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
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:
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:
CDC huge blunder with tests. This was a very expensive blunder which made the USA epidemic much larger, as it disallow
following the early cases and shut the spread on the virus via tracing contacts.
Trump administration blunder with protective equipment (face masks, suits, etc) and disinfectants such as hand sanitizer.
Especially painful was Trump administration incompetence with masks. Two month is enough to buy equipotent and start producing
them locally. That was not done. So recommendation not to wear them followed (with the idea of reserving them for medical
personnel), which increased the number of infections in highly populated places like NYC dramatically. Also the country with one
trillion military budget proved to be completely unprepared for flu-like epidemic. Even military does not have enough protection
equipment. To say nothing about US medics
Due to MSM scaremongering ventilators hoarding process started in full force ins state with NY as a clear leader.
Governer Cuomo bravely declared that NY need 40K ventilators when the total number of hospitalized with coronavirus infection
nationwide were less then that.
Hoarding epidemic quickly emptied the shelfs of supermarkets.
Privatized healthcare is about profits not about safety of personnel. Many hospitals operated with substandard set
of protective measures and that resulted in unnecessary additional infections among medical personnel.
Complete blunder to secure retirement homes. It is was creal from the very beginning that retirement home represent
a local community bond, that it just waiting for ignition. Nothing was none to prevent infection of inhabitants and personnel
and epidemics in nurcing homes followed. No masks, no obligatory usage of hand sanitizer, no UV lamps, nothing. In other
words no aven elementary hygienic measusres.
Grocery store personnel was left completely exposed to the virus. No government supply of masks to them and first
repondents. Priovite inductee scrooges like Bezos while spending extraordinary amounts on his pet space projects failed to
secure masks and sanitizer in Amazon warehouses and several of them experienced outbreaks of virus. One was closed.
New York Post
Neoliberalism with it cult of profits at any costs, promotion of unhealthy competition, outsourcing of manufacturing, long
supply chains, and the rule of financial oligarchy proved to be far from the best social system to face the epidemic and it
show. Outsourcing of manufacturing hit the country were it hurt: in such areas as protective suits for medics,
drugs, and even such low technology item as face masks.
Banks again were caught "swimming naked". It is unknown how many overplayed their hand with derivatives, but again
they required bailout at taxpayer expense. Under neoliberalism nationalization of most crooked entities and wiping out
shareholders is not an option. Wall Street scum remains parasitic scum: they did not help the country one bit.
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.
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.
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.)
"... If there's any demographic that isn't at risk, it's children. Children were never an issue when it came to COVID. Their caseload was never the majority, the plurality, or even a fraction that you could call 'significant.' ..."
"... If they do contract COVID, it's usually not a bad case. A child's survival rate is a whopping 99.995 percent when it comes to infection. They're virtually bulletproof. ..."
"... Since the start of the pandemic, only 335 kids under the age of 18 have died from COVID. Is one too many? Of course. It's tragic but hardly cause for a national panic. By this logic, we can no longer drive automobiles. Too much death. ..."
"... Schools have also never been a source of super spread. The schools in Irvine, California reopened in September of 2020. A report last March noted at the time, that of the 23,000 students in the Irvine School District, just 17 contracted COVID. How many of the 3,000 employees? Only three. And this was when the vaccine was not readily available. ..."
"... Should people still be careful? Sure, but this isn't a 'Apocalypse Now' mentality. ..."
They have nowhere to go. The liberal media and the experts see another avenue to lock us
down -- and they're going full bore. The Delta variant, which doesn't make you sicker nor is it
more lethal, is a problem for the unvaccinated. But we're not locking down again. No way.
There's a midterm election coming up, so no -- not even Joe Biden is going to back such a move.
It's the same reason why there will be no mandatory vaccination protocol. There's an election
coming up. If this were a national emergency, politics be damned -- everyone gets a shot,
right? They're readily available to everyone who can get them. That should be the mindset. It's
not. Why? Because obviously, it's not a do-or-die situation. If a mandatory vaccination mandate
is being kept in the desk until after an election, it's all politics. We've known this for
months.
And now, they're trying to gaslight us on children and COVID. Fellas, I have bad news. We've
been paying attention. If there's any demographic that isn't at risk, it's children.
Children were never an issue when it came to COVID. Their caseload was never the majority, the
plurality, or even a fraction that you could call 'significant.' This notion that children
are under threat is science fiction and it doesn't help that a hyper-partisan Surgeon General,
Vivek Murthy, who was not shy about wanting to declare gun violence a national health issue, is
peddling this fearmongering.
The science is clear. Children generally do not get it or spread it. If they do contract
COVID, it's usually not a bad case. A child's survival rate is a whopping 99.995 percent when
it comes to infection. They're virtually bulletproof.
Since the start of the pandemic, only 335 kids under the age of 18 have died from COVID.
Is one too many? Of course. It's tragic but hardly cause for a national panic. By this logic,
we can no longer drive automobiles. Too much death.
Schools have also never been a source of super spread. The schools in Irvine, California
reopened in September of 2020. A report last March noted at the time, that of the 23,000
students in the Irvine School District,
just 17 contracted COVID. How many of the 3,000 employees? Only three. And this was when
the vaccine was not readily available.
The vaccines right now are not available for kids under the age of 12. They're not at-risk.
They're not carriers. Should people still be careful? Sure, but this isn't a 'Apocalypse
Now' mentality. Also, the store-bought masks that people, like Fauci, are saying kids
under three should wear don't stop the spread of COVID. Fauci mentioned
that in his emails .
America is winning the battle against COVID-19. But you wouldn't know it by listening to our
politicians and public health authorities.
President Joe Biden
has said he will still wear a mask after vaccination -- even when outside or gathering indoors
with other vaccinated individuals -- calling it a "patriotic responsibility." Days earlier,
Biden's chief medical adviser, Dr. Anthony Fauci , insisted that children
should still wear masks while playing outside, even though outdoor transmission is virtually
impossible.
They're hardly the only doomsayers. Vaccines are rolling out quickly...
... ... ...
It's true that we may never get all the way to zero. But we don't have to. Expecting zero
transmission is both unrealistic and unnecessary. We accept all manner of risks as the price of
going about our daily lives. The flu kills tens of thousands of Americans each year. Car
accidents claim about 40,000 lives annually. But most people don't shun social contact each flu
season or refuse to drive.
Fear-mongering can be lucrative. Bad news grabs readers' attention and enables
testing companies to reap unprecedented profits -- but only if context is not allowed to
dampen enthusiasm for accentuating the negative. For example, even if U.S. deaths due to PIC
top 400,000 in 2020, whether COVID-19 without serious comorbidities caused the vast majority of
those deaths or only the largest portion, those deaths should be considered in the context of
the size of the U.S. population (about
328 million ) and the number of deaths otherwise expected this year (about
2.8 million ). In the context of those denominators, PIC deaths are a real concern, but
they are not catastrophic. As put by Michael
Barone ,
the 1957-58 Asian flu killed between 75,000 and 116,000 people in the United States,
between 0.04% and 0.07% of the nation's population then. The 1968-69 Hong Kong flu killed
about 100,000, 0.05% of the population.
The current [Covid-19] death toll of 185,000 is 0.055% of the current population. It will
go higher, but it's about the same magnitude as those two flu outbreaks and less deadly for
those under 65. Yet, there were no statewide lockdowns, no massive school closings, no closed
office buildings and factories, restaurants, and museums. No one even considered shutting
down Woodstock.
As of 2018, about
700,000 people have died from HIV/AIDS, and about 655,000 people die from heart disease while
about 140,000 die from
stroke each year in the United States. Even though stroke and heart disease are not
contagious, their combined 795,000 deaths will swamp reasonable projections for COVID-19 deaths
– but still, the effect of deaths from stroke, heart disease, and HIV/AIDS has not been
catastrophic because combating those illnesses has not entailed policies that cause massive
unemployment, divert
health care from other lethal illnesses , and raise the specter of economic collapse. Three
hundred and twenty eight million is a big denominator.
Given a concerning-but-not-catastrophic PIC pandemic, public health responses also need to
be kept in proper perspective. Wrong context is even worse than no context. Erring on the side
of caution, the CDC decided to advise more stringent strategies than might have been
appropriate – identifying and isolating patients, requiring social distancing, economic
and social lockdowns, compulsory mask wearing, maybe even tracing contacts, et cetera -- many
of the strategies that helped defeat Ebola
virus epidemics .
Sounds good, but there are two problems. The first is feasibility of enforcement. China's
government has the power over its provinces and people to enforce lockdowns and quarantine
major cities like Wuhan (11 million people). The United States is not that "united." We have
states' rights. Even states whose governors try to isolate their state from other states find
that their policies have more holes than a sieve. A country that champions "Give me liberty, or
give me death" and "Live free or die" cannot enforce strictures that could work in theory.
Feasibility of enforcement aside, there is an epidemiological hitch that cannot be overcome
even in theory. Compared to coronaviruses ( common cold , COVID-19) and
influenza viruses (flu), Ebola is super-lethal. Super-lethal means that victims do not live
long enough to become asymptomatic long-term carriers. But with COVID-19 we have asymptomatic
regular-spreaders,
silent spreaders , and super-spreaders
. So when new cases and deaths decrease below pandemic levels in areas where CDC
recommendations have been largely observed, and those areas begin to "open up" in response,
non-immune people who come out of lockdown are at high risk of being infected by a plethora of
highly mobile carriers. This phenomenon drives what is often called a "second wave" of Covid-19
(per the second bump in Figures 1 and 3). The term "second wave" can be misleading. The virus
does not do anything new
"... Federal officials concentrated their resources on quickly developing vaccines, with success. However, a relative dearth of drug research focused on coronaviruses, despite previous outbreaks, held back a fast response on treatments ..."
"... Red Texas btw had 1,387 new cases today. A state with 30 million people. 5 (yes that's five) deaths. The fourth straight day new cases fell. Weird how those stats aren't making it into the fear-mongering articles. ..."
"... Israel is struggling with a fourth wave of infections, and the Israeli Health Ministry announced at that Pfizer vaccine is only 39% effective against the Delta variant there. People who have had Covid and recovered are not being reinfected at a high rate. ..."
"... Time to stop the fear-mongering and hysteria. There is risk to everything in life, and you can't hide under the bed for the rest of your lives because something might happen. Let's get back to normal and stop being held prisoner by confused people like Fauci who don't understand their 15 minutes of fame are long over. ..."
Federal officials concentrated their resources on quickly developing vaccines, with
success. However, a relative dearth of drug research focused on coronaviruses, despite previous
outbreaks, held back a fast response on treatments . Scattered U.S. clinical trials
competed against each other for patients. When effective yet hard-to-administer drugs were
developed, a fragmented American healthcare system struggled to deliver them to patients.
Covid-19 cases, and the need for treatments, are continuing. U.S. hospitals are bracing for
new surges of cases with the
Delta variant spreading
... The Biden administration recently said it would
spend $3.2 billion to support the development of Covid-19 antiviral pills.
... ... ...
A lack of knowledge among healthcare providers has made it difficult to get even the
available treatments. When Bob Bellin of Austin, Texas, tested positive for Covid-19 last
December, he remembered that then-President Donald Trump had
taken a monoclonal antibody treatment from Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc.
Suffering from a mild cough and a headache, the retiree was worried about his chances of
developing a bad case of the virus because he has a compromised immune system condition. He
says he called a telemedicine provider to inquire about antibody treatment, but the physician
assistant on the call initially didn't know about it. After some pleading, the healthcare
worker agreed to research the drug's availability, he says.
Several minutes later, she got back to him with the names of sites where he could get the
antibody treatment. The next week, Mr. Bellin received the infusion over a three-hour visit. A
week later, he started his regular running routine again.
... ... ...
Remdesivir, first authorized by the Food and Drug Administration in May 2020 and later
granted full approval, is now given to roughly half of all hospitalized patients. Yet patients
often recover slowly regardless of whether they receive the treatment or not, doctors say.
"The effect of remdesivir is something a statistician can show you in a trial of 1,000
people, but it's not something where you really can see a day-to-day impact on your patients,"
says Dr. Griffin of ProHealth.
... ... ...
The Recovery study, which has examined at least 12 drugs so far, found the most effective of
all Covid-19 treatments for hospitalized patients to date, dexamethasone, which cut the risk of
death in patients on ventilators by a third. The Oxford scientists
reported the results in June 2020 , less than three months after they first began
evaluating it.
... ... ...
Last November, the FDA authorized the first drugs designed specifically to target Covid-19
in people who weren't hospitalized based on preliminary trial results. These monoclonal
antibodies were modeled after the natural antibodies people produce to fight the new
coronavirus.
Researchers at companies including Regeneron and Eli Lilly & Co. developed these monoclonal
antibody therapies in less than a year, compared with the decade or longer it usually takes to
bring a drug to market. The work was sped by earlier research by Regeneron and others to
develop antibodies for the MERS virus. The new drugs worked well in early Covid-19 patients,
reducing the risk of hospitalization or death by 70% in trials.
Yet of the nearly one million doses shipped to hospitals and clinics from November through
early May, just 49% were used by patients over the period.
One factor in their limited use was the fact that influential panels that issue Covid-19
treatment guidelines balked at endorsing them before full clinical trial data was available.
The NIH and the Infectious Diseases Society of America didn't recommend using the drugs until
February and March, respectively, after Lilly provided results from a Phase 3 study.
... ... ...
The hospital treated 1,469 patients with the drugs through early July, and as many as 30
people a day at the peak, says Jonathan Parsons, a pulmonologist and executive vice chair of
clinical operations for Wexner's internal medicine department.
Of the patients treated so far, 4.8% have gone on to be hospitalized, compared with an
estimated 8% to 9% for similar patients not infused with the drug, he says.
Looking ahead, the best solution would be an antiviral that can be taken early in the
disease as a pill, doctors say.
Finding highly effective treatments with tolerable side effects is likely to take years and
require more coordination between government, universities and industry...
The posts below are sad - Trump, Trump, Trump. A man who's been gone for eight months. I
guess that's better than dealing with Biden's endless problems. I suppose letting in
thousands of illegals, many with covid, still isn't an issue?
Love the constant blaming of "delta" on unvaxxed Trump supporters. Sure, it's mostly red
states, but the enormous fact that keeps getting ignored is the fact over 60% of whites have
vaxxed. African Americans? 9%. Yes 9%. That means millions of adult AAs who can get shots,
won't.
Not surprising is AAs make up a large portion of the current hospital load (which still
isn't bad). Of course all the media and the people making this political want to say
is...it's "red states". I guess they don't want to offend Biden's voting base?
Red Texas btw had 1,387 new cases today. A state with 30 million people. 5 (yes that's
five) deaths. The fourth straight day new cases fell. Weird how those stats aren't making it
into the fear-mongering articles.
jack Canzonetta SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
FDA, CDC, FAUCI all downplayed Regeneron's treatment--a super treatment --I also asked my
about DR above Regeneron's treatment .. We were discussing a plan in case I contracted the
Wuhan lab virus, he didn't say much Regeneron - I also found out the outlets to receive it
were limited and they had produced many of product.. Fauci was singing only one note--Moderna
--
Catherine G Attara-Fink SUBSCRIBER 27 minutes ago
How about we need treatment for those who have been vaccinated and get Covid after the
fact???
thomas barloon SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Today I saw a 50 year old man with active pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) . Each time he coughs,
he releases millions of tuberculosis organisms into to the air and fills the rooms he enters
with infectious active bacteria. Should our patient with active tuberculosis be allowed to go
when and where he wants? Would you enter a cafe where he is eating or enter a room where he
is living? Of course, most would hope the man with active TB stays home and takes medication
to treat his active infection. Now, in many states, people with active COVID are allowed to
enter cafes and stores. Who are those with acitive COVID? One does not know until one tests
and traces and isolates. And an effective vaccine is also available and monoclonal antibodies
are available to all. Why do doctors not use HCQ and Invermectin and zinc? Simple. These and
many other medications do not work. Yes, the results are available for all to read for free
in NEJM, JAMA, Nature. Follow facts not fantasy.
William Lamb SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
I guessed face mask might not be in this picture, since there are those who claimed it is
ineffective and covered one smile. Beside, it is their constutional rights to infect others
and care less for their fellow American, when they see that it is good to share the same
misery to others.
Dick Motley SUBSCRIBER 56 minutes ago
What an ironic post. You DO realize the vaccines are also categorized as emergency use
because they're also considered experimental right? And you HAVE heard about adverse
reactions to the vaccines, right? And you HAVE heard about "breakthrough" cases (reinfection)
among the vaccinated, right?
Sorry, did I say "ironic"? I meant "moronic".
Jamilla Graves SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
It would be irresponsible for the WSJ to spread propaganda about drugs that have been
disproven as treatments against and to prevent COVID-19.
jes merrell SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago
Agreed. It is equally irresponsible for the layman poster to spread propaganda such as "tens
of thousands" of doctors are doing what?
If the poster is a physician, virologist or immunologist, offer your credentials along with
your medical advice. It will then have credibility, your opinions have none.
Mikey Metz SUBSCRIBER 3 hours ago
"Fragmented health care" is correct. When will Congress and at least 60 percent of Americans
wake up and realize health care in a capitalized society does not work like Target Corp. or
any business that works in a competitive environment. And to read how little money is spent
in this area is horrible. The world has dealt with terrible viruses forever--and the feet
dragging continues.
We are not in Russia or China where the state mandates what to do. with your thinking it has
to be difficult for you to be in a country where there is freedom of choice.
Who are you to tell 50% of the population of the country what to do? Who are you to mandate
to get an experimental vaccine? This is everyone's individual decision. If you are vaccinated
you are safe. Didn't Biden say you are 100% safe?
Richard Dole SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago
Let's see, all the Science (actual peer reviewed studies) indicate that those who have
recovered from COVID (naturally vaccinated) or been jabbed are good to go, have broad
immunity. So why worry about others if you are protected........
J Domingo SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago (Edited)
So why worry about others if you are protected........
Because this is not about protecting people.
It is about controlling people.
That is the only explanation for why Covid survivors are put on the BAD list. If they
don't line up and demonstrate their servility, they are in trouble.
T
Now, a new NIH-supported study shows that the answer to this question will vary based on how
an individual's antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were generated: over the course of a naturally
acquired infection or from a COVID-19 vaccine. The new evidence shows that protective
antibodies generated in response to an mRNA vaccine will target a broader range of SARS-CoV-2
variants carrying "single letter" changes in a key portion of their spike protein compared to
antibodies acquired from an infection. These results add to evidence that people with
acquired immunity may have differing levels of protection to emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants.
More importantly, the data provide further documentation that those who've had and recovered
from a COVID-19 infection still stand to benefit from getting vaccinated.
J Domingo SUBSCRIBER 5 hours ago (Edited)
Israel is struggling with a fourth wave of infections, and the Israeli Health Ministry
announced at that Pfizer vaccine is only 39% effective against the Delta variant there.
People who have had Covid and recovered are not being reinfected at a high rate.
Now, a new NIH-supported study shows that the answer to this question will vary...
Quoting a study that is not yet published provides little useful information,
and cannot be used to conclude vaccination is superior to recovery from natural infection.
Thomas Erb SUBSCRIBER 5 hours ago
you missed a part of the Israeli quote
The two-dose vaccine still works very well in preventing people from getting seriously
sick, demonstrating 88% effectiveness against hospitalization and 91% effectiveness against
severe illness, according to the Israeli data.
David Richardson SUBSCRIBER 5 hours ago
Because I still have about a 20% chance of getting the Delta virus if I am in direct contact
with unvaccinated and unmasked people. I then have a 10% chance of getting seriously ill.
But, the many people who post exactly the same question know this data. It is reported daily
by outlets ranging from the MSM to Fox. You just don't like it . It cuts your argument that
unvaccinated people are not a concern or threat to vaccinated people to shreds Man up. Or, at
least, shut up. If you or others decide not to get vaccinated you are materially raising the
immediate risk to others and--perhaps even worse--the odds that you will bread an even worse
variant.
Hersh Goel SUBSCRIBER 3 hours ago
you do not have a 20% chance of getting Delta virus from unvaccinated pople - dont shake
hands, dont hug or kiss. dont get in crowded places like elevators. wear an eye shield and
mask - your risk is essentially zero. The evidence is the thousands of unvaccinated health
care workers who took care of covid 19 cases for over a year.
But if you want to have 'direct contact' with people, thats a choice you make.
T Swan SUBSCRIBER 5 hours ago
This from India news, July 1, 2021
'Not a long-drawn process': Bharat Biotech expecting WHO approval soon As several European
countries are accepting WHO-listed Covishield, Covaxin too is expected to receive WHO
approval soon.
Stephen Carroll SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago
The highest rates of unvaccinated people live in the inner cities. In order to get support
from liberals the Democrats have neglected these inner city people so it would not disprove
their narrative that it is suburban conservatives that are failing to get vaccinated.
Nikola Sizgorich SUBSCRIBER 6 hours ago
Time to stop the fear-mongering and hysteria. There is risk to everything in life, and
you can't hide under the bed for the rest of your lives because something might happen. Let's
get back to normal and stop being held prisoner by confused people like Fauci who don't
understand their 15 minutes of fame are long over.
K Baker SUBSCRIBER 4 hours ago
Everybody knows a person can still get covid even if a person is fully vaccinated and spread
it to other people. Except JD. He will Spin that a 1000 different ways to try to confuse
people. He is talking to himself.
J Domingo SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Everybody knows a person can still get covid even if a person is fully vaccinated...
That's truly funny.
"You're not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations." Joe Biden, speaking
at the CNN Town Hall in Cincinnati, OH, July 21, 2021
K Baker, and most D's don't even know what their confused leader believes and is
saying publicly about the vaccine.
Without misinformation, the Left would be bereft of information.
Always follow the money...... Every. Single. Time. Looks like Pfizer is the biggest donor of
this Academy. From twits: "AAP child-masking directive has zero citations to support its masking
recommendations, but it does have a citation for their support to send *even more* federal $$$ to
all schools, even schools that are closed: it's a teachers union lobbying document."
The American Academy of Pediatrics is demanding that all children over the age of 2 years
old wear face masks at schools and nurseries, a suggestion that goes further than any previous
restrictions.
@txsalth2o · Jul 19 The American Academy
of Pediatrics wants all kids masked until vaccinated?!? Let's go to their website and see
who the biggest donor is....
The group, which has 67,000 members in primary care,
announced that even if kids have been vaccinated they should still be forced to wear masks,
suggesting that "Combining layers of protection that include vaccinations, masking and
clean-hands hygiene will make in-person learning safe and possible for everyone."
The group also claims that "masking is proven to reduce transmission of the virus and to
protect those who are not vaccinated."
The group's statement also claims universal masking is "the most effective strategy to create
consistent messages and expectations among students without the added burden of needing to
monitor everyone's vaccination status."
The demand goes further than that of the CDC, which
has said that children and adults who work in schools who are fully vaccinated don't need to
wear masks.
The AAP is echoing Anthony Fauci, who last week called for all children older than 2 to be
forced to wear masks:
In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. We need you
to sign up for our free newsletter here . Support our sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without
the comedown. Also, we urgently need your financial support here .
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.472.0_en.html#goog_1547962665 Wall Street
Bounces, After Selloff Fed Boosts Liquidity SoftBank Said to Plan $14 Billion Sale of Alibaba
Shares NOW PLAYING China's Companies Have Worst Quarter on Record, Beige Book Says U.S.-Saudi
Oil Alliance Under Consideration, Brouillette Says ETF Volumes Surge in Current Market
Environment Investors Have Given Up on a V-Shaped Recovery, BNY's Young Cautions
The United States suffered through two lethal waves of contagion in the past year and a
half. The first was a viral pandemic that killed about one in 500 Americans -- typically, a
person over 75 suffering from other serious conditions. The second, and far more catastrophic,
was a moral panic that swept the nation's guiding institutions.
Instead of keeping calm and carrying on, the American elite flouted the norms of governance,
journalism, academic freedom -- and, worst of all, science. They misled the public about the
origins of the virus and the true risk that it posed. Ignoring their own carefully prepared
plans for a pandemic, they claimed unprecedented powers to impose untested strategies, with
terrible collateral damage. As evidence of their mistakes mounted, they stifled debate by
vilifying dissenters, censoring criticism, and suppressing scientific research.
If, as seems increasingly plausible, the coronavirus that causes Covid-19 leaked out of a
laboratory in Wuhan, it is the costliest blunder ever committed by scientists. Whatever the
pandemic's origin, the response to it is the worst mistake in the history of the public-health
profession. We still have no convincing evidence that the lockdowns saved lives, but lots of
evidence that they have already cost lives and will prove deadlier in
the long run than the virus itself.
One in three people worldwide lost a job or a business during the lockdowns, and half saw
their earnings drop, according to a
Gallup poll . Children, never at risk from the virus, in many places essentially lost a
year of school. The economic and health consequences were felt most acutely
among the less affluent in America and in the rest of the world, where the
World Bank estimates that more than 100 million have been pushed into extreme poverty.
The leaders responsible for these disasters continue to pretend that their policies worked
and assume that they can keep fooling the public. They've promised to deploy these strategies
again in the future, and they might even succeed in doing so -- unless we begin to understand
what went wrong.
The panic was started, as usual, by journalists. As the virus spread early last year, they
highlighted the most alarming statistics and the scariest images: the estimates of a fatality
rate ten to 50 times higher than the flu, the chaotic scenes at hospitals in Italy and New York
City, the predictions that national health-care systems were about to collapse.
The full-scale panic was set off by the
release in March 2020 of a computer model at the Imperial College in London , which
projected that -- unless drastic measures were taken -- intensive-care units would have 30
Covid patients for every available bed and that America would see 2.2 million deaths by the end
of the summer. The British researchers announced that the "only viable strategy" was to impose
draconian restrictions on businesses, schools, and social gatherings until a vaccine
arrived.
This extraordinary project was swiftly declared the "consensus" among public-health
officials, politicians, journalists, and academics. Anthony Fauci, director of the National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, endorsed it and became the unassailable authority
for those purporting to "follow the science." What had originally been a limited lockdown --
"15 days to slow the spread" -- became long-term policy across much of the United States and
the world. A few scientists and public-health experts objected, noting that an extended
lockdown was a novel strategy of unknown effectiveness that had been rejected in previous plans
for a pandemic. It was a dangerous experiment being conducted without knowing the answer to the
most basic question: Just how lethal is this virus?
The most prominent early critic was John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist at Stanford, who
published an
essay for STAT headlined "A Fiasco in the Making? As the Coronavirus Pandemic Takes Hold,
We Are Making Decisions Without Reliable Data." While a short-term lockdown made sense, he
argued, an extended lockdown could prove worse than the disease, and scientists needed to do
more intensive testing to determine the risk. The article offered common-sense advice from one
of the world's most frequently cited authorities on the credibility of medical research, but it
provoked a furious backlash on Twitter from scientists and journalists.
The fury intensified in April 2020, when Ioannidis followed his own advice by joining with
Jay Bhattacharya and other colleagues from Stanford to gauge the spread of Covid in the
surrounding area, Santa Clara County. After testing for Covid antibodies in the blood of
several thousand volunteers, they estimated that the fatality rate among the infected in the
county was about 0.2 percent, twice as high as for the flu but considerably lower than the
assumptions of public-health officials and computer modelers. The researchers acknowledged that
the fatality rate could be substantially higher in other places where the virus spread
extensively in nursing homes (which hadn't yet occurred in the Santa Clara area). But merely by
reporting data that didn't fit the official panic narrative, they became targets.
Other scientists lambasted the researchers and claimed that methodological weaknesses in the
study made the results meaningless. A statistician at Columbia wrote that the researchers "owe
us all an apology." A biologist at the University of North Carolina said that the study was
"horrible science." A Rutgers chemist called Ioannidis a "mediocrity" who "cannot even
formulate a simulacrum of a coherent, rational argument." A year later, Ioannidis still marvels
at the attacks on the study (which was eventually published in a leading
epidemiology journal). "Scientists whom I respect started acting like warriors who had to
subvert the enemy," he says. "Every paper I've written has errors -- I'm a scientist, not the
pope -- but the main conclusions of this one were correct and have withstood the
criticism."
Mainstream journalists piled on with hit pieces quoting critics and accusing the researchers
of endangering lives by questioning lockdowns. The Nation called the research a "black mark"
for Stanford. The cheapest shots came from BuzzFeed, which devoted thousands of words to a
series of trivial objections and baseless accusations. The article that got the most attention
was BuzzFeed's breathless
revelation that an airline executive opposed to lockdowns had contributed $5,000 -- yes,
five thousand dollars! -- to an anonymized fund at Stanford that had helped finance the Santa
Clara fieldwork.
The notion that a team of prominent academics, who were not paid for their work in the
study, would risk their reputations by skewing results for the sake of a $5,000 donation was
absurd on its face -- and even more ludicrous, given that Ioannidis, Bhattacharya, and the lead
investigator, Eran Bendavid, said that they weren't even aware of the donation while conducting
the study. But Stanford University was so cowed by the online uproar that it subjected the
researchers to a two-month fact-finding inquiry by an outside legal firm. The inquiry found no
evidence of conflict of interest, but the smear campaign succeeded in sending a clear message
to scientists everywhere: Don't question the lockdown narrative.
In a brief interlude of journalistic competence, two veteran science writers, Jeanne Lenzer
and Shannon Brownlee, published an article in Scientific
American decrying the politicization of Covid research. They defended the integrity and
methodology of the Stanford researchers, noting that some subsequent studies had found similar
rates of fatality among the infected. (In his latest review of the literature ,
Ioannidis now estimates that the average fatality rate in Europe and the Americas is 0.3 to 0.4
percent and about 0.2 percent among people not living in institutions.) Lenzer and Brownlee
lamented that the unjust criticism and ad hominem vitriol had suppressed a legitimate debate by
intimidating the scientific community. Their editors then proceeded to prove their point.
Responding to more online fury, Scientific American repented by publishing an
editor's note that essentially repudiated its own article. The editors printed BuzzFeed's
accusations as the final word on the matter, refusing to publish a rebuttal from the article's authors
or a supporting letter from Jeffrey Flier, former dean of Harvard Medical School. Scientific
American , long the most venerable publication in its field, now bowed to the scientific
authority of BuzzFeed.
Editors of research journals fell into line, too. When Thomas Benfield, one of the
researchers in Denmark conducting the first large randomized controlled trial of mask efficacy
against Covid, was asked why they were taking so long to publish the much-anticipated findings,
he promised them as "as soon as a journal is brave enough to accept the paper." After being
rejected by The Lancet , The New England Journal of Medicine , and JAMA , the study finally
appeared in the
Annals of Internal Medicine , and the reason for the editors' reluctance became clear: the
study showed that a mask did not protect the wearer, which contradicted claims by the Centers
for Disease Control and other health authorities.
Stefan Baral, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins with 350 publications to his name,
submitted a critique of lockdowns to more than ten journals and finally gave up -- the "first
time in my career that I could not get a piece placed anywhere," he said. Martin Kulldorff, an
epidemiologist at Harvard, had a similar experience with his article, early in the pandemic,
arguing that resources should be focused on protecting the elderly. "Just as in war," Kulldorff
wrote, "we must exploit the characteristics of the enemy in order to defeat it with the minimum
number of casualties. Since Covid-19 operates in a highly age specific manner, mandated counter
measures must also be age specific. If not, lives will be unnecessarily lost." It was a
tragically accurate prophecy from one of the leading experts on infectious disease, but
Kulldorff couldn't find a scientific journal or media outlet to accept the article, so he ended
up
posting it on his own LinkedIn page. "There's always a certain amount of herd thinking in
science," Kulldorff says, "but I've never seen it reach this level. Most of the epidemiologists
and other scientists I've spoken to in private are against lockdowns, but they're afraid to
speak up."
To break the silence, Kulldorff joined with Stanford's Bhattacharya and Sunetra Gupta of
Oxford to issue a plea for "focused protection," called the Great Barrington Declaration . They urged officials to divert
more resources to shield the elderly, such as doing more tests of the staff at nursing homes
and hospitals, while reopening business and schools for younger people, which would ultimately
protect the vulnerable as herd immunity grew among the low-risk population.
They managed to attract attention but not the kind they hoped for. Though tens of thousands
of other scientists and doctors went on to sign the declaration, the press caricatured it as a
deadly "let it rip" strategy and an "ethical nightmare" from "Covid deniers" and "agents of
misinformation." Google initially shadow-banned
it so that the first page of search results for "Great Barrington Declaration" showed only
criticism of it (like an article calling it "the work of a climate denial network") but not the
declaration itself. Facebook shut
down the scientists' page for a week for violating unspecified "community standards."
The most reviled heretic was Scott Atlas, a medical doctor and health-policy analyst at
Stanford's Hoover Institution. He, too,
urged focused protection on nursing homes and
calculated that the medical, social, and economic disruptions of the lockdowns would cost
more years of life than the coronavirus. When he joined the White House coronavirus task force,
Bill Gates
derided him as "this Stanford guy with no background" promoting "crackpot theories." Nearly
100 members of Stanford's faculty signed a letter
denouncing his "falsehoods and misrepresentations of science," and an editorial in the
Stanford Daily
urged the university to sever its ties to Hoover.
The Stanford faculty senate overwhelmingly
voted to condemn Atlas's actions as "anathema to our community, our values and our belief
that we should use knowledge for good." Several professors from Stanford's medical school
demanded further punishment in a JAMA article, "When Physicians Engage in Practices That
Threaten the Nation's Health." The article, which misrepresented Atlas's views as well
as the evidence on the efficacy of lockdowns, urged professional medical societies and
medical-licensing boards to take action against Atlas on the grounds that it was "ethically
inappropriate for physicians to publicly recommend behaviors or interventions that are not
scientifically well grounded."
But if it was unethical to recommend "interventions that are not scientifically well
grounded," how could anyone condone the lockdowns? "It was utterly immoral to conduct this
society-wide intervention without the evidence to justify it," Bhattacharya says. "The
immediate results have been disastrous, especially for the poor, and the long-term effect will
be to fundamentally undermine trust in public health and science." The traditional strategy for
dealing with pandemics was to isolate the infected and protect the most vulnerable, just as
Atlas and the Great Barrington scientists recommended. The CDC's pre-pandemic planning scenarios
didn't recommend extended school closures or any shutdown of businesses even during a plague as
deadly as the 1918 Spanish flu. Yet Fauci
dismissed the focused-protection strategy as "total nonsense" to "anybody who has any
experience in epidemiology and infectious diseases," and his verdict became "the science" to
leaders in America and elsewhere.
Fortunately, a few leaders followed the science in a different way. Instead of blindly
trusting Fauci, they listened to his critics and adopted the focused-protection strategy --
most notably, in Florida. Its governor, Ron DeSantis, began to doubt the public-health
establishment early in the pandemic, when computer models projected that Covid patients would
greatly outnumber hospital beds in many states. Governors in New York, New Jersey,
Pennsylvania, and Michigan were so alarmed and so determined to free up hospital beds that they
directed nursing homes and other facilities to admit or readmit Covid patients -- with deadly
results.
But DeSantis was skeptical of the hospital projections -- for good reason, as
no state actually ran out of beds -- and more worried about the risk of Covid spreading in
nursing homes. He forbade long-term-care centers to admit anyone infected with Covid and
ordered frequent testing of the staff at senior-care centers. After locking down last spring,
he reopened businesses, schools, and restaurants early, rejected mask mandates, and ignored
protests from the press and the state's Democratic leaders. Fauci
warned that Florida was "asking for trouble," but DeSantis went on seeking and heeding
advice from Atlas and the Great Barrington scientists, who were astonished to speak with a
politician already familiar with just about every study they mentioned to him.
"DeSantis was an incredible outlier," Atlas says. "He dug up the data and read the
scientific papers and analyzed it all himself. In our discussions, he'd bounce ideas off me,
but he was already on top of the details of everything. He always had the perspective to see
the larger harms of lockdowns and the need to concentrate testing and other resources on the
elderly. And he has been proven correct."
If Florida had simply done no worse than the rest of the country during the pandemic, that
would have been enough to discredit the lockdown strategy. The state effectively served as the
control group in a natural experiment, and no medical treatment with dangerous side effects
would be approved if the control group fared no differently from the treatment group. But the
outcome of this experiment was even more damning.
Florida's mortality rate from Covid is lower than the national average among those over 65
and also among younger people, so that the state's age-adjusted Covid
mortality rate is lower than that of all but ten other states. And by the most important
measure, the overall rate of " excess mortality " (the number of deaths above
normal), Florida has also done better than the national average. Its rate of excess mortality
is significantly lower than that of the most restrictive state, California, particularly among
younger adults, many of whom died not from Covid but from causes related to the lockdowns:
cancer screenings and treatments were delayed, and there were sharp increases in deaths from
drug overdoses and from heart attacks not treated promptly.
Chart by Jamie Meggas
If the treatment group in a clinical trial were dying off faster than the control group, an
ethical researcher would halt the experiment. But the lockdown proponents were undeterred by
the numbers in Florida, or by similar
results elsewhere, including a comparable natural experiment involving European countries
with the least restrictive policies. Sweden, Finland, and Norway rejected mask mandates and
extended lockdowns, and they have each suffered
significantly less excess mortality than most other European countries during the
pandemic.
A nationwide analysis in Sweden showed that keeping schools open
throughout the pandemic, without masks or social distancing, had little effect on the spread of
Covid, but school closures and mask mandates for students continued elsewhere. Another Swedish
researcher, Jonas Ludvigsson, reported that not a single schoolchild
in the country died from Covid in Sweden and that their teachers' risk of serious illness was
lower than for the rest of the workforce -- but these findings provoked so many online attacks
and threats that Ludvigsson decided to stop researching or discussing
Covid.
Social-media platforms continued censoring scientists and journalists who questioned
lockdowns and mask mandates. YouTube
removed a video discussion between DeSantis and the Great Barrington scientists, on the
grounds that it "contradicts the consensus" on the efficacy of masks, and also took
down the Hoover Institution's interview with Atlas. Twitter locked out Atlas and Kulldorff
for scientifically accurate challenges to mask orthodoxy. A peer-reviewed German study reporting
harms to children from mask-wearing was suppressed on Facebook (which labeled
my City Journal article "Partly
False" because it cited the study) and also at ResearchGate, one of the most widely used
websites for scientists to post their papers. ResearchGate refused to explain the censorship to
the German scientists, telling them only that the paper was removed from the website in
response to "reports from the community about the subject-matter."
The social-media censors and scientific establishment, aided by the Chinese government,
succeeded for a year in suppressing the lab-leak theory, depriving vaccine developers of
potentially valuable insights into the virus's evolution. It's understandable, if deplorable,
that the researchers and officials involved in supporting the Wuhan lab research would cover up
the possibility that they'd unleashed a Frankenstein on the world. What's harder to explain is
why journalists and the rest of the scientific community so eagerly bought that story, along
with the rest of the Covid narrative.
Why the elite panic? Why did so many go so wrong for so long? When journalists and
scientists finally faced up to their mistake in ruling out the lab-leak theory, they blamed
their favorite villain: Donald Trump. He had espoused the theory, so they assumed it must be
wrong. And since he disagreed at times with Fauci about the danger of the virus and the need
for lockdowns, then Fauci must be right, and this was such a deadly plague that the norms of
journalism and science must be suspended. Millions would die unless Fauci was obeyed and
dissenters were silenced.
But neither the plague nor Trump explains the panic. Yes, the virus was deadly, and Trump's
erratic pronouncements contributed to the confusion and partisanship, but the panic was due to
two preexisting pathologies that afflicted other countries, too. The first is what I have
called the Crisis Crisis, the incessant state of alarm fomented by journalists and
politicians. It's a longstanding problem -- humanity was supposedly doomed in the last century
by the "population crisis" and the "energy crisis" -- that has dramatically worsened with the
cable and digital competition for ratings, clicks, and retweets. To keep audiences frightened
around the clock, journalists seek out Cassandras with their own incentives for fearmongering:
politicians, bureaucrats, activists, academics, and assorted experts who gain publicity,
prestige, funding, and power during a crisis.
Unlike many proclaimed crises, an epidemic is a genuine threat, but the crisis industry
can't resist exaggerating the danger, and doomsaying is rarely penalized. Early in the 1980s
AIDS epidemic, the New York Times reported the terrifying
possibility that the virus could spread to children through "routine close contact" --
quoting from a study by Anthony Fauci. Life magazine wildly exaggerated the number of
infections in a cover
story , headlined "Now No One Is Safe from AIDS." It cited a study by Robert Redfield, the
future leader of the CDC during the Covid pandemic,
predicting that AIDS would soon spread as rapidly among heterosexuals as among homosexuals.
Both scientists were absolutely wrong, of course, but the false alarms didn't harm their
careers or their credibility.
Journalists and politicians extend professional courtesy to fellow crisis-mongers by
ignoring their mistakes, such as the previous
predictions by Neil Ferguson. His team at Imperial College projected
up to 65,000 deaths in the United Kingdom from swine flu and 200 million deaths worldwide from
bird flu. The death toll each time was in the hundreds, but never mind: when Ferguson's team
projected millions of American deaths from Covid, that was considered reason enough to follow
its recommendation for extended lockdowns. And when the modelers' assumption about the fatality
rate proved too high, that mistake was ignored, too.
Journalists kept highlighting the most alarming warnings, presented without context. They
needed to keep their audience scared, and they succeeded. For Americans under 70, the
probability of surviving a Covid infection was about 99.9 percent , but fear of the
virus
was higher among the young than among the elderly, and polls showed that people of all ages
vastly
overestimated the risk of being hospitalized or dying.
The second pathology underlying the elite's Covid panic is the politicization of research --
what I have termed the Left's war on science ,
another long-standing problem that has gotten much worse. Just as the progressives a century
ago yearned for a nation directed by "expert social engineers" -- scientific high priests
unconstrained by voters and public opinion -- today's progressives want sweeping new powers for
politicians and bureaucrats who "believe in science," meaning that they use the Left's version
of science to justify their edicts. Now that so many elite institutions are political
monocultures, progressives have more power than ever to enforce groupthink and suppress debate.
Well before the pandemic, they had mastered the tactics for demonizing and silencing scientists
whose findings challenged progressive orthodoxy on issues such as IQ, sex differences, race,
family structure, transgenderism, and climate change.
And then along came Covid -- "God's gift to the Left," in Jane Fonda's words. Exaggerating
the danger and deflecting blame from China to Trump offered not only short-term political
benefits, damaging his reelection prospects, but also an extraordinary opportunity to empower
social engineers in Washington and state capitals. Early in the pandemic, Fauci expressed
doubt that it was politically possible to lock down American cities, but he underestimated
the effectiveness of the crisis industry's scaremongering. Americans were so frightened that
they surrendered their freedoms to work, study, worship, dine, play, socialize, or even leave
their homes. Progressives celebrated this "paradigm shift," calling it a "blueprint" for
dealing with climate change.
This experience should be a lesson in what not to do, and whom not to trust. Do not assume
that the media's version of a crisis resembles reality. Do not count on mainstream journalists
and their favorite doomsayers to put risks in perspective. Do not expect those who follow "the
science" to know what they're talking about. Science is a process of discovery and debate, not
a faith to profess or a dogma to live by. It provides a description of the world, not a
prescription for public policy, and specialists in one discipline do not have the knowledge or
perspective to guide society. They're biased by their own narrow focus and self-interest. Fauci
and Deborah Birx, the physician who allied with him against Atlas on the White House task
force, had to answer for the daily Covid death toll -- that ever-present chyron at the bottom
of the television screen -- so they focused on one disease instead of the collateral damage of
their panic-driven policies.
"The Fauci-Birx lockdowns were a sinful, unconscionable, heinous mistake, and they will
never admit they were wrong," Atlas says. Neither will the journalists and politicians who
panicked along with them. They're still portraying lockdowns as not just a success but also a
precedent -- proof that Americans can sacrifice for the common good when directed by wise
scientists and benevolent autocrats. But the sacrifice did far more harm than good, and the
burden was not shared equally. The brunt was borne by the most vulnerable in America and the
poorest countries of the world. Students from disadvantaged families suffered the most from
school closures, and children everywhere spent a year wearing masks solely to assuage the
neurotic fears of adults. The less educated lost jobs so that professionals at minimal risk
could feel safer as they kept working at home on their laptops. Silicon Valley (and its
censors) prospered from lockdowns that bankrupted local businesses.
Luminaries united on Zoom and YouTube to assure the public that "we're all in this
together." But we weren't. When the panic infected the nation's elite -- the modern gentry who
profess such concern for the downtrodden -- it turned out that they weren't so different from
aristocrats of the past. They were in it for themselves.
RasinResin 54 minutes ago
Vive la France! The French just burnt down several vaccination clinics. Your turn
America.
KnitDame 51 minutes ago
They've had enough.
Lore 35 minutes ago
The entire Big Pharma Industial Complex needs to be shut down. Tens if not hundreds of
thousands of medical professionals and media mouthpieces and other enablers need to face
Nuremberg panels for crimes against humanity, with execution for all those convicted.
Yes, the virus was deadly
That is the great shortcoming of this article. "The virus" was no more dangerous than
the common cold or seasonal flu. Even this author is reluctant to call this thing out
for,what it really was: the virological equivalent of 1938 War Of The Worlds, essentially a
saturation-marketed exercise in mass hysteria.
Going forward, an even greater crime is being committed with these clot shots. That
atrocity is still unfolding.
Virgil Krenshaw PREMIUM 44 minutes ago
The Stanford faculty senate overwhelmingly
voted to condemn Atlas's actions as "anathema to our community, our values and our
belief that we should use knowledge for good."
Is it not the peak of irony that "scientists" now use the word "anathema," the same
language the Catholic Church would use in an excommunication?
I've said it before and I'll say it again: COVID has mutated into a suicide cult .
Lockdowns and vaccines are the Kool Aid.
11th_Harmonic 51 minutes ago remove link
The United States suffered through two lethal waves of contagion in the past year and
a half. The first was a viral pandemic that killed about one in 500 Americans --
typically, a person over 75 suffering from other serious conditions. The second, and far
more catastrophic, was a moral panic that swept the nation's guiding institutions.
First point: false . There was no viral pandemic that killed about one in 500 Americans.
It was the typical flu season. Where did the flu go ?
Second point: false . There was nothing 'moral' about the panic.
Po0h Bear 15 minutes ago (Edited)
All children over 2 should wear masks at school, regardless of vaccination status,
pediatrician group says
They orgasm over suffering. Especially the suffering of innocent children.
Most of the people who died were fat. Really fat. Obese.
Did the MSM mention that? Did they highlight that fact? Did they show hospital beds
filled with the bubberous dying? No, of course not.
That would be fat shaming. A sin so unpardonable, it is far better to let people die and
wreck a planet's economy.
And they wonder why so few people now take anything the MSM says seriously. Clowns, all
of them. Get back into your clown cars and stay there ... silently.
Kiev Connie of the MugMeddin 1 hour ago
Science is science. It's not political, it's not sensational journalism, and it's not
Business. It's science, applied to medicine. There was no need to fabricate profit out of
Covid-19.
I Write Code 14 minutes ago
Panic. And greed. And incompetence. And fascism.
The four donkeymen of the Pandemolypse.
19331510 35 minutes ago remove link
Dr. David Martin Ends covid, Fauci, DOJ, politicians -in one interview
The first was a viral pandemic that financially incentivised medical personnel to
massively inflate death rates pretending that the virus alone killed about one in 500
Americans, whereas realistically, many deaths were mainly due to other causes .
Neoliberal MSM now are trying to swipe under the carpet the bankruptcy of the idea or achieving "herd immunity"
via mass vaccination campaign. Which was sent to its grave by Delta variant.
The fact that CDC does not track mild cases does not prevent estimate them from other statistics relying of percentage of
hospitalization cases to total cases and deaths to total cases. If we use death state for the USA (624746 death for 34994151
cases), then for 1063 death of vaccinated people we will have around 60K infected. Of we assume that death of vaccinated is
ten time less probable then for non vaccinated the number will 600K. As such cases are concentrated in a few big cities
they probably ensure the spread of the virus even in totally vaccinated population. Then the question arise: was the gain from
this mass campaign ? And high level medical bureaucrats already failed us with the lockdown and quarantine which did not have
any noticeable effect of epidemic and then made all sacrifices a joke by riots in major cities.
As CDC admits: "The findings in this report are subject to at
least two limitations. First, the number of reported COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough cases is likely a substantial undercount of all
SARS-CoV-2 infections among fully vaccinated persons. The national surveillance system relies on passive and voluntary reporting,
and data might not be complete or representative. Many persons with vaccine breakthrough infections, especially those who are
asymptomatic or who experience mild illness, might not seek testing. Second, SARS-CoV-2 sequence data are available for only a small
proportion of the reported cases."
Fauci and other high level medical bureaucrats, who put all eggs into vaccination basket made a very risky move. They knew
that there were no successful vaccine against coronaviruses, because they constantly mutated, and still put them whole country into
questionable path of "total immunization"
Notable quotes:
"... The COVID-19 vaccines are extremely effective, but a few vaccinated people have gotten sick. ..."
"... "Breakthrough" infections are typically mild and might be less contagious than other cases. ..."
"... Out of more than 157 million fully vaccinated Americans, only 733 people had died of COVID-19 as of July 6, according to CDC data . At least 3,554 people had been hospitalized and survived. The CDC is no longer tracking mild breakthrough cases. ..."
The COVID-19 vaccines are extremely effective, but a few vaccinated people have
gotten sick.
"Breakthrough" infections are typically mild and might be less contagious than other
cases.
... ... ...
The COVID-19 vaccines have been extremely successful at preventing serious illnesses that
could lead to hospitalizations and deaths. But no vaccine is 100% effective at preventing
infection, Dr. Lisa V. Adams, an associate dean for global health at Dartmouth College, told
Insider.
"We know there are and will be some breakthrough infections in individuals who are
vaccinated - at least until we get to a point where there is very little virus circulating,"
Adams said. "The good news is that their illness should be very mild."
The vaccines
are designed to prevent hospitalizations and deaths
In early July, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention,
said new data indicated that 99.5% of COVID-19 deaths in the US were in unvaccinated
people.
Out of more than 157 million fully vaccinated
Americans, only 733 people had died of COVID-19 as of July 6, according to CDC
data . At least 3,554 people had been hospitalized and survived. The CDC is no longer
tracking mild breakthrough cases.
About 75% of breakthrough infections occurred in people 65 and older. That included cases in
nursing homes ,
whose residents and staff members were among the first Americans to get vaccinated.
Paul Offit, the director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children's Hospital of
Philadelphia, told Insider that even with a smattering of breakthrough infections taken into
account, the vaccines had met the goal of protecting most people from severe illness.
"The goal of these vaccines is to keep you out of the hospital and keep you out of the ICU
and keep you from dying. If you have a mild infection where you're PCR positive and have
essentially an asymptomatic infection, that's fine," Offit said, referring to a type of
COVID-19 test.
'Breakthrough' cases might cause some symptoms, but they're usually mild
Emerging data suggests many breakthrough infections are so mild that they might as well be
asymptomatic.
A
recent analysis of breakthrough infections in the UK indicated that the top symptoms of
Delta-variant COVID-19 were a runny nose and a headache, largely because most people mingling
and exposed to the virus were younger or fully vaccinated.
"Certainly, immunity decreases over time...the question is how much time," one doctor told
CNBC during an interview Monday morning.
Before Delta arrived in Israel, some believed the country had reached "herd immunity". But
as Dr. Scott Gottlieb and others have pointed out, COVID is now endemic in the human
population, and reaching "COVID zero", a standard that Israel is aiming at, simply might not be
possible . Israeli officials have already acknowledged that with the large percentage of
Israeli's vaccinated, deaths and hospitalizations associated with COVID will likely continue to
decline, even if the number of new cases does rise.
Serologic Testing of US Blood Donations to Identify Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–Reactive Antibodies: December 2019–January 2020
Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 72, Issue 12, 15 June 2021, Pages
e1004–e1009, https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1785
Published: 30 November 2020
Abstract
Background
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes
coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan, China, in December
2019, with subsequent worldwide spread. The first US cases were identified in January
2020.
Methods
To determine if SARS-CoV-2–reactive antibodies were present in sera prior to the
first identified case in the United States on 19 January 2020, residual archived samples
from 7389 routine blood donations collected by the American Red Cross from 13 December 2019
to 17 January 2020 from donors resident in 9 states (California, Connecticut, Iowa,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin) were tested at
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for anti–SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.
Specimens reactive by pan-immunoglobulin (pan-Ig) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)
against the full spike protein were tested by IgG and IgM ELISAs, microneutralization test,
Ortho total Ig S1 ELISA, and receptor-binding domain/ACE2 blocking activity assay.
Results
Of the 7389 samples, 106 were reactive by pan-Ig. Of these 106 specimens, 90 were
available for further testing. Eighty-four of 90 had neutralizing activity, 1 had S1
binding activity, and 1 had receptor-binding domain/ACE2 blocking activity >50%,
suggesting the presence of anti–SARS-CoV-2–reactive antibodies. Donations with
reactivity occurred in all 9 states.
Conclusions
These findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may have been introduced into the United States
prior to 19 January 2020.
My calculation is based on the statistical extrapolation of 106 out of 7389 samples over
331 million people in the USA. That gives 4.75 million cases of sars-cov-2 infection having
gone "silent" in the USA prior to the report of the outbreak in China.
The unwillingness and secrecy of the USA government in the initial phase of the official
arrival of corona in the USA, the strange and unexplained outbreak of the still mysterious
EVALI disease in the summer of 2019 (that in hindsight shared oddly many symptoms with
COVID), the bad flu season that suddenly disappeared when corona appeared in the USA: it all
points to Fort Detrick.
"My calculation is based on the statistical extrapolation of 106 out of 7389 samples over
331 million people in the USA."
You can't make that extrapolation, the sample size is too small, and the total population
too heterogenic. The cases might reflect an out break in just one state, or even one area.
And we don't know the characteristics of the virus strain found – for all we know what
happened in Wuhan could very well be that the virus mutated in a way that made it more
contagious. Among other things; after all it's just a hundred positives.
But the article clearly shows that there are still questions to be answered about where
the virus came from – if I'm not mistaken there has been pre jan 2020 cases found in
Italy as well.
Well yes I can and I did. I was completely open about it being a statistical extrapolation.
It is IMHO a relevant estimate, because even if the extrapolation is off by an order of
magnitude, it would still imply almost half a million cases - or almost 50 million ,
if the error was to the other side.
In both cases, it paints the origins of the pandemic in a dramatically different
light.
Hell, even if my estimate was off by two orders of magnitude - 50,000 cases - that would
still be a huge number of cases and make an entirely new investigation of the WHO on USA
territory an evident priority - if these organiztions were independent, objective and free
from political pressure.
the sample size is too small, and the total population too heterogenic. The cases might
reflect an out break in just one state, or even one area.
While 7389 samples is not a huge sample size, it is not ridiculously small either. The
samples were from 9 states, clearly not from a single cluster. Read the article, mkay? If the
statistical foundations were really that bad, it would not have been published in the journal
Clinical Infectious Diseases.
And we don't know the characteristics of the virus strain found – for all we know
what happened in Wuhan could very well be that the virus mutated in a way that made it more
contagious.
Oh come on, you're really pushing things here. None of the strains identified thus far differ
by an order of magnitude in infectiousness or transmissibility. The assumptions that you are
trying to introduce are far more shaky than any of my statistical broadstrokes.
" Of these 106 specimens, 90 were available for further testing. Eighty-four of 90 had
neutralizing activity, 1 had S1 binding activity, and 1 had receptor-binding domain/ACE2
blocking activity >50%, suggesting the presence of anti–SARS-CoV-2–reactive
antibodies."
As with all diseases, some people will have a natural immunity to SARA-Cov_2 virus. How
can natural or innate immunity be differentiated from acquired immunity?
In the Netherlands, the big early cluster was in an otherwise agricultural backwater area
that just happens to be the location of Volkel Air Base , the Dutch site where
the USA stores nuclear weapons (in the latter half of 2019, they had been very busy
modernizing said nukes, causing a lot of extra traffic to and from the USA).
Contributors to this site from Spain and possibly Italy (from memory - reports were made
early 2020) made similar observations about the geographical peculiarities of early corona
clusters in their localities.
What about the 2019 Wuhan Military World Games and the noteworthy competitive results (or
should I say absense thereof) of the USA athletes, who were too sick to perform and were
medevac'ed back to the USA? The Wuhan International Hotel that the USA team stayed in was
closer to the infamous wet market than any Biolabs. The Chinese authorities were quick to
point out the hotel as a much more prominent source of infections than the market, but
western media never picked up on those pesky details.
This article is a US hit piece on China but it also shows the military games may have been
the world superspreader event.
At the outbreak of covid, US military refused to have their athletes tested, but the article
looks at many other teams that become ill around the time they were returning from the games.
Absolutely nothing on the US team other than they only came in 35th place, deligation
included seven "senior leaders" and two dept of state people https://prospect.org/coronavirus/did-the-military-world-games-spread-covid-19/
Lurk, quite interesting post @45 On the allergies, symptoms range from mild to severe.
Hives are mild, choking to death severe.
anaphylaxis I refers to those that are severe as in face or throat swelling resulting in
death.
Long covid, and other virus that can take a long tome to recover from I believe trigger
inflammation of the myelin sheath that insulates the nerves.
So Fauci push toward "herd immunity" was meaningless from the very beginning. In Israel 50%
(which has 85% of adults fully vaccinated with Phizer vaccine) of infected with Delta were
vaccinated.
Both South African variant and the Delta variant (also known as B.1.617.2) changed the
picture of "herd immunity". Official figure is that Two doses of Pfizer's vaccine are still 88
percent effective at preventing symptomatic Delta infections. You can probably cut this figure by
half to get more realistic estimate based on Israel experience with Pfizer vaccine. Israel has
fully vaccinated about 85 percent of adults
Worryingly, a recent study documented several cases during India's spring surge in which
health-care workers who were fully vaccinated with AstraZeneca's vaccine were infected by Delta
and passed it on.
Now there is talk about that vaccinated people
might need booster shots . Which essentally mean re-vaccination with the newer version of
vaccine.
When breakthrough cases do arise, it's not always clear why. The trio of vaccines now
circulating in the United States were all designed around the original coronavirus variant, and
seem to be a bit less effective against some newer versions of the virus. These troublesome
variants have yet to render any of our current vaccines obsolete. But "the more variants there
are, the more concern you have for breakthrough cases," Saad Omer, a vaccine expert at Yale,
told me. The circumstances of exposure to any version of the coronavirus will also make
a difference. If vaccinated people are spending time with groups of unvaccinated people in
places where the virus is running rampant, that still raises their chance of getting sick.
Large doses of the virus can overwhelm the sturdiest of immune defenses, if given the
chance.
The human side of the equation matters, too. Immunity is not a monolith, and the degree of
defense roused by an infection or a vaccine will differ from person to person, even
between identical twins . Some people might have underlying conditions that hamstring their
immune system's response to vaccination; others might simply, by chance, churn out fewer or
less potent antibodies and T cells that can nip a coronavirus infection in the bud.
The effects of vaccination are best considered along a spectrum, says Ali Ellebedy, an
immunologist at Washington University in St. Louis. An ideal response to vaccination might
create an arsenal of immune molecules and cells that can instantaneously squelch the virus,
leaving no time for symptoms to appear. But sometimes that front line of fighters is relatively
sparse. Should the virus make it through, "it becomes a race [against] time," Ellebedy told me.
The pathogen rushes to copy itself, and the immune system recruits more defenders. The longer
the tussle drags on, the more likely the disease is to manifest.The range of vaccine
responses "isn't a variation of two- to threefold; it's thousands," Ellebedy told me.
"Being vaccinated doesn't mean you are immune. It means you have a better chance of
protection."
For these reasons and more, Viviana Simon, a virologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at
Mount Sinai, in New York, dislikes the term breakthrough case , which evokes a barrier
walling humans off from disease. "It's very misleading," she told me. "It's like the virus
'punches' through our defenses."
Vaccination is actually more like a single variable in a dynamic playing field -- a
layer of protection, like an umbrella, that might guard better in some situations than
others. It could keep a lucky traveler relatively dry in a light drizzle, but in a windy
maelstrom that's whipping heavy droplets every which way, another person might be overwhelmed.
And under many circumstances, vaccines are still best paired with safeguards such as masks and
distancing -- just as rain boots and jackets would help buffer someone in a storm.
In some ways, the shots' staggering success in trials -- where
breakthrough cases were also observed, causing appropriately minimal stir -- may have
papered over the inevitability of post-vaccination infections in more natural settings. "The
vaccines exceeded expectations," Luciana Borio, a former acting chief scientist at the FDA,
told me. Now, as we exit what Borio calls the "honeymoon phase" of our relationship with the
jabs, we need to temper our enthusiasm with the right amount of realism, especially as more
data on the shots' strength and longevity accumulate. Even excellent vaccines aren't foolproof,
and they shouldn't be criticized when they're not. "We can't expect it's going to be perfect,
on day one, always," Borio said.
A team at the CDC is tracking breakthroughs and will soon start reporting case counts, as
well as any patterns related to where, or in whom, these infections are occurring, Martha
Sharan, a CDC spokesperson, told me. Details like those matter. They can help experts figure
out why post-vaccination infections happen, and how they might be stopped. "The reassuring part
is, these cases will not go unnoticed," Omer told me.
Most of the time, vaccines are far more likely to offer some help than none. Serious
disease, hospitalization, and even death
will still occur , as will less well-studied outcomes, such as the long-term symptoms that
often arise from less severe disease. But should post-vaccination infections climb to
unexpectedly high rates, backup plans will quickly kick into gear. Some shot recipients might
get second or third shots to bolster their immune response; others might be administered a
tweaked vaccine recipe to account for a new viral variant.
There's something a touch counterintuitive about breakthrough cases: The more people we
vaccinate, the more such cases there will be, in absolute numbers. But the rate at which they
appear will also decline, as rising levels of population immunity cut the conduits that the
virus needs to travel. People with lackluster responses to vaccines -- as well as those who
can't get their jabs -- will receive protection from the many millions in whom the shots
did work. In a crowd of people holding umbrellas, even those who are empty-handed will
stay more dry.
Katherine J. Wuis a staff writer
atThe Atlantic,where she covers science.
Might be uptick might be statistical noise. The differences are stillsmall... in Israel the
Delta variant is infecting vaccinated people, who represent as many as 50% of new cases
If vaccines don't cover everyone, we need to know why and how we can fix it. Fauci is one
trick pony who made all bets of the success of the vaccines, decpite that fact that there were no
any sucessful coronavirus vaccine developered before COVID-19 epidemic.
Notable quotes:
"... Most Covid-19 patients in the Mercy hospital in Springfield are unvaccinated, though there have been a few cases among people who were vaccinated, Dr. Sistrunk said. ..."
The variant, which is about
40% to 60% more contagious than the previous dominant variant, is sending more people to
hospitals in the northern and southwestern parts of the state, health officials say.
In Springfield, Mo., Mercy Hospital had 90 Covid-19 patients on a recent day, up from 10
seven weeks ago, said William Sistrunk, lead infectious-disease doctor for Mercy, a multistate
hospital system with several facilities in Missouri. Almost all had the Delta variant, and most
were unvaccinated, he said. The hospital's caseload peaked at about 120 in late December.
Officials say the patients being admitted are younger, ages 30 to 60, a change from the last
two waves of infection. "It ramped up a lot faster than it did last fall when we had that
wave," Dr. Sistrunk said. "What's happening in Springfield may be an early warning for other
communities. This variant, we need to take this seriously."
The number of people in the hospital with Covid-19 in Missouri has started to climb in
recent weeks. The latest seven-day average is 864, up from 668 a month prior, according to the
state health department. During the winter surge in Covid-19 cases in 2020 and 2021,
hospitalizations topped 2,700 several times. Missouri has a population of 6.1 million.
... In Missouri, 55% of adults have received at least one vaccination shot, 11 percentage
points below the national rate, according to the CDC. Most Covid-19 patients in the Mercy
hospital in Springfield are unvaccinated, though there have been a few cases among people who
were vaccinated, Dr. Sistrunk said.
I had covid last summer, for me was like a bad flu, 3-4 days of severe symptoms then I
recovered, never went to hospital. There is zero evidence that those that previously had
covid get reinfected, none at all, we have developed natural immunity. Inspite of this
everyone is pushing me to get DNA altering vaccines, everyone, even my Dr., who should know
better.
What I find ammusing in all of this is that the same people pushing this vaccine on me
and others are the same people who won't even eat a GMO banana, paying 5 times more for
"organic" bananas...
Sono 2 hours ago
Yesterday a friend of mine who works in major hospital said she had a patient whom is 34
male, no prior health complications was put through surgery to remove a major blood clot.
It's unclear what damage was done at least as of yesterday. Chart says he received the
Pfizer vaccine April 19th and may 6th. Did the vaccine cause this? Anybody guess. But
hospital staff noted how unusual his case is.
rejectnumbskull 3 hours ago (Edited)
It is beyond sad when the so-called medical industry feels it has the authority to label
Americans into these 2 categories. Kick Fauci out now! The sick-care mafia has no business
dictating any type of domestic policy.
SaulAzzHoleSky 3 hours ago
Study out of England shows HIGHER emergency room and death rates (2x-8x) among
vaccinated people older than 50 compared to those unvaccinated older than 50. See pages
13-14.
Those below 50 had lower rates but shouldn't they be completely immune??
The 'vaccines' were accepted for emergency use on the basis that they slightly reduced
the severity of symptoms in slight cases of disease. Joe and Jane Public think the
'vaccine' gives them immunity. MSM has not been correcting the misunderstanding
Twox2 3 hours ago (Edited)
"If you are vaccinated, you diminish dramatically your risk of getting infected and even
more dramatically your risk of getting seriously ill. If you are not vaccinated, you are at
considerable risk," Fauci once again repeated.
"Mr. Science" seems to have another agenda entirely, since he clearly makes it up as he
goes along. I used the Covid risk calculator (from Oxford University...which many consider
the number one rated university in the world) and it showed my risk of death at 4 in 10,000
and risk of hospitalization at 1 in 732...during the three-month peak of the pandemic.
As one in his 7th decade, with 3 stents, this is my purported "considerable risk".
How does this guy retain any credibility at all?
White Domestic Tourist 3 hours ago
Vaxxes would be deadly to people with vascular conditions i think.
11b40 3 hours ago
Yep....73 yr old cancer survivor (Agent Orange Lymphoma). Never took flu shots, never
got the flu. No plans to get one of these jabs, either, as like you, I did my own research.
I'm fit and lead a healthy lifestyle. Also believe in Ivermectin & HCQ regimens if I
happen to get infected with something serious. Took HCQ malaria pills, like so many other
soldiers, with no side effects. Everybody took them when told the other option was malaria.
Since the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident, I have been watching my government lie to me, and
this has felt like one big con job since the beginning. There is no doubt in my mind now
that long term, the results of these shots will not be good for us.
Authorities doe not telling truth: people who already have COVID do not need to be
vaccinated. Also if Delta varient can infect vaccineted in conserable quantities how any resobale
person can maintain this goal of "herg immunity". How it can be achieved if a vaccinated person
can be infected and thus spread the disease both amoung vaccinated cohort and among the
unvaccinated cohort. The fact the vaccinated people are infected with Delta changes the game and
here Senator Paul is wrong.
Pushing vaccination on chidren in such curcumstances changes nothing is became a very
questionable move both from scientific an from ethical perspective.
America's favourite Chinese lab funding coronavirus doomonger doctor Anthony Fauci announced
Tuesday that there are now two Americas, a vaccinated America and an unvaccinated America.
As Senator Rand Paul noted
earlier this week , there is a boat load of misinformation on the matter coming from a
government that is indiscriminately pushing vaccinations:
There are now two Americas. One that's retarded. And one that wants Fauci on a
lamppost.
liberty2 1 hour ago (Edited)
Note that the officials said there's no such thing as "herd immunity" last year. Now
this year they keep saying that we can reach "herd immunity" if we are 70% vaxxed! Terms
are used if it fits their narrative.
Ride_the_kali_yuga 3 hours ago (Edited)
In the Covidian Cult, there is true believers in one side and heretics on the other
side. Vaxxed and unvaxxed.
Divide and rule strategy, as always. Do not undurestimate the ratio of retarded people
among the population, it has been growing like a cancer for decades. It amazes me how
perfectly coordinated those MSM Covidian propaganda events appears worldwide.
In here France, 2 days ago, most MSM have all simultaneously gone full berserk (without
any reason) blaming the reluctant ones. One of them on TV said something like : "if it was
me, i will use police to drag those who refuse these "vaccines" from their home and force
it on them"
This was priceless, this little man has morbid obesity. We now officialy all live on the
twilight zone on steroids. Land whales dictate how people should consider their own health.
This ride seems to never end.
We now have officialy entered the dehumanization phase of the unvaxxed. The sanitary
gulag is not far from here.
NIRP-BTFD 1 hour ago
There are 2 Americas. The 0.01% (the rulers that own everything) and the serfs.
DemandSider 1 hour ago
Exactly, parasite and host. Fauci would be the former, obviously.
The key unanswered question is: what benefits for 12 years old vaccine provides. I do not see
any, while risks are real and unknown. At this point we already know that vaccine cause serious
heart problems in some vaccinated young people (say below 30 yours old)
Twelve year-old Maddie was enrolled in the Pfizer vaccine clinical trial. She's now in a
wheelchair, has an NG tube, and is suffering from severe memory loss, along with many other
issues.
I am SO sorry for this girl. She relied on her parents, their job, to protect their minor
children. They failed.
I am very sorry for what's happened, but lady that is exactly what you get by disregarding your
fellow citizens &
relying on the government for your truth. Its been obvious to all those with open minds, that
this entire pandemic is
a huge scam, the worst scam in human history. The old saying comes to mind, "and if the
government told you to go jump
off the roof, would you?" Sadly leftists answer, "how many times?" Karen
The only way I would I "consider" allowing my child to sign up to be a guinea pig in any
clinical trial is if they had a life threating incurable disease and the trial was specific to
their disease & participation was a "chance" to save their life. I worked in a clinical
trial office, you agree to being the guinea pig when you agree that you will never know if
you're injected with
1. a placebo OR
2. the "drug" its self.
You're also informed in advance of how many visits (minimal # of visits) the trial will require
of you to fully participate as it usually requires regularly scheduled bi weekly or monthly
visits. It's in a office setting & your mandated to keep the doctor informed of everything,
even an emergency, because theres a written script "behind the scenes" of what to do along the
way if "this" or "that" happens. That way you collect better data of adverse reactions. Plus
there are the very important (to the medical side anyway) non disclosure agreements.
I noticed here it seems the family reached out to "emercency" facilities when things started
going wrong.
Are these "trials" being conducted standard procedure or not. MAJOR DANGER
What sort of parent would give their kid an untested, un-needed vaccine? There is NO excuse.
None. Zero. Mother should be in tears. 100% well deserved.
Deplored
" in healthcare" means nothing anymore. I've been in healthcare for 25 years and it blows my
mind how many 500,000$ plus educations lined up for the "vax" AND do not know the simple
definition of a vaccine. I watched 1st hand as practically overnight medicine went from being
science based to political weapon. We used to have to have an evidence based system where
doctors would look at the published studies and make decisions based on the best info
available. That's all gone now. You can't even trust the medical journals anymore that at one
time were the pinnacles of scientific medical discovery. The hospital I've worked in for 25
years is going to mandate the vax as soon as the FDA approves it,which means I'm out. 15% of us
are unvaxed and they have plans to get rid of us. The medical tyranny STARTED w the mandating
of the flu shot years ago for HC workers and now it's covid. It's not going to end ,just wait
til the next shit show released on us. Next time they will have the ballz to say ur locked in
ur home until u comply. Then when u can't pay ur property taxes because u cant leave the house
to work u find out who actually owns ur home. Peetoonya
The US "Healthcare" INDUSTRY ranks 37th in the world. John Hopkins put out a report that the
3rd leading cause of death is going to your doctor and doing what he/she says! I remember in
the 90's they ran off or bought out most of the private practices especially in the rural areas
with malpractice claims if they didn't sell out. But these days you can make up to $50,000 a
year just sending people the bill for your inflicted genocide. Medical Billing Specialist
Salary in the United States https://www.salary.com/research/salary/benchmark/medical-billing-specialist-salary
All the cowardly doctors will do as they are told for fear of losing their license. PS The
profession that has the highest rate of suicide is Doctors! I haven't been to a doctor in 21
years. Riseliberty
This is not a vaccine. Do you understand? It is experimental gene therapy. You cannot
compare this with any FDA approved vaccine you've had in the past. Hehe62
Before watching one clip I suggest you watch the entire press conference. ALL of the
participants explained they are pro science and pro vaccine up front.
They have been harmed-most likely permanently by this *vaccine* and as you can see by the
twitter disclaimer they have been silenced, told they are suffering from anxiety versus a
vaccine side effect and our medical community has done NOTHING to follow up on what is going
on.
As an NP who has been thrust into covid from the get go I now daily see covid 19 vaccine
injuries albeit less than those suffered from these victims; depending on how you see it.
Type 1 diabetes in a perfectly healthy 16 year old athletic boy with healthy family members
now requiring insulin for the rest of his life-happened right after 2nd pfizer. Tons of
shingles and herpes viruses, and regular colds that have taken out staff members for 3-4 weeks
versus 2-3 days in the past.
As an NP that started in the military and has all vaccines and vaccinated all my children
and seeing and living in the medical community throughout this I personally will NEVER get
another vaccine the government suggests or requires ever again. I will NEVER go see a
mainstream medical provider ever again unless I'm taken against my will or knowledge.
Sure, tons of people have gotten the vax without issue, but YOU are the phase III clinical
trial for this thing, it has only been about 6 months. Long term effects who knows. I have a
feeling it isn't going to get better. And the fact that these people have been completely
silenced, questioned, and "debunked" by mainstream media and the public as a whole that
suddenly seems to have 100% confidence in their government???? is EXTREMELY concerning. Ron
God bless Maddie and her family. For context, I'd like to know how many children have had
the Pfizer vaccine without serious side effects. We shouldn't fall into the left wing tactics
of using anecdotal emotional cases to distort reality to make a larger point. The fact is that
vaccines have saved millions of lives and prevented millions of crippling side effects from
polio, smallpox, yellow fever, mumps, measles, hepatitis, HPV . Regretfully, some of the
vaccinated have suffered side effects, but the benefit greatly outweighs the risk.
JedWSmith
For perspective, this "vaccine" has caused more deaths than all the other vaccines given
over the last century. Maybe caution is warranted. This little child had an almost ZERO chance
of any complications from the China virus. There's ZERO reason for someone who's had the China
virus and recovered, having natural antibodies, to get the vaccine. The therapeutics work. They
were demonized only because a sitting president, hated by the fake media, big pharma, and the
DC deep state, promoted them. Dillard
Offering up your child for experiments, was it for $$$$$$$?
Remember the Canadian govt with pop up vaccination sites offering children ice cream if they
got the jab, and they did it WITHOUT PARENTS CONSENT? Think about that one. The govt rolls up
and opens a vaccine tent near your home, your child sees FREE ICE CREAM and goes to get free
ice cream and gets injected without your knowledge. That is some real evil there. William
Walker
I'm terribly sorry for the young girl, but I'm inflamed with anger that the stupid parents
put not one, but THREE children through clinical trials giving them the vaccine–all the
while touting the science (oh, the science!) which completely contradicts the claims that young
people are in any way threatened by Covid as a demographic. This is tragic, this is moronic
liberalism, and this is a direct result of the parents swilling all the false idiocy from CNN
and MSNBC without questioning the actual empirical data and science. PALydia
"Trials" are done to determine outcome. The word "trial" is synonymous with the word
"experiment." I.e. you are playing Russian Roulette when you enroll your child in ANY trial.
That IS science. You should NEVER assume something is safe and harmless when it is still in
"trial" phase .never mind these vaccines bypassed animal trials and all previous mRNA vaccines
failed animal trials. My heart breaks for this child but it's criminal for any parent to
subject their child to this. LiberalsRPinworms
Was waiting for the "but we still think you should vaccinate your kids too "
I find it interesting that all these cult members keep saying they're pro science. However,
scientific experiments are based on hypotheses, not already known facts. Why is she upset? Her
kid wanted to provide data to this experiment and did just that. Too bad she wasn't an outlier
considering, if she were, she could probably still eat food on her own. Thanks for your
contribution to the science folks! navi282
I am very sorry about what has happened to Maddie, but the responsibility lies with the
parents who believe in the false religion of "scientism" and have opted into the con-game that
vaccinations are genuine healing methodologies. As an engineer Maddie's mother should have
studied logic and the philosophy of science and then discerned that the politicization of the
medical field in recent years created confirmation bias, poor SPC (statistical process
control), and question-begging fallacies from those who should have known better. Complicity or
Ignorance -- take your pick. Matt Walters
Being pro-science means you base decisions on data. There is not yet a data set for the
short and long-term risks, benefits, and side effects of this vaccine that would allow a
science-based decision to take it or not. Those who are pro science wait for reliable data
before considering taking an experimental vaccine that is not approved by the FDA. constitution
rules
For USA children ages 5 to 18:
Population: ~57,000,000
Covid deaths: 263
Chance: < 1 in 200,000 Para Bellum
I notice a common trend among these child abuser parents .they go online to complain how
their kids were maimed by the experimental mRNA, but then they always have to preface it by
saying "oh but we're pro vaccine and pro science"
Well, I am anti-vaccine and I'm anti-mRNA. Have some conviction you retard. No wonder you
find yourselves in the position you're in.
I sincerely feel bad for your kids. You stole their lives from them and they will never be
the same and while the fallen man part of me wants to say "just deserts", the Catholic part of
me prays the rosary for you and your kids every single night. solome
' .we are pro-vaccine and pro-science'
.these parents make a great case that academia does not necessarily convey common sense it
can convey a buttload of chutzpah ..we know that because Washington DC is full of it excessive
hubris, too and, in turn, they can make decisions that prove disastrous for the future of We
the People Christina
This is a terrible tragedy for this family. I hope this beautiful young girl will eventualy
recover fully. I hope her parents will recover as well.
As for her parents, however, who are obviously very intelligent, did they miss the reams and
reams of scientific studies, white papers, and patent applications available to the public
before they permitted their child to get this not yet approved, experimental gene therapy
injection?
Did they not watch the hours and hours of video interviews and presentations by doctors,
virologists, epidemiologists, etc., who warned, warned, warned us to NOT TAKE IT?
Even after big tech started censoring and scrubbing most of this information off the net and
everywhere else, even before the massive pro-vax propaganda machine cranked up, millions of
people informed themselves about what it really is and thus decided to not be part of the human
trials.
Most of us had our flu shots and regular real vaccines as well, real vaccines are not the
issue, here.
I'm really sorry to tell you this, Mom, but you either ignored the real science or you, too,
were caught up in the propaganda that caused so many people to automatically reject any thing
people on the other side of the debate had to say.
One more red flag when it comes to politics and propaganda: DID YOU NOT QUESTION WHY SO MANY
MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS WHO TRIED TO WARN US HAD THEIR INFORMATION SCRUBBED, CENSORED, LOST THEIR
JOBS, AND RECEIVED DEATH THREATS SIMPLY FOR DOING DUE DILIGENCE AND ENGAGING IN THE ALWAYS
REQUIRED DEBATES AMONG MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS BEFORE APPROVING VACCINES? AND THEN WARNING THE
PUBLIC BEFORE THE POLITIAL CAMPAIGN BEGAN.
This is a very, very sad day in America. It's a very, very sad day for this family.
But maybe other parents will think twice, now, before they sign their children up for
potentailly horrific experiences related to the gene therapy injections. Maria
"Twelve year-old Maddie was enrolled in the Pfizer vaccine clinical trial."
The complete blame belongs on the parents. The tearful mother, an electrical engineer, said
she and her husband were pro-vaccine. If they were so smart, why in the hell would they enroll
their CHILD in a clinical trial for a fast-tracked vaccine, especially when children are not in
a high-risk group, and Covid-19 survival is 99.8 percent? I am furious with these highly
educated people. THEY WERE DUMBER THAN DOORKNOBS TO SACRIFICE THAT GIRL TO THE
GOVERNMENT/PHARMA COMPLEX. Libby ChickenLittle
When I was a 12 year old girl, I didn't even know what a clinical trial was. But then again,
I grew up at time when kids were allowed to be just kids and not political pawns by their
brainwashed parents. Sorry mom – I know comments are going to be harsh – but you
deserve EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM. smith. jane smith.
Q. How does a government make a pro-vaccine person turn into an anti-vaccine person?
A. Give them a vaccine that makes them sicker than they were before they got the vaccine,
sicker with the very thing the vaccine was supposed to prevent.
I was told to go get a flu shot by my commander. Being a good USAF airman, I did so. I was
just a kid following orders. Two days later I was in the hospital, so sick with the flu until I
could not take 4 steps without getting so dizzy that I had to stop moving to keep from throwing
up. And it took 5 days before I was able to walk down a hallway without getting dizzy!
That was the last time I ever had a flu shot. Or the flu.
And that was over 35 years ago.
If the vaccine is such a good idea, then why does everybody have to get it in order for it
to work?
How about those who get the vaccine just leave those alone who choose not to get it?
And after what has happened to this lady's kid(s) .
Why the heck is she still PRO‐vaccine ???? 58
I blame the Fauci, Government, and the MSM for brainwashing fear amongst the masses. If you
are repeatedly gaslighted about almost every issue, you begin to believe the lies. You can add
schools also as they indoctrinate instead of teaching critical thinking.
This is a fiasco for Fauci "herd immunity" campaign. It means that vaccinated people can
become infected and spread the virus much like unvaccinated people.
Cases of the Delta variant of coronavirus have almost doubled in a week
with 73 people now confirmed to have died after testing positive for the variant, 26 of whom
had had both vaccine doses.
Public Health England (PHE) said that as of Monday, the UK has seen 75,953 confirmed cases
of the Delta variant first identified in India, up 33,630 - or 79% - from the previous
week.
While just 26 people died more than two weeks after their second COVID-19 vaccine dose from
the Delta variant, more than 30.6 million in the UK have had both jabs, according to the
latest
government figures .
PHE said a total of 806 people in England have been admitted to hospital with the Delta
variant as of 14 June, a rise of 423 on the previous week.
So we have real problems with vaccines as Delta mutation puts the end of Fauci and company
fake dream about herd immunity -- it infects vaccinated people, but we can't discuss that the US medical establishment is corrupt,
in bed with Big Pharma and failed us.
This "medical bolshevism" should better be stopped.
Notable quotes:
"... Johnson said Sheryl Ruettgers will detail "severe neurological reactions that still inhibit her ability to live a normal life, including muscle pain, numbness, weakness and paresthesia" that she experienced after getting the COVID-19 vaccine earlier this month. ..."
Wisconsin Republican Senator Ron Johnson announced plans to hold a news conference to
discuss adverse reactions related to the COVID-19 vaccine, drawing backlash from health care
experts who view the move as "dangerous" and a way to promote misinformation.
In a statement Friday, Johnson said he plans to give a platform to six people from across
the country who claim to have had negative health reactions after receiving the coronavirus
jab. Johnson said the conference will take place Monday to allow the individuals to tell their
stories and discuss issues that have been "repeatedly ignored" by the medical community,
according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
The Republican senator, who has been a vocal critic of vaccine mandates and has previously
advocated for alternative and unproven drug treatments to COVID-19, faced immediate backlash
from critics who feel the event will be a platform for spreading misinformation about the
safety of vaccines.
Dr. Jeff Huebner, a doctor in Madison, Wisconsin, said that Johnson was "promoting dangerous
and unfounded claims" about the vaccine that contradict medical research and analysis.
"As a member of the Wisconsin medical community I'm gravely concerned about the impact his
event and remarks will have on our ability to return to normal and protect Wisconsinites from
COVID-19.," Huebner said in a statement, the Journal Sentinel reported .
Joanna Bisgrove, a Wisconsin primary care doctor, told FOX6 that Johnson's statements and
event are "putting people at risk and already hurting people."
Tony Evers, the state's Democratic governor, added Friday that Johnson was being "reckless
and irresponsible" and said the event was "jeopardizing the health and safety" of the state's
vaccine rollout and economic recovery.
.@SenRonJohnson, you're being reckless and irresponsible. The #COVID19 vaccine is safe and
effective and based on years of science and research. Every time you suggest otherwise,
you're jeopardizing the health and safety of the people of our state and our economic
recovery.
-- Governor Tony Evers (@GovEvers) June 25, 2021
In defense, Johnson said Friday that he is "just asking questions" and isn't against the
vaccine.
"We're all supporters of vaccines. As I've repeatedly said, I'm glad that hundreds of
millions of Americans have been vaccinated, but I don't think authorities can ignore and censor
some of the issues," Johnson said in a tweet responding to Evers. "On Monday, we'll bring light
to stories that deserve to be seen, heard & believed."
Monday's event in Milwaukee will include statements from former Green Bay Packers player Ken
Ruettgers and his wife, Sheryl.
Johnson said Sheryl Ruettgers will detail "severe neurological reactions that still inhibit
her ability to live a normal life, including muscle pain, numbness, weakness and paresthesia"
that she experienced after getting the COVID-19 vaccine earlier this month.
Additional testimonies will be heard from individuals from Ohio, Missouri, Utah, Michigan
and Tennessee.
The medical community has long stressed that the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine far
outweigh the risks of possible side effects. Earlier this week, top U.S. health officials, medical agencies, laboratory and hospital
associations issued a statement reiterating the benefits by stating that getting vaccinated is
the "best way to protect yourself, your loved ones, your community, and to return to a more
normal lifestyle safely and quickly."
Newsweek contacted Johnson for additional comment, but did not hear back in time for
publication.
Newsweek, in partnership with NewsGuard, is dedicated to providing accurate and
verifiable vaccine and health information. With NewsGuard's HealthGuard browser extension,
users can verify if a website is a trustworthy source of health information. Visit the Newsweek
VaxFacts website to learn more and to download the HealthGuard browser extension.
I have been fighting for the last few months to convince my son and his family to not get
vaxed. They live near Seattle. They have a 15 yr old, and all of his friends point at and
bully that kid because he is NOT vaccinated. My son and his wife both have jobs, have to wear
masks at all times, and have lost the friendship of co-worker. The pressure in really bad,
but they are hanging tuff.
We can go back to normal when we get the vaccine .
The vaccine is safe and effective, but you must remain locked down, social distance, and
wear three masks.
When does this end? Why must this go on? They cannot and will not answer because this is not
about a virus. Yet when we are told we must lockdown again, especially when
the triple
mutant variants arise
The Justice Centre for Constitutional
Freedoms represents Dr. Francis Christian, Clinical Professor of General Surgery at the
University of Saskatchewan and a practising surgeon in Saskatoon .
Dr. Christian was called into a meeting today, suspended from all teaching responsibilities
effective immediately, and fired from his position with the University of Saskatchewan as of
September 2021.
There is a recording of Dr.
Christian's meeting today between Dr. Christian and Dr. Preston Smith, the Dean of Medicine
at the University of Saskatchewan, College of Medicine, Dr. Susan Shaw, the Chief Medical
Officer of the Saskatchewan Health Authority, and Dr. Brian Ulmer, Head of the Department of
Surgery at the Saskatchewan College of Medicine.
In addition, the Justice Centre will represent Dr. Christian in his defence of a complaint
that was made against him and an investigation by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of
Saskatchewan. The complaint objects to Dr. Christian having advocated for the informed consent
of Covid vaccines for children.
Dr. Christian has been a surgeon for more than 20 years and began working in Saskatoon in
2007. He was appointed Director of the Surgical Humanities Program and Director of Quality and
Patient Safety in 2018 and co-founded the Surgical Humanities Program. Dr. Christian is also
the Editor of the Journal of The Surgical Humanities.
On June 17, Dr. Christian
released a statement to over 200 doctors which contained his concerns regarding giving the
Covid shots to children. In it he noted that he is pro-vaccine, and that he did not represent
any group, the Saskatchewan Health Authority, or the University of Saskatchewan.
"I speak to you directly as a physician, a surgeon, and a fellow human being."
Dr. Christian noted that the principle of informed consent was sacrosanct and noted that a
patient should always be "fully aware of the risks of the medical intervention, the benefits of
the intervention, and if any alternatives exist to the intervention."
"This should apply particularly to a new vaccine that has never before been tried in
humans"¦ before the vaccine is rolled out to children, both children and parents must
know the risks of m-RNA vaccines," he wrote.
Dr. Christian expressed concern that he had not come across "a single vaccinated child or
parent who has been adequately informed" about Covid vaccines for children.
Among his points, he stated that:
The m-RNA vaccine, is a new, experimental vaccine never used by humans before.
The m-RNA vaccines have not been fully authorized by Health Canada or the US CDC, and
are in fact under "interim authorization" in Canada and "emergency use authorization" in
the US. He noted that "full vaccine approval takes several years and multiple safety
considerations "" this has not happened."
That in order to qualify for "emergency use authorization" there must be an emergency.
While he said there is a strong case for vaccinating the elderly, the vulnerable and health
care workers, he said, "Covid does not pose a threat to our kids. The risk of them dying of
Covid is less than 0.003% "" this is even less than the risk of them dying of the flu.
There is no emergency in children."
Children do not readily transmit the Covid virus to adults.
M-RNA vaccines have been "associated with several thousand deaths" in the Vaccine
Adverse Reporting System in the US. "These appear to be unusual, compared to the total
number of vaccines administered." He called it a "strong signal that should not be
ignored."
He noted that vaccines have already caused "serious medical problems for kids"
worldwide, including "a real and significantly increased risk" of myocarditis, inflammation
of the heart. Dr. Christian notes the
German national vaccine agency and the UK vaccine agency are not recommending the
vaccine for healthy children and teenagers.
The Saskatchewan Health Authority/College of Medicine wrote a letter to Dr. Christian on
June 21, 2021, alleging that they had "received information that you are engaging in activities
designed to discourage and prevent children and adolescents from receiving Covid-19 vaccination
contrary to the recommendations and pandemic-response efforts of Saskatchewan and Canadian
public health authorities."
Dr. Christian's concerns regarding underage Covid vaccinations are not isolated to him. The
US Centre for Disease Control had an "emergency meeting" today to discuss the growing cases of
myocarditis (heart inflammation) in younger males after receiving the Covid-19 vaccines.
The CDC released
new data today that the risk of myocarditis after the Pfizer vaccine is at least 10 times
the expected rate in 12 "" 17 year old males and females. The German government has issued
public guidance against vaccinating those under the age of 18.
The World Health Organization posted an update to its website on Monday, June 21, which
contained the statement in respect of advice for Covid-19 vaccination that " Children should not be
vaccinated for the moment ." Within 24 hours, this guidance was withdrawn and new
guidance was posted which stated that "Covid vaccines are safe for those over 18 years of
age."
Dr. Christian says there is a large, growing "network of ethical, moral physicians and
scientists" who are urging caution in recommending vaccines for all children without informed
consent. He said, physicians must "always put their patients and humanity first."
Dr. Byram Bridle, a prominent immunologist at the University of Guelph with a sub-speciality
in vaccinology, recently participated in a Press Conference on Parliament Hill on CPAC organized by MP
Derek Sloan, where he discussed the censorship of scientists and physicians. Dr. Bridle
expressed his safety concerns with vaccinating children with experimental MRNA vaccines.
Justice Centre Litigation Director Jay Cameron also has concern over the growing censorship
of medical professionals when it comes to questioning the government narrative on Covid.
"We are seeing a clear pattern of highly competent and skilled medical doctors in very
esteemed positions being taken down and censored or even fired, for practicing proper science
and medicine," says Mr. Cameron.
The Justice Centre
represented Dr. Chris Milburn in Nova Scotia, who faced professional disciplinary
proceedings last year after a group of activists took exception to an opinion column he wrote
in a local paper. The Justice Centre provided
submissions to the College on Dr. Milburn's behalf, defending the right of physicians to
express their opinions on matters of policy in the public square and arguing that everyone is
entitled to freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, as guaranteed by the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms "" including doctors. The Justice Centre noted that attempting
to have a doctor professionally disciplined for his opinions and commentary on matters of
public interest amounts to bullying and intimidation for speaking out against the
government.
Last week, Dr. Milburn also faced punishment for speaking out with his concerns about public
health policies, as he was removed from his
position as the Head of Emergency for the eastern zone with the Nova Scotia Health
Authority. In an unusual twist, a petition has been started to have Dr. Milburn replace Dr.
Strang as the province's Chief Medical Officer.
"Censoring and punishing scientists and doctors for freely voicing their concerns is
arrogant, oppressive and profoundly unscientific", states Mr. Cameron.
"Both the western world and the idea of scientific inquiry itself is built to a large extent
on the principles of freedom of thought and speech. Medicine and patient safety can only
regress when dogma and an elitist orthodoxy, such as that imposed by the Saskatchewan College
of Medicine, punishes doctors for voicing concerns," Mr. Cameron concludes.
Mr. Apotheosis 4 hours ago
These mother f'ers are seriously evil. To the bone evil.
high5mail 3 hours ago
I'm Canadian and the sooner they throw Trudeau and Manitoba's Pallister out of office
won't be too soon.
It is effen ridiculous what this country turned into. Makes California appear to be a
free place compared to here and that is saying something.
I am jealous of people living in Florida, Texas and South Dakota. They don't know how
lucky they are that some people in power there are not only intelligent but have
cajones...
No_Pretzel_Logic 2 hours ago
The Davos crowd is clutching most of the Western countries by the short hairs.
Yank....how does that feel, plebe?
Who needs a bio-weapon when changing a few words in the WHO's definition of "pandemic" and
"herd immunity" will have the desired effect?
If you asked most people to define what a pandemic is. They would probably tell you that
it is disease which kills enormous numbers of people around the world. I would have said the
same thing myself but we would be wrong. In recent years, WHO changed the definition of
pandemic, serology and herd immunity which made our present state of emergency a near
certainty.
According to WHO, prior to 2009, a pandemic would involve enormous numbers of deaths. In
the public mind, such a pandemic, with enormous numbers of deaths, would justify the
government declaring a state of emergency requiring lock-downs,masks, social distancing, etc,
and possibly, even promoting a trial vaccine if the number of fatalities were enormous. Not
so anymore. Now a virulent flu can be called a pandemic. And herd immunity ain't what it used
to be either. Now the WHO definition of herd immunity is grotesquely skewed towards
vaccination. Who would have guessed?
When is a pandemic not a pandemic?
Since 2003, the top of the WHO Pandemic Preparedness homepage has contained the following
statement: "An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus appears against which the
human population has no immunity, resulting in several simultaneous epidemics worldwide with
enormous numbers of deaths and illness."
However, on 4May 2009, scarcely one month before the H1N1 pandemic was declared, the web
page was altered in response to a query from a CNN reporter. The phrase "enormous numbers of
deaths and illness" had been removed and the revised web page simply read as follows: "An
influenza pandemic may occur when a new influenza virus appears against which the human
population has no immunity." Months later, the Council of Europe would cite this alteration
as evidence that WHO changed its definition of pandemic influenza to en-able it to declare a
pandemic without having to demonstrate the intensity of the disease caused by the H1N1
virus.
Source: https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/89/7/11-086173.pdf
9June2020 WHO website, Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Serology.
Definition of Herd Immunity:
Herd immunity is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a
population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous
infection. This means that even people who haven't been infected, or in whom an infection
hasn't triggered an immune response, they are protected because people around them who are
immune can act as buffers between them and an infected person. The threshold for establishing
herd immunity for COVID-19 is not yet clear.
Source: https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-covid-19-serology
13Nov2020 WHO website, Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Serology, antibodies and
immunity.
Definition of Herd Immunity:
'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.
Herd immunity is achieved by protecting people from a virus, not by exposing them to it.
Read the Director-General's 12 October media briefing speech for more detail.
Vaccines train our immune systems to develop antibodies, just as might happen when we are
exposed to a disease but – crucially – vaccines work without making us sick.
Vaccinated people are protected from getting the disease in question. Visit our webpage on
COVID-19 and vaccines for more detail.
As more people in a community get vaccinated, fewer people remain vulnerable, and there is
less possibility for passing the pathogen on from person to person. Lowering the possibility
for a pathogen to circulate in the community protects those who cannot be vaccinated due to
other serious health conditions from the disease targeted by the vaccine. This is called
'herd immunity'.
'Herd immunity' exists when a high percentage of the population is vaccinated, making it
difficult for infectious diseases to spread, because there are not many people who can be
infected. Read our Q&A on vaccines and immunization for more information.
The percentage of people who need to have antibodies in order to achieve herd immunity
against a particular disease varies with each disease. For example, herd immunity against
measles requires about 95% of a population to be vaccinated. The remaining 5% will be
protected by the fact that measles will not spread among those who are vaccinated. For polio,
the threshold is about 80%.
Achieving herd immunity with safe and effective vaccines makes diseases rarer and saves
lives.
These are topics which should have been discussed openly if we had an independent media
and a government which did not take its instructions from WHO, the UN et al. Without the
"pandemic" and the government and media collusion, could a state of emergency ever have been
declared?
@John Fisher o much baggage that I can't help wondering whether it, too, hasn't been
weaponized.
Why can't it be a bacterial infection?
I thought that quite a lot of controversy surrounding the so-called Spanish flu concerned
the issue of whether the millions of deaths really were caused by the virus, or by a
secondary bacterial infection.
In the case of covid-19, too, there is now considerable speculation that the real damage
(second and third phases as described by practicing physicians) is caused by the spike
proteins, not the virus itself.
The new definition seems to prime the public to accept increasing demonization of viruses
and draconian social control measures to combat the new "enemy" -- a virus, fer
chrissakes.
Eric Clapton shares his feelings candidly about the past year of Covid lockdown, in
this 25 min YT (06/14/21):
He talks about the flip-flops in policies and actions of British political and public
health officials throughout the the entire pandemic that frequently set off his "bullshit
radar", and:
-How he has been surprised to have been attacked/labeled a Trump supporter (within England
?!) for his public statements during the the pandemic.
-Talks about his own frightening symptoms after receiving the two-jab, AstraZeneca spike
protein-coding DNA-adenovector type experimental gene therapy vaccine agent.
"... Gainesville parents in Florida concerned about the harm caused to their children wearing face masks all day at school in 90 °F weather sent out six masks""five that were worn by children ages 6 to 11 for five to eight hours at school, and one worn by an adult""to be analyzed for contaminants at the University of Florida's Mass Spectrometry Research and Education Center. ..."
"... Five of the masks were found to be contaminated with parasites, fungi, and bacteria, according to Rational Ground . Only one mask was found to contain a virus that can cause a fatal systemic disease in cattle and deer. Other less harmful pathogens that can cause ulcers, acne, and strep throat were also detected. ..."
"... None of the controls were contaminated with pathogens, while "samples from the front top and bottom of the t-shirt found proteins that are commonly found in skin and hair, along with some commonly found in soil." ..."
"... The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says that kids should continue to wear masks and social distance until they are able to get vaccinated, despite data showing that children are minimally affected by COVID-19 and are not super-spreaders of the virus. ..."
A laboratory at the University of Florida that recently analyzed a small sample of face masks, detected the presence of 11 dangerous
pathogens that included bacterias that cause diphtheria, pneumonia, and meningitis.
Gainesville parents in Florida concerned about the harm caused to their children wearing face masks all day at school in 90 °F
weather sent out six masks""five that were worn by children ages 6 to 11 for five to eight hours at school, and one worn by an adult""to
be analyzed for contaminants at the University of Florida's Mass Spectrometry Research and Education Center.
Of the six masks, three were surgical, two cotton, and a poly gaiter. Masks that have not been worn and a t-shirt worn at school
acted as the control samples.
Five of the masks were found to be contaminated with parasites, fungi, and bacteria, according to
Rational Ground . Only
one mask was found to contain a virus that can cause a fatal systemic disease in cattle and deer. Other less harmful pathogens that
can cause ulcers, acne, and strep throat were also detected.
None of the controls were contaminated with pathogens, while "samples from the front top and bottom of the t-shirt found proteins
that are commonly found in skin and hair, along with some commonly found in soil."
Amanda Donoho, a mother of three elementary school children, teamed up with other parents to send the masks to the lab because
her sons broke out in rashes from prolonged mask-wearing.
"Our kids have been in masks all day, seven hours a day in school ," Donoho told Fox & Friends on June 17. " The only break
that they get is to eat or drink. "
Donoho said that while students do not have to wear a mask outside at school since April 2021, masks were still required when
they were within six to eight feet of each other. Masks must also be worn on school buses.
Further research is needed to better understand what is being put on children's faces, says Donoho.
Superintendent Carlee Simon at the Alachua County Public Schools (ACPS) in Gainesville, Fla. did not respond to a request for
comment.
The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says that kids should
continue to wear masks and social distance until they are able to get vaccinated, despite data showing that children are minimally
affected by COVID-19 and are not super-spreaders of the virus.
Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, signed an executive
order on May 3, suspending all COVID-19 emergency restrictions, including mask-wearing. However, certain school districts like
ACPS kept their mask policy in place for the remainder of the school year, while masks were optional within the community.
ACPS says masks will be optional for the 2021""22 school year but would continue to be required on school buses until mid-September
unless the federal transportation regulation changes.
The CDC says masks are still required on planes, trains, buses, and at airports.
In an updated June 17 guidance
, masks are no longer required in "outdoor areas of a conveyance (like a ferry or the top deck of a bus)" and fully vaccinated
individuals may resume everyday activities that were done prior to the pandemic without mask-wearing or physically distancing unless
required by federal or state law.
People are considered fully vaccinated two weeks after their second shot of a messenger RNA vaccine or after a single-dose Johnson
& Johnson vaccine.
The CDC did not give guidance for people who've recovered from COVID-19 and have natural immunity.
The Epoch Times has contacted the CDC for comment. 25,737 134 NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY
TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
In 1954, annual births first topped four million and did not drop below that figure until
1965, when four out of ten Americans were under the age of 20. Mid-20th century baby boom -
Wikipedia
Early in the pandemic, I had been furiously writing articles about lockdowns. My phone rang
with a call from a man named Dr. Rajeev Venkayya. He is the head of a vaccine company but
introduced himself as former head of pandemic policy for the Gates Foundation.
Replay Unmute Duration 0:22 / Current Time 0:22
Loaded : 100.00% Fullscreen Up Next Replay the list
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.464.0_en.html#goog_652049397 The World Now
Officially Has Five Oceans UP NEXT Kevin Connolly and girlfriend welcome daughter Edge Of The
World: Going Up River Political leaders arrive in Cornwall for G7 summit French president
Emmanuel Macron slapped in face during visit to town The G7 summit: What you need to know
Awake: Gina Rodriguez On What Drew Her To The Film Awake: Lucius Hoya On How He Prepared For
His Role NOW PLAYING
I did not know it then, but I've since learned from Michael Lewis's (mostly terrible) book
The Premonition that Venkayya was, in fact, the founding father of lockdowns. While working for
George W. Bush's White House in 2005, he headed a bioterrorism study group. From his perch of
influence "" serving an apocalyptic president" he was the driving force for a dramatic change
in U.S. policy during pandemics.
He literally unleashed hell.
That was 15 years ago. At the time, I wrote about the changes I was witnessing, worrying
that new White House guidelines (never voted on by Congress) allowed the government to put
Americans in quarantine while closing their schools, businesses, and churches shuttered, all in
the name of disease containment.
I never believed it would happen in real life; surely there would be public revolt. Little
did I know, we were in for a wild ride"¦
The Man Who Lit the Match
Last year, Venkayya and I had a 30-minute conversation; actually, it was mostly an argument.
He was convinced that lockdown was the only way to deal with a virus. I countered that it was
wrecking rights, destroying businesses, and disturbing public health. He said it was our only
choice because we had to wait for a vaccine. I spoke about natural immunity, which he called
brutal. So on it went.
The more interesting question I had at the time was why this certified Big Shot was wasting
his time trying to convince a poor scribbler like me. What possible reason could there be?
The answer, I now realized, is that from February to April 2020, I was one of the few people
(along with a team of researchers) who openly and aggressively opposed what was happening.
There was a hint of insecurity and even fear in Venkayya's voice. He saw the awesome thing
he had unleashed all over the world and was anxious to tamp down any hint of opposition. He was
trying to silence me. He and others were determined to crush all dissent.
This is how it has been for the better part of the last 15 months, with social media and
YouTube deleting videos that dissent from lockdowns. It's been censorship from the
beginning.
For all the problems with Lewis's book, and there are plenty, he gets this whole backstory
right. Bush came to his bioterrorism people and demanded some huge plan to deal with some
imagined calamity. When Bush saw the conventional plan" make a threat assessment, distribute
therapeutics, work toward a vaccine" he was furious.
"This is bulls**t," the president yelled.
"We need a whole-of-society plan. What are you going to do about foreign borders? And
travel? And commerce?"
Hey, if the president wants a plan, he'll get a plan.
"We want to use all instruments of national power to confront this threat," Venkayya
reports having told colleagues.
"We were going to invent pandemic planning."
This was October 2005, the birth of the lockdown idea.
Dr. Venkayya began to fish around for people who could come up with the domestic equivalent
of Operation Desert Storm to deal with a new virus. He found no serious epidemiologists to
help. They were too smart to buy into it. He eventually bumped into the real lockdown innovator
working at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico.
Cranks, Computers, and Cooties
His name was Robert Glass, a computer scientist with no medical training, much less
knowledge, about viruses. Glass, in turn, was inspired by a science fair project that his
14-year-old daughter was working on.
She theorized (like the cooties game from grade school) that if school kids could space
themselves out more or even not be at school at all, they would stop making each other sick.
Glass ran with the idea and banged out a model of disease control based on stay-at-home orders,
travel restrictions, business closures, and forced human separation.
Crazy right? No one in public health agreed with him but like any classic crank, this
convinced Glass even more. I asked myself, "Why didn't these epidemiologists figure it out?"
They didn't figure it out because they didn't have tools that were focused on the problem. They
had tools to understand the movement of infectious diseases without the purpose of trying to
stop them.
Genius, right? Glass imagined himself to be smarter than 100 years of experience in public
health. One guy with a fancy computer would solve everything! Well, he managed to convince some
people, including another person hanging around the White House named Carter Mecher, who became
Glass's apostle.
Please consider the following quotation from Dr. Mecher in Lewis's book: "If you got
everyone and locked each of them in their own room and didn't let them talk to anyone, you
would not have any disease."
At last, an intellectual has a plan to abolish disease" and human life as we know it too! As
preposterous and terrifying as this is "" a whole society not only in jail but solitary
confinement" it sums up the whole of Mecher's view of disease. It's also completely wrong.
Pathogens are part of our world; they are generated by human contact. We pass them onto each
other as the price for civilization, but we also evolved immune systems to deal with them.
That's 9th-grade biology, but Mecher didn't have a clue.
Fanatics Win the Day
Jump forward to March 12, 2020. Who exercised the major influence over the decision to close
schools, even though it was known at that time that SARS-CoV-2 posed almost risk to people
under the age of 20? There was even evidence that they did not spread COVID-19 to adults in any
serious way.
Didn't matter. Mecher's models" developed with Glass and others" kept spitting out a
conclusion that shutting down schools would drop virus transmission by 80%. I've read his memos
from this period" some of them still not public" and what you observe is not science but
ideological fanaticism in play.
Based on the timestamp and length of the emails, he was clearly not sleeping much.
Essentially he was Lenin on the eve of the Bolshevik Revolution. How did he get his way?
There were three key elements: public fear, media and expert acquiescence, and the baked-in
reality that school closures had been part of "pandemic planning" for the better part of 15
years. Essentially, the lockdowners, over the course of 15 years, had worn out the opposition.
Lavish funding, attrition of wisdom within public health, and ideological fanaticism
prevailed.
Figuring out how our expectations for normal life were so violently foiled, how our happy
lives were brutally crushed, will consume serious intellectuals for many years. But at least we
now have a first draft of history.
As with almost every revolution in history, a small minority of crazy people with a cause
prevailed over the humane rationality of multitudes. When people catch on, the fires of
vengeance will burn very hot.
The task now is to rebuild a civilized life that is no longer so fragile as to allow insane
people to lay waste to all that humanity has worked so hard to build.
Will insurance companies charge higher life insurance premiums to those who were
vaccinated?
Kelley 28 minutes ago (Edited)
It's the CDC's version of the Plunge Protection Team.
If anyone assumes the 'emergency' is about protecting the public, this is my message to
you: harharharharhar!
Divide_And_Conquer 38 minutes ago remove link
Satanists must be eliminated at all costs
Just a Little Froth in the Market 6 minutes ago
"Another 1,260 were reported in people 65 or older through claims data from Medicare
claims data. Neither number raised safety signals, Steve Anderson, director of the FDA's
Office of Biostatistics and Epidemiology said."
Of course there were no safety signals. Nothing's more important than Joetard reaching
his July 4th goal
on target 34 minutes ago
Why is the CDC even recommending this vaccine for the young, the immune, and those with
antibodies. Unethical. Unscientific. No bang for buck. Why wait a week. Why not meet
tomorrow. Answer--it takes a week to get their cover stories together. Zero confidence now
in the CDC and anything they say. It is all political Science.
According to the risk calculator of university of oxford i have a 0.00015% chance to die
from covid. (If sars-cov-2 is even real lol) I'm not going to risk my health with any of this
experimental stuff.
Gain of function experiments were a backdoor to the development of biological weapon despite
the convention for the prohibition of bioweapons. That makes Fauci a really sinister figure. And that also partially explains
overreaction of most governments to the second rate threat -- they suspected the worst.
The mood of the US public, if we judge it from WSL comments now is rather unfavorable for the
government as a whole and Fauci personally.
Notable quotes:
"... James Freeman is the co-author of "The Cost: Trump, China and American Revival." ..."
"... He's a two-faced political animal who acts in the best interests of keeping his job through multiple administrations. ..."
"... As far as his scientific principles...well, those walked out the door years ago ..."
"... he just went along with whatever helped him avoid accountability. ..."
"... Basically he was, and is, a coward unwilling to be honest and forthright. Instead he longs for the limelight and the adoration of a public that was lead down some 'rabbit hole' through his dishonest proclamations. ..."
"... Nuremberg type trials need to be convened for Fauci, Andersen, Barric, Daszak, the Bat Lady and other CCP Wuhan scientists. Fauci clearly lied-video proof is readily available. Fauci and the CCP are guilty of crimes against humanity. I hope I live to see such a trial. I remember the German trials on black and white TV. ..."
"... The broad lockdown was a national disaster ..."
"... It seems that Dr. Fauci may have colluded with other scientists to dismiss and coverup the possibility of a lab origin. ..."
Highly skilled in the ways of Washington, Dr. Anthony Fauci persuaded a reluctant President
Donald Trump to
endorse shutting down much of the U.S. economy in the spring of 2020. After Mr. Trump turned
against the idea, many governors continued to mandate shutdowns, supported by bleak
pronouncements from Dr. Fauci and his adoring media fan base. The broad lockdown was a national
disaster, yielding questionable public-health benefits and a mountain of new federal debt that
America's children will spend many years trying to finance. Prior to selling Mr. Trump on this
radical therapy to address Covid-19, did Dr. Fauci disclose everything he knew about the
possibility that a Chinese lab partly funded by his own institute might be the source of the
pandemic?
Publicly, Dr. Fauci played down this possibility in 2020. But a trove of his emails obtained
by two media outlets suggests that early in the pandemic, he had reason to take this potential
scenario very seriously.
In our bizarre media age, since the two outlets are generally pro-Fauci and anti-Trump, it's
not easy to find the news they've uncovered, even in their own reports. Instead, Dr. Fauci is
cast as a tireless and dedicated public servant who""don't laugh""is uncomfortable in the media
spotlight...
... ... ...
Since the two outlets (WaPo and BuzzFeed -- editor) that did so much to promote the Russia
collusion hoax are still reluctant to let go of any anti-Trump narratives, news consumers may
need to rely on other publications to tell them what the Post and Buzzfeed found. Nicholas
Jensen takes a
crack in the Australian:
America's top medical adviser Anthony Fauci was informed as early as February 2020 that
Covid-19 exhibited unusual viral characteristics which could have potentially been engineered
in a lab, according to emails published.
A trove of private correspondence, obtained by The Washington Post and Buzzfeed, reveal some
of the crucial moments leading up to the pandemic in early 2020 when Dr Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, sought urgent information
regarding the nature and origins of Covid-19... In one email from Kristian Andersen, a
virologist at the Scripps Research Institute in California, Dr Fauci was told that Dr
Andersen and his fellow scientists had to "look really closely at all the sequences to see
that some of the features (potentially) look engineered".
The email dated February 1, 2020 said Mr Andersen and three other respected colleagues had
discovered a genome "inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory".
The truth will most likely never be known with any certainty. Bejing will not cooperate.
Biden will sweep it away as no longer relevant in his 90 day report. The progressive media
have too much invested in their early narrative to dig deep enough outside the official
channels.
DeWitt Payne
SUBSCRIBER 50 minutes ago
I saw Fauci on the news today saying he was "cautiously optimistic" about an HIV/AIDS
vaccine.
*sigh*
This is a virus that has never been cleared from a patient by the human immune system
alone. Before drug regimens were developed to lower viral load to undetectable and other
drugs introduced to prevent infection in the first place, the Infection Fatality Rate was
100%. A vaccine fools the immune system into thinking there was an infection and develop
antibodies, B and T cells that will clear or prevent an infection. But infection itself has
been shown to not develop immunity. Any rational analysis would conclude that a vaccine was
extremely unlikely, if not impossible to develop. Fauci clearly isn't rational.
Stephen Phillips
SUBSCRIBER 55 minutes ago (Edited)
It is absolutely sickening that Fauci was able to get away pedaling his false narrative on
the American people. What is worse is, due to crack mainstream media, most Americans will
never learn the truth about this guy. And the damage this guy did as our elected leaders at
all levels, Federal, State & Local, just played along.
At least there are some red states out there that saw the light and opened up way sooner
versus later. Travel to a blue state - and you will wonder what country you are living in...
and those blue state citizens just take it.
If you want the definition of someone who way over stayed their welcome, Fauci is your
man.
Tom Dillon
SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
"...the allegedly publicity-shy government official needs to share everything he knows
about the U.S. taxpayer money that went into Wuhan and the global horror that came out of
it."
Don't hold your breath. Government bureaucrats know the first lesson of
bureaucracy - always cover your rear end. The Swamp is inculcated with the second lesson -
never give up one of our own. Washington insiders love to throw around the term
"accountable", as in, "that person should be held accountable", or, we need to hold "them"
accountable. When you hear that word, just know, no one will be "held accountable" or pay any
price for their malfeasance.
David Pearlman
SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
He's a two-faced political animal who acts in the best interests of keeping his job through multiple administrations.
As far as his scientific principles...well, those walked out the door years ago.
Gregory Hansen
SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
In the beginning Fauci was just an obscure bureaucrat whose thoughts and ideas didn't really
have any serious percussions. Then he is thrown into the spotlight and his ruminations
suddenly have consequences. At that point he becomes a 'weather vane' pointing himself in
what ever direction the wind is blowing.
He was afraid to go against the accepted orthodoxy so he just went along with whatever
helped him avoid accountability. And with whatever would continue to bolster him in the eyes
of the media and an adoring public.
Basically he was, and is, a coward unwilling to be honest and forthright. Instead he longs
for the limelight and the adoration of a public that was lead down some 'rabbit hole' through
his dishonest proclamations.
EDWARD HUGHES
SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago (Edited)
Nuremberg type trials need to be convened for Fauci, Andersen, Barric, Daszak, the Bat Lady
and other CCP Wuhan scientists. Fauci clearly lied-video proof is readily available. Fauci
and the CCP are guilty of crimes against humanity. I hope I live to see such a trial. I
remember the German trials on black and white TV.
Ray Woodcock
SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
The broad lockdown was a national disaster
That was entirely predictable. Fortunately, some officials understood that and
didn't go along with it.
Tom Motley
SUBSCRIBER 1 hour ago
Looks to me that .Deborah Birx was the smartest person in the room. She got out of Dodge
before it hit the fan while Fauci made the TV circuit"¦.. and wrote a book to boot.
Alan Veenstra SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago (Edited)
Fauci is going down in flames. Sadly the MSM will likely escape a similar fate, thereby
encouraging them to take even bolder steps as the propaganda arm of the DNC.
The MSM should be ashamed and apologetic. They should take a fresh new look at all the
other controversial issues since 2016, including the Steele dossier, Russian collusion,
Hunter Biden and both impeachment fiascos. While these issues may be fully explored and
revealed, it will be with their complete opposition however.
David Remmler
SUBSCRIBER 2 hours ago (Edited)
It seems that Dr. Fauci may have colluded with other scientists to dismiss and coverup the
possibility of a lab origin. The emails are at odds with his public pronouncements lauding
China as "transparent" and later dismissing the possibility of a lab leak origin as highly
unlikely. He made the statements despite China's obvious dishonesty, silencing of
whistleblowers and obstruction of investigations into the origins of the pandemic. This seems
to fit a pattern of serious dishonesty or mistakes on his part. This is the same man who
called the threat of Covid "minuscule" in February of last year and flipped his opinion on
masks. His dishonesty was misleading and gave many people, including this physician, a false
impression about the threat early in the pandemic.
From the git-go, the MSM coverage of this whole thing was shrill doom ****. Fantasies of widespread transmission and almost
universal infection were the only stories allowed. The narrative repeated the he didn't believe and then he got it story, expert
opinion about the end of the human race, and brave front line heroes otherwise known as underpaid nurses.
Even the government (billionaire) conspiracy facts aren't connected to the credulity such as it is. The panic was almost entirely
by the MSM, for the MSM, and still the policy of the MSM. And yes, it's accurate to call it policy.
The USA vaccination efforts were badly thought out and badly implemented, resulting in dramatic economic losses for non-existent
public health gains. Looks like governments suspected that "the genie is out of the bottle" -- pathogen escaped from biolab in
the USA or China and badly overreacted, creating unnecessary economic losses and mass unemployment comparable with the Great
Depression.
There is no need to vaccinate people who already have had COVID-19. Natural immunity is much better than a vaccine that was rushed through the FDA.
Also many people are naturally immune to COVID-19 due tot he fact that they have previous coronavirus infection. This issue is
completely ignored in neoliberal MSM/
Notable quotes:
"... Obviously, you not only got immune to the Wuhan virus, but also to the globalist/collectivist and state propaganda. Those of us who lived in Soviet socialist "paradise" get it back in the USSR while protecting our mind and soul from state propaganda and government statistics. ..."
"... So more of the lies are being exposed, the lies that some who want to be in control have told are so bad, and yet some believe them. Why was SARS not a continuing pandemic, if it is the same base virus ..."
"... This is too funny. So at some point is anyone going to ask why this report is being featured on yahoo FINANCE? The answer is in the reference to the publicly-traded, pharmaceutical companies named in the Dr.'s interview. ..."
Dr. Adrian Burrowes, Family Medicine Physician &CFP Physicians Group CEO, joined Yahoo Finance to discuss the latest on covid-19.
Thomas 2 hours ago
I had Covid twice. Once in 2020 and once this year. The first time I had it I coughed for two whole months. I had a fever off
and on and I had to sleep with an extra pillow. I was miserable but I thought it was the flu because we didn't know the virus
was here yet. It was only after I was tested for antibodies several months later did I learn that I had it.
This past January, I got it again after some co-workers came down with it and we all were tested. I was quarantined for 10
days. During this 10 day period, I was only sick for 1 day with a slight stomach ache and diarrhea.
The rest of the time I was out doing yard work and cutting dead limbs out of my trees.
I told my wife that if my T-Cells had that good of memory to protect me that well, I probably won't get the shot. After all,
what can the shot do for me that the virus hasn't already.
Mike -> Thomas 38 minutes ago
Obviously, you not only got immune to the Wuhan virus, but also to the globalist/collectivist and state propaganda. Those of
us who lived in Soviet socialist "paradise" get it back in the USSR while protecting our mind and soul from state propaganda and
government statistics.
With the time, I hope enough Americans will develop the same herd immunity to propaganda masquerading as news, unhealthy "guidance"
from government health agencies and corrupt intelligent agencies' deceptions that serve self-centered bureaucrats and political
operatives, not the country. G-d Bless!
Ed 3 hours ago
So more of the lies are being exposed, the lies that some who want to be in control have told are so bad, and yet some believe
them. Why was SARS not a continuing pandemic, if it is the same base virus, and did not have a vaccine. and yet you hear nothing
about it, could it be that people gained immunity and so it is not a horrible thing as this engineered virus. and remember that
SARS started in the same area of the world as this covid 19.
AB 3 hours ago
This is too funny. So at some point is anyone going to ask why this report is being featured on yahoo FINANCE? The answer
is in the reference to the publicly-traded, pharmaceutical companies named in the Dr.'s interview.
The USA vaccination efforts were badly thought out and badly implemented, resulting in dramatic economic losses for non-existent
public health gains. Looks like governments suspected that "the genie is out of the bottle" -- pathogen escaped from biolab in
the USA or China and badly overreacted, creating unnecessary economic losses and mass unemployment comparable with the Great
Depression.
There is no need to vaccinate people who already have had COVID-19. Natural immunity is much better than a vaccine that was rushed through the FDA.
Also many people are naturally immune to COVID-19 due tot he fact that they have previous coronavirus infection. This issue is
completely ignored in neoliberal MSM/
Notable quotes:
"... Obviously, you not only got immune to the Wuhan virus, but also to the globalist/collectivist and state propaganda. Those of us who lived in Soviet socialist "paradise" get it back in the USSR while protecting our mind and soul from state propaganda and government statistics. ..."
"... So more of the lies are being exposed, the lies that some who want to be in control have told are so bad, and yet some believe them. Why was SARS not a continuing pandemic, if it is the same base virus ..."
"... This is too funny. So at some point is anyone going to ask why this report is being featured on yahoo FINANCE? The answer is in the reference to the publicly-traded, pharmaceutical companies named in the Dr.'s interview. ..."
Dr. Adrian Burrowes, Family Medicine Physician &CFP Physicians Group CEO, joined Yahoo Finance to discuss the latest on covid-19.
Thomas 2 hours ago
I had Covid twice. Once in 2020 and once this year. The first time I had it I coughed for two whole months. I had a fever off
and on and I had to sleep with an extra pillow. I was miserable but I thought it was the flu because we didn't know the virus
was here yet. It was only after I was tested for antibodies several months later did I learn that I had it.
This past January, I got it again after some co-workers came down with it and we all were tested. I was quarantined for 10
days. During this 10 day period, I was only sick for 1 day with a slight stomach ache and diarrhea.
The rest of the time I was out doing yard work and cutting dead limbs out of my trees.
I told my wife that if my T-Cells had that good of memory to protect me that well, I probably won't get the shot. After all,
what can the shot do for me that the virus hasn't already.
Mike -> Thomas 38 minutes ago
Obviously, you not only got immune to the Wuhan virus, but also to the globalist/collectivist and state propaganda. Those of
us who lived in Soviet socialist "paradise" get it back in the USSR while protecting our mind and soul from state propaganda and
government statistics.
With the time, I hope enough Americans will develop the same herd immunity to propaganda masquerading as news, unhealthy "guidance"
from government health agencies and corrupt intelligent agencies' deceptions that serve self-centered bureaucrats and political
operatives, not the country. G-d Bless!
Ed 3 hours ago
So more of the lies are being exposed, the lies that some who want to be in control have told are so bad, and yet some believe
them. Why was SARS not a continuing pandemic, if it is the same base virus, and did not have a vaccine. and yet you hear nothing
about it, could it be that people gained immunity and so it is not a horrible thing as this engineered virus. and remember that
SARS started in the same area of the world as this covid 19.
AB 3 hours ago
This is too funny. So at some point is anyone going to ask why this report is being featured on yahoo FINANCE? The answer
is in the reference to the publicly-traded, pharmaceutical companies named in the Dr.'s interview.
Bacterial Pneumonia Caused Most Deaths in 1918 Influenza Pandemic. Tuesday, August 19, 2008.
Implications for Future Pandemic Planning
The majority of deaths during the influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 were not caused by the influenza virus acting alone, report
researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health.
Instead, most victims succumbed to bacterial pneumonia following influenza virus infection. The pneumonia was caused when bacteria
that normally inhabit the nose and throat invaded the lungs along a pathway created when the virus destroyed the cells that line
the bronchial tubes and lungs.
The work presents complementary lines of evidence from the fields of pathology and history of medicine to support this conclusion.
"The weight of evidence we examined from both historical and modern analyses of the 1918 influenza pandemic favors a scenario
in which viral damage followed by bacterial pneumonia led to the vast majority of deaths," says co-author NIAID Director 🐍Anthony
S. Fauci, M.D.🐍. "In essence, the virus landed the first blow while bacteria delivered the knockout punch."
The lockdowns implemented to curb the transmission of COVID-19 in the United States and
across the globe have not only been a "heinous abuse of power," but they have also failed to
protect the elderly and vulnerable, according to former White House COVID-19 adviser Dr.
Scott Atlas .
In an interview for Epoch TV's "
American Thought Leaders ," Atlas, a public health policy expert, suggested that the
consequences of lockdowns, which he believes have been largely fear-driven, will be felt in the
country for decades to come.
"We will have a massive price to pay for what was done in the United States," said
Atlas.
"The consequences of the lockdowns have been enormously harmful and they will last for
decades after this pandemic is completely finished."
In November 2020 Atlas resigned as former President Donald Trump's special adviser on the
White House pandemic task force. He is a senior fellow for the Hoover Institution at Stanford
University.
A large failure on the part of public health experts, Atlas said, has been the approach to
stop COVID-19, the disease caused by the
CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus , at all costs, disregarding the consequences of the
policies that were implemented in an attempt to do so.
And while he believes that imposing initial lockdowns during the onset of the pandemic last
spring was an "appropriate" response, that was only because the world was reacting to extremely
"imperfect knowledge," including an estimated fatality rate that was higher than what the world
knows now.
Further, the restriction of movement orders implemented last year as the virus began to
spread across the country were initially pushed as short-term measures to prevent the
overcrowding of hospitals and health care facilities, he said.
Fear
Soon, Atlas said, rational thinking and critical thinking disappeared, and lockdown measures were driven by
fear. No longer was the goal to prevent the overcrowding of hospitals, but it gradually shifted
to stopping COVID-19 cases altogether.
"Fear is very powerful, and it was really shown how powerful fear is during this pandemic.
They [Americans] bought into it because it was temporary, because [people] thought that would
be a very small price to pay to get things sort of under control, and have some handle on how
to proceed," Atlas said.
The public health policy expert suggested that a "frenzy" took over out of fear, out of a
lack of leadership by the faces of public health to put things into context and perspective,
and to recognize immediately what the consequences of these lockdowns would be.
"There's a big reason why lockdowns were never recommended in prior pandemics," Atlas
added.
"And those rules, those simple rational logical assessments, were thrown out the
window."
Protecting the Elderly, Vulnerable
Lockdowns have ultimately failed, Atlas said, as they failed to protect the elderly and
high-risk individuals in the early months of the pandemic last year. Meanwhile, countless
others have suffered due to diversions of medical resources.
"We saw even in March, April, May [2020], the lockdown policies were number one, failing
to protect the high risk people""people were dying, they were elderly. The nursing home
deaths made up 40 to 50 percent of all deaths," Atlas explained.
"And it was through many of our states; at one point in Minnesota, 80 percent of the
deaths were [in] nursing homes."
Americans were also skipping chemotherapy treatments, while people who had suffered acute
strokes and heart attacks were too afraid to call an ambulance as they didn't want to be in a
medical setting, and the majority of live organ transplants weren't conducted during the onset
of the pandemic, Atlas said.
Meanwhile, child abuse and domestic abuse skyrocketed, opioid deaths and suicides surged,
and there has been a dramatic rise in young people suffering from depression and anxiety, he
added.
"I think that it is still somehow held by many people that OK, the lockdowns are an economic
harm, but we're saving lives. No, you're destroying families, you're destroying lives, and
you're literally killing people with the lockdowns," Atlas said.
Citing
June 2020 data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlas said that
one in four young adults contemplated suicide.
"The lockdowns failed, they still failed to protect the people who are high risk, and the
lockdowns destroyed and killed," Atlas said.
"Many other people destroyed families, sacrificed our children out of fear for
adults""even though the children do not have significant risk. And we didn't care as a
country. We kept them out of school."
He added: "It's a disgrace. It's a heinous abuse of the power of public health experts to do
what was done."
play_arrow
yerfej 4 hours ago
Funny how 78% of those who were hospitalized or died of "covid" were obese, and everyone
else was old or comorbid. BUT the progressive lunatics in government demanded schools be
shutdown...
NIRP-BTFD 4 hours ago
He added: "It's a disgrace. It's a heinous abuse of the power of public health experts
to do what was done."
Atlas should replace Fauci asap!
Dabooda 47 minutes ago
Actually, keeping the kids out of government schools is probably the best thing that you
could do for them, unless you really WANT them to turn into brain-dead propagandized drones
of indeterminate sex. Homeschool them for about
$200 (for a full 12 year curriculum.
chunga 3 hours ago
The facility where my wife works as an RN has not seen much of a pandemic materialize
over the last year and a half. Dystopia Virus was not the leading cause of death or
sickness but the staff spends a huge amount of time (almost all) on that at the expense of
everyone else. She tells me just as many died from extreme "treatment" for Dystopia Virus
and that they are not doing that anymore. One was a last ditch cancer treatment.
Of all the science not followed, the medical community has earned a great share of
this.
TightLiner 3 hours ago remove link
Guy I know is an ICU nurse. They quit using ventilators when 80% of people on them died.
He said, once you're on a ventilator you're not coming off alive.
chunga 3 hours ago remove link
All the ingredients for a pandemic are there, except the pandemic itself. Where my wife
works they are still occupying themselves largely with meetings and filling out Dystopia
forms. Corporate management is trying to bribe the staff to get the experimental injections
with bonuses and perks. That figure is right around 50/50 who've refused.
The reptilian viciousness of hospital administrators is on full display for all staff to
see. Nobody would forget opening their front door and finding a saltwater crocodile.
Motion for Temporary Restraining Order Against Use of COVID Vaccine in Children
The case will challenge the EUAs for the injections on several counts, based on the law
and scientific evidence that the EUAs should never have been granted, the EUAs should be
revoked immediately, the injections are dangerous biological agents that have the potential
to cause substantially greater harm than the COVID-19 disease itself, and that numerous
laws have been broken in the process of granting these EUAs and foisting these injections
on the American people.
Portal 4 hours ago remove link
Covid is a Trojan horse that brought Fascism to the western world. Just like Hitler,
"emergency powers" become permanent fascism.
When the Saints start getting dragged to jail you know your country is turning fascist.
"3rd Canadian pastor arrested for holding worship services violating COVID-19 orders"
jammyjo 3 hours ago
Atlas was pilloried, but he was the man we needed instead of Fauci. Atlas had a more
balance perspective. Fauci was scared of his own shadow, and maybe even corrupt since he
was a life long government hack.
strych10 2 hours ago remove link
The only reason such power was granted is because the country is chock-full of obese,
poorly educated morons who were easily frightened into ludicrously unworkable "solutions"
by a profit driven media and idiotic, power hungry politicians.
NoPension 2 hours ago remove link
Still the best.....
Local TV reporter addressing a group of Amish leaders..." Why hasn't covid seemed to
affect the Amish?"
"... may have contained downstream effects of some endothelial changes that would give rise to the hypercoagulable state that is characteristic of the disease ..."
"... We suggest that, in part, the presence of spike protein in circulation may contribute to the hypercoagulation in COVID-19 positive patients and may cause severe impairment of fibrinolysis. Such lytic impairment may be the direct cause of the large microclots we have noted here ..."
The researchers examined the fluorescent amyloid signals in abnormal clots and in healthy
platelet-poor plasma (PPP) with or without spike protein.
This showed a marked increase in dense abnormal amyloid clots, called amyloid deposits, in
PPP to which spike was added, with or without thrombin. Thrombin alone also created an
extensive fibrin clot. However, there was a significant increase in the percentage area of
amyloid deposits.
The greatest change followed the addition of both spike and thrombin.
Platelet
activation
When whole blood was exposed to spike protein even at low concentrations, the erythrocytes
showed agglutination, hyperactivated platelets were seen, with membrane spreading and the
formation of platelet-derived microparticles.
In all samples, spontaneous amyloid deposits formed after exposure to the spike protein
without the need for thrombin exposure.
Clotting in microfluidics channels
Microfluidics systems were set up to simulate extensive endothelial damage, with resulting
hypercoagulability. This showed that COVID-19 produced changes in the clotting profile of the
PPP.
Clot formation in healthy PPP occurred slowly and gradually, to a moderate size, and with
orderly clot layers that allowed blood flow to occur through the channel's center. These clots
were easily removed by flushing the channel at 1 mL/min.
The PPP from COVID-19 patients showed large disorderly clots that often projected into the
channel's center and obstructed the flow. These clots were impossible to dislodge at the
earlier flow rate or even at a higher flow.
Again, large clots formed in PPP from COVID-19 patients when it was exposed to thrombin in
about 90 seconds. However, most of the clotting happened in one burst, with not much
propagation of the clot thereafter, indicating rapid consumption of the thrombin.
This was not the case with PPP exposed to spike protein, where a fibrous laminar clot was
combined with a chaotic clot. Moderate flow disruption was also observed. These clots could
also be removed with similar ease. This intermediate state could be due to the absence of
multiple other biological factors that may have hindered the formation of the characteristic
clots seen in COVID-19 patients.
Mass spectrometry
The results of mass spectrometry of the healthy PPP with spike protein showed changes in the
structure of the beta and gamma fibrin(ogen) proteins, together with complement 3 and
prothrombin. These proteins showed resistance to degradation by trypsin, a powerful proteolytic
enzyme, in the presence of spike protein.
What are the implications?
The researchers show that the spike S1 not only interacts directly with both platelets and
with the key clotting protein fibrinogen and its activated form, fibrin, causing changes in the
protein that, in turn, alter the way blood clots.
In PPP, the addition of thrombin was found to induce fibrinogen's polymerization into a
fibrin mesh. Exposure to spike protein was shown to precipitate dense clots.
When spikes and thrombin were added to healthy PPP, the formation of abnormal amyloid
deposits was increased. These also showed significant changes in the blood cells'
ultrastructure, including the red cells and platelets.
The presence of extensive spontaneous fibrin networks following the addition of the spike
protein to whole blood matches the ultrastructural appearance seen on COVID-19-positive blood
smears. Here again, the primary features were anomalous clotting, amyloid in the clots, and
spontaneous fibrin network formation.
The study also shows that it may alter blood flow in COVID-19. The microfluidics simulation
showed that the PPP from COVID-19 patients, which is almost pure fibrinogen, formed large
obstructing clots. The PPP " may have contained downstream effects of some endothelial
changes that would give rise to the hypercoagulable state that is characteristic of the
disease ."
" We suggest that, in part, the presence of spike protein in circulation may
contribute to the hypercoagulation in COVID-19 positive patients and may cause severe
impairment of fibrinolysis. Such lytic impairment may be the direct cause of the large
microclots we have noted here ."
Thus, the free S1 subunit has harmful effects on the host even without direct infection of
the cells themselves. This strengthens the case for targeting the spike protein via antibodies
and vaccines.
*Important Notice
medRxiv publishes preliminary scientific reports that are not peer-reviewed and,
therefore, should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related
behavior, or treated as established information.
Dr. Marty Makary made the comments during a recent interview, noting that "natural immunity works" and it is wrong to vilify those
who don't want the vaccine because they have already recovered from the virus.
Makary criticised "the most slow, reactionary, political CDC in American history" for not clearly communicating the scientific
facts about natural immunity compared to the kind of immunity developed through vaccines.
" There is more data on natural immunity than there is on vaccinated immunity, because natural immunity has been around longer,"
Makary emphasised.
"We are not seeing reinfections, and when they do happen, they're rare. Their symptoms are mild or are asymptomatic," the professor
added.
"Please, ignore the CDC guidance," he urged, adding "Live a normal life, unless you are unvaccinated and did not have the infection,
in which case you need to be careful."
"We've got to start respecting people who choose not to get the vaccine instead of demonizing them," Makary further asserted.
The professor's comments come amid a plethora of
media generated propaganda suggesting that natural immunity isn't enough, and that those who do not choose to take the vaccine
should be socially ostracisedJustus D. Barnes 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link
I would not call it a hoax as some people do get sick and die.
However. Some people are allergic to peanuts. So lets force everyone to get vaccinated against peanuts?
I think of this whole thing as $#IT politicians shoving their $#IT policies down stupid peoples throats. In a free America
any thoughtful person would asses the danger that corona or a peanut would present to them personally and then take the action
they thought best. IMHO If your state does not let you make the choice for yourself then you join a class action lawsuit against
your state or move.
FurnitureFireSale 4 hours ago remove link
And that's the problem in that what America has become: a bunch of thoughtless sheep that do what their idols tell them to
do; what the commercials tell them to do; what the brainwashing convinces them to do. There are many, many of them and a good
amount of thoughtful ones (us)too. It is the latter having these discussions about these therapies, no matter how much the MSM
and FAANG's try to supress it. Many highly intelligent people I know have gone ahead and gotten their shots. Several in my circle
have not- never will. The have nots understand just what is going on. The liberal states that are pushing this agenda need to
be reeled in via a class action. One should not be forced to move based upon their vaccination status. It's as arbitrary as saying
"move to a state where they don't serve peanuts". You're exactly right.
sun tzu 3 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Deaths from purely from covid was probably in the 25,000 range in the past 14 months, which is less than half of 5 months of
flu deaths each year. Some died due to pneumonia or cytokine storm. Others died when the spike proteins got into their blood and
caused clots. The vast majority died with covid, either real or thru a false positives. Probably 25-50K were murdered on ventilators.
philipat 1 hour ago remove link
As I have written about previously, the CDC/WHO are playing (political) games with science and their actions only discredit
themselves and raise other obvious questions which challenge the official explanation(s) of events, in summary as follows:
The definition of Herd Immunity has been changed (including in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary) to EXCLUDE natural immunity
as a contributing factor. This is scientifically false because naturally acquired immunity is the best type of immunity because
it is a complete immune response which conveys long-lasting immunity and prevents transmission of any virus. This is NOT true
for the "vaccines" whose manufacturers only claim a reduction in the severity of any symptoms. The obvious conclusion based
on the science is that naturally immune people have a stronger claim on "Vaccine Passports" than the vaccinated.
Not only is it unnecessary for naturally immune people to be vaccinated, there are potential dangers in doing so. Based
again on scientific knowledge from earlier attempts to develop vaccines for CoVs, there is a very real risk of ADE (Antibody
Dependent Enhancement), also described as Pathogenic Priming from occurring when people with non-neutralizing antibodies are
exposed to further challenge from either a live virus or high concentrations of viral antigen. This can potentially occur in
both vaccinated people (we will know during the next "Flu" season) and in naturally immune people exposed to high concentrations
of viral antigen which triggers non-neutralizing antibodies. The subsequent autoimmune reaction can result from a triggered
"cytokine storm" which can result in the shutdown of vital organs and death,
Ironically, this MIGHT explain some of the many AEs being seen with the "vaccines" where an autoimmune effect is seen.
The only possible reason for the above denials 1-2) of the science is so as to comply with the official narrative that everyone
needs vaccination "" presumably for reasons other than science and public health.
The CDC still recommends the RT-qPCR test to diagnose "new cases" at a cycle threshold (Ct) of >35 cycles, typically run
at 35-45 or even 50 cycles. This despite the fact they fully understand that at these high cycle counts, the numbers of "false
positives" are high (up to 95% in some labs). However, in coming to terms with "a few breakthrough cases" of disease in vaccinated
people, CDC has been running trials to sequence the virus (in the hope of blaming new variants) obtained from such people.
However, to be included, only samples from patients confirmed positive with a PCR test run at a Ct of <28 cycles are allowed.
Why the difference?
The dilemma for CDC here is obvious. If they recommend that for reasons of accuracy, ALL PCR tests are run at a Ct of <28,
they will not be able to find many "new cases" (a/k/a false positives) to inflate the case numbers and have ample material
to blame "Covid deaths" on. If they run the trials on "breakthrough infections" at a Ct of >35 (as recommended for general
use) they will "confirm" (by their own definition) thousands of such " extremely rare breakthrough cases". This clearly demonstrates
duplicity on the part of CDC and destroys their credibility, which has been built on science not politics.
The Virus origin dilemma. The Overton window has allowed two, and only two, "explanations" for the origin of the virus.
Setting aside the fact that whenever the Establishment presents a limited number of explanations for anything, they are always
all wrong (and in this case there are other explanations surrounding the Military Games, held in Wuhan at around the time the
first patients were recorded) it is now obvious that the desired conclusion is a "leak" at the Wuhan Institute of Virology
(WIV). That means we must also set aside the fact that Bio Safety Level 4 labs don't just "leak" "" I can attest to this from
personal experience of BSL training.
The dilemma for the Authorities with this explanation, not yet widely recognised, is that if indeed this is the explanation,
it means that wild SARS-CoV-2 virus (and other man made variants in the "gain of function" research, was being experimented
with in WIV so as to infect the respiratory system of those "infected". Other bodily contamination transported out of the lab
is entirely impossible due to the security features built-in at BSL-4 facilities (Pressure gradients, UV exit lighting, 3 changes
of clothing involving showers with various chemical components etc. "" these are SERIOUS safety precautions)
That being the case, why then has it not been possible to isolate and purify said virus (and its variants) for the purposes
of confirming its existence and for use in more accurate tests and diagnostics plus for use in making natural (real) vaccines?
konputa 4 hours ago
The CDC are vaccine pushers and owners of numerous vaccine patents. It seems to me they are doing their job as intended, it's
just that the public misunderstands their purpose. Their mission isn't public health.
CheapBastard 5 hours ago (Edited)
That's exactly what my doc told me. Stay healthy and take the relevant supplements like Vitamin D. Most likely have immunity
from previous Flu infections with cross-over protection.
Problem is for the CDC and Big Pharma is their Fear **** can't be promoted and they can't make mind-numbing profits from natural
immunity.
What a mess_man 4 hours ago
We knew this last spring with the Diamond Princess.
... here are some key ingredients in the CDC's recipe
for dystopian summer fun:
Two-layer masks should be worn at all times "" indoors and out ""except for eating,
drinking and swimming
Don't allow close-contact games and sports
Avoid sharing of objects such as toys, games and art supplies
Separate children on buses by skipping rows
Divide children into "cohorts" and then keep them away from other cohorts
Children should stay three feet away from kids in their cohort and six feet away from
those outside their cohort; campers and staff should stay six feet from each other, as
should fellow staff members
While eating and drinking, stay six feet away from everybody""even your own cohort
UpTo11 4 hours ago remove link
Just went to a high school graduation ceremony in Texas. 1 student had a mask. No one
else in the stadium of 400. Not sure who wears masks anymore at all.
ChargingHandle 3 hours ago remove link
Come to oregon and you will see all species of sheeple wearing masks even when
completely by themselves.
GunnerySgtHartman 2 hours ago
I still see people wearing masks while driving their cars ... with nobody else in the
cars ... talk about sheeple.
pods 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link
Is your summer camp following these ridiculous guidelines?
Well my kid won't attend.
Simple.
These guidelines may prevent some kids getting pooned by a counselor, so there is an
upside.
strych10 2 hours ago
Pooning isn't a concern. Dicking is the issue.
Reaper 4 hours ago
Obedience is the beginning of modern slavery.
high5mail 4 hours ago remove link
Scotty Beam me up
I am tired of woke, chinese flu, fauci, biden, trudeau and most of all, the people who
don't question the insanity and go along with it.
They have succeeded in taking the pleasure out of living. We are nothing more than
cattle with no rights, chipped and monitored.
Life was not meant to be like this....
Mike Rotsch 4 hours ago
If the summer camp follows the CDC, it's the wrong camp.
play_arrow
GoodyGumdrops 4 hours ago (Edited)
Anyone who allows their child to be indoctrinated into this fear cult is seriously
messed up. How can anyone justify treating children this way?
It sickens me to think that these kids are being taught to sacrifice their health for a
bunch of narcissistic hypochondriacs acting like frightened children instead of behaving
like normal, mentally healthy adults.
"... A ten-year-old boy absolutely humiliated a school board in Florida as he spoke passionately in requesting the council to stop the unscientific and ridiculous mask mandate for the district at the school. ..."
A ten-year-old boy absolutely humiliated a
school board in Florida as he spoke passionately in requesting the council to stop the unscientific
and ridiculous mask mandate for the district at the school.
"Based on the lack of a rational explanation for the actions of the WHO, Merck, FDA and Unitaid, we conclude that they result
from an active disinformation campaign ... "
Thank you for the latest release from FLCCC. When you find the time to comment, you always supply powerful material - I am
extraordinarily grateful for this.
I just spent the time to read the release, and I was absorbed from beginning to end. Of course, there's some unavoidable scientific
terminology, but very little, and most of the document stands as a revolutionary manifesto, a call to action, a call to resist
the misinformation and the disinformation permeating the COVID-19 pandemic.
The document illustrates in a verifiable and succinct charge how the WHO has loaded the dice against the use of ivermectin
as both a prophylactic and a treatment for COVID-19, in order to argue against its adoption - and this, in a world that is increasingly
adopting its use because it quite simply works.
It works, and the results from all over the world are recorded by doctors, showing that it works up to a 90% effectiveness
in the main and close to 100% in some cases, and it does this with negligible collateral harm demonstrated across billions of
doses and many decades - and the WHO, despite that in 2018 it formally lauded its safety, now says that it doesn't work and that
it may be dangerous.
~~
So what is the Why of the WHO?
This release from FLCCC explains why and describes the underlying, systemic rottenness in the western medical system, how it
has been tainted for decades by corporations and large funding sources - and how the common doctors, fighting to do no harm and
to save lives, are up against a wall of opposition during this pandemic that is breathtakingly huge.
The FLCCC press release goes beyond the medical science and explains also the corporate tactics that have demolished scientific
method. It presents a call to action, and sketches the only tools we have to resist. It says much that we already know - but these
are doctors and awarded researchers telling us all the things that are so obviously fishy in the institutional responses
to the pandemic.
Big Pharma, Big Science, Big Media, Big Tech, Big Government, Big Foundations - all in collusion, all following the trail originally
blazed by Big Tobacco.
See, we know how it works because we've watched it for decades. The FLCCC release does us the service of reminding us and enumerating
the instances when corporate venality (my word, not theirs) has destroyed the truth simply to make money.
What CDC knows what we do know to issue such draconian guidelines? This looks like is a
concentration camp not summer camp...
Notable quotes:
"... Two-layer masks should be worn at all times "" indoors and out ""except for eating, drinking and swimming ..."
"... Don't allow close-contact games and sports ..."
"... Avoid sharing of objects such as toys, games and art supplies ..."
"... Separate children on buses by skipping rows ..."
"... Divide children into "cohorts" and then keep them away from other cohorts ..."
"... Children should stay three feet away from kids in their cohort and six feet away from those outside their cohort; campers and staff should stay six feet from each other, as should fellow staff members ..."
"... While eating and drinking, stay six feet away from everybody, even your own cohort ..."
In April, the CDC published guidance
for operating youth camps that was the latest eye-rolling example of CDC maximalism that
conflicts with what we've learned about Covid-19.
Before we examine the CDC guidance, let's review some of the key things that we now know
about Covid-19 that we didn't in March 2020:
Covid-19 presents little risk at all to children. According to CDC data, only
295 children age 0-17 have died with Covid-19. Compare that to the CDC's estimation
that 600
died of the flu during the 2017-18 season.
Outdoor transmission pretty much never happens. An Irish
study of more than 232,000 Covid-19 cases found only 0.1% of cases were transmitted
outside.
Surface transmission isn't a material source of spread. The CDC has
declared the risk of contracting the virus by touching surfaces or objects is low, and
that rather than cleaning with disinfectant, "soap and water is enough to reduce risk"
(unless there's a known or suspected Covid-19 case in a community setting).
Vaccines are abundantly available. According to the CDC's vaccination data , 60.5% of U.S.
adults have have received at least one vaccine dose, and 48.4% are fully vaccinated. Gone
are the days when finding the vaccine was a challenge; today, anyone who wants the vaccine
can readily find it.
Covid-19 cases and deaths are in a free fall. The 7-day averages for cases and deaths
have respectively fallen 89% and 83% from
their peaks. On Sunday, the entire state of Texas
reported not a single death from the virus. Today, San Francisco General Hospital has
no Covid-19 patients for the first time
since March 2020.
With that knowledge in mind, here are some key ingredients in the CDC's recipe
for dystopian summer fun:
Two-layer masks should be worn at all times "" indoors and out ""except for eating,
drinking and swimming
Don't allow close-contact games and sports
Avoid sharing of objects such as toys, games and art supplies
Separate children on buses by skipping rows
Divide children into "cohorts" and then keep them away from other cohorts
Children should stay three feet away from kids in their cohort and six feet away
from those outside their cohort; campers and staff should stay six feet from each other, as
should fellow staff members
While eating and drinking, stay six feet away from everybody, even your own
cohort
Who exactly are these draconian, fun-killing guidelines meant to protect? The children
aren't in any meaningful danger"" the number of children who typically drown in a given
year is more than double the number of child Covid deaths we've observed in 15 months .
Meanwhile, against a backdrop of rapidly-vanishing Covid-19 infections across the country,
camp staff will have had more than ample opportunity to be fully vaccinated against Covid-19
before the first kids arrive.
We're told to "follow the science," but what is the CDC following? The agency's guidelines
read like they were written during the early dark ages of the Covid outbreak, when the peril
was still filled with overwhelming mystery, and "erring on the side of caution" still had a
trace of credibility.
As Columbia University pediatric immunologist Mark Gorelik told
New York Magazine , " We know that the risk of outdoor infection is very low. We know risks
of children becoming seriously ill or even ill at all is vanishingly small. And most of the
vulnerable population is already vaccinated. I am supportive of effective measures to restrain
the spread of illness. However, the CDC's recommendations cross the line into excess and are,
frankly, senseless. Children cannot be running around outside in 90-degree weather wearing a
mask. Period. "
Who cares what the CDC says? They have ZERO credibility and should be charged with fraud and
"Crimes Against Humanity"
UpTo11 4 hours ago remove link
Just went to a high school graduation ceremony in Texas. 1 student had a mask. No one else
in the stadium of 400. Not sure who wears masks anymore at all.
ChargingHandle 3 hours ago remove link
Come to oregon and you will see all species of sheeple wearing masks even when completely
by themselves.
GunnerySgtHartman 2 hours ago
I still see people wearing masks while driving their cars ... with nobody else in the cars
... talk about sheeple.
Snakerockhiker 3 hours ago
The CDC guidance has nothing to do with Covid-19 and everything to do with maintaining and
increasing fear, breaking down societal relationships, and ensuring people are following
operant conditioning protocols like Pavlov's dogs. A gang of criminals are running America's
medical heirarchy. We need to eliminate them.
"Ultimately, the point of life is not about avoiding diseases and meeting arbitrary
standards of health. Society has its necessary functions and its priorities that exist
regardless of the recommendation of public health experts. It's about time the CDC understood
that." ~ Ethan Yang
n May 16, 2021, the CDC updated its
guidance , stating that fully vaccinated people could resume their lives as normal,
including not wearing a mask. It goes without saying that not only was the CDC's initial
position that vaccinated people still have to practice all the same precautions as those that
are unvaccinated ridiculous, it's also way behind what some states have been doing. Citing the
success of places like Florida and Texas as completely open states flouting every overly
protectionist measure put out by the CDC would be beating a dead horse at this point. Of
course, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky clarified that in
regards to the new guidance on vaccinated persons not having to wear masks,
"Not everybody has to rip off their mask because our guidance changed," she said. "If you
are concerned, please do consult your physician before you take off your mask."
CNN also cited its own medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen, who criticized the CDC for being
overly cautious on mask-wearing for vaccinated individuals. This is of course the same CDC that
at the beginning of the pandemic lied to the public
about how people should not wear masks in an attempt to prevent a shortage. Eventually, of
course, the narrative changed to the current regime of masks being the one thing that will save
humanity. As we know this is also a ridiculous policy, as the overwhelming evidence points out
that masks are not the
silver bullet to stopping infectious disease and only help in specific contexts. Jenin
Younes writes on this subject when she notes ,
"On June 5, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a paper stating that "widespread
use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality
or direct scientific evidence and there are other potential benefits and harms to
consider."
Throughout the entire pandemic, the CDC has been the arbiter of comically cautious guidance,
arbitrary and unethical recommendations, and it contradicted itself so many times that it would
be a decent question to ask if anyone really listens at this point. Perhaps this would be a
good thing in a way as states and communities chart their own course towards voluntary
solutions based on their own contexts. Although it is certainly great to see people taking
matters into their own hands and living their lives based on reason and responsible behavior,
if we are going to have a CDC it would be best that it does its job well and not act as a
detriment to society sowing confusion and fear.
