop or turn mobile to landscape and reload for best results ), compared to the actual death toll on March 26, 2021 – one year after the original release of Imperial's international model .

    The table depicts three modeled scenarios that were published in ICL's report from one year ago (ICL also included a fourth scenario attempting to approximate focused protection of elderly populations; however this approach was not meaningfully attempted in any country).

    The first scenario shows an extreme "suppression" model, triggered when a country reached 1.6 deaths per 100,000 residents. This strategy envisioned a stunning 75% overall "uniform reduction in contact rates" across the entire population. Even in the short term, this approach is akin to the harsh measures first implemented in the Wuhan region of China as distinct from the lesser lockdowns with "essential business" exemptions seen in most of the world. But ICL's suppression strategy also assumed that this measure "will need to be maintained in some manner until vaccines or effective treatments become available" – basically a full year or more of uninterrupted lockdown.

    No country on earth maintained a 75% suppression rate of all contacts for an entire year, making ICL's first model an extreme hypothetical of what a "best case" aggressive policy response could attain rather than a predictive reflection of reality. Despite its hypothetical nature, ICL's suppression model still managed to overstate the number of Covid-19 deaths in all but the 20 worst-afflicted countries – none of which used anything close to the scenario's policy approach.

    The second ICL strategy is closer to reality in most countries. This "mitigation" model envisioned mandatory population-wide social distancing with a primary aim of preserving hospital capacity to treat the disease – a "flattening of the curve" as the popular slogan maintained. Using the most conservative replication rate that they modeled, R=2.4, Imperial's "mitigation" forecasts managed to dramatically overstate the number of deaths in every single country on earth. Using a higher R0 yields even more extreme overpredictions. But sticking with the 2.4 scenario is sufficient to show the systemic problem in the ICL model. Their "mitigation" numbers were too high by roughly 20-30% in hard-hit locations such as Peru, Mexico, and the Czech Republic – all countries that used stringent lockdown measures at several points in the last year . On the other extreme, ICL overstated the "mitigation" scenario's predicted death toll by 100,000% or more in a dozen countries. All but about 20 of the hardest-hit countries had "mitigation" forecasts that ran high by 100% or more.

    The third ICL strategy projected the results of an "unmitigated" pandemic in which governments did nothing at all. This is the scenario that famously predicted 2.2 million deaths in the United States, 500,000 in the United Kingdom, and similar catastrophic outcomes across the world. Although Ferguson's team has a bad habit of falsely claiming credit for saving millions of lives premised upon these apocalyptic numbers, the truth is they all amounted to wild exaggerations from a fundamentally flawed model. At the 1-year mark, no country on earth approached anywhere near ICL's "unmitigated" projections, and certainly not any of the countries that avoided heavy-handed lockdowns.

    Although ICL did not release its full timeline of how the pandemic would play out under these scenarios, its modeling enterprise was built upon the assumption that the peak daily death toll for each country would hit approximately three months after the introduction of the virus. For most countries, that means a predicted peak sometime in the summer of 2020, with the overwhelming majority of forecast deaths to have occurred by the end of that wave. A year later, most countries have not even remotely resembled the tolls predicted under most of the ICL model scenarios.

    Several questions remain.

    Why is Ferguson, who has a long history of absurdly exaggerated modeling predictions, still viewed as a leading authority on pandemic forecasting? And why is the ICL team still advising governments around the world on how to deal with Covid-19 through its flawed modeling approach? In March 2020 ICL sold its credibility for future delivery. That future has arrived, and the results are not pretty.


    asteroids 2 hours ago (Edited)

    As a computer scientist familiar with statistical modelling I took a look at his code. It made me want to puke. This joker should not be confused with Niall Ferguson, a top notch historian.

    gspanner PREMIUM 4 minutes ago

    The article doesn't mention that he broke the lockdown he espoused to travel across london to screw his partner. So one rule for me....

    He also was responsible for the slaughter of millions of cows during a Foot and Mouth outbreak (probably for no reason). His previous doom **** predictions for precious infectious disease outbreaks have been wrong. His model has been discredited because the code/methodology is fundamentally flawed, written in error ridden out of date language and code.

    Yet the BBC wheel him out whenever they need to justify the draconian regulations without any questions of his idiocy which I am afraid seems likely because they need to maintain /support the licence fee agreement with the government.

    It all stinks.

    Majorca PREMIUM 10 minutes ago

    Dr. John Ioannides(Stanford University California): Much closer to the reality. Does not fit the "script"

    JaxPavan 1 hour ago

    "As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK. There are many diseases which can cause serious illness which are not classified as HCIDs.

    The 4 nations public health HCID group made an interim recommendation in January 2020 to classify COVID-19 as an HCID. This was based on consideration of the UK HCID criteria about the virus and the disease with information available during the early stages of the outbreak. Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK HCID criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall), and there is now greater clinical awareness and a specific and sensitive laboratory test, the availability of which continues to increase.

    The Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) is also of the opinion that COVID-19 should no longer be classified as an HCID.

    The World Health Organization (WHO) continues to consider COVID-19 as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), therefore the need to have a national, coordinated response remains and this is being met by the government's COVID-19 response .

    Cases of COVID-19 are no longer managed by HCID treatment centres only. All healthcare workers managing possible and confirmed cases should follow the updated national infection and prevention (IPC) guidance for COVID-19 , which supersedes all previous IPC guidance for COVID-19. This guidance includes instructions about different personal protective equipment (PPE) ensembles that are appropriate for different clinical scenarios."

    Janet_the_Gannet 3 hours ago

    Why is Ferguson, who has a long history of absurdly exaggerated modeling predictions, still viewed as a leading authority on pandemic forecasting?

    I imagine because his predictions feed into a pre-existing agenda.

    Not Your Father's ZH 2 hours ago

    Vicious criminal Neil Ferguson playing key role in new lockdowns - by Jon Rappoport, December 24, 2020

    Professor Neil Ferguson, and the idiot presidents and prime ministers who believe his computer predictions : Nothing is riding on this except the immediate future of the human race. Ferguson used old failed model to predict COVID deaths - by Jon Rappoport May 4, 2020

    The five key events in the fake pandemic - by Jon Rappoport, December 22, 2020

    Janet_the_Gannet 2 hours ago

    "Ferguson co-founded the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, based at Imperial, in 2008. It is the leading body advising national governments on pathogen outbreaks."

    "It gets tens of millions of dollars in annual funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation"

    Colour me not at all surprised

    phoolish 3 hours ago

    A couple videos where I explain my experience as a researcher in modeling ...

    https://odysee.com/@EJOK:c/WIN_20210507_10_57_10_Pro:c

    https://odysee.com/@EJOK:c/WIN_20210409_08_53_11_Pro:9

    4thmeal 2 hours ago remove link

    Because he's one of the stupid ones willing to do it. Any decent statistician will not use models to predict outcomes like this, as it is problematic and error prone. Add in a lot of unknowns to said model and any outcome prediction is going to be absolute crap. It's junk science.

    SDShack 3 hours ago

    Why is Ferguson, who has a long history of absurdly exaggerated modeling predictions, still viewed as a leading authority on pandemic forecasting?

    Why is Michael Mann still a professor at Penn State after being exposed as the Globull Warming Hockey Stick Faker? As the ClimateGate emails proved...it's all about money. Same as it ever was. Follow the money!

    Detective Miller 3 hours ago

    You have answered your own question. That view serves a certain ideology, does it not? They pay people like that to continue screaming FIRE! because it gives them POWER.

    Taffer 2 hours ago

    Taiwan had 12 Covid deaths. I wonder how many the US actually had, removing all the government incentives to state almost every death as Covid related that is.

    Gone 2 hours ago

    And flu disappeared. But hey they got to try out their genetic crap on millions.

    Gone 2 hours ago

    Rerun of this

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/apr/21/uk.medicalscience

    Zero-Hegemon 2 hours ago

    Ferguson provided the best models that money could buy. They wanted global fear and he delivered.

    Follow the money.

    End Times Prophecy 3 hours ago

    COVID-19 Total Deaths Worldwide to Date : 0.0

    $1.2 M Reward Offered For Proof COVID-19 Virus Exists

    https://principia-scientific.com/1-2-m-reward-offered-for-proof-covid-19-virus-exists/

    After testing 1,500 samples from people who tested positive for the CCP Virus [COVID-19], these scientists found that ALL of the samples had evidence of Influenza A and Influenza B , something that had already been discovered in other cases, and none of COVID-19 .

    El Chapo Read 2 hours ago

    ...and Neil Ferguson was caught, in the middle of the strongest UK lock downs, criss-crossing London on several occasions to shag his mistress. The moment I heard that fact, it confirmed we were being scammed.

    JSG 2 hours ago

    His married mistress which is even worse!

    Kelley 50 minutes ago

    It's simple : Ferguson is paid through Imperial College because he comes up with numbers that match his paymaster's agenda.

    smacker 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link

    "And why is the ICL team still advising governments around the world on how to deal with Covid-19 through its flawed modeling approach?"

    I suspect the answer to this question is that Neil Ferguson produced the overly dramatic predictions that the political elites wanted, so they could impose authoritarian control over their populations, like we have seen in the UK, Europe, US and elsewhere. Let's not forget that Ferguson along with most governments are all now fully on-board with the so-called Climate Change Crises. So they all had common motives.

    MilwaukeeMark 2 hours ago (Edited)

    They weren't interested in truth. Leaders fear the truth as the Wicked Witch feared water. They were interested in peddling fear. Trauma based events like what we got with the MSM nightly fear **** gets people to by-pass reason and go right into reaction mode. I'm still seeing people out jogging with masks on. It worked.

    BigJJ 1 hour ago (Edited)

    During every "lockdown" in the UK people were still permitted by their gloriously benevolent government to hop on the London underground so mixing with millions of people per day, to go on buses all across the country so mixing with hundreds of people per day, to get in taxis mixing with dozens of people per day, to go to supermarkets at any time mixing with hundreds of people etc etc etc. This had nothing to do with stopping a virus and everything to do with killing small independent businesses and any business such as pub chains where people could sit and speak together about the upcoming trials of all Western politicians.

    [May 07, 2021] The Liberals Who Can't Quit Lockdown - The Atlantic

    Notable quotes:
    "... EMMA GREEN ..."
    "... MONICA GANDHI ..."
    "... EMILY OSTER ..."
    "... DEREK THOMPSON ..."
    May 07, 2021 | www.theatlantic.com

    The Liberals Who Can't Quit Lockdown

    Progressive communities have been home to some of the fiercest battles over COVID-19 policies, and some liberal policy makers have left scientific evidence behind.

    EMMA GREEN MAY 4, 2021
    A woman wearing a face shield, surgical mask, and plastic poncho holds up signs in protest of school reopening.
    Teachers in Massachusetts protest a school-reopening plan. MEDIANEWS GROUP / BOSTON HERALD / GETTY

    L urking among the jubilant americans venturing back out to bars and planning their summer-wedding travel is a different group: liberals who aren't quite ready to let go of pandemic restrictions. For this subset, diligence against COVID-19 remains an expression of political identity -- even when that means overestimating the disease's risks or setting limits far more strict than what public-health guidelines permit. In surveys, Democrats express more worry about the pandemic than Republicans do. People who describe themselves as "very liberal" are distinctly anxious. This spring, after the vaccine rollout had started, a third of very liberal people were "very concerned" about becoming seriously ill from COVID-19, compared with a quarter of both liberals and moderates, according to a study conducted by the University of North Carolina political scientist Marc Hetherington. And 43 percent of very liberal respondents believed that getting the coronavirus would have a "very bad" effect on their life, compared with a third of liberals and moderates.

    Get the news, without the noise.

    Subscribe to The Atlantic Daily for our editors' guide to what matters in the world. Sign Up

    Thanks for signing up!

    Last year, when the pandemic was raging and scientists and public-health officials were still trying to understand how the virus spread, extreme care was warranted. People all over the country made enormous sacrifices -- rescheduling weddings, missing funerals, canceling graduations, avoiding the family members they love -- to protect others. Some conservatives refused to wear masks or stay home, because of skepticism about the severity of the disease or a refusal to give up their freedoms. But this is a different story, about progressives who stressed the scientific evidence, and then veered away from it.

    me title=

    RECOMMENDED READING

    me title=

    For many progressives, extreme vigilance was in part about opposing Donald Trump. Some of this reaction was born of deeply felt frustration with how he handled the pandemic. It could also be knee-jerk. "If he said, 'Keep schools open,' then, well, we're going to do everything in our power to keep schools closed," Monica Gandhi, a professor of medicine at UC San Francisco, told me. Gandhi describes herself as "left of left," but has alienated some of her ideological peers because she has advocated for policies such as reopening schools and establishing a clear timeline for the end of mask mandates. "We went the other way, in an extreme way, against Trump's politicization," Gandhi said. Geography and personality may have also contributed to progressives' caution: Some of the most liberal parts of the country are places where the pandemic hit especially hard , and Hetherington found that the very liberal participants in his survey tended to be the most neurotic.

    The spring of 2021 is different from the spring of 2020, though. Scientists know a lot more about how COVID-19 spreads -- and how it doesn't. Public-health advice is shifting. But some progressives have not updated their behavior based on the new information. And in their eagerness to protect themselves and others, they may be underestimating other costs. Being extra careful about COVID-19 is (mostly) harmless when it's limited to wiping down your groceries with Lysol wipes and wearing a mask in places where you're unlikely to spread the coronavirus, such as on a hiking trail. But vigilance can have unintended consequences when it imposes on other people's lives. Even as scientific knowledge of COVID-19 has increased, some progressives have continued to embrace policies and behaviors that aren't supported by evidence, such as banning access to playgrounds, closing beaches , and refusing to reopen schools for in-person learning.

    "Those who are vaccinated on the left seem to think overcaution now is the way to go, which is making people on the right question the effectiveness of the vaccines," Gandhi told me. Public figures and policy makers who try to dictate others' behavior without any scientific justification for doing so erode trust in public health and make people less willing to take useful precautions. The marginal gains of staying shut down might not justify the potential backlash.

    Read: Overcaution carries its own danger to children

    E ven as the very effective covid-19 vaccines have become widely accessible, many progressives continue to listen to voices preaching caution over relaxation. Anthony Fauci recently said he wouldn't travel or eat at restaurants even though he's fully vaccinated, despite CDC guidance that these activities can be safe for vaccinated people who take precautions. California Governor Gavin Newsom refused in April to guarantee that the state's schools would fully reopen in the fall, even though studies have demonstrated for months that modified in-person instruction is safe. Leaders in Brookline, Massachusetts, decided this week to keep a local outdoor mask mandate in place, even though the CDC recently relaxed its guidance for outdoor mask use. And scolding is still a popular pastime. "At least in San Francisco, a lot of people are glaring at each other if they don't wear masks outside," Gandhi said, even though the risk of outdoor transmission is very low .

    me title=

    me title=

    Scientists, academics, and writers who have argued that some very low-risk activities are worth doing as vaccination rates rise -- even if the risk of exposure is not zero -- have faced intense backlash. After Emily Oster, an economist at Brown University, argued in The Atlantic in March that families should plan to take their kids on trips and see friends and relatives this summer, a reader sent an email to her supervisors at the university suggesting that Oster be promoted to a leadership role in the field of "genocide encouragement." "Far too many people are not dying in our current global pandemic, and far too many children are not yet infected," the reader wrote. "With the upcoming consequences of global warming about to be felt by a wholly unprepared worldwide community, I believe the time is right to get young scholars ready to follow in Dr. Oster's footsteps and ensure the most comfortable place to be is white [and] upper-middle-class." ("That email was something," Oster told me.)

    Sure, some mean people spend their time chiding others online. But for many, remaining guarded even as the country opens back up is an earnest expression of civic values. "I keep coming back to the same thing with the pandemic," Alex Goldstein, a progressive PR consultant who was a senior adviser to Representative Ayanna Pressley's 2018 campaign, told me. "Either you believe that you have a responsibility to take action to protect a person you don't know or you believe you have no responsibility to anybody who isn't in your immediate family."

    Goldstein and his wife decided early on in the pandemic that they were going to take restrictions extremely seriously and adopt the most cautious interpretation of when it was safe to do anything. He's been shaving his own head since the summer (with "bad consequences," he said). Although rugby teams have been back on the fields in Boston, where he lives, his team still won't participate, for fear of spreading germs when players pile on top of one another in a scrum. He spends his mornings and evenings sifting through stories of people who have recently died from the coronavirus for Faces of COVID , a Twitter feed he started to memorialize deaths during the pandemic. "My fear is that we will not learn the lessons of the pandemic, because we will try to blow through the finish line as fast as we can and leave it in the rearview mirror," he said.

    Progressive politics focuses on fighting against everyday disasters, such as climate change and poverty, struggles that may shape how some people see the pandemic. "If you're deeply concerned that the real disaster that's happening here is that the social contract has been broken and the vulnerable in society are once again being kicked while they're down, then you're going to be hypersensitive to every detail, to every headline, to every infection rate," Scott Knowles, a professor at the South Korean university KAIST who studies the history of disasters, told me. Some progressives believe that the pandemic has created an opening for ambitious policy proposals. "Among progressive political leaders around here, there's a lot of talk around: We're not going back to normal, because normal wasn't good enough," Goldstein said.

    me title=

    me title=

    Read: Schools aren't super-spreaders

    In practice, though, progressives don't always agree on what prudent policy looks like. Consider the experience of Somerville, Massachusetts, the kind of community where residents proudly display rainbow yard signs declaring in this house we believe science is real . In the 2016 Democratic primary, 57 percent of voters there supported Bernie Sanders, and this year the Democratic Socialists of America have a shot at taking over the city council. As towns around Somerville began going back to in-person school in the fall, Mayor Joseph Curtatone and other Somerville leaders delayed a return to in-person learning. A group of moms -- including scientists, pediatricians, and doctors treating COVID-19 patients -- began to feel frustrated that Somerville schools weren't welcoming back students. They considered themselves progressive and believed that they understood teachers' worries about getting sick. But they saw the city's proposed safety measures as nonsensical and unscientific -- a sort of hygiene theater that prioritized the appearance of protection over getting kids back to their classrooms.

    With Somerville kids still at home, contractors conducted in-depth assessments of the city's school buildings, leading to proposals that included extensive HVAC-system overhauls and the installation of UV-sterilization units and even automatic toilet flushers -- renovations with a proposed budget of $7.5 million. The mayor told me that supply-chain delays and protracted negotiations with the local teachers' union slowed the reopening process. "No one wanted to get kids back to school more than me It's people needing to feel safe," he said. "We want to make sure that we're eliminating any risk of transmission from person to person in schools and carrying that risk over to the community."

    Months slipped by, and evidence mounted that schools could reopen safely. In Somerville, a local leader appeared to describe parents who wanted a faster return to in-person instruction as "fucking white parents" in a virtual public meeting; a community member accused the group of mothers advocating for schools to reopen of being motivated by white supremacy. "I spent four years fighting Trump because he was so anti-science," Daniele Lantagne, a Somerville mom and engineering professor who works to promote equitable access to clean water and sanitation during disease outbreaks, told me. "I spent the last year fighting people who I normally would agree with desperately trying to inject science into school reopening, and completely failed."

    In March, Erika Uyterhoeven, the democratic-socialist state representative for Somerville, compared the plight of teachers to that of Amazon workers and meatpackers, and described the return to in-person classes as part of a "push in a neoliberal society to ensure, over and above the well-being of educators, that our kids are getting a competitive education compared to other suburban schools." (She later asked the socialist blog that ran her comments to remove that quote, because so many parents found her statements offensive.) In Somerville, "everyone wants to be actively anti-racist. Everyone believes Black lives matter. Everyone wants the Green New Deal," Elizabeth Pinsky, a child psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital, told me. "No one wants to talk about how to actually get kindergartners onto the carpet of their teachers." Most elementary and middle schoolers in Somerville finally started back in person this spring, with some of the proposed building renovations in place. Somerville hasn't yet announced when high schoolers will go back full-time, and Curtatone wouldn't guarantee that schools will be open for in-person instruction in the fall.

    me title=

    me title=

    Read: Are outdoor mask mandates still necessary?

    P olicy makers' decisions about how to fight the pandemic are fraught because they have such an impact on people's lives. But personal decisions during the coronavirus crisis are fraught because they seem symbolic of people's broader value systems. When vaccinated adults refuse to see friends indoors, they're working through the trauma of the past year, in which the brokenness of America's medical system was so evident. When they keep their kids out of playgrounds and urge friends to stay distanced at small outdoor picnics, they are continuing the spirit of the past year, when civic duty has been expressed through lonely asceticism. For many people, this kind of behavior is a form of good citizenship. That's a hard idea to give up.

    And so as the rest of vaccinated America begins its summer of bacchanalia, rescheduling long-awaited dinner parties and medium-size weddings, the most hard-core pandemic progressives are left, Cassandra-like, to preach their peers' folly. Every weekday, Zachary Loeb publishes four "plague poems" on Twitter -- little missives about the headlines and how it feels to live through a pandemic. He is personally progressive: He blogs about topics like Trump's calamitous presidency and the future of climate change. He also studies disaster history. ("I jokingly tell my students that my reputation in the department is as Mr. Doom, but once I have earned my Ph.D., I will officially be Dr. Doom," he told me.) His Twitter avatar is the plague doctor: a beaked, top-hat-wearing figure who traveled across European towns treating victims of the bubonic plague. Last February, Loeb started stocking up on cans of beans; last March, he left his office, and has not been back since. This April, as the country inched toward half of the population getting a first dose of a vaccine and daily deaths dipped below 1,000, his poems became melancholy. "When you were young, wise old Aesop tried to warn you about this moment," he wrote, "wherein the plague is the steady tortoise, and we are the overconfident hare."

    EMMA GREEN is a staff writer at ​ The Atlantic , where she covers politics, policy, and religion.

    [May 06, 2021] Aldous Huxley Foresaw Our Despots - Fauci, Gates, The Vaccine Crusaders

    This is starting to look really like staging of "Brave new world..." Today's society is closer to Huxley's "Brave New World" than to Orwell's "1984". But there are clear elements of both. If you will, the worst of both worlds has come true today.
    May 06, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Patricia McCarthy via AmericanThinker.com,

    In 1949, sometime after the publication of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four , Aldous Huxley, the author of Brave New World (1931), who was then living in California, wrote to Orwell. Huxley had briefly taught French to Orwell as a student in high school at Eton.

    Huxley generally praises Orwell's novel, which to many seemed very similar to Brave New World in its dystopian view of a possible future. Huxley politely voices his opinion that his own version of what might come to pass would be truer than Orwell's. Huxley observed that the philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is sadism, whereas his own version is more likely, that controlling an ignorant and unsuspecting public would be less arduous, less wasteful by other means. Huxley's masses are seduced by a mind-numbing drug, Orwell's with sadism and fear.

    The most powerful quote In Huxley's letter to Orwell is this:

    Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.


    Aldous Huxley.

    Could Huxley have more prescient? What do we see around us?

    Masses of people dependent upon drugs, legal and illegal. The majority of advertisements that air on television seem to be for prescription drugs, some of them miraculous but most of them unnecessary. Then comes COVID, a quite possibly weaponized virus from the Fauci-funded-with-taxpayer-dollars lab in Wuhan, China. The powers that be tragically deferred to the malevolent Fauci who had long been hoping for just such an opportunity. Suddenly, there was an opportunity to test the mRNA vaccines that had been in the works for nearly twenty years. They could be authorized as an emergency measure but were still highly experimental. These jabs are not really vaccines at all, but a form of gene therapy . There are potential disastrous consequences down the road. Government experiments on the public are nothing new .

    Since there have been no actual, long-term trials, no one who contributed to this massive drug experiment knows what the long-term consequences might be. There have been countless adverse injuries and deaths already for which the government-funded vaccine producers will suffer no liability. With each passing day, new side-effects have begun to appear: blood clots, seizures, heart failure.

    As new adverse reactions become known despite the censorship employed by most media outlets, the more the Biden administration is pushing the vaccine, urging private corporations to make it mandatory for all employees. Colleges are making them mandatory for all students returning to campus.

    The leftmedia are advocating the "shunning" of the unvaccinated. The self-appointed virtue-signaling Democrats are furious at anyone and everyone who declines the jab. Why? If they are protected, why do they care? That is the question. Same goes for the ridiculous mask requirements . They protect no one but for those in operating rooms with their insides exposed, yet even the vaccinated are supposed to wear them!

    Months ago, herd immunity was near. Now Fauci and the CDC say it will never be achieved? Now the Pfizer shot will necessitate yearly booster shots. Pfizer expects to make $21B this year from its COVID vaccine! Anyone who thinks this isn't about money is a fool. It is all about money, which is why Fauci, Gates, et al. were so determined to convince the public that HCQ and ivermectin, both of which are effective, prophylactically and as treatment, were not only useless, but dangerous. Both of those drugs are tried, true, and inexpensive. Many of those thousands of N.Y. nursing home fatalities might have been prevented with the use of one or both of those drugs. Those deaths are on the hands of Cuomo and his like-minded tyrants drunk on power.

    Months ago, Fauci, et al. agreed that children were at little or no risk of getting COVID, of transmitting it, least of all dying from it. Now Fauci is demanding that all teens be vaccinated by the end of the year! Why? They are no more in danger of contracting it now than they were a year ago. Why are parents around this country not standing up to prevent their kids from being guinea pigs in this monstrous medical experiment? And now they are " experimenting " on infants. Needless to say, some have died. There is no reason on Earth for teens, children, and infants to be vaccinated. Not one.

    Huxley also wrote this:

    "The surest way to work up a crusade in favor of some good cause is to promise people they will have a chance of maltreating someone. To be able to destroy with good conscience, to be able to behave badly and call your bad behavior 'righteous indignation' -- this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats ."

    - Crome Yellow

    Perhaps this explains the left's hysterical impulse to force these untested shots on those of us who have made the decision to go without it. If they've decided that it is the thing to do, then all of us must submit to their whims. If we decide otherwise, it gives them the righteous right to smear all of us whom they already deplore.

    As C.J. Hopkins has written , the left means to criminalize dissent. Those of us who are vaccine-resistant are soon to be outcasts, deprived of jobs and entry into everyday businesses. This kind of discrimination should remind everyone of ...oh, Germany three quarters of a century ago. Huxley also wrote, "The propagandist's purpose is to make one set of people forget that certain other sets of people are human." That is precisely what the left is up to, what BLM is planning, what Critical Race Theory is all about.

    Tal Zaks, Moderna's chief medical officer, said these new vaccines are "hacking the software of life." Vaccine-promoters claim he never said this, but he did. Bill Gates called the vaccines " an operating system " to the horror of those promoting it, a Kinsley gaffe. Whether it is or isn't hardly matters at this point, but these statements by those behind the vaccines are a clue to what they have in mind.

    There will be in the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude and producing dictatorship without tears , so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them but will rather enjoy it.

    This is exactly what the left is working so hard to effect: a pharmacologically compromised population happy to be taken care of by a massive state machine. And while millions of people around the world have surrendered to the vaccine and mask hysteria, millions more, about 1.3 billion, want no part of this government vaccine mania.

    In his letter to Orwell, Huxley ended with the quote cited above and again here because it is so profound:

    Within the next generation I believe that the world's rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.

    Huxley nailed the left more than seventy years ago, perhaps because leftists have never changed throughout the ages. 61,497 173


    Fat Beaver 14 hours ago (Edited)

    If i am to be treated as an outcast or an undesirable because i refuse the vax, i will immediately become someone that has zero reverence for the law, and i can only imagine 10's of millions will be right there with me.

    strych10 14 hours ago

    Welcome to the club.

    We have coffee in the corner and occasional meetings at various bars.

    Dr. Chihuahua-González 13 hours ago

    I'm a doctor, you could contact me anytime and receive your injection.

    Fat Beaver 13 hours ago (Edited)

    I've gotta feeling the normie world you think you live in is about to change drastically for the worse...

    sparky139 PREMIUM 10 hours ago

    You mean you'll sign papers that you injected us *wink *wink? And toss it away?

    bothneither 2 hours ago

    Oh geez how uncommon, another useless doctor with no Scruples who sold out to big Pharma. Please have my Gates sponsored secret sauce.

    Unknown 6 hours ago (Edited)

    Both Huxley and Orwell are wrong. Neoliberalism (the use of once office for personal gains) is by far the most powerful force that subjugates the inept population. Neoliberalism demolished the mighty USSR, now destroying the USA, and will do the same to China. And this poison dribbles from the top to bottom creating self-centered population that is unable to unite, much less resist.

    Deathrips 15 hours ago (Edited) remove link

    Tylers.
    You gonna cover Tucker Carlsons show earlier today on FOX news about vaxxx deaths? almost 4k reported so far this year.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIJQuk-qK2o

    19331510 14 hours ago (Edited)

    https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data/death-stats

    AGE Deaths

    0-24 23

    25-50 184

    51-65 506

    66-80 1164

    81-100 1346

    U 321

    R.I.P.

    Joe Joe Depends 13 hours ago

    India up in arms about mere 1%

    spanish flu was 3%

    JimmyJones 9 hours ago

    Is the population of india up in arms or is the MSM?

    Nelbev 10 hours ago

    Facebook just flagged/censored it, must sign into see vid, Tuck also failed to mention mRNA and adenovirus vaxes were experimental and not FDA approved nor gone through stage III trials. Beside deaths, have blood clot issues. Good he mentioned how naturally immune if get covid and recovered, better than vaccine, but not covered for bogus passports. Me personally, I would rather catch covid and get natural immunity than be vaccinated with an untested experimental vaccine.

    19331510 14 hours ago

    Covid19 links.

    Websites:

    https://www.americasfrontlinedocs.com/media/

    https://covid19criticalcare.com/

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/

    https://www.constitutionalrightscentre.ca/category/news/

    https://doctors4covidethics.medium.com/

    https://www.flemingmethod.com/

    https://gbdeclaration.org/

    https://www.lifesitenews.com/

    https://healthimpactnews.com/

    https://www.mercola.com/

    https://drleemerritt.com/

    https://www.drtenpenny.com/

    https://principia-scientific.com/

    https://standupcanada.solutions/canadian-doctors-speak

    https://thehighwire.com/

    https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/ https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/links/general-links/

    Video Sharing : https://www.bitchute.com/ ; https://brandnewtube.com/ ; https://odysee.com/ ; https://rumble.com/ https://superu.net

    Healthcare Professionals :

    Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya; Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche; Dr. Ron Brown; Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr. Richard Fleming; Dr. Simone Gold; Dr. Sunetra Gupta; Dr. Carl Heneghan; Dr. Martin Kulldorff; Dr. Paul Marik; Dr. Peter McCullough; Dr. Joseph Mercola; Dr. Lee Merritt; Dr. Judy Mikovits; Dr. Dennis Modry; Dr. Hooman Noorchashm; Dr. Harvey Risch; Dr. Sherri Tenpenny; Dr. Richard Urso; Dr. Michael Yeadon;

    A list of Canadian doctors: https://standupcanada.solutions/canadian-doctors-speak

    Lawyers : Dr. Reiner Fuellmich; Rocco Galati;

    Drug Adverse Reaction Databases:

    http://www.adrreports.eu/en/index.html (Search; Suspected Drug Reactions Reports for Substances) COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE MODERNA (CX-024414); COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE PFIZER-BIONTECH; COVID-19 VACCINE ASTRAZENECA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19); COVID-19 VACCINE JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S)

    https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html

    Research papers :

    https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/ (pcr tests)

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/ (face masks)

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/eci.13484 (lock downs)

    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2026670 (child/teacher morbidity)

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.01.20222315v1 (transmission by children)

    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm (masks/restaurants)

    https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/57/3/199 (biased trial reporting)

    Covid19 links.

    Websites:

    https://www.americasfrontlinedocs.com/media/

    https://covid19criticalcare.com/

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/

    https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/

    https://www.constitutionalrightscentre.ca/category/news/

    https://doctors4covidethics.medium.com/

    https://www.flemingmethod.com/

    https://gbdeclaration.org/

    https://www.lifesitenews.com/

    https://healthimpactnews.com/

    https://www.mercola.com/

    https://drleemerritt.com/

    https://www.drtenpenny.com/

    https://principia-scientific.com/

    https://standupcanada.solutions/canadian-doctors-speak

    https://thehighwire.com/

    https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/ https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/links/general-links/

    Video Sharing : https://www.bitchute.com/ ; https://brandnewtube.com/ ; https://odysee.com/ ; https://rumble.com/ https://superu.net

    Healthcare Professionals :

    Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya; Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche; Dr. Ron Brown; Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr. Richard Fleming; Dr. Simone Gold; Dr. Sunetra Gupta; Dr. Carl Heneghan; Dr. Martin Kulldorff; Dr. Paul Marik; Dr. Peter McCullough; Dr. Joseph Mercola; Dr. Lee Merritt; Dr. Judy Mikovits; Dr. Dennis Modry; Dr. Hooman Noorchashm; Dr. Harvey Risch; Dr. Sherri Tenpenny; Dr. Richard Urso; Dr. Michael Yeadon;

    A list of Canadian doctors: https://standupcanada.solutions/canadian-doctors-speak

    Lawyers : Dr. Reiner Fuellmich; Rocco Galati;

    Drug Adverse Reaction Databases:

    http://www.adrreports.eu/en/index.html (Search; Suspected Drug Reactions Reports for Substances) COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE MODERNA (CX-024414); COVID-19 MRNA VACCINE PFIZER-BIONTECH; COVID-19 VACCINE ASTRAZENECA (CHADOX1 NCOV-19); COVID-19 VACCINE JANSSEN (AD26.COV2.S)

    https://www.openvaers.com/

    Research papers :

    https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/ (pcr tests)

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/ (face masks)

    https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/eci.13484 (lock downs)

    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2026670 (child/teacher morbidity)

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.01.20222315v1 (transmission by children)

    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm (masks/restaurants)

    https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/57/3/199 (biased trial reporting)

    Ultramarines 15 hours ago (Edited)

    His making of the gamma and delta workforce was quite prescient. We are seeing it play out now, we all know gammas and delta. There was a really good ABC tv movie made in 1980 Brave New World. Excellent show, it shows the Alphas and names them Rothchild and so on. Shows what these people specifically want to do to the world. I wonder if the ruling psychopaths actually wait for science fiction authors to plan the future and then follow their script.

    Mineshaft Gap 10 hours ago

    If Huxley were starting out today no major publisher would touch him.

    They'd tell him Brave New World doesn't have a diverse enough of cast. Even the mostly likable totalitarian guy named Mustapha turns out to be white! A white Mustapha. It's soooo triggering. Also, what's wrong with a little electronic fun and drug taking, anyway? Lighten up , Aldous.

    Meanwhile his portrait of shrieking medieval Catholic nuns who think they're possessed in The Devils of Loudun might remind the leftist editors too uncomfortably of their own recent bleating performances at "White Fragility" struggle sessions.

    Sorry, Aldous. Just...too...problematic.

    [May 03, 2021] COVID-19 almost totally eliminated flu epidemic. Why ?

    Notable quotes:
    "... I am still trying to figure out the SCIENCE of BLM mostly peaceful protests were just safe, fine and dandy while churches had to be shut down or grandma would die. ..."
    May 03, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com
    Bollockinell 6 hours ago

    This is probably the first time in the history of mankind that an illness that has been with us our entire lives has magically disappeared only to be immediately replaced by another one with exactly the same symptoms!

    2banana 7 hours ago

    I am still trying to figure out the SCIENCE of BLM mostly peaceful protests were just safe, fine and dandy while churches had to be shut down or grandma would die.

    In this day and age, we all need to do our own research and we all need to think for ourselves, because the big pharmaceutical companies are more concerned with profits than anything else.

    If you are harmed by their experimental therapies, the big pharmaceutical companies won’t be there to pick up the pieces for you if something goes horribly wrong.

    [May 03, 2021] Masks help to prevent other infections so in closed spaces they are justified

    May 03, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Stonebird , Apr 27 2021 8:50 utc | 6

    Quote "So there may be a new form of normalcy where masks don?t necessarily have to go away.?

    Dr. Leonard A. Mermel, medical director of epidemiology and infection control at Rhode Island Hospital, who said making people wear masks all the time was worth it to stop the spread of other viruses aside from COVID-19.

    ?Within the Lifespan system we are seeing far fewer of all the respiratory viruses than we are used to seeing at this moment in the calendar year? So it?s impressive: the COVID preventative strategies are having an impact on other respiratory viruses, which just makes sense: they spread in a similar fashion,? said Mermel.

    ?It would not surprise me if that became a recommendation from the CDC,? he said. ?It?s a pretty low price to pay to try to reduce the risk to oneself and to particularly loved ones who may be at particular risk of these sorts of infections causing harm,?

    Of course "lockdowns" are being used in the same way, (ie in the UK) where they would love to have a third wave. ( Wave goodbye as freedom flies ). This is not a question of numbers but of policy that hides and tries to ignore .... rebellious attitudes. (The recent massive march in London that you didn't see reported by the BBC (!) Or we can have Bill Gates getting agitated about "patents" being used by anyone else (ie Russia and China) Who might "learn their techniques". This is in spite of Russia offering help to the West with their own research (Was that for the "Oxford" vaccine ?).
    *******
    "Many hands make light work", but with all of them trying to push the switch in their own direction, we will be lucky if a fuse doesn't blow somewhere

    [May 03, 2021] Why authorities ask vaccinated people wear masks and obey social distancing rules?

    May 03, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    acheron2016 10 hours ago

    IF vaccines worked it shouldn't matter to a vaccinated person whether you have a vaccination or not.

    The entire "what about the poor wretch that is so ill he cannot survive a vaccine" is just virtue signaling tripe. FIRST no person has a claim on your life. Period, the only exception being your own children. And even that has finite limits.

    The more truthful complaint is "I KNOW it is a scientific fact that flu vaccines are at BEST 70%, and often closer to 40% effective. So I am afraid of my own shadow." This exposes a risk aversion that has long since crossed over into the mental illness of full on uncontrollable paranoia.

    Let the person that is so sick they cannot be around other people self isolate. Let the person that is so terrified they cannot function in society self isolate too!

    The fake outrage and virtue signaling sociopaths have well and truly outlived the patience of everyone on the planet that doesn't require psychotropic drugs to make it through the day.

    [May 03, 2021] 53 prominent German actors/actresses have become satirical too! They've simultaneously released 1-minute satirical statements.

    May 03, 2021 | off-guardian.org

    Penelope , Apr 26, 2021 10:34 PM

    53 prominent German actors/actresses have become satirical too! They've simultaneously released 1-minute satirical statements. https://notrickszone.com/2021/04/24/shock-wave-50-prominent-german-actors-launch-campaign-satiring-corona-l

    [May 03, 2021] Take Off Your Mask and Go Outside by Daniel Halperin and Monica Gandhi

    Money quote: " Discarding pointless practices like outdoor masking and obsessive “ hygiene theater †would make the continuing necessary precautions, including indoor masking, easier to accept."
    Apr 28, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    You don’t need to wear a mask outdoors.

    That applies whether you’re vaccinated against Covid-19 or not, regardless of your age, and despite the other qualifications in the Centers for Disease Control’s latest guidance , released Tuesday. The only exception is in a packed setting in which social distancing is impossible, such as a political rally or a sports arena filled to capacity.

    The three main Covid mitigation strategies are distancing, masks and ventilation. Accumulating evidence indicates how difficult it is to contract the virus outdoors, which is as ventilated as it gets. One modeling study estimated that ventilation outside, even with only a gentle breeze, is well over 100 times as effective as in an office, and more than 1,000-fold better than in most homes.

    Documented cases of outdoor Covid-19 transmission are rare. A study in Wuhan, China, where the virus originated, used careful contact tracing and found that only one of 7,324 infection events was linked to outdoor transmission. An analysis of more than 232,000 infections in Ireland found that only one case in 1,000 was traced to outdoor transmission. An extensive review from the University of Canterbury concluded that outdoor transmission is rare and warned of “the potential impact on physical and mental health and wellbeing†of discouraging people from congregating outdoors.

    Coronavirus droplets are rapidly dissipated in the air and deactivated by ultraviolet radiation, heat and humidity. That’s why the World Health Organization concluded in December that masks are unnecessary outside as long as physical distancingâ€"which WHO defines as one meter, or around three feetâ€"can be maintained.

    Mr. Halperin is an adjunct professor at the Gillings School of Global Public Health at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and author of “Facing Covid Without Panic.†Dr. Gandhi is an infectious-disease physician and professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco.

    [May 03, 2021] It's like the neolibel elite is testing the level of our stupidity

    May 03, 2021 | off-guardian.org

    Apr 27, 2021 12:28 AM

    Yes just finished listening to my dose of bullshit on ABC. The amazing thing is they actually telling you it's bullshit if people listen closely. The number of new infections in India. Hundreds of thousands. Deaths a few hundred. In a country where the normal annual death rate is 9.6 Million and 26,000 people die EVERY DAY. It's like a joke. Like they testing our stupidity. And you can't say; No we not falling for it because there is no longer anywhere to say it! I feel like I have permanent road rage over this crap.

    Researcher , Apr 27, 2021 4:11 AM Reply to Dick

    It's the tone and emotive words like crisis, and other exaggerated terms they use that triggers fear. The viewer remembers the number of cases, not deaths because the number is larger. But the cases are based on testing.

    [May 03, 2021] Fascinating fellow

    May 03, 2021 | off-guardian.org

    Moneycircus , Apr 27, 2021 4:15 PM Reply to Judith

    Vimeo
    NoodleMagazine
    Odysee
    YT: Kary Mullis – The Full Interview by Gary Null

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/Vo-ue95TrUg?version=3&rel=1&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&fs=1&hl=en-US&autohide=2&wmode=transparent

    Judith , Apr 27, 2021 4:28 PM Reply to Moneycircus

    Thanks, Moneycircus.

    After watching that I searched for more interviews with him. He did a number of TED talks, in the early 2000's. Also did an interview with "Google Tech" about his work on a medicine for Anthrax.

    Interestingly, he liked being able to work with computer models of bacteria and tht like. It would be very interesting to know what he would have thought about Drosten's computer model of sarscov2 which set the standard for the PCR testing.

    Also, what he would have thought of the covid injections.

    His final TED talk was very funny and very sweet. Called Sons of Sputnik.

    Fascinating fellow.

    [May 03, 2021] Teachers abusing kids. Disgusting. Pfizer and Moderna experimenting on kids. Criminal

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... "teachers abusing kids" ..."
    "... " Pfizer and Moderna are both running clinical trials for their experimental mRNA shots on 11,000 children as young as six months old . Both trials began in mid-March. Moderna calls its study KidCOVE . Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca are also using children as guinea pigs . These companies have no moral fiber and are driven solely by profits. That is a given. But the parents are something beyond surreal." ..."
    May 03, 2021 | off-guardian.org

    Jacques , Apr 27, 2021 10:18 AM

    "teachers abusing kids"

    No shit. Yesterday, as I was driving from my hideaway up on the hill in the woods, I caught a glimpse of a group of preschoolers coming out of the forest. I thought that they had facemasks on, which I found preposterous, so I stopped, checked the rear-view mirror and waited for them to come closer. Sure enough, they did have the fucking things on. Mind you, it was a nice sunny day, the air fresh, the perfect April weather.