The CDC's Less Than Stellar Track
Record
It is worth mentioning that the CDC is credited with leading the eradication of smallpox
and credit should be given where credit is due. However, we should not let that distract us
from the fact that the CDC has always had a track
record of being overly cautious to the point that their guidelines are unrealistic,
trigger-happy on issuing guidance that would later be retracted, and especially as of recently
being absolutely disconnected from society.
Let's go back to the very beginning of the pandemic before the lockdowns. The CDC was
already starting off on the wrong foot when it came to procuring test kits. Reason
Magazinewrites
,
"A far more consequential error also occurred in February, when the agency botched the
development of the first batch of test kits that states were supposed to use to begin the
testing process. The CDC had already declined to use a German test
backed by the World Health Organization, preferring to create its own, as is typical for the
agency. This cost several weeks during the time when the virus was just beginning to spread
in the U.S. And when the CDC did send out test kits to states, the
majority of those kits delivered faulty results."
This issue with test kits was only resolved once development was turned over to the private
sector. An article in The Atlantic points out that in May the CDC was conflating viral and antibody tests.
Viral tests detect active Covid cases while antibody tests detect past infections, and
conflating the two paints a very different picture for the severity of active caseloads.
Of course, nobody can forget that the CDC endorsed the use of lockdown policies as if it was
common sense science, which not only failed to stop the virus but proceeded to throw the entire
country into disarray. An article published by AIER back in June of 2020 recounts these absurd
policies by noting
,
"In particular, two unprecedented and massively destructive physical distancing policies
were implemented: (1) quarantining an entire population (i.e., "stay-at-home" orders), and
(2) shutting down entire industries and significantly altering the operations of other
industries that were "permitted" to continue to operate. This includes educational
establishments, such as day care facilities, primary and secondary schools, and religious
institutions, which provide important educational and recreational services for
children."
At one point Dr. Fauci stated in a CNN interview that he was confused on why
every single state in the country wasn't implementing a stay-at-home order. Despite mounting
evidence for the tremendous collateral damage lockdowns were causing with little benefit to
show, the CDC continued to advocate for the use of lockdown policies.
Finally, we should never forget the blatant
political pandering to the teachers' unions when it came to school closures. Keeping
schools open isn't even a controversial topic; in fact, closing schools is largely considered a
fringe position in the scientific community, and even President Biden was advocating for the
opening of schools. It is clear that closing schools are massively harmful not only to children
but to the parents who now have unexpected child care burdens. At the same time, children are
not a significant source of transmission and are not vulnerable to the virus.
If there wasn't already enough said, the CDC even issued an unconstitutional nationwide
moratorium on evictions as if it had not meddled enough with the economy and the constitutional
order. Fortunately, there is now a
class-action lawsuit against the CDC for this offense.
Key takeaway
The CDC has always been out of touch and overly cautious when it comes to advising the
country on issues of public health. In a way that is understandable, as one could argue they
are simply trying to present the safest and healthiest way to live. Even then, those
recommendations could be overturned by new developments as in the case of drinking while
pregnant , which we now know isn't an issue if done in moderation. Even then, there is
absolutely no excuse for advocating lockdown policies which go beyond an abundance of caution
into the realm of recklessness and neglect. Ultimately, the point of life is not about avoiding
diseases and meeting arbitrary standards of health. Society has its necessary functions and its
priorities that exist regardless of the recommendation of public health experts. It's about
time the CDC understood that.
In reaction to Covid-19, the CDC really took things to a whole new level of absurdity. The
amount of hubris, ignorance, and condescension exhibited by our public health leaders truly
soared to new heights. Not only that but it had real consequences not just for the people who
had to live under the CDC's recommendations but for its own credibility. It would be fair to
say the CDC needs a wakeup call because they truly have tested our patience for what's becoming
far too long.
This video provides one of the most erudite and
informative looks at Covid-19 and the consequences of lockdowns. It was remarkable this week to watch as it appeared on
YouTube and was forcibly taken down only 2 hours after posting. The copy below is hosted on LBRY, a blockchain video
application. In a year of fantastic educational content, this is one of the best we've seen.
Dr. Michael Yeadon is an Allergy & Respiratory
Therapeutic Area expert with 23 years in the pharmaceutical industry. He trained as a biochemist and pharmacologist,
obtaining his PhD from the University of Surrey (UK) in 1988.
Dr. Yeadon then worked at the Wellcome
Research Labs with Salvador Moncada with a research focus on airway hyper-responsiveness and effects of pollutants
including ozone and working in drug discovery of 5-LO, COX, PAF, NO and lung inflammation. With colleagues, he was the
first to detect exhaled NO in animals and later to induce NOS in lung via allergic triggers.
Joining Pfizer in 1995, he was responsible for
the growth and portfolio delivery of the Allergy & Respiratory pipeline within the company. He was responsible for
target selection and the progress into humans of new molecules, leading teams of up to 200 staff across all disciplines
and won an Achievement Award for productivity in 2008.
Under his leadership the research unit
invented oral and inhaled NCEs which delivered multiple positive clinical proofs of concept in asthma, allergic rhinitis
and COPD. He led productive collaborations such as with Rigel Pharmaceuticals (SYK inhibitors) and was involved in the
licensing of Spiriva and acquisition of the Meridica (inhaler device) company.
Dr. Yeadon has published over 40 original
research articles and now consults and partners with a number of biotechnology companies. Before working with Apellis,
Dr. Yeadon was VP and Chief Scientific Officer (Allergy & Respiratory Research) with Pfizer.
My original training was a first-class honours
degree in biochemistry and toxicology. Followed by a research-based PhD into respiratory pharmacology; and after that
I've worked my entire life, uh, on the research side of the pharmaceutical industry – both big pharma and also biotech.
My specific focus has been inflammation, immunology, allergy in the context of respiratory diseases (so the lung, but
also the skin). So I would say I'm a kind of a deeply experienced inflammation, immunology, pulmonology kind of research
person.
I initially became concerned about, the, our
response to the coronavirus pandemic towards the middle or back end of April as early as that. It had become clear that
if you look at the number of daily deaths versus the date the pandemic had turned. Really, pleasingly, already the wave
was fundamentally over, and we would just watch it fall for a number of months – which is what it did. And so I became
very perturbed about increasing restrictions on the behavior and movement of people in my country and I could see no
reason for it then and I still don't.
Government's response to emergencies is guided
by the scientific group who sit together under the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies or
SAGE
.
So they should provide scientific advice to the government about what's appropriate to do. SAGE has got several things
wrong, and that has led to advice that's inappropriate and – uh, not only has had horrible economic effects, but has had
continuing medical effects in that people are no longer being treated properly.
SAGE took the view that since SARS-CoV-2 was a
new virus that they believed there wouldn't be any immunity at all in the population. So, I think that's the first
thing. I remember hearing that and I puzzled, because I already knew – because I read the scientific literature that
SARS-CoV-2 was 80% similar to another virus you may have heard of called SARS that moved around the world a bit in 2003,
and more than that: it's quite similar, in pieces of it, to common cold-causing coronaviruses.
So, when I heard that there was this
coronavirus moving across the world I wasn't as worried as perhaps other people were, because I figured that since there
are four common cold-causing coronaviruses, I figured that quite a lot of the population we've been exposed to one of
those viruses, and would probably have a perhaps substantial protective immunity. And just to explain why I was so
confident everybody knows the story of Edward Jenner and vaccination, and the story of cowpox and smallpox. And that the
old story was that milkmaids had very, uh, clear complexions: they never suffered from things like smallpox, that if it
didn't kill you would leave your skin permanently scarred. And the reason that they had the protection was that they
were exposed to a more benign, related virus called cowpox.
Edward Jenner came up with the idea that if
it's cowpox that saves the fair maid – he reasoned that if he could give another person an exposure to the cowpox, he
would be able to protect them from smallpox. Now, he did an experiment that you can't do now – and he never should have
done it – but apocryphally, or really, or maybe you're ill, we're not sure. Edward Jenner acquired some of the liquid
from a person infected with cowpox. Relatively mild pustules that then go away. And he got some of this and he – he
scraped it into the skin of a small boy and a few weeks later, he obtained some liquid from some poor person that was
dying of smallpox and infected the boy. And, lo and behold, the boy did not get ill and that gave birth to the whole
field of what's called vaccination. And vax, the vaccine's "vac." It comes from "vaccus," the Latin name for cow. So, we
are really familiar with the principle of cross immunization.
I've thought quite a lot about, you know, the
vulnerable people in in care homes and there's an awareness that, even though people really careful using PPE and so on,
but that's only going to go so far in a kind of, hot house environment where people are pretty close together in a care
home. So the question I've had all year is: once one or two people, you know, got the virus in a care home, why wouldn't
almost everyone get infected? And of course the truth is, they didn't. And one interpretation of that distinction is
that a large proportion of people in the care homes had prior immunity.
At this time of year, about 1 in 30 people
have a cold, caused by one of these coronaviruses. And just like the protection against smallpox provided by previous
exposure to cowpox, so people exposed to having had a cold caused by one of these coronaviruses they're now immune to
SARS-CoV-2. So, 30% of the population was protected before the start. SAGE said it was
zero
–
and
I don't understand how they could possibly have justified that. There's a second, and equally
fatal
,
unaccountable error that they have made in their model. The percentage of the population that SAGE asserts have been
infected to date by the virus is about seven percent. I know that that's what they believe and you can see it in a
document they published in September called "Non-pharmaceutical interventions" and it says sadly more than 90% of the
population is still vulnerable.
It's unbelievably wrong. And I'm just going to
explain why: they've based their number on the percentage of people in the country who have antibodies in their blood.
And only the people who became most ill needed to actually develop and release antibodies around their body. So, it is
certainly true that the people who have lots of antibodies were infected. But a very large number of people had milder
symptoms, and even more people had none at all. And the best estimates that we can arrive at is that those people either
made no antibodies, or so low amounts that they will have faded from now.
A recent publication on the percentage of care
home residents who have antibodies to the virus very, very interesting. This time they were using high sensitivity tests
for antibodies and they carefully picked out residents that never were PCR-positive: these are people who never got
infected. And they found that 65% of them had antibodies to the virus; they never got infected. So I believe there was
high prevalence of immunity in that population prior to the virus arriving. Big story in the media, recently, was that
the percentage of people with antibodies against the virus in their blood was falling. Now, this was cast as a concern
that immunity to SARS-CoV-2 doesn't last very long. Well, you know, anyone with knowledge of immunity would – would just
simply reject that. It's not the way immunity to virus works – that would be T-cells. So, if the antibodies are falling
gradually over time – which they have – from spring to present, the only plausible explanation is that the prevalence of
the virus in the population is falling, and that's why the antibody production gradually subsides.
Less than 40% of the population are
susceptible. Even theoretical epidemiologists would tell you that that's too small a number to support a consolidated
and growing outbreak, community immunity, herd immunity. So, SAGE says that we're not even close, and I'm telling you
that the best science, by the best scientists in the world, published in the top peer-reviewed journals, says they're
wrong: that more than 60 of the population are now immune, and it's simply not possible to have a large and growing
pandemic.
Really good news, genuine good news, to hear
that there's data emerging from the vaccine clinical trials, and we are seeing vaccines that raise not just antibodies –
but they're also producing T-cell responses. This is great; back to proper science, proper immunology. That's how
immunity to viruses works. So, my surprise though, and it's just annoying that when we're talking about, uh, the
percentage of the population that's still susceptible we only talk about antibodies, like seven percent from SAGE. Why
are we not talking about the 50% that have got T-cell immunity?
And so you might be thinking if Mike – and Dr
Mike Yeadon is telling you these things – or how come the pandemic isn't over? Well, this may come as a surprise to
you, but I believe fundamentally it is over. The country has experienced almost a complete cycle now of the virus
sweeping through the land, and we are at the end of it. London was –was horribly affected in the spring, and somewhere
in early April they were experiencing several hundred deaths per day from people dying with similar symptoms in
respiratory failure and, uh, inflammation. And at the moment the number of people dying of SARS-CoV-2 in the capital is
less than 10. So it's down by 98, or something like that. And, the reason it's down, is because there are now too few
people in London susceptible to allow the virus to magnify, to amplify, to get an epidemic. And, and they would have
been hit by now, because they were the first place hit in the spring. And I think what we're seeing now in the Northeast
and the Northwest would be the dying embers of the spreading out of this virus. And I'm very sorry that it is still
true, that a small number of people are catching it, getting ill, and dying.
So why aren't the media telling us that the
pandemic is over? It's not over because SAGE says it's not. So SAGE consists of very many scientists, from a range of
disciplines – mathematicians and clinicians – and there are multiple committees. But I found to my surprise – and I'm
actually going to use the word –
horror
,
that
in the spring, all the way through the spring and summer, SAGE did not have on their committee someone who I would call
a card-carrying immunologist; a clinical immunologist. I have to say I think that in the spring and summer SAGE was
deficient in the expertise it had. They should have armed themselves, you know, with – around the table all the people
required to to understand what was happening, and they didn't do that. People asked me then, "Well Mike, if it's, you
know, if it's fundamentally over, why are we still getting hundreds of deaths a day from SARS-CoV-2?" And I've thought a
lot about this. There is a test that's performed where people have their noses and tonsils swabbed, and then a test
(called a PCR test) is performed on that. And what they're looking for isn't the virus – you might think it's looking
for the virus, but it's not. What they're looking for is a small piece of genetic sequence; it's called RNA.
Unfortunately, that bit of RNA will be found in people's tonsils and nose not if they've just caught the virus, and
they're about to get ill, or they're already ill. It's also going to be found if they were infected
previously
weeks
– or even, sometimes, a small number of months ago. Let me just explain why that is.
If you've been infected, and you've fought off
the virus (which most people do), you'll have broken, dead bits of virus. These are tiny things smaller than your cells,
perhaps spread all the way through your airway, embedded in bits of mucus, maybe inside an airway lining cell. And so
over a period of weeks or months you bring up cells that contain broken, dead pieces of the virus that you have
conquered and killed. However, the PCR test is not able to detect whether the viral RNA has come from a living virus or
a dead one (as I've just described). So I think a large proportion of the so-called positives are, in fact, what I call
"cold" positives: they're correctly identifying that there is some viral RNA in the sample – but it's from a dead virus.
It can't hurt them, they're not going to get ill, they can't transmit it to anybody else. So they're not infectious. So
that accounts for a large number of the so-called positive cases. These are people who've beaten the virus. Why are we
using this test that cannot distinguish between active infection and people who've conquered the virus?
This test has never been used in this way –
and I've worked in this field. It's not a suitable technique it's a – it's the kind of technique you would use for
forensic purposes, if you were trying to do a DNA test to establish whether or not a person was at the scene of a crime.
You would not be doing these tests by a windy, supermarket car parking; what looks like plastic marquee tents; on picnic
tables. It's not suitable at all – and it definitely shouldn't be done in the way it's been done. It's subject to many
mechanical errors, should we say, handling errors. If this was a test being used for legal purposes, for forensic
purposes like a DNA identity test, the judge would throw out this evidence; would say it's not admissible. It produces
positives even when there's no virus there at all. We call that a false positive.
As we've increased the number of tests done
per day, so we've had to recruit less and less experienced laboratory staff – and now we're using people who've never
worked professionally in this area. What that does is it increases the frequency of mistakes, and the effect of this is
that the false positive rate rises and rises. So, if you had a false positive rate of one percent – which Mr. Matt
Hancock [British Secretary of State for Health and Social Care] told us was roughly the number they had in the summer –
then if you tested a thousand people that had no virus ten of them would be positive, astonishingly. If the prevalence
of the virus was only one in a thousand, that's 0.1% – as the
Office
for National Statistics
told us it was through the summer – then if you use the PCR test only one of them will be
positive and genuinely so. But if the false positive rate is as low as one percent, you'll also get 10 positives that
are false.
Some people did say to me, "Well, there'll be
a higher percentage of people coming forward for testing in the community," so-called "Pillar 2" testing, because
they've been instructed only to come if they've got symptoms. But I call B.S. on that one. I don't think that's true. I
know lots of friends and relatives who've been told by an employer, "Well, you've sat near someone who's tested
positive, and I don't want you to come back to work until you've got a negative test." I've seen information from many
towns in the North – certainly Birmingham was one; Manchester was another; Bolton – where councils (and I really think
they were trying to be helpful) were out leafleting the people of their cities saying, "We're going to come round and
swab you all because we want to track down this virus." Now once you start testing people, more or less randomly,
instead of [those] having symptoms you get the same amount of virus in the population as the Office of National
Statistics found which is, at the time was, one in a thousand. And I've just told you Matt Hancock confirmed during the
summer they had a false positive rate of about one percent. So that means out of a thousand people 10 would test
positive, and it would be a false result, and only one would test positive and it was correct.
This test is monstrously unsuitable for
detecting who has live virus in their airway. It's subject to multiple distortions that are worsening as we get into the
winter. As the number of tests done per day increase[s], the number of errors made by these overworked, not very
experienced lab staff increase[s]. I think it's not unreasonable to say a best guess of the false positive rate at the
moment – what's called the operational false positive rate is about five percent. Five percent of 300,000 is 15,000
positives. I think some of those positives are real; I don't think it's very many. Now, the problem with this false
positive issue [is] it doesn't just stop it at "cases": it extends to people who are unwell and go to hospital. So
people who go to hospital having tested positive – and it could be a false positive, and I think most of them are at the
moment – if you go to hospital and you've tested positive previously, or you test positive in hospital, you'll be
counted now as a Covid admission.
Although there are more people in hospital now
than a month ago, this is normal for autumn. Regrettably, people catch respiratory viruses and become ill, and some will
die. I just don't believe it's got anything to do with Covid-19 anymore. There are more people in intensive care beds
now than there were a month or so ago. That's entirely normal as we move through late autumn into the early winter:
those beds become used. But there aren't more people than is normal for the time of year, and we're not about to run out
of capacity, certainly at a national level. But I think you know it is going now: if you should now die, you'll be
counted as a Covid death. But that's not correct; these are people who might have – have gone to hospital having had a
broken leg, for example, but they'll – three percent of them will still test positive, and they're not, they haven't got
the virus. It's a – it's a false positive, and if they die they'll be called a Covid death – and they are not. They've
died of something else.
One of the most troubling things I've heard
this year was Mr. Johnson telling us about the "Moonshot" testing everybody often, maybe every day, is the way out of
this problem. I'm telling you it's the way to keep us in this problem: that number of tests is orders of magnitude
higher than we're already testing now, and the false positive rate (however low it is) will be far too large to accept.
It will produce an enormous number of false positives.
What we should do is stop mass testing. Not
only is it an affront to your liberty, it will not help at all: it will be immensely expensive and it will be a
pathology all of its own. We'll be fighting off stupid people – mostly government ministers – I'm sorry to say, who are
not numerate, and do not understand statistics. If you test a million people a day with a test that produces one percent
false positives, 10 000 people a day will wrongly be told they've got the virus. If the prevalence of the virus was say
0.1%, like the Office of National Statistics said it was in summer, then only a tenth of that number, uh, 1,000 would
correctly be identified. But you can't distinguish amongst the 11,000 who have genuinely got the virus and who are false
positives. Moonshot, I think, will have a worse false positive rate. It's not fixable, and it's not necessary either.
The pandemic – having passed through the population not only of, of the UK, but of all of Europe – and probably all of
the world quite soon – it won't return. Why won't it return? Well, they've got T-cell immunity. We know this. It's been
studied by the best cellular immunologists in the world.
Sometimes people will say, "Well, it looks
like the immunity is starting to fade." You'll sometimes see [statements] like that, and when I saw the first headline
like this I remember being really quite confused, because that's not the way immunology works. Just think about it for a
moment. If that was how it worked it could kill you. When you had to fight it off, and if you had successfully done
that, it somehow didn't leave a mark in your body. Well, it does leave a mark on your body. The way you fought it off
involved certain pattern recognition receptors, and has left you with – as it were – memory cells that remember what it
was they fought off. And if they see that thing again it's very easy for them to get those cells to work again in
minutes or hours, and they will protect you. So the most likely explanation is it'll last a long time.
So I read a bit more about this so-called
tailing off of immunity – and I realized they were talking about antibodies. Just incorrect to – to think that
antibodies, and how long they stay up, is a measure of immune protection against viruses. I mean you can tell I'm – I
don't agree with this. It says there have been some classic experiments done on people who have inborn errors in parts
of their immune system, and some of them have inborn arrows that means they can't make antibodies, and guess what: they
– they are able to handle respiratory viruses the same as you and me. So, I don't think it's harmful to have antibodies,
although some people are worried about the potential for amplifying inflammation from antibodies, but – but my view is
that they're – they're probably neutral, and you definitely should not believe the story that because the antibody falls
away you've lost immunity. Again, that's just not the way the human immune system works.
The most likely duration of immunity to a
respiratory virus like SARS-CoV-2 is multiple years. Why do I say that? We actually have the data for a virus that swept
through parts of the world 17 years ago called SARS, and remember SARS-CoV-2 is 80% similar to SARS, so I think that's
the best comparison that anyone can provide. The evidence is clear. These very clever cellular immunologists studied all
the people they could get hold of who had survived SARS 17 years ago. They took a blood sample, and they tested whether
they responded or not to the original SARS, and they all did. They all have perfectly normal, robust T-cell memory. They
are actually also protected against SARS-CoV-2 because it's so similar, it's cross-immunity. So, I would say the best
data that exists is that immunity should be robust for at least 17 years. I think it's entirely possible that it is
lifelong. The style of the responses of these people's T-cells were the same as if you've been vaccinated and then you
come back years later to see, has that immunity been retained? And so I think the evidence is really strong that the
duration of immunity will be multiple years, and possibly lifelong.
There have been but a tiny handful of people
who appear to have been infected twice – now they're very interesting, we need to know who they are and understand them
very well, they've probably got certain rare immune deficiency syndromes. So I'm not pretending no one ever gets
reinfected, but I am pointing out that it's literally five people (or maybe 50 people), but the World Health
Organization estimated some weeks ago that 750 million people have been infected so far by SARS-CoV-2. That means most
people are not being reinfected, and I can tell you why that is: it's normal. It's what happens with viruses,
respiratory viruses. Some people have – have called for "zero Covid" as if it's some political slogan. And there are
some people I've heard calling for it almost every day; they're completely unqualified to tell you anything.
Something that's really important to know is
that SARS-CoV-2 – it's an unpleasant virus. There's no question about it, but it's not what you were told in spring. We
were originally told that it would kill perhaps three percent of people it infected – which is horrifying. That's 30
times worse than flu. We always overestimate the lethality of new infectious diseases when we're in the eye of the
storm. I believe the true infection fatality ratio of Covid-19, the true threat to life is, the same as seasonal flu.
So there's no reason why you would want to try
and drive Covid to zero. It's a nonsense – that's just not how biology is. And all the means I have heard, uh, proposed,
as ways to get us there are much more damaging and pathological, I would say, than than the virus itself. It's simply
not possible to get rid of every single copy of the Covid-19 virus, and the means to get you there would destroy
society. Forget the cost – although it would be huge – it would destroy your liberty, you would need to not go out until
you've been tested and have your result back. And I have described how the false positive rate would just destroy it
from a statistical perspective. I don't believe it can be done: it's not scientifically realistic, it's not medically
realistic, and it's not what we have ever done.
As the virus swept towards the UK in the – in
the late winter and early spring I too was concerned, because at the time we were told perhaps three percent might die.
So when the Prime Minister called for a lockdown I wasn't pleased about it, but I understood that we should try this.
But it's important that you understand, that when we look at the profile of the pandemic as it passed through the
population, that it was clear that the number of infections every day was falling. We'd passed the peak quite a long
time before lockdown started. So we took all that pain, that locked down pain which was multiple weeks – I don't
remember exactly how many multiple weeks – we took it for nothing. If there was a really important effect of lockdown on
the number of people who died, or the rate of it, you should at least be able to order them. Like, these people had
locked down, and these didn't – and you cannot. All heavily infected countries' shapes are the same, whether they had
locked down or not. They don't work. I don't know why anyone is allowing you, know you, to be pushed into this corner.
I don't think we entirely know why it is that
some countries were hit harder than others, but I have to say I think scientifically the smart money is on a mixture of
forces. One would be this cross immunity. Although China had an awful time in Wuhan, in Hubei province, it didn't spread
elsewhere in the country, and I suspect that meant because a lot of them had this cross immunity. And I think nearby
countries, in the main, had lots of cross immunity. So that's one possibility. The other one, though, is in terms of the
severity of what did the virus do to a particular population. We've seen devastating effects in countries like UK and in
Belgium, uh, France, and maybe even in Sweden, and much smaller numbers of deaths in other countries like – like Greece
and in Germany. And you might think, "Well, was that was it something that they did?" And I wish it was true, because if
it was something we did we could learn from it and do it and it would work in the future. But there's no evidence
whatsoever that it was anything humans did. The passage of this virus through the human population is an entirely
natural process that completely ignored our puny efforts to control it.
So there is this theory – I don't like the
name very much – but it's called "dry tinder." If people in a country who are vulnerable for to dying in the winter
(usually of respiratory viruses), if you have a very mild winter season, like UK did – we had a very mild seasonal flu
last year and the year before and so did Sweden – then what happens is there are larger number of very vulnerable people
who are even older than usual, and – and I think that's why we suffered a rather large number of deaths. It was still
only 0.06% of the population, equivalent to about four weeks of normal mortality. But countries that had very severe
winters recently, and Greece and Germany certainly had very lethal winter flus in the last two years. I think then, they
had a smaller population of very vulnerable people, and that is the main reason why they lost fewer people. It's not to
do with locking down, it's not to do with testing, or tracking, or tracing. I personally don't think any of those
measures have made any difference at all. So Belgium and UK and Sweden were particularly vulnerable, whereas adjacent
Nordic countries – I – I get fed up with hearing about this, uh, idea that they locked down and that's why it saved them
and afraid the other Nordic countries had normal flu epidemics the last two or three years. Sweden, like UK, had very
mild epidemics: you can just go and look at the number of deaths, it's sub-normal for UK and Sweden. And now we've got a
supra-normal, a larger-than-normal, number of deaths from Covid.
Now there may be other reasons, I'm not saying
there are not but I think those two main forces – the amount of prior immunity and the so-called "dry tinder," what
vulnerable fraction of the population did you have as a result of seasonal flu being intense or not – I think that
accounts for most of it. And it's – it's just hubristic and kind of silly that our government and advisors tell you that
doing things that have never worked in the past, like lockdown are going to make any difference to the transfer of
respiratory viruses. I don't believe it for a moment. There's no scientific evidence behind it and there are much
stronger scientific hypotheses that do explain it. You might think that in terms of numbers of deaths – excess deaths –
that Covid has produced such a large number that this will be an awful year for excess deaths, but surprisingly not.
2020 is lining up to be about eighth in a list since 1993.
Roughly 620,000 people die every year in this
country (UK). They say in life we are also in death – and it's true, it's been awful for those who have been personally
affected by illness and death, but it's not particularly unusual in terms of the
number
of
people who've died. So one of the things I've noticed has happened in – in recent years is that we almost seem to be
moving, uh, you know post-science, post-fact as if – as if facts don't matter. For someone who's qualified and practiced
as a professional scientist for 35 years I think it's deeply distressing that, I don't think you should listen to me if
I talked about – I don't know, the design of motorways or something – like, I don't know anything about motorways or –
or how to grow trees better, I don't know anything about that. But I do know quite a lot about immunology, infection,
inflammation, and the way infectious organisms move through a population.
I've no other reason for giving this interview
other than I really care what happens to my country – and we have to pull ourselves out of this. And I personally
believe the way forward is twofold, it's not difficult. One, we should cease mass testing of the mostly-well in the
community
immediately –
it only provides misleading and grey information, and
yet we're driving policy almost completely based on it. It's definitely wrong, we should not do it. Use the tests in
hospital – I'm not saying don't test – don't continue mass testing, and for God's sake, don't increase the number of
tests. It is a pathology all of its own which must be stamped out by right thinking people. And I'm afraid the people on
SAGE, who have provided the modeling, the predictions, the – the measures that should be taken, that their work is so
badly, and obviously flawed – lethally incompetent, that you should have no more to do with these people. They should be
fired immediately. And the effect of that advice has been to – have cost lots of innocent people their lives from
non-Covid causes, they should be dismissed and reconstituted using an appropriate group of skilled individuals –
especially avoiding any who might even have the
suggestion
of a conflict of
interest. I think we're right at the edge of the precipice. I really hope that we can pull back.
Founded in 1933,
the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) is one of the oldest and most respected nonpartisan
economic research and advocacy organizations in the country. With a global reach and influence, AIER is
dedicated to developing and promoting the ideas of pure freedom and private governance by
combining
advanced economic research with accessible media outreach and educational programming
to cultivate a
better, broader understanding of the fundamental principles that enable peace and prosperity around the
world.
Get notified of new articles from AIER Staff and AIER.
SUBSCRIBE
RELATED ARTICLES – CRISIS, VIDEO
Jordan
Schachtel
–
May 20, 2021
How Team Biden Ended Covid Mania Overnight
READ MORE
AIER is a 501(c)(3) Nonprofit
registered in the US under EIN: 04-2121305
AIER would like to update you with the latest economic research, articles, and news .
Allow
Cancel
On Monday more than 30million Britons will be under Tier Two and Three restrictions.
We will then have days – a few weeks at best – until the inevitable total
lockdown.
While Boris Johnson will be the person announcing that catastrophic decision, the measures
are being dictated by a small group of scientists who, in my view, have repeatedly got things
terribly wrong.
The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) has made three incorrect assumptions
which have had, and continue to have, disastrous consequences for people's lives and the
economy.
Firstly, Sage assumes that the vast majority of the population is vulnerable to infection;
second, that only 7 per cent of the population has been infected so far; and third, that the
virus causing Covid-19 has a mortality rate of about 1 per cent.
+5
Many individuals who've been infected by other coronaviruses have immunity to closely
related ones such as the Covid-19 virus, argues Dr Mike Yeardon PM Boris Johnson considering
placing England under national lockdown Loaded : 0% Progress : 0% 0:00 Previous Play Skip Mute
Current Time 0:00 / Duration Time 0:53 Fullscreen Need Text
+5
According to Cambridge University the Covid-19 mortality rate is at 1.4% , followed by
Imperial College London with 1.2% and an Australian study with 0.75% Dr Yeardon cites the
Stanford study, saying: 'After extensive world wide surveys, pre-eminent scientists such as
John Ioannidis, professor of epidemiology at Stanford University in California, have concluded
that the mortality rate is closer to 0.2 per cent.'
In the absence of further action, Sage concludes that a very high number of deaths will
occur.
If these assumptions were based on fact, then I might have some sympathy with their
position.
After all, if 93 per cent of the country – as they claim – was still potentially
vulnerable to a virus that kills one in 100 people who are infected, I too would want to use
any means necessary to suppress infection until a vaccine comes along, no matter the cost.
The reality, though, is rather different.
Firstly, while the Covid-19 virus is new, other coronaviruses are not.
We have experience of SARS in 2003 and MERS in 2012, while in the UK there are at least four
known strains of coronavirus which cause the common cold.
Many individuals who've been infected by other coronaviruses have immunity to closely
related ones such as the Covid-19 virus.
Multiple research groups in Europe and the US have shown that around 30 per cent of the
population was likely already immune to Covid-19 before the virus arrived – something
which Sage continues to ignore.
+5 +5
Sage has similarly failed to accurately revise down its estimated mortality rate for the
virus.
Early in the epidemic Sage modelled a mortality rate of around 1 per cent and, from what I
understand, they may now be working with a number closer to 0.7, which is still far too
high.
After extensive world wide surveys, pre-eminent scientists such as John Ioannidis, professor
of epidemiology at Stanford University in California, have concluded that the mortality rate is
closer to 0.2 per cent.
That figure means one in 500 people infected die.
When applied to the total number of Covid deaths in the UK (around 45,000), this would imply
that approximately 22.5million people have been infected.
That is 33.5 per cent of our population – not Sage's 7 per cent calculation.
Sage reached its conclusion by assessing the prevalence of Covid-19 antibodies in national
blood surveys.
Yet we know that not every infected individual produces antibodies.
Indeed, the immune systems of most healthy people bypass the complex and energy-intensive
process of making antibodies because the virus can be overcome by other means.
The human immune system has several lines of defence.
These include innate immunity which is comprised of the body's physical barriers to
infection and protective secretions (the skin and its oils, the cough reflex, tears etc); its
inflammatory response (to localise and minimise infection and injury), and the production of
non-specific cells (phagocytes) that target an invading virus/bacterium.
In addition, the immune system produces antibodies that protect against a specific virus or
bacterium (and confer immunity) and T-cells (a type of white blood cell) that are also
specific.
Covid-19 immunity may only last for a few months Loaded : 0% Progress : 0% 0:00
Previous Play Skip Mute Current Time 0:00 / Duration Time 1:27 Fullscreen Need Text RELATED
ARTICLES
It is the T-cells that are crucial in our body's response to respiratory viruses such as
Covid-19.
Studies show that while not all individuals infected by the Covid-19 viruses have
antibodies, they do have T-cells that can respond to the virus and therefore have immunity.
I am persuaded of this because, of the 750million people the World Health Organisation says
have been infected by the virus to date, almost none have been reinfected.
Yes, there have been a handful of cases but they are anomalies, a tiny number among three
quarters of a billion people.
The fact is that people don't get reinfected. That is how the immune system works and if it
didn't, humanity would not have survived.
+5
Percentage change in coronavirus cases across London in the week to October 25. Dr Yeardon
writes:' Ministers and some parts of the media present the pandemic as the biggest public
health emergency in decades, when in fact mortality in 2020 so far ranks eighth out of the last
27 years.'
So, if some 33.5 per cent of our population have already been infected by the virus this
year (and are now immune) – and a further 30 per cent were already immune before we even
heard of Covid-19, then once you also factor in that a tenth of the UK population is aged ten
or under and therefore largely invulnerable (children are rarely made ill by the virus), that
leaves about 26.5 per cent of people who are actually susceptible to being infected.
That's a far cry from Sage's current prediction of 93 per cent.
It is also worth contextualising the UK death toll.
Ministers and some parts of the media present the pandemic as the biggest public health
emergency in decades, when in fact mortality in 2020 so far ranks eighth out of the last 27
years.
The death rate at present is also normal for the time of year – the number of
respiratory deaths is actually low for late October.
In other words, not only is the virus less dangerous than we are being led to believe, with
almost three quarters of the population at no risk of infection, we're actually very close to
achieving herd immunity.
Which is why I am convinced this so-called second wave of rising infections and, sadly,
deaths will fizzle out without overwhelming the NHS.
On that basis, the nation should immediately be allowed to resume normal life – at the
very least we should be avoiding a second national lockdown at all costs.
I believe that Sage has been appallingly negligent and its incompetence has cost the lives
of thousands of people from avoidable, non-coronavirus causes while simultaneously decimating
our economy and today I implore ministers to start listening to a broader scientific view.
My argument against the need for lockdown isn't too dissimilar to the Great Barrington
Declaration, co-authored by three professors from Oxford, Harvard and Stanford universities
– laughably dismissed as 'emphatically false' by Health Secretary Matt Hancock who has no
scientific qualifications – and signed by more then 44,000 scientists, public health
experts and clinicians so far, including Nobel Prize winner Dr Michael Levitt.
In my opinion, this government is ignoring a formidable collective of respected scientific
opinion and relying instead on its body of deified, yet incompetent advisers.
I have no confidence in Sage – and neither should you – and I fear that, yet
again, they're about to force further decisions that we will look back on with deep regret.
If we are to take one thing from 2020, it is that we should demand more honesty and
competence from those appointed to look after us. Share or comment on this article:DR MIKE YEADON:Three facts
Money quote: "I think the PCR test at present is throwing up so many false positives that in
fact we're misdiagnosing the cause of the deaths that are being reported. The number of deaths at
the moment is normal for the time of year. So if I'm right and the pandemic is fundamentally
over, what's going on? And I think quite simply it's not over because SAGE says it's not!"
Notable quotes:
"... You also don't set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn't been extensively tested on human subjects." ..."
Michael Yeadon has voiced [his concerns about government policies regarding COVID-19] and it
has left everyone shocked. As Pfizer pharmaceuticals breaks news for
bringing corona virus vaccine , a former vice president and chief scientists of the company
Michael Yeadon said that there is no need for any vaccine to end the ongoing pandemic.
According to a report published in the Lockdown Sceptics, Yeadon wrote: "There is absolutely
no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic. You do not vaccinate people who aren't at risk
from the disease. You also don't set about
planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn't been
extensively tested on human subjects." Yeadon made the comment on the vaccine development
while criticizing the role played by the Scientific Advisory
Group for Emergencies (SAGE), a government agency of the UK.
SAGE is tasked with a role to determine public lockdown policies; in the UK, as a response
to the COVID-19 virus. He added, "SAGE says everyone was susceptible and only 7 per cent have
been infected. They have ignored all precedent in the field of immunology memory against
respiratory viruses. They have either not seen or disregarded excellent quality work from
numerous world-leading clinical immunologists; which show that around 30 per cent of the
population had prior immunity."
Michael Yeadon wrote "They should also have excluded from 'susceptible' a large subset; of
the youngest children, who appear not to become infected biology; means their cells express
less of the spike protein receptor, called ACE2. I have not assumed all young children don't
participate in transmission, but believe a two-thirds value is very conservative. It's not
material anyway. So SAGE is demonstrably wrong in one really crucial variable, they assumed no
prior immunity, whereas the evidence clearly points; to a value of around 30 per cent (and
nearly 40 per cent if you include some young children, who technically are 'resistant' rather
than 'immune')."
He concluded that the pandemic is effectively over and; can easily be handled by a properly
functioning NHS (National Health Service).
They have total control of the narrative and if there is any push back by anybody they are
censored or scapegoated. The journey into Informational Dystopia took less than 18
months.
Dr. Samantha Bailey; Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya; Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche; Dr. Ron Brown;
Dr. Ryan Cole; Dr. Peter Doshi; 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;
Michael Yeadon, wasn't just any scientist. The 60-year-old is a former vice president of Pfizer, where he spent 16 years as an
allergy and respiratory researcher. He later co-founded a biotech firm that the Swiss drugmaker Novartis purchased for at least $325
million.
This is amazing interview for a scientist who really knows his staff... His warning is
essentially a very powerful warning against Lysenkoism in science.
I disagree with him on some minor points like wearing masks in closed spaces as well as the spectrum of applicability of
vaccines (I think that healthcare workers, teachers and other people who systematically interact with a lot of (possibly infected)
people might benefit from vaccination, which should in any case be strocly voluntary. But I agree that vaccinating people who
already have had COVID-19 and children s very questionable and probably indefensible practice -- flavor of Lysenkoism which is
called Fauchism. Also stress of vaccines and downgrading therapy is also Faucism, or worse.
I also disagree with his statement that vaccine should be effective against all strains. Now we know that htis not the case. For
exampe South afrecan mutation successfully infects people vaccinated wit the the first generation vaccines.
He is against medicines which are used with violation of safety protocols. He is anti unsafe
medicines, no matter what they are.
We never have such an absurd attribution of death to COVID, when that fact the diseased is
false positive serve as the key reason of death
Lockdowns were political hysteria. Witch hunt against witches which never arrived. They were
unscientific and fradulent. Lockdown were never used before because they are ineffective. Instead
in the past guaranteed the sick. Mass testing of people without symptoms is Lysenkoism and defies
common sense.
Non-symptomatic people will not infect you. That's faucism and new flavor of Lysenkoism.
Asymptomatic transmission is bunk. It can happen but this never exceed fraction of one
percent.
It is all about increasing of the level of fear and increasing political control as in famous
quote. The only open question to what end this control will used for.
PCR technology is similar to technology used in forensic investigation using genetic
material. They just ignore false positives. Nobody in the world releases the percentage of false
positive of PcR test and dependence of the number of false positive on the number of
amplification.
I never expected to be writing something like this. I am an ordinary person, recently semi-retired from a career in the
pharmaceutical industry and biotech, where I spent over 30 years trying to solve problems of disease understanding and seek new
treatments for allergic and inflammatory disorders of lung and skin. I've always been interested in problem solving, so when
anything biological comes along, my attention is drawn to it. Come 2020, came SARS-CoV-2. I've written
about the pandemic as objectively as I could. The scientific method never leaves a person who trained and worked as a
professional scientist. Please do read that piece. My co-authors & I will submit it to the normal rigours of peer review, but that
process is slow and many pieces of new science this year have come to attention through pre-print servers and other less
conventional outlets.
While paying close attention to data, we all initially focused on the sad matter of deaths. I found it remarkable that, in
discussing the COVID-19 related deaths, most people I spoke to had no idea of large numbers. Asked approximately how many people a
year die in the UK in the ordinary course of events, each a personal tragedy, They usually didn't know. I had to inform them it is
around 620,000, sometimes less if we had a mild winter, sometimes quite a bit higher if we had a severe 'flu season. I mention this
number because we know that around 42,000 people have died with or of COVID-19. While it's a huge number of people, its 'only' 0.06%
of the UK population. Its not a coincidence that this is almost the same proportion who have died with or of COVID-19 in each of the
heavily infected European countries – for example, Sweden. The annual all-causes mortality of 620,000 amounts to 1,700 per day,
lower in summer and higher in winter. That has always been the lot of humans in the temperate zones. So for context, 42,000 is about
~24 days worth of normal mortality. Please know I am not minimising it, just trying to get some perspective on it. Deaths of this
magnitude are not uncommon, and can occur in the more severe flu seasons. Flu vaccines help a little, but on only three occasions in
the last decade did vaccination reach 50% effectiveness. They're good, but they've never been magic bullets for respiratory viruses.
Instead, we have learned to live with such viruses, ranging from numerous common colds all the way to pneumonias which can kill.
Medicines and human caring do their best.
So, to this article. Its about the testing we do with something called PCR, an amplification technique, better known to biologists
as a research tool used in our labs, when trying to unpick mechanisms of disease. I was frankly astonished to realise they're
sometimes used in population screening for diseases – astonished because it is a very exacting technique, prone to invisible errors
and it's quite a tall order to get reliable information out of it, especially because of the prodigious amounts of amplification
involved in attempting to pick up a strand of viral genetic code. The test cannot distinguish between a living virus and a short
strand of RNA from a virus which broke into pieces weeks or months ago.
I believe I have identified a serious, really a fatal flaw in the PCR test used in what is called by the UK Government the Pillar 2
screening – that is, testing many people out in their communities. I'm going to go through this with care and in detail because I'm
a scientist and dislike where this investigation takes me. I'm not particularly political and my preference is for competent, honest
administration over the actual policies chosen. We're a reasonable lot in UK and not much given to extremes. What I'm particularly
reluctant about is that, by following the evidence, I have no choice but to show that the Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, misled the
House of Commons and also made misleading statements in a radio interview. Those are serious accusations. I know that. I'm not a
ruthless person. But I'm writing this anyway, because what I have uncovered is of monumental importance to the health and wellbeing
of all the people living in the nation I have always called home.
Back to the story, and then to the evidence. When the first (and I think, only) wave of COVID-19 hit the UK, I was with almost
everyone else in being very afraid. I'm 60 and in reasonable health, but on learning that I had about a 1% additional risk of
perishing if I caught the virus, I discovered I was far from ready to go. So, I wasn't surprised or angry when the first lockdown
arrived. It must have been a very difficult thing to decide. However, before the first three-week period was over, I'd begun to
develop an understanding of what was happening. The rate of infection, which has been calculated to have infected well over 100,000
new people every day around the peak, began to fall, and was declining before lockdown. Infection continued to spread out, at an
ever-reducing rate and we saw this in the turning point of daily deaths, at a grim press conference each afternoon. We now know that
lockdown made no difference at all to the spread of the virus. We can tell this because the interval between catching the virus and,
in those who don't make it, their death is longer than the interval between lockdown and peak daily deaths. There isn't any
controversy about this fact, easily demonstrated, but I'm aware some people like to pretend it was lockdown that turned the
pandemic, perhaps to justify the extraordinary price we have all paid to do it. That price wasn't just economic. It involved
avoidable deaths from diseases other than COVID-19, as medical services were restricted, in order to focus on the virus. Some say
that lockdown, directly and indirectly, killed as many as the virus. I don't know. Its not something I've sought to learn. But I
mention because interventions in all our lives should not be made lightly. Its not only inconvenience, but real suffering, loss of
livelihoods, friendships, anchors of huge importance to us all, that are severed by such acts. We need to be certain that the prize
is worth the price. While it is uncertain it was, even for the first lockdown, I too supported it, because we did not know what we
faced, and frankly, almost everyone else did it, except Sweden. I am now resolutely against further interventions in what I have
become convinced is a fruitless attempt to 'control the virus'. We are, in my opinion – shared by others, some of whom are well
placed to assess the situation – closer to the end of the pandemic in terms of deaths, than we are to its middle. I believe we
should provide the best protection we can for any vulnerable people, and otherwise cautiously get on with our lives. I think we are
all going to get a little more Swedish over time.
In recent weeks, though, it cannot have escaped anyone's attention that there has been a drum beat which feels for all the world
like a prelude to yet more fruitless and damaging restrictions. Think back to mid-summer. We were newly out of lockdown and despite
concerns for crowded beaches, large demonstrations, opening of shops and pubs, the main item on the news in relation to COVID-19 was
the reassuring and relentless fall in daily deaths. I noticed that, as compared to the slopes of the declining death tolls in many
nearby countries, that our slope was too flat. I even mentioned to scientist friends that inferred the presence of some fixed signal
that was being mixed up with genuine COVID-19 deaths. Imagine how gratifying it was when the definition of a COVID-19 death was
changed to line up with that in other countries and in a heartbeat our declining death toll line became matched with that elsewhere.
I was sure it would: what we have experienced and witnessed is a terrible kind of equilibrium. A virus that kills few, then leaves
survivors who are almost certainly immune – a virus to which perhaps 30-50% were already immune because it has relatives and some of
us have already encountered them – accounts for the whole terrible but also fascinating biological process. There was a very interesting
piece in the BMJ in
recent days that offers potential support for this contention.
Now we have learned some of the unusual characteristics of the new virus, better treatments (anti-inflammatory steroids,
anti-coagulants and in particular, oxygen masks and not ventilators in the main) the 'case fatality rate' even for the most hard-hit
individuals is far lower now than it was six months ago.
As there is no foundational, medical or scientific literature which tells us to expect a 'second wave', I began to pay more
attention to the phrase as it appeared on TV, radio and print media – all on the same day – and has been relentlessly repeated ever
since. I was interviewed
recently by Julia Hartley-Brewer on her talkRADIO show and on that occasion I called on the Government to disclose to us the
evidence upon which they were relying to predict this second wave. Surely they have some evidence? I don't think they do. I searched
and am very qualified to do so, drawing on academic friends, and we were all surprised to find that there is nothing at all. The
last two novel coronaviruses, Sar (2003) and MERS (2012), were of one wave each. Even the WW1 flu 'waves' were almost certainly a
series of single waves involving more than one virus. I believe any second wave talk is pure speculation. Or perhaps it is in a
model somewhere, disconnected from the world of evidence to me? It would be reasonable to expect some limited 'resurgence' of a
virus given we don't mix like cordial in a glass of water, but in a more lumpy, human fashion. You're most in contact with family,
friends and workmates and they are the people with whom you generally exchange colds.
A long period of imposed restrictions, in addition to those of our ordinary lives did prevent the final few percent of virus mixing
with the population. With the movements of holidays, new jobs, visiting distant relatives, starting new terms at universities and
schools, that final mixing is under way. It should not be a terrifying process. It happens with every new virus, flu included. It's
just that we've never before in our history chased it around the countryside with a technique more suited to the biology lab than to
a supermarket car park.
A very long prelude, but necessary. Part of the 'project fear' that is rather too obvious, involving second waves, has been the
daily count of 'cases'. Its important to understand that, according to the infectious disease specialists I've spoken to, the word
'case' has to mean more than merely the presence of some foreign organism. It must present signs (things medics notice) and symptoms
(things you notice). And in most so-called cases, those testing positive had no signs or symptoms of illness at all. There was much
talk of asymptomatic spreading, and as a biologist this surprised me. In almost every case, a person is symptomatic because they
have a high viral load and either it is attacking their body or their immune system is fighting it, generally a mix. I don't doubt
there have been some cases of asymptomatic transmission, but I'm confident it is not important.
That all said, Government decided to call a person a 'case' if their swab sample was positive for viral RNA, which is what is
measured in PCR. A person's sample can be positive if they have the virus, and so it should. They can also be positive if they've
had the virus some weeks or months ago and recovered. It's faintly possible that high loads of related, but different coronaviruses,
which can cause some of the common colds we get, might also react in the PCR test, though it's unclear to me if it does.
But there's a final setting in which a person can be positive and that's a random process. This may have multiple causes, such as
the amplification technique not being perfect and so amplifying the 'bait' sequences placed in with the sample, with the aim of
marrying up with related SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA. There will be many other contributions to such positives. These are what are called
false positives.
Think of any diagnostic test a doctor might use on you. The ideal diagnostic test correctly confirms all who have the disease and
never wrongly indicates that healthy people have the disease. There is no such test. All tests have some degree of weakness in
generating false positives. The important thing is to know how often this happens, and this is called the false positive rate. If 1
in 100 disease-free samples are wrongly coming up positive, the disease is not present, we call that a 1% false positive rate. The
actual or operational false positive rate differs, sometimes substantially, under different settings, technical operators, detection
methods and equipment. I'm focusing solely on the false positive rate in Pillar 2, because most people do not have the virus
(recently around 1 in 1000 people and earlier in summer it was around 1 in 2000 people). It is when the amount of disease, its
so-called prevalence, is low that any amount of a false positive rate can be a major problem. This problem can be so severe that
unless changes are made, the test is hopelessly unsuitable to the job asked of it. In this case, the test in Pillar 2 was and
remains charged with the job of identifying people with the virus, yet as I will show, it is unable to do so.
Because of the high false positive rate and the low prevalence, almost every positive test, a so-called case, identified by Pillar 2
since May of this year has been a FALSE POSITIVE. Not just a few percent. Not a quarter or even a half of the positives are FALSE,
but around 90% of them. Put simply, the number of people Mr Hancock sombrely tells us about is an overestimate by a factor of about
ten-fold. Earlier in the summer, it was an overestimate by about 20-fold.
Let me take you through this, though if you're able to read Prof Carl Heneghan's clearly
written piece first, I'm more confident that I'll be successful in explaining this dramatic conclusion to you. (Here is a link to
the record of numbers of tests, combining Pillar 1 (hospital) and Pillar 2 (community).)
Imagine 10,000 people getting tested using those swabs you see on TV. We have a good estimate of the general prevalence of the virus
from the ONS, who are wholly independent (from Pillar 2 testing) and are testing only a few people a day, around one per cent of the
numbers recently tested in Pillar 2. It is reasonable to assume that most of the time, those being tested do not have symptoms.
People were asked to only seek a test if they have symptoms. However, we know from TV news and stories on social media from sampling
staff, from stern guidance from the Health Minister and the surprising fact that in numerous locations around the country, the local
council is leafleting people's houses, street by street to come and get tested.
The bottom line is that it is reasonable to expect the prevalence of the virus to be close to the number found by ONS, because they
sample randomly, and would pick up symptomatic and asymptomatic people in proportion to their presence in the community. As of the
most recent ONS survey, to a first approximation, the virus was found in 1 in every 1000 people. This can also be written as 0.1%.
So when all these 10,000 people are tested in Pillar 2, you'd expect 10 true positives to be found (false negatives can be an issue
when the virus is very common, but in this community setting, it is statistically unimportant and so I have chosen to ignore it,
better to focus only on false positives).
So, what is the false positive rate of testing in Pillar 2? For months, this has been a concern. It appears that it isn't known,
even though as I've mentioned, you absolutely need to know it in order to work out whether the diagnostic test has any value! What
do we know about the false positive rate? Well, we do know that the Government's own scientists were very concerned about it, and a report on
this problem was sent to SAGE dated June 3rd 2020. I quote: "Unless we understand the operational false positive rate of the UK's
RT-PCR testing system, we risk over-estimating the COVID-19 incidence, the demand on track and trace and the extent of asymptomatic
infection". In that same report, the authors helpfully listed the lowest to highest false positive rate of dozens of tests using the
same technology. The lowest value for false positive rate was 0.8%.
Allow me to explain the impact of a false positive rate of 0.8% on Pillar 2. We return to our 10,000 people who've volunteered to
get tested, and the expected ten with virus (0.1% prevalence or 1:1000) have been identified by the PCR test. But now we've to
calculate how many false positives are to accompanying them. The shocking answer is 80. 80 is 0.8% of 10,000. That's how many false
positives you'd get every time you were to use a Pillar 2 test on a group of that size.
The effect of this is, in this example, where 10,000 people have been tested in Pillar 2, could be summarised in a headline like
this: "90 new cases were identified today" (10 real positive cases and 80 false positives). But we know this is wildly incorrect.
Unknown to the poor technician, there were in this example, only 10 real cases. 80 did not even have a piece of viral RNA in their
sample. They are really false positives.
I'm going to explain how bad this is another way, back to diagnostics. If you'd submitted to a test and it was positive, you'd
expect the doctor to tell you that you had a disease, whatever it was testing for. Usually, though, they'll answer a slightly
different question: "If the patient is positive in this test, what is the probability they have the disease?" Typically, for a good
diagnostic test, the doctor will be able to say something like 95% and you and they can live with that. You might take a different,
confirmatory test, if the result was very serious, like cancer. But in our Pillar 2 example, what is the probability a person
testing positive in Pillar 2 actually has COVID-19? The awful answer is 11% (10 divided by 80 + 10). The test exaggerates the number
of covid-19 cases by almost ten-fold (90 divided by 10). Scared yet? That daily picture they show you, with the 'cases' climbing up
on the right-hand side? Its horribly exaggerated. Its not a mistake, as I shall show.
Earlier in the summer, the ONS showed the virus prevalence was a little lower, 1 in 2000 or 0.05%. That doesn't sound much of a
difference, but it is. Now the Pillar 2 test will find half as many real cases from our notional 10,000 volunteers, so 5 real cases.
But the flaw in the test means it will still find 80 false positives (0.8% of 10,000). So its even worse. The headline would be "85
new cases identified today". But now the probability a person testing positive has the virus is an absurdly low 6% (5 divided by 80
+ 5). Earlier in the summer, this same test exaggerated the number of COVID-19 cases by 17-fold (85 divided by 5). Its so easy to
generate an apparently large epidemic this way. Just ignore the problem of false positives. Pretend its zero. But it is never zero.
This test is fatally flawed and MUST immediately be withdrawn and never used again in this setting unless shown to be fixed. The
examples I gave are very close to what is actually happening every day as you read this.
I'm bound to ask, did Mr Hancock know of this fatal flaw? Did he know of the effect it would inevitably have, and is still having,
not only on the reported case load, but the nation's state of anxiety. I'd love to believe it is all an innocent mistake. If it was,
though, he'd have to resign over sheer incompetence. But is it? We know that internal scientists wrote to SAGE, in terms, and,
surely, this short but shocking warning document would have been drawn to the Health Secretary's attention? If that was the only bit
of evidence, you might be inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. But the evidence grows more damning.
Recently, I published with my co-authors a short Position Paper. I don't think by then, a month ago or so, the penny had quite
dropped with me. And I'm an experienced biomedical research scientist, used to dealing with complex datasets and probabilities.
On September 11th 2020, I was a guest on Julia Hartley-Brewer's talkRADIO
show. Among other things, I called upon Mr Hancock to release the evidence underscoring his confidence in and planning for 'the
second wave'. This evidence has not yet been shown to the public by anyone. I also demanded he disclose the operational false
positive rate in Pillar 2 testing.
On September 16th, I was back on Julia's show and this time focused on the false positive rate issue (1m 45s – 2min 30s). I had read
Carl Heneghan's analysis showing that even if the false positive rate was as low as 0.1%, 8 times lower than any similar test, it
still yields a majority of false positives. So, my critique doesn't fall if the actual false positive rate is lower than my assumed
0.8%.
On September 18th, Mr Hancock again appeared, as often he does, on Julia Hartley-Brewer's show. Julia asked
him directly (1min 50s – on) what the false positive rate in Pillar 2 is. Mr Hancock said "It's under 1%". Julia again asked him
exactly what it was, and did he even know it? He didn't answer that, but then said "it means that, for all the positive cases, the
likelihood of one being a false positive is very small".
That is a seriously misleading statement as it is incorrect. The likelihood of an apparently positive case being a false positive is
between 89-94%, or near-certainty. Of note, even when ONS was recording its lowest-ever prevalence, the positive rate in Pillar 2
testing never fell below 0.8%.
It gets worse for the Health Secretary. On September the 17th, I believe, Mr Hancock took a question from
Sir Desmond Swayne about false positives. It is clear that Sir Desmond is asking about Pillar 2.
Mr Hancock replied: "I like my right honourable friend very much and I wish it were true. The reason we have surveillance testing,
done by ONS, is to ensure that we're constantly looking at a nationally representative sample at what the case rate is. The latest
ONS survey, published on Friday, does show a rise consummate (sic) with the increased number of tests that have come back positive."
He did not answer Sir Desmond's question, but instead answered a question of his choosing. Did the Health Secretary knowingly
mislead the House? By referring only to ONS and not even mentioning the false positive rate of the test in Pillar 2 he was, as it
were, stealing the garb of ONS's more careful work which has a lower false positive rate, in order to smuggle through the hidden and
very much higher, false positive rate in Pillar 2. The reader will have to decide for themselves.
Pillar 2 testing has been ongoing since May but it's only in recent weeks that it has reached several hundreds of thousands of tests
per day. The effect of the day by day climb in the number of people that are being described as 'cases' cannot be overstated. I know
it is inducing fear, anxiety and concern for the possibility of new and unjustified restrictions, including lockdowns. I have no
idea what Mr Hancock's motivations are. But he has and continues to use the hugely inflated output from a fatally flawed Pillar 2
test and appears often on media, gravely intoning the need for additional interventions (none of which, I repeat, are proven to be
effective).
You will be very familiar with the cases plot which is shown on most TV broadcasts at the moment. It purports to show the numbers of
cases which rose then fell in the spring, and the recent rise in cases. This graph is always accompanied by the headline that "so
many thousands of new cases were detected in the last 24 hours".
You should know that there are two major deceptions, in that picture, which combined are very likely both to mislead and to induce
anxiety. Its ubiquity indicates that it is a deliberate choice.
Firstly, it is very misleading in relation to the spring peak of cases. This is because we had no community screening capacity at
that time. A colleague has adjusted the plot to show the number of cases we would have detected, had there been a well-behaved
community test capability available. The effect is to greatly increase the size of the spring cases peak, because there are very
many cases for each hospitalisation and many hospitalisations for every death.
Secondly, as I hope I have shown and persuaded you, the cases in summer and at present, generated by seriously flawed Pillar 2
tests, should be corrected downwards by around ten-fold.
I do believe genuine cases are rising somewhat. This is, however, also true for flu, which we neither measure daily nor report on
every news bulletin. If we did, you would appreciate that, going forward, it is quite likely that flu is a greater risk to public
health than COVID-19. The corrected cases plot (above) does, I believe, put the recent rises in incidence of COVID-19 in a much more
reasonable context. I thought you should see that difference before arriving at your own verdict on this sorry tale.
There are very serious consequences arising from grotesque over-estimation of so-called cases in Pillar 2 community testing, which I
believe was put in place knowingly. Perhaps Mr Hancock believes his own copy about the level of risk now faced by the general
public? Its not for me to deduce. What this huge over-estimation has done is to have slowed the normalisation of the NHS. We are all
aware that access to medical services is, to varying degrees, restricted. Many specialities were greatly curtailed in spring and
after some recovery, some are still between a third and a half below their normal capacities. This has led both to continuing delays
and growth of waiting lists for numerous operations and treatments. I am not qualified to assess the damage to the nation's and
individuals' health as a direct consequence of this extended wait for a second wave. Going into winter with this configuration will,
on top of the already restricted access for six months, lead inevitably to a large number of avoidable, non-Covid deaths. That is
already a serious enough charge. Less obvious but, in aggregate, additional impacts arise from fear of the virus, inappropriately
heightened in my view, which include: damage to or even destruction of large numbers of businesses, especially small businesses,
with attendant loss of livelihoods, loss of educational opportunities, strains on family relationships, eating disorders, increasing
alcoholism and domestic abuse and even suicides, to name but a few.
In closing, I wish to note that in the last 40 years alone the UK has had seven official epidemics/pandemics; AIDS, Swine flu, CJD,
SARS, MERS, Bird flu as well as annual, seasonal flu. All were very worrying but schools remained open and the NHS treated everybody
and most of the population were unaffected. The country would rarely have been open if it had been shut down every time.
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.
This misuse of power must cease. All the above costs are on the ledger, too, when weighing up the residual risks to society from
COVID-19 and the appropriate actions to take, if any. Whatever else happens, the test used in Pillar 2 must be immediately withdrawn
as it provides no useful information. In the absence of vastly inflated case numbers arising from this test, the pandemic would be
seen and felt to be almost over.
Dr Mike Yeadon is the former CSO and VP, Allergy and Respiratory Research Head with Pfizer Global R&D and co-Founder of Ziarco
Pharma Ltd.
Its both...its fear porn and also shedding...according to researchers.
The National Vaccine Information Center published an important document relevant to this
topic titled "The Emerging Risks of Live Virus & Virus Vectored Vaccines: Vaccine Strain
Virus Infection, Shedding & Transmission." Pages 34-36 in the section on "Measles, Mumps,
Rubella Viruses and Live Attenuated Measles, Mumps, Rubella Viruses" discuss evidence that
the MMR vaccine can lead to measles infection and transmission.
New policies will artificially deflate "breakthrough infections" in the vaccinated, while
the old rules continue to inflate case numbers in the unvaccinated.
The US Center for Disease Control (CDC) is altering its practices of data logging and
testing for "Covid19" in order to make it seem the experimental gene-therapy "vaccines" are
effective at preventing the alleged disease.
They made no secret of this, announcing the policy changes on their website in late
April/early May, (though naturally without admitting the fairly obvious motivation behind the
change).
The trick is in their reporting of what they call "breakthrough infections" – that is
people who are fully "vaccinated" against Sars-Cov-2 infection, but get infected anyway.
Essentially, Covid19 has long been shown – to those willing to pay attention –
to be an entirely created pandemic narrative built on two key factors:
Inflated Case-count. The incredibly broad definition
of "Covid case", used all over the world, lists anyone who receives a positive test as a
"Covid19 case", even if they never experienced any symptoms .
Without these two policies, there would never have been an appreciable pandemic at all , and
now the CDC has enacted two policy changes which means they no longer apply to vaccinated
people.
Firstly, they are lowering their CT value when testing samples from suspected "breakthrough
infections".
From the CDC's instructions for state health authorities on handling "possible breakthrough
infections" (uploaded to their website in late April):
For cases with a known RT-PCR cycle threshold (Ct) value, submit only specimens with Ct
value ≤28 to CDC for sequencing. (Sequencing is not feasible with higher Ct values.)
Throughout the pandemic, CT values in excess of 35 have been the norm, with labs around the
world going into the 40s.
18 play_arrow
Just a Little Froth in the Market 15 hours ago
They are manipulating the numbers to make it look like only the unvaxxed get infected.
That is fraud, and this rogue agency needs to be stopped.
Enraged 1 hour ago remove link
The CDC is not an independent government agency, but is actually a subsidiary of Big
Pharma.
The CDC owns patents on at least 57 different vaccines, and profits $4.1 billion per year
in vaccination sales.
There are CDC patents applicable to vaccines for Flu, Rotavirus, Hepatitis A, HIV,
Anthrax, Rabies, Dengue fever, West Nile virus, Group A Strep, Pneumococcal disease,
Meningococcal disease, RSV, Gastroenteritis, Japanese encephalitis, SARS, Rift Valley Fever,
and chlamydophila pneumoniae.
People might be starting to get the impression that the federal regime, which owns the
media, judiciary, academia, bureaucracy, and big tech, are attempting to manipulate
information to increase their power and wealth. The elites have confiscated almost ALL the
commoners wealth and now they want the rest of the money and complete and total control. Mao
or Stalin would be proud of these fascists.
LetThemEatRand 17 hours ago
Imagine living under the rule of a globalist oligarchy that controls the Press. That.
JakeIsNotFake 14 hours ago remove link
What is that if not an obvious and deliberate act of deception?
Well, before 3/20, this would have been a FELONY. Each time a lab provided a patient with
KNOWINGLY FALSE test results, the lab and the doctor would have been subject to a 16 month
term in the state penitentiary. For each instance.
Can you imagine getting a positive, terminal prognosis, committing a well deserved murder,
and then not dying?
Oopsie! My bad.
gregga777 14 hours ago
Government, and that especially includes the so-called "Scientists" in government service,
are Corrupt, Incompetent, Unaccountable and Untrustworthy. The Government's so-called
"Scientists," including those funded by Government contracts, are no more trustworthy than
politicians.
PeterLong 14 hours ago
Sometimes you have no choice. We had to undergo surgical procedures in a hospital and had
to get tested a few days before. Whether they use the same parameters for these type cases as
for others I don't know. Perhaps they are reluctant to turn away or delay surgical cases for
BS reasons and therefore possibly use more realistic standards , but my opinion of the entire
medical industry has become so low that I could believe anything. I still wonder about
hospital and other medical practices finances concenring this scam. Have they continued to
profit somehow despite being shut down in some ways?
Beebee 1 hour ago (Edited) remove link
Same here, Peter. Hubby's mother broke her elbow last year. And we had to bring her to
tests to do surgery. She was negative. But, afterwards, suddenly, developed lymphoma. Now, I
wonder about these tests! The cancer chemo was delayed due to all this stuff. She had so many
Covid tests, all negative, and just now completed the chemo rounds. It's not necessary and
they do make a profit. She is the only reason we stay here, otherwise we would moved from NY.
She's a mess, and I resent the fact the hold-ups are due to testing.
fewer 36 minutes ago
Hospitals made tons of money on this. Uncle Sugar pays so much, and the administrators
always slice & dice the budget/reports so they seem on the edge of bankruptcy no matter
what. Naturally all of this is "debunked" by (((the usual sources))).
Here's one fact that the "debunkers" deliberately ignore: the feds pay for all the
treatment of uninsured C19 patients... including illegals . Normally if an illegal comes to
the ED and needs to be admitted, the hospital can't refuse to do that and instead has to eat
the cost (well, they pass the cost on to hardworking, insurance having people like you and
me, but bear with me).
If they admit the person for a reason *other* than C19, then the hospital still eats the
cost. Now, tell me, what's the incentive here if an illegal comes in with a bunch of
comorbidities and needs admission to manage those? What should be recorded as the admitting
diagnosis/problem if they can get swabbed for a high Ct PCR test (a meaningless positive
result)?
lasvegaspersona 7 hours ago
After more than 50 years in medicine, I tell friends and family, 'stay away from us if you
can'. Modern medicine is a rats nest of false positive testing and chasing trivial
abnormalities on imaging studies.
The sad part is patients feel relieved when they are told 'nothing was finally
found'....this after great expense of time and money.
spiff 54 minutes ago
Caught Red-Handed
Yes, define "Caught". I have a feeling life will continue without consequences for the
perpetrator of this fraud, or even your average person knowing about it.
_triplesix_ 14 hours ago
CDC, FBI, CIA, DHS, NIH, EPA, DOE...shall I go on?
Drater 6 hours ago
FAA, TSA, SEC, FCC, NHTSA, DOJ
JakeIsNotFake 13 hours ago
CDC is .gov. As an NGO, (funded by 99% .gov and 1% phony donations), the CDC can legally,
(not honestly), claim they are just an advisory body.
While noteing the distinction, please pay attention to the language: Mask mandate,
guidelines, advisories are NOT laws. Just like travel advisories, protocols, and best
practice. These are all weasel words. And totally unenforceable.
snatchpounder PREMIUM 9 hours ago
Everything is rigged, this plandemic, elections, markets you name it because when there's
currency to be made you'll always have someone more than willing to do it. Big pharma is
making a killing literally in this case and tax slaves paid for the gene therapy shots
creation. And all the rubes who took the shot will pay much more than just currency for their
naivety.
archipusz 11 hours ago
We can speculate all we want about what the agenda is of the CDC.
But what we know is that it has nothing to do with the truth or our health.
Enraged 1 hour ago remove link
The CDC is not an independent government agency, but is actually a subsidiary of Big
Pharma.
The CDC owns patents on at least 57 different vaccines, and profits $4.1 billion per year
in vaccination sales.
There are CDC patents applicable to vaccines for Flu, Rotavirus, Hepatitis A, HIV,
Anthrax, Rabies, Dengue fever, West Nile virus, Group A Strep, Pneumococcal disease,
Meningococcal disease, RSV, Gastroenteritis, Japanese encephalitis, SARS, Rift Valley Fever,
and chlamydophila pneumoniae.
amazing they do not even try to hide the deception.
but reporting on such deception will have one labeled a "conspiracy theorist", and the FBI
classifies "conspiracy theorists" as "domestic terrorists".
That's right, re-stating publicly available comments and policies of government agencies
and officials will have you branded as a domestic terrorist.
And the "intellectuals" in the media, academia, and "think-tanks" have abandoned all logic
and common sense to serve their masters in the government and big pharma.
history will not forget.
smacker 12 hours ago
Very good article which rightly exposes the CDC and all those around it for being utterly
corrupt and are perpetrating a fake pandemic with sinister objectives.
crazzziecanuck 11 hours ago
You realize, it's Putin's fault. Putin can rig a presidential election, it's child's play
for him to manipulate the CDC to do his evil bidding.
Everything is Putin's fault: Trump, COVID, 737 Max crashes, slavery, crucifixion of
Christ, the end of the dinosaurs, and so on.
archipusz 13 hours ago
Notice how Rand Paul will argue with Fauci about policy over when we should wear a mask,
BUT WILL NOT DARE ASK THEM WHY THEY HAVE, AND ARE, COMMITTING CRIMINAL FRAUD WITH THE PCR
TESTING?
Demystified 2 hours ago
It's a rigged game, a scam. These people are so dishonest, and intent on falsifying Covid
test results by applying different standards for vaccinated and unvaccinated people? They are
perpetuating a fraud on the people.
You have to be brain dead to not see what they are doing.
Robert De Zero 3 hours ago remove link
This is so evil. Medicalized dictatorship, supported by propaganda media, is here.
Alien 851 4 hours ago
This is NEWS??? Are you kidding?
It was March 2020 when they changed the rules on reporting of Covid deaths to run the
count as high as possible. It is still used in fear headlines today! How about wildly
fluctuation "new cases" that seem to totally respect state borders...?
For God's sake, wake the hell up!!!!
In March, the CDC redefined what is to be reported by Medical Examiners in the US. One
of them gave examples of Covid Death cases reporting criteria:
"The case definition is very simplistic," Dr. Ngozi Ezike, director of Illinois
Department of Public Health, explains. "It means, at the time of death, it was a COVID
positive diagnosis. That means, that if you were in hospice and had already been given a
few weeks to live, and then you also were found to have COVID, that would be counted as a
COVID death. It means, technically even if you died of clear alternative cause, but you had
COVID at the same time, it's still listed as a COVID death."
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.
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.
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.
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
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 .
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:
The corona crisis must be renamed the "Corona Scandal"
It is:
The biggest tort case ever
The greatest crime against humanity ever committed
Those responsible must be:
Criminally prosecuted for crimes against humanity
Sued for civil damages
Deaths
There is no excess mortality in any country
Corona virus mortality equals seasonal flu
94% of deaths in Bergamo were caused by transferring sick patients to nursing homes
where they infected old people with weak immune systems
Doctors and hospitals worldwide were paid to declare deceased victims of
Covid-19
Autopsies showed:
Fatalities almost all caused by serious pre-existing conditions
Almost all deaths were very old people
Sweden (no lockdown) and Britain (strict lockdown) have comparable disease and
mortality statistics
US states with and without lockdowns have comparable disease and mortality
statistics
Health
Hospitals remain empty and some face bankruptcy
Populations have T-cell immunity from previous influenza waves
Herd immunity needs only 15-25% population infection and is already achieved
Only when a person has symptoms can an infection be contagious
Tests:
Many scientists call this a PCR-test pandemic, not a corona pandemic
Very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive
Likelihood of false-positives is 89-94% or near certainty
Prof. Drosten developed his PCR test from an old SARS virus without ever having seen
the real Wuhan virus from China
The PCR test is not based on scientific facts with respect to infections
PCR tests are useless for the detection of infections
A positive PCR test does not mean an infection is present or that an intact virus has
been found
Amplification of samples over 35 cycles is unreliable but WHO recommended 45
cycles
Illegality:
The German government locked down, imposed social-distancing/ mask-wearing on the
basis of a single opinion
The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating
The lockdowns were based on non-existent infections
Former president of the German federal constitutional court doubted the
constitutionality of the corona measures
Former UK supreme court judge Lord Sumption concluded there was no factual basis for
panic and no legal basis for corona measures
German RKI (CDC equivalent) recommended no autopsies be performed
Corona measures have no sufficient factual or legal basis, are unconstitutional and
must be repealed immediately
No serious scientist gives any validity to the infamous Neil Ferguson's false
computer models warning of millions of deaths
Mainstream media completely failed to report the true facts of the so-called
pandemic
Democracy is in danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models
Drosten (of PCR test), Tedros of WHO, and others have committed crimes against
humanity as defined in the International Criminal Code
Politicians can avoid going down with the charlatans and criminals by starting the
long overdue public scientific discussion
Conspiracy:
Politicians and mainstream media deliberately drove populations to panic
Children were calculatedly made to feel responsible "for the painful tortured death
of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow Corona rules"
The hopeless PCR test is used to create fear and not to diagnose
There can be no talk of a second wave
Injury and damage:
Evidence of gigantic health and economic damage to populations
Anti-corona measures have:
Killed innumerable people
Destroyed countless companies and individuals worldwide
Children are being taken away from their parents
Children are traumatized en masse
Bankruptcies are expected in small- and medium-sized businesses
Redress:
A class action lawsuit must be filed in the USA or Canada, with all affected parties
worldwide having the opportunity to join
Companies and self-employed people must be compensated for damages
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:
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?
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?
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:
How dangerous is the virus really?
What is the significance of a positive PCR test?
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.
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 evenappeared. 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 ."
" 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:
As a result of a damage-inducing event
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.
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:
The corona crisis must be renamed the "Corona Scandal"
It is:
The biggest tort case ever
The greatest crime against humanity ever committed
Those responsible must be:
Criminally prosecuted for crimes against humanity
Sued for civil damages
Deaths
There is no excess mortality in any country
Corona virus mortality equals seasonal flu
94% of deaths in Bergamo were caused by transferring sick patients to nursing homes
where they infected old people with weak immune systems
Doctors and hospitals worldwide were paid to declare deceased victims of
Covid-19
Autopsies showed:
Fatalities almost all caused by serious pre-existing conditions
Almost all deaths were very old people
Sweden (no lockdown) and Britain (strict lockdown) have comparable disease and
mortality statistics
US states with and without lockdowns have comparable disease and mortality
statistics
Health
Hospitals remain empty and some face bankruptcy
Populations have T-cell immunity from previous influenza waves
Herd immunity needs only 15-25% population infection and is already achieved
Only when a person has symptoms can an infection be contagious
Tests:
Many scientists call this a PCR-test pandemic, not a corona pandemic
Very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive
Likelihood of false-positives is 89-94% or near certainty
Prof. Drosten developed his PCR test from an old SARS virus without ever having seen
the real Wuhan virus from China
The PCR test is not based on scientific facts with respect to infections
PCR tests are useless for the detection of infections
A positive PCR test does not mean an infection is present or that an intact virus has
been found
Amplification of samples over 35 cycles is unreliable but WHO recommended 45
cycles
Illegality:
The German government locked down, imposed social-distancing/ mask-wearing on the
basis of a single opinion
The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating
The lockdowns were based on non-existent infections
Former president of the German federal constitutional court doubted the
constitutionality of the corona measures
Former UK supreme court judge Lord Sumption concluded there was no factual basis for
panic and no legal basis for corona measures
German RKI (CDC equivalent) recommended no autopsies be performed
Corona measures have no sufficient factual or legal basis, are unconstitutional and
must be repealed immediately
No serious scientist gives any validity to the infamous Neil Ferguson's false
computer models warning of millions of deaths
Mainstream media completely failed to report the true facts of the so-called
pandemic
Democracy is in danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models
Drosten (of PCR test), Tedros of WHO, and others have committed crimes against
humanity as defined in the International Criminal Code
Politicians can avoid going down with the charlatans and criminals by starting the
long overdue public scientific discussion
Conspiracy:
Politicians and mainstream media deliberately drove populations to panic
Children were calculatedly made to feel responsible "for the painful tortured death
of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow Corona rules"
The hopeless PCR test is used to create fear and not to diagnose
There can be no talk of a second wave
Injury and damage:
Evidence of gigantic health and economic damage to populations
Anti-corona measures have:
Killed innumerable people
Destroyed countless companies and individuals worldwide
Children are being taken away from their parents
Children are traumatized en masse
Bankruptcies are expected in small- and medium-sized businesses
Redress:
A class action lawsuit must be filed in the USA or Canada, with all affected parties
worldwide having the opportunity to join
Companies and self-employed people must be compensated for damages
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:
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?
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?
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:
How dangerous is the virus really?
What is the significance of a positive PCR test?
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.
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 evenappeared. 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 ."
" 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:
As a result of a damage-inducing event
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.
"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."
"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.
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."
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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."
(scientificamerican.com) 306BeauHD 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.
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.
"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."
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'. ..."
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'.
"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."
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 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.
"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 ...
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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
.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 ."
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.
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.
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;
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;
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.
"... 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. ..."
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.
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
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.
Money quote: " Discarding pointless practices like outdoor masking and obsessive
“ hygiene theater
†would make the continuing necessary precautions, including indoor masking, easier
to accept."
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.
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.
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.
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.
"... " 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." ..."
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.
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.
" 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."
" 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.'
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,â€
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,â€
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,â€
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€
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."
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.
"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."
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.
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:
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"
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.....
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...
Requiring Vaccine IDs or passports violates medical privacy - Right?
Unvaccinated are NOT a threat because the vaccinated are protected - Right?
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.
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 ...
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.
"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.
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!"
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"... 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. ..."
"... 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. ..."
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.
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.
//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.
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...
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.
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.
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
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).
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.
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.
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."
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."
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 +/-.
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???
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.
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
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
"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."
"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."
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 "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.
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.
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.
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.
"... 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. ..."
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.
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."
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.
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.
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
:
He has blamed the vaccines
for causing spikes
in
severe illness
, by pointing to data that actually demonstrate their safety and effectiveness.
He has suggested that
countries
such as Israel have suffered
from their early vaccine rollout, even though deaths and hospitalizations among
vaccinated groups in Israel have plummeted.
He has implied that for
most non-seniors, the side effects of the vaccines are worse than having COVID-19 itself -- even though, according to the
CDC, the pandemic has killed
tens
of thousands of people
under 50 and the vaccines
have
not conclusively killed anybody
.
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.
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.
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.
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."
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@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".
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.
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."
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/ ..."
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.
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.)
"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."
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?
@ 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
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
"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
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:
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:
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.
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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".
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 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 reply Share link Report
flag
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?
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 .
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.
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
"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.
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
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."
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.
@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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!
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...
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.
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?
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!
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.
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?
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Global TimesEditorial 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.
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.
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).
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
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?
Quarantine the sick
CDC only recently acknowledged that sick people infect others in their household.
The household-infected then spread the virus when while they are assymptomatic.
Effective contact tracing
Is there any western country that does this well? AFAICT USA sucks at it.
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.
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.
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 .
'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.
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.
"... 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. ..."
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
Anthony Fauci says lockdowns are not possible in the United States (January
24):
"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."
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.
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.
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.
"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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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".
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".
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?
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?
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?
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.
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.
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
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
If the masks work -- Why the six feet?
If the six feet works -- Why the masks?
If both of the above work -- Why the lockdowns?
If all three of the above work -- Why the vaccine?
If the vaccine is safe -- Why protect it with a no liability clause?
If the vaccine is safe---Why not test it on animals first before using it on
humans?
If SARS-CoV-2 exists -- Why has it never been isolated?
If SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated -- How can an effective vaccine be
developed?
If the RT-PCR test works -- Why so many false positives?
If Kary Mullis, the inventor of the RT-PCR test who conveniently died in August 2019,
says his test shouldn't be used to diagnose infectious diseases -- Why use it to detect
SARS-CoV-2?
If there is an epidemic---Why so many empty hospitals?
If large numbers of people are dying from SARS-CoV-2---Why so many fake causes of death
on death certificates?
If SARS-CoV-2 exists -- Why give doctors financial incentives to diagnose
SARS-CoV-2?
If the official COVID-19 narrative is defensible -- Why censor people who dispute this
narrative?
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.
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.
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
africoman 9 hours ago
How dare you granny killer /sarc
Frito 4 hours ago
The past was erased, the erasure forgotten, the lie became truth.
There are no excess deaths. People may be dying with Covid 19(using a faulty test how can
anyone know?) but they are not dying of Covid 19.
So why are the hospitals filling up?
As to mask use: a mask will catch some virus particles (and some bacteria and fungal
spores), therefore it protects your health and that of people around you. If everyone wears a
mask there will be less diseases spread. (Less 'flu, fewer colds, less spread of TB.) Mask
wearing is not lethal and not for ever. Stop the stupid bitching and wear one for the sake of
other people if not for yourself!
The idea that opposing mask-wearing is somehow promoting "Freedom" is ridiculous. The Chinese
with their epidemic under control are vastly more free than we in the UK with our raging
disease. E.g. the Chinese are free to not wear a mask if they feel like it.
dearth of hospital capacity is being touted as the driver for lockdown. This is another
great example of fear mongering by withholding the context. At 6:27 minutes in this interview
of Dr. Margaret Flowers by Chris Hedge, Dr. Flower points out that from 1975 to today, the
population of USA has increased from 215 million to 331 million. Yet at the same time, the
total number of hospital beds has decreased from 1,500,000 t0 925,000!!! https://www.rt.com/shows/on-contact/507334-covid19-america-health-crisis/
When the population increased by 53% the hospital capacity decreased by 38%.
Without this contextual information, no wonder that the population is so very afraid of the
dangerous corona virus, that they are willing to allow the government to inject them with a
concoction made by a new technology, whose long term effects are unknown, and even whose
efficacy is questionable at best. It is questionable on multiple fronts. If I understand it
correct, Pfizer measures efficacy by quantifying any reduction in symptoms (rather than
immunity). Besides, the occurrence of covid-19 is being measured with an ill-defined test
method (see here https://cormandrostenreview.com/report/).
It is so easy to fool people who cannot think critically.
(Disclaimer: I have nothing against traditional vaccines, which I take. I am also not
saying that COvid-19 is harmless. Rather its dangers are being overblown. Especially
overblown is the inherent virulence of the virus in comparison to other related parameters
that ultimately cause death)
Like the flu, the common cold and the other corona viruses, we simply have to manage it,
and hope it evolves into something a little less contagious over time.
well said Blue Dotterel (38, Dec 3)
@foolisholdman, 54
Hospitals are always fill up during the winter respiratory virus season. SARS-CoV-2 is not
the only respiratory virus in circulation at present.
The yellow band is incomplete data, so still rising somewaht probably. Nevertheless, EU is
coming out of it looking like the current flare up is about half as bad as the initial wave
in the spring. This is WITH many weeks of reimposed restrictions.
"... Lockdowns as being inherently against the working class is a capitalist (liberal)
falsification: if you pay them while they're kept safe in their homes, you'll have the best
of the two worlds for the working class (being paid without working). This option is only
an anathema for the middle class and the capitalist class - who can't imagine a world
without the proletarians serving them ..."
We all live in an interconnected world and middle class, capitalist class (whatever that's
supposed to mean) and proletarians alike supply goods and services to one another. Money is
the medium that facilitates such exchanges. It follows then that proletarians also serve one
another and ditto for the other classes.
If working classes are paid to stay in their homes, who then supplies their needs? In
spite of Jeff Bozo's efforts and those of Elon Musk, not all transport is self-automating and
robots in Amazon warehouses still need some human inputs to operate quickly and without
hitches.
One could also argue that working fulfils other, non-monetary needs. Karl Marx actually
foresaw this when he wrote about anomie in capitalist systems of production, in which workers
are denied control over their lives and the work they do by being denied any say in what they
produce, how they produce it, the resources and environment needed to produce outputs, and
maybe even whether they can be allowed to work at all.
Lockdowns can be viewed as another method in which to deny people control over their work
and work environments. People socialise at work and lockdowns may be a way to deny workers a
place or a means to connect with others (and maybe to form unions). Is it any wonder then,
that during lockdowns people's mental health has become an issue and public health experts
became concerned at the possibility that such phenomena as suicide and domestic violence
could increase?
You can understand this from this quotation. It is the internal contradictions of the wesern
capitalist system that is driving the changes we observe, not "pressure applied by China",
which I would say is a myth.
"The fundamental cause of the development of a thing is not external but internal: it lies
in the contradictionariness within the thing. This internal contradiction exists in every
single thing, hence its motion and development. Contradictionariness within a thing is the
fundamental cause of its development, while its interrelations and interactions with other
things are secondary causes."
"It (Materialist dialectics) holds that external causes are the conditions of change and
internal causes are the basis of change, and that external causes become operative through
internal causes. In a suitable temperature an egg changes into a chicken, but no temperature
can change a stone into a chicken, because each has a different basis."
Mao Zedong. "On Contradiction" August 1937. Selected Works, Vol.1, p.315.
Lockdowns are a medical protection to eradicate a contagious virus.
The lock downs we have had are fake and we're designed to fail. For political reasons.
The very people who complained 10 months ago, were responsible for them not working,
10 months later those people are still complaining. They are the ones who have prolonged the
contagion.
They are to blame. That includes the polatians and duped public.
It's deliberate !
As we were driving to the park, I noticed a few bike riders on the side of the road wearing
masks while biking. I thought to myself – WTF. That is completely idiotic. Then we began
walking along the miles of trails. The park was moderately busy, but you passed someone every
few minutes.
Sadly, I would estimate that 80% of the people we passed on the trails were masked and
fearful of us unmasked hooligans. I can only imagine their thoughts as they wondered why we
were risking their lives by being so careless.
I was disgusted by the lack of critical thought exhibited by these people. I might have
understood if it was only people over 70 years old wearing the masks, but most of these people
were young. They have virtually a zero risk of dying from this flu. They have virtually a zero
risk of catching it on a walking trail at a State park. But, they obediently and silently do as
they are told by their overlords.
I am saddened by how easily the totalitarians have been able to use fear, propaganda, lies
and misinformation to turn the vast majority of Americans into compliant sheep. It is so clear
to me that this engineered flu panic is nothing more than another chapter in the scheme to
enslave global populations under the thumb of global elitist billionaires who want to control
us and enrich themselves.
NotMyCircus 5 hours ago
Everyday I see people alone in their cars wearing masks - there are very few people in the
world who can think critically and use reasoning to understand the actual risks for
COVID-19.
99.63% of the people don't get it...
StubbleJumper 4 hours ago
Putting on a mask to drive in the car alone is like putting on a condom to go to bed alone
and fall asleep.
DamnSheeple 1 hour ago
I just stare at them, honk and laugh.
Omega Point 4 hours ago
I agree, it really pisses me off seeing kids with masks. It is child abuse. Not only is it
physically harming, it is doing psychological damage too. These kids will be afraid of their
own shadow.
Anyway, I'm getting a new t-shirt made that displays two children with masks on and the
title "child abuse". I should get some interesting comments.
diana_in_spain 4 hours ago remove link
Parents telling their children to wear masks outside , it's beyond belief. We are truly
doomed
trailer park boys 4 hours ago
Masks don't prevent. Masks don't minimize spread. Masks are unhealthy for the wearer.
The whitecoat bureaucrats know this. It is not about science or health. It IS all about
control.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." - H.L.
Mencken ay_arrow
JUST THE FACTS 4 hours ago
I dip my face diaper in cheap Vodka so its all wet looking
before entering the supermarket.
People get out of my way without being asked.
fnfcst 1 hour ago (Edited)
Right! If social distancing works, stay way the F* far away from me.
sentido kumon 4 hours ago
People have always been like this. They can not grasp philosophy, history, science or any
other subject beyond eating and f'king. This whole covid hysteria has made that much obvious.
Its likely that humans devolve and relinquish their brains since they have no use for it
(other than eating and f'cking) and are just content being told.
Omega Point 4 hours ago
Perhaps the "elites" have a point. Too many useless eaters, breeders, and breathers.
Stringent COVID-19 control measures were imposed in Wuhan between January 23 and April 8,
2020. Estimates of the prevalence of infection following the release of restrictions could
inform post-lockdown pandemic management. Here, we describe a city-wide SARS-CoV-2 nucleic
acid screening programme between May 14 and June 1, 2020 in Wuhan. All city residents aged
six years or older were eligible and 9,899,828 (92.9%) participated. No new symptomatic
cases and 300 asymptomatic cases (detection rate 0.303/10,000, 95% CI
0.270–0.339/10,000) were identified. There were no positive tests amongst 1,174
close contacts of asymptomatic cases. 107 of 34,424 previously recovered COVID-19
patients tested positive again (re-positive rate 0.31%, 95% CI 0.423–0.574%). The
prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Wuhan was therefore very low five to eight weeks
after the end of lockdown.
my emphasis
This study comes supporting early (June 2020) official statements by WHO where:
We have a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing.
They're following asymptomatic cases, they're following contacts and they're not finding
secondary transmission onward. It's very rare and much of that is not published in the
literature. From the papers that are published there's one that came out from Singapore
looking at a long-term care facility. There are some household transmission studies where
you follow individuals over time and you look at the proportion of those that transmit
onwards.We are constantly looking at this data and we're trying to get more information
from countries to truly answer this question. It still appears to be rare that an
asymptomatic individual actually transmits onward.
There existing or not "asymptomatic transmission" is a key piece of information because
there lies the fundamental justification for isolation measures imposed on asymptomatic
individuals with positive rtPCR test results. Further, without asymptomatic transmission,
general confinements can not be scientifically justified for the purposes of slowing
down/flattening the curve as has been claimed .
This recenters the pandemic response where it should be all along: properly diagnosed
cases.
It is very curious that no later than 24 hours, WHO, was backtracking on the original statements ,
letting us know that models [as opposed to actual epidemiological studies] suggest otherwise
but since they were models they were not mentioned. I'll chalk that up as excess zeal at
best.
The supplementary material the study published in Nature was also revealing in terms of
the rtPCR testing protocol, which employed, following Chinese National Guidelines, Ct values
of ~35/34 (ORF and N genes respectively) on average. This arcs back to the question that has
been haunting us, why are these tests being threshold at such high Ct values. In the Chinese
case there appears to be an explanation. As the very title of the study mentions, these
are tests made for screening purposes not diagnostic .
The following is very enlightening, contrast the following case definitions:
Mild case The clinical symptoms are mild and no pneumonia manifestations can be
found in imaging .
Moderate case
Patients have symptoms such as fever and respiratory tract symptoms etc., and pneumonia
manifestations can be seen in imaging .
Severe case
Patients who meet any of the following criteria: dyspnea or respiratory rate ≥30
breaths/min; oxygen saturation ≤93% at a rest state; arterial partial pressure of oxygen
(PaO2)/oxygen concentration (FiO2) ≤300 mmHg. Patients with >50% lesions progression
within 24 to 48 hours in lung imaging should be treated as severe cases.
Critical case
Patients who meet any of the following criteria: occurrence of respiratory failure
requiring mechanical ventilation; presence of shock; other organ failure that requires
monitoring and treatment in the Intensive Care Unit.[at this severity they apparently
dispense with imaging]
Clinically-diagnosed cases
The clinically-diagnosed cases were only allowed for the cases in the Hubei Province for
the period of February 9 to 19 based on the 5th edition of the Scheme released by the
National Health Commission of China released on February 8 and abolished on February 19. A
presumptive case was defined as meeting the following criteria: (1) recent travel history
to Wuhan City or Hubei Province; or close contact with a confirmed or probable case; or
cluster transmission; (2) fever and/or respiratory symptoms; (3) laboratory evidence of
normal or decreased number of leukocytes and/or lymphopenia. Those presumptive cases
with further radiographic evidence showing pneumonia but without a positive RT-PCR test
result were defined as clinically-diagnosed cases .
my emphasis
-------------------------------------------------------
The take away: The Chinese rely on radiological imaging to confirm COVID-19 cases NOT on
rtPCR tests which they limit for screening purposes, as opposed to the European which use
radiological imaging to define a probable case and rtPCR testing to confirm. The Chinese
rely on a tried and tested method for confirming diagnostic and the European rely fallible
method generaly used for screening to confirm diagnostic .
"Afraid of corona? Fuck off! By the way, I think I've already had it. I am never sick, but
last February I had a good few days. My wife too. Not that I was sick in bed or anything,
because I'm too busy for that. In nature you don't have time to be sick either. There you
rely on your immune system. That's your best friend. If you take good care of it, it will
take good care of you. You really don't need a vaccine for that. That's why this is so
important. This book, the movie, everything. Everyone should know this! "
Your method would also work wonders for your immune system. Does it also help against
corona?
"Sure. And they aren't miracles, are they? We already scientifically demonstrated this in
2014. Back then it was about the E. coli bacteria, but the damage it causes to humans is
basically the same as that of coronaviruses. It causes chronic inflammation in the lungs.
Look, you shouldn't wait until you're on a stretcher on your way to intensive care, then it's
too late. A house that is ablaze cannot be saved. But at an earlier stage, the Wim Hof
Method is much stronger than the corona virus. In fact, if everyone were to
apply the method, such a lockdown would be totally unnecessary. And masks, and five feet
away, and all that other nonsense. Stop it anyway. Vaccines, money, power, that's the
disease! The answer is just in yourself. "
DENMARK: 9 days of protests over a new law that "would be able to define groups of people
who must be vaccinated. People who refuse the above can be coerced through physical
detainment, with police allowed to assist."
Covid accounts for less than half of last month's excess deaths
Covid-19 justifies less than half of last month's excess deaths compared to the average of
the last five years, the National Statistics Institute (INE) revealed on 13 November in its
latest analysis of mortality in Portugal.
The preliminary data revealed, indicate that "46.5 percent of the increase in deaths
between 5 October and 1 November compared to the average of the last five years was due to
deaths by Covid-19": of the 1,132 above-average deaths in that period, 526 were attributed to
Covid-19.
The disease caused by the new coronavirus caused less than a third (29.3 percent) of the
8,686 deaths that are above the average of the last five years, between 2 March and 1
November.
MRNA technology is untested and its inoculation and immunogenicity model unproven so far.
The mechanism of immuno-response to mRNA vaccine itself as well as side effects of cell
development largely unknown, possibly facilitating enhanced autoimmune response. And that are
general questions about technology not specific to COVID.
Regarding SC2/COVID vaccine: They published nothing but headlies to blatantly bump the
stock prices and dump their own shares. I checked everywhere no details. I will wait for
paper in NEJM or BJM about phase 3 results as they published in July about result of phase 2
with 50% of severe to moderate side effects after second inoculation.
Pfizer and Moderna have already been paid. So they have to hype junk they vomit.
Moneycircus , Nov 16, 2020 5:37 PM
UK Column News – 16th November 2020
PART ONE
"When good science is suppressed by the medical-political complex, people die."
THE BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL TAKES STAND ON POLITICIZED SCIENCE Covid-19: politicisation, "corruption," and suppression of science , BMJ, Nov 13,
2020.
"Politicisation of science was enthusiastically deployed by some of history's worst
autocrats and dictators, and it is now regrettably commonplace in democracies.20 The
medical-political complex tends towards suppression of science to aggrandise and enrich
those in power. And, as the powerful become more successful, richer, and further
intoxicated with power, the inconvenient truths of science are suppressed. When good
science is suppressed, people die."
CENSORSHIP AND THE SECURITY OF THE PEOPLE
Kier Starmer, Chief Tory Whip on the Labour Bench:
"The challenge is how we get ready for the vaccine a logistical operation probably larger
than we've seen since WW2." He then launches into military language: "The government must be
quick, decisive and effective so we can give the British people the security that they
need."
Labour's culture secretary Jo Stevens complains gov does not censor online platforms
enough. She says Labour has been warning the gov for years against vaccine skeptics.
THE RECENT HISTORY OF UK CENSORSHIP
In reality the "disinformation" strategy does not come from Labour:
In 2014 David Cameron,
then PM, called at UN for regulation of the Internet. In 2017 Amber Rudd, then Home
Secretary, interviewed Big Tech about counterterrorism and "hate". Google News Lab, Poynter
Inst, and George Soros-backed fact checkers began to delist sites from search, including UKC
and 21st Century Wire. 2018 Theresa May, then PM, formed Rapid Response "fake news units" in
Cabinet Office, Foreign Office, Culture Dept, "using cutting edge software to work round the
clock to monitor online breaking news stories and social media discussion." The Rapid
Response Unit's chief, Alex Aiken,in 2018 gave examples of "concern" regarding social media
posts on chemical weapons attacks in Syria, and the NHS and crime. 2019 Online Harms White
Paper consultation completed by July. No overt action but covert activity has blossomed
through 77th Brigade, 13th Signals Reg, etc. Sep 2019 BoJo spoke the the UN, with great
foresight choosing to focus on vaccine "disinformation". Center for Countering Digital Hate
(UK site, US spelling) identifies anti-vac as a worry.
HOSPITAL IGNORES GOV ADVICE ON MASK
Axminster Hospital, Northern Devon Healthcare Trust, makes up rules against 93 y/o man.
Nephew refused entry with his 93-y/o uncle because he was not wearing mask, for which nephew
had an exception. Hospital demanded he wear a lanyard and complete tracing forms. Pressure
alarmed his uncle, causing unnecessary risk to health. Bus driver had previously refused to let 93 y/o aboard bus because he forgot mask.
UKC: Beliefs have become law. We don't have laws. We don't have evidence and facts.
Instead people are being turned against each other.
ADVERSE DRUG REACTIONS (ADR) TO COVID-19 VACCINE – MHRA PROCURES ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE SOFTWARE
Further information: this is not a tender, it's a done deal.
UKC viewer points out this is a contract award notice, agreed in advance, with the notice
published to satisfy public procurement regulations.
GBP 1.5 million contract awarded to Genpact UK
Genpact UK
slogan: Adapt and rise: building resilience for communities, people and businesses.
It says its activities include: supply chain, leasing, mortgages and loans, on boarding,
property, claims and underwriting, trade shows, credit risk management.
UKC: looks like an enforcement agency.
MHRA told UKC that EU tenders are visible in UK, thus not advertised locally. What is
meant by expected high volume of adverse reactions to the Covid vaccine? MHRA replied:
"A number of previous vaccination campaigns have been considered in order to derive
estimates of ADR volumes in a forthcoming vaccination campaign Actual numbers of reports
will be dependent on the number of doses administered and the use of concurrent treatments
(for instance to manage fevers). Our past experience with other new immunization campaigns
is that we tend to receive around one yellow card per 1,000 doses. Most ADRs are short term
It is important to not that a report of a suspected side effect is not poof that the
vaccine cause it, but a suspicion by the reporter that the vaccine may have caused the side
effect."
At the time of its tender award MHRA said its legacy systems could not handle the
anticipated volume of Adverse Drug Reactions.
UKC: MHRA's answer is not consistent with earlier statements.
Mike Robinson: If as MHRA says the adverse reactions are 1 in 1,000 why would you need
artificial intelligence. A simple database would suffice.
David Scott : the level of adverse reaction must be enormous. The government must be asking
how many casualties there will be.
Brian Gerrish: People should know they can sue the Pharma companies. The government says
they are not liable but under common law the people within those companies who knowingly
implement mistakes are liable for their actions. The individual carries guilt for the
crime.
BBC Radio Four: "We don't know which vaccine will work. There are at least three vaccines.
People may have to take more than one vaccine at different times to build up immunity."
REMINDER: CHILD VACCINATIONS COULD BECOME COMPULSORY
Metro: Sep 2019: Children could be forced to have compulsory vaccination under Government
plans
Health Secretary Matt Hancock says children could be forced to have compulsory vaccinations.
Speaking at a fringe event at the Conservative Party conference in Manchester, in Sep 2019,
he said parents must 'take responsibility' over the issue.
"We need a massive drive to get these vaccination rates back up I said before that we
should be open minded and frank, what I'd say is that when we – the state –
provide services to people, then it's a two-way street, you have got to take your
responsibilities too.
So I think there is a very strong argument for having compulsory vaccinations for
children when they go to school because otherwise they are putting other children at
risk.'
Now, you have got to make sure the system would work, because some children can't be
vaccinated and some may hold very strong religious convictions that you would want to take
into account.
But, frankly, the proportion of people in either of those two categories is tiny
compared to the 7 per cent or 8 per cent now who don't get vaccinated.'"
UKC: Do you see what he is omitting: free will and rational judgement. You can have a
religious or medical exception or you have to comply. Or no education for you.
"Although tyranny may successfully rule over foreign peoples, it can stay in power only if
it destroys first of all the national institutions of its own people."
-- Hannah Arendt
The virus continues to evolve. The vaccine needs approval from regulators - and they, supposedly, will only grant that
if they're sure that the jab is safe and works well. Meanwhile, concerns have been raised that mutated forms of the virus
might hamper the effectiveness of future vaccines.
It comes after 12 people were found with a mink-related strain of the virus following an outbreak in Denmark.
Notable quotes:
"... When someone tests positive we say they tested positive for Covid-19, but that is [different from what is ] the disease, not the virus, which is Sars-CoV-2. That's the first problem. Secondly, it was termed new, when neither the disease nor the virus is new because coronaviruses have been with us forever. ..."
"... When the number of cases falls below a certain level, you must stop testing . Because if you keep testing people who are not infected, you are going to get more false positives than positives. ..."
"... Many labs in Germany were creating artifacts in the lab through poor procedures. They created a cluster of 60 people in Bavaria. On retesting it turned out 58 were clear. ..."
"... The whole idea of an immunity passport is stupid. Even if vaccinated and you have antibodies, you can only be protected if the number of viruses is low. ..."
"... Vaccines against coronaviruses are unlikely to work and could be dangerous -- especially if you put the gene of the virus into the body , supposedly to make your cells produce the characteristics of the virus against which the antibodies are supposed to act. ..."
"... These vaccines will create waste products and now the killer lymphocytes may start attacking healthy cells. I cannot prove this has happened but so many vaccines trials have had such serious side effects, pains, swelling, fever, muscle ache. The Astra Zeneca trial had to change its protocols before continuing which is not allowed. ..."
"... Then transverse myelitis emerged. There are reasons to suspect that the killer lymphocytes may have been triggered into an autoimmune attack. ..."
"... How are they going to prove a virus is effective? If you are under 70 your chance of dying from this virus is minuscule. If you are losing 5 out of 10,000 lives how are you going to show that a vaccine saves lives? It's not statistically significant. ..."
"... As for lockdown, they are killing people who are not diagnosed for cancer, heart disease, from depression, from suicide, and economic depression that causes poverty. They are killing far more than they save. ..."
"... If I was a "Conspiracy Theorist" I would wonder: is the mRNA vaccine is intended to weaken the immunity response? Because that is clearly a risk. ..."
"... "a country where loneliness is widespread .. Americans prefer myths that induce them to act out of habit so they can lose themselves in the group." ..."
"... The author here might be breaking the neoliberal convention of not describing people who live alone in terms other than 'Independent', 'Confident' and 'Emotionally Intelligent' ..."
"... I commute for 3 hrs a day for work, at rush hour in a total of 6 busses full packed with the masked herd. Mine lets my nose uncovered 6 months of this got tested for work last week.. tested NEGATIVE there you go with your highly contagious deadly disease. ..."
Back in medieval times, the folk believed in Satan and witchcraft. It wouldn't have taken
much to start off a panic about a demonic force threatening a community and plenty of people
would be willing to vouch for sinister sightings.
All of this could go on till the local priest
decided it was alright to return to normal. Since he was in direct communion with God, he was
the one with the credentials to determine when things were safe again. Now we have this:
The impact of a new Covid vaccine will kick in significantly over summer and life should be
back to normal by next winter, one of its creators has said."
Prof Ugur Sahin, BioNTech co-founder, says,
"I'm very confident that transmission between
people will be reduced by such a highly effective vaccine – maybe not 90% but maybe 50%
– but we should not forget that even that could result in a dramatic reduction of the
pandemic spread"
Just tell us when it's safe, Professor. We'll believe you!
"The time has come for homo sapiens to stand up and start becoming human again. This scare
has led man to lose reason as he follows the pied piper's call and we are being led to the
downfall of civilization.
Stand up, take those masks off your face, grasp each other's hands
again -- no more social distancing, what utter nonsense because of a virus that has been with
us since the beginning of mankind -- and start singing. The sound of the human voice is the
only thing which is going to halt this pied piper's madness."
When someone tests positive we say they tested positive for Covid-19, but that is [different from what is ] the
disease, not the virus, which is Sars-CoV-2. That's the first problem. Secondly, it was
termed new, when neither the disease nor the virus is new because coronaviruses have been
with us forever.
These viruses co-exist with us . Every few months they mutate so that my immune system
will accept them, otherwise they would be recognized on the second visit and be shut out. So
it is completely normal that the most successful viruses in the world, which keep the host
alive, which don't want to kill us, change a little all the time.
When the number of cases falls below a certain level, you must stop testing . Because if
you keep testing people who are not infected, you are going to get more false positives than
positives.
Many labs in Germany were creating artifacts in the lab through poor procedures.
They created a cluster of 60 people in Bavaria. On retesting it turned out 58 were clear.
Scenario two is immunity. The science is very fuzzy. One arm is the antibody that catches
the virus before it attaches to the cell but this antibody fights one-to-one. It is a matter
of numbers. The number of antibodies can become exhausted before more virus comes along.
The whole idea of an immunity passport is stupid. Even if vaccinated and you have
antibodies, you can only be protected if the number of viruses is low.
Also antibodies peak after you are immunized but with time they decline. Your immune
system does not do work unless there is a purpose. After two or three months, even with the
passport, you are not immune.
Our old antibodies are partially effective against new coronaviruses . Once the new virus
enters our cells, waste products of the virus sit on the outside of the cell. The immune
system's second arm, the killer lymphocytes emerge.
Lymphocytes spot the similarity of the new virus to the old and attack the cell. One
killer lymphocyte can kill many viruses-infected cells.
This is the body's natural defenses. This is why more than 90% of people who are infected
already have background immunity. Several recent reports have suggested people do have these
lymphocytes and even those who don't display them may have them 'waiting in the wings' in the
lymph nodes.
Vaccines against coronaviruses are unlikely to work and could be dangerous -- especially
if you put the gene of the virus into the body , supposedly to make your cells produce the
characteristics of the virus against which the antibodies are supposed to act.
These vaccines will create waste products and now the killer lymphocytes may start
attacking healthy cells. I cannot prove this has happened but so many vaccines trials have
had such serious side effects, pains, swelling, fever, muscle ache. The Astra Zeneca trial
had to change its protocols before continuing which is not allowed.
Then transverse myelitis emerged. There are reasons to suspect that the killer lymphocytes
may have been triggered into an autoimmune attack.
Secondly, suppose you have successfully generated antibodies but you have also reawakened
those killer lymphocytes , like a boxer, you are stronger and ready for the next fight. Now
when the real virus comes along, and overcomes the few antibodies that exist, you have so
many killer lymphocytes ready for battle that they overdo it.
This would be immune response dependent enhancement which ends in an over-strong immune
response.
How are they going to prove a virus is effective? If you are under 70 your chance of dying
from this virus is minuscule. If you are losing 5 out of 10,000 lives how are you going to
show that a vaccine saves lives? It's not statistically significant.
As for lockdown, they are killing people who are not diagnosed for cancer, heart disease,
from depression, from suicide, and economic depression that causes poverty. They are killing
far more than they save.
Lawyers around the world are going to bring those people to justice. The first cases are
currently being filed in Germany. I hope the right ones will be taken to court because what
they are doing is criminal. It is not a matter of belief. We know people are dying around the
world because of these lockdown measures. Millions of people are starving to death in India
and other places.
We should be taking about why and how has our society allowed these things to happen. How
and why and we must get answer so this will never happen again.
Moneycircus , Nov 16, 2020 1:59 PM Reply to Moneycircus
If I was a "Conspiracy Theorist" I would wonder: is the mRNA vaccine is intended to
weaken the immunity response? Because that is clearly a risk.
Vaccine trials suggest it affects quite a few people's immune systems negatively. So if
another virulent disease were to come along in the near future, those people weakened by the
vaccine would be very vulnerable to a different virus . (see Francis Boyle). If Covid were a
deadly threat the risk might be worth it. That does not seem to be the case.
Even if not deliberate conspiracy -- Let's use Bill Gates' own logic: Pandemics are
the greatest threat facing humanity , or the second after "climate" -- according to Gates
himself.
Why would you mess with the immune system of hundreds of millions of people?
The proposal from Bill and Melinda is to give it to healthcare workers and the elderly
first. Again, examine the logic. If the vaccine produces casualties, you would have just
created a crisis in the state health system -- perhaps bringing it to its knees, while
accelerating the cull of elderly.
Isn't one of the proposals of the Big Tech mafia to end traditional healthcare and replace
it with
"digital health" via a screen ?
Myall , Nov 16, 2020 11:49 AM
"a country where loneliness is widespread .. Americans prefer myths that induce them to
act out of habit so they can lose themselves in the group."
The author here might be breaking the neoliberal convention of not describing people who live
alone in terms other than 'Independent', 'Confident' and 'Emotionally Intelligent'
George Mc , Nov 16, 2020 10:52 AM
You will be pleased to hear that your commender in chief is providing such excellent
guidance on the requisite behaviour:
"It doesn't matter that we were all doing social distancing, it doesn't matter that I'm
fit as a butcher's dog, feel great. And actually, it doesn't matter that I've had the disease
and I'm bursting with antibodies. We've got to interrupt the spread of the disease and one of
the ways we can do that now is by self-isolating for 14 days when contacted by Test and
Trace."
So, things that DON'T matter: doing social distancing being as fit as a butcher's dog
feeling great having had the desease and bursting with antibodies
You must still follow the rules for track and trace and you should still be scared
shitless!
wardropper , Nov 16, 2020 2:38 PM Reply to George
Mc
These are people whose brains don't work, and who like having brains that don't work.
People to be avoided at all costs – and certainly not allowed to become Prime
Ministers.
I_left_the_left , Nov 18, 2020 1:54 PM Reply to wardropper
Comrade Carrie appears to control Boris's brain. Greens won 2.7% of the popular vote, but
she found a better way to get her fantasy policies adopted than respecting what the stupid
plebs want.
Arsebiscuits , Nov 16, 2020 3:22 PM Reply to George
Mc
Being as fit as a butchers dog doesn't make any sense.
He's got the Biden dementia going on
Theobalt , Nov 16, 2020 7:00 PM Reply to Arsebiscuits
They have to be fitter than the chocolate maker's dog though
Theobalt , Nov 16, 2020 6:57 PM Reply to George
Mc
I commute for 3 hrs a day for work, at rush hour in a total of 6 busses full packed with
the masked herd. Mine lets my nose uncovered 6 months of this got tested for work last week..
tested NEGATIVE there you go with your highly contagious deadly disease.
This whole coronavirus thingy is becoming ridiculous. I don't think it's a complete fake ;
yes, there is coronavirus named COVID-19, yes it is highly contagious, yes it's a health
hazard.
But to sum it up, we have here a new coronavirus which is slightly more dangerous than the
flu, which kills practically only very old people with comorbidities, with 99,98% chances
(ok, 99,95% if you like) of surviving it. given these odds, I'll pass on the vaccine, thank
you.
From the beginning, the whole treatment of this thing stank to high heaven. I'm sorry, but
the only meaningful explanation I can give is this one : big pharma and its various shills
(politicians or doctors) recognized the opportunity such a virus would mean ; they then set
out to systematically downplay or kill any possibility of cheap and effective treatments, and
cleverly directed the firehose of dollars which was poured onto the laboratories developing a
vaccine.
Some facts :
- in France, we had two large-scale studies, Discovery and Hycovid, which were started (very
reluctantly) and were pratically forced to include HCQ+AZ in their panel.
- In the weekend following publication of the fraudulent Lancet newspaper, our health
minister ordered a full stop.
- Since then, months have gone by; NOT ONE JOURNALIST has either 1) investigated who were the
accomplices of the Lancet fraud 2) questioned why all national and international authorities
reacted in lockstep 3) and most importantly WHY THE DECISIONS TO STOP THE STUDIES WERE NOT
REVERSED following the Lancet's retractation.
-In October, we learn that the EU Commission gave a cool 1 billion to buy remdesivir. ONE
WEEK before the WHO study concluding on the ineffectiviness of remdesivir came out.
I'm sorry, but this is becoming a little too much. One coincidence OK, but here we are
talking about a string of improbable events, with NO ONE analyzing with a cool head what
happened or reversing decisions that were taken based on obvious frauds.
Three weeks ago, our president solemnly declared that our OR would be saturated in
mid-November with 9000 people under respiratory assistance, no matter what we do. Well here
were are, and the tally is 4.800. Not a good situation, but still only half ; and with nobody
pointing out that every winter, our OR are saturated anyway due to the flu and the
influenza.
I think we should all grow up and do a more level-headed analysis of the pros and cons.
The most ridiculous thing perhaps is to see all those politicos sanctimoniously declare the
sanctity of life ; in a world where you can abort babies at your convenience, practices
eugenics, and where euthanasy is aggressively pushed into the mainstream, this is perhaps the
most hypocritical bullshit I have ever heard.
@Posted by: Avid Lurker | Nov 17 2020 13:53 utc | 117
Meh...Fauci is a political creature who has talked on both sides of his mouth on many
$ubject$, and goes with the (money)flow as long as he can get away with it without reducing
his credibility too much.
I wonder if Fauci is *still* singing the praises of Gilead's remdesivir, that $3K per
treatment apparent snake oil, according to critics:
Dr. Eric Topol, vice president for research at Scripps Research sez:
Most likely a game changer:
Portugiese court rule against PCR-test
Sorry, guys, this is a link to one of the best real-left Corona blogs, but in German
language. In Portugal a court decided that a PCR-test cannot be accepted as a proof of a
viral infection. Now think about its consequences!
Almost 500 medics and academics have penned a letter to U.K. prime minister Boris Johnson -
just hours after the U.S. election has been "decided" - informing him that official Covid data
is being "exaggerated" and that talk of a second wave of Covid is "misleading".
The letter was critical of the government's handling of the virus and said that the response
to the pandemic has been "disproportionate" relative to the risk, according to the
Daily Mail .
The group claims that mass testing has "distorted the risk of the virus" , that the high
numbers of tests are likely to be producing false positives, and that the infection and death
rates need to be put into the context of normal seasonal rates.
The group of scientists, medics and academics have also claimed that the U.K.'s second wave
"has already peaked":
Professor Tim Spector, who leads the Covid Symptom Study app aiming to track the spread of
Covid-19 in the UK, confirmed that there were 'positive signs' the country has 'passed the
peak of the second wave'.
The letter is titled "First Do No Harm". It comes one day after the U.K. confirmed 24,957
positive tests, up 13.9% from the week prior's total. Immunologist Dr. Charlotte R Bell,
pediatrician Dr. Rosamond Jones, and Keith Willison, Professor of Chemical Biology at Imperial
College are among those who signed the letter.
"The management of the crisis has become disproportionate and is now causing more harm than
good," it says. "We urge policy-makers to remember that this pandemic, like all pandemics, will
eventually pass but the social and psychological damage that it is causing risks becoming
permanent."
"After the initial justifiable response to Covid-19, the evidence base now shows a different
picture," it continues.
"The problem of functional false positive rates has still not been addressed and
particularly in the context of low prevalence of disease whereby false positives are likely to
exceed true positives substantially and moreover correlate poorly with the person being
infectious. Alongside this we have the issue that it is normal to see an increase in illness
and deaths during the winter months," the letter continues.
Then, the group points out that the "second wave" may not be any different from a normal
U.K. November: "It is notable that [the] UK death rate is currently sitting around average for
this time of year. The use of the term 'second wave' is therefore misleading . We have the
knowledge to enable a policy that protects the elderly and vulnerable without increasing all
other health and economic harms and which is not at the expense our whole way of life and
particularly that of the nation's children."
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
"The R rate of the coronavirus dropped in five regions of England this week - except London
and the South East, where it did not change - and stayed stable at between 1.1 and 1.3 in
England and the UK as a whole. Last week marked a drop from 1.2 to 1.4 the week before," the
Daily Mail concluded.
The letter was organized by a group called UsForThem, which opposes strong coronavirus
restrictions.
It won't make any difference. They KNOW it is inconsistent with facts and makes no sense,
which is precisely why they are doing it. It's part of the intended psychological grooming
exercise. And it's simply what they are being instructed to do by the Puppet Masters. This
David Icke video explains the process:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Brazilian City Ravaged
by Coronavirus
Reached Herd Immunity
in Just Months, Study Finds
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>Blood donations suggest that up to half of Manaus was infected at the epidemic's
peak
>coronavirus...swept through with little to no measures in place to stop
infection
>No lockdown was implemented and no major steps were taken to limit the spread of the
virus.
Manaus Brazil
>Population 2,182,763
Ravaged By Corona-virus?
>4.5 times as many deaths as expected for that time of year!
Wow! Ok, how many people died?
""The researchers estimate close to 4,000 people died from COVID-19 in Manaus"
WTH? Are you kidding me!
4.5X = 4,000
x = 888
4,000 – 888 = 3,112
So an extra 3,112 people, OUT OF 2,182,763, died AND YOU CALL THAT "RAVAGED"?
HALF of the population infected and 99.86% of population survived....THAT'S RAVAGED!?
Let me guess, half of the dead were at the end of their lives health wise, 70% were over 65
and the medical care for everyone in the people's Socialist Utopia of Manaus is chit?
Note the source is freaking Newsweek...do they realize what they're printing. And Science
News is big on "Climate Change" killing us all.
Even the UK MSM has started to realise it's a politicalized issue now, they've screwed up
the economy so much that if they unlock, everything will collapse, they have no choice but to
continue furlough (UBI) and faux lockdowns until the whole thing implodes, alternatively they
could admit it and take responsibility, but when do politicians do that...
kleptomistic , 38 minutes ago
Covid-19 in California
November 8, 2020
24 people died from Covid-19
7 of them lived in a care facility.
74% of California deaths are over age 65
27% of deaths are in care facilities
Population of 36,560,000
...in other news
76 people died yesterday, in California, from "medical errors".
These politicians will just keep locking everything down until there's a vaccine and you
can't reason with them about it; it doesn't matter that lockdowns kill more people than the
virus and it doesn't matter how effective it is for people to build up active immunity. It
doesn't matter that masks cause serious health problems and weaken immunity despite being
evidently ineffective at slowing the spread of Covid and influenza.
The vaccine is coming and for many people it won't be voluntary. In America we have guns
and so the task of trying to forcibly inoculate everyone is a bit more daunting.
BStreetMan , 5 hours ago
It's an RNA virus. Forget vaccines.
Aloha_Snackbar , 4 hours ago
There's gonna be a vaccine regardless even if it's ineffective at providing passive
immunity. There's too much money involved for them not to create one for mass
distribution.
strych10 , 4 hours ago
It's not just money.
Politicians have a pathogical inability to admit they've ever been wrong. So much so that
they'll knowing lie on video and then contradict that lie, again on video, the very next day.
When asked about the contradiction they'll deny saying whichever thing is convenient to deny
in the moment.
They do it on the news literally every day.
Chain Man , 3 hours ago
The Globalist are out to destroy "Free Speech", not so hard for them to do on line but,
the street is another thing. Covid- 19 is just the tool they need. Pubs and restaurants where
locals come together has always been a area of cross communication. They want to keep people
from organizing.
I worry about them (Biden and Globalist) trying to use Covid-19 (low Death rate) as a Line
of acceptable conditions for a lock down in the name of safety of life. Then they will lock
us down for the flue if needed. It's all about keeping people from organizing (Free
Speech.)
The European Mortality Monitoring Project (EUROMOMO) has been monitoring excess mortality
in Europe since 2008 for the purpose of "detecting and measuring, on a real-time basis,
excess number of deaths related to influenza and other possible public health threats across
participating European Countries."
EUROMOMO's key metric is called the "z-score". Briefly, z-scores remove differences due to
seasons and populations so that they are directly comparable with different countries and
different time periods. More details on z-scores:
The user can adjust the period sliders to examine any length of time between 2015 and
2020. For example, to examine the UK's z-scores for 2020 simply adjust the sliders to the
range 2020-01 to end (currently 2020-42). The user will be able to see that while there was a
problem with excess mortality for the period from 2020-12 to 2020-22 there has been no real
problem since. Also, the user will notice that a significant number of countries (e.g.
Austria, Denmark, Germany [partial, Hesse & Berlin only], Greece, Hungary, Norway) never
had any excess mortality problem.
"Far from settling into a 'new normal', we should expect a Covid19 domino effect,
triggering further disruptions – positive as well as negative – over the decade
ahead. "
There's a clue to the mass psychology of the Covid Death Cult. The rhetoric is very
familiar from forecasts of rising climate chaos, but with "Covid19" substituted for
"climate".
In spite of all the rhetoric about a "green economy" and a "Green New Deal", deep down
everyone except the most idiotic right-believers in the climate-industrial movement know that
the climate crisis cannot be solved within the framework of the economic civilization.
Since no one wants to face the implications of this, the global technocratic elites waging
the terror-lockdown assault which uses Covid as a pretext had the idea to include among their
propaganda a substitution of "Covid", which everyone (wrongly) believes can be controlled and
suppressed by system institutions (just as they wrongly believe it needs special control),
for the uncontrollable Earth.
In that way they hope to exorcise the demon of mass fear-itself over unsolvable resource
limits and uncontrollable ecological blowback and collapse by redirecting this
mass-psychological energy into belief in the Covid cult and enthusiastic faith in the
governments and globalist entities struggling to preserve their power. It's a call to throw
away all uncertainty, doubt, rational thought and immerse oneself in the terminal mass
know-nothingism.
Maskochism and hex spacing are designed to be constant day-to-day rituals reinforcing this
brain-dead obedience and propitiatory mindset.
... A recent survey by research firm Datassentials, for instance, found that 58% of those
surveyed described themselves as "uncomfortable" with dining indoors, and 36% described
themselves as "very uncomfortable." Not surprisingly, then, no matter how creative
restaurants get, traffic is still down sharply in most places, and 2.5 million restaurant
workers who lost their jobs in April remain unemployed. Similarly, gyms have been open in
most states for months now. But a recent survey of 5,000 gym-goers by RunRepeat found that
70% haven't returned and 43% said they had no plans to go back. Half a dozen gym chains have
filed for bankruptcy in recent months, including 24 Hour Fitness, the owner of New York
Sports Club, and Gold's Gym, with many of them permanently shuttering a majority of their
locations...
The point is that lifting stay-at-home orders and opening restaurants isn't enough: Until
consumers feel safe, they're going to stay away.
ptb @23
Thanks for responding. That's a good falsifiable hypothesis - I'll try and investigate the
data to see if it explains the fact that people are dying in the US at a significantly lower
rate than normal. If I can find the data, I'll report back.
When I look at the charts, I see an epidemic that's over, but I'm willing to be convinced
there is something else going on.
Thanks for looking that up, was curious about that actually.
The 5-10% dip below the baseline is certainly a tantalizing clue to something ... Maybe
the extreme precautions taken around hospitals and nursing homes simply mean the elderly are
getting other infectious diseases less often.
As for epidemic being over in the US, the serious-symptomatic hospitalization stats say
otherwise. I'd take the baseline mortality level as a sign that treatment has drastically
improved, combined with the 70+ age group now being much more isolated and thus protected, if
often miserable.
I.e. mask use is common enough in urban areas that it is working for those at risk of
dying who take it super seriously, but not enough to stop the infections for everyone
else.
Traffic fatalities down 2% despite miles travelled being down by 16%. So a 2% reduction in
traffic deaths, which itself is only 2% of deaths from all causes.
There must be something else driving the total mortality down lower than normal.
A statistical projection of traffic fatalities for the first half of 2020 shows that an
estimated 16,650 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes. This represents a decrease
of 2 percent as compared to the 16,988 fatalities reported to have occurred in the first
half of 2019
Preliminary data reported by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) shows that vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) in the first 6 months of 2020 decreased by about 264.2 billion miles,
or about a 16.6-percent decrease.
While we have previously reported
- and by now it is common knowledge - that Covid-19 usually kills only the very old with
virtually no deaths in the 45 and under category and most deaths in the 75 and over
category.
Indeed, as Deutsche Bank's Jim Reid noted when discussing the average age of fatalities from
Covid, "it is remarkably consistent around the 80-82 year old mark."
Then overnight, Bloomberg's John Authers pointed out how startling this mortality rate
varies from country to country, when referencing another chart from Jim Reid:
As Authers writes, "The U.S. is a remarkable outlier. How can that possibly be?"
According to Reid, a small part of this might be down to many of the other countries having
an older population. For example, Italy's median age is 45 (43 in Europe), whereas it is 38 for
the US.
However, another explanation offered by the Bloomberg commentator, which feeds into the
political debate of the moment, "is that all the other developed countries on this chart have
some form of universal state-provided healthcare." But rather than get embroiled in that
debate, Authers instead looks at the normal average age of people when they die. The following
is a chart of life expectancy (in years) at birth for all the members of the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development:
As shown in the chart above, the U.S. - which as we discussed last week is turning
into a banana republic with just a 50% share of the population in middle-income households,
roughly the same category as Turkey, China and, drumroll, Russia - has lower life expectancy
than the Czech Republic or Chile, and is lagged only by countries that are significantly
poorer. It trails the other major economies by several years, in many cases roughly equal to
the gap in the age at which Covid-19 victims die.
According to Authers, instead of focusing on Covid, "it might make sense for the U.S.
healthcare debate to revolve around treating this as a national disgrace and trying to make
common cause over fixing it, rather than having an arid political argument, but I digress."
Which brings us to the topic at hand, namely does America have a covid problem, or is it
just an extension of America's far more serious problem of obesity. To wit, tne of its greatest
life-shortening effects is diabetes. Here are the most recent OECD numbers on diabetes
prevalence:
As Authers observes, "the U.S. lags behind only the much poorer nations of Turkey and Mexico
in this dismal category, and has more than double the diabetes prevalence of the main developed
economies of Europe", and summarizes:
Once the country has finished tearing itself apart over the pandemic, which will probably
only happen once the virus has finally gone away, a new debate over diabetes and obesity will
be necessary. Let's hope it can be more constructive than the current one.
The numbers also shed light on why the US has had a relatively difficult time containing the
pandemic according to the Bloomberg author, and also suggests that a "Swedish" model of
"focused protection" for those most vulnerable could be harder to apply to the US, because a
far higher proportion of obese Americans are at risk. In other words,"allowing most of the
population to return to life as normal is going to require confining a lot of people to their
homes for the duration -- judging by the diabetes numbers, maybe twice as many as in Sweden, as
a proportion of the population. As Authers puts it " that isn't feasible. "
Of course, concerns about the obesity epidemic - and not just in the U.S. - are nothing new,
and we have covered them for much of the past
decade . Additionally, the attempt by investors to profit from obesity is also not new.
Back in 2012, Bank of America published a report on "Globesity" which it described as one of
three global mega-trends. As Authers reminds us, "it offered a list of 50 stocks that it
thought would benefit from a global fight on obesity, including some counterintuitive names
such as Pepsico Inc. and Nestle SA, both of which it thought were better positioned to move
toward less fattening products -- but which produce plenty of products, such as sugary drinks,
that contribute to obesity."
One year earlier, Solactive started an obesity index of smaller companies working in drugs
and diagnostics connected to the issue -- primarily diabetes. Soon after, Janus Henderson
launched an exchange-traded fund to track it, with the appropriate ticker symbol "SLIM." Then,
in January of this year, the announcement was made that the ETF would be liquidated, an event
that finally took place on March 12. As Authers writes, "that represented a missed opportunity"
because this is how the obesity index has performed relative to the S&P 500 since
inception
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
And here a remarkable statistic: the SLIMmers have done even better than the FANGs since the
market bottom, meaning that bets on America getting fatter are even more profitable than
betting on the giga-caps.
That said, as Authers notes judging by the valuations of the obesity index at present, the
short-term opportunity may have passed. It trades at an insane P/E ratio of 94.66x, (which
"drops" to 30.4 if one excludes the non-profitable companies). For the longer term, however,
the lesson according to Authers that all countries should learn from the dreadful experience of
the U.S. over the last eight months is that any given health emergency grows that much worse if
you are overweight.
In summary, " it's too late to help in the battle against Covid-19, and it's too late to
profit from the smallest companies working in the fight against diabetes, but the world will
have to combat obesity. In due course, capital will flow toward financing that fight. "
One of the hallmarks of totalitarianism is mass conformity to a psychotic official
narrative. Not a regular official narrative, like the "Cold War" or the "War on Terror"
narratives. A totally delusional official narrative that has little or no connection to reality
and that is contradicted by a preponderance of facts.
Nazism and Stalinism are the classic examples, but the phenomenon is better observed in
cults and other sub-cultural societal groups. Numerous examples will spring to mind: the Manson
family, Jim Jones' People's Temple, the Church of Scientology, Heavens Gate, etc., each with
its own psychotic official narrative: Helter Skelter, Christian Communism, Xenu and the
Galactic Confederacy, and so on.
Looking in from the dominant culture (or back through time in the case of the Nazis), the
delusional nature of these official narratives is glaringly obvious to most rational people.
What many people fail to understand is that to those who fall prey to them (whether individual
cult members or entire totalitarian societies) such narratives do not register as psychotic. On
the contrary, they feel entirely normal. Everything in their social "reality" reifies and
reaffirms the narrative, and anything that challenges or contradicts it is perceived as an
existential threat.
These narratives are invariably paranoid, portraying the cult as threatened or persecuted by
an evil enemy or antagonistic force which only unquestioning conformity to the cult's ideology
can save its members from. It makes little difference whether this antagonist is mainstream
culture, body thetans, counter-revolutionaries, Jews, or a virus. The point is not the identity
of the enemy. The point is the atmosphere of paranoia and hysteria the official narrative
generates, which keeps the cult members (or the society) compliant.
In addition to being paranoid, these narratives are often internally inconsistent,
illogical, and well, just completely ridiculous. This does not weaken them, as one might
suspect. Actually, it increases their power, as it forces their adherents to attempt to
reconcile their inconsistency and irrationality, and in many cases utter absurdity, in order to
remain in good standing with the cult. Such reconciliation is of course impossible, and causes
the cult members' minds to short circuit and abandon any semblance of critical thinking, which
is precisely what the cult leader wants.
Moreover, cult leaders will often radically change these narratives for no apparent reason,
forcing their cult members to abruptly forswear (and often even denounce as "heresy") the
beliefs they had previously been forced to profess, and behave as if they had never believed
them, which causes their minds to further short circuit, until they eventually give up even
trying to think rationally, and just mindlessly parrot whatever nonsensical gibberish the cult
leader fills their heads with.
Also, the cult leader's nonsensical gibberish is not as nonsensical as it may seem at first.
Most of us, upon encountering such gibberish, assume that the cult leader is trying to
communicate, and that something is very wrong with his brain. The cult leader isn't trying to
communicate. He is trying to disorient and control the listener's mind. Listen to Charlie Manson "rapping." Not
just to what he says, but how he says it . Note how he sprinkles bits of truth into his
stream of free-associated nonsense, and his repetitive use of thought-terminating
clichés, described by Robert J. Lifton as follows:
"The language of the totalist environment is characterized by the thought-terminating
cliché. The most far-reaching and complex of human problems are compressed into brief,
highly selective, definitive-sounding phrases, easily memorized and easily expressed. They
become the start and finish of any ideological analysis." -- Thought Reform and the
Psychology of Totalism: : A Study of "Brainwashing" in China , 1961
If all this sounds familiar, good. Because the same techniques that most cult leaders use to
control the minds of the members of their cults are used by totalitarian systems to control the
minds of entire societies: Milieu Control, Loaded Language, Sacred Science, Demand for Purity,
and other standard mind-control techniques. It can happen to pretty much any society, just as
anyone can fall prey to a cult, given the right set of circumstances.
It is happening to most of our societies right now. An official narrative is being
implemented. A totalitarian official narrative. A totally psychotic official narrative, no less
delusional than that of the Nazis, or the Manson family, or any other cult.
Most people cannot see that it is happening, for the simple reason that it is happening to
them. They are literally unable to recognize it. The human mind is extremely resilient and
inventive when it is pushed past its limits. Ask anyone who has struggled with psychosis or has
taken too much LSD. We do not recognize when we are going insane. When reality falls apart
completely, the mind will create a delusional narrative, which appears just as "real" as our
normal reality, because even a delusion is better than the stark raving terror of utter
chaos.
This is what totalitarians and cult leaders count on, and exploit to implant their
narratives in our minds, and why actual initiation rituals (as opposed to purely symbolic
rituals) begin by attacking the subject's mind with terror, pain, physical exhaustion,
psychedelic drugs, or some other means of obliterating the subject's perception of reality.
Once that is achieved, and the subject's mind starts desperately trying to construct a new
narrative to make sense out of the cognitive chaos and psychological trauma it is undergoing,
it is relatively easy to "guide" that process and implant whatever narrative you want, assuming
you have done your homework.
And this is why so many people -- people who are able to easily recognize totalitarianism in
cults and foreign countries -- cannot perceive the totalitarianism that is taking shape now,
right in front of their faces (or, rather, right inside their minds). Nor can they perceive the
delusional nature of the official "Covid-19" narrative, no more than those in Nazi Germany were
able to perceive how completely delusional their official "master race" narrative was. Such
people are neither ignorant nor stupid. They have been successfully initiated into a cult,
which is essentially what totalitarianism is, albeit on a societal scale.
Their initiation into the Covidian Cult began in January, when the medical authorities and
corporate media turned on The Fear with
projections of hundreds of millions of deaths and
fake photos of people dropping dead in the streets . The psychological conditioning has
continued for months. The global masses have been subjected to a constant stream of propaganda,
manufactured hysteria, wild speculation, conflicting directives, exaggerations, lies, and
tawdry theatrical effects. Lockdowns. Emergency field hospitals and morgues. The
singing-dancing NHS staff. Death trucks. Overflowing ICUs. Dead Covid babies. Manipulated
statistics. Goon squads. Masks. And all the rest of it.
Eight months later, here we are. The Head of the Health Emergencies Program at the WHO has
basically confirmed
an IFR of 0.14% , approximately the same as the seasonal flu. And here are the
latest survival rate estimates from the Center for Disease Control:
The "science" argument is officially over. An increasing number of doctors and medical
experts are breaking ranks and explaining how the current mass hysteria over "cases" (which now
includes perfectly healthy people) is essentially meaningless propaganda, for example,
in this segment on
ARD , one of the big mainstream German TV channels.
And then there is the existence of Sweden, and other countries which are not playing ball
with the official Covid-19 narrative, which makes a mockery of the ongoing hysteria.
I'm not going to go on debunking the narrative. The point is, the facts are all available.
Not from "conspiracy theorist" websites. From mainstream outlets and medical experts. From the
Center for Fucking Disease Control.
Which does not matter in the least, not to the members of the Covidian Cult. Facts do not
matter to totalitarians and cult members. What matters is loyalty to the cult or the party.
Which means we have a serious problem, those of us to whom facts still matter, and who have
been trying to use them to convince the Covidian cultists that they are wrong about the virus
for going on eight months at this point.
While it is crucial to continue reporting the facts and sharing them with as many people as
possible -- which is becoming increasingly difficult due to the censorship of alternative and
social media -- it is important to accept what we are up against. What we are up against is not
a misunderstanding or a rational argument over scientific facts. It is a fanatical ideological
movement. A global totalitarian movement the first of its kind in human history.
It isn't national totalitarianism, because we're living in a global capitalist empire, which
isn't ruled by nation-states, but rather, by supranational entities and the global capitalist
system itself. And thus, the cult/culture paradigm has been inverted. Instead of the cult
existing as an island within the dominant culture, the cult has become the dominant
culture , and those of us who have not joined the cult have become the isolated islands
within it.
I wish I could be more optimistic, and maybe offer some sort of plan of action, but the only
historical parallel I can think of is how Christianity "converted" the pagan world which
doesn't really bode so well for us. While you're sitting at home during the "second wave"
lockdowns, you might want to brush up on that history.
Maybe CJ deserves the benefit of the doubt as to whether this piece is intended to be a
satirical exposé of "regular official narrative[s], like the "Cold War" or the "War on
Terror" narratives" which normal people feel are "entirely normal. Everything in their social
"reality" reifies and reaffirms the narrative, and anything that challenges or contradicts it
is perceived as an existential threat."
I smell the coming of Covid Museums any-every-where to "bear witness" to the dangers of
pandemics so that "never again" can we allow another catastrophic Pandemic to happen. Glory
be to "safe and effective" Vaccines for ever and ever; Amen!
What a breath of fresh air is that German TV documentary linked to by CJ – a very
thorough and rational and honest and succinct summary of the Covid Pandemic.
C.J. Hopkins: " the only historical parallel I can think of is how Christianity
"converted" the pagan world which doesn't really bode so well for us."
Yes, that's it. The death cult known as Christianity enveloped the Western world long ago.
We've all been living in it all our lives, particularly Americans. Corpses come back to life?
Of course they do. That's what everyone thinks. LOL. Jesus made things appear out of thin
air? It must be true. And of course, it's necessary to die to attain eternal life. Jesus
himself said so, and it's so plainly true the point hardly needs to be emphasized.
But rather than attributing all of this to a totalitarian conspiracy, I attribute it to
human nature. The truth is, the vast majority of people are unreasoning conformist assholes
who enjoy inflicting their petty tyrannies on each other. The more nonsensical they are, the
greater their pleasure. As Sartre so aptly put it, "L'enfer c'est les autres" -- Hell is
other people. This death cult includes the innovation of mind control, which at the time was
unique to Christianity.
My current theory, admittedly speculative, is that the group mind of the West, as it
careens to an apocalypse of world-ending proportions, is still deeply in the thrall of the
Christian death cult. It wants to die, and is doing what it can to bring this about,
because only when the world dies can the crucified rabbi return. Owing to the culture
Christianity has spawned, even the so-called atheists have this expectation buried deep in
their subconscious.
Notice how our genius who is so smart he doesn't have to be a scientist to explain
scientific data to us in a condescending manner doesn't mention permanent internal organ
damage.
What the statistics on permanent internal organ damage, guy with initials instead of a
name?
What, can't find the data? How could that be? I thought you were an epidemiological
genius.
When the narrative is oversold people became cynical. That's the classic "Crying
Wolf!" situation, repeated again and again. Excessive deaths stats does not support "COVID-19
as a new Black Death" narrative and that provide some funny situations alike with this
shirt.
While infection was dangerous and some suspect that it was result of "gain of
function" experiments, the level of response was disproportional to the threat. It's like they
stages "Covid-revolution" -- a drastic social change in the society, which affects the way we
work, the way we communicate with each and the way we entertain each other in a very profound
fashion.
I've been wearing a hand painted [by me] , in large bright red letters:" COVID -19 IS A
SCAM" , black tee-shirt and matching hand-painted mask, on a more or less daily basis for the
last 8 weeks. [The mask I only wear when I have to enter a store with an idiotic "masks are
mandatory" policy.]
To date, much to my surprise, 38 people have stopped me and said " I agree" or similar,
and only 4 have said "you're wrong" or similar, [one large Australian male halfwit has been
the only person threatening me with violence to date – he got really mad- I just gave
him the finger and didn't argue- eventually he fucked off.
Of the agreers, perhaps the most notable was a cop who was driving by me on a main road as
I waited for a bus. He slowed to a stop and I thought "Oh-oh, what's he going to book me for,
no mask?", then he lowered his passenger side window [he wasn't wearing a mask, as required
locally], and said "I agree". I said "Huh?". He said "your shirt, I agree with the message".
I was shocked and happy at the same time.
My conclusion: there are many out there , [perhaps a majority?]who know that the whole
thing is a scam, they just don't let everyone know. It's the silent majority phenomena all
over again, perhaps.
I was in Baghdad
in 1998 during US airstrikes, watching missiles explode in great flashes of light as they hit their targets. There was
some ineffectual anti-aircraft fire , the only result of which was pieces of
shrapnel falling from the sky and making it dangerous to step outside the
building we were in.
To my surprise I saw a reporter, a friend of mine with long experience of war, crawling into
the open to use a satellite phone that would not work inside. When he returned, I said to him
that it must have been a very important phone call for him to take such a risk. He laughed
bitterly, explaining that the reason for his call was that his paper in the US had demanded
that he contact some distinguished "expert" in a think tank in Washington to ask him about the
air attacks.
Despite my friend being a highly informed eyewitness to the events he was describing, his
editors insisted that he access the supposed expertise of the think tanker thousands of miles
away. A more covert motive was probably to spread the blame if the reporter on the spot
expressed criticism of the airstrikes.
I recalled this story when watching Boris Johnson and his ministers interact with his
medical and scientific experts, Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick Vallance, sometimes deferential,
sometimes dismissive. Naivety and calculation are at work here. Politicians grappling with
crises,
be it a war or a pandemic , are frequently over-impressed by experts with the right bedside
manner and a command of the technical jargon. They are less good, and the same applies to the
media, in knowing if this apparent expertise has real practical value in averting some pressing
danger. Often it does not. A doctor or an academic specialist may know a lot about how the
virus operates inside the body, but have no idea and no experience of how to stop it spreading
from person to person in an epidemic. This is quite a different skill.
Politicians are feckless in choosing the right experts, in part because they may be out of
their depth in a crisis. There is nothing wrong with this, so long as they plug into the
expertise of somebody who really does know what to do and how to do it. Governments often pick
the wrong expert out of simple ignorance and because he or she is there primarily to beef up
the government's credibility and provide a scapegoat in case things go wrong.
This strategy worked well enough from the government's point of view during the first
lockdown in Britain, but it is now crashing in flames as the scientists refuse to provide
political cover for failed policies.
The manifesto of the mutiny is the Sage memo of 23 September, published this week, which
recommended a circuit-breaking lockdown to prevent "a very large epidemic with catastrophic
consequences". Rejection of this recommendation by the government understandably got all the
headlines, but towards the end of the memo there is an extraordinary admission that is surely
more important than the row about circuit-breaking measures and the different regional
lockdowns. Watch more
The justification for both is that they provide a pause button, which temporarily holds
back the epidemic until a vaccine is discovered – which may be a long time coming.
More immediately, closing down all or part of the country is supposed to win time so that
an effective Test, Trace and Isolate (TTI) system can be put in place to prevent a
resurgence of the virus.
Instead of relying on experienced public health experts with a successful record in
finding, containing and isolating people infected with HIV and TB, the government handed
the project over to the private sector, pouring great sums of money into the creation of a
new but, in Sage's judgement, dysfunctional system. Documents released by the Department of
Health and Social Care after a Freedom of Information Act request from Sky News, explains
why so much was spent for such small returns. No less than 1,114 consultants from Deloitte,
few of whom are likely to be public health experts, are now employed by the government to
organise Test, Trace and Isolate with each of them earning a daily fee of up to
£2,360. Other consultants, such as those working for the Boston Consulting Group, are
even more munificently rewarded, earning as much as £7,000 a day or £1.5m a
year.
The failure of NHS Test and Trace to cope with the second wave of the epidemic, as
predicted by Sage, is already with us with only 62.6 per cent of those testing positive for
coronavirus being contacted so that they can be told to isolate.Not that it would do much
good if the call centres reached more people according to a King's College London survey
showing that only 18 per cent of those infected are isolating.
The moment when Britain might have successfully contained the coronavirus has probably
passed. This would have been very difficult but not impossible, and it could only have been
carried out successfully by a government of real competence, energy and expertise. There
was no chance of this being done with Boris Johnson and his crew zig-zagging and blundering
so spectacularly that their antics would provide rich material for a Gilbert and Sullivan
comic opera, except that there is nothing funny about the unnecessary deaths of so many
people. Nor is there any sign that they have learned from their mistakes. As one German
statesman asked despairingly of a general during the First World War who wanted to press on
with some calamitous offensive: "Where does the incompetence end and the crime begin?"
PeteSW 1 day ago
It is not incompetence
The Tories and their chums are hoovering up billions of tax payers money
They give the illusion of being incompetent
But how much of the billions being squirrelled away has landed in YOUR pocket
It is the most brilliant of con tricks
The rich and powerful are more richer and powerful than ever before
This crisis has been the biggest cash cow in history
They are gobbling up tax payers money quicker than it can be printed
The last thing they want is for this to end
Reply 4 0 Larkspur 16 hours ago
They are certainly competent at selling the poor down the river, overwhelming hospitals
and funnelling large amounts of public money into their cronies&#x27; pockets. But
still 44 per cent of the public back Johnson.
Reply 0 0 DynSaesneg 2 days ago
Clearly the Thatcherite ideology of *public bad, private good* has prevailed over the
pragmatic reality that local public health teams know way more about this sort of thing -
after all, they*ve been doing it for almost two centuries - than do the likes of
Deloittes.
Reply 2 0 DynSaesneg 2 days ago
Clearly the Thatcherite ideology of *public bad, private good* has prevailed over the
pragmatic reality that local public health teams know way more about this sort of thing -
after all, they*ve been doing it for almost two centuries - than do the likes of
Deloittes.
Reply 1 1 DBlenkinsop 2 days ago
Incompetence is not a crime.
Be it in Government or Journalism.
Reply 0 1 Liarsbane 2 days ago
criminally negligent of you to say so
Reply 1 0 DBlenkinsop 2 days ago
Liarsbane .Negligence is not incompetence .One is not knowing the other not
doing
Reply 1 0 nonprobiker 3 days ago
Bunter is incapable of learning the lessons. Nothing will improve until he is out of the
way, and Gollum with him.
Reply 3 0 nonprobiker 3 days ago
Bunter is incapable of learning the lessons. Nothing will improve until he is out of the
way, and Gollum with him.
Reply 0 0 MichaelWME 3 days ago
Another good column. The English-speaking countries have two successes in the Antipodes,
and two much less successful responses. If only the US and UK had paid more attention to
the Antipodes.
Since March, the coronavirus has been treated as if it is a danger categorically different
from other dangers , including other viruses. But this treatment is deeply mistaken. The
coronavirus is not a categorically different danger. It occupies a location on the same
spectrum that features other viruses. Reasonable people can and do debate just where this
location is – that is, how much more dangerous is the coronavirus than are ordinary flu
viruses and other 'novel' viruses that plagued us in the past. But the coronavirus is well
within the same category as other viruses.
Yet humanity has reacted – and continues to react – to the coronavirus as if it
is a beast that differs from other health risks categorically. The hysterical overreaction by
the press, public-health officials, and politicians – an overreaction undoubtedly
supercharged by social media – has convinced many people that humanity is today being
stalked by a venomous monster wholly unlike anything to which we are accustomed.
Only by assuming that this virus differs fundamentally from other risks can governments
continue to get away with unprecedented and arbitrary restrictions on peaceful human activities
– restrictions on activities such as working at the factory or office, on dining out, on
attending religious services, on going to school, and even on seeking medical treatments for
non-Covid-related ailments. Only by being convinced that the coronavirus poses a threat
categorically unique are ordinary men and women led to change their ways of living and
interacting as fundamentally as many have done, and to tolerate the categorical change in
governments' responses to epidemics.
Quaking with fear that the angel of death lurks as never before in every stranger's breath,
on every person's fingertips, and around every corner, people today treat each other
categorically differently from how they treated each other until this past March. They leap
frantically away from approaching strangers on sidewalks. They "meet" their co-workers only
online. Neighbors no longer visit each other's homes, while those who still dare to chat
outside stand far apart, as if each is about to morph any moment from a Dr. Jekyll into a Mr.
Hyde. When they stage athletic events, the stands are filled not with human beings but with
eerie cardboard cutouts.
Other human beings are no longer treated as potential partners in productive social
cooperation, whether for work or pleasure. Now regarded as meaty and mobile vials of
unprecedented poison, other human beings are treated by so many of us in a way that differs
categorically from how we treated them for centuries up until just a few months ago. "Social
distancing" is undermining social cooperation – which means that it's undermining
civilization itself.
Is there any evidence to justify this categorical change in behavior?
My always wise friend and sometime co-author Lyle
Albaugh has from the start understood that Covid, while certainly no nothingburger, is not
remotely close to being the extraordinary monster that it has become in the popular mind . And
so he's having the following information printed on business-card-sized notices:
COVID-19 INFECTION SURVIVAL RATES (per CDC)
Ages 0-19: 99.997%
Ages 20-49: 99.98%
Ages 50-69: 99.5%
Ages 70+: 94.6%
Seasonal Flu Infection Survival Rate (for population as a whole): 99.90%
This single slice of information should be sufficient to put Covid-19 in proper perspective.
It makes plain that the risk that this disease poses to humanity as a whole does not differ
categorically from the risk of seasonal flu – or, for that matter, from any of the many
other perils that we humans routinely encounter. And because these figures show the estimated
chances of survival of those who are infected with Covid, even for persons 70 years of age or
older Covid obviously is not a categorically unique threat.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT
MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
And yet, again, humanity has reacted to Covid in a manner categorically unique. It's as if a
hornet rather than a honeybee found its way into our home, and so to protect ourselves from the
somewhat-more-threatening invader we commenced to frantically scour every room of our home with
a flamethrower.
But I despair that the information shared by Lyle – or even
the more extensive information shared by my courageous colleagues at AIER – will have
any noticeable impact. Very many people today seem almost eager to be misled about the danger
posed by Covid. Much of humanity today appears to perversely enjoy being duped into the
irrational fear that any one of us, regardless of age or health, is at the mercy of a brutal
beast categorically more lethal than is any other danger that we've ever confronted. I hope
that my despair proves misguided.
Locker up , 2 hours ago
Does anybody remember the original plan? "Flatten the curve" so not to overwhelm the care
facilities? This should be the only reason to take away people's regular routine and also to
"Protect the most vulnerable". Most of the extra lock down crap was to destroy Trump's great
economy so the Democratic Party would have one issue to vote for them. Shysters.
adr , 2 hours ago
There is no such thing as asymptomatic spread of a virus. A virus can not replicate by
itself, since it is just a strand of errant RNA. It requires a host cell to replicate.
If cells are not being actively infected, there can be no increase in viral load, so there
is a complete and total impossibility of becoming infectious.
If you aren't sick, you can't infect others.
Eric Post , 2 hours ago
Yes, you can. Look up Typhoid Mary and see. After her death her autopsy showed she was
full of Typhoid but it did not harm her in anyway, yet she was able to spread it.
zardov , 1 hour ago
Typhoid is a bacterial infection, not a virus.
Mtnrunnr , 2 hours ago
Lockdown made sense for 2 weeks in NYC. This crap we are doing now is insane.
househonky , 2 hours ago
Wrong. Thousands died in NYC because doctors destroyed people's lungs with ventilators. It
was murderous medical malpractice.
I Write Code , 1 hour ago
The original quite reasonable fear was that this was a weaponized or at least
gain-of-function experiment that might have mortality far beyond the strength of mortal men.
It turns out that, whatever the truth of its origin, in practice, by all the current
evidence, it's a nasty bugger but does not kill any unprecedented number of people.
This is quite an interesting experimental result, actually.
The problem is Fauci, who actually sponsored this hideously dangerous work, never
explained it that way to the public. Instead he repeatedly said, "WE HAVE NO IMMUNITY!", but
he's also a moron, hasn't read a biology book in forty years, and had no idea what he was
even talking about.
So now, it sure seems that it's a nasty bugger but no more, but Our Elite Scientific
Leaders cannot bring themselves to say it.
pearlsbeforepigs , 1 hour ago
The author is not comparing apples to apples. The ignorance is staggering, especially
coming from ZeroHedge commentors who are normally pretty smart but regarding covid-19 they
have let themselves be unscientifically influenced by politics. In actuality EVERYONE is
guessing when it comes to covid-19 because we simply don't know what percentage of people
have been infected. If we don't know that number then everything else that we postulate is
just guessing based pretty much on nothing. It has turned into a ridiculous political debate
instead of a health science discussion.
Aetherwizard , 2 hours ago
This article demonstrates a total lack of mathematical skills. Yes, the virus has been
kept in check for the most part and the death rate is presently falling. Everyone who has
worked on mitigation deserves credit for the success to date.
Here we are in year number two. Flu season is just starting and the rapid spread of
COVID-19 is ramping up. Last year, the virus started from just one person in China; this year
the virus will be starting from millions of people all around the planet. The virus is not
only being carried by humans, but it is literally spread all over the surface of the
globe.