    I went full postal and yelled at the teachers with just about all my might. They didn't seem to give a shit. Maybe they're too afraid, like of "losing their job". Damn, in retrospect, I should have addressed the kids and told them to tell the teachers to wipe their ass with the stupid masks.

    This is truly horrible, and I know what I'm talking about. I started school in 1970, a short while after the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1968. At a time when all hope was crushed, when the purges started. When people were afraid of "losing their job", if not worse. The teachers took out their fear, or perhaps anger, on us kids. Save for some, they came hard on us children and passed on us the oppression inflicted on them by the regime. I, as other kids, saw them as enemies and fought against them throughout my younger years. I was only able to come out of that in university (on the other side of the world).

    What the teachers are doing today is much worse. It's not just mindfuck, it physical terror. They're taking party in asphyxiating the kids.

    Disgusting

    Corarden , Apr 27, 2021 11:30 AM Reply to Jacques

    Very interesting observation born from real experience Jacques – that the oppressed adults took it out on the children, focused it through their own lens onto their helpless captives in a mirror image of the larger version of the cruelty and dehumanising process. Horrible. Undeniable based on current events.

    Arby , Apr 27, 2021 5:06 PM Reply to Corarden

    "VAERS: Two-year-old baby in Virginia dead six days after second experimental Pfizer mRNA shot"
    From the above linked-to article by ? (The Covid Blog):

    " Pfizer and Moderna are both running clinical trials for their experimental mRNA shots on 11,000 children as young as six months old . Both trials began in mid-March. Moderna calls its study KidCOVE . Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca are also using children as guinea pigs . These companies have no moral fiber and are driven solely by profits. That is a given. But the parents are something beyond surreal."

    Peter , Apr 28, 2021 12:10 AM Reply to Arby

    Sickening. Evil.

    Corarden , Apr 27, 2021 10:36 AM Reply to NickM

    Judge Christian Dettmar

    " the children are not only endangered in their mental, physical and spiritual well-being by the obligation to wear face masks during school hours and to keep their distance from each other and from other persons, but, in addition, they are already being harmed. At the same time, this violates numerous rights of the children and their parents under the law, the constitution and international conventions. This applies in particular to the right to free development of the personality and to physical integrity from Article 2 of the Basic Law as well as to the right from Article 6 of the Basic Law to upbringing and care by the parents (also with regard to measures for preventive health care and 'objects' to be carried by children) "

    As Reiner Fuellmich stated recently – 'They are coming after the children.'

    [May 03, 2021] Florida Gov. DeSantis Says Lockdowns Were A Huge Mistake by Ivan Pentchoukov

    Apr 16, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Ivan Pentchoukov and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times,

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis issued a statewide stay-at-home order on April 1 last year locking down the Sunshine State for 30 days amid a global panic about the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus outbreak. Sitting in his office exactly a year later, he told The Epoch Times that the lockdowns were a “huge mistake,†including in his own state.

    “We wanted to mitigate the damage. Now, in hindsight, the 15 days to slow the spread and the 30â€"it didn’t work,†DeSantis said.

    “We shouldn’t have gone down that road.â€

    Florida’s lockdown order was notably less strict than some of the stay-at-home measures imposed in other states. Recreational activities like walking, biking, golf, and beachgoing were exempted while essential businesses were broadly defined.

    “Our economy kept going,†DeSantis said. “It was much different than what you saw in some of those lockdown states.â€

    The governor nonetheless now regrets issuing the order at all and is convinced that states that have carried on with lockdowns are perpetuating a destructive blunder.

    After the 30 days of the initial lockdown in Florida lapsed, DeSantis commenced a phased reopening. He faced fierce criticism at each stage from establishment media and his own constituents beholden to the lockdown narrative.

    The governor fully reopened Florida on Sept. 25 last year. When cases began to rise as part of the winter surge he did not reimpose any restrictions. Lockdown proponents forecast doom and gloom. DeSantis stood his ground.

    The governor’s persistence wasn’t a leap of faith. Less than two weeks after Florida’s full reopening in late September, scientists from Stanford, Harvard, and Oxford went public with the Great Barrington Declaration, which disavowed lockdowns as a destructive and futile mitigation measure. The declaration, which has since been signed by 13,985 medical and public health scientists, calls on public officials to adopt the focused protection approachâ€"the exact strategy employed by DeSantis.

    Despite dire predictions about the pandemic in Florida, DeSantis has been vindicated. On April 1, 2021, Florida ranked 27th among all states in deaths per capita from the CCP virus, commonly known as the coronavirus.

    The ranking’s significance is amplified because the Sunshine State’s population is the sixth oldest in the United States by median age. Californiaâ€"the lockdown state often compared to Florida due to its lower per-capita death rateâ€"is the sixth youngest . The risk of dying from the CCP virus is highest for people over 55, with the group accounting for 93 percent of the deaths nationwide.

    While Florida is doing either better or relatively the same as the strict lockdown states in terms of CCP virus mortalities, the state’s economy is booming compared to the crippled economies in California and New York. Though less quantifiable, the human suffering from the lockdown-related rise in suicides, mental health issues, postponed medical treatments, and opioid deaths is undeniably immense.

    “It’s been a huge, huge mistake in terms of policy,†DeSantis said.

    “All I had to do was follow the data and just be willing to go forward into the teeth of the narrative and fight the media,†he added.

    “As people were beating up on me, what I said was I’d rather them beat up on me than have someone lose their job. I’d rather have them beat up on me than have kids locked out of school. I’m totally willing to take whatever heat comes our way because we’re doing the right thing.â€

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis gives a thumbs up as he leaves a press conference where he spoke about the cruise industry at Port Miami on April 08, 2021 in Miami, Florida. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

    ‘Don’t Let Them Roll Over Us’

    The Epoch Times spent a day embedded with DeSantis as he crisscrossed the state on April 1, jetting southeast from the seat of state government in Tallahassee to a press conference in Titusville and then back north to the Clay County Fair on the outskirts of Jacksonville.

    Across dozens of encounters with Floridians from all walks of life, one trend persisted. People thanked DeSantis for his work and his policies. Business owners praised him for not shutting them down.

    Chris Allen, the owner of Java Jitters, opened a coffee shop in Orange Park Mall during the pandemic.

    “We could not have done that if it wasn’t for Ron DeSantis,†Allen told The Epoch Times after personally thanking the governor during an encounter at the Clay County Fair.

    A staff member for Gov. Ron DeSantis holds a “DeSantis 2024, Make America Florida†hat at the Clay County fair on April 1, 2021. The staff member said the hat was handed to the governor by a fair attendee. (Ivan Pentchoukov/Epoch Times)

    At the time of the interview, Florida’s unemployment rate was 4.7 percent compared to 6.2 percent nationally. Lockdown states like New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and California had some of the highest rates in the countryâ€"8.9 percent, 7.8 percent, 7.3 percent, and 8.5 percent respectively.

    “I have a tough time paying for a meal in Florida just because I saved a lot of these restaurants from oblivion,†DeSantis said. Hours after this claim, a curly fries stand at the fair declined to charge the governor.

    DeSantis said some people get emotional when they meet him. Several of the interactions with the governor at the Clay County Fair resembled that description. An visibly moved elderly veteran urged the governor to not “let them roll over us.â€

    “If we hadn’t stood up, these people may not have jobs, the businesses may have gone under, the kids wouldn’t be in school, there’d be all these things,†DeSantis said.

    “This really, really impacts people in a very personal way. And I don’t think anything prior to COVID that I’ve seen in politics can quite do it on this level. And it’s really unfortunate that there were governors that had power [who did] the opposite. It really shouldn’t depend on the governor.â€

    Reopening the state wasn’t as easy as lifting his own stay-at-home measures. When DeSantis issued the final reopening order in late September last year, he signed a companion order prohibiting local Florida governments from restricting people from working or operating a business. The order had far-reaching consequences across the state, especially in densely-populated, liberal-leaning locales where the local authorities imposed their own strict measures.

    DeSantis adopted a hands-off approach to local regulations at first, thinking that voters would ultimately hold local authorities responsible. It became obvious eventually that some places would remain locked down despite the data showing that doing so would have no positive impact on the spread of the virus.

    “They weren’t going to open this stuff up unless I pried it open,†DeSantis said.

    “We had the data. We talked to some of the best scientists in the country,†DeSantis said, referring to Martin Kulldorff from Harvard, Jayanta Bhattacharya from Stanford, and Sunetra Gupta from Oxford.

    “Every Floridian has a right to work. Every business has a right to operate.â€

    In areas that were forced to reopen as a result, the economies are now booming with new hotels and restaurants opening, DeSantis said.

    DeSantis received a law degree from Harvard and is a textualist when interpreting the Constitution. He believes barring the local authorities from placing restrictions on the people and businesses was squarely within his authority.

    “You can’t have 67 different minimum wages, or 67 different regulations on hotels. We are one state economy, and we need to have certain rules of the road,†DeSantis said.

    Gov. Ron DeSantis delivers remarks at a press conference in Titusville, Florida, on April 1, 2021. (Screenshot via Epoch Times)

    ‘They Are Never Going to Admit They Were Wrong’

    Standing behind the desk in his office in Tallahassee, DeSantis leafed through a folder of praise he’s received from around the nation and across the globe. Hanging on the walls around the relatively small space was a portrait of Abraham Lincoln, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights as well as the uniform the governor wore as the captain of the Yale baseball team.

    When asked why he chose Lincoln, DeSantis said the president is the best example of a leader who had to make difficult decisions in a time of crisis. When asked why some of the leaders today have continued with lockdowns even with ample evidence of their ineffectiveness, the governor theorized that the people involved have committed too much to the narrative and have made it impossible to change course.

    “You have a situation where if you’re in this field, the pandemic, that’s something that you kind of prepare for and you’re ready for. And a lot of these people muffed it ,†he said.

    “When push came to shove, they advocated policies that have not worked against the virus but have been very, very destructive. They are never going to admit they were wrong about anything, unfortunately.â€

    Elected leaders aren’t the only ones to blame, according to the governor. The media and big tech companies played a major role in perpetuating fears about the virus while selectively censoring one side of the mitigation debate. DeSantis said the media and tech giants stood to benefit from the lockdown as people stayed home and consumed their products.

    “It was all just to generate the most clicks that they could. And so that was always trying to do the stuff that would inspire the most fear,†DeSantis said.

    Two weeks after the interview, an undercover video recorded by Project Veritas showed a technical director at CNN talking about the boost the network received due to its pandemic coverage.

    “It’s fear. Fear really drives numbers,†CNN Technical Director Charlie Chester said. “Fear is the thing that keeps you tuned in.â€

    The fear-mongering worked, DeSantis said, pointing to CDC statistics showing that 4 out of 10 American adults delayed or avoided getting urgent or routine medical treatment in June 2020. The agency’s report said that the pattern may have contributed to the excess deaths reported during that period, due to preventable illnesses and injuries going untreated.

    Emergency room doctors had reported that fewer people were coming in with cardiac-related chest pains while more were coming in with late-stage appendicitis, something that is usually caught much earlier. The pandemic has also led to a sharp decrease in cancer screenings and detections.

    “When you have people too scared to go to the emergency room when they’re literally having a heart attack, that didn’t happen in a vacuum,†DeSantis said.

    “Corporate media played a role in that, by really whipping up people into a frenzy.â€

    The profit motive wasn’t the only factor potentially driving the media’s slanted coverage, according to the governor. The pandemic hit the United States in an election year, presenting an opportunity to heap the blame on President Donald Trump.

    “They viewed it as an opportunity to damage Trump. Obviously, they hated Trump more than anything,†DeSantis said.

    Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in his office in Tallahassee, Florida, on April 1, 2021. (Screenshot via Epoch Times)

    ‘Council of Censors’

    In the April 1 interview, DeSantis criticized big tech companies for censoring critics of lockdowns. Less than a week after the interview, the governor himself became the victim of censorship. YouTube, without warning, scrubbed videos of a roundtable discussion between DeSantis and prominent scientists from Harvard, Oxford, and Stanford who assessed that lockdowns are ineffective.

    The American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) was the first to flag the video’s disappearance. The original clip is now hosted on a different platform and appears along with a full transcript on the AIER website .

    “Google and YouTube have not been, throughout this pandemic, repositories of truth and scientific inquiry, but instead have acted as enforcers of a narrative, a big tech council of censors in service of the ruling elite†DeSantis said in response to YouTube’s censorship during an April 12 video conference call with three of the scientists from the banned video.

    “When they took down the video … they were really continuing what they’ve been doing for the past year: stifle debate, short-circuit scientific inquiry, make sure that the narrative is not questioned. And I think that we’ve seen already that that has had catastrophic consequences for our society.â€

    The takedown of the video suggests that Big Tech intends to keep exercising the awesome power it directed against Trump in the closing days of the previous administration. Twitter and Facebook banned the president, cutting off a direct line of communication between the commander-in-chief and tens of millions of Americans.

    DeSantis thinks that the power monopolies have now is far more extensive than what the United States had witnessed at the turn of the century.

    “What we’ve seen with the big tech and the censorship, they are exercising more power than the monopolies at the beginning of the 20th century ever could have exercised,†the governor said. “The type of power that they’re exercising now in some respects is even more profound than the type of power that government typically exercises.â€

    No End In Sight

    Desantis believes the lockdown states may never fully reopen because the leaders there have invested so heavily in the narrative while the voters have grown fearful.

    While restrictions are easing across the nation, only six states, including Florida, have fully reopened, according to a tracker maintained by USA Today . Eight states never issued a stay-at-home order.

    “I think if your goal is no cases, then there may never be an end to it, because you’re never gonna have zero COVID,†DeSantis said, adding that a more pragmatic goal would be to aim towards a hospitalization rate indicative of a respiratory virus endemic.

    “But I don’t know that they’re willing to accept that reality. I think they’re going to try to have no cases at all, which would basically mean there would never be a full end to these policies, which is scary.â€

    [May 03, 2021] Tucker Carlson Says People Who Wear Masks Outside Should Be Mocked by Paul Joseph Watson

    Apr 27, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

    Leftists reacted with fury after Fox News host Tucker Carlson said people who wear masks outside should be mocked and that parents who made their kids wear them were engaging in "child abuse."

    me title=

    https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.453.0_en.html#goog_1043494571

    Carlson noted that masks were "purely a sign of political obedience like Kim Il-Sung pins in Pyongyang" and that the only people who voluntarily wear masks outside are "zealots and neurotics."

    He then asserted that the tables should be turned on Biden voters who have been harassing conservatives for almost a year for not wearing a mask in public.

    "The rest of us should be snorting at them first, they're the aggressors – it's our job to brush them back and restore the society we were born in," said Carlson.

    "So the next time you see someone in a mask on the sidewalk or on the bike path, do not hesitate. Ask politely but firmly, ' Would you please take off your mask? Science shows there is no reason for you to be wearing it. Your mask is making me uncomfortable, " he added.

    https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=eyJ0ZndfZXhwZXJpbWVudHNfY29va2llX2V4cGlyYXRpb24iOnsiYnVja2V0IjoxMjA5NjAwLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfSwidGZ3X2hvcml6b25fdHdlZXRfZW1iZWRfOTU1NSI6eyJidWNrZXQiOiJodGUiLCJ2ZXJzaW9uIjpudWxsfX0%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1386921015943602178&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fcovid-19%2Ftucker-carlson-says-people-who-wear-masks-outside-should-be-mocked&sessionId=2230b0fb24328ba2a6edaa853064249defa128d8&siteScreenName=zerohedge&theme=light&widgetsVersion=b5cd9ac%3A1619504549508&width=550px

    "We should do that and we should keep doing it until wearing a mask outside is roughly as socially accepted as lighting a Marlboro on an elevator."

    The Fox News host went on to call mask wearing "repulsive" while asserting that forcing children to wear masks outside should be illegal.

    "Your response when you see children wearing masks as they play should be no different from your response to seeing someone beat a kid in Walmart. Call the police immediately. Contact Child Protective Services. Keep calling until someone arrives," Carlson said.

    "What you're looking at is abuse, it's child abuse, and you are morally obligated to attempt to prevent it," he added.

    As expected, Carlson immediately began trending on Twitter, with hysterical leftists hyperventilating over Tucker once again challenging their cult. Many called for the Fox News host to be fired while others ludicrously described him as a "national security threat."

    As we highlighted yesterday , even Dr. Fauci now admits that the risk of vaccinated people spreading COVID outside is "minuscule," and yet some health professionals are pushing for the mask mandates to be made permanent.

    The transmission of COVID-19 outdoors is almost non-existent, making mask mandates merely a political tool of population control.

    In a recent open letter to the German government and state premiers, five leading members of the Association for Aerosol Research (GAeF) wrote, "The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 viruses takes place indoors almost without exception. Transmission outdoors is extremely rare and never leads to cluster infections as can be observed indoors."

    * * *

    Brand new merch now available! Get it at https://www.pjwshop.com/

    * * *

    In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here . Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, I urgently need your financial support here


    Fiscal.Enema 8 hours ago (Edited)

    In all fairness... Tucker should have pointed out that SOME MASKS do filter out the virus most of the time.

    Wearing a mask outdoors in most situations is ridiculous, stupid, and dangerous.

    3M N95's 1860 which are electrostatically charged have good filtration protection against most virus.

    https://www.3m.com/3M/en_US/company-us/all-3m-products/~/3M-Health-Care-Particulate-Respirator-and-Surgical-Mask-1860-N95-120-EA-Case/?N=5002385+3294795990&rt=rud

    Why the us government did not fund this type of mask for all is telling what the overall strategy is.

    Controlling you, your neighbor, and others that think for themselves.

    Its not about the virus

    Robert Neville 7 hours ago

    Actually, M95 masks filter out 95% of particles over 4 microns in diameter in perfect conditions. In the real world it is much less effective than that. Viruses are generally less than one micron in size so they are ineffective for most viruses. Also, the masks are so hard to breath through that some version have an exhale valve so they do nothing to protect others if you are infected. Most masks don't protect your eyes. The only thing that works is a space suit that is decontaminated before you remove it. The rest is virtue siganling.

    Fiscal.Enema 6 hours ago

    https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2012/04/lab-study-supports-use-n95-respirators-flu-protection

    PUT THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT!

    Properly fitted n95's do protect against virus and the science proves it.

    Dickweed Wang 10 hours ago (Edited)

    This is an excerpt from the "Stanford Study" from November 2020 (that's been making the rounds in the alternative media and conservative media space recently) about the uselessness of masks in preventing "the virus":

    A meta -analysis among health care workers found that compared to no masks, surgical mask and N95 respirators were not effective against transmission of viral infections or influenza-like illness based on six RCTs [28] . Using separate analysis of 23 observational studies, this meta -analysis found no protective effect of medical mask or N95 respirators against SARS virus [28] . A recent systematic review of 39 studies including 33,867 participants in community settings (self-report illness), found no difference between N95 respirators versus surgical masks and surgical mask versus no masks in the risk for developing influenza or influenza-like illness, suggesting their ineffectiveness of blocking viral transmissions in community settings [29] .

    It's predictable that the usual suspects have come out of the woodwork to "fact check" and disparage the entire paper (do an internet search for 'Stanford Mask Paper' and you'll see what I'm talking about). Their main criticism is 'that wasn't published by Stanford', while they totally ignore the claims made in the paper. When you look at the people and organizations doing the fact checking it really shows that the entire mask issue is a political/control ploy. Here's the link to the entire paper if anyone is interested:

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/

    [May 03, 2021] He who wear mask while alone in car should also wear condom while alone in bed. The power of propaganda about wearing masks outdoor coming from TV truly rots your brain

    From comments: " Tucker is right on this one. If you wear a mask outside you truly are a moron. You may as well add goggles and a butt plug." ... "Don't forget about those solo drivers with masks on!", "Maskers are stupid scared virtue signalers"
    May 03, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Dickweed Wang 10 hours ago (Edited)

    As an anti-mask militant for quite a while now I've been going out of my way to ask people with masks on outdoors why they're wearing one (I've really tried to be polite but it's getting increasingly hard to do that). In literally hundreds of instances I haven't gotten a straight answer yet. It's stunning that people are so gullible but it shows what the power of propaganda really is. 99% of that is coming from teevee, which truly rots your brain.

    Capt Tripps 10 hours ago remove link

    They are signaling the submission to a tyrannical state. That submission makes us all less free.

    safelyG 10 hours ago

    mister tucker is wrongeddy wrong wrong.

    we must all wear multiple masks. indoors. outdoors. at work. at play. while we sleep. while we bathe. while we eat. while we sing praises unto the most high.

    and we must remain 8 feet apart, one from the other. at all times.

    and report our whereabouts and our contacts and our body temperature. to the authorities.

    get your vacines!

    lovingly,
    bill n melinda

    radical-extremist 10 hours ago

    When Tucker Carlson says to tell people to take off their masks and call CPS on parents who mask their children he's trolling the Left. And because the Left has no sense of humor or irony or hypocrisy...they're of course OUTRAGED, which was his point.

    Realism 10 hours ago remove link

    I like it best when hiking outside, in 75 degree weather with a nice breeze, you see people put up their mask as they walk by

    Pure comedy, it's hard to understand the stupidity if you think you'll get any disease much less Covid walking by someone

    And importantly, would you really be hiking if you had Covid LOL

    aztrader 10 hours ago

    Mask wears see it as a badge of honor because they "care" about other people. In reality, it's a badge of Stupidity and ignorance.

    Prince Velveeta 10 hours ago (Edited) remove link

    California is an open-air mental ward. I was just out there and the collective idiocy is astounding. People jogging with masks on , exaggerating their breathing as they pass you in some competitive virtue signaling event. I witnessed some idiot jogging up the hill past my family member's house, with a bandana on his face, being sucked into his mouth as he's gasping for air.....

    [Apr 29, 2021] Slowly But Surely, The Truth Is Coming Out: Pfizer CEO admitted that fully vaccinated people will need a third shot of the vaccine within 12 months If you don t want to believe me, perhaps you will believe the CEO of Pfizer. This week, he admitted that fully vaccinated people If you don t want to believe me, perhaps you will believe the CEO of Pfizer. This week, he admitted that fully vaccinated people This week, he admitted that fully vaccinated people will need a third shot of the vaccine within 12 months

    Apr 29, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said people will “likely†need a third dose of a Covid-19 vaccine within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated. His comments were made public Thursday but were taped April 1.

    Bourla said it’s possible people will need to get vaccinated against the coronavirus annually.

    From the very beginning of this crisis, I have been warning my readers that any immunity would be very temporary.

    Natural COVID immunity is very temporary, and immunity conferred by the vaccines is very temporary too.

    The CEO of Pfizer is comparing the COVID vaccines to flu shots. Every year millions of Americans rush out to get their flu shots, and the CEO of Pfizer is admitting that it looks like the COVID vaccines will be on a similar schedule …

    “There are vaccines that’s like polio that one dose is enough, there are vaccines like pneumococcal vaccine that one dose is enough for adults and there are vaccines like flu that you need every year,†Bourla said. “The Covid virus looks more like the influenza virus than the polio virus.â€

    If people are going to need a new shot every year, that means that COVID will be with us for a very long time to come.

    This is essentially an admission that the COVID pandemic will not be ending any time soon.

    Needless to say, Pfizer stands to make giant mountains of money if COVID vaccines become a yearly thing, and we need to keep that in mind.

    A lot of people that I know are going to be extremely upset when they finally realize that the two shots that they got only provide temporary immunity.

    And of course lots of people are still getting sick after being fully vaccinated. According to the CDC, so far there have been almost 6,000 documented cases of people being infected after getting two shots, and dozens of them have died …

    The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has reported that roughly 5,800 people who received a coronavirus vaccine still ultimately came down with the disease anyway, according to CNN.

    Of those 5,800, 396 of them (roughly 7 percent) were hospitalized; 74 of the vaccinated people ultimately died. The report proves that the vaccines, though frequently touted by the government and the media, are not guaranteed to prevent everyone from contracting the virus.

    That wasn’t supposed to happen.

    But it is happening.

    Meanwhile, there is a lot of uncertainty about how the current vaccines will fare against variants that have already developed and variants that will develop in the future.

    At this point we just don’t know how effective the vaccines will be, but the New York Times is assuring us that we don’t have anything to be concerned about…

    “I use the term ‘scariants,’†said Dr. Eric Topol, professor of molecular medicine at Scripps Research in La Jolla, Calif., referring to much of the media coverage of the variants.

    “Even my wife was saying, ‘What about this double mutant?’ It drives me nuts. People are scared unnecessarily. If you’re fully vaccinated, two weeks post dose, you shouldn’t have to worry about variants at all.â€

    Really?

    I have a feeling that Dr. Eric Topol will end up eating those words.

    The reason why a new flu vaccine comes out every year is because the flu is constantly changing and mutating.

    The same thing is happening to COVID, and there are already dozens of mutant variations spreading around the globe.

    To me, Dr. Eric Topol’s statement was exceedingly irresponsible, especially considering some of the studies that have come out lately. Here is just one example …

    Two doses of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine were found to have only a 10.4% efficacy against mild-to-moderate infections caused by the B.1.351 South Africa variant, according to a phase 1b-2 clinical trial published on Tuesday in the New England Journal of Medicine . This is a cause for grave concern as the South African variants share similar mutations to the other variants leaving those vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine potentially exposed to multiple variants.

    In this article, I haven’t even discussed all of the side effects that we have been witnessing. A few days ago, the FDA issued an unprecedented order regarding the Johnson and Johnson vaccine because it was causing blood clots in a number of cases…

    This week, the Food and Drug Administration called for a halt in the administration of the single dose vaccine for COVID-19 manufactured by Johnson and Johnson. The halt was ascribed to the rare incidence of blood clots that could potentially be related to the vaccine.

    I am glad that the FDA decided to step in, but the order came too late for this guy …

    When the news broke about the pause of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine Tuesday, one Coast family was already living with a tragedy they believe was caused by the vaccine.

    It started out as a normal day for 43-year-old Brad Malagarie of St. Martin. This busy father of seven spent the morning at his D’Iberville office before heading to get a Johnson & Johnson vaccine a little after noon.

    He returned to work, and within three hours coworkers noticed he was unresponsive at his desk.

    It shouldn’t be controversial to say that rushing experimental vaccines through the testing process was a really bad idea.

    We should be putting the safety of the American people first, and nobody knows for sure what the long-term effects of these experimental treatments will be.

    In this day and age, we all need to do our own research and we all need to think for ourselves, because the big pharmaceutical companies are more concerned with profits than anything else.

    If you are harmed by their experimental therapies, the big pharmaceutical companies won’t be there to pick up the pieces for you if something goes horribly wrong.

    * * *

    Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America†is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.

    So...

    1. Requiring Vaccine IDs or passports violates medical privacy - Right?
    2. Unvaccinated are NOT a threat because the vaccinated are protected - Right?
    3. Preventing unvaccinated from participating in society is discrimination - Right?
    _arrow

    The Antisoiler 5 hours ago remove link

    It appears they are moving in the direction of mandating a vaccine subscription, where you will pay monthly or yearly.

    Trends indicate subscription based revenue generation is a win-win for both producer, consumer, and eugenicist.

    Remember, you will own nothing and be happy about it. You will be free from the burden of asset management. And, you'll essentially be a slave, working till you drop into a grave or incinerator.

    Fed Supporter 6 hours ago remove link

    Sorry Michael Snyder, you are flat out wrong about natural immunity not lasting very long.

    A corona virus from 17 years ago, every year those who were infected get tested for immunity, and guess what every year for 17 year those previously infected individuals still have immunity.

    Further, the current corona virus , Covid, is 80% similiar to the one from 17 years ago. Some virologits estimate that 30% of the world has cross immunity and can not get Covid.

    Sorry to burst your bubble, but you need to do more research. You are parroting the MSM outlets who were selling fear and citing quacks from stanford, etc that said "we just don't know", No they do know they just wanted to ramp fear sky high. Memory T cells are a thing.

    see

    Antibody that inhibits the new coronavirus discovered in ...

    https://www.livescience.com › sars-antibody-inhibits-ne...

    May 18, 2020 â€" Blood samples from the patient, who had SARS in 2003, contained an ... Antibody that inhibits the new coronavirus discovered in patient who had SARS 17 years ago ... Antibodies form part of the body's immune response to pathogens. ... But Vir Biotechnology has fast-tracked the antibody for development ...

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z

    Here we studied T cell responses against the structural (nucleocapsid (N) protein) and non-structural (NSP7 and NSP13 of ORF1 ) regions of SARS-CoV-2 in individuals convalescing from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ( n = 36). In all of these individuals, we found CD4 and CD8 T cells that recognized multiple regions of the N protein. Next, we showed that patients ( n = 23) who recovered from SARS (the disease associated with SARS-CoV infection) possess long-lasting memory T cells that are reactive to the N protein of SARS-CoV 17 years after the outbreak of SARS in 2003; these T cells displayed robust cross-reactivity to the N protein of SARS-CoV-2. We also detected SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells in individuals with no history of SARS, COVID-19 or contact with individuals who had SARS and/or COVID-19 ( n = 37). SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells in uninfected donors exhibited a, etc.

    Fed Supporter 6 hours ago

    BTW natural immunity is way better than Mrna vaccines, which are narrowly tailored to target proteins on the spike protein. Once it mutates, like the South Africa and UK mutations, the pfizer vaccine will need modified to target the new mutations hence yearly boosters at $180 a pop. We will be chasing this thing forever, always behind on catching the mutated viruses. Invest in Pfizer their stock will go so high, they are going to make a ton of money off the sheep.

    Also, some doctors, said it is not wise to get vaccinated for corvid if you already had it.

    Also isn't peculiar the mutations all occurred in countries that ran human trials, Brazil, UK, SA, Israel. These countries were the first to have humans vaccinated and they are the first to have mutations.

    Bacon's Rebellion 4 hours ago

    "Just look at the number of medicines pulled from pharmacies in the last 20 years that the FDC originally said were perfectly safe"

    Think for yourself 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link

    also, the mRNA vaccine 'targets' the s-proteins by genetically hijacking your cell to construct biochemical factories to create these s-proteins. Not only is it a fixed overhead (no off switch, it's in your genes now) but that overhead is spent building parts that are designed to inflame your immune system. Even after so-called 'immunity' is acquired, those biochemical factories will keep working to produce, the immune system will keep working against the low-level inflammation, so the cells will not only be spending fuel on negative output, but the spare viral proteins floating around it's creating are just begging to be assimilated into even more mutant strains.

    I am convinced that the mRNA 'vaccine' is exponentially increasing the mutation potential of covid-19.

    Libertarian777 5 hours ago

    THIS GUY GETS IT. Lack of antibodies does not mean immunity disappears.

    Pazuzu 4 hours ago

    Upvoted for clever use of term 'virologits'. If ever there were a bunch of gits the virology bunch fits the bill.

    Josey Yahoo 6 hours ago remove link

    Is anybody else stating to feel like they are being played?

    For a year now I have been saying that this is a flu, just another flu, being blown into a major issue to literally destroy our nation.

    First the lockdowns, to destroy small business, as the large companies will gladly assist in the elimination of cash. NOTE, the immediate calls for cash not to be used as it would transmit the virus, then all of a sudden a coin shortage, when was the last time that happened, oh, that's right, NEVER!

    ....
    freedommusic 4 hours ago (Edited)

    > Huh? Unvaccinated are a threat to other Unvaccinated people who want to get vaccinated and don't want to die.

    No problem that's what your double mask, self isolating, and social distancing is for. Since it is SO EFFECTIVE , it will provide the necessary protection until all the smart people get vaccinated.

    Then all the unwashed, ignorant, unvaccinated fools will die off as a result of natural selection.

    Everyone wins here and nature wins.

    RIGHT?

    taketheredpill 6 hours ago

    Or maybe the vaccine is 99.9925% Effective (6000 sick out of 80 Million with full dose) and Pharma guys rounded up?

    Bacon's Rebellion 6 hours ago (Edited) remove link

    ummm.

    Assuming 100% accuracy of the "cause of death" being Covid19:

    Covid19 survival rates for all age groups:
    563,000 dead / 329,000,000 total population = 99.829% survival.

    Covid19 survival rates over the age of 75:
    245,000 dead / 55,000,000 people = 99.555% survival rate.

    Covid19 survival rates under the age of 55:
    40,000 dead / 229,000,000 people = 99.983% survival rate.

    Covid19 survival rates under the age of 25:
    550 dead / 103,000,000 people = 99.9995% survival rate.

    Explain to us why in the world we need to vaccinate the 16 to 25 folks? Vaccination DOES NOT MEAN you can't catch it or spread it...

    "" We don't know yet whether or not it prevents you from getting infected where you're not with symptoms...but you have virus in your nasopharynx that you could then infect an unvaccinated person who might be vulnerable, and you will inadvertently and innocently get them sick," Fauci explained."

    The whole vaccine jive talk is packed with "Could", "Maybe", "Possibly", "Likely", "Unknown"...ect.

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/index.htm

    Bacon's Rebellion 5 hours ago (Edited)

    "UNLESS....you get people to lock down, wash hands, wear masks etc."

    Yeah, we did that, and we have 31,000,000 confirmed cases.

    How many people contracted Covid19 but were never tested?

    Estimating the Fraction of Unreported COVID-19
    "The results are striking: ...The range of results across model assumptions and time periods utilized vary between 6 to 24 unreported cases."

    So, at 6 unreported for every reported, more than half of the US population has been exposed...your masks and lockdowns have been a huge failure....

    186,000,000 infections and 563,000 dead = .3% death rate.

    University of Chicago

    Fed Supporter 5 hours ago remove link

    Bacon, don't confuse taketheredpill with facts, his mind is already made. I'll bet he is a paid sock puppet or just some sick liberal trolling one of the few places post comments that make sense, and that aren't a bunch of collectivist mindless sheep.

    russellthetreeman PREMIUM 6 hours ago

    It's not a vaccine. It doesn't even come close to halfway meeting the definition of a vaccine.

    It's not a pandemic. It doesn't even come close to halfway meeting the definition of a pandemic.

    The sars cov 2 virus has a known survival rate of WELL over 99+%.

    sun tzu 6 hours ago remove link

    The average sheep thinks over 30 million Americans died of covid-19 last year. Idiocy rules

    A Lunatic 6 hours ago (Edited)

    That still pales in comparison to the 150 million gun deaths we had last year, according to Joe.

    Bacon's Rebellion 5 hours ago

    "It's not a vaccine"...correct, it's a drug that forces your immune system to do something it doesn't want to do.

    The original mRNA researcher when it actually, sorta, worked "I felt like God!"

    NYTimes

    baja canada 6 hours ago remove link

    All BS. My wife and I are unvaccinated and have travelled half the country, always maskless, over the past year. Not sick, haven’t been sick. Our dog is fine, too.

    sun tzu 6 hours ago

    Same here. I've been to Mexico 3 times too. Nobody around me, family and co-workers, has gotten sick or died.

    Lead Engineer PREMIUM 6 hours ago

    And the CDC estimates that over 30% of the population has been infected. So if we assume that another 20% had previous natural immunity and another 50% of the susceptible have been vaccinated, then you can see that this pandemic is rapidly going extinct.

    Captive1 6 hours ago (Edited) remove link

    " From the very beginning of this crisis, I have been warning my readers that any immunity would be very temporary. Natural COVID immunity is very temporary, and immunity conferred by the vaccines is very temporary too."

    Disqualifying statement. There is no data to support this statement. Antibody surveillance studies have shown durability and case studies have demonstrated no reinfections to those who had an initial antibody response on the first infection. Not to mention T Cell memory. He doesn't know what he's talking about. Immune memory to COV2 is long lived and protective across multiple strains. I would link the papers but I'm not helping people not be retarded anymore. Big pharma wants you to believe that immunity is temporary to drive profit. It's not.

    Huxley's Ghost 6 hours ago remove link

    We know so little about the immune system (really the entire human body); basic concepts, yes but effect of environment, innate experience, stressors, diet, etc..not a clue. Individual immune systems because of all these factors are more like fingerprints--vastly unique to each unit. The endocrine and immune systems are black boxes to the medical community but they act like are doing more than spit-balling.

    Huxley's Ghost 5 hours ago remove link

    In theory, they (vaccine companies) annually analyze what strains are prevalent in the world and predicted to have the greatest impact. Those strains get selected for production of the annual flu shot; it could be the case that the same strain(s) prevailed. Or not. These days you can't believe anything anymore.

    Last time I had the flu shot was over 30 years ago. I had flu once since then and took Tamiflu, which was miraculous in its speed (identify and dose early while viral load is low) of effect, minimal/no side effects, and efficacy. I was back on my feet in about 36 hours--fully. I have heard people report horrible abdominal/GI issues (temporary). I was lucky.


    strych10 3 hours ago remove link

    OK, I've said this before but I will repeat it, ultra basic here:

    Natural immunity tends to be both "deeper" and "broader" than what one of these mRNA (straight up or adeno vector, doesn't matter) can provide.

    When a virus infects you there are a lot of different things that happen. The two that matter the most for the purposes of this discussion are as follows:

    1) Your body sees a wide array of viral surface proteins and gets a look at the actual capsid and lipid envelope too. Particularly after you immune system shreds up some of the buggers and looks at the pieces.

    2) Your body gets to see millions of variations on this, including the most statistically common variations in surface protein structure.

    This means that your body develops a set of antibodies that is much wider than a single introduced protein can provide.

    With the vax you get one structure, lab controlled QC, a single "image" of the target if you will. In the wild you get a bunch of various proteins and a ton of variation in their physical shape, hundreds or thousands of images from various angles.

    The result is that you get a relatively wide array of antibodies and a hugely wider picture of what is "not self". This makes it easier for your body to recognize the same or similar infectious agent/infection next time. You also now have a set of antibodies with variable structure making it more likely that they can neutralize a mutant strain of the same virus (or something substantially similar) or at least blunt the next virus' attack long enough to buy time for your immune system to learn about it without you getting a serious illness.

    duck_fur 2 hours ago

    You seem to have a background in virology. What of the issue of coding errors - either during or after manufacture - within the mRNA payload? What of the possibility of the expressed protein exhibiting a fold due to the error(s)?

    strych10 1 hour ago

    I'm not a virologist. I'm a cell biologist.

    So, trying not to make this a full on basic genetics class...

    Yes, what you're asking is possible. It's also statistically rare. The root of misformed proteins tends to be genetic code error or a mistake in copying that code into mRNA.

    Ribosomes, which translate mRNA into a protein, tend to be very good at their job and if they make an error can often detect it, back up and fix it and then begin sequencing again. Errors do occur but they're rare. At this stage more common is an issue of improper folding of the protein resulting in an improper tertiary structure and the inability to form a quaternary structure due to this. (A quaternary structure is an overall structure formed by multiple proteins folded to fit together into a larger unit which serves a purpose. For example, hemoglobin is formed from four separate proteins that fold up and then can fit together to form hemoglobin.)

    So, assuming that the QC is good, which I have no reason to believe that it is not, coding errors are not really a problem. It's the fact that the QC is too good.

    But then you have to step back and ask if this matters. Yes and no, and I'll give you a quick explanation of each.

    An antibody is, essentially, like a Y of gum you're sticking on the key to a lock. The virus has a key that unlocks the cell, the antibody prevents these two things from coming into physical contact so the key can never open the lock. Once bound this antibody also marks whatever it has bound to for destruction by other parts of the immune system. That in mind...

    Yes: If CoV-2 were to mutate to the point that the spike proteins in question changed enough that an antibody couldn't bind to the virion then the virus could evade the antibodies that neutralize the virion and mark it for destruction.

    No: In order to do this, generally, you need quite a bit of mutation to change the physical structure of the spike. In a lot of cases this would make the virion non-operational because the same change that allows it to avoid the antibodies also means it can no longer fit that key into the desired lock.

    So, does it really matter? Again, yes and no. If the virus can "figure out" a key that still opens the desired lock (or another one) and doesn't fit the antibody it will avoid the immune system until the immune system figures out what's going on. This takes some time. Infected cells have to signal that they're infected, inspection has to be done, antibodies synthesized etc.

    So, IMHO, and it's just my opinion: the fear of "breakthrough" is rather overblown. However, it is still real. In a natural infection there is less chance of this kind of "breakthrough" because your body has more data on the invader meaning that the invader usually needs to change a lot more in order to evade the immune system hence "broader" and "deeper". That said, there are viruses that are pretty good at this. Influenza A is one of them.

    This is the root of what you may have heard last year about "T-cell immunity". People had previously encountered a disease substantially similar to CoV-2 and it was similar enough that they produced an antibody that neutralized CoV-2.

    Quasimodo. 48 minutes ago remove link

    If you have breakthrough, you have a new virus. A mutation, not just a variant. Most variants have only slight changes in protein. A variant is more likely to spread and be more virulant if it is less deadly since the host survives long enough to spread the virus further, while a deadlier form (although could happen) will die out quickly as more hosts will die

    strych10 15 minutes ago

    I actually had to ask my wife about the technical definition about this.

    For CoV-2 to change enough to be "not CoV-2" it would require significantly more alteration than you're stating here.

    The things that would change the classification are things like capsid shape, nucleic acid type, mechanism of infiltration or exfiltration.

    You need far more than simply the ability to evade current immune response. Hence why Influenza A can jump species, come back and still be Influenza A.

    Codery 1 hour ago

    Ya but that’s just like science, can you explain how any of that helps get rid of Trump?

    strych10 1 hour ago remove link

    Yes, in three letters. CNN.

    sun tzu 6 hours ago remove link

    Stay away from big hospitals. They are contract killers for big pharma

    Sluggo315 3 hours ago

    My older brother that has three or four co-morbidities (weight, BP, asthma, one more I think) was rushed to the hospital for a bowel blockage. He spent the night in the emergency room, and was admitted into the hospital for tests. They put him on the COVID floor. Tell me these hospitals are not in on it too!!!?

    TheTruthisSomewhere 5 hours ago remove link

    The article unfortunately is going from the erroneous position that this is worse than the flu. It is not the statistics are cooked and it is a testdemic. Variants are always less potent and yes people have natural immunity to this. It is almost a Gaslighting article based on quasi facts and hearsay.

    [Apr 28, 2021] Joe Rogan is being attacked by Fauci the White House for daring to have an honest discussion about Covid-19 vaccines by Zachary Leeman

    Joe Rogan: "I think it's safe to get vaccinated, but if you're 21 years old ... if you're a healthy person and you're exercising all of the time and you're young and you're eating well, I don't think you need to worry about this." https://twitter.com/i/status/1387077145156063234
    And Fauci response: "You have to put a little bit of societal responsibility in your choices, and that's where I disagree with Mr. Rogan." https://twitter.com/i/status/1387414298432000000
    It is unclear how Fauci response correlates with the fact that existing vaccines are less effective or (in case of Pfizer and South African strain) ineffective against new mutations. Does he acts as Big Pharma lobbyist, or what ?
    Also, you have to be skeptical of pharmaceutical companies and the fact that they cannot be sued if something goes wrong with the vaccine.
    Apr 28, 2021 | www.rt.com
    White House health adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci and communications director Kate Bedingfield have made a point of belittling and attacking podcaster Joe Rogan for daring to have a mixed opinion on Covid-19 vaccines.

    As Rogan has skyrocketed over the years to arguably the most influential and successful podcaster around, he has also turned into an intensely controversial figure, mainly for liberals who fear his willingness to give a platform to right-wing figures like Alex Jones and his less-than-PC takes on everything from transgender athletes to Covid-19 vaccines.

    The latter is what landed the former 'Fear Factor' host in the hot seat this week as a clip from a recent episode of 'The Joe Rogan Experience' made its way across social media and critics painted Rogan as an anti-vaxxer spreading disinformation.

    The controversy stems from Rogan saying, during a conversation with fellow comic Dave Smith, he would not recommend that a healthy person in their early 20s get a Covid-19 vaccine as they are not as vulnerable to the virus as older generations (who account for the majority of Covid deaths in the US) and people with preexisting medical conditions.

    The Spotify podcaster also said pushing for kids to be vaccinated is "crazy," citing his own childrens' history with getting Covid-19, as both recovered relatively quickly.

    Critics painted Rogan's comments as an angry anti-vaxx rant, urging his millions of listeners to avoid getting inoculated against Covid-19. However, they ignored the fact that Rogan says in the clip (and has said in the past) that getting vaccinated seems mostly safe and is indeed "important" for certain people.

    Criticism of Rogan reached a bizarre new level on Wednesday when the White House appeared to launch a coordinated effort to disparage and belittle the podcaster, completely dismissing his opinions.

    In multiple interviews, Fauci blasted Rogan for ignoring "societal responsibilities," arguing even young and healthy people should get vaccinated as asymptomatic individuals can still spread the virus.

    The infectious disease expert also believes "kids of all ages" will be vaccinated by the end of the year – there are no vaccines on the market in the US approved for anyone under 16 – and everyone should "absolutely" get inoculated.

    ALSO ON RT.COM Rose McGowan tells Democrats they are in a cult, and their whining, defensive responses prove her right

    Bedingfield also dismissed Rogan's opinion in a CNN interview where she said Rogan not being a doctor basically strips his words of any merit.

    "I guess my first question would be, did Joe Rogan become a medical doctor while we weren't looking?" she asked. "I'm not sure that taking scientific and medical advice from Joe Rogan is perhaps the most productive way for people to get their information."

    Initial social media criticism of Rogan is one thing, but the White House pitting themselves against a private citizen having an open and frank discussion on a podcast is concerning. It's alarming enough that White House officials busy with vaccination efforts and a still-fresh administration would take the time to debate Rogan on the subject, but the responses to his discussion also show that administration officials are fearful of open debate and conversations about the vaccines. If one even strays from the belief that vaccines are 100% safe and every single person, regardless of age or health, should take them, they are attacked, at least if you have the following that Rogan has.

    Rogan's discussions on Covid-19 vaccines do not boil down to a debate on whether getting inoculated against the virus is good for everyone or not. The recent viral clip even opens with the podcaster saying vaccines are safe, and he acknowledges that what he says about children and young, healthy people is not true across the board. He merely expresses concerns as a father and gives a personal opinion that in no way discourages everyone from getting a vaccine.

    Looking at Fauci and Bedingfield's responses, it appears they aren't even debating what Rogan actually said.

    Fauci, who has been a controversial figure himself and accused of flip-flopping multiple positions during the pandemic, argues that it is the potential transmission of the virus from one person to another that is the reason everyone should be vaccinated. Rogan never talks about the risk of transmission though. He simply makes the argument that a healthy individual who is younger may not need a vaccination to protect themselves from the deadlier aspects of Covid.

    Bedingfield's argument is even lamer as she says without a "Dr." title, Rogan simply can't have concerns about vaccinations for children and others. She argues no one should take "medical advice" from a podcaster, setting Rogan up as a man who presented himself as some kind of expert on vaccines, dishing out advice to his listeners, who apparently aren't intelligent enough to make up their own minds, according to these critics.

    Fauci and Bedingfield and any other White House official who decides to paint Rogan as the face of anti-vaxxers should be ashamed of themselves. Their personal attacks are an opportunistic way to take a shot at someone who has somehow become a near-pariah on the left, and to discourage open and frank discussions about vaccines. Their swift dismissal of a comedian who is not quite waving the flag for every single person to be vaccinated shows that they don't want discussion from citizens they want compliance and for people to keep nodding their heads at their ever-changing talking points and guidelines.

    It really doesn't matter who is right in the White House versus Joe Rogan debate because there shouldn't be a White House versus Joe Rogan debate. Ironically, Fauci and Bedingfield have probably made more people aware of Rogan's comments by addressing them. They and other officials have taken questionable criticism of a fairly harmless conversation and used it to create a false narrative about one man to strike fear into anyone who would dare consider what he or anyone else would say above what they do.

    If you like this story, share it with a friend!

    [Apr 27, 2021] The Gamaleya Center statement - Official website vaccine against COVID-19 Sputnik V

    Notable quotes:
    "... Science Mag ..."
    Apr 27, 2021 | sputnikvaccine.com

    Covid-19 Vaccine Thrombosis:

    THE GAMALEYA CENTER STATEMENT

    A comprehensive analysis of adverse events during clinical trials and over the course of mass vaccinations with the Sputnik V vaccine showed that there were no cases of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST).

    All vaccines based on adenoviral vector platform are different and not directly comparable. In particular, AstraZeneca’s ChAdOx1-S vaccine uses chimpanzee adenovirus to deliver the antigen, consisting of S-protein combined with leader sequence of tissue-type plasminogen activator. The vaccine from Johnson&Johnson uses human adenovirus serotype Ad26 and full-length S-protein stabilized by mutations. In addition, it is produced using the PER.C6 cell line (embryonic retinal cells), which is not widely represented among other registered products.

    Sputnik V is a two-component vaccine in which adenovirus serotypes 5 and 26 are used. A fragment of tissue-type plasminogen activator is not used, and the antigen insert is an unmodified full-length S-protein. Sputnik V vaccine is produced with the HEK293 cell line, which has long been safely used for the production of biotechnological products.

    Thus, all of the above vaccines based on adenoviral vectors have significant differences in their structure and production technology. Therefore, there is no reason and no justification to extrapolate safety data from one vaccine to safety data from other vaccines.

    The quality and safety of Sputnik V are, among other things, assured by the fact that, unlike other vaccines, it uses a 4-stage purification technology that includes two stages of chromatography and two stages of tangential flow filtration. This purification technology helps to obtain a highly purified product that goes through mandatory control including the analysis of free DNA presence. In addition, the volume of nucleic acid is several dozen times lower in adenoviral vectors compared to Pfizer and Moderna vaccines (1 to 2 mcg vs 50 to 100 mcg, correspondingly).

    A study published in The New England Journal of Medicine on April 9, 2021, discusses that the cause of the thrombosis in some patients vaccinated with other vaccines could be insufficient purification that leads to the emergence of significant quantities of free DNA. Insufficient purification or use of very high doses of target DNA/RNA can result in adverse interaction of a patient’s antibodies that activate thrombocytes with elements of the vaccine itself and/or free DNA/RNA, which can form a complex with the PF4 factor.

    Link to the study:

    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104840?query=featured_home

    The Gamaleya Center is ready to share its purification technology with other vaccine producers in order to help them minimize the risk of adverse effects during vaccination.

    [Apr 26, 2021] Genetic Vaccines -- Are They the New Thalidomide by Dr. Lee Merritt

    Notable quotes:
    "... He had a total loss of his platelets -- the little blood cells that stop bleeding. In spite of being treated by a team of physicians, he died two weeks later from a brain hemorrhage, and was reported to have had zero platelets . ..."
    "... What happened to this physician and the others seems to be a new previously unseen problem related to vaccination -- despite the manufacturers' claims. ..."
    "... Increasingly, vaccine manufacturers and government officials are following the sarcastic maxim from Samuel Shem's novel of medical residency entitled The House of God that "if you don't take a temperature you can't find a fever." In other words, if we don't critically look at the actual recorded patient damage, we won't find our products to be defective. ..."
    Apr 26, 2021 | thenewamerican.com

    Many Americans have heard the news account of Dr. Gregory Michael, a 56-year-old Florida physician who, after receiving his first dose of a Pfizer COVID vaccine on December 18 of last year, was hospitalized three days later. He had a total loss of his platelets -- the little blood cells that stop bleeding. In spite of being treated by a team of physicians, he died two weeks later from a brain hemorrhage, and was reported to have had zero platelets .

    By February 10, 2021, 36 other similar cases were reported in the mainstream media. Pfizer, which along with its partner BioNTech made the vaccine the doctor received, said in a statement that it was aware of the death. Typically, they concluded, "We are actively investigating this case, but we don't believe at this time that there is any direct connection to the vaccine."

    Pfizer made this "finding" despite several unusual circumstances of the case. First, low-platelet disorders, known as idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), most commonly affect children, and generally follow a viral illness. Only 10 percent of ITP cases occur in adults, who usually present with a slow onset form of the disorder, referred to as chronic ITP. The disorder usually starts by someone noticing easy bleeding, such as slow oozing from gums or the nose, or bruises showing up without trauma. Rarely do platelets drop below 20,000, and generally treatment either reverses the disease or prolongs life for years in spite of the problem.

    What happened to this physician and the others seems to be a new previously unseen problem related to vaccination -- despite the manufacturers' claims.

    Increasingly, vaccine manufacturers and government officials are following the sarcastic maxim from Samuel Shem's novel of medical residency entitled The House of God that "if you don't take a temperature you can't find a fever." In other words, if we don't critically look at the actual recorded patient damage, we won't find our products to be defective. Now, major media are increasingly getting on board, condemning "vaccine hesitancy" and pushing everyone to get vaccinated for COVID, discounting any dangers. But in the practice of medicine, we are supposed to employ the "precautionary principle" -- above all do no harm.

    Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 "vaccines" are experimental, employing a genetic technology never before used on humans. Ironically, many people who wouldn't purchase the first edition of a new car line are lining up to take an injection they know nothing about, that has never successfully passed animal trials, that could never meet the required "safety level" for a "drug," and is unapproved for the prevention of COVID except as an emergency experiment .

    Legally, those who get the vaccine are unnamed participants in a Stage IV FDA trial.

    Moreover, a vaccine is supposed to prevent disease. By that definition, these agents are not even vaccines. They are more properly termed "experimental unapproved genetic agents." By admission of the manufacturers themselves, both the Pfizer and Moderna products only lessen the symptoms of COVID; they don't prevent transmission.

    me scrolling=

    Vaccination was first invented to treat smallpox, which had a a fatality rate of up to 60 percent. Then other diseases such as typhoid and polio were similarly addressed. But vaccination is not used when effective safe treatment is available. Although censorship has confused the public understanding, overwhelming evidence dating back to the 1970s shows that viruses can be treated with "lysosomotropic agents." The truth is, hundreds of papers have shown that chloroquine, and its later version hydroxychloroquine, are very effective in treating this virus if given early. A worldwide open architecture online review of COVID survival (hcqtrial.com) showed that death rate was 78.7-percent lower in those countries where hydroxychloroquine was used early and often:

    Multiple large studies done in outpatient settings show very excellent prevention and cure with these and other drugs such as Ivermectin. In Mumbai, India, a study was done of the city police force of 10,000 officers. No deaths were recorded in the 4,600 officers taking a small dose of hydroxychloroquine each week. All the deaths were in the untreated group. Using Worldometer statistics, COVID deaths per capita in New York State are 2,656 per million population; in New Jersey they are 2,821 per million population. In India the rate is 126 per million and in Uganda it is only seven per million. Neither India nor Uganda used social distancing in any real way. But they do use hydroxychloroquine. New York (except for Dr. Zev Zelenko and a few others) does not use the drug.

    As to the claims of the efficacy of the drugs, the declaration of 95-percent effectiveness of the Pfizer product was shown to be bunkum by Dr. Peter Doshi, the associate editor of the British Medical Journal , writing in that publication. After doing an independent review of the data submitted to the FDA, Dr. Doshi reported that only 30 percent of test subjects, at best, experienced even the slightest benefit (symptom reduction). Absolute risk reduction -- in other words stopping transmission -- he estimated at less than one percent.

    The limited benefit of taking the drugs is made worse by the relatively high death tolls from the new mRNA therapy. During the first two months of the rollout of Pfizer and Moderna "vaccines" in 2021, 95 percent of deaths from vaccines recorded in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) were for those agents, meaning only five percent of reported deaths involved all the other vaccines put together. Compared to 2019, deaths in VAERS are up 6,000 percent. Thirty-six deaths were recorded in the first quarter of 2020 versus 1,754 in the first quarter of 2021.

    In Israel, where the Pfizer mRNA product is being used exclusively and a major push is on to vaccinate the whole population, an independent review of government data after two months of the vaccine program was done by the Aix-Marseille University Faculty of Medicine Emerging Infectious and Tropical Diseases Unit's Dr. Hervé Seligmann and engineer Haim Yativ. They showed that when 12.5 percent of Israelis were vaccinated, 51 percent of the deaths from COVID were in the vaccinated group. Additionally, in the over 65-year-olds, vaccination resulted in death from COVID 40 times more than in unvaccinated people. In other words, this is not protecting people from COVID but increasing fatalities from the disease -- and this neglects the number of other side effects.

    If the truth were known, most sane, thinking people would not likely take part in such an experiment. With the truth hidden and with threats of travel bans and an unwarranted fear of COVID, and with pressure from employers and the politicization of COVID in general, Americans have been throwing caution to the wind.

    The Unknowns

    To understand what is actually happening to people after receiving the mRNA agents, I reviewed data in VAERS -- an open-source searchable database of possible vaccine side effects reported by both providers and patients. According to the CDC website:

    VAERS is used to detect possible safety problems -- called "signals" -- that may be related to vaccination. If a vaccine safety signal is identified through VAERS, scientists may conduct further studies to find out if the signal represents an actual risk.

    The main goals of VAERS are to:

    • Detect new, unusual, or rare adverse events that happen after vaccination.

    • Monitor increases in known side effects, like arm soreness where a shot was given

    • Identify potential patient risk factors for particular types of health problems related to vaccines

    • Assess the safety of newly licensed vaccines

    • Watch for unexpected or unusual patterns in adverse event reports

    • Serve as a monitoring system in public health emergencies

    The CDC acknowledges limitations of the system, including:

    • Reports submitted to VAERS often lack details and sometimes contain errors.

    ◦ Serious adverse events are more likely to be reported than mild side effects.

    ◦ It is generally not possible to find out from VAERS data if a vaccine caused the adverse event.

    I searched the VAERS database using keywords that would identify bleeding problems and thrombocytopenia (low or absent platelets). Entries are defined by age groups and sex with a narrative account of the injury.

    In a two-and-a-half-month period from December 15, 2020 to March 12, 2021, 358 cases of unusual clotting or bleeding were identified, and it makes grim reading. There were 104 cases of frank thrombocytopenia (low platelets) -- some including young people. However, the numbers alone do not adequately convey the problems. In one case about an 18-29 year-old female, the physician wrote this: "Patient was seen in in my office on 1/19/21 with complaint of heavy vaginal bleeding. A CBC was obtained which revealed an H/H of 12.2/36.1 and a platelet count of 1 (not 1K, but 1 platelet!) This was confirmed on smear review." The surprise and horror the doctor experienced upon seeing the absence of platelets is clear when reading the report.

    But the platelet problem may just be the most severe expression of a physical derangement that is producing bleeding of all sorts. As seen in the table below, there were 49 people with brain hemorrhages -- nine fatal at the time of reporting. A number of other people arrived at Emergency Departments with bleeding from multiple sites, or internally, so massive that they could not be stabilized even to clearly define the sources of the bleeding.

    Severe Thrombocytopenia 94 Various Spontaneous Skin bleeding 10
    Mild Thrombocytopenia 11 Vein bleeding from temple 1
    Thrombocytopenic Petechial rash/bruising 5 Prolonged surgical site bleeding 3
    Severe Pancytopenia 2 Severe multifocal bleeding 5
    Unknown Hematologic Problem 1 Severe internal bleeding 5
    Multifocal or "massive" brain hemorrhage 20 Severe uncharacterized bleeding 3
    Focal brain hemorrhage 29 Bleeding from cancer site liver 1
    GI Bleed 34 Renal dialysis shunt 1
    Severe Vaginal Bleeding 7 Hematuria 2
    Vaginal Bleeding 21 Renal bleed 1
    Bleeding in Pregnancy 6 Tonsillar bleed 1
    Bleeding with Miscarriage 12 Acute Uterine Fibroid hemorrhage 1
    Irreg Menses 4 Nosebleed 32
    Oral bleeding 8 Spontaneous Splenic hemorrhage 1
    Subconjunctival Hemorrhage 11 Injection Site Bleeding 21
    Intraocular bleed 4 Arm Bruising 1

    Most cases of severe problems were in people over the age of 50 years. But there were many younger people involved, especially in the less severe-but-unusual bleeding problems. Of the 36 reported nosebleeds, six were either unable to be stopped with usual measures, were recurrent, or were recorded as having significant blood loss or dubbed "profuse." Many were associated with other symptoms: photophobia (eye sensitivity to light), headache, hives, "sick in bed," brain fog, and face swelling. The youngest patient with a nosebleed was, sadly, a toddler requiring emergency care. Unusual skin bleeding was also reported. Four 65-plus-year-old males reported blood spontaneously oozing through the skin: one from the legs, one from the scalp, one from an old biopsy site, and one from an old healed "boil" site. Frank bleeding at the time of the inoculation occurred 14 times. Some bleeding was momentary, but often the bleeding was difficult to stop, recurrent, and/or persisted after the patient returned home. (How many times have you had an injection and bled at all, let alone bled off and on for hours?)

    Perhaps the saddest were the bleeding episodes that preceded spontaneous miscarriages. Here are some direct entries in VAERS:

    40-49 y.o. Female: The evening of my vaccination I began to feel feverish, weak and achy. During the night I woke with heavy bleeding and found out the following morning I had miscarried my otherwise healthy pregnancy.

    39 y.o. Female: Internal brain bleeding 10 days after 1st dose Covid vaccine; brain damage, confused, suffering memory loss; This is a spontaneous report from a contactable physician (patient).

    30-39 y.o. Female: 48 hours after injection developed micro-hemorrhages in her right eye. Symptoms resolved and 12/29 recurrence of bleeding to right eye slightly worse than before

    65+ y.o. Male: Patient developed significant nose bleed after receiving vaccine. Required emergency department visits x 2 and hospitalization.

    65+ y.o. Female: Vaccine administered 02/02/2021. By Thursday 2/11/2021 patient almost nonverbal, by Monday 2/15/2021 patient went to the hospital with bruising, sores on her stomach and clots reported as thrombocytopenia. Deceased by Friday, 2/19/20201.

    40-49 y.o. Female: Bleeding, myalgia, tingling in the fingers of the right hand; fatigue immediately upon vaccination -- bleeding at the injection site which the employee reports as filling the Band-Aid over the site. When she got home in the evening and took it off blood ran.

    65+ y.o. Female: Within 15 min of the injection, the individual became aphasic and stroke like symptoms. She was taken to the ER where she was later diagnosed with a cerebral hemorrhage and passed away.

    When such facts are presented, the standard retort from vaccine advocates is, "We have given millions of vaccines, so a few deaths are to be expected." Besides the fact that a willingness to sacrifice individuals for the nebulous good of the masses represents a bankrupt moral order, simply calculating the numbers of deaths is inadequate. "Experts" need to take the time to read the narrative to open their eyes -- and their hearts -- to the suffering happening. There are over 25 pages of such stories printed from VAERS entries, and we must consider, "How many of these people are now dead, and how many are going to die?"

    A second-year medical student armed with the facts should recognize looming disaster -- where are the experts?

    In truth, neither recipients nor their doctors know what is in these "vaccines." Only a few people at the top of the Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and AstraZeneca research groups really understand them. These mRNA injections produce a potentially deadly pathogen -- the spike protein -- in your cells.

    The Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer product says that it contains "a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (modRNA) encoding the viral spike glycoprotein (S) of SARS-CoV-2." If your immune system is strong enough to withstand this onslaught and create some immunity, you may survive the first onslaught. But even if you don't die in the short term, mRNA is an epigenetic controller of DNA . Though this foreign synthetic mRNA doesn't actually become part of your DNA to make you a "GMO human," as some people have been worrying about, it can control DNA in ways we have yet to completely understand . We literally have no idea whether this bodily additive is going to have a side effect of expressing cancer genes, or of repressing cancer protective genes, or thousands of other potentially deadly unknowns.

    Additionally, the Pfizer vaccine includes all types of ingredients that may by themselves create ailments. The Pfizer shot contains "lipids ((4-hydroxybutyl)azanediyl)bis(hexane-6,1-diyl)bis(2- hexyldecanoate), 2-[(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide, 1,2-distearoyl-snglycero-3-phosphocholine, and cholesterol), potassium chloride, monobasic potassium phosphate, sodium chloride, dibasic sodium phosphate dihydrate, and sucrose."

    I insert this list just for completeness -- don't expect to make sense of it. Your doctor can't either. I understand "sucrose" (sugar) and sodium chloride (salt), but who doesn't get lost in the "hydroxybutyl" and "distearoyl" lipid list?

    After doing some sleuthing and having some inside knowledge to start from, I discovered that this lipid particle is an adjuvant called "Matrix M." As described in scientific literature, "Adjuvant Matrix-M™ is comprised of 40 nm nanoparticles composed of Quillaja saponins , cholesterol and phospholipid."

    Matrix-M essentially wraps the mRNA in a lipid coating that allows it to move through cell walls and to linger in your system. Matrix-M is derived from plant chemicals called saponins, which have poorly understood properties in plant biology. They can be toxic to humans in some cases, and have been traditionally used by aboriginal tribesmen to poison fish. Should we consider that comforting?

    The pharmacology industry has a long history of removing bad drugs from the market. Thalidomide is perhaps the most famous example of a pharmacologic disaster. The drug was released in 1957 for its sedative effects and was touted as being safe for everyone including "pregnant women and children." In 1961, Dr. William McBride, an obstetrician, discovered that thalidomide was useful for "morning sickness" in pregnant women. Later he began to see unusual and devastating birth defects in babies born to women for whom he had prescribed the drug. Independently, Dr. Widuking Lenz, a pediatrician in Germany, also associated thalidomide with severe and unusual birth defects, such as the absence of limbs or parts of limbs. Sometimes an infants' hands were attached at the shoulders, there being no connecting long bones at all. By 1962 the drug was taken off the market.

    But unlike with our new, experimental agents, recognition of the thalidomide problem was made relatively easy by several factors. First among these was the uniqueness of the deformities. These were both profound and obvious, which stand in stark contrast to the current bleeding problems, which appear on the surface to be normal problems in clinical medicine -- such as nosebleeds. Even now, doctors continue to call the loss of platelets "ITP" -- even though what we are seeing is not the same as what we would expect to see under that diagnosis. ITP simply does not kill adult males in a few days.

    Second, with thalidomide, the physician who first began using the drug for nausea in pregnancy was also the doctor who delivered the affected babies, so he could readily put two and two together. In the case of our COVID drugs, when your doctor tells you to get a vaccine, he doesn't administer it, doesn't witness the injection, and usually doesn't follow up to see how you fared. And if you were to suddenly develop a vision problem or bleeding from the bowel, you wouldn't be seen by your PCP; you would be in an Emergency Department -- and they don't usually ask about your recent vaccine history.

    Third, Dr. Lenz presciently recognized that, in the case of thalidomide, many less-severe deformities, when put into perspective, revealed "gradations of the defect." Unfortunately in the present case, lesser degrees of clotting problems are indistinguishable from bleeding issues frequently encountered in an Emergency Room or doctor's office. For example, if a 75-year-old hypertensive male -- who has gotten a COVID shot -- suffers a brain hemorrhage and dies, it would not likely be deemed unusual, and the relationship to vaccination may not even be explored.

    Keeping that in mind, we should assume the worst when it comes to these new COVID shots. When any new drug problem starts, it begins slowly and unrecognized -- like a snowball beginning to roll down a mountain. By the time the problem is generally acknowledged, the avalanche is well on its way. In the case of thalidomide, over 100,000 children were severely damaged before the drug was removed from use. Though VAERS has the potential to shorten recognition time of drug problems by trying to spot the "unusual patterns," this requires that physicians be aware of the system, and take the time to enter any suspected side effects -- not just the worst cases. It also requires that researchers care enough to look. This is not happening. A report previously submitted to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality revealed that fewer than one percent of adverse events get reported to VAERS.

    In the past, testing done on mRNA technology revealed problems specifically involving the clotting system. Antibody-mediated platelet damage has been suspected. Yet today when these exact problems arise, the researchers are mum. Do the experts not study or know their own vaccine research history?

    For those who are concerned about the risks, we need to advocate for ourselves, either through contacting legislators or simply refusing to take the shots. It's obvious that the pharmaceutical industry is willing to release untried technology upon the entire world population, and not be deterred by any inconvenience such as unexplained death.

    We need to stop being a gullible population that forces our children to get vaccinated for trivial, non-fatal diseases such as mumps. We need to stop believing in the god-like status of medical technocrats who claim to be making the world safer. We need to reject the idea that vaccine deniers are anti-scientific troglodytes. We must reject the unspoken premise under which pharmaceutical companies and doctors operate -- that all vaccines are always safe in all people all the time. It should not be considered unreasonable to require scientific transparency, honesty by drug manufacturers, and safety from vaccines.

    Vaccines are only indicated for diseases with a high risk of death or morbidity, and for which there is no cure. After seeing the esteemed leaders in medicine denigrate hydroxychloroquine (even though it was a recognized treatment used successfully elsewhere for SARS, and mentioned favorably by Dr. Fauci for MERS), after watching three plants used in the production of hydroxychloroquine burn down in a year -- two on the same day -- after watching doctors lose their jobs and be censored for speaking truth and saving lives with old safe drugs that work, and now, after seeing experimental genetic agents being rolled out for use globally that have never passed animal testing and have only a few months human trials, perhaps it is time to address the 800-pound gorilla in the room and ask, "Are they trying to kill us?"

    Dr. Lee Merritt has been in the private practice of Orthopaedic and Spinal Surgery since 1995, has served on the Board of the Arizona Medical Association, and is past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. She is a lifelong advocate for a patient's right to choose their own medical care without government intervention.

    OhSoGood tex52 4 days ago ,

    Please point to a vaccine that didn't have such a tiny fraction of issues.

    Start with Polio... are you going to say that was a bad idea?

    Pauper Jim j b 4 days ago ,

    Try this:
    https://archive.org/details...

    [Apr 26, 2021] White House Mask Theater

    Apr 26, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    //Describing the move as "theater," Paul said that it would harm efforts to get people vaccinated if the public doesn't believe the shot has an impact in curbing the spread of the virus. He was referring to an online meeting between world leaders, in which President Joe Biden was the only official wearing a mask .

    Biden forgot that "this theater was so ridiculous that people would call him out on it," he added. Last week, others had questioned why the president would wear a mask in such a setting. All the other world leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau were not wearing masks.

    "If I want to go visit the White House, Republicans, and Democrats who go visit, even though they've all been vaccinated or had the disease, they're being tested with a deep sinus test," Paul told Fox News over the weekend,

    "And they're being told that wear the N95 masks to go in the White House, even though they've all been vaccinated," he added.

    "So, there is no science behind any of this. It's fear-mongering. But it also has a deleterious effect, in that it's discouraging people from getting the vaccine because they're saying, well, if the vaccine doesn't mean anything, it doesn't seem to have any protective benefit, you get no benefit. "

    If people cannot "quit wearing the mask," some have asked why they should get vaccinated at all, Paul said.

    "I think that's the wrong attitude," the Kentucky Republican added.

    "But this is what's coming from Biden and the so-called scientists that he's putting forward."

    It comes as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)'s director, Rochelle Walenksy, said the agency is looking into revising its mask provision for people who are outside.

    "We'll be looking at the outdoor masking question, but also in the context of the fact that we still have people who are dying of COVID-19," she told "Today" last week.

    ...The current CDC guidelines say that "masks may not be necessary when you are outside by yourself away from others, or with people who live in your household."

    The Epoch Times has contacted the White House for comment.

    [Apr 15, 2021] Number racket in COVIS-19 space

    Apr 15, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    youngman 3 hours ago

    and if we had an accurate count of how many died of this virus....we would see it was not bad at all.....but the healtcare workers made more money if they said it was covid than if it was just a heart attack.....and remember ....no one got the flu this year...

    [Apr 15, 2021] The Pandemic is Over! - Dr. Ryan Cole, CEO and Medical Director of Cole Diagnostics

    It is interesting presentation. He promotes ivermectin and points that CIVID-19 kill 90% of virus in petri disk study. He point s the NIH is co-holder with Moderna of a parent for the vaccine. The main points:
    1. We are no longer in pandemic, we are in endemic. Wearing makes in open space is idiotism.
    2. Coronavirus are seasonal and they have
    3. Average Covid19 age of death 78.6 yo. Average annual US age of death in the is the same
    4. Low vitamin D is the main reason of higher susceptibility.
    Apr 15, 2021 | www.bitchute.com

    [Apr 15, 2021] Covid is a very selective virus

    Apr 15, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Covid is a strange one. At a certain age and health spectrum (especially obesity) people that caught covid had a 10% plus or minus chance of not surviving. For everyone else, a nothing burger. The flu is/was more dangerous. play_arrow 3 play_arrow 4


    sun tzu 2 hours ago

    For people over 80, the survival rate is 95%. That's including tens of thousands murdered by ventilators and hundreds of thousands who died of something else blamed on covid-19

    LeftandRightareWrong 2 hours ago

    A high % of elderly + co-morbidities did not survive.

    theWHTMANN 2 hours ago

    So sick and old people die. Wow I am surprised.

    [Apr 14, 2021] CDC determined surface transmission is not the main route by which SARS-CoV-2 spreads. The risk of transmission is low in this instance

    Apr 14, 2021 | angrybearblog.com

    run75441 | April 14, 2021 9:21 pm

    HEALTHCARE

    A few notes catching you up on stuff.

    I would not recommend licking the counter top as it does not taste very good. In any case, the transmission of COVID-19 does not come from touching surfaces. And I am reiterating what I had read approximately a year ago.

    The Atlantic 's Staff Writer Derek Thompson reiterates what is pretty much known since the advent of COVID and ignored by many.

    " Deep Cleaning Isn't a Victimless Crime" brings the point home in its content on surface contamination.

    Based on "epidemiological data and studies of environmental transmission factors; the CDC determined surface transmission is not the main route by which SARS-CoV-2 spreads. The risk of transmission is low in this instance."

    Fomites are "objects or materials such as clothes, utensils, and furniture likely to carry infection. The surface transmission of COVID is low risk in the spread of SARS-CoV-2." Originally the thought was it to be a major contributor of spreading COVID.

    Instead, COVID-19 is an airborne threat and spreads through tiny aerosol droplets lingering in the air in unventilated spaces. Rhinovirus is a common virus and the predominant cause of a common cold. It spreads via aerosols .

    The solution is ventilating areas which may not be so due to being closed in by walls, etc.

    And outspoken researchers such as Jose-Luis Jimenez, an aerosol scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder, were insisting on needing focus on ventilation rather than surfaces and windows rather than Windex. Instead, they were being loudly rebuffed or ignored.

    "Watching people troll Aerosol Science reminds me of Creationists telling Evolutionary Biologists there is no evidence for Evolution. My students in 1st semester Physics easily follow the fluid dynamics of your presentation slides (drag F, Reynold's #, etc)." Clark Vangilder, PhD

    [Apr 14, 2021] More False Covid Hysteria

    Apr 14, 2021 | turcopolier.typepad.com

    Let's start with this blaring headline from the Miami Herald:

    White House looks at domestic travel restrictions as COVID mutation surges in Florida For those of you not familiar with my previous pieces on the Florida pandemic as viewed from my perch in the Sarasota/Bradenton area ( A Covid Panic Update and Why Does the Liberal Media Refuse to Report Meaningful Data on COVID? ), I have been a consistent critic of the scare tactics because I look at the actual facts. Here's the latest numbers for February compared to November and December 2020. The percent of patients hospitalized with COVID at Sarasota Memorial Hospital in December was 10.3%. That number now is 6.27%. Do you call that a surge?

    The 7 Day Positivity rate has gone from 5.4% in November to 3.2%. Yes, people are still being infected with COVID and a very small percentage of those are hospitalized. And even smaller number wind up in the ICU.

    And what about the death rate? If you just read the Miami Herald headline you would assume they are stacking bodies. Nope. The number of people who have died at Sarasota Memorial in the last 86 days (17 November 2020 to 10 February 2021) is averaging 1 per day. (Yes, I know, two died today but none died yesterday, so it averages out).

    Stumbling Joe Biden, or should I say his handlers, are pissed that Ron DeSantis, our Governor, is not playing the fear game. Florida is open for business and we have something approaching a normal, pre-COVID life (except for the brainwashed who have been bamboozled into improperly wearing masks).


    Deap , 12 February 2021 at 01:11 PM


    Here is the major Covid hysteria turning point, used to seal Trump's political defeat so the Democrat's could claim Trump murdered over 300,000 persons. This happened shortly after Nancy Pelosi tore up Trump's SOTU address in Feb 2020, which was her declaration of war against him. The real felony murder charge should fall on Dr. Deborah Birx, the infamous Scarf Lady.

    APRIL 2020: The federal government is classifying the deaths of patients infected with the coronavirus as COVID-19 deaths, regardless of any underlying health issues that could have contributed to the loss of someone's life.

    Dr. Deborah Birx, the response coordinator for the White House coronavirus task force, said the federal government is continuing to count the suspected COVID-19 deaths, despite other nations doing the opposite.

    "There are other countries that if you had a pre-existing condition, and let's say the virus caused you to go to the ICU [intensive care unit] and then have a heart or kidney problem," she said during a Tuesday news briefing at the White House. "Some countries are recording that as a heart issue or a kidney issue and not a COVID-19 death.

    "The intent is ... if someone dies with COVID-19 we are counting that," she added.

    Eric Newhill , 12 February 2021 at 02:47 PM

    Larry,
    You are spot on from where I'm sitting. What you see is not just true in Florida. It is true across the country.

    I have access to data pertaining to a sample of Americans from across the country - and it's not a small sample (i.e. consists of many millions). Inpatient bed utilization per 1,000 in < 65 products is same as, or lower than, the previous years. Ditto ICU utilization.

    We are not seeing a large volume of covid diagnosed people/people receiving treatment, nor hospitalizations for covid, nor deaths due to it in < 65 products. The deaths are minuscule in number/% and are almost exclusively among those with a history of serious underlying conditions - the kind of underlying conditions that kill you sooner or later anyhow.

    In > 65 products, the figures are a little higher, but still tiny (just like a bad flu season) and bed day utilization is flat compared to previous years. Deaths tend to be among those at, or above, their actuarially expected year of death.

    We are being to told to understand that what we see (or not see, more accurately) is explained by covid damage being done primarily to the indigent elderly; people on Medicaid,in low grade nursing homes, etc - and not to our people, who the type working or paying for Medicare Advantage. The indigent are always effected worse because they don't take of themselves. That is axiomatic in our business.

    At any rate, it still appears to me - based on the data - that relatively healthy, educated people have little to worry about from covid, beyond economic destruction caused by reactionary policies and by associated loss of freedoms that America is supposed to represent.

    Ghost Ship , 12 February 2021 at 03:54 PM

    The US excess deaths for 2020 show that approximately 300,000 more people died than were predicted to die in 2020.

    Even as U.S. deaths from COVID-19 surpassed 400,000 this week, some Americans dispute the accuracy of the death toll, contending it is exaggerated.

    Final figures aren't yet in, but preliminary numbers show 2020 is on track to become the deadliest year in U.S. history, with more than 3.2 million total deaths – about 400,000 more than 2019 – a sharp increase that public health experts attribute to COVID-19 and aligns with reported deaths from the disease.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported 2,835,533 U.S. deaths in 2019. Before the pandemic, models projected a slightly higher number, about 2.9 million deaths, for 2020, said Dr. Jeremy Faust, an emergency physician at Brigham and Women's Hospital.

    It's not a coincidence, he said, that the 400,000 excess deaths closely resemble the number of coronavirus deaths in the U.S., which reached 401,796 as of Wednesday, according to Johns Hopkins data.

    "That is not a seasonal change or just a random bad year," Faust said. "That is what every person who can correctly attest to these numbers can plainly see is a historic increase in excess mortality. If we put that together with the number of coronavirus deaths, it's game, set, match."


    FWH , 12 February 2021 at 04:35 PM

    Former President Trump's pandemic team addressed comorbidities at one time (well over 90% comorbidity). The "Swiss Doctor" website notes average age of death (I think it was 78 in US and 82 worldwide). These are clear signs that this additional information is being collected; just not consistently and widely published.

    I thought early on that consistent complete factual reporting by even a single local TV station could collapse the pandemic in a pocket. I remember others said early on that active resistance was needed for change (the covidians are "true believers", like religion, who will not be put off).

    The consistent, complete factual reporting has not taken place. This blog post may have found the key. "More governors need to go on the offensive."

    Posted by: FWH |

    Eric Newhill , 12 February 2021 at 05:11 PM

    Ghost Ship,
    What is the methodology used to arrive at the "excess deaths" number? Is it similar to Cuomo's nursing home deaths counting, but in reverse? Why are raw numbers being used and not rates (e.g. deaths per 100K)? Why is 2020 being compared to just one data point, 2019? Why not compare an *age adjusted* rate per 100K for 2020 to each of the past 10 years (hint, I know what that would show and it doesn't maximize covid hysteria)?

    How many excess deaths, such that they may be, are actually attributable to the increases in drug overdoses and suicides in 2020? To lack of screenings and early diagnosis due to doctor office and hospital shut downs and restrictions? To people too scared of covid exposure to continue treatment for chronic conditions even if they could see their doctor? To illegal aliens and other recent third world immigrants (another hint moment)?

    You're allowing yourself to be gaslighted under the guise of wanting to appear informed.

    Yes. There is a covid virus. Yes it will make some people with weak immune systems + a heavy viral load, sick. No. It's not more deadly than the some of the flues that come around from time to time, like every ten years +/-.

    akaPatience , 12 February 2021 at 05:22 PM

    SO, there were reportedly 400,000 more US deaths in 2020 than in 2019. Considering that the very eldest of the huge Baby Boom generation turned 74 in 2020, I wonder if such an increase in deaths per year is something we're going to witness for the foreseeable future?

    What does our resident actuarial have to say about US death rates vis a vis aging Baby Boomers???

    English Outsider , 12 February 2021 at 07:48 PM

    Eric - I've got the picture, here in Europe and also in the States, that it's a race between the new variants and mass vaccination.

    B117 gave us quite a scare. The figures were going down nicely, as in the States, then along came this new variant. In Ireland, Portugal (less certain because less genomic testing) and the UK the same pattern: New variant. Cases, and later deaths, rising sharply. Control measures (lockdown etc). Then an equally sharp drop.

    So in those three countries I don't think there's any doubt that after the new variant came along it was only lockdown that prevented the hospitals getting hopelessly overloaded. Now it's a question of hoping that mass vaccination will have its effect before the new variant gets further ahead.

    There's some B117 in the States but not enough genomic testing is done to be quite sure how much. The SA variant also, and the two Brazilian variants. The mysterious thing about the Brazilian variants in Manaus is that they seem to be attacking people who by rights should have immunity from previous exposure to Covid. I've just heard in Europe of yet another variant (N439K "Romania variant") this one seemingly more resistant to treatment but I don't know if it's more transmissible and don't know if it's reached the States.

    As are you, I'm sceptical about the stats put out. They don't allow for the effects of such lockdown as there has been. They don't allow for the fact that flu deaths have gone right down. They don't allow for informal lockdown - that is, people who isolate whatever the advice is. They don't allow for increased deaths from other conditions that didn't get treated because of the pandemic. And the crude stats I'm seeing don't allow for different cultural patterns, and different population densities, that increase transmission rates and therefore death rates by up to four times.

    So instead of rooting around in that thicket I believe it's safer to stick to the one verifiable fact. That is that the new variants are more transmissible, possibly more dangerous, and that if the race between them and vaccination is lost then all that will stop the hospitals getting overloaded over your way will be control measures of the sort that were successful in Ireland, Portugal and the UK.

    Is this right, or are there factors that alter the picture in the States that don't alter it here?

    ...................

    I've gone off your man Fauci, by the way. Heard him bad mouthing Trump. Nothing about what I reckon is going to be counted as one of the great achievements of the Trump Presidency, Operation Warp Speed. Nothing about the fact that he himself lost the plot several times last year. Just a sneaky little jibe. He could be Paracelsus come again for all I care but I put him down as a rat.

    And I'm not at all sure that William Barr shouldn't be placed in the same Hall of Infamy.

    Jose , 12 February 2021 at 07:56 PM

    Larry, you might be biased, we live in a "sane state" as oppose a democratic "state of fear."

    Remember Darth Maul's One Truth, fear is my ally...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZE1UM6xpjM

    Shanks , 13 February 2021 at 01:48 AM


    I have one data point to offer from an unlikely area and that too from India. Make of it what you will.

    I invested in Pharma stocks specifically generics makers that export to USA and Europe largely. I get copies of earnings conference calls posted and a typical is like this

    https://www.bseindia.com/xml-data/corpfiling/AttachLive/d3b8ef26-90ec-40ea-a0f4-38556a98d485.pdf

    This is the third time, I have seen a reference to the lowest-flu-shot sales in a decade . This is from Lupin and I have seen similar lines from CFOs in the earnings calls of Cipla, Aurobindo generics makers that have a large US generics presence.

    from the linked pdf file...


    Talking about sales - U.S. sales grew by 4% sequentially at US$188 million in
    Q3 FY21, as compared to US$180 million in Q2 FY21, and grew by 1% as
    compared to Q3 FY20. The sequential growth was driven by ramp up in
    Albuterol as well as new products like Lapatinib, Tacrolimus etc. The demand
    for seasonal products continues to be pretty weak on back of the weakest flu
    season in the last decade, leading to a fall in quite a few of those products as
    compared to the previous year.
    Other in-line products however. remain
    stable.

    For those of you who posted that there's something off about flu season, the above is a good indicator; though it still does NOT explain why the deaths seem higher than normal at an elevated 3000 deaths/week. Personally, I have no idea what's a "normal" weekly death rate is, as macabre as it may sound to ask.

    Eric Newhill , 13 February 2021 at 01:12 PM

    Seamus Padraig,
    Why yes of course.

    Everyone with some rudimentary smarts is fixated on "excess deaths", because it sounds, well, smart - and would have merit if done right and with full transparency into methodology. As I said, those figures, as thrown around today, have serious methodological flaws and who knows how they are really calculated.