Despite lockdowns and harsh measures, the virus still managed to infect over 38 million
people from a single case, and killed over 1 million. And now this article is making it sound
like the virus is benign and nothing to worry about.
COVID-19 is highly contagious. It spreads even when people do not show symptoms of having
the disease. We are going into the time of year when flu viruses easily spread; imagine how
much easier it is for COVID-19 to spread. Even if the death rate remains low, the numbers of
infected people will reach incredibly high numbers in the next six months. Nothing we can do
will stop this disease right now.
Hopefully, the medicines and equipment needed to treat people have been stocked up. But we
also need uninfected health care workers to apply the medicine. Even if there is not a single
lockdown anywhere, people will be getting sick in huge numbers and will not be able to pump
our gas, sell us groceries, transport goods to stores, harvest the crops, process our food,
and on and on. The magnitude of disease spread, deaths, and economic hardships will exceed
anything we saw last Spring.
And here we read Pollyanish articles telling the world that COVID-19 is a hoax and that
there is nothing to worry about. The ignorance is staggering.
dustinwind , 2 hours ago
In the words of government covid is a "tremendous opportunity" created by a "crisis that
shouldn't be wasted".
Zeusky Babarusky , 28 minutes ago
Seems as though Governor Chris Christie had a change of thinking relative to Covid-19. He
did not get the easy pass Donald Trump got, if Trump did indeed have the virus. Christie says
he did not take the proper precautions regarding the virus, and he paid a pretty big price
for it. Why is it that those who have not contracted Covid-19 and experienced a bad ordeal
with it, are the ones constantly parading out these articles downplaying the virus? My guess
is they are idiots. Here's a link. You can read about Christie's change of mind regarding
Covid-19.
"... COVID-19 spreads mainly among people who are in close contact (within about 6 feet) for a prolonged period. ..."
"... "Current data do not support long range aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, such as seen with measles or tuberculosis. Short-range inhalation of aerosols is a possibility for COVID-19, as with many respiratory pathogens. However, this cannot easily be distinguished from 'droplet' transmission based on epidemiologic patterns. Short-range transmission is a possibility particularly in crowded medical wards and inadequately ventilated spaces ." ..."
"... Kimberly A. Prather, PhD, Distinguished Chair in Atmospheric Chemistry, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego. ..."
"... Linsey C Marr, PhD, Charles P. Lunsford Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Virginia Tech. ..."
"... Donald K Milton, MD, DrPH, Professor of Environment Health at The University of Maryland School of Public Health. ..."
Right now, the CDC website does not acknowledge that aerosols typically spread SARS-CoV-2
beyond 6 feet, instead
saying :
" COVID-19 spreads mainly among people who are in close contact (within about 6 feet)
for a prolonged period. Spread happens when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks,
and droplets from their mouth or nose are launched into the air and land in the mouths or
noses of people nearby. The droplets can also be inhaled into the lungs."
The site says that respiratory droplets can land on various surfaces, and people can become
infected from
touching those surfaces and then touching their eyes, nose or mouth. It goes on to say,
"Current data do not support long range aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, such as
seen with measles or tuberculosis. Short-range inhalation of aerosols is a possibility for
COVID-19, as with many respiratory pathogens. However, this cannot easily be distinguished
from 'droplet' transmission based on epidemiologic patterns. Short-range transmission is a
possibility particularly in crowded medical wards and inadequately ventilated
spaces ."
Confusion has surrounded the use of words like "aerosols" and "droplets" because they have
not been consistently defined. And the word "airborne" takes on special meaning for infectious
disease experts and public health officials because of the question of whether infection can be
readily spread by "airborne transmission." If SARS-CoV-2 is readily spread by airborne
transmission, then more stringent infection control measures would need to be adopted, as is
done with airborne diseases such as measles and tuberculosis. But the CDC has told CBS News
chief medical correspondent Dr. Jonathan LaPook that even if airborne spread is playing a role
with SARS-CoV-2, the role does not appear to be nearly as important as with airborne infections
like measles and tuberculosis.
All this may sound like wonky scientific discussion that is deep in the weeds -- and it is
-- but it has big implications as people try to figure out how to stay safe during the
pandemic. Some pieces of advice are intuitively obvious: wear a mask, wash your hands, avoid
crowds, keep your distance from others, outdoors is safer than indoors. But what about that "6
foot" rule for maintaining social distance? If the virus can travel indoors for distances
greater than 6 feet, isn't it logical to wear a mask
indoors whenever you are with people who are not part of your "pod" or "bubble?"
Understanding the basic science behind how SARS-CoV-2 travels through the air should help
give us strategies for staying safe. Unfortunately, there are still many open questions. For
example, even if aerosols produced by an infected person can float across a room, and even if
the aerosols contain some viable virus, how do we know how significant a role that possible
mode of transmission is playing in the pandemic?
Aerosols can be thought of as cigarette smoke. While they are most concentrated close to
someone who has the infection, they can travel farther than 6 feet, linger, build up in the air
and remain infectious for hours. As a consequence, to lessen the chance of inhaling this virus,
it is vital to take all of the following steps:
Indoors:
Practice physical distancing -- the farther the better.
Wear a face mask when you are with others, even when you can maintain physical
distancing. Face masks not only lessen the amount of virus coming from people who have the
infection, but also lessen the chance of you inhaling the virus.
Improve ventilation by opening windows. Learn how to clean the air effectively with
methods such as filtration.
Outdoors:
Wear a face mask if you cannot physically distance by at least 6 feet or, ideally,
more.
Whenever possible, move group activities outside.
Whether you are indoors or outdoors, remember that your risk increases with the duration of
your exposure to others.
With the question of transmission, it's not just the public that has been confused. There's
also been confusion among scientists, medical professionals and public health officials, in
part because they have often used the words "droplets" and "aerosols" differently. To address
the confusion, participants in an August workshop on airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 at the
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine suggested these definitions for
respiratory droplets and aerosols::
Droplets are larger than 100 microns and fall to the ground within 6 feet,
traveling like tiny cannonballs.
Aerosols are smaller than 100 microns, are highly concentrated close to a
person, can travel farther than 6 feet and can linger and build up in the air, especially
in rooms with poor ventilation.
All respiratory activities, including breathing, talking and singing, produce far more
aerosols than droplets. A person is far more likely to inhale aerosols than to be sprayed by a
droplet, even at short range. The exact percentage of transmission by droplets versus aerosols
is still to be determined. But we know from epidemiologic and other data, especially superspreading
events , that infection does occur through inhalation of aerosols.
In short, how are we getting infected by SARS-CoV-2? The answer is: In the air. Once we
acknowledge this, we can use tools we already have to help end this pandemic.
Kimberly A. Prather, PhD, Distinguished Chair in Atmospheric Chemistry, Scripps
Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego.
Linsey C Marr, PhD, Charles P. Lunsford Professor of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Virginia Tech.
Donald K Milton, MD, DrPH, Professor of Environment Health at The University of Maryland
School of Public Health.
Coronavirus can survive on certain surfaces, including banknotes and mobile phone screens,
for nearly a month in cooler climates, new research by Australian scientists suggests.
Covid-19 is able to survive in the open for a significantly longer length of time than was
previously thought, according to a study by the Australian Commonwealth Scientific and
Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) published by the
Virology Journal.
"Establishing how long the virus really remains viable on surfaces enables us to more
accurately predict and mitigate its spread, and do a better job of protecting our people,"
said CSIRO's chief executive, Dr. Larry Marshall.
According to the research, the virus has proven to be "extremely stable" and able to
thrive on smooth, non-porous surfaces, including paper and plastic banknotes, glass, and steel.
Kept at around room temperature – 20C (68F) – Covid-19 stayed alive for a whopping
28 days, which is some 10 days longer than the survival time of the regular flu virus. It
should be noted that the experiment was carried out in the dark, as UV light is very effective
in killing the coronavirus.
Higher temperatures are significantly less comfortable for the virus. At 40C (104F), it was
able to survive for less than 24 hours. At 30C (86F) Covid-19 demonstrated quite mixed results,
staying alive for some seven days on stainless steel, plastic notes and glass, but only three
days on vinyl and cotton cloth. On paper cash, the contagious virus was still detected after 21
days under those conditions.
By Malcolm Kendrick , doctor and author who works as a GP in the National Health Service
in England. His blog can be read here and his book, 'Doctoring Data – How to Sort Out
Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense,' is available here . Yes, coronavirus is a serious infection for
the elderly and vulnerable. But, for just about everyone else, it's a relatively mild condition
with a very low fatality rate. The only thing to fear is our overreaction to it.
In this piece, I intend to establish a reasonably accurate estimate for the risk of dying of
Covid-19 for the average healthy person under the age of sixty-five.
If we go back to the start of the pandemic, most of the world locked down based on a
prediction that the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) of Covid-19 would be in the region of one per
cent.
In the UK, the pandemic modellers at Imperial College London, the group with the greatest
influence on Government policy,
estimated the IFR at 0.9 percent. In short, they predicted that approximately one in a
hundred people infected with the Sars-Cov2 virus would die.
Has this estimate proven accurate? If so, within a world population of between seven and
eight billion, we would expect to suffer up to 76 million deaths. So far, there have been just
over one million .
Having said this, no-one predicted that everyone could become infected. The Imperial College
model suggested that about 80 percent of people would need to be infected before we reached
'herd immunity.' I prefer to call it community-wide immunity. We are not cattle.
Which means that we were not going to reach that figure of 76 million. Under this 80 percent
model, we might expect to reach 61 million deaths (7.5bn x 0.8 x 0.1). Even with this reduced
number, we are a long way short. How long might it take to get to 61 million?
At present, worldwide deaths are running at around 5,000 per day. At this rate, it would
take 33 years to reach sixty million deaths. I am not certain what the time limitation is
before a pandemic could be considered to have ended. I would imagine that 33 years might be
stretching things a little far.
Perhaps a more important point to consider is this. Do we know how many people have been
infected up to this point? If so, we can make a better guess at the likely IFR, and your risk
of dying.
Dr Mike Ryan, the executive director of the World Health Organization's health emergencies
programme, recently stated the WHO has estimated that 750 million people have been
infected worldwide .
If this is the case, calculating the current, rather than the estimated, IFR is pretty
straightforward. You simply divide the one million deaths [1,034,068, to be fully accurate], by
750m.
So, an IFR of 0.138 percent. Which is significantly lower than the initially predicted one
per cent. Or, to turn this figure around, according to the WHO figures, if you become infected
with Covid-19, there is a one-in-750 chance you will die.
Of course, figures will vary from country to country. In Kenya, for example, the most recent
attempt to estimate the IFR showed an exceptionally low rate. A study was done where antibodies
for Sars-Cov2 were taken between April and June 2020. It was found that seroprevalence, the
number of people showing antibodies, was 5.2 percent. (This will be an underestimate of true
infection numbers, as many people do not create antibodies).
This represents an 'infected' population of just under three million (2,796,107), and there
had been 71 deaths. Which provides an Infection Fatality Ratio of 0.00254 percent. This
extremely low rate is, currently, unexplained .
On the other hand, the country with the highest overall death
rate based on mortality per million is Peru. The total population of Peru is 32 million,
and there have been just over 32,000 deaths. Which is a population fatality rate of almost
exactly 0.1 percent. How many people have been infected in Peru in total? Uncertain. However,
their IFR is going to end up in excess of 0.1 percent. Not everybody has yet been
infected.
Why is there so much variation? This is currently unknown. Some people think that the
indigenous population in Peru is at much higher risk than the surrounding 'European'
population, due to genetic factors. However, let's leave aside country-to-country and genetic
variability for now. Overall, if you get infected, it looks as though the chance of dying
currently stands at one in seventy hundred and fifty.
However, there is another enormously important factor at play here. Which is that, in almost
all countries, Covid-19 is far more serious and deadly in the elderly population. Therefore,
the average IFR doesn't tell you much about your real risk. You need to factor in age.
For example, across most of Western Europe, if we look at excess mortality rates since the
start of the epidemic, there have been just over two thousand more deaths than normal in those
under the age of 45. These figures come from EuroMOMO, which gathers data from 24 European
countries, with a combined population of 240 million (The UK is treated as four separate
countries).
EuroMOMO describes its mission thus: 'The overall
objective of the original European Mortality Monitoring Project was to design a routine public
health mortality monitoring system aimed at detecting and measuring, on a real-time basis,
excess number of deaths related to influenza and other possible public health threats across
participating European Countries.'
In those aged over 45, there have been more than 200,000 excess deaths. The figures from
EuroMOMO in more detail are:
1-14 years = -15 deaths (minus 15)
15-44 years = 2,075
45 – 64 years = 17,826
65 – 74 years = 25,674
75 – 84 years = 65,982
85 + years = 98.069
So in all, for people aged 65-plus, there were 190,857 excess deaths.
Below is the EuroMOMO graph of all deaths across Europe on a week-by-week basis in 2020. As
you can see there is a big rise in excess deaths, that started in late March and was finished
by the middle of May. There was a further small blip in early September, which has now
gone.
Essentially, if you are under 45 the risk of death (so far) has been 0.00158 percent or
about one in 70,000. Over the age of 65 it is 0.17 percent. What is it for those with no
significant underlying medical conditions? Much lower.
Leaving that issue aside, for those in the lower age range, even in those up to 65, the risk
of death remains extremely low. The following statement comes from a paper written by three Stanford
University doctors, entitled 'Population-level COVID-19 mortality risk for non-elderly
individuals overall and for non-elderly individuals without underlying diseases in pandemic
epicenters':
"People <65 years old have very small risks of COVID-19 death even in pandemic
epicenters and deaths for people <65 years without underlying predisposing conditions are
remarkably uncommon."
As this paper went on to say, looking at Europe, and various US States:
"The COVID-19 mortality rate in people <65 years old during the period of fatalities
from the epidemic was equivalent to the mortality rate from driving between 4 and 82 miles per
day for 13 countries and 5 states."
To put this another way, for healthy individuals under the age of 65, even during the peak
weeks of the pandemic, a forty-mile commute was more likely to kill you than Covid-19 in most
European countries and several US States.
Yes, for the elderly and vulnerable, Covid-19 is a serious infection, with an Infection
Fatality Ratio significantly higher than most influenza epidemics. With the possible exceptions
of 1957 and 1968, and leaving aside the flu pandemic of 1918-19
– which dwarfs everything else.
However, for the rest of the population, Covid-19 has proven to be a relatively mild
condition with a very low fatality rate.
Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
A new paper by
researchers at Edinburgh University suggests that lockdowns do not help to reduce the death
toll from Covid-19, but may simply postpone those deaths. It's another piece of evidence that
suggests that a different strategy to combat the pandemic - one that doesn't impose blanket
restrictions across society - is needed.
The research was done by a team from Edinburgh's School of Physics and Astronomy. If that
sounds odd, Professor Graeme Ackland, one of the authors, has a good explanation. He told me:
"From March, every serious epidemiologist has been seconded to SPI-M (the Scientific
Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling) and SAGE (the main Scientific Advisory Group for
Emergencies), producing new research on a timescale of days. There simply aren't enough of them
to also do replication or even careful peer review. But there were thousands of people who
could do data-cleaning, code checking, validation and replication."
Ackland and his colleagues were, he says, "tasked by SPI-M and SAGE with exploring any
'reservations'. SPI-M understood very well the problem of groupthink in a closed community, and
asked us to 'kick the tyres' on everything. Another thing real epidemiologists would do
themselves given enough time."
Their paper is not really a criticism of the original modelling done before lockdown. In
fact, it uses the model used by Imperial College to assess a wider range of scenarios than was
done at the time. "My overall opinion" , says Ackland, "is that the government's
experts have reliably produced better predictions than the 'newspaper experts'."
One sentence in the new paper is particularly striking in regards to the original Imperial
College work: "Contrary to popular perception, the lockdown, which was then implemented, was
not specifically modelled in this work." Given that lockdown carried on for months, and
schools remained shut until the autumn, the failure to go back to see what the model says about
the effects of lockdown is remarkable.
The aim of the paper is to "replicate and analyse the information available to UK
policymakers when the lockdown decision was taken in March 2020" . The paper concludes that
the original model would have provided a good forecast if based on a reproduction number for
the virus of 3.5. (The
Imperial report on 16 March was based on the 'R' being between 2.2 and 2.4.) The
counter-intuitive outcome of the model is that it suggests that "school closures and
isolation of younger people would increase the total number of deaths, albeit postponed to a
second and subsequent waves" .
The model suggests that prompt interventions were effective in reducing peak demand for
intensive care beds, but would also prolong the epidemic. In some scenarios, this could lead to
more deaths in the long term. Why? Because, as the paper notes, "Covid-19 related
mortality is highly skewed towards older age groups. In the absence of an effective vaccination
programme, none of the proposed mitigation strategies in the UK would reduce the predicted
total number of deaths below 200,000."
It's wise to be cautious about any particular numbers. When researchers applied a
similar model to Sweden, for example, the numbers were far in excess of the real outcomes.
Nonetheless, the thing that really caused alarm back in March wasn't the much-quoted half a
million deaths from a 'do nothing' policy. It was the Imperial team's assertion that the 'most
effective mitigation strategy' they examined - case isolation, household quarantine and social
distancing of the elderly - would lead to around 250,000 deaths.
This was the reason, we were told, that nothing short of lockdown would do. If the
government had asked Ferguson to model lockdown, and the result was 200,000 deaths - in other
words, in the same ballpark - would we have gone into lockdown, given the damage it has
done?
Specifically, for Covid-19, closing schools and universities was a serious mistake, it would
seem (contrary to comments
in April by Professor Neil Ferguson, who led the original modelling). Keeping them open
would have meant lots of younger people getting the virus, with relatively little harm, but
would have speeded up the process of achieving 'herd' immunity.
In conclusion, the authors write: "The optimal strategy for saving lives in a Covid-19
epidemic is different from that anticipated for an influenza epidemic with a different
mortality age profile." At the very least, says Ackland, schools could have remained open
while doing everything possible to protect the most vulnerable groups. The absolute priority
was to keep the disease out of hospitals and care homes.
Unsurprisingly, this is exactly the message coming from SAGE before the Imperial College
modelling results were published on 16 March. For example, Professor Graham Medley - the chair
of SPI-M and a member of SAGE, told BBCNewsnight on 13 March: "This virus is
going to be with us for a long time, we're going to have an epidemic and then it will become
endemic and join in with all the other coronaviruses that we all have all the time, but don't
notice. We're going to have to generate what we call herd immunity. So that's a situation where
the majority of the population are immune to the infection. And the only way of developing that
in the absence of a vaccine is for the majority of the population to become infected."
The trick is to ensure that the people who are worst affected by the disease are protected
from it - which, despite the lockdown, the UK government failed to do.
Postponing an avalanche of cases is not necessarily a bad thing. For example, it has allowed
us to find some specific treatments, particularly showing that the steroid dexamethasone can
save the lives of some of the most ill patients. We've learned that ventilators, which were
such a huge focus at the start of the crisis, are less useful than first thought. On the other
hand, we've learned that kidney dialysis machines could be vital. If a vaccine could be rolled
out soon, that could be very important, too, but that looks unlikely before next spring.
However, the fact remains that this epidemic will only end when either enough people have
been infected with it to end widespread transmission or until an effective vaccine becomes
available. It would be much better, given the modelling, if the people who get it are young and
healthy, rather than old or with a pre-existing illness.
Instead of holding its nerve, as Sweden did, the UK government panicked and imposed
unprecedented restrictions on our freedom. This has done enormous damage to the economy, mental
health, children's education and much more. Worse, if the modellers are correct, lockdown won't
really have much impact on saving lives. And having committed to this course, the government
doesn't seem to have double checked if this made sense using the very models they relied on in
the first place.
The fact that cases have been rising across Europe - particularly in countries like France
and Spain that imposed the strictest lockdowns - should give us cause for concern, but not
alarm. There are indications that the rate of spread has slowed down, possibly reflecting the
impact of some population immunity, although case numbers are still rising. However, the
numbers dying from it are low, and currently make up only around 2% of
all deaths in England and Wales.
We could end up in the worst of all scenarios: ever more restrictions, more and more older
people getting the virus, and heading into winter with the usual seasonal rise in other
illnesses like influenza on top of Covid - with all that means for pressure on healthcare.
There is still time to change course, open up society for younger people, protect and
support the vulnerable and allow the epidemic to take its course. There is no scenario where
nobody dies and everything is fine and dandy. We have been hit by a deadly new virus. That's no
excuse for bad policies that risk turning a crisis into a disaster.
Rob Lyons is a UK journalist
specialising in science, environmental and health issues. He is the author of ' Panic on a
Plate: How Society Developed an Eating Disorder'.
I cannot get around the fact that the number of deaths per month increased to double the
normal rate for a couple of months and then went back to normal by June or so. It varies by
country. Spain had double the normal death rate for a month or so, now back to normal. USA
had one and half times normal for longer. Germany never exceeded 20% above average.
Some people track "covid deaths" but there are intrinsic difficulties with such statistics
(co-morbidity) even if you are striving for objectivity, and every region has different
definitions.
The media seems to be talking a lot about "cases" and not talking about "deaths" - is that
because deaths are back to normal?
Looking at excess deaths, it looks like the Covid pandemic is basically over.
If anyone can provide some insight into why excess death statistics do not say what I
think they are saying, I'd be delighted to learn more.
While Mike Whitney is on the right track, I think he is incorrect when he echoes other
internet commentators that the end game of Operation COVID is population reduction.
Since World War II, global population has increased by 80 million each and every year. Of
course, as the world population grew, from just over 2 billion at the end of World War 2 to
almost 8 billion today, the annual percentage increase decreased since the annual 80 million
was coming off of a bigger base population. Until this year, the annual increase in absolute
numbers has always been 80 million.
Rich people often go to conferences and talk about wanting to control population, but that
has never come close to happening. Only the Chinese and Japanese governments implemented
effective population control programs. If the goal of the Bilderburg and Davos groups was to
control or reduce world population, they have been startling ineffective in doing so. If
COVID was about population control, they could have genetically engineered and release a
virus that actually killed more than really unhealthy people, instead of restricting people's
freedoms over an overhyped (to be polite) virus.
The obvious conclusion is that this crowd has no interest in population control
whatsoever. But they are concerned with reducing industrial activity and greenhouse gas
emissions. And that is to be accomplished by keeping up population growth, but reducing the
standard of living of everyone but the Davos crowd to medieval peasant levels. They want to
keep their slaves, thank you very much. The plan is to get to a global population of 11
billion people but everyone but a few families has a diet of rice and beans.
The victims of this scheme, which is flat out evil, can enjoy one irony. While the
lockdowns may have curbed greenhouse gas emissions, the worldwide temperature drop this year
was only o.o1 degree Celsius (0.02 to 0.03 Farenheit). Yeah, it would have been more without
the lockdowns, but all thisfor 0.01 degrees.
One issue is that greenhouse gas emissions are primarily caused by population growth
itself, so turning everyone into third world peasants but having lots and lots of them won't
work. Poor people in India contribute a lot by just cutting down trees for cooking fires. The
bigger issue is that since 2018, methane released from tundra and the Artic Ocean has started
overtaking carbon as the main greenhouse gas. Which means the game is already over in terms
of controlling greenhouse gasses. Its a matter of adjusting now, though granted a decrease in
worldwide population would make the adjustment easier.
By the way, even with the old fashioned carbon emissions, closing all the mom and pop
businesses and churches and forcing everyone to buy everything online and have it shipped to
them is counter-productive.
@eD
t care about diseases. They just care about control. They are evil psychopathic narcissists.
Sad thing is, most people are dumb as rocks and fall every time for the tales of these
snake oil salesmen.
These days in Montreal there was a protest for "climate action", "protection of migrants"
and "BLM" – and of course with all the people wearing masks against "Covid". A March of
Zombies if there ever was one.
Excellent article. I believe the treachery of the so-called elites have no boundaries.
Evil is their master and control of the populace is their aim. I also believe we need mass
arrests of those that are using this virus as a cover for their agenda for the world.
So how many times have the criminal psycho elites tried their "time to take over the
world" shtick for the past thousands of years and for some strange reason they never could?
Because they are criminals. Because they are psychopaths. Because they are elites but only in
their own minds as they think they are gods. And speaking of God .ever hear of the Bible?
There's a passage in Ecclesiastes that pretty much sums it up: from Ecclesiastes
1:9–"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is
that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." (KJV) And what is the
definition of insanity (for psychopaths are insane, right?)–doing the same thing
(nothing new under the sun) over and over (that which is done is that which shall be done)
expecting different results . when the result is always the same. And I don't give a crap how
wealthy Gates is he and his god Satan are not in control .God controls Satan (see Job Chapter
Two) doncha know .and so does Christ (see Matthew Chapter Four). Dystopian future? Only if
you want it that way and believe the nonsense that the elites are in control. With freedom
comes responsibility which most folks these days couldn't handle with a ten foot pole; hence
they'll accept whatever slavery the elites think they'll cajole the people to accept. Have
fun with that. Turning oneself into a "wear a mask or else" Karen bully has consequences .do
these idiots know how much their hatred will destroy them? When idiots become psychopaths
..
@RoatanBill
argill, DuPont, John Deere, and others have either bribed their way into securing certain
countries farmland, or have used regime change tactics in order to secure even more farmlands
{ Ukraine's, Syria's breadbasket etc. }. In Ukraine, Monsanto's gmo corn is called
AmeriKanski Kookarooza – and it's easy to see the difference between the gmo vs the
locally grown corn. Shall we talk about the takeover, of the world's fresh water aquifers? =
Same corporate game. Or the sabotage of the independent farms in all of the Americas. Russia
and China has been watching for years, and are developing their plans to be fairly
independent – time is running out. Thanks
You're probably right about the sociopath tag. Certainly, they're completely deluded.
Creating conditions for war when you have so much to lose is incredibly stupid, as Rasputin
never said to Tsar Nicholas.
Rasputin worked to bring about peace. He got the Tsar to sack ministers who were
pro-British. Rasputin was shot by a British Agent. There was previously another attempt on
his life – also by the British.
I'm a conservative who wants non-interventionism, less globalization and less immigration
(preferably zero), and I see things very differently.
For the life of me I can't understand why self-proclaimed conservatives are so keen on
getting things back to where they were, which they complained often as a world run by
liberals. As far as I'm concern, a lot more good will come from this than bad. The most
important is the decentralization of work and with it, the decongestion of cities. Remote
work lessens the need for immigration. Less air travel lessens globalization. More parents
will begin to embrace homeschooling thus lessening the power of our education establishment.
More universities will go bankrupt as they lose students in particular full fee paying
foreign students.
Our cities are bastions of liberalism. As more people move away from them to return closer
to their kin in the center of the country, the power of cities will decline. All the protests
esp. in (D) run cities in the West coast and NE will only hasten their own demise, which will
be good for America.
Our current economy relies far too much on the service sector. Cities have become centers
of excessive drinking, eating, gambling, night-clubbing, drug addiction, prostitution and all
sorts of unseemly activities that led to our moral decline. The decline of these
establishments and cities will lead to stronger families and a return to moral values.
If the goal of the Bilderburg and Davos groups was to control or reduce world
population, they have been startling ineffective in doing so.
What if their goal wasn't to reduce the entire population, but only certain segments?
Replacement Migration isn't a term that conspiracy theorists made up. How close do you
suppose the correlation is between the decline in white birth rates and things like"straight
white male" and "whiteness" becoming pejoratives in modern context?
imho by inserting HIV in Corona by "Gain Of Function" research they were looking just to
make a serious bioweapon. And the giveaway is the reaction out of any proportion in lockdowns
and hysteria, that is, they are still following the plot even if their bioweapon was a
pathetic dud.
"... The second type of Covid-19, is Covid "The Political Contrivance" or, rather, C ODENAME: O peration V irus Id entification 20 19. This iteration of the Covid phenom relates to the manner in which a modestly-lethal respiratory pathogen has been inflated into a perennial public health crisis in order to implement economic and societal changes that would otherwise be impossible. This is the political side of Covid, which is much more difficult to define since it relates to the ambiguous agenda of powerful elites who are using the infection to conceal their real intentions. ..."
"... hospitals were given a financial incentive to label each and every death as "covid." $13,000 a pop. ..."
"... Note also that the media claims that rioting and looting doesn't spread covid, funerals for dead negroes do not spread covid, abortion clinics do not spread covid, but going to church DEFINITELY spreads covid and Trump rallies are the most super-spreader events of all... ..."
"... Since gov't is making hydroxychloroquine and other treatments near impossible to use, gov't is essentially murdering sick people. Does murder count towards the virus death statistics? ..."
"... The virus is real enough, but the hype surrounding it and the mendacity involved in every report means no one KNOWS what the actual truth is. It should be obvious, however, that it's not the equal to the Spanish Flu or the Black Death. The reaction to the virus is infinitely worse than the virus itself, thanks to the swine in gov't. ..."
"... The CDC's own figures of several weeks ago make clear that only 6% of the 200 000 US deaths from Covid were actually directly because of Covid. ..."
"... The other 94% were said to have been either very elderly or to have at least 2 underlying serious medical conditions. ..."
"... I suspect many people would die when contracting the "ordinary" flu under the same circumstances. ..."
"... "... Of course people go to the hospital, moving into the autumn flu season but there is no science to suggest a second wave should happen." ..."
"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it." George Orwell
Can we agree that there are two types of Covid-19?
The first type, is Covid-19 ,"The Virus", which is a fairly mild infection that most people don't even realize they've contracted.
They remain either asymptomatic or have slight flu-like symptoms that go away after a week or so. A tiny sliver of the population–
that are mainly-older, vulnerable people with underlying health conditions– can develop complications, become seriously ill and die.
But, according to most analysis, the chances of dying from Covid are roughly between 1 in every 200 to 1 in every 1,000 people. (CDC-IFR-
0.26%)
In other words, Covid is not the Spanish Flu, not the Black Plague and the Genocidal Planetary Killer Virus it was cracked
up to be. It kills more people than the annual influenza, but not significantly more.
The second type of Covid-19, is Covid "The Political Contrivance" or, rather, C ODENAME: O peration V irus
Id entification 20 19. This iteration of the Covid phenom relates to the manner in which a modestly-lethal respiratory
pathogen has been inflated into a perennial public health crisis in order to implement economic and societal changes that would otherwise
be impossible. This is the political side of Covid, which is much more difficult to define since it relates to the ambiguous
agenda of powerful elites who are using the infection to conceal their real intentions.
hospitals
were given a financial incentive to label each and every death as "covid." $13,000 a pop.
The most revealing number is the number of total deaths year to year has NOT increased this year, which makes it obvious that
covid really hasn't had much of a real impact at all.
Note also that the media claims that rioting and looting doesn't spread covid, funerals for dead negroes do not spread covid,
abortion clinics do not spread covid, but going to church DEFINITELY spreads covid and Trump rallies are the most super-spreader
events of all...
@vot tak
ely inappropriate in the way it's being used according to the man who invented it, so all the positives and negatives are bullshit.
Since gov't is making hydroxychloroquine and other treatments near impossible to use, gov't is essentially murdering sick people.
Does murder count towards the virus death statistics?
The virus is real enough, but the hype surrounding it and the mendacity involved in every report means no one KNOWS what the
actual truth is. It should be obvious, however, that it's not the equal to the Spanish Flu or the Black Death. The reaction to
the virus is infinitely worse than the virus itself, thanks to the swine in gov't.
From all I have read, it looks as if the CDC is settling on an Infection Fatality Rate
(IFR) for COVID-19 of about 0.65%. That fluctuates a bit, and sometimes is presented as low
as 0.1%. But consensus in the field seems to be that the infection rate as a whole is grossly
underestimated, and may be 25 times as high – this seems to be supported by the 'new
cases' phenomenon, whereby the more they test, the more cases they discover, which in turn
seems to suggest more cases await discovery than current testing can keep up with. At the
same time, though, even fiddling with the death rate by incorporating all deaths of tested
people regardless whether COVID actually killed them cannot conceal that the fatality rate of
confirmed cases is quite low. COVID-19 is extremely contagious but chance of recovery for
those infected is in the order of 98% even by conservative estimate, and the demographic for
whom it is most dangerous is well-established as elderly, perhaps above age 75, and the
immune-compromised.
Against that backdrop, SARS CoV (2003) and MERS (2012) were considerably less contagious,
but significantly more dangerous – SARS CoV was 16 times more deadly at 9.6% IFR, and
MERS 57 times more deadly at 34.3 %. Both are coronaviruses. In both cases the at-risk group
included the elderly, although MERS seemed mostly to affect men, and the immune-compromised.
In neither case is a vaccine available to this day. In neither case was a lockdown
employed.
What can we deduce from this? I'm going to suggest governments fell hook, line and sinker
for the Imperial College model and its grossly-flawed projections of huge numbers of deaths.
Lockdowns, in their turn, were desperate efforts to stave off those mass deaths. But entirely
the wrong lessons were learned, and governments still seem to believe – or pretend to,
for their own purposes – that going back into lockdown is an efficacious way to deal
with an apparent 'surge' in cases. But this has already been shown to not prevent such deaths
as occur from Coronavirus, and it looks to me like safeguarding facilities for the elderly
and weak, such as care homes, would suffice. There is a totally-unsupported linkage of large
numbers of infections with large numbers of deaths. And for so long as we commit to wiping
out an airborne viral infection by suppressing it, we can never open our international
borders until the last case has been eradicated worldwide. Every country will have a large
pool of uninfected potential victims with no herd immunity. Astra-Zeneca/Oxford's vaccine
trials have been suspended because of unanticipated deleterious effects on test subjects.
Well, a 1% or .65% death rate is a huge number of deaths if everybody necessary for herd
immunity gets infected (~60-80% of all people based on the contagiousness). And apparently
it's not familiar to humans so everyone gets infected with it, unlike the flu or cold to
which many already have some antibodies. And you're still likely not to notice it that much
in your circle, but all of a sudden you end up with 2 million dead in the US where so many
are obese, and COVID is known for playing with the heart rate in addition to causing
breathing difficulties.
There is actually a MERS vaccine that finished Phase II. It was made by the same Russian
institute responsible for the coronavirus vaccine and they've been testing it for the last
few years. This explains why they had such a head start in vaccine development. They
basically took their MERS system and replaces it with the COVID specific antibody and felt so
certain about it that they injected themselves with it already back in the spring.
There is an interview there with the developer. I know it's Kevin Rothrock's outfit, but
the interview was actually very good and professionally done from a science angle. I'm not
sure they translated it from Russian entirely as I read it a while ago.
That's interesting. According to the source I cited, both SARS CoV and MERS are also
zoonotic, meaning they originate in animals and are not familiar to humans – SARS CoV's
natural reservoir was horseshoe bats and MERS from contact with Dromedary camels. I have seen
suggestions, which seem to be supported by the rapid decline in deaths relative to the rise
in infections, that herd immunity for COVID 19 may be a much lower threshold than previous
viral infections, possibly as low as 20%.
Mathematically, it does not make any sense that herd immunity for any disease to which you
need to develop immunity would be less than 50%, because until that threshold, each infected
person has on average a greater chance of coming in contact with someone who does not have
immunity, than with someone who has immunity. Now as you get to 50%, then the reproduction
rate of the virus across population starts to matter. If it's low, just above 1, then you
might become healthy and non infectious before you can infect someone else so herd immunity
can be just above 50%. However if it's really high, like the 20 of measles, then even 99%
will not be enough to kill it as it will always find someone who is a good host for it and
that's why measles is so hard to wipe out, even though almost everyone has a vaccination.
Interesting; I did not think about it from a mathematical point of view. I wonder where
the figure of 20% came from? Now I could challenge them and look smart.
Oh, hey – what do you know? I was just browsing for something interesting to read
while I ate my Instant Pot Peach Cobbler (delicious with French Vanilla ice cream, and I used
way less sugar than the recipe called for), and I found an article claiming a low (although
not quite 20% low) herd immunity is possible because of pre-existing immunity in T-cells, and
that a significant number of people worldwide already had some level of resistance to
COVID-19 before it even arrived on-scene.
Dr. Michael Yeadon, Chief Science Officer for Pharma giant Pfizer for 16 years, is the
source for some of the material, although I have not watched the video and do not know how
much of what is claimed he is responsible for. A lot of jaw-dropping inferences that at least
half the COVID test results might be false-positives, and maybe many more. If the numbers
claimed have any solid backing and are accurate, then the survival rate for COVID-19 is only
marginally less than the flu – 99.8% versus 99.9% for flu.
I forgot to mention that it's possible for the disease to end before reaching 50% if the
transmission rate goes below 1, but this is due to other factors such as quarantines, people
taking precautions, it's summer and it doesn't transmit well, etc But that means it ended
before herd immunity has been reached. If the transmission rate was always less than 1, then
there would have been no big outbreak at all and it would have died out by itself after
infecting a few dozen people. If the conditions revert to the original where the transmission
rate was more than 1, and the disease is still around and less than 50% of people have
immunity, it will start spreading again.
Herd immunity is ultimately a mathematical concept so it has to be above 50%. If people
already have pre-immunity, either from a previous disease that looked similar or from a
vaccine, then that counts as well as part of those 50%. But I thought the deal with the
coronavirus was that all humans did not have any pre-immunity to it since it was so different
and that's why everyone got scared at the beginning. Because if that is the case, then it
will infect ~60% of the entire human population in the best case herd immunity scenario.
"If the conditions revert to the original where the transmission rate was more than 1,
and the disease is still around and less than 50% of people have immunity, it will start
spreading again."
Hence my main point that even if we managed to wrestle it to submission using suppressive
techniques such as lockdown and quarantine, we would never be able to allow travelers from or
to other countries until it was extinct everywhere. Suppression was always a bad idea.
Well the point was that you could slow it down long enough for a to find some better
treatment techniques or for vaccine to be ready. I admit that I didn't think it likely, but
since a vaccine is coming out in January, it seems like it was quite an achievable goal, even
if the economic damage was not worth it. Now that there is no appetite for lockdowns since
the mortality rate is too low and it mostly kills people not in 'your' (i.e. most)
demographic, it still might not be enough time to prevent a second wave, but it'll take care
of a third one I guess. And they did find a cheap steroid that shuts down the overly strong
immune response in the bad cases. It's been credited for lower mortality lately in the US and
the low mortality in Russia. So that was the reasoning behind fighting it. Everyone being
vaccinated is a more palatable herd immunity strategy for politicians and a huge number of
other people, as opposed to the alternative. The economic damage and the bravery of citizens
in the face of something that kills only 1% of infected (and mostly old people) was
underestimated.
Well, some Canadian provinces – the only ones that matter, I guess, Quebec and
Ontario – spent much of today's news cycle declaring that the dreaded Second Wave is
already upon us. Cases, naturally, not deaths; they cite 'new infections' with the terrified
wonder that implies this was not the expected result of accelerated testing, at all. What
we's gonna do? I submit it is a shot across the bow of the 20% or so who are not convinced
that this is the Great Scourge childhood Bible tales warned us about; wear a fucking mask and
start looking like you like it, bucko, or we'll be back in Lockdown City before you can say
"droplets'. It looks more and more like no progress against the virus is going to be measured
until the entire population is so cowed that it will accept any withdrawal of its freedoms,
while congratulating itself for being so noble and community-minded. Hint – stop
thinking 'Rights', and start thinking 'Privileges'.
But I did hear a sort-of rebuttal to my usual charge that we will never be able to open
national borders until every single 'case' has been eradicated worldwide – No, they
said; as this situation evolves, we will have quicker and more reliable testing, and we can
test, test, test everyone who is entering the country until we are satisfied all travelers
from other lands are COVID-free. And we'll have a vaccine, as well, the magic potion that
will prevent those who have never had it from ever having it.
Perhaps. But to me, it's a little like death-penalty cases. If you only once send an
innocent plaintiff to his death, it's once too often. If only once a COVID test is inaccurate
and a single case carrying a live virus is permitted to enter, it will maul a population rich
in uninfected victims in less time than it takes to say it. Herd immunity is a far better
concept, and there is absolutely no requirement to risk the lives of the elderly to achieve
it. Let it rage among the healthy and younger population until it runs out of steam, and it's
beaten. But they're too busy trying to suppress it, then wailing and gnashing their teeth and
demanding more sacrifice until the unworkable somehow works.
The 20% figure may be from NYC's experience. Covid-19 spread in that city has largely been
eliminated yet with only about 20% (IIRC 22%) immunity of the general population. Those
numbers were mentioned in a Congressional hearing involving Rand Paul and the good Dr.
Faulucci whatever.
The 50% requirement likely assumes a completely homogeneous population that is randomly
interacting. Yet, children apparently have a lower likelihood of catching and transmitting
the disease and may not be counted in the 20-22% figure. Moreover, it's the health impact of
the spread that matters. A reasonably health adult has little chance of a severe reaction to
an infection. Indeed, getting infected seems to be a free and effective form of vaccination
contributing to the decline of further spread.
My suspicion is that masks and social distancing have only a minor contribution toward
reducing the spread. Only a complete lock down would guarantee a reduction in the rate of
transmission.
My inexpert but nevertheless fact-based assessment is that the most effective and least
damaging strategy is to protect those groups with a high likelihood of an adverse effect from
an infection while allowing the 90%+ of the population to go about their business.
The above strategy may not be PC as young but overweight people would be singled-out
thereby countering the body positivity message that fat is beautiful. Often mentioned by
non-MSM sources is that the US's poor Covid track record can be partially explained by the
very high rates of obesity with its related health problems. Such inconvenient facts to not
play well for an exceptional nation populated by heroes.
Yes, it's funny you should say that, because I just got off the phone with my Mom. We were
setting up lunch today; she mentioned that Coronavirus has killed almost 200,000 people in
the USA, and I told her that was way off, that's the number worldwide and the media routinely
confuses it to scare people. So I immediately looked it up after putting down the phone, and
indeed it is over 199,000 deaths in the USA. It is indeed deadlier than the flu; but still,
it is not the plague and the number of deaths has tapered off dramatically, hence the need to
refer to 'cases' now rather than 'deaths', although obviously if you are a 'case' it is still
very unlikely you will be a 'death'.
I would argue over the 'hidden deaths' unless you do not mean that such deaths should be
attributed to coronavirus, since there seems to have been a deliberate effort on the part of
the western health-care system to attribute any peripherally-related death to coronavirus and
if anything, the number is probably lower than stated. But it has certainly taken off more
than I thought.
relates to the ongoing mayhem generated by violence using firearms in Chicago.
Scroll down through the dismal stats on drive-by shooting incidents and the like and there
are a couple of sections dealing with Coronavirus demographics and, especially interesting,
listed comorbidities for deaths in Cook County cases. The footnotes detail the sources and
remind us to distinguish between cases of death WITH Cv19 and FROM Cv19. The blurring of
causes of death benefits only the fearmongers, I believe.
The Scottish death certificates I used to see regularly listed several causes of death, in
descending order of importance. The few English ones I saw had far fewer details, and perhaps
the US system followed the English example.
Gee; humour is to be found in a variety of odd places these days. The comparison between
COVID fatalities and being shot offered a Case Fatality Rate (CFR) of 3.68% for the former,
while a much higher rate of 17% was attributed to 'Hi-Speed Lead'. And the CFR for COVID is
likely exaggerated as well, due to linking of deaths owing to comorbidities as you mentioned.
I think the global average COVID CFR is about 2%.
Let's hope that the boutique niche specialists can avoid being crushed by the
conglomerates. And who knows, perhaps one day one of the western facing foodies will acquire
a taste?
That was a singularly interesting post; I always enjoy Helmer's work because it is
impeccably sourced, but in this instance the pie charts offered persuasive evidence as to why
Belarus was almost immediately selected as the underground railroad for European cheeses
masquerading as originating within the customs union. Belarus had 25% of the Russian cheese
import market in 2013, and its share ballooned to 86% this year. Added to that would be
Lukashenko's fence-sitting and flirtation with the EU, said tacit alliance and cooperation
having gone into the toilet bowl with the EU's complicity in trying to overthrow and replace
him, whipped on by Uncle Sam. Another nice own goal, you failures.
As an aside, I greatly appreciate Putin's earthy and impromptu sense of humour; in
response to cheesemaker Sirota's assurances that in the next two to three years, Russian
cheese exports would make established European cheese producers tremble, he inquired "Will it
make them tremble because it is delicious, or because of something else?"
I don't know if I mentioned it here, but I went to my wife's hometown in the summer of
2019 (I was there earlier as well), and one of the free days I went to the supermarket and
bought six to eight different cheeses that said "made in Russia" to try. I left the rest of
the blocks to her sister after trying. It wasn't bad actually. Not as good as stuff I can get
in Germany but close enough to it, but much better than typical American or Canadian made
cheeses. I know it's not a high bar, but still.
I guess I'm comparing it to Russian chesses from 2015. It was edible but not much
different than the cheap cheeses I could get at the ubiquitous Russian supermarkets in
Israel. There almost all the stuff was imported from Poland or Russia, and there were a few
of homemade varieties that had different names from the official Western version, like
Tal-Emek instead of Emmental, where it was slightly inferior but really depended on the
month. The Russian cheeses were often different in taste and were different kinds, but were
nothing extraordinary. They just didn't copy the Western famous types and concentrated on
their own thing. Which I guess is not allowed under the EU rules. Now they copy and call it
by the original name too and the taste is great.
I wish I could get more stuff from Europe and Russia here, but I think my current country
has some sort of import mafia where they don't want to compete with outside products too
much. The problem is that unlike Russia, they often just don't make that type of cheese so
the import substitution amounts to: "Just eat something else. Who needs all these stupid
cheeses anyways. We survived many centuries without Emmental. Why don't you just eat our
traditional food and be happy; there are pseudo-scientific studies showing that it's
healthy!"
I did not try a great variety of cheese in Russia when I was there, so my palate is quite
limited; we had a medium-hard ripened cheese that was whitish-yellow, sort of creamy in
colour and mild in flavour that we liked and pretty consistently bought to eat with rulka and
bread as a light meal. But that was in, what, 2006 or so. So the Russian cheese market might
have really taken off. And that was in the Primorskye region, which is pretty rural compared
with the great cities like St Petersburg and Moscow, where I imagine the variety to be quite
cosmopolitan, although back then most of it would likely have been international rather than
domestic. We did shop at a few supermarkets, but most of our food purchases came from
open-air markets with small shops or the ubiquitous stalls made by cutting one side out of an
old shipping container.
Overall I am encouraged by the Russian response to sanctions, because it seems to me very
positive to use it as an opportunity to infuse the domestic industry – rather than
being bitter and indulging in recriminations, which would only give the enemy satisfaction,
Russia reorients its markets and uses gentle mockery, which makes the enemy feel cheated,
balked and ineffective.
"95% of the people in Finland or the United States or Germany believe that Russian
state poisoned Navalny. The facts don't matter as much as what people believe in."
Bonus question – if that's true, how can such a reality coincide with this one?
"But it is far from clear that Ms Merkel is ready to pull the plug on Nord Stream 2.
The chancellor's messaging on the pipeline has been remarkably consistent and the Navalny
affair has, so far, barely impinged on it. Moreover, she is backed by most of the German
political establishment.
The opposition Greens tabled a motion in the Bundestag last week calling on the
government to stop the project, which will bring gas directly from Russia to Germany across
the Baltic Sea. Green party leader Annalena Baerbock said Nord Stream 2 was "splitting
Europe".
Yet Ms Baerbock and her party found themselves almost entirely isolated. Erstwhile
enemies from across the political spectrum ganged up to savage their motion. It was one of
the few occasions on which Ms Merkel's CDU/CSU, the Social Democrats, the hard-left Die Linke
and the hard-right Alternative for Germany had ever agreed on anything
At the same time, Berlin has continued to insist that political issues -- specifically,
the Navalny affair and the need for a robust European response -- must be kept apart from
economic ones, notably infrastructure projects that are seen as essential for Europe's energy
security.
Ms Merkel was asked in late August, shortly after Mr Navalny had arrived in Berlin for
treatment, if Germany should quit Nord Stream 2. Her response was clear: the two issues
should, she said, be "decoupled". Nord Stream 2 should be completed, she added, since it
would be operated by economic actors in both Russia and Europe. There is no reason to believe
her view has changed since then -- novichok or no novichok."
How sad – the Germans just do not seem to care about Navalny! Unless it is the 95%
of Germans who are outside the government (apart from the Greens) and the business community.
Ich weiß, welche Seite meines Brotes gebuttert ist.
President Duterte is said to have ordered police and the military to shoot dead anyone who
defied or protested COVID-19 lockdown orders on the island of Luzon – the largest
island and the most populous in the Philippines – back in March / April 2020. The
sources for this news are nearly all MSM sources and Amnesty International.
Duterte is the first Filipino President to have come from outside the political elite
based in Manila. This in itself makes him an easy target for Washington who would rather get
rid of someone they don't know or can't control instead of try to understand where he is
coming from and work with him.
As mayor of Davao City in Mindanao, in the southern part of the country, Duterte had
promoted policies to help disadvantaged women in areas of reproductive rights education and
fighting domestic violence. As any fule knows from following the MSM, Duterte is supposedly a
misogynist who makes crude fun of women. In addition, Duterte has expressed interest in
working with China and establishing better relations with Beijing, and this in itself, coming
from a leader of a former US colony, makes him a potential target for regime change
tactics.
I'd be very careful of anything reported about what Duterte says or doesn't say by the
mainstream press and groups like Amnesty International: it is very likely that Duterte's
utterances are taken out of context and twisted into something that conforms to a stereotype
depicting him as crude, violent and Stone Age, and consequently encourages the Western public
to accept his forced removal if and when the opportunity presents itself.
"I'd be very careful of anything reported about what Duterte says or doesn't say by the
mainstream press and groups like Amnesty International "
I totally concur.
I have been a long time admirer of President Duterte (as has a niece-in-law of mine).
I have a great dossier of his speeches and interviews. For example:
• Interview with Maria Finoshina on RT – a true investigative journalist.
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHjlCmdyesY
But then I started seeing him parading around with his full cabinet in those ridiculous
masks and wondered if 'they' had got to him.
Well it is a paraphrase but basically yes.but it was aimed at drug dealers. I had not
heard about the Covid-19 orders that Jen mentioned but it sounds a bit like something he
would say.
Apparently a lot of people have been shot but I cannot remember the figures. Possibly in
the 1,000s?
Jen, also, has a good point that he is not from the elite and the MSM media.
And he has incurred the wrath of the USA by evicting the American military presence.
Adding insult to injury by punctuating it with "I can always go to China".
Yes, indeedy, the Mayor of Nashville was caught red-handed discussing via email how to
hush up the relatively-small numbers of cases that were linked to restaurants and bars,
because putting restaurants and bars back into lockdown was the decided-upon action that
would be taken to show the eejits in the electorate that their elected officials are looking
out for public health.
One more time – COVID-19 is real. It's not fabricated, but the way it is being
ridden to political Nirvana is unprecedented, and if it does not destroy the global economy
altogether, putting us back to the barter system and working for food, it will be a fucking
miracle.
"... You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end -- which you can never afford to lose -- with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be. ..."
James C.
Collins related a conversation he had with Stockdale regarding his coping strategy during
his period in the Vietnamese POW camp. [21] [
non-primary source needed ] When Collins asked which prisoners didn't make it out
of Vietnam, Stockdale replied:
Oh, that's easy, the optimists. Oh, they were the ones who said, 'We're going to be out
by Christmas.' And Christmas would come, and Christmas would go. Then they'd say, 'We're
going to be out by Easter.' And Easter would come, and Easter would go. And then
Thanksgiving, and then it would be Christmas again. And they died of a broken heart. This
is a very important lesson.
You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end
-- which you can never afford to lose -- with the discipline to confront the most brutal
facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.[22]
Thousands of Britons who suffer heart attacks and strokes are dying at home instead of
seeking medical treatment, a new study has found, as new government figures show 75,000 are
projected to die as a result of lockdown measures.
Stay-at-home orders prompted countless people suffering from serious medical conditions to
avoid hospitals, according to the study's findings, which were published in the Heart medical
journal and first reported by the Daily Mail. The paper noted that deaths from heart disease in
private homes surged by 35 percent from March to July, resulting in 2,279 more fatalities on
average over the past six years. However, heart and stroke deaths in hospitals dropped by
around 1,400 during the same period, suggesting that some who chose to stay home would have
died anyway even if they had been hospitalized. The researchers calculated that in total, there
were 2,085 excess deaths in England and Wales that could be linked to heart attack and stroke
sufferers who refused to seek out medical treatment. This means that between March 2 and June
30, every day 17 people died needlessly from heart attacks.
Protests potentially nullified all potential positive effects from lookdown in large cities
like NYC, if such exist. So all economic damage was in vain and lockdown was just a capricious
and arbitrary move by ambitious and power hungry Dem politicians. And that fact alone make the
major on NYC and the governor on NY state look like completely politicized idiots.
If the crowd is dense, as often is the case in riots at places of confrontation with the
police cordon, it does not matter much if people are indoor or outdoor, what matters if the
length of the contact. Add to this that looting happens indoors.
...On Wednesday, Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh called out CNN's
hypocrisy on this matter, noting that "if people can protest in the streets by the tens of
thousands, if people can riot, if people can gamble in casinos, then certainly they can gather
peaceably under the First Amendment to hear from the president of the United States."
Butthurt from this exchange, CNN Newsroom drafted in "medical analyst" Leana Wen , who
happens to be a former Planned Parenthood president, to explain why science means COVID doesn't
affect BLM protests as much as Trump rallies.
"It does not care why it is that people are gathering but it does care about the conditions
under which they're gathering," Wen argued, adding "outdoors much safer than indoors and
wearing masks obviously much safer than not wearing masks."
"I would also in this case would distinguish between the behavior of the participants while
at protests versus rallies," she continued, arguing that BLM protesters are more "aware" of the
risks than Trump supporters.
"At protests many people are aware of the risks and doing everything they can to reduce that
risk versus at many of the rallies we are seeing people going in defiance," Wen claimed.
American Thinker has run several articles like
this one about Dr. Anthony Fauci's political bias (which is his right). But the Miami
Herald published an article that was aimed at undermining President Trump , which actually
contains compelling evidence that Fauci's bias or ignorance is affecting what he is telling the
American people about Covid-19. In the article,
Dr. Fauci: 'I have to disagree' with Trump on coronavirus , the author writes:
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious diseases expert, disagreed on Friday with
President Donald Trump's assertion that the country is "rounding the corner" on the
coronavirus pandemic.
"I really do believe we're rounding the corner," Trump said
during a White House briefing on Thursday. He added that newweekly cases have gone down
by 44% since July.
"I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with that because if you look at the thing that you
just mentioned, the statistics, Andrea, they're disturbing,"
Fauci told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell on Friday.
"We're plateauing at around 40,000 cases a day and the deaths are around 1,000.
From his interview with Andrea Mitchell Friday, the Herald quotes Fauci as stating, "We're
plateauing at around 40,000 cases a day and the deaths are around 1,000."
In fact, he is very wrong : the average daily new cases for the past two weeks have been
31,411, dramatically less than Fauci's 40,000 number; and the average daily deaths for the past
two-weeks have been 697, a full 30% less than Fauci's 1,000.
More significant, do these graphs of weekly average new cases (blue graph) and deaths (red
graph) from Bloomberg look like we're "plateauing?"
Source: Bloomberg
Fauci has a right and obligation to express his views about the current situation and the
future risks, but he should not mislead the public about the facts.
"We've been through this before," he said. "Don't ever, ever underestimate the potential
of the pandemic. And don't try and look at the rosy side of things."
"I keep looking at that curve, and I get more depressed and more depressed about the fact
that we never really get down to the baseline that I'd like," he said.
EmmittFitzhume , 59 minutes ago
Deep State Fauci has to go. Perhaps to prison
GoldenDebt , 58 minutes ago
Dr FRAUDci is non stop lying and flip-flopping
SMSpiff , 42 minutes ago
It's safe to come out of your basement now, Joe.
Pope Innocent III , 37 minutes ago
The nature of the Fauci scam is the total intentional destruction of induction and
deduction.
Jerky Miester , 32 minutes ago
You've been ****ting up this board for 3 years 7 months, you little phaqqot. Time to get
out of the basement and earn an honest living....unless you make your bread and beer money
being a pro troll. KYS now.
NotAGenius , 39 minutes ago
This is the legal argument to indict Fauci on mass murder charges, justified but justice
no longer exists in the USA, written by a legal writer. These comments and Fauci's crimes
would convict Fauci of mass murder and sentence him to prison for life:
Zeroes want Fauci's head on a stick...but decry liberals who interfere with the free
speech rights of conservatives on college campuses.
Free speech or no free speech - which is it, Zeroes?
knopperz , 55 minutes ago
The flu vaccination is now 78 years around.
The flu is still there.
Next Stop --> 78 Years wearing a diaper in your face.
Get used to it suckers.
All those people pushing the Corona Narrative should be hanged by the Balls.
CheapBastard , 53 minutes ago
We are obviously rounding the corner with fewer cases and fewer deaths. Most businesses
trying to reopen. Fauci is political hack and was from the start. he's also totally
incompetent or a liar giving Americans completely wrong advice from the start. The MSM loves
him because he's anti-Trump.
2hangmen , 54 minutes ago
Fauci has been wrong since day 1 on Covid. He's done multiple 180s on policies, and the
fact this is NOT a deadly virus in comparison to all other virus outbreaks. He's still
playing politics and he's still making millions from Big Pharma and the Deep State. Fauci,
please say good bye, and ride off into the sunset with your ill gotten gains.
NotAGenius , 44 minutes ago
Trump can't fire Fauci. He is a career government employee. Trump gave him a platform in
the beginning. Trump has been right about Fauci now and mostly about this cold virus too,
advocating the best medicine possible for it - hcq - while Fauci prevented Americans from
getting this cheap commercial safe and effective medical treatment. Fauci has committed mass
murder by withholding a life-saving medicine from Americans. The FDA is criminal too, same
reason. FDA has also been paying hospitals $39,000 for every patient they kill with the fatal
ventilators, killing more than saving according to records. But the government wants more
deaths for bigger numbers. The American medical system is actually a genocidal organization
now, trying to kill as many Americans as possible in many different ways, many associated
with this medical fraud. Fauci should be imprisoned for life were any justice to exist in
America. At best, Trump can minimize and ignore him and arrange for him to have no venue to
spout b.s. and lies publicly. That's what we basically need: Fauci minimized if not
disappeared.
blueapples Staff , 33 minutes ago
Why would he ever fire the fall guy? If he fired him, you'd still have the push for
lockdowns, the policies based on flawed statistical models, and all the other nonsense.
Except then without a guy like Fauci to place blame on, the administrations role in this
becomes much more apparent.
It makes more sense to have a guy like Fauci on board to deflect to, especially given his
career as a government employee, so that it looks like there's some nefarious underlying
force that is working against the administration when the reality is that that nefarious
underlying force is working in tandem with it.
JaWS , 49 minutes ago
Damn the cases. I know about 10 people that have tested positive for covid19. Most cases
are not much more than a cold. Some not even that bad. Look at the deaths. That's where the
narrative should go. They are significantly down from the peak.
"Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation's top infectious diseases expert ..."
I have to disagree with this.
SummerSausage , 36 minutes ago
If they left off the word "expert" it would be an accurate statement.
Bollixed , 6 minutes ago
Fauci is an expert. An 'ex' is a has-been and a 'spert' is a drip under pressure. He fits
the bill perfectly.
curtisw , 9 minutes ago
"Because I have a vaccine to peddle."
-- A. Fauci
scottyji , 19 minutes ago
FAUCI BELONGS IN PRISON.
Fauci's narcissisticly obsessed with his "expert image" and his lucrative role as pimp for
Big Pharma = total Napoleon Complex, two-faced, stinkin' bureaucrat of the Deep State.
Ergo I.C. , 28 minutes ago
Because Fauci and his buddy Bill Gates are trying peddle vaccines worth billions of
dollars.
adr , 39 minutes ago
Since Fauchi is supposedly an expert, maybe he can tell us why people suffering from hay
fever are being told they have Covid.
In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the
effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in
the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis,
we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks (RR
0.78, 95% CI 0.51–1.20; I 2 = 30%, p = 0.25)
Of the 29 studies analyzed by the Lancet meta-study, seven studies are unpublished and
non-peer-reviewed observational studies that should not be used to guide clinical practice
according to the medRxiv disclaimer (references 3, 4, 31, 36, 37, 40 and 70; see table
above).
Of the 29 studies considered by the meta-study, only four are about the SARS-CoV-2
virus ; the other 25 studies are about the SARS-1 virus or the MERS virus, both of which
have very different transmission characteristics: they were transmitted almost exclusively
by severely ill hospitalized patients and not by community transmission.
Of the four studies relating to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, two were misinterpreted by the
Lancet meta-study authors ( refs. 44 and 70 ), one is
inconclusive ( ref. 37 ),
and one is about N95 (FFP2) respirators and not about medical masks or cloth masks (see
detailed analysis below).
The Lancet meta-study is used to guide global facemask policy for the general
population. However, of the 29 studies considered by the meta-study, only three are
classified as relating to a non-health-care (i.e. community) setting . Of these three
studies, one is misclassified ( ref. 50 , relating to a
hospital environment), one showed no benefit of facemasks (
ref. 69 ), and one is a poorly designed retrospective study about SARS-1 in Beijing
based on telephone interviews ( ref. 74 ). None of these
studies refer to SARS-CoV-2.
The authors of the Lancet meta-study acknowledge that the certainty of the evidence
regarding facemasks is "low" as all of the studies are observational and none is a
randomized controlled trial (RCT). The WHO itself admitted that its updated facemask policy
guidelines were based not on new evidence but on "political lobbying" .
In view of these shortcomings, University of Toronto epidemiology professor Peter Jueni
called
the WHO study "methodologically flawed" and "essentially useless".
In the US state of Kansas , the 90 counties without mask mandates had lower coronavirus
infection rates than the 15 counties with mask mandates. To hide this fact, the Kansas
health department tried to
manipulate the official statistics and data presentation.
Consuelo , 36 minutes ago
Fauci has been torpedoed here --- even without his lying numbers (of cases & deaths).
With the actual non-LYING numbers, he should be stripped of his medical license and
prosecuted for gross negligence, even gross-er Incompetence, and for potential Criminal $Gain
off his rather cozy relationship with Big Pharma and Bill Gates...
This whole thing was a $SCAM of the highest order.
aelfheld , 34 minutes ago
Fauci's a bureaucrat.
Bureaucrats have unqualified immunity.
Everybodys All American , 43 minutes ago
During the Spanish Flu of 1918 no one as I can tell was advocating for everyone to be
vaccinated either for or against their will. That tells you everything about this Dr. Fauci
imo. He should be removed from the planet.
drstrangelove73 , 6 minutes ago
I've posted about Tony several times this year.I spent an academic quarter as a medical
student on his service at the NIH,then saw him again many times in the 80's when I returned
as a fellow.He is a lifelong democrat,and card carrying member of the deep state who has
played politics with the management of viral infections for 40 years.Let that sink in.He has
been the director of the same NIH institute for 40 years.No one else in the history of the institute has been a director
for half that long.You think he doesn't know
how to play the game? _arrow
asteroids , 14 minutes ago
How does Fauci explane Sweden? The number of new cases is very low. Their death rate is
almost zero. Sweden now has herd immunity without a vaccine.
Hyzer , 9 minutes ago
He pretends it doesn't exist, just like the MSM.
TannyDanner , 3 minutes ago
He's trusting the plebs won't do their own research. I'm looking at the data almost daily
and am beyond thankful that Sweden had the balls to go about it the way they did and not bow
down to the bullies.
legalize , 18 minutes ago
Fauci himself has said that asymptomatic cases are "not the driver of infection"
We keep measuring "cases" instead of symptomatic cases
Therefore, I could give **** all about "case numbers"; I want to know about number of
people who are infectious/symptomatic
Useful_Idiot714 , 35 minutes ago
700 mostly old people with other diseases are dying from this each day in a country of
325,000,000. Sounds like we need mail in voting so that the frightened commies can vote early
and often to save us by electing a senile racist rapist pedophile.
SummerSausage , 46 minutes ago
Panic is Fauci's objective.
Democrats love big government which means more power for Fauci, more taxes and less
freedom for you.
Robert Paulson , 30 minutes ago
Panic is too unpredictable, and disruptive.
The "hope" is for respectful, solemn acceptance that Big Brother/Sister can save "us" from
ill health, poverty and international "enemies."
I mean **** was broken across most institutions throughout Western Civilization before the
flu was weaponized into a means of control. But the whole theater has become absurd.
The casedemic is pure and blatant FUD targeted towards Trump and Americans.
JamcaicanMeAfraid , 27 minutes ago
I predict on November 4th and if Dementia Joe is elected Fauci and his super ego will
stand before any microphone put in fromt of him and say "Joe Biden has put a stop to covid,
he has conquered the virus."
aelfheld , 44 minutes ago
Fauci sees the statistics as disturbing because they indicate an endpoint to his
prominence.
JaWS , 51 minutes ago
There are 4 men in my county that were tested positive within about 3 days of each other
and they had to quarantine for 14 days. About a week into it they started meeting everyday
down at the local fishing hole to fish while no one else was around. One of these men is 80
years old. The other 3 are in their 70s. Does this sound like something to shut the entire
country down?
GoldenDebt , 1 hour ago
Dont be a moron
Dr Fraudci is all politics and he's LYING. Dr FRAUDci also never condemned the protests as
being potential SUPER-SPREADER events
He's a criminal
moneybots , 13 minutes ago
"I really do believe we're rounding the corner," Trump said
during a White House briefing on Thursday. He added that newweekly cases have gone down
by 44% since July.
"I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with that because if you look at the thing that you
just mentioned, the statistics, Andrea, they're disturbing," Fauci told Andrea Mitchell on
Friday.
The statistics say Trump is right, according to the chart. Why is Fauci lying to the
American people?
Thalamus , 45 minutes ago
Fauci's worst case prediction of 1.7 million deaths from Covid-19 kind of came up short at
only 10K; but at least he didn't yell fire in a crowded theater .
Zerogenous_Zone , 48 minutes ago
which statistics?
to quote the great Mark Twain (now classified by the leftists as a rassiss)...
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics ."
the one statistic that is relevant, is the decrease in mortality...
and I for one, would like to know how they created a Covid-19 specific test...wait...what
was that?
THEY HAVEN'T?! it is an antigen test...that is, if you have any residual from your LAST
flu shot (they inject you with lysed virus to build up your antibody count...antigens!) you
could test positive...
and probably a majority of the tests are at issue since the test is highly
inaccurate...
but who cares? the virus is out of the box and here to stay...so you have either already
been exposed, or you will soon be exposed...and NO vaccine will be sufficient (since viral
strains mutate almost immediately)...especially the comment cold (news flash!! the 'common
cold' is a CORONAVIRUS!!)
For anyone old enough to have been alive and aware of the attacks of September 11, 2001 and
of so-called COVID-19 in 2020, memory may serve to remind one of an eerie parallel between the
two operations.
However, if memory has been expunged by the work of one's forgettery or deleted by the
corporate media's flushing it down the memory hole, or if knowledge is lacking, or maybe fear
or cognitive dissonance is blocking awareness , I would like to point out some similarities
that might perk one up to consider some parallels and connections between these two
operations.
The fundamental tie that binds them is that both events aroused the human fear of death.
Underlying all fears is the fear of death. A fear that has both biological and cultural
roots. On the biological level, we all react to death threats in a fight or flight manner.
Culturally, there are multiple ways that fear can be allayed or exacerbated, purposely or not.
Usually, culture serves to ease the fear of death, which can traumatize people, through its
symbols and myths. Religion has for a long time served that purpose, but when religion loses
its hold on people's imaginations, especially in regard to the belief in immortality, as Orwell
pointed out in the mid-1940s, a huge void is left. Without that consolation, fear is usually
tranquilized by trivial pursuits.
In the cases of the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the current corona virus operation,
the fear of death has been used by the power elites in order to control populations and
institute long-planned agendas. There is a red thread that connects the two events.
Both events were clearly anticipated and planned.
In the case of September 11, 2001, as I have argued before
, linguistic mind-control was carefully crafted in advance to conjure fear at the deepest
levels with the use of such repeated terms as Pearl Harbor, Homeland, Ground Zero, the
Unthinkable, and 9/11. Each in its turns served to raise the fear level dramatically. Each drew
on past meetings, documents, events, speeches, and deep associations of dread. This language
was conjured from the chief sorcerer's playbook, not from that of an apprentice out of
control.
And as David Ray Griffin, the seminal 9/11 researcher (and others), has pointed out in a
dozen meticulously argued and documented
books , the events of that day had to be carefully planned in advance, and the post hoc
official explanations can only be described as scientific miracles, not scientific
explanations. These miracles include: massive steel-framed high-rise buildings for the first
time in history coming down without explosives or incendiaries in free fall speed; one of them
being WTC-7 that was not even hit by a plane; an alleged hijacker pilot, Hani Hanjour, who
could barely fly a Piper Cub, flying a massive Boeing 757 in a most difficult maneuver into the
Pentagon; airport security at four airports failing at the same moment on the same day; all
sixteen U.S. intelligence agencies failing; air traffic control failing, etc. The list goes on
and on. And all this controlled by Osama bin Laden. It's a fairy tale.
Then we had the crucially important anthrax attacks that are linked to 9/11. Graeme
MacQueen, in
The 2001 Anthrax Deception , brilliantly shows that these too were a domestic
conspiracy.
These planned events led to the invasion of Afghanistan, the Patriot Act, the U.S.
withdrawal from the ABM Treaty, the invasion of Iraq , the ongoing war on terror, etc.
Let us not forget years of those fraudulent color-coded warnings of the terrorist levels and
the government admonition to use duct tape around your windows to protect against a massive
chemical and biological attack.
Jump to 2020 .
Let me start in reverse while color-coded designs are fresh in our minds. As the COVID-19
lockdowns were under way, a funny thing happened as people were wishing that life could return
to normal and they could be let out of their cages. Similar color-coded designs popped up
everywhere at the same time. They showed the step-by-step schedule of possible loosening of
government controls if things went according to plan. Red to yellow to green. Eye catching. Red
orange yellow blue green. As with the terrorist warnings following September 11, 2001. In
Massachusetts, a so-called blue state where I live, it's color chart ends in blue, not green,
with Phase 4 blue termed "the new normal: Development of vaccines and/or treatments enable the
resumption of 'the new normal.'" Interesting wording. A resumption that takes us back to the
future.
As with the duct tape admonitions after 9/11, now everyone is advised to wear a mask. It's
interesting to note that the 3 M Company, a major seller of duct tape, is also one of the
world's major sellers of face masks. The company was expected to be producing 50
million N95 respirator masks per month by June 2020 and 2 billion globally within the coming
year. Then there is 3 M's masking tape but this is a sticky topic.
After the attacks of September 11, 2001, we were told repeatedly that the world was changed
forever. Now we are told that after COVID 19, life will never be the same. This is the "new
normal," while the post-9/11-pre-Covid-19 world must have been the old new normal. So
everything is different but normal also. So as the Massachusetts government website puts it, in
the days to come we may be enabled to enact "the resumption of 'the new normal.'" This new old
normal will no doubt be a form of techno-fascist transhumanism enacted for our own good.
As with 9/11, there is ample evidence that the corona virus outbreak was expected and
planned; that people have been the victims of a propaganda campaign to use an invisible virus
to scare us into submission and shut down the world's economy for the global elites. It is a
clear case, as Peter Koenig tells Michel Chossudovsky in this must-see interview
, that is not a conspiracy theory but a blatant factual plan spelled out in the 2010
Rockefeller Report , the October 18, 2019 Event 201 , and Agenda
21 , among other places.
Like amorphous terrorists and a war against "terrorism," which is a tactic and therefore not
something you can fight, a virus is invisible except when the media presents it as a pale,
orange-spiked bunch of floating weird balls that are everywhere and nowhere. Watch your back,
watch your face, mask up, wash your hands, keep your distance – you never know when those
orange spiked balls may get you.
As with 9/11, whenever anyone questions the official narrative of Covid-19, the official
statistics, the validity of the tests,
the effectiveness of masks , the powers behind the heralded vaccine to come, and the
horrible consequences of the lockdowns that are destroying economies, killing people, forcing
people to despair and to commit suicide, creating traumatized children, bankrupting small and
middle-sized businesses for the sake of enriching the richest, etc., the corporate media mock
the dissidents as conspiracy nuts, aiding the viral enemy.
This is so even when the dissenters are highly respected doctors, scientists, intellectuals,
et al., who are regularly disappeared from the internet. With September 11, there were
initially far fewer dissenters than now, and so the censorship of opposing viewpoints didn't
need the blatant censorship that is now growing daily.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS
MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
This censorship happens all across the internet now, quickly and stealthily, the same
internet that is being forced on everyone as the new normal as presented in the Great
Global Reset , the digital lie, where, as Anthony Fauci put it, no one should ever shake
hands again.
A world of abstract images and beings in which, as Arthur Jensen tells Howard Beal in the
film, Network , "All necessities [will be] provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom
amused." A digital dystopia that is fast approaching as perhaps the end of that red thread that
runs from 9/11 to today.
Heidi Evens and Thomas Hackett write in the New York Daily News :
With the nation's illusion of safety and security in ruins, Americans begin the slow and
fitful process of healing from a trauma that feels deeply, cruelly personal leaving citizens
throughout the country with the frightening knowledge of their vulnerability.
Be it Resolved, the scientific community has overreacted to the threat of COVID-19 and the
data prove it...
Six months into a global pandemic and 63,000 scientific papers later, scientists and
medical researchers continue to be perplexed by COVID-19. There are many unknowns with the
virus, and one of the most controversial is how deadly it really is. Since the beginning of
the pandemic, leading health institutions such as the World Health Organization and the
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases have warned that COVID-19 is much more
dangerous than the seasonal flu and that, without expansive public health measures, millions
of people around the world could die from the virus.
But there are some in the scientific community who disagree. And they say they have the
data to prove it. Antibody testing of large population groups indicates that we could be
grossly underestimating the number of people who have been infected by the virus –
which means we are dramatically overestimating the death rate. Given these findings, they
question whether sweeping public health controls are the way to approach a possible second
wave of COVID-19 this autumn.
GUESTS
To understand the true prevalence of COVID-19 infections in the United States, Jay
Bhattacharya has recently undertaken several seroprevalence studies (the study of antibodies in
a population). You can read about his study of Santa Clara County in California
here and his study of 5,600 Major League Baseball employees
here .
Sten Vermund has published numerous scholarly studies on infectious diseases, which you can
view here
.
During the debate both Jay and Sten speak about COVID-19's "infection fatality rate" (IFR).
IFR is one of the most important characteristics of an infectious disease in determining its
severity. It is basically the ultimate measure of a disease's ability to cause death. You can
learn more about IFR and how it is estimated here
. In the debate, both Jay and Sten agree that the current estimates of the COVID-19 infection
fatality rates are overestimated and therefore misleading. To learn more, read Jay's Wall Street
Journal op ed.
During the debate, Sten points out that between March and May of 2020 there was a 19 per
cent excess death rate in the United States. Excess death rates refer to
the difference between the observed numbers of deaths in specific time period and expected
number of deaths in the same time period. According to Sten, the excess rates are probably 28
per cent higher than the official deaths tally of COVID-19 because so many cases are not
reported. This
Nature.com article supports this view.
Jay argues that part of the science community's overreaction to COVID-19 has been censorship
of unpopular scientific views . Jay refers to an op ed in the New York Times by
Michael Eisen that expresses concern about how scientific study pre-prints are being
released before they are peer reviewed, and calling for the establishment of a scientific
"rapid review" service for pre-prints.
One of the scientists Jay identifies as having an unorthodox view on COVID-19 is Gabriela
Gomez, She speaks about her research on herd immunity occurring when as little as ten percent
of the population has been infected with the virus here
and you can read her research article
here .
Sten and Jay disagree with each other about the feasibility of isolating the most vulnerable
members of society, particularly the elderly, while letting the rest of the population continue
to live normally . Sten refers to a
New York Times article by David Katz which supports the strategy of "vertical
interdiction", where those over 60 are "preferentially protected."
Jay refers to the recent release of findings from a
Public Health England study that found negligible spread among one million students who
returned to school in June.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
From bomb drills to COVID lockdowns, protective rituals based on irrational fear are a
mainstay of American culture. A masked TSA agent at Bradley International Airport, CT.
(By Eric K. Warncke/Shutterstock)
With the 19th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks looming like a hangover it is worth asking the
price we pay for fear itself. Barack Obama said at his convention you must vote Democrat out of
fear for our democracy. Don Jr. said pretty much the same a week later, just reversing the
names and the politics. Everyone wants you to be afraid of anarchy, either the white or black
version. The message from all sides is fear. It sounds so 2020 but it is as old as the modern
era.
America's fear in my childhood was that we were going to die at school when the Russians
nuked America. We hid under our desks during drills, we huddled away from the windows with our
coats over our heads and waited to die. For an elementary student raised to believe what he was
taught, it was a nightmare. My third grade teacher even identified Ground Zero as the cinder
parking lot next to the school, and for some reason told us it would happen in the morning.
Americans were taught to be afraid even as we were the apex predator on the planet with the
world's only atomic bomb. We dutifully rewarded president after president for maintaining the
most massive national security state ever known, but we never felt safe. We spent the best
years of the American Century huddled like shelter dogs. We never saw that it was all a trick,
like conjuring a pandemic out of a virus which doesn't even cause symptoms in many of its hosts
and unlike almost anything else, like cancer or heart attacks, has a fatality rate well below a
single percent (so we count cases, not fatalities -- to generate fear). As with terrorism,
diabetes and ladder falls harm more American lives than the Russians.
In the face of COVID, living in daily fear of terrorism seems almost nostalgic. For me, our
first family plane trip after 9/11 started at a Japanese airport where security seemed about
the same as before. But when we transferred to a U.S. domestic flight the world changed.
The newly-erect TSA tore into us. After shouting at my lack of preparedness to present
various documents quickly enough, they pulled my pre-teen daughter away and impounded a nail
clipper and some sort of medieval-looking eyebrow curling device. She started to cry, and when
I tried to go to her I was held back. A security incident was underway I was told. The TSA
agent said harshly to her "I'm trying to keep you from dying on that airplane!" My little one
started to say something, but I shouted to her to be quiet. I'd learned at some eastern
European border checkpoint long ago the only answer. Submit and board the plane. Submit and we
can see grandma tonight at our destination.
Later, as a federal whistleblower,
I was placed on some sort of list. I could fly, but my trips through the airport would be met
with a firm "Sir, I need you to step over here." The protocols created to protect me from
terrorists had been twisted to turn me into one. Every time I was told I had been randomly
selected, wonderfully Orwellian in how the TSA workers at least seemed to believe it.
https://imasdk.googleapis.com/js/core/bridge3.407.2_en.html#goog_2124503549 Ad ends in 41s
Next Video × Next Video J.d. Vance Remarks On A New Direction For Pro-worker, Pro-family
Conservatism, Tac Gala, 5-2019 Cancel Autoplay is paused
I of course could refuse to hand over my electronics, but TSA would just confiscate them, so
why resist? Of course I could speak to a supervisor, but I'd miss my flight. My old computer
took minutes to cold boot and that angered the TSA agents and prolonged my searches. So I
bought a fast Chromebook to make my surveillance more convenient.
In a perfect melding of fears the 9/11 Memorial Museum showed us how much of this is farce.
After being closed since March to protect us from COVID they will reopen to the general public
on September 12. A symbolic day for sure but one with no science behind it. Why not September 3
or 24? Because it doesn't matter, the danger was never very real. And the museum, with its
cavernous interiors (it is built into the basements of the old Twin Towers) is allowed to host
only 25 percent of its capacity. Same for every other museum in NYC, 25 percent whether they
have state-of-the-art HVAC systems and thousands of square feet or are contained within early
19th century parlors. It doesn't matter because it doesn't matter; there's no science behind it
because there is no serious threat behind it.
In New York we are told it will be the death of us to reopen restaurants for a quick meal,
but from day one of the virus we have been welcome to sit in poorly ventilated subway cars. We
can't have more than a handful of customers inside a store, but we can spend six hours inside
an airplane cabin. Ten people gathered for a party is a death trap but 300 massed for a BLM
protest isn't. The less it makes sense the more it makes sense to just submit and go along,
because thinking is hard.
So it is no surprise I wear a mask outside. I alone seem to remember enough from biology
class to question how a soggy piece of cloth, or a dust mask with an air escape valve on the
side (i.e., your virus-laden exhaled breath goes out) is unlikely to do much, like hanging
garlic to ward off vampires. But I am allowed to buy milk at the store with a mask. I am
allowed to be part of society. I can avoid being scolded by the self-appointed mask
Jugend . I can have a socially distanced conversation with my Democrat neighbor who
believes she will literally risk her life to vote in-person, saving democracy itself after
Trump supposedly gutted the post office. Like many, she has an Old Testament view of the virus;
it is both punishment for electing Trump and the way of delivering us from him.
Those irrational fears from the Cold War and post-9/11 are nothing compared to today;
imagine the McCarthy Red Scare powered by social media. Every week it has been something new
that will destroy us -- war with North Korea and Iran, Boogaloo Bois, Trump the
Manchurian Candidate, not enough beds, and not enough ventilators. We're worried a fascist
government is taking away free speech and we're worried the government isn't doing enough to
suppress free speech to stop hate. There are too many guns for us to be safe and not enough
guns to protect us.
After a decade of terrorists everywhere (when they were actually nowhere) we transition to
live in terror of the virus. People not only support the restrictions and lockdowns, they want
more to feel safer, much like Americans demanded more nukes thinking they'd sleep better
during the Cold War. The enemy is those who oppose more retrictions.
It's not to say people do not die from the virus or there aren't reasons to take prudent
action. It's to say what we are doing in response does not keep many more alive for the price
we are paying. Same story as with terrorism, the Cold War, whatever noise makes you jump in the
dark. The bark outweighed the bite.
Fear as a policy has yielded a nuclear arms race which nearly destroyed the world, the lost
decade of freedoms sacrificed to protection from terrorism, and the hundreds of thousands dead
in pointless revenge wars. Now comes the wasted spring, summer, and autumns of COVID
overreaction, destroying the economy and breaking the spirit of people. The goal of
conditioning through fear is always the same.
Because submission scales. Decades-long nuclear arms race? OK. Support a war in Afghanistan
and Iraq and Syria and Libya and Yemen and Somalia? Patriot Act, torture, prison camps, drone
assassinations? Yes is always the easiest way to imagine you can allay fear forever until the
next scary thing is revealed. Yale welcomes students back to campus with all sorts of
restrictions then warns them they will see death in their dorms.
So in 2020, already conditioned to accept being humiliated barefoot before every flight, it is
easy to accept losing jobs, or to lock down whole cities, or close off state borders. It was
easy for people to accept being denied saying goodbye to a terminally ill loved one, or to be
blocked from attending church or their child's birth, by the government.
Fear is very powerful, and learned helplessness a dangerous thing. So forgive my dry heart
when I am not sure I should fear for our democracy even as I fear for our sanity. And don't be
surprised at how quickly the virus clears away once the election is over. And don't be
surprised when it is replaced by a new thing to fear.
Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well:
How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People, Hooper's War: A
Novel of WWII Japan, and Ghosts of Tom Joad: A Story of the 99 Percent.
Basic human behavior here in my home state of Michigan is being indelibly modified by
fear. I see it in people driving alone wearing a mask in their car. There was the guy
yesterday at the outdoor golf range hitting balls - not very well - 50 feet away from
everyone else wearing his mask the entire time. It's not required. It's not even
suggested.
There's the look of pure terror in people's eyes when you inadvertently stray within their
physical distancing radius while shopping at the local store. The kid in my younger son's Boy
Scout troop who flipped out at my son for coming too close to him without a mask while they
were on a Scout-sanctioned outdoor hike. Then there's the whole school fiasco.
I respectfully disagree with Mr. Van Buren on one point. This isn't going away any time
soon regardless of the election. The behavior will not be "unlearned." The residual fear will
remain. Masks will be a "thing" just as they are in China. Masks are now fashion accessories
and you can buy them with your favorite team's logo on them.
Too much effort has been invested in the narrative and making the "new normal" acceptable.
Too many otherwise marginal people like our beloved Governor Whitmer have been empowered for
all of this simply to evaporate.
I'm not in Michigan, but Los Angeles has similar restrictions, and I don't see the
irrational fear going away any time soon. It broke 100 degrees yesterday, and people were
jogging outdoors in masks. I make a point of not wearing one except when required by law.
Every day, I walk to the supermarket, and the number of people who jump into the street
(without looking! One man nearly got hit by the bus!) upon seeing a human face is startling.
I fear for our future. The mass hysteria boggles my mind.
Well, it isn't much, but living in nyc I mostly walk wherever I am going. I carry a mask
in my pocket and put it on to enter stores because I won't be allowed in without it. But I
walk without a mask on.
Some stores, and it's very clear which, you can go in without a mask. Like my regular bodega.
Either way, it's the small acts of defiance that count in such an environment. Or at least
that's what I tell myself.
It goes back well before the Cold War. Remember the First Red Scare, and the fear of
anarchists lurking around every corner? Or for that matter, Solid Citizens of the day quaking
at the thought that William Jennings Bryan might win the presidency and institute Free
Silver, which was practically bomb-throwing anarchy.
Before that, Southerners shook at the thought of slave uprisings, and Northerners at
Indian raids.
"The less it makes sense the more it makes sense to just submit and go along, because
thinking is hard. So it is no surprise I wear a mask outside"
Precisely the kind of thinking and abject submission that will ensure that this insanity
continues indefinitely (or until the election, depending on the outcome). I've never yet worn
a mask and will not. If that means that only place I can go outside home is the park, so be
it. I'll be leaving this worthless world soon enough. But, I will not wear a useless placebo
face muzzle in order to humor others in their irrational fears and paranoia.
"My third grade teacher even identified Ground Zero as the cinder parking lot next to the
school, and for some reason told us it would happen in the morning."
That was some world-class phycological torture.
I reflect back to my own childhood, in a household of Calvinist-like obsessions and guilt.
Faith as both identity and torture. Habits that even having left that behind, I can't quite
shake.
"Sinners in the hands of an angry God"
Secondly, I think some level of fear and neuroticism is inevitable in a super complex
system like industrial civilization. There seems to be a pervasive yearning to escape from it
that I too have felt. Minimalism, environmentalism, modern readaptations of Buddhism and
Stoicism, etc all are facets of this in my view. Perhaps human nature is simply telling us
that this 200 year old development needs quite a bit more refining before we're happy with it
for the long term. We've lost too much of our freedom and we want it back, but generally not
at the cost of much material comfort. A split like that will take
a long time to reconcile.
You wrote, "a virus which doesn't even cause symptoms in many of
its hosts and unlike almost anything else, like cancer or heart attacks,
has a fatality rate well below a single percent (so we count cases, not
fatalities -- to generate fear)."
By "a single percent" did you mean 1%? In Ohio, where I live, the death rate has been
consistently between 3 and 4%. Not the black plague, certainly, but serious enough. Much more
than the seasonal flu, where the death rate is less than 1%
From comments: "Article is poorly written by someone who does not know medical science. There
are no viral "cells" so the headline is a put off right away. The comment about "sensitivity" is
misplaced as PCR tests are too sensitive: ergo false positives. I believe "specificity" is the
word the author was searching for. If a test lumps true positives with false positives, then it
lacks specificity."
That's because new research from the University of Oxford's Center for Evidence-Based
Medicine and the University of the West of England has found that the swab-based technique used
for most COVID-19 testing is at risk of returning "false positives" since copies of the virus's
RNA detected by the tests might simply be dead, inactive material from a weeks-old infection.
Although patients infected with COVID-19 are typically only infectious for a week or less,
tests can be triggered by virus genetic material left over from a weeks-old infection.
The team's research involved analyzing 25 studies on the widely used polymerase chain
reaction test. PCR tests use material collected with a swab - the most common type of test
around the world, and especially in the US - then utilize a "genetic photocopying" technique
that allows scientists to magnify the small sample of genetic material collected, which they
can then analyze for signs of viral RNA.
What the researchers here have effectively found is that these PCR tests just aren't
sensitive enough to distinguish if the viral material is active and infectious, or dead and
inert.
For those who desire a more comprehensive understanding of how these tests work, the chart
below can be helpful.
Professor Carl Heneghan, one of the authors of the study, said there was a risk that a surge
in testing across the UK was increasing the risk of this sample contamination occurring and it
may explain why the number of Covid-19 cases is rising but the number of deaths is static.
"Evidence is mounting that a good proportion of 'new' mild cases and people re-testing
positives after quarantine or discharge from hospital are not infectious, but are simply
clearing harmless virus particles which their immune system has efficiently dealt with," he
told the Spectator.
Professor Heneghan added that international scrutiny might be required to avoid "the dangers
of isolating non-infectious people or whole communities." ZKnight 14 minutes ago
Fake science. How about purify the virus first and establish a gold standard for testing
first. No, of course not because the CDC has a patent for Covid-19 and nobody is allowed to try
find it to see if it exists. play_arrow LogicFusion 27 minutes ago
Everybody is a Covid-19 / Coronavirus expert now!
Read about the failed coin dealer and convicted felon's performance. It's hilarious!
Covid -19 has been so politicized that I don't believe a word of any publication for or
against testing, existence of the Virus, or anything that provokes testing or issues opinions
about locking down communities. Just like the riots, Covid news is just plain boring.
play_arrow ominous 3 hours ago
"Give me control of a nation's money, and I care not who makes the laws" - Mayer Amschel
Rothschild. play_arrow play_arrow tangent 4 hours ago remove link
People who recommend a vaccine for an entirely cured virus should lose their license to
practice medicine. 99.9% cure rate applying to people who take it before being hospitalized is
one of the biggest success stories in the history of medicine for HCQ. Not only that, but there
are multiple other likely cures that simply have not been studied well. You'd think people
would appreciate the fact that the common cold has been cured, but instead they just whine that
big pharma isn't getting those bucko bucks.
I honestly expected a ticker tape parade like in the movies when that first cure study came
out. But instead they took a massive **** on the study and on the doctor... ****ty world we
live in. ay_arrow Pair Of Dimes Shift 2 hours ago
An exec (55+) at my company is gung ho about the vaccine.
Unfortunately, I just had to give him a "wait and see" response although I know vaccines for
coronaviruses are impossible. play_arrow 2 play_arrow ThanksIwillHaveAnother 4 hours ago
(Edited)
Viruses are not full cells. They are DNA/RNA wrapped with a protein the clings to a cell
then the cell imports the DNA/RNA to start making its proteins. So what is inactive? If that
person sneezes on another person depending on immune system status that other person could get
a bad infection. y_arrow 4 CrabbyR 3 hours ago
viruses utilizes CELL structures and host DNA to replicate dna or rna according to the
viruses genetic code, the protein jacket is the final product to
disguise the virus from detection and to bind on another cell after the compromised cell
RUPTURES, there's more to it but if it cannot copy itself effectively it can become nonviable
and unable to infect another cell. It replicates DNA inside a host cell, It is not a complete
organism and cannot replicate unless it can inject its DNA into a host cell. Antibodies cling
to viruses and destroy this ability to bind to a target cell. A non viable virus has a damaged
coat or DNA RNA that has to many Dimers (damage or code breaks) Bacteria is more in line with
what you think a virus is y_arrow onewayticket2 4 hours ago (Edited) remove link
they lost me when they changed the definition of "death" to include "presumed, untested"
cases (while bI@#$% ing at me that we needed to "follow the science")....and even got busted
for the laughable motorcycle accident being classified as a covid death and the Labs that were
sending in 100% positive results. (until they were caught) play_arrow OutaTime43 4 hours ago
remove link
The test detects RNA. Not necessarily viable virus. Also, it will detect RNA presence in an
individual who may already have antibodies and may be immune. We are bombarded daily by viruses
of which we already have immunity. play_arrow sun tzu 10 hours ago
Shocking news that the South Koreans already discovered and published back in May. Western
big pharma driven medicine is garbage 😂😂😂
Interesting play_arrow play_arrow Jack Mehoff 1 more time 9 hours ago
Business as usual play_arrow play_arrow Argon1 7 hours ago
Preparation for agenda 2021 in 2017. play_arrow 1 play_arrow CrabbyR 4 hours ago
WOW.......ties a few strands from other sources together into a real ugly picture play_arrow
play_arrow Welsh Bard 10 hours ago
The professor who won the Nobel prize for work in this field, said that the way this test is
being operated with over forty cycles, means that any results are entirely meaningless.
In Britain, having spent over £15 billion setting up PCR testing systems and a shaky
test and trace apparatus on top of that, it appears that 90% of positive results now appear to
be false. This is compounded by the fact that when a hot spot develops, more testing is done to
show a rapid increase in more false positive results, meaning further new lockdowns and even
more testing to prove yet more false positive results ad infinitum.
Now whether this is by design or ineptitude, people must decide for themselves but the
outcome is utter chaos.
For those countries who have not followed the Swedish model especially countries like
Australia and New Zealand who have set up complete isolation, now face a future perpetually cut
off from the rest of the world.
Okay, new techniques will and are coming along to treat the disease like HCQ when used
correctly maybe as a prophylactic and a vaccine that will need to be constantly upgraded like
the Flu vaccine, means that the whole world has painted itself into a corner unless drastic
revision is now made to the whole sorry mess.
In the meantime, we will now be stuck with digital currency and the introduction of ID
Health Cards that will limit people in how they travel where they work and access to a whole
heap of things like government services.
Welcome to the new world order! play_arrow 1 KuriousKat 11 hours ago (Edited) remove
link
Don't tell the Shameless Aussie gov that after arresting hundreds for simply voicing doubt
on need to lockdown entire city...Next time it will be thousands and not a damn thing they can
do to stop it..These people are trickling us the truth how worthless the tests are when pretty
much everyone knows. play_arrow espirit 12 hours ago remove link
Lessee.
WHO
Imperial College
John Hopkins
CDC
Line all those peeps up against the wall, and the first one to rat gets to live.
I'll provide my own ammo... ay_arrow Sick Monkey 6 hours ago
Not everyone working in these agencies are dishonest but like you and I we have to work and
eat.
Most of them are trapped in this mess with bills to pay threatened by NDA.
play_arrow 1 Urban Roman 12 hours ago
Not particularly new news. Been talked about since April at least -- it's an RNA virus, it
has its own polymerase, and it leaves lots of RNA fragments in its wake.
The Corona family of viruses make 5 or 6 strands with partial copies of their RNA molecule.
negative copies are made first, and then copied again into positive copies. Finally the one big
RNA is made with the entire genome on it.
So about a dozen RNA molecules are made for each finished virus particle that is produced.
And finally, a variety of different primers are used for the PCR tests, some are matched to the
small partial RNA copies and others are matched to various features on the large whole-virus
RNA. They can give different results for the same sample.
So, someone who registers on a PCR test has probably been exposed to the virus, but the test
gives no clue as to whether it is an active infection, or the person is contagious, or they are
just coming down with it, or they got over it six months ago. play_arrow 4 play_arrow 1
10 play_arrow gordo 12 hours ago remove link
Sweden, no masks, no lock downs, ALL SCHOOLS OPEN, herd immunity, no second wave.
Still think your masks and lock downs are working muppets?
1 play_arrow The 3rd Dimentia 13 hours ago
https://youtu.be/sjYvitCeMPc
SARS-CoV2 and the Rise of Medical Technocracy. Lee Merritt, M.D. play_arrow 3 play_arrow
hugin-o-munin 13 hours ago
I'm glad to see that many are starting to counter the official narrative.
We've been asleep for too long and allowed these agendas to fester to the point we're at now
where a college dropout software salesman and a former 3rd world communist terrorist (neither
of whom have any medical degree) are dictating to the world how everyone needs to get a DNA
altering vaccine and a medical ID. It's completely nuts and bonkers yet more or less the entire
planet's governments follow in 'lockstep' with ever more draconian laws and regulations
incarcerating people in their own homes, making them wear masks causing oxygen deprivation and
shutting down the entire world economy.
lay_arrow Warthog777 , 13 hours ago
Article is poorly written by someone who does not know medical science. There are no viral
"cells" so the headline is a put off right away. The comment about "sensitivity" is misplaced
as PCR tests are too sensitive: ergo false positives. I believe "specificity" is the word the
author was searching for. If a test lumps true positives with false positives, then it lacks
specificity.
Anyone who would use the term "virus cells", has no clue what they're talking about and
should be completely disregarded. Viruses are not cells. PCR tests are searching for
something your body produces in response to a virus as well. They are not produced
specifically for a singular virus either. The entire concept of PCR testing is garbage. This
**** was a scam from the get-go.
hugin-o-munin , 13 hours ago
Yes it is evident now that this entire pandemic is false and political. The goal seems to
be to vaccinate entire populations and the question people need to ask is - why? what for?
Aside from the obvious economic motives there are some more sinister plans that most people
will have a hard time accepting but these need to be looked at. Several years ago there were
a group of doctors and researchers that died of suspicious suicides who were collaborating
and studying vaccines and the link to autism.
The effort was led by Dr.Jeffrey Bradstreet who was researching the natural substance
GcMAF and how this could boost the immune system. What he discovered was that many vaccines
had a compound/substance called Nagalase in them that is unnatural and has a detrimental
effect on the immune system and function of GcMAF (which is produced by our own bodies) and
has no business at all being in vaccines. Just before he was able to blow the whistle on this
he also died of a suspicious 'suicide' and today most of the clinics and research groups
working on GcMAF have been destroyed and ruined. Draw your own conclusions.
snblitz , 14 hours ago
Dr. Kary Mullis invented the PCR test. He said it was ineffective for this purpose.
Though he was addressing its use in a prior virus hoax unleashed upon the world.
I bet you didn't know this scam has been used before.
That is why I was able to call out the scam right from the start. The second I saw them
using the PCR again, I knew it was from the same playbook.
snblitz , 14 hours ago
So many lies.
Viruses are not alive. They have no metabolic functions. They cannot move.
Don't believe me? Get a degree is virology or microbiology or just a read a book on the
subject. Or capture a wuhan-virus yourself and watch it under a microscope. It won't move. It
won't consume anything. It will just sit there inert.
The problem is that you are being lied to at a scale you cannot imagine.
I know, off to the fema re-education camp for me for spreading false information about the
wuhan-virus.
Though I am not the one spreading fear and hysteria.
aldousd , 13 hours ago
There article is confused, but the work of the doctor is not. Viruses use your cells to
reproduce. When your immune system targets the virus it actually kills your own cell which
has become host to the virus. The virus particles and markers, and the DNA of the virus can
be detected in these dead cells, but dead cells cannot serve as a factory for more viruses.
So it's effectively a dead virus infected cell. Not a dead virus cell.
So while the transcription of the idea here was done by an idiot, it's not an idiotic
idea. The tests cannot tell if the virus came in a living cell that is actively producing
more viruses or a dead host cell that has been assassinated by your immune system. That's
what they're talking about here.
mstyle , 11 hours ago
what about the chromosome 8 stuff that has been mentioned lately?
(since you appear to be rather intelligent)
hugin-o-munin , 11 hours ago
Thanks. Well the chromosome 8 discovery in the PCR test specifications/details is strange
and worrying because it makes you wonder why it's part of this at all. Some believe it's to
get more false positive results while others believe it is what the mRNA vaccines are
intended to target and if that's right then it's really sinister. What exactly is the plan?
To make all of us get Downs Syndrome? I don't know but judging by all their other lies and
schemes it wouldn't surprise me.
IRC162 , 14 hours ago
Fuggin progressives and their pandemic political prop. But really this reaction is the
same as their reaction to 'racial injustice'. They focus on feelings before the facts are
known in order to achieve their end, and then do their best to bury/ignore the facts when
they are gathered later.
94% COVID deaths with multiple comorbidities.
10 unarmed blacks killed by police in 2019 (6 were in self-defense).
adr , 15 hours ago
Why didn't you mention that nearly all labs are running 35-40 cycles which guarantees a
positive test, simply from noise.
The inventor of the test said if you don't find anything after 15 cycles, it probably
isn't there. After 20 cycles the noise starts to be greater than any real information. By 30,
the test is mostly noise. More than 35, the test is completely worthless.
Of course I've been saying this for five months, but most people didn't listen. After the
NYT article came out, people I know started saying, "How did you know?"
I said, "Because I have critical thinking skills. Why didn't you believe me? Name a time
I've steered you wrong."
Antiduck , 14 hours ago
333 labs in florida had 100% positivity. (stupid word.)
ZenStick , 12 hours ago
Exactly correct.
Nobody will touch this line of reasoning in public or on media.
Bastages.
Identify as Ferengi , 15 hours ago
See above, Born2Bwired.
The PCR test is not useful for what they are using it for apparently. This has been
known since the beginning. Here is quote regarding AIDS:
"Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize in Science for inventing the PCR, is thoroughly
convinced that HIV is not the cause of "AIDS". With regard to the viral load tests, which
attempt to use PCR for counting viruses, Mullis has stated: "Quantitative PCR is an
oxymoron." PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is
unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral
load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect
free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some
cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV. The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but
not viruses themselves.
What PCR does is to select a genetic sequence and then amplify it enormously. It can
accomplish the equivalent of finding a needle in a haystack; it can amplify that needle
into a haystack. Like an electronically amplified antenna, PCR greatly amplifies the
signal, but it also greatly amplifies the noise. Since the amplification is exponential,
the slightest error in measurement, the slightest contamination, can result in errors of
many orders of magnitude."
"... It's time to stop fetishizing scientific methods. We have to accept that there are many elements of Covid-19 that science may never understand and if we wait for it to do so, we will never again be able to live a normal life. ..."
"... Science, if it is working properly, will not come to a conclusion that is wholly wrong. But not everything that is true can be established by a randomized control trial followed by peer review. Take the theory, popularized by Dr John Lee's work in the Spectator , that Covid has become less deadly as it spreads, and is now basically inert. ..."
"... People need to accept this about Covid (and hopefully later, much else) and stop fetishizing the scientific method at times when a bit of common sense would do the job. ..."
"... Consider this article , written by three scientific minds. It is a measured and 'data driven' analysis of whether Covid is becoming less deadly. But is blinkered by an assumption that only official data, no matter how muddled, can be relied upon. All you really need to do is ask doctors whether they are seeing people come in with Covid, or if they are dying of Covid when they do. Instead it focuses on case numbers, which are not worth the paper they are written on. ..."
"... So many people have been so frightened – understandably – by exaggerated accounts of the threat posed by Covid-19, and it will take a lot to persuade them that they have been sold a pup. But they need to be persuaded, so that can get their old lives back. The present regime will never take on this responsibility because it would center on an admission of massive guilt on their part. ..."
"... What is needed now from all sensible people is calm but insistent argument, with friends, relations and authorities alike, for the total abolition of all coronavirus-related restrictions. We saw some of that in London and Berlin over the weekend, and it was fantastic to see such well organized and clear minded dissent against the sinister 'new normal'. ..."
By Peter Andrews , Irish science journalist and writer based in London. He has a
background in the life sciences, and graduated from the University of Glasgow with a degree in
genetics
It's time to stop fetishizing scientific methods. We have to accept that there are
many elements of Covid-19 that science may never understand and if we wait for it to do so, we
will never again be able to live a normal life.
The Covid-19 outbreak is largely over, and man's attempts to slow, stop or understand the
virus have failed. Science will eventually discover more about the pandemic but it is a slow
process.
Science, if it is working properly, will not come to a conclusion that is wholly wrong. But
not everything that is true can be established by a randomized control trial followed by peer
review. Take the theory, popularized by Dr John Lee's work in the
Spectator , that Covid has become less deadly as it spreads, and is now basically
inert.
This would perfectly explain why so many people died of Covid-19 in a short period of time,
and why deaths have basically flat-lined since April. It fits with many Covid studies
confirming fast
evolution , different strains and reinfection .
Furthermore, a change to the virus itself could explain why the same patterns in deaths have
been seen everywhere, irrespective of lockdowns, demographics, contact tracing or any other
scheme.
In fact, with each passing day it is increasingly probable that the virus has mutated to a
milder form. The trouble is it would be nigh on impossible to establish this with the
instruments of science, now or any time soon. The vagaries of individual human bodies and
microscopic particles are just beyond the scope of exact science.
People need to accept this about Covid (and hopefully later, much else) and stop fetishizing
the scientific method at times when a bit of common sense would do the job. We are paralysed by
a need for the World Health Organization or Public Health England to conjure up some
peer-reviewed study or other confirming to 99.9 percent likelihood that we can go back to
normal now. That will never happen, but we have to get back to normal.
Consider this
article , written by three scientific minds. It is a measured and 'data driven' analysis of
whether Covid is becoming less deadly. But is blinkered by an assumption that only official
data, no matter how muddled, can be relied upon. All you really need to do is ask doctors
whether they are seeing people come in with Covid, or if they are dying of Covid when they do.
Instead it focuses on case numbers, which are not worth the paper they are written on.
Here is another paper ,
co-authored by the brilliant Professor Carl Heneghan of the University of Oxford's Center for
Evidence-Based Medicine. He has been tireless in his questioning of the government's
interpretation of coronavirus statistics, although it has taken far too long for him to be
given any kind of
platform from which to address the public.
The study, while no doubt accurate and valuable for establishing fine points of detail,
seeks to answer whether the infection fatality ratio has been falling in the UK. A
comprehensive review of the limited data suggests that it has, but so what? What does that mean
to the average Joe, confused as to whether they should send their child to school in the
morning, or whether it would be irresponsible to give their elderly parents a
hug?
So many people have been so frightened – understandably – by exaggerated
accounts of the threat posed by Covid-19, and it will take a lot to persuade them that they
have been sold a pup. But they need to be persuaded, so that can get their old lives back. The
present regime will never take on this responsibility because it would center on an admission
of massive guilt on their part.
What is needed now from all sensible people is calm but insistent argument, with friends,
relations and authorities alike, for the total abolition of all coronavirus-related
restrictions. We saw some of that in London and Berlin over
the weekend, and it was fantastic to see such well organized and clear minded dissent against
the sinister 'new normal'.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
On August 2, lockdown measures were implemented in Melbourne, Australia, that were so
draconian that Australian news commentator Alan Jones said on Sky News : "People are
entitled to think there is an 'agenda to destroy western society.'"
The gist of an August 13 th article on the Melbourne lockdown is captured in the
title: "
Australian Police Go FULL NAZI , Smashing in Windows of Civilian Cars Just Because
Passengers Wouldn't Give Details About Where They Were Going."
Another article with an arresting title was by Guy Burchell in the August 7 thAustralian National Review : "
Melbourne Cops May Now Enter Homes Without a Warrant , After 11 People Die of COVID --
Australia, This Is Madness, Not Democracy." Burchell wrote that only 147 people had lost their
lives to coronavirus in Victoria (the Australian state of which Melbourne is the capital), a
very low death rate compared to other countries. The ramped up lockdown measures were triggered
by an uptick in cases due to ramped up testing and 11 additional deaths, all of them in nursing
homes (where lockdown measures would actually have little effect). The new rules include a six
week curfew from 8 PM to 5 AM, with residents allowed to leave home outside those curfew hours
only to shop for food and essential items (one household member only), and for caregiving, work
and exercise (limited to one hour).
"But the piece de resistance ," writes Burchell, "has to be that now police officers
can enter homes with neither a warrant nor permission. This is an astonishing violation of
civil liberties . Deaths of this kind are not normally cause for government action, let alone
the effective house arrest of an entire city." He quoted Victoria Premier Daniel Andrews, who
told Victorians, "there is literally no reason for you to leave your home and if you were to
leave your home and not be found there, you will have a very difficult time convincing Victoria
police that you have a lawful reason." Burchell commented:
[U]nder this new regime you can't even remain in your house unmolested by the cops, they
can just pop 'round anytime to make sure you haven't had Bruce and Sheila from next door
round for a couple of drinks. All over a disease that is simply not that fatal .
Last year more than 310,000 Australians were hospitalised with flu and over 900 died. By
all metrics that makes flu a worse threat than COVID-19 but police weren't granted Stasi-like
powers during the flu season. Millions of people weren't confined to their homes and
threatened with AUS$5,000 fines for not having a good reason for being out of their
homes.
At an August 19 th press conference , Australia's second most senior medical
officer said the government would be discussing measures such as banning restaurants,
international travel, public transport, and withholding government programs through "No Jab No
Pay" in order to coerce vaccine resisters.
An
August 13 article on LifeSiteNews quoted Father Glen Tattersall, a Catholic parish
priest in Melbourne, who said the draconian provisions "simply cannot be justified on a
scientific basis":
We have a curfew from 8 pm to 5 am, rigorously enforced including by the use of police
helicopters and search lights. Is the virus a vampire that just comes out at night? Or the
wearing of masks: they must be worn everywhere outside, even in a park where you are nowhere
near any other person. Why? Does the virus leap hundreds of metres through the air? This is
all about inducing mass fear, and humiliating the populace by demanding external
compliance.
Why the strict curfew? Curfews have been implemented recently in the US to deter violence
during protests, but no violence of that sort was reported in Melbourne. What was reported, at
least on social media , were
planes landing in the night
from the Chinese province of Guandong carrying equipment related to 5G and the Chinese
biometric social credit system, which was reportedly being installed under a blanket of
secrecy.
Angelo Codevilla, professor emeritus at Boston University,
concluded in an August 13 th article, "We are living through a coup
d'état based on the oldest of ploys: declaring emergencies, suspending law and
rights, and issuing arbitrary rules of behavior to excuse taking 'full powers'."
Questioning the Narrative
Melbourne has gone to extremes with its lockdown measures, but it could portend things to
come globally. Lockdowns were originally sold to the public as being necessary just for a
couple of weeks to "flatten the curve," to prevent hospital overcrowding from COVID-19 cases.
It has now been over five months, with self-appointed vaccine czar Bill Gates intoning that we will not be able
to return to "normal" until the entire global population of 7 billion people has been
vaccinated. He has since backed off on the numbers, but commentators everywhere are reiterating
that lockdowns are the "new normal," which could last for years.
All this is such a radical curtailment of our civil liberties that we need to look closely
at the evidence justifying it; and when we do, that evidence is weak. The isolation policies
were triggered by
estimates from the Imperial College London of 510,000 UK deaths and 2.2 million US deaths,
more than 10 times the actual death rate from COVID-19. A Stanford University
antibody study estimated that the fatality rate if infected was only about 0.1 to 0.2
percent; and in
an August 4 th blog post , Bill Gates himself acknowledged that the death rate
was only 0.14 percent, not much higher than for the flu. But restrictive measures have gotten
more onerous rather than less as the mortality figures have been revised downward.
A July 2020 UK study from Loughborough and Sheffield Universities found that government
policy over the lockdown period has actually increased mortality rather than reducing it, after
factoring in collateral damage including deaths from cancers and other serious diseases that
are being left untreated, a dramatic increase in suicides and drug overdose, and poverty and
malnourishment due to unemployment. Globally, according to UNICEF, 1.2 million child deaths are
expected as a direct result of the lockdowns. A data analyst in South Africa asserts that
the
consequences of the country's lockdown will lead to 29 times more deaths than from the
coronavirus itself .
Countries and states that did very little to restrict their populations, including Sweden
and South Dakota, have fared as well as or better overall than locked down US states. In an
August 12 th article in The UK Telegraph titled "
Sweden's Success Shows the True Cost of Our Arrogant, Failed Establishment ," Allister
Heath writes:
Sweden got it largely right, and the British establishment catastrophically wrong. Anders
Tegnell, Stockholm's epidemiologist-king, has pulled off a remarkable triple whammy:
far fewer deaths per capita than Britain, a maintenance of basic freedoms and opportunities,
including schooling, and, most strikingly, a recession less than half as severe as our
own.
Not restraining the populace has allowed Sweden's curve to taper off naturally through "herd
immunity," with daily deaths down to single digits for the last month. (See
chart .)
The Pandemic That Wasn't?
Also bringing the official narrative into question is the unreliability of the tests on
which the lockdowns have been based. In a
Wired interview , even Bill Gates acknowledged that most US test results are
"garbage." The Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology used in the nasal swab test is
considered the "gold standard" for COVID-19 detection; yet the PCR test was regarded by its own
inventor, Nobel prize winner Kary Mullis, as
inappropriate to detect viral infection . In a detailed June 27 th analysis
titled "
COVID-19 PCR Tests Are Scientifically Meaningless ," Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin
Demeter conclude:
Without doubt eventual excess mortality rates are caused by the therapy and by the lockdown
measures, while the "COVID-19" death statistics comprise also patients who died of a variety of
diseases, redefined as COVID-19 only because of a "positive" test result whose value could not
be more doubtful.
The authors discussed a January 2007 New York Times article titled " Faith in Quick Test
Leads to Epidemic That Wasn't ," describing an apparent whooping cough epidemic in a New
Hampshire hospital. The epidemic was verified by preliminary PCR tests given to nearly 1,000
healthcare workers, who were subsequently furloughed. Eight months later, the "epidemic" was
found to be a false alarm. Not a single case of whooping cough was confirmed by the
"gold standard" test – growing pertussis bacteria in the laboratory. All of the
cases found through the PCR test were false positives.
Yet "test, test, test" was the message proclaimed for all countries by WHO Director General
Tedros Adhanom at a media briefing on
March 16, 2020 , five days after WHO officially declared COVID-19; and the test recommended
as the gold standard was the PCR. Why, when it had already been demonstrated to be unreliable,
creating false positives that gave the appearance of an epidemic when there was none? Or was
that the goal – to create the appearance of a pandemic, one so vast that the
global economy had to be brought to a standstill until a vaccine could be found? Recall Prof.
Codevilla's conclusion: "We are living through a coup d'état based on the oldest
of ploys: declaring emergencies, suspending law and rights, and issuing arbitrary rules of
behavior to excuse taking 'full powers'."
People desperate to get back to work will not only submit to a largely untested vaccine but
will agree to surveillance measures that would have been considered a flagrant violation of
their civil rights if those rights had not been overridden by a "national emergency" justifying
preemption by the police powers of the state. They will agree to get "immunity passports" in
order to travel and participate in group activities, and they will submit to quarantines,
curfews, contact tracings, social credit scores and informing on the neighbors. The emergency
must be kept going to justify these unprecedented violations of their liberties, in which
decision-making is removed from elected representatives and handed to unelected bureaucrats and
technocrats.
A national health crisis also a necessary prerequisite for relief from liability for
personal injuries from the drugs and other products deployed in response to the crisis. Under
the 2005 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREPA), in the event of a declared
public health emergency, manufacturers are shielded from tort liability for injuries both from
the vaccines and from invalid or invasive tests. Compensation for personal injuries is a
massive expense for drug companies, and the potential profits from a product free of that
downside are a gold mine for pharmaceutical companies and investors. The liabilities will be
borne by the taxpayers and the victims.
All this, however, presupposes both an existing public health emergency and no effective
treatment to defuse it. That helps explain the otherwise inexplicable
war on hydroxychloroquine , a safe drug that has been in use and available over the counter
for 65 years and has been
shown to be effective in multiple studies when used early in combination with zinc and an
antibiotic. A table prepared by the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (
below ) found that the US has nearly 30 times as many deaths per capita as countries making
early and prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.
The latest international testing of
hydroxychloroquine treatment of coronavirus shows countries that had early use of the drug had
a 79% lower mortality rate than countries that banned the use of the safe malaria drug.
Lowering the US mortality rate by 79% could have saved over 100,000 lives. But an effective,
inexpensive COVID-19 treatment would mean the end of the alleged pandemic and the vaccine
bonanza it purports to justify.
The need to maintain the appearance of a pandemic also explains the inflated reports of
cases and deaths. Hospitals have been rewarded with increased fees for reclassifying cases as
COVID-19. As deaths declined in the US, the numbers of cases reported by the Centers for
Disease Control were also
gamed to make it appear that America was in a "second wave" of a pandemic. The reporting
criterion was changed on May 18 from people who tested positive for the virus only to people
who tested positive for either the virus or its antibodies. The exploding numbers thus include
people who have recovered from COVID-19 as well as false positives. The Loughborough and
Sheffield researchers found that when controlling for other factors affecting mortality, actual
deaths due to COVID-19 are 54% to 63% lower than implied by the standard excess deaths
measure.
Ushering in "The Great Reset"
Forcing compliance with global vaccine mandates is one obvious motive for maintaining the
appearance of an ongoing pandemic, but what would be the motive for destroying the global
economy with forced lockdowns? What is behind the "agenda to destroy Western society" suspected
by Australian commentator Alan Jones?
Evidently it is this: destroying the old is necessary to usher in the new. Global economic
destruction paves the way for the "Great Reset" now being promoted by the World Economic Forum,
the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the International Monetary Fund and other big global
players.
Although cast as arising from the pandemic,
the "global economic reset" is a concept that was floated as early as 2014 by Christine
Lagarde, then head of the IMF, and is said to be a recharacterization of the "New World Order"
discussed long before that. It was promoted as a solution to the ongoing economic crisis
triggered in 2008.
The World Economic Forum – that elite group of businessmen, politicians and academics
that meets in Davos, Switzerland, every January – announced in June that the Great Reset
would be the theme of its 2021 Summit. Klaus Schwab,
founder of the Forum, admonished:
The world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and
economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the
United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must
be transformed.
No country will be allowed to opt out because it would be endangering the rest, just as no
person will be allowed to escape the COVID-19 vaccine for the same reason.
Who is behind the Great Reset and what it really entails are major questions that need their
own article, but suffice it to say here that to escape the trap of the globalist agenda, we
need a mass awakening to what is really going on and collective resistance to it while there is
still time. There are hopeful signs that this is happening, including massive protests against
economic shutdowns and restrictions, particularly in Europe; a rash of lawsuits challenging the
constitutionality of the lockdowns and of police power overreach; and a flood of alternative
media exposés despite widespread censorship.
Life as we know it will change. We need to ensure that it changes in ways that serve the
people and the productive economy, while preserving our national sovereignty and hard-won
personal freedoms.
@Brás Cubas ite the contrary. What he said is that its severity has been
intentionally and systematically exaggerated, and that is clearly correct and provable.
Here are experienced medical doctors providing well-documented detailed criticism of the
covid-19 death stats and the wide ranging dishonesty in their inflation. They note that thus
far, more accurate and honest stats suggest that this virus has been not as lethal as recent
flu strains in some countries, about the same in some, and slightly worse in some. Not
imaginary, but badly exaggerated as well as ineptly treated.
I'm a business owner. There's no point in me opening up because the customer base is
stupid enough to believe the lie. All I would be doing is running up my expenses.
This scam is a stroke of evil genius. What will stop it is economic collapse, nothing
else.
What I don't understand is why there hasn't been an investigation into the mysterious
upper respiratory virus that broke out at the Greenspring Retirement Community in Fairfax
County, Virginia last summer. 63 people became ill and three died. Very unusual for something
like that to break out in the summer months. Is there a connection to Covid-19? Fort Detrick
Lab in Maryland is about an hour away from the breakout.
Curb your enthusiasm for the WSJ. Western media and get away with portraying China's
government as 'opaque' because so few of their writers read Chinese. In fact, self-criticism
is built into Chinese governance as these comments by Shao Yiming, virologist and chief
HIV/AIDS expert at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CCDC), and the head
of the CCDC, Dr. George Gao, illustrate.
Like most such Western 'revelations,' the story appeared in Chinese newspapers last April
and in the Japanese news in May:
[Hide MORE]
Caixin: Many people compare China's CDC with the U.S. counterpart and call for the
agency to have greater authority. What's your thought?
Dr. George Gao: We must understand the technical nature of the work at CDCs. They use
scientific methods to carry out surveillance of infectious diseases, assess risks and send
timely alerts. They also carry out intervention based on the nature of the epidemic and set
up national standards and guidance to deal with diseases. But it is almost impossible for
China's CDC system to complete such tasks with their current resources and coordination
capacity. The Covid-19 outbreak proves the problems and the urgent need for CDC reforms.
There are about 20,000 people working in the American CDC system, compared with only
2,000 in China, and they cover almost four times the population of the U.S. The U.S. CDC
has more than 500 people focusing on research, warning, intervention, public education and
emergency response related to flu virus, but the team in China is only 2 0.
There should be dedicated teams to track and conduct long-term studies of seasonal flu,
novel influenza and respiratory infections. They need to carry out massive surveillance,
sample collection, testing and analysis to study the virus and response measures. Such
tasks can't be completed with only 10 to 20 people.
China has identified 36 infectious diseases in the Law on the Prevention and Control of
Infectious Diseases, but fewer than half of the diseases are under study by dedicated
teams. Although the China CDC has strived to hire high-end talent over the past 10 years,
it has difficulties retaining them. Institution-building should be enhanced in the disease
control system. We should eliminate certain institutional barriers such as limiting CDC's
responsibility to human disease control while assigning animal disease surveillance to
agricultural departments. In the U.S., the CDC regularly monitors risks from animals. The
frequent outbreak of zoonotic diseases (those transmitted from animals) reminds us of the
importance of cross-department cooperation.
On the other hand, the national CDC should not only function in Beijing. In countries
like the U.S. and Russia, the national CDC often has branches and dispatches teams to
states and cities to collect first-hand information. I think in China, while strengthening
the power of the national CDC, it is also important to combine disease control departments
at the provincial level with the CDC for better coordination.
It is a great pity that the direct reporting system to monitor infectious disease
set up after the SARS outbreak didn't play its due role during this epidem ic.
Under the rules, the cases should be submitted to the system whenever there are more
than three unknown pneumonia cases. The system is in place with a network covering more
than 70,000 reporting points across the country, and doctors can do it with a simple click.
The reports will be simultaneously submitted to the national and local level of the Disease
Control and Prevention Center (CDC). The idea of the direct reporting system is to reduce
administrative intervention and save time in the face of an epidemic.
But after 15 years of operation of this costly system, all the efforts
unbelievably turned out to be in vain, and hierarchical review and administrative
intervention were back in place. Why were there such actions, which violate the Law on the
Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases, could happen in government and law
enforcement departments? Why didn't local experts fulfill their duty according to the
infectious disease reporting rules? And why did the National Health Commission and its
experts fail to collect important information in a timely w ay? Whether we can find
true and adequate answers to these questions will be important to future work.
And as to
An entirely new disease that spreads in silent, asymptomatic fashion can easily escape
initial detection, and we should not be surprised that no one in China noticed the Wuhan
outbreak when it first began in October or November.
Obviously, it was spreading in silent, asymptomatic fashion in the USA much earlier, as
lab tests and image analyses have shown. The difference between China's and our CDCs was that
that they were looking for it and we issued restraining orders to anyone who attempted to
test for it.
_________________________________________________
Why 'Smart' Covid-19 Virus May Be Here to Stay. By Yang Rui, Denise Jia and Han Wei. Caixin,
Mar 19, 2020
While the virus is perfectly real, its severity has been intentionally and systematically
exaggerated, and that is clearly is provable. So the working hypoethisi is that somebody badly
needed Coronavirus reset, iether for political or financial purposes or both.
23 AUGUST 2020"COVID hysteria kills." The Telegraph
" ... Research commissioned that July by the firm Kekst CNC showed how far public
perceptions about the pandemic had been skewed, finding they were inclined to believe the
spread and fatality was more than a hundred times worse than the reality.
For example, the average Briton was found last month to estimate that the disease had wiped
out as much as 7 per cent of the United Kingdom, which would equate to around 4.6 million
people, rather than the actual rate in the tens of thousands. They estimate just over 22 per
cent of the population have had Covid-19, which at just over 14.6 million people would be well
over the current confirmed case tally of 322,000.
"
When people estimate risk, they overestimate it massively ," says King College London's
Professor Neil Greenberg, who works with Public Health England as part of the Health Protection
Research Unit for Emergency Preparedness and Response. "We are very poor as a public at
estimating what risk really means."
That does not mean the threat posed by Covid-19 can be summarily dismissed, but experts are
keen for a sense of proportion.
Prof Udi Qimron, the incoming head of clinical microbiology and immunology at Tel Aviv
University, recently highlighted that 99.9 per cent of the world's population has so far
survived the virus, as the total number of coronavirus deaths does not exceed 0.1 per cent of
the total population anywhere around the world. (See the table below for the latest data on
European deaths)
---------------
Nervousness? Apprehension? Nah! Not in the US. Here it is just plain old gutlessness. We are
not the people our ancestors were. pl
Col. Lang is correct. "We are not the people our ancestors were." We are an afraid people.
We wouldn't otherwise trade our liberty for the false security of mass surveillance,
government propaganda, and this lockdown that continues. Sad!
As Albert Camus wrote in The Plague: potentially deadly events like this give some people
their sole reason for living. And the cure, for them, becomes fatal.
Shows the Houthis wiping out the main IS bastion in Yemen earlier in the week. Prisoners
treated well, they wouldn't be treated like this in Syria/Iraq or in any country where
franchises exist.
The risk is relative. It is nil if you are not exposed to a coronavirus shedding person.
If you must work with the public to get paid, live in a multi-generational household, or are
over 70 the risks of getting ill and dying are greater. Coronavirus has killed 180,558
Americans to date which is almost five times more than the 36,750 who died in automobile
accidents last year. The virus is the third leading cause of death in America after heart
disease and cancer. The is no national coordination and funding to test every American daily
to see who is ill and who is not. Without universal testing there is absolutely no way to
know the risk of going out the door. With testing and agreement by the American public to
isolate if the daily antigen test positive and receive government healthcare, the pandemic
can be ended without needing a vaccine. This would require healthcare for all and a working
government which the ruling elite are absolutely against. Although the costs of the national
testing program are less than the amount already lost in economic activity from the Pandemic
Depression.
The basic problem is the US public health system was dismantled so for-profit hospitals
and professional managers could extract wealth from the ill. Money is earned by treating the
patients not curing them. Employee based health insurance by design does not cover everyone
leaving a hodge-podge of government programs; the VA, Medicare, Medicaid and local programs
for the left-overs. The current US system is simply incapable of containing the pandemic.
Only a functional government like New Zealand or South Korea can.
The US federal government decided to do nothing and wait for a for-profit vaccine next
year. 300,000 Americans are projected to die this year. If there is no vaccine or treatment,
the death toll from coronavirus could reach 675,000 - the number who died of the Spanish flu
in the USA in 1918 and 1919 (but with a 1/3 fewer people). No big deal for Wall Street who
got 4 trillion dollars to keep charging upwards; unless, the unrest continues and
expands.
What I read in Swedish media does not correspond well with what I see reported by others,
usually from outside of the country. Sweden has done worse than its close neighbors Norway
and Finland and they are paying a rather steep economic price for their inaction. Regarding
Florida, where I live, the infections are not receding yet and we have yet to see what will
happen with opening the schools. I suspect the misinformation has a political purpose. There
are more people in Florida wearing masks now, mainly due to local municipalities requiring
them and that is positive. Some think that is a political issue, failing to realize it is an
IQ test.
You see what you want to see in the press depending on what you choose to read. Yes,
lefties like you always want to talk down to people. You are typical. Why are you darkening
my door again?
Judy Miller the journo queen used to tell me that I am a gloomy gus, but I am nothing
compared to you. When did you last have a positive thought? Was it painful?
Your information seems to be out of date or terribly localized. The discontent with the
face burka mandate is increasing, though there's nothing stopping you from wearing one
24/7.
"Florida reported 4,300 new cases Saturday, continuing a downward trend that has seen the
number drop from above 10,000 new cases per day a month ago."
"Hospitalizations due to COVID-19 have also been declining. "
Science now is a highly politicized science and that's a huge problem. Ask USSR scientists
about possible consequences. Is Kapitsa noted long ago in his obitiary on Ernest Rutherford death
as soon as science become rich it lost its freedom. "
"The year that Rutherford died (1938) there
disappeared forever the happy days of free scientific work which gave us such delight in our
youth. Science has lost her freedom. Science has become a productive force. She has become rich
but she has become enslaved and part of her is veiled in secrecy. I do not know whether
Rutherford
would continue to joke and laugh as he used to.
Lysenkoism in Stalins's USSR was the first robin of this process. Now it became commonplace.
That's why we see so many pseudo-scientists -- politicians who pretend to be scientists like
Fauci. and so much corruption like among Professors of economics (all those neoclassical economic
scoundrels)
"...a permanent modern scenario: apocalypse looms and it doesn't occur."
- Susan Sontag, AIDs and its Metaphors
"I should not misuse this opportunity to give you a lecture about, say, logic. I call
this a misuse, for to explain a scientific matter to you it would need a course of lectures
and not an hour's paper. Another alternative would have been to give you what's called a
popular scientific lecture, that is a lecture intended to make you believe that you
understand a thing which actually you don't understand, and to gratify what I believe to be
one of the lowest desires of modern people, namely the superficial curiosity about the
latest discoveries of science. I rejected these alternatives."
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, A Lecture on Ethics
If you're reading this, then you've probably been called a conspiracy theorist. Also
you've been derided and shamed for questioning the "science" of the Covid debacle.
The idea of science is now a badly corrupted idea. In a nation, today, (the USA) which in
educational terms ranks 25th globally in science skills and reading, and well below that in
math; all one hears is a clarion call to science. In reading skills the US placed below
Malta, Portugal, and right about the same as Kazakhstan.
But in a nation that no longer reads, and *can* no longer read, it is not surprising that
knowledge is absorbed via the new hieroglyphics of gifs (interestingly the creator of gifs
wanted it pronounced with a soft g the more to sound like a peanut butter brand) and
memes.
So-called 'response memes' are the new version of conversation, and most register and
communicate (sic) confusion. As beer ad marketers know, the state of your brain after
consuming a six pack is pretty much the standard target ideal for advertising. And it relays
a message that six pack confusion is actually a good and perhaps even sexy state in which to
find oneself.
Education is for those with money, those who can afford the proper foundational skills to
get into Harvard, MIT, Cal Tech and the Stanford. For everyone else science is Star Trek.
But I digress. The point is that most Americans imagine that they revere science, and they
ridicule anyone they think of as unscientific. But they think of it in cult terms, really.
Its a religion of sorts. The only people who don't are those 'real' religious zealots,
Dominionist and Charismatic Christians (like Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence, Rick Perry, Betsy DeVos
et al) who hold positions of enormous power in the US government under the least scientific
president in history.
The Christian right doesn't like any science, ANY science. But for most of that target
demographic (the educated mostly white 30%), the cry is to "trust the science" even the great
Greta says to "trust the science".
The problem is, science is not neutral, its as politicized as media and news and the
pronouncements of celebrities.
In May 2020, The Lancet published an article revisiting the 1957 and 1968 Influenza
pandemics.
The 1957 outbreak was not caused by a coronavirus -- the first human coronavirus would
not be discovered until 1965 -- but by an influenza virus. However, in 1957, no one could
be sure that the virus that had been isolated in Hong Kong was a new pandemic strain or
simply a descendant of the previous 1918–19 pandemic influenza virus.
The result was that as the UK's weekly death count mounted, peaking at about 600 in the
week ending Oct 17, 1957, there were few hysterical tabloid newspaper headlines and no
calls for social distancing. Instead, the news cycle was dominated by the Soviet Union's
launch of Sputnik and the aftermath of the fire at the Windscale nuclear reactor in the
UK.
By the time this influenza pandemic -- known colloquially at the time as "Asian flu" --
had concluded the following April, an estimated 20 000 people in the UK and
80 000 citizens in the USA were dead. Worldwide, the pandemic, sparked by a new H2N2
influenza subtype, would result in more than 1 million deaths.
To date, Covid 19 has not reached the million death marker in the US, and yet we are
seeing the most draconian lockdowns in modern history, the total suspension of democratic
process and a level of hysteria (especially in the U.S. and UK) unprecedented. I wrote about
some aspects of this on my blog here , mostly touching on the
cultural effects
Allow me to quote The Lancet again.
The subsequent 1968 influenza pandemic -- or "Hong Kong flu" or "Mao flu" as some
western tabloids dubbed it -- would have an even more dramatic impact, killing more than
30 000 individuals in the UK and 100 000 people in the USA, with half the
deaths among individuals younger than 65 years -- the reverse of COVID-19 deaths in the
current pandemic.
Yet, while at the height of the outbreak in December, 1968, The New York Times described
the pandemic as "one of the worst in the nation's history", there were few school closures
and businesses, for the most, continued to operate as normal.
I remember the 68 Hong Kong flu. I was in my last year of high school. The summer after
was Woodstock, the 'summer of love'. Not a lot of social distancing going on. But we are past
numbers and statistics having any real meaning. The Covid narrative is now in the realm of
allegory.
The media perspective is utterly predictable. Liberal outlets that have the inside track
to government are seen to be reinforcing the mainstream story (VOX, Slate, Huff Post, The
Guardian and Washington Post). In a recent VOX article the message was only a sociopath would
NOT wear a mask and that the 'science' was unanimous.
Of course its no such thing. But the message of sites like VOX, or Daily Beast, or Wa Po
or the truly reprehensible Guardian, are always going to be to hammer away 'on message'. The
same is true for what passes for moderate news organs like the NY Times, ABC News, The Hill,
and BBC. There has been virtually no dissenting opinions expressed in these rags.
All these news outlets are given clear messages by the spin doctors in government, by the
White House, and by contacts within the State Department and Pentagon. And by the advertising
firms employed by the state (such as Ruder Finn).
"Ad agencies are not in the business of doing science."
- Dr. Arnold S. Relman (Madison Ave. Has Growing Role In the Business of Drug
Research, NY Times 2002)
The WHO, the CDC, and most every other NGO or government agency of any size hires
advertising firms. The WHO, which is tied to the United Nations, is a reasonably sinister
organization, actually.
Just picking up a random publication from the WHO, on what they call 'the tobacco
epidemic' and you find on page 33 the following chapter heading "Objective: Effective
surveillance, monitoring and evaluation systems in place to monitor tobacco use."
Reading further and all this is really saying is that the populace of any country is best
put under surveillance. It's for their own good, you see.
Institutions of medicine, global and national possess
no more integrity than your average NGO (Amnesty International, Médecins Sans
Frontières, Oxfam et al). And that means not very much.
To understand the nature of institutional corruption one must understand Imperialism. The
institutions of Imperialist nations are going to further Imperialist ideology. (see Antonio
Gramsci, ideological hegemony). The US is not
in the business of helping Americans .
Modern monopoly forms better reflect that scientific knowledge, and its advanced
application to production, are concentrated, ultimately, not in physical objects but in
human beings and human interaction with those objects. It is monopoly of the labour power
of the most highly educated workers, by both imperialist states and Multi National
Corporations, that forms the ultimate and most stable base of imperialist reproduction.
– Sam King (Lenin's theory of imperialism: a defence of its relevance in the
21st century, MLR)
The idea of super-exploitation needs to be conceptually generalised at the necessary
level of abstraction and incorporated in the theory of imperialism. Super-exploitation is a
specific condition within the capitalist mode of production [ ] the hidden common essence
defining imperialism.
he working class of the oppressed nations/Third World/Global South is systematically
paid below the value of labour power of the working class of the oppressor nations/First
World/Global North. This is not because the Southern working class produces less value, but
because it is more oppressed and more exploited.
– Andy Higginbottom (Structure and Essence in Capital 1, quoted by John
Smith Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century)
The US jobless rate just hit 2.1 million. Officially. Making the total something over
forty million. Its much higher in reality. Nobody has work. There is no work and we are at
the start of a period of massive evictions, foreclosures, and delinquencies - and the
homeless population will soon reach Biblical proportions (in some cities, such as Los
Angeles, its already Biblical). Will be simply of a magnitude never before seen.
Hence the authoritarian policing of lockdowns in, for example, New Zealand, suggests
something like a practice run. The ruling class in western nations knows full well this is
coming. And one wonders if it's not, in fact, a part of the plan (oh here is where someone
says conspiracy theory probably Louis Proyect).
Yes it's a fucking conspiracy theory. It is a theory based on evidence, however.
Why are the US and UK and a host of other countries deliberately ensuring a massive
depression? Because they care about your health? They are worried we all might catch the flu?
Has the US ever demonstrated a concern with your health and well being before?
Remember how many discretionary tax dollars go to health care and how much to defense.
Conspiracies do occur. The denial of that fact seems to be a hallmark of the pseudo or false
left. Does the suspension of democratic process not cause this soft left any problems at all?
Look at Sweden, at Belarus no lockdown and no problem.
It should be noted that there are a great many terrific doctors in the US. Dedicated and
brilliant, often. But they are not the system. The system is run for profit.
With about three-fourths of Americans under lockdown, the unintended consequences will
be vast. There has been a notable decrease in the number of heart attack and stroke
patients arriving at hospitals, presumably because they are afraid of catching the
coronavirus or of not finding a hospital bed.
As the economy spirals downward, we can also expect an increase in mental health crises,
domestic violence and suicides. While lockdown supporters say that to have a functioning
economy, we must have good public health, the reverse is also true: To have good public
health, we must have a functioning economy.
– Alex Berezow PhD (Geopolitical Futures, 2020)
Alfred Willener wrote an interesting book in 1970, analysing May 68 in France. He analyses
the answers students gave to various questionnaires they responded to. The section regarding
science is worth quoting.
'The scandalous fact is that, for all the means that science has put at our disposal,
most people live not much better than in the Middle Ages'. The system benefits from science
in the following way: through the atom bomb, through 'the power of statistical research',
through computers, through the chemical industry being 'in the hands of the state', through
space research.
'In the end, you realize', concludes one reasonably logical reply, 'that technological
progress, which makes economic growth possible, does not satisfy the fundamental needs of
man and is used above all to maintain and strengthen the system'.
Lastly, I should like to quote one quite unexpected reply, which forms the extreme point
of pessimism: ' Everyone is oppressed by science.'
– Alfred Willener (The Action-Image of Society on Cultural
Politicization)
I doubt seriously one would get such responses today in any European or North American
country. The contemporary indoctrination regards science is acute. And the media abounds in
junk science. Click bait science. And this is where most people have their opinions formed
for them.
There is a paper put out by one of the founders of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab,
called The Great Reset. The conclusion of the book reads
...at a global level, if viewed in terms of the global population affected, the corona
crisis is (so far) one of the least deadly pandemics the world has experienced over the
last 2000 years."
In other words, a mortality of .06% is simply not commensurate with the extreme measures
the governments of the world (the West in particular) are taking.
There is no question, none, that those measures, the lockdown, the masks, the distancing,
and the attending *diseases of despair*, will kill more people by a factor of ten than the
virus itself.
This is not even to begin discussing the psychological harm done, in particular to
children. And not just harm to children, but severe
harm to the most vulnerable .
What is being internalized by children is three fold. One, there is something inherently
sick and contagious about ME. Two, everyone MIGHT be a threat to my health. And three, obey
authority, because you don't want to end up like those smelly homeless people were are trying
to hard to avoid.
Children take things personally. They tend to blame themselves. Even in the comparative
sanity of Norway, where I reside, children are increasingly anxious about the world. How
could they not be? All this for a health risk of .06%.
But it is more than just the decimation of the economy in the US and UK. It is a
dismantling of the culture. One in three museums closed because of Covid will not re-open.
Ever. Where does all that art go?
Just a guess but probably very wealthy collectors will gobble it up at wholesale
prices.
The predictable outcome of these lockdowns, certainly in the US, is a guaranteed minimum
income. Very minimum. Restrictions on travel, all freedom of movement in fact, will not soon
return to normal. Various forms of surveillance and tracking, as well as health
certifications, are the goal of the state.
Also, if this pandemic succeeded so well, with so little resistance, why not have another?
And there is another aspect to the SWAT mask police, and that is that western society is
becoming alarmingly hypochondriacal. Children are kept out of school for runny noses. If all
kids with snotty noses were kept out of class, nobody would get an education.
There is a dire future of two or three generations now developing and maturing with very
weak immune systems. So that if a natural mutation takes place one day, from a Corona virus
or any other, a genuinely serious pandemic could kill tens of millions.
It is not a speculation that there are people who prosper and even benefit during an
economic crisis -- as smaller business owners struggle, large corporations and banks
benefit from huge government subsidies, giving them more power to buy failing small
businesses, for example. And it is a fact that many of those people have enormous economic
power to shape the policies that can benefit themselves.
It is not a speculation that they would appreciate having strict measures of control
against the people by limiting their freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom to
travel, or by installing means of surveillance, check points and official certifications
for activities that might give freedom to the people beyond the capitalist framework.
It is not a speculation that they would benefit from moving our social interactions to
the digital realm, which can commodify our activities as marketable data for the
advertising industry, insurance industry and any other moneyed social institutions
Including education, political institution, legal institution, and financial
institution.
Such matters should be seen within the context of the western history being shaped by
unelected capitalists with their enormous networks of social institutions.
– Hiroyuki Hamada (Wrong Kind of Green, April 2020)
The collapse of retail is accelerating. This is emerging as a monopolization of retail.
Few shops will remain, in fact, except luxury stores in select gated areas. The rest will be
online and probably rudimentary. The culture and the economy are being strip-mined and
recreated for a select clientele. The collapse of the economy means the collapse of the
bottom 90% or so.
The very richest men and corporations on the planet are making huge profits.
And yet, there are precious few voices of dissent to the master narrative in the US. In
Norway, the lockdown was about five weeks. But its a sparsely populated country and one
hardly noticed it save for the kids being home and not in school. But schools reopened and
the Prime Minister actually made a speech apologizing, in effect, for an *unnecessary*
lockdown. She had been frightened.
But now, with a mild uptick in positive cases the country is considering stricter
limitations on travel. Why?
There is no uptick in deaths, only in positive test results. The fact remains the virus
attacks the aged and the already sick. But this is very telling, I think. The Norwegian
government doesn't want to be seen as disobedient. They don't want to not follow the grand
plan provided by western agencies and experts. Even if they seemingly don't really believe
it.
(The saddest aspect is the voice of Dr. Mads Gilbert, a known advocate for Palestinian
rights, who has weighed in on the side of fear. Why? I have no idea. But it is worth noting
his predictions
from March 2020 were staggeringly wrong.)
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
But clearly the groupthink pressure is powerful and small nations do not want to be
singled out for bucking the *science* . There are economic coercions threatened, tacitly, as
well. The pressure to conform is huge and it takes a Herculean effort -- both individually
and as a nation, to resist. And *experts* seem to have a hard time admitting they were
wrong.
The science has been consistently wrong from day one.
As I say, this is now allegory. Or fable. There is nothing reasonable or rational in the
lockdown measures of the US and UK and NZ. Or anywhere. And this is not even to touch upon
the criminality of the Gates Foundation and Bill Gates buying public influence and
visibility. Not trained in any medical discipline, Gates has somehow made himself one of the
faces of the pandemic.
And to deconstruct Gates' language is to find a disturbing quality of authoritarian
hubris. Gates utters declarations as if he were God speaking to his flock. All from a man who
has done little save steal from his partners and exploit the poor of India and Africa. One of
the most striking aspects of this whole last few months has been the enormous and coordinated
effort the Gates machine has put into rehabilitating his image.
If you google "Crimes of the Gates Foundation" for example, you will get ten different
fact-checkers officially denying any crimes and another half dozen articles ridiculing those
who question Gates motives, his profit from vaccines, or even his alignment with eugenicists
(depopulation adherents)– all are derided as, yes, conspiracy theorists.
If you dare to question the rushing of an untested vaccine you are called an
anti-vaxxer.
My children are vaccinated. I just don't like the idea of a hurried untested vaccine
produced for a virus that needs no vaccine. And one promoted by a creepy millionaire.
But clearly the Gates charm offensive is in overdrive. The pastel cardigan is everywhere.
And yet, his favorable rating in recent surveys is around 56%. That is actually not very high
given the amount of self-promotion involved. It's better than Mark Zuckerberg and Joe Biden,
though. Gates is not likeable. No amount of spin can change that.
The final factor to note is the Trump effect. Many liberals would literally rather see
dead in the street if it meant discrediting Trump. It is no longer quite a zero sum game,
though. But overall the hatred of Trump is now at a religious level, too.
And behold, the opposition is Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. If you want a window in the
black heart of Biden, watch and/or listen to his testimony around the Waco inferno. The
inherent sadism and lack of humanity is glaringly apparent.
As for Kamala Harris:
As a San Francisco social worker, I sat on the school district committee that met with
families of chronically truant students. Once, when we asked a student why he didn't go to
school, he said there was too much police tape and shootings at his school bus stop.
Harris, as CA Attorney General, was putting parents/caregivers in jail if their child
was chronically truant. Also as Attorney General, she denied a DNA test to Kevin Cooper, a
very likely innocent man who came within hours of execution in 2004.
– Riva Enteen (Counterpunch Aug. 2020)
These are the servants of capital.
The left should be emphasising the economic aspect of lockdown because it is the working
class who are the principal victims of lockdown."
- Phil Shannon (Lockdown Skeptics, June 2020)
A Downing street tweet today:
We're putting tougher measures in place to target serious breaches of coronavirus
restrictions. Fines for not wearing a face-covering will double for repeat offences, up to
£3,200."
This is a class-based assault. The wealthy will not be fined for not wearing a
face-covering on their private beaches, or dinner parties at the yacht club.
Democrat politicians will keep their knee on the throat of small businesses for as long as
they possibly can for the sole purpose of crippling the economy to defeat Trump in November.
They don't care about the damage this causes. Keeping schools closed in the fall will result
in single parents staying home from work to care for their kids. At very least it stifles the
economy.
Send kids back to school, the majority wants this.
Vote in person November 3rd, make your vote count.
kaiserhoffredux , 3 hours ago
Exactly. There is no logic, reason, or precedent for quarantining healthy people.
To stop a virus, of all things? Ridiculous.
Ignatius , 2 hours ago
They've perverted the language as regards "cases."
A person could test positive and it might well be the most healthy situation: his body
encountered the virus, fought it off, and now though asymptomatic, retains antibodies from a
successful body response. The irony is that what I've described is the very response the vaxx
pushers expect from their vaccines.
Shameless political posturing.
coletrickle45 , 2 hours ago
So if you have 99 - 99.8% chance of surviving this faux virus
But a 100% chance of destroying lives through poverty, bankruptcy, small business
collapse, job losses, domestic abuse, depression, anxiety, fear.
What would you choose? Cost benefit analysis seems pretty obvious.
Gold Banit , 2 hours ago
Most people just regurgitate things they hear, they have lost the ability of creative and
free thought.They have been deliberately dumbed down. The entire system has created a mutant
society which is easy to control and manipulate.
"The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent
guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of
the masses." ― Malcolm X ay_arrow
sensibility , 2 hours ago
The COVID-19 Hoax has "Nothing" to do with "Real" Science, It's 100% about "Political"
Science.
Therefore, No Matter What, Politicians will Bend and Manipulate this for "Political"
Gain.
Who Stirred and Exposed the Swamp?
The Swamp Inhabitants Desperately Want & Intend to do Whatever it Takes to Return to
the Old Pre Trump Days of Operating Above the Law Without Exposure and Impunity.
Consequently, Those who Support the COVID-19 Hoax are Swamp Members & Supporters.
Know your Adversary!
monty42 , 2 hours ago
Trump didn't drain, stir, or expose the swamp, sorry that dog don't hunt. He has appointed
recycled establishment swamp creatures his entire term. He appointed Fauci to the Covidian
Taskforce. He says wearing masks is patriotic.
The promises he made his followers did not manifest. Another 4 years after being lied to
is just the same old routine, nothing new.
Until you people are honest about the reality of the situation, you'll never stop the
cycle of D/R destruction.
Politicians speak about following the science to set COVID-19 policy, but their decisions
are more about political objectives than they are about medical efficacy.
Why else did California Gov. Gavin Newsom shut down retail businesses in March when the
state had under 300 cases per day but allow them to be open in July when the state clocked in
at over 10,000 cases per day?
But as badly as our lockdowns have damaged local businesses, a potentially even bigger
problem is created by the physical closure of schools. One of the most important functions of a
civil society is to protect and educate its children, and the cancellation of in-person
education stands to become one of the most detrimental acts of collateral damage during this
pandemic.
California currently expects its 5-year-olds to complete kindergarten exclusively through
online distance learning. For this dubious undertaking, the politicians are given passionate
political cover. The Los Angeles Teachers Union maintains that "the only people guaranteed to
benefit from the premature reopening of schools amidst a rapidly accelerating pandemic are
billionaires and the politicians they've purchased" -- as if billionaires typically send their
kids to L.A. public schools. The wealthy will send their children to in-person private schools
or hire additional tutors, while most American families will suffer from a widening education
gap that could set their kids back years. Worst of all, none of this is medically
substantiated.
Children Are Safe
There is a great deal of fear generated in the media about risk to children, but the truth
is that children are incredibly resistant to coronavirus. So much so that children are far
more likely to die from the flu , or even just from driving to school, than from
COVID-19.
The CDC has recorded a total of 20
COVID-19 deaths in children ages 5-14 compared to almost 2,000 deaths from non-COVID causes
in the same time period for the same age group. It means children have been 100 times more
likely to die from non-COVID causes during the pandemic than from COVID. This puts the risk of
COVID death for children 5 to 14 in the same ballpark as deaths by lightning .
Claims of long-term damage or mystery illnesses have not been backed by any definitive
evidence and they therefore serve more as a scare and intimidation tactic than as a medical
guide. The truth is that children so far have had around a 1
in 20,000 rate of COVID-19 hospitalizations, according to the CDC. While controversial to
some, Sweden's policy of keeping primary schools open even at the height of the pandemic serves
as an excellent counterpoint. With over 1 million children,
Sweden did not have a single death of a school-aged child despite full attendance and no
masks.
Sweden is not alone in sending kids to school. Denmark opened its schools back up in April.
Finland kept normal class sizes when it reopened. Parts of Montana opened schools back in May,
as did parts of Canada and Germany. The Netherlands announced that
Dutch students didn't even need to socially distance anymore as they experienced very low
transmission rates. Schools all across Europe have reopened successfully, both with and without
masks. The risk to the children themselves therefore cannot be used as a justification for the
massive damage created by ceasing in-person education. But what about the
teachers?
A study in Switzerland, including a review of World Health Organization contact tracing,
failed to find evidence of a single case of a child passing coronavirus to an adult . A
comprehensive study in Iceland isolated SARS-CoV-2 samples from every positive case, sequenced
the virus genome, and tracked the mutation patterns. This analysis, along with contact tracing,
allowed researchers to identify definitively who passed the virus to whom. The study
concluded "[E]ven if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease
to others than adults. We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents." A
study of schools in Ireland found " no evidence
of secondary transmission of COVID-19 from children attending school. "
New Zealand conducted a study across 15 schools in which 18 individuals with COVID-19 were
in close contact with 735 other students and 128 staff members, yet
no teacher or staff member contacted COVID-19 from any of the initial 18 cases and only two
students out of the 735 would later test positive. The New Zealand study concluded: "Our
investigation found no evidence of children infecting teachers."
Cases and close contacts among teachers and students in 10 New Zealand high schools showing
one secondary case in a student. Source: "COVID-19 in Schools – the Experience in
NSW"
Since there could still be a rare school outbreak, such as experienced in Israel, students
with high-risk household members should be given a distance education option, and teachers who
believe themselves or their households to be at high risk should be allowed to teach remotely,
balancing the risk for all parties. This way healthy students can be be educated by healthy
teachers. With science overwhelmingly pointing to reopening schools, why do so many schools
intend to remain closed?
The Politics of Teaching
If children are at minimal risk, transmission to adults is rare, and both can be
accommodated with optional distance learning, why are some schools suspending all in-person
education? It's certainly not because of the parents, who would be the last people to send
their children into a dangerous situation. The vast majority of parents support
reopening schools with modifications, perhaps because they best understand the cost-benefit
of depriving their children of a full education.
The reason many schools won't open, just like why so many places originally locked down,
comes back to fear and politics. The Los Angeles' teachers union, for example, recently came
out with a list of demands before returning to teach in person. These included defunding the
police, ending charter schools, "Medicare for All," and a new wealth tax . It was not until
the union came out with these demands that Newsom announced closure of nearly all schools in
California -- overriding individual school districts that had planned to open.
In a brazen announcement, the union put in bold words the conclusion of their argument:
"Normal wasn't working for us before. We can't go back" – openly conveying that this
negotiation was more about changing what they didn't like about American education and society
before the pandemic, and certainly not about what is best for children. Despite overwhelming
scientific evidence pointing to the safety of school reopenings, union President Cecily
Myart-Cruz labeled doing so " anti-science ."
Yet, it's also no wonder that so many teachers have concern for their safety now, as media
outlets like CNN continue to run sensationalized stories building up school reopenings as
dangerous while
downplaying the actual science and evidence.
NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST
ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
Day
Care at School Gives the Game Away
Cities left with little choice due to their political environment are trying to mitigate the
situation for parents. New York City will offer
day care for 100,000 students attending schools that are only partially reopening, though
this largely defeats the point of keeping children from being at school in the first place. If
school closing advocates are correct, this would only expose children to a broader cohort of
peers and would make teachers, children, and their caretakers less safe.
Some districts in California are offering day care right on school campus
for half and full day programs , at a cost. So parents can pay to send their kids to school
to be watched but not to be taught. Ironically, a student might be physically at a school under
the watch of paid day care while simultaneously "attending" the very same school online.