    IMO, a more telling metric will be life expectancy in years, currently at 78.8 years (2019 figure). If covid is the existential scourge that Covidians want it to be, then life expectancy should show a decline in 2020. On the other hand, if what I am saying is true, that covid is merely killing those who were going to soon die anyhow, then life expectancy, in years, will remain the same. That finding would also support what you say about anyone testing positive and dying for any reason being chalked up to covid; an understanding that I agree with more than not.

    2020 figures are not yet available.

    I also note that Google searches for age/sex adjusted mortality rates direct you away from that and towards links about how terrible covid is and how many excess deaths there have been. It is near impossible for the general public to find adjusted mortality rates for the past 20 years. I'm sure that's done on purpose by the tech-Marxists. Of course the CDC site is a scrambled mess still. No luck there either.

    Fred , 13 February 2021 at 01:18 PM

    TTG,

    "Hospitals have never been in danger of collapsing..."

    Now that there has been a change in administrations there's a change of tune of the narrative. Why are states still ordering lockdowns and masks if there was never any danger of hospitals being overwhelmed? That was the whole point of doing so. Well, actually, driving Trump from office was the point. Mission accomplished.

    Deap , 13 February 2021 at 01:40 PM

    A few months ago when the first "Johns Hopkins study" (French female epidemiologist study) analyzing CDC data was squelched, it concluded from the official CDC morbidity data there were NO excess deaths in 2020 when plotted against the prior 10 years of CDC data.

    This CDC data "study" was immediately depublished by Johns Hopkins with the claim this study conclusion would be confusing to the public.

    However, it did serve the purpose to put CDC on notice and make sure any future CDC data reports conformed to the prevailing Democrat narrative, or risk also getting "cancelled".

    The latest official "gaslighting" narrative claims regular seasonal influenza morbidity is close to ZERO because everyone is wearing masks and social distancing - which stopped regular flu in its tracks according to this narrative.

    Yet for some reason this exact same masks and social distancing that stopped seasonal influenza cold, did nothing to stop "covid"?

    2020: Influenza = 0; Covid = 350,000. C'mon, man.

    When Democrats run both the media narrative and the deep state data gathering operations, we will never know the truth.

    Though I suspect many of actually do know the truth regardless of the massive Democrat efforts to keep gas-lighting the public for their own political gain. Yes, they are that venal. Look what they have accomplished for their own self-interests so far.

    KMD , 13 February 2021 at 01:50 PM

    Here's multiple breakdowns of the CDC's own data. It does not support nationwide lock-downs.

    https://kschulzke.github.io/C19/CDC_C19_Excess19.nb.html

    TL:DR Removing New York City, not the state, just the city, it was a bad flu season in the U.S.
    A better response would have been to educate the public with ways to boost their immune systems so as to avoid hospitalization. Vitamin D and Zinc supplements among other strategies.Depending on an EULA experimental "vaccine" as a magic bullet was flawed thinking.

    As others have noted we also have a boomer generation aging up and out.

    Deap , 14 February 2021 at 05:17 PM

    A sane discussion: Medicine, law, covid, censorship and media. The Rubin report explores covid tribal hysteria by those censored by new media algorithms with three popular media personalities who are experts in their field.

    https://generaldispatch.whatfinger.com/censored-medical-legal-experts-viva-frei-dr-drew-zdoggmd-roundtable-rubin-report/

    Media censorship in medicine has translated to private censorship among medical colleagues. No deviations allowed from the corporate medical orthodoxy - even conventional medicine suffering now from the heavy hand of media censorship.

    Where is this taking us - when will freedom finally leak out from under this heavy non-science censorship hand?

    [Apr 12, 2021] Education Tragedy in Los Angeles

    Apr 12, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    The L.A. district considers students engaged merely for logging on to the online teaching platform. Yet even by this low standard, the Great Public Schools Now report finds that "over 13,000 middle and high school students were consistently disengaged in fall 2020," and "an additional 56,000 did not actively participate on a daily basis." In January and February, some 22,800 students missed three or more days of class a week.

    During the 2020-2021 school year, 37% of Los Angeles kindergartners exhibited basic literacy skills, compared to 57% a year before. A fall 2020 assessment showed that only one in three middle- and high-school students displayed grade-level reading and math skills.

    M

    Mac Moore SUBSCRIBER 43 minutes ago

    It really is sad what the Dems have done to kids, for what? Political gain? What a sick party that puts their greed for power above their own children. They over-played their hands on COVID-19 and Race relations to scare citizens to their party and to keep minorities on the plantation. Now, we have kids about as confused about life, relationships and virtues as one can get.

    [Apr 12, 2021] Has the Era of Overzealous Cleaning Finally Come to an End- - The New York Times

    Apr 12, 2021 | www.nytimes.com

    This week, the C.D.C. acknowledged what scientists have been saying for months: The risk of catching the coronavirus from surfaces is low.


    When the coronavirus began to spread in the United States last spring, many experts warned of the danger posed by surfaces. Researchers reported that the virus could survive for days on plastic or stainless steel, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advised that if someone touched one of these contaminated surfaces -- and then touched their eyes, nose or mouth -- they could become infected.

    Americans responded in kind, wiping down groceries, quarantining mail and clearing drugstore shelves of Clorox wipes. Facebook closed two of its offices for a " deep cleaning ." New York's Metropolitan Transportation Authority began disinfecting subway cars every night.

    But the era of " hygiene theater " may have come to an unofficial end this week, when the C.D.C. updated its surface cleaning guidelines and noted that the risk of contracting the virus from touching a contaminated surface was less than 1 in 10,000 .

    "People can be affected with the virus that causes Covid-19 through contact with contaminated surfaces and objects," Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the director of the C.D.C., said at a White House briefing on Monday. "However, evidence has demonstrated that the risk by this route of infection of transmission is actually low."

    ADVERTISEMENT Continue reading the main story

    The admission is long overdue, scientists say.

    "Finally," said Linsey Marr, an expert on airborne viruses at Virginia Tech. "We've known this for a long time and yet people are still focusing so much on surface cleaning." She added, "There's really no evidence that anyone has ever gotten Covid-19 by touching a contaminated surface."

    Special offer: Subscribe for $1 a week.

    During the early days of the pandemic, many experts believed that the virus spread primarily through large respiratory droplets. These droplets are too heavy to travel long distances through the air but can fall onto objects and surfaces.

    In this context, a focus on scrubbing down every surface seemed to make sense. "Surface cleaning is more familiar," Dr. Marr said. "We know how to do it. You can see people doing it, you see the clean surface. And so I think it makes people feel safer."

    Image A
    A "sanitization specialist" at an Applebee's Grill and Bar in Westbury, N.Y., wiping down a used pen last year. Restaurants and other businesses have highlighted extra cleaning in their marketing since the pandemic began. Credit... Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times

    But over the last year, it has become increasingly clear that the virus spreads primarily through the air -- in both large and small droplets, which can remain aloft longer -- and that scouring door handles and subway seats does little to keep people safe.

    ADVERTISEMENT

    "The scientific basis for all this concern about surfaces is very slim -- slim to none," said Emanuel Goldman, a microbiologist at Rutgers University, who wrote last summer that the risk of surface transmission had been overblown. "This is a virus you get by breathing. It's not a virus you get by touching."

    The C.D.C. has previously acknowledged that surfaces are not the primary way that the virus spreads. But the agency's statements this week went further.

    "The most important part of this update is that they're clearly communicating to the public the correct, low risk from surfaces, which is not a message that has been clearly communicated for the past year," said Joseph Allen, a building safety expert at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

    Catching the virus from surfaces remains theoretically possible, he noted. But it requires many things to go wrong: a lot of fresh, infectious viral particles to be deposited on a surface, and then for a relatively large quantity of them to be quickly transferred to someone's hand and then to their face. "Presence on a surface does not equal risk," Dr. Allen said.

    In most cases, cleaning with simple soap and water -- in addition to hand-washing and mask-wearing -- is enough to keep the odds of surface transmission low, the C.D.C.'s updated cleaning guidelines say. In most everyday scenarios and environments, people do not need to use chemical disinfectants, the agency notes.

    "What this does very usefully, I think, is tell us what we don't need to do," said Donald Milton, an aerosol scientist at the University of Maryland. "Doing a lot of spraying and misting of chemicals isn't helpful."

    Still, the guidelines do suggest that if someone who has Covid-19 has been in a particular space within the last day, the area should be both cleaned and disinfected.

    [Apr 12, 2021] Another COVID Myth Dies The Death - ZeroHedge

    Apr 12, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Another COVID Myth Dies The Death BY TYLER DURDEN MONDAY, APR 12, 2021 - 05:00 AM

    Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The American Institute for Economic Research,

    Going to the grocery store in Massachusetts in 2020 guaranteed you would breathe heaps of sanitizer. A full-time employee scrubbed down shopping carts between customers. Conveyor belts at the checkout counter were blasted and wiped between every sale. Glass surfaces were sprayed as often as possible. The plastic keypads on credit machines were not only covered in plastic – why putting plastic on plastic stopped Covid was never clear – but also sprayed between uses.

    Employees would carefully watch your hands to see what you touched, and as you exited the space would cover the area with cleaning spray.

    It was the same at offices and schools. If a single person turned in a positive PCR test, the entire place had to be evacuated for a 48-hour fumigation. Everything had to be wiped, sprayed, and scrubbed, to get rid of the Covid that surely must be present in the bad place. The ritualistic cleaning took on a religious element, as if the temple must be purified of the devil before God could or would come back.

    All of this stemmed from the belief that the germ lived on surfaces and in spaces, which in turn stemmed from a primitive intuition. You can't see the virus so it really could be anywhere. The human imagination took over the rest.

    I was in Hudson, New York, at a fancy breakfast house that had imposed random Covid protocols. It was cold outside but they wouldn't let me sit inside, even though there were no government restrictions on doing so. I asked that masked-up twenty-something why. She said "Covid."

    "Do you really believe that there's Covid inside that room?"

    "Yes."

    Subway cars were cleaned daily. Facebook routinely shut its offices for a full scrub. Mail was left to disinfect for days before being opened. Things went crazy: playgrounds removed nets from basketball hoops for fear that they carried Covid.

    During the whole pathetic episode of last year, people turned wildly against physical things. No sharing of pencils at the schools that would open. No salt and pepper shakers at tables because surely that's where Covid lives. No more physical menus. They were replaced by QR codes. Your phone probably has Covid too but at least only you touched it.

    "Touchless"' became the new goal. All physical things became the untouchables, again reminiscent of ancient religions that considered the physical world to be a force of darkness while the spiritual/digital world points to the light. The followers of the Prophet Mani would be pleased.

    Already back in February, AIER reported that something was very wrong about all of this. Studies were already appearing calling the physical-phobic frenzy baseless.

    The demonization of surfaces and rooms stemmed not just from active imaginations; it was also recommended and even mandated by the CDC. It offered a huge page of instructions on the need constantly to fear, scrub, and fumigate.

    On April 5, however, the CDC page was replaced by a much-simplified set of instructions, which includes now this discreet note: "In most situations, the risk of infection from touching a surface is low ." Oh is that so?

    The link goes to the following:

    Quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) studies have been conducted to understand and characterize the relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 fomite transmission and evaluate the need for and effectiveness of prevention measures to reduce risk. Findings of these studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection via the fomite transmission route is low, and generally less than 1 in 10,000, which means that each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection .

    Whoops.

    So much for the many billions spent on cleaning products, the employees and the time, and hysteria and frenzy, the rise of touchlessness, and gloves, the dousing of the whole world. The science apparently changed. Still it will be years before people get the news and act on it. Once the myths of surface transmission of a respiratory virus are unleashed, it will be hard to go back to normal.

    Fortunately the New York Times did some accurate reporting on the CDC update, quoting all kinds of experts who claim to have known this all along.

    "Finally," said Linsey Marr, an expert on airborne viruses at Virginia Tech. "We've known this for a long time and yet people are still focusing so much on surface cleaning." She added, "There's really no evidence that anyone has ever gotten Covid-19 by touching a contaminated surface ."

    Still, I'm willing to bet that if right now I headed to a WalMart or some other large chain store, there will be several employees dedicated to disinfecting everything they can, and there will be customers there who demand it to be so.

    How many years will it take before people can come to terms with the embarrassing and scandalous reality that much of what posed as Science last year was made up on the fly and turns out to be wholly false?


    JMRPete 4 hours ago

    It was never about health, and never about sense. It's about OBEY!!!

    Mile High Perv 2 hours ago

    It's also about fear and controlling people's thoughts, emotions, and actions.

    We have nothing to fear except fear itself.

    Western medicine has never been about health, pandemic or not, and now the truth is out in the open for those who want to see.

    Frito 2 hours ago

    The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

    H.L. Mencken

    [Apr 12, 2021] The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary

    Apr 12, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Already back in February, AIER reported that something was very wrong about all of this. Studies were already appearing calling the physical-phobic frenzy baseless.

    The demonization of surfaces and rooms stemmed not just from active imaginations; it was also recommended and even mandated by the CDC. It offered a huge page of instructions on the need constantly to fear, scrub, and fumigate.

    On April 5, however, the CDC page was replaced by a much-simplified set of instructions, which includes now this discreet note: "In most situations, the risk of infection from touching a surface is low ." Oh is that so?

    The link goes to the following:

    Quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) studies have been conducted to understand and characterize the relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 fomite transmission and evaluate the need for and effectiveness of prevention measures to reduce risk. Findings of these studies suggest that the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection via the fomite transmission route is low, and generally less than 1 in 10,000, which means that each contact with a contaminated surface has less than a 1 in 10,000 chance of causing an infection .

    Whoops.

    So much for the many billions spent on cleaning products, the employees and the time, and hysteria and frenzy, the rise of touchlessness, and gloves, the dousing of the whole world. The science apparently changed. Still it will be years before people get the news and act on it. Once the myths of surface transmission of a respiratory virus are unleashed, it will be hard to go back to normal.

    Fortunately the New York Times did some accurate reporting on the CDC update, quoting all kinds of experts who claim to have known this all along.

    "Finally," said Linsey Marr, an expert on airborne viruses at Virginia Tech. "We've known this for a long time and yet people are still focusing so much on surface cleaning." She added, "There's really no evidence that anyone has ever gotten Covid-19 by touching a contaminated surface ."

    Still, I'm willing to bet that if right now I headed to a WalMart or some other large chain store, there will be several employees dedicated to disinfecting everything they can, and there will be customers there who demand it to be so.

    How many years will it take before people can come to terms with the embarrassing and scandalous reality that much of what posed as Science last year was made up on the fly and turns out to be wholly false?


    JMRPete 4 hours ago

    It was never about health, and never about sense. It's about OBEY!!!

    Mile High Perv 2 hours ago

    It's also about fear and controlling people's thoughts, emotions, and actions.

    We have nothing to fear except fear itself.

    Western medicine has never been about health, pandemic or not, and now the truth is out in the open for those who want to see.

    Frito 2 hours ago

    The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.

    H.L. Mencken

    [Apr 09, 2021] Distrust of the establishment plays a role in vaccine hesitancy, but it's probably time to back off on the prevailing commentary suggesting that those avoiding vaccines are irresponsible, uninformed or politically manipulated

    Highly recommended!
    Notable quotes:
    "... Dr. Kaplan is a faculty member at the Stanford School of Medicine Clinical Excellence Research Center and the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health. He has served as associate director of the National Institutes of Health and chief science officer at the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. ..."
    Apr 09, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    Originally from: Stop Taking Shots at Those Who Fear Them - WSJ By Robert M. Kaplan April 8, 2021 6:21 pm ET

    Distrust of the establishment plays a role in vaccine hesitancy, but it's probably time to back off on the prevailing commentary suggesting that those avoiding vaccines are irresponsible, uninformed or politically manipulated. Achieving herd immunity requires that about 70% of Americans are vaccinated or contract Covid and develop natural immunity, which official numbers place around 10% of the population. Polls consistently show that 21% say they will definitely not get the vaccine and about a third rate their chances of taking the vaccine as less than 50%. It's better to address common fears and concerns respectfully and informatively than with hectoring and condescension.

    Dr. Kaplan is a faculty member at the Stanford School of Medicine Clinical Excellence Research Center and the UCLA Fielding School of Public Health. He has served as associate director of the National Institutes of Health and chief science officer at the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

    [Apr 03, 2021] How 6 feet became 3- Meet an ER doctor behind the research showing kids are still safe in school with new social-distancing s

    Apr 03, 2021 | www.marketwatch.com

    It turns out that children who attend schools with mask requirements are likely just as safe from COVID-19 sitting just 3 feet from each other and not the 6 feet previously recommended by the Centers for Disease and Prevention.

    Those findings, which were used by the CDC to update its guidance about schools in mid-March, stem from a study conducted over the fall and winter examining transmission rates in K-12 schools in Massachusetts, where masks are required for most public-school students and all staff.

    Putting students closer together in classrooms did not lead to an increase in COVID-19 cases, a group of medical researchers and policy experts concluded in the accepted manuscript published March 10 in the medical journal Clinical Infectious Diseases.

    One of the researchers is Dr. Elissa Schechter-Perkins, an emergency-room physician at Boston Medical Center who has done infection control for the ER there during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    " Back in spring of 2020, we didn't know a whole lot about COVID-19," she said in a March 23 interview with MarketWatch. "And based on what we have seen in influenza pandemics, it was thought that closing schools would be essential and effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19."

    But now, as the pandemic has stretched into its second year and the science is still evolving, it looks like the 6-foot rule, which was particularly onerous for classrooms, may not be necessary.

    --

    MarketWatch: Has much of the research around distancing in schools so far been anecdotal?

    Dr. Elissa Schechter-Perkins: I would say it went beyond anecdotal evidence. There have been multiple studies that are primarily epidemiologic in nature, from around the world and around the U.S., in which students went back at closer distances. [Editor's note: The World Health Organization recommends 1 meter -- about 3 feet -- in schools.] There haven't been large amounts of in-school transmission, and there haven't been increased cases in school settings compared to the surrounding communities. So there has been a slowly emerging body of literature, saying that our schools are safe, even with fewer than 6 feet of distance between the students.

    MarketWatch: How do you think mitigation factors like masking, plexiglass dividers, or open windows affect transmission in schools?

    Schechter-Perkins: It's a really important point. Our study really was not able to tease out which of the mitigation measures other than distancing was not important. I think it's important to understand that every school in the districts in Massachusetts that were part of our study had a 100% masking mandate for all staff and all students in Grade 2 and above, and the majority of districts had either a masking requirement or masking was strongly encouraged in the younger students as well. [Editor's note: The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education requires noses and mouths to be covered at all times, except during designated breaks, for staff and students in second grade or older. Kindergartners and first graders were encouraged to wear masks or shields, but it's not required . ]

    Many of the schools, but not all, had multiple other mitigation measures in place, including daily symptom screening. Many of them had other mitigation measures in place, such as ventilation checks and requirements for contact tracing and quarantining for exposed people. Although we can't say which of the mitigation measures was the most important, our thought is [that if] the bundle of mitigation measures taken in aggregate is sufficient in decreasing the spread of COVID-19, then it becomes safe to decrease the distance between students. We shouldn't extrapolate our findings to other less controlled environments where those other factors are not in place.

    MarketWatch: Now that we have the new CDC guidance for schools, are you planning any follow-up studies?

    Schechter-Perkins: It's going be really important to continue to follow the data, and it's something that the country has really struggled with over the last year. As new studies come out and new evidence comes out, the guidelines should change, and that's been a real struggle for the United States population at large to come to terms with. We're not used to things changing so rapidly, but I would say as schools do open for more in-person learning it is really essential that we continue to see what happens, especially as we know that the new variants are circulating but also vaccination is increasing.

    MarketWatch: Do you think it's a possibility that one day we would see that spacing requirement shrink even further?

    Schechter-Perkins: I absolutely would be open to that. I'm very optimistic about where we are right now. We are doing an excellent job vaccinating greater and greater numbers of the population, and I am really hopeful that we can decrease the transmission of COVID-19 in our country to the point that it becomes, instead of widespread, it becomes episodic in our communities. [Editor's note: About 16% of the U.S. population has been fully vaccinated, as of March 31, according to the CDC .] At that point, we can use other public health measures, such as rapid diagnostic testing, rapid contact tracing, rapid surveillance testing and quarantines -- and really tamp down the transmission of COVID-19.

    When we start to get to that point, I do think we'll be able to open up a lot of things with less distancing requirements, and life will look much more like normal. We're not there yet, but I do you think that that is in the future.

    The other opportunity to keep in mind is what was mentioned in the CDC guidelines, where they talk about cohorting. This has worked really well in other countries, particularly in Europe, where they have groups of students that don't require any distancing between them. So if there's an outbreak, that particular cohort or bubble is at greater risk, but [the virus] is not anticipated to spread outside of that cohort. That's another model that can be looked at, as a way to get more students back in the classroom and try to get life more back to normal. Our study did not evaluate that at all. That is more of an international phenomenon.

    MarketWatch: Strictly from a vaccination point, how long do you see distancing being necessary in schools?

    Schechter-Perkins: It's a tough question to answer. Our study was conducted during a time where virtually nobody was vaccinated. [Editor's note: It was conducted between Sept. 24 and Jan. 27.] What our study and others have shown is that vaccination is not essential to getting back into school safely, as long as the mitigation measures are in place. In order to really start relaxing some of the other mitigation measures, you really have to have a large portion of not just the teachers but the entire community vaccinated. We'll get there, but I think it's still a long way away.

    MarketWatch: One of my co-workers has talked about how there's a cycle of an exposure, kids get tested or stay home, and then they resume school in person. Would cohorting be one way to offset that type of cycle?

    Schechter-Perkins: It would. The cycle that we have is really dependent on where in the country you are. Certain places are very aggressively quarantining. I don't know if this has changed in New York, but I know it at one point all it took was two cases in a school building, and the entire school would shut down for quarantine. [Editor's note: New York Mayor Bill de Blasio is reportedly re-evaluating that policy, as of March 14, according to Gothamist .] That is incredibly conservative and a really damaging policy that's not necessary. More schools across the country are going to more of a modified quarantine, in which, as long as students are only exposed in school with masks on, they're not being made to quarantine. There are many places that have recently gone to that sort of model, and reportedly there hasn't been a lot of in-school transmission, even with that modified limited quarantine. So I'm eagerly awaiting publication of that data.

    Right now, if people are within 6 feet of each other for a cumulative 15 minutes, according to the CDC guidelines , they should still be quarantining. But, hopefully, that's not entire classrooms at a time. There's a lot of variation in how people are interpreting exposure in the school setting. I do worry that the constant exposure–shut down–quarantine the whole class for 10 days–then resume [cycle] may very well be too conservative and too disruptive, and it may also not prevent more cases. If it's not preventing the cases, then I don't think we want to pursue that strategy. But I think we still need more data.

    MarketWatch: Do you think that's a leftover reaction from last spring?

    Schechter-Perkins: It's been really hard to change. Way back when we set out these guidelines, they were based on the best evidence at the time. It's really important for guidelines to change as the evidence evolves. We need to keep doing the studies, providing the science, so that the guidelines can then catch up to what the evidence actually shows.

    MarketWatch: At what age are children in a K-12 school at higher risk for contracting the virus?

    Schechter-Perkins: It seems like about 12 years old, maybe about puberty, is about when things start to change, when younger kids who seem more protected and less likely to transmit start to behave more and more like adults, as far as their infection risk and their transmission risk.

    That said, in our study, and plenty of others, even high schools are still safe for students and for staff with those mitigation measures in place. So even though you have older students who may behave more like adults as far as the virus goes, they can still be safe in school settings.

    And they are at particular risk for some of the harms of not being in school. We see harms to their mental health, with anxiety, depression, isolation, suicide, as well as tremendous learning loss. So that risk-benefit analysis really needs to take place as far as keeping schools closed. We've seen that, in a regulated school environment, they can still be safe in school, and their teachers and their educators can also be safe in schools with them.

    Schechter-Perkins later noted in email that "even though they may have a higher risk of getting ill or transmitting the virus compared to younger students, I still think they can belong in school, since the risk in school is not higher than it is outside of school."

    This Q&A has been edited for clarity and length.

    Read more A Word from the Experts interviews:

    It's a 'question of time' before another virus jumps from animal to human, says co-inventor of flu treatment Tamiflu. Preventative therapies are needed.

    The new B.1.1.7 is a 'superspreader' strain. Here's how the U.S. can control it, says Dr. Eric Topol.

    Dr. James Hildreth: Here's how to instill vaccine confidence among people of color

    [Apr 02, 2021] Was COVID-19 quarantine worth it?

    Apr 02, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    there are essentially two countries inthe USA: one is the country of big cities with high dencity of population were carantine probably makes some sense and aother countryside with low density of population (let's say areas 100 miles or more from major metropolitan area, where restriction were much less sensible. Also authorities behaviour during summer riots has shown that this was about deposing Trump as much as about COVID-19.

    boyplunger7777 48 minutes ago

    Was COVID-19 quarantine worth it? In addition to $6 trillion in new debt. The ruined businesses, the damage to school children, the psychological pain, depression, and anxiety as well as substance/domestic abuse? The lingering damage to sporting events, concerts, and outdoor entertainment? You tell me.

    [Apr 01, 2021] NYT reporter against the Atlantic vaccine cheerleaders

    There are a lot of issues with vaccine rollout. One issue is that they do not check if a person has immunity to the virus or not.
    Another issue is how long vaccine will be effective is the next year we might face yet another strain of the virus. Coronaviruses are mutating viruses and that's why previous attempts to create vaccine failed.
    Are those people who demonstrate a severe reaction to the vaccine the same people who would get severe case of COVID-19 if infected ?
    Yes another issue is "emergency use". Long time effects are not known. We do not know why immunity for some people do not emerge and they became ill even after being immunized. We do not know how long immunization status hold. Will it weaken in six months to the level when infection became possible again or. and how effective it is against new strains.
    So this rush with vaccine rollout is a large scale biological experiment with uncertain consequences.
    In this sense any skeptic is valuable.
    Notable quotes:
    "... and then that test came back negative. ..."
    "... suspected but unconfirmed ..."
    Apr 01, 2021 | www.theatlantic.com

    Alex Berenson- The Pandemic's Wrongest Man - The Atlantic Derek Thompson, Staff writer at The Atlantic

    For the past few weeks on Twitter, Berenson has mischaracterized just about every detail regarding the vaccines to make the dubious case that most people would be better off avoiding them. As his conspiratorial nonsense accelerates toward the pandemic's finish line, he has proved himself the Secretariat of being wrong :

    Usually, I would refrain from lavishing attention on someone so blatantly incorrect. But with vaccine resistance hovering around 30 percent of the general population, and with 40 percent of Republicans saying they won't get a shot, debunking vaccine skepticism, particularly in right-wing circles, is a matter of life and death.

    Jon D. Lee: The utter familiarity of even the strangest vaccine conspiracy theories

    Berenson's TV appearances are more misdirection than outright fiction, and his Twitter feed blends internet-y irony and scientific jargon in a way that may obscure what he's actually saying. To pin him down, I emailed several questions to him last week. Below, I will lay out, as clearly and fairly as I can, his claims about the vaccines and how dangerously, unflaggingly, and superlatively wrong they are.

    Before I go point by point through his wrong positions, let me be exquisitely clear about what is true . The vaccines work. They worked in the clinical trials, and they're working around the world. The vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson seem to provide stronger and more lasting protection against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants than natural infection. They are excellent at reducing symptomatic infection . Even better, they are extraordinarily successful at preventing severe illness from COVID-19. Countries that have vaccinated large percentages of their population quickly, such as the U.S., the United Kingdom, and Israel, have all seen sharp and sustained declines in hospitalizations among the elderly. Meanwhile, countries that have lagged in the vaccination effort -- including the U.K.'s neighbors France and Italy, and Israel's neighbor Jordan -- have struggled to contain the virus. The authorized vaccines are marvels, and the case against them relies on half-truths, untruths, and obfuscations.

    me title=

    me title=


    Berenson's claim: In country after country, "cases rise after vaccination campaigns begin," he wrote in an email.

    The reality: In country after country, cases decline after vaccination campaigns begin.

    One of Berenson's themes is that the mRNA vaccines are badly underperforming outside the clinical trials and are possibly even causing a spike in cases after the first shot. But just this week, CDC researchers studying real-world conditions came to the opposite conclusion : The mRNA vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer are 90 percent effective two weeks after the second dose, in line with the trial data. "COVID-19 vaccination is recommended for all eligible persons," they concluded.

    Still, Berenson pushes the argument that the vaccines are causing suspicious illness and death. On Twitter and in his email to me, Berenson claimed that an "excellent" Denmark study showed a 40 percent rise in infections immediately after nursing-home residents received their first vaccine shot.

    I reached out to that study's lead author , Ida Rask Moustsen-Helms at the Statens Serum Institut, who said that Berenson had mischaracterized her findings. She explained to me that the Danish nursing homes in question were already experiencing a significant COVID-19 outbreak when vaccinations began. Many people in the long-term-care facilities were likely already sick before their vaccine was administered, and "these people would technically count as vaccinated with confirmed COVID-19, even if the infection happened prior to the vaccination or its immune response," she said. With limited vaccines, countries ought to give the first vaccines to the groups most likely to get COVID-19. That's exactly what seems to have happened here. Berenson is scaremongering about the vaccines by essentially criticizing their wise distribution.

    In our emails, Berenson further argued that many of the perceived benefits of the vaccines are illusory. "It is very hard to distinguish the course of the epidemic this winter in countries that have vaccinated heavily, such as Israel and the UK, and those that have not, such as Canada and Germany," he wrote.

    This is hogwash. In the U.K. and Israel, hospitalizations have fallen by at least 70 percent since mid-January, and they remain low. In Canada , hospitalizations fell by significantly less, and in Germany, the seven-day average of COVID-19 cases has more than doubled since mid-February; its government has debated a new lockdown .

    This stage of the pandemic is a race between the variants and the vaccines. In many states, such as Michigan and New York, normalizing behavior combined with more contagious strains of the virus are pushing up cases again. This is not evidence that America's vaccination campaign isn't working. Quite the opposite: It highlights the urgency of moving faster to deliver vaccines, which are our best chance to control the spread of contagious variants.

    Berenson's claim: Pfizer-BioNTech's clinical-trial data prove that the companies are being shady about vaccine efficacy.

    The reality: His "proof" is a total mischaracterization of trial data.

    Berenson seems to enjoy spelunking through research to find esoteric statistics that he then dresses up with spooky language to make confusing points that sow doubt about the vaccines. Arguing that COVID-19 cases spike after the first dose, he directs people to the Pfizer-BioNTech FDA briefing document , which reports hundreds of "suspected but unconfirmed" COVID-19 cases in the trial's vaccine group that aren't counted as positive cases in the final efficacy analysis.

    me title=

    me title=

    But "suspected but unconfirmed" doesn't refer to participants who were probably sick with COVID-19. On the contrary, it refers to participants who reported various symptoms, such as a cough or a sore throat, and then took a PCR test -- and then that test came back negative.

    "His point is absolutely stupid, and I would know because I enrolled participants in the Pfizer-BioNTech trial," Kawsar Talaat, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins University, told me. "He's talking about people who call in and say, 'I have a runny nose.' So we mark them as 'suspected.' Then we ask them to take a PCR test, and we test their swab, and if the test comes back negative, the FDA says it's 'unconfirmed.' That's what suspected but unconfirmed means."

    Read: Coronavirus reinfection will soon become our reality

    When I emailed Pfizer and BioNTech representatives about Berenson's claim, they struggled to even understand what I was talking about. Someone was taking a group of several thousand people who had tested negative for COVID-19 and, from afar, diagnosing all of them with COVID-19? "Does not make sense," a BioNTech spokesperson responded curtly.

    If you were enrolled in Berenson's vaccine trial for SARS-CoV-2 and never contracted the virus, but one day you told a clinician that you had a bit of a cough, Berenson would mark you down as "infected with COVID-19" and blame the vaccine. That's the logic here, and, as you can tell, it's not really logic; it just seems like an attempt to find something -- anything -- wrong with the vaccines.

    Berenson's claim: The mRNA vaccines dangerously suppress your immune system, possibly causing severe illness and even death.

    The reality: His claim is based on a total misunderstanding of how the immune system works.

    Berenson wrote in an email that "the first dose of the mRNA vaccine temporarily suppresses the immune system." He has claimed on Twitter that the mRNA vaccines "transiently suppress lymphocytes," or our white blood cells, and suggested that this might lead to "post-vaccination deaths."

    Scientists tore this one to shreds. "The claim he is making is simply fearmongering, connecting a simple physiological event with bogus claims of deaths," Shane Crotty, a researcher at the Center for Infectious Disease and Vaccine Research at the La Jolla Institute for Immunology, told me. "The observation of lymphocyte numbers temporarily dropping in blood is actually a common phenomenon in immune responses."

    Renee DiResta: Anti-vaxxers think this is their moment

    A little background is useful here: White blood cells are the immune system's scouts. After an effective vaccination, some of them leave the blood and go to the site of inflammation, such as the arm that received the shot. "The cells are not gone," Crotty said. "They come back to the blood in a few days. It is generally a good sign of an immune response, not the opposite." To demonstrate that the vaccines are counterproductive, then, Berenson is pointing to the very biological mechanism that strongly suggests they're working just as scientists expected.

    me title=

    me title=

    Readers are surely familiar with other biological events that sound bad in the short term but are part of a normal, healthy process. When you lift weights at the gym, your muscles experience small tears that recover and then strengthen over time. Imagine if some loudmouth started screaming in the middle of the weight room, "You all think you're building your muscles, but actually you're tearing them to shreds, and it could kill you!" You would probably carry on calmly, assuming that this guy just got a little overexcited after finding a Yahoo Answers article about muscle formation and stopped reading after the first paragraph. Berenson's claim is basically a version of that, but for your immune system.

    "Actually," Talaat said, "his argument is even worse than your analogy. Muscles really do tear at the gym. But lymphocytes don't go away. They just move. What he's describing as dangerous in these tweets is just the regular functioning of our immune system."

    Berenson's claim: In Israel, the shots are causing a scary number of deaths and hospitalizations.

    The reality: Israel is a sensational vaccine success story: a nearly open economy where COVID-19 rates are plunging. See for yourself!

    On February 11, Berenson warned his followers that early data from Israel proved that vaccine advocates "need to start ratcheting down expectations." This was a strange claim to make at the time: An Israeli health-care provider had reported no deaths and four severe cases among its first 523,000 fully vaccinated people. But the claim seems even more ridiculous now, in light of Israel's incredible success since then. New positive cases in Israel are down roughly 95 percent since January. Deaths have plunged, even though the economy is almost fully open .

    When I asked Berenson to explain his beef with Israel's vaccine record, he sent a link to a news story in Hebrew that, he said, reported "several hundred deaths and hospitalizations and thousands of infections in people who have received both doses." I can't read Hebrew, so I reached out to someone who can, Eran Segal, a computational biologist at the Weizmann Institute of Science, in Rehovot, Israel. He replied by email: "This link actually shows that the vast majority of those who died were NOT vaccinated." By Segal's calculations, the vaccines have reduced the risk of death by more than 90 percent in the Israeli population. Segal also said that "numbers of infections only went down, and even more so among the age groups who were first to vaccinate."

    Berenson is wrong about all sorts of little things when it comes to Israel, but I want to emphasize how straightforward and obvious the big picture is here. Israel is a world leader in vaccinations . Its COVID-19 cases have plunged, and its economy is roaring back to life.

    Berenson's claim: Healthy people under 70 shouldn't get a vaccine.

    The reality: Outside of extremely rare cases, every adult should get a vaccine -- and if it's authorized for children, children should get it too.

    I wanted to know where Berenson stood on the most important question: Who does he think should get a vaccine, and who does he think shouldn't? This was the core of his answer:

    For most healthy people under 50 -- and certainly under 35 -- the side effects from the shots are likely to be worse than a case of Covid. Over 70, sure. The grey zone is somewhere in the middle and probably depends on personal risk factors.

    This response has two huge problems. First, although the disease clearly gets more severe with age, drawing a line at 70 is nonsensical. Those in their 50s and early 60s are three times more likely to die from this disease than a 40-something, and 400 times more likely to die than a teenager, according to the CDC.

    [Apr 01, 2021] "Professor" Neil Ferguson

    Apr 01, 2021 | science.slashdot.org

    One person stands out... ( Score: 4 , Informative) by Archtech ( 159117 ) on Thursday April 01, 2021 @12:41PM ( #61224618 )

    Oh, surely not. "Professor" Neil Ferguson has never met an epidemic he couldn't portray as a world-ending catastrophe. He has often been wrong by four orders of magnitude.

    https://statmodeling.stat.colu... [columbia.edu]

    https://fort-russ.com/2020/05/... [fort-russ.com]

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/ar... [spectator.co.uk] Re:One person stands out... ( Score: 2 ) by Frank Burly ( 4247955 ) on Thursday April 01, 2021 @01:44PM ( #61224940 )

    I'm not a Neil Ferguson fan, but AC below seems correct. https://theferret.scot/fact-ch... [theferret.scot] In particular, Ferguson's doomsday prediction of 500k dead in the UK was based on just letting the virus run its course. Almost a year later, with 120k dead, this seems like it would be in the right ballpark.

    Honestly though, I thought he was an economist moonlighting as an epidemiologist, but it turns out that I had it backwards. So maybe "ballpark" isn't good enough.

    [Apr 01, 2021] 'The Pandemic's Wrongest Man'

    Apr 01, 2021 | science.slashdot.org

    The pandemic has made fools of many forecasters. Just about all of the predictions whiffed . Anthony Fauci was wrong about masks . California was wrong about the outdoors . New York was wrong about the subways . I was wrong about the necessary cost of pandemic relief . And the Trump White House was wrong about almost everything else .

    Fauci has been a disaster ( Score: 2 ) by schwit1 ( 797399 ) on Thursday April 01, 2021 @01:55PM ( #61225004 )

    He has lied at every turn [reason.com].

    And why did the CDC's method for counting deaths change in March 2020 [disquscdn.com]? Summary is Irresponsible without Links ( Score: 3 ) by eepok ( 545733 ) on Thursday April 01, 2021 @02:48PM ( #61225280 ) Homepage

    The article has very important links that should probably be included in the summary because those links given EXTREMELY important context.

    Summary : Anthony Fauci was wrong about masks.
    Article Link : Fauci said, "There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is..."

    He wasn't wrong that masks are important and need to be worn. He was wrong about masks when he made a comment before on March 8, 2020 . On March 8, 2020, the WHO counted 213 total cases in the US to date. At the time it seemed unnecessary to wear a mask in public and, furthermore, the concern was that there would be a mask shortage for medical workers... AND THERE WAS. No one was mass-producing cloth masks yet. We all remember the "how to make a cloth mask at home" tutorials right?

    Summary : New York was wrong about the subways
    Article Link : New York City is shutting down its subway system every night, for the first time in its 116-year history, to blast the seats, walls, and poles with a variety of antiseptic weaponry, including electrostatic disinfectant sprays.

    Surface transmission has been shown to be low risk. This is a relatively new conclusion. Transit systems have shown to be low-probability vectors for transmission, but that is likely due to VASTLY reduced use, reduced occupancy, and and the ridiculous amount of cleaning they're doing now. The precautions have prevented the need for knee-jerk closures of the transit systems. That's not being wrong... that's being successful.

    Summary : I was wrong about the necessary cost of pandemic relief.
    Article Link : We Can Prevent a Great Depression. It'll Take $10 Trillion.

    That still seems about right. It hasn't nor will it come as a single check being written, but all the stimulus adding up will probably cost around that much-- especially if you factor in the MASSIVE amounts of expenses (and lost revenue) taken on by major public institutions with the blind hope of getting reimbursed by FEMA. That's right, a lot of the relief is being debt-financed by organizations other than the Federal government and if we want to prevent recession or depression, we're going to have to keep spending. Re:Right vs Wrong ( Score: 4 , Insightful) by Rob Y. ( 110975 ) on Thursday April 01, 2021 @01:01PM ( #61224708 )

    And whoever wrote this article and included the phrase "Fauci was wrong about masks" is making a political statement. Fauci pretty much winked at us at the time he said masks won't make much difference. He was saying that because there was a run on them, and doctors weren't able to find enough N95's. In that light, yes, it was more important for doctors to get them than the general public - who were already being recommended to socially distance.

    As the epidemic wore on, Fauci and almost anybody else acting responsibly recommended mask wearing for everyone when out in public. But the talking points still include "...but Fauci said masks don't work". It's out of date, irrelevant, and a political distraction tactic at best... Re:Right vs Wrong ( Score: 2 ) by l0n3s0m3phr34k ( 2613107 ) on Thursday April 01, 2021 @03:14PM ( #61225414 ) Absolutely, it's like people saying "well, the Church said the Earth is the center of the solar system!" in discussing modern astronomy. Or, a bit more modern, always trying to factor in the affect of the aether on the propagation of light.

    Science works by observation, experiments, and data. "Tradition and order", the 2nd Pillar of US Conservatism, specifically "conserving the values that have been established over centuries" [isi.org] and therefor the idea of "doubling down" no matter what more recent data shows is just part of the fundamental core ideals.

    [Mar 31, 2021] The "Unvaccinated" as outcasts by C.J. Hopkins

    Mar 31, 2021 | www.unz.com

    So, the New Normals are discussing the Unvaccinated Question. What is to be done with us? No, not those who haven't been "vaccinated" yet. Us. The "Covidiots." The "Covid deniers." The "science deniers." The "reality deniers." Those who refuse to get "vaccinated," ever.

    There is no place for us in New Normal society. The New Normals know this and so do we. To them, we are a suspicious, alien tribe of people. We do not share their ideological beliefs. We do not perform their loyalty rituals, or we do so only grudgingly, because they force us to do so. We traffic in arcane "conspiracy theories," like "pre-March-2020 science," "natural herd immunity," "population-adjusted death rates," "Sweden," "Florida," and other heresies.

    They do not trust us. We are strangers among them. They suspect we feel superior to them. They believe we are conspiring against them, that we want to deceive them, confuse them, cheat them, pervert their culture, abuse their children, contaminate their precious bodily fluids, and perpetrate God knows what other horrors.

    So they are discussing the need to segregate us, how to segregate us, when to segregate us, in order to protect society from us. In their eyes, we are no more than criminals , or, worse, a plague , an infestation. In the words of someone (I can't quite recall who), "getting rid of the Unvaccinated is not a question of ideology. It is a question of cleanliness," or something like that. (I'll have to hunt down and fact-check that quote. I might have taken it out of context.)

    In Israel , Estonia , Denmark , Germany , the USA , and other New Normal countries, they have already begun the segregation process. In the UK , it's just a matter of time. The WEF, WHO, EU, and other transnational entities are helping to streamline the new segregation system, which, according to the WEF, " will need to be harmonized by a normative body, such as the WHO, to ensure that is ethical ."