It is clear that science is not the driving principle behind any of these policies, which
helps explain why both the CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics have
advocated for opening on-campus education .
Teachers Are Essential Workers
There are few functions in society more essential than educating our children. "Education of
our children is an essential Texas value," Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton recently
wrote in a letter directing that health officials cannot completely close schools, and they
certainly cannot preemptively close schools with no evidence of local school spread.
The
CDC recently concluded that "in-person schooling is in the best interest of students,
particularly in the context of appropriate mitigation measures similar to those implemented at
essential workplaces."
The education of our children is too essential to be used as a political bargaining
chip.
If nurses can come to work every day and treat the sick and infected, then certainly
teachers can be expected to come to work and teach the young and healthy. _arrow 3 Macho
Latte , 2 hours ago
WuFlu Hysteria Ends Nov. 4
More than 55.3 million tests confirm:
✓ Deaths from WuFlu = Flat Line
✓ Hospitalization from WuFlu = Flat Line
DemonRats = an Existential Threat to America & Humanity
WuFlu Lies Matter
Question_Mark , 47 minutes ago
"The Virology Journal" - the official publication of Dr. Fauci's National Institutes of
Health - published what is now a blockbuster article on August 22, 2005, under the heading -
get ready for this - "Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and
spread." Write the researchers, "We report...that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on
SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are
treated with the drug either before of after exposure to the virus, suggesting both
prophylactic and therapeutic advantage."
This means, of course, that Dr. Fauci has known for 15 years that chloroquine and its even
milder derivative hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) will not only treat a current case of coronavirus
("therapeutic") but prevent future cases ("prophylactic"). So HCQ functions as both a cure
and a vaccine. In other worlds, it's a wonder drug for coronavirus. Said Dr. Fauci's NIH in
2005, "concentrations of 10 um completely abolished SARS-CoV infection." Fauci's researchers
add, "chloroquine can effectively reduce the establishment of infection and spread of
SARS-CoV.
When one thinks of all the destruction brought about by the so-called lockdown, it hurts
to know we are being defrauded. Ouch.
Indelible Scars , 3 hours ago
Wife taught for 32 years. She is a badass teacher and the kids obviously loved her. I
urged her to get out while the getting was good and now she's happy she did. Her district is
a complete mess and almost all of the good teachers have retired or moved to another
district. She hates what has happened to education.
hllnwlz , 1 hour ago
Teacher here. Agree 100%. The sooner this butch is dead, the freeer we all will be.
The complete and abject failure of public education is is 100% at the Feds door.
1) The poor academic performers who become ed/liberal arts majors never could've gone to
college without the printed loan money.
2) the system could not support a 9 month work year, insurance, and pensions not to
mention support staff and admin pay and bennies without the fed bc schooling doesnt add
enough value to the economy; very few kids leave school able to move directly into a role in
the economy productive enough to offset the insane cost of their education.
3) inflation made moms have to go to work. No one to support the kud and hold them
accountable table but, MORE IMPORTANTLY, theres no one to call the school to account when
Johnny cant read.
The Fed is the root of all evil.
(Okay, I'm oversimplifying, but I'm pissed off.)
Vince Clortho , 3 hours ago
The longer students are away from the cultural marxist "education" system the better.
Schools are now Bolshevik programming mills and the teachers are the willing puppets
spreading marxism.
Defund the schools. Defund the universities, Defund the student loan program.
Local communities with limited dollars can do a far better job of providing real
education.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Old White Guy , 3 hours ago
Democrat politicians will keep their knee on the throat of small businesses for as long as
they possibly can for the sole purpose of crippling the economy to defeat Trump in November.
They don't care about the damage this causes. Keeping schools closed in the fall will result
in single parents staying home from work to care for their kids. At very least it stifles the
economy.
Send kids back to school, the majority wants this.
Vote in person November 3rd, make your vote count.
If this is indeed the "Fort Detrick flu", as many people here (including me) have
speculated upon, do you really believe that "western governments might be persuaded to
seek and/or spread truthful data."
I would rather expect these governments (and the lackey media) to cover up all traces of
the initial outbreak, classify all high level government briefings about the subject and
drown any rational and fact-based discourse in a swamp of hysterical projections and divisive
diversions.
"persuaded" is more rhetorical than realistic, certainly. But it doesn't hurt to
try. In the case of the tobacco industry and cancer, for example, it took decades, but
eventually when 90%+ of the general public saw the link, even the industry had to admit it.
And governments, corporations and the powerful spend an awful lot of money to keep the truths
of many of their horrible actions from the media... yet some of that information seeps
through. We must hope and do what we can.
U.S. Officials Disseminate Disinformation About 'Virus Disinformation'Getald
, Jul 29 2020 17:44 utc |
1
In another round of their anti-Russian disinformation campaign 'U.S. government officials'
claim that some websites loosely connected to Russia are spreading 'virus
disinformation'.
However, no 'virus disinformation' can be found on those sites.
The Associated Press as well as the New York Times were briefed by the
'officials' and provided write ups.
Two Russians who have held senior roles in Moscow's military intelligence service known as
the GRU have been identified as responsible for a disinformation effort meant to reach
American and Western audiences, U.S. government officials said. They spoke to The
Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak
publicly.
The information had previously been classified, but officials said it had been
downgraded so they could more freely discuss it. Officials said they were doing so now to
sound the alarm about the particular websites and to expose what they say is a clear link
between the sites and Russian intelligence.
Between late May and early July, one of the officials said, the websites singled out
Tuesday published about 150 articles about the pandemic response, including coverage aimed
either at propping up Russia or denigrating the U.S.
Among the headlines that caught the attention of U.S. officials were "Russia's Counter
COVID-19 Aid to America Advances Case for Détente," which suggested that Russia had
given urgent and substantial aid to the U.S. to fight the pandemic, and "Beijing Believes
COVID-19 is a Biological Weapon," which amplified statements by the Chinese.
There is zero 'virus disinformation' in the Korybko piece. The aid flight did happen and
was widely reported. In a response to the allegations the proprietors of O neWorldpoint out that
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in a recent Q&A also alluded to a new détente with
Russia. Was that also 'virus disinformation'?
The second piece the 'officials' pointed out, Beijing believes COVID-19 is a biological weapon , was
written In March by Lucas Leiroz, a "research fellow in international law at the Federal
University of Rio de Janeiro". It is an exaggerating analysis of the comments and questions a
spokesperson of the Chinese Foreign Ministry had made about the possible sources of the
Coronavirus.
The original spokesperson quote is in the piece. Referring to additional sources the
author's interpretation may go a bit beyond the quote's meaning. But it is certainly not
'virus disinformation' to raise the same speculative question about the potential sources of
the virus which at that time many others were also asking.
The piece was published by InfoBRICS.org, a "BRICS information portal" which
publishes in the languages of the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South
Africa). It is presumably financed by some or all of those countries.
Another website the 'U.S. officials' have pointed out is InfoRos.ru which publishes in Russian and English. The
AP notes of it:
A headline Tuesday on InfoRos.ru about the unrest roiling American cities read "Chaos in
the Blue Cities," accompanying a story that lamented how New Yorkers who grew up under the
tough-on-crime approach of former Mayors Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg "and have zero
street smarts" must now "adapt to life in high-crime urban areas."
Another story carried the headline of "Ukrainian Trap for Biden," and claimed that
"Ukrainegate" -- a reference to stories surrounding Biden's son Hunter's former ties to a
Ukraine gas company -- "keeps unfolding with renewed vigor."
U.S. officials have identified two of the people believed to be behind the sites'
operations. The men, Denis Valeryevich Tyurin and Aleksandr Gennadyevich Starunskiy, have
previously held leadership roles at InfoRos but have also served in a GRU unit specializing
in military psychological intelligence and maintain deep contacts there, the officials
said.
InfoRos calls itself a 'news agency' and has some rather boring general interest
stuff on its site. But how is its writing in FOX News style about unrest in U.S.
cities and about Biden's escapades in the Ukraine 'virus disinformation'? I fail to find any
on that site.
In 2018 some "western intelligence agency"
told the Washington Post , without providing any evidence, that InfoRos
is related to the Russian military intelligence service GU (formerly GRU):
Unit 54777 has several front organizations that are financed through government grants as
public diplomacy organizations but are covertly run by the GRU and aimed at Russian
expatriates, the intelligence officer said. Two of the most significant are InfoRos and the
Institute of the Russian Diaspora.
So InfoRos is getting some public grants and was allegedly previously run by two
people who before that worked for the GU. What does that say about the current state and the
content it provides? Nothing.
The NYTadds
that hardly anyone is reading the websites the 'U.S. officials' pointed out but that their
content is at times copied by more prominent aggregator sites:
"What we have seen from G.R.U. operations is oftentimes the social media component is a
flop, but the narrative content that they write is shared more broadly through the niche
media ecosystem," said Renee DiResta, a research manager at the Stanford Internet
Observatory, who has studied the G.R.U. and InfoRos ties and propaganda work.
There are plenty of sites who copy content from various outlets and reproduce it under
their name. But that does not turn whatever they publish into disinformation.
All the pieces mentioned by AP and NYT and attributed to the 'Russian'
sites are basically factual and carry no 'virus disinformation'. That makes the
'U.S.officials' claims that they do such the real disinformation campaign.
And the AP and NYT are willingly falling for it.
People being
prepared for Russia having the worlds first covid19 vaccine, the US will of course say it was
stolen from them. Infantile politicians create infantile press to feed infantile articles to
adult children. Critical thinking skills do not exist in the US population.
The development of propagation of information/disinformation through the internet eroded
the power of the old newspapers/news agencies. It's not that this or that particular website
is getting more views, but that the web of communications - the the imperialistic blunders +
decline of capitalism post-2008 -, as a whole, weakened what seemed to be an unshakeable
trust on the MSM (the very fact that this term exists already is historical evidence of their
loss of power).
And this process manifests itself not only in loss of power, but also loss of money: this
is particularly evident in the social media, where Facebook (Whatsapp + Facebook proper) and
Google are beginning to siphon advertisement money from both TV and the traditional
newspapers (printed press). When those traditional printed newspapers went digital, they
behaved badly, by using paywalls - this marketing blunder only accelerated their decline in
readership and thus further advertisement money, generating a vicious cycle for them.
The loss of influence of public opinion for the MSM also inaugurated another very
important societal shift: the middle class' loss of monopoly over opinion and formation of
opinion. Historically, it was the role of the middle class to be highly educated, to go to
academia (college) and, most importantly, to daily read the newspapers while eating the
breakfast. The middle class was the class of the intellectuals by definition, thus served as
the clerical class of the capitalist class, the priests of capitalism. With the
popularization of the internet, the smartphone and social media, this sanctity was broken or,
at least, begun to deteriorate. We can attest this class conflict phenomenon by studying the
rise of the term "expert" as a pejorative one. In the West's case, this shift begun through
the far-right side of the political spectrum, but the shift is there.
The popularization of what was once a privilege is nothing new in capitalism. The problem
here is that capitalism depends on infinite growth to merely exist (i.e. it can't survive on
zero growth, it is mathematically impossible), so it has to "monetize" what still isn't
monetize in order to find/create more vital space (Lebensraum - a term coined by the
hyper-capitalist Nazis) for its expansion and thus survival. Hence the popularization of
college education in the USA (then in Europe). Hence the popularization of daily news through
the internet/social media. This process, of course, has its positives and negatives (as is
the case with every dialectical process) - the fall of the MSM is one of the positives.
So, in fact, when the likes of AP, Reuters, NYT, WaPo, Guardian, Fox, CNN spread
disinformation against "alt-media", they are really just protecting their market share - the
fact that it implies in suppression of freedom of speech and to mass disinformation and,
ultimately, to war and destruction, is merely collateral damage of the business they operate
in. They are, after all, capitalist enterprises above all.
Excellent analysis, as always, by b. And vk's points are very pertinent too. One tiny
quibble: I doubt that the Nazis coined, though they certainly popularised, the term
lebensraum.
There is an air of desperation about these campaigns against "Russian" "disinformation"
massive changes are occurring, and, because they are so vast, they are moving relatively
slowly.
The old media model, now totally outdated, was the first thing to fall. Now capitalism itself
is collapsing as a result of the primary contradiction that, left to itself, the marketplace
will solve all problems.
As Washington, where magical thinking is sovereign, is demonstrating, left to itself the
hidden hand will bring only misery, famine, death and the Apocalypse. This was once very well
understood, as a brief look at the history of the founding of the UN will show, now it is the
subject of frantic denial by capitalism's priesthood who have grown to enjoy the glitter and
sensuality of life in a brothel. It is a sign of their mental decay that they can do no
better than to blame Russians.
One should presume the anonymous officials responsible for this ground-breaking report (sarc)
are close to the various "combatting Russian disinformation" NGOs. They are merely living up
to the mission statements of their benefactors. AP and NYTimes are being unprofessional and
spreading fake news by failing to reveal their sources. It's mind-numbing - the BS one must
wade through.
Good point however with one glaring contradiction in your thinking.
You make valid a very criticism of capitalism yet you tend to applaud Chinese capitalist
growth (although you tend to deny Chinese capitalist growth is capitalist, a feat of
breathtaking magical thinking).
The great Chinese wealth is fully 75% invested in bubblicious real estate valuations of
non-commercial real estate built on a mountain of construction debt. Sound familiar?
The irony is Chinese growth since 2008 has been goosed along entirely by the very same
financialized hyper capitalist traits as US: great gobs of debt creating supply-side
"growth", huge amounts of middle wealth tied to asset inflated bubbles, and of course the
resulting income and wealth inequality that rivals US inequality and continues to increase
over time.
I snorted coffee out my nose when Gruff tried to totally excuse Chinese income inequality
for being only slightly less than US level....how about the truth? Chinese inequality is
heinous, only slightly less than the also heinous US level.
The diseased working class in China only has an an arm and two legs hacked off while the
diseased US working class is fully quadriplegic. Much, much better to be a fucked over by
globalization Chinese citizen! Lmao
@ b who ended his posting with
"
And the AP and NYT are willingly falling for it.
"
Sorry b, but AP and NYT are active participants in the disinformation campaign of failing
empire and are not falling for anything
The folks that are falling for it are the American public that has lost its ability to
discriminate with the fire hose volume of lies told to them on a daily basis.
Empire is in the process of defeating itself which is the only safe way of ending the
tyranny of global private finance. I commend China and Russia for having the patience and
fortitude to hold the safe space for the dysfunctional social contract having private control
of the lifeblood of human commerce to self destruct.
This is SO hilarious! The propagandists are worried about Russian virus dis-information when
most dis-information has come from the US government in the person of Trump and from the CDC,
which spent months discrediting the effectiveness of face masks!!!
Theses propagandists need to get real jobs dealing with real world problems.
This is SO hilarious! The propagandists are worried about Russian virus dis-information when
most dis-information has come from the US government in the person of Trump and from the CDC,
which spent months discrediting the effectiveness of face masks!!!
Theses propagandists need to get real jobs dealing with real world problems.
there has been no national response to coronavirus but there must be a national acceptance
that this national non-response is China's fault. and any sources reporting truthfully about
the US or disseminating statements easily found elsewhere, as long as they are Russian,
Chinese, Venezuelan, Cuban, Iranian, etc., is pure disinformation. How brittle and weak the
US is. Where's the Pericles to say to the Spartans, "enter our city and inspect our
defenses"? The US is a nation of heavily-armed mice and sheep.
btw, the China love on display around here is pretty funny. in that the Chinese government
has mounted a national response to a very serious threat, China is a nation in a way that the
US is not. There is no US or we would not have 50 states doing different things in response
to the corona outbreak. the US is already dead. But China is a thoroughly authoritarian
capitalist state. they are who they are in a dialectic competition with the US and other
capitalist powers, not because of some Maoist-Confucian amalgam that inspires such wisdom in
their brilliant leaders, who are just as quick to destroy their environment for capitalist
gain as anyone on this planet is. The decline of the US will not make China or Russia or any
"emerging" power less authoritarian or violent. au quite the contraire. They are Shylocks who
will try to better instruction.
However, none of this is of concern to people in the US, whose only concern is the Nazi
spawn who've been running "the West" for much longer than the last 75 years. but it's time to
kill the bitch, not let it keep screwing us and breeding.
As others already said, this is a bit rich, considering that virus disinformation comes from
Trump himself, both live and on Twitter, quoting genuine hacks and megalomaniac doctors,
depending on the week.
Reality check: Russians will be able to travel across the world way before Americans, for
obvious healthcare reasons.
Bevin, I agree, I once had a short exchange on Mondoweiss about the term Lebensraum, it
had been used in some type of marketing by my favorite Swizz supermarket. Which then,
apparently caused an uproar. The term Lebensraum on its own is rather innocent. Leben (life)
Raum (space), a noun compound. Context matters. And I am sure I checked it, and Micros
definitively did not use it in any type of world conquering settler context. I haven't
stumbled yet across a Micros supermarket anywhere outside Switzerland, ;)
I'm under the impression that Info Ros is a Russian government-funded, supported, backed,
site, it certainly looks like it and its reportage is decidedly 'neutral'.
This is SO hilarious! The propagandists are worried about Russian virus dis-information
when most dis-information has come from the US government in the person of Trump and from the
CDC, which spent months discrediting ...
Posted by: JohnH | Jul 29 2020 19:21 utc | 8
This is close to my overall take on matters. But I wouldn't put so much emphasis on
face masks but on something along the lines of Covid is notthing but a flu. Face masks were
initially discussed quite controversially everywhere.
Were it gets interesting is here:
A report published last month by a second, nongovernmental organization, Brussels-based EU
DisinfoLab, examined links between InfoRos and One World to Russian military intelligence.
The researchers identified technical clues tying their websites to Russia and identified some
financial connections between InfoRos and the government.
They have a competitor which seems Bruxelles based too, Patrick Armstrong alerted me to
a while ago: https://euvsdisinfo.eu/
EUvsDisinfo is the flagship project of the European External Action Service's East StratCom
Task Force
************
But yes, on first sight InfoRos seems to be neatly aligned with US alt-Right-Media in
basic outlook. More than with the US MSM.
And now I first have to read what has been on Andrew Korybko's mind lately. ;)
Many Americans of all walks of life do not trust their own government, yet most people here
seem to have faith that their media outlets are telling the truth. How do you break through
to the public that has utter faith in whatever newspaper or television channel they prefer
and highlight the lies in a way which gains real traction?
I believe it takes leadership, which, for Americans, mean celebrities have to endorse the
idea or it likely won't be taken seriously. This cult of celebrity is mirrored on social
media platforms, where millions flock to be a part of some beautiful person's beautiful
photograph or some known personalities acceptable opinion du jour.
There is a great bond gripping the minds of American media consumers. They have trained
their entire lives to worship at the cult of celebrity and this is the key to breaking the
entire media landscape down for them.
This also is the key to unlocking the voices of those who know better with regards to
media lies, but keep silent out of fear.
Will a Joe Rogan or Tucker Carlson be able to break the spell? I think it will never
happen based on how Hollywood gatekeeps celebrity and based on how hopelessly apathetic most
are to Julian Assange.
Lol I write for One World. I'm an American who has never had a piece edited or been told what
to write. I was allowed to write a piece about Russia where I was critical of their policy of
backing the STC in Yemen (I thought it was bad to divide Yemen). No one makes anybody tow any
specific line. I decided not to publish my piece on Russia and the STC in Yemen because I
didn't find the topic interesting enough, but I was 100% allowed to be critical of Russia.
Lol I write for One World. I'm an American who has never had a piece edited or been told
what to write.
...
Posted by: Ben Barbour | Jul 29 2020 22:36 utc | 23
Is it possible that you're just the in-house joke at OW?
If they don't care that you'd write "tow" instead of "toe" or that you're too
lazy/thoughtless to reproduce the full name of the entity for which STC is an acronym, before
using the acronym, then it suggests that One World's Editorial Standards are as lax as your
own :-)
"... Two Russians who have held senior roles in Moscow's military intelligence service
known as the GRU have been identified as responsible for a disinformation effort meant to
reach American and Western audiences, U.S. government officials said. They spoke to The
Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak
publicly ..."
Of course GRU agents always work in pairs, guided only by the mysterious telepathic powers
of the Russian President and no-one or nothing else, as Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov
did in Salisbury in March 2018 when they supposedly tried to assassinate or send a warning to
Sergei Skripal, and as Dmitri Kovtun and Andrei Lugovoy did in London in November 2006 when
they apparently put polonium in a pot of tea served to Alexander Litvinenko in full view of
patrons and staff at a hotel restaurant. It's as if each agent carries only half a brain and
each half is connected to its complement by the corpus callosum that is Lord Vlademort
Putin's thoughts beaming oing-yoing-yoing-like through the atmosphere until they find their
targets.
And of course US government officials always speak on condition of anonymity.
As Agence Presse News puts it:
"... The information had previously been classified, but officials said it had been
downgraded so they could more freely discuss it. Officials said they were doing so now to
sound the alarm about the particular websites and to expose what they say is a clear link
between the sites and Russian intelligence ..."
So if US government officials can now freely discuss declassified news, why do they insist
on being anonymous? This would be the sort of news announced at a US national press club
meeting with Matt Lee in the front row asking awkward and discomfiting questions.
The malicious cultivation (including Gain of Function research) and implantation of this
biowarfare agent (and other ones such as Swine Fever) by the U.S. Intelligence services in
various places around the world (especially in China and Iran), the intentional faulty
responses and deceptive statistics administered by the monopoly-controlled medical
establishment, the feigned inability to provide adequate testing, care, and treatment, along
with planned economic destruction as a means of restoring investor losses and control of
populations through stifling of dissent, are at the heart of the deflection and projection of
blame. That broadly-based subject is barely discussed in alternative media and is totally
obfuscated in MSM, because the "denier-debunkers" dispute the possibility of such extreme
malice existing in our institutions, in spite of previous experience with events such as 9/11
and the '08 financial crisis.
...
So if US government officials can now freely discuss declassified news, why do they insist on
being anonymous?
...
Posted by: Jen | Jul 29 2020 23:29 utc | 25
Precisely.
My guess is that they don't know when to quit.
and/or
They embrace the Mythbusters motto...
"If a thing's worth doing, it's worth overdoing."
"Is it possible that you're just the in-house joke at OW?
If they don't care that you'd write "tow" instead of "toe" or that you're too
lazy/thoughtless to reproduce the full name of the entity for which STC is an acronym, before
using the acronym, then it suggests that One World's Editorial Standards are as lax as your
own :-)"
Fair point on tow vs toe. That's why editing exists when writing articles. As for the STC
part, that is common knowledge if you follow basic geopolitics. When making a post in a
comment thread, should I write out "Islamic State of Iraq and Syria" before using the acronym
ISIS? If I am posting in a comment thread about Iran, do I need to write out "Mujahedin-e
Khalq" instead of just using MEK?
It just displays a massive level of ignorance on your part. Nice try though.
Global media moguls are blaming the 1,000 American deaths per day from the Wuhan coronavirus
on Donald Trump to finally get him out of the way. But they are silent on their and the
Democrats complicity in the death toll due to the lack of a national public health system or
the funding to pay for it.
The USA is going to hell. A scapegoat is needed. For the media and Democrats, Russia is to
blame. Anybody else rather than themselves, the true culprits. Donald Trump blames China for
the pandemic if he acknowledges it at all but that is where all of Tim Cook's iPhones are
made. Blaming China is globalist heresy.
I think there's a reasonable case to be made that this is what has occurred.
And, if true, it is covered up by sly suggestions that nCov-19 was man-made with hints or
a smug attitude that convey the message that China created the virus. As well as a
virtual black-out in Western media of Chinese suggestions that the virus may have started in
USA or been planted in Wuhan.
But then, I already stand accused of attributing magical powers of self-interested
foresight and boldness to US Deep-State due to my belief that Trump was their choice to lead
USA in 2016. And so I expect you're theory will receive the same derision. Yet Empires have
not been shy about killing millions when it was in their interest to do so.
In any case, I've written many times that USA/West's unwillingness to fight the virus has
been dressed up as innocent mistakes. Even if the West wasn't the source of the virus they
have much to answer for. Yet very few have taken note of the way that USA/West have played
the pandemic to advance their interests - from lining the pockets of Big Pharma to blaming
China for their own "incompetence" (a misnomer: the power-elite are very competent at
advancing their interests!).
It seems disinformation has been redefined to mean information that counters someone else's
(yours) belief. We pretend to be in an Age of Reason but really, we have just replaced
religious beliefs with secular beliefs. Science has been taken over by pseudoscientists that
have replaced priests. The conflict of interest by the science/priests who profit from their
deceptions is beyond criminal.
To know what is the truth you just have to look at whats being censored. Nobody being
censored for supporting mask mandates, claiming vaccines are safe, and not questioning the
blatant data manipulation of COVID cases that anyone with an open mind and IQ of 100 , and
who reads the data, definitions and studies can see through.
It seems people on both sides of the fence have replaced their brains with their chosen
ideology. Its like watching a Christian, Jew and Muslim arguing which is the best or true
religion. No point in it.
so, lets say GRU agents are feeding russian propaganda sites... how does that compare to
all the CIA-FBI agents and has been hacks working for the western msm?? seems a bit rich for
the pot to be calling a kettle black, even if they are lying thru their teeth! i am sure if
someone did a story on how many CIA - m16 people are presently working with the western msm,
they would have a story with some legs... this shite from anonymous usa gov't officials is
just that - shite..
@ Ben, or Benson Barbour .. thanks for your comments!
Lol I write for One World. I'm an American who has never had a piece edited or been told
what to write. I was allowed to write a piece about Russia where I was critical of their
policy of backing the STC in Yemen (I thought it was bad to divide Yemen). No one makes
anybody tow any specific line. I decided not to publish my piece on Russia and the STC in
Yemen because I didn't find the topic interesting enough, but I was 100% allowed to be
critical of Russia.
There's such a thing as self-censorship. Mainstream US news has effectively brought up
folks to be this way: stay in line or become unemployed- doesn't need to be stated. Not aimed
at you, but it needs to be said (und understood).
@35 That's a very good point. I completely agree. Self-censorship and group think are two of
the biggest problems in modern journalism/analysis. One World consistently publishes
pro-Pakistan and pro-China articles. When I was first sending them submissions, I did a piece
on US vs China in Sudan and South Sudan. I considered omitting China's culpability in
escalating the conflicts, and instead focus on laying the blame squarely at the feet of the
US. In the end I told the truth about both countries' imperialist escalations (to the best of
my ability).
There is a lot of incentive to self-censor at just about any outlet. It's more comfortable
to fit in with a site's brand.
In the case of the Russia-STC article, I really just found the subject matter to be thin.
Russia's support of the STC is mostly just diplomatic. Not a lot to write about.
The Americans are increasingly unhinged in their spittle-flecked accusations against not only
Russia, but also China, Iran, Venezuela, etc.
It's so pathetic as to be humorous.
Underlying the USA's Two Minutes of Hate campaigns, however, is a deeper disease that
defines Americans as a nation and as a people.
Namely, Americans have an inbred fundamentalist belief in their own Moral Superiority as
the Beacon of Liberty, Land of the Free, blah, blah, blah--no matter how many nations they
have bombed back to the Stone Age, invaded, colonized, regime changed, sanctioned, or
economically raped in the name of Freedom and Democracy™.
Donald Trump is half correct.
The United States of America is truly a great nation alright--but great only in terms of
its deceit, great in terms of its delusions, and great in terms of the horrors that it has
inflicted on much of the world.
Comparing America to the Nazis would be a high insult ... to Nazi Germany, as the Third
Reich only lasted about 12 years, while the American Reich has unfortunately lasted well over
200 years and gotten away with its crimes against humanity by possessing what are likely the
greatest propaganda machine and political deception in human history: the American Free Press
and the world historic lie called "American Freedom."
Harold Pinter in his 2005 Nobel Literature Prize speech briefly but powerfully exposes
this heart of American darkness:
"The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless,
but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has
exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for
universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis.
I put to you that the United States is without doubt the greatest show on the road.
Brutal, indifferent, scornful and ruthless it may be but it is also very clever. As a
salesman it is out on its own and its most saleable commodity is self love. It's a
winner."
"Top US immunologist Dr Anthony Fauci is now saying citizens are not "complete" in
protecting themselves from the Covid-19 pandemic unless they go beyond wearing a mask and add
in eye protection like goggles, too."
More provocation from the oligarchy. Now, that masks are becoming less controversial, time
to step up the provocation, division and control.
Fauci is also behind the anti-hydroxychloroquine propaganda, as well, that even b has
swallowed. This, despite it being used effectively in other countries. All of this simply
because Trump supports it (ergo, it must be bad) and Big Pharma (who control Fauci,
CDC abd WHO) can't profit significantly from its use.
"During the course of the debate, Kennedy also talked about the regular vaccines most
people take, from Hepatitis B to the flu shot, emphasizing that no proper testing had ever
been done, which is mandatory for any other medication. Vaccines "are the only medical
product that does not have to be safety-tested against a placebo," he explained."
Kennedy said
"it's not hypothetical that vaccines cause injury, and that injuries are not rare. The
vaccine courts have paid out four billion dollars" over the past three decades, "and the
threshold for getting back into a vaccine court and getting a judgment – [the
Department of Health and Human Services] admits that fewer than one percent of people who are
injured ever even get to court."
So, how well has the Russian vaccine been tested? Does anyone know?
It is interesting how USAians are being played by the oligarchy.
On foreign policy, the dems and reps are in basic agreement and the propaganda is to bring
the masses together to hate Russia, Chaina and anyone else who the Western (US) oligarchy has
targeted.
Domestically, unity is the enemy of the oligarchy. The masses must be controlled through
division and diversion, so the dems and reps play good cop, bad cop (bad and good being
relative to the supporter) to ensure the masses are diverted from important oligarch issues
to issues of irrelevance to the oligarchs, but easily manipulated emotionnally by the
oligarchs for the beast.
"[...]Donald Trump blames China for the pandemic if he acknowledges it at all but that is
where all of Tim Cook's iPhones are made. Blaming China is globalist heresy."
Then why do you phrase it the "Wuhan coronavius" yourself?
For those interested in corona virus truth,
I am interested in the question -- - was it spread by negligence or deliberately?
That question must be relivant to this debate on MOA.
I ask this now becouse -- --
Tonight on bbc 'panorama' there investigating the spread of the virus from Hospital to care
homes !! I'm told there is some pretty shocking information exposed.
Some may wish to catch that prog. Heads up.
I just add an obversation. -- western psychopathic disinformation and projection has led
to a confused public. A public deciding to disengage with politics. To the gain of the
psychopaths.
A new candidate to the demonization and disinfo operations has been added...Germany...which
has been labeled "delinquent" by the POTUS...in a clear exercise of projection...
Of course, to not be insulted or labeled delinquent, you must act as these other countries
enumerated by Southcom commander, to work for the US ( not your country...) and moreover pay
for it....Typical mafia extortion, isn´t it?
That broadly-based subject is barely discussed in alternative media and is totally
obfuscated in MSM, because the "denier-debunkers" dispute the possibility of such extreme
malice existing in our institutions, in spite of previous experience with events such as
9/11 and the '08 financial crisis.
YES to that and thank you for that post. That the institutions of state and private
sectors are the incubators and propagators of extreme malice is axiomatic in the UKUSAI and
its five eyed running dogs is beyond doubt. They attack and scorn any critic or unbeliever.
They assault and pillory truth speakers and those who might question 'their narrative'.
Then if all that fails the hunt them down and make preposterous claims about them being
anti semitic of anti religion or anti their nation.
Mendacity is the currency of the permanent state and its minions and they need to be outed
and shamed and challenged at every opportunity.
Fort Detrick coronavirus would be on the mark and as you most likely know, you cannot
trust the USA lying eyes once you have served them in their killing fields.
Even that right wing ex special forces advocate Steve Pieczenic testifies to the fact of a
deadly virus in USA in November/December plus his beloved bloggers say way earlier than that
around Maryland etc. Then there is the small problem of the 'vaping' illness that generated
lots of pneumonia like fatalities in June/July. And then the instant closure of Fort Detrick
due to its leaking all over the place through a totally inadequate waste water treatment
plant that couldn't scrub a turd let alone a virus.
The problem with presstitutes, possibly including Ben Barbour , (disclaimer: I've
never read any media products that particular individual generated) goes beyond the point
made by Seer @35 . To be sure, there is no chance that a presstitute would bite the
hand that feeds it, but there is more depth to the problem of why they all suck so
badly, at least the ones in the US. While journalism degrees are the university equivalent of
Special Education (nowadays referred to as "Exceptional Student Education" , which is
very fitting for students from such an "exceptional" nation), they still prepare the
future presstitute to understand that their capitalist employers have interests beyond their
immediately apparent ones. That is, more important to a capitalist employer than tomorrow's
sales and profits is the preservation of capitalism itself.
But the problem is deeper still. The presstitute that is successfully employed by a
capitalist enterprise will invariably be one that knows not to criticize the employer's
business, the capitalist system it depends upon, and the empire that improves that employer's
profitability. More importantly, that successful hireling will additionally have been
brainwashed from infancy that all of these things are good and necessary aspects of the
modern world that need to be ideologically defended. The prospective presstitute will be one
that not only voluntarily, but eagerly serves its capitalist masters varied interests. After
all, when there are plenty of whores to choose from, would you hire one that requires
explicit instructions on every last thing you expect from them and just follows those
instructions mechanically or the the one that puts effort into figuring out what would please
you and delivers that with enthusiasm? Keeping this dynamic in mind will allow one to better
understand the capitalist mass media's products.
The contempt at which the American ruling class hold their citizens is galling. The US
corporate media operates as if their targeted audience are all morons.
Mark2 @45: "...was it [ novel coronavirus] spread by negligence or
deliberately?"
Most likely both.
There is evidence to suggest that the virus was circulating in the US prior to it being
discovered in China. While it is possible this could have been the results of testing the
transmissibility of the virus, it seems more probable that it was an accidental release from
Fort Detrick. This would explain the facility being shut down last year. Military facilities
are never shut down simply for breaking a few rules but because those rule violations led to
something unpleasant.
An accidental release, coupled with the fact that the synthetic origin of the virus would
become apparent to scientists worldwide, resulted in a need to quickly establish an alternate
explanation for the virus. Since the US was losing its trade war with China, and use of a
bioweapon to turn the tide was already gamed out and on the table anyway, the virus (or
possibly a very similar strain that had been pre-selected for the attack) was deliberately
sprayed around a market in Wuhan.
The CDC and CIA probably thought that the virus was contained in the West and that since
it was a surprise to the Chinese it would run rampant there and result in their economy
shutting down and their borders being closed, decoupling China from the world. With the
Chinese treating the virus as a bio attack and defeating its spread, followed by the virus
rampaging through the West, the dynamic changed. Now in order for the virus to decouple China
it must become endemic in the West. The Chinese must be made to close their borders in fear
of becoming infected from the rest of the world. To make this backup plan a reality, and to
get the economies moving again as fast as possible, some western leaders have decided to
accelerate the spread in the hopes of quickly developing "herd immunity" . Taking out
some retirees whom the capitalists view as a burden on the economy is just some nice icing on
the cake.
@ 51 & @ 52
I'd say not ! I'm confided Vietnam Vet is doing 'balenced' Reporting ! The subject of this
post. Take another look at both this post and his comment. A lesson in how to be unbiased but
truthfull.
Soooo any one got a definition of fake news.
Mine would be Truth before personal agenda.
William Gruff @ 53
I think yours is just about the most clear and concise summary of this whole virus
catastrophe that I have seen so far. And that's a hell of a statement !
Unrelated I wonder what would have happened if the Chinese whistle blower had not blown the
whistle ? Now that's one to ponder ? As bad as this all is world wide, where would be right
now ? Dose not bare thinking about.
What are you trying to tell me? Anyone that does not acknowledge the virus originated in
China and that China didn't respond as fast as it could have? And more polemically: there is
some kind of African Marxist heading WHO who obfuscated China's late information to the
WHO?
There is a dot of truth in everything. There is also a dot of truth in the fact that Trump
or his relevant admin was informed early enough.
We've been acquainted with this virus about 7 months or so and it is difficult to separate
reliable information from disinformation. We know very little about it, eg, we don't know
whether those who recover can be reinfected. Is it like the common cold, against which there
is no immunity? We just have to assume that the Trump virus has infected every level of the
administration so that there is ignorance and unadulterated stupidity from the lowest level
in the ministry of propaganda to the secretary of state and, of course, the president himself
currently celebrating the wisdom of an animist/Christian hybrid doctor from Africa spewing
the foulest disinformation one can imagine.
Big @ 57 What ?
Posted by: Mark2 | Jul 30 2020 12:27 utc | 58
babbling: look if this is the good old VV from SST, I wouldn't want to nail him on the
usage of Wuhan virus. But on the larger content of his comment, I am wondering.
Full discovery: I entered the US conspiracy universe shortly after 9/11. I'll probably
never forget there was this one commenter that completely out of then current preoccupations
within the diverse theories, you recall?, suggested that the Chinese were approaching via the
Southern borders.
There surely should be a way how the US and Russia
There surely should be a way how the US and Russia
There surely should be a way how the US and Russia repartition their claims. After all
historically the Russian had some type of partly real Yellow threat too ... :)
Except the "whistle blower" was not a whistle blower since local, provincial, and nations
institutions were already advised or in the process of being advised. Dr Wenliang posted his
information in a private chatroom with other medical professionals on December 30th. Timeline
of events:
Dec 27 -- Dr. Zhang Jixian, director of the respiratory and critical care medicine
department of Hubei Provincial Hospital, files a report to the hospital stating that an
unknown pneumonia has developed in three patients and they are not responding to influenza
treatment.
Dec 29 -- Hubei Provincial Hospital convened a panel of 10 experts to discuss the now
seven cases. Their conclusion that the situation was extraordinary, plus information of two
similar cases in other hospitals, prompted the hospital to report directly to the municipal
and provincial health authorities.
Dec 30 -- The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission issued an urgent notification to medical
institutions under its jurisdiction, ordering efforts to appropriately treat patients with
pneumonia of unknown cause.
Dec 31 -- The National Health Commission (NHC) made arrangements in the wee hours, sending
a working group and an expert team to Wuhan to guide epidemic response and conduct on-site
investigations. The Wuhan Municipal Health Commission released a briefing on its website
about the pneumonia outbreak in the city, confirming 27 cases and telling the public not to
go to enclosed public places or gather. It suggested wearing face masks when going out. The
Wuhan Municipal Health Commission released briefings on the pneumonia outbreak in accordance
with the law. WHO's Country Office in the PRC relayed the information to the WHO Western
Pacific Regional Office, then to the international level headquarters.
Jan 1 -- The NHC set up a leading group to determine the emergency response to the
epidemic. The group convened meetings on a daily basis since then.
Jan 2 -- The Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC) and the Chinese
Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) received the first batch of samples of four patients from
Hubei Province and began pathogen identification. The NHC came up with a set of guidelines on
early discovery, early diagnosis and early quarantine for the prevention and control of the
viral pneumonia of unknown cause.
Jan 3 -- Dr. Wenliang signs a statement not to post unsubstantiated rumors.
There's no "whistle blowing" as the information of the cases were already going up the
chain of command. These are facts that can be sourced by multiple media outlets. I can't
believe this fallacy keeps floating and doesn't flush.
In retrospective analyses, SARS-COV-2 was found in routinely collected samples of European
sewage water dating back to at least december 2019. A french doctor reviewed archived medical
samples and imagery from patients who had fallen mysteriously ill in the latter half of 2019
and also found that some had been early cases of COVID-19.
The real coronavirus whistle-blower is a doctor in Washington state USA who tested for the
virus in Januari 2020 and was silenced by USA medical and federal authorities.
I am afraid that there will never be a sincere investigation into the real cause of the
"vaping disease" that caused many deaths from sudden respiratory failure in the USA in the
summer of 2019. Tell me again when Ft. Detrick labs was shut down exactly?
What are you trying to tell me? Anyone that does not acknowledge the virus originated in
China and that China didn't respond as fast as it could have? And more polemically: there is
some kind of African Marxist heading WHO who obfuscated China's late information to the WHO?
There is a dot of truth in everything. There is also a dot of truth in the fact that Trump
or his relevant admin was informed early enough.
Posted by: vig | Jul 30 2020 12:21 utc | 57
vig repeats widely spread arguments, basically, the "official propaganda" from offices
related to an orange-American (excessive time spend on golf courses changes skin color,
perhaps in combination with sunscreen, without sunscreen you would get a "redneck look").
1. Origin: somewhat debatable, but any virus has to originate somewhere. Every country was
on receiving end of pathogens from other countries.
2. China did not respond as fast as it could have. Now, how fast and effective was USA?
One has to note that clusters of fatal lung infections happen regularly, but this is because
of mutations that increase impact on health, while separate mutations increase (or decrease)
the transmission. Draconian measures are necessary if you get both, but you do not lock
cities, provinces, introduce massive quarantine programs until you know that they are
necessary. For the same reasons, the response in Western Europe and USA was not as fast as it
could have.
3. "African Marxist heading WHO mislead poor naive Americans". What is the budget of
American intelligence, and American disease control? Do they collect information, do they
have experts? In particular, American authorities knew pretty much what Chinese authorities
knew, and they had benefit of several weeks of extra time to devise wise strategy. Giving
this benefit to people with limited mental capacities has a limited value. Perhaps China is
at fault here too, Pompeo reported about pernicious impact of Chinese Communist Party on PPT
meeting in USA, that could have deleterious impact on education and thus on mental
capacities.
Pompeo himself may be a victim. He excelled as a West Point student, but if the content of
education was crappy, diligence impacted his brain deeper and not for the better. But nobody
attempts to blame CCP for that.
For starters, the "whistleblower" wasn't a whistleblower at all: he thought he had found a
resurgence of SARS, not a new pandemic. Secondly, the head of respiratory diseases at the
region already was investigating some cases of a "mysterious pneumonia" since end of November
or mid-December - so the investigation already was well under way.
Discovering a new disease is not magic: a doctor cannot simply go the market, see a random
person, and claim he/she discovered a new virus. Doctors are not gods: they can only diagnose
the patients under their care.
The point of discord that the Western MSM capitalized upon was the fact that some random
officer from the local police intercepted his private social media and made him sign a letter
of reprimand. No Law is ever perfect, and these episodes of false triggers do happen even in
Western Democracies.
Little known fact (one which the Western MSM censored) is that the so-called
"whistleblower" was a member of the CCP. After knowing the details of the situation
(including that the disease was already being investigated), he quickly realized the
state-of-the-art and went to the frontlines to fight the pandemic - as any member of the CCP
would've done. Revolutionary communist parties have this tradition that comes since the
Bolshevik Party, where the leadership always leads by example. The Bolsheviks themselves lost
the vast majority of their elite in the Civil War, as they always led in the front
(vanguard). Fidel Castro himself led his army in the front when the invasion of the Bay of
Pigs begun. So, it is not surprising this doctor, once having the facts on the field, quickly
shut up and went to the frontline as a vanguard soldier.
After the whole truth came to the forefront, the Western MSM quickly begun to meltdown
over the fake story they fantasized, and the Taiwanese MSM invented a story of some another
whistleblower who had discovered the virus "at the end of November". That one never truly
gained traction, and silently died out.
But all of this is moot point for the West, because Trump and the other European liberal
powers refused to believe either that the virus was real or that it could reach them until
February the next year.
I think it is OK that b nails the US makes yet another display of stupidity.... on the other
hand I presume that b also has other things to care about, I mean exposing the US as a "fake"
nation is a full time job!
Americans have at least the last 50 years been known for fails, even Churchill commented
something like "the Americans will fail numerous times, but eventually they will get it
right" well that was back then! Today it is fail upon fail. I know that there must be bright
people over there, but it is my sincere impression, that they are a very small minority.
Maybe their schooling system has all gone bonkers ?
"3% of all Americans believe the Earth is flat! WTF!!!
America is on a steep slope downward.
I am personally not worried much about Covid 19, although I am 63 and live in Sweden, the
"black Sheep" in Europe because of our rather lax restrictions, the Swedes themselves are
rather good at keeping distance and using common sense.
I am much more worried that the American culture of ignorance, brain farts, stupidity and low
IQ media will infest my country further and maybe completely ruin it.
Especially by the junk that comes out of Hollywood, pure Sh*t served nice and hot!
I am happy I know, I have not got to endure further 30 years of this.
A few months ago, b posted a link to a Canadian vlogger who lives in Nanning, China. The
vlogger took us on a tour of a so called Wet Market. Here, the vlogger takes us to another
Wet Market tour. He does a good job dispelling racist stereotypes and showing real life in
China.
One to many @ 64
Thanks ! So there was a group of whistle blowers then. It's down to definitions again.
Perhaps mine is a little more loose. But it's of no concern.
For the sake of this excellent thread, perhaps we could all be a little less pedantic. VK ?
Also relevant - Crimson Contagion - the pandemic simulation run by the US government from
January to August 2019 and was based on an infectious coronavirus coming from a food market
in China
Everywhere u go in this world you'll find some version or an "murican" in every country.
Even a country like modern first world Switzerland has its "mountain folk".
In my personal experience with Americans I'm most often pleasantly surprised at their levels
of sophistication and introspection over their American experiences. An enjoyable and as
pleasant a people as anywhere. This may be clouded by mostly meeting these people outside of
the US where unless tourists are well educated and travelled and by default more aware of a
negative view of their homeland that exists outside of the US. For some reason most of these
Americans I've met abroad are decidedly non republican in nature and are mostly
from California and North and North Eastern States. Fellow future Canadians I would call
them.
The other side of the coin is when I've travelled to the states. Texas, Florida, Arizona.
Whew! What a difference. I've learned that talking politics is impossible and the natives are
almost entirely ignorant of anything outside their bubble. Outside of talking points there is
no information behind their arguments. Their knowledge of the outside world is incredibly
lacking and the view of the US in it is overwhelmingly positive.
It isn't Americans its America and its leadership, its influences, systems and all the other
shit that make the US the salad it is. The people r redeemable.
Calling the professionals doing their jobs in China "whistleblowers" is inaccurate.
"Whistleblower" implies revealing information that others are trying to hide. In this
case the suggestion is that the Chinese government was trying to hide the outbreak. This is
nonsense as the Chinese government was unaware of an outbreak until after the relevant
professionals had determined that there was an outbreak. There is no way the Chinese
government could have known about an outbreak before the outbreak was identified by the
professionals tasked with identifying outbreaks. The only ones who knew about the outbreak
before the outbreak occurred were the US "intelligence community" .
"... Some of the neoliberal countries may be at the stage of the collusion; some of them may find themselves at the stage of oligarchy; some of them may be at the stage of corruption culture. ..."
"... In Japan, since 1957, there were twenty-one prime ministers of whom 75% were one-year or two-year prime ministers despite the four-year term of prime ministers. The short life span of Japanese prime ministers is essentially due to the short term interest pursued by the corrupted golden triangle composed of big business, bureaucrats and politicians. Unless, Japan uproots the corruption culture, it will be difficult to save the Japanese economy from perpetual stagnation. ..."
"... In the U.S. the big companies are spending a year no less than $2.6 billion lobbying money for the promotion of their interests, while the Congress spends $ 2.9 billion and the Senate, $860 million for their respective annual operation. Some of the big companies deploy as many as 100 lobbyists. ..."
"... It is unbelievable that the amount of lobbying is as much as 70% of the annual budget of the whole legislative of the U.S. ..."
"... Under such lobbying system, each group should deploy lobbyists to promote their interests. The immigrants, the native Indians, the Afro Americans, the alienated white people and other marginal groups cannot afford lobbyists and they are often excluded from fair treatment in the process of making laws and policies ..."
"... In the case of the U.S. its rank increased from 18 in 2016 to 22 in 2019. Thus in three years, the degree of corruption increase by 22.2% ..."
"... The U.S. is the richest country in the world, but it is also a country where income inequality is the most pronounced. I will come back to this issue in the next section. In relation to the corona virus crisis, income inequality means an army of those who are most likely to be infected and who are unable to follow CDC guidelines of testing, self quarantine and social distancing. Finally, the privatization of public health services has made the whole country unprepared for the onslaught of the virus. ..."
"... The experience of Japan shows how this can happen. The economic depression after the bubble burst of 1989, Japan had to endure 30-year deflation. The government of Japan has flooded the country with money to restore the economy, but the money was used for the bail-out of big corporations neglecting the healthy development of the SMEs and impoverishing the ordinary Japanese people. South Korea could have experienced the Japanese-type economic stagnation, if the conservative government ruled the country ten more years. ..."
"... The neoliberal pro-big company policy of Washington has greatly depleted consumer demand and SMEs even before the onslaught of the coronavirus. ..."
"... Fourth, the U.S. economy is shaken up so much that the neoliberal regime will not able to recover the economy. Thus, the survival of neo-liberalism looks uncertain. But, if the coronavirus crisis continues and destroys SMEs and if only the big corporations survive owing to bailout money, neo-liberalism may survive and we may end up with authoritarian governance ruled by the business-politics oligarchy. ..."
For the last forty years, neo-liberalism has dominated economic thinking and the formulation of economic policies Worldwide.
But the corona virus crisis has exposed, in a dramatic way, its internal contradictions, its incapacity to deal with the corona
crisis and its incompetence to restore the real economy ruined by the crisis.
In this article, we will focus on the relationship between Neoliberalism and the Corona Crisis:
Neoliberalism has prevented the governments from controlling effectively the initial outbreak of the corona virus.
Neoliberalism has made the wave of virus propagation higher and wider, especially in the U.S.
Neoliberalism can shake the foundations of the U.S. economy.
Neoliberalism may not survive the corona virus crisis in the U.S.
To save democracy and the global economy, We need a new economic model which supports the future of humanity, which sustains human
livelihood Worldwide.
1. Neoliberalism and the initial Outbreak of the Corona Virus
The most important part of neoliberalism is the relation -often of a corrupt nature- between the government and large corporations.
By corruption, we mean illegal or immoral human activities designed to maximize profit at the expense of people's welfare. In this
relation, the government may not be able to control and govern the large corporations. In fact, in the present context, the corporations
govern and oversee national governments.
Hence, when the corona virus broke out, it was difficult for the government to take immediate actions to control the virus break-out
to save human lives; It was quite possible that the price of stocks and large corporations' profit had the priority.
The theory known as neoliberalism distinguishes itself from the old liberalism prevailing before the Great Depression.
It became widely accepted mainly because of its adoption, in the 1970s and 1980s, by Ronald Reagan , president of the U.S. and
Margaret Thatcher , prime minister of Great Britain as an economic policy agenda applied nationally and internationally.
The justification of neoliberalism is the belief that the best way to ensure economic growth is to encourage "supply activities"
of private sector enterprises.
Now, the proponents of neoliberalism argue that public goods (including health and education) can be produced with greater efficiency
by private companies than by the State. Therefore, "it is better" to let the private enterprises produce public goods.
In other words, the production of public goods should be "privatized". Neoliberals put profit as the best measure of efficiency
and success. And profit can be sustained with government support. In turn, the private companies' policy is that of reducing the
labour costs of production.
Government assistance includes reduction of corporate taxes, subsidies and anti-labour policies such as the prohibition of labour
unionization and the abolition of the minimum wage.
Reduction of labour cost can be obtained by the automation of the production of goods
Under such circumstances, close cooperation between the government and the private corporations is inevitable; even it may be
necessary.
But, such cooperation is bound to lead to government-business collusion in which the business receives legal and illegal government
support in exchange of illicit money such as kick-backs and bribes given to influential politicians and the people close to the power.
As the collusion becomes wider and deeper, an oligarchy is formed; it is composed of corporations, politicians and civil servants.
This oligarchy's raison d'être is to make money even at the expense of the interests of the people.
Now, in order to protect its vested interests, the oligarchy expands its network and creates tight-knit political community which
shares the wealth and privileges obtained.
In this way, the government-business cooperation can be evolved by stage to give birth to the corruption culture.
Some of the neoliberal countries may be at the stage of the collusion; some of them may find themselves at the stage of oligarchy;
some of them may be at the stage of corruption culture.
South Korea
When the progressive government of Moon Jae-in took over power in 2017, South Korea under the 60-year neo-liberal rule by the
conservatives was at the stage of corruption culture.
The progressive government of Moon Jae-in has declared a total war against the corruption culture, but it is a very long way to
go before eliminating corruption.
In South Korea, of six presidents of the conservative government, four presidents were or are in prison for corruption and abuse
of power. This shows how deeply the corruption has penetrated into the fabrics of the Korea society
In Japan, since 1957, there were twenty-one prime ministers of whom 75% were one-year or two-year prime ministers despite the
four-year term of prime ministers. The short life span of Japanese prime ministers is essentially due to the short term interest
pursued by the corrupted golden triangle composed of big business, bureaucrats and politicians. Unless, Japan uproots the corruption
culture, it will be difficult to save the Japanese economy from perpetual stagnation.
Lobbying and "Corruption Culture"
Many of the developed countries in the West are also the victims of corruption culture. In the U.K. the City (London's Wall Street)
is the global center of money laundry.
In the U.S. the big companies are spending a year no less than $2.6 billion lobbying money for the promotion of their interests,
while the Congress spends $ 2.9 billion and the Senate, $860 million for their respective annual operation. Some of the big companies
deploy as many as 100 lobbyists.
It is unbelievable that the amount of lobbying is as much as 70% of the annual budget of the whole legislative of the U.S.
True, in the U.S., lobbying is not illegal, but it may not be morally justified. It is a system where the law makers give privileges
to those who spend more money, which can be considered as bribes
Under such lobbying system, each group should deploy lobbyists to promote their interests. The immigrants, the native Indians,
the Afro Americans, the alienated white people and other marginal groups cannot afford lobbyists and they are often excluded from
fair treatment in the process of making laws and policies
Some of the developed European countries are also very corrupted. The international Transparency Index rank, in 2019, was 23 for
France, 30 for Spain and 51 for Italy.
In the case of the U.S. its rank increased from 18 in 2016 to 22 in 2019. Thus in three years, the degree of corruption increase
by 22.2%
What is alarming is that, in the corruption culture, national policies are liable to be dictated by big businesses.
In South Korea, under the conservative government, it was suspected that the national policies were determined by the Chaebols
(large industrial conglomerates), not by the government.
As matter of fact, during the MERS crisis in 2015, the anti-virus policy was dictated by the Samsung Group. In order to save its
profit, Samsung Hospital in Seoul hid the infected so that the number of non-MERS patients would not decrease.
In Japan, the Abe government made the declaration of public health emergency as late as April 6, 2020 despite the fact that the
infections were detected as early as January, 2020.
This decision was, most likely, dictated by Keiretsu members (grouping of large enterprises) in order to save investments in the
July Olympics. Nobody knows how many Japanese had been infected for more than three months.
Similarly, Trump was well aware of the sure propagation of the virus right form January, but he waited until March 13, 2020 before
he declared the state of effective public health emergency. The obvious reason was the possible fear of free fall of stock price
and the possible loss of big companies' profits.
The interesting question is: "The delayed declaration of public health emergency, was it Trump's decision or that of his corporate
friends?" It doesn't matter whose decision it was, because the government under neoliberal system is controlled the big businesses.
So, as in Japan, Italy, Spain, France and especially, the U.K, Trump lost the golden time to save human lives to keep profit of
enterprises.
God knows how many American lives were sacrificed to save stock price and company profit!
Thus, the neoliberal governments have lost the golden chance to prevent the initial outbreak of the dreadful virus.
2. Neo-liberalism and the Propagation of Corona-Virus
We saw that the initial outbreak of the virus was not properly controlled leading to the loss to golden time of saving human lives,
most likely because of the priority given to business and political interests.
The initial outbreak of the virus was transformed into never-ending propagation and, even now, in many states in the U.S. the
wave of the virus is getting higher and wider.
This tragic reality can be explained by four factors:
people's mistrust in the government,
unbounded competition,
inequitable income distribution,
the absence of public health system.
These four factors (above) are all the legacies of neoliberalism.
The people know well that the corrupted neoliberal government's concern is not the welfare of the people but the interest of a
few powerful and the rich. The inevitable outcome is the loss of people's trust in the unreliable government.
This is demonstrated by Trump's indecision, his efforts of ignoring the warning of the professionals, his fabricates stories and
above all, his perception of who should be given the right to receive life-saving medical care at the hospital.
Under such circumstances, Americans do not trust the government directives and guidelines, allegedly implemented to protect people
from the virus.
The guideline of the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) for self quarantine, social distancing and wearing face masks has little
effect. There is another product of neoliberalism which is troublesome. I mean its credo of unbounded competition.
It is true that competition promotes efficiency and better quality of products. However, as competition continues, the number
of winners decreases, while that of losers rises. The economy ends up being ruled by a handful of powerful winners. This leads to
the segregation of losers and leads to the discrimination of people by income level, religion, race and colour of skin.
In the present context, largely as a result of government policy, there is little to no social solidarity; each individual has
to solve his or her own problems. I was sad when I saw on TV a young lady in California saying:
"To be killed by the COVID-19 or starve to death is the same to me. I open my shop to eat!"
This shows how American citizens are left alone to fight the coronavirus. Furthermore, neoliberalism has another unhappy legacy;
it is the widening and deepening income inequality.
The U.S. is the richest country in the world, but it is also a country where income inequality is the most pronounced. I will
come back to this issue in the next section. In relation to the corona virus crisis, income inequality means an army of those who
are most likely to be infected and who are unable to follow CDC guidelines of testing, self quarantine and social distancing. Finally,
the privatization of public health services has made the whole country unprepared for the onslaught of the virus.
In fact, in the U.S. there is no public health system. For three months after the first breakout of the virus, the country lacked
everything needed to fight the virus.
There was shortage of testing kits and PPE (personal protective equipment);
there were not enough rooms to accommodate the infected;
there was shortage of qualified medical staff;
there was lack of face masks.
Thus, neoliberalism has made the U.S not only to lose the golden time to prevent the initial breakout but also it has let the
wave of virus to continue. Nobody knows when it will calm down. As a matter of fact, on July 4, there were 2.9 million infected and
132,000 deaths; this gives a death rate of 4.6%. Given U.S. population of 328 million, we have 402.44 deaths per million inhabitants
which is one of highest among the developed countries. The trouble is that the wave of virus is still going higher and wider. On
July 4, the confirmed cases increased by 50% in two weeks in 12 states and increased 10% to 50% in 22 states.
3. Neo-liberalism and the very Foundation of the U.S. Economy
The message of this section is this. The foundation of the American economy is the purchasing power of the consumers and the job
creation by small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The consumer demand is 70% of the GDP, the SMEs create 66% of jobs. Unfortunately,
because of neoliberalism, the consumers have become very poorer and the SMEs have been neglected in the pro-big-company government
policies. The COVID-19 has destroyed the SMEs and impoverished the consumers. Nobody would deny the contribution of neo-liberalism
to globalization of finance, the creation of the global value chain and, especially the free trade agreement.
All these activities have allowed GDP to grow in developed countries and some of new industrial countries. However, the wealth
created by the growth of GDP has gone to countries already developed, some developing countries and a small number of multinational
enterprises (MNE). The rich produced by GDP growth has led to the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few privileged. What
is more serious is this. If the skewed income distribution in favour of a decreasing number of people continues for long, the GDP
will stop growing and decades-long deflation is quite possible, as it has happened in Japan.
According to the OECD data, in the period, 1975-2011, the GDP share of labour income in OECD countries fell by 13.8% from 65%
to 56%. In the case of the U.S., in the same period, 1970-2014, it fell by 11%. The falling labour-income share is necessarily translated
into unequal household income distribution. There are two popular ways of measuring income distribution: the decile ratio and the
Gini coefficient.
The decile ratio is obtained by dividing the income earned by the top 10% income earners by the income earned by the bottom 10%
income earners . The decile ratio in 2019 was 18.5 in the U.S. as compared to 5.6 in Finland. The decile ratio of the U.S. was the
highest among the developed countries. Thus, in the U.S. the top 10 % has an income 19 times more than the bottom 10%, while, in
Finland, the corresponding ratio is only 6 times. This shows how serious the income gap is in the country of Uncle Sam.
The Gini coefficient varies from zero to 100. As the value of the Gini increases, the income distribution becomes favourable to
the high-income households. Conversely, as the value of the Gini decreases, the income distribution becomes favourable to low-income
households. There are two types of Gini: the gross Gini and the net Gini. The former refers to Gini before taxes and transfer payment,
while the latter refers to Gini after taxes and transfer payment. The difference between the gross and the net Gini shows the government
efforts to improve the equality and fairness of income distribution The gross U.S.- Gini coefficient in 2019 was 48.6, one of the
highest among the developed countries.
Its net Gini was 38.0 so that the difference between the gross and the net Gini was 12.3%. In other words, the U.S. income distribution
improved only by 12.3% by government efforts as against, for example, an improvement of 42.9% in the case of Germany, where the gross
Gini was 49.9 while the net Gini was 28.5 The net Gini of the U.S. was the highest among the developed countries. The implication
is clear. The income distribution in the U.S. was the most unequal. To make the matter worse, the government's effort to improve
the unequal income distribution was the poorest among the developed countries. There are countless signs of unfortunate impacts of
the inequitable income distribution in the country called the U.S. which Koreans used to admire describing it as "mi-gook- 美國미국 –
Beautiful Country". Now, one wonders if it is still a "mi-gook".
The following data indicates the seriousness of poverty in the U.S. (data below prior to the Coronavirus crisis).
In the U.S. the richest 1% of the population has 40% of all household wealth. (2017 data)
More than 20% of the population cannot pay monthly bills.
About 40% do not have savings.
31% of private sector worker do not have medical benefits.
57% of the workers in the service sector have no medical benefits.
These data give us an idea on how so many people have to suffer from poverty in a country where per capita GDP is $65,000 (2019
estimate), the richest country in the world. Most of the Americans work for small- and medium-sized companies (SMEs). In the U.S.,
there are 30 million SMEs. They create 66% of jobs in the private sector. The SMEs are more severely hit than big companies by the
coronavirus.
In fact, 66% of SMEs are adversely affected by the virus against 40% for big firms. As much as 20% of SMEs may be shut down for
good within three months, because of the virus. Under the forty years of neoliberal pro-big corporation policies, available financial
resources and the best human resources have been allocated to big firms at the expense of the development of SMEs.
The most damaging by-product of neoliberalism is no doubt the widening and deepening unequal income distribution for the benefit
of the big corporations and the uprooting of SMEs. This trend means the shrinking domestic demand and the disappearance of jobs for
ordinary people.
The destruction of the domestic market caused by the shrinking consumer demand and the disappearance of SMEs can mean the uprooting
of the very foundation of the economy.
The experience of Japan shows how this can happen. The economic depression after the bubble burst of 1989, Japan had to endure
30-year deflation. The government of Japan has flooded the country with money to restore the economy, but the money was used for
the bail-out of big corporations neglecting the healthy development of the SMEs and impoverishing the ordinary Japanese people. South
Korea could have experienced the Japanese-type economic stagnation, if the conservative government ruled the country ten more years.
The neoliberal pro-big company policy of Washington has greatly depleted consumer demand and SMEs even before the onslaught of
the coronavirus. But, the COVID-19 has given a coup de grâce to consumer demand and SMEs To better understand the issue, let us go
back to the ABC of economics. Looking at the national economy from the demand side, the economy consists of private consumer demand
(C), the private investment demand (I), the government demand (G) and Foreign demand represented by exports of domestic products
(X) minus domestic demand for imported foreign products (M).
GDP=C + I + G + (X-M)
In 2019, the consumer expenditure (C) in the U.S. was 70% of GDP, whereas the government's spending (G) was 17%. The investments
demand (I) was 18%. The net exports demand (X-M) was -5%.
In 2019 the composition of Canadian GDP was: C=57%; I=23 %; G=21 %; X-M=-1%.
Thus, we see that the U.S. economy heavily depends on the private domestic consumption, which represents as much as 70% of GDP
compared to 57% in Canada. The government's contribution to the national demand is 17% as against 21% in Canada. In the U.S. a small
government is a virtue according to neoliberals. In the U.S. the private investments account for only 18% of GDP as compared to as
much as 23% in Canada. In the U.S., off-shoring of manufacturing jobs and the global value chain under neo-liberalism have decreased
the need for business investments at home. It is obvious then that to save the American economy, we have to boost the consumers'
income. But, the consumer income comes mainly from SMEs. We must remember that the SMEs create 66% of all jobs in the U.S. Therefore,
if consumer demand falls and if SMEs do not create jobs, the US economy may have to face the same destiny as the Japanese economy.
This is happening in the U.S. The corona virus crisis is destroying SMEs and taking away the income of the people.
The coronavirus crisis is about to demolish the very foundation of the American economy.
4. Corona Virus Crisis and the Survival of Neoliberalism
The interesting question is this. Will neo-liberalism as economic system survive the corona virus crisis in the U.S.?
There are at least four indications suggesting that it will not survive.
First, to overcome major crisis such as the corona virus invasion, we need strong central government and people-loving leader.
One of the reasons for the successful anti-virus policy in South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore was the strong central government's
role of determining and coordinating the anti-virus policies. As we saw, the gospel of neo-liberalism is the minimization of the
central government's role. Having little role in economic policies, the U.S. federal government has proved itself as the most incompetent
entity to fight the crisis. It is more than possible that the U.S. and all the neoliberal countries will try to get away from the
traditional neoliberal governance in which the government is almost a simple errand boy of big business.
Second, the people's trust in the neoliberal leaders has fallen on the ground. It will be difficult for the neoliberal leaders
to be able to lead the country in the post-corona virus era.
Third, the corona virus crisis has made the people aware of the abuse of power by the big companies; the people now know that
these companies are interested only in making money. So, it may be more difficult for them to exploit the people in the era of post-COVID-19.
Fourth, the U.S. economy is shaken up so much that the neoliberal regime will not able to recover the economy. Thus, the survival
of neo-liberalism looks uncertain. But, if the coronavirus crisis continues and destroys SMEs and if only the big corporations survive
owing to bailout money, neo-liberalism may survive and we may end up with authoritarian governance ruled by the business-politics
oligarchy.
5. Search for a New Economic Regime: Just-Liberalism
One thing which the corona-virus crisis has demonstrated is the fact that the American neo-liberalism has failed as sustainable
regime capable of stopping the virus crisis, restore the economy and save the democracy. Hence, we have to look for a new regime
capable of saving the U.S. economy and democracy. We would call this new regime as "Just-liberalism " mission of which is the sustainable
economic development and, at the same time, the just distribution of the benefits of economic development. Before we get into the
discussion of the main feature of the new regime, there is one thing we should discuss. It is the popular perception of large corporation.
Many believe that they make GDP grow and create jobs. It is also the popular view that the success of these large corporations is
due to the innovative managing skills of their founders or their CEOs. Therefore, they deserve annual salary of millions of dollars.
This is the popular perception of Chaebols in South Korea.
But, a great part of Chaebols income is attributable to the public goods such as national defence, police protection, social infrastructures,
the education system, enormous sacrifice of workers and, especially tax allowances, subsidies and privileges. In other words, a great
part of the Chaebols' income belongs to the society, not the Chaebols. Many believe that the Chaebols create jobs, but, in reality,
they crate less than 10% of jobs in Korea. We may say the same thing about large corporations in the U.S. In other words, much of
the company's income is due to public goods. Hence, the company should equitably share its income with the rest of the society. But
do they?
The high ranking managers get astronomical salaries; some of them are hiding billions of dollars in tax haven islands.
We ask. Are large corporations sharing equitably their income with the society? Are the corporate tax allowances they get too
much? Is the wage they pay too low? Is CEO's income is too high?
It is difficult to answer these questions.
But we should throw away the mysticism surrounding the merits of large corporations; we should closely watch them so that they
do not misuse their power and wealth to dictate national policies for their own benefit at the expense of the welfare of the people.
The new regime, just-liberalism, should have the following eight features.
First, we need a strong government which is autonomous from big businesses; there should be no business-politics collusion; there
should be no self-interest oligarchy of corruption.
Second, it is the time we should reconsider the notion of human right violation. There are several types of human right violation
in developed countries including the U.S. For example, the racial discrimination, the inequality before the law, the violation of
the right of social security and the violation of the right of social service are some cases of violation of human rights defined
by the U.N. The Western media have been criticizing human right violation in "non-democratic countries", but, in the future, they
should pay more attention to human right violation in "democratic countries."
Third, the criterion of successful economy should not be limited to the GDP growth; the equitable distribution of the benefits
of GDP growth should also be a criterion; proper balance between the growth and the distribution of growth fruits should be maintained.
Fourth, market should not be governed by "efficiency" alone; it must be also "equitable". Efficiency may lead to the concentration
of resources and power in the hands of the few at the expense of social benefit; it must be also equitable. As an example, we may
refer to the Chaebols (big Korean industrial conglomerates) which kill the traditional village markets which provide livelihood to
a great number of poor people. The Chaebols may make the market efficient but not equitable. The Korean government has limited Chaebols'
penetration into these markets to make them more equitable.
Fifth, we need a partial direct democracy. The legislative translates people's wish into laws and the executive makes policies
on the basis of laws. But, in reality, the legislative and the executive may pass laws and policies for the benefit of big companies
or specific group of individuals and institutions close to the power. Therefore, it is important to provide a mechanism through which
the people – the real master of the country – should be allowed to intervene all times. In South Korea, if more than 200,000 people
send a request to the Blue house (Korean White House) to intervene in matters judged unfair or unjust, the government must intervene.
Sixth, those goods and services which are essential for every citizen must be nationalized. For example, social infrastructure
such as parks, roads, railways, harbours, supply of electricity should not be privatized. Education including higher education should
be made public goods so that low income people should get higher education as do high income group.
This is the best way to maximize the mass of innovative minds and creative energy to develop the society. Above all, the health
service should be nationalized. It is just unbelievable to see that, in a country where the per capita GDP is $63,000, more than
30 million citizens have no medical insurance, just because it is too expensive. Politicians know quite well that big companies related
to insurance, pharmaceutical products and medical professions are preventing the nationalization of medical service in the U.S. But,
the politicians don't seem to dare go over these vested interests groups and nationalize the public health system. Remember this.
There are countries which are much poorer than the U.S. But, they have accessible universal health care insurance system.
Seventh, the economy should allow the system of multi- generational technologies in which not only high-level technologies but
also mid-level technologies should be promoted in such a way that both high- tech large corporations and middle-tech SMEs can grow.
This is perhaps only way to insure GDP growth and create jobs.
Eighth, in the area of international relations, it is about the time to stop wasteful ideological conflict. The difference among
ideologies is narrowing; the number of countries which have abandoned the U.S. imposed democracy has been rising; the ideological
basis of socialism is weakening. According to the Economist Intelligence Unit, 48% of countries are democratic, while 52% are not.
According to Freedom House, in 2005, 83 countries had net gain in democracy, while 52 countries had net loss in democracy.
But in 2019, only 37 countries had net gain while 64 countries had net loss. Between 2005 and 2018, the number of countries which
were not free increased by 26%, while those which were free fell by 44%. On the other hand, it is becoming more and more difficult
to find authentic socialism. For example, Chinese regime has lost its pure socialism long time ago. Thus, the world is becoming non-ideological;
the world is embracing ideology-neutral pragmatism.
To conclude, the corona virus pandemic has given us the opportunity to look at ourselves; it has given us the opportunity to realize
how vulnerable we are in front of the corona virus attack.
Many more pandemics will come and challenge us. We need a world better prepared to fight the coming pandemics. It is high time
that we slow down our greedy pursuit for GDP growth; it is about the time to stop a wasteful international ideological conflict in
support of multibillion dollar interests behind Big Money and the Military industrial complex.
It is therefore timely to find a system where we care for each other and where we share what we have .
***
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.
Professor Joseph H. Chung is professor of economics and co- director of the Observatoire de l'Asie de l'Est (ODAE) of the Centre
d'Études de l'Intégration et la Mondialisation (CEIM), Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM). He is Research Associate of the Center
of Research on Globalization (CRG).
Growing Social and
Wealth Inequality in America
What? "Complications: Any life-threatening infection requires time to fully recover from
and can lead to long-term sequelae. This is true for influenza and #COVID19, which have both
been linked to a wide spectrum of long-term adverse consequences." The flu has long-term
adverse consequences??
What? What? "Vaccines: Vaccination against influenza began in the 1930s. The efficacy of
flu vaccines is generally good." Is he talking about these flu vaccines that are frequently
extremely ineffective, and prone to greater adverse reactions than other vaccines? Do they
get some other flu vaccine at UCL?
Wha... "Summary: #SARSCoV2 behaves in most ways like a pandemic influenza strain. The only
major epidemiological difference between #COVID19 and flu pandemics is the age risk
distribution, with influenza being highly dangerous to young children in addition to the
elderly." This UCL that he's part of, is that some UCL that's located elsewhere in the galaxy
other than the UCL in London?
And he works at the Genetics Institute. Just to reassure everyone.
Is the high share of 70% asymptomatic cases really confirmed?? The last time I heard
something about that isue it whas claimed to be 15-20% with no evidence for high numbers of
undiscovered asymtomatic cases. The extensive testing with a low percantege of positives
seems to confirm this.
If the asymptomatic cases were really around 2/3 then this would mean the number of real
cases is much higher the the number of officially counted cases, by the factor of 3
roughly.
Motorcycle accidents ruled Covid deaths? In the rush to paint Florida as the epicenter of
the "second wave" of the coronavirus outbreak, government officials and their allies in the
mainstream media have stooped to ridiculous depths to maximize the death count. A television
station this weekend looked into two highly unusual Covid deaths among victims in their 20s,
and when they asked about co-morbidities they were told one victim had none, because his Covid
death came in the form of a fatal motorcycle accident.
Sadly, this is not an isolated incident. In fact the "spike" that has dominated the
mainstream for the last couple of weeks is full of examples of such trickery.
Washington state last week revised its Covid death numbers downward when it was revealed
that anyone who passed away for any reason whatsoever who also had coronavirus was listed as a
"Covid-19 death" even if the cause of death had nothing to do with Covid-19.
In South Carolina, the state health agency admitted that the "spike" in Covid deaths was
only the result of delayed reporting of suspected Covid deaths.
An analysis of reported daily Covid deaths last week compared to actual day-of-death in
Houston revealed that the recent "spike" consisted largely of deaths that occurred in April
through June. Why delay reporting until now?
We do know that based on this "spike" the Democrat mayor of Houston cancelled the convention
of the Texas Republican Party. Mission accomplished?
Doesn't it seem suspicious that so many states have experienced "delayed" reporting of
deaths until Fauci and his gang of "experts" announced that we are in a new nightmare
scenario?
Last week in Florida – which is perhaps not coincidentally the location of the
Republican Party's national convention – another scandal emerged when hundreds of Covid
test centers reported 100 percent positive results. Obviously this would paint a far grimmer
picture of the resurgence of the virus. Orlando Health, for example, reported a positivity rate
of 98 percent – a shocking level – but a further investigation revealed a true
positivity rate of only 9.4 percent. Those "anomalies" were repeated throughout the state.
Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.
"Cases" once meant individuals who displayed sufficient symptoms to be treated in medical
facilities. But when the scaremongers needed a "second wave" they began reporting any positive
test result as a "Covid case." No wonder we have a "spike."
Politics demands that politicians be seen doing "something" rather than nothing, even if
that something is more harmful than doing nothing at all. That is why Washington is so addicted
to sanctions.
The same has been true especially in Republican-controlled states in the US in response to
the coronavirus. Faced with a virus that has killed about one-third as many people as the
normal, seasonal flu virus in 2018, Texas Governor Greg Abbott has endorsed a partial shutdown
of the economy resulting in millions tossed into the despair of unemployment. Then he
arbitrarily shut down bars because massively increased testing showed more people have been
exposed to the virus. And he mandated that people wear face masks. Neither shutting down bars
(instead of restaurants or Walmarts) nor forcing people to wear masks will have any effect on
the progression of the virus through society. But at least he looks like he's doing
"something."
We are facing the greatest assault on our civil liberties in our lifetimes. The virus is
real, but the government reaction is political and totalitarian. As it falls apart, will more
Americans start fighting for their liberty?
High numbers of asymptomatic are a feel good propaganda thing. Most have no symptoms when
they first become contagious, but the numbers that never develop symptoms are relatively
low.
Plenty of genuine people here that have developed their thoughts away from herd mentality.
And most are different in some aspects.
My thought is all free thinkers begin with a baseline or foundation and then expand from
there in relation to their experiences. Baseline starting points differ, as does life
experiences.
For me, I guess being able to raise a family and see them able to go out in the world and
start their own family is my baseline. This is overlapped with the historical saying - 'a
good leader brings peace and prosperity to his people'.
Goering though had a good understanding of the modern western world ...
Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm
want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his
farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in
England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all,
it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to
drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or
a Communist dictatorship.
For most here, democracy is still the sacred cow, but even that is something I no longer
worship. Democracy is controlled by whoever controls the media.
For me, the baseline is family, as in father mother and children, and, a leadership capable
of, or who's main interest is bringing peace and prosperity for the people..
This Paul
Krugman column helped crystallize the weirdness of the ongoing economists versus
epidemiologists spat, perhaps more accurately described as the 'some economists, especially
those with libertarian politics, versus epidemiologists spat.' Different theories, in turn
below the fold.
steven t johnson 07.20.20 at 2:37 pm
"1) The theory that economists actually are superior Certainly, epidemiologists' workhorse
models have had mixed predictive success " The predictive power of the economists' models, or
their guidance of government policies that have ended business cycles (for an example) by
contrast has had presumably unmixed success? I believe it is misleading to phrase the point
this way: The theory is that the laws of economics as expounded in the academy are laws of
nature, a description of the anatomy of the final society, the endpoint of human history, if
not human evolution. Thus, any unwelcome conclusions from epidemiological models must be
rejected.
"(2) The theory that economists' superiority is a sociological construct that economists
desire to maintain." The word "sociological" may be written here, but the discussion seems to
indicate that it actually means, psychological trait. In plain terms, it means the vanity of
economists. Insofar as it is a sociological construct, it refers to things like the status
ascribed to economists by those who employ them, who fund their institutions, who make sure the
right kind of economic education is started in elementary schools and beyond, etc. In this
view, critiquing the competence of epidemiologists is merely a tactic in servicing the
constitutency that desires a different policy.
The OP has vehemently asserted however such a view of the academy is criminal. And that it
is the first priority of all decent people to fight such imitations of thought. The OP is as
one with Jason Brennan on this, despite a trifling disagreement over manners or the lack of.
Nonetheless I suggest the variation in economists in their distaste for epidemiologists roughly
coincides with the variation in what kind of service they're selling and in the constituency
they sell too. A Hanson who sells a radical critique of humanity will tack a different tack
than another economist.
"(3) The theory that economists and epidemiologists have different motivations or values
both disciplines have likely systematic biases towards one notion of the broader welfare rather
than another." This says that the economists are driven solely by disinterested commitments to
independently chosen values and that particular interests have no role whatsoever. This says it
is not even conceivable some aggressive economists are attacking epidemologists' competence to
help sell the pre-determined policy -- predetermined by those who will benefit monetarily by it
and who have the power to rule not formally guaranteed (and strenuously denied) to make policy
independent from mere elections -- of reopening the economy no matter what.
"(4) The theory that epidemiology challenges the basic ideological presuppositions of (some)
economists The externalities of people's actions during coronavirus are extremely high, and the
prospect of decentralized solutions for those externalities extremely low." This is a plea for
the golden mean, maybe? The assumption that sophisticated von Hayek should be taken seriously
strikes me as doubtful. (And, no, I'm not too sure about Coase either.)
So it seems to me the problem of why some economists and fellow travelers like Brennan are
aggressively impugning the competence of epidemiologists is because it helps promote favored
policies of inaction. That is, that it's not much of a problem. The problem is why such
transparent nonsense isn't dismissed for what it is. The OP's herculean diplomacy seems to me
to deny this is a problem at all.
I never thought I'd see the day when publicly wearing a muzzle would constitute a proof of
virtue in the same country whose government, less than twenty years ago, rationalized the
bloody invasion of Afghanistan as a way of saving
women from
veiling their faces .
But then, I never thought I'd hear American liberals proudly denounce supporters of the US
Constitution as a "death cult,"
nor that I'd actually start to find Donald Trump sounding almost reasonable.
But at least there's one thing we can all be sure about: "mainstream" news media, busily
cheerleading for the death of freedom, will continue to gush with absurdities,
self-contradictions and victim-shaming memes in their propaganda war to Keep America Gagged.
The Bill of Rights (in case you haven't noticed) is history; today, we demonstrate our
patriotism by creeping around hiding our faces. Dissenters need not apply.
If you think I'm exaggerating, I suspect you haven't been paying attention. Recently I had
the poor judgment to turn on National Public Radio for about an hour, under the impression that
I was going to learn something about the day's news.
I could have saved myself the trouble. During the hour in question, I learned nothing at all
about the presidential election campaign (now in its final months), nothing about the
tens of millions of my fellow citizens whose jobs have been snatched away by government
fiat, nothing about climate change, nuclear arms buildups, international refugees or growing
worldwide poverty – nothing even about the intensification
of air and water pollution authorized by recent federal regulation, although pollution
kills an estimated
100,000 Americans every year .
No – for a solid hour, I heard the following: that COVID19 – in reality, at
most, a moderately serious flu virus – is the worst medical threat the United States has
ever faced; that this "deadly" virus (the word "deadly" was repeated obsessively, even though
the disease is fatal in a tiny percentage of cases) has been empowered by a conspiracy of
Republican politicians serving the arch-demon Donald Trump; that recent data showing the rapid
decline in deaths attributable to the virus may have been faked, because the numbers aren't
what the "experts" want them to be; and that a massive increase in COVID19 tests –
primarily among people between 20 and 40 years of age who are subjected to swabbing because
their employers demand it, not because they're in any danger – cannot possibly have
anything to do with a rise in the number of reported infections, and that anyone who dares to
suggest otherwise is "putting lives at risk."
But the real theme of the hour was masks, masks, masks: how to make them, how to wear them,
their different types, who doesn't seem to have enough of them, and why muffling our faces
(even though no such thing was ever demanded of us during dozens of past viral outbreaks) is
absolutely, positively good for us all.
I waited in vain for some mention of the fact that every single order requiring the wearing
of muzzles in the US is
probably unconstitutional , a matter that National Public Radio – which once prided
itself on its legal affairs reporting – might have been expected to care about.
No, facts would only have complicated matters. After all, we already knew what good little
boys and girls were expected to do with those muzzles. At the close of each weather forecast,
just in case anyone had missed the point, the reporter said cheerily, "And when you go out
– put on a mask." "And drink milk with every meal," I half expected him to add, but I
guess self-conscious condescension would have spoiled the effect.
Put on a mask.
In well over half a century, I cannot remember a weather report that ended with a brisk
piece of non-meteorological advice, let alone a patently silly one – after all, if these
magical masks were to make any difference, their greatest usefulness would have been at the
beginning of the outbreak, not on its heels.
Yet throughout March, while police-state fever prompted the suspension of democracy in
some 40 states and most of the US population was being hustled into virtual house arrest,
the pro-incarceration crowd's loudest voices unanimously insisted that masks were of no
practical value.
[t]here'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 better and it might even block a
droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think it is. And often
there are unintended consequences – people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep
touching their face."
That was how things stood when the epidemic was new and all stops were out. And now?
Contemplating the lockdown-lovers' belated fetish for surgical gear, one can only imagine the
US Navy ceremoniously issuing an air-raid warning at Pearl Harbor a hundred days or so after
the Japanese attack had wiped out much of the fleet.
But you've got to hand it to the mask-maniacs. No matter how many of their excuses for
muzzling the population go the way of the Great Auk, they keep the new ones tumbling out so
fast you can hardly keep track.
Here's one peddled on
July 14 in the Los Angeles Times : even though the masks won't really prevent infection,
they may reduce the amount of the virus you breathe in – that is, just in case you happen
to come across an infected person who somehow manages to breathe into your (masked) face from a
very short distance and for an extended period. (No one cited in the article bothers to discuss
how often such a scenario is likely to occur.) According to a Dr. Monica Gandhi:
[t]here is this theory that facial masking reduces disease severity."
In other words, you'll get COVID19 with or without a mask, but the effects will probably be
milder if you muffle your face.
But wait a minute – even if "this theory" is correct (note that it contradicts
everything the propagandists have been telling us about masks for the last three months),
wasn't it always the case that the overwhelming majority of those who catch COVID19 have very
mild symptoms, or no symptoms at all?
So what's the big advantage of the mask? The article is silent on that point – and Dr.
Gandhi herself ultimately admits that her "theory" remains unproven. But that doesn't stop the
Times from lambasting a few local California officials who have raised inconvenient questions
about mandatory muzzling.
"This anti-mask rhetoric is mind-blowing, dangerous, deadly and polarizing," the article
quotes Dr. Peter Chin-Hong as responding. Why? Because masks prevent infection? No. Because
they save lives? No. Criticizing the muzzle mandate is "deadly" because – wait for it
– because:
[t]here is no evidence that [wearing a mask] is dangerous."
Well, actually, there is such evidence; Anthony Fauci admitted as much to 60 Minutes in
March.
But the main problem with this retort is that it misses the point: people are being forced
to mask their faces in public without any evidence that it's dangerous not to.
Dr. Chin-Hong's implicit confession that this is so knocks the stuffing out of the mandate
– and the Times' rationale. But to say so openly is "dangerous, deadly [there's that
favorite adjective again] and polarizing." It's no accident that the symbol of submission
currently in vogue is one that covers the mouth. The real message of the mask-maniacs is that
we have no right to say what we think.
And speaking of "polarizing," what about the personal viciousness to which mask-mania so
frequently descends? I have lost track of the number of videos circulated by so-called news
outlets that depict frustrated shoppers losing their cool over being forced to dress like
mummies.
Apparently this is supposed to be cute – as in, "Get a load of that stupid,
Trump-supporting bitch having a public meltdown." Myself, I feel sorry for these people; I
share their exasperation, and I empathize with them over the invasion of their privacy.
As for the propagandists who peddle Schadenfreude in support of governors-turned-dictators
– I indict them as heartless hypocrites, who claim to value our collective welfare and
prove it by publicly humiliating their victims. Would they take similar pleasure, I wonder, in
mocking the reaction of a black shopper who'd just been called "nigger"?
And it gets worse. In the upside-down world of COVID19 media values, even death is no
protection from victim-shaming. Recently, American news organizations "reported" the death of an
Ohio man who had the misfortune to die on July 4 of what they gleefully called
"complications of COVID-19."
More than two months earlier, the victim had posted a comment on social media saying he
wasn't going to "buy a mask." The articles – which even named the deceased (a combat
veteran) – practically salivated over the fact that he had had the audacity to go to a
swimming pool in mid-June, where he may have contracted the virus. You see? screamed the
reporters' moralizing subtext. The maskless, self-indulgent right-wing bastard got what he
deserved!
Just for the record, let me note that there are a number of things we don't know. We don't
know whether the poor man actually wore a mask or not. (He wrote in late April that he didn't
intend to buy one, but that's really not the same thing.) We don't know how he actually caught
the virus. We don't know whether he could have been saved with better treatment; it's even
possible he waited too long to seek medical help.
Given his youth and the apparently lightning pace of his descent into serious illness, his
death from COVID19 is so highly unusual that its medical significance amounts to another thing
we don't know.
Most important, we don't know whether wearing or not wearing a mask had anything at all to
do with his death. (If he was infected while at a swimming pool, I doubt even the mask-maniacs
would insist that he should have worn it in the water.)
What we do know is that he was targeted for savage personal attacks after he died, first on
social media and now in the press.
"[P]eople have come out of the woodworks, posting nasty, hateful comments about a man they
knew nothing about," one of his friends has said. "Most of it crossed the line into harassment.
When reported to Facebook, nothing was taken down nor was there ANY action taken," he added,
while "[t]hose that defended [him] faced consequences from Facebook in way of bans."
Well, at least the pattern of the propaganda makes sense, in a way: slander the
nonconformist and you can get away with murder; defend him, you're silenced.
Even the New York Times' resident faux progressive, Michelle Goldberg, has taken up the cry.
Another "Trump fan," she sniffed on July
14 , has become a "macabre cliché" by dying of a disease she blames him for
contracting.
I wonder whether Ms. Goldberg would be smirking about a woman who was raped some two months
after posting a comment to the effect that "I'll go wherever I want and dress however I like."
My guess is that the analogy hasn't occurred to her; she knows her job, and it's about
propaganda, not consistency.
And the propaganda's bottom line is as clear as it is grim. Forget about your personal
liberties. Forget about the democracy you thought you were living in. The mask – the
symbol of fear, of arbitrary rule, of the abolition of normal social life, of voiceless
submission – isn't going away any time soon.
It's clear that we are having a significant resurgence of cases in the summer, and they'll
get bigger. And it'll keep going until we lock things down again. "
And how long before the cycle of incarceration really ends? "[S]everal years," Toner says
blandly, adding the sinister afterthought that people who resist being muzzled "will get over
it. It's just a question of how many people get sick and die before they get over it."
Makes you feel kind of warm and protected, doesn't it? Thank heaven people like Toner know
our needs so much better than we do.
The media ubiquity of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security is another ominous
feature of the current wave of propaganda.
Last October, the Center ran a coronavirus pandemic "simulation"
in New York City – cosponsored by the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation – for an assembly of powerful people in business and government, after which
its members
openly speculated about the possible need for "censoring social media content" on the
theory that "[m]isinformation and disinformation are likely to be serious threats during a
public health emergency."
These facts obviously bear on the organization's motives and credibility, at the very least.
But you won't hear them mentioned when the Center's data are repeated as fact in mainstream
media, nor when its members assure us that if we don't wear masks for the next two years we'll
all drop dead.
Is it unreasonable to hope that reporters might want to explore why "health security" is
presumed to entail censorship? Or whether the huge investment of the Gates Foundation in
vaccine development has any influence on its partner organization's bleak predictions for
escaping the coronavirus without a new vaccine? Or whether, having insisted first on
devastating lockdowns and now on worthless face masks, the Center will use its political
leverage to demand mandatory vaccination when the time comes?
Professor Lawrence Gostin is another worrisome presence in the media, including Michelle
Goldberg's recent sanctimonious outburst in the New York Times – where, pretending to
describe the consequences of the virus, she catalogs the devastation of the lockdowns
instead:
[A] record 5.4
million people lost their health insurance between February and May. A generation of
American kids will have their educations derailed, and many parents who don't lose their jobs
due to the economic crisis will see their
careers ruined by the demands of child care
[ ]
The psychological consequences alone will be incalculable. Even before the coronavirus,
researchers spoke of loneliness as its own epidemic in America. A
March article in the medical journal JAMA Psychiatry attributed 162,000 deaths a year to
the fallout of social isolation. Now people are being told that they can socialize only under
the most stringent conditions. Much of what makes life sweet is lost to us, not for days or
weeks, but months or years.
As I said, this is a chillingly accurate summary of the consequences of the mass
incarceration foisted on us by more than 40 state governors, most of them Democrats, beginning
in early March – when each one, with a unilateral declaration of a "health emergency,"
seized quasi-dictatorial powers, shunted aside the Constitution and bankrupted the citizenry.
Those "emergency" powers have not been relinquished to this day.
But neither Goldberg nor her hero, Professor Gostin, offers a single word of criticism for
any of those governors, and certainly not for the Democratic Party leadership that has backed
this democracy-destroying, economy-wrecking madness at every step. For them, everything is the
exclusive fault of one man: Donald Trump.
Coming from Goldberg, that might be just another election-year screed against an incumbent
the Times dislikes. But what about Gostin? Well, although Goldberg never mentions it, Professor
Gostin just happens to be the author of the model version of the Emergency Health Powers
Act , the adoption of which in all fifty states (if in somewhat different versions) made
possible the coup the governors pulled off by claiming "emergencies" several months ago.
It's worth remembering that Gostin's proposed bill was sharply criticized by the American
Civil Liberties Union back in 2001 as "replete with civil liberties problems" and "a throwback
to a time before the legal system recognized basic protections for fairness."
In fact, some of its specific objections to the EHPA deserve quoting at length, in light of
where the Act's reckless application has brought us today:
It fails to include basic checks and balances. The Act would grant extraordinary
emergency powers, but that kind of authority should never go unchecked. Public health
authorities make mistakes, and politicians abuse their powers The lack of checks and
balances could have serious consequences for individuals' freedom, privacy, and equality.
The Act lets a governor declare a state of emergency unilaterally and without judicial
oversight, fails to provide modern due process procedures for quarantine and other
emergency powers and contains no checks on the power to order forced treatment and
vaccination.
It goes well beyond bioterrorism. The act includes an overbroad definition of "public
health emergency" that clearly do[es] not justify quarantine, forced treatment, or any of
the other broad emergency authorities that would be granted under the Act.
It lacks privacy protections. The Act requires the disclosure of massive amounts of
personally identifiable health information to public health authorities, without requiring
basic privacy protections and fair information practices . That not only threatens to
violate individuals' medical privacy but undermines public trust in government
activities.
It's not hard to see why Ms. Goldberg is reluctant to give us the accurate back story for
her star witness. The ACLU's list of warnings about the potential abuses of the law Gostin
drafted is a near-perfect précis of what has actually happened: unilateral declarations
of an "emergency," state by state, where none really existed; the seizure by each governor of
almost unlimited power to order quarantines and forced vaccinations; the elimination of "due
process" restrictions on mass confinement; the dismantling of privacy protections along with
basic rights.
I don't intend to sing the praises of the ACLU, which – like so many other liberal
institutions in the US – has been missing in action since the actual coup began last
March. But no one can deny the prescience of its critique. And Goldberg knows her readers
aren't stupid: once they are aware of the role Gostin played in orchestrating the overthrow of
their freedoms, they're not likely to grant him the pied piper status Goldberg wants him to
have.
Why does she cite Gostin? First, to "prove" – like Eric Toner in another context
– that the COVID19 outbreak, the current excuse for the denial of our liberties, will
last another two years; amazingly, Goldberg claims this while insisting simultaneously that the
same outbreak is practically over in New Zealand, Taiwan and Italy after just a few months.
But she also needs him to explain, albeit in somewhat indirect language, why democracy isn't
good for us.
According to Gostin, the coronavirus has proved that "health system capacity alone is almost
useless unless you have a government that can unleash that capacity promptly and consistently."
Obviously, we can't do that if we have to bother with pesky constraints like representative
government or the public will. And from Gostin's perspective, we've been dabbling in the
utopianism of democracy for too long as it is: "It's going to take several years for us to be
able to come out of all of the trauma that we've had," he warns.
And I think that suggests the real message Goldberg and the other propagandists are keen on
peddling. They didn't do this to us. It's not that we've been lied to and illegally confined.
It's not that our state executives have defied their oaths of office. It's not that their media
mouthpieces have offered us one swindle after another: lockdowns, business closings, job
losses, muzzling, scare-mongering, the destruction (as Goldberg herself admits) of "much of
what makes life sweet" – theater, cinema, public discussion, time shared with
friends.
The problem is us. We've been clinging to dreams of freedom – and that will cost us.
The lockdown-lovers are going to punish us for our wrongheaded attachment to notions of
individual rights, and they will punish us still more for continuing recalcitrance. But note
this: they can only get away with it by selling us one more lie – namely, that what
they're doing to us is really the work of a disease beyond anyone's control.
"The coronavirus is a natural disaster," Goldberg writes.
No, it isn't.
The coronavirus is just another flu. The real disaster has been the work of human beings.
Resisting it must be, too.
I once thought the whole thing was a Big-Pharma scam to grab a shitload of cash. But Big
Pharma – I don't think – would have engineered it to start in China, and it's not
made-up;
"And when Fauci was telling the White House Coronavirus Task Force that there was only
anecdotal evidence in support of hydroxychloroquine to fight the virus, I confronted him with
scientific studies providing evidence of safety and efficacy. A recent Detroit hospital study
showed a 50% reduction in the mortality rate when
the medicine is used in early treatment.
Now Fauci says a falling
mortality rate doesn't matter when it is the single most important statistic to help guide
the pace of our economic reopening. The lower the mortality rate, the faster and more we can
open." Navarro in USA Today
-------------
"Laputa's population consists mainly of an educated elite, who are fond of mathematics,
astronomy , music and
technology, but fail to make practical use of their knowledge. Servants make up the rest of the
population.
The Laputans have mastered magnetic levitation. They also are very fond of astronomy, and
discovered two moons of Mars. (This is 151 years earlier than the
recognized
discovery of the two moons of Mars by Asaph Hall in 1877.) However, they are unable to
construct well-designed clothing or buildings, as they despise practical geometry as "vulgar
and mechanick". The houses are ill-built, lacking any right angles, [6] and
the clothes of Laputans, which are decorated with astrological symbols and musical figures, do
not fit, as they take measurements with instruments such as quadrants and a compass rather than with tape measures . [7] They
spend their time listening to the music of the spheres. They believe in astrology and worry
constantly that the sun will go out." wiki on Gullivers Travels.
--------------
Ah, I see it now! Dr. Fauci is a Laputan seer! He is devoid of any real comprehension or
respect for the ordinary humans trying to deal with actual pandemic problems rather than "the
music of the spheres."
Is he a Democratic Party operative? I doubt it. He is simply "out of it." pl
Fauci doesn't matter. Over the weekend the WH tried to strongarm parents to get on board
with school reopening. They are fucking with the wrong interest group.
There is a better, albeit a more difficult way to undermine Fauci. Educate the people that
this issue has vast economic consequences and we must factor in those consequences when
crafting an over-all policy. Fauci, I expect, will openly admit he is approaching the topic
from a purely medical perspective...which is exactly what he's supposed to be doing.
As is, Trump is leaves himself wide open to the obvious counter: Neither he nor his
economic adviser have any medical expertise.
"Tony Fauci has many, many vaccine patents and there's one vaccine patent that he has that
is a way of packaging a coronavirus with some other vaccine in a protein sheet and then
delivering it through a vaccine he somehow ended up owning that patent Tony Fauci will be
able to cash in . So Fauci's agency will collect half the royalties for that vaccine [related
to the coronavirus]."
"Sunderland co-founded the VC firm, known for making ambitious investments, after having
led program-related investments for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which provided
financial support to Moderna while she was there. Since 2010, Moderna has been working on
developing messenger RNA (mRNA) that allows the body's cells to act like reprogrammed
biological factories, producing antibodies needed to battle diseases, including viruses.
"The nice thing about big bets is that they play out over time. ... We made an investment
five years ago in Moderna, and mRNA was a big bet, and you see it playing out in terms of
their ability to get a rapid vaccine for Covid. ... You have to take those big bets,"
Sunderland said."
"The other thing that is amazing in its evolution is the amount that we've learned about
HIV pathogenesis, the reservoir, the potential for controlling the virus, either in the
absence of antiretroviral [treatment] or in a modified regimen that takes away the need to
have a single pill or multiple pills every single day. The thing that remains the holy grail
of unaccomplished goals is the development of a highly effective, safe vaccine. And that is
something that's not surprising because of the very special situation with HIV, that the body
-- as much as we study pathogenesis and understand it so incredibly well -- the body does not
make an adequate immune response against HIV, which is the reason why no one has yet
spontaneously cleared the virus by their immune system. And so what we need to do, and where
we're combination putting a lot of effort into, but also struggling with, is the issue of the
development of a vaccine that would be effective enough to be able to be deployed.
We have one situation that took place, well after that meeting in San Francisco, where a
trial of a candidate vaccine -- in a trial named RV 144 that took place in Thailand -- showed
a 31% efficacy, which gave us some great hints of correlates of immunity and are the basis
for a number of subsequent trials, but still was not good enough to deploy. So we have a
number of very large vaccine trials, going on now throughout the world, including a heavy
concentration in southern Africa. But we also are pursuing another line of vaccine research,
which is the attempt to present to the body, in the proper conformation with sequential
immunizations, the capability of making broadly neutralizing antibodies. And if we're
successful in that, then I think we have a really good chance of developing a vaccine that
would have an efficacy and safety profile good enough to actually deploy it."
I think over time mrna "vaccines" will change medicine. Are we opening Pandora's box?
Possibly.
"errors in Florida virus positivity report: ... actual rate much lower" Wash
Examiner
"The investigation into data from the Florida Department of Health, conducted by Fox 35 News , showed labs reporting a 100% positivity rate in testing,
meaning that every single person who was tested was positive for the coronavirus. Several other
labs had high positivity rates upward of 80%.
One hospital, Orlando Health, responded to the investigation and confirmed that the report
is inaccurate, saying that its positivity rate was 9.4% and not 98% as the report stated.
Another hospital, Orlando Veteran's Medical Center, is listed in the report with a
positivity rate of 76%, but the hospital says the actual number was 6%." Washington
Examiner
------------
Evidently there are over 300 facilities in Florida that have been reporting wildly
exaggerated positivity rates on COVID-19 testing. This seems to have occurred because of
guidance given by the state medical department that was just blindly, madly ignorant as to how
to do arithmetic, not calculus - arithmetic. Hey, Florida medical bureaucrats, how about the
idea of having a few other people check your work product for accuracy before you issue
guidance?
The Democrats, devoid of conscience when power is at stake, are having a wonderful time
using worthless numbers from all over the country in their propaganda. In fact the only numbers
that matter are the death and the hospitalization rates. Even these must be looked at carefully
to know if deaths are falsely being attributed to COVID-19 and if people are being hospitalized
with mild illnesses. pl
The elderly account for the majority of COVID-19 deaths. It was reported in USA
Today a few months ago that Medicare reimbursement for pneumonia, a major cause of death,
is $5,000. IF COVID-19 is claimed as the cause of death, Medicare reimburses $13,000. I
wonder how many hospital administrators are opting for more than 2.5X the Medicare
reimbursement by stating the official causes of death are the virus, especially when a
positive COVID test result apparently isn't required and/or if COVID isn't the primary cause
of death?
If these medical math idiots keep this up here in Florida I hope they are ready to cook
their own meals 24/7 cause they are wrecking havoc on our restaurants, not to mention the
lost incomes these hard working restaurant folks are experiencing.
At least our county, Charlotte, voted yesterday to no mandatory mask wearing.
This is woke war, just like with little miss SJW who sabatagued Florida's Covid-19
dashboard. Some folks should go to jail for fraud, but we only fine and jail people for going
to the beach now.
I don't think this is a DNC conspiracy. This is a S. Florida thing.
Medical fraud is crazy high there. Scammers have used the cover of Florida's older
demographic to bill state/federal authorities for services/products neither requested nor
rendered for years, perhaps decades. My mother received a call from someone to confirm she
would be receiving a medical machine in the 90s. Recently my father told me about two friends
who waited over two hours to get tested. They got fed up and left, but not before they signed
a form with their information. They received a call about a week later informing them they
tested positive. Apparently testers are getting a nice government refund for their
services.
I don't think Japan shut down their economy and they have had minimal cases/deaths due to
their habit of wearing masks. The Colorado governor is right if you don't have a medical
reason to not wear a mask.
From BBC 2018: it was sent to me by another friend and is interesting. Most probably, that
epidemic completely passed you by. And yet: There were around 50,100 excess winter deaths in
England and Wales in 2017-18 -- the highest since the winter of 1975-76, figures from the
Office for National Statistics show.
Thank goodness NY,NJ,MI and all the other states are fraud free. The Japanese did not
start wearing masks because of corona viruses. Try tuberculous and its history in the
islands.
AkaPatience has it right. There are financial incentives to hospitals to include even a
presumed diagnosis of CV-19. There are also financial incentives to cities and states to
maximize case and death counts. CDC guidelines are wide open for a loose "interpretation" of
what constitutes a CV-19 death. Those of us who actually look at the real data with the
mission of understanding big insurance bottom lines (vents, ICU, etc. are very expensive
encounters) see that a substantial proportion of CV-19 attributed hospitalizations and deaths
are actually due to other causes and the CV-19 was either "presumed" or was present, but not
the primary cause (e.g heart attack in a person with a history of cardiac issues).
When we look at the so called "excess deaths" across the country we are not seeing a CV-19
driven phenomenon. Looking at CV-19 in isolated geographies, such as New York City, there was
a small effect, but that has stopped. More importantly, when we look at years of life lost,
we are not seeing anything of note, even in NYC; meaning that the deceased are people that
were expected to be deceased within 12 months CV-19 or no CV-19 - though, admittedly, that
picture won't be 100% clear until a retrospective assessment next year.
An iconoclastic take on the pandemic, and the measures taken to contain it
Some of the statements may be disputed today (this article was published about 4 weeks
ago: see below), but many of the points made still stand. The author is scathing about the
data and the science, and their misuse. He makes a number of obvious points about the use of
[faulty] masks, among other things. Regarding children, I am not sure it is as clear-cut as
he presents the facts to be.
No doubt this will be debated for many years to come, as it takes 10 to 15 years --
perhaps longer -- to get over the economic shock suffered since March 2020!
Out of curiosity, I have compiled a few figures, below, with countries that did not take
drastic lockdown measures (eg: Sweden), and those that did, but a bit late (eg: France), and
finally those that took them early on (eg: Vietnam). If you look at Sweden, the ratio with
France is about 1 to 6, which mirrors the population figures (10m Swedes Vs 67m French
people, and 5,500 dead in Sweden Vs 30,000 dead in France). In other words, the French had a
complete lockdown and the Swedes did not, but the figures are comparable: on that basis, the
Swedes were right and the French were wrong. But if you look at Vietnam -- an extreme case
(of success) -- you have close to 100m people and zero deaths.
My conclusion would be that draconian measures early on work, but they may not be a
complete and general lockdown of the entire population (as done in the UK for 4 months or
so); it may be the quarantine of sick people (or suspected cases) with systematic contact
tracing. But what is for sure is that a complete lockdown introduced too late (eg: UK and to
a lesser extent France, Italy and Spain) is of little benefit.
The UK, thus, had the worst outcome: a complete lockdown that was introduced 10 to 20 days
too late at least, and a huge shock to the economy, with 50,000 dead, which is a sad record
in Europe.
Germany is a mixed model up to a point, and has done far better than France or the UK,
maybe because measures were taken earlier, and also the health-care system is better
resourced and more resilient (c.9,000 dead out of >80 m people).
___________________________
Sweden
Coronavirus Cases:
75,826
Deaths:
5,536
Population 10.25 m
Israel
Coronavirus Cases:
41,235
Deaths:
368
Recovered:
19,474
Pop.: 8.9 m
There was a report of COVID-19 in Barcelona back in March of 2019.
This would mean the number of infected people is far, far higher, hence the relative death
rate must be far, far lower.
Furthermore, we could be encountering different variants of the virus at different time
periods and places.
It could be that the variant in Vietnam was different than the one in Wuhan or in
Italy.
Furthermore, different races could have, collectively, different responses to the same
pathogen; measles is not as deadly among Near Eastern children as among the Nordic children -
for example.
Lesly,
You are absolutely correct. Florida is a fraud outlier. There was so much fraud on ACA
insurance that at least one major insurance company will no longer offer ACA products in some
of the more populous zip codes. A lot of the fraud was involving narcotics prescriptions and
drug rehab centers (massive), but there was a wide variety of other forms of fraud as well. I
hear the same from the Medicare Advantage teams.
I am a Biomedical Scientist with expertise in this area. Made antibodies and PCR tests for
a living for 35 years, I did other stuff to but I did make some World Class Antibodies and
other discoveries. My gut feeling is that all of these tests are tremendously flawed and not
reliable in any way to make any kind of decision for either the patient or society. It is
almost impossible to create a truly specific test and and it would take a considerable amount
of time and effort to get one that could be performed on large numbers of samples. At least a
year or more even with a Herculean effort. So the bottom line is it is all Bull Shit at best.
Garbage in Garbage out is what you have. Would you base anything in your life on information
that you know is inaccurate? You would have to be intoxicated, greedy or needing sex badly to
go to that place. The Scum of humanity has pushed a large number of people to that state. I
think the outcome is going to be very unpleasant for many.
Losing around forty thousand men killed and wounded in a single day, many of whom would
succumb to their wounds or freeze to death shortly was not uncommon during WWI or WWII.
They tried to defend their country, the economy, etc.
There too many despicable cowards now. Especially among jingoistic US politicians.
Jun 22, 2020 CELEBRATED SCIENTIST: '80% NOT SUSCEPTIBLE TO COVID"
Named the "most influential" brain scientist of our time, Dr. Karl Friston, made waves
when he published his study mapping the real susceptibility of contracting Coronavirus. His
results are staggering and challenge the rationale for a lockdown like no other.
Jun 15, 2020 The Collapse of the COVID-1984 Narrative
Now that the major institutions pushing the COVID panic are now admitting that the virus
is not an existential threat and the lockdowns were not necessary, what does this mean for
the future of the COVID-1984 police state and the ushering in of the new "biosecurity"
paradigm?
"... Several nurses, e.g. in New York City, described an oftentimes fatal medical mismanagement of Covid patients due to questionable financial incentives or inappropriate medical protocols. ..."
"From an alleged media research and review organization: Trust, but verify. COVID-19 - what
we now know today Overview According to the latest immunological and serological studies, the
overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 0.1% and thus in the range of a strong seasonal
influenza (flu). In countries like the US, the UK, and also Sweden (without a lockdown),
overall mortality since the beginning of the year is in the range of a strong influenza season;
in countries like Germany, Austria and Switzerland, overall mortality is in the range of a mild
influenza season. Even in global "hotspots", the risk of death for the general population of
school and working age is typically in the range of a daily car ride to work. The risk was
initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no symptoms were not taken into
account. Up to 80% of all test-positive persons remain symptom-free.
Even among 70-79 year
olds, about 60% remain symptom-free. Over 95% of all persons develop at most moderate symptoms.
Up to 60% of all persons may already have a certain cellular background immunity to Covid19 due
to contact with previous coronaviruses (i.e. common cold viruses).
The median or average age of
the deceased in most countries (including Italy) is over 80 years and only about 4% of the
deceased had no serious preconditions. The age and risk profile of deaths thus essentially
corresponds to normal mortality. In many countries, up to two thirds of all extra deaths
occurred in nursing homes, which do not benefit from a general lockdown. Moreover, in many
cases it is not clear whether these people really died from Covid19 or from weeks of extreme
stress and isolation. Up to 30% of all additional deaths may have been caused not by Covid19,
but by the effects of the lockdown, panic and fear. For example, the treatment of heart attacks
and strokes decreased by up to 60% because many patients no longer dared to go to hospital.
Even in so-called "Covid19 deaths" it is often not clear whether they died from or with
coronavirus (i.e. from underlying diseases) or if they were counted as "presumed cases" and not
tested at all. However, official figures usually do not reflect this distinction. Many media
reports of young and healthy people dying from Covid19 turned out to be false: many of these
young people either did not die from Covid19, they had already been seriously ill (e.g. from
undiagnosed leukaemia), or they were in fact 109 instead of 9 years old. T
he claimed increase
in Kawasaki disease in children also turned out to be false. Strong increases in regional
mortality can occur if there is a collapse in the care of the elderly and sick as a result of
infection or panic, or if there are additional risk factors such as severe air pollution.
Questionable regulations for dealing with the deceased sometimes led to additional bottlenecks
in funeral or cremation services. In countries such as Italy and Spain, and to some extent the
UK and the US, hospital overloads due to strong flu waves are not unusual.
Moreover, this year
up to 15% of health care workers were put into quarantine, even if they developed no symptoms.
The often shown exponential curves of "corona cases" are misleading, as the number of tests
also increased exponentially. In most countries, the ratio of positive tests to tests overall
(i.e. the positive rate) remained constant at 5% to 25% or increased only slightly. In many
countries, the peak of the spread was already reached well before the lockdown.
Countries
without curfews and contact bans, such as Japan, South Korea, Belarus or Sweden, have not
experienced a more negative course of events than other countries. Sweden was even praised by
the WHO and now benefits from higher immunity compared to lockdown countries.
The fear of a
shortage of ventilators was unjustified. According to lung specialists, the invasive
ventilation (intubation) of Covid19 patients, which is partly done out of fear of spreading the
virus, is in fact often counterproductive and damaging to the lungs.
Contrary to original
assumptions, various studies have shown that there is no evidence of the virus spreading
through aerosols (i.e. tiny particles floating in the air) or through smear infections (e.g. on
door handles or smartphones). The main modes of transmission are direct contact and droplets
produced when coughing or sneezing.
There is also no scientific evidence for the effectiveness
of face masks in healthy or asymptomatic individuals. On the contrary, experts warn that such
masks interfere with normal breathing and may become "germ carriers". Leading doctors called
them a "media hype" and "ridiculous". Many clinics in Europe and the US remained strongly
underutilized or almost empty during the Covid19 peak and in some cases had to send staff home.
Millions of surgeries and therapies were cancelled, including many cancer screenings and organ
transplants. Several media were caught trying to dramatize the situation in hospitals,
sometimes even with manipulative images and videos. In general, the unprofessional reporting of
many media maximized fear and panic in the population. The virus test kits used internationally
are prone to errors and can produce false positive and false negative results. Moreover, the
official virus test was not clinically validated due to time pressure and may sometimes react
positive to other coronaviruses.
Numerous internationally renowned experts in the fields of
virology, immunology and epidemiology consider the measures taken to be counterproductive and
recommend rapid natural immunisation of the general population and protection of risk groups.
At no time was there a medical reason for the closure of schools, as the risk of disease and
transmission in children is extremely low.
There is also no medical reason for small classes,
masks or 'social distancing' rules in schools. The claim that only (severe) Covid-19 but not
influenza may cause venous thrombosis and pulmonary (lung) embolism is not true, as it has been
known for 50 years that severe influenza greatly increases the risk of thrombosis and embolism,
too. Several medical experts described express coronavirus vaccines as unnecessary or even
dangerous. Indeed, the vaccine against the so-called swine flu of 2009, for example, led to
sometimes severe neurological damage and lawsuits in the millions. In the testing of new
coronavirus vaccines, too, serious complications and failures have already occurred.
A global
influenza or corona pandemic can indeed extend over several seasons, but many studies of a
"second wave" are based on very unrealistic assumptions, such as a constant risk of illness and
death across all age groups. Several nurses, e.g. in New York City, described an oftentimes
fatal medical mismanagement of Covid patients due to questionable financial
incentives or inappropriate medical protocols.
The number of people suffering from
unemployment, depressions and domestic violence as a result of the measures has reached
historic record values. Several experts predict that the measures will claim far more lives
than the virus itself. According to the UN 1.6 billion people around the world are at immediate
risk of losing their livelihood.
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden warned that the "corona
crisis" will be used for the permanent expansion of global surveillance. Renowned virologist
Pablo Goldschmidt spoke of a "global media terror" and "totalitarian measures".
Leading British
virologist Professor John Oxford spoke of a "media epidemic". More than 600 scientists have
warned of an "unprecedented surveillance of society" through problematic apps for "contact
tracing". In some countries, such "contact tracing" is already carried out directly by the
secret service. In several parts of the world, the population is already being monitored by
drones and facing serious police overreach. A 2019 WHO study on public health measures against
pandemic influenza found that from a medical perspective, "contact tracing" is "not recommended
in any circumstances". Nevertheless, contact tracing apps have already become partially
mandatory in several countries." Deap
"an alleged media research and review organization" Who? I have been doing fatality % for
Virginia and Alexandria on a daily basis, the number is consistently .02% on a developing
cumulative basis. Hey, folks, suck it up! Move on!
If this is "alleged" then why should I trust it? Anybody can write anything on the Internet
and make it sound official.
This item sounds suspect, for example:
"Several medical experts described express coronavirus vaccines as unnecessary or even
dangerous. Indeed, the vaccine against the so-called swine flu of 2009, for example, led to
sometimes severe neurological damage and lawsuits in the millions. In the testing of new
coronavirus vaccines, too, serious complications and failures have already occurred."
I thought we were eagerly awaiting a good vaccine. Just because developing and using a
vaccine is not without risk and disappointment is no reason to jump to the conclusion that we
should stop attempting to get an effective vaccine. If the swine flu vaccine of 2009 had been
that prolematic the damage suits would have amounted in the multi-billions, not the
millions.
As for your post, it completely misses the main point, even if you are correct about the
mildness of the infection; that is the logistical consequences of millions of sick people :
(a) not turning up for work, and (b) swamping and breaking the medical infrastructure.
You need to understand that we have only 8.5 million cases and 400,000 deaths according to
WHO. World population is over 5 billion. You fail to understand the potential scale of this
thing.
To put it another way; we are dealing with a small grassfire at present. The forest is as
yet unbutton and unprotected.
There is a lot wrong with this article. A lot of vague, unsupported, and false statements, no
links or anything. "Experts", "Leading doctors", etc., again, who are the people saying these
things and what are their credentials? I won't go into all of it since that would be too
long, but I'll address one thing.
Regarding mortality rate, the statement "latest immunological and serological studies, the
overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 0.1%" is utter nonsense. Immunological and
serological studies are not used to determine lethality, they look at antibody formation and
corresponding viral load.
0.1% number is just made up, current US death rate is 0.035% vs. overall population (so
120,000 deaths over 340 million people), Europe is slightly higher at 0.045%. For comparison,
typical flu season is much less severe, it's 0.01% vs. overall population, bad flu season is
0.02%. So, this is already twice as bad as the worst flu seasons, and it still has ways to
go.
And yes, there is a discussion to be had on how deaths are attributed (COVID-caused vs.
COVID-incidental), but that cuts both ways. Many people likely died before they were tested,
especially amongst the older population.
There is considerable information presented, much of which I have not seen before. Key
statements should have footnotes directing us to source material. Without references this is
mostly hearsay.
The content of this article is a cut and paste from a disreputable "swiss policy research
institute" that has no credentials. While the original article has links, they lead to more
hearsay.
What is different now: cause of death as COVID-19 are affixed to death certificates when
there is no actual medical confirmation.
The CDC sent out a letter to the "medical community" months ago, to record deaths with
COVID-19 when it might be, or could be, or someone feels it was, etc., along with when it is
actually verified as the primary cause, and of course when it was present but not necessarily
a cause of the cause of death.
It will take a while to sort this out, if it ever is sorted out. Until then, death rates
are inaccurate for this disease, period.
The CDC's action/recommendation was and is very controversial, yet media hyenas rarely
discuss it as their agenda is what it is.
For those wo are interested, the IFR (the mortality rate for those who have antibodies) has
been measured or calculated in 60+ papers. They are listed here below with links to the
original papers
a mortality of 0.3% is a very strong flu, like 1957 or 1968. However, we will never know
the "true" mortality since so many states forced nursing homes to take in covid patients,
creating artificially high mortality compared to other years.
Also please see Ref. 25 in the following link, a letter sent to Merkel by two german
doctors. No one with good vitamin D dies.
Deap,
Ioannidis, who has long been the most skeptical of Covid-19's seriousness, just published an
analysis of IFR from a large number of countries.
However, it's already killed .16% of all the residents of New York State. So the IFR there
is at least .16% and that would require all of NY had been infected. Serologic studies show
less than 20% have been infected. Most in the City with much fewer in outlying areas.
IFR varies considerably between countries and regions. For instance it's lower in Calif
(0.2% ish). than New York (> .6% ish). Ioannidis lists the median (not mean which is
higher) IFR as .26%.
This is indeed evidence that something, aside from the well known age and co-morbidities,
strongly affects the lethality of Covid-19. It may be vitamin D deficiency, or partial
cross-immunity from corona virus that cause a portion of common colds. And that likely means
places like NY have higher IFRs than most other places.
On the other hand lots of places like Fla. are opening up. Young people are crowding the
bars and the positive test numbers are spiking to record levels. Since they are young they
are very unlikely to die or even get seriously ill. And deaths are not increasing. At least
for now. And I don't expect deaths in Fla. to be anywhere near NY.
I keep having this nagging thought at the back of my mind, and it is elegent in its
simplicity: those nations which insisted in taking this seriously from the very beginning
have done very well, with few deaths, and are now resuming "normal services" while keeping
the rest of the world at arms length.
While those countries that essentially shrugged their shoulders and took half-measures are
still struggling with no end in sight.
How odd, hey?
Yet I read this article and it reads for all the world like Deap has concluded that the
latter group erred by being too harsh, not in being too slack.
I live in a country with roughly 1/10th of the USA's population, and it has had less than
1/100th the number of deaths. And it is coming out of lockdown with nary an uptick in new
infections.
There would be very, very few people here who would conclude that Deap has the faintest
idea what he is talking about.
"The Case Fatality Rate (CFR) is the ratio between confirmed deaths and confirmed cases.
During an outbreak of a pandemic the CFR is a poor measure of the mortality risk of the
disease. We explain this in detail at OurWorldInData.org/Coronavirus." *
CFR for the US on June 22nd was 5.26%. The global CFR on June 22nd was 5.25%
*Case fatality rate of COVID-19 (%) (Only observations with ≥100 cases)
Variable time span Jan 19, 2020 – Jun 22, 2020
Data published by European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)
Link https://github.com/owid/covid-19-data/tree/master/public/data
Raw data on confirmed cases and deaths for all countries is sourced from the European
Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC).
Our complete COVID-19 dataset is a collection of the COVID-19 data maintained by Our World
in Data. It is updated daily and includes data on confirmed cases, deaths, and testing.
We have created a new description of all our data sources. You find it at our GitHub
repository here. There you can download all of our data.
The Mercury News: NB: non-peer reviewed study at time of publication
".....The risk study by Dr. Rajiv Bhatia, clinical assistant professor of primary care and
population health at Stanford, and Dr. Jeffrey Klauser, adjunct professor of epidemiology at
UCLA, looked at publicly available case incidence data for the week ending May 30 in the 100
largest U.S. counties as states began to reopen.
"The thing we are looking for is to start a discussion of risk," Bhatia said. "We're
bombarded with data on death and cases."
The study found a person in a typical medium to large U.S. county who has a single random
contact with another person has, on average, a 1 in 3,836 chance of being infected without
social distancing, hand-washing or mask-wearing.
If that sounds like a tolerable risk, consider the odds of being hospitalized. The study
found a 50-to-64-year-old person who has a single random contact has, on average, a 1 in
852,000 chance of being hospitalized or a 1 in 19.1 million chance of dying based on rates as
of the last week of May.
"We were surprised how low the relative risk was," Klausner said....."
There is an old saying I heard many years ago - I think it was from Bob Frodle, my first
boss. Don't recall the actual context of the conversation. Here it is: "Figures don't lie but
liars can figure". It is even more relevant today.
I was curious about the origin of this quotation. It's been around since at least 1854. I
particularly enjoyed this one from a little later in an 1888 article on free trade from a
Sacramento newspaper:
"It was a highly protective measure. The cry of free trade was a false one, and was
maliciously put forth by "the uncrowned king" and other Republican leaders. Figures would not
lie, but liars will figure, and were doing so in this campaign. She said that not a mill
would shut down or a hammer stop from the passage of the Mills bill. Too much money was being
made by them."
Wikipedia (I know it's easily manipulated) but you can verify this for yourself:
"Mercola's medical claims have been criticized by the medical, scientific, regulatory and
business communities. A 2006 BusinessWeek editorial stated his marketing practices relied on
"slick promotion, clever use of information, and scare tactics."[4] In 2005, 2006, and 2011,
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warned Mercola and his company that they were making
illegal claims of their products' ability to detect, prevent, and treat disease.[8] The
medical watchdog site Quackwatch has criticized Mercola for making "unsubstantiated claims
[that] clash with those of leading medical and public health organizations and many
unsubstantiated recommendations for dietary supplements."[9] Of Mercola's marketing
techniques, oncology surgeon David Gorski says it "mixes the boring, sensible health advice
with pseudoscientific advice in such a way that it's hard for someone without a medical
background to figure out which is which."[10]
The article appears to be designed to get things back to normal so the stock market doesn't
crash and portfolios of debt assets don't need to be written down from coming defaults.
I think it should be considered that we won't get the economy back unless people feel
safe.
For anyone who says it's not real and you don't need to wear a mask, I say; "you go first,
I'll hold your beer"!
Dear,
I agree with a lot of what the article says.
Regarding the increases in new cases in some states;
1. Primarily due to more testing. Most of the new cases are asymptomatic and are in people
under 40 years old. Very little threat.
2. The increase in hospitalizations in some states is a small number and is due to people who
are in the hospital for elective surgeries (big backlog after three months of no elective
surgeries permitted) and for labor and delivery. They are tested now upon being admitted.
Yes, they are in the hospital and, yes, they tested positive, but they are in the hospital
for reasons unrelated to C-19 and are asymptomatic.
The people pushing this latter statistic as evidence of a "second wave" are real scum.
IMO, they want to have the people too scared to go to the ballots so there can be vote
tampering with mail-in ballots. I have no evidence for this particular claim. It's just my
sense. Points 1 and 2 are from data.
I dunno man.i dunno.this whole thing is off.what if a second new virus,not covid 19,but uses
covid 19 antibodies as a pathway to do serious damage.a 1-2 knockout blow
Weigh that up against over population.Yes,I do believe we are all living it right now.It has
been spoken about and now 2020 it has started.
Just imagine.Todays teens living in a future world where all the whales are dead.Just bones
left in a museum.Too many people.
The Chinese and Indians went hand to hand.That will become future combat.MAD is
bad.unsustainable.Bring all the troops home,scrap the weapons.Change the rules of
engagement.knives and hand to hand combat only
Deap - I also am disappointed in the way the pandemic's been handled by most Western
countries. Walrus tells us that by late last year virologists knew something nasty was
brewing. Yet as late as mid-February of this year the responsible authority in Europe was
assuring us that there was "low risk" to the general population. I assume the Health
Authorities were asleep at the wheel in the US as well, because apart from Trump's limited
ban on China travel - and that decision, I believe, taken in defiance of the then general
consensus - the US also seems to have been late responding.
The stats tell us little when it comes to national comparisons. Sweden's sometimes
compared to other Scandinavian countries with lower death rates and this is instanced as
showing failure of the Swedish approach. But this ignores the fact that Swedish care homes
are larger than in the neighbouring countries and poorly run, so they were due for higher
death rates in any case.
In the UK there seems to be a policy of reporting cause of death as Covid when, say, that
patient was due to die of an unrelated comorbidity. I think this is correct reporting because
if I were due to die of cancer in a couple of years it'd still be Covid that killed me today,
but it means that countries that don't report deaths in the same way seem to be doing better
when they're not.
Also in the UK we worsened the death rate by sending infected patients back to care homes.
So UK comparisons don't help much in that respect either when it comes to looking at what the
best policy is.
For what they're worth the stats so far show the US not doing too badly when it comes to
deaths per million. You ought to be doing a lot worse, given the high level of international
travel and given that the conditions in the inner cities are ideal conditions for
transmission. Perhaps, therefore, there's worse to come. My uninformed guess is that there
probably is. In any case the US national stats tell us very little when it comes to making
comparisons between this or that national policy. One cannot lump an entire continent
together like that.
But the stats are going to be argued about for ever. Away from all that there are two
aspects I think are not sufficiently considered.
1. I don't accept the "let it rip because they're due to die anyway" approach. That goes
against normal principles of public health, particularly so in this case because we still
know little about the virus.
2. I don't think we've got our heads around the economic effects if no vaccine or
effective treatment turns up.
Whatever governments do the vulnerable are going to isolate anyway. I met a young woman
recently who has a condition that means if she gets Covid she dies, no question. Of course
she's going to take what precautions she can, and does.
Millions of the vulnerable are in the same boat. The UK Prime Minister is in his fifties
and nearly died of Covid. You can be quite sure that there are now plenty of the economically
active of that age and older who saw that and who will now tend to keep away from gatherings
where they might catch the disease too. The resultant changes in our patterns of consumption
and our patterns of work will be profoundly disruptive to the already tottering economies of
many Western countries.
For those two reasons I believe there's a strong argument for going all out to eradicate
the disease or to severely limit its spread. I think your view is that the crude national or
State-wide lockdowns aren't the best way to tackle the problem and that I agree with
wholeheartedly. But we should still be looking to be doing much more than we are to tackle it
and, if possible, to prevent the disease entirely
A feature of Sweden is that the politicians have very little to say in how a pandemic is
handled.
According to Swedish constitutional tradition since ca 1632 political leaders cannot
interfere with the decisions of government agencies.
So no matter what urges/fears a Swedish politician may have (in order to curry favour with
the voters). It's a technocratic decision by experts on how the situation is to be
handled.
Such a practice could very well lead to better decisions than what we have seen in many
other European countries.
, This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
Your comment could not be posted. Error type: Your comment has been saved. Comments
are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the
image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image?
View an alternate. <iframe src="6Ldg1s4SAAAAAEvvZX2ILFkWp7KB-jjdL4v0JV2e" height="300"
width="500" frameborder="0"></iframe><br /> <textarea
name="recaptcha_challenge_field" rows="3" cols="40"></textarea> <input
type='hidden' name='recaptcha_response_field' value='manual_challenge' />
Post a comment
Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.
The 122,000 deaths in the US so far is conclusive evidence that COVID-19 is no ordinary flu,
which kills about 40,000 a year. And the toll will be much higher, since cases in many states
are spiking.
A scientist known for his contrarian takes to dire COVID-19 predictions has released a paper
claiming that antibody evidence suggests the median coronavirus infection fatality rate for
those under 70 is just 0.04%.
The estimate throws into sharp relief the lopsided mortality figures for the disease, which
has claimed an inordinate number of elderly people across the planet while leaving younger
individuals mostly unscathed.
John Ioannidis, a professor of epidemiology and population health at Stanford University,
argues in a paper published
earlier this month that COVID-19 "seroprevalence studies," which measure infection rates using
the presence of antibodies in blood samples, "typically show a much lower fatality than
initially speculated in the earlier days of the pandemic."
"It should be appreciated," he writes in the paper, "that [the fatality rate] is not a
fixed physical constant and it can vary substantially across locations, depending on the
population structure, the case-mix of infected and deceased individuals and other, local
factors. "
In the paper, which has not yet been peer-reviewed, Ioannidis surveyed 23 different
seroprevalence studies and found that "among people <70 years old, infection fatality rates
ranged from ... 0.00-0.23% with median of 0.04%."
The median fatality rate of all cases, he writes, is 0.26%, significantly lower than some
earlier estimates that suggested rates as high as over 3%.
In the paper, Ioannidis acknowledges that "while COVID-19 is a formidable threat," the
apparently low fatality rate compared to earlier estimates "is a welcome piece of
evidence."
"Decision-makers can use measures that will try to avert having the virus infect people
and settings who are at high risk of severe outcomes," he writes.
"These measures may be possible to be far more precise and tailored to specific high- risk
individuals and settings than blind lockdown of the entire society."
International Man : The Lancet recently retracted an anti-hydroxychloroquine study, which
the media had used to attack Trump.
Trump had admitted to taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventative measure against the
coronavirus. The media then went into a frenzy. The talking heads often cited The Lancet study
as proof hydroxychloroquine was dangerous.
The bottom line is that bogus research made its way -- likely deliberately -- into one of
the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals in the world. People then used this
"science" as a political weapon.
What is your take on this?
Doug Casey : I'd say the whole charade is tragic, except that "tragic" has become the most
overused word in the language today. It bears a short discussion.
Look at the recent death of a small-time career criminal, George Floyd. It's as if "tragic"
were part of his name. It's as if people no longer understand the meaning of the word. A
tragedy used to mean that a heroic protagonist succumbed to a cosmic force. There are no heroes
in the degraded melodrama, just villains, where a costumed thug murdered a street thug under
the color of law.
Sorry to go off on a tangent. But it's a timely instance of another word whose meaning has
been twisted. It's Orwellian, like so many other things in our devolving society.
Let's talk about something that's actually tragic: the corruption of science over the last
couple of generations.
I've subscribed to Scientific American , Discover, and New Scientist for many years. During
this time, I've noticed a distinct change in their respective editorial policies. They've all
been politicized, captured by the PC left. These popular magazines are nowhere near the quality
they once were. But this is just symptomatic of a bigger problem.
You might recall the 2018 hoax where three academics, disgusted with widespread incompetence
and dishonesty in research, submitted absurd "spoof" papers to twenty leading journals. They
were written in gobbledygook, full of made-up facts and flawed reasoning. But most, as I
recall, were peer-reviewed and published.
If you research the subject a bit, you come to the conclusion half the peer-reviewed papers
-- absolutely in "soft" fields like psychology, sociology, political science, race and gender
studies, etc. -- are unreadable, dishonest, useless, and pointless.
Why might this be? If an academic wants to advance in today's university system, he has to
publish research. It's Pareto's Law in action, the 80–20 rule. It's pretty reliable, 80%
of this sort of thing is crap because it's written mainly to fabricate credentials, not advance
knowledge.
This is a bad thing.
It's causing the average guy, who may not know anything about science but still has some
respect for it, to lose that respect. That's because science has become politicized.
You can see it with the conflicting information about COVID-19. Is it deadly or just another
seasonal flu? Does it affect everyone, like the black death, or mainly the old and sick? Does
almost everyone who contracts the virus get very sick or die or only a tiny percentage? Should
you quarantine or live normally?
So far, as near as I can tell, the great virus hysteria has gone from being the next black
plague to basically a big nothing. It's not nearly as bad as the Asian Flu from the 50s or the
Hong Kong Flu from the 60s. Forget about the Spanish Flu -- there's no comparison whatsoever.
The main effect of COVID isn't medical; it's the hysteria that's destroyed the economy. And
political actions are even more insane than those after 9/11.
Politics thrives on hysteria. The politicization of everything is the real problem. And it's
not just about the total disruption of society and multitrillion-dollar deficits. For instance,
I've played poker with a bunch of guys in Aspen every Monday night for years. Now, even though
the lockdown in town is easing, the group is breaking up because most of them insist that
everyone wear a mask. I won't, nor will a couple of other guys. So, between that and a few guys
who are now scared to socialize no matter what game over. It may also mean the end of a larger
Friday business lunch group I belong to that's been around for decades.
There are millions of similar small rips in the social fabric taking place everywhere now.
And they're largely justified by "the science."
The real problem is that the knock-on effects of the virus will last much, much longer than
the trivial virus itself -- which will soon burn out and be forgotten. The political, economic,
and social changes, however, will linger for years, as will attitudes toward "science."
International Man : What are the implications of people corrupting the scientific process to
launder their political propaganda to shape mainstream opinions?
Doug Casey : You might think this is a new thing, but the left, in particular -- who have
always been advocates of social engineering -- love using "science" to further their political
agenda.
The first important instance of this was Karl Marx and his notion of "scientific socialism"
-- a totally bogus idea.
Since he first promoted it over 150 years ago, the concept has become ingrained in the
culture, especially academia. People have been taught to believe there's such a thing as
"scientific socialism," and that it's not just inevitable, but desirable. In fact, it's
pseudoscience. But that's just the first example of corruption of science in modern times.
Keynesianism is another example. Keynesians believe that they can manipulate the economy as
if it were a machine.
A machine is a horrible analogy for the economy, however. It's not a machine or a factory
where you can pull levers to make magic happen -- which is precisely what the Keynesians (who
run the economic world today) think they can do.
The economy is more like a rainforest, which is very complex. It can't be manipulated from
outside by apparatchiks enforcing rules. And if you do try to manipulate a rainforest from
outside, you're likely to destroy it.
Keynesianism is a perfect example of scientism (that's the use of the vocabulary and
trappings of science for inappropriate subjects). You can see scientism used everywhere in the
humanities and "soft" sciences. This is usually to legitimize some type of state
intervention.
Sociology and psychology are basically about social engineering. They're not generally
scientific so much as scientistic. They often try to put a scientific patina on forcing people
to interact with each other in prescribed ways.
But it goes way beyond just sociology and psychology. English departments are notorious for
using leftist literary works to insinuate certain ideas in students. Economics departments use
arcane math formulas to describe human action -- pure scientism, with lots of ideological
baggage. Marx himself was primarily a historian. Many college degrees today are completely
bogus and worthless. An example? There are degrees in gender studies.
The trend is way out of control. Ridiculous scientific concepts that started with Marx are
everywhere.
The same people -- by that, I mean those with Marxist, socialist, and Keynesian outlooks --
are behind the global warming frenzy, which is full of pseudoscience, fudged numbers, and bogus
statistics.
The latest manifestation of all this, of course, is the COVID hysteria.
But behind it all is state funding of science -- Big Science. It started in earnest after
World War II.
Government funding is authorized by politicians. They make decisions for political reasons.
In order to qualify, you have to come up with results that are politically acceptable, which
itself is the best reason for not having any government funding.
But some might ask: Without the government, where would Big Science get the billions needed
for giant projects?
In fact, most of the capital that goes into scientific research from the state would still
go into science; knowledge has value. But money would be allocated economically, not
politically, thereby creating more wealth -- much more than today, when much is wasted on
politically caused boondoggles. Most government science spending is necessarily
misallocated.
The increasingly political nature of science funding has served to discredit the idea of
science itself.
International Man : The Democrats liken themselves as the so-called "Party of Science." What
do you think?
Doug Casey : It's nonsense, but it's very clever marketing on their part.
They get away with it because the Republicans are basically the party of business. And more
importantly, the people who vote Republican tend to be traditionalist and
religion-oriented.
That's a problem because scientific thinkers tend to see religion as irrelevant, dangerous,
or even laughable -- at best, as an inaccurate or bogus way to describe the world.
Democrats, on the other hand, are notoriously secular and non-religious. Coincidentally, so
are most scientists. That's resulted in some unfortunate confusion. Democrats, illogically,
seem to believe that just because they're secular, they must be scientific.
The fact is, however, that the Democrats are not the party of science.
In fact, they're the party of pseudoscience, bogus science, and scientism. Science doesn't
mix well with politics -- or religion.
But Democrats are clever marketers, linking themselves with science to differentiate
themselves from Republicans, the party of tradition and religion.
When you think about tradition and religion, it can bring to mind flat earth theories,
geocentric astronomy, Torquemada, the persecution of Galileo, and witch trials. Democrats love
to paint themselves as rational advanced thinkers and Republicans as superstitious
atavists.
Of course, religion and science have been at each other's throats forever. Another reason
I've always said the Dems are more the evil party and the Reps more the stupid party. But a pox
on both their houses
International Man : Events like this seem to be a prime reason why a growing number of
people are losing confidence in previously credible institutions and the self-anointed
"experts."
What does this mean?
Doug Casey : Tens of millions now have college degrees that they think mean something. In
fact, they're worth less than a high school diploma was before World War 2. People go on to get
PhDs, which, it's always been said, stands for "piled higher and deeper."
Especially since World War 2, government has gotten vastly bigger and involved in
everything. Huge mistake
The government's role is simple -- to protect people from coercion: protection from domestic
coercion, which implies the police force; protection from transnational coercion, which implies
an army; and providing justice within the country, which implies a judicial system.
The government shouldn't do anything else.
But since it's now involved in absolutely everything, you need "experts" to decide what's to
be done.
We see this today with people like Dr. Anthony Fauci, who's nothing more than a lifelong
bureaucrat. He's lived in the swamp his entire life, and he's a typical technocrat. He believes
he knows what's best for you.
People like Fauci have assumed tremendous power over other people and the way society works.
He's a clever politician and has been effective at backslapping and backstabbing. And wheedling
his way into a high bureaucratic position. The government is full of people like him.
Another important thing about COVID is that they call it a "health crisis."
That's untrue for several reasons. First, health is something that you take care of
yourself. It's personal, not public. As wonderful and as advanced as medicine has become, it's
of little use for maintaining your health.
You maintain your health through proper diet, exercise, and good habits. Medicine is about
repairing damage if you have a serious injury or illness. It overlaps, obviously, but is
essentially very different from health care.
Anyway, COVID has been dressed up as an excuse to not just destroy the economy, but in many
ways, destroy society itself. Similar to global warming, Keynesianism, Marxism, and other forms
of scientism.
It's one of many signs of how society is degrading at an accelerating rate.
I don't know what the next massive boondoggle is going to be after this is over. You might
recall the police state pictured in the excellent movie "V for Vendetta" was brought into being
because of a fake virus epidemic. Talk about life imitating art! If things keep going in this
direction, the US will start looking like the old USSR.
International Man : Society is degrading at an accelerating pace. What can people do to
protect themselves?
Doug Casey : Unfortunately, the whole world seems to worship democracy. Democracy, however,
is really just mob rule dressed in a coat and tie. Worse, that trend is not only still in
motion, but it's accelerating.
I've always been a fan of gold -- always for savings and often as a speculation. It's been
great, and gold bugs have done very well. It's gone from $35 to over $1,700. And it's going
much higher.
It's a great way to save money and build capital over time. At the moment, I'm speculating in
gold mining stocks , which are extremely cheap. I expect the next mania to be in them.
But I don't have any political solutions for people, except to stop looking to politics as
the solution to problems. And stop acting like a bunch of chimpanzees looking for a leader.
Politics is the problem, the cause of most of today's problems. It's not the solution.
* * *
Economically, politically, and socially, the United States seems to be headed down a path
that's not only inconsistent with the founding principles of the country but accelerating
quickly toward boundless decay. It's contributing to a growing wave of misguided socialist
ideas. That is precisely why NY Times best selling author, Doug Casey just released this urgent
new video titled The Most Dangerous Event of the
21st Century which outlines what comes next and what you need to do to be ready.
We do still need to worry about the coronavirus's spread. But how can we when the experts
have completely forsaken our trust? Dr. Anthony Fauci (L), director of the National Institute
of Allergy and Infectious Diseases speaks next to Response coordinator for White House
Coronavirus Task Force Deborah Birx, during a meeting with US President Donald Trump and
Louisiana Governor John Bel Edwards D-LA in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington,
DC on April 29, 2020. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)
Since the pandemic began, I've been described as a so-called "COVID warrior," which makes
some sense. After all, I've defended the shutdowns of large gatherings. I've insisted that it's
wise to temporarily close churches and postpone funerals and other ceremonies. I've argued that
extreme caution is necessary -- that to do anything else would be to blatantly and selfishly
ignore the
scientific information at our disposal. I've held the opinion that, although it has caused
irrevocable harm to the economy and caused millions of people to suffer, business owners
who close up shop for fear of spreading contagion are in the right.
Now I feel like a fool.
By no means am I a coronavirus denier -- more than 100,000
and counting have died from the COVID. But with conflicting reports about everything from
wearing masks to the
spread of the virus through surfaces coming out of the World Health Organization and the
CDC almost weekly, my head is spinning. Nothing seems to make sense anymore.
For fear of spreading the virus, health experts have consistently recommended shutting down
and avoiding public spaces, including
schools ,
playgrounds ,
public pools , and
public transportation . They've also advocated for
limiting large gatherings and closing anything that might draw crowds. It's advice that's
been repeated for months -- to the point that those ignoring it have been
reviled and accused of experimenting with "
human sacrifice ."
That's because asymptomatic carriers of the virus, though they may feel all right
themselves, can become
mass spreaders of the deadly contagion, especially in large groups. This is why Michigan
residents
protesting their state's lockdown in Lansing were deserving of shame -- they likely
caused mass immiseration and sickness, right?
Wrong. Turns out, health officials didn't really believe any of that.
Just last week, the WHO
announced that it's extremely rare for asymptomatic spreading of the coronavirus to occur.
If you feel fine, then you're probably not a grave threat to anyone, especially if you're
wearing a mask and gloves. Then the WHO backtracked on that statement, ultimately arriving at
the completely unhelpful determination that "
this is a major unknown ." Health experts simply don't know to what extent the disease is
transmitted by asymptomatic carriers -- yet they
still feel confident that the risks of the coronavirus shouldn't impact our protesting of
police brutality.
One rightly wonders how, within a span of weeks, we went from shaming people for being out
in the streets to shaming those who won't join the
crowd .
What's more,
contact with infected animals and surfaces is
unlikely to cause COVID-19 to spread, and
chlorine kills the virus upon contact, so clean pools are also safe. But of course, many
schools, playgrounds, pools, and businesses were forced to close.
Livelihoods have been destroyed, children are paying a
high price through a loss of time and key social-educational development, and mental health
across the country is on
the decline .
And now some journalists from prominent publications -- the same ones that have been
demanding oh-so-extreme caution -- are performing breathtaking gymnastics in an effort to
backtrack,
explaining that there's no evidence of outdoor coronavirus spread. Now, it's "prolonged
indoor close contact" that we have to worry about.
They may be right. Maybe protesters really shouldn't worry (though they probably
should ). But that doesn't excuse what seems to be a disgusting hypocrisy that trampled on
the livelihoods of more than
30 million Americans. Understandably, many are outraged and have
lost all faith in the experts.
Health advice can't shift with politics -- COVID-19, cancer, and the flu don't know party
lines. The virus is either unmanageable or manageable. That's it.
Now, with Trump
aiming to restart his so-called "MAGA rallies," we'll inevitably have -- and
already have had -- another round of tut-tutting from the media about how horribly
irresponsible it is to gather in crowds. But who can possibly blame those who shrug these
warnings off? MAGA rallies very well could spread COVID-19, but in the event they do, the
George Floyd protests will be equally culpable. Expert credibility has been lost.
Maybe we should, as many of my more classically liberal friends have been saying all along,
allow people to make their own choices, take their own risks, open their own businesses back
up, hold their own protests against injustice.
Whatever the case, given the whiplash the public has experienced over these past few weeks,
we certainly won't be running to health experts as readily as before. Certainly, social
distancing practices have
helped flatten the curve, but living your life based on the inconsistent messaging of the
WHO and the CDC is a recipe for disaster. If a second wave does appear, it will be cautious
individuals and community innovation that provides the solutions -- not those who have done
nothing to earn our trust.
Anthony DiMauro is a freelance writer based in New York City. His work has appeared
in The National Interest , Real Clear Media, and elsewhere. You can follow him on
Twitter @AnthonyMDiMauro.
It's become a farce of historic proportions. As a general rule, the government has resisted
any demands by businesses to reduce the government's arbitrary limit from 2 metres to 1 metre .
This would have greatly helped businesses to avoid expensive health and safety compliance and
reopen this summer.
While the government and its science team dither back and forth, the economy continues to
crater, and unemployment is spiralling.
Meanwhile, scientists from the vaunted committee of experts known as 'SAGE' (Scientific
Advisory Group for Emergencies), are busy issuing warnings to ministers that the public will
need to wear masks and also 'minimise their time together' if they sit closer than 2 metres
apart.
It's already well-known by now according to real data and the experience of European
countries – that the virus was seasonal and has already 'left the building,' and that the
only demographic who were ever at any serious risk were elderly persons with chronic
comorbidities, and more specifically, those residing in care homes.
Why are UK government officials still resisting relaxing social distancing measures? Has
this become some sort of elaborate political face-saving exercise now, or is there a larger
social engineering agenda in motion?
The
two-metre rule has no basis in science, leading scientists have said as the Government
comes under increasing pressure to drop the measure.
Writing for The Telegraph , Professors Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, from the
University of Oxford, said there is little evidence to support the restriction and called for
an end to the "formalised rules".
The University of Dundee also said there was no indication that distancing at two metres
is safer than one metre.
The intervention comes as two Government ministers suggested on Monday that the rule is
likely to be relaxed following a review commissioned by Boris Johnson, the Prime
Minister.
Examining the current evidence for the two-metre rule, Prof Heneghan and Prof Jefferson
looked at 172 studies cited in a recent review in The Lancet and found just five had dealt
explicitly with coronavirus infection in relation to distance. Only one mentioned coming
within six feet of a patient, and that paper showed proximity had no impact.
"Queueing outside shops, dodging each other once inside, and not getting too close to
other people anywhere: social-distancing has become the norm," they wrote.
"The two-metre rule, however, is also seriously impacting schools,
pubs, restaurants and our ability to go about our daily lives.
"Much of the evidence in this current outbreak informing policy is poor quality.
Encouragement and hand-washing are what we need, not formalised rules."
A University of Dundee study suggested that 78 per cent of the risk of infection happens
below one metre and there is just an 11 per cent chance of any increased distance making a
difference.
Dr Mike Lonergan, a senior statistician and epidemiologist who reviewed 25 papers compiled
for the World Health Organisation (WHO) said:
"Our conclusion is that avoiding contact is very important and that a one-metre distance
might be slightly better than just avoiding contact, but the difference is unlikely to be
much. These data give no indication that two metres is better than one metre."
The hope remains that more real science and sober analysis will continue emerging which can
hopefully influence the government to return to reality, and put the incredible COVID lockdown
debacle behind it. But can they?
"... This program is 100 percent listener supported! You can join the hundreds of financial sponsors who make this show possible by becoming a member on our Patreon page . ..."
Since April, he has uncovered how COVID-19
came
to be a boon for the ultra-wealthy , reporting that America's billionaires, including Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Warren Buffet,
Michael Bloomberg and others, accrued more wealth in the first three weeks of the lockdown than they made in total prior to 1980.
Billionaire wealth surged by $484 billion in just three months, while a record 40 million Americans filed for unemployment.
This economic phenomenon, the largest radical transfer of wealth out of the hands of taxpayers and into the hands of billionaires,
was the largest taxpayer bailout of the wealthy in American history.
As MacLeod reported,
In the last 30 years, U.S. billionaire wealth soared by over 1100 percent while median household wealth increased by barely
five percent. In 1990, the total wealth held by America's billionaire class was $240 billion; today that number stands at $2.95
trillion. Thus, America's billionaires accrued more wealth in just the past three weeks than they made in total prior to 1980."
While the pandemic and subsequent lockdown turned the world upside down for working-class people, forcing upon them school closures,
long lines at the grocery store, empty shelves, panic buying, record unemployment, and miles-long bread lines, little media attention
was given to the Billionaires buying islands and land where they could enjoy life in first-class bunkers built to withstand a nuclear
war.
If anything, the coronavirus has lifted the veil to expose the growing inequality in the United States, an unfortunate reality
in the world's richest country.
Macleod leaves us with a salient statistic, explaining that while Amazon owner Jeff Bezos makes $1 million every three minutes,
"Amazon staff, directly employed by Bezos, also
risk
their lives for measly pay.
One-third of all Amazon
workers in Arizona, for example, are enrolled in the food stamps program, their wages so low that they cannot afford to pay for food."
Alan MacLeod joins MintCast to explain all of this and how the coming economic crash that is expected to contract the economy
by 40 percent will only advance the interests of America's ultra-wealthy and increase their wealth even further.
America already faces a reality in which less than one thousand billionaires influence policies that ensure more tax obligations
for the working class to the benefit of ultra-wealthy oligarchs. Corporate media ensures this reality by presenting billionaires
in a positive light, often as philanthropists who run charitable organizations. Yet, in reality, they are little more than big fish
eating off of the hard work of the working class.
This program is 100 percent listener supported! You can join the hundreds of financial sponsors who make this show possible
by becoming a member on our Patreon page .
Subscribe to this podcast on iTunes
, Spotify and
SoundCloud . Please leave us a review and share this segmen t.
Mnar Muhawesh is founder, CEO and editor in chief of MintPress News, and is also a regular speaker on responsible journalism,
sexism, neoconservativism within the media and journalism start-ups.
MintPress News is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.
Dr. Fauci and the Scarf Lady are not the only Virus Patrol miscreants spreading the Covid
Hysteria and thereby empowering the authorities to keep suffocating everyday economic life and
personal liberty in America.
In fact, there is a whole camarilla of current and former health officials, purported
disease experts, all-purpose talking heads and other Washington apparatchiks who continue to
appear on mainstream media, peddling the hoary tale that coronavirus is some kind of horror
flick monster: It purportedly just keeps springing from its Lockdown grave – whack-a-mole
fashion – the instant officialdom relaxes its quarantine edicts.
Call these people the "groomers" of Big Pharma, and their job is to keep public fears on the
boil so that the demand for high-priced treatments, cures and preventative vaccines becomes
overwhelming. And given that the Covid is now rapidly succumbing to the exhaustion of its
infection cycle and the summertime sun, their exact current mission is one of bridging the
gap.
That is, finding and publicizing local outbreaks and "hot spots" during the months just
ahead so that the Virus Patrol will remain in full control of policy and the narrative until
the Covid makes its forecasted second wave rebound during next fall's flu season.
After all, they desperately need these hot spots to keep the aggregate narrative alive
because it is visibly collapsing by the day.
Back in early May, for instance, the NYT breathlessly carried a leaked study from the Trump
Administration that projected a massive surge of new infections and a near doubling of daily
death rates by early June relative to levels than extant:
As President Trump presses for states to reopen their economies, his administration is
privately projecting a steady rise in the number of coronavirus cases and deaths over the
next several weeks. The daily death toll will reach about 3,000 on June 1, according to an
internal document obtained by The New York Times , a 70 percent increase from the current
number of about 1,750 .
The projections, based on government modeling pulled together by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, forecast about 200,000 new cases each day by the end of the month, up from
about 25,000 cases a day currently.
The numbers underscore a sobering reality: The United States has been hunkered down for
the past seven weeks to try slowing the spread of the virus, but reopening the economy will
make matters worse.
Needless to say, that one went down the memory hole ages ago (i.e. around Memorial Day). As
of June 10, in fact, actual daily averages for the month to date were:
827 deaths per day, representing a 53% decline , not a 70% increase;
20,694 new cases per day, representing a 17% decline , not an 8X increase;
In other words, these Washington modelers (this one was prepared by FEMA) couldn't hit the
broadside of a barn with the antiaircraft guns Chairman Kim uses to dispatch his adversaries.