    Cowboy , says: March 29, 2021 at 4:26 pm GMT • 2.4 days ago

    @follyofwar

    Nice thoughts but the high priests of the new secular cult of scientism are playing a zero sum game. It's an either/or for them; slavery or scalp. The rituals of the cult reinforce the dogma. The continual washing of hands as an act of purification. The mask as an act of penance for your defiling breath. Forced solitude to keep you in front of the 24 hour Cult broadcasts on tv. Social distancing as a way to inculcate insular thinking. Any resistors to the new rituals will be brought to a tribunal of neo torquemadas. Perhaps a better way to be thinking of the resistance is in terms of knighthood.

    Auntie Analogue , says: March 29, 2021 at 5:25 pm GMT • 2.3 days ago

    A black market trade in forged been-vaccinated-passports should be expected to debut and thrive.

    [Mar 31, 2021] Stupidity and unintended consequences characterize human actions and interactions far more accurately than malice aforethought and design.

    Mar 31, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Dr. Robert Morgan , says: March 30, 2021 at 4:34 pm GMT • 1.4 days ago

    TTSSYF: "Good point, but what drives the "experts" to push this? Would that not be a conspiracy of sorts?"

    Certainly there are factions among the so-called experts, and the members of factions can "conspire" with each other to win out over other factions. I don't doubt that at all. Nor do I doubt that anything that happens will advantage some groups and disadvantage others, and that groups fight to advance their own interests. Yet, to claim that the whole pandemic was planned in advance down to the last detail by a shadowy group of conspirators called "Globocap", as CJ Hopkins often seems to do, I think is a bridge too far. Stupidity and unintended consequences characterize human actions and interactions far more accurately than malice aforethought and design. Some see conspiracy where in reality there is only chaos.

    [Mar 31, 2021] So the bulk of U.S. political "leaders" and media geniuses shriek in horror at the thought of someone needing to present an ID in order to vote. This, we are endlessly told, is a crime against humanity. But every pleb and prole will need to produce a government-issue "vaccine passport

    Mar 31, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Buck Ransom , says: March 30, 2021 at 4:06 am GMT • 1.9 days ago

    So the bulk of U.S. political "leaders" and media geniuses shriek in horror at the thought of someone needing to present an ID in order to vote. This, we are endlessly told, is a crime against humanity. But every pleb and prole will need to produce a government-issue "vaccine passport;" without it, they will forfeit the right to leave their residence,
    go to the park, or enter a grocery store.

    I think even the normies may start to dimly discern something not quite right here.

    [Mar 31, 2021] Techno-totalitarism

    Mar 31, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Dr. Robert Morgan , says: March 29, 2021 at 8:43 pm GMT • 2.2 days ago

    CJ Hopkins: "This stuff is built into the structure of the system. It is a standard feature of totalitarian societies, cults, churches, self-help groups, and well, human society, generally."

    Quite true, and why I tend to think the so-called pandemic isn't a result of a conspiracy as such, but rather should just be seen as an expected outcome in a technological society that increasingly and necessarily depends on the recommendations of "experts" to operate. Take that necessary fact, and couple it with the built-in conformism of human nature (herd mentality), and voilà, you get today's techno-totalitarianism. In short, never suspect conspiracy when ordinary stupidity will serve perfectly well as an explanation.

    [Mar 31, 2021] The shutting down of economies all over the world, the faulty PCR tests producing false positives, counting as many deaths as possible as Covid deaths, the lies and deceit, the shutting down of dissenting opinions, the firing of doctors, the banning of alternative medicines this type of behavior cannot be put down to "stupidity"

    Mar 31, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Dr. Robert Morgan , says: March 30, 2021 at 4:34 pm GMT • 1.4 days ago

    TTSSYF: "Good point, but what drives the "experts" to push this? Would that not be a conspiracy of sorts?"

    Certainly there are factions among the so-called experts, and the members of factions can "conspire" with each other to win out over other factions. I don't doubt that at all. Nor do I doubt that anything that happens will advantage some groups and disadvantage others, and that groups fight to advance their own interests. Yet, to claim that the whole pandemic was planned in advance down to the last detail by a shadowy group of conspirators called "Globocap", as CJ Hopkins often seems to do, I think is a bridge too far. Stupidity and unintended consequences characterize human actions and interactions far more accurately than malice aforethought and design. Some see conspiracy where in reality there is only chaos.

    Thomasina , says: March 30, 2021 at 7:15 pm GMT • 1.2 days ago
    @Dr. Robert Morgan fled on masks, so I'm willing to admit these might not have been part of the plan. And the vaccines might also have been an opportunistic play by the pharmaceutical industry. Heck, why not? They were given immunity from prosecution for their vaccines. Same with the useless ventilators.

    But the shutting down of economies all over the world, the faulty PCR tests producing false positives, counting as many deaths as possible as Covid deaths, the lies and deceit, the shutting down of dissenting opinions, the firing of doctors, the banning of alternative medicines – this type of behavior cannot be put down to "stupidity".

    Enjoy the Great Reset.

    Petermx , says: March 30, 2021 at 4:46 pm GMT • 1.3 days ago
    @bcos t">

    Good tunes, better lyrics. I have never felt more disrespect, contempt and had such complete lack of confidence in the authorities in the US. Until the last year I had complete confidence in at least the science of the American medical establishment which maybe led me even to have a little too much confidence in my own doctors. I always had good doctors but no one is faultless and I realize if I had not had an unquestioning confidence in my doctors some serious problems I had may have been solved much earlier. But the problem is not our doctors. They are good, many excellent and they have spoken out against incompetents like Fauci.

    [Mar 31, 2021] Perhaps the Hindu caste system is a better analogy. The unvaccinated will become Dalit or "untouchable."

    Mar 31, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Timothy Kelly , says: March 30, 2021 at 5:22 pm GMT • 1.3 days ago

    The comparisons of the New Normal to Nazi Germany have become thread bare if not misleading in my opinion but the author hits all the key points. Perhaps the Hindu caste system is a better analogy. The unvaccinated will become Dalit or "untouchable."

    [Mar 30, 2021] There is something rotten in the state of Covid

    The level of corruption of science (and medicine is just a branch of science) in the USA is really astounding. It is Lysenkoism, pure and simple. And vaccine debate, or absence of thereof is just a tip of the iceberg, one manifestations of corrupt nature of neoliberalism in the USA and the level of amorality and corruption of the neoliberal elite. After all the essence of neoliberalism is "profits before people".
    Notable quotes:
    "... it's what it looks like to me too... pfizer must be laughing all the way to the bank, or blackrock - whatever.. i guess the johnston vaccine or whatever will have to be pushed harder too.. https://www.holdingschannel.com/13f/blackrock-inc-top-holdings/ ..."
    Mar 30, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
    gottlieb , Mar 30 2021 16:10 utc | 15

    Well these aren't vaccines as much as flu-shots. Indeed they're already buzzing about combining the annual flu jab with the covid 'vaccine' for inoculation once or twice a year depending on the severity of variant season. Vaccines are supposed to offer protection against disease for long periods of time. The flu shot isn't a vaccine and neither are these Covid jabs. And contrary to a comment above these 'vaccines' have proven very effective to 'cure' serious Covid patients, much like the gene-therapies being used to great effect.

    I certainly wouldn't take the experimental mRNA 'vaccines' until much more data is in. Is there a reason the mRNA rabies vaccine hasn't been approved after years of trying? And of course folks are quick the forget the Moderna/Pfizer medicines have not been approved either except for "emergency use."

    And now finally there is out in the open debate about the origins of the 'novel' Corona virus of which so many react as if it is not novel at all. Not to say we'll ever know the truth - imagine the legal liability of setting off a global pandemic.

    There is something rotten in the state of covid. Let's put on our gasmasks and get to the bottom of it.


    ptb , Mar 30 2021 16:21 utc | 17

    @15 gottlieb

    Well these aren't vaccines as much as [seasonal] flu-shots.

    That seems to be a very significant possibility.

    james , Mar 30 2021 16:25 utc | 18

    it's what it looks like to me too... pfizer must be laughing all the way to the bank, or blackrock - whatever.. i guess the johnston vaccine or whatever will have to be pushed harder too.. https://www.holdingschannel.com/13f/blackrock-inc-top-holdings/

    james , Mar 30 2021 16:25 utc | 19

    it is hard not to be cynical..

    norecovery , Mar 30 2021 16:53 utc | 23

    Most people are not grasping the serious wrong-headedness of this mass vaccination effort. I transcribed a germane section of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche's interview so folks here can please read it until they understand what he's saying. (I inserted punctuation and paragraphs to make it more readable.)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJZxiNxYLpc

    "If you go to war, you better make sure you have the right weapon. The weapon in itself can be an excellent weapon, and that is what I'm saying about the current vaccines, I mean just brilliant people who have been making these vaccines in no time and with regulatory approval and everything, so the weapon in itself is excellent. The question is, is this the right weapon for the kind of war that is going on right now? And there, my answer is definitely no. Because these are prophylactic vaccines, and prophylactic vaccines should typically not be administered to people who are exposed to high infectious pressure. So don't forget we are administering these vaccines in the heat of a pandemic.

    "So in other words, while we are preparing our weapon, we are fully attacked by the virus – the virus is everywhere – so that is a very different scenario from using such vaccines in a setting where the vaccinee is barely or not exposed to the virus. And I'm saying this because if you have a high infectious pressure, it's so easy for the virus to jump from one person to the other. So, if you're immune response is just mounting, as we see right now with a number of people who get their first dose – they get their first dose, the antibodies are not fully mature, [inaudible] are not very high, so their immune response is sub-optimal. But they are in the midst of this war. While they are mounting an immune response they are fully attacked by the virus. And every single time – I mean, this is textbook knowledge – every time you have an immune response that is sub-optimal in the presence of an infection, in the presence of a virus that infects that person, you are at risk for immune escape. So that means that the virus can escape from the immune response.

    "So I'm saying that these vaccines – I mean, in their own right of course, are excellent – but to use them in the midst of a pandemic and do mass vaccinations, because then you provide within a very short period of time with high antibody [types ?] [inaudible] I mean, that wouldn't matter if you could eradicate if you could prevent infection. But these vaccines don't prevent infection – they protect against disease.

    "Because unfortunately, we look no further than the end of our nose, in the sense that hospitalization, that's all that counts – you know, getting people away from the hospital. But in the meantime, you're not realizing that we give, all the time during this pandemic, by our interventions the opportunity to escape the immune system. And that is of course a very, very dangerous thing, especially when we realize that these guys they only need 10 hours to replicate.

    "So we think that by making new vaccines – new vaccines against the new infectious strains – we think we're going to catch up. It's impossible to catch up. The virus is not going to wait until we have those vaccines ready. I mean, this thing continues. As I was saying, the thing is, I mean, if you do this in the midst of a pandemic, that is an enormous problem. These vaccines are excellent, but they are not made for administration to millions of people in the midst, in the heat of a pandemic. So that is my point."

    Mina , Mar 30 2021 16:56 utc | 25

    BBC buries detail about the new AZ problems
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56580728

    https://www.dw.com/en/berlin-halts-astrazeneca-vaccines-for-under-60s/a-57049301
    blood clots... in the brain

    https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/coronavirus-vaccine-germany-reports-more-astrazeneca-clot-cases-121032900737_1.html
    31 of whom ... 7 died.

    Luckily, the EU has approved a change of name of the AZ vaccin
    https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/vaxzevria-previously-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca
    https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/eu-affairs/162559/astrazeneca-vaccine-now-renamed-as-vaxzevria-ema-european-eu-uk-swedish-lakemedelsverket/

    But this latest point is not mentioned by most MSM of course...

    Digital Spartacus , Mar 30 2021 16:57 utc | 26

    James @ 19

    It's impossible to not be cynical.

    norecovery , Mar 30 2021 17:16 utc | 30

    Mass vaccination apparently is accelerating the mutation of more dangerous variants. Do the experts not understand that the antigen-specific antibodies the vaccinations are eliciting, actually compromise people's innate broadly-based immune resistance to variants?

    psychohistorian , Mar 30 2021 17:27 utc | 31

    @ defaultcitizen | Mar 30 2021 16:55 utc | 24 who wrote

    "
    .....Yet some persist in shouting "The King is NAKED!" in the land of the blind and deaf and naked – their words quickly washed away by the next wave of crashing yaddayadda. Inspiring. Admirable. I need a double shot, now and then, to keep my courage and anger up. Graffiti on the cyber time-tunnel hearkens the occasional weary voyager.
    "

    Thanks for that and the sentiments about what b has to go through to keep churning out the truth he finds within his bias like we all have.

    We are an interesting species struggling to evolve or perish it seems and yet adding my textual white noise to yours feels positive in some way and so I do it. I think it is a small percentage that don't feel the impotent rage of our social system and that rage is causing it to lose trust.

    I have been waiting over 50 years for the failure tipping point in the private finance based social system and I feel it is close. But I have to admit I felt more positive in the middle of the Occupy movement because their were people in the streets and it was focused on Wall Street....and it sure as heck isn't now.....sigh

    Jackrabbit , Mar 30 2021 17:30 utc | 32

    Mina @Mar30 16:56 #25

    AstraZeneca has been plagued with problems that get lots of media attention (production problems, suspected health problems, etc.)

    And the J&J vaccine is still hard to find. There are now dozens of places to get a vaccine in NYC but I could only find 4 or 5 that give the J&J vaccine (along with one of the mRNA shots) - at least two of which note that they are not giving "first dose" shots and another says (in a FAQ on their site) that they are only receiving Moderna vaccines "at this time".

    IMO we are being herded into the mRNA vaccines.

    But if you complain to others about that (as I have) you are treated as though you are "anti-vaxx / anti-science.

    !!

    norecovery , Mar 30 2021 17:46 utc | 34

    karlof1 – The "anti-vaxxer – anti-science" smear is analogous to "anti-American" if one criticizes U.S. foreign policy. Simplistic demonization is encouraged by the mainstream media with news delivered in sound bites in order to dumb down the populace and manufacture consent (or paranoia).

    karlof1 , Mar 30 2021 17:53 utc | 36

    norecovery @30--

    That's why I see getting vaccinated now as a waste of time and medicine. My lifestyle hasn't changed much at all with the pandemic, although my employment of precautions has soared. That will change with our cross-country road trip during the month of April as we interact with many more people and visit their homes. Yes, aside from lodgings, they'll be kin--but--unprotected interactions with kin are often the source of infection. As we see cases soar once again, it's clear that the vaccine was seen as some sort of panacea when it's not that at all. People ought to wonder why they're prompted to get a new flu shot annually; it's because it mutates and a different formula's required. I've never had a flu shot and don't get the flu, mainly because of my lifestyle. What's most important for me is my preferred vaccine--Sputnik V--isn't available in my nation and may never be approved for use here. For me, the AIDS experience is my reference--Sex wasn't deadly until it suddenly was (All STDs were never considered in the same league) which prompted a change in behavior. Same with COVID, although flu is clearly a deadly virus for many.

    [Mar 30, 2021] Any veteran newsman like yourself must have recognized the traditional hallmarks of an overblown, concerted, government-corporate media campaign when this 24/7 Corona hysteria first cranked up more than a year ago.

    Mar 30, 2021 | www.unz.com

    St-Germain , says: March 26, 2021 at 2:07 pm GMT • 4.1 days ago

    What we're seeing is the most extravagant Madison Avenue "product launch" in America's 245-year history, and it's coming at us full-throttle from all sides. It's virtually impossible to turn on the TV or radio without being deluged by one emotive vignette after the other all of which are aimed at promoting vaccination.

    Good job, Mike Whitney. In a free society, normal, healthy life is possible without TV and MSM. But our Western world may have already reached the point where real life may become impossible with those two cynical propaganda purveyors.

    Any veteran newsman like yourself must have recognized the traditional hallmarks of an overblown, concerted, government-corporate media campaign when this 24/7 Corona hysteria first cranked up more than a year ago. Alas, the great majority who have never set foot in a newsroom are still taking this nonsense at face value. Trusting souls -- that's what corporate-government aims for.

    [Mar 27, 2021] I wonder if people still believe the official COVID propaganda?

    Looks like large swats of population are completely delusional
    Mar 27, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Idiocrates , Mar 24 2021 18:21 utc | 17

    I wonder if people still believe the same shit about covid?

    Of protests and resistance can change Merkel's mind about lockdowns what does this say about the motives for the whole sharade?

    Who still thinks this is fact and science based?


    vetinLA , Mar 24 2021 18:42 utc | 21

    17 asked; "I wonder if people still believe the same shit about covid?"

    Who knows, reality will be the final decider. Speaking only about here in the U$A, Americans don't handle reality well, if at all...

    bevin , Mar 24 2021 21:09 utc | 43

    JB@37
    Does anyone doubt that proper medical attention, including drugs, nursing care and hospital access would have greatly reduced the number of deaths in the pandemic? The problem of the pandemic is firstly that it was allowed to rage out of control, providing the perfect conditions for increasingly dangerous variants to evolve and secondly that it imposes on societies the need to provide public health systems to ensure that the ability to pay doctors, rent beds and buy drugs is not needed to ensure treatment.
    Capitalism is about making profits out of the desperation of humanity. It is already being reported that the drug companies intend to use their patents to make enormous profits, while refusing to make their formulae available so that generic vaccines can be supplied to the billions who cannot afford to buy them.
    The irony that life has in store for capitalism's cheerleaders being the inevitability of future waves of Covid which will slay hundreds of millions- the direct result of a systemic choice.

    [Mar 26, 2021] Are PCR tests picking up spike proteins from the mRNA vaccines?

    Mar 26, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Finally, COVID vaccinations are re-accelerating in US and EU...

    Source: Bloomberg

    And while cases are up modestly (are PCR tests picking up spike proteins from the mRNA vaccines?), death rates continue to tumble...

    [Mar 23, 2021] The Masters of Covid are too powerful to be challenged openly

    Mar 23, 2021 | www.unz.com

    The Deputy Director of the State Influenza Institute Dr Daria Danilenko wryly commented: "For the first time in the history of scientific observation, the world faced an epidemic season without influenza".

    The Masters of Covid are too powerful to be challenged openly. This week, they disposed of the Tanzanian President, John Magufuli . A cheeky man, he tested papaya, goat and engine oil for covid using WHO-supplied tests, and they all turned out to be positive. He rejected testing and declared Tanzania free of covid. Then, the London Guardian newspaper (in a section funded by Bill Gates) called for him to be removed.

    ... ... ...

    President Lukashenko also refused the WHO diktat, and was almost deposed, but he fought back – after all, Belarus is not in Africa. The Swedes, as you know, also gave ground under pressure. Perhaps President Putin acted wisely when he did not contradict the Masters of Covid. They are, apparently, an irresistible force in the current world. They removed Trump, they locked Europe down. Putin would also have been destroyed – and Russians would end in an endless lockdown, like Israel or France.

    I cannot answer the question of how the Masters of Covid were able to do it. Neither Schwab, a second-rate professor in Zurich, nor Gates, the owner of a large data company – could have achieved such a result by any known means. Will we ever know who is behind them? Or is that very question to be condemned as a conspiracy theory?

    By the way, Magufuli, the late president of Tanzania, was an outstanding personality. A Russian newspaper wrote:

    Magufuli looked everywhere to cut unnecessary expenses, and the saved money was used for the construction of roads and for free education (with him, not only primary, but secondary schools became free, as well). He reduced the cabinet from 30 to 19 people, and fired about 150 high-ranking officials as unnecessary or corrupt. An audit revealed that 10,000 salaried civil servants existed on paper only. Magufuli cancelled two deals with China, which had already been signed by his predecessor, President Kikwete: the construction of the country's first electrified railway and the largest port in East Africa in Bagamoyo. Only a madman could agree to the conditions proposed by the Chinese. Magufuli was indignant. The railway was eventually built by a Turkish company; the Tanzanian authorities still cannot agree on the port with Chinese investors. Magufuli believed that the scale of the pandemic is greatly exaggerated and some forces use it to sabotage the economy, wrote Associated Press. He did not want to introduce quarantine fearing that the level of poverty would rise.

    In short, a wonderful person! But he undertook to chop down a tree that was beyond his strength.

    The Masters of Covid played on our fear of death. I wonder how they will overcome it while instigating a world war? Perhaps they will do it by trying to make our life so miserable that we will accept mass annihilation, if not gladly, at least placidly.

    Israel Shamir can be reached at adam@israelshamir.net


    Max Payne , says: March 21, 2021 at 6:05 pm GMT • 2.3 days ago

    The great hack will be the next move after covid, a true false flag. Blamed on Russia. A hack that will impact businesses and more importantly end-users. Create havoc for the everyday man. Deleted accounts and intermittent comnection. Make it real (who cares some NSA server got hacked But people will care when they can't get their porn).

    If even half of this SolarWinds hack is true

    The great hack scenario has to be timed just right so that Russia (or China) are actually in the middle of some kind of minor cyber attack/operation. Make it look like it was TOO successful. For years the people have been primed for 'Russian hackers'.

    All you have to do is use Obamas internet killswitch to disconnect the people from facebook and gay porn for 48 hours and have an NSA spokesman blame Russia on radio and TV (that will scare the kids having to use such antiquated tech) and watch it work itself.

    Biden don't BS me pretending to be senile. I want my cheque!

    Johan , says: March 21, 2021 at 11:15 pm GMT • 2.1 days ago

    "That's how they spoke of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gadhafi; both were killed and their 'rogue states' devastated."

    Note also how the images of Hussein, unwashed and unshaved hiding somewhere in a wild place, Gaddafi in the gutter, and the narrative of Bin Laden executed while wearing pyjamas where distributed by the Western media. Narratives of crude humiliation, evil barbarians done away with, they end up as loosing suckers. A culture which cannot at least show some respect, this is not typically Western though

    Marshall Lentini , says: March 22, 2021 at 11:27 am GMT • 1.6 days ago

    I'll preface my comments by saying I have great respect for you as a writer. Apart from CJ Hopkins and Pepe Escobar, I think you're one of the best actual literary stylists here, even with imperfect English. And you have been against the hoax from day one. Unfortunately, I think you're impressionistic style is getting in the way of finer analysis and leading you to absurd conclusions.

    I cannot answer the question of how the Masters of Covid were able to do it. Neither Schwab, a second-rate professor in Zurich, nor Gates, the owner of a large data company – could have achieved such a result by any known means. Will we ever know who is behind them? Or is that very question to be condemned as a conspiracy theory?

    This is you not doing your homework. Gates is not merely the "owner of a large data company", which you'd understand if you troubled to "google" this for approximately one minute.

    It is irritating to have to point out, again, that the Gates Foundation is the largest "individual" contributor to the WHO – the same WHO you just accused of assassinating two African presidents who resisted its agenda:

    https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/who-funds-world-health-organization-un-coronavirus-pandemic-covid-trump/

    But even that is deceptive. Note in the chart at that link two other large donors, Rotary Club and National Philanthropic Trust. No surprise that the Gates Foundation donates to and works closely with both:

    https://www.rotary.org/en/rotary-and-bill-melinda-gates-foundation-extending-fundraising-partnership-eradicate-poliohttps://www.nptrust.org/philanthropic-resources/philanthropist/how-our-philanthropic-partners-are-leading-through-covid-19/

    So, Gates money is flowing into the WHO, alone, constantly and from several places. It would take too long to list all the personnel in all the various organizations and institutions with ties to the Foundation or any of its many, many "sister" orgs, but it's symbolic that the current Director-General, Tedros, is Ethiopian, and the Foundation opened an office in Addis back in 2012, and has been dumping money into the country. Tedros got in with GAVI (another Foundation front) and the Aspen Institute (also partly funded by the Foundation) around that time.

    https://www.aiha.com/gates-ethiopia/

    The more you look into this, the more you'll find Foundation money and players at every level, in every project and "initiative" and study, big or small.

    Of course, Gates has been explicitly criticized for controlling the WHO's narrative:

    https://www.politico.eu/article/bill-gates-who-most-powerful-doctor/

    He got a huge boost after Trump briefly pulled out of funding it. One could call it suspicious timing, but it was more probably just Trump doing something he couldn't follow through with, in this case because of his term-limit.

    https://www.unz.com/article/the-lockdown-the-vaccine-and-the-corruption-endemic-in-modern-democracy/#comment-4533640

    There is no one "behind" Gates precisely because there is no one with greater wealth except Bezos, who does not have even a tenth of Gates' vision, connections, or influence; and because Gates' power is tangential to traditional power – i.e. the specter of "health", which traditional power centers have lined up to enforce. $182 billion (Gates' assets plus Foundation assets, a total which no one ever mentions) goes a long way in buying local politicians pretty much everywhere.

    The simple fact is that Gates represents something unique in the history of power, in the Foucauldian sense, and this must be understood to get a clear picture of what is happening to global civilization, apart from the overshoot effects of civilization itself.

    Through his vast "philanthropic" network and investments, Gates has made himself the Panopticon, the supreme surveyor of "bodies", under the guise of "medicine" and "philanthropy".

    Don't believe me? All right. Just know that the Foundation is very up-front about their donations; you can see them all here, on a rather annoying spreadsheet: https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants – see if you can sort through all the names and reasons for the donation without getting a headache.

    Not only are these means known, they are more than enough to buy off literally anyone but Bezos, Musk, two Africans and Lukashenko, while Putin wisely played ball for a while to avoid censure.

    You have to get on the ball about this. We all have to.

    But I suspect what's going on here is:

    – "Fringe" right intellectuals have for so long wanted to name the Jew behind everything, they can't accept that the supervillain we got is not Jewish
    – "Fringe" right intellectuals have a psychological habit / heuristic bias of expecting a still bigger villain behind whatever else they perceive

    The only good news here is that Gates is out front declaring his plans. You don't need a smoking gun when it's firing at you almost daily.

    [Mar 22, 2021] The unprecedented pandemic, as defined by the timeous WHO (heavily diluted) definition of the term, has been addressed in the unprecedented locking down of entire populations

    The measures taken might not so much against the pandemic as against growing opposition to neoliberalism and legitimization of neoliberal elite.
    Mar 22, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org
    Carver , Mar 21 2021 20:15 utc | 48

    As cononavisus are seasonal spring reduction will be interpreted as the sucess of vaccinaions, while authom jump as the next wave requreing another round of vccinations.

    The unprecedented pandemic, as defined by the timeous WHO (heavily diluted) definition of the term, has been addressed in the unprecedented locking down of entire populations manner. No consideration was apparently given to the prospective consequences of an array of this and related directives that withdrew normal health care from entire populations and rendered another prospectively fatal blow to global economies. The new flu has been repeatedly verified as creating no more deaths than its annually experienced (influenza) predecessors.

    The main-stream indoctrination propaganda narrative would have everyone believe that the flawed but purposeful use of the loudly ill-advised testing methods are proclaimimg an endless resurgence of the pandemic.

    The flawed tests produce false positive results in surges that rhyme with the surges of totally unnecessary testing which are ingeniously generated from easily abused track and trace amongst many other scams.

    The absurd claims of the WHO that it has now pontificated is that natural herd immunity no longer exists and that immunity can only be obtained via mass and totally inclusive vaccination. Their infantile script appears to be the doctrine of their major self-appointed sponsor, being none other than the repeatedly discredited, unqualified and lifelong self-enrichment expert Mr Gates, who appears as a busybody manipu;ator at every turn.
    It is now ascertained by a core of genuinely qualified, erudite, concerned and political immune knowledge that any attempt to achieve herd immunity via vaccinations will inevitably create endless leaks of virulent variants. The logic is not obvious to the lay person, but it is to those that know what they are talking about.

    For me it is the initial approach as adopted by the UK govnmnt of aimiing for natural herd immunity that rings in my ears. The message from the original medical authority was clear and stated that any pandemic cannot be stopped, it can only be slowed down. As with all viral infections it must generate an overwhelming immune system response in the population which needs to be enabled as quickly as possible in order to defend against and counter the virus and the propensity for the generation of variants. Only the genuinely and highly vulnerable should be identified for protective isolation.

    lysias , Mar 21 2021 20:24 utc | 49

    If people strengthen their immune systems with things like Vitamin D, that will provide protection against all strains of all infections. But governments are quite uninterested in encouraging this.

    [Mar 19, 2021] Fauci and his masks wearing hypocrisy

    Mar 19, 2021 | www.rt.com

    Jonathan E 21 hours ago 19 Mar, 2021 01:31 AM

    What studies exist that show mask wearing to have made any difference? Seems like a easy question for Fauci to answer plainly and simply. He has had a year to find one. Fauci is a master sociopath who uses 'gaslighting' in his narrative. For example when he is accused of mask theatre he says 'here we go again with the theatre, lets get down with the facts.' But mask theatre is a fact because science does not support people with immunity to be needing to wear a mask.

    Dee Wilson 1 day ago
    18 Mar, 2021 09:09 PM
    Anthony Fauci is a fraud.. the super dumbed downed Americans which are becoming slowly less stupid....are ( way behind the rest of the world ) in knowing WHO runs your government as a dictator entity... Trump got rid of it .. Biden brought this evil back to the US.. WHY ????..... read and learn what this rot means.... it is not good.

    [Mar 19, 2021] Fauci behaviour resembles the behaviour of a drug dealer interetined only in pushing his drugs

    Mar 19, 2021 | www.rt.com


    Je suis CHUMP 1 day ago
    18 Mar, 2021 09:06 PM

    Fauci is a drug dealer. He has been a drug dealer since he was a teenager, and he started it at his dad's pharmacy. Pfizer/Moderna/OxAsZ syrup doesn't give any protection, so why let them inject their syrup into you with the risk of dying from blood clots and allergic reaction?

    picklenickel RussianSpy222 1 day ago
    18 Mar, 2021 10:06 PM
    Fauci is addicted to fame now, and will do anything to prolong his time in the spotlight.
    Macanesewarrior 1 day ago 18 Mar, 2021 08:47 PM
    Hopefully fraudci will wear a third or even a fourth mask. How about just a plastic bag over his head tied at the throat?
    Biff Shackleford 1 day ago 18 Mar, 2021 09:20 PM
    the old good cop bad cop routine. Rand like the rest of the R's are only there to appear as though they are fighting for you. Appear a threat never be one. Tough talk doesn't translate into any real world results.

    Dee Wilson 1 day ago
    18 Mar, 2021 09:09 PM
    Anthony Fauci is a fraud.. the super dumbed downed Americans which are becoming slowly less stupid....are ( way behind the rest of the world ) in knowing WHO runs your government as a dictator entity... Trump got rid of it .. Biden brought this evil back to the US.. WHY ????..... read and learn what this rot means.... it is not good.

    [Mar 19, 2021] If [recovered and vaccinated people are] not spreading the infection, isn't [wearing a mask] just theatre? by denouncing current mask rules as "theater."

    Mar 19, 2021 | www.rt.com

    The Kentucky senator demanded Fauci explain why Americans who'd already been sick with Covid-19 and recovered, or received the vaccine should be "wearing masks well into 2022" during a Senate hearing on Thursday. Insisting there "no scientific studies arguing or proving that infection with Covid does not create immunity," Paul demanded the doctor cite "specific studies" to bolster his claims that "everyone" should wear a mask (or two masks, as Fauci's trend-setting television appearances have encouraged).

    "If [recovered and vaccinated people are] not spreading the infection, isn't [wearing a mask] just theatre?" the senator queried, arguing that as of last fall, just five of the 38 million confirmed cases of the virus were believed to be reinfections.

    After an uneasy pause, Fauci dismissed the notion that vaccinated people double-masking was just for show, arguing even vaccinated Americans would be helpless in the face of a South African Covid-19 variant that has recently emerged. However, while the South African variant has shown itself to be more resistant to the AstraZeneca vaccine, individuals vaccinated with the Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech jabs appear to retain whatever benefits they would otherwise have received from the shots.

    As Fauci attempted to talk up the ferocity of the South African variant, which has not been shown to be any more infectious or harmful to the patient than any of the other viral variants, Paul accused him of making policy based on conjecture – all but suggesting that new strains would slip into the country and begin infecting helpless vaccinated Americans willy-nilly, undoing all the hard work the government's vaccination campaign had accomplished and returning Americans to square one if they didn't wear their masks.

    Such a claim would seem to run contrary to the US government line suggesting Americans should get vaccinated as soon as humanly possible, an issue Paul took care to point out. "You want to get rid of vaccine hesitancy? Tell them they can quit wearing their mask after they get the vaccine!" he explained.

    You want people to get the vaccine? Give them a reward instead of telling 'em that the nanny state's going to be there for three more years and you've got to wear a mask forever!

    "If you already have immunity, you're wearing a mask to give comfort to others. You're not wearing a mask because of any science," the senator concluded. Fauci icily reiterated that he "totally disagreed" after the Republican accused him of "parad[ing] around in two masks for show."

    Even though Fauci agreed it was unlikely someone would get infected with the original strain, he once again argued that "we in our country now have variants."

    When you talk about reinfection and you don't keep in the concept of variants, that's an entirely different ballgame. That's a good reason for a mask.

    While Fauci and his media cheerleaders have a habit of dismissing Paul's criticisms out of hand as the meaningless opinions of a layperson, the Kentucky senator is also a doctor, though a trained ophthalmologist rather than an immunologist.

    Some watching the latest Fauci-vs-Paul battle on social media questioned the seriousness of the latest viral "variant," implying that these new strains were little more than paper tigers whose role was to enter epidemiological stage right just in time to keep the population frightened for a few more months.


    Home USA News WATCH: Rand Paul challenges Fauci's ever-more-elaborate 'mask theatre' on Senate floor 19 Mar, 2021 00:00 Get short URL WATCH: Rand Paul challenges Fauci's ever-more-elaborate 'mask theatre' on Senate floor © Susan Walsh / Pool via Reuters 107 Follow RT on RT US coronavirus czar Anthony Fauci has again butted heads with Republican senator (and fellow doctor) Rand Paul over the government's mask mandates. Paul got under Fauci's skin by denouncing current mask rules as "theater."

    The Kentucky senator demanded Fauci explain why Americans who'd already been sick with Covid-19 and recovered, or received the vaccine should be "wearing masks well into 2022" during a Senate hearing on Thursday. Insisting there "no scientific studies arguing or proving that infection with Covid does not create immunity," Paul demanded the doctor cite "specific studies" to bolster his claims that "everyone" should wear a mask (or two masks, as Fauci's trend-setting television appearances have encouraged).

    "If [recovered and vaccinated people are] not spreading the infection, isn't [wearing a mask] just theatre?" the senator queried, arguing that as of last fall, just five of the 38 million confirmed cases of the virus were believed to be reinfections.

    https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1372573094494285829&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F518538-rand-paul-fauci-mask-theatre%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px

    After an uneasy pause, Fauci dismissed the notion that vaccinated people double-masking was just for show, arguing even vaccinated Americans would be helpless in the face of a South African Covid-19 variant that has recently emerged. However, while the South African variant has shown itself to be more resistant to the AstraZeneca vaccine, individuals vaccinated with the Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech jabs appear to retain whatever benefits they would otherwise have received from the shots.

    As Fauci attempted to talk up the ferocity of the South African variant, which has not been shown to be any more infectious or harmful to the patient than any of the other viral variants, Paul accused him of making policy based on conjecture – all but suggesting that new strains would slip into the country and begin infecting helpless vaccinated Americans willy-nilly, undoing all the hard work the government's vaccination campaign had accomplished and returning Americans to square one if they didn't wear their masks.

    ALSO ON RT.COM 'No data, no evidence': Fauci admits CDC advising against air travel for vaccinated Americans a 'judgement call'

    Such a claim would seem to run contrary to the US government line suggesting Americans should get vaccinated as soon as humanly possible, an issue Paul took care to point out. "You want to get rid of vaccine hesitancy? Tell them they can quit wearing their mask after they get the vaccine!" he explained.

    You want people to get the vaccine? Give them a reward instead of telling 'em that the nanny state's going to be there for three more years and you've got to wear a mask forever!

    "If you already have immunity, you're wearing a mask to give comfort to others. You're not wearing a mask because of any science," the senator concluded. Fauci icily reiterated that he "totally disagreed" after the Republican accused him of "parad[ing] around in two masks for show."

    Even though Fauci agreed it was unlikely someone would get infected with the original strain, he once again argued that "we in our country now have variants."

    When you talk about reinfection and you don't keep in the concept of variants, that's an entirely different ballgame. That's a good reason for a mask.

    While Fauci and his media cheerleaders have a habit of dismissing Paul's criticisms out of hand as the meaningless opinions of a layperson, the Kentucky senator is also a doctor, though a trained ophthalmologist rather than an immunologist.

    Some watching the latest Fauci-vs-Paul battle on social media questioned the seriousness of the latest viral "variant," implying that these new strains were little more than paper tigers whose role was to enter epidemiological stage right just in time to keep the population frightened for a few more months.

    https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1372577674036662280&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fusa%2F518538-rand-paul-fauci-mask-theatre%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px

    Paul was infected with the virus a year ago and has argued he is now immune, pointing to the almost nonexistent rate of reinfection among those recovered from the virus. Fauci received the Moderna vaccine in January. While he has become a vehement defender of face coverings, the Biden administration's top health advisor initially urged Americans not to wear them, suggesting last February that the protection they offered was largely illusory and urging ordinary people to leave them on the shelves so that they would be available for the healthcare workers who needed them.


    CyanTeepee 1 day ago 18 Mar, 2021 09:09 PM

    Dr. Fauci talks out of both sides of his mouth and can't be trusted he changes the narrative whenever they need to incite more fear and control into the public 'Biden administration's top health advisor initially urged Americans not to wear them, suggesting last February that the protection they offered was largely illusory and urging ordinary people to leave them on the shelves so that they would be available for the healthcare workers who needed them."

    Drifter275 CyanTeepee 22 hours ago
    18 Mar, 2021 11:48 PM
    Yes, and he is improperly wearing the inner mask. It is open at the top under his eyes. He is inhaling and exhaling across his eyes. That dries his eyes and exposes his eyes to being inoculated with virus either when inhaling or exhaling.

    Reilly 1 day ago
    18 Mar, 2021 09:05 PM
    When science has become like a religion where if you go against the tide , you are labeled a heretic by the scientific field your are dissenting against. Science is about investigating and debating on the theories in "question". Its not about closing down and censoring apposing views, which do not line up with this profit driven "dogmatic science" we have today.

    CrabbyB 1 day ago
    18 Mar, 2021 10:30 PM
    So if you get the jab you are still in danger from other variants... how can someone have a so-called vaccine passport then? If you've had the jab he's saying it counts for nothing and you still need a mask. Note his confirmation they will be pushing for a new jab every six months in that talk too

    Reilly 1 day ago
    18 Mar, 2021 09:16 PM
    The doctors today are hypocrites, they are just salesmen for big pharma and do not have moral fortitude anymore. They used to take the Hippocratic Oath, "Do No Harm" being the first tenet of this Oath. They are now no different to a car salesmen trying to sell you a dodgy car for cheap, just so they can make some quick money.
    Laura Johnson Reilly 10 hours ago 19 Mar, 2021 11:59 AM
    Hippocratic oath ends when money talks... but wait why do you expect something different from the doctors, they are people just like you and me and if the society worships only one god 'money' how do you expect doctors to be different. Yeap, salesmen - some years ago I heard USA is the united salesmen of America but now this culture is exported all over the world, started with multilevel marketing, market economy and neoliberal thinking... so by now it might be called hypocritic oath, lol...haha

    FredMc Reilly 22 hours ago
    19 Mar, 2021 12:19 AM
    It has been replaced with the "hypocritical" oath.

    [Mar 14, 2021] Twelve questions nobody will ask Dr. Fauci?

    Mar 14, 2021 | www.brighteon.com

    Steven Keitha day ago ,

    1.If the PCR test works -- Why the false positives?
    2.If the masks works -- Why the six feet?
    3.If the six feet works -- Why the masks?
    4.If all three works - Why the social distancing?
    5.If all four work -- Why the Lockdown?
    6.If all five work -- Why the vaccine?
    7.If the vaccine works - Why do people care if I will get one or not? (They can't get it from anyone if vaccine works)
    8.If the vaccine is safe -- Why the no liability clause from BIG PHARMA side?
    9.If the PCR test works - Why Kary Banks Mullis (creater of PCR method) said: "PCR tests CAN'T be used to determine if someone is positive or negative in a matter of ANY virus."
    10.If Kary Banks Mullis was not a threat to their agenda - Why he died in unexplained circumstances few months before world heard about CONvid-1984?
    11.If CONvid-1984 exists -- Why has it not been isolated according to CDC?
    12.If there is no conspiracy - Why the media, governments and oligarchs of this world are trying to vaccinate the WHOLE WORLD?

    [Mar 12, 2021] Opinion- Lessons of the Long Covid Year - WSJ

    Unlike this charlatan Fauci thinking, measures should be gradated by density of population. countryside does not need as severe restrictions as big cities with their high density of population. Less populous state need different measured then the most populous.
    The US even managed to fail to introduce temperature checks in airports in February 2020, when the scenario unfolding was pretty clear. To say nothing about quarantine for those who came form "hot zones".
    Mar 12, 2021 | www.wsj.com

    The tragedy is how poorly we've adapted as we've learned more about the risks. Studies from Europe showed nearly half of deaths were occurring in nursing homes, and children rarely transmitted the illness or became severely ill. Treatments improved as doctors learned more, but government prescriptions didn't change. As Philippe Lemoine argues nearby , the accumulating evidence is that lockdowns don't reduce the virus spread in the long run.

    Lockdowns nonetheless became an ideological battle. The media became lockdown cheerleaders as they sought to take down Mr. Trump, with tragic results for lost businesses, lost livelihoods and health damage in late diagnoses, untreated conditions and mental illness that will compound for years.

    Children have lost a year of learning, which many will never make up. The lockdown recession hurt low-income workers the most, while affluent Americans could work from home. While it's impossible to quantify the social harm, last summer's riots and the deepening political discord didn't happen in a vacuum.

    There was an alternative. Tens of thousands of doctors signed the Great Barrington Declaration, which recommended that government minimize deaths and economic harm by protecting the vulnerable while letting most Americans return to normal life. Individuals and businesses could adjust to the virus and socially distance as they saw fit. The media and progressive elites dismissed these voices and refused to drop their lockdown dogmatism.

    The Covid pandemic has seen the greatest loss of American liberty outside wartime. Politicians closed houses of worship without regard for the First Amendment. They ordered arbitrary shutdowns that favored some businesses but punished others. Politicians and governments have used the pandemic to justify an enormous expansion of state power. Government had to act in March to avoid economic catastrophe from the lockdowns it ordered. But the politicians keep amassing power even as vaccines are rolling out.

    Government spending and deficits have reached heights unseen since World War II as a share of the economy, and taxes are likely to follow. The Federal Reserve has become a de facto arm of the Treasury to finance deficits, with unknown future consequences.


    C Chad Koepke SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago The forecasts from political pundits and "health experts" stated there would be millions of US deaths if no lockdowns were instituted. Sweden was much more laze fairer in the approach and the death rates are not all that different from lockdown USA... C Chad Koepke SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago The forecasts from political pundits and "health experts" stated there would be millions of US deaths if no lockdowns were instituted. Sweden was much more laze fairer in the approach and the death rates are not all that different from lockdown USA... C Christopher Hsu SUBSCRIBER 4 hours ago ... ".In total, in an unmitigated epidemic, we would predict approximately 510,000 deaths in GB and 2.2 million in the US, not accounting for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed on mortality." https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf P Paul Bremner SUBSCRIBER 4 hours ago Andrew Wachtel:
    Wrong, Paul. That figure was even assuming a lockdown.

    Incorrect.
    The study assumed NO lockdown or any other mitigation for the 2.2 million casualty number in the US.

    The study looked at a variety of lockdown and distancing options ranging from least selective to most comprehensive.

    Then it presented findings in the "Results" section where it said the following:

    Results
    In the (unlikely) absence of any control measure s or spontaneous changes in individual behaviour, we would expect a peak in mortality (daily deaths) to occur after approximately 3 months.....In total, in an unmitigated epidemic , we would predict approximately 510,000 deaths in GB and 2.2 million in the US, not accounting for the potential negative effects of health systems being overwhelmed on mortality.

    Source: Imperial College
    "Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand." pp 6-7.

    Date: 16 March, 2020 M Marc Antos SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago If you look at the developed countries with the highest per capita deaths, its the UK, Italy, and the US in no particular order. Whatever we did, it didn't work. We'll have to do an autopsy report on the US response when everyone is vaccinated.

    Letting the virus spread among healthier populations and isolating vulnerable populations hasn't worked wherever they've tried it. You can't completely isolate the sick and elderly as they have caregiving needs. What has worked best are intrusive methods that aren't compatible with any system that values liberty and privacy. I'm not advocating for that, but I am saying that viruses prey on the openness that free societies value. A long term pandemic could result in a greater and greater amount of people willing to surrender their cherished freedoms. T Tom Richard SUBSCRIBER 5 hours ago Suicides are up, overdose deaths are up, murders are up considerably.
    Because people either couldn't or wouldn't get to hospitals, logic states that deaths from heart attacks, strokes, etc. are up.
    Not to mention, sending infected patients into nursing homes front-loaded deaths into a concentrated time frame.
    As viruses cause deaths annually, the lock downs will be found to have increased deaths in 2020 more than the virus itself - and devastated our children in the process.
    It was a monstrous decision. L larry roberts SUBSCRIBER 5 hours ago Look at the excess deaths in 2020. Excess Deaths are the number of deaths from all causes during a crisis above and beyond what we would have expected to see under normal conditions. For 2020, the majority of excess deaths are reasonably attributable to Covid19 either directly or indirectly. The data is available on the CDC website. The number of excess deaths is > 500K. Andrew Wachtel Andrew Wachtel SUBSCRIBER 5 hours ago The UK and Italy instituted some of the longest and most draconian lockdowns in the world.

    Whatever they did didn't work either. B BILL GOSSETT SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago (Edited)

    President Biden and Democrats blame Donald Trump for 530,000 American deaths

    Yet in March when Trump wanted to shut down air travel and the borders, these same people called him a racist and other derogatory names. That alone would have prevented 300,000 deaths.

    I remember this clear as day, but I am sure the leftist will deflect with some other nonsense. Like thumb_up 6 Reply Share link Report
    F Francis Grimes IV SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago The secret to the lockdowns---which did not happen unilaterally across the country--is uncovered in the below quote, dateline March 20, 2020

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) worked to scupper the phase-three coronavirus relief package on Sunday after Majority Whip James Clyburn (D., S.C.) told caucus members last week that the bill was "a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision."
    It was never about public health, public safety, or anything else related to the virus. D David Solak SUBSCRIBER 7 hours ago Eye covering is just as important as a mask in my opinion. There was a story on NBC about this.
    The passenger who is employed by NBC noted that people who have some sort of covering, even glasses , have a lower rate of infection.
    When someone sneezes or coughs the droplets can easily enter your eyes where your eyelids are a mucus membrane.
    We haven't had so much as a sniffle since 2019, when we caught some nasty virus and we all know where it came from. S Steve Gokorsch SUBSCRIBER 7 hours ago
    The media became lockdown cheerleaders as they sought to take down Mr. Trump, with tragic results for lost businesses, lost livelihoods and health damage in late diagnoses, untreated conditions and mental illness that will compound for years.
    Night after night we heard from the MSM how this pandemic was because of President Trump's actions or inactions - it did not matter what he did; he was wrong and to blame. Their contempt and hatred for him hurt us, all of us. They did not report facts but instead tailored their broadcasts to paint him in a negative light...day after day after day.

    Note they to this day do not blame President Xi. Hmm, wonder why?

    [Mar 10, 2021] US government forgot that first and foremost in COVID-19 vaccination campaign is to avoid excessive zeal: where I live, people have signs in heir front years which read "f**k the Vaccines".

    Mar 10, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

    snake , Mar 10 2021 18:35 utc | 6

    a most disturbing review of the government response to pharma demands that the government force those it governs to pay for and take the pharma offered vaccines. Basically I see it as a declaration of war against human rights

    Texas is fighting back, they have removed the requirement of a mask.. and where I live, people have signs in heir front years which read "f**k the Vaccines".

    [Mar 08, 2021] The CDC Is About To Be Canceled By Google Facebook For COVID Heresy - ZeroHedge

    Mar 08, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    The CDC Is About To Be Canceled By Google & Facebook For COVID Heresy BY TYLER DURDEN MONDAY, MAR 08, 2021 - 16:45

    Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

    On Friday afternoon, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (still called the CDC, even though they added a 'P') released a heretical report about mask-wearing and COVID-19.

    The report, authored by at least a dozen medical doctors, PhD researchers, and, bizarrely, a handful of attorneys, examined how mask mandates across the US affected COVID cases and death rates.

    You'd think with all of the media propaganda about mask effectiveness and all the virtue signaling, with politicians and reporters appearing on live TV wearing masks that the data would prove incontrovertibly and overwhelmingly that masks have saved the world.

    But that's not what the report says.

    According to the CDC's analysis, between March 1 and December 31 last year, statewide mask mandates were in effect in 2,313 of the 3,142 counties in the United States.

    And, looking at the county-by-county data, the CDC concludes that mask mandates were associated with an average 1.32% decrease in the growth rates of COVID-19 cases and deaths during the first 100 days after the mask policy was implemented .

    Wait, what? Only 1.32%?

    You read that correctly, they didn't misplace the decimal: according to the federal government agency that is responsible for managing the COVID-1984 pandemic, the difference between mask mandates and no mask mandate is literally just a 1.32% difference.

    And bear in mind, it's entirely possible that the real figure is even lower than that, given all the questionable COVID statistics.

    For example, the CDC reports that influenza cases in the United States have dropped to almost zero in the 2020-2021 flu season, down from 56 MILLION the previous year.

    It's amazing they expect anyone to take this data seriously.

    Are we honestly supposed to believe that the flu has been eradicated?

    Or is it possible, that, maybe just maybe, at least some influenza cases have been misdiagnosed as COVID?

    If that's the case, then the real impact of masks on COVID growth rates is potentially much lower than 1.32%.

    Even the CDC seems to understand this, because at the end of its report, they inspidly conclude by stating that mask mandates " have the potential to slow the spread of COVID-19. . ." [the bold is mine, obviously]

    Really? " Potential "? That's HERESY! And an obvious contradiction to WHO guidance. It makes we wonder whether Google and Facebook are gearing up to censor this report, given they have self-appointed themselves as the Ministry of Truth.

    Frankly it's pretty incredible that the data was too weak for the CDC to make a clear assertion about the benefits of mask mandates.

    (though I did say there were a couple of lawyers who co-authored this paper and using non-committal language like "potential" certainly sounds like typical weasel lawyer-speak.)

    Now, please don't misunderstand the point of this letter. I'm not here to bash masks or say that they don't work, or go on some anti-mask rant.

    The point is that I'm pro-data. And pro-reason.

    Public health policies come with consequences. There are always costs, and there are (hopefully) benefits.

    The CDC has just published an official analysis of the benefits, quantified at precisely 1.32%.

    What are the costs of their decisions? Well there's plenty of data about that too.

    For example, a recent study published earlier this month in the premier scientific journal Nature shows that Americans who wear masks are more likely engage in riskier activities, like, you know, leaving the house.

    The study conclude that mask mandates "lead to risk compensation behavior" and mask wearers "spend 11-24 fewer minutes at home on average and increase visits to some commercial locations– most notably restaurants, which are a high-risk location."

    Other consequences are more grim.

    There have been several studies which chronicle the alarming rise in severe mental health issues, including a spike in youth suicide, as a result of various public health policies, including mask mandates and lockdowns.

    For example, another study published in Nature from early January reported that, in late 2020, suicide rates among children in Japan jumped 49%.

    And the US government's Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service (SAMHSA) reported an incredible 890% increase in call volume to its nationwide suicide hotline last April.

    Then there are the economic consequences to consider: Do mask mandates boost the economy by giving people more confidence to go out and spend? Or do mask mandates compel more people to stay home to avoid the hassle, and hence reduce economic activity?

    There's still no conclusive analysis on the subject. But you'd think that policymakers would want to know.

    You'd think that they would look at all the data, all the pro's and con's, economic consequences, public health consequences, etc., and make an informed, rational decision.

    But that doesn't seem to happen anymore.

    There can be no rational discourse on the topic. You're not allowed to ask any questions or express any intellectual dissent, otherwise you'll be denounced as a conspiracy theorist.

    You have one job: obey. It's not even about 'trusting the science' anymore, as we've been told to do over and over again during the pandemic. Because now the science tells us that mask mandates "have the potential" to reduce Covid growth rates by just 1.32%.

    Not that you'll hear this in the media.

    There actually was a bonanza of coverage over the weekend about the CDC's new report.

    • The Washington Post headline read "After state lift restrictions, CDC says mask mandates can reduce deaths".

    • The New York Times reported that "Wearing masks, the [CDC] study reported, was linked to fewer infections with the coronavirus and Covid-19 deaths."

    • NBC called the report "strong evidence that mask mandates can slow the spread of the coronavirus. . ."

    But very little of the media coverage bothered to mention the real data, i.e. the marginal 1.32% reduction in growth rates.

    Just like the CDC's influenza data, it's incredible that the media expects to be taken seriously, or that they pass themselves off as an objective, unbiased source of information.

    [Mar 06, 2021] I expect to see the bottom up resistance worldwide to COVID-19 fearmongering to continue to grow

    Mar 06, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

    snake , Mar 6 2021 6:03 utc | 83

    News tonight announced one state <=governing Americans in the USA, think it was Alabama passed a law, making statements about the possible risks, composition or adverse consequences of the so called vaccine (RNA script) which c\n be supported (like if you don't shut up, we will bankrupt you with an expensive trial) is to be made unlawful..

    Could such a law be an infringement against the 1st amendment? "Congress shall make no law ..abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    What about applying the same logic to news outlets, that promote false flag ops, suppress real news, promote lies, favor for access to mass media, those that speak the untruth, and condone presenting testimony without support, as fact?

    Resistance of the governed to nation state hegemony over mankind seems to be growing in every nation state in the world. A possible logic for the lock down (conspiracy theory) is that it was designed to keep the governed of the different nation states from talking with each other. <=debate please. Those who govern are becoming concerned: conditions have ripen for the bottom to change the balance of power at the top or even to reduce oligarchs and political leadership to equivalent or less than deplorable level.

    ... ... ...

    The beginning of the war between the non-conforming governed and those that wield the power of the nation states seems to be marked by the nation state system's globally coordinated declaration that the flu is a Pandemic; the propaganda allowed to be presented over the privately owned media and viewed as prime time content by the mass audience projects powerful media support for the nation state leaders and reals in billions of corporate tax deductible advertising $s to support the media effort to make what the politicians want to come true.

    The response of the governed to support of private party products by the political leadership of the various nation states in the name of a questionable pandemic has shown that resistance by those who are the governed is not only possible but highly effective, much more effective than ever I thought possible.

    Judging from the flu is a pandemic scenario, I expect to see the bottom up resistance worldwide to continue to grow..and as yet unknown dark underground networks to grow. Interesting times seem to be ahead.

    Norwegian , Mar 6 2021 8:10 utc | 89

    @snake | Mar 6 2021 6:03 utc | 83

    Judging from the flu is a pandemic scenario, I expect to see the bottom up resistance worldwide to continue to grow..and as yet unknown dark underground networks to grow. Interesting times seem to be ahead.

    Thank you for this optimistic perspective, I believe you are right. It must be so.

    [Mar 03, 2021] Nobody can enter or leave the Promised Land. But the virus is smart; it finds its way around the vaccine.

    Mar 03, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Israel leads the world in corona vaccinations; vaccines are forced on people; the unvaccinated aren't even allowed to shop for food. Airports are closed down; nobody can enter or leave the Promised Land. But the virus is smart; it finds its way around the vaccine.

    The old non-vaccinated virus could kill some old people well into their eighties or nineties. The new virus attacks children.

    Vaccinated people also can get Covid, as did my mother-in law, despite two jabs she duly received.

    Masks remain in force, schools remain shut, the new round of elections is due very soon, probably leading to no better result than the previous three rounds.

    ... ... ...

    Nature has its own ways. It is insistent and persistent. Coronavirus was successful (on its own terms) where flu was eradicated. These two viruses occupy the same evolutionary cell. Anti-flu vaccines saved many people from flu and prepared the ground for Covid. In Lombardy, Italy Covid came down hard on the old people who were vaccinated against flu; ditto in Israel, where flu vaccination was offered to all. I await with horror the next threat that will creep out of the abyss if coronavirus is defeated. Meanwhile, in Israel, it fights back with great vigour.

    ... ... ...

    Our problem is not so much bad will (and here I disagree with my esteemed colleague Mike Whitney ) but the noble and quixotic desire to save mankind from some perceived peril. P.G. Wodehouse tells us of four scouts who, in their quest for a good deed, helped an old lady to cross the street, and reported to their guide. All four of you were needed for that, asked an amazed guide. Well, she put up quite a strong resistance, they replied. Until recently, only governments played God and that was bad enough. But now every Tom, Dick and Harry with an extra billion dollars in his pocket wants to save mankind.

    [Mar 03, 2021] Gates and coronavirus fearmongering

    Mar 03, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Besides being silly, this guy knows too much! In 2015, Gates gave a "prescient warning about the threat of a pandemic", says a reviewer . To what extent was it "prescient" if in the same 2015, Gates patented a coronavirus quite similar to the one that attacked mankind in 2020? Perhaps he is prescient "for the same reason that arsonists have the earliest knowledge of future fires", as Ron Unz remarked .

    The fact-checking site 'corrects' me:

    Fine, so he had five years to bring his "weakened version" to full strength!

    Now he promotes plans that would make our world uninhabitable. Blotting out the sun is one of his great ideas. Gates wants to spread some metallic powder in the air so the world will enter eternal darkness. No farting cows, no Covid-spreading beaches: a cold world, all too similar to Texas at this moment is our future if we do not stop these bastards.

    I have a simple clear-cut proof that Warmers do not even believe in the nonsense they utter. (Some, like young Greta, do not understand what they say.) They speak of farting cows, but they never mention the biggest farting cow: the US Military, which is bigger than all the armies and fleets of the world put together and has the biggest carbon footprint on earth. Greta and Gates never called for its cutting down to size, let alone dismantling, though in the prism of their logic all Americans should be able to eat juicy steaks and drive gas-guzzlers for a hundred years just by scrapping their Juggernaut.

    Their ideas are bonkers. In order to switch to electric cars, we would need to destroy Africa and Latin America, to get the rare earth elements (like lithium) for the batteries. Africans and Latin Americans from devastated lands would be forced to move to Europe and the US, a win-win for tycoons, but lose-lose for the people. The problem is with very rich folk, I wrote in my recent piece . They want to reshape humans, planet Earth, our future. Why? Because they can. Or they think they can.

    Grandiose plans are a real danger, because now people can do more than they can calculate the consequences of. Like Hecatoncheires, mankind has more brawn than brain. People want to act like gods without having god's intelligence. The Soviets (inspired by Marx who preferred titans to Olympic gods) made a lot of these mistakes. They dammed the rivers, destroying thousands of villages with their rich culture, and created manmade shallow seas, a breeding ground for mosquitos. The dams became obsolete quite fast; but there was no way to reverse the project: the lands were already ruined. Some of the biggest Soviet projects achieved by huge efforts of the people were handed over by Yeltsin to his pet oligarchs, and their huge yachts are the only tangible results of these efforts. Until now, the Russians could only feel happy that the greatest of all Soviet projects, turning Siberian rivers to flow southwards into Central Asia, was mercifully derailed by the collapse of the Soviet Union.

    [Mar 01, 2021] What is the reason for closing venues at 8 or 9 PM. Should we suppose the virus only creeps in after 20.00

    Mar 01, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    Reply Jacques Nov 16, 2020 7:52 AM Reply to Andrew Thompson

    The mocking bit notwithstanding, how we move on from this shite is a good question.

    Spreading information to get as many people on board as possible. Common sense, roots, traditions should kick in sooner or later, at least in the case of some. Over here, in our little Central European country, I see more and more of that. I mean how stupid is it to impose a 9:00 p.m. curfew to stop the spread of a virus? Even educated people (see the comments above about how educated people most susceptible to fall for this crap) should be able to understand that.

    Legal action.

    Resistance of this or that kind 8 0 Reply Julia Nov 16, 2020 8:03 AM Reply to Jacques

    Yeah, the nonsensical evening curfews on bars and restaurants (like ones which suppose a virus only creeps in after 20.00) seem like a good starting point to get people on board with anger and frustration, and later some action. As for legal action, protests are spreading everywhere, but are not really covered in global media; maybe what is needed is some sort of global underground network so people can communicate and organise from country to country. Later, we will need some sort of underground transport network anyway, for people who have refused to get the vaccine. 7 0 Reply

    [Mar 01, 2021] The mass application of questionable against mutating coronavirus vaccine might be another step toward harnessing humans to the sickness industry

    Looks like same safety measures are just obsessive Howard Hughes syndrome. The way people actually handle masks facilitates spreading of the virus ;-)
    Mar 01, 2021 | consortiumnews.com
    Nov 16, 2020 6:28 AM

    "However, many types of vaccine are likely to be needed to end the pandemic"

    It is often suggested that the vaccine for this non-existent disease will contain some shite that will eventually kill people, sterilize them, alter their genetic makeup, and so on, all of which is possible, but let's say that it doesn't.

    The vaccine, or the first in a series of vaccines for this one will establish a precedent, will be another step toward harnessing humans to the sickness industry. I remember some f-head from the WHO mention that something along the lines that "we've created a vaccine-dependent population". No shit! The occidental population today is just about completely dependent on the sickness industry. To begin with, humans are just about unable to bear offspring without a sickcare attendant masking himself as a doctor. In many jurisdictions it might even be illegal for humans to bear their kids on their own. And so on so forth, sickcare is behind people's asses all their lives, a fact most people not only do not question, but readily embrace. Whatever minuscule ailment they're suffering from, they run to the nearest white-coat dispenser of pharmaceutical poison. Well, maybe not all doctors are like that, but all probably are to some extent, not to mention that they have to follow lege artis protocols written by scheisskopfs of Fauci's kind, which gives them little maneuvering space.

    Now, the sickness industry is upping the ante and taking all that to another level. It might well be that people will be dropping dead or turning into zombies after whatever crap is now being concocted, but if not, there will be one vaccine after another, plus a permanent state of emergency, and all sorts of hygienic phantasmagoria.

    The natural ability of human beings to survive will deteriorate another quite a few notches. Gezzah Potts Nov 16, 2020 6:25 AM

    When one is stuck at home, in lockdown, and you avoid MSM News like the plague; you don't really notice the covid propaganda except when you're out shopping and enter a supermarket or shop.
    Been back at work just over 2 weeks now, and the propaganda is everywhere, especially on the train system. Both on the platform, and on the train itself, its like Orwell's 2 minutes of hate!
    I'm grateful that at least I know why it's being being pumped out relentlessly, and about the scamdemic and the Great Reset and all the other nasties.
    Met yet another covid sceptic today, and another very positive, maskless chat.
    Turns out we're in a couple of the same groups. George Mc Nov 16, 2020 9:49 AM Reply to Jacques

    The scare tactics by the MSM have been the single biggest giveaway in this whole farce. And this is why I cannot understand these formerly intelligent Left-wing sites which have just swallowed the bull without further ado. Indeed not only do they swallow but they're incredibly belligerent about the deadly pandemic and get ferociously snooty about any doubters. The covid crap has effectively neutered all political dissent.

    Why can't these Left sites understand that the MSM is the voice of the ruling class? It's a voice that comes from higher up than all those cartoon political clowns – whose true job is to get pelted with rotten fruit before their next replacements arrive for further pelting. And when the MSM drone on about the deadly plague that's what the ruling class want us all to believe . The lockdowns are therefore not some kin of progressive action move. Quite the reverse. Reply May Hem Nov 16, 2020 12:11 PM Reply to George Mc

    The other giveaway in the farce is the lack of any sort of debate or questioning on mainstream media. Any sign of an intelligent question about the 'virus' is met with ridicule and condemnation.

    And the censorship on social media? Something strange going on here. That so many accept what they're being told is the worst part of it. Jacques Nov 16, 2020 12:50 PM Reply to May Hem

    I grew up in a Second World country, where media were state owned and spewed out an endless stream of complete bullshit. Safe for a handful of diehard communist idiots, nobody believed a word of they were saying. And people were able to read between the lines.

    We're pretty much in an analogical situation now, in the First World (BTW, I was expecting that the First World wouldn't outlive its nemesis by more than a few decades – the writing was on the wall. I would have never imagined that they'd pull something like this COVID crap). The media are completely full of shit. Just about everything that's published is pushing some hidden agenda.

    Hopefully, people will realize that quickly and will turn to alternative sources. Then, again, one might ask the question how long before those get corrupted too. Also, censorship, including removal from the Internet, might make it impossible for outlets like that to operate. So, people will just have to realize that those smartphones, Internet connections, and all this crap serve for nothing but their indoctrination and stop using them. There still are books and people are still able to speak – we have ways to pass information. George Mc Nov 16, 2020 2:05 PM Reply to Jacques

    I'd say the "communist" appellation is irrelevant. Censorship is just as effective – and indeed even more so – under capitalism.

    Someone once noted the difference between East and West propaganda by saying that in the old Soviet Union hardly anything was permitted but every tiny thing was important whereas in the West everything is permitted and nothing is important.

    State owned dictatorships have a massive disadvantage in that anyone with any brains living under them knows they are being bullshitted. But under capitalism, everyone thinks they are floating on wings of informational freedom without realising that the info is being managed by clever associative methods e.g. corralling the sensitive stuff into "loony fringe" sites while relaying the lies through sites normally trusted. Reply kevin Nov 16, 2020 5:21 PM Reply to George Mc

    It is trickier under capitalism, but I think the failure of the population to view the media as disseminators of propaganda stems from the lack of understanding that we are ruled by an organized oligarchy. Once that is understood, the role of oligarchic media becomes as obvious as the role of state broadcasters in communist regimes.

    However, we do have state broadcasters like BBC and CBC that are very similar to Pravda and there is a direct comparison to be made. Reply George Mc Nov 16, 2020 6:39 PM Reply to kevin

    Gore Vidal once cited amazement of a visiting Soviet official who was interested in seeing the fabled free Western press and was astonished at the dreary uniformity of it. Vidal told him there were far more effective ways of controlling minds than totalitarianism – indeed there are effectively different forms of totalitarianism. Reply George Mc Nov 16, 2020 1:57 PM Reply to May Hem

    This is precisely the power of the covid story. Under the guise of "protecting public safety", the MSM can "legitimately" ban all alternative views. And it is no longer a matter of "protecting national security" (which no-one believes in anyway). It is a matter of life and death for people in real time . If you were to appear on TV and breathe even a word of doubt, you would be ferociously condemned by the media – and even by a significant number in the population. wardropper Nov 16, 2020 3:34 PM Reply to Julia

    Is it possible that all we who frequent these pages are just wrong, and there is no great reset, no larger plan, and that our governments have just become increasingly careful in the face of what they perhaps *know* is a biological weapon?

    I'd say, no, it isn't possible.
    It doesn't even take advanced scientific knowledge to realize that the 'facts' we are constantly presented with in the MSM are not facts at all.

    My mother was a nurse, and I grew up with access to, and an interest in, all her reference books, so perhaps I have an advantage there, but in any case virology had hardly got off the ground in her day.

    At least what I know from decades of familiarity with common knowledge about bacteria and viruses bears out what most people here have discovered: That something much more pervasive and sick is currently at work than any mere virus.
    The science generally pushed out at us by the media is infantile in its wrongness, its illogicality and its inconsistency – exactly in line with pretty much anything else you care to name which ends up in modern media hands.

    Checking out what real doctors are saying about all this is very reassuring – I mean those doctors who are either retired and have little to lose by telling the truth or who possess great courage and consider the truth to be more important than their own short-term career prospects.

    There are now plenty of them.

    [Mar 01, 2021] If COVID-19 were really that dangerous, there would be thousands if not millions of biohazard containers set up across the world for 'mask disposal'. Just like the hospitals.

    Mar 01, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com


    dtoc Nov 16, 2020 1:12 PM Reply to Jacques

    if CV was real, there would be thousands if not millions of biohazard containers set up across the world for 'mask disposal'. Just like the hospitals. 12 0 Reply kevin Nov 16, 2020 5:27 PM Reply to dtoc

    Very good point, that is another clear tell.

    [Feb 26, 2021] No Household Asymptomatic Spread

    Feb 26, 2021 | www.zerohedge.com

    The CDC just admitted in its own report that asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission within households - a key justification for lockdowns - turns out to be virtually nonexistent. Household transmission is the primary mode of infection for COVID-19.

    As The Federalist 's Georgi Boorman writes:

    The Jan. 29 report's conclusion seems to fit the pro-mask narrative, of course: "Schools might be able to safely open with appropriate mitigation efforts [such as masking and not allowing student cohorts to mix] in place." In the 17 rural Wisconsin schools surveyed, only seven cases were linked to in-school transmission out of 4,876 pupils, and no staff members were infected at school during the study period.

    While the report spends ample time explaining the mitigation strategies employed in the schools and the high reported mask compliance (92%) among students, the authors later discuss something you probably have not seen in any of the mainstream media's coverage of this report:

    "Children might be more likely to be asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 than are adults This apparent lack of transmission [in schools] is consistent with recent research (5), which found an asymptomatic attack rate of only 0.7% within households and a lower rate of transmission from children than from adults. However, this study was unable to rule out asymptomatic transmission within the school setting because surveillance testing was not conducted" (emphasis added).

    The study, a meta-analysis of 54 studies into household transmission of COVID-19, was posted as a pre-print over the summer and published in December.

    The most significant portion of the analysis finds that while asymptomatic and presymptomatic cases account for just 0.7% of transmission, symptomatic cases had an 18% attack rate within the household. In other words, most people who contract COVID-19 at home were infected by someone who was visibly ill .

    "Estimated mean household secondary attack rate from symptomatic index cases ( 18.0% ; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) was significantly higher than from asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases ( 0.7% ; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%; P < .001), although there were few studies in the latter group. These findings are consistent with other household studies28,70 reporting asymptomatic index cases as having limited role in household transmission," reads the study.

    As Boorman continues: " The key, if not central, rationale for non-pharmaceutical interventions such as masking, distancing, and staying at home is allegedly significant transmission from people who don't show symptoms . If the contagiousness of people without symptoms is not what drives the spread of SARS-COV-2, then no COVID restriction on public life besides staying home when you are clearly sick could be justified, considering the obvious negative consequences of these restrictions."

    Read the rest of the report here .


    homeskillet 41 minutes ago (Edited)

    The CDC is virtually a private organization whose sole profits come from the sale of their fraudulent and destructive vaccines which members hold patents to. This medical tyranny must be burned to the ground.

    BurningFuld 30 minutes ago remove link

    I got one for ya:

    In 2020, 58,972,613 people died worldwide.

    In 2019, 58,390,000 people died worldwide.

    In 2018, 57,630,000 people died worldwide.

    In 2017, 56,940,000 people died worldwide.

    In 2016, 56,330,000 people died worldwide.

    In 2015, 55,820,000 people died worldwide.

    On average from 2015 to 2020, 630,523 more people die each year.

    In 2019, there were 760,000 more deaths worldwide than in 2018.

    In 2020, there were 582,613 more deaths worldwide than in 2019.

    Contrary to what almost all people believe because of the non-stop media brainwashing, there wasn't any unusual amount of worldwide excess deaths in 2020, in truth, there were slightly fewer deaths.

    In 2020, 582,613 more people died than in 2019, a decrease of 177,387 deaths from the 760,000 excess deaths in 2019 versus 2018. Also, the 582,613 excess deaths in 2020 were 47,910 below the yearly average increase of 630,523 deaths from 2015 to 2020.

    In 2020 there were "supposedly" 1,833,737 deaths from Covid-19.

    So, why aren't these "supposed" 1,833,737 deaths from Covid-19 in 2020 showing up in the 2020 worldwide death rate?

    csc61 38 minutes ago

    CDC is a for-profit organization that obtains the majority of its income via pharmaceuticals. So, pardon me if I'm a little suspicious.

    Now you'll have to excuse me .... I'm off to ask the fox if I should lock up the henhouse at night.

    adr 27 minutes ago

    So, only 18% of people exposed to symptomatic people in their own home tested positive?

    Where's the danger?

    Less than a 20% chance of being infected when you are in an enclosed area with a symptomatic person, and near zero chance of getting infected from "asymptomatic" people.

    Tenebrose 18 minutes ago

    It's always been about control.

    BinAnunnaki 31 minutes ago

    Asymptomatic is simply a false positive

    [Feb 21, 2021] The vanishing of flu-deaths, for example, suggests COVID gets a lot more credit than it deserves, though flu-death counts in prior years were rough statistical inferences from a dataset far from complete.

    Feb 21, 2021 | www.unz.com

    The Alarmist , says: February 12, 2021 at 3:54 pm GMT • 8.4 days ago

    @Ron Unz Actual death by COVID alone would be a fraction of that, with most being mortality displacement by COVID acting on one or a combination of comorbidities that would have proven fatal over some time in the not-so-distant future. Some of the "excess" deaths of 2020 will also be attributable to the aging of the population as a whole, as well as by increases of the population in general, not even taking into account the healthiness or not of new arrivals. Some of the excess or premature deaths will include deaths of despair as well as death for other causes where treatment of other illnesses or conditions was postponed out of fear of COVID.
    The Alarmist , says: February 12, 2021 at 8:53 pm GMT • 8.2 days ago
    @Ron Unz fe expectancy age).

    What the political reaction to COVID most certainly is is a catalyst for world leaders to take steps they could only dream of a few years ago; they couldn't shut down world travel and national economies to save a world they assured us will die in twelve years, but they found they could sell that tough medicine if they convinced enough of us it could kill a lot of us in three weeks within the next years.

    I look forward to your American Pravda article on this subject when we have the benefit of a couple more years of hindsight, assuming they still let you publish. I might even want to write it myself.

    [Feb 21, 2021] The Tycoon Plot by Israel Shamir

    Feb 21, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Perhaps, but a better explanation is that some evil tycoon(s) played the part of Karl Stromberg who intended to nuke both Moscow and New York causing war and world-wide devastation, as in the James Bond movie. It could be somebody like Bill Gates, who is a major investor in Wuhan Lab. A fact-checking site with its weasel language admitted that the Lab "has received funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, but Bill Gates can hardly be called a "partner" in the laboratory." Sure, not a partner. Just an investor, and that is more important than a partner. And he is not the only one; other multi-billionaires also are involved in bioresearch, in vaccine manufacturing, in Big Pharma. "Glaxo, BlackRock, and Bill Gates are all partners, but not owners of Pfizer", says another fact-checker . "In 2015, Anthony Fauci did issue a USD 3.7 million grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but not to "create the coronavirus" – the fact-checking site adds. Well, you could not possibly expect Fauci to word the grant in such a straightforward way, could you?

    Perhaps it is too formidable a job even for an evil tycoon like Gates. A plot of several evil tycoons is more likely. Together, they could try to change the world and mankind to suit them.

    The evil tycoons could poison China on their New Year holiday and take this uppity state down a ring or two. They could import the virus into the US to undermine and remove Trump whom they hated. (He was certain to win the elections but for Corona.) They could poison Europe to weaken it and make it more docile and obedient to their demands – and to buy their assets on the cheap. Corona and lockdown did not harm them for they are normally withdrawn from the bustle of the common man's life.

    The billionaires control the media; that much we know, and the part media has played in the Corona crisis was enormous. The media coverage of the crisis has a huge hidden cost. Try to publish information you consider important on the front page of a newspaper. It will cost you a lot. Still, all newspapers belonging to the Billionaires' Media block beginning with the New York Times and ending with Haaretz gave at least a third of its front page to Corona news each day. The sheer cost of this advertising runs into billions. Will we ever know who paid for it?

    Steven Soderbergh's (2011) film Contagion predicted many features of the Covid-19, notably the origin of the virus. In the film, the disease originates from bats in China and is spread through markets where contaminated pork meat is sold. How could Soderbergh (or his script writer Scott Z. Burns) possibly know eight years before the event that the contagion should originate in the Chinese bats? Who told him? Wouldn't you expect he knew something? Burns was instructed by WHO experts, the CNN site explains. Isn't it interesting that the same Bill Gates is a major donor of WHO? Is it entirely impossible that already in 2011 Gates' people began to leak some details of the future virus through their own WHO to Hollywood?

    The tycoons could force a weak state to follow their instructions. Scientists do obey orders: otherwise, no grants, no positions. In April 2020, the German scientists were ordered , "to instill the fear of Corona". And they did it, as we learned this week, producing numbers of dead on demand.

    It seems that tycoons gained most from the Corona Crisis. Their assets grew by trillions, while the assets of the middle classes decreased by the same amount. More importantly, all states suffered from the crisis; they took loans and credit, they were responsible for their citizens' health, while billionaires just had fun and enjoyed it. For this reason, I tend to dismiss the case against states, be it the US or China, while (some) billionaires appear the only possible villains.

    These billionaires are able to influence people much better that the state. Consider Pierre Omidyar. Besides being the owner of eBay, he is the force behind hundreds of NGOs. His organisations form the 'progressive' agenda and train the foot soldiers of the Green Deal. Roslyn Fuller of Spiked-online checked the plethora of NGOs he employs.

    She says his NGOs and charities are "engaged in 'social engineering' – that is, using their resources to artificially change the structure of society to how they think it should be. If successful this would amount to an extreme circumvention of democracy, utilising money not just to win elections, but to substitute paid or subsidised content for actual support, and thereby flip an entire political culture on to a different track by amplifying some voices and drowning out others."

    He is just one of the Masters of Discourse, next to the infamous George Soros. Facebook, Google, Twitter and Amazon are even more powerful. The billionaires have immense clout and they decide what we can and can't say and write. Just last week Amazon banned my Cabbala of Power , a book that was sold by them for some ten years. The estimable The Unz Review is banned on Facebook and shadow-banned on Google. Twitter switched-off President Trump, showing who is the real boss of the United States. Probably almost all movements described as 'leftists' nowadays are engineered by the tycoons like Omidyar or Soros. True left had been left for dead on the battlefield of ideas.

    The tycoons are directly involved in the Corona Crisis, because its results are good for them. And it means they have us where they want to have us, and they won't let us out. We are cancelled until we regain the government and cancel them.

    SAGE, as British Corona management team rather presumptuously named itself (it included the ridiculous figure of Neil Ferguson, he of the millions of predicted deaths), already declared that lockdowns will be a part of British life for years to come, vaccine or no vaccine. The Guardian , the Voice of the Oligarchs, gently pooh-poohed them, for it is not good to declare what must happen right away. Let people have some hope, so they run to vaccinate themselves, and then only afterwards can we reveal that, sorry, it does not help, you still have to don a mask and observe social distance and, yes, suffer lockdowns. "It's much easier to follow the rules if we think of them as temporary."

    The plotters' plans aren't secret; they were described by Klaus Schwab in his book The Great Reset . Schwab is not a great thinker, being merely a weak scientist with just a few publications, and not a good or even decent writer. He had to collaborate with a journalist Thierry Malleret to produce the book. He is just a voice for the tycoons. But the question is, will he/they get what they want?

    My preliminary answer is No. We recently had an important event, Davos-2021, the online gathering of tycoons and their intellectual henchmen. For the first time in many years, they invited Vladimir Putin. Chairman Xi gave the first talk. The idea was to demonstrate that Russia and China agree to their plans. I was very worried, I must admit, and the Chinaman's speech didn't calm me (as opposed to our friend Pepe Escobar who celebrated his appearance). Yes, Xi said China will proceed at its own speed and by its own route but towards the same goals. Sustainable, inclusive, all the dog-whistle words were there. I expected an even worse talk by Putin. For years he has wanted to be invited and co-opted by the Western decision-makers, and here was a great opportunity to jump on their bandwagon.

    St-Germain , says: February 11, 2021 at 3:39 pm GMT • 9.4 days ago

    Bravo! Israel Shamir. I enjoyed every syllable of that essay. It frames the shocking reality that is nowhere treated so forcefully in print in the decadent West. These tycoons not only purchasse their corrupted governments but are positioned to trade them in concert like Monopoly board properties, all in plain sight of our blind mass media. Putin courageously stepped up a notch when he said as much to the Davos crowd and then demonstratively restored to his own countrymen many of the basic freedoms that have just been erased in the locked-down EU. How long will it take for Europe's venal career politicians to realize they are in danger of becoming just expendable hirelings in the new world order they have so gleefully promoted? Probably nothing short of a revolution could now save the United States from the new feudalism. But Putin's warning must have resonated among the European politicians, whose status and relevance still derives from a long tradition of statism with a strong social components. Will the national governments finally grasp that the gravest threat is not the hated populism but relegation to irrelevance by corporations and plutocrats. The stakes are clear; either governments will reassert their prerogatives or plutocrats will govern.

    Emslander , says: February 12, 2021 at 12:12 pm GMT • 8.5 days ago

    The next strong man we elect must be an actual STRONG man. I salute Trump for his genius in identifying the real majority in this country and for forcing the techno-oligarchs into overdoing their election steal. Now we need someone who is willing to establish real authority on behalf of the un-queer.

    [Feb 14, 2021] Caught In The Act - New York Times -Selectively Misquotes- Scientists To Fit Its -Prescribed Narrative-

    Notable quotes:
    "... The information could be key to determining how and when the outbreak started, and to learning how to prevent future pandemics. ..."
    Feb 14, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

    uncle tungsten , Feb 13 2021 19:43 utc | 23

    The New York Times continues Trump's anti-China campaign by claiming that China hindered a WHO investigation into the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and is withholding data.

    On W.H.O. Trip, China Refused to Hand Over Important Data
    The information could be key to determining how and when the outbreak started, and to learning how to prevent future pandemics.

    Chinese scientists refused to share raw data that might bring the world closer to understanding the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, independent investigators for the W.H.O. said on Friday.

    The investigators, who recently returned from a fact-finding trip to the Chinese city of Wuhan, said disagreements over patient records and other issues were so tense that they sometimes erupted into shouts among the typically mild-mannered scientists on both sides.

    China's continued resistance to revealing information about the early days of the coronavirus outbreak, the scientists say, makes it difficult for them to uncover important clues that could help stop future outbreaks of such dangerous diseases.

    "If you are data focused, and if you are a professional," said Thea Kølsen Fischer , a Danish epidemiologist on the team, then obtaining data is "like for a clinical doctor looking at the patient and seeing them by your own eyes."
    ...
    Peter Daszak , a member of the W.H.O. team and the president of EcoHealth Alliance in New York, said the trip was emotionally draining, as he and the team came to terms with the trauma of the early days of the pandemic. The team interviewed some of the first people to fall ill with Covid-19 in Wuhan, as well as medical workers.

    "The world doesn't realize, you know, that they were the first to get this thing," Dr. Daszak said, "and they didn't know how bad it was."

    While the Times claims that the Chinese have more data than they provided (they don't) and insinuates that they have something to hide, the researchers quoted in its piece reject both as nonsense.

    Linking the NYT propaganda piece Peter Daszak refuted its basic tone:

    Peter Daszak @PeterDaszak - 11:27 UTC · Feb 13, 2021

    This was NOT my experience on @WHO mission. As lead of animal/environment working group I found trust & openness w/ my China counterparts . We DID get access to critical new data throughout. We DID increase our understanding of likely spillover pathways.

    New data included env. & animal carcass testing, names of suppliers to Huanan Market, analyses of excess mortality in Hubei, range of covid-like symptoms for months prior, sequence data linked to early cases & site visits w/ unvetted live Q&A etc. All in report coming soon!

    Quoting Daszak's tweet Thea Fischer pitched in:

    Cont. reading: Caught In The Act - New York Times "Selectively Misquotes" Scientists To Fit Its "Prescribed Narrative"

    What a convenient distraction from an investigation into Fort Detrick. Or even just a brief summary of the reason for its closure and its sorry tale of gross mismanagement. Gee look over there...


    JB , Feb 13 2021 21:51 utc | 39

    US Gov statement today:

    Calling for transparency, Sullivan said "China must make available its data from the earliest days of the outbreak."

    Read more here: https://www.macon.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article249239565.html#storylink=cpy


    https://www.macon.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article249239565.html

    Tollef Ås اس طلف , Feb 13 2021 22:03 utc | 40
    What else would or could we expect from a gutter publication like "The New York Times"? I've been to New York at several "Times" -- at ages six, eight, sixteen and fifty-six -- and have observed the continued desaccitation and delapitation of the times there. As "for instance" the renevenation of such other places I've lived in like Tehran, Shànghâi, Bêijing, Hángzhou or (stragely enough) even Oslo and Hälsingfors/Helsinki.
    Sam F , Feb 13 2021 22:20 utc | 43

    I find it astonishing that WHO denies that Covid originated in the Wuhan outbreak. It was there that Fauci's NIAID did bat coronavirus enhancement research without doing vaccine research. They did that there because they were not allowed to do such dangerous research in any lab in the US! Did WHO investigate that?

    From Newsweek April 28, 2020:
    https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741

    National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the organization led by Dr. Fauci, funded scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and other institutions for work on gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses.

    In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million.

    Many scientists have criticized gain of function research, which involves manipulating viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans, because it creates a risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release.

    SARS-CoV-2 , the virus now causing a global pandemic, is believed to have originated in bats. U.S. intelligence, after originally asserting that the coronavirus had occurred naturally, conceded last month that the pandemic may have originated in a leak from the Wuhan lab. (At this point most scientists say it's possible -- but not likely -- that the pandemic virus was engineered or manipulated.)

    I have heard that the virus originated first in bats in a district not far from Wuhan. But it certainly seems likely that even that resulted from the Wuhan lab work. If not, one would need some strong reason that they just happened to be doing bat coronavirus enhancement research there and nowhere else in the world!

    foolisholdman , Feb 13 2021 22:34 utc | 45

    steven t johnson | Feb 13 2021 19:57 utc | 25

    but as far as just making stuff up...generally. Really, the mainstream media most likely to simply make stuff up are still Fox News, Breitbart, the tabloids (you know, like the Murdochs' Star.)