So to keep the Covid-Hysteria alive, they send out the hot spot "groomers".
On of the most mendacious of these groomers is Dr. Scott Gottlieb, who was the Donald's
first FDA commissioner and is an alleged pedigreed "conservative" with a berth at the American
Enterprise Institute to burnish his numerous sinecures with Big Pharma.
Gottlieb is also a CNBC regular, and yesterday, sitting astride a screen crawler which read
"Texas reports second day of record hospitalizations", he was busy promulgating the "hot spot"
news about two red states, whose merely semi-craven GOP governors have belatedly attempted to
get their economies back in business:
When you look at hotspot regions like Arizona and Texas , they have to be concerned,
particularly areas around Houston right now. They could lose control of this very quickly,"
says @ScottGottliebMD on
balancing re-opening with public health.
We call bullshit!
Gottlieb was peddling a pimple on the elephant's ass because, apparently, cable TV audiences
generally and bubble vision's especially, were born yesterday. That is, they are infantile
victims of recency and confirmation biases and will apparently believe anything served up in a
context-free modality.
The truth is, there is nothing worrisome whatsoever going on in Arizona and Texas beyond the
fact that the coronavirus started its inexorable spread in these interior states later than on
the East and Left coasts, and is therefore cresting slightly later, as well.
But as of June 8, the count of infected cases and WITH Covid deaths in Arizona stood at
27,678 and 1,047, respectively. Those figures a hot spot do not make, nor do they offer any
reason for not getting the state's boot-heel off the economy ASAP.
Relative to the USA as a whole and the New York epicenter, Arizona's figures per 100,000
population compare as follows as of June 8:
Infected cases Arizona : 375;
Infected cases USA : 596;
Infected cases New York : 1,963
WITH Covid deaths Arizona : 14.2;
WITH-Covid deaths USA : 32.3;
WITH-Covid deaths New York : 126.0;
In other words, Arizona's mortality rate is less than half of the US average and only 11% of
that for New York. So why is it a worrisome "hot spot" by the lights of Virus Patrol shills
like Gottlieb?
Indeed, the WITH-Covid mortality rate in Arizona stands at nearly rock bottom, clocking in
at at just one-fifth to one-half of the mortality rates in much as European Christendom. To
wit, current rates per 100,000 include:
Belgium: 83.1;
United Kingdom: 60.2;
Spain: 58.0;
Italy: 56.3;
Sweden: 47.5;
France: 44.9;
Netherlands: 35.3;
Arizona: 14.2;
But when context doesn't matter, of course, any pimple can be depicted as a large boulder.
Thus, the number of new cases in Arizona is allegedly soaring, suggesting that the state has
jumped the gun letting its citizens out of house arrest too soon.
In fact, during the first 8 days of June, Arizona reported 7,742 new cases – a figure
which is sharply higher than the 2,189 new cases reported for the last eight days of April, for
example.
But that gain is entirely a function of the testing rate and then some. Thus, during the
June 1 to June 8 span, the state reported 62,825 new tests, implying an infection rate of 12.3%
.
By contrast, during April 22 to April 30 the state reported only 15,185 new tests
(one-fourth of the June figure), implying an infection rate of 14.4% .
So the state is testing a lot more, as it has been instructed to do by Washington, and such
accelerated testing is generating a falling infection rate!
And that's not the half of it. By now there are more than enough antibody tests of different
US populations to be reasonably certain that in a state like Arizona with a population of 7.38
million that there have been far more infected cases than the 27,678 cases reported through
June 8.
Generally, antibody tests show infection rates of 5-20% in the general population, which
would imply total cases – most of which remained asymptomatic or resulted in mild
illnesses – of between 370,000 and 1.5 million for Arizona.
So, actually, higher reported cases daily may mean nothing at all as to the current status
of the virus among the population. More likely, it actually means that what is already there is
being slowly discovered after the fact ; it's stale, irrelevant old news, not an alarming new
development, to say nothing of evidence of a hot spot.
Indeed, the latter is a meaningless but loaded term, honed for TV talking points, but is
incapable of conveying any meaningful information about context at all. That is, the real test
is how does what's happening with the coronavirus now compare with year-in-and-year-out
illness, hospitalization, disease and mortality trends?
Self-evidently, you do not empower the state to put its citizens under house arrest and
destroy the livelihoods of millions of workers and tens of thousands of small businesses on
account of a bad run of seasonal illnesses that leaves more people than usual home in bed or
even heading to the hospital for treatment.
To the contrary, this whole Lockdown Nation thing is about the modern equivalent of the
Black Death – the presence of a virulent killer that can takedown the young, the old, the
healthy, the sick and all categories between with equal alacrity.
But, again, there is nothing to support that Grim Reaper notion in the data, and most
especially not the "hot spot" flavor of the week in Texas and Arizona.
The mortality rate from all causes for Arizona for the four months from January through the
end of April (latest available) is shown below.
Naturally, the total mortality rate surmounts the cause of death attribution and coding
issues; and it means that unless these total death rates are significantly elevated from the
norm, then nothing unusual – or at least worthy of drastic quarantine policies–is
actually going on.
On a per 100,000 basis, the Arizona's total mortality rates for the first four months of the
year have been as follows:
2016: 293;
2017: 277:
2018: 297;
2019: 285:
2020: 301;
The above does not indicate the Black Plague at loose. The tiny elevation in 2020 relative
to the previous four years is just statistical noise!
Moreover, there is no new signal coming out of this "noise" owing to the higher testing and
infection rates being reported in recent days. Again, the evidence for that is in the state's
own published data on hospitalization rates, among others.
Between March 23 and June 1, Arizona consistently reported new WITH-Covid hospitalization
cases of between 40 and 60 per day on a statewide basis.
During June 3 through June 8, however, the number of new hospitalizations daily has dwindled
to 34, 19, 17, 10, 4 and 5 , respectively.
The last few days, in fact, have had the lowest new hospitalizations since before the
Donald's malpracting doctors triggered the Covid Hysteria on March 13.
So, hot spot my eye!
In this connection, they also keep trotting out the hoary old claim that the hospitals are
in danger of being overrun with new cases – per the crawler on the screen yesterday
during Gottleib's appearance on bubble vision.
Alas, it never happened previously in Arizona and is not remotely in danger of happening
now. Even during the peak of new hospitalizations between April 20 and May 8, the utilization
rate of hospital intensive care beds rose from 72% to 78% and has remained at that level ever
since.
Finally, it is worth noting that Arizona's WITH-Covid mortality data show the same dramatic
skew toward the elderly, as is true with the rest of the country. Fully 77% of the Covid deaths
in Arizona have been among the 65 and older population, which comprises just 17% of the state's
overall population.
That fact alone, of course, militates strongly against the across-the-board stay-at-home and
general quarantine orders in the first place.
The Arizona WITH-Covid mortality rate through June 9 breaks out as follows by age cohorts.
That is to say, anyone under 55 years old driving to the Scottsdale Fashion Mall would have had
a greater chance of being killed in an auto accident than being felled by the Covid:
Deaths Per 100,000 population:
<20 years: 0.1;
20-44 years: 2.1;
45-54 years: 7.5;
55-64 years: 14.9;
65+ years: 66.3;
With respect to Texas, it's the same story. There is no "hot spot", period.
Its reported cases and deaths through June 8 are actually far lower than those for Arizona
and in the sub-basement relative to the overall USA figures, to say nothing of the nursing-home
based disaster-data reported for New York and New Jersey.
That is, the number of infected cases in Texas amounts to 256 per 100,000 or 68% of the
Arizona rate, 42% of the overall USA rate and just 13% of the rate of infected cases among the
New York state population.
Likewise, the WITH-Covid mortality rate through June 8 in Texas was 6.2 per 100,000. That's
just 43% of the Arizona rate, 19% of the USA average and only 5% of the New York state rate
.
So Texas isn't remotely a "hot spot" or some kind of warning about reopening too soon, and
is actually a thundering rebuke of the entire Lockdown Nation narrative.
That is, Texas was late and tepid about the lockdown, and among the first to begin
"reopening" in early May.
Yet its reported infected case rate of 256 per 100,000 is just 10% of the real "hot spot"
rate of 2,477 per 100,000 in the five boroughs of New York City; and its mortality rate of 6.2
per 100,000 population is just 3% of New York City's 196 per 100,000 rate.
So for crying out loud, with that kind of yawning gap and rock bottom absolute level, what
is this clown, Scott Gottlieb, doing on bubble vision warning about Covid dangers in Texas?
Answer: He's grooming the sheeples in order to keep the Killer Covid narrative alive and the
money and legal immunities flowing to the drug companies chasing cures and vaccines.
It goes without saying, course, that the alleged surge in new cases reported in Texas during
recent days is just as bogus as the claims about Arizona.
Yes, new cases reported during June 1 to June 8 averaged 1,416 per day or about 61% higher
than the rate of 877 per day reported for April 22 to April 30. Except, the number of new tests
also rose by about 60% from 113,500 to 168,500, leaving the infected rate virtually unchanged
at a very low 6.7% .
Again, if you want to talk "hot spots", try New York City. The the infected rate per test
has run north of 20% in the Bronx, for example.
So the question recurs. Why are people like Scott Gottlieb out pimping the Killer Covid
story in the face overwhelming evidence that it it nothing of the kind.
Perhaps, it might be noted that Gottlieb went straight from medical school to various jobs
at the FDA before becoming commissioner in 2017, and then heading out the revolving door to
Pfizer's Board of Directors in May 2019.
And, yes, here's the list of the top five firms being supported by billions from Washington
in the race for a Covid vaccine, which may or may not happen, but whether safe or not will be
of no never-mind to Big Pharma.
After all, Washington has already indemnified them against lawsuits; pretty much guaranteed
that they can name their charge per dose; and will be doing all it can to make getting a tap on
the arm from one or more of the Big Pharma competitors a mandatory duty of citizenship.
Call it what you will, but don't call it honest capitalism. And chalk it up as still another
blow to the idea of limited government and personal liberty.
The five companies are Moderna, a Massachusetts-based biotechnology firm, which Dr. Fauci
said he expected would enter into the final phase of clinical trials next month; the
combination of Oxford University and AstraZeneca, on a similar schedule; and three large
pharmaceutical companies: Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Pfizer . Each is taking a somewhat
different approach.
On Thursday, a Republican lawmaker introduced legislation, dubbed "Murphy's Law," that would
nullify any executive order the governor himself violates. Assemblyman Jay Webber noted that
Murphy attended the rallies on Sunday, when outside gatherings were limited to no more than 25
people to curb the spread of the coronavirus. Two days later, Murphy raised the limit to 100
people and exempted political protests.
"Executive orders should end for everyone when governors break their own rules for
themselves," Webber said in a statement. The legislation, of course, has virtually no chance of
being signed by Murphy, a Democrat who stood by his decision to demonstrate and on Thursday
urged the like-minded to continue to do so peacefully, using masks and other virus
precautions.
But business owners and others are expressing their own frustration with the governor, with
unsanctioned startups of indoor dining and other activities in a state whose death toll,
12,443, is second only to New York's. As Murphy, 62, in recent days has relaxed some
restrictions put in place to slow the virus' spread, he has warned that cases will jump when
more people come in contact with one another.
A second U.S. coronavirus wave is emerging in states including Texas, Florida and California
while New Jersey's cases have slowed. But throughout the Garden State, some say they're willing
to risk a swifter return to typical operations -- albeit with some precautions.
Millions of Americans remain subjected to unprecedented restrictions on their personal
lives, their daily lives, their family's lives.
The coronavirus
lockdowns continue in many places. You may not know that because it gets no publicity, but it's
true. And if you're living under it, you definitely know.
As a result of this, tens of millions of people are now unemployed. A huge number of them
have no prospects of working again. Many thousands of small businesses are closed and will
never reopen. More Americans have become dependent on drugs and alcohol, seeing their marriages
dissolve, and become clinically depressed.
Some of them delayed their weddings. Others were banned by the government from burying their
loved ones in funerals. Some Americans will die of cancer because they couldn't get cancer
screenings, some unknown number have taken their own lives in despair. Others have flooded the
streets to riot because bottled up rage and frustration take many forms.
The cost of shutting down the United States and denying our citizens desperately needed
contact with one another is hard to calculate. But the cost has been staggering.
The people responsible for doing all of this,say they have no regrets about it. We faced a
global calamity, they say. COVID-19 was the worst pandemic since the Spanish flu. That flu
killed 50 million people.
We had no choice. We did the right thing. That's what they're telling us. Is it true?
The answer to that question matters, not just because the truth always matters, but because
the credibility of our leaders is at stake here. This is the biggest decision they have made in
our lifetimes. They were able to make it. They rule because we let them. Their power comes from
us.
As a matter of public health, we can say conclusively the lockdowns were not
necessary.
So the question, now and always is, are they worthy of that power? That's not a conversation
they want to have. And right now, they don't have to have that conversation because all of us
are distracted and mesmerized by the woke revolution underway outside.
They just created a separate country in Seattle. Huh? We'll bring you the latest on that.
But we do think it's worth four minutes taking a pause to assess whether or not they were in
fact lying to us about the coronavirus and our response to it.
And the short answer is this: Yes, they were definitely lying.
As a matter of public health, we can say conclusively the lockdowns were not necessary. In
fact, we can prove that. And here's the most powerful evidence: States that never locked down
at all -- states where people were allowed to live like Americans and not cower indoors alone
-- in the end turned out no worse than states that had mandatory quarantines. The state you
probably live in.
The states that locked down at first but were quick to reopen have not seen explosions of
coronavirus cases. All of this is the opposite of what they said would happen with great
confidence.
The media predicted mass death at places like Lake of the Ozarks and Ocean City, Md. --
places where the middle class dares to vacation. But those deaths never happened. In the end,
the Wuhan coronavirus turned out to be a dangerous disease, but a manageable disease, like so
many others. Far more dangerous were the lockdowns themselves.
For example, in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, panicked and
incompetent governors forced nursing homes to accept infected coronavirus patients, and as a
result, many thousands died, and they died needlessly.
This is all a remarkable story, but it's going almost entirely uncovered. The media would
rather tell you why you need to hate your neighbor for the color of his skin. The media
definitely don't want to revisit what they were saying just a few weeks ago, when they were
acting as press agents for power-drunk Democratic politicians.
We were all played. Corrupt politicians scared us into giving up control over the most
basic questions in our lives. At the same time, they gave more power to their obedient
followers, like Antifa, while keeping the rest of us trapped at home and censored online.
Back then, news anchors were ordering you to stop asking questions and obey.
Chris Cuomo, CNN anchor: All right, so while most Americans are staying inside -- or
should be, right, if they're not out protesting like fools -- they're not happy about being
told to stay home. Staying home saves lives.
And the rest of us should be staying at home for our mothers and the people that we love,
and to keep us farther apart, will ultimately bring us closer together in this cause.
Oh, if you love your mother, you will do what I say. It turns out cable news anchors don't
make very subtle propagandists.
And then Memorial Day arrived in May, and some states started to reopen. Millions of
grateful Americans headed outdoors for the first time in months, and the media attacked them
for doing that. They called them killers.
Swimming with your kids, they told us, was tantamount to mass murder.
Claire McCaskill, MSNBC political analyst: Frankly, a lot of the people in those crowds
-- they thought they were, you know, standing up for what the president believes in and that is
not to care about the public safety part of this.
Robyn Curnow, CNN host: Look at this. I mean, this is kind of crazy, considering we're in
the middle of a global pandemic.
I mean, as one person quipped, you know, that's curving the curve. That's not flattening
it.
Don Lemon, CNN anchor: Massive crowd of people crammed together, as if it were just an
ordinary holiday weekend despite the risks of a virus that has killed more than 98,000
people.
Boy that montage was the opposite of a MENSA meeting. Has that much dumbness been captured
on tape ever?
The last clip you saw was from May 25th. That was just over two weeks ago. "Ninety eight
thousand people are dead. How dare you leave your house? You don't work in the media. You're
not essential."
But it didn't take long for that message to change completely. In fact, it took precisely
five days.
Here's the same brain dead news anchor you just saw less than a week later. He is no longer
angry, you'll notice, about Americans going outside. As long as they are rioting and burning
and not doing something sinful, like swimming with their children, he is delighted by it.
Lemon: And let's not forget, if anyone is judging this -- I'm not judging this, I'm just
wondering what is going on. Because we were supposed to figure out this experiment a long time
ago. Our country was started because -- this is how: the Boston Tea Party. Rioting.
So don't -- do not get it twisted and think that, oh, this is something that has never
happened before. And then this is so terrible, and where are we in these savages and all of
that. This is how this country was started.
Yes, don't judge. This is how this country was started -- by looting CVS and setting fire to
Wendy's. Of course, you took American History. You knew that.
Andrew
Cuomo 's brother must have been in the same history class because he had the same
reaction.
Chris Cuomo: America's major cities are filled with people demanding this country be more
fair, more just.
And please, show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful.
Because I can show you that outraged citizens are the ones who have made America what she is
and led to any major milestones.
They are here to yell, criticize, blame, and shame.
Citizens have no duty to check their outrage.
Wow. So, one minute they were mass murderers for going outside. Now, they're Sam Adams.
They're patriots. They're American heroes.
If all of this seems like a pretty abrupt pivot, fret not. Rioting is not a health risk as
long as it helps the Democratic Party's prospects in the November election .
Rioting will not spread the coronavirus.
Sounds implausible, but we can be certain of that, because last week, hundreds of
self-described public health officials signed a letter saying so. They announced that the Black
Lives Matter riots are a vital contribution to public health. In effect, they're an essential
medical procedure.
But that doesn't mean you get to go outside. You don't. Thanks to coronavirus, you do not
have the right to resume your life, and if you complain about that, it's "white nationalism."
That was their professional conclusion.
Does a single American believe any of that? No, of course not. It is too stupid even for CNN
to repeat, so they mostly ignored it. That's an ominous sign if you think about it. It means
these people are done trying to convince you, even to fool you.
They're not making arguments, they're issuing decrees. They think they can. They no longer
believe they need your consent to make big decisions to run the country. Once the authority
stops trying to change your mind, even by deceit, it means they've decided to use force -- and
they have.
During the lockdowns, people whose loved ones died were not allowed to have funerals for
them. Think about that. It's hard to think of anything crueler, but it happened to a lot of
people. They claimed it was necessary. It was not necessary. And we know that because now that
a man has died
whose death is politically useful to the Democratic Party , the authorities have given him
three funerals and not a word about a health risk.
Or consider King County, Wash -- that's where Seattle is. Restaurants in King County are
operating at just 25 percent capacity. That's the law now. Nonessential businesses are allowed
just 15 percent capacity. The effect of that is economic disaster. Most small businesses run on
very small margins. They can't survive for long, and in fact, many have failed.
What should they do? They should join Antifa, obviously, because in King County, Wash.,
Antifa can do whatever Antifa wants to do. They have taken over an entire six-block section of
downtown Seattle, and that's fine with health authorities. There is no social distancing
required. They're essential.
Are you getting the picture? Is it adding up to a message? Yes, the message is we were
played. We were all played. Corrupt politicians scared us into giving up control over the most
basic questions in our lives. At the same time, they gave more power to their obedient
followers, like Antifa, while keeping the rest of us trapped at home and censored online.
In other words, they used a public health emergency to subvert democracy and install
themselves as monarchs. How were they able to do this? The sad truth is, they did it because we
let them do it. We believed them, therefore, we obeyed them.
If there's anything good to come out of this disaster, it's that none of us will ever make
that mistake again.
Adapted from Tucker Carlson's monologue from " Tucker Carlson Tonight " on June 10,
2020.
Millions of Americans remain subjected to unprecedented restrictions on their personal
lives, their daily lives, their family's lives.
The coronavirus
lockdowns continue in many places. You may not know that because it gets no publicity, but it's
true. And if you're living under it, you definitely know.
As a result of this, tens of millions of people are now unemployed. A huge number of them
have no prospects of working again. Many thousands of small businesses are closed and will
never reopen. More Americans have become dependent on drugs and alcohol, seeing their marriages
dissolve, and become clinically depressed.
Some of them delayed their weddings. Others were banned by the government from burying their
loved ones in funerals. Some Americans will die of cancer because they couldn't get cancer
screenings, some unknown number have taken their own lives in despair. Others have flooded the
streets to riot because bottled up rage and frustration take many forms.
The cost of shutting down the United States and denying our citizens desperately needed
contact with one another is hard to calculate. But the cost has been staggering.
The people responsible for doing all of this,say they have no regrets about it. We faced a
global calamity, they say. COVID-19 was the worst pandemic since the Spanish flu. That flu
killed 50 million people.
We had no choice. We did the right thing. That's what they're telling us. Is it true?
The answer to that question matters, not just because the truth always matters, but because
the credibility of our leaders is at stake here. This is the biggest decision they have made in
our lifetimes. They were able to make it. They rule because we let them. Their power comes from
us.
As a matter of public health, we can say conclusively the lockdowns were not
necessary.
So the question, now and always is, are they worthy of that power? That's not a conversation
they want to have. And right now, they don't have to have that conversation because all of us
are distracted and mesmerized by the woke revolution underway outside.
They just created a separate country in Seattle. Huh? We'll bring you the latest on that.
But we do think it's worth four minutes taking a pause to assess whether or not they were in
fact lying to us about the coronavirus and our response to it.
And the short answer is this: Yes, they were definitely lying.
As a matter of public health, we can say conclusively the lockdowns were not necessary. In
fact, we can prove that. And here's the most powerful evidence: States that never locked down
at all -- states where people were allowed to live like Americans and not cower indoors alone
-- in the end turned out no worse than states that had mandatory quarantines. The state you
probably live in.
The states that locked down at first but were quick to reopen have not seen explosions of
coronavirus cases. All of this is the opposite of what they said would happen with great
confidence.
The media predicted mass death at places like Lake of the Ozarks and Ocean City, Md. --
places where the middle class dares to vacation. But those deaths never happened. In the end,
the Wuhan coronavirus turned out to be a dangerous disease, but a manageable disease, like so
many others. Far more dangerous were the lockdowns themselves.
For example, in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, panicked and
incompetent governors forced nursing homes to accept infected coronavirus patients, and as a
result, many thousands died, and they died needlessly.
This is all a remarkable story, but it's going almost entirely uncovered. The media would
rather tell you why you need to hate your neighbor for the color of his skin. The media
definitely don't want to revisit what they were saying just a few weeks ago, when they were
acting as press agents for power-drunk Democratic politicians.
We were all played. Corrupt politicians scared us into giving up control over the most
basic questions in our lives. At the same time, they gave more power to their obedient
followers, like Antifa, while keeping the rest of us trapped at home and censored online.
Back then, news anchors were ordering you to stop asking questions and obey.
Chris Cuomo, CNN anchor: All right, so while most Americans are staying inside -- or
should be, right, if they're not out protesting like fools -- they're not happy about being
told to stay home. Staying home saves lives.
And the rest of us should be staying at home for our mothers and the people that we love,
and to keep us farther apart, will ultimately bring us closer together in this cause.
Oh, if you love your mother, you will do what I say. It turns out cable news anchors don't
make very subtle propagandists.
And then Memorial Day arrived in May, and some states started to reopen. Millions of
grateful Americans headed outdoors for the first time in months, and the media attacked them
for doing that. They called them killers.
Swimming with your kids, they told us, was tantamount to mass murder.
Claire McCaskill, MSNBC political analyst: Frankly, a lot of the people in those crowds
-- they thought they were, you know, standing up for what the president believes in and that is
not to care about the public safety part of this.
Robyn Curnow, CNN host: Look at this. I mean, this is kind of crazy, considering we're in
the middle of a global pandemic.
I mean, as one person quipped, you know, that's curving the curve. That's not flattening
it.
Don Lemon, CNN anchor: Massive crowd of people crammed together, as if it were just an
ordinary holiday weekend despite the risks of a virus that has killed more than 98,000
people.
Boy that montage was the opposite of a MENSA meeting. Has that much dumbness been captured
on tape ever?
The last clip you saw was from May 25th. That was just over two weeks ago. "Ninety eight
thousand people are dead. How dare you leave your house? You don't work in the media. You're
not essential."
But it didn't take long for that message to change completely. In fact, it took precisely
five days.
Here's the same brain dead news anchor you just saw less than a week later. He is no longer
angry, you'll notice, about Americans going outside. As long as they are rioting and burning
and not doing something sinful, like swimming with their children, he is delighted by it.
Lemon: And let's not forget, if anyone is judging this -- I'm not judging this, I'm just
wondering what is going on. Because we were supposed to figure out this experiment a long time
ago. Our country was started because -- this is how: the Boston Tea Party. Rioting.
So don't -- do not get it twisted and think that, oh, this is something that has never
happened before. And then this is so terrible, and where are we in these savages and all of
that. This is how this country was started.
Yes, don't judge. This is how this country was started -- by looting CVS and setting fire to
Wendy's. Of course, you took American History. You knew that.
Andrew
Cuomo 's brother must have been in the same history class because he had the same
reaction.
Chris Cuomo: America's major cities are filled with people demanding this country be more
fair, more just.
And please, show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful.
Because I can show you that outraged citizens are the ones who have made America what she is
and led to any major milestones.
They are here to yell, criticize, blame, and shame.
Citizens have no duty to check their outrage.
Wow. So, one minute they were mass murderers for going outside. Now, they're Sam Adams.
They're patriots. They're American heroes.
If all of this seems like a pretty abrupt pivot, fret not. Rioting is not a health risk as
long as it helps the Democratic Party's prospects in the November election .
Rioting will not spread the coronavirus.
Sounds implausible, but we can be certain of that, because last week, hundreds of
self-described public health officials signed a letter saying so. They announced that the Black
Lives Matter riots are a vital contribution to public health. In effect, they're an essential
medical procedure.
But that doesn't mean you get to go outside. You don't. Thanks to coronavirus, you do not
have the right to resume your life, and if you complain about that, it's "white nationalism."
That was their professional conclusion.
Does a single American believe any of that? No, of course not. It is too stupid even for CNN
to repeat, so they mostly ignored it. That's an ominous sign if you think about it. It means
these people are done trying to convince you, even to fool you.
They're not making arguments, they're issuing decrees. They think they can. They no longer
believe they need your consent to make big decisions to run the country. Once the authority
stops trying to change your mind, even by deceit, it means they've decided to use force -- and
they have.
During the lockdowns, people whose loved ones died were not allowed to have funerals for
them. Think about that. It's hard to think of anything crueler, but it happened to a lot of
people. They claimed it was necessary. It was not necessary. And we know that because now that
a man has died
whose death is politically useful to the Democratic Party , the authorities have given him
three funerals and not a word about a health risk.
Or consider King County, Wash -- that's where Seattle is. Restaurants in King County are
operating at just 25 percent capacity. That's the law now. Nonessential businesses are allowed
just 15 percent capacity. The effect of that is economic disaster. Most small businesses run on
very small margins. They can't survive for long, and in fact, many have failed.
What should they do? They should join Antifa, obviously, because in King County, Wash.,
Antifa can do whatever Antifa wants to do. They have taken over an entire six-block section of
downtown Seattle, and that's fine with health authorities. There is no social distancing
required. They're essential.
Are you getting the picture? Is it adding up to a message? Yes, the message is we were
played. We were all played. Corrupt politicians scared us into giving up control over the most
basic questions in our lives. At the same time, they gave more power to their obedient
followers, like Antifa, while keeping the rest of us trapped at home and censored online.
In other words, they used a public health emergency to subvert democracy and install
themselves as monarchs. How were they able to do this? The sad truth is, they did it because we
let them do it. We believed them, therefore, we obeyed them.
If there's anything good to come out of this disaster, it's that none of us will ever make
that mistake again.
Adapted from Tucker Carlson's monologue from " Tucker Carlson Tonight " on June 10,
2020.
CLICK HERE TO READ
MORE FROM TUCKER CARLSON Tucker Carlson currently serves as the host of FOX News Channel's
(FNC) Tucker Carlson Tonight (weekdays 8PM/ET). He joined the network in 2009 as a
contributor.
Covid threat reactions which remain deeply embedded in many people's psyche was another
example of rampant hysteria trumping facts. (No pun intended, it is just a good serviceable
word)
Common denominator: one's personal confrontation with mortality and existential fears.
Existential fears can never be taken away by outside forces, words, promises or even external
changes. They are embedded deeply within us and each of us has to confront them solely on our
own.
At one time religious played a dominant role in responding and ameliorating existential
fears. No longer. And this is what is now getting acted out in the covid hysteria and the BLM
hysteria. There are too many lies and too many things avoided in this present blame scenario
to be healing or functional at this time.
But as long as the Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer types bow, kneel and "put on African
garb" in appeasement - the need to make peace with one's own existential fears and one's own
mortality is momentarily circumvented by their inauthentic side show. Black intellectuals
laugh at this white preening. Black radicals just up the price for submission.
We have let craziness lead to hot wars in the past, even within our own living memories.
Because of existential fears tagging along with external fears. "Stopping communism which
will destroy our way of life" - was that the only argument and was it ever valid?
Maybe Marianne Williamson was more prescient that given credit in the DNC debates. She
sensed a deep darkness in the US soul. Too bad she demanded it carry a partisan label. She
failed her own better instincts when she did that.
overnments have used psychological warfare throughout history to manipulate public opinion,
gain political advantage, and generate profits. Western governments have engaged in such
tactics in the war on terrorism as well as in its predecessor, the war on communism.
In both cases, state-sponsored
terrorism and propaganda were used to distort the public's perception of the threats,
leading to increased governmental control of society and huge financial benefits for
corporations.
It appears that the same kinds of effects are being seen as a result of the COVID-19
pandemic.
Many of the features and outcomes seen in the war on terrorism and the war on communism are
evident in this new "war on death."
Therefore, it's reasonable to wonder if the extreme response to COVID-19, and its associated
virus SARS-COV-2, could be another psychological operation against the public.
Considering facts
about the disease and the disproportionate response emphasizes the possibility.
If COVID-19 has been co-opted for manipulation of the public, through hyping the threat and
pushing exploitive solutions, who is behind it and who benefits?
Let's first review what features and outcomes the "coronavirus scare' shares in common with
the "red scare" that drove the perceived threat of communism and the "Muslim scare" behind the
perceived threat of terrorism. Here are a dozen characteristics that these perceived threats
share.
Fear-based and globally directed Media saturation with bias toward fear Data
manipulation and propaganda
Censorship of opposing views Intelligence agency
control of information Preceded by exercises mimicking the threat Series
of claims made that are later proven false
Response threatens democracy Large
increase in wealth and power for a few; increase in social inequality Increased government
control of the public and reduced individual freedoms Response kills far more than the
original threat Evidence for manufactured events (see below)
There are also differences between the COVID-19 pandemic response and the "wars" on
communism and terrorism. One difference is that, for the virus, agencies dedicated to public
health have taken the lead. Although the central characters that hyped the communism threat and
the terrorism threat were sometimes the same people , they tended to represent
military, diplomatic, or intelligence agencies.
The primary actors driving the coronavirus lockdowns and associated control mechanisms are
political leaders. However, the
directives being acted upon come from the World Health Organization (WHO), an agency of the
United Nations ostensibly responsible for international public health.
Others controlling the coronavirus scare are national health agencies, most notably the US
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the United Kingdom's National Health
Service (NHS).
Are these agencies acting solely in the interest of public health?
The WHO
The common impression is that the entire matter began in reaction to events in China but
even that is not clear. For example, the virus is said to have originated in the city of Wuhan
and the first, limited, lockdown occurred in that area from January to March.
China has since said that it warned the WHO about the virus during the first week of
January. However, it is known that U.S. intelligence
agencies were aware of the potential outbreak even before that, in November 2019. A Chinese
spokesman later suggested that the U.S. military might have
brought the virus to Wuhan during the military games held there in October.
The first instance of an entire country being locked down for the coronavirus was in Italy.
This occurred on March 9 th based on advice from the Italian government's
coronavirus adviser Walter
Ricciardi , who said, "The situation risks going out of control and these measures are
necessary to keep the spread at bay. "
Ricciardi, a WHO committee member, later admitted that
Italy had inflated the death counts from the virus, stating:
"The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the
people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the
coronavirus."
Many have noted the inordinate influence of billionaire Bill Gates on the activities and
direction of the WHO. As of 2017, this influence was seen as troubling, with health advocates
fearing that:
because the Gates Foundation's money comes from investments in big business, it could
serve as a Trojan horse for corporate interests to undermine WHO's role in setting standards
and shaping health policies."
Gates has been called a ruthless schemer by his Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen and Allen is
not alone in that assessment.
Despite engaging in a costly "public charm offensive," Gates is seen by many as a predatory and
monopolistic opportunist hiding behind a false front of philanthropy. With regard to the
coronavirus scare and Gates' stated goal of vaccinating the entire world population, however,
people should be most concerned that he has worked diligently on mechanisms of population control .
Of course, no one person controls the world yet so who is supposed to be running WHO, apart
from Bill Gates? The face of the WHO is Dr. Tedros Adhanom, the director-general of the
organization. Tedros has a poor history of ethics in leadership, with many accusations having
been made against him including that he covered-up epidemics in the past.
Alarms about Tedros began to go off immediately after his appointment in 2017, when he named
Robert Mugabe, the former dictator of Zimbabwe, as a goodwill ambassador to the WHO. Mugabe's
rule over Zimbabwe was dominated by "
murder, bloodshed, torture , persecution of political opponents, intimidation and
vote-rigging on a grand scale." This appointment indicated that Tedros' judgment of goodwill
was dubious at best.
A letter from a group of American doctors that same year described why Tedros has become
known as " Dr. Cover Up ."
They wrote:
"Your silence about what is clearly a massive cholera epidemic in Sudan daily becomes more
reprehensible. The inevitable history that will be written of this cholera epidemic will
surely cast you in an unforgiving light."
They added that Tedros was "fully complicit in the terrible suffering and dying that
continues to spread in East Africa."
Problems at WHO didn't start with Tedros, however.
After the H1N1 pandemic of 2009, evidence came to light that the WHO had exaggerated the
danger and had spread fear and confusion rather than helpful information. It was later learned
that "Italy, Germany, France and the U.K.
made secret agreements with pharmaceutical companies" that "obliged the countries to
buy vaccinations only if the WHO raised the pandemic to a level 6."
The WHO then proceeded to change its guidelines for defining a pandemic in order to
accommodate those contracts, thereby increasing the public's fear despite the fact that the
pandemic never became a serious threat.
Although WHO has been praised for its work to reduce some illnesses like polio, it has also
been found that drugs and vaccines recommended by WHO have been " found to be
harmful and without significant clinical effect."
A comprehensive view suggests that the WHO is more of a corporate interest agency than an
organization committed to preserving public health. That's not surprising due to the fact that
80% of WHO's funding comes from "voluntary contributions" provided by private donors including
pharmaceutical companies and industry groups like Bill Gates' Global Alliance for Vaccines and
Immunization (GAVI).
nd since the worldwide response to COVID-19 has been directed and coordinated by an
organization that works on behalf of multi-national corporations that stand to benefit, the
idea that the coronavirus scare could be a psychological operation seems plausible.
The
CDC
In the US, the CDC is also heavily influenced by corporate and political interests. This
became clear when, in 2016, a group of senior scientists within the CDC filed an ethics
complaint against the agency making that exact claim. They wrote:
The scientists noted that, in order to pursue political objectives, "definitions were
changed and data cooked" at CDC, even to the point of misrepresenting data to Congress.
Like the WHO, the CDC has a history of pushing harmful vaccines. An example was covered in a
60 Minutes episode
exposing the harm done by the Swine Flu vaccine in 1976 and CDC's urging that all Americans be
injected with that harmful vaccine. The report revealed that the illness was hyped based on
very questionable data and the vaccine caused neurological damage.
The current Director of CDC is retired US Army doctor Robert Redfield, who is known for
having led the Pentagon's disastrous response to HIV-AIDS in the 1980s.
A devout catholic, Redfield saw AIDS as the product of an immoral society. For many years,
he championed a much-hyped remedy that was discredited in tests. That debacle led to his
removal from the job in 1994."
Public health reporter Laurie Garrett remarked:
"Redfield is about the worst person you could think of to be heading the CDC at this time.
He lets his prejudices interfere with the science, which you cannot afford during a
pandemic."
The CDC is an agency within the department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Alex Azar, a
lawyer and former pharmaceutical company executive, was appointed as Secretary of HHS in 2017.
Azar has deep connections to the pharmaceutical industry and is known for having engaged in
price gouging with his former employer.
Azar is also known for leading the HHS response to the anthrax scare of 2001, the first
known bioterrorism attack on the United States. The anthrax attacks were targeted against
members of Congress and the media that were dissenting voices in the national discussion about
the Patriot Act, the oppressive legislation introduced immediately after the 9/11 attacks.
Although Muslims were first blamed through highly questionable evidence, it was ultimately
found that the weaponized anthrax came from
U.S. military laboratories .
Azar was instrumental in defining the National Biodefense Strategy in 2018, working
closely with John Bolton , Trump's National Security Advisor. Bolton, a neocon and member
of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), has a long history of pushing authoritarian
policies and war.
In the US the person most visibly in charge of the COVID-19 response is Anthony Fauci, who
is the long-time director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).
Like Redfield, Dr. Fauci is a Catholic and has said that values he learned in his Jesuit
education continue to guide him.
After weeks of Fauci having led the coronavirus response in the US, it was learned that his
NIAID had funded
"gain of function" research at the Wuhan laboratory where the SARS-COV-2 virus is suspected
of having originated.
Fauci's response to questions about that inexplicable coincidence was simply to denounce
"conspiracy theories" rather than addressing the questions directly, much as others did when
questioned about 9/11 foreknowledge.
Whether SARS-COV-2 was genetically engineered in a laboratory, like the NIAID-funded Wuhan
lab, is a subject that has become of
interest to many scientists.
The Wuhan laboratory is not the only place the US supports work like this, however, as the
Pentagon funds such labs in 25 countries across the world. Located in places such as Eastern
Europe, the Middle East, South East Asia, and Africa, these labs isolate and manipulate viruses
like the bat coronaviruses from which SARS-COV-2 originated.
This bat-research program is further coordinated by a group called EcoHealth Alliance.
The manipulation of viruses for gain of function at US funded labs is, like the origin of
the weaponized anthrax at US labs, evidence that bioterrorism and pandemics can be manufactured
events. This is another way in which the coronavirus scare could reflect the war on terrorism
and war on communism, both of which were driven by manufactured terrorist events .
It is remarkable that Fauci funded work to manipulate coronaviruses then became the voice of
the coronavirus pandemic response while also working closely with Bill Gates' GAVI initiative.
Fauci has boasted that NIAID and GAVI work together to push vaccines with "outright
collaboration between us in setting the standard
of what is needed."
This makes it easier to see that a new pattern of hyped pandemics resulting in increased
population control and global vaccinations is not only possible but would be a very lucrative
business model.
The NHS and Corporate Nations
By now it's well known that the initial projections for deaths due to COVID-19 were
massively overestimated and one academic paper was responsible for the panic. The lead author
of that paper, Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, has since resigned in disgrace from his
government advisory position. Much like the US government's explanation for destruction of the
World Trade Center buildings, his estimates were based on computer models that cannot be shared
with the public.
As in the US, UK intelligence agencies have taken a leading role in managing the coronavirus
scare. The terrorism expert who is expected to be the next chief of MI6 was selected to lead a
new " biosecurity centre " to
evaluate the coronavirus threat and "enable rapid intervention."
Additionally, the UK intelligence agency known as Government Communication Headquarters
(GCHQ) was granted powers over the
NHS's computer systems . GCHQ is known for engaging in illegal activities related to
population control mechanisms such as mass
surveillance .
Totalitarian outcomes are further enabled with billionaire Peter Thiel's CIA-initiated
company Palantir managing the databases used by
both the CDC and UK's NHS that drive COVID-19 decision making.
For perspective, in 2009, Thiel said, "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are
compatible," providing another clue that public health and awareness are not the main
priorities behind the coronavirus scare.
The data behind the COVID-19 pandemic was never reliable, with test kits being inaccurate , government
policies
inflating the death counts , and the media focusing solely on fear-based predictions that
are repeatedly proven false.
Recently, scientists and government leaders from other countries, including Russia,
Germany and Denmark , have begun speaking out about how the coronavirus threat has been
exaggerated.
The outcomes of the coronavirus scare have included huge windfalls for billionaires,
financial institutions , and corporations. Legislation being passed in response to COVID-19
is largely beneficial
to corporate interests. The outcomes for everyone else have been fear, unemployment,
poverty, loss of freedoms, grave risks to democracy, and death.
How this is possible is related to the fact that governments, and the nations they
represent, are no longer what they were. In many ways, corporations have replaced
governments as the drivers of public policy and, as with Peter Thiel's Palantir, the
public's interest is not their concern. Meanwhile, over two dozen companies have become
larger and more powerful than many national governments.
As a result, governments are now false fronts for corporations and the decisions they make,
for example to lockdown citizens and remake their economies, are driven by profit-based
strategies indifferent to public interests.
In summary, the features and outcomes of the coronavirus scare reflect those of previous
psychological operations including the war on terrorism and its predecessor, the war on
communism.
The people and agencies driving the coronavirus scare have a history of unethical behaviors,
including hyping pandemics to push vaccines, and appear to seek long-term profits through
implementation of a highly controlled society. Therefore, the response to COVID-19, if not the
virus itself, can be seen as a psychological operation used to drive those outcomes.
Don't laugh derisively, as people do these days, but I've always admired the New York Times
. First draft of history. Talent everywhere. Best production values. Even with its ideological
spin, it can be scrupulous about facts. You can usually extract the truth with a decoder ring.
Its outsized influence over the rest of the press makes it essential. I've relied on it for
years. Even given everything, and I mean everything.
Until now. It's just too much. Too much unreality, manipulation, propaganda, and flat out
untruths that are immediately recognizable to anyone. I can't believe they think they can get
away with this with credibility intact. I'm not speaking of the many great reporters,
technicians, editors, production specialists, and the tens of thousands who make it all
possible. I'm speaking of a very small coterie of people who stand guard over the paper's
editorial mission of the moment and enforce it on the whole company, with no dissent
allowed.
Let's get right to the offending passage. It's not from the news or opinion section but the
official editorial section and hence the official voice of the paper. The paragraph from June
2, 2020, reads
as follows.
Healing the wounds ripped open in recent days and months will not be easy. The pandemic
has made Americans fearful of their neighbors, cut them off from their communities of faith,
shut their outlets for exercise and recreation and culture and learning. Worst of all, it has
separated Americans from their own livelihoods.
Can you imagine? The pandemic is the cause!
I would otherwise feel silly to have to point this out but for the utter absurdity of the
claim. The pandemic didn't do this. It caused a temporary and mostly media-fueled panic that
distracted officials from doing what they should have done, which is protect the vulnerable and
otherwise let society function and medical workers deal with disease.
Instead, the CDC and governors around the country, at the urging of bad computer-science
models uninformed by any experience in viruses, shut down schools, churches, events,
restaurants, gyms, theaters, sports, and further instructed people to stay in their homes,
enforced sometimes even by SWAT teams. Jewish funerals were broken up by the police.
It was brutal and egregious and it threw 40 million people out of work and bankrupted
countless businesses. Nothing this terrible was attempted even during the Black Death.
Maximum
economic damage; minimum health advantages . It's not even possible to find evidence that
the lockdowns saved lives at all .
But to hear the New York Times tell the story, it was not the lockdown but the pandemic that
did this. That's a level of ideological subterfuge that is almost impossible for a sane person
to conjure up, simply because it is so obviously unbelievable.
It's lockdown denialism.
Why? From February 2020 and following, the New York Times had a story and they are
continuing to stick to it. The story is that we are all going to die from this pandemic unless
government shuts down society. It was a drum this paper beat every day.
Consider what the top virus reporter Donald J. McNeil (B.A. Rhetoric, University of
California, Berkeley) wrote on
February 28, 2020, weeks before there was any talk of shutdowns in the U.S.:
There are two ways to fight epidemics: the medieval and the modern.
The modern way is to surrender to the power of the pathogens: Acknowledge that they are
unstoppable and to try to soften the blow with 20th-century inventions, including new
vaccines, antibiotics, hospital ventilators and thermal cameras searching for people with
fevers.
The medieval way, inherited from the era of the Black Death, is brutal: Close the borders,
quarantine the ships, pen terrified citizens up inside their poisoned cities.
For the first time in more than a century, the world has chosen to confront a new and
terrifying virus with the iron fist instead of the latex glove.
And yes, he recommends the medieval way. The article continues on to praise China's response
and Cuba's to AIDS and says that this approach is natural to Trump and should be done in the
United States. ( AIER
called him out on this alarming column on March 4, 20202.)
McNeil then went on to greater fame with a series of shocking podcasts for the NYT that put
a voice and even more panic to the failed modeling of Neil Ferguson of the Imperial College
London.
This first
appeared the day before his op-ed calling for global lockdown. The transcript
includes this:
I spend a lot of time thinking about whether I'm being too alarmist or whether I'm being
not alarmist enough. And this is alarmist, but I think right now, it's justified. This one
reminds me of what I have read about the 1918 Spanish influenza.
Reminder: 675,000 Americans died in that pandemic. There were only 103 million people living
in the U.S. at the time.
He continues:
I'm trying to bring a sense that if things don't change, a lot of us might die. If you
have 300 relatively close friends and acquaintances, six of them would die in a 2.5 percent
mortality situation.
That's an astonishing claim that seems to forecast 8.25 million Americans will die. So far
as I know, that is the most extreme claim made by anyone, four times as high as the Imperial
College model.
What should we do to prevent this?
You can't leave. You can't see your families. All the flights are canceled. All the trains
are canceled. All the highways are closed. You're going to stay in there. And you're locked
in with a deadly disease. We can do it.
So because this coronavirus "reminds" him of one he read about, he can say on the air that
four million people could soon die, and therefore life itself should be cancelled. Because a
reporter is "reminded" of something.
This is the same newspaper that in 1957 urged people to stay calm during the Asian flu and
trust medical providers – running all of one editorial on the topic. What a change! This
was an amazing podcast -- amazingly irresponsible.
McNeil was not finished yet. He was
at it again on March 12, 2020, demanding that we not just close big events and schools but
shut down everything and everyone "for months." He went back on the podcast twice more, then
started riding the media circuit, including
NPR . It was also the same. China did it right. We need to lock down or people you know, if
you are one of the lucky survivors, will die.
To say that the New York Times was invested in the scenario of "lock down or we die" is an
understatement. It was as invested in this narrative as it was in the Russia-collaboration
story or the Ukrainian-phone call impeachment, tales to which they dedicated hundreds of
stories and many dozens of reporters. The virus was the third pitch to achieve their
objective.
Once in, there was no turning back, even after it became obvious that for the vast numbers
of people this was hardly a disease at all, and that most of the deaths came from one city and
mostly from nursing homes that were forced by law to take in COVID-19 patients.
That the newspaper, a once venerable institution, has something to answer for is apparent.
But instead of accepting moral culpability for having created a panic to fuel the overthrow of
the American way of life, they turn on a dime to celebrate people who are not socially
distancing in the streets to protest police brutality.
To me, the protests on the streets were a welcome relief from the vicious lockdowns. To the
New York Times , it seems like the lockdowns never happened. Down the Orwellian memory
hole.
In this paper's consistent editorializing, nothing is the fault of the lockdowns.
Everything instead is the fault of Trump, who "tends to see only political opportunity in
public fear and anger, as in his customary manner of contributing heat rather than light to the
confrontations between protesters and authority."
True about Trump but let us remember that the McNeil's first pro-lockdown article praised
Trump as perfectly suited to bring about the lockdown, and the paper urged him to do just that,
while only three months later washing their hands of the whole thing, as if had nothing to do
with current sufferings much less the rage on the streets.
And the rapid turnaround of this paper on street protests was stunning to behold. A month
ago, people protesting lockdowns were written about as vicious disease spreaders who were
denying good science. In the blink of an eye, the protesters against police brutality (the same
police who enforced the lockdown) were transmogrified into bold embracers of First Amendment
rights who posed no threat to public health.
Not even the scary warnings about the coming "second wave" were enough to stop the paper
from throwing out all its concern over "targeted layered containment" and "social distancing"
in order to celebrate protests in the streets that they like.
And they ask themselves why people are incredulous toward mainstream media today.
The lockdowns wrecked the fundamentals of life in America. The New York Times today wants to
pretend they either didn't happen, happened only in a limited way, or were just minor public
health measures that worked beautifully to mitigate disease. And instead of having an editorial
meltdown over these absurdities, preposterous forecasts, and extreme panic mongering that
contributed to vast carnage, we seen an internal
revolt over the publishing of a Tom Cotton editorial, a dispute over politics not
facts.
The record is there: this paper went all in back in February to demand the most
authoritarian possible response to a virus about which we already knew enough back then to
observe that this was nothing like the Spanish flu of 1918. They pretended otherwise, probably
for ideological reasons, most likely.
It was not the pandemic that blew up our lives, commercial networks, and health systems. It
was the response to the virus that did that. The Times needs to learn that it cannot construct
a fake version of reality just to avoid responsibility for what they've done. Are we really
supposed to believe what they write now and in the future? This time, I hope, people will be
smart and learn to consider the source.
In the period leading up to the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration and its
media accomplices waged a relentless propaganda campaign to win political support for what
turned out to be one of the most disastrous foreign policy mistakes in American history.
Nearly two decades later, with
perhaps a million dead Iraqis and thousands of dead American soldiers, we are still paying
for that mistake.
Vice President Dick Cheney, Attorney General John Ashcroft, Assistant Attorney General John
Yoo, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, were key players behind the propaganda -- which we
can define as purposeful use of information and misinformation to manipulate public opinion in
favor of state action. Iraq and its president Saddam Hussein were the ostensible focus, but
their greater goal was to make the case for a broader and open-ended "War on Terror."
So they created a narrative using a mélange of half-truths, faintly plausible
fabrications, and outright lies:
Iraq and the nefarious Saddam Hussein were "behind," i.e., backing, the Saudi terrorists
responsible for 9-11 attacks on the US;
Hussein and his government were stockpiling yellowcake uranium in an effort to develop
nuclear capability;
Hussein was connected with al-Qaeda
Iran was lurking in the background as a state sponsor of terrorism, coordinating and
facilitating attacks against the US in coordination with Hamas;
Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and other terror groups were working against the US across the
Middle East in some kind of murky but coordinated effort;
We have to "fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here";
The Iraqis would welcome our troops as liberators.
And so forth.
But the propaganda "worked" in the most meaningful sense: Congress voted nearly 3–1 in
favor of military action against Iraq, and Gallup showed 72 percent of Americans supporting the
invasion as it commenced in 2003. Media outlets across the spectrum such as the Washington Post
cheered the war . National Review dutifully did its part, labeling Pat
Buchanan, Ron Paul, Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, and other outspoken opponents of the
invasion as "unpatriotic conservatives."
Tragically, the American people never placed the burden of proof squarely with the war
cheerleaders to justify their absolutely crazed effort to remake the Middle East. In hindsight,
this is obvious, but at the time propaganda did its job. Disinformation is part and parcel of
the fog of war.
What will hindsight make clear about our reaction to COVID-19 propaganda? Will we regret
shutting down the economy as much as we ought to regret invading Iraq?
The cast of characters is different, of course: Trump, desperately seeking "wartime
president" status; Dr. Anthony Fauci; epidemiologist Neil Ferguson; state governors such as
Cuomo, Whitmer, and Newsom; and a host of media acolytes just itching to force a new normal
down our throats. Like the Iraq War architects, they use COVID-19 as justification to advance a
preexisting agenda, namely, greater state control over our lives and our economy. Yet because
too many Americans remain stubbornly attached to the old normal, a propaganda campaign is
required.
So we are faced with a blizzard of new "facts" almost every day, most of which turn out to
be only mildly true, extremely dubious, or plainly false:
The virus aerosolizes and floats around, so we all need to be six feet apart (But why not
twenty feet? Why not one mile?);
The virus lives on surfaces everywhere, for days;
Asymptomatic people can spread it unknowingly;
Antibodies may or may not develop naturally;
People may become infected more than once;
Young healthy people are at great risk not only themselves, but also pose a risk to their
elderly family members;
Thin, permeable paper masks somehow prevent microscopic viral spores from being inhaled
or exhaled toward others;
People are safer inside;
The rate of new infected "cases" in the first few weeks of the virus reaching America
would continue or even grow exponentially;
Social distancing and quarantines do indeed "save" lives;
Testing is key (But what if an individual visits a crowded grocery an hour after testing
negative?);
A second wave of infections is nigh; and
Our personal and work lives cannot continue without a vaccine, which, by the way, may be
two years away.
Again, much of this is not true and not even intended to be true -- but rather to influence
public behavior and opinions. And again, the overwhelming burden of proof should lie squarely
with those advocating a lockdown of society, who would risk a modern Great Depression in
response to a simple virus.
How much damage will the lockdown cause? Economics aside, the sheer toll of this
self-inflicted wound will be a matter for historians to document. That toll includes all the
things Americans would have done without the shutdown in their personal and professional lives,
representing a diminution of life itself. Can that be measured, or distilled into numerical
terms? Probably not, but this group of researchers and academics
argues that we have already suffered more than one million "lost years of life" due to the
ravages of unemployment, missed healthcare, and general malaise.
By the same token, how do we measure the blood and treasure lost in Iraq? How much PTSD will
soldiers suffer? How many billions of dollars in future VA medical care will be required? How
many children will grow up without fathers? And how many millions of lives are forever
shattered in that cobbled-together political artifice in the Middle East?
Propaganda kills, but it also works. Politicians of all stripes will benefit from the
coronavirus; the American people will suffer. Perversely, one of the worst COVID propagandists
-- the aforementioned Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York -- yesterday rang the bell as the New
York Stock Exchange reopened to floor trading. He now admits that the models were wrong and
that his lockdown did nothing to prevent the Empire State from suffering the highest
per capita deaths from COVID. Like the architects of the Iraq War, he belongs on a criminal
docket. But thanks to propaganda, he is hailed as presidential.
Governments throughout the world and across the US justified extreme, draconian,
undemocratic, and unconstitutional (in most US states) "lockdown" and stay-at-home orders on
the grounds that the COVID-19 virus was exceptionally fatal.
In March, the World Health Organization (WHO) was claiming that the fatality rate was a
very
high 3.4 percent .
Yet as time went on, it became increasingly clear that such high estimates were essentially
meaningless because researchers had no idea how many people were actually infected with the
disease. Tests were largely being conducted on those with symptoms serious enough to end up in
emergency rooms or doctor's offices.
By late April, many researchers were publishing new studies showing that the number of
people with the disease was actually much higher than was previously thought. Thus, it became
clear that the percentage of people with the disease who died from it suddenly became much
smaller.
Now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released new estimates
suggesting that the real fatality rate is around 0.26 percent.
Specifically, the report concludes that the "symptomatic case fatality ratio" is 0.4
percent. But that's just symptomatic cases. In the same report, the CDC also claims that 35
percent of all cases are asymptomatic.
Or, as the Washington Post reported this week:
The agency offered a "current best estimate" of 0.4 percent. The agency also gave a best
estimate that 35 percent of people infected never develop symptoms. Those numbers when put
together would produce an infection fatality rate of 0.26, which is lower than many of the
estimates produced by scientists and modelers to date."
Of course, not all scientists have been wrong on this. Back in March, Stanford scientist
John Ioannidis was much, much closer to the CDC's estimate than the WHO. The Wall Street
Journal noted in
April :
In a March article for Stat News, Dr. Ioannidis argued that Covid-19 is far less deadly
than modelers were assuming. He considered the experience of the Diamond Princess cruise
ship, which was quarantined Feb. 4 in Japan. Nine of 700 infected passengers and crew died.
Based on the demographics of the ship's population, Dr. Ioannidis estimated that the U.S.
fatality rate could be as low as 0.025% to 0.625% and put the upper bound at 0.05% to 1% --
comparable to that of seasonal flu.
Not that this will settle the matter.
Proponents of destroying human rights and the rule of law in order to carry out lockdowns
will continue to insist that "we didn't know" what the fatality rate was back in March. The
lack of evidence, however, didn't stop proponents of lockdowns from implementing policies that
destroyed the ability of families to earn a living, and which also created social conditions
that caused child
abuse and
suicides to spike.
But for more sane people, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Those who
have claimed that lockdowns are "the only option" had virtually no evidence at all to support
their position. Indeed, such extreme over-the-top measures such as the general lockdowns
required an extreme level of high-quality, nearly irrefutable evidence that lockdowns would
work and were necessary in the face of a disease with an extremely high fatality rate. But the
only "data" the prolockdown people could offer was speculation and hyperbolic predictions of
bodies piling up in the streets.
But that became politically unimportant.
The people who wanted lockdowns had gained the obeisance of powerful people in government
institutions and in the media . So actual data, science, or respect for human rights suddenly
became meaningless. All that mattered was getting those lockdowns. So the lockdown crowd
destroyed the lives of millions in the developed world -- and
more than a hundred million in the developing world -- to satisfy the hunches of a tiny
handful of politicians and technocrats.
How does that affect this specifically? What we see is that the US has a slower
decline in cases than these other nations.
My point is the form of the curve in the USA was partially distorted by the NY
metropolitan areas with its huge and very specific problems and demographics. This area
accounts for around 40% of cases.
Death per million normalize the number of death for the population of the whole county
and that's it.
But my pint is that the USA is not homogeneous country and will never be.
In this sense any "nationwide" statistics for the virus without exclusion of the NY
metropolitan area for the USA is big fat lie. At least it is clear that it distorts the
picture for the rest of the country.
We have core inflation which exclude food and energy, why we can't have death without NY
metropolitan area?
Another important point that the number of death as a statistics is another one big and
fat lie. Or at least is very suspect. I would like to stress that only the difference
between number of death for the particular period and average for several previous years
has scientific value. Not the absolute number.
And what is interesting that for March 2020 COVID-19 epidemic was a lives saver. Such an
interesting paradox.
There are essentially two outcomes of COVID-19 -- one in this pneumonia does not
develop, and the second in which virus pneumonia develops.
The only way to die from the virus is to die from virus pneumonia or complications
(including organs failures due to the lack of oxygen).
Everything else (including gunshot wounds belongs to "with COVID-19" category
and in the USA constitutes probably 80% of reported COVID-19 deaths. In other words, most
of deaths reported are very sick people with significant percentage already of the death
bed.
For people at the end of their life scan coronavirus is often the last straw that break
the camel back, so to speak. Cutting this lifespan for several months or a couple of years
at best.
And there is nothing special for this role of coronavirus. Flu acts exactly the same
way: pneumonia as a flu complication is one of the most common ways for the old sick people
to meet the creator.
Unfortunately we know very little about conditions in which pneumonia develops (there
are probably some generic markers in play as well as sex and a couple of other metrics )
other that the main victims are obese (often morbidly obese), diabetics (which in the USA
is almost synonym with obesity) and hypertonics (those are intersecting categories).
Chances for everybody else to get this (very dangerous indeed) virus pneumonia are
approx. 100-1000 times less.
Britain has had the second highest number of deaths from Covid-19 so far, 36.875 according
to the current count.
Relative to population, it is currently only the fifth:
# Country Deaths /
million
people
1 San Marino 1,251
2 Belgium 808
3 Andorra 658
4 Spain 570
5 United Kingdom 557
6 Italy 546
7 France 424
8 Sweden 390
9 Netherlands 335
10 Ireland 326
11 United States 298
...
Russia 25
...
China 3
For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate
for COVID-19, and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%.
Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35%
rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality
rate (IFR) to just 0.26% - almost exactly where
Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.
We destroyed our entire country and
suspended democracy all for a lie, and these people perpetrated the unscientific degree of
panic. Will they ever admit the grave consequences of their error?
sybaris , 3 minutes ago remove link
I believe the CDC has lied from the start, and will continue to lie for one goal in mind,
making certain enough people fall ill to make any vaccine regiment they cook up mandatory
(because of the sudden realization of bad numbers) do not trust a word these people say, they
are proven liars. Sars 1 circa 2003 had a cfr of 15%, sars-cov-2 is a variant of the first
one, in a year the true cfr will actually be known, sure as hell won't be known now with this
limited data set, and that is why this seemingly good news is extremely deceptive......
FinkPloyd, 52 minutes ago
Caveats:
§ Estimates only include onset dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to
ensure cases have had sufficient time to observe the outcome (hospital admission or
death).
¶ Estimates only include hospital admission dates between March 1, 2020 – March
31, 2020 to ensure cases have had sufficient time to observe the outcome (hospital discharge
or death).
** Estimates only include death dates between March 1, 2020 – March 31, 2020 to
ensure sufficient time for reporting.
This Scenario represents a current best estimate about viral transmission and disease
severity in the United States, with the same caveat: that the parameter values will change as
more data become available.
Are not predictions of the expected effects of COVID-19.
Flynt2142ahh, 1 hour ago (Edited)
Weak dumb decaden society ... where to start - Intellectually lazy media and public plus
weak analysis skills across board coupled with a culture that likes a quick fix and fast
takes - you get snow-pocalypses that turn into light dustings with school closures that you
and I know are total BS... and now you get fake pandemics. In a society that needs to ask if
you are glutten free or are you non binary... or for some strange reason these upright
walking sapiens need to "save" a billion year old planet from what I am not entirely sure of
- cuz the math of those models is crap too -whoops said the quiet part out loud.. (last i
checked it was not climate that blew up the world trade back on 9/11 ) ... losing faith in
humanity here... and those in the media carrying water for the chicoms & W.H.O need to
relocate to the China and enjoy their version of freedom and liberty..
TruthDetector, 1 hour ago (Edited)
“ We destroyed our entire country and suspended democracy all for a lie, and these
people perpetrated the unscientific degree of panic ( for this plannedemic ).
Will they ever admit the grave consequences of their error?”
I’ve got a dollar that says the only substantive thing we’ll ever hear from
the Fake Stream Media (FSM) is...
...🦗🎶🦗Crickets🦗🎶🦗...
Any one willing to wager $1 against my prediction?
Patmos, 1 hour ago remove link
So basically it should have been what’s been known since very early on:
Isolate the elderly and the infirm, maybe recommend masks as part of that protection plan
especially if you’re going to be around that vulnerable subset, so that if you got it
you don’t give it to them.
Instead we got:
Be very afraid, because the Bill Gates funded WHO said so, and oh yeah also take this
vaccine which helps pad Bill Gates’ coffers.
I'm not sure it is the 14th amendment that is the proximate cause. I would argue that the
17th amendment did more for centralization which IMO inevitably has led to the symbiotic
relationship between big business and big government. A veritable oligarchy.
I'm also not certain that it has to do with ideology either as there's not been any
opposition to this centralization by either the left or right. While I get that "socialism"
is the boogeyman for the right, the reality is that the biggest socialists are the ostensibly
"capitalist" Wall St financiers who have socialized their speculative losses at every turn.
Why are the "right" so silent to this when the scale is so gargantuan?
IMO, the problem is much more deep rooted. It is societal. The attitudes and proclivities
of our society began a dramatic and steady shift over the last 50 years and it has only
accelerated. Values have changed and we see it across the board from our politics to our
economy.
Over the last 50 years, for example, the majority of food production, processing and
distribution became consolidated into a handful of large corporations. All aspects of it from
agricultural inputs to processing and distribution. This consolidation along with close
financial relationships between these corporations and the political system has enabled
massive corporate welfare and cartelization. Trump for example, has pushed massive taxpayer
payments to the large multinational agribusinesses to the tune of hundreds of billions. So
this is not an ideological divide. Both the left and right have enabled this under the rubric
of supporting the "small family farm".
Market consolidation has taken place in practically every segment with one of the most
insidious being the consolidation in media. Couple that with Citizens United and the
financialization of economy where financial speculation is where the biggest "wealth"
creation takes place and we can see the erosion in our societal value system. From business
to politics it's all about immediate personal gain.
Where in history can we find a dominant power that voluntarily dismantled it's
productive capacity to ship it to an enemy state? All so that the financial and political
elite could personally gain in the short term. This can all be traced back to the trend of
centralization, IMO.
The wars we have fought in the past decades as well as our large garrisons around the
world at tremendous cost both financially and in lives have brought what national benefit?
We've been in Afghanistan for 19 years to what end? Military spending continues to rise not
because there's a strategy but because of the huge benefits to the vested class. The massive
expenditures on various boondoggles engendered by the financial gains for the few in the
revolving door.
As blue peacock noted in another thread and I agree wholeheartedly is that our society is
now easily propagandized with fear. Both 9/11 and the Wuhan virus exemplifies how easily
Americans will voluntarily support increased authoritarianism. Take for example the Patriot
Act, where with the exception of one senator, everyone voted for it without any qualms on its
implications for constitutionally protected civil liberties. And that senator, Russ Feingold
was a Democrat. The authoritarians are counting on this partisan and faux ideological divide
among the citizenry.
Where does this lead? IMO, more authoritarianism. The constitution cannot be a bulwark
when citizens no longer have the will to sacrifice and defend its precepts.
Someone described the current situation as the Inner (Democrat) and Outer (Republican)
Parties coming to parity, with identity politics (IDPOL) being pushed so hard because its not
really giving up any of the real power...
"... "According to CDC, the disease of obesity affects about 78 million Americans 1 and the ASMBS estimates about 24 million have severe or morbid obesity." ..."
And the government botching of this crisis continues...
'How Could the CDC Make That Mistake?' The government's disease-fighting agency is
conflating viral and antibody tests, compromising a few crucial metrics that governors depend
on to reopen their economies. Pennsylvania, Georgia, Texas, and other states are doing the
same. https://tinyurl.com/y92ea59f
Nearly half of US states haven't contained their coronavirus outbreaks, a new study
finds https://tinyurl.com/yc72pd8t
And no, Sweden is not doing better...
Just 7.3% of Stockholm had Covid-19 antibodies by end of April, study shows
Official findings add to concerns about Sweden's laissez-faire strategy towards the
pandemic https://tinyurl.com/yahnmb3a
Finally, a large scale study on HCQ - 86,000 patients, with 15,000 receiving HCQ...
Blacks are *twice* as likely to get it as whites and Latinos. American Indians are *five
times* more likely to get it. They conclude the best indicator is poverty.
From The Lancet, a study of New York patients... Epidemiology, clinical course, and
outcomes of critically ill adults with COVID-19 in New York City: a prospective cohort study
https://tinyurl.com/yblmszsx
Between March 2 and April 1, 2020, 1150 adults were admitted to both hospitals with
laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, of which 257 (22%) were critically ill.
The median age of patients was 62 years (IQR 51–72), 171 (67%) were men. 212 (82%)
patients had at least one chronic illness, the most common of which were hypertension (162
[63%]) and diabetes (92 [36%]).
119 (46%) patients had obesity.
As of April 28, 2020, 101 (39%) patients had died and 94 (37%) remained
hospitalised.
203 (79%) patients received invasive mechanical ventilation for a median of 18 days (IQR
9–28), 170 (66%) of 257 patients received vasopressors and 79 (31%) received renal
replacement therapy.
The median time to in-hospital deterioration was 3 days (IQR 1–6).
In the multivariable Cox model, older age (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1·31
[1·09–1·57] per 10-year increase), chronic cardiac disease (aHR
1·76 [1·08–2·86]), chronic pulmonary disease (aHR 2·94
[1·48–5·84]), higher concentrations of interleukin-6 (aHR 1·11
[95%CI 1·02–1·20] per decile increase), and higher concentrations of
D-dimer (aHR 1·10 [1·01–1·19] per decile increase) were
independently associated with in-hospital mortality.
Note: 36% had diabetes; 46% were fat. Like I've said before, "diabetes" is a code word for
"fat." And how many people in the US are fat and thus at risk? "According to CDC, the
disease of obesity affects about 78 million Americans 1 and the ASMBS estimates about 24
million have severe or morbid obesity."
So much for "let's just isolate the elderly"...so we can attend our baseball games this
summer and stuff ourselves with crap food...
During March 11–May 2, 2020, a total of 32,107 deaths were reported to DOHMH; of these
deaths, 24,172 (95% confidence interval = 22,980–25,364) were found to be in excess of
the seasonal expected baseline. Included in the 24,172 deaths were 13,831 (57%)
laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated deaths and 5,048 (21%) probable
COVID-19–associated deaths, leaving 5,293 (22%) excess deaths that were not identified as
either laboratory-confirmed or probable COVID-19–associated deaths ( Figure ).
Connecticut and North Carolina are missing some weeks in 2020 (5 weeks & 3 weeks
respectively). Pennsylvania is also negative but not missing any weeks. Interesting, I'll
have to look into that.
The entire USA is about 4.5% higher than the 4 year average.
In some online discussions some were suggesting using "excess deaths" to see what
effect the covid-19 disease is having and I thought that would be a reasonable approach as it
gets past the deaths "with/from" issue.
California 88731 91453 2722
Florida 65372 68427 3055
Georgia 26955 27649 694
Illinois 35539 38088 2549
Massachusetts 19074 21800 2726
Michigan 31957 35598 3640
New Jersey 24525 32600 8075
New York State 33187 39267 6079
New York City 17614 35524 17910
Pennsylvania 44275 37383 -6892
The script generates data for all 50 states plus DC and New York City (CDC treats it
separately from New York State).
I follow the advice of Ken Thompson, "When in doubt use brute force". The script is
nothing fancy and dumps to file a lot as that is how I like to debug.
I will be doing up a Powershell script for this as well so the Windows folks can run it
natively if they don't have WSL2 or a Linux system around.
From the most recent CDC COVID-19 mortality data report, Feb 1 to May 16:
> US deaths 62,515 [which are inflated, and yet comparable to annual flu deaths]
> US deaths from all causes – 97% of expected deaths. [i.e. no 'excess' deaths] . .
here
> The media currently reports 90,694 deaths which they get from Johns Hopkins. That's an
organization which ought to be examined. CDC data is not used by the media, but CDC doesn't
have a great record either:
> CDC estimates that, from October 1, 2019, through March 28, 2020, there have been 24,000
– 63,000 flu deaths . . here
> For 2017-2018, the CDC first estimated 80,000 flu deaths, then later reduced the
estimate (their word) to 61,000.
> In the news now: San Diego County California public health first reported 194 Covid
deaths out of a population of 3.3 million. After autopsies and testing of tissue, health
department reported only 6 of the 194 actually died of Covid.
> Meanwhile the lives of millions of people of all ages have been adversely affected.
> But hey, the banks have more money.
"... On April 21st the Washington Post savaged Georgia governor Brian Kemp's decision to begin opening his state after locking down for weeks. "Georgia leads the race to become America's No. 1 Death Destination," sneered the headline. ..."
"... Milbank, who is obviously still getting paid while millions are out of work, sees his job as pushing the mainstream narrative that we must remain in fear and never question what "experts" like Dr. Fauci tell us. ..."
"... in places that are opening, we're not seeing this spike in cases. ..."
"... Shutting down the entire United States over a virus that looks to be less deadly than an average flu virus – particularly among those under 80 who are not already sick – has resulted in mass unemployment and economic destruction. More Americans may die from the wrong-headed efforts to fight the virus than from the virus itself. ..."
"... Americans should pause and reflect on the lies they are being sold. Masks are just a form of psychological manipulation. Many reputable physicians and scientists have said they are worthless and potentially harmful. Lockdowns are meant to condition people to obey without question. ..."
On April 21st the Washington Post savaged Georgia governor Brian Kemp's decision to begin
opening his state after locking down for weeks. "Georgia leads the race to become America's No.
1 Death Destination," sneered the headline.
The author, liberal pundit Dana Milbank, actually found the possibility of Georgians dying
to be hilarious, suggesting that, "as a promotion, Georgia could offer ventilators to the first
100 hotel guests to register."
Milbank, who is obviously still getting paid while millions are out of work, sees his job as
pushing the mainstream narrative that we must remain in fear and never question what "experts"
like Dr. Fauci tell us.
Well it's been three weeks since Milbank's attack on Georgia and its governor, predicting
widespread death which he found humorous. His predictions are about as worthless as his
character. Not only has Georgia not seen "coronavirus burn through Georgia like nothing has
since William Tecumseh Sherman," as Milbank laughed, but Covid cases, hospitalizations, and
deaths have seen a steep decline since the governor began opening the state.
Maybe getting
out in the fresh air and sunshine should not have been prohibited in the first place!
In fact, as we now have much more data, it is becoming increasingly clear that the US states
and the countries that locked down the tightest also suffered the highest death rates. Ultra
locked-down Italy suffered 495 Covid deaths per million while relatively non-locked down South
Korea suffered only five deaths per million. The same is true in the US, where non lockdown
states like South Dakota were relatively untouched by the virus while authoritarian-led
Michigan, New York, and California have been hardest hit.
In those hardest hit states, we are now seeing that most of the deaths occurred in senior
care facilities – after the governors ordered patients sick with Covid to leave the
hospitals and return to their facilities. There, they infected their fellow residents who were
most likely to have the multiple co-morbidities and advanced age that turned the virus into a
death sentence. Will these governors be made to answer for this callous disregard for life?
Yesterday, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar admitted the obvious:
" We are seeing that in places that are opening, we're not seeing this spike in
cases."
So why not open everything? Because these petty tyrants cannot stand the idea of losing the
ability to push people around.
Shutting down the entire United States over a virus that looks to be less deadly than an
average flu virus – particularly among those under 80 who are not already sick –
has resulted in mass unemployment and economic destruction. More Americans may die from the
wrong-headed efforts to fight the virus than from the virus itself.
Americans should pause and reflect on the lies they are being sold. Masks are just a form of
psychological manipulation. Many reputable physicians and scientists have said they are
worthless and potentially harmful. Lockdowns are meant to condition people to obey without
question.
A nation of people who just do what they are told by the "experts" without question is a
nation ripe for a descent into total tyranny.
This is no empty warning – it's backed up by history. Time to stand up to all the
petty tyrants from our hometowns to Washington DC. It is time to reclaim our freedom.
"... > How about we follow WHO's rule zero: test, test and test? ..."
"... Why the USA did not implemented entry/exist temperature checks (even at airports) I do not understand. The richest nation in the world has the government which is probably the most inept and disfunctional ..."
"... It looks like this is mainly the disease of megacities and industries with closely packed people (ships, meatpacking plants, Amazon warepuses) . And a large part of large cities infrastructure such as subways and air-conditioned building, hotels and shops are ideal environment for spreading of the virus. ..."
"... Another interesting feature of this virus is that it simply revealed how unhealthy the USA population generally is. For example, the epidemic of obesity now is tightly intermixed with the epidemic of COVID-19. Within the limits of the neoliberal social system very little can be done about it: for profit medicine makes is more fragile and create multiple avenue of abusing people. ..."
Do you understand that the current polymerase tests have 20-30% of false positives?
So if everybody in the USA is tested around 60-80 million people in the USA would be
deemed infected. I suspect that a very large percentage of "asymptomatics" are in reality
false positives.
We need to distinguish between the necessary measures and fearmongering. I suspect that in
the case of polymerase test the mantra "test, test, test" is close to the latter. This is s
rather expensive test and money probably can be better spend distributing masks to the
population. That would instantly give a larger effect. The simple measure that in the USA was
not done. Just for that Fauci should be fired and probably tried, IMHO.
The same is probably true with the distribution of oxymeters too: people with lows reading
need oxygen. As simple as that. That probably will cut hospitalizations in half.
My impression is that temperature and oxymeter testing might be a proxy for polymerase
testing and much cheaper: if oxygen saturation is less then 90% the person need to be
isolated/treated with oxygen
Why the USA did not implemented entry/exist temperature checks (even at airports) I do
not understand. The richest nation in the world has the government which is probably the most
inept and disfunctional
It looks like this is mainly the disease of megacities and industries with closely
packed people (ships, meatpacking plants, Amazon warepuses) . And a large part of large
cities infrastructure such as subways and air-conditioned building, hotels and shops are
ideal environment for spreading of the virus.
Even reasonable prophylactic measures do not work that well in large cities. Slums and
homeless are and will be hotspots.
Even at work enforcing prophylactic measures is non trivial. You need to change mask each
2 hours when you are working inside. How many people will do that ?
I think there is not way out other then clench your teeth and go forward adapting the
behavior as new information about the virus emerge.
For example individual supply of air in planes, trains and buses (which existed in old
planes and some buses ) might be an important psychological (and with better filters medical)
measure required.
Also Cruise ships "experiments" suggest that only around 20% of population is susceptible
to the virus. Even among Wuhan medics who started working with coronavirus patients without
wearing protective equipment only around half got the disease. The simplistic assumption that
100% of people is susceptible is just a myth propagated by fearmongers for fun and
profit.
Another interesting feature of this virus is that it simply revealed how unhealthy the USA
population generally is. For example, the epidemic of obesity now is tightly intermixed with
the epidemic of COVID-19. Within the limits of the neoliberal social system very little can
be done about it: for profit medicine makes is more fragile and create multiple avenue of
abusing people.
she is
truly sorry for the error, and the ensuing public furor she accidentally unleashed.
... ... ...
As KABC's John Phillips shared on his radio show Wednesday, the good doctor's
educational resume, according to a bio published at USC, where she was recently a panelist at a
"Safe Schools" symposium, reveals she received her Ph.D. in Social Welfare from Brandeis
University, a Master of Arts in Public Health from Boston University, a Master of Arts in
Education from the University of Massachusetts, and a Bachelor of Arts in Community Studies
from UC Santa Cruz.
None of these disciplines are rooted in the sciences - rather, it appears the good doctor's
"public health" background doesn't include any specialization in actual medical care, or
epidemiology. This woman probably knows about as much as the discipline as the average
Californian who has spent the last couple of months on Wikipedia.
However, as the LA Times reports, Ferrer has somehow found her way into a role where she is
the top public health officer in a county of 10 million people. Keep in mind, she has no actual
medical background, but despite this, she's found herself in the middle of "every tough
conversation about which businesses and institutions have to shut down, whether public and
private hospitals are equipped and prepared to handle a possible surge" and what precautions
individuals can take to protect their health.
Her role for the county is essentially equivalent to that of Dr. Fauci at the White house.
Except Dr. Ferrer isn't a doctor, she's a professional social justice warrior. However, as the
LA Times reports, Ferrer has somehow found her way into a role where she is the top public
health officer in a county of 10 million people. Keep in mind, she has no actual medical
background, but despite this, she's found herself in the middle of "every tough conversation
about which businesses and institutions have to shut down, whether public and private hospitals
are equipped and prepared to handle a possible surge" and what precautions individuals can take
to protect their health.
Her role for the county is essentially equivalent to that of Dr. Fauci at the White house.
Except Dr. Ferrer isn't a doctor, she's a professional social justice warrior.
As Red State points out, when Dr. Ferrer was put in charge of solving the homelessness
epidemic in LA County, her game plan 100% focused on "community outreach". "We need to start
this work by speaking directly with those experiencing homelessness to better understand how to
align our support," she said.
That's right: Dr. Ferrer's one-size-fits-all plan for solving homelessness started with
talking to a demographic group where those with severe mental health disorders and
substance-abuse problems represent an overwhelming share of the population. Dr. Ferrer's
approach to help improve the lives of the homeless was to talk to a bunch of schizophrenics and
drug addicts about government policy,
as Red State pointed out.
Does this woman sound qualified to be one of a handful of people in the room making
decisions that will impact the livelihoods and health of millions of people? If we lived in LA
County, we certainly wouldn't be comfortable with that.
Yes, Ken Garoo @26, the fearmongers have blood on their hands, not just in the UK, and this
is a massive life-and-death crisis. More evidence, from another unimpeachable source various
MoA stalwarts will now have to claim is a hack:
"...According to a stark report published in Lancet Global Health journal on Wednesday,
almost 1.2 million children could die in the next six months due to the disruption to health
services and food supplies caused by the coronavirus pandemic.
"The modelling, by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and
Unicef, found that child mortality rates could rise by as much as 45 per cent due to
coronavirus-related disruptions, while maternal deaths could increase by almost 39 per
cent.
"Dr [Stefan Peterson, chief of health at UNICEF] said these figures were in part a
reflection of stringent restrictions in much of the world that prevent people leaving their
homes without documentation, preventing them from accessing essential health care services.
...
"...Covid is not a children's disease. Yes there are rare instances and we see them
publicised across the media. But pneumonia, diarrhoea, measles, death in childbirth, these
are the reasons we will see deaths rise."
From the beginning of this crisis we have been pointing out that there are two mutually
contradictory messages at the heart of the covid19 rollout , and, just as Orwell describes in
1984, a major point of the exercise seems to be to get people to believe both at the same time
.
1. 'BE AFRAID '
The first message is that covid19 is terrifying, unique, an existential threat to the human
race.
This message is never sourced to much fact, because the facts about the virus don't really
support it. If it cites anything solid it's the appallingly sloppy and discredited Imperial
computer model, or some generic research into the pathology of severe infections or rare viral
syndromes, which it tries to spin as being unique to covid19, even though it is not. But mostly
it doesn't cite anything at all. Or really claim anything at all.
It just tells people to be afraid. Very afraid. Of death, of uncertainty, of the 'virus', of
other people, of 'fake news'.
The fear being encouraged is not rooted in facts, and is therefore impervious to
them.
2. 'THERE IS NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF '
The second message is that covid19 is actually pretty harmless and no big deal.
This message is rooted in a great deal of fact, because, as we have been pointing out since
day one, pretty much all the data coming out about this virus supports exactly this
conclusion.
No official body has ever denied this, and most of them readily admit it. Regularly and
unambiguously.
Here and here
and here and here .
Chris Whitty above is only one of many and this is not even his first go (see here ) at
explaining clearly that covid19 is only dangerous to a very very small minority of people, and
that most who get it will be just fine.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/adj8MCsZKlg
Here's a slide from his talk on April 30th:
Now, let's look at what he is saying in the above video, on May 11th [our emphasis]:
[T]he great majority of people will not die from this and I'll just repeat something I
said right at the beginning because I think it's worth reinforcing :
Most people, a significant proportion of people, will not get this virus at all, at any
point of the epidemic which is going to go on for a long period of time.
Of those who do, some of them will get the virus without even knowing it, they will have
the virus with no symptoms at all, asymptomatic carriage, and we know that happens.
Of those who get symptoms, the great majority, probably 80%, will have a mild or moderate
disease. Might be bad enough for them to have to go to bed for a few days, not bad enough for
them to have to go to the doctor.
An unfortunate minority will have to go as far as hospital, but the majority of those will
just need oxygen and will then leave hospital.
And then a minority of those will end up having to go to severe end critical care and some
of those sadly will die.
But that's a minority, it's 1% or possibly even less than 1% overall.
And even in the highest risk group this is significantly less than 20%, ie. the great
majority of people, even the very highest groups, if they catch this virus, will not die.
And I really wanted to make that point really clearly
It seems all the officials want 'to make that point really clearly', even while they behave
as if it was not true.
Why?
There's plenty of room for speculation there, and we leave it to readers to get into that
BTL.
The motives, though, are less important than the basic and undeniable fact – the fear
currently gripping the public mind is being simultaneously encouraged and acknowledged as
unnecessary by the bodies overseeing the 'response'.
And if enough people would wake up to the pea-and-thimble trick being pulled on them, then
the most dangerous and far-reaching coup against human liberty we have ever seen would
essentially be stopped in its tracks.
The distinction between 'with' and 'of' is self-evident bullshit, if you just think about
HIV and how it acts and what it does.
You just need to think it through: how could you possibly tell the difference?
Lots of semi-educated, semi-smart people are drawing this tenuous distinction vis a vis
Covid-19 that they would not dare to do with any other disease ('Oh no the real cause of his
illness was Kaposi sarcoma. It just happened to be an unfortunate coincidence that the
patient was HIV positive as well'.)
In any case, there was an actuary in a twitter thread I have now lost the addy for, who
pointed out that actuaries make decisions about this 'distinction' all the time, it is
literally their job. And the reality is that even for very old Covid-19 sufferers who die,
they are still losing a non-trivial number of years in terms of their lifespan, maybe up to 8
or 9 years.
Just look at excess death rates – they are at least as bad as the covid numbers, there
is no overcounting whatsoever going on in the UK. What is going on is very slow reporting of
non hospital covid death.
Just for the record, has the Department of Public Health ever taken the lead or even
participated significantly in the establishment of a despotic regime? First they told us to
eat more broccoli; and next thing you know, they're telling us we're going to be deloused.
@Quentin The "dying with, not of" is pretty much moot given that all-cause mortality in
England and Wales is twice normal. The Financial Times has a write up, but there's no way to
explain that away as mislabeling existing deaths. There's a lot of people who live 50 years
or more with high blood pressure or diabetes. They didn't just all die this month for no
reason.
But it does not test all deaths and only counts those who had a positive test result. I've
seen more complaints about likely undercounting than overcounting.
The UK is generous with its death figures: it counts those who die with Coronavirus, not
those who die of it. That's a nice but important distinction.
Not many car accidents in the respiratory ER, I thought.
The distinction between "with" and "of" matters very much for chronic conditions. A lot of
cancers are extremely slow-growing, for example; a 90-yo with early stage prostate cancer is
statistically likely to die of something fast-acting -- a car accident, a lung infection --
years before the prostate cancer becomes a problem. The thing-that-kills-you has to be
faster-acting than the thing-that-will-kill-you-if-you-live-long-enough. But COVID-19 is an
acute condition, actually pretty fast-acting: there's not a huge lot that kills you faster
than a lung infection. Major trauma? Septicemia, dehydration? If you're working at a
meatworks and you have COVID-19 and you get decapitated, that's "with not of", but that looks
to me like we're talking about tiny numbers, and you've just claimed that that's an important
distinction.
I don't think that that distinction is important. It's potentially non-zero, a source of
error that might potentially be significant but on the face of it that potential is so small
as to be ludicrous rather than important. You think otherwise, strongly enough to bother to
write a comment: please, explain to me what lead you to think that. Show me I'm wrong.
Regarding over/undercounting in general. There are just no standardiced rules for counting.
Every nation, sometimes every region does it´s own thing, with a wild mix of aspects
that under and overcount, or just delay reporting of some death. Overall overcounting
(compared to excess death rates, there is no objective rule whom to count anyway) seems to be
very rare, maybe Belgium?
Here is a nice graphic tool with weekly excess mortality data, they sure look particular ugly
in the UK: https://www.euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps#excess-mortality
If the infection rate in big cities and institutions is as high as some studies have
suggested (1/3 by some reports), counting "deaths by Covid-19" as "presumed deaths" +
"positive tests at death" will obviously be inaccurate. There are other reasons to count
asymptomatic infections.
If people like the form of argument "basically P, but it's more complicated than that, for
reason A, and B, and I think that's enough reasons, may as well just assert that P," I guess
I'm not going to stop them. Maybe they're right and I'm wrong. It's not like anyone's willing
to pay me to do it my way.
If the infection rate in big cities and institutions is as high as some studies have
suggested (1/3 by some reports), counting "deaths by Covid-19" as "presumed deaths" +
"positive tests at death" will obviously be inaccurate
I am forced to admit that I was approaching this problem with the perspective of the
situation we have in australia, where the disease is still very rare.
[which is to say much of what I said and implied is wrong, for which I apologise.]
Here's Who's Dying From Covid-19 in the United States
Data and new research reveal all age groups are at risk, from children to middle age and
beyond https://tinyurl.com/y8ch67qk
"We estimated that 45.4% of U.S. adults are at increased risk for complications from
coronavirus disease because of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, respiratory disease,
hypertension, or cancer," according to a new analysis from the CDC. Those at elevated risk
include 19.8% of people age 18 to 29 and 80.7% for people over age 80.
As I've pointed out before, the virus may mostly kill older people - but it's because of
the co-morbidities which almost *half* of US adults suffer from. More than 25 million
Americans have asthma. This is 7.7 percent of adults and 8.4 percent of children. Currently,
there are about 6.2 million children under the age of 18 with asthma. Granted, most of them
probably never will get this virus - but those who do...
Separately, a new study of children with Covid-19 admitted to pediatric intensive care
units in the United States and Canada concludes that while the overall severity of symptoms
in the children was "far less than that documented in adults Covid-19 can result in a
significant disease burden in children." According to the research, published in JAMA
Pediatrics, 40 of the 48 children, ranging in age from four to 16, had underlying medical
conditions. Two of them died, and three remain on ventilators. /BLOCKQUOTE> Assuming the
three on ventilators die, that's five out of 48 - ten percent.
So much for the "we can let the old people die" meme. No one wants to claim a
willingness to let kids die to re-open the economy.
"... The medical examiner's database showed COVID-19 as the primary cause of death for 2,303 people. Of those, 2,112 were shown to have at least one underlying condition as a secondary cause of death. Those conditions, also known as comorbidities, included hypertension, diabetes, obesity and heart disease. There were no secondary causes reported for 191 deaths. ..."
"... For months, Illinois residents have lived in fear, a fear that has been exacerbated by a lack of transparency and open reporting from the state. ..."
A Wirepoints analysis of COVID-19 deaths from the Cook County Medical Examiner's office
reveals that 92 percent of victims from the virus had pre-existing medical conditions.
The medical examiner's
database showed COVID-19 as the primary cause of death for 2,303 people. Of those, 2,112
were shown to have at least one underlying condition as a secondary cause of death. Those
conditions, also known as comorbidities, included hypertension, diabetes, obesity and heart
disease. There were no secondary causes reported for 191 deaths.
... ... ...
Hypertension affected 1,070 victims, or more than 46 percent of all deaths. Diabetes
impacted 973 victims, or 42 percent of the total. Pulmonary disease was part of 397 deaths, or
17 percent. And 215 of those deaths, about 9 percent, were accompanied by obesity or morbid
obesity.
Yet others had conditions including cancer and cardiovascular and kidney diseases. The
numbers above add up to more than 100 percent because many victims had more than one
pre-existing condition.
,,, ,,, ,,,
What’s stark about the Cook comorbidity data is just how few young adults die from
COVID-19 in the absence of some pre-existing condition. Just 3 of the 15 deaths in the 20-29
age bracket had no comorbidities. Same goes for the 30-39 and 40-49 age brackets, where just 26
of the 132 deaths were accompanied with no underlying causes.
Even more, almost 50 percent
of all Illinois deaths have
been tied to long-term care facilities, the subject of an upcoming Wirepoints piece. That
means nearly 1,600 deaths occurred outside the general public.
For months, Illinois residents have lived in fear, a fear that has been exacerbated by a
lack of transparency and open reporting from the state.
With politics (the November election), scapegoating, the economic depression and the fall of
the Western Empire very much involved, finding impartial scientific COVID-19 information is
near impossible. This site is the best you'll find but, no doubt, it and the comments are
colored by our human biases.
A factor never mentioned in corporate press is that healthcare in the USA is privatized.
All that matters is profits. The only thing that would get any attention at all is a
significant cluster of deaths. Three were reported in mid-2019 in a nursing home in Northern
Virginia. The 68 Vaping deaths came and went when vitamin E acetate was identified as a
possible culprit. With both, there was no exponential growth of illness and death like the
coronavirus outbreak. In fact, clusters of deaths don't matter to the corporate elite. Boeing
killed 346 people. The around 0.1% fatality rate of COVID-19 with a functional healthcare
system is touted as justification for ending the lockdown. That will kill about a million and
half Americans without mitigation. This is of no matter to the White House, Republicans and
apparently corporate Democrats. Without spending the money and instituting national public
health measures to test everyone, trace contacts and quarantine the infected in safe secure
facilities; the pandemic will wax and wane and spread to every corner of North America.
Lockdowns will keep popping up to prevent local hospitals from being overwhelmed by all the
sick; rich, middle-class and mostly poor. America will be a very ill society for the
foreseeable future.
I wouldn't be surprised that a contagious former bat coronavirus made it into a human
population earlier in 2019. A virulent form appeared in Wuhan China that swamped the city's
hospitals and a third even more deadly mutation occurred in Lombardy, Italy. Any study that
hinders the out of China propaganda will likely ignored by politicians and the media. They
really want to hide the truth. To try keep things as they were.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. "
- Voltaire
I once read a definition of psychological depression as a result of anger and fatigue. That
seems about right. Personally, I'm sick of COVID-19 dominating the headlines and I definitely
have inner rage at the magic spell that's been cast over society. And it is a magic spell. Or
an ill wind, if you prefer. Except tracking the source of a voodoo curse, or determining where
a breeze began, might be easier than identifying the many variables of this planned-demic .
Truly, the overwhelming information is difficult to process on any given day.
Last week, I read
an article describing how COVID-19 is a hoax propagandized by the media and, a few minutes
later, I watched a video
of a survival expert (whom I very much respect) chastise those who are not taking COVID-19
seriously as a genuine health threat.
Then, I was informed of an acquaintance dying from coronavirus. I knew the man personally
and the last time we spoke he was telling me about his new girlfriend. His death was deemed
notable enough to have a write-up included into the COVID-19 series of a national newspaper;
and that's how I learned he died – when someone sent me the link. I'll also say he was in
his seventies and his blood pressure was so high his eyes were constantly bloodshot.
So did he die with COVID-19 or from COVID-19? Yes, he did.
Indeed, lots of variables to consider. And it's tricky because health policies are a matter
of public concern AND private responsibility. It's why considering the variables requires
balance and common sense. Yet, unsurprisingly, it's become obvious COVID-19 has been
politicized by some and even commandeered by others for purposes of power consolidation and
achieving authoritarian goals.
Certainly, the virus doesn't need to be devastatingly lethal in order to accomplish the
objectives of the globalists. At any given time, the ship of state progresses via (what I have
designated as) the
"Bulbous Bow of Confusion" , or, rather, competing narratives.
Two physicians who own five urgent care locations in Kern County California recently posted
a viral YouTube video citing their own COVID-19 data and calling for an end to the draconian
lockdowns. Their names are Dr. Dan
Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi and the data they compiled acted as a "resistance wave" to
countermand the official narrative put forth by ( as I've identified
in past articles ) the likes of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), World Health
Organization (WHO), The Gates Foundation, John Hopkins University, and UK's The Guardian.
Yet, today, if you click on any previous articles where the doctors'
viral videos were once posted you will see they've been taken down; and even their other
videos queued in the threads of the articles have been transitioned into dead links by our
benefactors at YouTube.
Truly, censorship is the validation of ideas as the most powerful force on earth; because if
you now search for the two doctors by name on YouTube, you will find a video stamped with the
Washington Post logo describing "What Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi get wrong
about coronavirus" .
To be sure, the billionaires are committed. They can't go back now and this is why they are
on full offense in the narrative war. It means no expense will be spared in the media onslaught
until every person in the world fears COVID-19 being spread from cats and
farts . It's
also why various
treatments are claimed to be ineffective and only the
five innovations proposed by the New American King should be considered:
[Bill Gates] said the innovations needed to come in five areas: treatments, vaccines,
testing, contact tracing, and policies for reopening the economy.
But what about Trump? He is still the U.S. President, right?
In past postings, I've exhaustively considered Trump as a possible "movie" or "reality TV
show". My article entitled
"Personal Politics, Public Impeachment, Persuasion and Post-Apocalyptic Planning" also
discussed how the Military Industrial Complex has NOT grown weaker in the decades since
Eisenhower and Kennedy – and, in fact, cited the trend of its growing strength from Abe
Lincoln through the creation of the Federal Reserve, and Woodrow Wilson, onward.
I've additionally speculated in previous writings President Trump as one of the
following:
1.) The Real Deal – fighting the Dark Lords out of love of country
2.) Being used by the Dark Powers unwittingly
3.) A Judas Goat
At this point in time, it appears the possibility of # 1 is fading, if not having been
completely debunked as of this writing.
So, given #'s 2 & 3 above, I've previously questioned if Trump was elected as a "
bleeding of the brake lines " prior to the " big stop " (i.e. end of America).
Therefore, what if the Trump Reality TV Show® was meant to demonstrate the sheer power
of "The Controllers" and their ability to convert the globe into One World under Communism?
And, furthermore, what if the 2016 Presidential Election was staged to illustrate to all
nations the futility of resistance?
Consider the waves that have crashed upon Trump's shores over the past four years:
Russiagate/Mueller, Ukrainian Impeachment, and, now, COVID-19. Each of these consecutive waves
were increasingly consequential from a historical perspective.
Is the war to "drain-the-swamp" real? Because, if not, the battle lines have been made clear
and the tech gods have cataloged our IP addresses.
Since the United States recently suspended its payments to the WHO, the organization's
biggest contributor is now the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Another major contributor
to the WHO is the GAVI Alliance (formerly the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation).
Both of these organizations are also part of ID2020, an organization that is advocating for
the use of vaccines to implement a global digital ID system using tattoos or microchips.
Or was it planned? And for those who would say it was planned, would you call them
"conspiracy theorists"? But, seriously, is it really conspiracy if it's all been published
?
Because, over the decades, it has become quite evident that wealthy individuals, influential
families, and powerful organizations and corporations have coopted nation-states in order to
unite the globe. World War I delivered the League of Nations and World War II brought about the
United Nations. Since then, the billionaire round-table groups have only grown more
interconnected as Davos Men planned and the Bilderberg's conspired .
The modern era has progressed by committee; and to the giant sucking sounds as predicted by
former presidential candidate Ross Perot.
In 2010, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Global Business Network drafted a document
entitled " Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development " which
outlined the following potential plans schemes through 2030: " Lock Step ", " Clever Together
", " Hack Attack ", and " Smart Scramble ".
The first link below is a 54-page (2.29 MB sized) PDF file. Even if the Bill Gates' inspired
MS Windows gives you a virus warning, just know the file can be viewed (or downloaded) with no
issues. Or, if you would rather watch a one-hour, forty-two-minute video presentation, just
click on link # 2 below:
Note that on page 18 of the PDF (#1 above), the "Lock Step" scenario describes a 2012
pandemic leading to a global economic collapse followed by oppressive authoritarian
controls:
In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike
2009's H1N1, this new influenza strain -- originating from wild geese -- was extremely
virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when
the virus streaked around the world The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies:
international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries
like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and
office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.
. The United States' initial policy of "strongly discouraging" citizens from flying proved
deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but
across borders. However, a few countries did fare better -- China in particular. The Chinese
government's quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as
well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives,
stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter
post-pandemic recovery.
China's government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens
from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their
authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face
masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and
supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of
citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from
the spread of increasingly global problems -- from pandemics and transnational terrorism to
environmental crises and rising poverty -- leaders around the world took a firmer grip on
power.
At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval.
Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty -- and their privacy -- to more
paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more
tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more
latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened
oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter
regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests.
Sound familiar? Because this was the dialectic with which we were presented: " Herd
Immunity® " (an Orwellian term befitting cattle) or " Continuous" COVID-19®. And what
did American's chose? They picked " continuous ", Alex, for $1,200 per U.S. citizen. And as we
Flattened the Curve ®, the CDC broadcasted
concerns regarding second waves of coronaviruses as telescreens the world over warned of
mutant strains of
coronaviruses more contagious than the original .
Yes. Both Coronavirus®, and Big Brother, Incorporated have marched forward
unencumbered.
But as people sheltered in their homes they saw "conservative" Never-Trumpers weaponize the
ghost of Ronald Reagan against the Bad Orange Man® with a video entitled "Mourning in America" . It was too cute
by half. Then, fortunately, as the world remained mystified by
"covid toes" , the president
tweeted back at the Never-Trump "losers" in the most ingenious and gratifying ways.
And Trump is just getting warmed up. No doubt his Zoom® debates with Biden are bound to
be hilarious. Unless Whistleblowergate
Part Deux is the silver-bullet that will stop the Bad Orange Man® once and for all?
(CNN) Dr. Rick Bright, the ousted director of the office involved in developing a
coronavirus vaccine, formally filed an extensive whistleblower complaint Tuesday alleging his
early warnings about the coronavirus were ignored and that his caution at a treatment favored
by President Donald Trump led to his removal.
What I found interesting in that article is how it identified "opposing sides" (i.e.
opposites) as "capstones" on the bottom of the "pyramid" – with the top capstone (eye) as
representative of the final action:
The chess board is a well-known Masonic or Hegelian symbol, the black and white squares
symbolize control through duality in the grand game of life in all aspects. Left or right,
white or black people, conservative or liberal, democrat or republican, Christian or Muslim
and so on. Through two opposing parties control is gained as both parties reach the same
destination, which is order through guided conflict or chaos.
Left (thesis) versus right (antithesis) equals middle ground or control (synthesis). The
triangle and all seeing eye we see so often symbolizes the completion of the great work
The pyramid is supported by the bottom opposing sides. The capstone at the top is
established through controlled solution or middle ground.
In my piece entitled "On
Channel Surfing, Circus Acts, and Time Passages" , I discussed the 1927 movie "Metropolis"
as a favorite of the occult. The words that appear on the screen at the end of that film are
these:
THE MEDIATOR BETWEEN THE HEAD AND HANDS MUST BE THE HEART!
A
2010 article posted on TheVigilantCitizen.com speculated on the "mediator" as the
electronic media which manipulates the plebes (workers) on behalf of the head
(controllers).
To be sure, the Modern Centralizers craft their new realities by means of the Orwellian
Media. It's why they call it programming . And what better way to manipulate the emotions
(hearts) of people than by fiction and fear?
With that in mind, I now call your attention to the below video link of the opening
ceremonies for the 2012 Olympics:
If one cares to click that link and view the segment shown between the 45 and 55 minute
marks, they will see what appears to be a staged viral pandemic. The drama takes place beneath
black pyramids malevolently towering over the stadium (and the crowd) and ends with the
appearance of a giant, creepy-looking baby; or maybe a still-birth – it's hard to
tell.
At the 45 to 47 minute mark, we see kids in hospital beds surrounded by dancing nurses and
doctors. At around the 47:30 mark, the medical staff/dancers put the kids to bed and with
fingers over their months, urging silence. What appears to be a giant virus then appears
center-stage at the around the 48 minute mark.
Then, around the 49 minute mark, Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling reads from Peter Pan and
says: "But in the two minutes before you go to sleep, it is real ". Next, shadowy virus-looking
demons take the stage to chase the children, and dark horses towing a magician and a steel cage
glide behind an oriental woman who is looking elsewhere as the pandemic commences.
The 49:50 mark shows what appears to be a giant (British Prime Minister) Boris Johnson sick
in bed.
Finally, as the dark magicians cast their spells and the viruses dance, the nurses and
doctors appear paralyzed and robotic – like puppets (50:45 to 51:45 mark) before Mary
Poppins figures descend from the sky.
In my research, I found another article by the
Vigilant Citizen dated August 17, 2012 , and it had this to say back then regarding the
opening ceremonies of the 2012 Olympics:
The next important sequence of the ceremony paid tribute to the National Health Service
(NHS) and Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH). The set combined sick kids on hospital beds
with characters from English children's literature and had a very strange and dark undertone
from the start, when it began with the theme from The Exorcist, which is, in case you don't
know, a movie about a child possessed by the Devil. Odd choice.
The sequence begins with children on hospital beds who get put to sleep by nurses. Then
J.K. Rowling appears and reads a quote from Peter Pan alluding to Neverland, which becomes
real in the "two minutes before you go to sleep". I couldn't say if that was done on purpose,
but many elements of this set, mostly the mix of vulnerable children in a hospital with fairy
tales and the concept of blurring the lines between reality and fiction, are all associated
with mind control programming. Like the Wizard of Oz and Alice of Wonderland, the story of
Peter Pan is heavily used in mind control programming as victims are told to escape to
"Neverland" while inducing dissociation from reality.
The same article also addressed the 2012 Olympic closing ceremonie s (video at this link) and showing a new
world order rising like a phoenix; while referencing The Who, no less.
At midnight, the Olympic cauldron and the petals representing each country are slowly
extinguished, but the phoenix, representing the occult elite and the New World Order, stays
lit above it. In other words, as the nations of the world slowly disappear, a New World Order
will emerge. On that note, let's listen to The Who!
Of course, listen to The Who rock band? Or the World Health Organization (WHO)? Coincidence
or conspiracy? You're probably right.
So, to summarize: 2012 was the same year the Rockefeller Foundation predicted the "Lock
Step" pandemic scenario as the Olympic ceremonies that year showed opposing sides battling over
children during the opening ceremonies and followed by the resolution in the closing
ceremonies: A new phoenix rising from the ashes – like a new world order.
Order out of chaos.
Therefore, if COVID-19 was, indeed, a PLANdemic perpetrated by dark forces, was my
aforementioned friend murdered by those who now want us to self-quarantine and wear masks for
the safety of those being murdered? Most likely; because observing luciferian pedophiles
through their symbols is like identifying hidden planets via the observed effects of
gravitation, or studying game theory when the game is rigged.
It's how we can identify who "they" are, but only for people willing to first acknowledge
that "they" exist. Unfortunately, it's a wasted effort on most. One might as well don a tinfoil
hat and chase shadows on a magic pony.
Proponents of mandatory vaccines and enhanced surveillance are trying to blackmail the
American people by arguing that the lockdown cannot end unless we create a healthcare
surveillance state and make vaccination mandatory. The growing number of Americans who are
tired of not being able to go to work, school, or church, or even to take their children to a
park because of government mandates should reject this "deal." Instead, they should demand an
immediate end to the lockdowns and the restoration of individual responsibility for deciding
how best to protect their health.
Regrettably, it was supposed to be a season of graduation parties, weddings, and Fourth of
July celebrations. But these have been displaced by lockdowns, social distancing, bodies in
refrigerated trucks, fear, magic spells, and propaganda.
Big companies partnering with the government to spy on you without your knowledge.
Americans locked in their homes, banned from going to church, placated with sedatives like
beer and weed. Anyone who speaks up is silenced. Political demonstrations are illegal.
Organizers are arrested. Only opinions approved by unelected leaders are allowed on
information platforms. Sound familiar? It sounds a lot like China. Of all the many ironies of
this moment, so many of them bitter, the hardest to swallow is this: as we fight this virus,
we are becoming far more like the country that spawned it. We're becoming more like China.
It's horrifying.
Those in power are the ones the our professional class seeks to protect, not the country.
Freedom of conscience never endangers the public. It only threatens the powerful. It
endangers their control. It hinders their ability to dictate election results, to loot the
economy, to make policies based on whim for their own gain. No wonder our leaders have done
such a poor job protecting us from China. They're on the same team.
– Tucker Carlson Tonight: Tuesday, April 28, 2020
Sadly, it appears Trump may be a crisis actor, like
Anthony Fauci , and part of the plan from the start. The final details were solidified
years ago – including the bioengineered PLANdemic.
China is quite likely part of the plan, too, since One World Under Communism has become the
desired destination of the billionaires; with millions dying along the way. For those who do
survive, they'll be allowed to work , consume , and obey . Of course, many Americans will not
cooperate with their planned demise and this is why The Central Planners will need a great big
war.
Most recently, in an Oval Office Press conference on May 6, 2020, Trump actually blamed
China for Coronavirus while claiming it is the "worst attack we've ever had" :
"This is worse than Pearl Harbor, this is worse than the World Trade Center. There's never
been an attack like this.
– President Donald Trump – May 6, 2020
It means events could potentially occur as follows: As soon as rock-solid proof is revealed
that China released the virus to take out Trump because our great president was winning the
trade wars, then, the Orange-Haired Wonder will rally national support via sorrowful
lamentations while standing tall on reality TV amidst the economic ruins.
A bumbling first strike by the U.S. could allow a Sino-Russian alliance to seal America's
fate once and for all; and most likely by nuclear means.
Then any surviving sheeple will eagerly line up for the Bill Gates of Hell special: A free
digital tattoo along with a bonus vaccination and bowl of soup.
Welcome to the end of the rainbow. Orwell was right: we've always been at war with Eastasia
and jackboots will stomp on human faces forever. Unless, that is, the digital drip-drops from
Q-anon and our online commentaries change the future.
Conclusion
Those gathering at the round tables have been tremendously successful in our societal
programming . Yet most of them are mere puppets to the inner rings of concentric power. The
monsters that once lurked under our beds were set loose years ago and, today, they dress in
drag and read to kids in libraries while others wear blue uniforms and arrest mothers for
taking kids to playgrounds.
And where are the men of action? Where are the lovers of liberty? In my area, they've been
fishing. And grilling. And why not? Trump is in the White House while Nancy Pelosi is locked in
her gourmet kitchen eating fancy ice cream. The stimulus checks are in the bank, the grocery
stores are still open, and if the fish aren't biting, those who would stand up to tyranny can
always grab a bucket of chicken through the KFC drive-thru on the way home. At least for
now.
As far as national lockdowns go, this has been the best one ever. So far.
For obvious reasons, I've been thinking of the autistic livestock guru Temple Grandin and how she pioneered
more humane methods of leading animals to slaughter. One of the methods was to have cattle
march to their demise single file via tall shutes. That sort of isolation seems reminiscent of
what's occurring in America now – with people staring at walls, muzzled by masks, and
numbly following orders while remaining six-feet apart.
How can people resist when they've been fooled? How can they fight back when they're
frightened? And why have they placed their hope in safety instead of liberty ?
Good questions.
Real hope remains in the smart choices, right actions, and the prepping and survival
decisions made every day by those awake and aware. But no matter what the future holds, may all
reading this be surrounded by friends and loved ones who know Epstein didn't kill himself.
The real blame China has is not "coverup" but that the opposite: Overreaction When China ordered a province-wide Lockdown, it
persuaded enough people that this was uniquely terrifying a virus as to merit extreme measures, setting stage for worldwide panic.
What if they were wrong?
We now know large declines in the transmission rate occurred BEFORE the lockdowns, meaning simple voluntary measures under
a Swedish-style Stay Open scenario were enough:
The other finding is that, one way or another, this flu-epidemic passes as all others have. It's actually good news, because
it means the worst fears were wrong and we can re-open.
"The basis of reassuring the public about re-entry is repeating the facts about the threat
and who it targets . By now, studies from Europe
and the U.S
. all suggest that the overall fatality rate is far lower than early estimates. And we know who
to protect, because this disease – by the evidence – is not equally dangerous
across the population. In Michigan's Oakland County , 75 percent of deaths were in
those over 70 years old; 91 percent were in people over 60, similar to what was noted in
New York . And younger, healthier people have virtually zero risk of death and little
risk of serious disease; as I have noted before, under one percent of New York City's
hospitalizations have
been patients under 18 years of age, and less than one percent of deaths at any age
are in the absence of
underlying conditions.
Here are specific and logical steps to end the lockdown and safely restore normal life:
First , let's finally focus on protection for the most vulnerable -- that means nursing home
patients, who are already living under controlled access. This would include strictly
regulating all who enter and care for nursing home members by requiring testing and protective
masks for all who interact with these highly vulnerable people. Specifically, nursing home
workers should be tested for COVID-19 antibodies, and if negative, for virus to exclude
infection, to ensure safety of senior residents. No COVID-19-positive patient can resume
residence until definitively cleared by testing.
We should continue to inform the public about what they have already successfully learned
regarding the at-risk group. That means issuing rational guidelines advising the highest
standards of hygiene and appropriate social distancing while interacting with elderly friends
and family members at risk, including those with diabetes, obesity and other chronic
conditions.
Second , those with mild symptoms of the illness should strictly self-isolate for two weeks.
It's not urgent to test them -- simply assume they have the infection. That includes
confinement at home, having the highest concern for sanitization and wearing protective masks
when others in their homes enter the same room." Dr. Scott Atlas in The Hill
---------------
It should be mentioned that Dr. John Ioannides, a leading epidemiologist at Stanford agrees
with Dr. Atlas.
I saw Atlas on a news program a day or so ago. The anchor looked frightened by what Atlas
was saying. This is understandable. The COVID panic is now so deeply embedded and pervasive
that to question the rationale for the shut-down of the economy is equivalent to heresy in a
theocratic state.
IMO the road back economically is going to be slow and difficult. I hope I am wrong. pl
I hope you are wrong, too. I am tired of the drama and hysteria.
Still, I do want the investigations into China's culpability for the
result of their "accident" or of their planned upheaval of the rest of the world.
I just want to trust some designated "expert" to tell us when when we can put away the
masks and can take up hugging our friends and shaking hands while smiling and meeting new
acquaintances. What is a church service without that and all the stories of Christs care and
concern for the "untouchables" of the world?
Seems the CCP's MSS's think-tank CICR compiled an Intelligence Report of their own warning
of possible armed conflict with U.S..
IMO it's hoped that our IC will realize that this virus doesn't jump ship into the human
sphere on its own naturally without 'human tweaking in a lab' which then provides a bridge
from which the virus could go from bats to the human sphere. And why would the CCP/MSS play
such a dangerous game? -- Bio-weapons R&D.
There can be little doubt that the fascist/socialist/anti-Trump elements in this country have
seized upon the presence of the virus to attempt to destroy Trump's chances in November and
to bring about greater state control of citizens. This immediately after the lame impeachment
plot failed to remove Trump; which was right after the lame Russian collusion plot failed to
remove Trump.
I don't think it's paranoid to consider that China released the virus on the US at a time
when President Trump is engaging in a major trade war with the Chinese, as a tactic in
fighting that war.
The Ionides/Atlas clinical perspective has been known to be correct - based on data -
since March, yet the Democrat controlled states continue to double down on state control of
their populations and destruction of their economies.
The Left has become a collection of kamikazes. The elites can ride this out. They have
money. They are hoping that when the economy is in ashes, all of the starving little people
will come into their open arms.
In 1968 another Asian virus, known as the Hong Kong flu, arrived in the US. It began
killing Americans noticeably in 1969. As this was occurring, the Woodstock music festival was
planned. The festival went off with now famous record crowd numbers during the peak of the
virus. No one seemed to care. That virus ultimately killed 100,000 Americans (not Woodstock
attendees); more than covid, even if you believe the artificially inflated covid figures.
That was at a time when the population of the US was far less. So a far greater % died than
covid.
We've been here before folks. It's the reaction that is different this time. The reaction
is driven by internal and external political objectives of massive importance for our future
as a free society.
Free people need to be able to make these decisions on their own. Give them clear
information and let them decide their next move. Keep the government "experts" out of the
decision making process. I believe that as the weather improves and the economic hardship
increases, Americans will turn on the fascist/socialist elites and take their lives back. The
vulnerable and the cowards will self-isolate. I further believe Americans will do what they
need to to get the economy going again, buying American made only, patronizing small
businesses beyond what they normally would and voting for pro-American candidates (i.e. the
Democrats lose big time).
What have we done every flu season that has resulted in very similar numbers and
population groups affected. How, in fact, is this one materially different.
Mnuchin said today that it is too early to say whether international travel will open back up
before the end of the year . Coincidentally, I also came across a Twitter poll of
15,000 people with the the following question & results:
"Hypothetically, if everything opens up tomorrow when would you fly again?"
- Immediately 25%
- 2-3 months 20%
- 3-6 months 26%
- 1 year or more 29%
Hardly scientific and I've no idea of the demographic or geographic spread of respondents,
but it seems pretty clear many people remain fearful.
The Democrat-media hysteria HAS been deeply ingrained.
The mass of people have - not surprisingly - turned out to be lambs (baby sheep).
Each person is responsible for managing their own life - which includes risk.
Unfortunately, the population of lambs has been trained over the years to look for mommy
government to manage their risk - mandatory seat belt laws come to mind.
Ben Franklin said it succinctly:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve
neither Liberty nor Safety."
There is widespread criticism of Ioannides two Covid studies, including the use of an
unapproved antibody tests which is known to give false positives; statistical flaws, and
recruiting volunteers for the sampling via Facebook, as well as the wife of a study co-author
to call and recruit parents from her kids school.
Here is an excerpt from an article on the controversy.
""My quick take is that something really odd is going on with Ioannidis," wrote Alexander
Rubinsteyn, a geneticist and computational biologist at the University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, in an email to Undark. Rubinsteyn suggested that Ioannidis may simply be "so
attached to being the iconoclast that defies conventional wisdom that he's unintentionally
doing horrible science."
He added: "Pretty much no one with statistical acumen believes these
studies.""https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/23/coronavirus-antibody-studies-california-stanford
In areas where the health system is not under stress this makes perfect sense. I would give
the hugging, handshaking and church services a miss and maintain the social distancing at
work and when out of the house as far as is practical. It needs to be done with lots of
testing, contact tracing and case isolation. Knowledge and common sense on everyone's part
will work. Limited local shutdown may be needed if cases start climbing in some areas.
Our restaurants open today in most of Florida. In spite of needing our hair attended to, we
will eat out both lunch and dinner. Sadly, some of our restaurants are closing for good. My
wife tells me that local Facebook is about evenly divided about going out now. I don't get it
as these folks have been gathering in the supermarkets the whole time.
"I just want to trust some designated 'expert' to tell us when when we can put away the
masks and can take up hugging our friends and shaking hands while smiling and meeting new
acquaintances. What is a church service without that and all the stories of Christs care and
concern for the 'untouchables' of the world?"
I think that "expert" you seek is going to have to be the person you see in the mirror
every morning. The "designated experts" have no interest in encouraging you to go back to
living a life you love. As Eric Newhill stated, it's going to be up to free-thinking adults
to make those decisions for themselves. If you expect or hope for "experts" to protect you
from yourself, then you have too much faith in "experts" and in government. Take sensible
precautions as they relate to your own risk demographic and respect other people making those
choices for themselves. Otherwise let's all get on living like Americans.
Even in blissful 'pre rona' December the Fed's repo market had been sounding the alarms that
a serious bubble recession was coming. Nothing apparently was fixed from the last wall street
megadooshbaggery meltdown. See:
This means that even those who built up real estate equity will have a difficult time
short term liquifying that equity, which means that Chase, Wells Fargo, et al have a lot of
pessimism about the US real estate market, the thing they have made so much money on last few
years, and which they were supposed to have fixed.
well pilgrims ;) not only is the economy enduring sudden searing pandemic pain, it is also
feeling the beginning of a big bubble popping recession, which everybody in the financial
world was already freaking about well before the rona arrived. Perhaps endless Fed QE can
prop up equities markets through November, perhaps, but then it's all bets off into 2021 as
numerous wall street debts scams will have to be deleveraged.
Sir,
In the spirit of fairness, anti-body testing would allow scientists to identify who has the
anti-bodies and then track them to see if they become re-infected and, if so, at what level
of severity. That would shed light on the "herd immunity" theory (i.e. is there such a thing
and, if so, to what extent?).
Otherwise, calls for "universal testing" are just sound bites born of confusion and panic,
at best; another means of violating the rights of Americans at worst (e.g. making people wear
yellow stars, carrying papers that allow them to enjoy full or truncated societal
"privelges").
Widespread antibody testing will show covid-19 is more contagious than a lot of diseases,
but not not near as deadly as most people think. People will see they had it, didn't even
know it and are now immune to it at least in the near term. Fear will be deflated. We will
then have a known large segment of the population known to not capable of further spreading
the virus and a ready supply of antibody serum as an effective treatment for those who do get
infected. That will also diminish fear.
Covid-19 and our response to it is as much a political issue as it is a public health
issue. Trump was going to run on a booming economy. If he wants to get back to that strategy,
he has to banish the fear of the virus. That will get everyone back to work so they can eat
and pay rent, as well as continue to piss away their money on crap they don't need. Our
economy depends on all that. If Trump is smart, he best get to stepping and institute a
nationwide antibody testing program.
And Fauci has already been awarded the dunce cap with his 1980s assertion that HIV was going
kill us all. So I guess for his most recent action he gets the dunce cap with slide rule
cluster.
A cruise passenger interests website offered another informal poll - are you willing to
cruise again: 64% said as much as in the past; 10% said they would cruise even more to help
get the industry back on its feet. Therefore, in this obviously interested sample, 75% want
the cruise industry to start up again. Yesterday. 25% will choose to wait or not cruise
again.
The cruise industry passenger base remains willing and loyal. In fact they are probably
better trained in personal hygiene habits than most having had to deal with noro (aka
tourista ) in the past and a typical URI complaint commonly called" cruise crud" that
was most likely picked up on the air flight to get to the cruise port. The real numbers of
disease and mortality overall within this industry do not support the screaming head llnes
and lurid reporting.
It remains to be seen if one infection makes an individual immune for some time. IMO we
should follow the Atlas/Ioannides formula. I noticed in re-reading "Sharpsburg," that Hunter
McGuire appears therein.
What does an anti-body test do? I just had one last week and awaiting the results - was a
cruise passenger and international air passenger during the month of January in a later
suspected area. (not Asia).
Here is why I did the anti-body test: (Quest Labs - fee service, no RX- 99% accuracy -
drawn blood vial test)
1. Helps substantiate dates and areas of transmission that may not yet be in the data
pool.
2. Tracks the rates of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases occurring among the
"elderly", in order to see if there is an enhanced risk of not in this age group, if there
are no underlying co-morbidities.
3. Adds demographic data specific for the travel industry.
4. Allows possible donation of anti-body serum for research and perhaps mitigation of
those who are affected.
5. Personal peace of mind -been there and done that. Freedom to move about.
6. Provides baseline for duration of immunity; resilience of immunity or data showing
re-infection can be possible.
Primarily it is for data gathering to help stop the hysteria. That was worth the time,
money and blood donation for me. We will never know the true extent of this virus, its
impacts, its initial modeling accuracy until we start plugging facts into the "expert"
hypotheticals.
Taking one for the team is the way I see it. Will I now become a local Typhoid Mary and
our house burned down if this data becomes known? Or will people stop walking out into the
roadway in faux deference to my advanced age as I pass by, from our deliciously virtue
signaling "progressive" population in blue state California.
Am I right or wrong in thinking that when the injected liquidity plus existing cash
exceeds the amount of money that would haven been in the economy at this point then the
currency will begin to inflate?
"Provides baseline for duration of immunity; resilience of immunity or data showing
re-infection can be possible. Primarily it is for data gathering to help stop the hysteria."
Yes
Colonel, you are NOT wrong. The oil business in America is going to take a very long time to
recover. There are complete shutterings of businesses, bankruptcies and more - all while we
were in the middle of a downturn. Personally, I just folded up my tent because my my active
client list went from 21 to zero over this last month (and that includes intl clients).
As the number one buyer of US steel, the oilpatch represents much more than people
realize. We have also been the number one buyer of many other items - where sales have
disappeared as company quietly and reluctantly face the reality of the current induced
glut.
I'm being forced to change livelihoods - interesting for me, as I am short of the age to
get my SS check and too old to employ by most corporate masters....
Yes, I noticed Hunter Holmes when I reread Chancellorsville this time. I knew nothing
about him until you mentioned him a while back. He also founded what is now the VCU Medical
Center and was president of the AMA for a time. There is a statue of him on the State Capitol
grounds, but i haven't seen it yet.
"... during such catastrophes, a large number of people find themselves in a state where they realize that they cannot control their lives. They don't know what will happen in the near future. The state of complete uncertainty makes people much more susceptible to conspiracy theories, and also makes them repost information that they doubt is true. People think: "What if it's true" - and try to warn others about the "impending danger". ..."
"... Fake information is mostly launched because of a sense of concern. During a period of turmoil and uncertainty, the need to exchange texts increases at times ..."
"During such disasters, a large number of people find themselves in a state where they
realize that they cannot control their lives. They don't know what will happen in the near
future. The state of complete uncertainty makes people much more susceptible to conspiracy
theories," social anthropologist Anna Kirzyuk told VZGLYAD newspaper. She explained why the
Internet is flooded with the most unthinkable fakes dedicated to COVID-19.
This week, the Supreme court of Russia clarified the use of articles of the criminal code
for spreading fake news and rumors about coronavirus. Criminal liability starts when
dissemination of information create circumstances which pose a threat to the life and health of
people. It occurs if the author knew about the falsity of the reports, but gave them
credibility.
A wave of false reports about coronavirus in Russia appeared in mid-March, and this flow
continues to this day. On Thursday, the Prosecutor General's office recognized fake and
demanded to block access to reports that the new coronavirus was allegedly created in the
Novosibirsk scientific center "Vector" and later brought to China. Earlier, the prosecutors
discovered the websites that sell fake medicines and remedies. Another vicious rumor that
should entail criminal responsibility is that the patients was forced to pay for treatment. And
the Moscow health Department recently denied information that patients with suspected
coronavirus are allegedly forced to pay for treatment themselves if they were not hospitalized
by an ambulance.
On Tuesday, the Chairman of the Media Commission of the Public Chamber, Alexander Malkevich,
launched the website CoronaFake to combat false information about COVID-19. Also, the
"encyclopedia of coronavirus rumors and fakes" has been created and updated on the Internet,
which is being developed by professional folklorists and anthropologists. Which might help to
fight the rumors. But in a way number of rumors are inverse indicator of the trust to the
government.
About the nature of the appearance of fakes and their impact on daily life newspaper LOOK
told one of the authors of the encyclopedia, social anthropologist, PhD, research fellow,
school of modern Humanities research, Ranepa Anna Kiresuk.
VIEW: Anna Andreyevna, at the beginning of the pandemic, there were many fakes about the
coronavirus. Now the flow of these fakes is decreasing?
Anna Kiresuk: The number of fake news about coronavirus probably is not becoming larger or
smaller. small number of rumors always exist locally and surface spontaneously nationwide: the
appeared periodically in the past and will appear periodically in the future. This probably
will continue until the end of the pandemic, or at least the the and of the regime of
self-isolation.
VIEW: Why does the flow of fake news and rumors increase during various social
disasters?
A. K.: during such catastrophes, a large number of people find themselves in a state
where they realize that they cannot control their lives. They don't know what will happen in
the near future. The state of complete uncertainty makes people much more susceptible to
conspiracy theories, and also makes them repost information that they doubt is true. People
think: "What if it's true" - and try to warn others about the "impending danger".
VIEW: Who is the main source of fakes?
AK: There is no center, no malicious group of people who compose and launch fakes in social
networks. It is also impossible to say that a specific person is to blame for the appearance of
a fake. Let's say a person leaves a text or a post on a social network. Then this text can be
transformed in the process of transmission, become overgrown with new details, and lose its
authorship. For example, a person heard two women talking at a bus stop about hundreds of dead
people in the local regional hospital, and the authorities allegedly hushed it up. Then he
writes about it in some social network message, it begins to "walk" and acquire new details.
Who is the author of this message? Women who spoke at the bus stop, the author of the first
post in the social network, or those people who repost fake and add comments? It is impossible
to talk about authorship here.
VIEW: in other words, it is common for people, especially in crisis conditions, to
exchange unreliable information?
AK: Of course. There are no people who RUB their hands and think: "But I'm going to start a
panic." Fake information is mostly launched because of a sense of concern. During a period
of turmoil and uncertainty, the need to exchange texts increases at times .
When there is a sense of the presence of an indefinite danger outside, whether it is a virus
or possible harsh measures by the state, people have an urgent need to be a member of some
circle of people who think in the same way, the cicle which provide some kind of mutual cocial
support. Fake news are just perverted way to create such a circle.
OPINION: But how fake rumors help to create such a circle?
A. K.: Texts that circulate in groups of acquaintances, friends, and relatives somewhat
strengthen the feeling that "we are together", "I am not alone", and "others think the same as
me". This is a very important function of fake rumors and folklore in General. Launching a text
in the public, a person virtually create a check of the correlation of his underanding of the
situation and feelings with the understadnng and feelings of the group.
For example, a person who calls on all citizens to lock their windows at night, because
government helicopters will start spraying the virus disinfectant in Moscow. This rumor was
popular in mid-March. The author of the message may doubt the reality of this news, but he
wants to to get confirmation that he is wrong from his social circle (is somewhat perverted
way), to make sure of his suspicions and understanding is right or wrong. He is interested in
what his friends in Vkontakte or his colleagues from the work chat in WhatsApp will say about
the rumor that he/she spreads. If other people swallow the fake line hook and thinker, he begin
to believe that this news is real and his suspicions were not in vain.
VIEW: In Addition to the "disinfection of the city using helicopters" are are any there
other prominent. widespread rumors?
A. K.: Yes there are. One example, is the rumor about bananas infected with coronavirus. In
some regions of Russia, thanks to this rumor, the sales of bananas were reduced. Because many
people believed in the validity of such a path infection with the coronavirus.
There are also a lot of widely circulating rumors with pseudo-medical advice about the
usefulness of drinking hot water, applying ginger or eating alkaline foods – there is a
market for fake prophylactic methods and fake cures for the coronavirus becuase the danger of
infection is real. So some believe that particular stupid actions can be a means of treating
and preventing coronavirus. Thanks to the popularity of such pseudo-medical advice, the price
of ginger in many cities has soared at times. People rushed to buy ginger, thinking that it
protects against the coronavirus by boosting one's immune system.
The distribution of such texts performs several very important psychological functions at
once.
First, it gives people the illusion of control: I know where the danger is coming from,
and I can warn others.
Secondly, the distribution of such texts allows a person to feel that he is not alone in
feeling anxiety and anxiety. And, third, by distributing such texts, a person can increase
their status in this group. The one who warned about the danger, the one-well done. He shares
with others the knowledge that is available only to him, but vital for all.
VIEW: Can we disitinushe beweem fake news about coronavirus and rumors? What is the
difference, if any?
AK: Rumors and fake news or "imporvized news" are identical social phenomena. For example,
in some cities there are rumors about the imminent introduction of internal troops and the
announcement of a curfew. People tell this rumor to each other in stores, at bus stops, and to
their neighbors. At some point, one of the "carriers" infected with this rumor creates and
posts a fake document that troops are being drawn to Moscow. He/she may do it as a joke, but at
this point, the rumor becomes fake news and the person should face legal responsibility.
VIEW: What is meant by a fake document? The this a post itself in the social
network?
AK: No. Fake document is a document printed on official letterhead with seals, signatures
and other formal attributes, information about the imminent introduction of a curfew is set
out. Links to the Ministry of internal Affairs and the mayor's office may be provided. This
text may be drawn up on behalf of the Moscow government. Forged seal, signature, outgoing
number, coat of arms of the Russian Federation. This is a fake news based on a rumor.
VIEW: Which category of people are more susceptible to fake information?
AK: Generally this is difficult to predict. We don't have the tools to predict how different
social and educational strata would react. But there rumors and fake news which contains
references to scientific and medical authorities or authorities make the text more reliable
even for an educated audience.
In the late 80's, French folklorist Jean-Noel Kapferer investigated the distribution of
so-called Villejuif leaflets, which warned that a certain set of food additives (they were
designated by numeric letter codes such as E221) is life-threatening and causes cancer. The
document was allegedly drawn up on behalf of a clinic in the city of Villejuif, which
specialized in the treatment of cancer. These leaflets were dropped into mailboxes and
scattered in stores.
Kapferer found out that thanks to the link to the Villejuif clinic, these leaflets were
distributed even by educated people-doctors, teachers. A reference to authority makes the text
more reliable.
"... There's a concerted effort on the part of influential people at the network that we at All In call Trump TV right now to peddle dangerous misinformation about the coronavirus Call it coronavirus trutherism. ..."
"... Who needs to win elections when you can personally reestablish the social order every day on Twitter and Facebook? When you can scold, and scold, and scold. That's their future, and it's a satisfying one: a finger wagging in some vulgar proletarian's face, forever. ..."
"... Get a Grippe, America: The flu is a much bigger threat than coronavirus, for now : Washington Post ..."
"... Coronavirus is scary, but the flu is deadlier, more widespread : USA Today ..."
"... Want to Protect Yourself From Coronavirus? Do the Same Things You Do Every Winter : Time ..."
"... We should de-escalate the war on coronavirus ..."
"... "Good hand-washing helps. Staying healthy and eating healthy will also help," says Dr. Sharon Nachman, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at New York's Stony Brook Children's Hospital. "The things we take for granted actually do work. It doesn't matter what the virus is. The routine things work ." ..."
The offenders were Drs. Dan Erickson and Artin Massahi, co-owners of an "Urgent Care" clinic
in Bakersfield, California. They'd held a presentation in which they argued that widespread
lockdowns were perhaps not necessary, according to data they were collecting and analyzing.
"Millions of cases, small amounts of deaths," said Erickson , a vigorous, cheery-looking
Norwegian-American who argued the numbers showed Covid-19 was similar to flu in mortality rate.
"Does [that] necessitate shutdown, loss of jobs, destruction of oil companies, furloughing
doctors ? I think the answer is going to be increasingly clear."
The reaction of the medical community was severe. It was pointed out that the two men owned
a clinic that was losing business thanks to the lockdown. The message boards of real E.R.
doctors lit up with angry comments, scoffing at the doctors' dubious data collection methods
and even their somewhat dramatic choice to dress in scrubs for their video presentation.
The American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) and American College of Emergency
Physicians (ACEP) scrambled to
issue a joint statement to "emphatically condemn" the two doctors, who "do not speak for
medical society" and had released "biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal
financial interests."
As is now almost automatically the case in the media treatment of any controversy, the story
was immediately packaged for "left" and "right" audiences by TV networks. Tucker Carlson on
Fox backed up the doctors' claims, saying "these are serious people who've done this
for a living for decades," and YouTube and Google have " officially
banned dissent ."
Meanwhile, over on Carlson's opposite-number channel, MSNBC, anchor Chris Hayes of the
All In program reacted with fury to Carlson's monologue:
There's a concerted effort on the part of influential people at the network that we at
All In call Trump TV right now to peddle dangerous misinformation about the coronavirus Call
it coronavirus trutherism.
Hayes, an old acquaintance of mine, seethed at what he characterized as the gross
indifference of Trump Republicans to the dangers of coronavirus. "At the beginning of this
horrible period, the president, along with his lackeys, and propagandists, they all minimized
what was coming," he said, sneering. "They said it was just like a cold or the flu."
He angrily demanded that if Fox acolytes like Carlson believed so strongly that society
should be reopened, they should go work in a meat processing plant. "Get in there if you think
it's that bad. Go chop up some pork."
The tone of the many media reactions to Erickson, Carlson, Trump, Georgia governor Brian
Kemp, and others who've suggested lockdowns and strict shelter-in-place laws are either
unnecessary or do more harm than good, fits with what writer Thomas Frank describes as a new "
Utopia of Scolding ":
Who needs to win elections when you can personally reestablish the social order every
day on Twitter and Facebook? When you can scold, and scold, and scold. That's their future, and
it's a satisfying one: a finger wagging in some vulgar proletarian's face, forever.
In the Trump years the sector of society we used to describe as liberal America became a
giant finger-wagging machine. The news media, academia, the Democratic Party, show-business
celebrities and masses of blue-checked Twitter virtuosos became a kind of umbrella agreement
society, united by loathing of Trump and fury toward anyone who dissented with their
preoccupations.
Because this Conventional Wisdom viewed itself as being solely concerned with the Only
Important Thing, i.e. removing Trump, there was no longer any legitimate excuse for disagreeing
with its takes on Russia, Julian Assange, Jill Stein, Joe Rogan, the 25th amendment, Ukraine,
the use of the word "treason," the removal of Alex Jones, the movie Joker, or whatever
else happened to be the #Resistance fixation of the day.
When the Covid-19 crisis struck, the scolding utopia was no longer abstraction. The dream
was reality! Pure communism had arrived! Failure to take elite advice was no longer just a
deplorable faux pas . Not heeding experts was now murder. It could not be tolerated.
Media coverage quickly became a single, floridly-written tirade against "
expertise-deniers ." For instance, the Atlantic headline on Kemp's decision to end
some shutdowns was, " Georgia's
Experiment in Human Sacrifice ."
At the outset of the crisis, America's biggest internet platforms – Facebook, Twitter,
Google, LinkedIn, and Reddit – took an unprecedented step to
combat "fraud and misinformation " by promising extensive cooperation in elevating
"authoritative" news over less reputable sources.
H.L. Mencken once said that in America, "the general average of intelligence, of knowledge,
of competence, of integrity, of self-respect, of honor is so low that any man who knows his
trade, does not fear ghosts, has read fifty good books, and practices the common decencies
stands out as brilliantly as a wart on a bald head."
We have a lot of dumb people in this country. But the difference between the stupidities
cherished by the Idiocracy set ingesting fish cleaner, and the ones pushed in places
like the Atlantic, is that the jackasses among the "expert" class compound their
wrongness by being so sure of themselves that they force others to go along. In other words, to
combat "ignorance," the scolders create a new and more virulent species of it: exclusive
ignorance, forced ignorance, ignorance with staying power.
The people who want to add a censorship regime to a health crisis are more dangerous and
more stupid by leaps and bounds than a president who
tells people to inject disinfectant . It's astonishing that they don't see this.
Journalists are professional test-crammers. Our job is to get an assignment on Monday
morning and by Tuesday evening act like we're authorities on intellectual piracy, the civil war
in Yemen, Iowa caucus procedure, the coronavirus, whatever. We actually know jack: we
speed-read, make a few phone calls, and in a snap people are inviting us on television to tell
millions of people what to think about the complex issues of the world.
When we come to a subject cold, the job is about consulting as many people who really know
their stuff as quickly as possible and sussing out – often based on nothing more than
hunches or impressions of the personalities involved – which set of explanations is most
believable. Sportswriters who covered the Deflategate football scandal had to do this in order
to explain the Ideal Gas Law , I
had to do it to cover the subprime mortgage scandal, and reporters this past January and
February had to do it when assigned to assess the coming coronavirus threat.
It does not take that much work to go back and find that a significant portion of the
medical and epidemiological establishment called this disaster wrong when they were polled by
reporters back in the beginning of the year. Right-wingers are having a blast collecting the
headlines , and they should, given the chest-pounding at places like MSNBC about others who
"minimized the risk." Here's a brief sample:
There are dozens of these stories and they nearly all contain the same elements, including
an inevitable quote or series of quotes from experts telling us to calm the hell down. This is
from the Time piece:
"Good hand-washing helps. Staying healthy and eating healthy will also help," says Dr.
Sharon Nachman, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at New York's Stony Brook Children's
Hospital. "The things we take for granted actually do work. It doesn't matter what the virus
is. The routine things work ."
There's a reason why journalists should always keep their distance from priesthoods in any
field. It's particularly in the nature of insular communities of subject matter experts to
coalesce around orthodoxies that blind the very people in the loop who should be the most
knowledgeable.
"Experts" get things wrong for reasons that are innocent (they've all been taught the same
incorrect thing in school) and less so (they have a financial or professional interest in
denying the truth).
On the less nefarious side, the entire community of pollsters in 2016 denounced as infamous
the idea that Donald Trump could win the Republican nomination, let alone the general election.
They believed that because they weren't paying attention to voters (their ostensible jobs), but
also because they'd never seen anything similar. In a more suspicious example, if you asked a
hundred Wall Street analysts in September 2008 what caused the financial crisis, probably no
more than a handful would have mentioned fraud or malfeasance.
Both of the above examples point out a central problem with trying to automate the
fact-checking process the way the Internet platforms have of late, with their emphasis on
"authoritative" opinions.
"Authorities " by their nature are untrustworthy. Sometimes they have an interest
in denying truths, and sometimes they actually try to define truth as being whatever they say
it is. "
Elevating authoritative content " over independent or less well-known sources is an
algorithmic take on the journalistic obsession with credentialing that has been slowly
destroying our business for decades.
The WMD fiasco happened because journalists listened to people with military ranks and
titles instead of demanding evidence and listening to their own instincts. The same thing
happened with Russiagate, a story fueled by intelligence "experts" with grand titles who are
now proven to have been
wrong to a spectacular
degree , if not actually criminally liable in pushing a fraud.
We've become incapable of talking calmly about possible solutions because we've lost the
ability to decouple scientific or policy discussions, or simple issues of fact, from a
political argument. Reporting on the Covid-19 crisis has become the latest in a line of moral
manias with Donald Trump in the middle.
Instead of asking calmly if hydroxychloroquine works, or if the less restrictive Swedish
crisis response has merit, or questioning why certain statistical assumptions about the
seriousness of the crisis might have been off, we're denouncing the questions themselves as
infamous. Or we're politicizing the framing of stories in a way that signals to readers what
their take should be before they even digest the material. " Conservative
Americans see coronavirus hope in Progressive Sweden ," reads a Politico headline,
as if only conservatives should feel optimism in the possibility that a non-lockdown approach
might have merit! Are we rooting for such an approach to not work?
From everything I've heard, talking to doctors and reading the background material, the
Bakersfield doctors are probably not the best sources. But the functional impact of removing
their videos (in addition to giving them press they wouldn't otherwise have had) is to stamp
out discussion of things that do actually need to be discussed, like when the damage to the
economy and the effects of other crisis-related problems – domestic abuse, substance
abuse, suicide, stroke, abuse of children, etc. – become as significant a threat to the
public as the pandemic. We do actually have to talk about this. We can't not talk about it out
of fear of being censored, or because we're confusing real harm with political harm.
Turning ourselves into China for any reason is the definition of a cure being worse than the
disease. The scolders who are being seduced by such thinking have to wake up, before we end up
adding another disaster on top of the terrible one we're already facing.
Patrick Lovell Apr 30 Like always, I agree and am moved
deeply by most of your positions. I do however find the argument not entirely convincing.
I've seen you down on Russiagate from the beginning and I've never felt like I understood
why. I get the barrage without the evidence and what that means for the broader context
but seriously, Washington's entire currency is lying. So too is Wall Street. But Putin's
isn't? Trump's? Is it really that complicated?
Trump was laundering real estate for bad guys for decades. It's his business model.
Deutsche Bank was involved with fraud in every dimension and direction and Trump was a
relatively small play all things considered, but the SOB knew what he was involved with
and doing. He went so far as to claim the "Act of God" defense based on deuschbag
Greenspan's insane lie that no one saw 2008 coming.
Trump went so far as to sue DM for being a victim of predatory lending. Trump? Victim
of Predatory Lending??!?!?! WTF?!?!? Given all of that and then some (Mercers, Bannon,
etc.) are we to pretend it wasn't exactly what it looks like? Why wouldn't we? Because
Clinton was on the other side? I really don't get that part at all.
Matt Taibbi Apr 30 I'm sorry, but Russiagate wasn't about
whether or not Trump or Putin were liars or bad people. It was a very specific set of
allegations that have been proven now to be false: that Trump was being blackmailed by
the Russian state, that the Russians coordinated with the Trump campaign in an election
interference plot, that the Trump campaign traded sanctions for election aid, that Trump
himself committed treason and was a compromised foreign agent, etc. This has all been
investigated and discounted. In fact it appears now, from the investigation of IG Michael
Horowitz, that the FBI knew relatively early on -- by late 2016 -- that there was no
coordination or collusion going on between Russia and the Trump campaign. Yet smears and
innuendo flowed for years from intelligence sources anyway. You don't have to be a Trump
fan to be pissed that there was such an elaborate effort at spreading this false tale.
Larry May 1 Matt, I disagree, perhaps, with your
reference to Kemp and the other governors who opened their states. Don't you agree that
their effort seems to be an attempt to prevent workers from claiming unemployment benefit
and that, as such, their efforts should not be seen as motivated by a simple, freely
determined skepticism about the merits of the science or even the biased journalism?
I do applaud your general thesis, and would add for my part that one of the most
interesting phenomena regarding the media response to coronavirus and scientific material
in general is a seeming mass desire to settle matters once and for all rather than
fostering an attitude that scientific activity is more than anything else a manifestly
long-drawn out, labor intensive pursuit, that requires much time, almost always, before
actionable insights can be formulated, much less acted upon.
It is odd that, as you have noted so many times, a media so addicted to manufacturing
themes that must be continually resuscitated, like Russia, do the exact opposite with
science: as you note, pundits and reporters, when confronted with science, tend to cram
and swot maniacally (under deadline, assuredly) in order to get as close to a definitive
statement as possible as fast as possible, when the entire process is designed (though
increasingly commercialized and siloed privatized science mitigates against this in
important ways, whilst reinforcing it in others) only to provide "answers" of any sort
extremely tentatively.
This is perhaps one of the most annoying things about many Americans' expectations of
scientific activity, which you see in medicine (and weather forecasting!) perhaps most of
all: people frustrated with the underlying uncertainty of medical prognoses seem to
expect cookie-cutter specific formulations virtually on the spot, and are angered when
these are not forthcoming.
I even know people who have taught philosophy of science who have never stepped foot
in a lab or have the vaguest notion of how "knowledge" is produced there. This sort of
thing adds fertile ground for themes development of potential misunderstandings amongst
lay-people that raises the deleterious effects to another level. But I am digressing.
My main question is about Kemp and the others, but if you could speak a little to
flesh out your interesting comments on reporters and scientific subject matter, I would
be most grateful. I love your work, Matt, keep up the good job!
. The work of two research groups was crucial in shaping the decision of the UK and US
governments to implement wide-ranging lockdowns, and, in turn, governments around the world.
The first group, the Imperial College Covid-19 Research Team,
issued a report on March 16th that predicted up to 500,000 deaths in the UK and 2.2 million
deaths in the US unless strict government measures were put in place.
The second group, the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in Bill Gates' home state
of Washington, helped
provide data that corroborated the White House's initial estimates of the virus'
effects, estimates that have been
repeatedly downgraded as the situation has progressed.
Unsurprisingly, the Gates Foundation has injected substantial sums of money into both
groups. This year alone, the Gates Foundation has already given
$79 million to Imperial College, and in 2017 the Foundation announced a $279 million investment into the IHME
to expand its work collecting health data and creating models.
Anthony Fauci, meanwhile, has
become the face of the US government's coronavirus response, echoing Bill Gates' assertion
that the country will not "get back to normal" until "a good vaccine" can be found to insure
the public's safety.
ANTHONY FAUCI : If you want to get to pre-coronavirus . . . You know, that might not ever
happen, in the sense of the fact that the threat is there. But I believe with the therapies
that will be coming online, and with the fact that I feel confident that over a period of
time we will get a good vaccine, that we will never have to get back to where we are right
back now.
Against the Corona Panic, Pt. VI: Where has the regular flu gone? The CDC reports
unprecedented crash in non-COVID flu-positives, raising questions
...
As the story of COVID 19 unfolds and demands every ounce of our attention another unique
health event, anomalous and perhaps connected goes ignored. An event unprecedented in at
least the last 20 years since these things have been detailed by the CDC, coinciding with the
C19 event, the CDC quietly informed any who were paying attention that the common flu- both
scourge and money-maker – has been disappeared from the United States.
As the trend towards the usual gradual tapering began all of a sudden by Week 12 (March
21st) the 'flu positive' numbers dropped off a cliff. When one looks at the numbers from Week
10, 21.5%, to Week 12, 6.9%, we see an incredible drop off of 14.6% occurred. By Week 14
the 'flu positives' dropped to nearly non-existent – 0.8%. A quick glance to Week
9, 24.3%, and then down to Week 14's all time record low of 0.8% shows a drop off of
23.5%.
It's important to note that while the 22,324 tests done in Week 14 represent a significant
drop in tests done compared to earlier weeks in 2020 those numbers still represented the 2nd
highest overall Week 14 test numbers done in the history of the CDC. Yet only 0.8% 'flu
positives' this season when the average for the preceding 7 years was 12.5% for Week 14. Even
given the circumstances this is a statistical anomaly that begs many questions.
Questions that demand answers:
How did such a terrible flu season suddenly disappear?
In what column have those 'flu positives' been placed?
What happened to all the other seasonal virii that afflict humans this time of the
year?
Where did they all go?
After a 20 year run the CDC has stated that Flu View, it's flagship offering, will no
longer be offering such meticulous reports as they shift their focus to Covid. It would seem
that the CDC has decided after all these years the flu has finally run its course
Exactly! Anyone who announces Covid deaths should also have to announce an adjacent column
called normal flu/influenza/pneumonia, to see how these two columns flow together and to
compare total figures.
Otherwise, at best, they are disingenuous, and more probably, fraudsters and liars!
So, if a HIV patient suffers from and dies of a bacterial pneumonia (pneumococcus and
others) because his immune system is down due his HIV infection, then he's said to have died
of HIV. Correct?
If another HIV patient acquires Covid-19 and suffers from a virological pneumonia and
subsequently succumbs to it, then he has died of Covid-19? Did I get that right?
How about a Covid-19 positive person getting killed in a fatal car accident? Covid-19
then? What about cancer patients in their terminal phase, which in most cases ends by some
fatal organ failure?
Why don't you stop making sh*t up just so it fits your narrative?
Let's take a quick look at how CNN (Cuomo New Network) propaganda works. For but one example:
Here we get the apocalyptic, fear headline:
Deaths spiked as Covid-19 spread in March and April, new analysis finds
And then the story- on the side of your screen you will see a short interview with the
ever-reliable and now regularly featured "expert" Dr. Gupta to lend even more credibility to
this new "report."
And what does the report actually say? The essence of the report is found in the following
comment by Dan Weinberger, the lead epidemiologist(?), (or does he just study infectious
disease?) in the report:
"Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the team found about
15,000 excess deaths from March 1 to April 4. During the same time, states reported 8,000
deaths from Covid-19. "That is close to double," Dan Weinberger, who studies the epidemiology
of infectious diseases at Yale, told CNN.
The team could not show whether the increased deaths were due to coronavirus,
Weinberger said. But there are strong indications that they were. For instance, the team also
looked at data on doctor visits.
"What we see is that in many states, you see an increase in influenza-like illnesses,
and then a week or two later, you see an increase in deaths due to pneumonia and influenza,"
Weinberger said. "It provides some confirmation that what we are seeing is related to
coronavirus."
The first thing that stands out is that while the headline is worded so as to suggest (yet
elusively) a spike in deaths to Covid (meant to increase hysteria in the viewers- and improve
ratings) the report clearly states- "that it could not show whether the increased deaths were
due to coronavirus." Based on anecdotal evidence though, the report's author itself then goes
on to assert that as they have seen more "influenza like" illnesses that these "must be"
Covid cases- and why is that? Let's also keep in mind in the vast majority of these cases no
testing is being done to confirm or deny Covid.
Oddly deaths attributed to influenza (even as the CDC warned us in December we were in for
a bad flu season) have completely stalled and deaths from pneumonia have dropped off
significantly as well. Makes one wonder how all the flu and pneumonia deaths are being
categorized.
But the deceptions get even worse – as you can see there is an embedded link to the
study itself- and when you click that link you will be directed here:
The first item of note is who these authors get their funding from. As you can see the
authors are awash in money from medical organizations that have deep ties to pharmaceutical
companies. They are paid to do such studies.
Let's also keep in mind that this is a pre-print study that is not peer-reviewed yet CNN
(and WaPo) featured it and represented this as if the study was factual and beyond
reproach.
FUNDING:
(Dan Weinberger) DMW acknowledges support from grants R01AI123208 and R01AI137093 from
the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/National Institutes of Health. VEP
acknowledges support from grants R01AI112970 and R01AI137093 from the National Institute of
Allergy and Infectious Diseases/National Institutes of Health. NGR acknowledges support from
grant R35GM119582 from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences/National Institutes
of Health and 1U01IP001122 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). TC
acknowledges support from R01AI146555 from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases/National Institutes of Health. LS acknowledges support from the Carlsberg Foundation
grant # CF20-0046. FWC acknowledges support from NICHD grant 1DP2HD091799-01.
But it gets worse as stated in the next paragraph which precedes the study we can see the
lead author of the study has direct conflicts of interest here through his connections to
pharmaceutical companies that stand to profit handsomely from the entirety of the Covid
business model:
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST:
DMW has received consulting fees from Pfizer, Merck, GSK, and Affinivax for topics
unrelated to this manuscript and is Principal Investigator on a research grant from Pfizer on
an unrelated topic. VEP has received reimbursement from Merck and Pfizer for travel
expenses to Scientific Input Engagements unrelated to the topic of this manuscript.
An intrepid reporter certainly should ask each of the authors to disclose their stock
holdings and also examine the financial contributions received by The Yale School of Public
Health where these authors work.
So we are to trust a pre-print, non peer reviewed study by authors who have direct ties to
the very companies that will profit from this? CNN believes we should- so are we to believe
CNN?
It is possible to conclude that there is evidence of excess mortality in Portugal between
March 1 and April 22, 2020 during the COVID-19 lockdown even using the usual baselines
(mean, median).
By adopting baselines more consistent with the lockdown, the excess mortality becomes
more evident, with estimated 2400 to 4000 potential excess deaths during this period.
The observed excess of mortality is associated with older age groups (over age 65).
The reduction of more than 191,000 daily hospital ED visits occurred between March 1 -
April 22 may potentially be associated with 1291 or more deaths .
Overall, these
results point towards an excess mortality that is associated with and that is 3 to 5-fold
higher than the official COVID-19 mortality.
It is interesting that the study chose to compare all-cause mortality but also against a
different period of the year in an attempt to reflect the reduced movement under the lockdown
more akin to the holiday period. The resulting increased excess-mortality give way for the
authors hypothesis that this is explained by the reduction in visits to hospital.
I will comment though that the authors' estimating method could never be made official for
the purposes that those are used, and their assessment of "3 to 5-fold higher than the
official COVID-19 mortality" is being on the side of the sensationalistic if they are
suggesting that we could replace one with the other. Despite this it is a welcome study.
"For the purposes of argument, I am going to put an extremely conservative figure of 5
million on the number of people who died as a result of Western military intervention, direct
or proxy, in the Middle East.
Now compare that to the worldwide death toll from coronavirus: 220,000. Let me say that
again.