    They all repeat lies such as that "The Russians poisoned Skripal and his daughter", that "Russia shot down MH17", that "Russia invaded Georgia", that "Russia fixed the 2016 election for Trump" and I am sure there are many other statements which are repeated over and over again, in the MSM, as though they were established facts, though most of them are merely barely arguable assertions.

    Doryphore , Feb 13 2021 22:35 utc | 46

    @Sam f,

    The newsweek article provided no sources for the claim GoF research was funded and done at WIV.

    The claim is rejected here. They did seem to fund one study using GoF but it's unclear where that study was done.

    https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/02/09/covid-dr-anthony-fauci-did-not-fund-research-tied-creation/4450338001/

    Doryphore , Feb 13 2021 22:35 utc | 46

    @Sam f,

    The newsweek article provided no sources for the claim GoF research was funded and done at WIV.

    The claim is rejected here. They did seem to fund one study using GoF but it's unclear where that study was done.

    https://www.statesman.com/story/news/politics/politifact/2021/02/09/covid-dr-anthony-fauci-did-not-fund-research-tied-creation/4450338001/

    Patroklos , Feb 14 2021 1:44 utc | 56

    The MSM lies and serves as the main vector for imperial propaganda and misinformation. It's also the main medium for preparing populations to accept narratives in the event of conflicts. Given that WE all know that, would not our time be better spent analysing current contexts rather than frittered away trying hold these media to some truth-in-reporting accountancy long ago abandoned? My response when told the NYT is full of shit, is... and? The more on the 'left' (rofl) these media claim to be (e.g. The Guardian) the worse their mendacity because they masquerade as progressive outlets and soften up readers to accept lashings of BS.

    That said, my favourite posts by b, and comments by the community here, are analytical, like the Russia-EU situation. Who cares what misinformation is circulated by commercial purveyors of hype? On the subject of China, for example, what's happening in Taiwan? Are they going ahead with their ultra-provocative 'independence' referendum?

    ak74 , Feb 14 2021 2:25 utc | 57

    Where's Judith "Niger Yellowcake Uranium" Miller and Jayson Blair when you need them?

    These intrepid former New York Times reporters are urgently needed to return and restore integrity to the New York Times!

    God knows they would be an improvement for the Times--the Newspaper of Record ... Lies.


    js , Feb 14 2021 10:09 utc | 70

    Viruses are thoroughly studied all around the world – among other things for creating new vaccines (see Sputnik V). They are efficient vectors and their capability to bypass human immune system is rather useful.

    Wuhan lab got its P4 security level some years ago in cooperation with Institute Pasteur and French state. It is worthwhile to know that IP has patented coronaviruses in attempt to create malaria vaccine (*).

    At one moment "gain of function" research was banned in United States by Barack Obama. It continued, but was moved overseas to China. Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak from Ecohealth Alliance (and WHO) were both involved.

    So blaming China is really a two-edged sword – once they through caution to the wind the whole cardhouse could be crumbling down.

    Lab leak is a real possibility – Alina Chan (@Ayjchan) with colleagues has written extensively on this subject. It cannot be outruled.

    (*) Robin Monotti https://twitter.com/robinmonotti/status/1338456894537691139

    FRANCE: Accomplished pharma prof thrown in psychiatric hospital after questioning official COVID narrative: Professor #Fourtillan was taken to the Uzès psychiatric hospital of Le Mas Careiron, where he has been held since. https://lifesitenews.com/news/accomplished-pharma-prof-thrown-in-psych-hospital-after-questioning-official-covid-narrative

    Fourtillan gained widespread publicity when a recent film by Pierre Barnérias, giving a voice to critics of the official narrative, became viral in France.

    In Hold-Up, Professor #Fourtillan spoke of his concern that the COVID-19 crisis was fabricated and is being used to impose a dangerous vaccine on the world population: CLIP:
    Extrait Holdup: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z1-O-vsoU8&feature=youtu.be

    Among the public documents Fourtillan has analyzed and made public are patents for SARS-COV-1, which contains parts of the malaria virus, dating back to 2003. The patents were used by various labs to develop vaccines.

    2011 saw the Institut Pasteur filing a further patent application for "SARS-COV-2," identical to the previous one, according to Fourtillan, who says this was done because commercial exploitation of the first patent started in 2003 and would expire 20 years later, in 2023

    The Wuhan P4 lab. was built following an agreement between France and China signed in 2004..in 2017, France's then–Interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, joined the official opening ceremony of the Wuhan Institute of Virology's P4 lab

    together with Yves Lévy, co-president of the steering committee. Lévy is the husband of Agnès Buzyn, who was France's health minister when the COVID-19 crisis erupted. She was responsible for signing the decree that banned over-the-counter sales of #hydroxychloroquine in France

    js , Feb 14 2021 10:09 utc | 70

    Viruses are thoroughly studied all around the world – among other things for creating new vaccines (see Sputnik V). They are efficient vectors and their capability to bypass human immune system is rather useful.

    Wuhan lab got its P4 security level some years ago in cooperation with Institute Pasteur and French state. It is worthwhile to know that IP has patented coronaviruses in attempt to create malaria vaccine (*).

    At one moment "gain of function" research was banned in United States by Barack Obama. It continued, but was moved overseas to China. Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak from Ecohealth Alliance (and WHO) were both involved.

    So blaming China is really a two-edged sword – once they through caution to the wind the whole cardhouse could be crumbling down.

    Lab leak is a real possibility – Alina Chan (@Ayjchan) with colleagues has written extensively on this subject. It cannot be outruled.

    (*) Robin Monotti https://twitter.com/robinmonotti/status/1338456894537691139

    FRANCE: Accomplished pharma prof thrown in psychiatric hospital after questioning official COVID narrative: Professor #Fourtillan was taken to the Uzès psychiatric hospital of Le Mas Careiron, where he has been held since. https://lifesitenews.com/news/accomplished-pharma-prof-thrown-in-psych-hospital-after-questioning-official-covid-narrative

    Fourtillan gained widespread publicity when a recent film by Pierre Barnérias, giving a voice to critics of the official narrative, became viral in France.

    In Hold-Up, Professor #Fourtillan spoke of his concern that the COVID-19 crisis was fabricated and is being used to impose a dangerous vaccine on the world population: CLIP:
    Extrait Holdup: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z1-O-vsoU8&feature=youtu.be

    Among the public documents Fourtillan has analyzed and made public are patents for SARS-COV-1, which contains parts of the malaria virus, dating back to 2003. The patents were used by various labs to develop vaccines.

    2011 saw the Institut Pasteur filing a further patent application for "SARS-COV-2," identical to the previous one, according to Fourtillan, who says this was done because commercial exploitation of the first patent started in 2003 and would expire 20 years later, in 2023

    The Wuhan P4 lab. was built following an agreement between France and China signed in 2004..in 2017, France's then–Interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, joined the official opening ceremony of the Wuhan Institute of Virology's P4 lab

    together with Yves Lévy, co-president of the steering committee. Lévy is the husband of Agnès Buzyn, who was France's health minister when the COVID-19 crisis erupted. She was responsible for signing the decree that banned over-the-counter sales of #hydroxychloroquine in France

    js , Feb 14 2021 10:09 utc | 70

    Viruses are thoroughly studied all around the world – among other things for creating new vaccines (see Sputnik V). They are efficient vectors and their capability to bypass human immune system is rather useful.

    Wuhan lab got its P4 security level some years ago in cooperation with Institute Pasteur and French state. It is worthwhile to know that IP has patented coronaviruses in attempt to create malaria vaccine (*).

    At one moment "gain of function" research was banned in United States by Barack Obama. It continued, but was moved overseas to China. Anthony Fauci and Peter Daszak from Ecohealth Alliance (and WHO) were both involved.

    So blaming China is really a two-edged sword – once they through caution to the wind the whole cardhouse could be crumbling down.

    Lab leak is a real possibility – Alina Chan (@Ayjchan) with colleagues has written extensively on this subject. It cannot be outruled.

    (*) Robin Monotti https://twitter.com/robinmonotti/status/1338456894537691139

    FRANCE: Accomplished pharma prof thrown in psychiatric hospital after questioning official COVID narrative: Professor #Fourtillan was taken to the Uzès psychiatric hospital of Le Mas Careiron, where he has been held since. https://lifesitenews.com/news/accomplished-pharma-prof-thrown-in-psych-hospital-after-questioning-official-covid-narrative

    Fourtillan gained widespread publicity when a recent film by Pierre Barnérias, giving a voice to critics of the official narrative, became viral in France.

    In Hold-Up, Professor #Fourtillan spoke of his concern that the COVID-19 crisis was fabricated and is being used to impose a dangerous vaccine on the world population: CLIP:
    Extrait Holdup: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z1-O-vsoU8&feature=youtu.be

    Among the public documents Fourtillan has analyzed and made public are patents for SARS-COV-1, which contains parts of the malaria virus, dating back to 2003. The patents were used by various labs to develop vaccines.

    2011 saw the Institut Pasteur filing a further patent application for "SARS-COV-2," identical to the previous one, according to Fourtillan, who says this was done because commercial exploitation of the first patent started in 2003 and would expire 20 years later, in 2023

    The Wuhan P4 lab. was built following an agreement between France and China signed in 2004..in 2017, France's then–Interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, joined the official opening ceremony of the Wuhan Institute of Virology's P4 lab

    together with Yves Lévy, co-president of the steering committee. Lévy is the husband of Agnès Buzyn, who was France's health minister when the COVID-19 crisis erupted. She was responsible for signing the decree that banned over-the-counter sales of #hydroxychloroquine in France

    William Gruff , Feb 14 2021 10:36 utc | 72

    Peter AU1 @68: "The most likely source at the moment for the jump from bats to humans appears to be mink. Farmed mink."

    Yes. Farmed mink living in cages at Fort Detrick. You cannot get rapid generational mutations in the virus in a homogeneous population as that population gets infected with the same strain all at once. The population must be isolated into small groups that are sequentially infected from one group to the next in order to force rapid adaptation of the virus.

    We are still talking several hundreds of years of mutation in the virus that somehow occurred in just a couple years. Obviously the virus was edited from its natural state and then cycled through dozens of generations of infection in caged mink. The intention of those dozens of virus generations in mink was partially to obfuscate the genetic code and hide the edits.

    kiwiklown , Feb 14 2021 11:04 utc | 74

    Posted by: A.L. | Feb 13 2021 18:04 utc | 8 -- "Now if only the NYT will focus on NY and write about its own "exemplary" covid 19 response and totally "transparent" handling of nursing home covid 19 deaths figures..."

    Good riposte.

    However, I have noticed that whenever the MSM chooses to call out a misdemeanour, they would castigate a single individual (eg. they might report that Cuomo or Newsom has been asked to go fly a kite), but they NEVER blame the entire US government.

    On the other hand, they pin ALL wrongdoing in China on "the evil CCP regime", and not the individual Chinese governor or bureaucrat at fault.

    Western values, anybody?

    vk , Feb 14 2021 12:52 utc | 81

    Chinese State media has published something about the NYT article:

    U.S.' continued deception, deflection, politicization

    --//--

    @ Posted by: js | Feb 14 2021 10:09 utc | 70

    It was a possibility until the WHO investigation team visited the Wuhan lab and ruled it out. The SARS-CoV-2 is not in the lab's "catalogue" (I don't know how you call that in English) and there was no signs of any leaks of unprocessed samples.

    The links you posted are from December 2020, when the speculation was still somewhat valid (even if a long shot).

    --//--

    @ Posted by: jean | Feb 13 2021 20:37 utc | 31

    Which makes him the ideal investigator. He knows which variations of the coronavirus are from labs and which aren't.

    It would be weird if he wasn't in the team.

    Norwegian , Feb 14 2021 13:35 utc | 86

    @vk | Feb 14 2021 12:55 utc | 82

    Trust does not belong at all anywhere near science. Critical thinking in relation to science is important in evaluating an existing hypothesis and the data that goes along to support it , but critical thinking alone is not sufficient, if the data is missing it is not science, because there is no way to falsify the often outrageous claims (That is where we are with "global warming" and "covid").

    Also required is imagination, without imagination you cannot formulate new laws from the information available and then you will never progress.

    It boils down to being able to verify and replicate a scientific hypothesis through data and experiments, trust has no place in it. This also why "peer review" is fundamentally unscientific since it mostly functions as a gate-keeping mechanism defending mainstream views.

    The Essence Of Science In 60 Seconds (Richard Feynman)
    If it disagrees with experiment, its wrong. It doesn't matter how beautiful your guess is, it doesn't matter how smart who made the guess is, or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment, its wrong.


    Transferred to journalism, a similar rule must apply. If a claim is made that cannot be verified independently, it is not journalism.

    m , Feb 14 2021 16:57 utc | 93

    Of course is SARS-CoV-2 not registered under that name at Wuhan in the records of 2019. The designation "SARS-CoV-2" stems from the WHO and has been introduced only in Feb. 2020. The Wuhan Institute of Virology did however work with RaTG13 - the bat virus from south China - which is the closests known relative to SARS-CoV-2. In fact, it was Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Institute of Virology who had discovered RaTG13 in 2013.

    I have never claimed that SARS-CoV-2 is a bioweapon. Gain-of-function research isn`t about creating bioweapons. It is about modifying viruses that accure naturally in such a manner that they mimic hypothetical viruses that could emerge naturally in the future and might pose a serious epidemic threat. The rationale behind this is that by doing research with such viruses before they emerge provides mankind with the knowledge to fight them when a similar virus eventually does emerge naturally.

    I have also never claimed that SARS-CoV-2 -emerged- at the wet market in Wuhan. I wrote that it had been -detected- there first.

    karlof1 , Feb 14 2021 18:08 utc | 96

    Global Times Editorial today proves conclusively that Jake Sullivan is merely continuing Pompeo's policy of lies and distortions while misusing science in a failing attempt to politicize the pandemic and concludes:

    "While the new US administration claims that it is different from its predecessor, it has hardly kept its distance from the previous policies on major issues involving China and COVID-19. Such self-contradictive moves will only cripple the current administration's abilities to make clear and resolute policies. The dominant authority of science and rationality is fading in American society, and desire often goes ahead of facts. This is the most significant sign that the US is declining."

    How's that for a swift kick to the groin--BidenCo is no different from TrumpCo. Or maybe this was the blow:

    "The only goal of the US to attack China with COVID-19 is to cover its own ineptitude. But the world will not always be fooled by the US."

    Yes! China is now enjoying the Lunar New Year and welcoming the Year of the Ox with extremely few pandemic issues while the Outlaw US Empire continues to record 100,000+ new cases daily and a death toll that's not abating. In other words, its policy remains a failure--one that it can't hide.

    It has yet to dawn on the Neoliberalcons that every time they open their mouths to smear Russia or China all they accomplish is digging the hole they're mired inside deeper, nor have they figured out that it's a Credibility Hole that lies and such only serve to deepen while Truth is what fills it in. But Truth is something they cannot abide since their entire gambit is based on lies and falsehoods.

    kiwiklown , Feb 15 2021 0:29 utc | 100

    vk @89: "You can't have it both ways...."

    Typically simplistic American "mindset". To them, it is always either-or, black-white, good guys-bad guys. False choices. False logic. I do not read vk's bombast, but this phrase jumped out. Neither do I read those who "challenge" Gruffy. It is all about so little time to read so much. And about sense and sensibility.


    Posted by: William Gruff | Feb 14 2021 21:53 utc | 99 -- "SARS Mk.II was neither precise nor intended to be very devastating.... just the closest that the CIA could find off the shelf to a "Goldilocks virus".....

    Highly plausible fit to the events as played out on the ground. We can also suggest that Wuhan was a field test for a virus product undergoing continuing "improvement". I note that China mounted a war-response, continue to maintain a war-footing (medically speaking), and now counter-strike with suggestions for the US leadership to invite the WHO to inspect their bio-labs.

    Smith , Feb 15 2021 2:55 utc | 104

    I'm seeing a lot of people here are just East vs West cultural warriors nonsense. For them, the West is bad, thus the East is now the "shining city in the hill".

    I'd echo vk and Norwegian here, don't trust anyone without verifiable evidences, analyze the contents (if it's good for your health, your livelihood, will it benefit your people?) and judge them based on that.

    The exact same person can be right about certain things but can be wrong about certain things.

    Don't be a contrarian who puts your position as the opposite position of your supposed enemy (i.e. Putin is good because he's anti-USA, likewise for China and WHO/UN).

    [Feb 03, 2021] Extra death stats sugessts the the pandemic was overblown

    Feb 03, 2021 | www.unz.com

    A British View of the Imposture NICK KOLLERSTROM JANUARY 25, 2021 3,300 WORDS 222 COMMENTS REPLY Tweet Reddit Share Share Email Print More RSS

    2020 saw 14% more deaths than average, last year in England & Wales and that amounted to seventy-five thousand extra deaths. We here use the Office of National statistics figures, as it gives total weekly deaths, plus also for comparison an average value of corresponding weekly deaths over the previous five years. [1]

    That compares with the figure of ninety thousand deaths for the entire United Kingdom, due allegedly to covid-19.

    We here ask and answer the question, what caused that excess of deaths ? The answer will not be certain, but will be the simplest possible explanation. By Occam's razor we are obliged to take it.

    For the first quarter of last year, deaths in England and Wales were down : for whatever reason, overall weekly mortality was 3% below the yearly average. Then around the spring equinox on March 23 rd Lockdown was announced and suddenly, deaths surged right up so that thousands of extra deaths started happening week after week. That continued all through April and May and then finally, in the first week of June Britons were allowed out again: with relief we could walk the streets and parks, cafes and pubs opened up again.

    Those months of Lockdown saw fifty-nine thousand excess deaths (see graph). That comes from counting the eleven weeks ending 27 March to the 5 th June, as being the lockdown period.

    The question arises as to what caused them? Could it have been, for example, the shock? The month of April averaged ninety percent more deaths than usual! Then May was not quite so bad, as folk got used to the grim new reality.

    In the weeks after the Lockdown i.e. after the first week of June the whole excess of deaths suddenly vanished. Over the next four months deaths remained exactly average compared to previous years.

    The graph shows this distinct, three-stage process.

    OBNS data for weeks ending
    3rd Jan to 20th March 12 weeks 138,916 143,738 -4,822 -3%
    27 March to 5 June 11 weeks 168,396 109,703 +58,693 +54% LOCKDOWN
    12 June to 9 Oct 18 weeks 166,392 165,808 +584 0%

    These figures suggest that it is the lockdown itself and not any virus, that caused the excess deaths.

    We're here reminded of a careful survey done last May which found that, in all countries with reliable death-figures, their increase in mortality began after the lockdown was imposed and not before. There is a very simple difference between cause and effect: the cause comes first, before the effect!

    A second Lockdown was imposed over the month of November. This lacked the same terror and shock value of the first and so only reached a net 18% excess of mortality: for the five weeks from week ending 6 November to that of 4th December there were nine thousand excess deaths, compared to the seasonal average.

    Figure: weekly data from the Office of National Statistics for 2020, comparing total mortality per week with an estimated average from the previous five years.

    After the autumn equinox as the nights grew longer the government again started to terrorise the population with talk of the 'dark winter' to come. Somehow they knew that a 'second wave' was coming, and so there would have to be a 'second lockdown' and no Christmas. Here's what I said in a podcast on 20 th October :

    They are trying to resuscitate another big scare, trying to claim there is a second wave come this autumn, they have started drumming up fear again, they have imposed these levels of Lockdown which are rather terrifying. A lot of stress they are putting on people, I've been wondering, are the deaths going to go up again like last time?

    Did that happen? The figures show as before a surge around the time of the lockdown and just before it, however this time it did not vanish after the lockdown. That's because there was not really any easing up. On the contrary yet more draconian measures were announced, with the unheard-of measure of police stopping people walking outdoors, to ask them if they had good reason to be out of their house? Meeting friends was forbidden, etc. That pressure pushed up the mortality even more and we here especially note the 'Christmas week' ending 25 th December, with a whopping 45% excess mortality. That is not a merry Christmas, it's an extra three and a half thousand people popping off (as compared to previous years) in a week, caused presumably by shock and despair of Xmas being cancelled. The week after that it was still very high, 26% excess, as folk faced the bleak new year.

    It helps to express that excess mortality as overall monthly means, for the last few months of 2020. Thus taking each month as a whole and selecting four weeks of data for each month:

    September from weeks ending 11 Sept to 2 Oct. +4%
    October 9 Oct to 30th Oct +7%
    November 6 Nov to 27 Nov +18%
    December 4 Dec to 1st Jan +21%

    Slowly the excess deaths (comparing, as before, with previous years) have increased through the autumn and winter. The month of December had ten thousand extra deaths. Should one take the government's view, that these deaths were caused by the CV19 virus, and that the increasingly severe restrictions were a necessary response to 'contain' the spread of this virus? A simpler hypothesis would be that there is no virus killing people, whereas the stress of bankruptcy, solitude, loneliness, etc. imposed by government edicts really has been killing people. Thus for example 'tier 4' was announced on 19 th December for large parts of England and that resulted in the highest mortality for the week following. That knockout blow to everyone's Christmas – never banned since the days of Oliver Cromwell – had the deep impact, driving up the mortality index.

    Overall it would appear to be the government's lockdown policy that has been killing people and not some new disease. Stress, loneliness, fear and despair have been causing the excess of deaths: together with emptying out of hospitals, especially of old folk and cancellation of normal services because of the 'pandemic.' If the government knows this, then it is a population-reduction program.

    A recent US CDC report agreed with the approach we've here taken, that the significance of CV19 can only be appreciated in terms of total mortality. Published on the John Hopkins University website on 22 nd November (but soon removed), it endorses the view that no virus is killing people, any more than normal flu, whereas deaths from other causes are being re-classified as Covid19:

    According to new data, the U.S. currently ranks first in total COVID-19 cases, new cases per day and deaths. Genevieve Briand, assistant program director of the Applied Economics master's degree program at Hopkins, critically analyzed the effect of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in her webinar titled "COVID-19 Deaths: A Look at U.S. Data."

    From mid-March to mid-September, U.S. total deaths have reached 1.7 million, of which 200,000, or 12% of total deaths, are COVID-19-related. Instead of looking directly at COVID-19 deaths, Briand focused on total deaths per age group and per cause of death in the U.S. and used this information to shed light on the effects of COVID-19.

    She explained that the significance of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths can be fully understood only through comparison to the number of total deaths in the United States.

    After retrieving data on the CDC website, Briand compiled a graph representing percentages of total deaths per age category from early February to early September, which includes the period from before COVID-19 was detected in the U.S. to after infection rates soared.

    Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19. Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same.

    "The reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals," Briand said.

    Briand also noted that 50,000 to 70,000 deaths are seen both before and after COVID-19, indicating that this number of deaths was normal long before COVID-19 emerged. Therefore, according to Briand, not only has COVID-19 had no effect on the percentage of deaths of older people, but it has also not increased the total number of deaths.

    These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people's assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States

    When Briand looked at the 2020 data during that seasonal period, COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases. This was highly unusual since heart disease has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths. However, when taking a closer look at the death numbers, she noted something strange. As Briand compared the number of deaths per cause during that period in 2020 to 2018, she noticed that instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes, there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease. Even more surprising, as seen in the graph below, this sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes.

    This trend is completely contrary to the pattern observed in all previous years. Interestingly, as depicted in the table below , the total decrease in deaths by other causes almost exactly equals the increase in deaths by COVID-19. This suggests, according to Briand, that the COVID-19 death toll is misleading. Briand believes that deaths due to heart diseases, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia may instead be recategorized as being due to COVID-19.

    Base on this analysis, the best way to end the ongoing mass-killing of elderly Britons would be to terminate the lockdowns and resume normal life. As Dr Simone Gold (of Frontline Doctors ) well explained , CV19 is just 'killing' elderly people who were about to die anyhow. It cannot be shown that 'having' CV19 i.e. testing PCR-'positive' contributed to shortening their life. So that isn't a causal connection, i.e. the alleged illness has not 'caused' their death. That's why the age-distribution of CV-19 is indistinguishable from that of the normal population.

    The average age of death in England & Wales is 81.5 years, while the average age of 'Covid-19 fatalities' is 82.4 years (ONS data). What this tells us is very simple: the disease does not exist.

    The concept of PCR 'testing' has always been fraudulent . The so-called PCR 'test' multiplies up fragments of nucleotide-chains and the number of 'positive' cases depends on the multiplication factor used as well as how many persons are tested. There will never come a time when the virus is 'cured' or 'solved' or whatever people imagine the government is trying to do (if it knows!), such that the PCR test ceases to generate 'positive' tests. No-one will ever give you evidence that people who test 'positive' get ill more often than others. Is there an aim of government policy, aside from terrorising the populace? Is it to kill the virus? That can never happen because the virus isn't alive.

    he World Health Organization has now backtracked over the PCR 'test', saying (January 13 th ) it is merely a diagnostic tool that can assist. It now advises –

    Where test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested using the same or different NAT technology.

    In other words, a single PCR test should not be used for diagnosing Sars-Cov-2 infection. It's merely a guide!

    Most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information.

    So we finally have it that the PCR cannot be relied upon a diagnostic test. Which is exactly what its inventor Kary Mullis said. So forget all of the figures you've heard about 'cases' and 'covid deaths' – they cannot be relied upon.

    If one did want to believe there was a disease associated with this virus, then surely we'd agree with Dr Alexander Myasnikov, appointed last year as Russia's chief medical advisor. In an interview he explained how the world had greatly over-reacted to the CV19 story and death numbers in the West were greatly over-counted. He added:

    "It's all exaggerated. It's an acute respiratory disease with minimal mortality."

    Thus the former Chief Medical Officer of Ontario has recently challenged his government's policy saying, "We're Being Locked-down for an Infection Fatality Rate of Less than 0.2%?" and the lockdown is not "supported by strong science." He here means, that for those who test PCR-positive one in five hundred will die. The time-period here involved needs to be defined, eg it could be one month: we all die, and given the median age of alleged-CV19 deaths is around 80 that could well be a normal rate of mortality – especially if they are PCR-testing everyone admitted to hospitals.

    Last November a Cornish nurse went public, saying the hospital wards had been empty over months when it was claimed they were overflowing. She said whenever they had flu patients they were classified as Covid: 'flu and Covid cases are now recorded as 'the same thing' on death certificates.' . That wouldn't be necessary if the disease really existed. Not surprisingly, the flu this winter has mysteriously vanished . One woman who walked round her local hospital filming its empty wards was arrested by police entering her home the next day.

    The virus itself cannot be shown to exist, by which we mean that it cannot be reliably differentiated from all the other normal coronaviruses, that have been with us since time began. It has never been isolated, let's be clear about that. Last April an EU science department admitted :

    " No virus isolates with a quantified amount of the SARS-CoV-2 are currently available "

    And the same thing was echoed a few months later by the US Centre for Disease Control:

    " Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available , assays [diagnostic tests] designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA " [2]

    In other words, nobody can hold a test-tube or petri-dish and say, 'Here is COVID-19.' Published gene-sequences of the alleged virus are mere hypothetic constructs. Yes some disease broke out in Wuhan in November 2019 and yes the Chinese authorities published a gene-sequence allegedly of it, but so what?

    Fear Porn Promotion

    The government needs your fear. It wants your attention but knows that it has no prospect of improving your life in any way. Thus we have a health minister who knows nothing about health or well-being: he can get your attention by telling you that you won't be able to fly without a vaccine. They need your fear, and in the last century the government was able to arouse your fear by threatening to press the nuclear button. That doesn't work any more. The UK govts latest exercise in fear-porn advises citizens to behave as if they are ill . ('Act like you've got it') Yes, that sounds just like how to promote health.

    It further promotes the diabolical idea that perfectly healthy persons can transmit disease ('anyone can spread it'). Here one could quote the WHO expert Dr Maria van Kerkhove: 'From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onwards to a secondary individual. Its very rare.' (Head of the WHO Emerging disease and zoonosis unit at a news briefing from the UN agency's headquarters at Geneva, 6.6.20). Admittedly she was pressured to backpedal and retract, but she did say it. [3]

    In the words of the Daily Mail , 'Terrifying new TV ads' are being promoted by the Government (23 Jan 2021) The above fear-porn promotion is through the US media agency Omnigov, who signed a 110 million Lockdown advertising deal – on March 2 nd , three weeks before the Lockdown.

    The journalist Neil Clark commented [4] on 'the report in the Daily Telegraph newspaper that the UK government struck a deal worth £119m with an American advertising company, OMD Group, urging people to 'Stay Home, Stay Safe' a full three weeks before Boris Johnson ordered a lockdown. Think about what this means.' That meme 'Stay home Stay safe' would have been blueprinted the previous year at the US 'Event 201' by Bill Gates et. al. Fear blocks out rational, coherent thought which is why the government needs it.

    People may be forgetting how debilitating winter flu can be and how it can last for weeks. Now they want to call it COVID. Let's here support Prof. Dolores Cahill, who has been looking at the sequencing of PCR testing. In Ireland it was found that of fifteen hundred PCR tests 'all of them were influenza A and B, not one of them were SARS-COV2.' Her group will be seeking legal action where the tests come back as influenza rather than the specific CV19 and doctors can be sued for medical negligence. ( Corbett Report, 23 mins) That sounds like a promising way of dealing with this phantomic virus.

    'Is this an epidemic of despair?' asked that perceptive commentator Peter Hitchins . Scientists are trained not to take notice of emotions and instead to look for things, objects as causative agents, whereas here we agree with Peter Hitchens that the negative soul-conditions of the populace caused by government policies are leading to death. Hitchens' article quotes the distinguished professor of medical microbiology, Sucharit Bhakdi:

    'He said that older people had the right to make efforts to stay fit, active, busy and healthy. But he warned that the shutdown of society would condemn them to early death by preventing this.

    'Social contacts and social events, theatre and music, travel and holiday recreation, sports and hobbies, all help to prolong their stay on earth. The life expectancy of millions is being shortened.'

    In a prediction that has turned out to be terribly accurate, he added: 'The horrifying impact on the world economy threatens the existence of countless people. The consequences for medical care are profound. Already services to patients who are in need are reduced, operations cancelled, practices empty, hospital personnel dwindling. All this will impact profoundly on our whole society.'

    That is what is killing people, there is no other pandemic.

    We're here concerned with UK, however for comparison let's end with a graph showing the US weekly mortality rate over 2020, showing the very same effect.

    The graph shown an excess of 280k deaths above normal-expected levels, following the lockdown. The web-page hosting this graph states 'The large spike in deaths in April 2020 corresponds to the coronavirus outbreak.' I'm here suggesting a different view.

    By Nick Kollerstrom , PhD, author of The Great British coronavirus Hoax, A Sceptics view (banned by Amazon.)

    Notes

    [1] Using fifty-two weeks i.e. 364 days of the year, from the week ending 3 rd January 2020 to that of 1 st January 2021, the ONS compares a week in 2020 with the average value for 2015-9.

    [2] CDC '2019-Novel Coronavirus Real-Time PCR Diagnostic Panel performance characteristics' p.39, 13.7.20. This has been scrubbed from the Web, but see BMJ response to it.

    [3] A huge Chinese study of ten million around Wuhan between May and June showed 'no evidence that positive cases without symptoms spread the disease': Nature 20.11.20 'Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening'.

    [4] RT 'Covid-19 reverse psychology' by Neil Clarke, 28.10.20, deleted but preserved on the Hugo Talks video

    [Jan 26, 2021] I accept the older guidance from Johns Hopkins that lockdowns are political, not medical

    Jan 26, 2021 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Jackrabbit , Jan 25 2021 2:40 utc | 69

    Many things could be done. How about a fully paid six week lockdown?

    b doesn't provide the context for Biden's remark. Biden was walking back his initial optimism about defeating the virus by inoculating 100 million people. And today Biden surrogates even walked-back that goal by saying they want 100 million SHOTS to be given (the current vaccines require TWO shots).

    Furthermore, b is asking for trouble by advocating for a new lock-down. Yet, MAGICALLY, there is no longer push-back from the astro-turf libertarian mob. LOL.

    But it's unclear if lock-downs would work. Most of us already live in virtual "lockdown" because everyone that's not essential works remotely; most activities are cancelled; and testing is now ubiquitous. Plus almost everyone wears masks now in public and practice social distancing.

    Further complicating a call for more/more stringent lock-down is that there are a lot of false positives and possibly some counting of influenza deaths as Covid-19 deaths. (Note: Acknowledging that doesn't mean that I don't believe the pandemic isn't real and very deadly.)

    What do we NOT DO that successful countries have done?

    Lancet Study

    Why would anyone trust what Lancet has to say after they completely discredited themselves? oldhippie and Lurk explain how "the authorities" are still screwing around with bogus studies.

    oldhippie , Jan 25 2021 15:14 utc | 114

    JR @ 69

    Thank you, JR. Yes, the Lancet has comprehensively discredited itself. So has nearly all of the medical firmament.

    There is nothing to replace that medical firmament. Each of us pretends we are able to discover which authority and which evidence we are ready to believe in. None of us has particular ability to do that. For myself I will accept the current guidance from WHO that lockdowns are ineffective and meaningless. I accept the older guidance from Johns Hopkins that lockdowns are political, not medical.

    And otherwise, for myself, consider WHO as largely a cats paw for Bill Gates and Hopkins more like an arm of the intelligence community than a medical resource. Cue the WHOs on first routine. All madness.

    Anyone who tells me to be totally passive and obedient and to STFU while waiting for inevitable doom is simply an enemy. That would be half of this bar? And why argue? "The science" is any damn thing any advocate wants it to be. I didn't drag the science down to that level. The scientists and doctors took the money and did it to themselves.

    [Jan 25, 2021] Crisis careerists and PcR tests exaggerated pandemic (aka Casedemics)

    An interesting commentary. Introduces a new term "Crisis careerists"
    Jan 25, 2021 | www.unz.com

    Ralph Seymour , says: January 25, 2021 at 6:44 pm GMT • 8.1 hours ago

    Terrific summary and analysis of the current situation:

    https://www.bitchute.com/embed/Dq7cBJksrUnC

    [Jan 09, 2021] They are looking at hundreds of patients on their screens and they don't know when the next ambulance will be available

    Jan 09, 2021 | off-guardian.org

    George Mc , Jan 8, 2021 6:36 PM

    Terror ratcheting up on TV:

    "They are looking at hundreds of patients on their screens and they don't know when the next ambulance will be available"

    The power of the PCR voodoo boxes.

    [Jan 02, 2021] WHO (secretly) changed their definition of "Herd Immunity"

    Jan 02, 2021 | off-guardian.org

    he World Health Organization has changed the definition of "herd immunity" on the Covid section of their website, inserting the claim that it is a "concept used in vaccination", and requires a vaccine to be achieved.

    Both of these statements are total falsehoods, which is demonstrated by the WHO's own website back in June, and every dictionary definition of "herd immunity" you can find.

    To quote the WHO's own original definition:

    Herd immunity is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or a natural immunity developed through previous infection.

    This definition was posted on the WHO's website on June 9th of this year, and conforms with the general usage of the term for generations .

    Then, on October 15th, we woke up to find the words on the side of the barn had changed . The definition has been altered to this:

    'Herd immunity', also known as 'population immunity', is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached.

    No explanation is offered for the change, in fact note of the change is made on the website at all.

    Indeed all the previous versions of the website have been totally wiped from the wayback machine. A telling thing to do, in and of itself.

    We're only aware of the change because screencaps of the original exist:

    The new definition, aside from being inaccurate and off-handedly disposing of decades of epidemiological research, is also contradictory. It includes the phrase:

    Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it."

    Which is newspeak doublethink nonsense. The entire point of vaccination IS "exposing" people to the virus.

    This revised, inaccurate and contradictory definition of "herd immunity" was first expressed in a speech by WHO Director General Thedros Adhanom on October 12th. Within three days that speech had been added, word for word, to the website. And within a month of the change, the UK had approved the first commercial vaccine for Sars-Cov-2 infection.

    We're truly in an Orwellian timeline, where the powers that be can simply change the meaning of words and phrases to suit their purpose.

    [Jan 01, 2021] Five Times This Year The New York Times Accidentally Told The Truth

    Only five ;-)
    Notable quotes:
    "... I'm still stunned that the paper did a study that confirmed what people have suspected, namely that a high cycle threshold used on PCR testing was creating the appearance of a pandemic that might have long receded. The testing mania was generating wild illusions of millions of "asymptomatic" carriers and spreaders. How severe was the problem? Read this and weep ..."
    "... up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found. ..."
    "... A major reason for the ongoing lockdowns are due to the pouring in of positive case numbers from massive testing. If 90% of these positive tests are false, we have a major problem. The whole basis of the panic disappears. All credit to the Times for running the article but why no follow up and why no change in its editorial stance? ..."
    "... I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this near total meltdown of normal life -- schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned -- will be long lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus itself. ..."
    "... During the Covid-19 pandemic, the world is unwittingly conducting what amounts to the largest immunological experiment in history on our own children. We have been keeping children inside, relentlessly sanitizing their living spaces and their hands and largely isolating them ..."
    "... in the course of social distancing to mitigate the spread, we may also be unintentionally inhibiting the proper development of children's immune systems. ..."
    "... The psychological effects of loneliness are a health risk comparable with risk obesity or smoking. Anxiety and depression have spiked since lockdown orders went into effect. ..."
    Jan 01, 2021 | zerohedge.com

    Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The American Institute for Economic Research,

    The paper of record in 2020 shifted dramatically to the most illiberal stance possible on the virus, pushing for full lockdowns, and ignoring or burying any information that might contradict the case for this unprecedented experiment in social and economic control. This article highlights the exceptions.

    ...

    Even within the blatant and aggressive pro-lockdown bias, and consistent with the way the New York Times does its work, the paper has not been entirely barren of truth about Covid and lockdowns. Below I list five times that the news section of the paper, however inadvertently and however buried deep within the paper, actually told the truth.

    1. Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn't Be.

    I'm still stunned that the paper did a study that confirmed what people have suspected, namely that a high cycle threshold used on PCR testing was creating the appearance of a pandemic that might have long receded. The testing mania was generating wild illusions of millions of "asymptomatic" carriers and spreaders. How severe was the problem? Read this and weep:

    In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.

    On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times . If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing.

    The implications of this revelation are incredible. A major reason for the ongoing lockdowns are due to the pouring in of positive case numbers from massive testing. If 90% of these positive tests are false, we have a major problem. The whole basis of the panic disappears. All credit to the Times for running the article but why no follow up and why no change in its editorial stance?

    2. Scientists See Signs of Lasting Immunity to Covid-19, Even After Mild Infections .

    Byline By Katherine J. Wu

    Gone missing this year in public commentary has been much at all about naturally acquired immunities from the virus, even though the immune system deserves credit for why human kind has lasted this long even in the presence of pathogens. That the Times ran this piece was another exception in otherwise exceptionally bad coverage. It said in part:

    Scientists who have been monitoring immune responses to the virus are now starting to see encouraging signs of strong, lasting immunity, even in people who developed only mild symptoms of Covid-19, a flurry of new studies suggests. Disease-fighting antibodies, as well as immune cells called B cells and T cells that are capable of recognizing the virus, appear to persist months after infections have resolved -- an encouraging echo of the body's enduring response to other viruses .

    Researchers have yet to find unambiguous evidence that coronavirus reinfections are occurring, especially within the few months that the virus has been rippling through the human population. The prospect of immune memory "helps to explain that," Dr. Pepper said.

    3. Why You Shouldn't Worry About Studies Showing Waning Coronavirus Antibodies .

    Byline Apoorva Mandavilli

    Reinforcing the solid point above:

    Data from monkeys suggests that even low levels of antibodies can prevent serious illness from the virus, if not a re-infection. Even if circulating antibody levels are undetectable, the body retains the memory of the pathogen. If it crosses paths with the virus again, balloon-like cells that live in the bone marrow can mass-produce antibodies within hours.

    4. Schoolchildren Seem Unlikely to Fuel Coronavirus Surges, Scientists Say .

    Byline: Apoorva Mandavilli

    It's still a shock that so many schools closed their doors this year, partly from disease panic but also from compliance with orders from public health officials. Nothing like this has happened, and the kids have been brutalized as a result, not to mention the families who found themselves unable to cope at home. For millions of students, a whole year of schooling is gone. And they have been taught to treat their fellow human beings as nothing more than disease vectors. So it was amazing to read this story in the Times :

    So far, schools do not seem to be stoking community transmission of the coronavirus, according to data emerging from random testing in the United States and Britain. Elementary schools especially seem to seed remarkably few infections.

    5. One-Third of All U.S. Coronavirus Deaths Are Nursing Home Residents or Workers .

    Byline Karen Yourish, K.K. Rebecca Lai, Danielle Ivory and Mitch Smith

    Another strangely missing part of mainstream coverage has been honesty about the risk gradient in the population. It is admitted even by the World Health Organization that the case fatality rate for Covid-19 from people under the age of 70 is 0.05%. The serious danger is for people with low life expectancy and broken immune systems. Knowing that, as we have since February, we should have expected the need for special protection for nursing homes. It was incredibly obvious. Instead of doing that, some governors shoved Covid patients into nursing homes. Astonishing. In any case, the above article (and this one too) was one of the few times this year that the Times actually spelled out the many thousands times risk to the aged and sick as versus the young and healthy.

    Notable Opinion columns

    The op-ed page of the paper mirrored the news coverage, with only a handful of exceptions. Those are noted below.

    Is Our Fight Against Coronavirus Worse Than the Disease?

    Op-ed by David Katz

    I am deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this near total meltdown of normal life -- schools and businesses closed, gatherings banned -- will be long lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus itself. The stock market will bounce back in time, but many businesses never will. The unemployment, impoverishment and despair likely to result will be public health scourges of the first order.

    Worse, I fear our efforts will do little to contain the virus, because we have a resource-constrained, fragmented, perennially underfunded public health system. Distributing such limited resources so widely, so shallowly and so haphazardly is a formula for failure. How certain are you of the best ways to protect your most vulnerable loved ones? How readily can you get tested?

    Quarantine May Negatively Affect Kids' Immune Systems .

    Op-ed by Donna L. Farber and Thomas Connors

    During the Covid-19 pandemic, the world is unwittingly conducting what amounts to the largest immunological experiment in history on our own children. We have been keeping children inside, relentlessly sanitizing their living spaces and their hands and largely isolating them. In doing so, we have prevented large numbers of them from becoming infected or transmitting the virus. But in the course of social distancing to mitigate the spread, we may also be unintentionally inhibiting the proper development of children's immune systems.

    What Has Lockdown Done to Us? .

    Op-ed by By Drew Holden

    Our mental health suffers, too. The psychological effects of loneliness are a health risk comparable with risk obesity or smoking. Anxiety and depression have spiked since lockdown orders went into effect. The weeks immediately following them saw nearly an 18 percent jump in overdose deaths and, as of last month, more than 40 states had reported increases. One in four young adults age 18 to 25 reported seriously considering suicide within the 30-day window of a recent study. Experts fear that suicides may increase; for young Americans, these concerns are even more acute. Calls to domestic violence hotlines have soared. America's elderly are dying from the isolation that was meant to keep them safe.


    [Dec 29, 2020] Small but important difference

    Dec 29, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    mijj , Dec 28 2020 20:35 utc | 12

    > "Wuhan, where the first large outbreak of Covid-19 occurred"

    .. ahem .. where a detection was first made public. (not the location of the first outbreak)

    [Dec 28, 2020] Twelve Times The 'Lockdowners' Were Wrong - ZeroHedge

    Dec 28, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Twelve Times The 'Lockdowners' Were Wrong BY TYLER DURDEN SUNDAY, DEC 27, 2020 - 23:35

    Authored by Phillip Magness via The American Institute for Economic Research,

    This has been a year of astonishing policy failure. We are surrounded by devastation conceived and cheered by intellectuals and their political handmaidens...

    The errors number in the thousands, so please consider the following little more than a first draft, a mere guide to what will surely be unearthed in the coming months and years. We trusted these people with our lives and liberties and here is what they did with that trust.

    1. Anthony Fauci says lockdowns are not possible in the United States (January 24):

    When asked about the mass quarantine containment efforts underway in Wuhan, China back in January, Fauci dismissed the prospect of lockdowns ever coming to the United States :

    "That's something that I don't think we could possibly do in the United States, I can't imagine shutting down New York or Los Angeles, but the judgement on the part of the Chinese health authorities is that given the fact that it's spreading throughout the provinces it's their judgement that this is something that in fact is going to help in containing it. Whether or not it does or does not is really open to question because historically when you shut things down it doesn't have a major effect."

    Less than two months later, 43 of 50 US states were under lockdown – a policy advocated by Fauci himself.

    1. US government and WHO officials advise against mask use (February and March)

    When mask sales spiked due to widespread individual adoption in the early weeks of the pandemic, numerous US government and WHO officials took to the airwaves to describe masks as ineffective and discourage their use.

    https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=830

    Surgeon General Jerome Adams tweeted against masks on February 29. Anthony Fauci publicly discouraged mask use in a nationally broadcast 60 Minutes interview on March 7. At a March 30 World Health Organization briefing its Director-General supported mask use in medical settings but dissuaded the same in the general public.

    By mid-summer, all had reversed course and encouraged mask-wearing in the general public as an essential tool for halting the pandemic. Fauci essentially conceded that he lied to the public in order to prevent a shortage on masks, whereas other health officials did an about-face on the scientific claims around masking.

    While mainstream epidemiology literature stressed the ambiguous nature of evidence surrounding masks as recently as 2019 , these scientists were suddenly certain that masks were something of a magic bullet for Covid. It turns out that both positions are likely wrong. Masks appear to have marginal effects at diminishing spread, especially in highly infectious settings and around the vulnerable. But their effectiveness at combating Covid has also been grossly exaggerated, as illustrated by the fact that mask adoption reached near-universal levels in the US by the summer with little discernible effect on the course of the pandemic.

    1. Anthony Fauci 's decimal error in estimating Covid's fatality rates (March 11)

    Fauci testified before Congress in early March where he was asked to estimate the severity of the disease in comparison to influenza. His testimony that Covid was "10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu" stoked widespread alarm and provided a major impetus for the decision to go into lockdown.

    The problem, as Ronald Brown documented in an epidemiology journal article , is that Fauci based his estimates on a conflation of the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) and Case Fatality Rate (CFR) for influenza, leading him to exaggerate the comparative danger of Covid by an order of magnitude. Fauci's error – which he further compounded in a late February article for the New England Journal of Medicine – helped to convince Congress of the need for drastic lockdown measures, while also spreading panic in the media and general public. As of this writing Fauci has not acknowledged the magnitude of his error, nor has the journal corrected his article.

    1. "Two weeks to flatten the curve" (March 16)

    The lockdowners settled on a catchy slogan in mid-March to justify their unprecedented shuttering of economic and social life around the globe: two weeks to flatten the curve. The White House Covid task force aggressively promoted this line , as did the news media and much of the epidemiology profession. The logic behind the slogan came from the ubiquitous graph showing (1) a steep caseload that would overwhelm our hospital system, or (2) a mitigated alternative that would spread the caseload out over several weeks, making it manageable.

    To get to graph #2, society would need to buckle up for two weeks of shelter-in-place orders until the capacity issue could be managed. Indeed, we were told that if we did not accept this solution the hospital system would enter into catastrophic failure in only 10 days, as former DHS pandemic adviser Tom Bossert claimed in a widely-circulated interview and Washington Post column on March 11.

    Two weeks came and went, then the rationale on which they were sold to the public shifted. Hospitals were no longer on the verge of being overwhelmed – indeed most hospitals nationwide remained well under capacity, with only a tiny number of exceptions in the worst-hit neighborhoods of New York City.

    A US Navy hospital ship sent to relieve New York departed a month later after serving only 182 patients , and a pop-up hospital in the city's Javits Convention Center sat mostly empty . But the lockdowns remained in place, as did the emergency orders justifying them. Two weeks became a month, which became two months, which became almost a year. We were no longer "flattening the curve" – a strategy premised on saving the hospital system from a threat than never manifested – but instead refocused on using lockdowns as a general suppression strategy against the disease itself. In short, the epidemiology profession sold us a bill of goods.

    1. Neil Ferguson predicts a "best case" US scenario of 1.1 million deaths (March 20)

    The name Neil Ferguson, the lead modeler and chief spokesman for Imperial College London's pandemic response team, has become synonymous with lockdown alarmism for good reason. Ferguson has a long track record of making grossly exaggerated predictions of catastrophic death tolls for almost every single disease that comes along, and urging aggressive policy responses to the same including lockdowns.

    Covid was no different, and Ferguson assumed center stage when he released a highly influential model of the virus's death forecasts for the US and UK. Ferguson appeared with UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on March 16 to announce the shift toward lockdowns (with no small irony, he was coming down with Covid himself at the time and may have been the patient zero of a super-spreader event that ran through Downing Street and infected Johnson himself).

    Across the Atlantic, Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx cited Ferguson's model as a direct justification for locking down the US. There was a problem though: Ferguson had a bad habit of dramatically hyping his own predictions to political leaders and the press. The Imperial College paper modeled a broad range of scenarios including death tolls that ranged from tens of thousands to over 2 million, but Ferguson's public statements only stressed the latter – even though the paper itself conceded that such an extreme "worst case" scenario was highly unrealistic. A telling example came on March 20th when the New York Times's Nicholas Kristof contacted the Imperial College modeler to ask about the most likely scenario for the United States. As Kristof related to his readers, "I asked Ferguson for his best case. "About 1.1 million deaths," he said."

    1. Researchers in Sweden use the Imperial College model to predict 95,000 deaths (April 10)

    After Neil Ferguson's shocking death toll predictions for the US and UK captivated policymaker attention and drove both governments into lockdown, researchers in other countries began adapting the Imperial College model to their own circumstances. Usually, these models sought to reaffirm the decisions of each country to lock down. The government of Sweden, however, had decided to buck the trend, setting the stage for a natural experiment to test the Imperial model's performance.

    In early April a team of researchers at Uppsala University adapted the Imperial model to Sweden's population and demographics and ran its projections. Their result? If Sweden stayed the course and did not lock down, it could expect a catastrophic 96,000 deaths by early summer. The authors of the study recommended going into immediate lockdown, but since Sweden lagged behind Europe in adopting such measures they also predicted that this "best case" option would reduce deaths to "only" 30,000.

    By early June when the 96,000 prediction was supposed to come true, Sweden had recorded 4,600 deaths. Six months later, Sweden has about 8,000 deaths – a severe pandemic to be sure, but an order of magnitude smaller than what the modelers predicted . Facing embarrassment from these results, Ferguson and Imperial College attempted to distance themselves from the Swedish adaptation of their model in early May. Yet the Uppsala team's projections closely matched Imperial's own UK and US predictions when scaled to reflect their population sizes. In short, the Imperial model catastrophically failed one of the few clear natural experiment tests of its predictive ability.

    1. Scientists suggest that ocean spray spreads Covid (April 2)

    In the second week of the lockdowns several newspapers in California promoted a bizarre theory: Covid could spread by ocean spray (although the paper later walked back the headline-grabbing claim, it is outlined here in the Los Angeles Times ). According to this theory – initially promoted by a group of biologists who study bacterial infection connected to storm runoff – the Covid virus washed down storm gutters and into the ocean, where the ocean breeze would kick it up into the air and infect people on the nearby beaches. As silly as this theory now sounds, it helped to inform California's initially draconian enforcement of lockdowns on its public beaches.

    The same week that this modern-day miasmic drift theory appeared, police in Malibu even arrested a lone paddleboarder for going into the ocean during the lockdown – all while citing the possibility that the ocean breeze carried Covid with it.

    1. Neil Ferguson predicts catastrophic death tolls in US states that reopen (May 24)

    Fresh off of their exaggerated predictions from March, the Imperial College team led by Neil Ferguson doubled down on alarmist modeling. As several US states started to reopen in late April and May, Ferguson and his colleagues published a new model predicting another catastrophic wave of deaths by the mid-summer. Their model focused on 5 states with both moderate and severe outbreaks during the first wave. If they reopened, according to the Imperial team's model, New York could face up to 3,000 deaths per day by July.

    Florida could hit as high as 4,000, and California could hit 5,000 daily deaths. Keeping in mind that these projections were for each state alone, they exceed the daily death toll peaks for the entire country in both the fall and spring. Showing just how bad the Imperial model was, the actual death toll by mid-July in several of the examined states even fell below the lower confidence boundary of its projected count . While Covid remains a threat in all 5 states, the post-reopening explosion of deaths predicted by Imperial College and used to argue for keeping the lockdowns in place never happened.

    1. Anthony Fauci credits lockdowns for beating the virus in Europe (July 31)

    In late July Anthony Fauci offered additional testimony to Congress. His message credited Europe's heavy lockdowns with defeating the virus, whereas he blamed the United States for reopening too early and for insufficient aggressiveness in the initial lockdowns. As Fauci stated at the time, "If you look at what happened in Europe, when they shut down or locked down or went to shelter in place -- however you want to describe it -- they really did it to the tune of about 95% plus of the country did that."

    The message was clear: the United States should have followed Europe, but failed to do so and got a summer wave of Covid instead. Fauci's entire argument however was based on a string of falsehoods and errors.

    Mobility data from the US clearly showed that most Americans were staying home during the spring outbreak, with a recorded decline that matched Germany, the Netherlands, and several other European countries. Contrary to Fauci's claim, the US was actually slower than most of Europe to reopen. Furthermore, his praise of Europe collapsed in the early fall when almost all of the lockdown countries in Europe experienced severe second waves – just like the locked down regions of the United States.

    1. New Zealand and Australia declare themselves Covid-free (August-present)

    New Zealand and Australia have thus far weathered the pandemic with extremely low case counts, leading many epidemiologists and journalists to conflate these results with evidence of their successful and replicable mitigation policies. In reality, New Zealand and Australia opted for the medieval ' Prince Prospero' strategy of attempting to wall themselves from the world until the pandemic passes – an approach that is highly dependent on their unique geographies.

    As island nations with comparatively lower international travel than North America and Europe, both countries shut down their borders before the as-of-yet undetected virus became widespread and have remained closed ever since. It's a costly strategy in terms of its economic impact and personal displacement, but it kept the virus out – mostly.

    The problem with New Zealand and Australia's Prince Prospero strategy is that it's inherently fragile. All it takes to throw it into chaos is for the virus to slip past the border – including by accident or human error. Then heavy-handed lockdowns ensue, imposed with maximum disruption at the spur of the moment in a frantic attempt to contain the breach.

    The most famous example happened on August 9 when New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern declared that New Zealand had reached 100 days of being Covid-free . Then just two days later a breach happened , sending Auckland into heavy lockdown. It's a pattern that has repeated itself every few weeks in both countries.

    In early December, we saw a similar flurry of stories from Australia announcing that the country had beaten Covid . Two weeks later, another breach occurred in the suburbs around Sydney, prompting a regional lockdown . There have been embarrassing missteps as well. In November the entire state of South Australia went into heavy lockdown over a single misreported case of Covid that was mistakenly attributed to a pizza purchase that did not exist. While both countries continue to celebrate their low fatality rates, they've also incurred some of the harshest and most disruptive restrictions in the world – all the result of premature declarations of being "Covid-free" followed by an unexpected breach and another frantic lockdown.

    1. "Renewed lockdowns are just a strawman" (October)

    In early October a group of scientists met at AIER where they drafted and signed the Great Barrington Declaration , a statement calling attention to the severe social and economic harms of lockdowns and urging the world to adopt alternative strategies for ensuring the protection of the most vulnerable. Although the statement quickly gathered tens of thousands of co-signers from health science and medical professionals, it also left the lockdown supporters incensed. They responded not by scientific debate over the merits of their policies, but with a vilification campaign .

    They answered by flooding the petition with hoax signatures and juvenile name-calling, and by peddling wildly false conspiracy theories about AIER's funding (the primary instigator of both tactics, ironically, was a UK blogger known for promoting 9/11 Truther conspiracies ). But the lockdowners also adopted another narrative: they began to deny that lockdowns were even on the table.

    Nobody was considering bringing back the lockdowns from the spring, they insisted. Arguing against the politically unpopular shelter-in-place orders in the fall only served the purpose of undermining public support for narrower and more temperate restrictions. The Great Barrington authors, we were told, were arguing with a "strawman" from the past.

    Over the next several weeks in October a dozen or more prominent epidemiologists, public health experts, and journalists peddled the "lockdowns are a strawman" line . The "strawman" claim saw promotion in top outlets including the New York Times , and in an op-ed by two principle co-signers of the John Snow Memorandum, a competing petition that lockdown supporters drafted as a response to the Great Barrington Declaration.

    The message was clear: the GBD was sounding a false alarm against policies from the past that the lockdowners "reluctantly" supported in the spring as an emergency measure but had no intention of reviving. By early November, the "strawman" of renewed lockdowns became a reality in dozens of countries across the globe – often cheered on by the very same people who used the "strawman" canard in October.

    Several US states followed suit including California, which imposed severe restrictions on private gatherings up to and including meeting your own family for Thanksgiving and Christmas. And a few weeks after that, some of the very same epidemiologists who used the "strawman" line in October revised their own positions after the fact. They started claiming they had supported a second lockdown all along, and began blaming the GBD for impeding their efforts to impose them at an earlier date. In short, the entire "lockdowns are a strawman" narrative was false. And it now appears that more than a few of the scientists who used it were actively lying about their own intentions in October.

    1. Anthony Fauci touts New York as a model for Covid containment (June-December)

    By all indicators, New York state has suffered one of the worst coronavirus outbreaks in the world. Its year-end mortality rate of almost 1,900 deaths per million residents exceeds every single country in the world. The state famously bungled its nursing home response when Governor Andrew Cuomo forced these facilities to readmit Covid-positive patients as a way to relieve strains on hospitals. The policy backfired as most hospitals never reached capacity, but the readmissions introduced the virus into vulnerable nursing home populations resulting in widespread fatalities (to this day New York intentionally undercounts nursing home fatalities by excluding residents who are moved to a hospital from its reported numbers, further obscuring the true toll of Cuomo's order).

    New York has also fared poorly during the fall "second wave" despite reimposing harsh restrictions and regional lockdown measures. By mid-December, its death rate shot far above the mostly-open state of Florida, which has the closest comparable population size to New York. All things considered, New York's weathering of the pandemic is an exemplar of what not to do.

    Cuomo's policies not only failed to contain the virus – they likely made it far more deadly to vulnerable populations. Enter Anthony Fauci, who has been asked multiple times in the press what a model Covid response policy would look like. He gave his first answer on July 20th : "We know that, when you do it properly, you bring down those cases. We have done it. We have done it in New York."

    Fauci was operating under the assumption that New York, despite its bad run in the spring, had successfully brought the pandemic under control through its aggressive lockdowns and slow reopening. One might think that the fall rebound in New York, despite locking down again, would call this conclusion into question. Not so much for Dr. Fauci, who told the Wall Street Journal on December 8 : "New York got hit really badly in the beginning" but they did "a really good job of keeping things down, and still, their level is low compared to the rest of the country."

    [Dec 27, 2020] The New COVID-19 Strain Is A Political Disaster Of Our Own Making - ZeroHedge

    Dec 27, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    The New COVID-19 Strain Is A Political Disaster Of Our Own Making BY TYLER DURDEN SUNDAY, DEC 27, 2020 - 9:20

    Authored by Rob Sutton via TheCritic.co.uk,

    By seeking answers to scientific questions no-one had asked, we find ourselves assigning importance to discoveries which may have none...

    I n justifying the move to a new national lockdown, the leaders of the UK briefly enjoyed the political fortune of a headline-grabbing finding: a new strain of Covid-19, possibly more virulent than the old.

    This strain, despite the paucity of scientific data, has been described as "up to 70 per cent more transmissible than the old variant," and it is this figure which has gripped the media and policymakers. The tendency towards catastrophism is palpable.

    Yet this new strain, VUI-202012/01, quickly transcended its role within national politics as the justification for introducing Tier 4 lockdowns. The fear of a new, super-transmissible mutant strain has spread to other nations, who are similarly eager to display the sort of knee-jerk reactionary interventions being generously described as "decisive leadership." Over 30 countries have banned entry by UK citizens over fears of the new strain, with chaotic scenes at Dover exacerbating already tetchy Brexit negotiations.

    Never mind that the Department of Health committee whose recommendations regarding the new strain expressed considerable uncertainty about the transmissibility and dangers posed. At present, the precautionary principle completely dominates decision making in Westminster and the devolved assemblies. "Better safe than sorry," we hear, as further lockdowns are announced without the slightest hint of legislative oversight.

    How has this happened so quickly? It seems that hardly had news of a mutant strain of Covid-19 broken that we were promptly shepherded into Tier 4 and became a global pariah. To understand how this panic has developed, we need to understand the nature of diagnostic medicine, its relationship to the scientific method, and how both might be abused for political ends.

    In Britain, we have one of the most advanced scientific, medical and technological infrastructures in the world. This infrastructure was greatly expanded during the early months of the pandemic, with Covid-19 diagnostic testing capacity rapidly increased. The reasons for this increase were largely political. By pushing to achieve 100,000 tests per day, the government hoped it might reassure an anxious public.

    https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=830

    Under normal circumstances, medical tests are generally not used with such political goals in mind. They form part of a process of hypothesis testing and Bayesian reasoning to guide the rational medical management of patients with diagnostic uncertainty. We begin by forming a question, choosing a test to answer that question, and applying that test, bearing in mind the limits of diagnostic certainty for a given investigation.

    The key here is that a diagnostic test is used to answer a specific question. We do not, as a matter of both economic feasibility and ethical restraint, apply scattergun testing to vast swathes of the population without a good reason. In populations at risk of a disease but otherwise asymptomatic, we might use screening to identify disease in an early stage and to improve treatment outcomes. But never before have we attempted to apply such intensive "screening" for such a poorly understood disease to guide such far reaching policies as the infringements of civil liberties we are currently seeing.

    At present, national testing programmes are being used as political vehicles to justify pre-determined policy prescriptions, instead of as scientific instruments to answer well-formulated diagnostic questions. Those policy makers who saw testing infrastructure as a way to tally-up some quick political points have instead scored something of an own goal, subjecting us to a torrent of data which, instead of reassuring us, only serves to give us more questions. The perversion of the scientific method doesn't get much worse than this.

    As an anxious patient who is subject to a battery of tests will only become more anxious as incidental findings lead to further follow-up questions, so too do our policymakers find themselves with more problems than answers through the indiscriminate application of the full arsenal of testing methods at the disposal of the British state. And these problems have a habit of producing even more problems through a cycle of positive feedback.

    Since the early days of the pandemic, the UK's testing capacity has been aggressively expanded. The original target of 100,000 tests per day was no sooner reached than it was replaced by a new target of 200,000 tests per day. The political thinking here is obvious: a big number ought to reassure the public. But this is extraordinarily myopic.

    More intensive testing leads to new justifications for even more intensive testing. The cycle is as follows: we start with a moderate testing capacity which is primarily used to detect cases among the sickest and most vulnerable patients, in order to guide further treatment. Concerns are raised by those not able to access testing for themselves. The government pledges to expand testing beyond its initial scope, and broadens the eligibility criteria to include doctors, nurses, care home workers and others.

    We start to include more and more asymptomatic carriers for whom a positive case has an essentially negligible risk of serious harm. Yet the number which captures the public's attention is the absolute number of positive cases. With a vastly increased number of tests, we get a vastly increased number of positive cases. And the government, seeing a situation running away from it and desperate to regain control by those limited means available to it, promises to further increase testing capacity. The cycle continues.

    More tests will naturally lead to more cases, particularly if those tests are used indiscriminately and with no real strategy in mind. The problem compounds when we consider the increase in the absolute number of false positives. The growth in false positives is linear with increase in number of tests, but the negative consequences for society spread out as a highly non-linear network, with isolation of contacts of (falsely) positive cases having expansive and synergistic negative consequences for broader society. But even without this, and assuming that all our positive results are true positives, by using testing as a form of mass-surveillance we have set ourselves up for a never-ending cycle of lockdowns.

    The same logic applies to the genetic testing which has unearthed this "new" strain, although we may yet find that it has been in circulation globally for a long time . By testing more, without knowing what we are testing for, we will find things which, from a political perspective, necessitate further intervention.

    The corpus of data which can be poured over to find new justifications for ongoing restrictions continues to grow. With the added dimension of genomic studies, the potential for the noise to smother the signal grows, particularly at a time when there is strong public and political demand for a coherent narrative. There will always exist some metric sufficiently intimidating that it might be used to justify a new lockdown. Yet we keep searching without really knowing what we are searching for or why we are doing it.

    There is essentially no logic upper limit to how intensively we can test and how many different techniques we can apply to elucidate Covid-19 and its various strains. Some strains will inevitably be more virulent, and will, by definition, have a greater tendency to spread. This is not, in itself, a cause for alarm; it is simply Darwinism on a microscopic scale. And whether these findings matter from a policymaking perspective is an altogether different question.

    The scientific method begins with a question and sets out to find an answer. If we decide to seek answers without questions, then we end up with data which must be interpreted and given significance post hoc, regardless of whether that significance really exists. Positive feedback cycles are difficult to escape from. The various governments of the UK and its devolved legislatures urgently need to rationalise the use of testing and clearly justify the introduction of any new investigative methods. Otherwise, we will be trapped by a political crisis of our own making.

    [Dec 27, 2020] New Study Suggests Asymptomatic COVID Patients Aren't -Driver Of Transmission

    Are not so called asymptomatic cases mostly a side effect of excessive amplifications in PcR tests? So they are healthy people who were "false positives" in PcR test. If this is true they present no danger.
    Dec 25, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    Thanks in part to a massive investment in research by the British government, a lot of interesting data has come out of the UK, including a study which supposedly found evidence that immunity to COVID 'degrades' in the months after infection . Now, other studies have come to seemingly contradictory conclusions . It's just another reminder how fraught and complicated the process of study and research can be during an unprecedented pandemic.

    It should also be a reminder, particularly as all the world's top COVID-vaccine manufacturers reassure the public that their vaccines will work against the more infectious mutated strains allegedly discovered in the UK and South Africa, among other places, that the leading scientific and public health authorities aren't always 100% certain when it comes to - as they like to call it - "the science".

    And in yet another reminder of this principle, the American Medical Association's JAMA Network Open journal has published new research from a government-backed study that appears to offer new evidence that asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 may be significantly lower than previously thought.

    Some members of the public might remember all the way back in February and January when public officials first speculated that mass mask-wearing might not be that helpful unless individuals were actually sick. They famously back-tracked on that, and - for that, and other reasons - decided that we should all wear masks, and that lockdowns were more or less the best solution to the problem, even as millions of Americans continued to flout the new "rules" daily.

    But for those who don't, this paper makes one thing clear: For all the talk in the press about asymptomatic people being infectious, which included a heavy-handed rebuke of a WHO scientist who nonchalantly said a few months back that asymptomatic people don't spread the virus as effectively, there haven't been many large-sample-size longer-term studies that study how "asymptomatic" patients actually spread the virus vs. how "symptomatic" patients do, since most public health agencies don't even collect data on whether people who test positive are asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, or symptomatic (a specification which, as most people probably know by now, can vary widely).

    Since the pandemic has only been ongoing for less than a year now, researchers have instead tried conducting "meta studies" - that is, comparing data collected in dozens of studies examining some aspect of the virus's functionality. In the paper noted above which examined 54 separate studies with nearly 78K total participants, the authors claim that "The lack of substantial transmission from observed asymptomatic index cases is notable...These findings are consistent with other household studies reporting asymptomatic index cases as having limited role in household transmission."

    This is of course not the first time we have heard this. Aside from the WHO scientist example cited above, two British scientists recently published an editorial in the BMJ imploring scientists to rethink how the virus spreads "asymptomatically".

    They pointed to "the absence of strong evidence that asymptomatic people are a driver of transmission" as a reason to question such practices as "mass testing in schools, universities, and communities."

    That's not to say that asymptomatic people can't spread the virus, it's just to say that maybe there is a significant difference in risk levels in terms of exposure . Of course, public health officials at this point seem to be afraid to acknowledge anything that questions the notion that everybody is potentially a threat. To be clear, the WHO's current guidance on the issue is that "while someone who never develops symptoms can also pass the virus to others, it is still not clear to what extent this occurs, and more research is needed in this area" - but at this point, they have changed their guidance and flip-flopped so many times, who even knows, understands or cares what they say?

    about:blank

    about:blank

    me title=

    Anyway, it's just some more food for thought next time somebody tries to lecture you about "the science".


    adr 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link

    Asymptomatic people can not spread a viral infection.

    This was considered fact until 2020.

    valjoux7750 1 hour ago

    Friend of mine passed away from non covid illness and the hospital offered to pay all his medical bills if allowed to record as covid. His wife accepted.

    Robespierre2020 23 minutes ago

    They will never, ever admit that asymptomatic actually means false positive. They must keep the case count up at all costs to keep stoking the fear.

    Itchy and Scratchy 1 hour ago

    The Big Lie is mutating quickly! Hide the women & children!

    Newstarmistagain 1 hour ago

    Anybody else get the feeling that this coronavirus nonsense is really nothing more than a huge Pavlovian experiment being conducted on the entire population? You do realize that Pavlov's dogs ended up catatonic, and in a state of perpetual fear, eh goiyim cattle?

    PanGlossius 1 hour ago

    Right on. This smells like the brute simplicity of Skinner or Pavlov programming. Crude, careless, short time horizon. Like the practitioners are just running out the clock.

    namrider 1 hour ago remove link

    Conflicting reports and information because it = PSYOP

    MrBoompi 33 minutes ago

    What is a "covid patient"? Someone who tested positive? The pcr test doesn't detect live viruses. Why would someone who is not sick, aka asymptomatic, be considered a patient?

    This is the fraud we are enduring.

    jomama 46 minutes ago

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w

    Out of ~10,000,000 people observed, not a single case of asymptomatic transmission.

    This lie has the been premise for healthy people to wear masks.

    Reject the authoritarianism immediately.

    [Dec 24, 2020] Virus mutations are typically less lethal than the earlier form of the virus. Serial mutations are most common when herd immunity is being reached.

    Dec 24, 2020 | www.moonofalabama.org

    Liberty Blogger , Dec 22 2020 8:08 utc | 47

    Virus mutations are typically less lethal than the earlier form of the virus. Serial mutations are most common when herd immunity is being reached.

    How does this established science fail to disrupt virus lockdown mania?

    Fake science wins again on the panic scale.

    [Dec 10, 2020] Covid epidemic, PCR test abuse, and other calamities

    The fact that Cr (number of amplification cycles) was not reported, creates some bad thoughts. Especially about Fauci and his gang ;-) Can Fauci be sued for criminal negligence?
    Dec 10, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    wonderman 3 hours ago remove link

    I lost my dad due to a drunk driver. Therefore, we should ban cars and alcohol. Maybe, we should also ban bottles because the drunk driver drank out of a bottle. Oh, and maybe we should ban humans too because ... You see the logic!

    LEEPERMAX 3 hours ago

    It's worth repeating

    A POSITIVE PCR TEST IS NOT A "CASE"

    Lansman 2 hours ago

    They will continue to manipulate the test results to ensure the desired level of fear and panic. It is the only way to get the public to accept their absurd lockdowns and mask requirements.

    Patrick Bateman Jr. 2 hours ago

    99.9992% of the US population has survived.

    ThePub'Lick_Hare 2 hours ago

    Time for every state to follow Florida by class action suit. This farce has gone on too long. Kudos to Florida for taking the initiative. Now at last people can ask relevant questions and insist on proper protocol. The Portuguese High Court saw false COVID testing for what it is, the spark and flame of a reign of terror. Time to douse the flames and the douche-bags inflaming the scam-demic.

    Lucky Guesst 3 hours ago

    The test results weren't supposed to change until after they got Trump out and after the vaccine release so the sheep could bow to the Democrats for "saving" them. The PCR cycle threshold will change to 5 after our 100 days of penance.

    Ajax_USB_Port_Repair_Service_ 2 hours ago (Edited)

    " Whoever wins the presidency " Will get the credit.

    Agree, covid hysteria is being controlled by some group more powerful than our president.

    [Dec 06, 2020] Tested 'Positive' For COVID-19- Be Sure To Ask This Question

    Highly recommended!
    Dec 06, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    The lockdowns are based on surging "cases" which are based on positive PCR test results.

    However, what exactly is a positive PCR test result? What does it mean? As Dr. Tommy Megremis summarized recently :

    If you are generally aware, the PCR test is used to amplify small amount of genetic material so as to recognize patterns of DNA by "cycling." (Also, for RNA virus, the RNA is converted to DNA in order to be detected, it's just the way the test works) This is how we have been able to recognize the genomes in Egyptian mummies and Wooly Mammoths. It works because if you amplify and cycle enough times to "grow" legitimate DNA fragments, you get something with with a fair amount of specificity. W hat is becoming more and more apparent is that the PCR test was not designed as a diagnostic tool for infection, and really cannot function as one without having a huge amount of false positives, period.

    When it comes to COVID, the presence of viral particles picked up by the PCR technique does not and has not been quantitatively linked to an active "symptomatic" infection. It simply cannot be so, because infection threshold as a result of viral load is different for each patient. It turns out, if you "cycle" over around 25 times, the false positivity of COVID infection starts getting very high.

    I and others have explained in blogs how people can be exposed to virus, and mount a simple innate immune response and never know any differently. When you test these people with very low viral loads, who are not sick, you can find the viral RNA code that is used to "diagnose" if you cycle enough times. The last I read, Labcorp cycles at least 40 times to detect viral genome fragments. The PCR test was never intended for diagnosis of infection but as a qualitative test for presence of parts of a virus genome. I know there has been some confusion circulating the net about what the inventor Kary Mullis had said about that. But we walk daily with people who have any number of parts of killer virus or bacterial genomes which one could pick up with a PCR test if one had the specific test for it. Would we claim that that individual was an infected patient? No!

    So given all that, PeakProsperity's Chris Martenson explains below , in great details, the answer to the most important question you should ask if you or a loved one gets a positive PCR test result .

    "What's the Cycle Threshold (CT) value for that test?"

    Sounds wonky but it's actually really important to understand. A low CT value means someone is loaded with virus. A high value, oppositely, means less of a viral load.

    Beyond a certain level the load is insufficient to either infect someone else or be of any clinical or epidemiological relevance whatsoever.

    The problem? Governments all over the country and world are basing their decisions on CT values that are very high. Too high.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/eWqNl4UUlH0

    https://lockerdome.com/lad/13084989113709670?pubid=ld-dfp-ad-13084989113709670-0&pubo=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com&rid=www.zerohedge.com&width=890

    * * *

    Links:

    WHO PCR 47 (!) Cycles

    https://www.who.int/diagnostics_laboratory/eul_0489_185_00_path_covid19_ce_ivd_ifu_issue_2.0.pdf?ua=1

    CT over 35 is non-infectious

    https://www.infectiousdiseaseadvisor.com/home/topics/covid19/ct-value-may-inform-when-patients-with-covid-19-can-be-safely-discharged/

    Cycle Thresholds Too Damn High

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

    Corman Drosten retraction request

    https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/

    Bad Testing Video Sept 1

    NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

    ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX

    Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.

    https://youtu.be/ZFNdsRHKUM4

    UK PCR positive standards

    https://www.england.nhs.uk/coronavirus/wp-content/uploads/sites/52/2020/03/guidance-and-sop-covid-19-virus-testing-in-nhs-laboratories-v1.pdf

    Kansas CT cutoff of 42

    https://www.coronavirus.kdheks.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1505/SARS-CoV-2-COVID-19-PCR-Ct-Cutoff-Values-PDF -- 10-5-20


    span

    6 hours ago remove link

    Jon Rappoport (excellent blog) nails it in some of his recent posts.

    .

    "July 16, 2020, podcast, 'This Week in Virology': Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR Covid test is useless and misleading when the test is run at '35 cycles or higher.' A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.

    "Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci's key quote: ' If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more the chances of it being replication-competent [aka accurate] are miniscule you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle even 36 '

    "Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.

    "That's called a false positive.

    "What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.

    "Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and

    "The total number of Covid cases in America -- which is based on the test -- is a gross falsity.

    "The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers.

    play_arrow
    GenuineAmerican 3 hours ago

    Fauci has lied again the PCR maximum cycle for a accurate test results is 25 NOT 35. PCR is run, or should be run at 21-25 cycles everything else will give a false positive. Had a friend in Scottsdale MAYO. I had to go to this god-forsaken place to get him out. They were running the PCR at 42 cycles to keep him in the hospital because he had very, very good UNION insurance!! The health industries are all crooks, lying to people to get more money being paid to the orgainizations by the feds.

    BaNNeD oN THe RuN 7 hours ago

    IQ tests were always seriously flawed, just like the PCR test

    https://medium.com/incerto/iq-is-largely-a-pseudoscientific-swindle-f131c101ba39

    It does not measure creative or lateral thinking ability at all.

    I had scores that put me in the top 0.5% but I had no illusion that made me anything more than a good test taker.

    NatsarimAmericanoLion 6 hours ago

    Giorgio Palmas 21 hours ago

    U.S TOTAL DEATHS
    2015: 2,602,000
    2016: 2,744,248
    2017: 2,649,000
    2018: 2,839,205
    2019: 2,909,000
    According to usalivestats(dot)com, there are 2,486,700 so far this year. There could be a lag in reports, but I doubt enough to fulfill their doomsday claims. The CDC still admits only 6% of these "COVID" are without 2 or more comorbidities, so that's about 25,000 or so. This is a mild flu season. Here are the recent flu numbers:
    FLU DEATHS 2010's
    2010: 36,656
    2011: 12,447
    2012: 42,570
    2013: 37,930
    2014: 51,376
    2015: 22,705
    2016: 38,230
    2017: 61,099
    2018: 34,157

    choctaw charley 5 hours ago remove link

    so what's the purpose behind the bogus plandemic. In order to institute a one world plantation several things have to happen. Foremost is the sense of "nationhood". a nation can be thought of as modeled on the family unit. We look similar, we share religious beliefs, economic and political views and we have a common history which we take pride in. We trust rely on and help another. If you have half a brain you don't need me to describe how all these are under attack. So how does the plandemic play into this? Yesterday you neighbor was your neighbor. Today he is behind a mask because the government tells you that he is a threat to you and your family and you to his! The plandemic was used to to hugely expand the mail-in ballot fraud further driving in the wedge suspicion. Then there is this: when you get your covid test there will be a permanent file created with your name on it. It will contain your genetic code and the test result. this will become the social register that is all over Europe. Get a traffic ticket; late in making a payment; engage in disapproved political activity as I am doing at this moment? All these will find their way into your file and will in the future determine the rate you pay on your home mortgage whether you can be employed in a government job, what you have to endure to board a commercial aircraft etc. There is also a great likelihood that contained in the vaccine will be a tracking component. Consider also population segment most vulnerable to covid: older retired people drawing on an already bankrupt social security ponzi scheme. Hitler referred to these as "Useless Eaters". He had a system in place to rid society of these. Later these faciliries were expanded to include the Jewish population.

    flyonmywall 9 hours ago

    I've done lots of PCR in my life. If you have to do over 35 cycles to detect or amplify something, you're probably barking up the wrong tree or there is something wrong with your assay.

    Once you ramp up the cycles to past 35-40 cycles, you're just amplifying non-specific competing amplification products, of which there are always some.

    You could have the best designed primers in the world, there is always some random **** that happens to get amplified at high cycle counts.

    Zero-Hegemon 4 hours ago

    False positives are beneficial for obtaining COVID money and creating hysteria.

    KimAsa 9 hours ago (Edited)

    these psychopaths have redesignated the normal course of annual deaths from heart disease, and other common ailments that old people die from, to Covid 19, to create the illusion of a deadly pandemic. they claim to have isolated this virus out of one side of their mouth, out the the other side they claim it has mutated (how many times?) so can't produce proof that this virus even exists. and out of their ******* they claim to have developed a vaccine?

    this is and always has been about the vaccinating the public for free moral agency prevention.

    Ride_the_kali_yuga 9 hours ago

    Covid "tests" are an efficient way to feed the false pandemic narrative with nonsensical numbers of "contaminations". Masks are a mark of submission.

    africoman 9 hours ago

    Re-posting someone's comment from this article Here

    by John Wear, (retired) lawyer, accountant, and author.

    Excellent points, now let's threw a monkey wrench in it to the Operation Warp Speed play_arrow

    Schooey 6 hours ago

    Its all BS

    KimAsa 9 hours ago (Edited)

    these psychopaths have redesignated the normal course of annual deaths from heart disease, and other common ailments that old people die from, to Covid 19, to create the illusion of a deadly pandemic. they claim to have isolated this virus out of one side of their mouth, out the the other side they claim it has mutated (how many times?) so can't produce proof that this virus even exists. and out of their ******* they claim to have developed a vaccine?

    this is and always has been about the vaccinating the public for free moral agency prevention.

    Ms No 8 hours ago

    They actually murdered people with the lockdown too though. Knowingly and premeditated...certainly some of those were also declared covid.

    smacker 8 hours ago

    " this is and always has been about the vaccinating the public "

    Correct.

    That has become clear. What we are only now slowing learning is what the sinister motive is.

    kellys_eye 9 hours ago

    Is the test for Covid or Covid-19. Can it tell the difference? The 'normal' flu and influenza are both corona viruses and this is the 'high season' for such cases in the Northern hemisphere.

    Strangely (or not) the incidence of actual flu and influenza are suspiciously MUCH lower than they should be.

    Ergo - tests that prove 'positive' for Covid are likely either false OR reporting on the flu/influenza.

    The LIES keep mounting and mounting.

    Harry Tools 5 hours ago

    there is no pandemic

    RedNeckMother 3 hours ago

    I will add another: FDA: 40 recommendation for testing

    And let's not forget the comments by Fauci that if they're testing at 35 they're going to get a lot of false positives.

    There's an attorney in Ohio who has filed a FOI to obtain all the ct levels used by the labs testing in Ohio. It will be very interesting once that is revealed - I'm sure our governor already knows the answer. If I recall, the NYT itself did an article on this very topic awhile back and estimated that 90% of the positive results in CT and NY were bogus. And going from 40 to 35 I believe reduces positives by 63%.

    We're being played.

    MoreFreedom 5 hours ago remove link

    Dr. Martenson's videos are very good. He's clear.

    As for "the science" and scientists, we all make mistakes. If we didn't make mistakes, we wouldn't have scientists pointing out other scientist's mistakes. But it's not a question of whose science is correct, it's that science is no excuse for taking away peoples' liberty.

    SRV 7 hours ago

    The inventor of the test (Dr Kary Mullis) was very outspoken that it was NOT developed for human virus confirmation...he died of cancer just weeks before the first Covid cases (hmmmm).
    The test procedure was developed as a screening tool in lab research, and he won a Nobel Prize for it!

    It's in your face proof of the scam we're all being subjected to that almost no one ever questioned (brilliant move really)... ONE cycle above 35 (each cycle doubles the amplification) will explode the the false positives.

    And... if you have no symptoms you DO NOT have the virus (remember how much play the "asymptomatic" BS story got early on... another psyop). Notice how none of the athletes never get sick and are back in two weeks... yet it's never questioned by a soul paid to look the other way!

    smacker 9 hours ago

    " What is becoming more and more apparent is that the PCR test was not designed
    as a diagnostic tool for infection, and really cannot function as one without having
    a huge amount of false positives, period. "

    This is not knew and didn't need to become "more and more apparent".

    The inventor of the PCR test Kary Mullis is on video record stating it. Sadly his expert
    knowledge has been wilfully ignored by the political elites and countless talking heads
    and "experts" because it doesn't suit them and didn't fit their agenda.

    It's time to prepare the gallows and stock up with rope.

    smacker 7 hours ago remove link

    The PCR test is used precisely because it can be manipulated to produce as many "cases" as wanted.

    Just turn the dial up on "amplification cycles" and hey presto, you get as many positives as you want.

    The cases are not genuine cases but simply PCR positive tests, but are reported as "cases" and then
    "infections" by MSM who are "In On It".

    The idea is "FEAR Management" which allows draconian CovID rules like lockdowns and tiers and
    social distancing to be introduced which accustoms people to being managed and controlled.

    It then ramps up demand for vaccines which is the ultimate objective. Initially (or soon after), the
    vaccines will contain nano-technology - dust-chips - which will be used for surveillance and control.
    Some say they will also contain ingredients to render people infertile (ie population control).

    We are seeing in plain sight the biggest coup ever against mankind.

    It must be stopped.

    smacker 7 hours ago remove link

    The PCR test is used precisely because it can be manipulated to produce as many "cases" as wanted.

    Just turn the dial up on "amplification cycles" and hey presto, you get as many positives as you want.

    The cases are not genuine cases but simply PCR positive tests, but are reported as "cases" and then
    "infections" by MSM who are "In On It".

    The idea is "FEAR Management" which allows draconian CovID rules like lockdowns and tiers and
    social distancing to be introduced which accustoms people to being managed and controlled.

    It then ramps up demand for vaccines which is the ultimate objective. Initially (or soon after), the
    vaccines will contain nano-technology - dust-chips - which will be used for surveillance and control.
    Some say they will also contain ingredients to render people infertile (ie population control).

    We are seeing in plain sight the biggest coup ever against mankind.

    It must be stopped.


    4 hours ago

    [Dec 06, 2020] How dare you granny killer to question usefulness of PCR test

    Dec 06, 2020 | www.zerohedge.com

    GenuineAmerican 3 hours ago

    Fauci has lied again the PCR maximum cycle for a accurate test results is 25 NOT 35. PCR is run, or should be run at 21-25 cycles everything else will give a false positive. Had a friend in Scottsdale MAYO. I had to go to this god-forsaken place to get him out. They were running the PCR