Western aggressive wars to coronavirus: 5,000,000 : 220,000."
This is one time I have to respectful disagree. The virus is certainly real but the hysteria
is totally unjustified. I live in the city and state with supposedly the highest number of
cornivirus death but yet you have hospitals and facilitysb designated for infected person are
empty.....we have doctors and nurses being forced to label any death as cornivirus death.....
and also any death labeled cornivirus has been monetized....
"... First of all, because Stoics believe that our true good resides in our own character and actions, they would frequently remind themselves to distinguish between what's "up to us" and what isn't. Modern Stoics tend to call this "the dichotomy of control" and many people find this distinction alone helpful in alleviating stress. What happens to me is never directly under my control, never completely ..."
"... Marcus likes to ask himself, "What virtue has nature given me to deal with this situation?" That naturally leads to the question: "How do other people cope with similar challenges?" Stoics reflect on character strengths such as wisdom, patience and self-discipline, which potentially make them more resilient in the face of adversity. They try to exemplify these virtues and bring them to bear on the challenges they face in daily life, during a crisis like the pandemic. They learn from how other people cope. Even historical figures or fictional characters can serve as role models. ..."
"... fear does us more harm than the things of which we're afraid. ..."
"... Finally, during a pandemic, you may have to confront the risk, the possibility, of your own death. Since the day you were born, that's always been on the cards. Most of us find it easier to bury our heads in the sand. Avoidance is the No1 most popular coping strategy in the world. We live in denial of the self-evident fact that we all die eventually. ..."
"... "All that comes to pass", he tells himself, even illness and death, should be as "familiar as the rose in spring and the fruit in autumn". Marcus Aurelius, through decades of training in Stoicism, in other words, had taught himself to face death with the steady calm of someone who has done so countless times already in the past. ..."
T he Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was the last famous
Stoic philosopher of antiquity. During the last 14 years of his life he faced one of the worst
plagues in European history. The Antonine Plague, named after him, was probably caused by a
strain of the smallpox virus. It's estimated to have killed up to 5 million people, possibly
including Marcus himself.
="rich-link__link u-faux-block-link__overlay" aria-label="'What it means to be an American':
Abraham Lincoln and a nation divided"
href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/apr/11/abraham-lincoln-verge-book-ted-widmer-interview">
From AD166 to around AD180, repeated outbreaks occurred throughout the known world. Roman
historians describe the legions being devastated, and entire towns and villages being
depopulated and going to ruin. Rome itself was particularly badly affected, carts leaving the
city each day piled high with dead bodies.
In the middle of this plague, Marcus wrote a book, known as The Meditations, which records
the moral and psychological advice he gave himself at this time. He frequently applies Stoic
philosophy to the challenges of coping with pain, illness, anxiety and loss. It's no stretch of
the imagination to view The Meditations as a manual for developing precisely the mental
resilience skills required to cope with a pandemic.
First of all, because Stoics believe that our true good resides in our own character and
actions, they would frequently remind themselves to distinguish between what's "up to us" and
what isn't. Modern Stoics tend to call this "the dichotomy of control" and many people find
this distinction alone helpful in alleviating stress. What happens to me is never directly
under my control, never completely up to me, but my own thoughts and actions are
– at least the voluntary ones. The pandemic isn't really under my control but
the way I behave in response to it is.
Much, if not all, of our thinking is also up to us. Hence, "It's not events that upset us
but rather our opinions about them." More specifically, our judgment that something is really
bad, awful or even catastrophic, causes our distress.
This is one of the basic psychological principles of Stoicism. It's also the basic
premise of modern cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), the leading evidence-based form of
psychotherapy. The pioneers of CBT, Albert Ellis and Aaron T Beck, both describe Stoicism as
the philosophical inspiration for their approach. It's not the virus that makes us afraid but
rather our opinions about it. Nor is it the inconsiderate actions of others, those ignoring
social distancing recommendations, that make us angry so much as our opinions about them.
Many people are struck, on reading The Meditations, by the fact that it opens with a chapter
in which Marcus lists the qualities he most admires in other individuals, about 17 friends,
members of his family and teachers. This is an extended example of one of the central practices
of Stoicism.
Marcus likes to ask himself, "What virtue has nature given me to deal with this
situation?" That naturally leads to the question: "How do other people cope with similar
challenges?" Stoics reflect on character strengths such as wisdom, patience and
self-discipline, which potentially make them more resilient in the face of adversity. They try
to exemplify these virtues and bring them to bear on the challenges they face in daily life,
during a crisis like the pandemic. They learn from how other people cope. Even historical
figures or fictional characters can serve as role models.
With all of this in mind, it's easier to understand another common slogan of Stoicism:
fear does us more harm than the things of which we're afraid. This applies to
unhealthy emotions in general, which the Stoics term "passions" – from pathos ,
the source of our word "pathological". It's true, first of all, in a superficial sense. Even if
you have a 99% chance, or more, of surviving the pandemic, worry and anxiety may be ruining
your life and driving you crazy. In extreme cases some people may even take their own
lives.
In that respect, it's easy to see how fear can do us more harm than the things of which
we're afraid because it can impinge on our physical health and quality of life. However, this
saying also has a deeper meaning for Stoics. The virus can only harm your body – the
worst it can do is kill you. However, fear penetrates into the moral core of our being. It can
destroy your humanity if you let it. For the Stoics that's a fate worse than death.
Finally, during a pandemic, you may have to confront the risk, the possibility, of your
own death. Since the day you were born, that's always been on the cards. Most of us find it
easier to bury our heads in the sand. Avoidance is the No1 most popular coping strategy in the
world. We live in denial of the self-evident fact that we all die eventually. The
Stoics believed that when we're confronted with our own mortality, and grasp its implications,
that can change our perspective on life quite dramatically. Any one of us could die at any
moment. Life doesn't go on forever.
We're told this was what Marcus was thinking about on his deathbed. According to one
historian, his circle of friends were distraught. Marcus calmly asked why they were weeping for
him when, in fact, they should accept both sickness and death as inevitable, part of nature and
the common lot of mankind. He returns to this theme many times throughout The Meditations.
"All that comes to pass", he tells himself, even illness and death, should be as
"familiar as the rose in spring and the fruit in autumn". Marcus Aurelius, through decades of
training in Stoicism, in other words, had taught himself to face death with the steady calm of
someone who has done so countless times already in the past.
Donald Robertson is cognitive behavioural therapist and the author of several books on
philosophy and psychotherapy, including Stoicism and the Art of Happiness and How to Think Like
a Roman Emperor: The Stoic Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius
Some conclusions from those two doctors: Do we need "shelter in place" the answer is emphatical NO. Do no need business shut down --
the answer is emphatical NO.
The virus has been proved to be significantly similar to seasonal
flue epidemic of which we experience each year. Quarantining the sick is what should be done. Not
healthy people.
These journalists are arguing with them! The so called "reporters" don't want to report the
truth, they WANT to spread fear and chaos and drama. The media is complicit in the coup! The
media IS the deep state coup!
Finally light in the middle of pandemic darkness! High spread and low
fatality. Thank you for paying attention to the SCIENTIFIC DATA Dr. Erickson and speaking the
truth. Someone needed to say this in light of the twilight zone that is now our government
leadership AND MEDIA HYPE! Dr. Faulci flat out ignored the biology of herd immunity in his
recommendations to Donald Trump. He also ignored the fact that more than 97% recover from Covid
without medical assistance let alone need a ventilator! He is culpable for a bankrupt America.
We were never at risk for overwhelming our hospitals because most people recovered on their own
at home. Thousands got Covid and recovered that the media never talked about. They are corrupt
and complicit in a bankrupt America. Instead of saying 'better safe than sorry' and driving our
country into bankruptcy how about saying 'better to have money than not' because now 26 million
people have lost their jobs and have filed for unemployment. The ignorant ill informed fear
mongers have damaged America which we will be feeling for a long time to come. Remember this---
and don't ever let them ever do that to you again. Karen Marshall RN BSN
The hospitals and ICUs are not full of people sick with COVID, although the models that
predicted the healthcare system would be overwhelmed by now. The doctors don't feel the
shutdown is justified by what they are seeing.
"All patients with Lupus (an autoimmune illness) get hydroxychloroquine as a preventive
medical treatment and take it all the time. There is no single case known yet that such a
person got covid-19."
Only some 0.05% of people have Lupus. There is NO statistic available that shows that
Lupus cases do not acquire Covid-19. None!
"HCQ has to be given as early as possible. And it works in different and important
ways:
prevents the virus from replicating (in conjunction with Zinc); and
protects hemoglobin."
None of those alleged protections has a scientifically explained causation chain nor have
there been any serious studies that prove what you claim.
May I suggest you try drinking bleach to defeat the virus?
The "CoronaPanic" marches on. It consists of, is driven by,
and/or is propped up by a combination of: Fiasco, farce, fascism, failure, fantasy, fanaticism,
and a ferocious fit of feeling-over-thinking.
While there is a flu pandemic going on, we now know it is a minor and rather unremarkable
one. (Opinions differ on just how unremarkable; Dr. Knut Wittkowski, a hero of the hour,
has recently
suggested it looks a lot like the Swine Flu pandemic strain of 2009-10 in its true 'hit'
potential.) The virus' impact is dwarfed by a parallel force which I will capitalize for
effect. Think of it as: the flu pandemic vs. The Hysteria Pandemic. An abbreviated way to refer
to the latter is "the CoronaPanic."
The CoronaPanic is as a demonic entity that has forced its way into our reality. In this
post, I want to show the difference of the immediate effects of the flu pandemic vs. The
Hysteria Pandemic, as observable in New York City (
jump to the section on New York ).
____________
A brief word on why I am writing this series of posts .
Preceding this post in the series "Against the Corona Panic," are: Pt. I , and
Pt. II , and
Part III , all dealing with something a little different. There will be more.
I believe the fight against the CoronaPanic is a duty for "those of us who can see." There
remain cynics who continue to
believe that the best thing to do is "beg the demonic force of the CoronaPanic for table
scraps as it feasts on our national soul." I deal with this in
Part II ("Say 'No' to jockeying for political advantage on the coattails of Corona
Hysteria").
The evidence we have continues to be against the pro-CoronaPanic side's alarmist predictions
and apocalyptic views, as is observed reality everywhere, including/especially
in the case of Sweden , the greatest hero of the hour we have. The continuous stream of
good news never seems to actually make its way into discourse, which is well and truly surreal
to observe.
As one of the editors of OffGuardian , Kit Knightly, recently
said :
"The most peculiar thing about COVID19 so far has been that they are not hiding the data [
] The data is right there, and yet it is separate from the narrative, which never references
the data; the data never references the narrative. What you have to do is basically ignore
everything the media says, and just look at the numbers, and where the numbers come
from."
Many of us realized this at about the height of the Panic, but the initiative had totally
been lost to the Corona-extremists, who were enabled, if not led outright, by the media.
Why is the media ignoring the data and pushing a largely-data-detached narrative of
cherry-picked, "
scary-looking, big, contexless numbers "? Maybe it's out of garden-variety ignorance; maybe
it's that they know better but have caved into the group-hysteria and group-think; maybe it's
out of a very cynical desire for the crisis to be as bad as possible so that they look
good, even heroic, for reporting on it. I believe all of the above are true, and they partly
explain the media's disgraceful role in promoting CoronaPanic, which is nicely depicted in this
image:
One way or another, to entrust the media with your Corona news is to entrust the henhouse to
a team of foxes.
If the media "throws a number at you," the simple act of asking basic, critical questions is
often enough for the narrative to unravel in front of you. Which is what follows about New York
City.
The surprise . In the search for answers, you can/will find hidden stories, such as
the one I am going to try to tell below, in which we can tentatively quantify the impact of the
Panic vs. the impact of the virus. The surprise is that even in terms of immediate-term body
count, the Panic is much worse than the virus, the cure much worse than the disease for the
body-politic; the net-losers, almost everyone.
_____________
The Coronavirus in New York: Piercing the Numbers-Fog
[W]hat do you make of the New York news release claiming 24000 deaths since March 1, which
supposedly is 4 times normal. Is this true?
(–
MattinLA )
Good question. Given the sensationalist way the media has covered the US hotspot of New York
City, there is no better opportunity to look for context, to practice the art of critical
inquiry, to ask basic questions.
In an
introductory section to the "Just the Flu Vindicated" post, I wrote about the media and the
pro-CoronaPanic side (but I repeat myself!)'s " Scary-looking, Big, Contextless Numbers "
tactic. The alarming-seeming numbers out of New York City are a good case study of this
phenomenon. Twenty-four thousand!
MattinLA asks whether it is "true" that there were 24,000 deaths up to April 22. I don't
doubt that the 24,000 coronavirus-positive-deaths figure is true, in the sense that they have
counted 24,000 bodies since March 1 which were positive for the virus. But this is not the same
as 24,000 coronavirus- caused deaths, and in any case the number 24,000 itself needs
context to have any real meaning.
What does the "24,000 deaths" figure mean?
As a first-off, bird's-eye-view, one-line response, I'd offer this:
What a number like that (24,000) more likely shows is that the virus was/is widespread in
the population at a given time that those 'positives' were logged on the death rolls.
In statistics we run what is called a Null Hypothesis test. If we assume the virus has a
<0.15% fatality rate in New York, can we use the data we have to definitely reject that
"null hypothesis"? It looks unlikely. (cf.: Austrian researchers have found
that in their country's case, the null-hypothesis that coronavirus-positives have been dying at
the same rate as coronavirus-negatives in Austria could not be rejected; in other words, at the
time of that study there was no firm statistical evidence for the virus being uniquely
dangerous at all, in Austria at least.)
Put another way: Given that we have data out of a lot of places now that all suggests a
fatality-rate between 0.02% and 0.2% (which is, embarrassingly for the Panic-pushers, within
the normal range for flu viruses), which of the following is more likely on why
we have seen a high number of deaths in New York City (although a fairly counted true toll is
not 24,000; see below). Is it:
(a) that the virus in highly urban New York City spread more fully and sooner
than it did in other places, and therefore has yielded more virus-positive deaths in roughly
proportional terms to its spread, or
(b) that the virus is much more deadly in New York City than the same strain of flu virus is
in other places, including neighboring localities, or
(c) that the data in NYC is right and the data most everywhere else is wrong; that
only New York's (seeming, at-first-glance) death figures are "true." Most other countries,
regions, cities, and testing authorities have either bungled their data, or are covering it
up.
One of those three must be true. To immediately assume (c), to run with (c), brooking no
dissent on (c), is the mark of the true "Doomer," or CoronaCultist. The latter is someone so
obsessed with the Panic that that they have effectively converted to a religion centered around
it.
I believe the media's default position is effectively a soft version of (c). They don't say
this directly. It is implied.
Few of the assumers of (c) stop to ask whether they have made a reasonable assumption. They
start to love Corona in a perverse way. They start to their chains. Maybe it's useful to think
of it in terms of a "Corona Stockholm Syndrome" (ironically, the Stockholmers themselves proved
'immune' from this syndrome; see also
Sweden Vindicated ).
________________
Now on to analyzing the "24,000 deaths" number itself. First we should establish the base
population. Reports are that it applies to the NYC metro area, not to NYC proper. I assume they
are using the NYC Metropolitan Statistical Area measure, population 20.3 million.
The first question to ask is:
How many deaths are normal for the same time period?
This is to say, how many deaths are statistically expected for the period March 1 to April
22, for the NYC metro area, in a regular year (53 days of late winter, into early spring),
absent a peak-flu-event? (and what about with a peak flu event?)
The number of normal-expected deaths for the NYC-MSA is probably in the vicinity of 25,000
to 27,000 , if their death rate is in line with the national average. (If someone has the exact
numbers of deaths for the same period in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019, those would be
useful. I can't imagine it will be far off 26,000.)
If, in February and March, this flu virus achieved the level of penetration in NYC that it
appears to have done, a lot of the normal/expected deaths in March and April would have been
"corona-positive" at death. They would have died imminently anyway, in many cases on exactly
the same day and the presence of the flu virus is coincidental and did not contribute to
death.
In other words, there is going to be overlap between the categories "normal deaths" and
"coronavirus-positive deaths." How much overlap is hard to say, but we know from elsewhere that
it is high. It could easily be half (as it
was in Hamburg, Germany, when they started dividing between "deaths with" and "deaths from"
this much-hyped virus), plausibly even more than half (as seen in early reports in Sweden,
which estimated up to two-thirds were "deaths with"). For simplicity of calculation, let's say
half.
Deaths could, therefore, not have risen 4x above normal because of the virus. If
total deaths did rise 4x above normal, putting total deaths for the period at 100,000+,
something else caused most of the excess deaths, because there aren't nearly enough
coronavirus-positive deaths to account for it . Epecially not when measuring deaths fairly (see
paragraph above). This is the first hint that something dark may be going on here, the big
surprise we find when we tug on the numbers: That the Panic has killed more people already than
the virus.
I haven't yet seen any official, all-cause-mortality data for NYC metro area for the
CoronaPanic period. The New York Timespublished some graphs that
appear to have been made by their staffers, manually adding all reported corona-positive deaths
as marginal deaths onto a graph plotting a supposed historical-running-average; if so, that is
dishonest but alas unsurprising for the way Corona discourse goes.
_________________
Conceptual categories for deaths during a peak-flu-event (and a Panic)
Useful would be thinking in terms of four categories of deaths , conceptually, all of which
we can theoretically calculate when the smoke clears, and as for now make estimates:
Corona-positive Normal Deaths;
Corona-negative Normal Deaths;
Corona-positive Excess Deaths .sub-dividable into: (3a.) those dying of a respiratory
disease (some very large share of which may be attributed to "COVID19" during the epidemic);
(3b.) those dying of, or primarily of, other causes, with the virus playing an ambiguous role
at most;
Corona-negative Excess Deaths.
The "24,000 corona-positive deaths" figure is distributed between categories (1) and (3).
(1)+(2) must add to 26,000 (or whatever the exact number is of normal deaths absent a
peak-flu-event temporary spike in deaths).
The deaths in "(3a.)" are true victims of the viral flu epidemic. In this case, because
there was a Panic, the theoretically fully calculable figure of (3) must be treated with
caution. The less-calculable figure (3a.) is what we are really after.
The deaths in "(4)" are unambiguous victims of the Panic. Reports are that hospitals in NYC
have had record-low intakes, especially heart attack victims have dropped off. These deaths
would not have occurred had a Panic been averted in mid-March. The Panic-pushers are
responsible for these deaths.
The weeks-long, pro-CoronaPanic stranglehold on the media (looking set to last months more),
and the successful pushing of the hysteria (
see image above for an artistic reproduction) made many tens of thousands too scared to
seek treatment when they needed urgent care.
Some thousands of these unlucky, frightened people will have died of (treatable) ailments
like heart attacks. These are clear cases of "4."
[ Update (April 24):] Here is a graphical representation, found online, of the rise
in "at-home deaths" in New York City. We know from much data elsewhere that
coronavirus-attributable deaths very seldom occur at home, but are slow onset and victims are
hospitalized first. It's likely that the entirety of this excess is to people in category "4,"
running hundreds a day for over a month:
The funny thing is, if someone dies in such circumstances -- the heart attack victim who
doesn't seek help -- and ends up positive for the virus at death, he still goes up onto the
bloodthirsty media's "Big Board of Corona Deaths." This is a kind of 'scam' and bogus data that
led some on the anti-CoronaPanic side to use the the term "Scamdemic."
The practice of over-counting corona victims is satirically shown here, a jab at the
pro-CoronaPanic side, circulating by early-mid April:
Some nursing homes have also been abandoned
by cowardly, panicking staff (ultimately driven to the Panic by the media), and in such places
there have been cases of elderly residents dying from lack of care. These deaths, at least some
of them, are attributable to the Panic, not the Virus, mostly sortable into category 3b or
4.
What are best-guesses for the number of deaths in each category? If we have a known figure
of 24,000 total Corona-Positive Deaths, and a figure of 26,000 Normal Deaths (recalling that
these are overlapping), and if we have significant virus penetration/spread in the population
which especially hit places like nursing homes where many are close to death in any case, the
split may look something close to this:
Total Deaths in New York City metro area for the period (est.) (proposed):
Corona-positive Normal Deaths: 12,000
Corona-negative Normal Deaths: 14,000
Corona-positive Excess Deaths: 12,000 (some unnecessary and caused by the Panic;
5,000-10,000 true coronavirus-induced deaths?)
Corona-negative Excess Deaths: ? (all unnecessary, collateral victims of the Panic)
The (1)+(2) figure is 26,000 (the normal death rate), and here it is proposed 45% of
normal-deaths were positive at death during the height of the epidemic, which may or may not
run slightly ahead of the total-population penetration rate. It is reasonable to assume it runs
ahead of the full-population rate because of spread within hospitals and other long-term care
facilities with terminal patients whose time had come in March/April and would have come absent
a flu-virus epidemic.
As for (3) and (4). If a Panic is ongoing, or there is some other non-virus-related
mechanism causing excess deaths (in other words, if "(4)" is above zero), "(3)" must be
subdivided. The force driving "(4)" will also be spilling over into "(3)," hence the proposed
(3a.) and (3b.), which are harder to calculate. Just because you are positive does not mean you
get a serious disease; very few do. But you might well still die of something else (like
those heart attack victims who stay hunkered down at home) while incidentally positive and be
an excess death.
To get a better handle on this problem, death certificate information would be useful. How
many deaths were classified as "primary cause: respiratory disease"?
[
MAJOR UPDATE (April 25):
See a comment below . The numbers now released for deaths occurring through April 18,
including average age for corona-positive vs. corona-negative deaths, place of death for
corona-positive deaths, and deaths in New York City through April 18, corona-positive vs.
corona-negative) offer strong corroboration for the contents of this post.]
______________
New York City at the cusp of Herd Immunity
If the number I propose there for "(1)" is correct, and such a large portion of
corona-positive NYC metro area deaths have been in "people who were dying anyway" (suggested
by, e.g., the report that half of corona-positive deaths have been to nursing home patients),
this would mean the virus has reached a large share of the total population, something like 30%
to 40% population penetration this writing. (= 6 to 8 million people in the metro area having
had current or past contact with the virus), with terminal patients running ahead of that rate.
If this is the case, we are once again down to the 0.1% fatality rate range for the virus
itself.
Here is the calculation derived from the above:
<10,000 deaths in the NYC metro area fairly attributable to the direct effect of the
virus
divided by
7 million people in the region whose bodies have had contact with the virus (@ 35% of metro
area population of 20.3 million being either a past- or present-positive)
_______________
= ca. 0.1% fatality rate
which is in line with the numbers out of just about every other large-area study since early
April), and we are back to
Just The Flu .
If the virus penetration rate is that high, it is good news, as it means New York City's
epidemic is already over , or very soon over, as they are at the cusp of Herd Immunity. It
also suggests that the lockdowns were unnecessary and created a Panic that killed more than the
virus ever could. A complete failure of policy, driven by a hostile media and cowardly or
demagogic political leaders. If there are any responsible people left in charge, they need to
take action to end the deadly and destructive Panic.
______________
Just how deadly might the Great Hysteria Pandemic (as against the lesser virus pandemic)
have been?
On non-coronavirus-attributableexcess deaths
Recalling the four categories of deaths again:
Corona-positive Normal Deaths;
Corona-negative Normal Deaths;
Corona-positive Excess Deaths sub-dividable into: (3a.) those dying of a respiratory
disease (some very large share of which may be attributed to "COVID19" during the epidemic);
(3b.) those dying of, or primarily of, other causes, with the virus playing an ambiguous role
at most;
Corona-negative Excess Deaths.
What might be the totals for (4), corona-negative excess deaths, and (3b.), corona-positive
excess deaths not caused by a respiratory disease? Put more directly: How many people have the
lockdowns already killed in NYC?
When we get final and confirmed total-mortality data for the NYC metro area, which may not
be soon ( if someone has this, please
leave a comment ), we can calculate (4) as follows:
[Total Reported Deaths] minus (1) minus (2) minus (3) = (4).
[ Update (April 24):] Recall this graph from above:
[ Update (April 24), cont.:] We see that excess deaths at home may have pushed up to
7,500, cumulative, by April 22, for NYC proper alone; this may need to be up to doubled for the
NYC metro as a whole. Therefore 15,000 may be a ballpark-estimate for for "(4)," plus thousands
more in (3b.), adding up to Panic-caused deaths at twice or three times the number of true,
coronavirus-attributable deaths (or "3a" above). The lesson here is: It turns out that when a
Panic is created, people take it seriously, and the outcomes can cause increased mortality in
the immediate term .
[ Update (April 25): See also how the above estimates all compare to
the latest CDC data for all deaths through April 18. The latest data corroborates each of
the findings of this post.
______________
The same phenomenon of Panic-caused excess deaths, documented in the UK
Figures
out of the UK suggest "(4)+(3b.)" are at least as high as "(3a.)" in a high-panic place
like New York City, and potentially pushing three times as high.
Health authorities in the UK
estimate there have been more than 2,500 excess heart attack deaths in London so far,
"excess" meaning those that would normally be treatable and make full recoveries but have
instead died. (That is, since the bizarre about-face by the UK government, in which the
government caved in totally to the Doomers and pro-'Lockdown' extremists [see also: UK Imperial
College study
shown to be laughably wrong ]. In the words of anti-CoronaPanic expert Knut Wittkowski, the
UK's cave-in was based on " one person's
guesstimate " as other experts were sidelined or not consulted; a surreal episode and a
disgrace to the Western tradition.)
London's spike in total mortality, which drives the UK's excess-mortality spike, is
therefore largely explained by people too afraid to to the hospital when they needed to and
dying easily preventable deaths, a fact now
admitted in the Guardian (a sign that the pro-Panic coalition is fraying at the
seams?).
The same holds true in New York.
Possible demographic factors in non-coronavirus-attributable excess deaths
A higher figure for "(4)" could partly indicate a low-trust population in the given area
affected, one much less able to withstand any kind of stressor, less able to "come together,"
one that may have little in common with each other, perhaps mutually suspicious of one
another.
This general description certainly fits today's metro NYC. A large portion of New York,
especially in the outer boroughs, is all but completely devoid of Americans; it was here that
the Panic may have struck hard and the people least ready for how to deal with the e social
stressor thereof, and hunkered down, distrusting all and easy victims of the media-driven
Panic. This produced bodies for the media in their bid to appease their new god; an evil
self-fulfilling prophecy.
We also hear that as much as half of Stockholm's
corona-positive deaths at one point were to Somali immigrants, and a fair portion to other
immigrants, putting ethnic Swedes' total-fatality rate in Stockholm during the current flu
epidemic at a very low level indeed, with deaths probably rounding to 0.0%
based on the latest studies there. There may be something of an international pattern
here.
The No-Lockdown Swedes have avoided much of a "(4)," as have other populations of higher
social trust and regimes that blunted the impact of the evil-beast of CoronaPanic.
______________
The non-corona-attributableexcess deaths: Whose fault?
What causes a man to refuse to go to the hospital when he has a heart attack? What causes an
immediate-term death of despair?
It is no cosmic mystery that the cause here is the Panic itself, and so we must ask: Who
caused the Panic?
The CoronaPanic-pushers, large and small, in the media and elsewhere. The Corona
opportunists, large and small, especially what I call the the Corona Coup d'Etat faction, which
is to say many political leaders. (A great case has been made in OffGuardian today
for
the Corona Coup d'Etat Hypothesis ).
The surprising finding that has emerged, in clear view by mid-April, and clear in the New
York City data, is that the Panic-pushers have already killed more people than the
unremarkable flu virus ever will, at least in certain hotspots . This is humbling, and enough
to make the anti-CoronaPanic side redouble its efforts that we may be liberated from this "mind
virus," as each day it does more damage.
The hard times for us the living are yet to come, and will tower over the short-term hit in
Panic-caused deaths (The Mass Hysteria Pandemic) that was a focus of this post. More and more
are seeing this as among the most extreme cases of "burning down the village in order to save
it" in our times. Aggregate life-years and life-year-equivalents lost due to the the effects of
the Panic will exceed those lost to the virus
by hundreds fold , and plausibly even thousands fold. A complete defeat for
the pro-CoronaPanic holdouts. May they see the light.
None of this needed to be. May the guilty be disempowered and live out their days in shame;
may the rest of us learn the right lessons that this never happen again.
The tragedy of the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be entering the containment phase. Tens of
thousands of Americans have died , and Americans are now
desperate for sensible policymakers who have the courage to ignore the panic and rely on facts.
Leaders must examine accumulated data to see what has actually happened, rather than keep
emphasizing hypothetical projections; combine that empirical evidence with fundamental
principles of biology established for decades; and then thoughtfully restore the country to
function.
Five key facts are being ignored by those calling for continuing the near-total
lockdown.
Fact 1: The overwhelming majority of people do not have any significant risk of
dying from COVID-19.
The recent Stanford
University antibody study now estimates that the fatality rate if infected is likely 0.1 to 0.2
percent, a risk far lower than previous World Health Organization estimates that
were 20 to 30 times higher and that motivated isolation policies.
In New York City, an epicenter of the pandemic with more than one-third of all U.S. deaths,
the rate of death for people 18 to 45
years old is 0.01 percent, or 11 per 100,000 in the population. On the other hand, people aged
75 and over have a death rate 80 times that. For people under 18 years old, the rate of death
is zero per 100,000.
Of all fatal cases in New York
state , two-thirds were in patients over 70 years of age; more than 95 percent were over 50
years of age; and about 90 percent of all fatal cases had an underlying illness. Of 6,570
confirmed COVID-19 deaths fully investigated for underlying conditions to date, 6,520, or
99.2 percent , had an underlying illness. If you do not already have an underlying chronic
condition, your chances of dying are small, regardless of age. And young adults and children in
normal health have almost no risk of any serious illness from COVID-19.
Fact 2:
Protecting older, at-risk people eliminates hospital overcrowding.
We can learn about hospital utilization from data from New York City ,
the hotbed of COVID-19 with more than 34,600 hospitalizations to date. For those under 18 years
of age, hospitalization from the virus is 0.01 percent per 100,000 people; for those 18 to 44
years old, hospitalization is 0.1 percent per 100,000. Even for people ages 65 to 74, only 1.7
percent were hospitalized. Of 4,103 confirmed COVID-19 patients with
symptoms bad enough to seek medical care, Dr.
Leora Horwitz of NYU Medical Center concluded "age is far and away the strongest risk
factor for hospitalization." Even early
WHO reports noted that 80 percent of all cases were mild, and more recent studies show a
far more widespread rate of infection and lower rate of serious illness. Half of all people
testing positive for infection have no symptoms at all. The vast majority of younger, otherwise
healthy people do not need significant medical care if they catch this infection.
Fact 3:
Vital population immunity is prevented by total isolation policies, prolonging the problem.
We know from decades of medical science that infection itself allows people to generate an
immune response -- antibodies -- so that the infection is controlled throughout the population
by " herd
immunity ." Indeed, that is the main purpose of widespread immunization in other viral
diseases -- to assist with population immunity. In this virus, we know that medical care is not
even necessary for the vast majority of people who
are infected. It is so mild that half of infected people are asymptomatic, shown in early data
from the Diamond
Princess ship, and then in
Iceland and
Italy . That has been falsely portrayed as a problem requiring mass isolation. In fact,
infected people without severe illness are the immediately available vehicle for establishing
widespread immunity. By transmitting the virus to others in the low-risk group who then
generate antibodies, they block the network of pathways toward the most vulnerable people,
ultimately ending the threat. Extending whole-population isolation would directly prevent that
widespread immunity from developing.
Fact 4: People are dying because other medical care
is not getting done due to hypothetical projections.
Critical health care for millions of Americans is being ignored and people are dying to
accommodate "potential" COVID-19 patients and for fear of spreading the disease. Most
states and many hospitals abruptly stopped "nonessential" procedures and surgery
. That prevented diagnoses of life-threatening diseases, like cancer screening, biopsies of
tumors now undiscovered and potentially deadly brain aneurysms. Treatments, including emergency
care, for the most serious illnesses were also missed. Cancer patients deferred chemotherapy
. An estimated 80 percent of brain surgery cases were skipped. Acute stroke and heart attack
patients missed their only chances for treatment, some dying and many now facing permanent
disability.
Fact 5: We have a clearly defined population at risk who can be protected
with targeted measures.
The overwhelming evidence all over the world consistently shows that a clearly defined group
-- older people and others with underlying conditions -- is more likely to have a serious
illness requiring hospitalization and more likely to die from COVID-19. Knowing that, it is a
commonsense, achievable goal to target isolation policy to that group, including strictly
monitoring those who interact with them. Nursing home residents, the highest risk, should be
the most straightforward to systematically protect from infected people, given that they
already live in confined places with highly restricted entry.
The appropriate policy, based on fundamental biology and the evidence already in hand, is to
institute a more focused
strategy like some outlined in the first place:
Strictly protect the known vulnerable,
self-isolate the mildly sick, and
open most workplaces and small businesses with some prudent large-group precautions.
This would allow the essential socializing to generate immunity among those with minimal
risk of serious consequence, while saving lives, preventing overcrowding of hospitals and
limiting the enormous harms compounded by continued total isolation. Let's stop
underemphasizing empirical evidence while instead doubling down on hypothetical models. Facts
matter.
* * *
Scott W. Atlas, MD, is the David and Joan Traitel Senior Fellow at Stanford University's
Hoover Institution and the former chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical
Center.
xxx
You can lift the lockdown, but the psychological damage has already been done and it is
irreversible. Our economy will never return to the free-wheeling, go for broke mentality of 4
months ago. That spirit is gone with the wind.
xxx
With all due respect to the MD author......answer this question.
How many would be dead/dying WITHOUT any isolation at all?
The Herd immunity concept is a cop out.......it was called Euthanasia back in the NAZI
Germany day.
Comparing Spanish Flu statistics to today is asinine. Your average MD in 1918 new nothing
about virology and or public health....I will say it again....nothing.
In orders of magnitude;
We have better hygiene
We have better nutrition
We have better public health
We have better educated medical personnel across all disciplines
We have better diagnostics technology
Reinstate levels of all of the above to 1918 levels and Covid-19 would be absolutely
savaging the world population.
**** off back to the bar diner if that is your wish but dont come crying down the road
because your alveoli are full of puss and you cant breathe just find a dark corner somewhere
and die quietly in it.
xxx
Status of COVID-19
As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence
infectious disease (HCID) in the UK:
As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence
infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK.
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 need to have a national, coordinated response remains, but 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.
Definition of HCID
In the UK, a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) is defined according to the
following criteria:
acute infectious disease
typically has a high case-fatality rate
may not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is
managed effectively, efficiently and safely
Classification of HCIDs
HCIDs are further divided into contact and airborne groups:
contact HCIDs are usually spread by direct contact with an infected patient or
infected fluids, tissues and other materials, or by indirect contact with contaminated
materials and fomites
airborne HCIDs are spread by respiratory droplets or aerosol transmission, in
addition to contact routes of transmission
List of high consequence infectious diseases
A list of HCIDs has been agreed by a joint Public Health England (PHE) and NHS England
HCID Programme:
Contact HCID
Airborne HCID
Argentine haemorrhagic fever (Junin virus)
Andes virus infection (hantavirus)
Bolivian haemorrhagic fever (Machupo virus)
Avian influenza A H7N9 and H5N1
Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever (CCHF)
Avian influenza A H5N6 and H7N7
Ebola virus disease (EVD)
Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)
Severe fever with thrombocytopaenia syndrome (SFTS)
Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)*
*No cases reported since 2004, but SARS remains a notifiable disease under the
International Health Regulations (2005), hence its inclusion here
**Human to human transmission has not been described to date for avian influenza
A(H5N6). Human to human transmission has been described for avian influenza A(H5N1),
although this was not apparent until more than 30 human cases had been reported. Both
A(H5N6) and A(H5N1) often cause severe illness and fatalities. Therefore, A(H5N6) has been
included in the airborne HCID list despite not meeting all of the HCID criteria.
The list of HCIDs will be kept under review and updated by PHE if new HCIDs emerge that
are of relevance to the UK.
HCIDs in the UK
HCIDs, including viral haemorrhagic fevers (VHFs), are rare in the UK. When cases do
occur, they tend to be sporadic and are typically associated with recent travel to an area
where the infection is known to be endemic or where an outbreak is occurring. None of the
HCIDs listed above are endemic in the UK, and the known animal reservoirs are not found in
the UK.
As of February 2020, 2019, the UK has experience of managing confirmed cases of Lassa
fever, EVD, CCHF, MERS and monkeypox. The vast majority of these patients acquired their
infections overseas, but rare incidents of secondary transmission of MERS and monkeypox
have occurred in the UK.
xxx
Dumbest comment in the history of ZH, and that's saying a lot.
In 1918, people weren't flying all over the world 24 hours a day, going to work on crowded
trains, riding to their offices in crowded elevators, etc. Also, doctors were not as dumb as you suppose.
Also, if hygiene is such a big factor, why is Bangladesh largely unaffected? Why is
Belarus not dying en masse even though they've taken a "don't give a ****" stance since Day
1?
The Flu of 1918 was far more deadly than this little cold. It had killed 10 million four
months in.
So go hide in your closet. I'll be outside playing and building up my immune system.
xxx
How many would be dead/dying WITHOUT any isolation at all?
Much much less.
Death numbers are over inflated (i work in the field).
people dying from the economic shock and medical negligence from other disease will be
worse than the total number of covid death
virus has already been around the world at least since December, even before. Number of
non symptomatic people is probably around the 20-30%, and would have been more it or weren't
for that idiotic isolation. More non vulnerable people getting immunity from the virus = less
spreading and contagion.
you are prioritizing very old people, and endangering the live of younger workers. Next
time you're in the Titanic, make sure to save the older people first, and the children
last.
Btw covid isn't the Spanish flu, get it out of your head.
xxx
What do you call ravaging? 2 million? Do we destroy the planet for 2 million?
9 million
died of hunger last year and we find that completely acceptable even though it's the most
preventable cause of death out there.
if we were truly concerned about people not dying we
could fix that for less money and lively hoods than we have spent this year already and we're
just getting started.
I don't think you see what's coming in the form of global unrest, wars,
famine, complete marshal law, ect. I reply to you respectfully and will listen to anything
you have to say with an open mind.
My bank now has traffic pylons outside the door. They ask the following questions if you
want to enter:
-Have you been out of the country ? Answer; How am I going to be out of the country when the
airport is closed?
-Do you have any symptoms ? Answer: If I had I would be at the hospital
-Have you associated with anyone who has the symptoms? Answer: If I thought they did I would
ask them to go to the hospital and so would I.
-Sir! There is no need to be rude. Answer: Far from it. You are asking questions parrot
fashion. Questions that do not make any sense.
After getting MY money out of THEIR pockets I proceeded to the auto mechanic for front
brakes.
Joker: Am I allowed to come inside ?
70 Year old Mechanic Unmasked : Sure, you are the only customer today. You can keep me
company while I do the work. I cannot afford to lose customers.
The public panic that abounds is not of natural origin. It is manufactured by the media and
the deep state. The question arises, for what purpose. I suspect that that the US economy is
undergoing a designed, controlled demolition in order to produce an uncontrolled demolition
of the Chinese economy and thus forestall Chinese ascendancy.
The little people in the US, as Leona Helmsly would have dubbed them, purchase mountains
of Chinese manufactured goods and are really the cornerstone of the Chinese economy.
The little people in the US will no longer be purchasing anything but absolute necessities
like food as the engineered depression will leave them with pockets too empty for anything
else.
Following new CDC
guidelines : " As of April 14, 2020, CDC case counts and death counts include both
confirmed and probable cases and deaths . This change was made to reflect an interim COVID-19
position statement issued by the Council for State and Territorial Epidemiologists on April 5,
2020. The position statement included a case definition and made COVID-19 a nationally
notifiable disease.
A confirmed case or death is defined by meeting confirmatory laboratory evidence for
COVID-19. A probable case or death is defined by i) meeting clinical criteria AND epidemiologic
evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19; or ii) meeting
presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence; or iii)
meeting vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID19" [
source ]
Branko Milanovic
@BrankoMilan
Why is nobody discussing truly staggering differences in death rates between Eastern and
Western Europe? In the @FT graphs none of Eastern European countries is even included. The
gap is just striking. (Worldometer, 22 April)
I tend to think both B and some opponents of the lockdown are massively oversimplifying.
It's dangerous to a small demographic and we mostly know who that is. The binary lockdown
vs not lockdown mindset ignores the enormous specificity of the disease and variables in
actions taken. A lockdown that poor people can't follow won't be effective and a lockdown
that fails to protect elderly and especiallly nursing homes will see high deaths. An open
approach that does these things might be more efficaous.
The premise that the anti lockdown position is a bunch of ignorant, right wings nuts is
readily dispelled by the large number of scientists who have spoken out against it.
Again, the problem here is the various shades of grey and large number of variables. Some
containment acts might not work and do more harm than good. Different places will have
different results based on weather, density (spread rate), demographics, etc
Then there is the changing narrative. Flatten the curve was about reducing strain on
hospitals with only modest (at best) gains in lives. Now we compare Sweden and Norway say on
deaths and not strain on hospital resources.
The lockdown is doing a lot of economic, social, psychological harm especially in the US
where we have no safety net, no healthcare and many poor. Closing schools will seriously hurt
children. EG: 50% of NYC kids get assistance for breakfast and 72% get it for lunch. Those
schools fulfill important social and care functions beyond schooling.
There are many variables in this equation. Stop pretending otherwise.
Cheers, b, for standing up to the libertarian nonsense.
I would still note that - at least in the US - the federal and state plan for nCOV
management is unquestionably very poorly thought out.
A few questions:
1) While lockdowns in breakout areas like New York, New Jersey, Louisiana make sense -
what is the plan for the rest of the country?
In particular - Singapore has demonstrated that controlling initial nCOV penetration
(travellers from Wuhan) - even subsequent secondary infection from other countries (Students
returning home from Europe) is still not enough to prevent resurgence. Singapore is now
headed for the worst results in Asia due to its 200K cheap offshore laborers in barracks.
The same (actually, probably worse) conditions exist for fruit and produce harvesters and
meat workers in the US, as well as Amazon and other delivery warehouses. Dark kitchens are
likely to add to the mix.
So - is the solution to lock down until there is a vaccine? For at least 7 months from
now? Is it to have flareups and more lockdowns later? The uncertainty causes as much economic
damage as anything else.
2) The mortality data is also quite clear: the vast majority of affected are the 65+. What
about having state and federal government planning - via say, Medicare - to provide food and
support services and to quarantine/protect via isolation those vulnerable demographics?
They're already widely financially supported via their Social Security paychecks; they're the
least vulnerable to needing paychecks to eat - unlike a huge percentage of the rest of the
population.
3) The economic disruption is ginormous. Unemployment helps some - but it maxes out at 30
weeks.
There are still huge numbers of business owners and others who are not eligible for
unemployment.
Are those people just having to lump it for the duration of nCOV protective measures? Which,
as I noted above, is likely to be many months - not just 1 or 2?
4) Testing. Why is testing not being heavily subsidized and/or price controlled? Both PCR
for active and antibody?
Lastly, even if the lockdowns were to magically end tomorrow - entire sectors are still
going to be severely disrupted.
The entire travel sector is toast for 2020.
The sports and concert scene is also toast for 2020.
Bars and nightclubs? Highly problematic.
Restaurants? Also very problematic.
Schools? We're going into summer now, but nCOV will still be a problem in September - and we
won't have a vaccine then. The entire commercial/restaurant/school supply chain is hosed - how is that situation
going to get resolved?
The real problem the libertarians have isn't just that their rabid aversion to government
is wrong headed - it is that the only way to try and get out of this nCOV situation without
maximum economic and public health impact is via smart government policy.
But at the same time, there is very little evidence of smart government policies - at any
level - in the US.
There is one size fits all measure. Quarantine is necessary in some places like NYC (and many
other large cities). As well as for people over 65, and other who continue the high risk group
(extremely obese, diabetics, with immune system problems, with cardiovascular problems, etc) It
is less nessesary and justified in area will low population density. In those places mass
gathering (say more then 10 people) can be prohibited and obligatory wearing of masks inside
buildings and transports as well as places with high density outside like lines, but life can
continue as usual
Yesterday James Corbett of The
Corbett Report interviewed Kit Knightly of Off-Guardian about the corona crisis. At 18:30 minutes in
Corbett finds it "disturbing" that some of the blogs who usually criticize governments, like
Moon of Alabama, support the measures governments have taken to lower the speed of the novel
coronavirus epidemic.
Corbett then highlights a discussion on
Twitter between me and the Off-Guardian account.
#BillGates funded World Health Organisation advocate forced removal of family members fm
homes if "tested" positive for #COVID19 even tho test is not proven reliable. So, govts hve
corralled us in homes & will now unlawfully raid & extract citizens under poss.
false pretext.
China did this in phase 2 of the Wuhan quarantine because it was the only way to protect
the families from their infected members. Without that policy Wuhan would not have ended
the epidemic.
Current test reliability is relativ high if test is immediate used when symptoms appear.
OffGuardian retweeted my tweet and launched the discussion:
... ... ...
Now back to the Off-Guardian and Corbett critique. My view on the epidemic
was always based on science. You can follow how it developed through the list of posts
attached to this one. As I watched how China defeated its outbreak I had hoped that other
governments would take similar measures. With globally concerted action we could have
completely erased this disease!
But one slips into a pandemic with the governments one
has, not with the ones one wishes for.
Will our 'elites' use the crisis to further enrich themselves. Sure .
Will they abuse some of the control measures? That is practically guaranteed. And it does not
change a damned thing with regards to the pandemic.
It is now too late to defeat it by eradicating its source. Social distancing measures like
lock-downs are needed to keep the epidemic under control and to not overload our health care
systems. Should the next outbreak wave be worse than the current one we will need even
harsher measures than we currently have. I will support those because I know that they will
save lives.
If that makes me an 'authoritarian' in the view of some then let it be so.
I for one find it more useful to tell people
to make and wear masks than to post
'expert opinions' (scroll down) from PR-company sites which disagree with the scientific
mainstream while their estimates of the total death toll have already been exceeded.
--- It is entirely erroneous and risible to view any action of the state as
"authoritarian."
This infantile disorder is derivative of all liberal thought, which rests on a
methodological individualism, the idea that society is nothing beyond the individuals which
allegedly constitute it. Incidentally, left-wing anarchism shares the same theory of
the state, regardless of its ostensibly social objectives. The state in both views is just an
exogenous, evil "thing," which interferes unjustifiably in civil society and markets. Of
course, this theory has no connection to reality at all if you are sane enough to accept the
merits of public libraries, roads, water treatment, schools, healthcare, environmental
protections, etc.
The Marxist theory of the state is the correct one. The state emerges from class
relationships, and enforces them through a variety of means. But, it is also a terrain of
class struggle and a resume of the balance of class forces in society.
The historical evolution of the state clearly expresses these realities, and working-class
movements and left-wing parties have shaped the state and its institutions in important ways.
Public health care systems are inextricable from the success of working-class struggles. The
power of the coercive branches of the state are an expression of the weakness of the left.
And so on.
It follows that a working-class demand for stronger lockdown and quarantine measures in
the interest of protecting lives and the very public institutions we need has nothing in
common with "authoritarianism."
Only an asshole capitalist who truly thinks, as the Governor of Texas put it, that "there
are more important things than life," would say so.
Let's be clear: the call for more meaningful and stronger directives and rules in the
present is only coming from the left because it alone cares for the health and well being of
fellow human beings. It is the right-wing assholes and capitalists who want to "return to
normal" as soon as possible.
Those warning of the authoritarianism of any lockdown measures are regurgitating the heart
and soul of reactionary right-wing thought and capitalist interests.
This whole charade exposes how many in the so called Alternative Media are unable to
differentiate, to base their thinking on scientific methods, and just live and think in a
bi-polar borderline black and white world.
I applaud you for your stace, even more seeing the onslaught of hysterics you face.
Most of the Alternative media are just as bad as MSM. Only mirrored.
Only a differentiated, scientific, and neutral analytic stance like yours can be a solution.
Neither the likes of Off-Guardian, nor CNN.
IMO this divide stems from this:
Our European (and German) stance of social democracy of freedom for the individual, as
long as it does not harm others or the society as a whole
vs.
the anglo ideology of total freedom for the individual, not matter the costs for others.
Many so called "progressives" from the likes of Off-Guardian are foreigners to the
concept, that individual liberty has limits, when the well being of higher values (like the
society as a whole, harm to others) is at risk.
They are libertarians who put themselves over all others, but claim to be "progressive".
In the context of an aglo-american society they well be "progressive" But only compared to
the likes of Trump or Biden or Clinton.
Mostly the protests are being instigated by the usual anti-government oligarchs who are
terrorized that people might actually conclude that government has an important role to play
in addressing problems.
As far as public opposition to the police state lockdown coming almost only from MAGA
types, this is yet another example of the complete abdication and worthlessness of "the left"
which leaves a vacuum that's filled by right-populism.
Just like with Brexit, just like with the American opportunity for a populist movement
truly against Wall Street, corporate rule, the Pentagon, the police state.
As we saw with Brexit, erstwhile "anti-globalists" ran home to globalist mama the moment
the chips were down. Today we see the vastly more profound phenomenon of almost all
self-alleged "anti-authoritarians" running home to police state mama.
When everyone who ever claimed to hold human principles and who filled most of the
ideological leadership space among the "alternative" set then not only abdicates but flips
180 degrees to embrace the very system they'd always claimed to oppose, that can do nothing
but throw the whole space wide open to fascism.
And if the people do embrace classical fascism, a major cause will be this revelation of
the fraudulence of almost all who ever claimed to fight for an alternative.
IMO we should just label them the pro-COVID crowd in any discussion of the
matter.
You're the one exulting in how the bug allegedly promises total apocalypse. The pro-COVID
crowd are those propagating this mass terror campaign and those like you who have joyously
embraced it.
This whole charade exposes how many in the so called Alternative Media are unable to
differentiate, to base their thinking on scientific methods, and just live and think in a
bi-polar borderline black and white world.
I applaud you for your stace, even more seeing the onslaught of hysterics you face.
Most of the Alternative media are just as bad as MSM. Only mirrored.
Only a differentiated, scientific, and neutral analytic stance like yours can be a solution.
Neither the likes of Off-Guardian, nor CNN.
IMO this divide stems from this:
Our European (and German) stance of social democracy of freedom for the individual, as
long as it does not harm others or the society as a whole
vs.
the anglo ideology of total freedom for the individual, not matter the costs for others.
Many so called "progressives" from the likes of Off-Guardian are foreigners to the
concept, that individual liberty has limits, when the well being of higher values (like the
society as a whole, harm to others) is at risk.
They are libertarians who put themselves over all others, but claim to be "progressive".
In the context of an aglo-american society they well be "progressive" But only compared to
the likes of Trump or Biden or Clinton.
With respect to your statement "Will they abuse some of the control measures? That is
practically guaranteed", I feel I must point out when Bush brought in targeted killings he
insisted that it would only be done against selected individuals and now, 18 years later the
US has a committee of unelected military and intelligence officials rubber stamping secret
kill lists that have resulted in at least 100,000 deaths, 80% of which were "collateral
damage" of bystanders, no legal defense against inclusion on the list, no appeal, not even a
public declaration of who is being pursued. I simply can not imagine a more irrespirable
group to grant the power to seize and hold individuals, especially since the US is in the
middle of a political/economic crisis before the pandemic. My specific concerns are.
1. how long can an individual be held, what is the process for being released (do Doctor's
have the power to release the patient? do Judges, military officers?) - I suspect it will be
a long drawn out process taking at least 6-10 weeks requiring several different doctors and
multiple tests, since the US has NO infrastructure setup for this process currently it will
be subject to overloading and delays and rather than balancing the safety of society vs the
rights of the individual it will simply crush the individual
2. What facilities does the government even have for the internment of seized individuals?
- The government has none, meaning it will be forced to construct WW-2 Japanese-style
internment camps in isolated areas with minimum health care services and probably outbreaks
of other diseases
3. What treatment for the disease will individuals receive? (will they receive any?) - The
US public doesn't have universal health care or even enough medical supplies for the public
at large, the detainees will in all likelihood receive only nominal healthcare services,
making them at high risk of other diseases. I suspect any camp setup by the US government to
specifically treat sick individuals will have excessively high death rates
4. What support will be provided for the family members or dependants of the detainees? -
I think we all know the answer is zero, the US has gone to war against social services in the
US for last 30 years and unlike all of the other wars the US has launched they've been hugely
successful in destroying the safety net of society. What do you think will happened when
previously detained individuals are released back into society to discover that their family
lost their house or apartment or their children were taken into foster care
You may claim that giving the government this power is the only way to defeat the Pandemic,
but the simply truth is the government will not use it to defeat the Pandemic , rather
they will use that power to enrich themselves and create only the barest façade of an
effort to fight the pandemic and it will be so weak, so incompetently designed and
ineffectively managed that it will make the Pandemic worse. Why should I believe that a
government that has a bipartisan history of corruption, incompetency and failure going back
30 years will now unexpectedly succeed. They will fail.
Unfortunately, the science says there is not a vaccine for this corona virus or any other
corona virus or even the common cold virus. The science says there are not even any perfectly
effective vaccines for the flu. Developing one every year is something of a crap shoot.
However, the science also says that this virus is unusually highly infective, even if the
death toll is low relative to infected persons - possibly 0.1%. This is why I suggest an
effective vaccine is highly unlikely to ever be developed for this virus
There is really no evidence that the virus will ever be eradicated, unless mother nature
helps us as it had done with the first SARS virus and the MERS virus. The way Sars Cov2
infects us suggests this will not be the case.
So the argument between OFF Guard and Moon is moot. People are going suffer and
occasionally die from the virus' infections if and until we develop a balanced "relationship"
with it similar to the other four human corona viruses. The difference between the two
arguments is the OG set up will kill more now, and b approach will kill more later. The
advantage to b's point of view is that evolution might tame the virus into a less virulent
strain through mutation of the virus and/or built up immunity in humans.
The best approach is a holding pattern, not a complete futile lockdown, but not a do
nothing herd immunity approach. Testing, learning more of the virus' nature, social
distancing, wearing masks, developing/discovering drugs to mitigate the effects of the virus,
research possible vaccines, open the economy in a measured manner, and develop
politcal-economic policies that will equalize the distribution of wealth to defend against
the high death toll and missery that mass unemployment will produce.
Russia detected 5,236 new coronavirus carriers yesterday. That is substantially less than
yesterday. But this is not the story. It really should not matter that much how many new
cases the Russians are able to dig up, because the big story is that according to Russia's
own statistics upwards of 60% of those infected don't get sick and are asymptomatic:
The 60% asymptomatic figure is pretty consistent with the Diamond Princess (46% I think) and
Roosevelt numbers (something around 60%). The Stanford study of a 50 to 1 ratio of
asymptomatic (98%) doesn't jibe with this. I believe the study was very flawed. Either the
testing and/or the sample group.
The case of a mother in Meridian, Idaho, who was arrested after police say she violated a
city order by letting her children play in a playground has sparked a furious backlash and
protests against Covid-19 restrictions. Sara Brady was arrested and charged with one count of
misdemeanor trespassing, following the incident at Kleiner Park in Meridian on Tuesday.
Video footage shows Brady being led away from the scene in handcuffs as several other women
with young children plead with the police officers for an explanation for the arrest.
"As a person, does this make sense to you? As a person, not as a police officer," one
can be heard asking as the mother is perp-walked out of the park on the sunny afternoon.
🚨 BREAKING 🚨 Mother arrested in Meridian, Idaho for letting kids play in
parkThis has gotten out of controlStop arresting free Americans for being outside with their
familiesRT!! pic.twitter.com/TUsbgat0D2
Meridian police say they made several attempts to encourage Brady to adhere to the rules and
she did not comply with their requests. She was part of a group of families that was taking
part in a "playdate protest" over Idaho's stay-at-home orders. She is now facing up to
six months in jail and/or a US$1,000 fine.
The arrest prompted a protest outside Meridian City Hall on Tuesday evening, where
demonstrators voiced their concerns about how the incident was handled by the police and
expressed their opposition to Idaho's Covid-19 measures.
Restrictive lockdown measures limiting people's freedom of movement and sending unemployment
rates to record highs have created tensions in many US states.
Footage of Brady's arrest went viral on Twitter on Wednesday, with one video of the incident
racking up more than one million views in two hours.
"This has gotten out of control," activist Rogan O'Handley writes in one viral message.
"Stop arresting free Americans for being outside with their families."
One could say there are generally 2 honest standpoints on what is happening (ignoring the
dishonest ones). On the surface these 2 groups appear to have diverging opinions based on
essentially the same fear: What happens to the economy.
One group fears the extreme actions taken by governments and institutions are causing far
more damage to society and individuals in terms of economic damage, unemployment, eradication of
democratic and personal rights and ultimately also deaths. These actions are seen as real and
deliberate attacks on individuals and modern society.
The other group senses the same fear, but the fear is so strong that cognitive dissonance
kicks in to deny reality. One is simply not able to accept the implication of governments and
institutions willingly crushing society. So the official virus doomsday line is internalized as
the truth, instead of causing a revision of one's world view, even though the numbers show that
it is an irrational standpoint.
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;
Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,
And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
Now over the last two weeks, the city's fire officials said more than 2,192 New York City
residents died in their homes, compared to 453 during the same time period last year.
On average there are 25 deaths in home per week in NYC- Tuesday, April 7th for example,
there was 256. The reason? People are afraid to go to the hospitals, cardiologists are
confirming this, lest they get infected with the "killer virus." This means when they are in
the early stages of cardiac arrest, for example, they stay at home and some don't make
it.
NYC officials stated that they WILL NOT be conducting tests on these at home deaths nor
will they be doing any diagnostics on the cadavers.
NYC officials also confirmed that they will begin to count suspected COVID-19 deaths in
addition to cases confirmed by a laboratory.
Stephanie Buhle, a spokeswoman for the New York City's Health Department, confirmed the
change in protocol.
"The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner (OCME) and the NYC Health Department are working
together to include into their reports deaths that may be linked to COVID but not lab
confirmed that occur at home."
NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio in his infinite wisdom acknowledged that the vast majority of
deaths taking place at home were likely also due to COVID-19. No tests, no diagnosis but the
mayor with his crystal ball stated:
"We do want to know the truth about every death at home, but it's safe to assume that the
vast majority are coronavirus related."
That's his exact quote.
What will this do to the COVID death count? What will this also do to the excess mortality
rate as people are fearful of getting immediate treatment for very serious life or death
conditions?
Now, AG Barr has taken Trump's embrace of the 'reopen now' movement to the next level by
claiming the DoJ might join lawsuits filed by businesses and citizens against various states
over the shutdown orders.
"We have to give businesses more freedom to operate in a way that's reasonably safe," Barr
said. "To the extent that governors don't and impinge on either civil rights or on the
national commerce - our common market that we have here - then we'll have to address
that."
The move comes as more conservative groups reportedly heap pressure on the administration to
do more to stop governors like Gavin Newsom from keeping their states closed until the summer,
according to BBG.
But the last thing states need right now is another reason to blame the White House for
meddling in their reopening planning...
One way the Justice Department might act against state or local officials is by joining
lawsuits brought by citizens or businesses over restrictions, Barr said. He acknowledged that
state governments are at "a sensitive stage," as they try to balance health and safety
against pressure to reopen.But he said that "as lawsuits develop, as specific cases emerge in
the states, we'll take a look at them."
"We're looking carefully at a number of these rules that are being put into place," Barr
said. "And if we think one goes too far, we initially try to jawbone the governors into
rolling them back or adjusting them. And if they're not and people bring lawsuits, we file
statement of interest and side with the plaintiffs."
...and Barr just gave it to them on a silver platter.
There's a descent into hysteria and anger here. You all _really_ need to read that John
Ioannidis article I posted above. He's not an "Off-Guardian nut job." He's a professor of
epidemiology at Stanford University. He and other experts reviewed all the currently
available data (with some common-sense restrictions) and made a report I've also linked to.
The report indicates that Covid-19 is not very dangerous to under-65s in good health, with
possible exception of people in a horrible health care situation.
As for dying 'from' rather than 'with', that's also not some wacky theory pushed by some
"Off-Guardian nut job." No, it's promoted by Oxford University, _that_ Oxford University, and
I've cited their report repeatedly. Global Covid-19 Case
Fatality Rates , is from the The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of
Oxford. The report states, emphasis in original:
"Recording the numbers of those who die with Coronavirus will inflate the CFR as
opposed to those that died from Coronavirus, which will deflate the CFR."
The report later adds: "It is now essential to understand whether individuals are dying
with or from the disease. Understanding this issue is critical. If, for instance, 80% of
those over 80 die with the disease then the CFR would be near 3% in this age group as opposed
to 15%. Cause of death information from death certificates is often inaccurate and
incomplete, particularly for conditions such as pneumonia. These factors would act to lower
the IFR."
Now, these Stanford and Oxford University epidemiologists might be wrong. Or they might be
right. Still much uncertainty. But treating the people you disagree with in _this_ context as
conspiracy-addled nut cases tells me that you have an excessive commitment to 'winning' and
not to getting this thing right.
What do you mean by "minimizing"? It's simply a fact, based on the increasingly strong
statistical data, that Covid-19 is not very dangerous for under-65s in good health. But no
one should deny (I'm not) that the US disaster capitalism health care system puts millions in
danger. This is clear in the stats. There's a huge difference in Covid mortality rates in the
US and Western Europe:
"Individuals with age <65 account for 5%-9% of all COVID-19 deaths in the 8 European
epicenters, and approach 30% in three US hotbed locations. People <65 years old had 34- to
73-fold lower risk than those ≥65 years old in the European countries and 13- to 15-fold
lower risk in New York City, Louisiana and Michigan. The absolute risk of COVID-19 death
ranged from 1.7 per million for people <65 years old in Germany to 79 per million in New
York City. The absolute risk of COVID-19 death for people ≥80 years old ranged from
approximately 1/6,000 in Germany to 1/420 in Spain."
And, compared to Europe, there are (many?) more Americans with poor diets and health,
greatly raising the % of vulnerable in the under-65s. But the world is not the US. Maybe the
Covid-19 response should be nuanced. One size probably does not fit all.
I read the link. I think his information is a little dated.
It was written april 10th, there were 100,000 deaths at that time, 9 days later there are
165,000 deaths.
His selection of areas to study seems odd at best.
(Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland), three
states (Louisiana, Michigan, and Washington), and one city (New York)
"Flattening the curve to avoid overwhelming the health system is conceptually sound -- in
theory," he wrote in a paper in March."
Again, a paper he wrote in march, before shit hit the fan.
He seems pretty dismissive of anything that doesn't align with his perception. All in all
not very convincing.
Posted by: fairleft | Apr 20 2020 0:46 utc | 144 Read Ioannidis, everyone, and calm down:
As I said before, he needs to get out of his office and talk to the doctors on the front
lines. If he doesn't, he's an idiot talking from an ivory tower - or he has an agenda. Do
you know what his agenda is?
But then maybe not. Ioannidis could be a fine scientist with a clear comprehension of the
trajectory of viral outbreaks. Perhaps there is room for the meeting of minds of the risk
assessment science and the epidemiologists but I believe they have been in collaboration for
many decades and have a sense of each others methodologies.
There is always the possibility that the political sense of risk management is
dramatically different from the sense that Risk scientists and Epidemiological scientists
possess.
I note this is a Presidential election year where the choice might be driven by any one of
the following each with a weighting that a political machine might attribute:
Get the deaths over with asap
Get the economy up and running asap
Blame the 'other' country (it worked for the dems and Clinton)
Blame Fauci / epidemiology / WHO / DHHS / Bill Gates
Reinstate TR Captain who 'saved' his crew in defiance of the Navy Brass (as metaphore for
self)
What could Biden do or say that would be of any comprehensible value to anyone but Trump
Smash the DNC as they already look like imbeciles
Go for a majority in both houses and to hell with the human cost
Do nothing and keep up the shutdown gives the democrazies more scope to attack
Supposedly someone in the DNC machinery has a strategy but I see it isn't Bernie
Sanders.
Decent news from Poland: government "relaxed" lockdown, entry to forests and parks is allowed
again. Covering of mouth and nose in public is obligatory, except for those working in
agriculture. At least there will be no collapse there. No word if fishing is allowed again...
that was very messy -- local police could fine people sitting with fishing rods on lake/river
banks at their discretion. Presidential elections scheduled for May are not rescheduled, but
it seems that it will be a postal vote. Will they microwave the ballots or cook the results?
It is becoming clearer with each passing day that the death toll from the Wuhan virus is not
rising exponentially as the "experts" predicted but only modestly in some places while
levelling off or even declining almost everywhere else in the country --
as well as the world . The incidence of infection borders on nil in the hot and humid
countries, where the number of deaths remains in the double or very low triple digits
four months after the virus emerged from the Wuhan province of China.
Common sense alone indicates that the number of deaths will ultimately be nowhere near the 2
million without "mitigation" or a best case 100,000 to 240,000 with "mitigation" as predicted
by "Tony and Deborah" at the White House press briefings that have fueled nationwide panic.
Tony and Deb have
since revised their "models" downward to predict 40,000 to 178,000 deaths. And that
prediction has already been lowered again as the IMHE model Tony and Deb have been touting
during the briefings now "predicts" 81,766 deaths by August 4. That prediction
would require some 18,000 people to die every month between now and then, even though at 10,000
deaths
since February 29 -- a number consistent with a heavy flu season -- we appear to have
reached the peak and a decline is already evident .
At some point, Tony and Deb will be "predicting" precisely what has already happened, as we
saw with the "models" that first predicted Hillary Clinton was certain to win the Presidency.
And when the final death toll fails even to approach what they first predicted in order to
panic the whole country into a nationwide lockdown never before seen in human history, they
will make the unprovable, non-falsifiable, junk science claim that "mitigation worked."
But it is becoming increasingly clear that "mitigation" has done nothing but cause a
pointless, catastrophic disruption of social and economic life. This seems to delight the lying
media and their Democrat partners, who are striving to keep fear alive, avoid or minimize any
good news about the numbers, overstate the burden on local hospitals (without any unedited
video or other reliable evidence), argue against curative treatment by hydroxychloroquine or
otherwise, get everybody into masks after months of "expert" advice that masks are ineffective,
and generally prolong the economic damage and loss of civil liberties for months to come.
As the actual numbers belie the pseudo-scientific prophecies of doom, however, the lockdown
of America that began with Democrat governors and mayors now exhibits a curious and hardly
coincidental fissure along party lines. As of today, nine states, all headed by Republican
governors, refuse to join the lockdown regime and now provide embarrassing counterfactuals
demonstrating that officially mandated lockdowns were never necessary and have probably made
the situation worse by preventing the development of "herd immunity" to this virus, like all
the others, from the normal interaction of large populations.
The following are the nine states that have refused to impose lockdowns. All of them have
minimal death tolls from the Wuhan virus, including the populous South Carolina, and five of
them have not enacted even local lockdowns:
Arkansas – 14 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Iowa – 14 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Nebraska – 8 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
North Dakota – 3 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Oklahoma – 42 deaths.
South Carolina – 40 deaths.
South Dakota – 2 deaths. No statewide or local lockdowns.
Utah – 8 deaths.
Wyoming – 0 deaths.
[Data as of this writing on April 6 at 9 p.m.]
Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas told the Fake News
New York Times what we have been saying on these pages since the stupid lockdowns began:
"the typical stay-at-home order was a misleading 'illusion' because it includes so many
exemptions allowing people to go out in public, such as for groceries or exercise ordering
people to stay at home would simply leave thousands jobless."
The Times demands to
know why these nine states have seceded from the United States of Mitigation: "Holdout
States Resist Calls for Stay-at-Home Orders: 'What Are You Waiting For?' screams the indignant
headline. Editorial desperation leaps from the page, for the Fake News combine as a whole knows
that these nine Republican-led holdout states are all counterfactual to the panic narrative,
and that what they are waiting for is the rest of the country to discover that they have been
had by the cheerleaders of "mitigation," who live in luxury and job security while the masses
suffer. First and foremost, Deb and Tony, intimate associates of Bill Gates, whose "models"
keep lowering predictions to catch up with the growing embarrassment of the real numbers.
Another embarrassing counterfactual is the Commonwealth of Virginia, now being suffocated by
Democrat Governor Ralph ("Infanticide") Northam's absurd executive orders, which have ruined
the state's economy while attempting to place its entire population under a fake quarantine
that does nothing but create instant unemployment and bankruptcy. The Northam lockdown will
remain in effect until June 10 unless Northam calculates he cannot get away with prolonging his
virus-themed dictatorship past Trump's new control date of April 30. Yet, as of the week of
March 28, the
Virginia Department of Health "has received report of 1,352 pneumonia and
influenza-associated deaths," including five pediatric deaths, during the 2019-20 flu season,
while purported deaths from the Wuhan virus and related pneumonia stand at 54 as of today at 9
p.m., with no pediatric deaths.
Based on the example of Virginia alone, which provides an all-but-irrefutable
counterfactual, it is time to call this fiasco what it is: Coronagate. In my view, Coronagate
will go down as the single biggest fraud in the fraud-ridden history of American politics --
outside of the fraudulent inducement of America's belated entry into World War I, which
sacrificed
116,000 American lives to an epochal disaster that destroyed the last remnants of
Christendom, guaranteed World War II, and led to the rise of the Third Reich and the Soviet
Union.
Meanwhile, the White House press briefings have devolved into a black comedy with the same
script every day: Trump recites a litany of statistics on the number of COVID-19 tests
performed, the mass production and distribution of ventilators and N95 respirators, surgical
masks, surgical gowns and surgical gloves; praises the captains of industry for pitching in
with massive contributions of product; and lauds the branches of the military for their massive
logistical operations, including the building of entire hospitals that remain almost empty.
Pence then delivers another sermon on how to "slow the spread in 30 days." Then Deb drones
on about her ever-evolving models, followed by a very hoarse Tony, who croaks the same
statements he made the day before about "the curve" and "mitigation, mitigation, mitigation"
while assiduously avoiding any suggestion that the "pandemic" could be over any time soon or
that there could be any proven effective treatment.
Then it's the media jackals' turn. Day after day these morons jabber at Trump with
accusations disguised as questions: Why has governor so-and-so or such-and-such hospital not
received enough test kits/ventilators/masks/gowns/gloves/breath mints?
... ... ...
At today's briefing, one reporter attempted to elicit from Fauci a declaration that, no
matter what Trump might think, America cannot "return to normal" without a vaccine whose
development is, conveniently enough for the media-DNC complex, at least a year away. Fauci's
meandering response was a dog whistle that, if he has anything to say about it, the country
will remain under some level of lockdown until there is a largely ineffective or even harmful
vaccine, like the one he advocated
for the swine flu of 2009.
The Fake News media are laboring to elevate Fauci, a star in the Leftist galaxy whose center
is Bill Gates, to the status of Recovery Czar whose "medical opinion" will determine the fate
of the nation
The shutdown of the American economy should end as soon as possible. We have reached the
point where fear and panic have precluded logic and facts. The damage from our overreaction to
the Covid-19 pandemic is likely to prove greater than the death toll from the disease itself.
The virus is not containable, and our attempt to achieve the unachievable grows more costly
every day.
Covid-19 is not proving as deadly as first imagined. Last March 16, a group of researchers
at Imperial College in London predicted 510,000 deaths in the UK and
2.2 million in the US. Within ten days, these early estimates were revised downward by more
than an order of magnitude. As I write, the best estimate of ultimate deaths from
Covid-19 in the US is about 60,000, the same as the 61,000 people who died from influenza during the winter
of 2017-2018. Yet we continue to suffer from a shutdown whose imposition was justified by a
fallacious model prediction.
The spread of the coronavirus is both inevitable and necessary. It is necessary because, in
the absence of a vaccine, the only way to counteract the disease is to build immunity in the
population. A person who contracts the infection and recovers is immune. They can no longer
become ill or spread the disease. Infection and recovery is the most effective vaccination
possible.
Last March 3, the World Health Organization estimated the mortality
rate from Covid-19 to be 3.4 percent. We now know that this early estimate was much too high
because testing was limited to individuals exhibiting severe symptoms. Subsequently, more
extensive testing has
found that half the infected population is entirely asymptomatic, and that the
corresponding mortality rate is in the neighborhood of 0.1 percent. Thus 99.9 percent of the
people who get the disease further the goal of building immunity in the population. Although
this is an inconvenience for those who are affected, these infections accomplish an ultimate
good.
The whole idea behind shutdowns and quarantines is not to reduce cumulative mortality, but
to "flatten the curve" so that our health care facilities are not overwhelmed. Individuals who
need intensive care may be saved by this strategy but the net mortality reduction is likely to
be small. Shutdowns and quarantines will prolong the course of the pandemic. When social
distancing ends, as it must eventually, the disease will simply resume its inevitable course
through the population. Flattening the curve does not reduce the area under the curve.
Where did we get the idea that some businesses and occupations are "non-essential?"
In a market economy, every job is essential. And every job is certainly essential to the
person who depends on it for their livelihood. In the midst of a pandemic it's sensible to ban
mass gatherings of hundreds and thousands of people. But local governments are now imposing
restrictions that make little sense. Parks and golf courses have been closed. The imposition of
evening curfews is baffling. Every government official with totalitarian instincts now has the
moral justification to impose arbitrary and senseless curtailments on freedom of movement and
association.
Ironically, in the midst of a supposed epidemic, hospitals all over the nation are
closing down for a lack of patients. Why? Because government officials ordered them to
cancel all elective medical procedures so they could be prepared to receive a crush of Covid-19
patients that never arrived. In the last four weeks, we've lost
22 million jobs . In our panic over the Covid-19 pandemic, we seem to have forgotten that a
robust economy supports health care, education, fire and police protection, and the
construction and maintenance of critical infrastructure that maintains human civilization. The
toll from the artificial induction of poverty may ultimately exceed lives lost to the
disease.
In 2011, researchers at Columbia University
found that poverty contributes to 133,000 premature deaths annually in the US. Our stop-gap
solution, massive government spending, is no panacea. Prosperity comes from production, not
spending, borrowing, and taxing. If we don't reverse course in a matter of days, we're on our
way to national suicide.
Two important results in Switzerland and Germany show that it is the elimination of large
gatherings together with mask wearing and social distancing that have had the main impact on
reducing the infectivity of covid-19, not the lockdowns (which appear to have had relatively
minor effects so far, according to these two results). Any measures have a built-in delay of
8 to 10 days before their effects, due to the incubation periods of successive infections.
The accumulating death toll from Covid-19 can be seen minute-by-minute on cable news
channels. But there's another death toll few seem to care much about: the number of
poverty-related deaths being set in motion by deliberately plunging millions of Americans into
poverty and despair.
In the first three weeks since governors began shutting down commerce in their states, 17
million Americans filed for unemployment, and according to
one survey , one quarter of Americans have lost their jobs or watched their paychecks cut.
Goldman Sachs
predicts that the economy will shrink 34 percent in the second quarter, with unemployment
leaping to 15 percent.
Until the Covid-19 economic shut-down, the poverty rate in the United States had dropped to
its lowest in 17 years. What does that mean for public health? A 2011 Columbia University
study funded by the National Institutes of Health estimated that 4.5 percent of all deaths
in the United States are related to poverty. Over the last four
years, 2.47 million Americans had been lifted out of that condition, meaning 7,700 fewer
poverty-related deaths each year.
It's a good bet these gains have been completely wiped out, and it's anyone's guess how many
tens of millions of Americans will have been pushed below the poverty line as governments
destroy their livelihoods. It's also a good bet the resulting deaths won't get the same
attention.
And that doesn't count an unknown number of Americans whose medical appointments have been
postponed indefinitely while hospitals keep beds open for Covid-19 patients. How many of the
1.8 million new
cancers each year in the United States will go undetected for months because routine
screenings and appointments have been postponed? How many heart, kidney, liver, and pulmonary
illnesses will fester while people's lives are on hold? How many suicides or domestic homicides
will occur as families watch their livelihoods evaporate before their eyes? How many drug and
alcohol deaths can we expect as Americans stew in their homes under police-enforced indefinite
home detention orders? How many new cases of obesity-related diabetes and heart disease will
emerge as Americans are banished from outdoor recreation and instead spend their idle days
within a few steps of the refrigerator?
I have participated in many discussions among top policymakers in Congress and the
Administration over the last few weeks. Such considerations are rarely raised and always
ignored. Instead, policymakers fixate on epidemiological models that have already been
dramatically disproven by actual data.
On March 30, Drs. Deborah Birx and Anthony Fauci gave their
best-case projection that between 100,000 and 200,000 Americans will perish of Covid-19 "if
we do things almost perfectly." As appalling as their prediction seems, it is a far cry from
the 200,000 to 1.7 million deaths the
CDC projected in the United States just a few weeks before. And even their down-sized
predictions look increasingly exaggerated as we see actual data.
Sometimes the experts are just wrong. In 2014, the CDC
projected up to 1.4 million infections from African Ebola. There were
28,000 .
Life is precious and every death is a tragedy. Yet last year, 38,800 Americans died in
automobile accidents and no one has suggested saving all those lives by forbidding people from
driving – though surely we could.
In 1957, the Asian flu pandemic
killed 116,000 Americans, the equivalent of 220,000 in today's population. The Eisenhower
generation didn't strip grocery shelves of toilet paper, confine the entire population to their
homes or lay waste to the economy. They coped and got through. Today we remember Sputnik
– but not the Asian flu.
It's fair to ask how many of those lives might have been saved then by the extreme measures
taken today. The fact that the Covid-19 mortality curves show little difference
between the governments that have ravaged their economies and those that haven't, suggests not
many.
The medical experts who are advising us are doing their jobs – to warn us of possible
dangers and what actions we can take to mitigate and manage them. The job of policymakers is to
weigh those recommendations against the costs and benefits they impose. Medicine's highest
maxim offers good advice to policymakers: Primum non nocere -- first, do no harm.
Goldman Sachs
predicts that the economy will shrink 34 percent in the second quarter, with unemployment
leaping to 15 percent.
Notable quotes:
"... Across the US, millions of businesses have been shut down by "executive order" and the unemployment rate has skyrocketed to levels not seen since the Great Depression. ..."
"... What if the "cure" is worse than the disease? ..."
From California to New Jersey, Americans are protesting in the streets. They are demanding
an end to house arrest orders given by government officials over a virus outbreak that even
according to the latest US government numbers will claim fewer lives than the seasonal flu
outbreak of 2017-2018.
Across the US, millions of businesses have been shut down by "executive order" and the
unemployment rate has skyrocketed to levels not seen since the Great Depression.
Americans, who have seen their real wages decline thanks to Federal Reserve monetary
malpractice, are finding themselves thrust into poverty and standing in breadlines. It is like
a horror movie, but it's real.
Last week the UN Secretary General warned that a global recession resulting from the
worldwide coronavirus lockdown could cause "hundreds of thousands of additional child deaths
per year." As of this writing, less than 170,000 have been reported to have died from the
coronavirus worldwide.
Many Americans have also died this past month because they were not able to get the medical
care they needed. Cancer treatments have been indefinitely postponed. Life-saving surgeries
have been put off to make room for coronavirus cases. Meanwhile hospitals are laying off
thousands because the expected coronavirus cases have not come and the hospitals are partially
empty.
My concept of a pandemic is smallpox when it reached the Indian tribes on Vancouver Island
and had a death rate of about 92%, including all ages and all states of health.
I have never heard of a pandemic which leaves the children untouched, most infected with
no symptoms, and kills mainly those above eighty years of age. I call that a virulent
'flu'!
In Western Australia we have had six deaths, with an average age of probably 75 years. I
have seen more people, in the local park, on a Saturday afternoon, choking to death on
cucumber sandwiches!
I smell a '9-11' rat. I smell the contrived Banking panic of 1907, the dark footsteps of J
P Morgan and Jacob Schiff, leading to the setup of the US Fed and six months later the start
of WW1, leading to the decapitation of half a dozen empires.
Now that we have destroyed our economies, allowing the debt bankers to swoop in and buy
the ruins of the small businesses, for 'pennies' in the pound, beware of the dark footsteps
and the webs of dark design!
Reminder: because of the aggressive way in which we code #COVID deaths - and because
the virus mostly kills elderly people with pre-existing conditions (who may be dying WITH and
not OF it), changes in all-cause mortality will be the ONLY reliable way to judge the death
toll.
Gene Epstein 8:47 AM - 17 Apr 2020
I suggest we look at all-cause mortality EXCLUDING: --all transport-related deaths (which
should be way down), ---suicides & deaths from drug overdose (should be up) --all
crime-related deaths (should be down).
"... Many Americans believe their government is using this crisis to preempt restlessness, riots or even revolution, for the American economic house of cards is overdue for collapse anyway, thanks to decades of mismanagement. With a rising China making Uncle Sam increasingly irrelevant and annoying, the US has to unleash this bioweapon to zap its nemesis and decouple from it. So what if a few shiploads of its own citizens keel over. They're just useless eaters anyway. ..."
"... The self-image of Americans as freedom-loving renegades is a long way from reality. There's a reason those guys were allowed to run around Richmond, Virginia armed to the teeth a couple of months back: everyone – including the gun lovers themselves – knew it was all for show. ..."
After China, South Korea was hit hardest by the coronavirus, yet it never locked itself
down. By comprehensively testing people, regularly disinfecting places, contact tracing and
having nearly everyone wear a face mask while in public, it has managed to suffer only 211
deaths in 11 weeks. On just April 8th, 799 people died from it in New York State.
Why hasn't the Korean model been emulated worldwide, instead of China's much more
restrictive measures? If you want to explore your totalitarian playbook, however, this is the
perfect window.
Many Americans believe their government is using this crisis to preempt restlessness, riots
or even revolution, for the American economic house of cards is overdue for collapse anyway,
thanks to decades of mismanagement. With a rising China making Uncle Sam increasingly
irrelevant and annoying, the US has to unleash this bioweapon to zap its nemesis and decouple
from it. So what if a few shiploads of its own citizens keel over. They're just useless eaters
anyway.
I think you'll find that the 1981 edition of Koontz's novel called the bioweapon "Gorki-400,"
and this was changed to "Wuhan-400" in an edition published in 2008.
The self-image of Americans as freedom-loving renegades is a long way from reality.
There's a reason those guys were allowed to run around Richmond, Virginia armed to the teeth
a couple of months back: everyone – including the gun lovers themselves – knew it
was all for show.
Linh Dinh asked: " don't you sometimes get the feeling we're just being toyed with?"
Answer: Absolutely, yes, Linh!
Linked below is some evidence. Event 201, a weird global pandemic exercise which included
"players," for example, global business, government, & public health leaders.
To date, Event 201's implemented Psy-Op plan works, & the fearful & divided
"Sheeple" are obediently performing their part. * Almost all Americans welcome protection
& free money from The Blue & White House occupant, The Big Bad Orange Wolf..
Texans flocked to the state's Capitol in Austin to protest Covid-19 lockdown measures,
refusing to practice social distancing and cheering for Dr. Anthony Fauci to be fired by
President Donald Trump. In attendance at Saturday's 'You Can't Close America' Rally were
InfoWars founder Alex Jones and host Owen Shroyer, who led the crowd of some 200 people in
chants against the mainstream media and officials like Fauci.
Shroyer, who referred to the doctor as "fascist Fauci," asked the crowd: "Do
you think Anthony Fauci should be fired?" , before leading them in chants of "Fire
Fauci."
Sometimes, the best thing to do, is to do nothing at all. Take Sweden, for example, where
the government decided not to shut down the economy, but to take a more thoughtful and balanced
approach. Sweden has kept its primary schools, restaurants, shops and gyms open for business
even though fewer people are out in public or carrying on as they normally would. At the same
time, the government has kept the Swedish people well-informed so they understand the risks the
virus poses to their health and the health of others. This is how the Swedes have minimized
their chances of getting the infection while avoiding more extreme measures like
shelter-in-place which is de facto house arrest.
What the Swedish experiment demonstrates, is that there's a way to navigate these
unprecedented public health challenges without recklessly imposing police state policies and
without doing irreparable harm to the economy. And, yes, the results of this experiment are not
yet known, but what we do know is that most nations cannot simply print-up trillions of dollars
to counter the knock-on effects of bringing the economy to a screeching halt. These countries
must dip into their reserves or take out loans from the IMF in order to recover from the lack
of production and activity. That means they're going to face years of slow growth and high
unemployment to dig out from the mess their leaders created for them.
And that rule applies to the US too, even though the government has been recklessly printing
money to pay the bills. The unforeseen cost to the US will come in the form of long-term
unemployment triggered by millions of failed small and mid-sized businesses. That grim scenario
is all but certain now. And just as the USG "disappeared" millions of workers from the
unemployment rolls following the 2008 Financial Crisis– forcing them to find low-paying,
part-time, no-benefits work in the "gig" economy– so too, millions of more working people
will fall through the cracks and wind up homeless, jobless and destitute following this crisis.
One $1,200 check from Uncle Sam and a few weeks of unemployment compensation is not going to
not be enough to prevent the fundamental restructuring of the US labor force that will be
impossible to avoid if the economy isn't restarted pronto.
That's why we should look to countries like Sweden that have taken a more measured approach
that allow parts of the economy to continue to function during the epidemic, so other parts can
gear-up quickly and return to full capacity with minimal disruption. This should not be a
"liberal vs conservative" issue as it's become in the United States. One should not oppose
restarting the economy just because Trump is 'for it', but because millions of working people
are facing an uncertain future in an economy which– most economists believe– is
headed for a severe and protracted recession. Liberals should be looking for ways to avoid that
dismal outcome instead of wasting all their time criticizing Trump. (Of course, now that the
idiot Trump has appointed Ivanka, Jared, Kudlow and Wilbur Ross to lead his Council to Re-Open
America" it will be impossible to extricate the issue from partisan politics.) This is a clip
from an article by Donald Jeffries at Lew Rockwell:
"The shutdown of businesses now has been going on for more than a month. How many of the
dwindling small businesses left in our casino economy have already closed down forever? How
many mid-sized ones will ever be able to reopen? How many millions will be furloughed, laid
off, fired- however they word it- because of this draconian reaction? How can an economy
based on commerce exist without commerce?" ("The Locked Down World", Donald Jeffries, Lew
Rockwell)
Indeed. This isn't a question of putting profits before people. The economy IS our life. Try
to make a living without an economy. Try to feed your family or pay the rent or buy a car or do
anything without an economy. We need the economy. Working people need the economy, and we need
to find a way to do two things at the same time: Keep the economy running and save as many
lives as possible. The idea that we can just do one of these things and not the other, is not
only blatantly false, it is destructive to our own best interests. We have to do both, there is
no other way. Here's more background on Sweden from an article at Haaretz:
"The truth is that we have a policy similar to that of other countries," says Anders
Tegnell, Sweden's state epidemiologist, "Like everyone, we are trying to slow down the rate
of infection The differences derive from a different tradition and from a different culture
that prevail in Sweden. We prefer voluntary measures, and there is a high level of trust here
between the population and the authorities, so we are able to avoid coercive
restrictions"
It's still too early to say whether Stockholm's policy will turn out to be a success story
or a blueprint for disaster. But, when the microbes settle, following the global crisis,
Sweden may be able to constitute a kind of control group: Did other countries go too far in
the restrictions they have been imposing on their populations? Was the economic catastrophe
spawned globally by the crisis really unavoidable? Or will the Swedish case turn out to be an
example of governmental complacency that cost human lives unnecessarily?" ("Why Sweden Isn't
Forcing Its Citizens to Stay Home Due to the Coronaviru", Haaretz)
Tegnell, is no long-haired, fist-waving radical, he's Sweden's chief epidemiologist and has
worked for mainstream organizations like the WHO and the European Commission. Where he differs
from so many of his peers is simply in his approach, which empowers ordinary people to use
their own common sense regarding their health, their safety and the safety of others. It's
simple, if you develop symptoms, stay home. Tegnell believes that its easier to get people to
do the right thing by trusting their judgement then by ordering them to do so.
That said, Sweden's objectives are the same as every other country impacted by the pandemic.
The emphasis is on "flattening the curve", slowing the rate of infection, testing as many
people as possible, and protecting the vulnerable and older populations. It's just their
methods are different. They've taken a more nuanced approach that relies on level-headed people
conforming to the guidelines that help to minimize contagion until some better remedy is found.
"Social distancing" is practiced in Sweden, but the population has not had their civil
liberties suspended nor have they been put under house arrest until the threat has passed.
Sweden has not compromised its core values in a frenzied attempt to stave off sickness or
death. Can the U.S. say the same? Here's more from an article at the Washington Times:
"As government leaders in the UK and the United States are grappling with how to revive
dormant economies, Dr. Tegnell said the Swedish approach will allow the country to maintain
social distancing measures in the long term without putting the economic system at risk. Dr.
Tegnell said he believes certain regions in Sweden are already very close to a state where so
many in the population have built up resistance to the virus that it is no longer a pandemic
threat
"We do believe the main difference between our policies and many other countries' policies
is that we could easily keep these kinds of policies in place for months, maybe even years,
without any real damage to society or our economy," Dr. Tegnell said. Although the government
has not issued a stay-at-home order, many Swedes have decided to quarantine and practice
social distancing on their own volition, Dr. Tegnell said." ("Top Swedish official: Virus
rates easing up despite loose rules", The Washington Times)
The threat of pandemic is new to most countries, so it's not entirely fair to criticize
their response. But, at this point, reasonable people should be able agree that implementing
sweeping policies that inflict incalculable damage to the economy and on people's personal
liberties is a gross overreaction that poses as big a threat as the pandemic itself. Leaders
must be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. That's all we should expect of them: Just
restart the damn economy while minimizing the risks of infection as much as possible. Is that
too much to ask? Here's an excerpt from an article at MedicineNet:
"The financial ruin this pandemic has caused for many will almost certainly lead to
increased suicide, mental illness, and physical health problems exacerbated by a loss of
health insurance in countries without socialized medicine, according to the World Economic
Forum. That's partly why both Sweden and Singapore have tried to keep life in their countries
as normal as possible for as long as possible during the response. It does not explain the
drastically different death tolls between the two countries, however .
Anders Tengall, the country's chief epidemiologist, is making a grim wager. The hypothesis
is there will not be significantly more Swedes dead at the end of the pandemic than if the
country had initiated stricter distancing protocols, but the looser approach will keep the
number of cases from spiking when lockdowns are lifted.
Tengall's and the rest of the Swedish government's bet is this approach is more
sustainable, and can help prevent some of those other bad health outcomes that accompany
economic depression." ("Sweden and Singapore: The COVID-19 'Soft' Approach vs.
Techno-Surveillance", MedicineNet)
So, yes, the number of deaths per thousand in Sweden do not compare favorably to nearby
Denmark, but the final results of the experiment might not be known for years. With a
population of 5.8 million, Denmark's death-toll is currently 336, while Sweden's is 1,400 for a
population of 10.2 million. (as of 4-17-20) So, as a practical matter, the Swedish method looks
vastly inferior. (Interestingly, Sweden's population is similar to NY City's 8.4 million, but
coronavirus deaths in NYC have now reached a horrific 12,822.)
at the end of the day it does not matter where or how the virus originated and first became
public. that's all in the rear view mirror. throwing stones or getting lawyers solve nothing.
the crime against humanity is not the virus but the response to what hindsight will
demonstrate to be no more worrisome than seasonal flu.
only a nation bent on suicide shuts down their entire economy for a virus with a death
rate in the 1% range and even that is predicated largely on age and pre existing
conditions.
in other words the old and the already quite sick.
i am 71 and so have no axe to grind against us old folks.
The ventilator shortages of which we were all gravely warned have not yet come to pass.
I n March, one of the most feared aspects of the pandemic was the widely reported coming
shortage of ventilators. One well-publicized estimate, repeated by the New York Times , the New
Yorker and CNN, was that the U.S. would need roughly one million ventilators, or more than five
times as many as we had. Gulp. Ventilators are expensive, they're complex machines, and they
can't be churned out in the thousands overnight.
Advertisement
In the state that (as of today) has one-third of the country's confirmed COVID-19 cases, New
York governor Andrew Cuomo sounded the alarm for ventilators repeatedly. On March 27, he
acknowledged "I don't have a crystal ball" but said his state desperately needed 30,000
ventilators, maybe 40,000, but had only 12,000. When President Trump noted that Cuomo's state
had thousands of unused ventilators it hadn't even placed yet, Cuomo admitted this was true but
said he still needed more: "Yes, they're in a stockpile because that's where they're supposed
to be because we don't need them yet. We need them for the apex," Cuomo said at the time. On
April 2, Cuomo predicted the state would run out of ventilators in six days "at the current
burn rate." But on April 6, Cuomo noted, "We're ok, and we have some in reserve."
Rockland County, NY has more than 2700 infections per 100000 residents.
In my little portion of Appalachia, we have less than 20 infections per 100000 residents.
When it comes to COVID-19 suppression policies, one size doesn't fit all.
States are clearly not equal in the scope of epidemic and density of population. And even in
composition of population, including the number of elderly and homeless: it is difficult to
survive for homeless in Northern states. What is good from NY or NJ is not good for Ohio.
"Ohio Senate candidate attacks DeWine's 'tyranny' in coronavirus response" [
Columbus Dispatch ]. "Republican Melissa Ackison was among about 100 protesters outside the
Statehouse during DeWine's appearance inside on Monday . "'The original model, along with the
president's condemnation of the World Health Organization's handling this pandemic
inappropriately, is all that the public needs to know," she said. 'We have children to feed,
businesses to run, employees to pay, and Ohio must end this shutdown now. Those with high-risk
categories and compromised immune systems can shelter safely at home while the rest of us can
exercise our constitutional liberties to work and take care of our businesses and
children.'"
UPDATE "The very American conflict between liberty and lockdown" [ The Week
]. "To recap: Demonstrators have hit the streets this week in
Ohio , Kentucky , and
North
Carolina . On Wednesday, a protest in Michigan was dubbed " Operation
Gridlock. " Despite the firearms and Confederate battle flags, the protesters' demands
might seem familiar, even sympathetic to most Americans. They want freedom -- freedom to go
shopping, freedom to open up their businesses, freedom to go sit in a restaurant and have
dinner with friends, freedom merely to do what they were doing unencumbered two months ago.
Don't we all? 'Quarantine is when you restrict movement of sick people,' one of the Michigan
organizers told Fox News. 'Tyranny is when you restrict the movement of healthy people.'"
• Wrong on the merits. Federalist 47 : "The accumulation of
all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or
many, and whether hereditary, selfappointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very
definition of tyranny." That said, this gentleman doesn't seem to understand that the
sick/healthy binary breaks down in the absence of testing and with asymptomatic transmission.
And that's before we get to the "Not us, me" mentality. Naturally, the press is treating these
putatively spontaneous demonstrations as very serious and important, much as they treated
Santelli's rant against
foreclosure relief in 2009.
"... By every measure, New York is the aberrant epicenter of the Covid-19 outbreak. So what you find in the New York stats has got to be definitive, but what they're conclusive about is the very opposite of the hysteria being propagated by the Cuomos & friends. ..."
"... The New York data, in fact, show that Covid-19 almost pinpointedly attacks the old, the frail, and the medically vulnerable, not the general population. ..."
We are getting sick and tired of the CNN/Cuomo Brothers inquisition and the Coviddeath
Cavalcade. Their relentless, morose, partisan coverage of the coronavirus pandemic is the
single greatest campaign of misinformation, disinformation, propaganda, scaremongering and
elitist prattle we can recall in our entire lifetime.
Indeed, Joe McCarthy's Red Scare was a Sunday School picnic compared to CovidGate. And just
as there were no commies secretly subverting America 66 years ago, there is no deathly
contagion stalking the American people today and no public health emergency that remotely
justifies the Lockdown Nation regime that the CNN/Cuomo Brothers and infectious disease lobby
have foisted on the country with virtually no public debate or democratic accountability.
By every measure, New York is the aberrant epicenter of the Covid-19 outbreak. So what you
find in the New York stats has got to be definitive, but what they're conclusive about is the
very opposite of the hysteria being propagated by the Cuomos & friends.
The New York data, in fact, show that Covid-19 almost pinpointedly attacks the old, the
frail, and the medically vulnerable, not the general population.
In turn, that means that public health measures should be focused on identifying, isolating,
protecting, treating and supporting the very small sub-population that is bearing the brunt of
the illness and deaths, while allowing the vast bulk of the population to get back to normal
social and economic life forthwith.
As we document below, the peak of new cases and deaths is now in the rear-view mirror. So
what we can glean from the New York stats through April 13th reporting is definitive and will
only get even more definitive in the weeks ahead.
As of 1PM today, the nationwide death count "WITH" Covid-19 was 23,529. And we go full monte
with CAPs, quotes, bolds and italics for the reason that it is self-evident the virus per
se didn't kill many or most of these people: It triggered organ and function failures that
were already embedded in pre-existing morbidities. And that truth is validated in spades by the
New York data. As of this afternoon, New York had reported 10,834 corona deaths or 45% of the
national total.
But when you look at the break-out by age categories and rates relative to population, the
numbers are simply stunning:
· Under 50 years: 642 deaths or 4.9 per 100,000;
· 50-69 years: 3,174 deaths or 65 per 100,00;
· 70-79 years: 2,888 deaths or 272 per 100,000;
· 80 years+: 4,130 deaths or 1,086 per 100,000.
In short, 18% of all the Covid-19 nationwide deaths crawling across the CNN screen today
have been among New Yorkers 80 years and older; and 7,018 or 30% of national deaths and 65% of
New York Covid-19 deaths have been among those 70 years and older.
To be sure, as a member of the 70+ class of New York residents, we don't begrudge anyone the
longest and happiest life possible. But we are here talking about the appropriate public policy
response to a bad winter flu and suggest that when the mortality ratio for the over 80
population is 222 times higher than for those under 50 years old, then one size surely does not
fit all.
Indeed, when it comes to quarantines and contact tracing, the Cuomo brigade has it
assbackwards. To wit, leave the general population alone where quarantine is unnecessary and
contact tracing is a ridiculous needle-in-the-haystack waste of time, and target protection
measures on the vulnerable, instead.
After all, in the entire state of New York there are only 382,000 souls age 80 or over.
Would it not have been far more rational for Governor Cuomo's health department minions to
track down these 382,000 vulnerable elderly rather than to shutdown the entire economy of the
state in order protect 13.05 million folks under 50 years from a death risk which amounts to a
minuscule 4.9 per 100,000?
In all honesty, that latter figure is a rounding error in the scheme of things. Every year
in New York state, 11,760 persons under 50 years or 91.3 per 100,000 suffer an untimely death
-- including 3,428 from auto and other accidents and 917 from suicides.
Since the infection wave, hospitalizations and death numbers have now clearly peaked and
will be falling sharply in the weeks ahead (see above), we can say with some considerable
confidence that when the Covid is gone, it is doubtful whether more than 917 New Yorkers under
50 -- the normal year suicide population -- will have died WITH the coronavirus.
That's 7.0 souls per 100,000 -- and its just plain insane to got into plenary Lockdown on
their account -- especially because the predominant share of under 50 year-olds who have
succumbed WITH the coronavirus were also suffering from one or more morbidities, especially
hypertension, diabetes and COPD (see below).
Indeed, that gets us to the even more damning stats in the New York data. To wit, only 1,242
or 11% of New York's 10,834 Covid-deaths (as of April 13) were not accompanied by at least one
of the top 10 co-morbidities.
By contrast, of the 9,592 cases with these conditions, the total co-morbidities were 19,280.
That means the New Yorkers among this group died with an average of 2.01 comorbidities, and
some with three or four.
Again, when you stratify by age, the injunction to identify, trace, isolate and treat by
indicated vulnerability could not be more dispositive. Among the 4,130 persons aged 80 or older
who have died in New York,
· 2,489 or 60% had hypertension;
· 1,264 or 31% had diabetes;
· 845 had hyperlipidemia (blood disorder);
· 605 had coronary artery disease;
· 819 had dementia;
· 425 had renal disease;
· 534 had COPD;
· 366 had cancer;
· 386 had congestive heart failure.
So Governor Cuomo, riddle us this. In lieu of your daily reality TV show and presidential
campaign audition, way didn't you mobilize the doctors and health authorities to identify these
10,834 medically imperiled among the thousands more with like and similar conditions among the
382,000 octogenarians in your state in order that every possible precaution could have been
taken weeks ago?
Compared to the needle-in-the-haystack idiocy of contact tracing among the general
population, the state's doctors and health agencies do actually know the names, addresses and
social security number of nearly every one of these medically vulnerable cases. That's where
the resources should have gone -- not into a mindless Lockdown of the entire economy.
Indeed, when you look at the next most vulnerable category, the 1.26 million state residents
aged 70-79, the story becomes even more compelling. In this age bracket, there have been 2,888
deaths WITH Covid reported as of April 13th, which, as indicated above, represents 272 per
100,000.
But, not surprisingly, 62%, 45%, 23% and 14% also had hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia
and coronary artery disease, respectively. In all, this group had 5,695 comorbidities among the
to 10 diseases, which amounts to 2.0 per deceased.
In sum, 7,018 or 65% of the WITH Covid deaths in New York were 70 years and older and
suffered from 13,800 instances of these major underlying illnesses that could have been readily
identified by the doctors and health care professionals who treat them.
Likewise, even the 3,174 deaths among aged 50-69 overwhelmingly involved 4,848
comorbidities, including 2,930 cases of hypertension and diabetes alone.
Finally, among the 642 deaths under 50 years, there were fully 634 cases of the top 10
morbidities.
That is to say, there have been virtually no deaths among the disease free population under
50. Yet hundreds of thousands have been infected and tens of thousands have become symptomatic
or sick, but recovered from this novel flu in the normal fashion.
Here's the thing. The US economy was so weakened by 30 years of debt, speculation and
money-printing that its own economic "immune" system was at ultra low ebb.
So the Lockdown Folly will prove to be far more destructive than would have otherwise been
the case. So now is the time for the Donald to do something constructive for once, and
face-down the CNN/Cuomo Brothers and infectious disease lobby and stop cold the economic
bleeding cure they have foisted on the US economy in the name of public health.
And now is the moment. During the last few days, the death rates have plunged in most of the
nation, and clearly even New York has turned the corner as this chart makes abundantly
clear.
But for want of doubt, here is the the nationwide gain in new cases WITH Covid-19. It is now
down nearly 26% from its Good Friday peak, after accelerating in early April:
So let us repeat: The New York Covid epicenter has provided the pretext for the present
nationwide hysteria and insensible acts of economic suicide.
But its actual data show why the Lockdown should be ended now. To wit, the 1.64 million
residents of New York over 69 years old account for just 0.5% of the US population, but have
suffered 30% of the nation's deaths WITH Covid.
It is therefore time to tell the economy-wreaking Cuomo Brothers and their political cohorts
and media megaphones to stand down and let America get back to work, and the doctors and health
professionals refocused on the real victims of this nasty virus.
Looks like the death rate has substantially decreased during recent weeks, as many more
people have had the virus but didn't show any symptoms than was previously known. 80% without
symptoms really makes you wonder. Also up to 60% of all deaths in nursing homes. Sad we
coulnd't protect these places any better?!
Do I believe that Iraq had weapons of mass distruction -- no
Do I beleave that Russia used novachoc on the Skripals -- - no
Do I beleave the Syrian army used chlorine on the rebels -- -- no
Do I beleave Trump and U.K. Tory's would press the bio- button -- -yes
Do I beleave that US @UK lie about Russia, Iran, China and the Middle East -- - yes
Do I beleave the US @ U.K. want to reduce the world population by 50% -- -yes
Ditto their own populations -- -- -yes
We're dealing with three viruses here -- - coronavirus, internet/MSM misinformation and worse
of all psychological denial.
The last of those is what is destroying society.
Two things spread this virus -- -- -- -
(1) How dense the population is.
And
(2) How dense the population is.
Premising that most people understand that the virus is real, something is, nonetheless, up.
In a first instance.
We have Sweden. You will notice that the curve in Sweden pretty much mimics the curve in
countries that instead opted for economic suicide. Econonmic suicide I remind you, that not
only brings a whole constellation of social and medical issues that will be longer lasting
than this pandemic ever could, but that will also mean a much slower immunisation of society
thereby virtually guaranteeing a relapse.
Too, Corona virus vaccines have been in the works for the past 40 years with little
success to show for it. So now Bill Gates is magically going to produce a vaccine in 18
months?
We then have the models that have been peddled by the great and the good that are showing
to be wildly off reality in terms of hospital bed occupancy or ICU use.
Finally, we have the ships. Oh the ships!
Today we have the following:
Diamond Princess 3000 passengers and crew
Grand Princess 3000 passengers and crew
Zaandam 3000 passengers and crew
Ruby Princess 4000 passengers and crew
Now we also have the Theodore Roosevelt nuclear powered war ship carrying 4000+ crew
So now we have a closed sample of in excess of 15000 individuals that have been exposed to
Covid19 good and hard over entire days.
Yet, we have fewer than 2000 infections and fewer than 20 fatalities.
Of 2 things therefore, 1 must be true.
1 The Covid19 numbers being thrown out by various state, regional and city authorities are
skewed (and there is plenty evidence they are)
or
2 ships offer a peculiar environment that somehow inhibits the infection and mortality
rate of this virus.
Now, if 2 should turn out to be true (and data from all ships combined as well as Sweden
says it is) then what we are doing is, at best, counterproductive.
Also, if 2 is true, then the US$1T that is being bandied about in the US to somehow
compensate business and society for their losses, would be better spent buying every single
man, woman and child a cruise. This would come to a fraction of the cost of the entire
boondoggle.
With regards to the idea repeatedly suggested, that the graphs and other data from
governmental and other bodies constitute some form of propaganda, it is certainly possible to
willfully present a fake world with such data, if one has a very refined mathematical (random
variables on say Papoulis and Pillai level, that much and more for epidemic growth etc.)
understanding of the evolution of e.g. (in this instance) epidemics. Instead one sees little
shit lies and occasionally embarrassing mathematical inadequacy in propagandistic media. It
is orders of magnitude more difficult to fake that, and doing so to undermine oneself, as the
propagandistic media is doing from time to time suggests actual inadequacy rather than
feigned inadequacy. It is orders of magnitude more probable that the propagandists believe
their own idiotic propaganda (successful propagandists need to convince themselves of their
own lies) and mix in such data that they can find, with a gloss to somehow in their minds
have the data fit their propaganda narratives, than to make a much broader fake. The actual
results from statistics makes it often quite easy (for the mathematically adequate) to
discover when data is implausible.
If the people who want to claim that any data from propagandistic media should
automatically be discarded want to become mathematically adequate, they should at least have
a grasp equivalent to chapter 6 of Papoulis and Pillai to make the necessary arguments.
Prerequisite to such study is a solid background in math (multivariable calculus including
some partial differential equations) and natural science---what kind of fluctuations may one
expect in a given process? As the people who tend to make such broad claims tend not to have
the requisite background, I shall specify---one should be able to solve the problems at the
end of the chapter using the methods in the chapter.
"... "For this, we scared the hell out of the American people, we lost 17 million jobs, we put a major dent in the economy, we closed down the schools... shut down the churches," ..."
"... "You know, this was not, and is not a pandemic. But we do have panic and pandemonium as a result of the hype of this." ..."
"... "aggressively stupid" ..."
"... "Bill Bennett may be a self-proclaimed ethics expert, but he obviously knows very little about logic and cause-and-effect," ..."
"... "It is deeply irresponsible to air this view on national television," ..."
"... "the hell out of the American people." ..."
"... " crucial" ..."
"... "no need to change anything you're doing on a day-to-day basis." ..."
Former education secretary Bill Bennett has been savaged online for suggesting that the
coronavirus is "not a pandemic," calling for the lifting of lockdown measures, as the debate
rages over reopening the shuttered US economy. More than half a million Americans have caught
the coronavirus, with just over 22,000 deaths. While the numbers are dire, the University of
Washington's forecasters revised their total predicted Covid-19 deaths down to 60,000 last
week, a number comparable to deaths from influenza in 2017-2018, and
significantly lower than the six-figure death toll floated by
President Donald Trump's top medical adviser, Dr Anthony Fauci, last month.
"For this, we scared the hell out of the American people, we lost 17 million jobs, we
put a major dent in the economy, we closed down the schools... shut down the churches,"
Bennett said on Monday's edition of Fox and Friends. "You know, this was not, and is not a
pandemic. But we do have panic and pandemonium as a result of the hype of this."
Fox News contributor Bill Bennett compares coronavirus to the flu, claiming that "this was
not and is not a pandemic." pic.twitter.com/Q4oBcXKISV
The World Health Organization declared the coronavirus a pandemic on March 11 and it has
been reported in almost every country around the world. Bennett was flayed online for his
"aggressively stupid" statement.
"Bill Bennett may be a self-proclaimed ethics expert, but he obviously knows very little
about logic and cause-and-effect," wrote author Ward Carroll.
Aggressively stupid Bill Bennett may be a self-professed ethics expert, but he obviously
knows little about logic or cause-and-effect.Hey, Billy Boy, do you think there's any
relationship between actions taken and the number of #COVID19
fatalities?And get a haircut, old man.
"It is deeply irresponsible to air this view on national television,"tweeted CNN's
Chris Cillizza, while neoconservative pundit Bill Kristol suggested the low death toll was a
direct result of the government scaring "the hell out of the American people."
Needless to say, if we have "only" 60,000 deaths, it's BECAUSE "we scared the hell out of
the American people," and they radically changed behavior. Or rather: "We" didn't scare
anyone. People were alarmed by the facts and adjusted -- despite dangerous happy talk from
our president. https://t.co/yTeivjA82F
My doctor told me he presumes I had #COVID19 and then
related #coronavirus
pneumonia. I can assure Bill Bennett that even though I exercised and ate well, covid kicked
my ass. It was terrifying. I couldn't breathe and thought I was dying.It was nothing like the
flu, fool. https://t.co/9BjQvC2yyU
Bill Bennett doesn't understand that the only reason my "only" 60,000 people will die is
because we're all stuck at home.I've said before. If the GOP thinks this is a hoax then go
throw a huge party and invite yours entire family and Trump, and see how it goes. https://t.co/6TR3I0MyXC
Modeling the spread of infectious diseases is an imprecise science. While the University of
Washington's researchers attribute their revised predictions to "
crucial" social distancing measures and recommend they remain in place until the end
of May, many initial predictions about the virus were wrong. When it first entered the US in
January, media outlets urged Americans not to panic, warning them that the flu was a more
imminent threat. These same outlets now tell a
different story .
Likewise, Fauci himself said in February that there was "no need to change anything
you're doing on a day-to-day basis." On Sunday, he told CNN's Jake Tapper that the
government "could have saved lives" if social distancing started earlier.
With commentators on the right demanding a relaxation of lockdown rules, and Trump's
advisers telling the president – to quote Fauci – that "the virus decides"
when things return to normal, no clear path forward is obvious.
The graphs show the normal mortality rates in the England and Wales and in New York City
and the current deviations from it. The flu does not create such graphs. Nor do the
lock-downs.
I've got a nice bridge for sale, B, 2000 miles long and entirely made of NYT articles and
twitter tweets.
The Twitter chart leaves the impression that the number of deaths suddenly soared up
almost vertically by around 5500 just in the last few days ...
Good panic porn stuff that. Also take note of what sort of people appear in that thread -
it is not a list of nobodies!
But wait - look more closely! That upturn is for week 14 - the week ending 3rd April,
already 12 days ago. You can see the release of the data by the Office for National
Statistics
here (there is no more recent data released by ONS)
As soon as you see the real data released by the ONS you will immediately see that the
cited twitter is blatant fake news!
That chart is specifically constructed to deceive. No actual cited figures, no actual
dates, no links to the real data - just pure panic porn. Why not cite the specific dates
covered? Because that would raise immediate suspicion with that sudden spurt, because it does
not correspond to previously available figures. Why not cite the specific figures in the
tweet? Because then it would be immediately obvious that this is fake news. Why not explain
the cause of the strange shape of the graph? Because that would give the whole game away.
So what do you see when you look at the real data released by ONS, instead of the
fake news in that twitter?
1) Total deaths registered in week 14 16387
2) Increase over week 13 5246
3) Increase over 5-year average for week 14 6082
*** BUT ***
4) Note that these figures are not the deaths which occurred in week 14, they are the deaths
which were registered in week 14, irrespective of when the deaths actually occurred
(registration is often delayed)
5) Note the warning given on that page: "Please note, where Easter falls in previous years
will have an impact on the five-year average used for comparison"
6) 3475 deaths in week 14 " mentioned novel coronavirus (COVID-19)" on the death
certificate - NOTE - this is not the cause of death specified on the death certificate!!!
7) 539 deaths in week 13 " mentioned novel coronavirus (COVID-19)" on the death
certificate
8) But wait - 3475 is only about half the alleged excess deaths, and these
are not even the deaths caused by covid-19 (see below) these are only the deaths where
covid-19 "happens" to have been tested positive (car accident, for example!)
Look further!
9) Look at the row "Deaths where the underlying cause was respiratory disease (ICD-10
J00-J99)" under official WHO standards, that is the broad category under which the covid-19
deaths are to be listed, if it is considered by the doctor to be the cause of death.
The row gives figures for each week of 2020 as follows (from weeks 1 to 14 in sequence):
2141 2477 2188 1893 1746 1572 1602 1619 1546 1581 1492 1515 1534 2106
VOILA!
This category - which is the actual recorded cause of death - includes covid-19
deaths, but it is a broad category of respiratory-related deaths which also includes many
deaths which have nothing whatsoever to do with covid-19. Those 2141, 2477 and 2188 deaths
registered in each of the first 3 weeks of 2020 were before there was even a single death
from covid-19 in the UK! The average of the first 13 weeks is 1762, and the value for week 14
(2106) is only 344 more than that!
Also note that the deaths which "mention" covid-19 are 1369 greater (including car
accidents, unrelated illness, etc) than the number of deaths caused by respiratory
illnesses (including Covid-19), which already includes another 1500 to 1700 deaths not
caused by covid-19!
This spurt of extra deaths registered in week 14 most certainly does not represent a
sudden spurt of genuine covid-19 deaths - that is conclusively proven by the row of figures
giving the underlying cause of death for each week's registrations.
If anything, the data may show a sudden spurt of deaths from other causes such as
stress caused by the lockdown, food shortages, money shortages, unexpected homelessness,
non-covid-19 illnesses not treated because the hospitals cancelled appointments and
operations, stress, fear etc.
Such causes probably underlie at least a few of the unaccounted for excess deaths
(conceaveably even most, perhaps), but it is also possible it is simply a statistical
aberration and/or related to delays in registering deaths, including the unspecified effect
of the Easter holidays on death registration. The aberration may also have been deliberate,
to cover up government mishandling of the crisis, or it may result from staff shortages, or
perhaps completely irrelevant reasons - we cannot know without detailed investigation of how
the data were prepared and the patterns of death registration.
What is absolutely certain is that that twitter chart is unmitigated fake news
deliberately designed to deceive .
The NYT is no better - completely non-sensical presentation of the data with no
explanation of the meaning of the non-sensical presentation, deliberately designed to
misrepresent.
Comments, B? Time to reconsider what you are doing?
I've been urging people to look more closely at what is happening, because the magicians
have been very successful with their acts, recently. Things are not as they seem on the
surface - you need to look more carefully at the small print.
That includes the details of lockdowns. Lockdowns kill, when they are done in the
irresponsible and brutal and dishonest way they have been done in the UK and the USA.
China did NOT rely on lockdowns - they relied on an integrated combination of
social distancing (including, where necessary, lockdowns, but mostly not , except in
Hubei Province), tracing, and isolation of those infected or at risk.
Lockdowns as imposed by the UK and the USA are just suicide pacts, as described by
Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, and are ineffective in dealing with covid-19.
The dotted line on the above map indicates the current trend of beds needed for COVID-19 in
New York.
At present, only 18,279 are in use.
The professional forecasters all projected that beds would be a multiple of the beds
actually needed.
Notice not one model came in under the actual number. These are all professional fearmongers
who alarmed the country about a virus that appears to be in line with a severe flu season.
Philosopher Larken Rose, in his ''manual'' on ''How to be a Successful Tyrant'', written 15
years ago: "Chapter 2 Exploiting fear. Almost all oppression via propaganda is based upon
scaring people, and then presenting a false choice, where the people can choose either to do
what you want them to do, or face some unknown, often purely fictional horror. This is not
the method of the common thug, which can be summarized as ''do this or I will hurt you''. A
successful modern tyrant never presents himself as the thing to be afraid of, as doing so
would obviously create resentment and hatred in the peasantry, and that leads to resistance.
Every ''thing to be feared'', with which you terrorize your peasants, must be presented as
some separate, outside evil, that only you can save them from.
You must present the simple choice between obedience to you, and the threat of some
unpleasant happening, which does not appear to be of your doing, and which you pretend to
lament the existence of. In short, you must deceive and scare the citizens into voluntarily
giving up their freedom. ''The people never give up their liberty but under some delusion.''
- Edmund Burke
A simple example would be making up a plague of some sort ;) , assuring people that
millions are doomed to die, and then claiming that giving you a lot of money and control is
the only hope of averting disaster. Or perhaps, instead of making up a disease, you can pick
a real disease, grossly exaggerate the risk it poses to the peasants ;) , whip them into a
frenzy, and then present yourself as their only hope for salvation. Which, of course, will
require you to be given much wealth and power. Even the common flu ;) , can be used to spread
alarm and panic in the peasantry.'' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4LtEciQUF8
Two months ago 2 out of every 100 YouTube users were actual medical professionals. Today,
we have 97 pseudo medical professionals for every 100 users... especially the wacko group
that thinks 5G causes COVID-19.
There is no doubt that corporate media distributes fake news. Before the pandemic, it was to
line the owner's pockets and get rid of the nationalist oligarch, Donald Trump. Now the world
is turned upside down and the pandemic is out of their control.
Markets rule, profits first, dying empire reluctantly and haphazardly sheltered its
population in place crashing the economy. Donald Trump was a useless bystander. 15% to 20% of
the coronavirus infected must be hospitalized. This would crash the healthcare system for the
wealthy not just everyone else. The super-rich's Hamptons on Long Island are just as
adversely impacted as NY City.
The nations that conduct contact tracing and quarantine the infected have lower numbers of
dead than nations like the USA that don't. The riff-raff still don't matter. The Oligarchs
will open up the USA on May 1st if they see no risk dying themselves. The basic problem is
that with the stupid inept national governments left over from the fall of the Western
Empire; the outcome, opened up or not, will be a continued economic depression and new waves
of coronavirus breakouts and more lockdowns until a vaccine is developed or civil society is
restored.
Here is that view: "if funds are not limitless – then we should focus on doing things
whereby we can do the most good (save the most lives) for the least possible amount of
money. Or use the money we have, to save the most lives." Health economics measures the
cost per QALY. A QALY is a Quality Adjusted Life Year. One added year of the highest
quality life would be one QALY. "How much are we willing to pay for one QALY? The current
answer, in the UK, is that the NHS will recommend funding medical interventions if they
cost less than £30,000/QALY. Anything more than this is considered too expensive and
yet the UK's virus package is £350bn, almost three times the current yearly budget
for the entire NHS. Is this a price worth paying?" This expert reckoned that "the cost of
saving a COVID victim was more than eleven times the maximum cost that the NHS will
approve." At the same time cancer patients are not being treated, hip replacements are
being postponed, heart and diabetes sufferers are not being dealt with.
Tim Harford in the FT took a different view. He points out that the US Environmental
Protection Agency values a statistical life at $10m in today's money, or $10 per micromort
(one in a million risk of death) averted. "If we presume that 1 per cent of infections are
fatal, then it is a 10,000 micromort condition. On that measure, being infected is 100
times more dangerous than giving birth, or as perilous as travelling two and a half times
around the world on a motorbike. For an elderly or vulnerable person, it is much more risky
than that. At the EPA's $10 per micromort, it would be worth spending $100,000 to prevent a
single infection with Covid-19. You don't need a complex epidemiological model to predict
that if we take no serious steps to halt the spread of the virus, more than half the world
is likely to contract it. That suggests 2m US deaths and 500,000 in Britain -- assuming,
again, a 1 per cent fatality rate. If an economic lockdown in the US saves most of these
lives, and costs less than $20tn, then it would seem to be value for money." The key point
for me here is that this dilemma of 'costing' a life would be reduced if there had been
proper funding of health systems, sufficient to provide 'spare capacity' in case of
crises.
It is also a myth that lockdowns lower life expectancy. This is pure money fetishism.
Besides the fact that almost nobody dies of hunger in one month, you have to take into
account that mortality by violent causes (car accidents, workplace accidents in dangerous
jobs, etc.) also fall:
But the Bristol study is just a risk assessment. Proper health studies show that recessions
do not increase mortality at all. A recession – a short-term, temporary fall in GDP
– need not, and indeed normally does not, reduce life expectancy. Indeed,
counterintuitively, the weight of the evidence is that recessions actually lead to people
living longer. Suicides do indeed go up, but other causes of death, such as road accidents
and alcohol-related disease, fall.
Marxist health economist Dr Jose Tapia (also an author of one of the chapters in our
book World in Crisis) has done several studies on the impact of recessions on health. He
found that mortality rates in industrial countries tend to rise in economic expansions and
fall in economic recessions. Deaths attributed to heart disease, pneumonia, accidents,
liver disease, and senility -- making up about 41% of total mortality -- tend to fluctuate
procyclically, increasing in expansions. Suicides, as well as deaths attributable to
diabetes and hypertensive disease, make up about 4% of total mortality and fluctuate
countercyclically, increasing in recessions. Deaths attributed to other causes, making up
about half of total deaths, don't show a clearly defined relationship with the fluctuations
of the economy. "All these effects of economic expansions or recessions on mortality that
can be seen, e.g., during the Great Depression or the Great Recession, are tiny if compared
with the mortality effects of a pandemic," said Tapia in an interview.
The food problem (for those who can't afford, because production was never the problem)
can be easily solved by a simple scheme of food banks.
They key, thus, is to avoid healthcare systems collapses. As long as the healthcare system
stands, mortality in general should lower - but that's obviously not the case in many
countries, as decades of neoliberalism had a deteriorating effect on them.
The economic impact (fall in GDPs) has a merely geopolitical effect: yes, the West will
emerge smaller from this pandemic. But then, it was already degenerating since 2008.
This guy is really a fearmonger who after sleeting for two months greatly contributed with
his idiotic interviews to the botched reaction of the US government to this crisis. He should
go
Notable quotes:
"... And now, after the Trump Administration scrambled to ramp up testing capacity and the states worked with the Feds, private entities, and others (including in some cases foreign nations) to distribute ventilators as Gov. Andrew Cuomo painted a horrifying portrait of sickened New Yorkers suffocating to death in hospital hallways because there were no ventilators available. ..."
"... Well, yesterday, NYC Mayor de Blasio said that, after a few days of near capacity numbers, hospitalizations have dropped by such a steep degree that the city believes it has enough ventilators on hand, and won't need any more. ..."
And now, after the Trump Administration scrambled to ramp up testing capacity and the states
worked with the Feds, private entities, and others (including in some cases foreign nations) to
distribute ventilators as Gov. Andrew Cuomo painted a horrifying portrait of sickened New
Yorkers suffocating to death in hospital hallways because there were no ventilators
available.
Well, yesterday, NYC Mayor de Blasio said that, after a few days of near capacity numbers,
hospitalizations have dropped by such a steep degree that the city believes it has enough
ventilators on hand, and won't need any more.
Now on Thursday, Dr. Fauci is taking to cable news to spread the message of optimism that
has lifted US stocks over the past few days: Instead of the 240k figure used by President Trump
as recently as two weeks ago, Dr. Fauci told NBC News that if the public continued to stick to
the "mitigation efforts", that the death toll might be as low as 60k.
"... " T he operational dilemmas faced by Indo-Pacific Command demand urgent attention. In order to make American investments in advanced fighters, attack submarines, or breakthroughs in military technology meaningful (in other words, to deter or win a conflict), there must be urgent investment in runways, fuel and munitions storage, theater missile defenses, and command and control architecture to enable U.S. forces in a fight across the Pacific's vast exterior lines. " ..."
'Number one priority' is a $1.5 billion, 360-degree persistent and integrated air defense
ring around Guam.
... ... ...
Arguing in favor of the PDI i n a recent
op-ed , former Pacific policy official for the DoD Randall Schriver
and Eric Sayers, former special assistant to the commander of INDOPACOM,
wrote:
" T he operational dilemmas faced by Indo-Pacific Command demand urgent
attention. In order to make American investments in advanced fighters, attack submarines, or
breakthroughs in military technology meaningful (in other words, to deter or win a conflict),
there must be urgent investment in runways, fuel and munitions storage, theater missile
defenses, and command and control architecture to enable U.S. forces in a fight across the
Pacific's vast exterior lines. "
Well the Pentagon sees that the checkbooks are open, Look if those pencil necked doctors
can get 2trillion for a case of the sniffles, we ought to be able to get 2 billion to face
down the Chicoms!
In strict meaning the pandemic is when the the particular infection increases mortality
in all affected countries... It did not happened.
Doctortrinate ,
Latest figures Gov uk. Deaths registered in the year-to-date, Week 1 to 13. Looking at the
year-to-date (using refreshed data to get the most accurate estimates), the number of deaths
is currently lower than the five-year average. The current number of deaths is 150,047, which
is 3,350 fewer than the five-year average. Of the deaths registered by 27 March 2020, 647
mentioned the coronavirus (COVID-19) on the death certificate; this is 0.4% of all deaths.
In recent decades, flu season has often peaked sometime from January to March, and this is a
major driver in total deaths. The average daily number of deaths from December through March
is over eight
thousand .
So far, total death data is too preliminary to know if there has been any significant
increase in total deaths as a result of COVID-19, and this is an important metric, because it
gives us some insight into whether or not COVID-19 is driving total death numbers well above
what would otherwise be expected.
Indeed, according to some sources, it is not clear that total deaths have increased
significantly as a result of COVID-19. In a March 30 article for The Spectator , former UK
National Health Service pathologist John Lee noted that the current number of deaths from
COVID-19 does not indicate that the UK is experiencing " excess deaths ." Lee
writes
:
The simplest way to judge whether we have an exceptionally lethal disease is to look at
the death rates. Are more people dying than we would expect to die anyway in a given week or
month? Statistically, we would expect about 51,000 to die in Britain this month. At the time
of writing, 422 deaths are linked to Covid-19 -- so 0.8 per cent of that expected total. On a
global basis, we'd expect 14 million to die over the first three months of the year. The
world's 18,944 coronavirus deaths represent 0.14 per cent of that total. These figures might
shoot up but they are, right now, lower than other infectious diseases that we live with
(such as flu). Not figures that would, in and of themselves, cause drastic global
reactions.
How do these numbers look in the United States? During March of 2020, there were 4,053
COVID-19 deaths according to Worldometer. That is 1.6 percent of total deaths in March 2019
(total data on March 2020 deaths is still too preliminary to offer a comparison). For context,
we could note that total deaths increased by about four thousand from March 2018 to March 2019.
So for March, the increase in total deaths is about equal to what we already saw as a pre-COVID
increase from March 2018 to March 2019.
As Lee notes, total COVID-19 deaths could still increase significantly this season, but even
then we must ask what percentage of total deaths warrants an international panic. Is it 5
percent? Ten percent? The question has never been addressed, and so far, a figure of 1 percent
of total deaths in some places is being treated as a reason to forcibly shut down the global
economy.
Yet, as a CDC report recently noted , pneumonia deaths have often
been far more common than COVID-19 deaths are right now: "Based on National Center for Health
Statistics (NCHS) mortality surveillance data available on March 26, 2020, 8.2 percent of the
deaths occurring during the week ending on March 21, 2020 (week 12), were due to [pneumonia and
influenza]."
Meanwhile there is a trend toward to attributing more of those pneumonia deaths to COVID-19
rather than influenza, although this doesn't actually mean the total mortality rate has
increased. The CDC report continues: "the percent of all deaths with Influenza listed as a
cause have decreased (from 1.0% to 0.8%) over this same time period. The increase in pneumonia
deaths during this time period are likely associated with COVID-19 rather than influenza." This
doesn't represent a total increase in pneumonia deaths, just a change in how they are
recorded.
This reflects an increased focus on attributing deaths to COVID-19, as noted by Lee:
In the current climate, anyone with a positive test for Covid-19 will certainly be known
to clinical staff looking after them: if any of these patients dies, staff will have to
record the Covid-19 designation on the death certificate -- contrary to usual practice for
most infections of this kind. There is a big difference between Covid-19 causing death, and
Covid-19 being found in someone who died of other causes. Making Covid-19 notifiable might
give the appearance of it causing increasing numbers of deaths, whether this is true or not.
It might appear far more of a killer than flu, simply because of the way deaths are
recorded.
Given this rush to maximize the number of deaths attributable to COVID-19, what will April's
data look like? It may be that COVID-19 deaths could then indeed number 10 or 20 percent of all
deaths.
But the question remains: will total deaths increase substantially compared to April 2019 or
April 2018? If they don't, this will call into question whether or not COVID-19 is the engine
of mortality that many government bureaucrats insist it is. After all, if April's mortality
remains "about the same" as the usual total and comes in around 230,000–235,000, then
obsessive concern over COVID-19 would be justified only if it can be proven April 2020 deaths
would have plummeted year-over-year had it not been for COVID-19.
Update:
Meanwhile the CDC is instructing medical staff to report deaths as COVID-19 deaths even when
no test has confirmed the presence of the disease. In
a Q and A on death certificates published by the CDC on March 24, the agency advises:
COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease
caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death . Certifiers should include as
much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory
testing, etc. If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may
have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II. [emphasis in
original.]
This is extremely likely to inflate the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19 while
pulling down deaths attributed to other influenza-like illnesses and to deaths caused by
pneumonia with unspecified origins. This is especially problematic since we know the
overwhelming majority of COVID-19 deaths occur in patients that are already suffering from a
number of other conditions. In Italy, for example, data
shows 99 percent of COVID-19 deaths occurred in patients who had at least one other
condition. More than 48 percent had three other conditions. Similar cases in the US are now
likely to be routinely reported simply as COVID-19 cases.
Unfortunately, because total death data is not reported immediately, we have yet to see how
this plays out.
We do know historically, however, that deaths attributed to flu and pneumonia over the past
decade have tended to make up around five to ten percent of all deaths, depending on the
severity of the "season." Last week (week 14, the week ending April 4) was the first week
during which COVID-19 deaths exceeded flu and pneumonia deaths, coming in at 11 percent of all
death for that week. The prior week, (week 13, the week ending Mar 28) COVID-19 deaths made up
3.3 percent of all deaths.
Until we have reliable numbers on all deaths in coming weeks, it will be impossible to know
the extent to which COVID-19 are "cannibalizing" flu and pneumonia deaths overall. That is, if
the COVID-19 totals skyrocket, but total deaths remain relatively stable, than we might guess
that many deaths formerly attributed simply to pneumonia, or to flu, are now being labeled as
COVID-19 deaths. Potentially, this could also be the case for other patients, such as those
with advanced cases of diabetes.
To add to the discussion of how the CDC's rules on assigning primary causation to coronavirus
for deaths (and analogously, how other nations medical Grey Eminences also handle this
issue), regardless of the presence of underlying co-morbidities, I drop this link here. It is
a quite well written comment from the poster, The Right Doctor, an older, senior physician
who explains the "cause of death" assignment process, and discusses past practices, and what
has changed in this with the advent of CoVID-19. Very illuminating.
The books are being cooked, not only in this way, but also by "lying with statistics"
through not having a reliable means of understanding the overall infection rate, nor the
mechanisms of infection. W
Without a handle on the overall infection rate in the population, it is child's play to
exaggerate the lethality by focusing solely on the death rate among those groups with
co-morbidities, the significance of which is itself a moving, anecdotal target absent focused
study.
Here is a report of a study to address those issues being implemented in Germany. Sorry,
the link is from The Guardian (I brandish a crucifix in one hand, and fondle my necklace of
heads of garlic with the other...), but it is still valuable in increasing understanding of
what we don't know, but should in order to make optimal policy choices.
When Zen teacher Issan Dorsey was asked to describe the essence of Zen art, he answered, "Nothing extra."
"Nothing extra" is also of course the essence of Zen living itself: perceiving life as it
actually is, as opposed to perceiving it through a bunch of believed narrative filters about
yourself, about others, about reality, and so on. These narrative filters are an extra pile of
layers that are added on top of the actual experience of life, and they give a distorted view
which causes a lot of confusion and suffering. Relinquishing belief in them brings clarity and
peace.
This is also the essence of clearly understanding what's really going on in the world. Like
so much else, the approach to the large is the same as the approach to the small, which is to
say the approach to seeing clearly in the big picture is the same as the approach to seeing
clearly as an individual: you need to learn to look at it without the extra narrative
overlay.
Because the news media are
controlled by plutocrats who have a vested interest in
protecting the status quo upon which their kingdoms are built, almost everything in the
news is useless narrative fluff. It doesn't tell you what's really going on, it rather tries to
influence what's going on by manipulating the perceptions of the audience. It does this by
either (A) distracting from what really matters by focusing on what doesn't matter, or (B)
actively working to manipulate how the audience thinks about a given issue.
When you strip away all the empty fluff and manipulative spin, there are basically only four
often-overlapping pieces of information that really matter in the big picture: (1) where the
money is going, (2) where the resources are going, (3) where the weapons are going, and (4)
where the people are going. When it comes to understanding world dynamics, accurate information
about these four things is the only real news you'll ever encounter. Everything else is empty
narrative spin meant to justify, distort, or distract from information about these things.
If you ignore everything else and only focus on finding the most accurate information
possible about these four items, you will have an infinitely clearer understanding of what's
really going on in the world than someone who trusts news reporters to walk them through
it.
Watch where the money is going because you can trust the raw numbers of financial
transactions a lot more than you can trust the stories people are telling. A massive percentage
of daily news coverage goes toward analyzing the latest foam-brained gibberish that came out of
Donald Trump's mouth even though we all know he's going to contradict himself two days later,
but the fact that he's been
heavily funded by an oligarch who happens to have been a longtime proponent of the Iran
policies this administration has been advancing is much more solid.
Zoom out and watch where the money is going in the big picture and you'll see that a grossly
disproportionate amount of it is moving away from the general public and toward a very small
group of people, which we just saw illustrated in the historically unprecedented multitrillion-dollar wealth transfer in
the US corporate bailout. If you watch this small group and pay attention to the projects,
candidates, think tanks and media outlets they pour their wealth into, you will notice that
they exert an incredible amount of influence on all four crucial factors: where the money goes,
where the resources go, where the weapons go, and where the people go.
Watching where the resources are going gives you an even clearer image of what's going on
because resources, unlike money, are completely independent of narrative. There is no such
thing as "money" without the thoughts that humans agree to collectively think about it, but oil
would still be oil even if all humans were wiped off the face of the earth. When you see the US
ramping up escalations against Venezuela , ignore the narratives about "drug trafficking"
and what a bad, bad man Nicolás Maduro is, and look at
what resources lie beneath the ground in that nation to find out what this is really about.
Mentally "mute" the soundtracks the political/media class spout about who's doing what to whom
and just watch where the resources are going, and who's controlling them. That way you'll be
able to discern the powerful from the disempowered and the takers from their victims.
Watch where the weapons are going because those are another non-narrative factor which
exerts a huge influence on the world; a bullet will stop a beating heart regardless of what the
mind thinks about it. Ignore the irrelevant narrative fluff about where the coronavirus
originated and whether or not it's racist to say "Wuhan virus", and look at
the ring of US military bases encircling China and the way the Marine Corps
is shifting its attention onto that nation . Ignore Trump's gibberish about ending wars and
note that
he's been expanding them and
increasing foreign troop presence . Ignore the Democratic Party's nonsense about Trump
having loyalties to Russia and watch his administration's many dangerous
nuclear escalations against that nation . Ignore international finger-wagging at
humanitarian abuses by Israel and Saudi Arabia and look at who's still selling them weapons and
supporting them militarily.
Watch where the people are going for another important piece of real information that isn't
dependent on narrative. Where are the prisoners? Where are the refugees, where are they going,
and what are they fleeing? Where are people moving to, and what do they want?
With each of these four items you can simply watch raw data and ignore all the stories the
establishment spinmeisters tell about that data. As long as you make sure you're getting the
most accurate data possible, it's like you're looking at a globe and watching lines in four
different colors moving around in it from place to place and person to person. And without
anyone's stories tainting your view.
You will notice that there's a heavy degree of overlap between these four items. You see the
weapons moving toward China and you notice that's the nation with the US hegemony-threatening
Belt and Road
Initiative (where the resources are moving) and the key player in the
US dollar-threatening Shanghai Cooperation Organization (where the money is moving). You
see Julian Assange locked in prison (where the people are going) for exposing US war crimes
(where the weapons are going). You see US troops illegally
occupying Syrian oil fields (where the weapons and resources are going) to prevent the Syrian
government from using it to rebuild the nation (where the money is going). And so on.
Nearly everything that makes it to the top of the daily news churn is either propaganda
distortion or distracting drivel, and either way you can safely ignore it. Just watch where the
money is going, where the resources are going, where the weapons are going and where the people
are going, and ignore all the narrative chatter.
Similarities between the COVID-19 pandemic and 9/11 Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological
Operations (psyops).
Two main streams of propaganda:
One aimed at the masses
One aimed at the skeptics
Stream aimed at skeptics
9/11
-- Focus everyone on the cause of the building collapses and the science involved , maintain
ambivalence with regard to the science of the plane crashes – all to distract from the
pivotal truth: staged death and injury and thus that the event is a complete psyop.
-- Some scientists involved in the psyop are pushing out fake stuff, eg, molten metal at
Ground Zero. There may well be other fake stuff that could rear its head in whatever results
from the sham Lawyers' Committee for 9/11 Inquiry (similar to the sham 9/11 Commission).
COVID-19 pandemic
-- Focus everyone on the anomalies in the figures and the science of viruses and pandemics ,
all to distract from the simple fact that there is no virus, that this is a complete psyop
and perhaps to keep us distracted from the implications of this psyop until it's too late. As
some scientists will be involved in the psyop they will no doubt push out stuff that is fake
and/or confuses.
It's all about distraction and confusion folks. This is so very clearly a psyop and the
science and numbers are a deliberate distraction leading us absolutely nowhere. We
have right now all the science and numbers we need to know that this is a psyop – as
well as, of course, all the deliberate nonsense they push at us, just as we had all the
science we needed of controlled demolition and the fakery of the planes yonks and yonks
ago.
Both the COVID-19 pandemic and 9/11 are psychological operations and need to be called out
as such . Do not let them lead you along the neverending science and numbers path and keep
you tied up with all the other distractions.
This event can be called out right here right now. No further evidence is required.
There is no doubt whatsoever that it is a Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological
Operation.
Petra, I like your style. Really. You are rigorously deconstructive, peeling away each layer
of the onion. That approach of course is what is required for all these Moriarty-esque
psyops, where they are piled high with distractions as involved as some ancient mystery
religion, only to disguise a simple objective: $$$. Or Power (to wit, more money).
Why wage the war to "win the hearts and minds" when it's oh so easy to simply control
them, with techniques and "high" tech of "coercive hypnotism": all new versions of Dr.
Mengele's Mind Control thru trauma-based assaults upon the media-managed world public, now
linked everywhere by this gadget we engage here: the sticky and sneaky WorldWideWeb patrolled
by their very own WorldWideSpiders?
I don't know if you ever saw "Young Sherlock Holmes" – a movie out about 30 years
ago. It seems at the end roll of the credits that the wily Moriarty escaped yet again, and
these current psyops seem as though his current incarnation.
What's interesting about the film is the use of many ploys that are still in use in these
days, age old stage magic and sleight of hand and other standard tricks of deception that are
constants in spycraft and go back seemingly to the dawn of society.
The key difference in our age, is that they have a whole Novelty Shoppe of new gadgetry to
daze and confuse.
I'm grateful that I began to study it more in earnest about 15 years ago, and digging
deeper, like discovering my own father was attorney to the client one old military character
told me in 2016 was the director of one of the main mind control projects (I get the vibe
that it's fraught with just too much trouble to get too specific, for now. His name pops up
in CIA ROGUES by Patrick Nolan, the chapters about Sirhan.)
I had no idea, no connection of those dots, though I'd got my first hints about 30 years
ago, and bought Norman Mailer's "Harlot's Ghost: a Novel of the CIA". I was intrigued to have
read he had been writing it for over 20 years and people said he talked about nothing else at
parties in NYC. He had promised a finale, "Harlot's Grave" but died in a fall before that
"and so on."
Also "Bobby" de Niro made a film, "The Good Shepherd" about Angleton, loosely based, but
that promised sequel seems also now to be a mirage.
In short, all these studies have only served to illuminate the landscape of my life like a
bolt, and gave me a schemata visibly to see incursions into my own life, just for starters.
They do it to various degrees to everybody.
I'm a bit of an extreme case, I would suspect, but I try to suggest to thoughtful people
all the time, to study these things. We are all in their sites now.
Every time we are being diverted from who we really are, you may bet a lot of what you
got, on that "component" of Intel being not too far in the "background,".
I respect the fact that they have a job to do, of sorts, every nation that's ever been has
had ops, but not with such criminal abandon, and we are venturing into crazier and crazier
territory that every Prez since Truman, at the dawn of the CIA, has totally despised, or at
least stated so.
Truman: "I would have never agreed to the formulation of CIA, back in '47, if I had known
then it would become the American Gestapo."
Too little too late, Harry!
Eisenhower: "I have nothing to offer the incoming President but a legacy of ashes." -His
last big meeting with Intel officials, January '61.
JFK: "I want to break CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter them to the winds." And then
shortly after CIA scattered his life to the winds of history.
Since then, other presidents have been more choosy in their language.
CIA deformations and their deforming of US society, and the world, has been the greatest
tragedy of our times, which they cannot disavow.
But I digress. I simply meant to thank you for presenting your results of your strict
deconstruction of their psyops. It speaks volumes that so few in the field take that rigorous
approach.
Did ANY of it really happen? You certainly raise real doubts, and that is a real service
to readers, how you do that. Perhaps some if it did happen, but that is the wrong starting
point. Yours seems to be the correct one, from what I know.
Meanwhile I'm preparing my screenplay sequel, 65 years after, to the classic Terry
Southern script "Dr. Strangelove: How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Bomb" update
2020
"Dr. StrangeCoVid: or How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Virus"
I think there will be seen many benefits in hindsight, after all the fallout.
You know, they delayed the release of the original because it was set tight at the time of
JFK Dallas.
Meanwhile, "the game is afoot, Watson.". Lol
-- -- -- -
Have you studied the work of the late Steve Kangas? He seems remarkably rigorous. If you
look up "Timeline of CIA Atrocities" it leads you to all his work. I read many of the links.
Revelatory. That's the feel I get.
He seems to be an avatar, to the best of my knowledge. Inspiring anyway, and that's plenty
these days
My goodness can they distract us with the science and the figures.
But there is a simpler approach – the checklist test for Trauma-based Mind
Control Psychological Operation (psyop) in the form of a "live exercise".
As the Donald says of the coronavirus:
It's going to disappear. One day it's like a miracle, it will disappear.
It's amazing the words of truth that can come out of that man's mouth – admittedly,
sometimes they're delivered cryptically such as for the crash of PS-752 where he says the
following nonsensical words in relation to a plane while the man standing next to him
ostentatiously hides a smile:
We know it will disappear as the Donald says because because the virus – let alone
any pandemic – never appeared in the first place and they will only test our patience
for so long before they "make" it disappear.
1. Pre-pandemic indications including exercises. TICK.
-- Event 201, a tabletop pandemic exercise, held in October 2019, partnered by the Johns
Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation
-- Positions advertised by the CDC for Quarantine Advisors as early as November 15 2019
and
-- Netflix docuseries on preventing pandemics
-- The film, Contagion
-- The Simpsons, S22 E6, The Fool Monty, which speaks of a phoney-baloney crisis of a public
health scare
2. As psyop rules state we will be told nonsense, check Wikipedia, media and other
sources. TICK.
Wikipedia told us (all changed now) about Chinese cobras and many-banded kraits being
reservoirs and then we see people falling flat on their faces, laid out on the pavement,
nonsense about empty buildings being converted into hospitals within 48 hours with extremely
unconvincing visual evidence provided of this amazing feat and so much more nonsense.
3. As psyop rules state that nothing should be faked so well it can be used to support
their story, check that no patients show symptoms. TICK.
Yep! All alleged patients interviewed in hospitals do not show symptoms or there are
anomalies in that they are filmed in an ICU and say strange things such as, "They had to sew
that into my artery."
4. As a typical hallmark of psyops (where applicable) is ludicrous "miracle survivors"
stories, check for those stories. TICK.
Yep! Yes, we have the 90 year-old looking fit as a fiddle being pulled back from the brink of
death with potato soup, and the 82 year-old who miraculously recovered with a course of
antibiotics and the 52 year-old who was "gaspin'" and thought "his days were done" who, at
the suggestion of a friend, took anti-malarials and hey presto!
Thus we know – nonsense pushed at us without a single skerrick of evidence of the
presence of this virus.
In psyops the ONLY things they do for real are the things they want for real. They don't
want or need a virus or a pandemic for their psyop and a real virus would never behave
remotely the way they want it to for their story in any case, just as they didn't want real
planes for 9/11 and they wouldn't have worked anyway, nor did they want people to die or be
injured – that wouldn't have gone down at all well with the loved ones of the 3,000
dead and 6,000 injured (not to mention the 6,000 injured themselves) and nor would it have
been accepted very readily by the numerous agency, media, government, corporation and other
people necessarily involved in the operation. 9/11 was a Trauma-based Mind Control
Psychological Operation just like this one.
The alleged COVID-19 pandemic is, in reality, a Trauma-based Mind Control Psychological
Operation in the form of a "live pandemic exercise" and there is no novel virus.
Yes, that's SOP: distraction by a hyperabundance of mirrors: it was really first given its
rollout with JFK DALLAS. Endless deadends or deadweights are integral to all the psyops, but
especially that one. I'm of the opinion JFK was hit there, but that may be force of long
habit. Why 1000 books about it? Probably 937 are red herrings, right?
Here's a fascinating thing though, you will admit: I had a friend at work in 1982 at
Reunion Tower, Dealey Plaza. It overlooked the Grassy Knoll, believe it or not. The day after
my 30th birthday, they told me that that friend, John (Sullivan) had been shot coming out of
a bar around midnight 4.14.82 in Downtown Dallas, clean through the chest, and was in stable
condition. I went to the hospital where he was recovering, next evening, with flowers, and
left them on his nightstand. He was sedated and asleep with all kinds of bandages and tubes
coming out of his chest, no shirt. I offered a few words up, and had to be at our job in the
600 ft. Tower, and left. On the way out of the seedy parking lot, I saw the Marquee sign and
ran it back and forth on my tongue. "Parkland Hospital, why do I feel like I'm missing
something, here?"
It wasn't till I got on the freeway and had to go soon to punch a clock that it hit me
like a shot, "Holy good night, that is THE Parkland Hospital!" I would have turned back but I
was late.
Two nights later I get the call at home, from my sister, that my father had just been
found a few hours earlier, dead, in a locked Lincoln, gun in his hand and hole in his
head.
I'm not making this up, all the papers for all of that can be verified, across the board.
The question is, did it all actually happen, or was I the center of their own little
mob-generated psyop?
They have littered the landscape with so many doppelgangers and "simulacra' that can be
proven, also, so we know that much.
If JFK and/or LHO actually DID die at Parkland, I was standing within a few feet of their
bays.
But you do cast some serious doubts.
And one other thing, they ran an actual staged psyop on me a few years ago, it was all
choreographed with actors. It seemed real, but "after further review" it was staged. They
were amazed I could put it all together, but they staged a rather involved skit, to see if
I'd bite. I took some deep breaths and realized it was ALL rigged. And they knew I'd seen the
moving parts of their metaphorical"magician's box" such as in magic shows. It was quite
elaborate. The proof it was real is that once I figured it out, they suddenly discontinued it
a week later.
Here's one clue: for about 15 years every so often, one of their mob crosses my path and
tries to suggest we're being run from afar by space aliens and they keep steering me to a
video at YouTube. Or other trumped up info.
This is a favorite ploy. I tell them, no thanks, but I have enough on my plate just here
on Earth.
It's seemingly just a huge diversion, and I studiously ignore it.
They haven't done much lately. About a year and a half ago an Armenian guy named Apollo
(sounds like a stage magician, eh?) ran some crafty things past me, very sleight of hand. I
caught enough wind of it, I found a way to dodge it. It could have killed me, or worse.
Anyway, might seem off topic, but it's all just to add context and color to your
comments.
I am confirming that I have seen with my own eyes some of their psyops hocus pocus and it
IS real.
Two of the people in contact with SIRHAN were listed at bios at Wikipedia (which did not
mention Sirhan) as two of the most prominent hypnotists in US History. The Harvard hypnotist
who has been treating and shrinking for 10 years, Dr. Daniel Brown seems off, to me, when I
see him in "The Real Manchurian Candidate."
Sirhan DOES, categorically, strike me as a *real* trauma based mind control victim, not an
actor. He had a history of PTSD as a boy, all the way back in Palestine, when he watched as
his brother was run over by a Jeep.
I knew a woman who taught at USC (where my old man taught at the law school) who swore to
me in an email in 2006 that one of the hypnotists, my father's client, could put a whole
class "under", simultaneously, when she went to his Sunday lectures. Gives me the creeps. I
don't mention his name, no free publicity for a "brujo" of his ilk.
This all may sound too colorful to not be scripted, but this IS Hollywood we're talking
here. The Client used to hypnotize Bela Lugosi before he did coffin scenes, because the
eponymous (there's that word again) Dracula had claustrophia!
But it is significant here, in Anglo-American exchanges, that The Client founded in '30s
Hollywood the "Philosophical Research Society". I mention that, because it is a curious echo,
fifty years after the founding in London of the Society for Psychical Research, where both
Conan Doyle and Mark Twain were early members. (I think Twain was an intel agent. He bonded
with Tesla for many years, #1 early U.S. Intel target.)
PRS and SPR. (I can remember my fabulous late mother, even when I was 2 or 3, calling it
invariably "Pew" RS, pew being American slang for "stinks".)
One of the hypnotists who knew Sirhan (who grew up in Taybeh, Ephraim in Gospels, the last
stop of Jesus before Jerusalem and Golgotha) was technical advisor to the first version of
Manchurian Candidate, with Sinatra. William Joseph Bryant. He died several years after RFK,
in Las Vegas, rather young. My father's client, subject of the book, "Master of the
Mysteries" was murdered on his ranch in Fallbrook, about an hour's drive from here. So they
SAY: I've come across several versions of the forensics over the last 30 years, since he
purportedly died there in '90.
My sister told me his corpse was found with worms crawling out of every orifice of his
body, like Herod in the New Testament, "Acts of the Apostles".
But more authoritative sources say black ants. And I read another version too.
All which tends to argue your premise: ops.
And I told you, the Unabomber storyline seems silly with staged events.
One fact I can vouch, though: many a time I have found myself in the penumbra of these
events, if not closer! But still in the dark. Duped? Not entirely .
Mme. Blavatsky was a key figure in SPR in late 1800s London. Gandhi visited her there. She
was exposed as at least semi-fraudulent: she was not above using early audio technology at
her seances, for audible spookinesses! Wooooo . Hahaha
They called "The Client" of my dad's, "the American Blavatsky". Even Ronald Reagan
consulted him. Huxley knew him. I had dinner with Huxkey's wife once, when I was a callow 15
year old, but I never was introduced to The Client. Thank God! The old man insulated me from
some things, for some reason.
Angleton used a phrase from "Gerontion" about "mirrors".
We're seeing a helluva lot of mirrors, this month!
~~~~~~~~~~~~
"The CIA doesn't care what you do, as long as it's something they want you to do."
That is, something irrelevant & unmeaningful.
(Some of the above might sound rambling, but it is all unbelievably pertinent. Believe
it!)
I'm sure you've lived an interesting life, but does any of your rhetoric inform readers as to
practical solutions?
"Modern" society is now living under the boot of a militarized police state. Yet no one is
married to such persons, no one is related to such persons, no niece or nephew, aunt, uncle,
or cousin. No one knows them as a neighbor or as a person who is seen at the local bar. Hmmmm
Strange
The sleaze balls you allude to have names and addresses, and need to be hunted down and
culled. Jus' sayin'
Petra: I was on radio at Goddard College in VT 15 years ago, 7.15.05, reporting and analyzing
with the host, Jim HOGUE, the 7.7 London Tube and bus bombings. So very clearly a "terrorist
training exercise." Peter Power, formerly of Scotland Yard, spoke later that evening how they
had been doing a training exercise at the very moment for Visor, a private company, when he
said, on BBC Channel 4, "You can imagine how the hair stood up on our necks when we realized
the drill had suddenly gone 'live'".
There were many other stories like that.
I found out around then in a nice "find" of my own that a CIA agent, Art Riley, I believe
had been in charge of Port of NYC during 9/11, and was also head of London Transport during
7.7.
C'mon. Serious? So obvious.
This was the idea crystallizing in my mind the last few days, that the whole flu op was
just a new training exercise like those, for a variety of Intel purposes.
A to Z.
Great minds think alike!
But no fooling, it's got all those same fingerprints.
Hear, hear.
But garishly, tastelessly, wide in scope. If it's not "class war", I wonder how we
categorize it.
The 7/7 9/11 connection is interesting, John. And they're so brazen, no? "Hair stood up on
our necks." Yes, where their nature is applicable, psyops are "live" drills of themselves and
are preceded by at least one other drill, sometimes more and sometimes other drills run
concurrently. The greatest number of drills and exercises ever to occur on US soil probably
occurred on 9/11 which was, in effect, a massive Full-Scale Anti-Terrorist Exercise pushed
out as a real event.
The way I have come to see it, after ten years of having sporadic "chance," (yeah, right?)
interactions with Intel agents out in the field (they – a few retired one's have-
almost never identify themselves as such, but you get a workable certainty, and though the
working ones are saturated with sheepdip as being regular folk with regular jobs) is that
they see the world strictly as insiders versus outsiders. Us v. Them. They don't say that,
it's just so manifest.
Anyone who is not in the loop is essentially an adversary, and should mind their own
business if they're smart: "pay no attention to the wizard behind the curtain!" Etc.
Their own business: According to pretty dammed strict fish bowl like rules.
Oh, they don't mind if you act up or "carry on" but as the tagline of the Denzel remake of
Manchurian Candidate was given us by the late great Jonathan Demme: "Everything is under
control."
Pretty sick, but what now can they do. It is a bestial dialectic of the beast, that has
broken it's chains, really, and a roving rogue everywhere in the world. At least in its most
dangerous aspects.
Which are not few!
Only God and our own very good judgement, itself a gift, can save US.
Two have told me, "Be careful, it's NOT a free country."
That can put quite a nasty cramp in good judgement, but that comes with the territory
.
Might as well really reconnoiter that territory, eh, because we ALL share it now.
The Age of SPOOKOCRACY.
Exhibit A: all the many lockdowned nations. Switzerland, characteristically, is proud of
it's neutrality and one of the lightest loads now. That speaks volumes about what's really
going on?
Like Jews during WW II, I'm scanning their borders. I'm pricing jet tickets.
No, after all, I'll share this grief
wardropper ,
They can't make it last too long, however, otherwise we'll all go nuts. As the Donald
says, it will disappear like magic.
One has to consider, however, the possibility that they would rather like us all to go
nuts
Then we get the great civil military confrontation which some in Washington are just dying to
see, because their new devices for crowd control desperately need a thorough try-out.
If that seems far-fetched, we might consider that little Iceland, a country which had no
crime to speak of thirty years ago, ordered, after the banking crash of 2008, a crapload of
AK-74s for its police force (it has no army)
Doctortrinate ,
Latest figures Gov uk. Deaths registered in the year-to-date, Week 1 to 13. Looking at the
year-to-date (using refreshed data to get the most accurate estimates), the number of deaths
is currently lower than the five-year average. The current number of deaths is 150,047, which
is 3,350 fewer than the five-year average. Of the deaths registered by 27 March 2020, 647
mentioned the coronavirus (COVID-19) on the death certificate; this is 0.4% of all deaths.
U.K Lockdown – evening of the 23'rd March – Deaths, of 'or' with Covid ?
Tests, false positive / incorrect diagnosis = ? ? %
Gordo ,
Excellent article. It is apparent that the 'bone-pointers' generating individual panic and
general hysteria are first the MSM. Thus, this article should be sent to every editor and
every journalist involved making it clear that they are potential murderers.
Ben ,
If no one knew what Corona Virus was and it wasn't on the news no one would know or care
about it. Unlike Spanish flu. You would know and care very quickly. With or without MSM
bullshit.
That should tell you something.
All of it demonstrates our underlying quandary: we have a very real practical problem in
establishing the truth or validity of ALL the info we get, let alone really challenging
Intel.
The only confidence I can have personally in doing thar, over years of these things, is by
a process of triangulation.
THAT IS: Comparing, and contrasting, certain alleged facts with other alleged facts.
One of those clear facts is that they flood the field with psyops from actors and fakes to
try to erode our knowledge base and disorient and isolate us from real knowledge, and
allies.
And simply distract us. (Franz Kafka: "Evil is distraction." So, if their shoe fits
Lol)
Triangulation . is the reason I included some of my own stories. I was raised in various
circles around some of these people, and at least I know thus that certain things really
happen. So I set them down here, and elsewhere, to 1) document them as such, and 2) as
reference for people, later, since they can connect with some very important stories. Later.
Archived here.
Obviously we are too busy with the tasks at hand and this mess, to do "legwork" with them
now, but they will register at a later date, or even now, if they interconnect with some of
these other facts. There are patterns embedded in my testimony that parallel patterns in
these other psyops. Some times that can give unimaginable weight to a clue or two, from
personal storylines. Especially ones such as those I gave some details.
Which is why I give them. Granted, there are tonnages of facts involved, but there is a
peculiar phenomenon here of many similar patterns, and when they connect it can be quite
illuminating.
But proof? I loved first reading the opening of GK Chesterton's Autobiography almost a
half century ago, so much that I learned some sections of it by heart.
He calls the first chapter, opening pages, "Hearsay Evidence" about his own birth, "Bowing
down in blind credulity before tradition and the testimony of my elders, I confess that I was
born May 29, 1872 . etc. etc."
I got the point, that it's hard to say exactly what's true.
Later on he says, "For all the evidence, there still exists the real possibility that I
could have been the lost heir of the Holy Roman Empire, or some infant left on my parent's
back doorstep by ruffians from Soho, later to develop traits of a hideous criminal
heredity."
In a word, he was showing us some of the pitfalls of personal revelations, or just
acquired knowledge in general. That book is available online at the Project Gutenberg
Archives, as well as most, if not all of his 100+ titles oeuvre.
Certainly America today, and its viral infections of knowledge bases everywhere, speaks
volumes about these "epistemological problems".
(GKC had a really big advantage that so very few have: many of his works were dictated
without reference to notes. He said offhand, shortly before he died unexpectedly of heart
failure at 62, that he could remember the plot details of all 10,000 books he had reviewed
for the London press! Wow: most Franciscan and Thomist scholars say that the small books he
dictated on their saints were the best single volumes about them.
Just think of what he could do today toward conspiracy crime solutions. Probably why he
died in 1936. Things were heating up and they had to get him out of the way!
Sometimes I find, though, just knowing and practicing some of the intellectual tools he
developed, and mastered, are of great use in our epistemological pursuits of
TRIANGULATION.
I listen a lot to Alan Watts broadcasts and he mentions in one that his training as an
Anglican priest and his parallel wide studies in Eastern religions and practices was very
useful in "triangulating his true position."
The Trappist Thomas Merton – also most likely a anti-war 2968 martyr through the
handiwork of the CIA, whose more roguish members are the real fly in our global ointment, as
current events indicate – was one of the most "devout" of Catholics (Pope Francis
singled him out for special mention when he came here 5 years ago, along with Dorothy Day,
who was a good friend).
And Merton said, interestingly, "By the time I die, I want to have become the best
Buddhist I can possibly be."
He clearly had a good grasp of the blessings of triangulation.
Not that it is not without it's pitfalls, and I still am learning it's fascinating ways,
how to use it, hopefully, more correctly.
Meanwhile, we carry on with tasks close at hand. I am not trying to distract but inform
that process.
My own "way" that I preach. State Intel will do all they can to recruit and assimilate us.
The one Golden Rule I know is to do all I can to remain independent, separate, and a complete
ABSOLUTE non-collaborator.
Basically, they only want to control, totally contain, or kill you. And/or your
message.
We are under their virtual house arrest now, facts seem to show.
When Zen teacher Issan Dorsey was asked to describe the essence of Zen art, he answered, "Nothing extra."
"Nothing extra" is also of course the essence of Zen living itself: perceiving life as it
actually is, as opposed to perceiving it through a bunch of believed narrative filters about
yourself, about others, about reality, and so on. These narrative filters are an extra pile of
layers that are added on top of the actual experience of life, and they give a distorted view
which causes a lot of confusion and suffering. Relinquishing belief in them brings clarity and
peace.
This is also the essence of clearly understanding what's really going on in the world. Like
so much else, the approach to the large is the same as the approach to the small, which is to
say the approach to seeing clearly in the big picture is the same as the approach to seeing
clearly as an individual: you need to learn to look at it without the extra narrative
overlay.
Because the news media are
controlled by plutocrats who have a vested interest in
protecting the status quo upon which their kingdoms are built, almost everything in the
news is useless narrative fluff. It doesn't tell you what's really going on, it rather tries to
influence what's going on by manipulating the perceptions of the audience. It does this by
either (A) distracting from what really matters by focusing on what doesn't matter, or (B)
actively working to manipulate how the audience thinks about a given issue.
When you strip away all the empty fluff and manipulative spin, there are basically only four
often-overlapping pieces of information that really matter in the big picture: (1) where the
money is going, (2) where the resources are going, (3) where the weapons are going, and (4)
where the people are going. When it comes to understanding world dynamics, accurate information
about these four things is the only real news you'll ever encounter. Everything else is empty
narrative spin meant to justify, distort, or distract from information about these things.
If you ignore everything else and only focus on finding the most accurate information
possible about these four items, you will have an infinitely clearer understanding of what's
really going on in the world than someone who trusts news reporters to walk them through
it.
Watch where the money is going because you can trust the raw numbers of financial
transactions a lot more than you can trust the stories people are telling. A massive percentage
of daily news coverage goes toward analyzing the latest foam-brained gibberish that came out of
Donald Trump's mouth even though we all know he's going to contradict himself two days later,
but the fact that he's been
heavily funded by an oligarch who happens to have been a longtime proponent of the Iran
policies this administration has been advancing is much more solid.
Zoom out and watch where the money is going in the big picture and you'll see that a grossly
disproportionate amount of it is moving away from the general public and toward a very small
group of people, which we just saw illustrated in the historically unprecedented multitrillion-dollar wealth transfer in
the US corporate bailout. If you watch this small group and pay attention to the projects,
candidates, think tanks and media outlets they pour their wealth into, you will notice that
they exert an incredible amount of influence on all four crucial factors: where the money goes,
where the resources go, where the weapons go, and where the people go.
Watching where the resources are going gives you an even clearer image of what's going on
because resources, unlike money, are completely independent of narrative. There is no such
thing as "money" without the thoughts that humans agree to collectively think about it, but oil
would still be oil even if all humans were wiped off the face of the earth. When you see the US
ramping up escalations against Venezuela , ignore the narratives about "drug trafficking"
and what a bad, bad man Nicolás Maduro is, and look at
what resources lie beneath the ground in that nation to find out what this is really about.
Mentally "mute" the soundtracks the political/media class spout about who's doing what to whom
and just watch where the resources are going, and who's controlling them. That way you'll be
able to discern the powerful from the disempowered and the takers from their victims.
Watch where the weapons are going because those are another non-narrative factor which
exerts a huge influence on the world; a bullet will stop a beating heart regardless of what the
mind thinks about it. Ignore the irrelevant narrative fluff about where the coronavirus
originated and whether or not it's racist to say "Wuhan virus", and look at
the ring of US military bases encircling China and the way the Marine Corps
is shifting its attention onto that nation . Ignore Trump's gibberish about ending wars and
note that
he's been expanding them and
increasing foreign troop presence . Ignore the Democratic Party's nonsense about Trump
having loyalties to Russia and watch his administration's many dangerous
nuclear escalations against that nation . Ignore international finger-wagging at
humanitarian abuses by Israel and Saudi Arabia and look at who's still selling them weapons and
supporting them militarily.
Watch where the people are going for another important piece of real information that isn't
dependent on narrative. Where are the prisoners? Where are the refugees, where are they going,
and what are they fleeing? Where are people moving to, and what do they want?
With each of these four items you can simply watch raw data and ignore all the stories the
establishment spinmeisters tell about that data. As long as you make sure you're getting the
most accurate data possible, it's like you're looking at a globe and watching lines in four
different colors moving around in it from place to place and person to person. And without
anyone's stories tainting your view.
You will notice that there's a heavy degree of overlap between these four items. You see the
weapons moving toward China and you notice that's the nation with the US hegemony-threatening
Belt and Road
Initiative (where the resources are moving) and the key player in the
US dollar-threatening Shanghai Cooperation Organization (where the money is moving). You
see Julian Assange locked in prison (where the people are going) for exposing US war crimes
(where the weapons are going). You see US troops illegally
occupying Syrian oil fields (where the weapons and resources are going) to prevent the Syrian
government from using it to rebuild the nation (where the money is going). And so on.
Nearly everything that makes it to the top of the daily news churn is either propaganda
distortion or distracting drivel, and either way you can safely ignore it. Just watch where the
money is going, where the resources are going, where the weapons are going and where the people
are going, and ignore all the narrative chatter.
"... A dominant characteristic of fear is to always favor informations that maintain or amplify it and repress the ones which do not. Could it be the reason why the Scandinavian experience is rarely mentioned and if yes, qualified as being nonethical, without discussion of the pros and cons and the risk/benefit ratio of the confinement approach (see below). Fear does not allow good science to be performed, and we badly need good science, now and tomorrow. ..."
"... Lockdown and isolation practices have been taken by many with an amazing amount of ethics, patience, courage, adaptability, inventiveness and humor. As they block the young and active part of society, they may produce along time significant psychosocial and economic harm, risking to destabilize society in a worldwide manner. Rather sooner than later, they will have to be cancelled by governments. ..."
A few considerations on the corona crisisThe monumental importance of the measures taken around the world in the fight for control of the
current COVID-19 pandemic during the past few weeks motivated us to express through this text a few considerations
and comments on this hugely important topic.
Dr. Joel Kettner [
1
],
professor of Community Health Science at Manitoba University and Medical Director of the International Centre for
Infectious Diseases declared recently:
I have never seen anything like this I am not talking about the pandemic, because I have seen 30 of them, one
every year But I have never seen this reaction, and I am trying to understand why "
We do too, and wish to share our thoughts through these lines. Dr. David Jones[
2
]
declared recently, concerning the corona crisis, in the New England Journal of Medicine:
History suggests that we are actually at much greater risk of exaggerated fears and misplaced priorities"
Corona and other common Cold viruses
The common cold, as its name indicates, is the most common human infectious disease and affects people all over
the globe. Adults have typically two to three infections per year, and children even more. Rates of symptomatic
infections increase in the elderly due to reduced defense mechanisms. Over 200 virus types are implicated, the main
ones being rhino-, corona-, adeno- and enteroviruses as well as influenza, parainfluenza, human respiratory syncytial
and metapneumoviruses.
Studies out of different countries were reviewed by Wodarg[
3
]
(see among others Nicholson et al.[
4
]),
showing that coronaviruses are present year after year in 7-15% of winter respiratory tract infections (RTI). Every
year indeed, these common cold viruses invade the planet in wintertime of the northern hemisphere and mutate to get
entry into our organisms, and reproduction inside our cells.
We are thus dealing with a cyclic viral planetary invasion with high contagious capacity, in this sense a
pandemic, which, because it is so well known and most of the time benign, activates no significant fears in the
population and most of the time low interest from microbiologists.
Like the SARS-CoV-1 of 2002-2003 and the MERS virus of 2012, the SARS-CoV-2 is a corona virus which is thought to
have mutated from an animal. The next essential characteristic of a virus, after its contagiousness, is its lethality
for the human population. Roussel et al.[
5
]
have just published that common (i.e. pre-SARS-CoV-2 mutation) coronaviruses had in France an estimated mortality of
0.8% in 2016.
They analyzed, in addition, 4 common coronavirus strains between 2013 and 2020, which had mortalities between 0.36
and 2.7% (381 other corona strains diagnosed before 2017 were not assigned to this study). Data from the OECD and
from France (Roussel et al.[
5
])
show a SARS-CoV-2 mortality of 1.3% and 1.6%, respectively.
These data are fundamental to demonstrate the following: SARS-CoV-2 displays no higher mortality than its older
companions. It must be realized, however, that viral RTIs can be threatening to old, sick and weakened human beings.
The mortality rate of the common cold can go indeed as high as 8% in elderly nursing homes (Ioannidis[
6
]).
Diagnostic tests
We have at the time no idea of the presence (prevalence) of the SARS-CoV-2 in the human population. The journal
Le Monde
[
7
]
published a detailed review of 26 countries showing an average 10% of tests being positive, and Capek[
8
]
cites values staying between 10 and 15%. Interestingly, the presence of common cold coronaviruses in yearly RTIs
worldwide is 7-15% (see above).
These data speak for a usual presence of the SARS-CoV-2 this year as compared with the one, each year, of older
corona strains. They contradict the existence of a progression of the SARS-CoV-2 infections beyond the usual yearly
rate.
Common cold viruses display a high contagiousness level, due among other factors to the fact that a large majority
of their infections, estimated between 80 and 99.5%, are non or mildly symptomatic.
As around 20-40% of the population get an RTI in winter, we are led to the conclusion that a very large proportion
of the population must harbor common cold viruses including the SARS-CoV-2 corona strain. Confirming this line of
thought, Gupta et al.[
9
]
from Oxford University have drafted a model suggesting that a large part of the population has already been infected
by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, going through a mild or an asymptomatic infection.
Testing its presence in the population just confirms this reality, and the (obviously!) growing number of positive
tests should in no way be interpreted as a sign of an unusual propagation of the virus. This interpretation is one of
the two main panic activation factors at the source of the current worldwide panic wave. The only useful side of a
progressively larger testing of the whole population would be to bring the mortality rate down by including more mild
(rhinitis, coughing, no fever) or asymptomatic infection forms.
Mortality
The World Health Organization and numerous experts have communicated to the world a crude mortality rate for
COVID-19 of 3.4%, causing panic: this indicates (erroneously) a danger for the population around 30 times higher than
with the influenza virus, which is estimated at 0.1%.
In addition to the idea (not the evidence, as discussed above) of an exceptional pandemic, this statement
represents the second essential panic activation factor. The approach here is to count the number of deaths over the
number of positive tests performed.
As tests are in general not performed on persons affected mildly or without symptoms, this approach ignores their
high presence, estimations for it, going for COVID-19 from 82-90% in China (Li et al.[
10
])
up to 99.5% in Germany (Bhakdi[
11
]).
Such a crude mortality rate is thus inadequately high, not providing the centrally relevant information: the
number of deaths calculated over the total of infections by a given virus, including all clinical forms, from
asymptomatic to fatal ones. This mortality rate is the one representing the real danger the human population is
exposed to when getting infected: it is the infection mortality rate.
It is to be noted that the type of calculation followed by Roussel et al. ([[
5
]]
mentioned above) was considering the death percentage on the positive tests performed, with high crude mortality
values. The usefulness of this study resides however, as discussed above, in the comparison between the mortality of
the older and the current SARS-CoV-2 corona strains.
Ioannidis[
6
]
estimates an infection mortality rate for COVID-19 between 0.05 and 1%. Assuming a mid-range mortality value of 0.3%
and a 1% infection rate, it would correspond to 10'000 deaths for the USA. This surely is an impressive number, it
would however stay buried within the noise of the estimate of deaths from usual seasonal RTIs.
The European Monitoring of Excess Mortality for Public Health Action[
12
]
reveals that, till year week 13, no global European excess mortality can be seen as compared with earlier years, the
death toll trend for 2019-2020 is in fact slightly lower than for earlier years.
Confirming this, the German Robert Koch Institute[
13
]
documented end of March a nationwide decrease in the activity of acute RTIs, with the number of hospital stays caused
by them being below the level of previous years and currently continuing to decline.
Roussel et al.5 remind us that every year around the world 2.6 million people die of RTIs. Today, at the end of
March and of the RTI season, we may really hope that the SARS-CoV-2 strain will not be the "killer virus" which was
profiled and which produced such an intense and worldwide reaction. A revealing comparison can be made with the
yearly mortality of influenza infections, estimated between 0.5 and 1 million worldwide.
In Switzerland where the death toll of the flu is estimated at an average of 2'000 deaths per season, we live,
like all other countries around the world, with this cyclic reality, and have integrated it fully in our personal,
social and national lives (Osterloh and Frey[
14
]).
With the COVID-19, Switzerland remains, end of March, with a lower death toll.
As of today, we have not yet a final estimation of the infection mortality rate of the COVID-19. The data
described above indicate a value at or below the one of the flu. Bendavid and Bhattacharya[
15
]
proposed indeed estimations of the infection mortality rate of the COVID-19 between 0.01 for the US and 0.06% for
Italy (based on the testing of the whole population of the town of Vò), values close to the ones proposed by
Ioannidis[
6
],
and below the 0.1% rate of the flu.
If the monitoring of the global (e.g. European) death toll does not show any excess mortality during the 2019-2020
season, it is nevertheless true that a local increase is present in northern Italy. In the city of Bergamo for
example, 652 deaths (all causes of death included) were reported between January 1st and March 21st of this year
versus 386 in the same period of 2017, during the last bigger flu wave.
An interesting fact is that in the same period the city of Milano has recorded 3,283 deaths this year versus 3,792
in 2017[
16
].
Obviously, further analysis of the demographic data and of local factors will be needed.
The detailed Italian official data[
17
]
demonstrate a very high relevance for mortality of pre-existing morbidities: the average age of deceased patients was
78.5 years old. On a study on 481 deaths, 6 patients (1.2%) had no pre-existing morbidities, 23.5 % had one, 26.6%
two and 48.6% three or more pre-morbidities. Nine patients were younger than 40 years old, but at least seven of them
had serious pre-existing pathologies. In 84% of Italian therapeutic programs, antibiotics were applied, indicating a
high rate of bacterial co-infections.
It must also be kept in mind that the SARS-CoV-2 is often accompanied, in an average of 24% of infections
according to Shah et al.[
18
],
by other common cold viruses, so that it cannot always be held primarily responsible for the disease and its
consequences.
Following these lines and according to Prof. Ricciardi[
19
],
an analysis of Italian death certificates showed that only 12% of them displayed a direct causality from the COVID-19
virus. This leads to a most significant reduction of the deaths attributable to it. One ends up with a few dozen
deaths per day, compared to 20'000 flu deaths per year in Italy.
The Italian Civil Protection Service underline in this context the necessity to differentiate between death with
and death from corona virus[
20
].
This analysis is absolutely essential, should be considered by all countries counting their deaths, and will
contribute to get a final correct estimation of the COVID-19 death toll worldwide.
Finally, two additional factors add to the Italian mortality rate: the high average age of the population (with
633'133 deaths[
21
]
for all reasons in 2018, estimated 2,000 deaths per day in wintertime) and high air pollution levels. One gets hence
the addition of 3 factors reducing strongly the death causality of COVID-19:
other viruses because they often come together
bacterial secondary infections
pre-existing morbidities
In conclusion, a very invasive virus with a high death toll is the basis for the development of fear and panic in
the human population. The statistical considerations above allow us to hope that the SARS-CoV-2 will not be the
"killer virus" that we expected. Local factors, like in Italy, may play a significant role. That fear and panic may
in themselves cause and increase locally human losses is discussed below.
The alveolar and interstitial pneumopathy (AIP) and the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)
The AIP[
22
]
affects around 2 million people worldwide and is due to the triggering of an ill-understood abnormal healing
response. This response is delayed over around a week in the case of the SARS.
Two-thirds of AIP are idiopathic, i.e. have no known cause. For the ones with a known etiology, the causes are
autoimmune, allergic or infectious. Infectious agents are the coronavirus, but also the respiratory syncytial virus
and tuberculosis. There is evidence that the autoimmune and allergic dynamics point to the relevance of
psycho-neuro-immunological mechanisms, which, in the presence of an associated genetic predisposition, may trigger
overactive deleterious inflammatory responses.
Thus, in the AIP, the virus is only the environmental trigger of a process which needs other factors, genetic and
psycho-emotional, to develop.
In accordance with the presence of an autoimmune response in SARS, Chinese and Italian doctors have applied with
success to serious SARS patients a treatment of Tocilizumab[
23
],
a medication useful in the treatment of the rheumatoid arthritis, a well-known auto-immune disorder. We thus propose
that emotional factors play a role through the development of the SARS and AIP, in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.
Everybody's life experiences and growing scientific evidence speak for a direct influence of our emotional state
on immunity and inflammation processes.
This will determine, at the moment of viral invasion, the activation level of our defense mechanisms, closing, or
in stress alas opening up a breach allowing a full-blown respiratory infection (including lungs). In the case of an
AIP, an overactivation of the organism's immune and inflammation responses can also be induced (named "cytokine storm
or release syndrome"[
23
]).
The role of stress and panic
Stress has been shown to be at the source of cell losses in the limbic (behavioral) brain of animals. It is in
position to activate excitotoxic, oxidative, immunological, inflammatory, endocrine and vegetative mechanisms, and to
cause in certain conditions the potentially fatal failure of multiple organs.
One such situation has been described by ethnologists in the context of a ritual performed by the kurdaitcha man,
or shaman of the aborigenic society. It is called "pointing the bone" and causes the so-called "self-willed death",
or "bone-pointing syndrome"[
24
][
25
].
It consists in the pointing onto a victim of a ritual bone which activates the effect of a "spear of thought" and
kills the cursed person over days to weeks, without great suffering.
This ritual may have served kurdaitcha men along the millennia when a member of their community would become
dangerous. The power of an idea and its related emotion, i.e. fear, is exemplified here in a most impressive and
definitive way.
We propose to consider the possibility, in the context of the corona crisis, that a planetary "spear of thought"
loaded with fear and capable to kill is active now and threatens the whole of mankind, inducing among other things
the development of the AIP and provoking fear-based chain reactions all over the world.
Pre-existing and facilitating factors may be the threat of human extinction by a killer virus as shown
impressively in disaster movies, and a current feeling of doomed and dismal planetary state due to pollution.
Images have been displayed all over the world of bad science fiction scenes, with human silhouettes installed in
beds surrounded by alien-looking fully masked and dressed-up doctors and nurses, dead streets swept with gross
disinfectant systems, the close-up picture of the initiating Chinese doctor with panicky eyes over a ventilation
device, "state of war" declarations to the virus by politicians, faked Italian messages as the one from a mother
wanting to convince her child to stay home, emergency military tents filled with persons waiting for the verdict of
their test, etc
In addition, it is interesting to consider that both the SARS-CoV-1 in 2003 and the MERS-CoV in 2012 were
coronaviruses: they may have paved the way toward a sensitivity of the human environment to a respiratory threat.
They were rated as dangerous because they had a high mortality, although their propagation was very limited with a
death toll of 770 (SARS-CoV-1) and 850 (MERS-CoV) patients worldwide[
26
].
The elements for panic generation were in place: death by a killer virus, economic failure and chaos, loss of
familial and social support, loss of freedom and isolation due to lockdown measures, helplessness, uncertain future
for the human civilization, and the overwhelming fear of losing a loved one without being able to say goodbye.
Like the man cursed by the pointing of the bone of the kurdaitcha, the current corona "spear of thought" seems
well to be able to hit different body targets and induce multiple organ failure: for example, cardiomyopathy is
described in the high percentage of 33% of Italian patients[
27
].
Fear and anxiety are felt indeed typically at the cardio-respiratory level, with dyspnea (choking feeling) and heart
palpitations.
Let us imagine a person, for example in the north of Italy in February 2020, coughing and unwell from an RTI. An
immediate fear of getting infected by the COVID-19 virus arises and dominates his mind (I take here the example of a
man, as the infection risk is higher for males!).
He heard, announced the day before by the WHO, that this virus kills more than the flu (against which he is
vaccinated, being 70 years old). He knows that policemen closed the village where he lives, forbidding entry and
exit. Being a good citizen, he announces that he suspects a corona infection and is taken in an emergency to the
local hospital.
By arrival, he is placed in a probably uncomfortable and cold tent, in the middle of other fearful citizens, and
his SARS-CoV-2 test is performed. Other people cough around him, and he waits for the sentence. His heart beats hard
and it seems that he cannot breathe well.
His test being positive, he is taken into the hospital by an efficient but stressed medical team, and gets
surrounded by masked nurses. He realizes that he is now no longer free to leave this whole nightmare, to get back
home. Panic raises its dreadful head, and his defense mechanisms fall down, opening the way to a full-blown, at his
age threatening viral infection. In this state, our patient may experience one of the three following scenarios:
At best: he keeps an upper RTI, with a bit of fever, a solid cough through bronchitis, some difficulty to
swallow and a full nose. He is kept isolated in the hospital, the staff remains efficient but stressed, very busy
and distant, and he stays alone with his fears to get full-blown choking feelings leading so many to the intensive
care unit and ventilator. He cannot get the visit of his family and he stays sick with a solid RTI for the next
two weeks. Most probably, this experience will stay imprinted for ever in his emotional brain.
At worst, first scenario: his age, his long standing suboptimal pulmonary function, his significant overweight
precipitate a bronchopneumonia, with combined viral development and bacterial secondary infection by nosocomial
germs, leading to death in a few days. He dies without a last contact with his wife and children.
At worst again, second scenario: the viral attack on his pulmonary system is moderate and the tissues there
begin to recover in proper manner over a week. He keeps a deep feeling of fear and doom, dyspnea arises, a scan is
performed showing the presence of an AIP, and he is taken to the intensive care unit. Over the next few days, the
"spear of thought" proceeds flying, his pre-existing suboptimal health state limits his resources to overcome the
reanimation phase, secondary infections arise, heart failure and failure of other organs develop and he dies,
again far away from his family
Around him and at home, other patients suffering from other health problems are treated suboptimally, all energy,
material and staff being concentrated on the corona crisis.
It is easy to understand how hospital staffs will be submitted to a huge overload:
worried people flow into hospitals, increasing the workload of the medical and nursing teams,
teams are reduced by the absence of burned-out collaborators, by the quarantine of others and in some
situations by the ones kept away by the closing of borders. Again stress and panic develop and create the pervasive
impression of exceptional and uncontrollable chaos
The existence of the SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV corona episodes in 2003 and 2012 could point to the possibility of
mutations of the coronavirus toward a particular pulmonary affinity.
Three same or similar, allegedly random mutations are however not likely, and we favor in this context the
hypothesis mentioned above of sensitivity of the human environment to a respiratory threat, a "spear of thought"
loaded with fear and threatening the whole human planet
There are, currently end of March, very significant differences of mortality rates between countries. The
respective crude mortality rates (deaths on the number of positive tests performed) are around 0.3% for Germany, 3.6%
for France and 7.8% for Italy.
For the same countries, the number of deaths per million inhabitants is respectively 7, 40 and 178. We propose
that the three following factors, in addition to local factors (see discussion above about Italy), co-influence the
amount of critical cases and deaths:
the baseline level of anxiety in a given human population,
the suppression of basic human social interactions through isolation, and
the suppression of democratic freedom by limitation of civil rights.
The difference is fundamental between a recommendation to the people in the name of the safety for all or an order
enforced by state-given punishments (including emprisonment).
The Swiss government, for example, has managed in such tensed times to pass measures mainly as recommendations and
not as orders, counting on the goodwill and adequation of the Swiss people. Concerning point 2), it is to be noted
that the disruption of social bonds is indeed a severe issue for all primate societies, and in non-human primates,
isolation can lead to death.
A surely premature review of some national mortality rates worldwide may provide insights favoring this
proposition: as an example, Scandinavian countries have mostly respected the freedom of the people, and classical
safety measures have been recommended as usually against the flu, without confinement of the whole population. They
have among the lowest mortality rates in Europe.
A dominant characteristic of fear is to always favor informations that maintain or amplify it and repress the ones
which do not. Could it be the reason why the Scandinavian experience is rarely mentioned and if yes, qualified as
being nonethical, without discussion of the pros and cons and the risk/benefit ratio of the confinement approach (see
below). Fear does not allow good science to be performed, and we badly need good science, now and tomorrow.
Confinement and isolation measures
The rapid adoption in most countries of the strategy to control viral spread with confinement measures has
developed, as far as we are aware, without an in-depth, open and balanced analysis of all pros and cons concerning
this approach.
As cited by Ioannidis and other experts, there exists only a weak evidence for the efficiency of confinement
measures (see Cochrane Database). Evident however are their negative psychosocial effects we have discussed above,
and deleterious effects on the world economy are already present and cannot be underrated.
Of course, classical measures of decontamination/isolation to reduce viral transmission between individuals are to
be recommended, but can be limited around the sensitive members of the population, that is old, sick and weakened
individuals. This has been the approach of Scandinavian countries. A general lockdown approach does not seem to make
sense from many aspects.
Firstly, the rapidity with which European countries lost track of the chain from patients 1 onward underlines a
well-known extreme contagiousness, questioning even the possibility to stop the propagation by tracking the virus and
its carriers in the whole human population.
This happened in Italy in a matter of a day or two, and in spite of very fast and extensive isolation measures.
Common cold viruses have probably developed a great experience through their yearly planetary invasions, and tracking
them as well as establishing lockdown measures does not seem to be the proper thing to do when one realizes that, as
discussed above, they distribute themselves worldwide over millions of individuals (see the Oxford model above)
during the whole winter season.
The next argument is centered on the regularly proposed necessity to flatten the epidemy distribution curve to
reduce the death toll. This approach does not consider the existence and relevance of the "herd or population
immunity". With it, the larger the amount of immunized people in the human population, the less dangerous the viral
epidemy can be.
The application of general distancing and confinement measures leads unavoidably to all sorts of questionable
decisions. Even worse, different measures, which make minimal or even no sense, may be imposed by states and
implemented/increased by fearful individuals.
In any case, in the name of the safety of all, states appeal to the duty of all individuals to accept limitations
of their civil rights and freedom. This move should be limited to recommendations, and not orders accompanied by
punishment: the readiness of the people must remain the dominant factor, and the people should not be threatened by a
government they have themselves chosen.
The subject of the adoption of more or less strict measures creates unavoidably fractures inside the social group.
Movements come up proposing different ways, mainly through electronic media, to increase the penetration into the
private sphere of individuals in the name of epidemic control, notwithstanding the fact that any population control
is a danger to democracy.
When a discussion arises on this theme, anybody demanding for a maintenance of her/his private sphere is opposed
by the arguments 1) that the fact that one has nothing to hide should bring no problem, and 2) that in the case of
epidemic prevention, one surely does not mean to limit safety measures to protect everybody.
In the case of our country, the Swiss federal council has shown a most solid position and insisted to maintain as
low as possible the temporary limitation of the Swiss people's freedom and civil rights, resisting firmly
journalistic pressures.
As examples of questionable lockdown measures, let us mention first the school stop, which backfires onto
grandparents induced to provide child care. This measure is not evidence-based, i.e. there is no available scientific
study demonstrating its efficiency, it has been introduced from country to country because another country had done
it before. Population immunity mentioned above has to be addressed here.
Leaving children to interact at school and playground and leaving the young (below 65) adult group work and also
interact can be seen as the best way to advance herd immunity and thus protect the whole population, knowing in
addition that these two age groups have an absolutely minimal risk to be endangered by the SARS-CoV-2. There are thus
sound reasons to doubt the usefulness of the introduction of this measure, and we may even envisage that it could be
counterproductive.
The closing of public and natural spaces, particularly parks in cities, makes no sense: if people are demanded or
obliged to keep distance in the streets, are they going not to do so in parks, whereby the way more place is there
for them to keep distance?
The contact with nature and fresh air, as mentioned by the Danish government, will be of utmost importance for the
well-being of inhabitants of large cities, before or after they go out for food, work or other primordial activities.
With this measure, they are unjustly limited in comparison with people living in the country.
Among other highly questionable measures, the suppression/limitation of the access to the medical and spiritual
domains is fully inappropriate, deleterious and inhumane. Not only COVID-19 patients but also all the other patients
hospitalized for other reasons cannot get their visits.
In general, but particularly now in the middle of the crisis, the support by dear ones is part of social and
spiritual functions which should never be touched or withdrawn, taking the risk to alienate human beings from their
vital psychosocial and spiritual environment. Why couldn't a close visiting family member apply the same safety
precautions in the hospital as the medical staff do? And religious services could be performed with the same distance
recommendations as for other civil sessions, which have been maintained because they are considered indispensable.
Lockdown and isolation practices have been taken by many with an amazing amount of ethics, patience, courage,
adaptability, inventiveness and humor. As they block the young and active part of society, they may produce along
time significant psychosocial and economic harm, risking to destabilize society in a worldwide manner. Rather sooner
than later, they will have to be cancelled by governments.
Experts, politicians and media
In the domain of biology, and particularly studies of large biological structures and dynamics, detailed analyses
considering all sides of a phenomenon are essential, to avoid biased views and inappropriate conclusions and
decisions. Biology is not mathematics, physics or chemistry, its complexity requires the integration of multiple
dimensions and the adoption of a hopefully well-based interpretation. In the intensive and extensive, worldwide field
of the corona crisis, an open, deep, careful, multidimensional and thus unbiased study of the whole situation with
presentation of pros and cons and risk/benefit balance analyses is fundamental. Medical experts, mainly
microbiologists and epidemiologists, are the ones to provide these informations to politicians. They have to realize
that they hold in their hands the power to modulate the state of mind of the whole human planet, and that they have
to carefully avoid to activate a worldwide powerful chain reaction of fear and panic. In the aftermath of the corona
crisis, an open, deep and constructive analysis will have to be performed, with the goal to avoid the future
repetition of current errors.
Politicians represent their people and, in this function, have the difficult role to protect them when necessary.
They have the right and the duty to ask from their experts the open, detailed and unbiased analysis just mentioned.
Governments should make at best propositions which are the product of their sound and balanced analysis. These
propositions will often be compromises between extremes (a tradition in our country!), and being thus moderate, they
will be more readily accepted by the people. And, as discussed above, this approach may take away one of the three
panic activation factors we propose, i.e. the reduction/suppression of democratic freedom. The public must be
informed in an open and reassuring way, and negative informations should be balanced by positive ones, maintaining
hope in the population. There is nothing questionable to provide hope in a balanced information context. In addition,
a government would make something deeply constructive by congratulating its people for its courage and adequacy
Media have a role to relay informations from all possible environments and tendencies. As exemplified particularly
clearly in the current situation, they should avoid to exert pressures on politicians, and be deeply aware that they
can contribute to the worldwide activation of powerful anxiogenic mechanisms if they do not provide balanced
informations from controlled sources.
The very fast and overwhelming distribution of the current panic has as one facilitating factor the spreading
efficiency of social media, which have been instrumental in profiling, through biased and even fake news, a situation
in Italy as more chaotic than it really is. Of course, positive news are also distributed by social media, but an
anxious environment tends, as discussed above, to maintain itself by the relay of dominantly anxiogenic informations.
Conclusion
As of today (end of March 2020), a death toll of around 35'000 worldwide is being attributed to COVID-19. This is
of course a high number but still much less than the flu, which kills every season between half a million and a
million people. There are 2.6 million deaths worldwide every year due to RTIs.
The world is, in the middle of the corona crisis, mesmerized by one mutated corona virus like hundreds of other
ones spreading over the whole world every year. It presents no evidence of higher mortality than its earlier yearly
mutations. Diagnostic testing is being interpreted as a way to follow the epidemic propagation, whereas it only
reveals (partially) the ubiquitous and collaborative presence of common cold viruses worldwide.
The mortality rate of COVID-19 has been calculated as the percentage of performed tests coming out positive, not
integrating the strong mortality reduction allowed by the presence of a high percentage of mild or asymptomatic
disease forms. Fear and panic were kindled by these two inaccurate scientific communications and spread over the
whole planet like a bushfire, causing the chaos we observe every day on the News.
Scientific experts, politicians and media people will have to deeply realize the importance of providing
well-based unbiased information and recommendations. The corona crisis has brought to light that the human planet has
currently a high anxiety level and must be treated gently, just like a human patient in a sensitive phase of her
life!
There is no way for us to conceive life without viruses. They are everywhere, around 50% of our own genome is of
viral origin, and the virologist Prof. Moelling brought documented arguments in her book that viruses are "more
friends than foes"[
28
].
Our main foe is fear activated by a biased and heartless science. We are with most viruses in a win/win and
need/need interaction: we cannot live without each other. No party has advantage to eradicate the other. Older
pandemics, which are at the source of deep atavic plague memories, were in most cases due to bacterias and related
closely to precarious human life conditions.
The only catastrophic viral pandemic was the 1918 H1N1 flu, which killed millions, but developed in the chaotic
and unhealthy aftermath of the first world war. Panic seems to be no appropriate, even no feasible way to integrate
our interaction with viruses, it would guarantee us a future filled with fear for the next pandemic and repeated
panic states and destabilizations of the worldwide human environment.
A bleak future, indeed not desirable at all. Avoidable though if we apply this: to think deep, to do good science,
and not to panic
Daniel Jeanmonod MD
, Professor Emeritus of Neurosurgery at Zürich University and
Physiology & Neuroscience at New York University.
Roxanne Jeanmonod
, Physical Therapist.
Francis Neirynck
, Civil Engineer
References:-
[1] Dr Joel Kettner on CBC Radio – Cross Country Checkup,
March 15, 2020.
[2] Jones D. History in a Crisis – Lessons for Covid-19. New England Journal of
Medicine (2020).
[3] Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg. Review on https://www.wodarg.com.
[4] Nicholson K.G. et al. Respiratory viruses and exacerbations of asthma in adults.
British Medical Journal 307 (1993).
[5] Roussel Y. et al. SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data, International Journal of
Antimicrobial Agents (2020).
[6] Dr. Ioannidis J.P.A. A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes
hold, we are making decisions without reliable data. www.statnews.com, March 17, 2020.
[7] Dagorn G. Coronavirus : la France pratique-t-elle assez de tests ? Le Monde. March
20, 2020.
[8] Kapek R. https://coronadaten.wordpress.com.
[9] Gupta S. Fundamental principles of epidemic spread highlight the immediate need
for large-scale serological surveys to assess the stage of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. Link to download the draft in
the following article: Cookson C. Coronavirus may have infected half of UK population -- Oxford study. Financial
Times, March 24, 2020. https://www.ft.com/content/5ff6469a-6dd8-11ea-89df-41bea055720b
[10] Li R. et al. Substancial undocumented infection facilitates the rapid
dissemination of novel coronavirus (SARS-Co2). Science (2020).
[11] Bhakdi S. Corona-Krise: Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi erklärt warum die Maßnahmen
sinnlos und selbstzerstörerisch sind. YouTube Video. March 24, 2020.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBB9bA-gXL4&feature=emb_logo
[12] European Monitoring of Excess Mortality for Public Health Action
https://www.euromomo.eu/outputs/number.html
[13] Buda s. et al. Influenza Wochenbericht Kalenderwoche 13/2020. Robert Koch
Institut. March 27, 2020.
[14] Osterloh M. and Frey B. Coronavirus: Vergleiche sind wichtig. Gastkommentar Neue
Zürcher Zeitung, March 12, 2020.
[15] Bendavid E. and Bhattacharya J. Is the Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say? Wall
Street Journal Editorial, March 24, 2020.
[16] Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. Dataset sintetico con i decessi per settimana.
https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/240401
[17] EpiCentro. Characteristics of COVID-19 patients dying in Italy Report based on
available data on March 20th, 2020. Istituto Superiore di Sanità.
[18] Shah N. Higher co-infection rates in COVID19. Data shared at the request of the
California Department of Public Health. Medium. March 18, 2020.
[19] Newey S. Why have so many coronavirus patients died in Italy? The Telegraph,
March 23, 2020.
[20] Borrelli A. Dipartimento Protezione Civile. Conferenza stampa 20 marzo 2020 ore
18.00 – Coronavirus. YouTube Video (at 3.30 minutes), March 20, 2020.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0M4kbPDHGR0&feature=youtu.be&t=210
[21] Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. I.Stat. Popolazione e famiglie – Mortalità –
Decessi – Morti. http://dati.istat.it/Index.aspx?QueryId=19670
[22] Synthesis on Interstitial lung disease on Wikipedia including detailed
references. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstitial_lung_disease
[23] Zhang C. et al. The cytokine release syndrome (CRS) of severe COVID-19 and
Interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R) antagonist Tocilizumab may be the key to reduce the mortality. International
Journal of Antimicrobial Agents (2020).
[24] Cannon W.B. „Voodoo" Death. American Anthropologist (1942)
[25] Milton G.W. Self-willed death or the bone-pointing syndrome. The Lancet (1973)
[26] Synthesis on Coronavirus on Wikipedia including detailed references.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronavirus
[27] Arentz M. Characteristics and outcomes of 21 critically ill patients with
COVID-19 in Washington State. Journal of the American Medical Association (2020).
[28] Moelling K. Viruses, more friends than foes. World Scientific Publishing, New
Jersey London Singapore (2017).
Rhisiart Gwilym
,
Take a look at this cry from frontline medical staff at a Bergamo hospital. Does this sound like a psyop
to you? Something pretty desperate seems to be happening in Lombardy, whatever the ultimate explanation
may be. Can't just discount testimony like this:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/5CCVUc5ZMZo?version=3&rel=1&fs=1&autohide=2&showsearch=0&showinfo=1&iv_load_policy=1&wmode=transparent
film done by 2 americans called Quarantiranny
re : Imperial College of Medicine
re : who or whats behind it
The counties where I work or live most of the time, Orange and San
Diego, contiguous and 120 miles of coastline, with a combined GDP of almost exactly a half trillion
dollars, and each with almost identical populations, 3 million each, each of which is larger than over 20
U. S. States out of 50, released this fearsome figure of DEATH counts from (?) this killer flu:
15 in Orange County
31 in San Diego.
(They think.)
STOP THE PRESSES!!!!!!
Find the Mega-Font for the global headlines.
Would it be "QUARANTINES WORKING!!!"
We should be so lucky.
I have been quizzing a lot of people in my travels, and roughly 4 out of 5, or higher, think this
whole thing is just a tragi-musical. A Soap Opera Psyop. A very police- styled security guard kicked me
out of a parking lot at my high school yesterday. I told him I was parked under the solar panels to get
shelter so I could use my portable stair stepper, as it was raining everywhere and I had no other access
to exercise. He said, "District Orders, sorry. But I agree with you completely." Given that opening, I
gave him a short paragraph pitch that this was an international Ponzi Scheme to crash the global economy,
precisely like ENRON 2000, only worldwide. Suddenly the rain kicked up with a driving wind and he was
getting drenched, but fascinated, not going anywhere. I took pity on him after 30 seconds of torrent, he
said he was only 24 when I asked, but knew some about Enron. He wanted to keep listening, we were alone
at my deserted HS of 1970 class, but he was standing outside my car getting soaked, so I overruled him,
and he said, "Let me open the gate for you." It had been locked after I entered!
A dyed-in-the-wool future Police Aademy graduate, if we last that long.
It may be the wake-up call that's needed, or at least more advantageous. Only the born germaphobes
seem to be holdouts to a California statewide citizen quorum .
And even the faces that strike me as born ijjits are spouting a lot of sense ?!?!! What, The Flock?
And *hearing* sense, like, for one featured example of mine: "Governmental Psyops".
That SUDDENLY,
SUDDENLY, I SAY
Is not tinfoil hat public pity.
Waking up, World?
Now, just hoping we all don't wake up dead .
San Francisco County was the first to totally shut down almost a month ago, or less. Or at least it
enacted the first draconians of rules .
9 deaths now, 25 days in . Scary. It's almost like death is becoming a regular terrorist event, some
kind of serial killing.
9 people were murdered here at a beauty salon ten years ago. It ruled the headlines for months, Worst
crime in Seal Beach history".
And now this! FIFTEEN KILLER FLU DEATHS.
I was shouting (not very loudly) at the gerrymandered line at Walmart yesterday, "HOAX, HOAX". This
petite debutante comes alongside saying "You are SO sick. People are DYING."
I burst out laughing uncontrollably, and spluttered, "Wait! That just doesn't happen! You're trying to
tell me that people DIE! I tell you the real problem here. The millions of your crowd are the biggest
part of our problem. Silence of the SHEEPLE! Baaaasasahhh."
She continued to glare at me steely-eyed like my Commanding Officer, and I said, "Call the cops! I'd
rather die or be tortured than this! Call the cops! Turn me in!"
She was still on her high horse, or cart, pushing into the store, but I saw her getting wipes later,
and she looked seriously conflicted. But chastened.
I felt bad, but like maybe she was at least searching for that other brain cell to rub together!
We can use all of them, now.
Meanwhile, we can't attend Holy Thursday tomorrow, at any church, for the first time in my lifetime.
Days of Obligation, cancelled.
Maybe that's one big prong of their multi-pronged global attack .
Worldwide denial of the Eucharist
That thought struck me Day 1.
Pawel
,
The authors don't know the difference between Mortality Rate and Case Fatality Rate (CFR) and on top of
that seem to think that 'C' in CFR stands for crude and the words like 'mortality' and 'fatality' are
exchangeable :). Maybe in everyday language but not in statistics and serious medical literature. The
piece is overall ok, but their lack of understanding these basic differences makes the entire article
look very amateurish.
In general they should switch from Mortality Rate to Fatality Rate throughout the entire article but
not everywhere! Yes, they got that confused.
The editor or whoever allowed this piece to be published here should familiarize himself with those
terms.
This well-argued article is such a breath of fresh air. Here in Spain the results of the lockdown are
awful – fearful, isolated people, violence against those who go outside, and completely bewildering
official figures which, if true, only show how useless it is to lock people indoors, often in tiny flats.
And where is the quantification of the suffering that the complete destruction of our economies will
produce? Not to mention the horrendous treatment of old people who, when they are dying, should have
kind, palliative care, not be scared witless with Star Wars-type masks and intubation.
Shaking My Head
,
Have you seen any doctors/scientists/etc. publicly dissenting?
I'm a little dubious about various aspects of this article including the authors.
While Daniel
Jeanmonod is a highly-esteemed neurosurgeon, coronaviruses would not seem to be in his field.
According to her staff bio on Polarstern, a communication agency supporting companies and
organisations committed to ecological, social and economic sustainability, Roxanne Jeanmonod, presumably
Daniel's daughter, was a physiotherapist and is now in charge of administration at Polarstern and
Coworking Space Loreto. She's also listed on the company site of her father as a Financial Consultant.
Francis Neirynck is a Civil Engineer so it is difficult to see any reason at all he would be a
contributor to this article.
A feature of psychological operations is "controlled opposition" often in the form of experts and
another feature is conflicting information. Two seeming experts who comment on this site, Tony and
VirusGuy, say that a specific coronavirus cannot be isolated while this article speaks of SARS-CoV-2 as
if it can be isolated and tested for.
It's a psyop folks. In psyops, they don't do things for real unless they want them for real. They
don't want or need a virus and couldn't make it behave in the way they wanted it to anyway. There is no
virus out of the ordinary and there is certainly no pandemic.
Best guess is that all they can test for is "coronavirus" and they are presumptively labelling
anything "coronavirus" as COVID-19. I very much doubt the existence of SARS-CoV-1 (the SARS pandemic) or
SARS-CoV-2 – I'd say just like this alleged pandemic the SARS pandemic was a psyop too, as were MERS,
Zika and Ebola.
wardropper
,
On the other hand, the common cold is not in the specialist field of most of us, yet we know a heck of
a lot about it, simply through personal experience. Similarly, the fact that I don't know a single
person who has CoVid19 – (nor does my wife) tells its own story, and it puts a lot of what we hear
into perspective.
Portonchok
,
While Daniel Jeanmonod is a highly-esteemed neurosurgeon, coronaviruses would not seem to be in
his field.
I'd prefer this version:
While Petra Liverani is allegedly a highly-esteemed PSYOPS disinfo agent,
coronaviruses would not seem to be in her field.
Voz ZeroBel
,
Hello Unfortunately to me, your article doesn't offer nothing new!
I've been writing and saying that
for months now. I wrote to the politicians to the president (of Portugal!) but FEAR and PANIC fueled by
IGNORANCE is very difficult to fight especially for someone like me that doesn't carry a college title.
Even you guys are probably in the same situation, because they don't care about what you write and
say, even though you guys carry a college title!
All politician's wages should be reduced by 75%. The "health experts" who are advising them should follow
a similar fate whether "working from home" or not. They are the ringleaders of this fear campaign of
misinformation over a virus which is being publicised as something similar to the Black Death.
wardropper
,
Needless to say, nobody has the courage to reduce any politician's wages, and the most corrupt of them
will continue to receive the highest wages.
I know, Petra, but
Here we are, "calling out" this event, as you encourage us to do.
The response: Silence.
We need an effective outlet, however much OffG cheers us up with real information.
There is a very seminal documentary at YouTube which rocked my world and reconfigured my entire
perspective about 9 years ago, PSYWAR, by Zeitgeist Films, with the tagline: "The Real Battlefield
is the Mind."
It has must-know info for everyone who knows a bit about the Age of the Mind Virus.
As I shall now call it.
(The co-producer of the film is a real keeper name: "I Am the Mob")
John
,
Population of the USA 332,000,000
Annual normal death rate 2,712,000
Monthly death rate 226,000
Daily rate 7,500
1. The hysteria about a "health ID card" or whatever people call it is overblown.
International travelers used to carry exactly that - a yellow health certificate that listed
all your immunizations - which used (circa 1956) to be compulsory for international travel
(typhoid, cholera, smallpox and perhaps yellow fever). We carried them with our passports.
They are nothing new. We could easily roll out an App, like China has, that indicates your
health status and use it to control the winding back of the lockdown.
2. The use of social distancing is 500 years old. The idea that it's something dreamed by
leftist globalists is BS.
3. The rules and practices for ship quarantine are also at least 200 years old and the
word itself comes from the fourteenth century Venetian word for forty days - the quarantine
period they observed back then. So the hoohaa we are getting from the likes of Carnival lines
(who could have known, etc.) is BS.
4. Vaccines don't make money for anyone. That is because they are cheap to produce and
most doses will be administered for free by public health agencies to poor people in third
world countries for diseases such as typhoid, Cholera, TB, etc. The result of that situation
is that worldwide there are relatively few manufacturers. It's not a sexy, high margin
business at all. From memory, tests are similarly not a high margin business. The bulk of
pharmaceutical investment goes into treatments for diseases and conditions of rich western
lifestyles. That is where the money is. That is also why you suddenly find yourself dependent
on Chinese and Indian suppliers for stuff such as Chloroquine.
My conclusion is that the idea that Bill Gates or anyone else would see vaccine
development as an attractive investment is ludicrous.
Agents outside our control with their own vested interests – politicians, the media,
business – construct reality, much as a film-maker designs a movie, says Jonathan
Cook.
Is it possible that only a few weeks ago our priorities were just a little divorced from a
bigger reality? That what appeared to be the big picture was not actually big enough? That
maybe we should have been thinking about even more important, pressing matters – systemic
ones like the threat of a pandemic of the very kind we are currently enduring?
Because while we were all thinking about Russiagate or Trump or Brexit, there were lots of
experts – even the Pentagon ,
it seems – warning of just such a terrible calamity and urging that preparations be made
to avoid it. We are in the current mess precisely because those warnings were ignored or given
no attention – not because the science was doubted, but because there was no will to do
something to avert the threat.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/E3URhJx0NSw
If we reflect, it is possible to get a sense of two things. First, that our attention rarely
belongs to us; it is the plaything of others. And second, that the "real world", as it is
presented to us, rarely reflects anything we might usefully be able to label as objective
reality. It is a set of political, economic and social priorities that have been manufactured
for us.
Agents outside our control with their own vested interests – politicians, the media,
business – construct reality, much as a film-maker designs a movie. They guide our gaze
in certain directions and not others.
A Critical Perspective
At a moment like this of real crisis, one that overshadows all else, we have a chance
– though only a chance – to recognize this truth and develop our own critical
perspective. A perspective that truly belongs to us, and not to others.
Think back to the old you, the pre-coronavirus you. Were your priorities the same as your
current ones?
This is not to say that the things you prioritize now – in this crisis – are
necessarily any more "yours" than the old set of priorities.
If you're watching the TV or reading newspapers – and who isn't – you're
probably feeling scared, either for yourself or for your loved ones. All you can think about is
the coronavirus. Nothing else really seems that important by comparison. And all you can hope
for is the moment when the lockdowns are over and life returns to normal.
"Paradoxically, a craving for the old-normal may mean we are prepared to submit to a
new-normal that could permanently deny us any chance of returning to the old-normal."
But that's not objectively the "real world" either. Terrible as the coronavirus is, and as
right as anyone is to be afraid of the threat it poses, those "agents of authority" are again
directing and controlling our gaze, though at least this time those in authority include
doctors and scientists. And they are guiding our attention in ways that serve their
interests – for good or bad.
Endless tallies of infections and deaths, rocketing graphs, stories of young people, along
with the elderly, battling for survival serve a purpose: to make sure we stick to the lockdown,
that we maintain social distancing, that we don't get complacent and spread the disease.
Here our interests – survival, preventing hospitals from being overwhelmed –
coincide with those of the establishment, the "agents of authority." We want to live and
prosper, and they need to maintain order, to demonstrate their competence, to prevent
dissatisfaction bubbling up into anger or open revolt.
Crowded Out By Detail
But again the object of our attention is not as much ours as we may believe. While we focus
on graphs, while we twitch the curtains to see if neighbors are going for a second run or
whether families are out in the garden
celebrating a birthday distant from an elderly parent, we are much less likely to be
thinking about how well the crisis is being handled. The detail, the mundane is again crowding
out the important, the big picture.
Our current fear is an enemy to our developing and maintaining a critical perspective. The
more we are frightened by graphs, by deaths, the more we are likely to submit to whatever we
are told will keep us safe.
Under cover of the public's fear, and of justified concerns about the state of the economy
and future employment, countries like the U.S. are transferring huge sums of public money to
the biggest corporations. Politicians controlled by big business and media owned by big
business are pushing through this
corporate robbery without scrutiny – and for reasons that should be self-explanatory.
They know our attention is too overwhelmed by the virus for us to assess intentionally
mystifying arguments about the supposed economic benefits, about yet more illusory
trickle-down.
Paradoxically, a craving for the old-normal may mean we are prepared to submit to a
new-normal that could permanently deny us any chance of returning to the old-normal.
The point is not just that things are far more provisional than most of us are ready to
contemplate; it's that our window on what we think of as "the real world", as "normal", is
almost entirely manufactured for us.
Distracted By the Virus
Strange as this may sound right now, in the midst of our fear and suffering, the pandemic is
not really the big picture either. Our attention is consumed by the virus, but it is, in a
truly awful sense, a distraction too.
In a few more years, maybe sooner than we imagine, we will look back on the virus –
with the benefit of distance and hindsight – and feel the same way about it we do now
about Putin, or Trump, or Brexit.
It will feel part of our old selves, our old priorities, a small part of a much bigger
picture, a clue to where we were heading, a portent we did not pay attention to when it
mattered most.
The virus is one small warning – one among many – that we have been living out
of sync with the natural world we share with other life. Our need to control and dominate, our
need to acquire, our need for security, our need to conquer death – they have crowded out
all else. We have followed those who promised quick, easy solutions, those who refused to
compromise, those who conveyed authority, those who spread fear, those who hated.
If only we could redirect our gaze, if we could seize back control of our attention for a
moment, we might understand that we are being plagued not just by a virus but by our fear, our
hate, our hunger, our selfishness. The evidence is there in the fires, the floods and the
disease, in the insects that have disappeared, in the polluted seas, in the stripping of the
planet's ancient lungs, its forests, in the melting ice-caps.
The big picture is hiding in plain sight, no longer obscured by issues like Russia and
Brexit but now only by the most microscopic germ, marking the thin boundary between life and
death.
Jonathan Cook is a freelance journalist based in Nazareth.
At least 14,000 people have died and 250,000 have already been hospitalized during the
2019-2020 flu season, according to estimates from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. More than 26 million Americans have fallen ill with flu-like symptoms.
"There is a deadly respiratory virus that is circulating throughout the United States, and
it is at its peak. It is not novel coronavirus," said Dr. Pritish Tosh, an infectious disease
specialist with the Mayo Clinic, in Rochester, Minn.
This flu season has come in two waves and has been particularly hard on children, the
experts said.
The season started early, in October, with an unusual wave of influenza B virus.
Influenza B is less likely than other strains to mutate and become more virulent. That means
it poses a greater threat to young people than to older folks, who may have gained immunity
because they encountered the strain before.
The percentage of deaths attributed to flu and pneumonia currently is 6.8%, which is below
the epidemic threshold of 7.3% , according to the CDC.
C1ue @91: why the exponential growth observed now if the virus has been around for months?
The numbers you see reported is cased discovered by testing. Testing is what ramps up
exponentially now. The % of tested people showing the virus is only very mildly growing. In
other words, the underlying base of infected is large and relatively stable as part of the
total population. The more you test, the more you find.
Tom @151: "covid causing nerve damage" . That's conjecture stemming from the fact that all
test-positive deceased are declared covid victims, including those without symptoms. Rather
than state the correct cause of death for almost all those deaths (old age - average age 81
of corona deaths in Italy, 99% with one or multiple chronic diseases, dehydration of care
patients whose staff ran back to their Eastern European homes under the panic of border
closures, hospitals overwhelmed like every flu winter and now compounded by panic, doctors
stuck at home looking after their children), new unseen ways of covid killing are
invented.
Of 200,000 people die in the US with COVID-19 out of a population of 330 million people that
is 0.06% of the population. That is to say a six hundredths of a percent chance of dying from
the virus. Destroying the economy and losing our rights for a 0.06% chance of dying is not
reasonable.
And worldwide, Covid-19 Worldwide deaths as of April 4th, 64,518 divided by 7,000,000,000
world population. = 9.21 millionths of one percent. Corona virus, Covid-19, is IMO an
orchestrated hysteria.
Consider:
World Health Organization: Yearly Death Rate Comparisons
• Influenza (Various): 290 000 to 650 000 respiratory deaths
• Cholera: 21 000 to 143 000 deaths
• Malaria: 405 000 deaths (2018)
• Typhoid: 128 000 and 161 000 deaths.
• HIV-related causes: 770 000 deaths (2018)
• Measles: 140 000 people died (2018) – mostly children under the age of 5
• Pneumonia: 808 694 children deaths under 5 years in 2017.
• Drowning: 320 000 deaths
• Road Traffic Crashes: 1.35 million deaths
"... What has happened to the British working class ethos of never believing the authorities? Where I live they're more likely to grass you up than question anything. ..."
"... Also if someone has to go to emergency for other reasons: heart attack, stroke, even a broken leg, if the conditions there are worsened by excess patients who should not be there, they too being weak, may catch some infection, which could in their case due to the secondary issues make them worse, and give them severe breathing issues and so on, which in a normal year they would avoid, because excess contagious patients are not crowded in hospitals when they dont need to be in hospital. ..."
Covid19 Death Figures "A Substantial Over-Estimate" Bizarre guidelines from health
authorities around the world are potentially including thousands of deceased patients who were
never even tested Kit Knightly
Prof Walter Ricciardi, advisor to Italy's health minister, explained this was caused by the
"generous" way the Italian government handles death certificates:
The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the
people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the
coronavirus.
Essentially, Italy's death registration process does not differentiate between those who
simply have the virus in their body , and those who are actually killed by it
.
Given the amount of fear and panic Italy's comparatively alarming numbers caused around the
world, you would think other nations would be eager to avoid these same mistakes.
Surely all the other countries of the world are employing rigorous standards for delineating
who has, and has not, fallen victim to the pandemic, right?
Wrong.
In fact, rather than learning from Italy's example, other countries are not only repeating
these mistakes but going even further.
In Germany, for example, though overall deaths and case-fatality ratio are far lower than
Italy's, their public health agency is still engaging in similar practice.
On March 20th the President of Germany's Robert Koch
Institute confirmed that Germany counts any deceased person who was infected with
coronavirus as a Covid19 death, whether or not it actually caused death.
In Heinsberg, for example, a 78-year-old man with previous illnesses died of heart
failure, and that was without Sars-2 lung involvement. Since he was infected, he naturally
appears in the Covid 19 statistics.
How many "Covid19 deaths" in Germany, fall into this bracket? We don't know, and will likely
never know.
But at least Germany is actually limiting itself to test positive cases.
In the United States, a
briefing note from the CDC's National Vital Statistics Service read as follows [our
emphasis]:
It is important to emphasise that Coronavirus Disease 19, or Covid-19, should be reported
for all decedents where the disease caused or is presumed to have caused or contributed to
death.
"Presumed to have caused"? "Contributed"? That's incredibly soft language, which could
easily lead to over-reporting.
The referenced detailed "guidance" was released April 3rd , and is no
better [again, our emphasis]:
In cases where a definite diagnosis of COVID–19 cannot be made, but it is suspected
or likely (e.g., the circumstances are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty),
it is acceptable to report COVID–19 on a death certificate as "probable" or "presumed."
In these instances, certifiers should use their best clinical judgement in determining if a
COVID–19 infection was likely.
Are careful records being kept to separate "Covid-19" from "presumed Covid-19"? Are the
media making sure they respect the distinction in their reporting?
Absolutely not.
Whenever the alleged casualties are referenced we are fed one large all-inclusive number,
without context or explanation, which – thanks to lax reporting guidelines – could
be entirely false.
Government agencies all across the UK are doing the same thing.
Northern Ireland's HSC Public Health Agency is releasing weekly surveillance bulletins on
the pandemic, in those reports
they define a "Covid19 death" as :
individuals who have died within 28 days of first positive result, whether or not COVID-19
was the cause of death
NHS England's Office of National Statistics releases weekly reports on nation-wide
mortality. Its
latest report (Week 12 – March 14th-20th) was released on March 31st and made special
mention of Covid19, explaining they were going to c hange the way they report the numbers in
future .
The ONS system is predicated on the registration of deaths. Meaning they count, not
the number of people who die every week, but the number of deaths registered per week.
This, naturally, leads to slight delays in the recording of numbers as the registration process
can take a few days.
However, with coronavirus deaths, since its a "national emergency", they are now including
"provisional figures" which will be "included in the dataset in subsequent weeks". This leaves
them wide open to – either accidentally or deliberately – reporting the same
deaths twice . Once "provisionally", and then once "officially" a week later.
That's just one peculiar policy decision. There are many others.
Up until now, the ONS reported those Covid19 numbers collated by the Department of Health
and Social Care (DHSC). The DHSC records only those who died in hospital and have tested
positive for the coronavirus as Covid19 deaths.
BUT, from now on, the ONS will also include Covid19 deaths "in the community" in their
statistics. That "includes those not tested for Covid19" and where " suspected
Covid19″ [our emphasis] is presumed to be a "contributory factor".
The official NHS guidance for doctors filling out death certificates is
just as vague [our emphasis]:
if before death the patient had symptoms typical of COVID19 infection, but the test result
has not been received, it would be satisfactory to give 'COVID-19' as the cause of death, and
then share the test result when it becomes available. In the circumstances of there being no
swab, it is satisfactory to apply clinical judgement .
The government is telling doctors it is OK to list "Covid-19" as a cause of death when there
is literally no evidence the deceased was infected . That means there are potentially
huge numbers of "Covid19 deaths" that were never even tested for the disease.
Further, any possible mistakes will never be noticed or rectified, thanks to recent changes
to the law.
Usually, any death attributed to a "notifiable
disease" had to be referred to a coroner for a jury hearing.
Further, according to the
office of the Chief Coroner , the Coronavirus Bill means that these deaths don't have to
be referred to a coroner at all , and that medical practitioners can sign off a cause of
death for a body they have never even seen :
Any registered medical practitioner can sign an MCCD [Medical Certificate for Cause of
Death], even if the deceased was not attended during their last illness and not seen after
death, provided that they are able to state the cause of death to the best of their knowledge
and belief.
Deaths "in the community" can be listed as Covid19 deaths without being tested for
the disease, or even seen by a doctor at all . These deaths will not necessarily be
referred to a coroner, and certainly not heard by a jury.
By enacting this legislation the UK government has not only made false reporting of Covid19
deaths more likely , they actively removed the safeguards designed to correct it.
Recording accurate fatality numbers in this situation is borderline impossible.
This is, at best, totally irresponsible and at worst incredibly sinister.
Now, before you roll your eyes at the whacky alternate media and their crazy paranoia, the
idea deaths are being over-estimated is not a fringe concept or a "conspiracy theory". It is
actually addressed in the mainstream frequently, people just seem to not hear it, drowned out
as it is by the fear-inducing headlines.
Dr John Lee, a professor of pathology and retired consulting pathologist with the NHS, wrote
in a
column for the Spectator :
Why Covid-19 deaths are a substantial
over-estimate
Many UK health spokespersons have been careful to repeatedly say that the numbers quoted in
the UK indicate death with the virus, not death due to the virus – this
matters.
[ ]
This nuance is crucial – not just in understanding the disease, but for
understanding the burden it might place on the health service in coming days. Unfortunately,
nuance tends to be lost in the numbers quoted from the database being used to track
Covid-19
[ ]
This data is not standardised and so probably not comparable, yet this important caveat is
seldom expressed by the (many) graphs we see. It risks exaggerating the quality of data that we
have.
In fact, Dr Lee goes out of his way to emphasise:
The distinction between dying 'with' Covid-19 and dying 'due to' Covid-19 is not just
splitting hairs.
The death figures being reported daily are hospital cases where a person dies with
the coronavirus infection in their body – because it is a notifiable disease cases have
to be reported.
But what the figures do not tell us is to what extent the virus is causing the death.
It could be the major cause, a contributory factor or simply present when they are dying of
something else.
These absurd rules contributed to this recent example, referenced in the BBC article, but
not widely reported at the time:
An 18-year-old in Coventry tested positive for coronavirus
the day before he died and was reported as its youngest victim at the time. But the hospital
subsequently released a statement saying his death had been due to a separate "significant"
health condition and not connected to the virus.
This story is completely true. The boy was widely reported as the UK's "youngest coronavirus
victim" on
March 24th , before the hospital issued a statement saying:
[The hospital] had tested for COVID-19 on the day before he died, but this was not linked
to his reason for dying.
Despite the hospital correcting the press, the case was still being reported in the tabloids
a week later on March 31st .
However, the important detail here is being lost: Going by the current NHS rules, despite
the hospital officially saying it was not his cause of death, this boy is still part of the
official coronavirus fatality statistics.
How many more people fit that profile? We will never know.
*
Italy, Germany, the United States, Northern Ireland and England.
That's five different governments, across four countries, all essentially saying it's OK to
just assume a patient died of Covid19, and then add that to the official statistics.
Is that really responsible practice during a potential pandemic?
Are any other countries doing the same?
To what extent can we trust any official death statistics at all, at this point?
As Dr Lee points out, Covid19 is not a disease that presents with a unique – or even
rare – collection of symptoms. The range of severity and type of presentation is in line
with literally dozens of extremely common respiratory infections.
You cannot see "fever" and "cough" and then diagnose "probable covid19" with even the
slightest chance of accuracy.
This has become one of those nuggets of information we all know by heart, but between 290000
and 650000 people die of flu, or "flu like illness", every year. If just 10% of those cases are
incorrectly assumed to be "probable" coronavirus infections, then the fatality numbers are
totally useless.
At a time when good, reliable information is key to saving lives and preventing mass-panic,
global governments are pursuing policies which make it near-impossible to collect that data,
whilst stoking public fear.
Due to these policies, the simple fact is we have no reliable way of knowing how many
people have died from this coronavirus . We have no hard data at all. And governments and
international organisations are going out of their way to keep it that way.
What has happened to the British working class ethos of never believing the authorities?
Where I live they're more likely to grass you up than question anything.
Seamus Padraig ,
You know what I think? You know how economist John Williams has that website
shadowstats.com , where he shows you what the real unemployment and inflation figures
would be if the government and the media didn't lie? Well, I think there should a shadowstats
for Corona virus infection figures, too.
tonyopmoc ,
"It's time we started asking why."
The answer is quite simple. The "Authorities" are doing the exact reverse of what they are
claiming to do. I don't necessarily blame them, because they are brainwashed too, as are the
vast majority across most of the world.
They are trying to kill most of us off, and I think they are highly likely to succeed.
This used to be a crazy conspiracy theory – which even I didn't take seriously.
The Georgia Guidestones (1980) are hardly Stonehenge "Maintain humanity under 500,000,000
in perpetual balance with nature.", and have always been dismissed on the basis, that the USA
contains some very rich and powerful religious nutters, but it seems we completely
underestimated how powerful they are. The "elite" Malthusians are almost certainly of British
origin.
I never thought they could pull this off on a world wide basis, but they have. They have
succeeded in terrorising almost everyone.
It's not COVID – The Coronavirus that will do it, but the panic reaction to it, and
the total crashing of the world wide economy. Supply lines are certain to break down, and in
fact already have done for the most vulnerable.
Not only do I see little if any resistance to this madness, most people are fully engaged
and a part of it.
The only response I have to it, is to become as self sufficient as possible, by digging up
my garden to grow food. Most people think I am nuts, and think everything will be back to
normal in a few weeks time, but the people in control, would not have crashed the entire
world economy in pursuit of their Malthusian Agenda, to give up after a few weeks, when their
well designed plans, all based on the most powerful psychological techniques are working so
well, just as they envisaged, and game tested starting of course with 9/11 – where most
people still believe the official story, which is literally impossible, because it does not
conform with the most basic laws of physics and maths.
Tony
Willem ,
Here is an idea
1) Test everyone who according to the triage system should be tested on covid19 with
PCR
2) distinguish pcr+ vs pcr- negative and follow both groups over time (for example 28
days)
3) then see which group dies more often: the pcr positive group or the positive negative
group
4) the relative risk will then show the excess risk of pcr positive Covid 19 vs Covid 19
negative cases
I am surprised that this research has not been done yet. It is plain and simple but
apparantly nobody cares about a comparison group. And that is weird, as in normal
circumstances you always compare with your competing neighbor, football club, fellow student,
etc. But for Covid19 comparisons don't matter. The mortality rate is just high (compared to
what?)
Mucho ,
Last night on Steven Nolan, quite early on in the show, a genuine NHS worker called in to
relay his experience. He said that where they suspect Covid19 in a patient, sometimes they
have to do up to four tests to get back the Covid positive result they are looking for.
Utterly insane. They get three negatives on the bounce, but when the fourth one rolls in
positive, it's all good and Covid19 is established. (are the tests for Coronavirus Normal or
specifically Covid19?) No need to take into account the potential for a false positive,
because they already know what the patient has. This is barmy. Gotta start raising the alarm
people. This is not a drill. (Well maybe it is, but a drill for something much effing worse
so alarm bells still totally necessary).
I am very concerned about the building of these "Nightingale" hospitals. What have they
got lined up for us to make sure these places are full of patients on ventilators? Because we
have firmly established that this current pandemic is a fake. If it were half as bad as they
were predicting, people would be dropping like flies in the UK by now, but we all know that
they're not. They have rigged the legal system and all kinds of checks and balances have been
nullified to enable them to give the appearance of a pandemic, but what is the endgame
here?
"We're not gonna have a war, we're gonna the appearance of a war." From Wag The Dog,
Brendon O Connell fave. Best case scenario is that the new hospitals are there for window
dressing to give the scam crisis authenticity through the visual action being taken, photo
opportunities and emotional manipulation of the public becoming invested when they see "our
boys" and the NHS "pulling together" in the crisis and doing everything they can. It
psychologically consolidates the slave/master relationship very nicely too. Worst case
scenario, genocide incoming. That we can legitimately raise these issues is symptomatic of a
very real disease that is controlling our world.
fritzi cohen ,
We need to expose industrial agriculture's possible contribution. Rob Wallace wrote a book
about
this in 2016. Of course no one paid attention even if they knew about his research.
The American Scholar: How Global Agriculture Grew a
theamericanscholar.org/who-should-we-blame-for-coronavirus
Evolutionary biologist Rob Wallace, of the Institute for Global Studies at the University
of Minnesota, has some answers. For the past 25 years, he's been studying the evolution and
spread of influenzas and other pathogens.
The latest expert to emerge slamming CoronaPanic is Dr. Knut Wittkowski, who attacks head-on
at the very premise, less on the margins over numbers (which is also important work).
Wittkowski says long-term social distancing for the vast majority, low-risk people, does
more harm than good, even from a strictly disease-control standpoint (will cause more death,
not less) and also repeatedly questions the wild projections. He says the coronavirus small
spike in flu is totally unremarkable and behaves like every other observed flu pandemic does,
not a second-rate-movie-like World-Shattering Mass Killer.
Just finished listening to the government press conference here in the UK (Lt Gruber hosting
it). Two mildly challenging questions, both sidestepped. The final question from The Scotsman
newspaper was much more challenging, about the status of the Scottish Chief Medical Officer.
This question was completely evaded by Hancock, and he didn't even allow the Deputy Chief
Medical Officer to say what she thought, or confirm whether she's visited her second home, if
indeed she has one. What a bloody shower they are!
Bettynho Zirigdum ,
Here in Brazil the Minister of Health authorized burials without a death certificate. When
the death cause is not known, the death "may" be recorded as a Covid-19 death.
It's only a mistake if you think their main objectives are to tell the public the truth and
protect public health. Given that the lockdowns, discouragement of exercise, putting millions
out of work and torpedoeing health budgets will kill far more than the virus, then there are
plainly other agendas here.
Look at how nervous the politicians get when the public aren't scared 'enough' of the virus.
And this evening, in the UK, we even have Queen drafted in to frighten people and stir up
panic. How low can they go?
MrChops ,
Forgot to join in with the clap-a-thon for the health workers
Why not join Peekay for some 'Effin n jeffin' for the NWO ..
A sample: "The medical specialist portal Rxisk points out that various drugs can increase
the risk of infection with corona viruses by up to 200% in some cases. It is also known that
vaccination against influenza viruses may increase the risk of coronavirus disease."
stonecircle ,
Interesting about the possible increase in susceptibility to severe C-19 due to having the
flu jab. Tragically many nurses and doctors are dying from C-19 even though they are
comparatively young. Medical staff are put under a lot of pressure to have the flu jab each
winter. It would be very interesting to see some hard data investigating this issue.
Anecdotally: I had C-19 in mild form last week – high temperature, headache –
but was almost better in two days. I am aged 70 and never have the flu jab as I worry it
might weaken my immune system. All my peers have the jab and have had more persistent
illnesses this winter than I have.
MLS ,
We have no idea how many health workers are dying of COVID19. All we know is how many of them
have it on their death certificate.
Not the same thing. As this article should have made clear to you.
And let's also remember the euromomo statistics show that excess deaths are not happening.
The pandemic is a lie created by reclassifying ordinary flu deaths as COVID19
crank ,
Seeing as the daily (total) death rate in the UK averages about 1600 per day, then I would
like to think that 'COVID deaths' might top out at that. However, the effects of lockdown
will push the death rate up considerably, I would predict, so who knows, maybe Trump is
actually right in saying there will be 'lots of death' ? In the statistical mobius strip/
self re-inforcing/ feedback loop so clearly described by Kit, all these deaths could, in the
end, be classified as 'COVID deaths'. In theory at least, to take the idea to the extreme,
the virus could be completely harmless and no more than a marker – a new means of
counting death.
Kafka could not have devised anything so insane.
"To what extent can we trust any official death statistics at all, at this point?" By
focusing on all cause mortality. These are reliable numbers. Presently, they do not show any
cause for concern. Yet the government and parliament have seen fit to introduce the
Coronavirus Act 2020, which gives the government the power to do anything, forever.
It is of some interest to note that Jeremy Hunt on LBC stated that the government had
prepared for a pandemic after an exercise in 2016 (when he was Health Secretary) by drafting
legislation to give the government emergency powers: which explains how they were able to
produce the three hundred and twenty page Coronavirus Bill so quickly.
Harry Stotle ,
Off-G has opened a really important conduit to talk about the Corona outbreak in term of its
wider economic and geopolitical context – this is to be applauded.
However I can promise you that in living memory there has never been a higher number of
patients suffering with ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) presenting to hospital
services, in such concentrated numbers over a relatively short time interval.
At the moment there is no way to stop COVID-19 related ARDS from developing, while
survival rates post-ventilation may be no better than 50/50 for vulnerable groups (older
patients with co-morbidities) – the jury is still out on this question.
Getting on for 5,000 deaths have been reported over a period of 4 weeks in the UK –
it is likely most are COVID-19 related because they exhibit the typical cluster of finding
(bilateral infiltrates on chest x/ray, hyperferritinaemia, lymphocytopaenia, elevated
d-dimer, elevated troponin and profound hypoxia on arterial blood gas despite hi-flow
oxygen). [citation requested -ed]
From conversations I have been privy to the approach of China has been held up as the key
strategy to control the spread (because of the difference in death rates pre and post
lockdown).
We will probably get a better idea of how things look once countries that find it
difficult to follow the Chinese model (because of things like poverty or over-crowding)
experience higher numbers of infections, and thus a growing numbers who develop ARDS –
India, Brazil and Palestine come to mind (I know the death toll is low at the moment).
None of this addresses the collateral damage bound to arise from lack of access to medical
services (because of the selective focus on COBID-19) or the economic time-bomb that will
explode once the size of the debt mushrooms out of control.
I am the first to admit I simply do not have any answers to these questions – I am
simply reporting what I have experienced on the shop floor.
anita ,
Usually if you have pneumonia, you stay at home and a doctor prescribes some basic antibiotic
as precaution. Even in severe cases among already fragile people, usually you then slowly
recover. Today if you have pneumonia, either you will have no doctor you can see in town, or
else they will send you to hospital because of the scare created, or else you yourself will
go to hospital because of the scare. This is just with pneumonia, there are plenty of other
illnesses like a very bad flu and so on that can be as bad.
Hence hospitals will get overloaded with patients which they dont usually get. And I can tell
you, having nursed my mother after her stroke, and having had to take her a few times to
emergency over a number of years, that emergency was each time overcrowded, and you are left
for hours in corridors. So hospitals are getting more people because of above than a normal
already overcrowded year.
As for the patients, those that would normally be cured at home, they are in hospital
surrounded by a whole lot of other people also with contagious diseases, apart from the
nosocomial disease you may anyhow catch in a hospital nowadays, and in conditions which
because of above have overwhelmed the hospital staff. So these patients being already
weakened get worse, possibly die.
Also if someone has to go to emergency for other reasons: heart attack, stroke, even a
broken leg, if the conditions there are worsened by excess patients who should not be there,
they too
being weak, may catch some infection, which could in their case due to the secondary
issues
make them worse, and give them severe breathing issues and so on, which in a normal year they
would avoid, because excess contagious patients are not crowded in hospitals when they dont
need to be in hospital.
On top of this there is a shortage of staff from other years for multiple reasons. I can
think of 2 without any effort:
In no other year staff with a virus but not ill (first they in that case would not know that
had a
virus) are not put on quarantine.
Secondly, at least in West Europe, a major proportion of the medical staff at all level is
from outside West Europe. Many, when the confinement measures and closures of borders were
made, have returned to the home countries, to be with their families, especially those coming
from countries that have not taken from such draconian measures.
Hence what you are actually seeing needs to be analysed to be understood. By merely saying
what you are seeing without analysing the cause is only likely to give a wrong justification
for the measures and increase the panic among people. As a result, the entire
thing is going to go worse.
Harry Stotle ,
We are talking about are two different conditions with different pathologies and different
outcomes – ARDS is a hyperinflammatory response, that in the context of COVID-19 is not
amenable to antibiotics.
Pneumonia is generally caused by a more localised lung infection although in some cases
pneumonia can lead to ARDS as a secondary complication.
In the case of COVID I am unaware of any therapy that presents ARDS ftom developing
– ARDS is what kills you.
Croach ,
The icnarc report raises a question.
If we have close to 5000 deaths but few hospitals are breaching ICU capacity (London and the
West Midlands, the two biggest disease clusters have reported they're within capacity,
nightingale hospital not needed yet etc.) why is icnarc reporting only 346 deaths in
ICU/Critical care beds?
Where are all the rest dying?
If there is spare capacity in ICU why weren't they in ICU beds when they died?
Also, do you know why the percentages in table 5 regarding the presence or not of severe
comorbidities (yes,no) add up to more than 100% in the covid-19 column and less than 100% in
the pneumonia comparison column?
Rhys Jaggar ,
This is precisely why everyone is so cynical. A propaganda narrative was written long ago and
the data is crafted around that narrative, rather than a true narraitve emerging from
whatever data happens to present itself.
The narrative is that CoVid19 is so dangerous that we will all have to be locked down
unless we all have a vaccination, testing and can be digitally tracked.
Now if that were even to be half acceptable, the digital certificates would be owned and
issued by the people, not by TNC billionaires. The data generated through tracking and
testing would never be owned privately and any public official disclosing such information to
corporations would be issued with the metaphorical Black Spot.
What this is all about is billionaires owning everyone lock stock and barrel: their
movements, their medical history, their private actions, their travel, their purchases etc
etc.
If Bill Gates thinks he can afford to buy all that data he is living in cloud cuckoo land.
I would value my lifetime private data at £100,000 minimum, so for 5 billion humans
(just for round figures), that might come to £500 trillion.
I think that is about 5,000 times Bill Gates' net worth ..
I have not signed away my private data to anyone, will not do so and consider it illegal
for anyone to nick it, pass it on, hand it over, sell it on etc etc etc.
bob ,
If people in the uk don't address the issue of organ donation then the state will claim it
owns their bodies – the law changed in April to make it important that people who do
not wish to donate their organs they have to opt out – at a time like this when
family/friends cannot be with a person dying who knows what's happening – does anybody
still trust the british state?? Get it sorted is my advice and don't let the state steel the
bodies
Mucho ,
The concept of policy decision being made and then a mad dash to find evidence to support
that policy decision was highlighted in this excellent report, which I think every reader
here will find interesting.
".. provided that they are able to state the cause of death to the best of their knowledge
and belief"
Surely, in Australia, many the death of many people will be the result of their sins,
especially if the conservatives continue to engineer health policies. This is the best of
their belief.
Shaking My Head ,
This circus is maddening. Is anyone else in Canada? There is a complete lack of dissent here.
The first Canadian I've seen online with any critical perspective is Rosemary Frei's article
here on Off-Guardian. Are there any other Canadians speaking out? It seems like people are
openly welcoming more of the police state rather than questioning anything.
AlexCanadianJones ,
Also in Canada. You aren't alone.
We have to keep in mind that everyone is at home isolated, everyone that feels and is
thinking the way do, feels they are alone and that other Canadians. The Media has
unprecedented influence during this crisis and they are cherry picking 'socially accepted
responses' to the virus to make us think we are in the minority, it is mind games to keep us
all feeling powerless.
Keep spreading your opinions, while we still have freedom of speech. Make sure all of
those in your life to you know are getting the information you are getting.
Shaking My Head ,
I hope you are right but it seems like Canadians are so much more acquiescent than the French
who have had mass protests. Here it seems you will get snitched out for walking in the park.
I saw a photo of several police in an empty park and the comments were all supportive of
these measures to 'keep us safe'. I suppose there could be a small but loud segment of the
population who are generally quite terrified of life, who feel powerless, and now are enabled
to exercise their inner authoritarian to grasp at some semblance of importance by
self-policing and policing others.
"... In a clip aired on Sunday but filmed a week earlier, nurse Imaris Vera bursts into tears and describes how she quit her job after "none of the nurses" ..."
"... "America is not prepared," she sobbed, "and nurses are not being protected." ..."
"... But dig a little deeper and the story begins to collapse. Vera admitted in a tweet on Saturday that she had actually been assigned an N95 respirator to wear, despite claiming in the video that "none of the nurses" ..."
"... Furthermore, the nurse didn't quit her job after a long and tireless struggle against the coronavirus. Her social media posts revealed that she quit on her first day on the job. According to her Facebook page, the woman had taken a year off, during which time she had built a career as a blogger and Instagram model. Since the virus hit US shores, she's used her Instagram page to promote boutique hand sanitizer and designer nurse's scrubs. ..."
Stories
of human tragedy abound during the Covid-19 pandemic, but in its hunger for tearjerking
moments, CBS has thrown the rulebook out the window and spread some viral "fake news." In a
clip aired on Sunday but filmed a week earlier, nurse Imaris Vera bursts into tears and
describes how she quit her job after "none of the nurses" in a dedicated coronavirus
unit were wearing masks. Furthermore, she called out her Chicago hospital for banning nurses
from using their own protective equipment in the facility.
"America is not prepared," she sobbed, "and nurses are not being protected."
In tears, a nurse says she quit her job after she was asked to work in a coronavirus ICU
without a face mask: "America is not prepared, and nurses are not being protected" https://t.co/ywoSuLOPYP
pic.twitter.com/S5BsnlO5nt
On its surface, the video is a damning indictment of the US government's response to the
pandemic. Indeed, the media have frequently lambasted President Donald Trump for failing to act
quick enough to contain the spread of the virus.
But dig a little deeper and the story begins to collapse. Vera admitted in a tweet on
Saturday that she had actually been assigned an N95 respirator to wear, despite claiming in the
video that "none of the nurses" in her ICU unit were wearing masks. Whether her
hospital banned the wearing of masks in hallways and corridors to preserve supplies is still
unclear.
Furthermore, the nurse didn't quit her job after a long and tireless struggle against
the coronavirus. Her social media posts revealed that she quit on her first day on the job.
According to her Facebook page, the woman had taken a year off, during which time she had built
a career as a blogger and Instagram model. Since the virus hit US shores, she's used her
Instagram page to promote boutique hand sanitizer and designer nurse's
scrubs.
... ... ...
Whether its aim is to mislead viewers or to tug on heartstrings, the media hasn't missed an
opportunity to rush dodgy footage in front of viewers. Such videos may generate clicks, but
they also lend credence to President Trump's oft-repeated assertion that the "fake news
media" doesn't care about the truth.
"COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease
caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death."
Verity
et al. (March 30, 2020) have estimated the (adjusted) case fatality ratio, infection
fatality ratio, and proportion of infections requiring hospitalization:
First premise: This year, the percentage of influenza patients in relation to the total
population is the same as in previous years.
Second premise: In previous years, seasonal influenza had a percentage of certain
coronaviruses. This year the percentage is similar.
Third premise: The percentage of deaths among people who are infected is no different from
other years.
Fourth premise: The media falsifies the percentage of deaths among those who are infected.
The only serious study concerning the real mortality in the country where according to the
media there are the most deaths (Italy) is the one carried out by the Italian Ministry of
Health. It reveals that it is not 12% but 1.2% of sick patients, which corresponds to the
usual mortality of influenza.
Fifth premise: this study reveals that the average age of the deceased is 80 years.
Additional information: The percentage of deaths by Covid19 in the USA is 17.8 per million
citizens, which corresponds to the usual percentage of seasonal influenza.
Be careful, don't be an accomplice in the panic they want to create: This is essentially a
media attack to disguise the economic meltdown they've created.
Today 4-3-20, Covid is the third cause of death in USA, with around 1.100 deaths per day is
only behind heart disease (1.774/day) and cancer (1.641/day), but in two weeks is expected to
be clearly the leading cause of death in USA as it is now in Italy and Spain. It is a matter
of when start to decrease the number of deaths to see if will be, or not, the leading cause
of deaths in absolute terms (I expected and I think it will not)
A comment on Peter Hitchens' article in today's Mail on Sunday (5th April) provided a link to
an interview with Italian nano-pathologist Dr Stefano Montanari. Since he doesn't appear in
OffG among the first twelve or subsequent ten scientists questioning the official Covid-19
narrative I am providing the link here in case anyone is interested. The site itself seems to
have a save white identity bias, but in these strange times, politics makes strange
bedfellows.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2020/04/04/the-coronavirus-and-galileo-an-interview-with-a-italian-nano-pathologist-dr-stefano-montanari/
George Mc ,
Interesting interview. This bit especially:
There is one point we did not touch -- the economic, which is not part of my competence.
We are now blocking the world and, as for Italy, the economy was already at a low point.
What do they do? They freeze all activities but keep the stock exchange open. Stocks reach
a low bottom. What does it mean? The ultra billionaire can easily purchase companies that
are now worth pennies.
When eventually it will be decided that the (coronavirus) farce is ended -- and nothing
will end because this virus will continue undaunted to do what it's doing now (or its
evolving strains will do), the ultra-billionaires will own everything. The rich (a degree
below the billionaires) will have bought, say, 3–4 restaurants and/or 10 stores that
had to close. In summary, all who were rich will be infinitely richer, But we will also
have a flood-tide of people who will always be poorer. This will be another consequence of
this fake epidemic, perhaps, who knows, created on purpose.
A postmortem by a competent pathologist is the only way to confirm cause of death.
Americans must not be led like lemmings over the cliff of disease paranoia chased by an
invisible bug unless there is irrefutable proof that COVID-19 and ONLY COVID-19 was the
principle reason attributed to a person's demise.
Investigative journalists ( b?) must dig into the facts and interview some of the hundreds
of ME's (medical examiners) who performed autopsies on these people and ask these
questions:
1. Did the autopsy reveal the presence of other chronic diseases pulmonary or otherwise,
that could have contributed to the death of the person (e.g., influenza, COPD, emphysema,
tuberculosis, heart disease, cancers, etc.?
2. Was the deceased taking medication that suppressed the immune system such as for
rheumatoid arthritis?
3. Did the autopsy reveal the presence of disease of the respiratory system due to harmful
inhalants (smoking tobacco, vaping)?
4. Did the autopsy show the patient had heart or vascular problems and had surgeries to
correct them such as stent implants, pace maker or other medical devices?
5. Did the deceased receive chemotherapy treatment for cancer related illness?
Unless every answer to the above questions is an affirmative 'No", the public must not
believe that only COVID-19 caused the death of these people. This calls into question the
number of reported COVID-19 deaths has been deliberately inflated to cause panic in America
as well as around the world.
The next question is, for what other purpose are governments doing this?
Can you not see the il-logic in your criteria? Suppose a person has an underlying illness,
that will eventually prove fatal. If I shoot that person in the head are we going to say that
the cause of death was the underlying illness, or are we going to say it was the bullet to
the head?
Many people live with underlying illnesses for years. The criteria that should be used is:
why did that person die right now? If what killed them right now is a viral infection, then
the fact that the underlying illness would have killed them eventually is meaningless, the
cause of death is the viral infection.
I think that some people are adamant that they will not believe there is a deadly virus in
our midst. Nothing said to them is going to make them believe this, they will keep changing
their reasons for the denial. This is somewhat understandable to a point. Yes our government
lies about everything, and yes they take every opportunity to enrich themselves and increase
their power. My initial reaction was dismissive, I too thought it was a case of overblown
hype, but as the days and weeks passed, and the facts changed, so did my opinion.
The overwhelming evidence is pointing to a serious, deadly virus in our midst, and it is
time people start acting appropriately. Even the people who understandably ignored the boy
who cried wolf, eventually came to the realization that there was indeed a wolf in their
midst.
"... The number of advertisements for short-time work has skyrocketed to an unprecedented level, and the number of unemployed is also increasing: The Federal Employment Agency expects an increase of up to 200,000 unemployed in April. ..."
"... The virologists had not succeeded in breeding Sars-Cov-2 in initial tests after swabbing various objects in apartments of highly infectious residents, sinks, doorknobs, but also pets such as cats. "For me it looks like the first results that a door handle can only be infectious if someone has coughed in the hand beforehand and then grabs the handle immediately." This suggests that there is no smear infection. Keeping a distance and washing hands is therefore a very effective tool. ..."
"... "We talk a lot about speculation and model calculations. With these, however, only one factor has to be wrong and the whole thing collapses like a house of cards. "That is why facts are so important to make effective decisions. He was therefore surprised that the Robert Koch Institute, as the highest federal authority for infectious diseases, had not previously carried out such an investigation. He sees such tests as a duty for virologists "to find answers for the citizens." ..."
The Corona crisis hits the global economy with great violence: In Germany, too,
restaurants and companies have to pause for weeks, tourism stands still, nothing works in
public life anymore.
The number of advertisements for short-time work has skyrocketed to an unprecedented
level, and the number of unemployed is also increasing: The Federal Employment Agency expects
an increase of up to 200,000 unemployed in April.
And despite the government's aid measures, one thing is certain: the German economy will
not be the same for the foreseeable future once the crisis is over. The existence of many
citizens is under threat.
Hardly anyone had questioned these tough government measures, as it is about saving lives.
But on Tuesday evening a well-known virologist for the first time openly raised doubts about
the need for the shutdown at "Markus Lanz" (ZDF). Did our entrepreneurs have to shut down
unnecessarily?
The virologist Hendrik Streeck from the University Hospital Bonn is currently carrying out
a unique examination in the district of Heinsberg - the epicenter of the coronavirus. There,
the expert collects both the number of infected people and the infection routes in a
representative sample. The study is intended to provide answers to questions such as where
the greatest sources of danger are. How exactly the virus is transmitted. How high the
unreported number of infected people is. The research group around Streeck wants to publish
the first results as early as next week.
The virologists had not succeeded in breeding Sars-Cov-2 in initial tests after swabbing
various objects in apartments of highly infectious residents, sinks, doorknobs, but also pets
such as cats. "For me it looks like the first results that a door handle can only be
infectious if someone has coughed in the hand beforehand and then grabs the handle
immediately." This suggests that there is no smear infection. Keeping a distance and washing
hands is therefore a very effective tool.
However, the risk of infecting someone else while shopping is considered to be low. "We
see how the infections took place. That was not in the supermarket or in the restaurant or at
the butcher's. That was at the parties at the après ski in Ischgl, in the Berlin club,
trumpet ', at the carnival in Gangelt and at the exuberant football games in Bergamo.
In the current discussion about the "shutdown" and the "exit" strategies, which lead again
from a standstill, such reliable facts are important. So that public life doesn't stand still
for too long.
"We talk a lot about speculation and model calculations. With these, however, only one
factor has to be wrong and the whole thing collapses like a house of cards. "That is why
facts are so important to make effective decisions. He was therefore surprised that the
Robert Koch Institute, as the highest federal authority for infectious diseases, had not
previously carried out such an investigation. He sees such tests as a duty for virologists
"to find answers for the citizens."
Did the shutdown come too quickly?
Streeck looks back at the various measures taken by the federal government, which have
gradually restricted life: Larger events have been canceled, schools have been closed down to
exit restrictions. "But I had already said in advance: We want to wait and see what happens.
The virus doesn't obey any politician. "
Measures that are now decided would only be visible in the statistics in two weeks at the
earliest. "You have to give this virus time so that we can see and classify the results of
the measures in the long term."
He had never heard of infections in hairdressing salons, said Streeck. But now they are
closed. It is the same with supermarkets or the like. "We just don't know that infections
have taken place there. I think it's important that we focus on what we really know - and
what we don't. "You have to find the nuances of when exactly an infection occurs. And this
must also be the guideline for reducing certain measures.
A very good way to contain the virus effectively: do a lot of tests like South Korea did.
"If they tested people positively and found a cluster, then they contained the area there,"
says Streeck. A nationwide curfew was not necessary there. "In my eyes, this is a very good
strategy and also a strategy that is feasible in Germany. Because we have the options. "
The virus is really dangerous for the risk groups, so "when it comes to the hospital,
nursing home and old people's home," said the doctor. It is therefore very important to
effectively protect particularly vulnerable people, with weekly corona tests for medical and
nursing staff, for example. Such pool procedures are already used in transfusion medicine to
test blood. So you are not new.
"It is therefore important to develop exactly such ideas. However, many experts are
involved in this development, and not just individual ones. "It is a shame that the
government approached the crisis" rather monothematically ". Unfortunately, there is no round
table with a large number of virologists, in which China is also involved.
Streeck criticizes the lack of objectives in the fight against Corona
"I see what such a curfew does to people," explains the virologist. He himself has friends
who wonder if they still have a job after the crisis. "In relation to other epidemics and
viruses, I find these restrictions to be very drastic." Before taking such measures, Streeck
would have liked to think carefully: "Where do we actually want to go?" He would lack the
precise definition of the objective.
"Our limit is the capacity of the hospitals. Not the number of people infected. But we
never heard where our guideline was. What is our goal? Are 1000 infections a day too much? Or
100? We have to listen to the intensive care physicians who tell us where their limits are.
"They could best assess which measures are the right ones.
Marcel Fratzscher: "A good health system needs a functioning economy"
Streeck therefore supports the fastest possible discussion about an exit strategy. Marcel
Fratzscher, President of the German Institute for Economic Research, explains how great the
danger for the economy is at "Lanz". He speaks of a "catastrophe" with a "rat tail of
problems". Small businesses and the self-employed could only last a few weeks despite
government aid.
Anyone who receives a salary of 60 or 70 percent in short-time work can hardly stay afloat
in the long term. At the same time, the economist feels uncomfortable weighing human lives
against the financial damage - as many in the discussion about an exit strategy do. "Because
a good health system also needs a functioning economy."
One should not play both sides against each other, but rather find a solution that is
acceptable to everyone. After six to eight weeks, the loss caused by the shutdown would
become critical. And that must be avoided.
Currently the total hospital admissions in the USA are less then 30K and the virus
considerably slowed down (from 32$ a day to 24% a day and this percentage will go down further)
.
the United States New
York Governor Cuomo Daily Briefing :
Everything we do now (procure ventilators etc) is in preparation for possible apex (when
curve hits the highest point) Apex in New York is estimated in 14-21 days from now We'll
keep COVID-19 patients separated from the other patients in hospitals We can now test for
antibodies to determine whether a person had COVID-19. This is a blood test 172 new ICU
admission in the last day, vs. 374 in the preceding day, may indicate a decline in the
growth rate 155,934 people tested in New York State We need a faster testing process.
Can't wait 5 days as it is now. Other countries now also have home tests. We should do
the same
An additional 37,000 ICU beds are
needed Will use college dormitories , hotels , nursing homes, and all possible space by
converting it to hospitals if needed in April 138,376 people have been tested Schools will
stay closed for an additional 2 weeks after April 1, to then reassess the situation and
extend again if needed. 180 days requirement has been waived "This is not going to be a
short deployment [...] This is going to be weeks, and weeks, and weeks [...] This is a
rescue mission you are on, to save lives. [...] You are living a moment in history that
will change and forge character"
Here, b. The Swiss Propaganda Research did the work for you and brought us via its Dutch
sister website the official mortality numbers of Holland over the past years up until
18/3/20.
It's a huge pity that I can't paste a picture here, because this graph really says it all.
It's a graph of numbers recorded by the same official source that simply collects the
weekly death rates in Holland. Numbers that up until now were totally apolitical and neutral.
Nobody cared.
Two years ago, due to a heavy flu season, a whopping 9,444 excess deaths were counted. The
present corona mortality is nowhere near such numbers and will probably never get there.
But two years ago there was no panic, no lockdown, no nothing. Just an unfortunate heavy flu
season.
Not a good enough reason to question anything? No need to get this truth out? No need for
rationality and a woke population? No need for whatever MoA is meant to be?
As from today the daily "Covid-19" death toll will include data from the Office for
National Statistics (ONS) regarding deaths that occur external to hospital. Basically,
anyone who dies and is not being treated in a hospital at the time, but nevertheless has
"Covid-19" registered on the associated death certificate, will be counted in the official
toll. Those of us who are not prone to become unhinged at the slightest nudging towards it
by Government psychological manipulation will have the sense to realise that this
development will not be wholly unrelated to the arrival of the Coronavirus Bill, and how it
has created an environment where there is potential for a good deal of abuse in order to
create the impression of copious amounts of death by "Covid-19"
...
The reason why excess death is a crucial way of getting a handle on the issue should
be well understood by a FBEL reader, but to explain briefly: it has been the tendency by
the medical establishment to attribute death by other causes to so-called Covid-19 (and
now, if the reader examines the corporate-media reportage carefully, coronavirus)†.
As such, we should expect to see no great deal of excess death (or more death than usual),
but instead numbers under one column on a ledger shifted across to another headed
"Covid-19".
...
Even so, when the Chief Executive says that [nine] thousand people are hospitalised, it
might sound scary to the psychologically damaged masses that would be intensely following
the "war reports" of the sort that Stevens was holding. However, one should consider how
there are 100,000 "general and acute" beds in NHS England, and how, in the year 2018-19,
the institution saw 626,000 admissions for "influenza, pneumonia". The source for this data
is the House of Commons briefing paper, Number 7281, 20 February 2020, "NHS Key Statistics:
England, February 2020", which is online for anyone who isn't deranged to find.
If somebody dies of pneumonia and lung biopsy turns up coronavirus then it likely
coronavirus caused the death. It would be interesting though to see how officialdom does
actually determine if a death outside hospital is determined but I take it that would be done
by autopsy. Something the writer at your link didn't look into or mention.
Our mainstream media was equally oblivious, and even if they had sounded the alarm, they
had hysterically cried wolf so many times about so many ridiculous things that nobody would
have taken them seriously.
100% Correct -- Media is the problem. Globalist Media firms hate Trump, the Constitution,
and America.
Trump stated true fact. There are promising results from chloroquine, but it may or may
not work. The dishonest Globalist Media such as CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WaPo . tried (and failed) to
blame Trump for the death of someone who ingested an aquarium cleaner with a similar name.
(1)
Trump stated an optimistic hope. He hoped that it would be possible to begin lifting
restrictions by Easter. That hope has not come to pass, and the Trump administration has
extended restrictions. Optimism is an unwritten part of the President's duties, keeping and
building hope among U.S. Citizens.
The Globalist Media propaganda machine repudiates the concepts of hope, optimism,
integrity, and honesty. The *Media Lied* , when they intentionally changed "Trump's hope" to
"would" and further on to "must". Then with the bogus straw man set, the Globalist hoax about
a non-existent "restrictions must end" policy was launched. Again, the Globalist Media tried
(and failed) to undermine the Constitution with their hoax.
When will the Media start telling the truth instead of pushing the DNC's anti-American,
Globalist, Elite 1% agenda?
https://covidtracking.com/us-daily/ I use this page
as I find the one from John Hopkins suspect. I think some numbers should be looked at and
people should decide just how serious the Coronavirus is:
% US Population tested as of 29 March 2020 – .25% (831,351)
% tested who test positive – 16.73%
% tested who test negative – 83.27%
% tested who get Hospitalized – 2.37%
% Infected who get Hospitalized – 14.19%
% Infected who die – 1.75%
Percentage of those Tested who dies – .288%
Worst case sceanario as of 3/29/20 is 957,374 people could die from this virus if the % of
3/29/20 remain constant, but our death rate has dropped from a high of 2.73% (occured on
3/12/20).
Per the CDC webpage the N1H1 (swine flu) Pandemic infected 61 million Americans of which
12,469 died in 09. President Obama declared it an emergency in Oct 09 (7 months into the
Pandemic's season 04/09 – 04/10)
8,234 had died before he declared.
Bear in mind the H1N1 DR for 09-10 was .021% substantially lower than the DR rate of
Coronavirus, we are only in week 13 of the Coronavirus discovery (January through March)
Remember, from 03/12 to 03/28 the death rate has dropped 35.9% (2.73 to 1.75)
@anastasia The normies, i.e. the uninformed masses who follow received opinion, have been
well-trained to 'trust' the word of their masters, who want them panicking while the final
looting of the treasury by the banksters takes place right in front of their noses.
But, once it becomes evident that the economic collapse has occurred and society has been
looted, even the normies will begin to understand that the finance capitalists running their
world were not doing so in the best interests of the people.
What are they NOT hearing: We are not hearing any statistics about flus, how many are
hospitalized each year, and how many die from flu each year. This basis of comparison is not
pertinent, is not newsworthy? The public has no interest in these things?
We are not hearing how many corona victims have been hospitalized in each area, in each
hospital in NYC, how many are in regular rooms; how many are on ventilators or receiving
oxygen. They are not filming in hospitals where the patients are. We are not seeing full
emergency rooms.. We are not seeing people in those tents they are putting up everywhere. We
are not seeing any people in the make-shift hospitals. We are not seeing any victims of this
disease on ventilators in any hospitals. (unlike China that had every reporter in the middle
of that contagion of the hospitals).
Instead, whenever they talk about a hospital in New York, they show the same line at
Elmhurst Hospital, which is the hospital where all Riker's Island prisoners go, where they
ORDINARILY treat 200 patients per day, where they may have afree clinic, where they may be
dispensing "methodone".
We are not being told how many people over 80 die every few seconds in this country, as a
basis for comparison. They are not giving us anything to compare these deaths they are
posting every day, like stock market statistics, on every media station.
German pulmonologist Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg favors the latter explanation, describing the
epidemic as "hype" (his word in German) which has taken on a life of its own in spite of the
facts and therefore merits further consideration:
Every year we have new types of virus in the world. When tests were done in Glasgow
coronaviruses were always present. In each year, coronaviruses were always part of the mix at
a rate of 7 to 15 percent. In Wuhan they discovered a new strain of virus. Is this virus
dangerous. . . .
How can we know? It's important to compare the current data with data from previous years.
But even if we look at the 7 to 15 percent who have the virus, we can't say that they died
from it. The big question about mortality rates in Italy is where were the tests taken? If
they were administered to severely ill people in hospitals, the death rate would naturally
increase. The normal mortality rate for the seasonal flu is 0.1 percent. That means that one
person out of a thousand dies every winter.
It's obvious that the virologists have created something very sensational here which
impressed the Chinese government. The Chinese government made a big deal out of it. It was
suddenly very important politically in a way that had nothing to do with virology, prompting
face recognition in airports, spot temperature checks to see if people had fever.
And those measures had international consequences. Politicians suddenly had to take a
stand. Something was fabricated. A network of information and opinions developed in these
groups of experts, and the politicians turned to these groups of experts and they
internalized their information network and began operation within its parameters.
The politicians have instrumentalized this network of information in order to determine
what measures need to be taken. All of these decisions have been derived from these
arguments. That means it's going to be very difficult for a critic to say, "Stop, there's
nothing going on."
It reminds me of the fairy tale about the emperor's new clothes. Only a small child was
able to say he was naked. The politicians are playing along with the scientists who want to
seem important because they need money to support their operations. We want to be important;
we want to earn money. Didn't the same thing happen last year? Is anything new going on here?
[23]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_AyuhbnPOI&fea...utu.be My translation from the
German.
Reports from Italy confirmed Wodarg's suspicions. On March 18, Italy's national health
authority released a statement which showed that more than 99 percent of Italy's coronavirus
fatalities have been people who suffered from previous medical conditions. The overwhelming
majority of those who died while infected with the coronavirus were either old or had
pre-existing conditions which made the virus worse. The average age of patients who succumbed
to COVID-2019 was 81 years of age, about 20 years higher than the age of all patients who
contracted the infection. The average age of women who died was 28 years higher. The greatest
percentage of deaths (or 42.2 percent) occurred in the age group between 80 and 89 years, while
32.4 percent were between 70 and 79, 8.4 percent between 60 and 69, 2.8 percent between 50 and
59 and 14.1 percent over 90 years. Women who died after contracting COVI_D-2019 infection are
older than men (median age women 83.4 – median age men 79.9). The average number of
pathologies observed in this population is 3.4 (median 3, Standard Deviation 2.1). Overall,
15.5 percent of the sample had 0 or 1 pathologies, 18.3 percent had 2 pathologies and 67.2
percent had 3 or more pathologies. The most represented comorbidity is hypertension (present in
74.6 percent of the sample), followed by ischemic heart disease (70.4 percent) and diabetes
mellitus (33.8 percent). [24]
http://www.salute.gov.it/portale/news/p3_2_1_1_1.js...d=4163 My translation from the
Italian. Silvio Brusaferro, head of the Italian health service confirmed the fact that
senior citizens and those with pre-existing conditions are more at risk. "We are talking about
people who are very fragile and who live in close contact with others and the need to protect
them as much as possible." [25]
http://www.salute.gov.it/portale/news/p3_2_1_1_1.js...d=4163 My translation from the
Italian.
Seems like government meddling often just makes things worse. In response to the disease
airports shut down and thousands of people were herded into cramped, crowded areas of the
airport. That's a good way of dealing with a highly communicable disease, get frightened and
cram thousands of people together so they really will get it. This to prevent it, you see.
I wish we could shut down all Billionaires foundations and phony charities, fire all their
employees and sieze the trust-funds that pay into them to pay down the national debt.
Its giving inherited gazillionaires too much money to play with. Honestly, piddling around
with weaponized viruses via private foundation grant money thrown at foreign scientists with
dual loyalties and dual passports. When one of them decides he resents one country or the
other, what is to stop him from releasing the viruses he has been researching?
Coronavirus and COVID-19 won't stop globalism; in fact, the global war on this virus makes
globalism essential. Locking us down and force-feeding us the Left's Holy Trinity (Drugs,
Porn, and Abortion) while depriving us any alternative viewpoints and sanity checks with
other living, breathing human beings in an environment that fosters trust, e.g. in person and
face to face, is how they'll grind us down to willing mind-numbed robots serving the New
World Order in petty fiefdoms with imaginary borders designed to make it easier for the
Criminal Elite to divvy up the loot they are at this very moment picking from our pockets in
this Holy War against the pandemic.
Power and self-interest are as old as pestilence. They are the cause of continued war; they
are the cause of the coming nuclear Armageddon. It is not the coronavirus that will destroy
us – we will. https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/
Just learned that Andrew Cuomo of all people is saying the same thing E. Michael Jones said
about the error of quarantining sick old people with fit young people!
Below is today's complete speech of PM of Pakistan. It is 17:13 minutes long and it is in
Urdu addressed to his nation and people. What I understand he is saying due to extreme
poverty in Pakistan, they cannot have complete lock down as they don't have the resources,
and people will die of extreme hunger. Think about it how will it effect the entire world. I
believe extreme poverty is the biggest disease and virus of the world. God has given us so
many resources and only Israel is destroying these resources.
We could ask our resident Pakistani Talha to probably help translate the speech of
Pakistani PM!
I was watching a video from Dr. Stephen Greer MD. He said that nearly everyone will
eventually get this virus, it will float around for years. The current effort is to spread
out the infection rate over a year so hospitals can treat sickly people who contract the
disease. Otherwise they may be overwhelmed and lack the needed ventilators to save lives. He
does say this is one of the most deadly stains so those vulnerable must be careful.
I say why not "lock down" those age 70 and older, like no airline or bus travel? Let
younger get back to work at places like restaurants, but use the posted fire code capacity
and say only half as many people can come inside and chairs must be six feet from other
tables. Reopen the schools, except for sickly children and teachers, and with no recess but
staggered lunch times.
How will you know if the decision to lock down was wrong? What would you accept as evidence?
Sweden has not chosen the lockdown. They have restricted large public gatherings, but kept
schools open. If Sweden does not suffer a disaster, does that invalidate the lockdown? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-52076293
Now, just imagine if Western governments invested a (sizeable) fraction of their warfare
budgets into planning and prepping for civil emergencies, along with discussing and gaining
the social buy-in to prepare their populations to respond positively in a non-military
emergency.
I'm certainly struggling to my core to believe any of the official channels and MSM around
Covid. The virologists may be right this time, but the last 20 years of BS from 9/11 through
Russiagate, the Skripals, the MH17 shootdown etc etc ad nauseum makes my intellectual immune
system automatically reject the mainstream "truth" (hence looking to non-MSM sites for
alternate perspectives).
I realised today that my personal social compact with the (NZ) government was basically
dead – I no longer trust them to represent my best interests. A vast change in
perspective over a few short years.
Regardless of how Covid turns out, I suspect the next few months may be the nail in the
Western political coffin. Some relationships are so broken they can't be repaired..
An excellent resource for the coronavirus panic is https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/#latest
compiled by Swiss Propaganda Research. "According to the latest data published by the Italian
Ministry of Health, overall mortality is now significantly higher in all age groups over 65
years of age, after having been below average due to the mild winter. Until March 14, overall
mortality was still below the flu season of 2016/2017, but may have already exceeded it in
the meantime. Most of this excess mortality currently comes from northern Italy. However, the
exact role of Covid19, compared to other factors such as panic, healthcare collapse and the
lockdown itself, is not yet clear." These points were also made by Dr John Ionnadis in a
recent interview. It should be mentioned that the statistics for deaths from flu and
pneumonia are usually lumped together. So for example, the US had 80,463 deaths from "flu and
pneumonia" in 2017; the UK 32,120. Pneumonia does a lot of killing, even in a year that
doesn't put the whole world on lockdown. https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/united-kingdom-influenza-pneumonia
The matching half of what is happening in Italy for starters. What those on the front
lines are saying. Only trying to save those under sixty or sixty five due to lack of
ventilators and so forth would have the effect of pushing the average age of the deceased
up.
There is much about large numbers of undiagnosed cases. This requires pulling numbers out
of arses.
Part the reason for the thinking on large numbers of undiagnosed cases is the belief that
everyone will catch this disease. Spanish flue only hit about 20 - 25% of the population.
Coronavirus cruise ships showing similar percentage. Possibly only 20 - 25% of the
population will contract the virus resulting in various levels of illness.
If this is the case, then deaths as a percentage of the population will be less, but
mortality amongst those susceptible to the disease is higher.
There is also percent damage amongst survivors to consider. Many critical cases that
survive will suffer permanent lung damage. It will be some time before we have a good idea of
how much permanent damage has been done to how many people, but this needs to be right up
alongside deaths when looking at the human cost of the virus.
During the "War on Death" (see at Off-Guardian), the first two casualties, entirely wiped out
the media, were actually the two actors that occupied most of it in the preceding weeks:
migrants and demonstrators. no need to ask cui bono?
America's fake political system has been highlighted as the Democratic Party's presumptive
nominee completely
vanished for a week and then returned to deliver an embarrassing string of befuddled interviews
upon his return, reminding the nation once again that the Democrats are running an
actual, literal dementia patient for the most powerful elected office in the world. Biden
will of course be running against an incoherent reality TV star who
only last week decided that the virus is indeed a real problem which needs to be seriously
addressed, and who now already wants to begin
rolling back the inadequate measures his administration implemented far too late. The
debates between two men who don't understand what they're doing and can't string a sentence
together between them will soon be broadcast around the world for all of civilization to
behold.
America's lying mass media are being highlighted with propagandistic lines that would make
Kim Jong Un blush, like The New York
Times describing the American medical system as "unsurpassed." We can safely expect
U.S. media to get even more demented as they expand their hysteria-inducing new cold war
propaganda campaign against Russia to China as well.
America's murderous sanctions machine has been highlighted as the U.S. continues ramping up
its economic warfare against Iranian civilians, with
thousands already dead and
potentially millions to follow due to Tehran's inability to access necessary equipment,
medicine and resources during the pandemic. The Trump administration has not eased the
sanctions during the outbreak, and
has in fact added to them , because killing Iranian civilians has always been the goal.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has gone on record to say that the
objective is to make Iranian civilians so miserable and desperate that they overthrow their own
government.
So basically everything crazy about America is being amplified to absurd caricatures of its
own insanity and highlighted for everyone to see. There's a lot of ugliness coming out into the
light as a result of this virus, which may end up being one of its few perks for everyone. As
they say of both viruses and governments, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
The ongoing and unfolding reactions to the Coronavirus look set to
have
wide-ranging and long-lasting effect on politics, society and economics.
The
drive to close down all activities is extraordinary as are the measures being promoted to isolate
people from each other.
The deep-rooted fear of contagious disease, hardwired into the collective consciousness by
historical events such as the 'Black/Bubonic Plague' and maintained through popular culture (e.g. the
Hollywood movies
Outbreak
and
Contagion
), means that people are without question
highly susceptible to accepting extreme emergency measures whether or not such measures are rational
or justified.
The New York Times
called for America to be
put
on a war footing
in order to deal with Corona whilst
former
Army General Stanley McChrystal
has been invoking his 9/11 experience in order to prescribe
lessons for today's leaders.
At the same time, political actors are fully aware that these conditions of fear and panic
provide a critical opportunity that can be exploited in order to pursue political, economic and
societal objectives.
It is very likely, however, that the dangers posed by the potential
exploitation of Corona for broader political, economic and societal objectives latter far outweigh the
immediate threat to life and health from the virus. A lesson from recent history is instructive here.
9/11 AND THE GLOBAL 'WAR ON TERROR'
The events of September 11 2001 represent a key moment in contemporary history. The destruction of
three skyscrapers in New York after the impact of two airliners and an attack on the Pentagon, killing
around 3000 civilians, shocked both American and global publics. The horror of seeing aircraft being
flown into buildings, followed by the total destruction of three high rise buildings within a matter
of seconds, and the spectre of a shadowy band of Islamic fundamentalists (Al Qaeda) having pulled off
such devastating attacks, gripped the imagination of many in the Western world.
It was in this climate of paranoia and fear that extraordinary policies were implemented. The USA
Patriot Act led to significant
civil
liberty restrictions
whilst the mass surveillance of the digital environment became normalized.
In the United States torture was authorized in the name of preventing terrorism whilst the
Guantanamo Bay facility in Cuba became a site in which accused individuals have been held without any
adequate legal protection or due process.
Remarkably, the individual accused of leading the alleged 9/11 plot, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who
'confessed' to CIA interrogators after being 'waterboarded' 183 times, has
recently
received his trial date
, set for January 11 2021 and 20 years after 9/11. Civil liberty
restrictions, mass surveillance and torture were only a sub-strand of the major war-fighting-policy
that was enabled by 9/11.
Presented at the time as America's 'New Pearl Harbour', 9/11 provided the conditions for a series
of major regime-change wars which persist until today.
Critically, these wars have not been primarily about combatting 'Islamic fundamentalist
terrorism'/Al Qaeda, but rather attacking 'enemy' states. Indeed, the evidence that the 9/11 event and
the alleged threat of 'Islamic fundamentalist' was then exploited in order to pursue a geo-politically
motivated set of regime-change wars which had little connection to the purported Al Qaeda threat is
well established.
Former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, Wesley Clark,
famously
went public in 2006/7
stating that immediately after 9/11 he had been informed that the US was
intending to attack seven countries within five years including Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, Sudan
and Iran. Clark stated:
He [the Joint Staff officer] picked up a piece of paper, he said I just got this down from
upstairs, from the Secretary of Defence's office today, and he said this is a memo that describes
how we are gonna take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq and then Syria,
Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and finishing off Iran.
Clark's claims have recently been corroborated by retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson (chief of
staff to Colin Powell and Iraq War planner) who stated that
he
had actually seen the same plans
Clark was referring to many months prior to 9/11:
My first briefing in the Pentagon from an Air Force three-star general in February of 2001 I
almost fell of my chair because their briefing included on the one hand the Air Force's ability to
take out 80 to 90% of the targets in North Korea in the first few hours of an aerial strike on that
country to hey when we do Iraq we're gonna do Syria and Lebanon and we're going to do Iran and
maybe Egypt but this was more than that [just contingency planning] Wes Clark is right they had
these plans they were going to go right through all these countries that they felt threatened
Israel all through those countries that they felt threatened 25-30% of the world's oil passing
through the Strait of Hormuz.
Documentary evidence for these claims
has come by way of the UK Chilcot Inquiry into the 2003 Iraq
War. For example, a report quoted a British embassy cable, dated 15 September 2001, explained that
'[t]he "regime-change hawks" in Washington are arguing that a coalition put together for one purpose
[against international terrorism] could be used to clear up other problems in the region.' Another
document released by Chilcot shows British Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George Bush
discussing phases one and two of the 'war on terror' and when to hit particular countries. Blair
writes:
If toppling Saddam is a prime objective, it is far easier to do it with Syria and Iran in favour
or acquiescing rather than hitting all three at once.
The regime-change wars that have flowed directly and indirectly from 9/11 continue to this day. War
and conflict continues in Afghanistan and Iraq whilst the nine-year-long war in Syria has borne
witness to
extensive and illegal policies
pursued
by Western governments including the funding and arming of extremist groups coupled with support for
groups
actually aligned with Al Qaeda
. Iran
continues to be subjected to US hybrid warfare tactics including sanctions and covert operations
whilst the threat of military action is very clear and present.
The human cost of these wars, built upon the ruthless exploitation of public fear of terrorism in
order to pursue multiple 'regime-change' wars, has been huge. According to the Brown University 'Costs
of War Project', the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have killed a
combined
480,000 to 507,000 civilians
, coalition military members, and foreign fighters, with an untold
number having been maimed and disfigured.
IPPNW
estimated that the first ten years
of the 'war on terror' in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan killed
1.3 million people.
Since 2011, in Syria alone, over 400,000 people have died as a result of war. The
numbers
of people displaced
as a result of these conflicts are also extremely high; wars in Afghanistan,
Iraq, Pakistan, and Syria have wrought a combined 9.39 million refugees, 10.78 million internally
displaced peoples, and 830,000 asylum seekers. In addition, there are persisting and very serious
concerns with respect to the possible involvement of state actors with the event of 9/11.
Overall, the 9/11 global 'war on terror' is
increasingly
coming to be understood
particularly across the world as, first and foremost, a remarkable
propaganda campaign designed to enable violent conflict in the international system and with its
effects and objectives being far wider and deeper than had been suggested by official narratives
regarding the need to combat Al Qaeda.
CORONA VIRUS: A NEW 9/11?
The lesson of 9/11 is that major events can become what scholar Peter Dale Scott describes as deep
events which are exploited by political actors in order to precipitate and manage major political,
economic and social shifts. 9/11 became, in effect, the deep event that enabled 20 years of unfettered
Western warfare abroad and severe civil liberty restrictions and extensive surveillance at home.
At the time of 9/11 many people in the West were terrified of terrorism. Public opposition to the
invasion of Afghanistan (the first regime war to flow within months of 9/11) was almost impossible
without being accused of being reckless in the 'fight against terrorism' or of being an 'Al Qaeda'
sympathizer. Muslims throughout the West were widely despised. US President George Bush declared that
'you are either with us or against us'. The parallels with what is happening today are obvious.
Is the Coronavirus a new 9/11, a new deep event?
We cannot yet be
sure, as of this writing. Perhaps the current strategy of suspending basic liberties will work to
effectively eliminate all threats posed by the virus. Governments will then restore the civil
liberties currently being suspended and all will fairly quickly return to the way things were before.
Perhaps the economy will confidently weather the fallout from the 'lockdowns' and everything will
return to business as usual.
And perhaps a sober 'lessons learned' review will lead to public health officials developing
reasonable and balanced plans, such as developing sufficient capacity for rapid testing and tracing,
which can be deployed the next time a sufficiently dangerous virus starts to spread thus avoiding
terrifying publics and implementing draconian measures that inflict significant damage to the social
and economic fabric of society.
Or perhaps not. It may be that, as
British
journalist Peter Hitchens has been warning
, the loss of liberty and basic rights will continue
indefinitely as governments greedily hold on to their increased powers of control over their
citizenry.
Similarly, Italian journalist
Stefania
Maurizi has warned about the risks
in Italy of state authorities, hostile to open societies and
the political left, exploiting Corona in order to increase their control.
An obvious concern here is whether there will be a permanent impact on mass gatherings and
protests. James Corbett warns of a permanent state of
'medical
martial law'
and there is certainly the very real possibility of the normalization of
government-imposed quarantine and other freedom of movement restrictions.
Margaret Kimberley of the US-based Black Agenda Report warns that Corona may be used as a way of
covering up
both
economic crisis and collapse
. She notes that the Federal Reserve 'recently threw Wall Street a
$1.5 trillion lifeline which only kicked the can down the road. The can has been kicked ever since the
Great Recession of 2008'. The likely destruction of small businesses might allow for ever greater
corporate choke-hold on the economy with more people forced into the corporate workforce.
There is certainly the danger that COVID-19 will be exploited in order to distract from severe
economic problems whilst also enabling the pursuit of new economic strategies which worsen rather than
mitigate the social inequalities that already tarnish Western countries.
And, of course those actors behind the regime-change wars that flowed from 9/11 may use the
Coronavirus to increase pressure on the countries they have been targeting for the last 20 years and
those they wish to target in the future.
ABC news report that, despite the Coronavirus,
US
and UAE troops have held a major military exercise
'that saw forces seize a sprawling model
Mideast city'. It is also worth nothing here the recent US assassination of Iranian General Solemeni
and the on-going proxy battles between US forces and Iranian-backed groups in Iraq. The possibility of
Corona being exploited in order to further the regime change wars we have seen over the last 20 years
is extremely likely and it would be naïve in the extreme to think otherwise.
Whatever the COVID-19 event may or may not be, the fundamental lesson of the last 20 years is that
governments can and do exploit, even manipulate, events in order to pursue political, social, military
and economic objectives. Fearful populations are frequently irrational ones, vulnerable and malleable.
Now is not the time for deference to authority and reluctance to speak out.
It is time for publics to get informed, think calmly and rationally, and to robustly
scrutinize and challenge what their governments are doing. The dangers of failing to do this likely
far surpass the immediate threat posed by the Coronavirus.
@niteranger
"For example, New York Times Columnist Nicholas Kristof on Sunday reported the disheartening analysis of Dr. Neil Ferguson of
Britain, one of the world's leading epidemiologists."
Nicholas Kristoff has the bad habit of falling for falling for frauds and making them famous. "Three cups of tea" for starters.
He's got a long track record of peddling fake stuff.
Extensive details from medical professionals, on just what an exaggerated scam this
coronavirus Covid-19 panic is
In reality, what we have is a somewhat worse flu season 99% affecting the elderly and
chronically ill, e.g., a young person dying turned out to have hidden leukemia
Most major media falsely report that Italy has up to 800 deaths per day from the
coronavirus. In reality, the president of the Italian Civil Protection Service stresses
that these are deaths WITH the coronavirus and not FROM the coronavirus. In other words,
these persons died while also testing positive [not nececessarily causal]
Between those who died *from* the coronavirus and those who died *with* the coronavirus,
it is not clear whether the person died from the pre-existing chronic diseases
Renowned Italian virologist Giulio Tarro argues that the mortality rate of Covid19 is
below 1% even in Italy and is therefore comparable to influenza. The higher values only
arise because no distinction is made between deaths with and by Covid19 and because the
number of (symptom-free) infected persons is greatly underestimated.
Stanford Professor John Ioannidis showed that the age-corrected lethality of Covid19 is
between 0.025% and 0.625%, i.e. in the range of a strong cold or the flu
A Japanese study showed that of all the test-positive cruise passengers, and despite
high average age, 48% remained completely symptom-free; even among the 80-89 year olds 48%
remained symptom-free, while among 70 to 79 year olds it was an astounding 60% that
developed no symptoms at all.
The Italian example has shown that 99% of test-positive deaths had one or more
pre-existing conditions, and even among these, only 12% of the death certificates mentioned
Covid19 as a causal factor.
Average age of the positively-tested deceased in Italy is currently about 81 years. 10%
of the deceased are over 90 years old. 90% of the deceased are over 70 years old.
80% of the deceased had suffered from two or more chronic diseases. 50% of the deceased
had suffered from three or more chronic diseases.
Less than 1% of deceased were healthy persons
Northern Italy has one of the oldest populations and the worst air quality in Europe,
which had already led to an increased number of respiratory diseases and deaths in the
past
Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera points out that Italian intensive care units
already collapsed under the marked flu wave in 2017/2018.
Argentinean virologist and biochemist Pablo Goldschmidt explains that Covid19 is no more
dangerous than a bad cold or the flu.
Dr. Goldschmidt speaks of a „global terror" created by the media and politics.
Every year, he says, three million newborns worldwide and 50,000 adults in the US alone die
of pneumonia.
German Professor Karin Moelling, former Chair of Medical Virology at the University of
Zurich, stated in an interview that Covid19 is „no killer virus" and that
„panic must end".
Countries like South Korea and Japan that introduced no lockdown measures have
experienced near-zero excess mortality in connection with Covid-19
Swiss deaths so far were also high-risk patients with chronic diseases, an average age
of more than 80 years and a maximum age of 97 years
According to all current data, for the healthy general population of school and working
age, a mild to moderate course of Covid-19 can be expected.
Official data on deaths from pneumonia in the US. There are usually between 3000 and
5500 deaths per week and thus significantly more than the current figures for Covid19
No one of normal intelligence can avoid being a skeptic. We are all skeptics these days.
The MSM is nothing but a lie-box, the blaring loudspeakers on every corner pouring out
disinformation 24/7. So if the story is that this is a killer virus many people assume just
the opposite. It's clearly a golden opportunity for a massive power grab as well as tapping
into the public till. Can't blame people for having become reflexive cynics. When the music
stops we'll see who ends up with the chairs.
It is irresponsible to spread panic in such cases.
From what I see the spread of the virus is slightly slowing in the USA starting from
March 21.
It is still exponential but with lower base. So Trump assertion that in the second half
of April the epidemic might subside is not completely out of touch with reality.
Also effects from the measures which were put in place since March 11 only now start
coming into play.
I notices more and more people are wearing masks in public places.
In some countries (Czech Republic is one example) appearance without a mask in public
places now is a punishable offence.
In Russia breaking mandatory 14 day quarantine for those who arrives from abroad is a
punishable offence.
Human societies are highly adaptable. Also losses so far did not lead to increased
morality. Actually it is the first pandemic in history in which average weekly morality in
certain countries either stayed the same or dropped. GB in February is one example.
To provide you a proper perspective, the number of victims from COVID-19 for three month
of the epidemic existence is slightly less than the number of births in three hours
The UNICEF estimates that an average of 353,000 babies are born each day around the
world.
It appears that Oz himself is backtracking a bit on the severity of COVID:
On the basis of a case definition requiring a diagnosis of pneumonia, the currently
reported case fatality rate is approximately 2%.4 In another article in the Journal, Guan et
al.5 report mortality of 1.4% among 1099 patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19; these
patients had a wide spectrum of disease severity.
If one assumes that the number of
asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of
reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests
that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a
severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a
pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS
or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.
As of 19 March 2020, COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK....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.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance...
Armstrong interpets:
"Ferguson now says both that the U.K. should have enough ICU beds and that the coronavirus
will probably kill under 20,000 people in the U.K. and interestingly he now admits that more
than half of whom would have died by the end of the year in any case because they were so old
and sick. Ferguson now predicts that the epidemic in the U.K. will peak and subside within
"two to three weeks" after advocating 18+ months of quarantine would be necessary."
Imperial College (Ferguson's Employer) Twitter a/c says it differntly:
He told the committee current predictions were that the NHS would be able to cope if strict
measures continued to be followed.
Professor Ferguson, who is also Director of MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease
Analysis, added: "There will be some areas that are extremely stressed but we are reasonably
confident – which is all we can be at the current time – that at the national
level we will be within capacity."
I think that Ron Unz is gravely mistaken in his analysis here.
There is a growing body of opinion amongst medical professionals and academics that questions
the benefits of a lockdown balanced against what we know of the danger from the virus. Ron
has not included any of this in his article here, and he should.
Studies are emerging which are indeed showing that infection stats may be orders of magnitude
higher than official estimates, that hospitalisation rates are therefore much lower, and the
overall threat overshaddowed by the consequences of closing down the economy and open
society.
As ever the media is the prime culprit in spreading fear and hysteria. Alt media have an
obligation to question the very basis of the covid pandemic response. 'The director of the German National Health Institute (RKI) confirmed that they count all
test-positive deaths, irrespective of the actual cause of death, as „coronavirus
deaths". The average age of the deceased is 82 years, most with serious preconditions. As in
most other countries, excess mortality due Covid19 is likely to be near zero in
Germany.' https://swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/
12 experts speak out: https://off-guardian.org/2020/03/24/12-experts-questioning-the-coronavirus-panic/
From yesterday in WSJ ('Is The Coronavirus as Deadly as They Say?'): https://archive.fo/cgCff
A study from Oxford University Epdemiologists confirming doubts about lethality: https://www.dropbox.com/s/oxmu2rwsnhi9j9c/Draft-COVID-19-Model%20%2813%29.pdf?dl=0
Even the UK government website confirms that the covid virus has been re-classified as no
longer on the register of High Consequence Infectious Diseases (on March 19th, just before
the government closed down the whole society).
There is more going on here than the virus. Maybe it is incompetence and panic, or something
more disturbing. Either way, alt media voices have a duty to report the growing doubt about
how deadly this virus really is or isn't.
According to Dr. Ferguson the "best case" scenario is that the Coronavirus will kill
over a million Americans.
According to the pie chart below, which is based on the Italian experience, 99.2% of those
who die have one or more pre-existing health condition. I suspect that if you were to exclude
those under 60, the result would go up to 99.9%
This data strongly suggests that only those who are over 60 should be obliged to remain at
home. This virus has seemingly been going around the USA since last September and a lot of
those who caught it and died were classified as flu victims or something else.
Every year, several millions die in the USA. That is normal. The deaths allegedly from
this virus would have probably died anyway. At worst, their useless lives would have been
curtailed by one or two years. Don't forget that 90% of a person's lifetime health costs are
expended in the past year of "life". BTW, I am 69 so don't accuse me of ageism or any such
nonsense please.
Similarly, New York reported its first death on March 14th. Yet just ten days later,
deaths in that state were running at 50 per day, and rapidly accelerating.
You mean first death attributed to Covid-19 after testing started. How many died of
Covid-19 before testing? It is not known at what stage of the epidemic, testing started
therefore accuracy of data is suspect.
The Coronavirus epidemic may soon produce the greatest American disaster since our Civil
War over 150 years ago, and numbers reveal the possible magnitude.
The current data out of China, and Wuhan in particular, suggest otherwise. They have
closed all 19 temporary hospitals set up there to treat the coronavirus infections. The only
way you can believe a minimum of one million Americans will die from the coronavirus is to
believe that these figures from Hubei province have been falsified in some way.
Hubei, China
Confirmed: 67,801
Deaths: 3,163
Recovered: 60,811
Existing: 3,827
@niteranger When considering what the authorities, both medical and political, are
constantly telling us about how deadly this pandemic is, I think back to my college
Statistics course of nearly 50 years ago. On the first day of class the professor told the
old joke that "there are lies, damned lies, and statistics." I'm sure most who read here have
heard of that bromide, but it is still well to keep it in mind. Don't forget, most have an
agenda.
If that's the case, then maybe I don't need to worry that most of the people where I live
seem, like St-Germain, above, too dumb to understand the meaning of the term social
distancing .
For the victims of coronavirus the median time from the first symptoms to hospitalization is
4 days, and the median time to death is 8 days, according to a report by the Italian National
Institute of Health.
The study comes as the number of Covid-19 deaths in the country continues to increase. On
Wednesday, the number of people who have died from coronavirus jumped to 2,978, recording the
largest one-day increase - 475 - since the beginning of the outbreak, while
the number of infected people rose to over
28,000.
According to the study, which was run on 2,003 patients who have died from coronavirus, the
most affected region is Lombardy reporting around 71.1% of the deaths, followed by
Emilia-Romagna (17.3%) and Veneto (3.9%).
The median age of death is 80.5 while the
median age of the people who got infected is 63. As of March 17, among the coronavirus victims
only 17 people were younger than age 50 and only 30% were women.
The majority of patients were treated with
antibiotics (83%), while antiviral therapies were used in 52% of cases.
According to the study, most of the people who have died suffered from previous illnesses
before contracting the coronavirus. Based on a sample of 355 out of 2003 fatalities, the
institute found that almost half of the victims had three or more illnesses, a quarter had
either two or one prior medical condition - such as high blood pressure (76%), diabetes (35.5%)
and heart disease (33%) - and only 3 people, or 0.8% of the sample, had no previous
illnesses.
@NPleeze
Oxford's Centre for Evidence Based Medicine is providing regular updates of an estimate of
the infection fatality rate for Covid-19. Their current estimate is 0.20% (95% CI, 0.17 to
0.25).
Two Stanford doctors writing in The Wall Street Journal suggest that the fatality rate
could be as low as 0.01%, which is about one-tenth the mortality of seasonal flu. They
suggest that a better strategy than widespread lockdowns would be to focus on protecting
vulnerable members of the population, particularly the elderly.
Both of these estimates would result in far, far fewer deaths than the garbage-in
garbage-out models produced by Imperial College and others.
I'm 26. Coronavirus Sent Me to the Hospital.
I'm 26. I don't have any prior autoimmune or respiratory conditions. I work out six times a
week, and abstain from cigarettes. I thought my role in the current health crisis would be
as an ally to the elderly and compromised. Then, I was hospitalized for Covid-19.
That night I woke up in the middle of the night with chills, vomiting, and shortness of
breath. By Monday, I could barely speak more than a few words without feeling like I was
gasping for air. I couldn't walk to the bathroom without panting as if I'd run a mile. On
Monday evening, I tried to eat, but found I couldn't get enough oxygen while doing so. Any
task that was at all anxiety-producing -- even resetting my MyChart password to communicate
with my doctor -- left me desperate for oxygen.
While I was shocked at the development of my symptoms and my ultimate hospitalization,
the doctors and nurses were not at all surprised. After I was admitted, I was told that
there was a 30-year-old in the next room who was also otherwise healthy, but who had also
experienced serious trouble breathing. The hospital staff told me that more and more
patients my age were showing up at the E.R. I am thankful to my partner for calling the
hospital when my breathing worsened, and to the doctor who insisted we come in. As soon as
I received an oxygen tube, I began to feel slight relief. I was lucky to get to the
hospital early in the crisis, and receive very attentive care.
@NPleezeThe reason younger Americans are dying is because Americans are extremely unhealthy. I
wager all the very sick younger Americans are obese, probably with diabetes, don't exercise,
and eat unhealthy foods, leading to heart and other weaknesses.
Precisely. We have received several reports recently of young people being hospitalised
and some even dying. However, the reports do not specify the condition of those young people.
In places like the US, the youth are very unhealthy so it would not surprising to discover
the youth requiring hospitalisation are obese or drug takers.
Fiona Lowenstein is a writer, producer, and yoga teacher and the founder of the queer
feminist wellness collective, Body Politic.
From her selfie, she also appears to be an Orthodox Jew, though apparently one of those
classic New York breakaway (sorta) types.
Now, did anyone from the Times validate her story? Of course they didn't. They are
desperate for stories like this. My guess is the entire thing is made up. She looks perfectly
well in her few other hospital selfies on her Instagram. You think people like this wouldn't
rig those photos?
PS -- Her Instagram has a number of bikini shots. Guess what that means.
I'm 26. I don't have any prior autoimmune or respiratory conditions. I work out six
times a week, and abstain from cigarettes.
The highly specific listing of non-symptoms suggests that the patient did have other
co-morbidities, such as obesity, diabetes etc. Did he/she smoke weed? Smoke cigarettes in
the past ?
If he/she had been entirely healthy prior to the infection, he could simply have said
so.
Stop the $6 Trillion Coronavirus Corporate Coup!
Matt Stoller
What Is In This Bill?
Congress is going to pass a bill with a lot of important stuff for workers, hospitals,
cities and small business, and to address the pandemic. That's inevitable. And the bill on
the table includes some of this. The question though is what else the bill includes, and
that's where we get into trouble. Because while we have to deal with the pandemic and crisis,
we do not have to fundamentally eliminate the economic rights of all of us in the
process.
Now, first I should say I don't have the final deal in hand because it's not public. I
have only seen versions of the negotiating text. But I'm fairly sure most of these provisions
haven't changed, because the final sticking points were over various direct pandemic spending
pieces. If I get that wrong, I'll tell you in an update.
On Saturday, I went over the Christmas wish list of corporate lobbyists in this process,
everything from Adidas letting people deduct gym costs to candymakers seeking a $500 million
loan to Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk seeking $5B in loans for their space corporations. Of course
what Wall Street sought, and got, dwarfed all of these requests.
Here's how you can tell. A lot of reporters have been talking about how this is a $2
trillion deal, with a bunch of spending for hospitals and whatnot. But last night White House
advisor Larry Kudlow announced it is actually a $6 trillion deal. And business reporter
Charlie Gasparino said he's hearing chatter that the total will be $10 trillion! Say
what?!?
Charles Gasparino
@CGasparino
i hear its $10 trillion or higher when all is said and done
Matt Stoller @matthewstoller
People are not internalizing what is happening. A $6 trillion credit allocation to Wall
Street isn't a corporate handout, it's a coup. These numbers are a thorough restructuring of
America.
March 24th 2020
How does this work? How can Wall Street have one impression of the amount of money, and
everyone else have a different impression? Easy. Confusion, lying and bad reporting. If
important people don't talk about the boring sounding big stuff, then us non-important people
sound crazy or nerdy mentioning it. It's a giant game of social climbing, and the goal is to
make all of us afraid to point out what's going on. (Incidentally I hope Rep. Brad Sherman,
who is an accountant and a key anti-bailout leader, really delves into this.)
So let's talk about the big stuff that McConnell, Schumer and Pelosi are hiding.
The bill establishes a series of boring-sounding slush funds, and these will be given strange
alphabet soup names by the Federal Reserve and Treasury, names like 'special purpose vehicle'
and 'ABS' and 'TALF' and FDIC bank guarantees. That's where the real money is. Here are some
of these slush funds, starting with the ones that are more understandable:
$50 billion in loans and loan guarantees to airlines
$8 billion in loans and loan guarantees to air cargo carriers
$17 billion in loans and loan guarantees to "businesses critical to national security"
A $425 billion fund for loans and investments to be used at the discretion of the
Secretary of the Treasury, Steve Mnuchin. He can use it to loan money, buy stock, buy bonds,
whatever.
Obviously helping certain enterprises is important, so I'm not opposed to industry
aid.
But the terms and conditions matter, and based on what I'm seeing, I don't believe there will
be meaningful restrictions on this aid. Executives and financiers are going to profit off of
taxpayer money.
So that's the stuff that's been reported. Here's what hasn't, and why the bill goes up in
value to $6-10 trillion.
An additional $4 trillion from the Federal Reserve in lending power to be lent to big
corporations and banks.
Authorization to bail out money market funds, multi-trillion dollar unregulated bank-like
deposits for the superrich.
Authorization for the the government through the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to
guarantee trillions of dollars of risky bank debt.
"We can fight this bill. Remember, Congress is going to pass a bill with a lot of
important stuff for workers, hospitals, cities and small business, and to address the
pandemic. That's inevitable. If we do stop it, Congress will simply pass the same bill, strip
out all the slush funds, and take that stuff on in a few weeks. This is a crisis, they are
getting sick, and they know we have to act.
"Even if this bill passes, we can keep fighting against the misuse of such a giant
corporate slush fund, and continue to build a left-right coalition against cronyism. The one
thing I have learned in politics is that we are not powerless, if we are honest about the
moral terms .
"A lot of people are likely to die in the next few months, and it is going to be awful.
And this is largely because of the same reckless leadership class that is now using this
moment to hand political power over to financiers. But all of us are learning lessons about
what it means to build a more resilient, free and democratic society and business community.
My hope is that we can put those lessons to work, sooner rather than later." [My
Emphasis]
IMO, the ideological basis for the coming conflict within the Outlaw US Empire are now set
with more people becoming aware daily--The Moral High Ground of caring for people first
versus the immoral gutter of catering to Wall Street's parasites to continue to feed of the
body politic which will outweigh any benefits provided for the public.
This hoax has been such a bonus for some bad actors. Bibi is one, but someone at Wall Street
got gifted 1.5 Trillions while the stimulus package is a few billions.
How do I know it is an hoax? Total mortality has been declining for 5 weeks in Europe, as it
does every winter. The site is produced by a collaboration of 40+
european academic institutions
I wonder if history will record that this Coronavirus was like a Global Reichstag Fire? Wall
Street is the Matchmaker to this marriage of globalization and Big Brother. If Netanyahu can
have a coup like this, who's to say that the template can not be made to order for other
nations in the West? The disruption of assembles is the key to this. "Shelter-in-Place"
isolation, and the restriction of movement, are the novel constructions that could help push
this catastrophe forward.
I'm not worried about the guy coughing next to me. I'm worried about the ones who seem to be
looking for Jim Jones.
Jones was the charismatic founder of the cult-like People's Temple. Through fear-based
control, he took his followers' money and ran their lives. He isolated them in Guyana where he
convinced over 900 of them to commit suicide by drinking cyanide-laced grape Kool Aid.
Frightened people can be made to do anything. They just need a Jim Jones.
So it is more than a little scary that media zampolit Rick Wilson
wrote to his 753,000 Twitter followers: "People who sank into their fear of Trump, who
defended every outrage, who put him before what they knew was right, and pretended this chaos
and corruption was a glorious new age will pay a terrible price. They deserve it." The tweet
was liked over 82,000 times.
The New York Timesclaims
that "the specter of death speeds across the globe, 'Appointment in Samara'-style, ever faster,
culling the most vulnerable." Others are claiming Trump will
cancel the election to rule as a Jim Jones. "Every viewer who trusts the words of Earhardt
or Hannity or Regan could well become a walking, breathing, droplet-spewing threat to the
public," opined
the Washington Post . Drink the damn Kool Aid and join in the panic en route to
Guyana.
The grocery store in Manhattan, just after the announcement of the national state of
emergency, was pure panic. I saw a fight break out after an employee brought out paper towels
to restock the shelf and someone grabbed the whole carton for himself. The police were called.
One cop had to stay behind to oversee the lines at the registers and maintain order. To their
credit, the NYPD were cool about it. I heard them talk down one of the fighters, saying, "You
wanna go to jail over Fruit Loops? Get a hold of yourself." Outside New York, sales of weapons
and ammunition
spiked .
Panic seems to be something we turn on and off, or moderate in different ways. Understanding
that helps reveal what is really going on.
No need for history. Right now, in real time, behind the backs of the coronavirus, is the
every-year, plain-old influenza. Some 12,000
people have died, with over
13 million infected from influenza just between October 2019 and February 2020. The death
toll is screamingly higher (as of this writing, coronavirus has infected 60,653 and killed
819 Americans).
Bluntly: more people have
already died of influenza in the U.S. than from the coronavirus in China, Iran, and Italy combined. Double in
fact. To be even blunter, no one really cares, even though a large number of bodies are piling
up. Why?
The first cases of the swine flu, H1N1, appeared in April 2009. By the time
Obama finally declared a national emergency seven months later, the CDC was reporting that
50 million Americans, one in six people, had been infected, and 10,000 Americans had died. In
the early months, Obama had no HHS secretary or appointees to the department's 19 key posts, as
well as no commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, no surgeon general, no CDC
director. The vacancy at the CDC was especially important because in the early days of the
crisis, only they could test for the virus (sound familiar?). Yet some 66
percent of Americans thought the president was protecting them. There was no panic. Why?
Of course, Trump isn't Obama. But if you really think it is that black and white, that one
man makes that much difference in the multi-leveled response of the vast federal government,
you don't know much about bureaucracy. Most of the people who handled the swine flu are now
working the coronavirus, from the rank and file at CDC, HHS, and DHS to headliners like Drs.
Andrew Fauci (in government since 1968, worked ebola) and Deborah Brix (in government since
1985, prior to corona was an Obama AIDS appointee).
Maybe the most salient example is 9/11. Those who lived through it remember it well, the
color threat alerts, the jihadi cells around every corner, the sense of learned/taught
helplessness. The enemy could be anywhere, everywhere, and we had no way to fight back. But
because the Dems and Repubs were saying the same thing, there was a patina of camaraderie to it
(led by Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg, where are they now?), not discord. But the panic was
still very real.
Why? We panicked when people took steps to ensure we would. We were kept calm when there was
nothing to gain by spurring us to panic (the swine flu struck in the midst of the housing
crisis; there was enough to worry about). After 9/11, a fearful populace not only supported
everything the government wanted to do, they demanded more. Nearly everyone cheered the wars in
Afghanistan and Iraq, and not believing the government meant you were on their side. The
Patriot Act, which did away with whole swaths of the Bill of Rights, was overwhelmingly
supported. There was no debate over torture, offshore penal colonies, assassinations,
kidnappings, and all the little horrors. The American people counted that as competent
leadership and re-elected George W. Bush. Fear was political currency.
Need a 2020 example of how to manipulate panic? Following fears of a liquid bomb, the TSA
limited carry-on liquids to four ounces for years. Can't be too careful! Yet because of corona,
they just changed the limit for hand sanitizer only (which, with its alcohol content, is
actually flammable, as opposed to say, shampoo) to
12 ounces. Security theater closed down alongside Broadway tonight.
False metrics are also manipulative because they make fear seem scientific. We ignore the
low death rate and focus on the number of tests done. But whatever we do will never be enough,
never can be enough, the same way any post-disaster aid is never delivered quick enough because
the testing is not (just) about discovering the extent of the virus. For those with naughty
motives, it is about creating a race we can't win, so testing becomes proof of failure. Think
about the reality of "everyone who wants one should get a test." The U.S. has 331 million
people. Testing 10 percent of them in seven days means 4,714,285 individuals a day while the
other 90 percent hold their breath. Testing on demand is not realistic at this scale. Selective
decision-based testing is what will work.
South Korea, held up as the master of mass testing, conducted at its peak about 20,000 a day. Only 4 percent
were positive, a lot of effort for a little reassurance. Tests are valuable to pinpoint the
need for social distancing, but blunt tools like mass social distancing (see China) also work.
Tests do not cure the virus. You can hide the number of infections by not testing (or claim so
to spur fear), but very sick people make themselves known at hospitals and actual dead bodies
are hard to ignore. Tests get the press, but actual morbidity is the clearest data point.
There will be time for after-action reviews and arguments over responsibility. That time is
never in the midst of things, and one should question the motives of journalists who use rare
access to the president to ask questions meant largely to undermine confidence. If they
succeed, we will soon turn on each other. You voted for him; that's why we're here now. Vote
for Bernie and Trump wins and we all literally die. You bought the last toilet paper. You can
afford treatment I can't. You're safe working from home while I have to go out. Just wait until
the long-standing concept of medical triage is repackaged by the media as "privilege" and hell
breaks loose in the ERs. We could end up killing each other even as the virus fades.
At the very least, we will have been conditioned to new precedents of
control over personal decisions, civil life, freedom of movement and assembly, whole city
lockdowns, education, and an increasing role for government and the
military in health care. Teachers, don't be surprised if less of you, and fewer classrooms,
are needed in the virus-free future, in favor of more classes online. It's almost as if someone
is taking advantage of our fears for their own profits and self-interest.
There are many reasons to take prudent action. There are no good reasons for fear and panic.
The fear being promoted has no rational basis compared to regular influenza and the swine flu
of 2009. We have a terrifying example in 9/11 of how easily manipulated fearful people are.
Remaining calm and helping others do so is a big part of what your contribution to the disaster
relief could be.
That's one way to see this. Too many right now, however, seem to be looking for Jim
Jones.
You are right. While corona in my view is absolutely bonkers, and as my conviction mounts
with every half witted calculation that I come across, it gains its own dimension in reality.
The cause is non-existent but the consequences are real:
People die in overwhelmed hospitals in run down health systems. The world economy is breaking
down, as it was going to anyhow. The convenient scapegoat has been found and the interest for
the PTB to allow the truth to come out is zero.
Will we get laws that make Corona-denial illegal? Because it dishonors the dead and
traumatizes their families?
I am praying to Saint Ron to fearlessly tell the truth, but he goes corona full steam.
I have written this before. My Damaskus moment was Kiew in february 2014. Since then I
have known that the same people who were behind that thing would set my country and the world
on fire in time.
I marvel at their inventiveness.
Similarly, once government lockdowns or other similar measures are taken, the
doubling-period of the infection becomes much longer.
I'm pretty certain that there's no doubling once a country, (province, city, whatever)
enacts a relatively comprehensive lockdown and people themselves take it seriously. I'm in
one of those countries and if I look around it's clear that the R0 ratio is way below 1.
Probably less than 0.1 to be honest.
If I remember correctly, COVID-19 R0 ratio in China was somewhere around 3.5 when the
country was still figuring it out. That's a horrible number but it's easy to see how it can
be brought down to a tiny fraction when 95% of risky contacts get removed and the remaining
5% approached with protective gear and caution. The virus doesn't stand a chance in that kind
of environment.
So, the numbers in my neck of the woods will almost certainly start decreasing rapidly in
the coming weeks but the problem of international travel will remain for many months
(years?).
I also remember some of early estimates of Mad Cow disease in humans in UK and they
turned out to be very exaggerated.
When the political class was trying to de-gay HIV/AIDS in 1987, they had Oprah tell
everyone that 20% of heterosexual people would be dead before 1990.
The first I learned of Oprah's jaw-droppingly sensationalist remarks, was in a piece a
couple of days ago on AmericanThinker (which sounds like a rare bird indeed, if not an
outright oxymoron – but it has good stuff from time to time).
Anyhow, it was an interesting piece – entitled
" Reflections on a Century of Junk Science " by the author of " Hoodwinked: How
Intellectual Hucksters Have Hijacked American Culture ", which I will acquire today. (The
book's 11 years old, but sounds like it will be along the same lines as Kendrick's "
Doctoring Data: How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense ", which was
excellent).
March 20, 2020 STUNNING! Via the CDC As of Friday There Are 100 TIMES AS MANY Flu Deaths in
US this Season than Coronavirus Deaths
According to the weekly CDC flu report -- flu deaths are up by 1,000 over last week. And
according to the global coronavirus trackers US coronavirus deaths are up by 218 this
week.
Nov 4, 2019 Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Segment 4, Communications Discussion and Epilogue
Video
Event 201 is a pandemic tabletop exercise hosted by The Johns Hopkins Center for Health
Security. The exercise illustrated the pandemic preparedness efforts needed to diminish the
large-scale economic and societal consequences of a severe pandemic.
"... The reason younger Americans are dying is because Americans are extremely unhealthy. I wager all the very sick younger Americans are obese, probably with diabetes, don't exercise, and eat unhealthy foods, leading to heart and other weaknesse ..."
"... I share your skepticism. Do the "tests" prove that COVID-19 causes illness? Is it possible that some or even all of the deaths associated with COVID-19 have been primarily caused by other factors? Is it possible that COVID-19 is very widespread in contemporary populations and is harmless in most or even all people in which it exists? ..."
"However, the Coronavirus death statistics are certainly far more solid and reliable"
Are they really?
Report shows up to 88% of Italy's alleged Covid19 deaths could be misattributed
"The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the
people who die in hospitals with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus [
] On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 per cent of death
certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 per cent of patients
who have died have at least one pre-morbidity – many had two or three,"
– Professor Walter Ricciardi, scientific adviser to Italy's minister of health
Report in English:
the Coronavirus death statistics are certainly far more solid and reliable
But still quite unreliable. Nobody knows what tests are being performed or how accurate
those tests are. For all we know they are calling flu/pneumonia deaths as COVID-19 deaths,
whether deliberately/recklessly (pressured) or because the tests are simply faulty.
If we assume a mortality rate of 1%
Based on what? As noted, the best case of a general population exposure is the Diamond
Princess – where all passengers were exposed fully for 2 weeks and then under terrible
quarantine conditions for 4 weeks. Of the 3,177 passengers and crew, some 677 (20%) took ill,
and 7 (0.2% of the population, and 1% of the ill) died, all of them in their 70s and older
(and indeed the data released by the Japanese health ministry indicates the ship had twice
the number of people in each age category 60-79, 70-79, and 80+ than does the US).
Conveniently, everyone repeating the hysteria line completely omits to look at the best
data available.
Number of infected = Number of Deaths / Mortality_Rate *
2^(Mortality_Period/Doubling_Period)
Nothing in nature is exponential as everything runs up against some barrier, usually
sooner than later. I can make the argument about rabbit reproduction: each female rabbit can
produce 60 rabbits per year in three litters. This would indicate that each male/female pair
increases 10-fold every 3 months – a far faster growth rate than your virus. And under
certain conditions, they can, for a time, accomplish that before they hit the proverbial
brick wall.
Let's look at Italy. The first recorded death (FWIW) was Feb. 21. Now using your
assumptions, there had been 100 new infections three weeks earlier (on Jan. 31). Next, as you
assume a doubling-period of 6 days, those 100 infections would have increased to 100 x
2^(37/6) = 7,183 infections by the time of March 8, when the emergency orders went into
effect. However, on March 8 there had already been 366 deaths. Since the disease, according
to your model, takes 3 weeks to kill, this means we need to look at the number of infections
on Feb. 21, which, in your model, equals 100 x 2^(21/6) = 1,131.
In other words, on Feb. 21 there were 1,131 persons infected, and of those, 366 had died
by March 8. For a mortality rate of 32.3%.
But let's work backwards from another date. By Mar. 24, there had been 6,820 deaths. To
arrive at that, using your assumed death rate, that means by Mar. 3, 682,000 people had to be
infected (since 1% of them would die within 3 weeks). Which means, according to your model,
that 341,000 were infected on Feb. 26, 170,500 on Feb. 20. But your model already showed that
only 1,131 were infected on Feb. 21.
In other words, this "model" is utter bunk.
What we do know is as follows: the death rate on the Diamond Princess, under terrible
conditions, was 0.2%, all over 70.
The global death rate is about 18,000 dead out of 7 billion. The annual tuberculosis death
number is between 1 and 2 million.
That people who are very old (and thus have compromised immune systems) or people who have
various chronic diseases are the ones who die from this disease. This is because the virus
can attack numerous receptors, including those in the kidney, liver, heart, white blood
cells, and pancreas (a sort of "frankenstein" bio-engineered virus). Thus anyone with a weak
pancreas (diabetes), kidney, liver, heart (hypertension, etc.), or lungs (smokers, etc.) are
susceptible to having an organ fail.
The death rate will grow only among this segment of the population. It is enough to
isolate them (or, better yet, have them self-isolate).
The reason younger Americans are dying is because Americans are extremely unhealthy. I
wager all the very sick younger Americans are obese, probably with diabetes, don't exercise,
and eat unhealthy foods, leading to heart and other weaknesses.
All of this apart from the issue, of how long this virus has been in the wild. It seems my
mother caught this disease in early February, in a small Midwestern isolated community
– she had what are given at the symptoms, but nobody was looking for it at the time, so
there is no diagnosis of her illness.
I share your skepticism.
Do the "tests" prove that COVID-19 causes illness?
Is it possible that some or even all of the deaths associated with COVID-19 have been
primarily caused by other factors?
Is it possible that COVID-19 is very widespread in contemporary populations and is harmless
in most or even all people in which it exists?
These questions deserve forensically rigorous investigation – conducted and reported
honestly.
A new study shows the coronavirus mortality rate in Wuhan, China, may have been lower
than previous estimates.
According to research published in the monthly Nature Medicine journal, the death rate
from the coronavirus disease, COVID-19, in Wuhan -- the epicenter of the global outbreak --
was 1.4%.
"Using public and published information, we estimate that the overall symptomatic case
fatality risk (the probability of dying after developing symptoms) of COVID-19 in Wuhan was
1.4%," reads the body_abstract of the study.
The study -- titled "Estimating clinical severity of COVID-19 from the transmission
dynamics in Wuhan, China" -- said the estimate was "substantially lower than both the
corresponding crude or naive confirmed case fatality risk".
Previous estimates placed the mortality rate in Wuhan between 2% to 3%.
Underlining that fatality risk was higher for the elderly, the study found 2.6%
mortality rate among people over 60 years in Wuhan, 0.5% for people aged between 30 to 59,
and 0.3% for people under 30 years.
The COVID-19 outbreak that started in Wuhan has been declared a pandemic by the World
Health Organization (WHO).
Data compiled by the U.S.-based Johns Hopkins University shows the virus has now spread
to 167 countries and regions.
Over 341,700 cases and 14,750 deaths have been reported worldwide since last December,
while more than 98,860 people have recovered.
Transmission in China has slowed down over recent weeks, with authorities reporting no
new indigenous cases on Monday.
There were also no new infections in Wuhan city for the fifth consecutive day, according
to China's National Health Commission.
#COVIDー19 vs #flu
'So far, #COVIDー19 has led to > 220,000 illnesses and >9,300 deaths worldwide.
But that's nothing compared with the flu. In the US alone, flu has caused an estimated 36
million illnesses, 370,000 hospitalizations and 22,000 deaths this season, according to CDC.
' https://www.livescience.com/new-coronavirus-compare-with-flu.html
I am pretty sure they were in the initial period but once the epidemic spreads into areas
with different population densities where doubling periods are different and when new
countermeasures are being implemented you will see departures from the exponential
growth.
Even w/o countermeasures when more and more people get infected the reproduction number R0
will be getting smaller resulting in a steady decrease of the exponential coefficient.
Zhanwei Du et al. studied the exponential growth in Wuhan in the period before quarantine
was imposed. See the Appendix in
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/20-0146_article
The COVID-19 epidemic was growing exponentially during December 1, 2019– January 22,
2020, as determined by the following: dI(t) = I0 × exp(λ × t) in which
I0 denotes the number of initial cases on December 1, 2019, and λ denotes the
epidemic growth rate during December 1, 2019–January 22, 2020.
What is important about Ron Unz approach is that by looking at daily death increments one
can gage the number of new infections and as the epidemic progresses the changes in doubling
period would be adjusted from daily death increments.
In times when very few tests are being done to asymptomatic patients and no serum tests
are performed to determine who already went through infection and recovered this approach is
very useful and simple method to estimate the extent of the epidemic.
"So far we know:
-tests have large error margin
-positive tests only associated with small chance of being sick
-vast majority of COVID-19 cases have other serious diseases
-We have 80x more pneumonia cases than COVID-19
Are these good reasons to suspend the lives of billions?"
the Coronavirus death statistics are certainly far more solid and reliable
But still quite unreliable. Nobody knows what tests are being performed or how accurate
those tests are. For all we know they are calling flu/pneumonia deaths as COVID-19 deaths,
whether deliberately/recklessly (pressured) or because the tests are simply faulty.
If we assume a mortality rate of 1%
Based on what? As noted, the best case of a general population exposure is the Diamond
Princess – where all passengers were exposed fully for 2 weeks and then under terrible
quarantine conditions for 4 weeks. Of the 3,177 passengers and crew, some 677 (20%) took ill,
and 7 (0.2% of the population, and 1% of the ill) died, all of them in their 70s and older
(and indeed the data released by the Japanese health ministry indicates the ship had twice
the number of people in each age category 60-79, 70-79, and 80+ than does the US).
Conveniently, everyone repeating the hysteria line completely omits to look at the best
data available.
Number of infected = Number of Deaths / Mortality_Rate *
2^(Mortality_Period/Doubling_Period)
Nothing in nature is exponential as everything runs up against some barrier, usually
sooner than later. I can make the argument about rabbit reproduction: each female rabbit can
produce 60 rabbits per year in three litters. This would indicate that each male/female pair
increases 10-fold every 3 months – a far faster growth rate than your virus. And under
certain conditions, they can, for a time, accomplish that before they hit the proverbial
brick wall.
Let's look at Italy. The first recorded death (FWIW) was Feb. 21. Now using your
assumptions, there had been 100 new infections three weeks earlier (on Jan. 31). Next, as you
assume a doubling-period of 6 days, those 100 infections would have increased to 100 x
2^(37/6) = 7,183 infections by the time of March 8, when the emergency orders went into
effect. However, on March 8 there had already been 366 deaths. Since the disease, according
to your model, takes 3 weeks to kill, this means we need to look at the number of infections
on Feb. 21, which, in your model, equals 100 x 2^(21/6) = 1,131.
In other words, on Feb. 21 there were 1,131 persons infected, and of those, 366 had died
by March 8. For a mortality rate of 32.3%.
But let's work backwards from another date. By Mar. 24, there had been 6,820 deaths. To
arrive at that, using your assumed death rate, that means by Mar. 3, 682,000 people had to be
infected (since 1% of them would die within 3 weeks). Which means, according to your model,
that 341,000 were infected on Feb. 26, 170,500 on Feb. 20. But your model already showed that
only 1,131 were infected on Feb. 21.
In other words, this "model" is utter bunk.
What we do know is as follows: the death rate on the Diamond Princess, under terrible
conditions, was 0.2%, all over 70.
The global death rate is about 18,000 dead out of 7 billion. The annual tuberculosis death
number is between 1 and 2 million.
That people who are very old (and thus have compromised immune systems) or people who have
various chronic diseases are the ones who die from this disease. This is because the virus
can attack numerous receptors, including those in the kidney, liver, heart, white blood
cells, and pancreas (a sort of "frankenstein" bio-engineered virus). Thus anyone with a weak
pancreas (diabetes), kidney, liver, heart (hypertension, etc.), or lungs (smokers, etc.) are
susceptible to having an organ fail.
The death rate will grow only among this segment of the population. It is enough to
isolate them (or, better yet, have them self-isolate).
The reason younger Americans are dying is because Americans are extremely unhealthy. I
wager all the very sick younger Americans are obese, probably with diabetes, don't exercise,
and eat unhealthy foods, leading to heart and other weaknesses.
All of this apart from the issue, of how long this virus has been in the wild. It seems my
mother caught this disease in early February, in a small Midwestern isolated community
– she had what are given at the symptoms, but nobody was looking for it at the time, so
there is no diagnosis of her illness.
Isn't the real issue this (numerically and culturally): we have a health care system,
which is obviously not made to provide services to every single American whenever they
need it, all at the same time , and this pandemic is likely to kill say, a million old
people (given how large our overall population is), and since no one "gets" to just die (ala
Soylent Green) but instead gets sick at 70, 80, etc and has to be preserved forever so
anything that "burns" through what would be an otherwise healthy population, as with all
animals (including humans) historically, instead becomes such a serious risk (if not somewhat
random) to the old or infirm, that we shut everything down, potentially causing all sorts of
other human catastrophes so that some old folks get to choose another death (maybe the flu?)
over a Covid-19 death?
Long run on sentence, but isn't that really what this is all about now ?
Bmac
says: Show Comment March
25, 2020 at 12:28 pm GMT 100 Words Neill Ferguson of Imperial College London argues that
every fatality represents an infected population one thousand strong.
"... The state governments prefer that all schools be closed while Canberra is receiving advice from Dr Brendan Murphy, Chief Health Officer of Australia, that schools not be closed because children would be at more risk of picking up COVID-19 from adults at home, and from congregating in areas where they are not being supervised by adults if they decide not to stay at home for various reasons (because among other things they would also be at risk from domestic violence). ..."
"... Please don't feel brainwashed into taking totally unnecessary extra precautions beyond normal levels of hygiene in order to protect yourself from a common coronavirus. ..."
"... The behavior of elites across the globe suggest a level of collective anxiety not seen in before in my lifetime. Certainly endless decades of oligarchic control maintained through keeping Western populations mystified by means of coordinated mass propaganda – has seen rather significant cracks develop through the emergence of progressive independent journalism shared across the world via the web. One would think those ever widening cracks in the indoctrination system have perhaps clarified for our betters that their fairy tales are falling upon ever greater numbers of deaf ears around the globe. ..."
"... Given currently unfolding events one is tempted to think that elites – perhaps rather than being left to respond to events completely out of their control – like a system-crashing spontaneous economic collapse – are collectively choosing to instead to – "control what they can" – through this supposed 'pandemic' response operation. ..."
"... That this over the top elite led pandemic response appears an effort to lead the credulous masses into whatever straightjacket has been prepared for us is simply impossible to ignore. ..."
Below is our list of twelve medical experts whose opinions on the Coronavirus outbreak contradict the official
narratives of the MSM, and the memes so prevalent on social media.
* * *
Dr
Sucharit Bhakdi
is a specialist in microbiology. He was a professor at the Johannes Gutenberg University
in Mainz and head of the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene and one of the most cited research scientists
in German history.
What he says:
We are afraid that 1 million infections with the new virus will lead to 30 deaths per day over the next 100 days.
But we do not realise that 20, 30, 40 or 100 patients positive for normal coronaviruses are already dying every
day.
[The government's anti-COVID19 measures] are grotesque, absurd and very dangerous [ ] The life expectancy
of millions is being shortened. The horrifying impact on the world economy threatens the existence of countless
people. The consequences on medical care are profound. Already services to patients in need are reduced,
operations cancelled, practices empty, hospital personnel dwindling. All this will impact profoundly on our whole
society.
All these measures are leading to self-destruction and collective suicide based on nothing but a spook.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/JBB9bA-gXL4
*
Dr
Wolfgang Wodarg
is a German physician specialising in Pulmonology, politician and former chairman of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. In 2009 he called for an inquiry into alleged conflicts of interest
surrounding the EU response to the Swine Flu pandemic.
What he says:
Politicians are being courted by scientists scientists who want to be important to get money for their
institutions. Scientists who just swim along in the mainstream and want their part of it [ ] And what is missing
right now is a rational way of looking at things.
We should be asking questions like "How did you find out this
virus was dangerous?", "How was it before?", "Didn't we have the same thing last year?", "Is it even something
new?"
That's missing.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/p_AyuhbnPOI
*
Dr Joel Kettner
s professor of Community Health Sciences and Surgery at Manitoba University, former
Chief Public Health Officer for Manitoba province and Medical Director of the International Centre for Infectious
Diseases.
I have never seen anything like this, anything anywhere near like this. I'm not talking about the pandemic,
because I've seen 30 of them, one every year. It is called influenza. And other respiratory illness viruses, we
don't always know what they are. But I've never seen this reaction, and I'm trying to understand why.
[ ]
I worry about the message to the public, about the fear of coming into contact with people, being in the same
space as people, shaking their hands, having meetings with people. I worry about many, many consequences related
to that.
[ ]
In Hubei, in the province of Hubei, where there has been the most cases and deaths by far, the actual number of
cases reported is 1 per 1000 people and the actual rate of deaths reported is 1 per 20,000. So maybe that would
help to put things into perspective.
Dr John
Ioannidis
Professor of Medicine, of Health Research and Policy and of Biomedical Data Science, at
Stanford University School of Medicine and a Professor of Statistics at Stanford University School of Humanities and
Sciences. He is director of the Stanford Prevention Research Center, and co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation
Center at Stanford (METRICS).
He is also the editor-in-chief of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation. He was chairman at the
Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina School of Medicine as well as adjunct professor at
Tufts University School of Medicine.
As a physician, scientist and author he has made contributions to evidence-based medicine, epidemiology, data
science and clinical research. In addition, he pioneered the field of meta-research. He has shown that much of the
published research does not meet good scientific standards of evidence.
Patients who have been tested for SARS-CoV-2 are disproportionately those with severe symptoms and bad outcomes.
As most health systems have limited testing capacity, selection bias may even worsen in the near future.
The one
situation where an entire, closed population was tested was the Diamond Princess cruise ship and its quarantine
passengers. The case fatality rate there was 1.0%, but this was a largely elderly population, in which the death
rate from Covid-19 is much higher.
[ ]
Could the Covid-19 case fatality rate be that low? No, some say, pointing to the high rate in elderly people.
However, even some so-called mild or common-cold-type coronaviruses that have been known for decades can have case
fatality rates as high as 8% when they infect elderly people in nursing homes.
[ ]
If we had not known about a new virus out there, and had not checked individuals with PCR tests, the number of
total deaths due to "influenza-like illness" would not seem unusual this year. At most, we might have casually
noted that flu this season seems to be a bit worse than average.
– "A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without
reliable data",
Stat News
, 17th March 2020
*
Dr Yoram Lass
is an Israeli physician,
politician and former Director General of the Health Ministry. He also worked as Associate Dean of the Tel Aviv
University Medical School and during the 1980s presented the science-based television show Tatzpit.
Italy is known for its enormous morbidity in respiratory problems, more than three times any other European
country. In the US about 40,000 people die in a regular flu season and so far 40-50 people have died of the
coronavirus, most of them in a nursing home in Kirkland, Washington.
[ ]
In every country, more people die from regular flu compared with those who die from the coronavirus.
[ ]
there is a very good example that we all forget: the swine flu in 2009. That was a virus that reached the
world from Mexico and until today there is no vaccination against it. But what? At that time there was no Facebook
or there maybe was but it was still in its infancy. The coronavirus, in contrast, is a virus with public
relations.
Whoever thinks that governments end viruses is wrong.
– Interview in
Globes
, March 22nd 2020
*
Dr Pietro
Vernazza
is a Swiss physician specialising Infectious Diseases at the Cantonal Hospital St. Gallen and
Professor of Health Policy.
What he says:
We have reliable figures from Italy and a work by epidemiologists, which has been published in the renowned
science journal ‹Science›, which examined the spread in China. This makes it clear that around 85 percent of all
infections have occurred without anyone noticing the infection. 90 percent of the deceased patients are verifiably
over 70 years old, 50 percent over 80 years.
[ ]
In Italy, one in ten people diagnosed die, according to the findings of the
Science
publication, that
is statistically one of every 1,000 people infected. Each individual case is tragic, but often – similar to the
flu season – it affects people who are at the end of their lives.
[ ]
If we close the schools, we will prevent the children from quickly becoming immune.
[ ]
We should better integrate the scientific facts into the political decisions.
– Interview in
St. Galler Tagblatt
, 22nd March 2020
*
Frank Ulrich Montgomery
is German radiologist,
former President of the German Medical Association and Deputy Chairman of the World Medical Association.
I'm not a fan of lockdown. Anyone who imposes something like this must also say when and how to pick it up again.
Since we have to assume that the virus will be with us for a long time, I wonder when we will return to normal?
You can't keep schools and daycare centers closed until the end of the year. Because it will take at least that
long until we have a vaccine. Italy has imposed a lockdown and has the opposite effect. They quickly reached their
capacity limits, but did not slow down the virus spread within the lockdown.
– Interview in
General
Anzeiger
, 18th March 2020
*
Prof.
Hendrik Streeck
is a German HIV researcher, epidemiologist and clinical trialist. He is professor of
virology, and the director of the Institute of Virology and HIV Research, at Bonn University.
The new pathogen is not that dangerous, it is even less dangerous than Sars-1. The special thing is that
Sars-CoV-2 replicates in the upper throat area and is therefore much more infectious because the virus jumps from
throat to throat, so to speak. But that is also an advantage: Because Sars-1 replicates in the deep lungs, it is
not so infectious, but it definitely gets on the lungs, which makes it more dangerous.
[ ]
You also have to take into account that the Sars-CoV-2 deaths in Germany were exclusively old people. In
Heinsberg, for example, a 78-year-old man with previous illnesses died of heart failure, and that without Sars-2
lung involvement. Since he was infected, he naturally appears in the Covid 19 statistics. But the question is
whether he would not have died anyway, even without Sars-2.
– Interview in
Frankfurter Allgemeine
, 16th March 2020
*
Dr Yanis Roussel
et. al.
– A team of researchers from the Institut Hospitalo-universitaire Méditerranée Infection, Marseille
and the Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Marseille, conducting a
peer-reviewed study on Coronavirus mortality for the government of France under the 'Investments for the Future'
programme.
The problem of SARS-CoV-2 is probably overestimated, as 2.6 million people die of respiratory infections each year
compared with less than 4000 deaths for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of writing.
[ ]
This study compared the mortality rate of SARS-CoV-2 in OECD countries (1.3%) with the mortality rate of common
coronaviruses identified in AP-HM patients (0.8%) from 1 January 2013 to 2 March 2020. Chi-squared test was
performed, and the P-value was 0.11 (not significant).
[ ]
it should be noted that systematic studies of other coronaviruses (but not yet for SARS-CoV-2) have found that
the percentage of asymptomatic carriers is equal to or even higher than the percentage of symptomatic patients.
The same data for SARS-CoV-2 may soon be available, which will further reduce the relative risk associated with
this specific pathology.
– "SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data",
International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents
, 19th March 2020
*
Dr. David
Katz
is an American physician and founding director of the Yale University Prevention Research Center
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.
– "Is Our Fight Against Coronavirus Worse Than the Disease?",
New York Times
20th
March 2020
*
Michael T. Osterholm
is regents professor and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and
Policy at the University of Minnesota.
Consider the effect of shutting down offices, schools, transportation systems, restaurants, hotels, stores,
theaters, concert halls, sporting events and other venues indefinitely and leaving all of their workers unemployed
and on the public dole. The likely result would be not just a depression but a complete economic breakdown, with
countless permanently lost jobs, long before a vaccine is ready or natural immunity takes hold.
[ ]
[T]he best alternative will probably entail letting those at low risk for serious disease continue to work,
keep business and manufacturing operating, and "run" society, while at the same time advising higher-risk
individuals to protect themselves through physical distancing and ramping up our health-care capacity as
aggressively as possible. With this battle plan, we could gradually build up immunity without destroying the
financial structure on which our lives are based.
– "Facing covid-19 reality: A national lockdown is no cure",
Washington Post
21st March 2020
*
Dr
Peter Goetzsche
is Professor of Clinical Research Design and Analysis at the University of Copenhagen
and founder of the Cochrane Medical Collaboration. He has written several books on corruption in the field of
medicine and the power of big pharmaceutical companies.
Our main problem is that no one will ever get in trouble for measures that are too draconian. They will only get
in trouble if they do too little. So, our politicians and those working with public health do much more than they
should do.
No such draconian measures were applied during the 2009 influenza pandemic, and they obviously cannot
be applied every winter, which is all year round, as it is always winter somewhere. We cannot close down the whole
world permanently.
Should it turn out that the epidemic wanes before long, there will be a queue of people wanting to take credit
for this. And we can be damned sure draconian measures will be applied again next time. But remember the joke
about tigers. "Why do you blow the horn?" "To keep the tigers away." "But there are no tigers here." "There you
see!"
– "Corona: an epidemic of mass panic", blog post on
Deadly Medicines
21st March 2020
Gary Wilson
,
What happened in Wuhan will eventually happen everywhere. Any new pathogen will rapidly spread in the
susceptible population (those with some degree of a compromised immune system). After a period there
will be no more susceptible people left to infect and the disease will disappear. Government
regulations to prevent the spread is of no use if someone infected with the pathogen can infect others
before they get the symptoms that they have the disease. Lots of money is spent fighting the virus
(there is money to be made!) while no money is spent to improve the immune system of those people with
weakened immune systems.
fred
,
Btw, the only major sporting event still going on right now is the
Chess Candidates Tournament
(which is a qualification for the World Championship) taking place in
Yekaterinburg, Russia. (Which has freezing temperatures right now and is covered in snow.)
Players get
a health check up twice daily, but are not tested for the coronavirus specifically. This means that if
any one of the players gets a cold or mild temperature: coronavirus!
Therefore I expect the tournament
to be halted mid-way any day now. (Also if one of the players feels like the tournament is not going
well, or that his preparation is not working, they might pretend to be sick to get the tournament
postponed.)
You may be well aware that the Australian Federal government is at loggerheads
with New South Wales and Victorian state governments over the issue of closing all schools.
The state
governments prefer that all schools be closed while Canberra is receiving advice from Dr Brendan
Murphy, Chief Health Officer of Australia, that schools not be closed because children would be at
more risk of picking up COVID-19 from adults at home, and from congregating in areas where they are
not being supervised by adults if they decide not to stay at home for various reasons (because among
other things they would also be at risk from domestic violence).
Please find at this link
an article which among other things gives the opinions of various medical
and health experts who oppose the closure of schools during the current lock-downs here in Australia.
An example of such advice from the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee:
The AHPPC met on Tuesday 17 March to consider the issue of school closures in relation to the
community transmission of COVID‑19. The Committee's advice is that pre-emptive closures are not
proportionate or effective as a public health intervention to prevent community transmission of
COVID-19 at this time Previous studies suggest that the potential reduction in community
transmission from pre‑emptive school closures may be offset by the care arrangements that are in
place for children who are not at school. Children may require care from older carers who are more
vulnerable to severe disease, or may continue to associate (and transmit infection) outside of
school settings. Broadly, the health evidence on school closures from previous respiratory
epidemics shows the costs are often underestimated and the benefits are overestimated. This may be
even more so in relation to COVID-19 as, unlike influenza, the impact on otherwise healthy children
has been minimal to date. School closure is associated with considerable costs. Studies have
estimated that around 15% of the total workforce and 30% of the healthcare workforce may need to
take time off work to care for children. This burden will be significant and will fall
disproportionately on those in casual or tenuous work circumstances. At this stage, the spread of
COVID-19 in the community is at quite low levels. It may be many months before the level of
Australian community infection is again as low as it is at the moment
More than 70 countries around the world have implemented either
nationwide or localised school closures, at different times in the evolution of the local COVID-19
epidemic, however it should be noted the majority of these have not been successful in controlling
the outbreak.
Some of these countries are now considering their position in relation to
re-opening schools. Singapore has had success in limiting the transmission of COVID-19 in the
community without closing schools" [however the successful period in Singapore coincided with
school holidays and when students returned they were temperature-tested ]
Antonym
,
This
cure is worse than the disease, true.
Governments made lock downs in haste, erring on the heavy handed side just to be "sure". Who can
prove them wrong afterwards? The voters.
Airplanes have been the worse spreaders.
Some religious preachers have shown to be immune to public self isolate calls in Asia.
Maybe a good Global practice run for when a
really
deadly
virus breaks loose?
Let East Asian and central African wildlife wet markets be forbidden and enforced with long jail
and financial sentences.
Virus Guy
,
Nonsense. It was not in haste or error. No government is going to hastily shut down its economy out
of too much tender concern for its citizens, and we have teams of analysts and advisors on
infectious disease working for governments who would never have advised this insane level of
'precautions ' for a moderate coronavirus showing no evidence of extreme infectivity or fatality.
As in China the reaction has anticipated a non-existent problem and then gone beyond any
accepted protocol to 'respond.' This has all the hallmarks of an entirely manufactured crisis.
Virus Guy
,
Please don't feel brainwashed into taking totally unnecessary extra precautions beyond normal
levels of hygiene in order to protect yourself from a common coronavirus.
Results: When the infection rate of the close contacts and the sensitivity and specificity of reported
results were taken as the point estimates, the positive predictive value of the active screening was
only 19.67%, in contrast, the false-positive rate of positive results was 80.33%. The
multivariate-probabilistic sensitivity analysis results supported the base-case findings, with a 75%
probability for the false-positive rate of positive results over 47%. Conclusions: In the close
contacts of COVID-19 patients, nearly half or even more of the 'asymptomatic infected individuals'
reported in the active nucleic acid test screening might be false positives.
Gary Weglarz
,
The behavior of elites across the globe suggest a level of collective anxiety not seen in before in my
lifetime. Certainly endless decades of oligarchic control maintained through keeping Western
populations mystified by means of coordinated mass propaganda – has seen rather significant cracks
develop through the emergence of progressive independent journalism shared across the world via the
web. One would think those ever widening cracks in the indoctrination system have perhaps clarified
for our betters that their fairy tales are falling upon ever greater numbers of deaf ears around the
globe.
Given currently unfolding events one is tempted to think that elites – perhaps rather than being
left to respond to events completely out of their control – like a system-crashing spontaneous
economic collapse – are collectively choosing to instead to – "control what they can" – through this
supposed 'pandemic' response operation.
That is to initiate a prefabricated "response" – proactively
to a projected impending system catastrophe that is only a matter of time. Or perhaps this is simply a
"testing operation," a "dry run" so to speak for when the uncontrollable event that crashes the system
does take place. A chance to gauge public reactions and further fine tune future response options?
That this over the top elite led pandemic response appears an effort to lead the credulous masses
into whatever straightjacket has been prepared for us is simply impossible to ignore.
Gary Weglarz
,
On the breathtaking clairvoyance of our wealthiest elites:
Slight uptick in overall registered deaths although still below average for this time of year.
But they've omitted the figures for deaths where the underlying cause was respiratory illness.
I can think of no legitimate reason why they would do so.
These are registered deaths, everybody knows they don't represent the true current number of
deaths.
There is no legitimate rationale for 'waiting for more accurate data' or any such excuse. Even if
the data is incomplete it's published. It's a registry of deaths not an adjusted death rate.
I really can't keep a sense of humour about this.
Or take any satisfaction from 'knowing better' or 'I told you so'. I thought what was happening now would be a process of years.
I don't expect sites like this will survive very long, regardless of how fringe or maligned they
are.
I'd like to say invest in printing presses.
But it's probably too late for that now.
The cat is slowly being let out of the bag Recently leaked (or unofficially released) Norwegian
government papers says the Corona measures are expected to be in place for 12 to 18 months, not just
for a few weeks. Presumably it will be the same in as good as every (NATO)-country.
The emergency
laws introduced in Norway are conspicuously similar to a highly unusual law proposal for increased
government powers in case of a civil emergency from September 2019, now they have been rushed through
parliament.
paul
,
Don't worry, folks, pandemics are profitable.
Bezos dumped $3 billion of stock just before the crash.
Makes Feinstein's paltry $6 million look like chump change.
Boeing want $60 billion, the airlines
want $50 billion (for starters), $150 billion for hotels, a trillion or so for shopping malls. A few
billion here, a few billion there, and pretty soon you're talking serious oney.
$3 trillion to date, but have patience, it's early days yet.
We can all rest easy.
The billionaires will emerge with their wealth more than doubled, just like last time.
Certainly puts my mind at rest.
Savorywill
,
We can rest easy because the government will just print more money. Plenty to go around! Every one
gets $3000 plus insurance covers their absent paychecks, so everything is back to normal, money
wise, and no one has to do anything. This can probably go on forever, until trucking companies also
go out of business, so no food or supplies can be transported into NYC, and then the shit will well
and truly hit the fan. I don't think AOC's green new deal will be of much use in such a situation
But, hopefully, it won't come to that.
xdream
,
Somewhere further down this thread somebody used the word:
Plandemic.
Could I suggest another variant on this theme a mutant perhaps:
AaronInMVD says: Website Show Comment March
24, 2020 at 12:01 am GMT 100 Words @Anon
For reasons of math and historic examples of how viral pandemics work in mammals, the fastest
way out would be to do nothing and ignore the virus so that it burns through quickly. This
happens with surprising frequency when the folks picking strain for the year's flu vaccine
guess wrong. And, no business is non-essential to the people depending on it for their
livelihood. So far Most people getting sick with the COVID-19 get unpleasantly sick or don't
realize they were sick. 99% of the fatalities are in the morbidly old or morbidly ill.
Now that the panic's been hyped up, there's no way out. For reasons of how democracy works,
the panic will be appeased. Expensively. Very Expensively.
More will suffer and experience pre-mature mortality due to the economic consequences of the
panic than than virus itself, because the economic damage here is going to last far longer.
"Italy is known for its enormous morbidity in respiratory problems, more than three times any
other European country. In the US about 40,000 people die in a regular flu season and so far
40-50 people have died of the coronavirus, most of them in a nursing home in Kirkland,
Washington."
"The characteristics in every country are different. In Italy the median age of those
dying of the coronavirus is 81 and the population is very old and frail and smokes more and
among the dead are more men." - Professor Yoram Lass / https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-lockdown-lunacy-1001322696
European Journal of Clinical Investigation
"Coronavirus disease 2019: the harms of exaggerated information and
non‐evidence‐based measure
John P.A. Ioannidis
First published: 19 March 2020
Early reported CFR figures seem exaggerated.
The most widely quoted CFR has been 3.4%, reported by WHO dividing the number of deaths by
documented cases in early March.
This ignores undetected infections and the strong age-dependence of CFR. The most complete
data come from Diamond Princess passengers, with CFR=1% observed in an elderly cohort; thus,
CFR may be much lower than 1% in the general population; probably higher than seasonal flu
(CFR=0.1%), but not much so.
Observed crude CFR in South Korea and in Germany, , the countries with most extensive
testing, is 0.9% and 0.2%, respectively as of March 14 and crude CFR in Scandinavian
countries is about 0.1%. Some deaths of infected, seriously ill people will occur later, and
these deaths have not been counted yet. However even in these countries many infections
probably remain undiagnosed. Therefore, CFR may be even lower rather than higher than these
crude estimate
I posted this before but it bears posting again. A 2016 Johns Hopkins study concluded that
250,000 Americans die annually from medical negligence. And that's just mortality; imagine
the morbidity.
Long waits for short appointments. Protective, sanctimonious medical front offices. A
lifetime of frustrating, humiliating, frightening fighting for access. If a presidential
candidate made a promise to double the number of physicians, starting right now, he would be
elected in a landslide. Sure, it would take seven years before this kicked in. But start
right now. For this coming fall semester, the medical schools need only to have more
seats.
As long as I am talking about laws that nearly everyone would support .about those leaf
blowers
We know from the Diamond Princess and now the Costa Luminosa that SARS-CoV-2 is not
extremely contagious.
17% of the people on the DP were infected, half without symptoms (perhaps even false
positives -- the jury is out). 52 from 3711 (1.4 %) became critically ill or died.
On the CL 74 (known to be an overcount, in a shared cabin both were counted as critical)
from 1471 (5% or less) became critically ill or died according to current information.
So, in cases of 100% population exposure, or as close as it will be in this world we see 1
to 5% critically ill (assuming a consistent definition of critically ill).
They could easily be lost in the everyday winter flu statistics in the US. The deaths from
vaping are a key clue.
@Philip Owen"not
extremely contagious" -- You are making a wrong conclusion. Passengers on Diamond
Princess were isolated in their cabins. Passengers who tested positive were taken out of the
ship to military hospital in Japan. Diamond Princess was not a peri dish! The epidemic was
arrested there and stopped.
" passengers who tested positive [ ] have been transferred to hospitals "
"For those left on board, there is nothing to do but sit in their cabins, wait for meals
to be delivered, watch television or choose from a limited selection of movies on demand.
Those lucky enough to have a balcony can at least sit in the sun, look at the ocean and
talk to their neighbors."
After 9-11, the Feds surveyed hospitals to determine if they were prepared to handle extreme
emergencies where they couldn't handle the patient load and were forced to triage and delay
treatments. They learned that most hospitals were already overwhelmed every Friday and
Saturday night, and many were unable to handle the demand every night. So the photos, videos,
and reports of packed emergency rooms and hospitals unable to properly handle COVID-19 cases
is normal.
As of March 7th, the flu has killed 39 people while news reports that one died from the
COVID-19 virus. The Type A flu killed 28, or 28 times more than the COVID-19 virus. Updated
stats should appear this week, but the media reported a second death from COVID-19 in Las
Vegas, with no mention of the others killed by Type A flu. I expect COVID-19 deaths to rise
quickly, but will be surprised if they exceed the Type A flu deaths.
FFS can we stop with the endless debate about who did what to whom in the early days of this
virus' existence?
Not only are such debates entirely pointless because it is out among us now, it is pointless
because whether they want it or not a full investigation including non-fiction backtrace is
inevitable if we the people who look past the lies, play our cards right.
It has been said that like 911 the coronavirus pandemic will be a game-changer, that is
the world will be different after the lockdowns, lies and beat ups than it was before.
There is however one major difference. Most humans were busy working and looking to keep
their families going to do more than lap up what network TV & the fishwraps told them
about 911. The far from reality attitudes too many still hold, date from that intensive
tabloid indoctrination.
This time is pretty much opposite, people are stuck at home with too much time to think,
but not enough they believe they can do.
If ever there was a time when it was possible to assist our fellow humans to see the world
as it is rather than how the media tells them it is, that time is right now.
Many humans are already pissed about this; plans they had made for their 2020 are
kyboshed, no one really trusts politicians anymore so everyone is asking themselves if
this enforced income cut is really as essential as the pols claim it is(sure some nations
have trickled a little down for the durationbut even there no one is gonna be better off,
everyone normal is going to be copping an income cut).
That means most people are going to be somewhat resistant to the usual bland pol
platitudes.
Have no fear the neolibs see the danger and will be pumping out the bulldust 24/7, the
difference this time is Jo/Joe Blow finally has the time to consider other points of view,
especially those which are expressed entertainingly rather than didactically, so WTF are
people wasting time and energy arguing the toss about matters of interest to so few other
humans?
I'm germinating a notion of what I am going to try to combat the tosh being pumped out by
the elite it would be great if other humans considered the same as I'm certain most will come
up with far better means to help others see than what I dream up.
Allen , Mar 24 2020 1:29 utc | 127
(Coronavirus is a fake emergency))
I've also pondered the question of whether the 'cure' is worse than the 'disease' in
net/overall effect. However, it's important to remember that the reason the pandemic has been
declared an emergency IN EVERY COUNTRY, whether Commie or Fake Democracy, is that it's making
people sick enough to require hospital treatment. And these patients are ADDITIONAL patients
which the health system hadn't planned for. When the flood of COVID-19 patients eases, then
hospitals will return to normal levels of bed vacancy - nationwide.
For your preferred theory to be true, it would be necessary to prove that many, or most, of
these extra patients are faking the seriousness of their illness AND the medics are too
uneducated/inexperienced to tell the difference. You'd probably also have to prove that there
are lots of people would rather be in hospital, pretending to be sick, than anywhere but
hospital...
Italy had an excess number of deaths attributed to influenza of 25,000 in the
2016/17 season, the last year numbers are available, what we are seeing at present is not an
aberration from recent years as that 16/17 season was representative of recent trends. This
is directly as a result of the severely degraded environment in which they live. As
others have pointed out both the air and water quality in that region is horrendous- as it
has become in recent years in Wuhan, Madrid and Tehran. One has to be beyond obstinate not to
understand this and connect the dots.
At present there is great uncertainty as to deaths from Covid versus deaths
with Covid. In some reporting Covid deaths were identified using a case definition
that included pulmonary disease e.g
This distinction is crucial as it points to causal factors that allowed the virus to
replicate, to flourish- and disputes the narrative that the corona virus (which BTW is
decidedly not novel only this mutation is which brings us to another discussion) is the
causal factor. The causal factors are the specific modes of production that created
horrendous living conditions in these areas to begin with (most of the planet by now) which
have destroyed people's abilities (immune system e.g.) to ward off disease.
By focusing solely on the corona virus and considering it to be the causal factor this
allows the capitalist class off the hook for being the very ones who have created the
conditions for all sorts of diseases to proliferate. Further by keeping the focus solely on
corona history tells us that the capitalists will not only use this for any draconian
measures they deem "essential" but also a means to explore all manner of profiteering- the
"next magic cure" (for the disease they created) being the most obvious pot of gold.
If you want to pursue a more analytical line of inquiry start by examining the severely
degraded air quality in Madrid, Wuhan, Tehran and the Po River Valley and the accompanying
health problems in those areas and start connecting some dots.
In the flu season 2015/2016, Italy reported 20,259 deaths attributable to influenza (just as
now, these were almost all in the 65+ age group). (Source: Journal of Infectious
Diseases)...and nobody proposed shutting down the world then. If it's now being suggested the
virus has been around since November then the numbers don't add up even more (i.e. Italy's
Covid-19 deaths so far are around the 6,000 mark which would make the virus far less deadly
than the 2015/16 flu).
Is there not an argument to be made (as says John P.A. Ioannidis -- professor of medicine
and professor of epidemiology and population health at Stanford University) that we are
destroying economies and lives (and possibly killing far more people than Covid-19) in an
hysterical over-reaction based on flawed modelling and sparse and unreliable data?...
"The number of idiots everywhere on the Internet proclaiming the following:
1) The virus won't prove to be any more dangerous than ordinary flu..."
Yeah sure, we should have just shut up and believed...
Russia interfered in the election
Russia invaded Crimea
Russia invaded Georgia
Iran is making nuclear bombs
The Skripals were poisoned by Russian agents
Assad is using chemical weapons
Saddam has weapons of mass destruction
"etc, etc., ad nauseum.
I could go on and on. The number of people who just *have to have an opinion* is staggering.
And they'll argue that they're right until the cows come home."
@99 Michael Weddington
"The virus deniers here remind me of the global warming deniers."
Why not holocaust deniers? In fact, since you didn't say holocaust deniers you must be an
antisemite holocaust denier nazi, right? It's not like you two are at CNN's website, you're
in the alternative media, where we actually questions things instead of just having blind
faith.
"... "We showed that it was precisely the patients with the most acute symptoms who are the most infectious, both because of the high viral load [meaning, the amount of a virus in one's body] and also because of the increase in the number of encounters between people: The acute patients were dying, so everyone came to take their leave from them," Yamin says. "I was pleased that Liberia adopted our recommendations and isolated those who were seriously ill. In retrospect, we know that that new policy helped curb the epidemic." ..."
"... the coronavirus can be expected to disappear from this region with the same dizzying speed with which it entered our lives ..."
"... But in practice, the most rapid mutations occur in animals, and they only infect us then, and obviously it's less probable that we will be infected again by a bat in the near future. ..."
"... "The actual number of people who are sick with the virus in South Korea is at least double what's being reported, so the chance of dying is at least twice as low, standing at about 0.45 percent – very far from the World Health Organization's [global mortality] figure of 3.4 percent. And that's already a reason for cautious optimism." ..."
"... "And Netanyahu talked about a mortality rate of between 2 percent and 4 percent. And do you know what's most absurd? That in the final analysis [U.S. President Donald] Trump was right . Not that the coronavirus is just plain flu – it absolutely isn't – but as he put it: 'This is just my hunch – way under 1 percent' [will die].' ..."
"... At some stage, we will have to resume a regular routine, and then the R0 will stabilize at 2 again. Effectively, we are delaying the inevitable. I have no criticism of the decisions made until now. On the contrary: With such a large area of uncertainty, Israel's decision makers are considering not only a reasonable scenario but also a margin of safety. ..."
"... "It's not only a function of hygiene, it's mainly a function of contact between people. Picture the average old person. How many different people does he encounter in a day? And what is the nature of those encounters? The older we get, the less we caress and kiss others. Also, children constitute the only age group that comes into contact with all other age groups – not just theirs. That's why it is the key population in spreading respiratory diseases." ..."
Dr. Yamin is an engineer, not a physician. But in 2008, when he was a graduate student at Ben-Gurion University in Be'er Sheva,
a certain research study caught his eye.
"It was an analysis of a dynamic model for the spread of smallpox," Yamin, 38, says. "The researchers used tools from game theory.
It was so interesting that I decided to conduct a similar study on influenza – which turned into a doctoral thesis on disease-spread
models.
"If, 40 or 50 years ago, epidemiology researchers came exclusively from the field of medicine, today we understand that in order
to predict the spread of diseases, it's also necessary to understand how humans behave as a collective, to be able to analyze big
data and to have the ability to create models and perform mathematical simulations – and for that you need engineers."
Yamin encountered his first real epidemiological crisis while doing postdoctoral work at the the Center of Infectious Disease
Modeling and Analysis at Yale University's school of public health.
"At Yale we worked for three weeks, with almost no sleep, to create models based on engineering tools for the spread of Ebola.
The dilemma of the Liberian health ministry regarded whom to prioritize, given a serious shortage of isolation facilities. The Liberians
assumed that it would make more sense to quarantine those who were ill with less serious symptoms, because the others could not be
saved in any case.
"We showed that it was precisely the patients with the most acute symptoms who are the most infectious, both because of the high
viral load [meaning, the amount of a virus in one's body] and also because of the increase in the number of encounters between people:
The acute patients were dying, so everyone came to take their leave from them," Yamin says. "I was pleased that Liberia adopted our
recommendations and isolated those who were seriously ill. In retrospect, we know that that new policy helped curb the epidemic."
Yamin currently heads the Laboratory for Epidemic Modeling and Analysis in TAU's engineering faculty. His primary field of work
is development of models for the spread of infectious diseases, with an emphasis on viruses responsible for respiratory ailments,
such as flu and RSV (respiratory syncytial virus), which causes bronchitis. He is actually somewhat optimistic about the models he
has developed for the
spread of the coronavirus , which is also a respiratory disease.
"The big, open question is what the chance is of dying from the virus," Yamin explains.
"When you ask epidemiologists what the most important datum is concerning a virus, they will say it's the rate of the basic reproductive
ratio, or R0 [often called "R nought"] – the average number of people a sick person will infect. That's an interesting question,
but a theoretical one.
"The R0 of measles is 12, meaning that each person who is ill with measles infects 12 people on average. However, only 5 percent
of the population can actually be infected, because most of us have been immunized or had measles in the past. So that is the upper
limit of its spread."
But we know that the R0 of the coronavirus is 2, and we still don't know whether anyone is naturally immune to the disease.
Yamin: "The overwhelming majority of people are apparently not immune, because it's not a common disease. After all, there is
no precedent for such an infectious and violent type of virus from the corona family, so it's safe to assume that the majority has
not been exposed to the virus before this and that they can be infected. However, that's not to say that the majority of the population
will actually contract the disease.
"The basic principle is that a virus with an R0 of 2 in a non-immune population can be expected to infect 50 percent of the population.
After that the R0 will reach a value of 1 or less, and the disease will be contained. By the way, it will recede in a converging
exponential; in other words, the coronavirus can be expected to disappear from this region with the same dizzying speed with which
it entered our lives."
But we don't know for certain whether a person can be infected twice.
"No, but with the majority of viruses, if you're infected and you have recovered, you won't be re-infected, because of immunological
memory. And if you are infected again, the symptoms will be less acute the second time. The exception to the rule is influenza: Its
mutation frequency is so high that you can be infected by it year after year. Last year alone, the flu underwent 17 mutations. Whereas
the last time we heard about corona was 17 years ago, with SARS. In other words, the coronavirus did not undergo mutations at the
same frequency as the flu. Of course, the mutations themselves are a function of the number of infections: The more infections there
are, the greater the likelihood that mutations will occur. But in practice, the most rapid mutations occur in animals, and they only
infect us then, and obviously it's less probable that we will be infected again by a bat in the near future.
"By the way, viral mutations are more frequent in bats, whose immune system is astonishingly weak, while their social network
is extensive and characterized by a lot of interaction."
So we're talking about maximum rate of infection – that is, of becoming a carrier – of 50 percent. That's still a lot of patients,
a lot of hospitalizations and mainly a lot of deaths.
"Again, the most interesting issue for decision makers is the mortality rate. When we look at the dry data, we see a very high
mortality rate, of 4 to 7 percent, in countries like
Italy
and Spain, alongside far lower numbers in countries like Germany and South Korea.
"And then there's China, though it's very difficult to believe the numbers coming out of there – and in any event no country in
the West can allow itself to adopt the measures that China adopted to contain the spread. Now ask yourself: How do you check the
mortality rate in all those countries? You take the total number of deaths and divide it by the total of reported patients."
So the research is biased.
"Very biased. If I can only carry out few tests, I will test those who have the highest chance of becoming ill, and then, when
I check the mortality rate among them, I will get very high numbers. But there is one country we can learn from: South Korea. South
Korea has been coping with corona for a long time, more than most Western countries, and they lead in the number of tests per capita.
Therefore, the official mortality rate there is 0.9 percent. But even in South Korea, not all the infected were tested – most have
very mild symptoms.
"The actual number of people who are sick with the virus in South Korea is at least double what's being reported, so the chance
of dying is at least twice as low, standing at about 0.45 percent – very far from the World Health Organization's [global mortality]
figure of 3.4 percent. And that's already a reason for cautious optimism."
'Worst-case scenario'
Let's move from percents to people.
"Just a minute. Although we're both Westernized countries, we are absolutely not South Korea. South Korea has one of the highest
proportions of elderly people in the world, whereas Israel tops the graph in fertility, and we have a very young population. So,
if we use the upper limit [of mortality] of South Korea and normalize the mortality rate for the population in Israel, we are talking
about the probability of a mortality rate of 0.3 percent among those who have been infected.
"Now we'll go to a severe scenario in which no one is immune and every second person is sick, so that the disease is incapable
of spreading further – namely, a situation where there's a maximum infection rate of 50 percent.
"We are a country of nine million citizens. So in the worst-case scenario, we are talking about 4.5 million Israelis who will
become ill with the coronavirus. Multiply 4.5 million by 0.3 percent and you get 13,500 Israelis who are liable to die from the disease.
By comparison, 700 to 2,500 Israelis die every year of complications from other respiratory ailments."
But German Chancellor Angela Merkel talked about a rate of infection of 70 percent in Germany.
"And Netanyahu talked about a mortality rate of between 2 percent and 4 percent. And do you know what's most absurd? That in the
final analysis [U.S. President Donald]
Trump was right . Not that the coronavirus is just plain flu – it absolutely isn't – but as he put it: 'This is just my hunch
– way under 1 percent' [will die].'
"We must be cautious, of course, but at the moment a high probability is emerging that the risks are far lower than what the World
Health Organization presented. Under two assumptions – that the health system doesn't collapse and that life continues as usual –
we are not likely to see more than 13,500 victims of the coronavirus in Israel." (About 45,000 people die in Israel in a normal year,
which would make for a rise of approximately one-third.)
But, social distancing should lead to fewer cases of infection and death, no?
"No, because we won't be able to isolate ourselves completely or forever. At some stage, we will have to resume a regular routine,
and then the R0 will stabilize at 2 again. Effectively, we are delaying the inevitable. I have no criticism of the decisions made
until now. On the contrary: With such a large area of uncertainty, Israel's decision makers are considering not only a reasonable
scenario but also a margin of safety.
"In my opinion, the Health Ministry deserves tremendous credit for being ahead of the world by having instituted so few measures.
In the same breath, the public needs to understand that these measures of social distancing mean that we will find ourselves with
corona for a longer period, even to 2023."
A quarantine ward being set up at Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan. Tomer Appelbaum
That long?
"Take the swine flu, from 2009. Reliable models show clearly that it was contained in Israel because its appearance coincided
with the Jewish holidays in the fall [when people weren't out much in public]. From the virus' point of view, the timing wasn't good
for it in Israel. By contrast, in the United States there was significant infection in 2009-2010. But in the end, it balances out.
So we saw swine flu in Israel both in 2009-10 and in 2010-11, whereas in the United States it just came and went. The American population
as a whole was exposed to the virus at high rates, so those who fell ill and recovered served as a 'human shield' for those who did
not get sick."
So what you're saying is to tear the bandage off in one fell swoop, and explose everyone at once, the way they tried to do
in Britain.
"We need to make decisions based on the most precise models possible. What should be done? Of course, we must significantly increase
testing, using the rapid PCR test, and that is what is actually being done. In parallel, serologic tests should be conducted. These
differ from regular tests in that they examines an individual's immunological reaction to exposure. That's the only way we will be
able to get an accurate picture of the distribution of the virus in Israel, and thereby also of the mortality rates."
What will that test be able to tell us?
"It will solve the riddle of the young people: It's still not clear whether young people are infected by the coronavirus but don't
develop symptoms, or are simply immune and thus don't become infected. This is different from most respiratory ailments. With those
illnesses, like RSV or flu, this is a key population: The 5-to-19 age group is not at risk but they are responsible for infecting
others."
Because children don't wash their hands, and they drool on themselves?
"It's not only a function of hygiene, it's mainly a function of contact between people. Picture the average old person. How many
different people does he encounter in a day? And what is the nature of those encounters? The older we get, the less we caress and
kiss others. Also, children constitute the only age group that comes into contact with all other age groups – not just theirs. That's
why it is the key population in spreading respiratory diseases."
"... A drug like chloroquine doesn't have to be extremely effective in order to have a huge benefit on our ICU density. A small effect could have a big impact. And if chloroquine turns out not to work, there are other promising drugs such as Remdesivir, though chloroquine has the advantage of being cheap and easy to produce. ..."
Rod, I was one of those screaming at our public officials to shut stuff down. I was
extremely frustrated by President Trump's brushing off of our problem for a long time. I
asked my Facebook friends if anyone wanted to help with a recall petition of Governor
Edwards, after he took very mild steps against COVID-19 instead of the necessary firmer ones.
I bristled with a mixture of horror and astonishment as New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell
allowed bars to pack people in last weekend to celebrate St. Patrick's Day. I argued with
friends on Facebook who insisted to me that "this is just a cold" and told me that I was
irrational and needlessly spreading fear and panic.
So I have consistently supported strong steps to contain this virus, but I have now become
very optimistic that the tide is about to turn, and I want to share why.
Testing is about to expand exponentially.
We've been steadily growing
our testing ability since the outbreak began. America tested 44,176 people today, and
every day sees a big increase. Yesterday, we tested 34,654 and it was 27,372 the day before
that. A week ago, it was 4,124.
But these increases are small compared to what's in the pipeline. This week we saw FDA
approval of new testing systems from
Roche and from
Abbott labs that run tests ten times faster than current methods. To give you an idea of
what this means, Roche brags that their Cobas 8800 machine can process over 3000 tests per
day. Until today, Louisiana hadn't had a total of 3000 people tested. Roche is now making and
shipping 400,000 test kits per week in the US, while Abbott is making a million of their test
kits each week. Those systems will be coming online this coming week.
Today, we got even more good news, with
Cepheid getting FDA approval for their new test, which will detect the virus in 45
minutes and can be used in over 5000 Cepheid machines already in US hospitals. This will
allow hospitals to test all their staff and every incoming patient on a consistent basis, so
that we can keep our doctors and nurses safe and our hospitals don't spread the disease.
Those testing kits are getting shipped out this coming week.
And there are more companies in the process of getting approval. In two weeks, we should
be able to test 150,000 – 200,000 Americans daily, and that means that we don't all
need to stay home anymore.
Let me explain how this works.
Suppose that Boudreaux, who works for the state of Louisiana, wakes up and has a fever.
Right now, it's not easy for him to get tested – and if he could get tested, he
wouldn't get his results for days. Let's say that Boudreaux is a good citizen and stays home
at this point. That's great, except that Boudreaux went to work yesterday and exposed his
coworker Pierre, and he also got his hair cut and exposed his barber, T-Boy. His wife Marie
doesn't isolate from him, because she thinks that Boudreaux is just lazy and doesn't want to
work, so she is also exposed. Unless Boudreaux gets sick enough that he needs to go to the
hospital, he's not going to be tested, and Pierre, T-Boy, and Marie might all get the virus
and – and this is key – then spread it themselves.
That's been our situation, and the only solution that we've had was to keep Boudreaux at
home in the first place. That's why the state is keeping non-essential workers at home.
That's why many places are forcing barbershops to close. So, now, our governmental
restrictions keep T-Boy and Pierre from getting infected, though Marie is still at risk.
Now, imagine our original situation with easy, high-speed testing. Boudreaux wakes up with
a fever, he goes to the drive-thru testing site and is notified about four hours later that
he is positive. Now, everyone in his family and workplace immediately gets tested, as does
T-Boy – and the virus does not spread beyond them.
The ability to test everyone who needs to be tested is how South Korea and Singapore have
been able to control their outbreaks without significant societal restrictions. Their
schools, restaurants, etc. are all open. And their economies are not wrecked. Again, we'll be
at that point in less than two weeks.
Evidence strongly suggests that COVID-19 is seasonal.
A recent Chinese study
compared transmission rates for all 100 Chinese cities outside of Wuhan that had at least 40
cases before their national lockdown, to see if the virus spread more slowly in warmer, more
humid parts of China. Their conclusion:
"High temperature and high relative humidity significantly reduce the transmission of
COVID-19, respectively, even after controlling for population density and GDP per capita of
cities This result is consistent with the fact that the high temperature and high humidity
significantly reduce the transmission of influenza. It indicates that the arrival of summer
and rainy season in the northern hemisphere can effectively reduce the transmission of the
COVID-19."
That study, as an example, predicted a R value of 1.3 in Tokyo for the Olympics -- with
zero intervention! (For those of you who don't know what that means, it means that instead of
spreading the disease to about 2.6 people, which is what happens now, the average person
would only infect half as many people.) If this study were correct, it would mean that, with
some control measures, it would be easy to keep COVID-19 from spreading during the
Olympics.
Besides this study, we have the basic observation that the world's serious outbreaks have
occurred in cold, dry weather. Jakarta and Milan both had nonstop flights to Wuhan during
Wuhan's outbreak, but Italy has suffered a horrific crisis and Indonesia has not. Scientists
believe that this is because COVID-19 is mainly
transmitted by coughing , and the microdroplets emitted when someone coughs travel about
twice as far in cold, dry air. Additionally, the water vapor present in humid air interacts
with those microdroplets to stop them.
If COVID-19 is indeed a seasonal disease, then we should be able to almost eliminate it
this summer, to the point that there will be zero restrictions on ordinary life. Sports
leagues can fill stadiums with fans and political conventions can meet, and we won't have to
worry that we're fanning a new outbreak.
Improved treatment will improve COVID-19 patient outcomes.
If you have watched President Trump on TV or follow him on twitter, then you know that
he
is hopeful about the promise of chloroquine (and its close relative
hydroxychloroquine).
President Trump has perhaps overpromised what chloroquine can do, as the evidence of its
benefit is still rather thin. But, if it has any benefit at all, it's a game-changer in terms
of our ICUs. If chloroquine works, it works by lowering the amount of virus in the body. When
you combine this with earlier testing, there's a tremendous advantage. The people who end up
in the ICU don't get there until they've been sick for a week or so, as the virus grows in
their body and then inflames the alveoli in the lungs, leading to shortness of breath. If
chloroquine works, an at-risk patient would be given it right after testing positive, and
hopefully, the viral load in their body never gets high enough for the patient to develop
severe shortness of breath, and he stays out of the ICU.
A drug like chloroquine doesn't have to be extremely effective in order to have a huge
benefit on our ICU density. A small effect could have a big impact. And if chloroquine turns
out not to work, there are other promising drugs such as Remdesivir, though chloroquine has
the advantage of being cheap and easy to produce.
Is the situation going to get worse in the US? Yes. Is the end in sight? I believe that it
is. I write this to encourage each of you to hold on. If we can stay and home, enduring the
claustrophobia, the family bickering, and the often severe economic consequences, we can beat
this virus.
I miss my church. A streamed service tomorrow is not a true substitute for the
togetherness in Christ that I need more than ever at this time. And my business is suffering.
I think that I can make it another month, but I don't know about longer than that. I expect
that our nation's psychiatrists and therapists are swamped right now, as stress and
depression skyrocket.
I think b has not been very good with this corona virus reporting. He thinks he was wrong on
his initial reporting and changed as new facts emerged. however he basically repeats the
mainstream line. I certainly am no expert, But then again it seems thee is a wide divergence
of views from the "experts" but there is a mainstream conclusion which b agrees with. And the
mainstream media is pushing the fear full stop.
I still think this is not a specially dangerous virus. almost entirely it is old people
dying. almost entirely most of them have pre-existing conditions. My initial take was people
who would die fairly soon or might die if they got a bad flu are dying but sooner. I know my
wife went to the hospital and acquired a very bad pneumonia. She was on a respirator for over
a week and afterwards was diagnosed with COPD. How many of these deaths are people who are
sick with corona virus and go to the hospital and get a hospital acquired infection but are
counted as dying from COV-18? Virologist have been heavily researching corona viruses since
the SARS and MERS outbreaks that didn't kill very many people
I do agree that this virus seems exceptionally communicable. That nature article b cited
seemed as if it was written to dismiss the idea that the virus was made in some biolab. I
have read an article debunking this Nature article - the writer was trying to make a case
that it came from a Chinese lab He agreed it wasn't manufactured by gene editing but was
created by passing a corona virus through ferrets who do have the same ACE receptor that
humans have and COV-19 uses to infect cells.
Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research ...
the announcement by Ralph Baric and co-workers at the University of North Carolina that
they had created a chimeric SARS-like virus, which expresses the spike (attachment protein)
of a bat coronavirus in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone (4). As in the cases of the
genetically modified H5N1 avian influenza viruses, the newly generated SARS-like virus is
potentially an extremely dangerous, possibly pandemic pathogen... That was 5 years ago.
I agree with the uselessness of bioweapons as a military operation. The economic blowback
we are now seeing is proof
But But what if this global crisis is exactly what those who want to totally control us
would want to happen. It is precipitating the roll out of medical martial law.
There are laws on the books that give extraordinary powers in the event of a global
epidemic or even a pandemic.
Not to mention in the US the Continuity of Government provisions strengthened massively
after 9/11. Every year the state of emergency triggered by 9/11 has been renewed. Mandatory
vaccinations for everyone. Quarantine powers granted The initiation of martial law. Now you
don't have to be a terrorist but just said to be infected and away you go.
I don't think COV-19 is the one to justify the full implementation but it is another giant
step for setting up the population for the full implementation.
@prime
noticer What if–as seems to be happening in Italy–the journalists simply
pretend that bodies are piling up, perhaps by attributing other deaths to Corona?
Beware: whenever these people decide on a narrative, they are loath to back down once they
are proven wrong. They don't want to lose face.
There is a bit more encouraging news tonight. the numbers for Italy have come down just a
little bit more. Restrictions on the other hand have got even tighter, now only people who do
essential work are allowed out of their homes.
As I mentioned yesterday in a post that got swallowed by the ether, Italy is going through
some hard times financially.
Some self inflicted by governments spending more than the took in to stay in power and
some because the banks refused to take a haircut.
Many small businesses are just barely survive and a couple of months without income is
going to really hurt.
Michael Osterholm -
Wikipedia (born March 10, 1953) is an American infectious disease epidemiologist, regents
professor, and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the
University of Minnesota.
Scientific establishment want money, want importance, wants political influence. That create
difficult dilemma and force some people play the role of fear mongers.
BUMP 00:10 Intro 0:40 How bad is Coronavirus
4:00 Is
the virus an "old persons" disease 5:18 Incubation period
7:50
What can be done to prevent infection 13:45 Drug shortages 15:20 Sauna use
effect on infections 18:00 Was Coronavirus man-made
22:00
American Wild Deer diseases and Prions 32:00 Is Corona seasonal
35:00
Corona could be 10 times worse than the flu 35:25 Corona will stay around
for months 36:10 Coronavirus vs Spanish
flu 38:30 How can we prepare our
immune system 43:20 Do hand sanitizers and
masks work 50:00 We stockpile weapons more
than medical goods 54:30 Will people panic if they
are told the truth 56:00 Vaccines 1:02:00 Why a
virus would originate from China 1:11:30 What to do if you get
the flu 1:15:45 Lime disease and ticks
1:23:00
Effects of fire suppression on ecosystem 1:30:00 Vaccine for
Coronavirus
Sick nurses working, I have experienced that in every nursing home I have worked in in the
US. In California and NV. Luckily, I found the trick, If I have a headache that won't be
resolved with hydration, I figure it's a flu, I take 4 grams of C and 20,000 IU of D, and
usually that takes care of it, no more symptoms. In the case that it persists, I keep taking
4 grams of C ever few hours and high dose D until the symptoms subside. Usually doesn't take
too long, and ( a few hours) symptoms don't get bad.
Beware of any expert that promotes fearfulness and helplessness and tells us to just wait
for a "miracle" vaccine. Why didn't he tell us the truth about the success of vitamin C
therapy? Why didn't he tell us that some common medications like ibuprofen and heart
medications can impede healing of the virus.
div> It´s funny and very predictable how programmed into fear people have become
when it´s never the virus that kills you, but a weak immune system´s panick
reaction. If you believe the MSM is not aligned with certain agendas, the WHO is not
inherently corrupt, the pharmaceutical vaccine pushing industries have your best interests at
heart and doctors really know what they are talking about when they always look at the parts
as seperated and never the whole living system, then you will be shocked to learn the truth.
https://www.youtube.com/user/drvashiva/videos
I really look forward to a time, probably thanks to this crisis it will be in the not so
distant future, where people will begin to wake up, see through the BS we are being bombarded
with from the parasitical class of "rulers" or "elites". Then a paradigm shift in so many
ways will begin to take place... Greetings from a tireless truth seeker!
lass="comment-renderer-text-content expanded"> the difference between COVID 19 and the
spanish flu and the fear rampant about this comparison is that our health care system is a
little more advanced than what was available back in 1919 AND we are also so much more
informed regarding hygiene practices.........not discounting the seriousness of this
unprecendented occurrence.........but still great to focus on the "little" advantages we can
monopolise on. in order to tackle this global crisis head on and rationally
> @PowerfulJRE - Joe PLEASE have Michael Osterholm back on asap and please ask Michael
the following questions...
1) Are highly infectious airborne cold viruses killed by ozone from ozone/ion
generators(?) and
2) Why do medical facilities and schools no longer install or utilize UV disinfection
lighting like they use to utilize/install in entranceways, hallways, and rooms of hospitals
and school classrooms like they use to do 50-75 years ago(?)
N95 masks....remember kids its a one way valve on the front of those things....breath in,
and it filters the air....breath out, valve opens and the air goes out, " unfiltered". If
you're sick, these masks will not prevent you from spreading it around.
> Osterholm is a catalog of infectious disease info that is beyond valuable . . he's in
his 60s . . maybe the planet has others who could fill his shoes in my home state of
Minnesota; of course, I hope so! He also has a good sense of humor, managing a little chuckle
when Joe suggested if any president could get around the informed consent issue of testing
vaccines on prisoners, such as nasty rapists, it would be Trump. I'm glad to receive all the
helpful info without a steady dose of politics and conspiracy chitchat. Now I know that my
prebiotic and probiotic pills are only good for temporary relief and that my natural flora
and fauna in the gut will take over...
51:46 "We spend about 0.001% on
public health compared to our defense department and yet look how vulnerable...it's the
bugs...it's not a war...it's not a missile...is bringing the world economy down right
now....it's a darn virus."
Can you imagine if even half the US defence budget was redirected into health care and
research!! We (the world) spend trillions on arms and now we are fighting an enemy that
bullets can't kill!! Infuriating!! 😡😡😠😠
> How do you draw the conclusion that such viruses would always come from China? MERS
was first discovered in the middle east, the 2009 flu originated in mexico, the Spanish flu
originated in Kansas. I mean like if you search China on the pandemic wikipedia page there's
only SARS and several flu outbreaks.
Also Wild life is not part of the cuisine in most of China, and it's really more of a
status symbol for rich people to be able to find exotic food
"article"> There is another nasty virus going around here in Victoria BC Canada that is
a bit like CORVID-19.. I got it in mid-December and I am just getting over it. My friends
recovered in two to three weeks. The symptoms include a cough that goes on and on leaving you
breathless, extremely sore throat, runny nose, extreme weakness. Even the emergency room
doctor said she had it. Have you heard of it? I think I got it travelling in a Handi-dart van
with some elderly, sneezing Chinese speaking males.
51:40 Good reminder of war
against missiles vs virus. Budgets... 53:00 his talk to
banking/finance people. Scary. Like children, whereas Michael is more analytical, like
engineers/scientists, see it all as problem-solution.
There is by now lots of material on the internet for the reader to understand how
deaths by pre-existing illness have been attributed to Covid-19, and this site provides a
reasonably good starting place (please see the article linked to above titled, Covid-19 and
pneumonic immune system overreaction).
On the other hand, the effort to get to grips with the reason that a fake pandemic has
been used by governments in the west to destroy the livelihoods of their governed is
something that has not solidified into a coherent and demonstrable idea, and perhaps the only
proof of the pudding will be in the eating; i.e. we will only know when it is happening to
us.
However, at that stage knowledge of Covid-19 as the phantom scapegoat will be well
established.
And just as the widespread exposure of al-Qaeda, which was the equivalent
bogeyman device in the War on Terror as an Orwellian tool of those executing the reaction to
(their own) terrorist provocation, proved to undermine and cause to fail a plan for
domination of foreign territory by Globalist financier class interests, so too will
widespread appreciation of the true nature of Covid-19 undermine and cause to fail the
irregular warfare that is now being unleashed on domestic territories
First of all I see few people wearing masks in my city. In photos on the internet and
media websites those that do seem to be staged photos. The thumbnail photo for this article
supposedly shows Italy, the country allegedly hardest hit, the Roman Arena in the background
but only one girl wearing a mask. Yet I hear the virus is spreading like "wildfire" and such
nonsense. I read congregations of more than 50 people is prohibited but yet see supermarkets
full of folks jostling each other. Even on the internet I see photos beating the virulence
and destructive power of the virus, photos with 20 people and only 2 wearing masks.
Second, every country is "locking down" although deaths to infections are around 1.5%
and deaths to total world population are negligible to the point of irrelevancy. Other
tropical diseases kill millions annually with hardly a blink from anyone or any government.
Deaths from road accidents worldwide must be in the hundreds of thousands. Why is there no
shutdown or driver quarantine internationally ? One is at greater risk of violence in modern
day urban centers. We have African countries with germs scientists have not even discovered
"locking down".
Third, the "experts" seem to be clueless and clued out. One minute everyone has to self
quarantine and now I see the leading WHO expert saying everything cannot be locked down. They
need to identify the infected and their contacts and isolate THEM or else the virus "could
jump up again". Other experts not to be outdone assert the virus could reappear in September.
Then there is all the jargon like social distancing and flattening the curve.
Fourth, all the billions now being thrown around for the "War" on the virus is like
spilling honey on an ants nest. I dont want to be crass but will health units accurately test
and report results. Lets say a Government has set aside $100,000 per infected citizen. Go to
the hospital with a sniffle and you may well be diagnosed with the virus, the health
professionals only too happy to bill the Government. Since it is you, a wife and three kids
and you had a birthday party recently with 14 other relatives one is now running into the
millions. There seems to be too much incentive to flog this virus and milk every penny
possible from whoever is shovelling out the cash.
Fifth, this virus seems to be killing people well up in their age whose immune systems
are already weak. Germs, insects and pests and scavengers always congregate where there is
filth. Poor eating habits, bad diet, lack of exercise, smoking, drinking and use of
recreational and other drugs weaken the immune system and make the blood dirty leaving it
open to infection by ANY germ or virus that comes along. In any case the media seems to tout
statistics in a dishonest way. For example "Country X now has 30,000 infections" is spun as
if the 30,000 died or "Deaths shatter records, rise by 30%" when in fact the 30% rise amounts
to three people.
I could go on for another 2000 words. Even poor Harvey, locked away in jail is now
infected. Everyone is looking for an angle and flogging this virus. Everyone forgets we went
through this with Swine Flu, Bird Flu, West Nile, Sars and Anthrax. Now it is COVID !
Everyone is looking for a payout. The herd instinct s strong, monkey see monkey do. States
with no infections are locking down.
Finally, there si all the finger pointing about the origin of the virus and the name
squeezes out accusations of racism, bigotry and whatever. It now seems fashionable to have
the virus with Mr and Mrs Rich and Famous claiming to have tested for it and so forth. Yahoo
had an article today showing a well dressed white girl wearing a black mask in front of a
chinese building. Looked like a photoshoot and recently there was an article from a boy
telling what is was like to have the virus. He looked very healthy with a big smile. I guess
he is one of those rare characters who can be flat on their backs for 2 weeks with a deadly
virus and come out looking like Clark Gable.
As to why this would NOT be a hoax. Why would the market crash and the economy be
ruined ? The answer to me is that it started as a virus and people saw a way they could
exploit it. Maybe they never expected the reaction in terms of shutdowns and lockups , maybe
they never expected the reactions to be so out of control but ultimately the reason is
MONEY.
The public gets fooled everytime with this nonsense or some other rubbish. The
traditional media and social media flog this virus ad nauseum to the point where ordinary
folks panic from the sheer volume of information and opinions and "research" .Brace
yourselves, 2021 or 2022 will bring another "catastrophe" and we will fall for the b/s all
over again. I dont know about other commentators but I am tired of the whole thing and the
cure will decimate many more than the virus itself.
A very interesting discussion by Dr.
Wolfgang Wodarg. He compare this epidemic hype with famous Andersen tale about the Naked King.
He points out on the fact that test for the virus was developed in a hurry and it is unclear how many false
positive it allow.
All-in-all a very interesting, educational discussion by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg even you do not agree with him.
Two issues continue to be misrepresented which systematicly allow "corona" to take on the spectre of the Zombie Apocalypse:
1. Social distancing keeps people out of the sneeze-cough zone for droplet contamination by air. Yet social shunning of those
who continue to cough and sneeze in public in fact is what needs to be made the primary line of defense. Not the crowds of people
stocking up on toilet paper but virtuously standing 6 feet apart, clueless about their own role fostering the Zombie Apocalypse
imagery.
2. Self-inoculation is the second source of infection, and way under-emphasizied while again disguised by virtuous but meaningless
ritual behavior.
All the talk is about hand washing, surface decontamination and hand sanitizers which ultimately are a fools errand since this
additional new, and critical ritual behavior often fails to emphasize the absolutely important disease connection that comes from
sticking your very own (presumed) dirty fingers into one's own nose, mouth and/or eyes.
Few are 100% observant about how many surfaces they actually touch before the stick their "washed or sanitized hands" back
into their own mouth, nose or eyes.
Washing your hands remains #1 in importance, but so does WATCHING your hands.
"Don't touch your face" misses the point too - another message fail - one must vividly make the connection between their own
fingers and their own body orifices leading to the upper respiratory tract. And continue to be aware of this connection 24/7 -
no exceptions.
Organic homemake hand sanitizers are as good as the last thing you touched or the next person who cough next to your clorox-wiped
surfaces.
The media goes out of its way to instill the Zombie Apocalypse vision of this "flu" - it is everywhere, you must fear everything
and nothing can protect you. If you touch it, you will die. If it is in the air, you will die. You never know who has it. You
are a victim. And it is someone else's fault.
So one can pretend to do useless and ritual activities but ignore one's own role and one's own personal responsibility for
its contact and spread.
1. Socially shun anyone who fails to protect their coughs or sneezes, until they learn new habits - how does staying 6 feet
away from everyone teach the offenders new habits?
2. Wash your hands and watch what you touch. 100% of the time.
TSA is now with us 100% of the time after 911- regardless of the numerical threat. Proper self-hygiene needs to be with us
100% of the time too - and never should have left us.
Here in the UK either our management are incompetent of they know something we don't is my take.
Apart from summary figures broken down by Health district for 'got it' or 'dead from it' there is nothing. Testing apart from
in hospitals is unknown unless you are famous so no-one has any idea what the viruses progress is in the community. What is happening
at individual hospitals is probably a state secret now.
Even though, between themselves, they knew it was coming at the latest in mid January, they did nothing. No extra orders for
masks, ventilators etc.
Yet they are allowing fear and panic to rip through the community and huge economic damage.
I haven't yet properly worked out cui bono but I have my suspicions. But they are passing some draconian laws.
The actual mortality rate may be closer to 1% or less with most of it concentrated in the over 70s. The reasonable thing to do
would have been to protect seniors while letting everyone else go about their business. Nuking the economy with lockdowns is the
politicians' way of competing with each other to show they're "doing something." It's craven behavior not leadership.
Thank you Larry for the sobering analysis of Corvid-19.
I only disagree with your emphasis that the social distancing is the main cause of economic collapse.
Methinks that the everything bubble in coordination of unrepayable debt fiasco has arrived, and the ELITES/media are distracting
from refinancing the Wall Street gamblers, Share-buyback artists, Private equity leveraged asset strippers and the offshore artist
looser.
We are replaying the 2008 modus operandi get the elites saved financially and let the poor people try to survive on their own
as they assume all the obligation of the
elite rescue
Larry Johnson - I'm afraid I'm rather more of JJ Jackson's view as to the potential seriousness of this disease.
But the economic effects are already pretty devastating. 10% of world trade is tourism and related. Entertainment is a big
industry. Both hard hit and other sectors too. Pensioners spend a fair bit and many are no longer doing so.
So whether we panic or not that's the reality. A reality superimposed on a weak and vulnerable economy. Also on a financial
system already on life support.
That's more the case in my country than yours, by quite a long chalk. Even so, though I believe the US is in a better position
to recover, the hit's coming our way wherever we live. You can't take that amount of economic activity out and expect there to
be only a few bumps in the road.
Theoretically the best approach is yours. Business as usual, tuck the vulnerable away, take such casualties as come along among
the less vulnerable. Could even be an opportunity for economic regeneration along Trump 2016 lines.
This hasn't happened and I doubt it would have even had the strategy been agreed on and adopted early on. And there's too much
disconnect between the rulers and ruled for anything constructive much to happen now, certainly in UK politics though it would
be presumptuous in me to venture an opinion here about yours. This is already a big deal and should be treated as such.
I've been following your analyses on Russiagate and they're on the money every time. I hope the pandemic isn't used as an opportunity
to bury that disgraceful affair. But there'll be plenty hoping it's just that.
@Dd I
don't know, but I have a lot of questions about things I have been reading, from the data,
demonstrating the weakness of the virus, and non-lethality, to a New York Times opinion
piece, authored by a "writer, producer and yoga teacher" who apparently contracted the virus,
and had to be hospitalized noting that it did not keep her (Fiona Lowenstein) from taking a
"selfie", apparently with a non-sterile, yet-somehow-permitted-in-the-hospital room cell
phone? You normally have all that stuff bagged up. I dunno. Check out the article and her
pic, judge for yourself.
It isn't that I don't think it is possible, or true, about this or other similar stories,
or that the data is fake or false .there's just so much to digest and some of it seems
incredulous and/or contradictory.
"It is the existence of these serious cases (absurdly estimated at 15% of the cases, probably
in reality 10 times less) that justifies not simply relying on group immunity. ..."
Hubei is the best figures we have at the moment. Still 5,000 or so active cases there but
everything has stabilized enough to get an idea of percentages.
Numbers at the moment
Recovered 59,432
Deaths 3,144
Active 5224
That gives a death rate of around 5% of those infected. There will also be a good number
have suffered permanent lung damage, perhaps another 5%.
No medical care and those numbers go a lot higher.
"... Financialisation operates through three different conduits: changes in the structure and operation of financial markets, changes in the behaviour of nonfinancial corporations, and changes in economic policy. ..."
"... Yes, the contrived-virus (convid19) is most certainly a smoke screen for global financial collapse ..."
"... The media and the Government are in lockstep. They are quarantining areas and locking down, not to contain the virus but to contain the ensuing violence when people finally and hopefully figure out that they are getting royally screwed. ..."
"... The oil markets are playing a role in the market turmoil. And its not the Corona virus, but the radical state overreaction aided by the cynical shameless hype mongering media that has crashed the markets. ..."
"... Corona as an economic instrument ? Can't argue that medical claims are just as inflated as the amount of money that has been printed. As a companion piece to Frank's excellent article take a look at Renegade Inc's film explaining why a Fiat economy is bound to end in tears. ..."
The years since the 1970s are unprecedented in terms of their volatility in the price of commodities, currencies, real estate
and stocks. There have been 4 waves of financial crises: a large number of banks in three, four or more countries collapsed at
about the same time. Each wave was followed by a recession, and the economic slowdown which began in 2008 was the most severe
and most global since the great depression of the 1930s."
Manias, Crashes and Panics – Kindelberger and Aliber
Interestingly enough 1971 was the year when Nixon took the world off the gold standard, which had been in effect since 1944. Fiat-bugs
please note.
More to the point, however. Booms and busts have always been normal in a capitalist economy. But in recent years this has been
a feature which has been exacerbated by and involves that part of the economy indicated by the acronym FIRE (Finance, Insurance and
Real Estate) and its growing importance in the economy in both qualitative and quantitative terms.
Financialisation is a process whereby financial markets, financial institutions, and financial elites gain greater influence over
economic policy and economic outcomes. Financialisation transforms the functioning of economic systems at both the macro and micro
levels. Its principal impacts are to:
elevate the significance of the financial rent-seeking sector relative to the real value-producing sector
transfer income from the
real value-producing sector to the financial sector
increase income inequality and contribute to wage stagnation
Since 1970 this part of the economy has grown from almost nothing to 8% of US Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This means that one
dollar in every ten is associated with finance. In terms of corporate profits finance's contribution now represents around 40% of
all corporate profits in the US. This is a significant figure and, moreover it does not include those overseas earnings of companies
whose profits are repatriated to their countries of origin.
Thus, the increasing presence and role of finance in overall economic activity and the increase of profits channelled to the financial
sector represent the salient indicators as to what has been termed financialization. It is argued by some that financialization may
put the economy at risk of debt deflation and prolonged recession.
Financialisation operates through three different conduits: changes in the structure and operation of financial markets, changes
in the behaviour of nonfinancial corporations, and changes in economic policy. Countering financialisation calls for a multifaceted
agenda that:
restores policy control over financial markets
challenges the neoliberal economic policy paradigm encouraged by financialisation
makes corporations responsive to interests of stakeholders other than just financial markets
reforms the political process so as
to diminish the influence of corporations and wealthy elites
The rent-seeking nature of finance is common to all forms of insurance, banking, monopolistic pricing, and property. This has
not always been the case, or at least wasn't as pronounced as it is at present. There was a time when the banking system was junior
partner in the relationship between banks and industry. Banks provided industry with loans for investment with a view to maximising
profit for both. This is patently not the case today.
Generally speaking, banks will lend for property purchases, stock buy-backs, and perhaps loans for dubious mergers and acquisitions.
Moreover, when we speak of 'profits' this has now assumed a rather obscure meaning. Profits were generally understood as a realization
of surplus value.
Firms made stuff – goods and services – which had a value, which was then sold on the market at a profit. Given the competitive
nature of the system, firms invested in increased capital formation and output which increased productivity, surplus value and ultimately
profit.
With regard to Investment banks like Goldman Sachs and the commercial banks they do not create value; they are purely rent-extractive.
For example, commercial banks make a loan out of thin air, debit this loan to the would-be mortgagee who then becomes a source of
permanent income flow to the bank for the next 25 years.
Goldman Sachs makes year-on-year 'profits' by doing – what exactly? Nothing particularly useful. But then Goldman Sachs is part
of the cabal of central banks and Treasury departments around the world. It is not unusual to see the interchange of the movers and
shakers of the financial world who oscillate between these institutions. Hank Paulson, Mario Draghi, Steve Mnuchin, Robert Rubin
on and on it goes.
This financialised system now moves in ever-increasing levels of instability. But what did we expect when the whole institutional
structure – its rules, regulations and practises – were deregulated and finance was let off the leash.
Thatcher, Reagan, the 'Big Bang' had set the scene and there was no going back: neoliberalism and globalization had become the
norm. From this point on, however, there followed a litany of crises mostly in the developing world but these disturbances were in
due course to move into the developed world. Serial bubbles began to appear.
US stock prices [which of course would only ever go up] began to decline in the Spring of 2000, and fell by 40% in the next
three years. Whilst the prices of NASDAQ stocks decline by 80%."
Manias, Panics and Crashe s – Kindleberger and Aliber
Chastened monies moved out of this market and into property speculation. It is common knowledge what happened next. The run-up
to 2008 was floated on a sea of cheap credit. The price of stocks pushed property prices to vertiginous heights until – pop, went
the weasel.
The reason was quite simple. Any boom and bust has an inflexion point where boom turns to bust. This is when buyers incomes, and
borrowers inability to extend their loans could no longer support the rise in the price level. Euphoria turned to panic as borrowers
who once clamoured to buy were now desperate to sell. 2008 had arrived.
The strange thing, however, regarding the property price boom-and-bust was that it was based upon pure speculation. Prices went
up, prices went down. Some – a few – made money, quite a few lost money. Investors were wondering what had happened to their gains
which they had made during the up phase. Where had all that money gone?
The short answer is – nowhere. It was never there in the first place. It was fictitious capital. Gains which had appeared and
then disappeared like a will 'o' the wisp. As opposed to physical capital – machinery, labour and raw materials, and money capital
which enabled through purchase the production of value to take place, we have fictitious capital which is a claim on future production.
If my house goes up by 10% that is a capital gain, if everybody's house goes up by 10% that is asset-price inflation
Fictitious capital is a by-product of capitalist accumulation. It is a concept used by Karl Marx in his critique of political
economy. It is introduced in chapter 25 of the third volume of Capital. Fictitious capital contrasts with what Marx calls "real capital",
which is capital actually invested in physical means of production and workers, and "money capital", which is actual funds being
held.
The market value of fictitious capital assets (such as stocks and securities) varies according to the expected return or yield
of those assets in the future, which Marx felt was only indirectly related to the growth of real production. Effectively, fictitious
capital represents "accumulated claims, legal titles, to future production'' and more specifically claims to the income generated
by that production.
The moral of the story is that it is not possible to print wealth or value. Money in its paper representation of the real thing,
e.g., gold, is not wealth it is a claim on wealth.
Of course, this would be lost on establishment economists, bankers, and financial journalists, whose view is that the policy should
be QE, liquidity injections, and so forth. A one-trick pony.
And what has all of this to do with Coronavirus? Well, everything actually.
I take it that we all knew that the grotesquely overleveraged world economy was heading for a 'correction' but that's a rather
a soothing description. "Massive correction" would be a better description. That is the nature of the beast. The world was a bubble
of paper money looking for a pin. It found one.
Have a nice day all.
John ,
The "gold" backed currency is just another myth of stability, gold is controlled by central banks and hoarded by the owners of
such, the syndicate in pc terms for delicate ears. Meaning the syndicate can adjust it as they please and decide what gold is
worth as they've done in the past on a weekly basis. Inflation and deflation are used to rob the vast majority of people and expect
there to be deflation coming up as that is the worst of the two. Price stability is much more desirable across the staples that
people actually need, not what backs the man made tool called currency. The goal of responsible civil government should be full
employment of its citizens (and price stability of essential for living), especially in productive industries, not useless luxury
industries which do not benefit in any way. Now QE is just another form of inflation on a massive scale, good if you have say
a house that will go up, but the more currency you have the less it's worth and the central banksters are using it.
Prices rise
but wages and salaries do not rise anywhere near inflation, it's a slow sinking into poverty and vassalage of which mortgages
are just a form of debt slavery. You can own nothing, you're just a renter of all things to be molded and caged if necessary by
the syndicate owners and their God-State.
At some point no one will be able to afford houses and the crash will come. They DO
NOT CARE if you payoff the debt, what's important is that you pay to service the debt thus keeping you in line. If you go out
of line they can just demand the money now, thus putting you in the streets. When the time comes the God-State will take possession
of all housing, all industry etc and the slavery will be complete. Just like the Soviet Union there will be an elite that are
immune "gods" to all this, there is actually already this today, the "olympians" kingpins etc whatever you want to call them.
Biff ,
Yes, the contrived-virus (convid19) is most certainly a smoke screen for global financial collapse. Another day down
under and another super tanker full of media hype and horseshit arrives. But then it struck me. Most of us know that Convid19
is about as deadly as the common cold.
In fact the Government even tells you this if you listen carefully to press conferences. This to me can only mean one obvious
thing.
The media and the Government are in lockstep. They are quarantining areas and locking down, not to contain the virus but
to contain the ensuing violence when people finally and hopefully figure out that they are getting royally screwed. The warning
flag will be shutdown of social media services or the internet in your area. Then watch out. They have created a world where our
only means of communication is the internet. You can't even make a phone call in Aus without the internet. Imagine it's not there.
Robbobbobin ,
"Yes, the contrived-virus (convid19) is most certainly a smoke screen for global financial collapse."
Are you saying that if COVID-19 were not contrived but a genuine public health problem then it could (so would) not
be used as a smokescreen, i.e. that the contrivance of a virus of some sort (in this case COVID-19) is an essential aspect
of your narrative; that if there were no pathogen engendering a pandemic problem then a serviceable smokescreen could (so would)
not be contrived based on some factor other than a biological one, or are you saying something else altogether?
simply put ,
Money exists to facilitate trade.
So if the economy grows you need to put more money into circulation, if it shrinks you need to take money out of circulation.
That's why a gold standard does not work very well in a modern world, it cannot adapt to the changing environment, you cannot
increase or decrease the amount of gold in the world (not as needed anyway) so you end up with not enough "money" available (or
too much), both disastrous for the economy.
The banking system is corrupt, but not because of fiat money.
Ken Kenn ,
Lenin talked about making Statues out of Gold post a Communist Society so its' inherent worth is in the eye of the shareholder
in its price or it's perceived future price.
Money ( fiat or otherwise ) is only an agreed exchange of labour to price of goods between a group of swindler Capitalists
who ideally would wish that all the other Capitalists to pay their workers more so that they can buy the other Capitalists goods
who don't pay their workers more.
The state of play at the moment is a bit Rooseveltian.
Is it better to be a poorer capitalist temporarily than not a future capitalist at all?
the UK Neo – Liberal position says yes only because there is a tiny chance that the masses will twig what's going on and why
it's going on in this way.
80% of wages is better than 0% of wages/income.
This is predicted to last just 3 months.
If it lasts a year watch it all change.
Fact is- in the end the Middle Classes and down will pick up the tab.
And if the 'We ' are picking up the tab anyway ' We ' may as well demand and get 100% of wages/income.
As Thatcher said – It's our money – not the State's.
Theoretically of course in a democracy.
Toby Russell ,
I don't believe this or that form of money can ever be the be-all-and-end-all form. Fiat has its place, a gold standard
has its place, shells have their place, gift exchanges, IOUs, etc. There are reasonable arguments to be made for each, but each
reasonable argument, to be reasonable, would have to include historical context / societal conditions as a very large part of
its logic.
Far more important than 'money as wealth' is how we culturally understand the nature of wealth that money can only ever
be a claim on (an important function, an important component of wealth). As Rhys points out below, wealth is a slippery thing
– it's subjective to a considerable degree after all – but if one thing unites all 'instances' of it, that would be its networked
nature. There is no wealth at all without some sort of complex, living and healthy ecosystem to generate it, continually,
dynamically. So another feature of wealth would be its dynamic and ever evolving nature. Another would be that there is thus no
final guarantee of Always Having So Much Wealth I Never Have To Work Again. (Whatever work is.
Bullshit jobs, anyone ?)
And as for productivity, well, what's that? Is productivity only productive when wealth is produced? On what definition of
wealth? Good sleep produces health, assuming good exercise, good diet, healthy soil, richly biodiverse ecosystems, etc. The same
is true of friendships, community, trust, fun All things that cannot be manufactured. Not that there's anything wrong with manufacture,
which etymologically comes from manual , the hand, thus skill, craftsmanship, etc. All that good stuff.
So it's slippery, nuanced, open to discussion. What kills wealth, on the other hand – and is killing wealth right in front
of our eyes – is narrow, dogmatic assertions about what it is. One's thing's for sure: it's not money (he asserts dogmatically).
Money needs a thorough demotion, in my view, and things like sleep, community and trust need a great big cultural promotion.
Yet again, we are at a strange and mighty inflection point historically. They're popping up now with alarming regularity! Something
is obviously in the offing.
Will our imaginations and courage fail us this time around?
Here in France last weekend was Acte 70, with a huge number of gilets jaunes out on the streets for the 70th consecutive
week, protesting against 'austerity' and neoliberalism. This weekend, Acte 71, thus far there's been no street protests. I guess
the gilets jaunes will know that it will bring bad publicity for them at the moment. What they are doing instead is issuing
a massive call for everyone to open windows on their home this evening at 9pm, and bash pots and pans as loudly as possible. It'll
be interesting to see how many people will do this.
No singing on balconys baloney here.
Alan Tench ,
Please speculate: why is the number of deaths compared to infections very much lower in all the Scandinavian countries than elsewhere
in Europe? Let's just assume the figures might be reasonably accurate for this one. Also, looking at all the figures (sorry, I
used Wikipedia for this), am I right in suspecting that the number of recoveries is being blatantly unreported in just about every
country?
Ted ,
The oil markets are playing a role in the market turmoil. And its not the Corona virus, but the radical state overreaction
aided by the cynical shameless hype mongering media that has crashed the markets. As the evidence rolls in, the actual Corona
virus, and not whatever it is that is going on in Italy (a radical statistical outlier among all world nations), is rather boring.
Much more boring than the normal flu virus. And let's not forget the possibility of an epidemic of false positives in a radical
increase in PCR testing for Corona virus. Here in the West of the US, only 7% or so of tests yield positive results what if 100%
of those are false positives during the normal tail end of flu season? see for example:
'I have a five pound note, issued by the Bank of England. It clearly states: "I promise to pay the bearer the sum of five
pounds on demand." It is signed by the Chief Cashier on behalf of the Governor of the Bank of England. However, if I were to
take this bank note to the Bank of England and demand my five pounds, I would be swiftly escorted from the building.'
Unlikely. If they could not oblige you there they would certainly refer you to a nearby commercial bank who would be happy
to pay you five one-pound coins, or the equivalent in any lesser denomination, on their behalf, as promised. Of course, that would
not counter your point, but it would keep their promise.
Seamus Padraig ,
OT: If anyone here wants a good laugh, read the comments on this ridiculous tweet.
Very amusing Seamus (but not funny for the victims) however, having read through all the tweets I didn't see one advocating "Spend
many happy hours building your own Lego model of Netanyahu's bulldozers"
Jen ,
CIA must be desperate to recruit kiddies to spy on their parents through online games.
Mike Ellwood ,
Quite. As Minsky said, anyone can create money. The trick is to get it accepted.
Governments who issue currency give it value simply by insisting that their citizens pay them tax in it. And how do the citizens
get the currency in the first place? Governments spend it into the economy.
If you had a closed, autarkic (no imports or exports) economy, government could control the value of its currency pretty closely
if it chose to. It gets more complicated in the real world, where you need to import real resources, and your currency is being
traded in the Foreign Exchange market. It helps if you have something that other countries want, that you can export.
At the end of the day, what matters are real resources (people, as well as things). As we see with the toilet roll panic (and
other, more serious shortages).
Toby Russell ,
Your comment gets my vote, though I would argue that this discussion, and the point you make, needs much more airing. As such,
the argument is not academic, but vital. And this new Bizzaro World we just burst into is the right place for it. And loudly.
Seamus Padraig ,
By the way, Ben Swann did a great show the other night analyzing the media hype surrounding Corona Virus data. Enjoy
The Japan numbers have puzzled me for a while, since they are no slouches when it comes to managing epidemics. Where are the
exploding numbers for this modern plague in Japan?
At some point, folks gotta say that the WHO needs to be reformed or closed down.
John Pretty ,
Ted, there has been no coronavirus epidemic in Japan and no panic:
Japan may have a healthier elderly population compared to the same age demographic in China and other parts of the world due to
diet (less Western junk food consumption over past decades) and rates of smoking probably lower as well. Air pollution levels
in Japan probably much lower due to greater use of public transport and Shinkansen bullet trains in particular since 1960s. No
wonder Japan still wants to go ahead with Tokyo Olympics.
Seamus Padraig ,
Another ringer from Frank Lee!
But then Goldman Sachs is part of the cabal of central banks and Treasury departments around the world. It is not unusual
to see the interchange of the movers and shakers of the financial world who oscillate between these institutions. Hank Paulson,
Mario Draghi, Steve Mnuchin, Robert Rubin
They don't call it Government Sachs for nothing.
#CoronaHoax
DunGroanin ,
Let's play them at their own game.
I want to see McDonnell put out a clear simple response of what measures are actually needed – i listed them a few posts ago
in haste but they still hold:
1. All self employed / free lancers etc ought to be paid at least 60% of their last years submitted accounts on a monthly basis
directly by HMRC – they have their bank details and these figures at hand a simple database query can be constructed and tested
within hours – There can be a max limit to that based on numbers of children.
2. All others without such records ought to be allowed the full and increased benefit amount.
3. The 80% for employees is smoke and mirrors – that also should be 60% and no charges or NI / pensions/ student loans etc
to complicate matters.
4. All rent private and social to be suspended. All interest on mortgages, creditcards, loans and overdrafts to be cancelled
permanently until normal service is resumed (not accumulated aa debt).
5. All capital payments to be suspended.
6. All council tax collections suspended.
7. BBC licence fee cancelled and direct funding by the HMRC introduced to provide pybluc service broadcasting only.
8. All credit ratings and any such nonsense to be suspended on individuals records – nothing should be added for failing to
keep up payments since beginning of March.
9. Any government funds into banks, corporations, pfi's to be accompanied by equity stakes in these and retained until all
such balance sheet investment has been returned.
BigB ,
I see your bubble has yet to pop, DG?
The "massive correction" – that is value destruction – has to happen before any return to "real, productive" values can occur.
Financialisation distorted productive values so much that any "normalisation" would destroy the value of money. Normal service
cannot just be resumed.
Put simply: there is more money than productive goods and services that can be claimed on now, and in the future. A lot more
a lot, lot more. At least 75 times more.
As I've said time after time: the economy has to expand exponentially or it collapses. As it stands: there is no pause or reset
button without massive value destruction. Which could be done responsibly – a la the heterodox economists "jubilee" – or irresponsibly
by keep blowing the everything bubbles with QE 5.
If you understand which mechanism is being employed: you will understand home isolation and draconian lockdowns. If debt deflation
becomes hyperinflation you might wake up in Rhodesia or the Weimar Republic and you know what came next? 🙁
DunGroanin ,
Have you missed the 40% drop in stocks BB?
And the wiping out of business Goodwill value of many a small business?
Its a major scalping. Which we are letting happen as they say 'hide' from each other. The banks are laughing all the way to
the bank.
BigB ,
No: collapse of financial assets is just the prelude. The real contagion is corporate bond market: full of over-leveraged Zombie
corporations. Particularly stressed are BBB bond junkies of the shale market but the whole market is junked out on a decade of
cheap money. When they cannot pay their way – that is, service their debt – then the defaults, layoffs, and delinquencies start
probably in the second quarter.
In other words: it hasn't even started yet. Problem: excessive debt. Solution: create more debt (and buy up the most toxic
bonds). Any rebound makes matters worse in the longer term.
One scenario to watch is when Saudi oil hits the market in April. That will put deflationary pressure on oil which is already
at $23. That could cause things to cascade (all asset classes are proxies for each other – Dr Jack Rasmus check out his blog for
explainers).
The thing is DG: this has sweet FA to do with any virus. The knock-on effect of which would have been containable I guess.
But to start an oil price war? MbS was either recklessly irresponsible, or quite deliberate. My feeling is the latter. It was
coming anyway. What better than to blame *force majeure* of a virus? And have populations on lockdown as the effects wind through
to Main St.
DunGroanin ,
I agree on the whole BB.
The thing about debt is that it can be cancelled! If that means these 'investments' will also be wiped out.
BigB ,
As Michael Hudson says "debts that cannot be paid, will not be paid". We cancel the debts, or we cancel the future. No choice
to be made really, is there?
Mike Ellwood ,
Not sure if this what you meant above, but in case not, NIC should be suspended indefinitely, both for employers and employed,
and self-employed.
Harry Stotle ,
Corona as an economic instrument ?
Can't argue that medical claims are just as inflated as the amount of money that has been printed. As a companion piece to Frank's excellent article take a look at Renegade Inc's film explaining why a Fiat economy is bound
to end in tears.
Welcome to corona capitalism or the corona casino! 😀
nottheonly1 ,
Roughly translated:
The masses owe, what the billionaires own.
What the masses still own, is now taken away.
Those who understand, see that a most generous unconditional guaranteed basic income/compensation for damages suffered on life
and property by those who run the present system, will not suffice.
A system that is sold to the masses as the gold standard of governance and distribution, has driven the collective of the species
closer to extinction. Maybe extinction is the goal after all? If that is not the case, then the UBI accounts to be like a glimpse
into a world without money in any form. A world in which everything is indeed free. Mother Earth has never been compensated for
the damages and destruction done to her and her more connected life forms.
For various reasons, corona-whatever has the potential – and it was created to do/utilize that potential – to virtually/spiritually
grow a mushroom out of homo sapiens' head. Due to the constant absorption of aerosolized air, having glyphosate in the bloodstream
down into the bone marrow, being exposed to wireless **radiation** constantly and occupied with social media 24/7 has rendered
the human immune system a sick joke compared to what it was before the commodification of everything and everything that will
come.
The bucket must stop here. And I am more than willing to go. Just don't make Soylent Green from me. But to allow a human being
to leave, when they decide to be "I'm good! I'm ready!" would also mean to allow fellow humans to leave at their choosing. Before
they are forcefully removed from the pension/social security/Renten system.
Now is the time to end social networking. No more facebook, twitter, or whatever. The addiction of the masses to panic is wholly
abused right now. And the u.s. has a president who thought he could weather it all out alone. And so did many more – doing everything
they can to maintain their grip on power and wealth.
But the gallows are coming. For all of them. And that is not the result of the rulings of corrupt courts. They will join the
only waiting line the rich ever have to experience. The call for the closure of all u.s./il/nato biological weapons laboratories
has echoed yesterday. It will be followed by the end of militarism and killing for profit. Religions are failing human beings,
because they, themselves are untruthful. And Julian Assange? Will he be given a corona?
As it goes with self-dynamical events, this one too, has long taken on a life of its own. The Universe allows for all crimes
to happen, but it does not promote them. It does not judge them. Karma means 'action' and nobody cannot not act. Things need to
be done constantly – if not to barely survive, then surely for the sake of the addiction to the virtual glass pearl that shine
so bright.
And yes, by all means. Remember that traditional Chinese medicine offers a variety of herbal mixtures against practically everything.
People need to boost their immune systems. All wifi must go. Towers must all be dismantled immediately and replaced with fiber
optics. Planned obsolescence must be prohibited. It must all start here, now.
In Argentina, they were sounding the sirens yesterday – because corona is coming. It oddly reminded me of "Incoming ballistic
millie alert! Not a Drill!". I know it's the people in the cities who are hit the hardest. Out on the countryside, one can at
least be outdoors with plants and animals. Animals also suffer from this artificially induced madness. But it would have come
anyway. Now getting back to what's really important.
BigB ,
If the economy really tanks – and it must, but not necessarily this time – they will have to totally restructure society without
work or not enough of it. There is a deeply sinister side to what they are doing. Which is establishing a precedent for further
doings. Imagine what they would do if there was a real economic crisis?
It is going to take a massive and concerted shift in the social conscience to turn it around now. It is the People's own alienated
creative cultural powers that are being enacted by the market state system against the People. It is only the People who can enact
a different system if they get another chance.
nottheonly1 ,
Exactly. Moving forward at this point means also to evolve. One time I was wondering what would happen if everyone would be told
"Don't worry about it. It has already been taken care of."
When society acknowledges its nature to be more organic than bureaucratic. For Life to be much more alive, than following the
needs of the very few.
There is a Mel Brooks classic worth watching: "Life Stinks". It applies as much to the owner class, as does 'Trading Places'
– whereas I am afraid that the owner class was making fun of the working class/poor part of society.
Organic Food security has to be our priority. Ridding ourselves from what is making us really sick to be profited from by the
owner class. Instead of giving ownership of corporations that are bailed out to the 'government' responsible for this mess, ownership
must be transferred to the workers that run the business.
"These officials "failed us" in the same way that our media "fails us": they serve the
interests of the EMPIRE-FIRST Deep State."
Yuppp. Our error is to assume all 17 intelligence agencies; the presstitudes; and US
"leadership" exist to serve the American people. And so, yes, they "fail" the people. But, from the point of view of the controllers of those agencies and of those "leaders",
they hardly ever fail !!!
While the people argue over virulent minutae, they are once again helping themselves to
the US Treasury.... Trillions of USDs.... LOL
".... was then told to STOP TESTING...... A medical person would not try to suppress testing.
That would be a "management decision" and its the Nation Security Council that was running
the show (and which had classified all discussions related to virus preparations)...."
Thanks for reminding us of Dr Chu's story. What if the US leadership:
Knew the coronavirus was already out in the wild in the US by Sep 2019;
Decided to set up China to be the "origin" to be blamed;
Realized that a "pandemic" can be the cover for kicking the table over to do the Great
Financial Reset;
"... the Iranian population is the world's most lung-weakest. Almost all men over the age of sixty suffer from the after-effects of the US combat gases used by the Iraqi army during the First Gulf War (1980-88), as did the Germans and the French after the First World War. Any traveller to Iran has been struck by the number of serious lung ailments. ..."
"... The Diamond Princess is an Israeli-American ship, owned by Micky Arison, brother of Shari Arison, the richest woman in Israel. The Arisons are turning this incident into a public relations operation. The Trump administration and several other countries airlifted their nationals to be quarantined at home. The international press devoted its headlines to this story. Referring to the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-1919, it asserts that the epidemic could spread throughout the world and potentially threaten the human species with extinction [ 2 ]. This apocalyptic hypothesis, not based on any facts, will nevertheless become the word of the Gospel. ..."
"... It is not known at this time whether tycoons deliberately spread panic about Covid-19, making this vulgar epidemic seem like the "end of the world". However, one distortion after another, governments have become involved. Of course, it is no longer a question of selling advertising screens by frightening people, but of dominating populations by exploiting this fear. ..."
"... Let us remember that never in history has the confinement of a healthy population been used to fight a disease. Above all, let us remember that this epidemic will have no significant consequences in terms of mortality. ..."
"... The two governments panic their populations by distributing unnecessary instructions disavowed by infectious diseases doctors: they encourage people to wear gloves and masks in all circumstances and to keep at least one metre away from any other human being. ..."
"... It is too early to say what real goal the Conte and Macron governments are pursuing. The only thing that is certain is that it is not a question of fighting Covid-19. ..."
Returning to the Covid-19 epidemic and the way governments are reacting to it, Thierry
Meyssan stresses that the authoritarian decisions of Italy and France have no medical
justification. They contradict the observations of the best infectiologists and the
instructions of the World Health Organization.
The Chinese Prime Minister, Li Keqiang, came to lead the operations in Wuhan and restore
the "celestial mandate" on January 27, 2020.
On November 17, 2019, the first case of a person infected with Covid-19 was diagnosed in
Hubei Province, China. Initially, doctors tried to communicate the seriousness of the disease,
but clashed with regional authorities. It was only when the number of cases increased and the
population saw the seriousness of the disease that the central government intervened.
This epidemic is not statistically significant. It kills very few people, although those it
does kill experience terrible respiratory distress.
Since ancient times, in Chinese culture, Heaven has given a mandate to the Emperor to govern
his subjects [ 1 ]. When he withdraws it, a disaster
strikes the country: epidemic, earthquake, etc. Although we are in modern times, President XI
felt threatened by the mismanagement of the Hubei regional government. The Council of State
therefore took matters into its own hands. It forced the population of Hubei's capital, Wuhan,
to remain confined to their homes. Within days, it built hospitals; sent teams to each house to
take the temperature of each inhabitant; took all potentially infected people to hospitals for
testing; treated those infected with chloroquine phosphate and sent others home; and treated
the critically ill with recombinant interferon Alfa 2B (IFNrec) for resuscitation. This vast
operation had no public health necessity, other than to prove that the Communist Party still
has the heavenly mandate.
During a press conference on Covid-19, the Iranian Deputy Minister of Health, Iraj
Harirchi, appeared contaminated.
Propagation in Iran
The epidemic spreads from China to Iran in mid-February 2020. These two countries have been
closely linked since ancient times. They share many common cultural elements. However, the
Iranian population is the world's most lung-weakest. Almost all men over the age of sixty
suffer from the after-effects of the US combat gases used by the Iraqi army during the First
Gulf War (1980-88), as did the Germans and the French after the First World War. Any traveller
to Iran has been struck by the number of serious lung ailments.
When air pollution in Tehran increased beyond what they could bear, schools and government
offices were closed and half of the families moved to the countryside with their grandparents.
This has been happening several times a year for thirty-five years and seems normal.
The government and parliament are almost exclusively composed of veterans of the Iraq-Iran
war, that is, people who are extremely fragile in relation to Covid-19. So when these groups
were infected, many personalities developed the disease.
In view of the US sanctions, no Western bank covers the transport of medicines. Iran found
itself unable to treat the infected and care for the sick until the UAE broke the embargo and
sent two planes of medical equipment.
People who would not suffer in the other country died from the first coughs due to the
wounds in their lungs. As usual, the government closed schools. In addition, it deprogrammed
several cultural and sporting events, but did not ban pilgrimages. Some areas have closed
hotels to prevent the movement of sick people who can no longer find hospitals close to their
homes.
Quarantine in Japan
On February 4, 2020, a passenger on the US cruise ship Diamond Princess was diagnosed ill
from the Covid-19 and ten passengers were infected. The Japanese Minister of Health, Katsunobu
Kato, then imposed a two-week quarantine on the ship in Yokohama in order to prevent the
contagion from spreading to his country. In the end, out of the 3,711 people on board, the vast
majority of whom are over 70 years old, there would be 7 deaths.
The Diamond Princess is an Israeli-American ship, owned by Micky Arison, brother of Shari
Arison, the richest woman in Israel. The Arisons are turning this incident into a public
relations operation. The Trump administration and several other countries airlifted their
nationals to be quarantined at home. The international press devoted its headlines to this
story. Referring to the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-1919, it asserts that the epidemic could
spread throughout the world and potentially threaten the human species with extinction [
2 ]. This
apocalyptic hypothesis, not based on any facts, will nevertheless become the word of the
Gospel.
We remember that in 1898, William Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer, in order to increase the sales
of their daily newspapers, published false information in order to deliberately provoke a war
between the United States and the Spanish colony of Cuba. This was the beginning of "yellow
journalism" (publishing anything to make money). Today it is called "fake news".
It is not known at this time whether tycoons deliberately spread panic about Covid-19,
making this vulgar epidemic seem like the "end of the world". However, one distortion after
another, governments have become involved. Of course, it is no longer a question of selling
advertising screens by frightening people, but of dominating populations by exploiting this
fear.
For the WHO Director, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, China and South Korea have set an
example by generalising screening tests; a way of saying that the Italian and French methods
are medical nonsense.
WHO intervention
The World Health Organization (WHO), which monitored the entire operation, noted the spread
of the disease outside China. On February 11th and 12th, it organized a global forum on
research and innovation on the epidemic in Geneva. At the forum, WHO Director-General Dr Tedros
Adhanom Ghebreyesus called in very measured terms for global collaboration [ 3 ].
In all of its messages, the WHO stressed : the low demographic impact of the epidemic; the
futility of border closures; the ineffectiveness of wearing gloves, masks (except for health
care workers) and certain "barrier measures" (for example, the distance of one metre only makes
sense with infected people, but not with healthy people); the need to raise the level of
hygiene, including hand washing, water disinfection and increased ventilation of confined
spaces. Finally, use disposable tissues or, failing that, sneeze into your elbow.
However, the WHO is not a medical organization, but a United Nations agency dealing with
health issues. Its officials, even if they are doctors, are also and above all politicians. It
cannot therefore denounce the abuses of certain states. Furthermore, since the controversy over
the H1N1 epidemic, the WHO must publicly justify all its recommendations. In 2009, it was
accused of having let itself be swayed by the interests of big pharmaceutical companies and of
having hastily sounded the alarm in a disproportionate manner [ 4 ]. This time it used the word
"pandemic" only as a last resort, on March 12th, four months later.
At the Franco-Italian summit in Naples on February 27, the French and Italian presidents,
Giuseppe Conte and Emmanuel Macron, announced that they would react together to the
pandemic.
Instrumentation in Italy and France
Modern propaganda should not be limited to the publication of false news as the United
Kingdom did to convince its people to enter the First World War, but should also be used in the
same way as Germany did to convince its people to fight in the Second World War. The recipe is
always the same: to exert psychological pressure to induce subjects to voluntarily practice
acts that they know are useless, but which will lead them to lie [ 5 ]. For example, in 2001, it was
common knowledge that those accused of hijacking planes on 9/11 were not on the passenger
boarding lists. Yet, in shock, most accepted without question the inane accusations made by FBI
Director Robert Muller against "19 hijackers". Or, as is well known, President Hussein's Iraq
had only old Soviet Scud launchers with a range of up to 700 kilometers, but many Americans
caulked the windows and doors of their homes to protect themselves from the deadly gases with
which the evil dictator was going to attack America. This time, in the case of the Covid-19, it
is the voluntary confinement in the home that forces the person who accepts it to convince
himself of the veracity of the threat.
Let us remember that never in history has the confinement of a healthy population been
used to fight a disease. Above all, let us remember that this epidemic will have no significant
consequences in terms of mortality.
In Italy, the first step was to isolate the contaminated regions according to the principle
of quarantine, and then to isolate all citizens from each other, which follows a different
logic.
According to the President of the Italian Council, Giuseppe Conte, and the French President,
Emmanuel Macron, the aim of confining the entire population at home is not to overcome the
epidemic, but to spread it out over time so that the sick do not arrive at the same time in
hospitals and saturate them. In other words, it is not a medical measure, but an exclusively
administrative one. It will not reduce the number of infected people, but will postpone it in
time.
In order to convince the Italians and the French of the merits of their decision, Presidents
Conte and Macron first enlisted the support of committees of scientific experts. While these
committees had no objection to people staying at home, they had no objection to people going
about their business. Then Chairs Conte and Macron made it mandatory to have an official form
to go for a walk. This document on the letterheads of the respective ministries of the interior
is drawn up on honour and is not subject to any checks or sanctions.
The two governments panic their populations by distributing unnecessary instructions
disavowed by infectious diseases doctors: they encourage people to wear gloves and masks in all
circumstances and to keep at least one metre away from any other human being.
The French "reference daily" (sic) Le Monde, Facebook France and the French Ministry of
Health undertook to censor a video of Professor Didier Raoult, one of the world's most renowned
infectiologists, because by announcing the existence of a proven drug in China against
Covid-19, he highlighted the lack of a medical basis for the measures taken by President Macron
[ 6 ].
It is too early to say what real goal the Conte and Macron governments are pursuing. The
only thing that is certain is that it is not a question of fighting
Covid-19.
Covid-19! H1N1! Names of guns on Call of Duty! Scary! I call it a Cold. The Flu killed many
more than this will 2 years ago. I propose to change the name of the Flu to "Putin Plague".
That will do it.
Russia has 1 death, few cases, a massive border with China, huge numbers of Chinese
tourists, officials, students, etc. India has 4 deaths, a border with China, and many
Chinese. How are any of you buying that?
If this was the end of the world would Putin be almost disinterested in his demeanor?
Would Kadyrov laugh it off on national tv? Are the Russians that stupid or do they know
something?
If this was big, Kadyrov would be in full-action. Special Corona uniform, big guns, lots
of hitting the pads, plenty of screams of Akhmat Sila! Instead, he is complaining that he is
bored because there are no fights to watch.
Let me tell you something that is not being discussed. Millions, yes millions, died from
the Flu a few seasons back. It was horrible. Hospitals could not handle it. Yet, the media
was dead silent. Zero concerns. No mention. It was just a bad Flu season and life went on for
you. Maybe you buried Grandma. Maybe you were dog sick (I was and I had a Flu shot!). What
you did not have was 24/7 hysteria. Hysteria is NEVER good. NEVER.
At the beginning of this year, I suddenly started getting these horrible videos from China
of healthy-looking men falling face down on the street. What the ? Healthy men walking down
the street and then – BAM! Straight down. They went viral. Freaked the Western world
out. Millions and millions of views. We now know that IS NOT the virus. Whoever created those
videos knows more than we do.
–Steps Russia Seems To Be Taking–
If a patient dies make sure to list the cause of death as whatever they were suffering
from (healthy people RARELY die from this) prior to the illness.
Use regional heads (Ramzan!) to dampen any hysteria. Chechens have been told that they
will die eventually why worry about a cold. Go drink some tea. Don't be a wimp. This kind of
talk is dangerous to soft Europeans/Americans, but is part of the Caucasian spirit.
Get the FSB to run EVERYTHING. Rumor is it that the guy in charge of tests has been in
charge of security for Putin. I promise you that the FSB is in total control of all results.
If the numbers look bad – Lie. Slowly add a death here and there. Make sure that it
appears that you did not let anyone die from this because of lack of equipment. This is not a
health issue. This is an actual war. Yes, war. You do what you can medically, you just don't
create mass hysteria. Make sense? Many countries are doing this and will be better off for
this. More lives will be saved because healthy people will not be taking up space that
belongs to the very sick. Hysteria is the last thing you want.
*NOTE* Have you noticed how Russians are furious with Italy while the West cries for them?
The West is furious with China while Russia is happy for them. Topsy turvy world.
There is NO REASON to destroy your country because of this. NONE. Something else is in
play. I can promise you that millions of Americans have it or have had it. The CDC has said
this! There were no testing kits. If there are no testing kits you cannot officially die from
a Call of Duty weapon.
The American people need to demand the age groups of all the deaths due to the SARS-CoV-2
variant of coronavirus. We will find the highest group that have succumbed to the disease are
60 years and older. I want to see numbers for each State in the Republic, not percentages.
Then peel the onion back further and reveal if the elderly who died had previous pulmonary
problems (e.g. emphysema, COPD, asthma, pulmonary fibrosis, cystic fibrosis, lung cancer,
tuberculous, etc) and what immuno-suppressant medications they were taking.
If in fact it turns out the majority who perish are old people, then the deaths could be
attributed to influenza, which is the epidemic that is going on right now in the country.
There are 29 million people infected and more than 4,500 have died so far with two months to
go in the flu season.
The patients are not being swabbed for influenza and testing for that disease, just
COVID-19. This skews the numbers away from influenza so the media screams every day about
COVID-19.
The Great Panic of 2020 is already one for the history books. Yet the damage has only just
begun. We suspect the stock market crash, economic destruction, and forfeiture of freedoms will
persist long after the coronavirus hobgoblin has been put to bed.
With respect to the stock market, the modus operandi of the last 11 years is being stood on
its head. Rather than 'buy the dip.' The new divine mantra is 'sell the rip.' Here's why
If you recall, the U.S. stock market commenced a multi-year swan dive in autumn of 1929.
About that time, the economy also commenced a decade long Great Depression. Given the rapid and
relentless stock market carnage over the last month, and the prospect of a lengthy depression,
a closer look is in order.
From September 3, 1929 to November 13, 1929, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) lost
48.9 percent. Then, as rarely noted, it rallied 48.1 percent through April 17, 1930. This had
the adverse effect of luring the buy the dip crowd back into the stock market just in time for
the next massacre.
The 1929 through 1932 bear market, as noted by Pater Tenebrarum , was like a rubber ball bouncing down
stairs. With each bounce, even the most savvy of investors were given another chance to lose
their money. Taken in sequence, the repeated bounces provided many opportunities to lose money
over and over again.
In the end, the bounce up between November 13, 1929 and April 30, 1930, turned out to be the
ultimate sucker's rally. The DJIA subsequently crashed 89.2 percent from its initial peak,
along with the hopes, dreams, and aspirations of an entire generation.
Such a colossal collapse could never, ever happen again, right?
Well, if it happened before, by definition, it could happen again. Hence, if an interim
bottom is put in over the next several weeks, and the DJIA attempts to retrace towards its
February 12 all-time closing high, take this as a gift. An opportunity to sell the
rip.
Bend the Curve
The economy's being fundamentally pummeled by coronavirus containment. Long term damage will
be sustained. The type of damage that takes a decade – or more – to recover from.
Fake money won't fix it. But, nonetheless, there's no shortage of solutions being offered to
save us from ourselves.
Coronavirus, according to scientific prophecy, spreads exponentially. The only way to
contain it is to "flatten the curve" through "social distancing." The world must "hunker down"
in unison; if not voluntarily, by government decree.
Bars, restaurants, gyms, schools, and many employers are shutting down. San Francisco has
ordered all residents to "shelter in place." The Maltese Falcon can only screech to itself from
within a vacant John's Grill.
The former Mayor of San Francisco, and now California Governor, Gavin Newsom, has ordered all residents to stay at
home until further notice. According to
Newsom , "We need to bend the curve in the state of California."
Perhaps these solutions have merit. But they're disastrous for the economy. Cash flows are
running dry. Credit markets are freezing up. People are losing their jobs. Full mobilization is
needed, we're told, in the war on coronavirus.
For example, Fed Chairman Jay Powell's pulling out all the monetary stops – zero
interest rate policies, quantitative easing, repo madness – to pump liquidity into credit
markets. But that's not all
The Fed's now accepting
stocks as collateral in exchange for liquidity. The Fed also established a Money Market
Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility ( MMLF ). The
sole intent of the MMLF is to keep short-term credit markets from frosting over like the
Alaskan tundra, and breaking the buck.
On the fiscal side, the Treasury Department's angling with Congress to send out $1,000
checks – possibly, two of them – to struggling Americans. Mitt Romney, a man of
discretion, is onboard with $1,000 checks. Chuck Schumer says it won't be enough. Cory Booker
wants to send out
$4,500 checks .
But why stop there? Why not send out $45,000 checks? If a little helicopter money's good,
isn't more always better?
Is the Panic Worse than the Virus?
If only the world was as simple as potato brains Booker believes. Remember, when the U.S.
Treasury borrows money created out of thin air from the Fed to send out checks, it's executing
a program of mass currency debasement.
A check may arrive in your mailbox. But its face value constitutes a fraud. Moreover, this
fraud constitutes a down payment on tomorrow's disorder.
Yet, by the doom being proffered on the matter, mass currency debasement and systematic
hunkering is needed to win the war on coronavirus and save the economy. Or is it?
For perspective, we'll draw from words first scribbled in 1841 by Charles MacKay. Here's a
brief excerpt from MacKay's timeless classic, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness
of Crowds
"During seasons of great pestilence men have often believed the prophecies of crazed
fanatics, that the end of the world was come. Credulity is always greatest in times of
calamity. Prophecies of all sorts are rife on such occasions, and are readily believed,
whether for good or evil.
"During the great plague, which ravaged all Europe, between the years 1345 and 1350, it
was generally considered that the end of the world was at hand. Pretended prophets were to be
found in all the principal cities of Germany, France, and Italy, predicting that within ten
years the trump of the Archangel would sound, and the Saviour appear in the clouds to call
the earth to judgment."
As far as we can tell, the coronavirus has attracted prophets of all stripes like bees to a
honey pot. Mass coronavirus hysteria has led to public and pretend prophetic histrionics.
Maybe so. Or maybe the mass panic has been slightly overblown. By this, is the panic worse
than the virus? Who knows?
What we do know, is the spring equinox has arrived marking the earliest coming of spring in
124 years. After the last several weeks of winter, we'll take it.
Whether this virus jumped species or was made in a bath tub, I can't say. What I can do is
count. in 2019 there were 30,000 deaths in the USA attributed to the Flu. Now, here we are in
2020 with the first quarter of the year nearing coming on, and there are less than 75 deaths
traced to ncov19. So, in my estimation maybe we may record 2,000 dead this year.
Is it rational that we're watching our hard earned 401k's tank, self quarantining,
suffering food shortages, told to distance, avoid our neighbors, and panic over what is
little more than the common cold?
Why must the President address the nation every morning with the Dow Jones numbers
flashing in sync? Why are people in hazmat suits poking around our cities spreading fear, and
asking inane questions such as: do you have a cough, have you recently been to Iran, China,
N. Korea or Iran? I was screened at my local VA hospital on the March 13th, and those were
the questions asked of me. After saying negative a purple wrist ban was put on me and I was
allowed access.
This all reminds me of the movie 'Citizen Kane'. For those old enough to remember it Orson
Welles played the owner of a major newspaper. One day his headline read "WAR DECLARED IN
(some fictitious country)" Consequently, the President of said fictitious country called the
editor by phone, and complained that the paper had it wrong, and there wasn't any war going
on in his country, and how could he. However, Orson responded quite cavalierly with something
on the order of; "Why of course there is a war, because I said there is"
This theatre has gone far enough.
1918 Spanish Flu. WWI ongoing. 675 , 000 deaths in US (300K excess deaths based on
mortality stats published at the time) , 15 million estimated worldwide deaths in 7 months.
No significant impact on GDP due to war
1950-1952 Polio peak panic-Korean War. No significant economic impact. 16,000 paralysis
cases, 3000 deaths annually (mostly children)
1957 -58 influenza pandemic- over 100 K deaths in half the population. Significant
recession in 1958 following Eisenhower's cutting DOD spending. Cold War ramped up to boost
spending. Business as usual for most people during the pandemic
1968 influenza pandemic, over 100k dead, peak Vietnam War, no significant economic
impact
1976 Swine Flu- minimal deaths (dozens) Public health induced hype led to 45 million
rushed to market vaccines. 450 people got Guillain-Barré syndrome from vaccines
causing paralysis . No serious economic impact, business as usual except for vaccination
2003 SARS outbreak. Panic in China/Asia, 800 deaths. Significant economic disruption to
Greater China region due to travel bans and quarantine measures. Iraq war began at same time.
No economic impact in US
2009 H1N1 Pandemic. 12,000 estimated deaths in US. CDC recommended against testing in
July. Not much panic. Country already in recession due to subprime crash. Obamacare passed in
December. Arab spring followed. US government bought 229 million doses of vaccine mostly
unused. Former CDC director hired by Merck probably got a nice bonus. Total cost 4 billion.
About 2 billion went for vaccines,
2019- virus starts to spread in China starting from November 17. A month after Event 201 .
This was attended by Dr Gao of China CDC. China covers up initially then began limited
testing reporting few cases until January 18 when they expanded testing and cases spiked. .
Did not quarantine Wuhan until Jan 23 allowing millions to leave city for other locations due
to up upcoming Lunar New Year Holidays when everything shuts down fir 1-2 weeks anyways.
Significant economic disruption and depression follow as West inflates panic among citizens
with the help of MSM and altmedia to gain support for adopting Chinas draconian measures and
curtailment of freedoms, with censorship sure to follow. Can another war to lift the West out
of depression be far behind, or will that war be fought against the bottom 90% after
lightbulbs go off and they realize they got played.
Experimental DNA changing vaccines being rushed to market. Total cost for everything will
be tens of trillions. Thats a lot of pork. Helicopter money coming soon. Freedom and
Democracy will be a pipe dream. That was Trumps role all along, to put the finishing touches
on a 120 year program to destroy Democracy and replace it with an Elitist Dictatorship ruled
by Philosopher Kings and Corporate Technocrats and enforced by the Military.
... that USA and the West were unprepared because China withheld information about the
virus.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Mar 19 2020 18:20 utc | 106
The "Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on COVID-19" states that China transparently
reported the identification of virus to the WHO and the international community on January
3rd, and a WHO investigative team was invited to Wuhan a week after that.
From January 3rd, 2020, information on COVID-19 cases has been reported to WHO daily.
On January 7th, full genome sequences of the new virus were shared with WHO and the
international community immediately after the pathogen was identified.
On January 10th, an expert group involving Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwanese technical
experts and a World Health Organization team was invited to visit Wuhan.
To make a just evaluation of the health danger of Covid-19 it could be useful to make a
computerized simulation model based on the data from an influenza virus seasonal outbreak
some years ago,but with the actual medical extended reaction to it like testing on a bigger
scale then normally.(I don't even know how it is ,in normal wintertime flu.
I guess the numbers tested equal those who seek medical help,or maybe they test all
citizens taking part in the free government proposed vaccination,that pretty soon follows the
outbreak(how do they find the vaccin so quickly?)) improvising hospitals and other medical
stuff.And also take in account the appreciation of the illness by the general public.The high
number of medical staff that went ill after weeks of treating patients with it seems not to
be an annual affair.The outcome should make clear the real danger ratio of Covid-19.
Still pondering over those Italian deaths. Average said to be 81 years.10% over 90 years
old.90 % over 70 years old.Nobody died from it under seventy years old?
The governments's reactions to CV are another chapter.
Nowadays governments are mainly made up of incompetent empire-compatibles. In the same way
the empire gets away with bombing away poor people, those incompetents get away with every
single stupidity they commit. They rarely step down. When they do they are sure to find an
even better con-job;(Cf.Christine Lagarde,van der Leyen and so many others)
The general public accepts incompetence, so the politicians know they can do anything
their overlord wants them to. They are shouted at some times, made fun of in accomplice
media, ridiculized by the workers, they don't care.
In the evening they have their ration of high quality cocaine and they are feeling very
special when they look down upon you common plebs next morning. Incompetence is the excuse of
the century, but not a reason to loose the job.
A third question that I want to raise.
So it was in Wuhan in September 2019 that the World Military Games were held. I never
heard of before, but yeah its just a sportive meeting between army personal from all over the
world, in an olympic spirit I wager.
Then it seems there was on the same day the opening of something called Event 201 said to
be a simulation (Real time?computer game,Viral!?) of a virus outbreak.OK. So what?
I don't want to look myself into this, because I've never liked Bill Gates, who did this,
but I like to know from more inquisitive barflies ,if such a thing has really taken place.
How long did it last? What was the outcome? And has this study been taken in account by
government officials, be it in the USA or abroad?
Because what if there was really nothing, just the announcement?
I vaguely recall the polio era. There was a fair amount of panic. I remember lining up in the
school gymnasium with everyone else in town to get a dose of oral vaccine. My father had a
friend with a leg damaged by polio. He played slide guitar in a Country & Western band.
I don't remember lockdowns or anything like that. Other than polio and tuberculosis, maybe
epidemics were more accepted 60 years ago? Everyone got measles, mumps, chicken pox. That's
just the way it was. I don't think most people thought about it much; too busy trying to make
a living, just like nowadays.
Here's a
report on the current war against the unseen enemy . The question about polio is relevant
IMO, but for a vastly different reason than what the OP likely had in mind. At the time, the
ongoing war against the unseen enemy was taken very seriously as it affected all
classes and especially city dwellers.
Recall for centuries the Miasma Theory of Disease and related piety and fear of god were
the primary explanations for the unexplainable. That dogma was challenged by a Persian
scholar in the mid 1000s when the Arab world was where genuine science was being pursued
while the West went looking for Devils, witches and heretics, but even the Arab world
couldn't accept what we now know to be the truth of the matter.
We needed to await the arrival of microscopes and Bacteriology to establish the Germ
Theory of Disease in 1870. Death was everywhere and quite powerful.
I recall the average life expectancy for Philadelphia in 1740 to be 20--lots of early
childhood and child bearing deaths--with little differentiation between the slowly growing
urban regions within the Colonies.
Charlestown was the worst with its residents abandoning the city during Summer.
FDR was the first genuinely handicapped POTUS, but he tried his best to conceal his
disability. My Maternal Grandfather was kept stateside in 1918 thanks to the flu epidemic,
while his cousin wasn't so lucky and died in the trenches, his mother never forgave my
Maternal Grandmother for Fate's result.
While dated (2010)
this graphic illustrates the top 15 Communicable Diseases. Some will find this essay on the use
of quarantine helpful by providing some historical context to the ongoing war against the
unseen world.
There was no quarantine. They closed beaches. Told people to no go into the water. That
was for a summer or two at most.
I don't recall anything else. A kid up the street got it. He was a hell of an athlete but
wound up with a brace on one leg. He was away fro some time and his return was the only sign
that polio was really bad.
People were deathly afraid of the first vaccine, injected. Dr. Salk invented that first
vaccine.
The Oral Vaccine really changed everything. Dr. Sabin changed the paradigm and saved several
generations.
@FB I, too, have been disappointed in Tucker Carlson's China bashing. I have thought that
he was the best on FOX News, but now he is getting to be as bad as Sean Hannity.
We may never know the origin of the coronavirus. It is foolish to try and assign blame at
this point.
@follyofwar Well, as the Cheyenne used to say, "It's a good day to die". If the ones who
think they can rule over others push it too far," then the the sun will shine upon a good day
to die". I remember that line from the novel "Little Big Man".
It used to be part of the American ethos, the idea that it's better to die on your feet
than to live on your knees. Levon Helm wrote a line in a song in the '80s: "You give your
life to live your life". Some of us still see it that way.
There are so many scenarios. I haven't read all of the comments, so what I'm about to say
may already have been touched on.
1. The virus happened naturall y, transferred from a bat and eventually to
humans.
2. The virus accidentally escaped the Wuhan lab.
3. The globalists did it. The globalists (the Chinese elite in concert with the
U.S. multinational corporate elite) don't want things to change as both groups of elites are
getting filthy rich off of the offshoring of jobs to China.
Trump is a nationalist. He is upsetting their apple cart as he's placing tariffs on the
goods manufactured in China by the U.S. multinational corporations, trying to force the U.S.
multinationals to come back home. They don't want to, so they manufactured the virus thinking
it would bring down the economy/stock market, thereby bringing down Trump.
China plays along, feigns ignorance, and accuses the U.S. of trying to infect their
citizens, Xi wears a mask. A few thousand old people dying is a small price to pay, in their
minds.
4. The U.S. multinational corporate elite did it alone, without China's knowledge ,
for the same reasons as stated in #3, to throw a wrench in the works, purposely sink the
economy. With Trump gone, globalism could continue.
5. The U.S. did it alone, without China's knowledge. The U.S. globalists realize
globalism is ending and they have acquiesced to the U.S. nationalists. They are angry that
China has not followed through with their part of the original deal, which is that China gets
the offshored jobs, their elite get rich, and they get money to modernize, but she must open
up more to the U.S. corporations and financial firms, which she has been reluctant to do.
6. The nationalists did it in order to bring down globalism, put an end to it once and
for all . Once people realize that supply lines (especially pharmaceuticals) thousands of
miles away is a recipe for disaster, they'll scream for things to be changed. Trump has said
he likes President Xi and the Chinese people, this is nothing personal, but he wants the jobs
to return.
7. China did it alone . The Chinese elite realize that globalism is ending, and
they know the Chinese citizens will blame them for the loss of their jobs. The Chinese elite
worry that the citizens will wonder why they've become filthy rich and they haven't. The
Chinese elite plant the virus, but blame it on the U.S.
8. The world elites, in collusion with the central banks, have blown massive financial
bubbles. They realize they can't continue blowing the bubbles any bigger, but they don't see
any way out without being blamed. They plant the virus in order to bring down the world
economy, deflate the bubble. The virus takes the blame, not them. China blames the U.S.,
the U.S. blames China, some old people are sacrificed, and they raise a glass to the
devil.
... I don't know whether you realise how the rest of the world is feeling at the moment:
people are stunned as if the Apocalypse has come. They are worried about their very survival,
and things are only going to get worse because the containment, lockdown, military special
powers will likely extend for weeks and months ahead, as it will take months to gain control
over the epidemic.
The Chinese have officially accused the US to have, at a minimum, covered up early
Covid-19 infections that took place in America several weeks before the epidemic broke out in
Wuhan.
Separate Japanese and Taiwanese epidemiologists have previously determined that only
the US had the five strains of Coronavirus that could have generated the Covid-19:
@Ron Unz Too many Americans are stuck on Pax Americana la la land and will never admit
something so grave to American status. We saw exactly this during 9/11.
Well, I think there's a certain amount of circumstantial evidence suggesting that the
Coronavirus outbreak may have been an American bioweapon attack against China (and Iran).
But if so, I'm *extremely* skeptical that the perpetrators ever intended or imagined that
it would leak back into the US and inflict the horrific economic and social damage that now
seems unavoidable. How to explain this lack lack of foresight?
The most obvious answer is that they were stupid and incompetent, but here's another
point to consider
In late 2002 there was the outbreak of SARS in China, a related virus but that was far
more deadly and somewhat different in other characteristics. The virus killed hundreds of
Chinese and spread into a few other countries before it was controlled and stamped out. The
impact on the US and Europe was negligible, with just a small scattering of cases and only
a death or two.
So if American biowarfare analysts were considering a Coronavirus attack against China,
isn't it quite possible they would have said to themselves that since SARS never
significantly leaked back into the US or Europe, we'd similarly remain insulated from the
Coronavirus?
Obviously, such an analysis was foolish and mistaken, but would it have seemed so
implausible at the time?
Well, I have only recently heard of a guy named Francis Boyle,a law professor out of the
Univ. Of Illinois. He is apparently an expert on bio-warfare treaties. He claims covid-19 is
manmade,period.
That is a very scary notion,from which most people will flee.
As I have accepted that 9/11 was "the usual suspects," I guess it is definitely possible.
@Ron Unz Maybe, but my take is an engineered market crash. This looks to me like a Nathan
Rothschild sort of trick (according to legend) – propagating fake news about Napoleon's
victory at Waterloo, crashing the markets, then snapping up the whole LSE for a penny to the
pound. If so, you have to admire it, the sheer genius, the psychopathic beauty of it all.
As a bonus, the Reichstag Fire also is an extremely efficient delivery system for the
eugenics payload – a very virulent strain that almost exclusively targets the social
burden (pensioners and already ill) while leaving alone the tax-farm base! Never in the
history of tax-farming have the sheeple been stampeded and fleeced so thoroughly! Bravo!
The US is the customer, with the enormous trade deficit. Trump has been hugely effective
with his tariff's policy in rehoming manufacturing to the US – a process that will
vastly accelerate thanks to the Corona virus outbreak.
I agree that 9-11 stink to high heaven and that PNAC are unmitigated bastards, but this
capitulation to China is balls.
@Ron Unz Stupidity is certainly an American Military essential behavior for promotion and
success in the current US Armed Forces.
But you can't have someone clever enough to create a Recombinant Designer Pathogen and be
in the US Military.
However, the psyops fucks would likely be ready to game the system should a natural
outbreak occur which would be called a Pandemic even when its not and make everyone of our
low quality leaders $hit their pants and go totally crazy. A mild fart with the claim its
poison gas would make the Stock Markets Collapse.
But if so, I'm *extremely* skeptical that the perpetrators ever intended or imagined
that it would leak back into the US and inflict the horrific economic and social damage
that now seems unavoidable. How to explain this lack lack of foresight?
This is the same issue with cyberwar viruses. One can infect computers in Iran, but with
the internet they may be passed onto the entire world, just like rap music.
But if so, I'm *extremely* skeptical that the perpetrators ever intended or imagined
that it would leak back into the US and inflict the horrific economic and social damage
that now seems unavoidable. How to explain this lack lack of foresight?
One word: Trump. Because he could very well lose his reelection bid if the pandemic causes
an economic recession which now seems highly likely given the stock market collapse.
Cui Bono ? The people OPPOSED to Trump, variously referred to as the "Deep State"
or the "National Security State" as described by Gore Vidal in his book which by the way
Julian Assange was holding while being hauled away from the Ecuadorian Embassy.
After Russiagate and Ukrainegate, THEY finally hit the bullseye with Coronagate.
This is a pretty good article. I'll probably link to it.
Some people think this is coming from City of London types. The US pursued a "strategy of
tension" with China that may have allowed third party actors to intervene and get them
fighting each other.
There has been some Bad Blood between British elites and China for awhile now. It's
not clear why.
In this scheme, the US is the patsy, the Oswald to take the blame.
The real gem in the whole article are the observations made by Yang himself:
YANG: That's what freaks me out about the whole thing. What we're doing is saying things
like, "Keep your social distance," and trying to stop the spread that way, which is fine.
But we have shit for data. Like, we don't know what the infection rate is. And so,
there's no reason we would ever be able to give the 'all-clear.' If you don't have any
data, this whole thing is a nightmare that doesn't end. When you close schools, what gives
you the all-clear to say, "OK, open them again"? Nothing. There's no data to compare it to.
This whole thing is a fear-based approach with no end in sight. There's no catalyst to ever
sound the all-clear. This whole thing is so fucked up.
YANG: I think the nature of that guidance has to be different, personally. I think they
need to be transparent about what kind of data we're relying on, to give people a sense of
the timeline. Right now, our sense of the future is so cloudy. And you get the sense the
president went from not taking this seriously to suddenly realizing its seriousness, and now
we're reacting in various ways to slow the spread of the virus. But then what? I would be
clearer as to what the timeline looks like, what data we're going to rely upon, how we're
going to get that data, what steps we're taking to increase testing capacity and just give
people a sense of the future.
We need to know now what the future can look like under different scenarios and then be
presented with what scenario we're in when that time comes. We've been on lockdown
for half a week. Right now, the American people don't have any visibility into whether it's
going to be four more weeks or four more months, and we don't know how those judgments are
going to determined. As president, I would say, "Look, here's the information, here's the
dashboard, here's what we're lining up, here's what we're hoping for, here's how
circumstances could change, and thank you for doing your part -- if you proceed with like
the rest of the country in flattening the curve and keeping things under this level, then
we can look forward to this. " You know, so we could actually have a sense of
accomplishment and purpose.
So here we have it, replicated throughout the whole of the Western world. An open-ended
clamp-down based on fear, with no timeline or road map, and no conditions set on when (or IF)
things will get back to normal.
For now, smells really fishy. Even if DS (Deep State) did not intentionally engineer this
circumstance, they are decisively and very swiftly exploiting it to exert extreme control
over everything .
@antibeast On the contrary, for the deep state Trump is the ideal puppet. Those
who are against Trump belong to the surface state , i.e. Democrats, Leftists in
general and the equally Leftist main stream media. Real policy in the US is only made by the
deep state .
The fixation on bats distracts from the important fact, which is that China primarily has one
haplotype (with instances of three others in small counts, including those brought in from
from abroad). The China haplotype is distinct from the Iran one, and the Italy one. Therefore
none of these locations can be the origin, because where the 'parent' of the virus comes from
would also be a place that would have multiple 'children' or haplotypes of the virus. The
only place place that has all five haplotypes is the US. You can talk all day about bats but
that is to ignore the scientific data about haplotypes and the parent-child relationship it
implies.
On the ideological level, I see many comments saying its not racist to talk about Asians
and weird foods. Let me point out that racism is not just discrimination, but discrimination
from a position of power. A black slave cannot be racist against his plantation master no
matter how much he hates him, because his individual 'prejudice' against the master does not
alter the world and its system of prejudice. Racism issues from power, so viruses that
originate from the US or western countries are NOT stigmatized as linked to white people or
white culture, but viruses that originate from Africa or Asia are racially stigmatized. In
any place, there are some people who eat 'weird' food, whether it be gator meat in Florida or
bats in Palau. But only non-white countries get branded as places of 'disease'. That's
because racism is the perpetuation of structures of power.
Black slaves were prized in southern plantations because they were resistant to diseases
like malaria. That is a fact, but it is also a historical reality that how people talk about
diseases is part of racial and racist discourse.
"... ...The notion of panic is best studied in the context of war. Subjected to fire, explosion etc. a military unit can be reduced to an unthinking mass, fleeing, dropping weapons and massacred by the advancing opponent. This is called panic, and it is never advisable, unlike a retreat performed in a controlled manner, minimizing the losses of the material, life and territory. ..."
...The notion of panic is best studied in the context of war. Subjected to fire, explosion
etc. a military unit can be reduced to an unthinking mass, fleeing, dropping weapons and
massacred by the advancing opponent. This is called panic, and it is never advisable,
unlike a retreat performed in a controlled manner, minimizing the losses of the material,
life and territory.
On personal level, I think I witnessed a trace of panic when I visited supermarket
today. There is a wide aisle with paper goods on one side and frozen goods on the
other. Toilet paper seems 95% gone, and so are frozen vegetables on the other side. Frozen
stuff from other aisles seem untouched. Personally, I had to substitute canned peas for
frozen peas I planned to buy. In any case, few reasons to expect major shortages.
On a larger level, a number of governments in Europe reacts with panic, doing things
that can seriously make things worse. When small countries close borders, there can be
serious havoc. Tens of thousands of people, thousands of trucks are stuck.
At least in USA, states have no authority to close borders. A smallish country like
Slovakia can have severe shortages if hysterical neighbors (Poland and Hungary, I am not
sure about Czechia) close borders. As supply chains cross borders to a large degree in EU,
interrupting the border traffic can create unpredictable shortages.
Additionally, creating big crowds (of stranded people) is very, very stupid under the
circumstances.
Rational policies would be to create the balance of needs and resources, take
measures to increase critical supplies including test kits, medical equipment and
medicines, find ways of humane and rational handling of travelers and so on.
"... Now moving on to the COVID-19 virus and the reactions. At present it is without question, based on the statistical evidence, an overreaction of historical proportions. ..."
"... The three areas, so far, where the virus has been the worst, N Italy, N China and Iran each have one thing in common - some of the worst air pollution on the planet which has been widely cited and as much as a decade ago it was noted that the results would be compromised immune systems, diminished lung functions and outbreaks of related health issues. So what we have essentially is an environment which was ripe for such viruses to proliferate and population that is vulnerable to such things. ..."
"... BTW Russ is correct on his note about bio-weapons and the funding for such things is always there even as the accounting methods serve to hide where these funds go. ..."
People have completely lost their minds here and that is due to decades of social engineering
which has created a culture devoid of critical thinking skills and a frighteningly docile
populace. Accepting the narrative of so-called (and ideologically and often financially)
experts is demanded of everyone lest you be cited as a "conspiracy monger." We could cite
literally all day the number of "whacked out" conspiracies that ended up being factual but
that's for another time.
Having said that it is the case that at present all of what b is saying in this
post is almost certainly the case- excepting the bio weapons narrative which is virtually
impossible to prove and if this is the case it was a very poor job of utilizing those
bio-weapons. And there is most definitely a racist element to this amongst the right-wingers
which will be played up.
Now moving on to the COVID-19 virus and the reactions. At present it is without
question, based on the statistical evidence, an overreaction of historical proportions.
The only option that changes this is if there is something further that we do not know and
for this we are to place our faith in governments and institutions that have consistently
lied to us and manipulated the public for decades. Someone tell me that we are actually
suppose to hold our noses and this time believe the "official narrative." It would
actually go against the proven evidence, that these entities are proven liars, for us to do
so.
The virus itself is just that - a virus even if it is particularly virulent which is still
up for debate. The notions of how to address this, at least the ones peddled to us, are
simply wrongheaded and fit a certain model of the medical establishment that BTW is part and
parcel of the same system that has brought us to the point of massive ecological collapse.
Let's not separate that out.
The three areas, so far, where the virus has been the worst, N Italy, N China and Iran
each have one thing in common - some of the worst air pollution on the planet which has been
widely cited and as much as a decade ago it was noted that the results would be compromised
immune systems, diminished lung functions and outbreaks of related health issues. So what we
have essentially is an environment which was ripe for such viruses to proliferate and
population that is vulnerable to such things.
Keep in mind that viruses constantly mutate and there are myriad viruses that are unknown
and never to be known until something like this occurs. So all talk of some "silver bullet"-
be it vaccine or other medical discovery- is at best short-term if not a Trojan Horse.
The solution is to have an economic social order that creates environments where the
external environment is such that the inhabitants are less likely to be impacted by such
contagions. Right now we have the exact opposite. So say what you want about COVID and
pretend that you can find a "fix" but once this passes if we are forced to return to the same
omnicidal economic system we will be right back here a few years from now.
BTW Russ is correct on his note about bio-weapons and the funding for such things is
always there even as the accounting methods serve to hide where these funds go.
I will unfortunately have to go against the grain here and say that I still fail to see the
immense danger of the virus.
The argument this article makes - particularly in its third paragraph - that drastic
measures taken by governments and private institutions means that the virus is a huge threat
doesn't logically follow. No matter how drastic the measures, how large the public's panic or
how rabid the panic buying, my chance of dying from the virus even if contracting it is, as a
sub-60 year old, healthy person still at roughly 1%, not much higher than viruses that gain
little to no media or political attention.
The fact that it affects old people, but unlike many other viruses not babies is another
factor that should lessen fear, rather than increase it.
This article summarizes the poll but mentions no reasons why those who do not believe the
mainstream narrative should change their opinions other than empty polemic statements (such
as "It would require deliberately ignoring these developments or accepting a completely false
narrative about them to conclude that the threat has been overblown at this point.")
In lieu of proper counter-arguments, it is false to assume that only those willfully
ignorant or believing in false narratives would not be as concerned about this virus as those
in the media and others blowing it out proportion.
A thought. I have often heard the regime in Beijing described as evil, but not stupid. Why on
earth would they have shut down an entire province and partially shut down their whole
country with all the attendant societal disruption and economic devastation if they didn't
think COV is a lot more than flu? Remember, the Chinese are famously fatalistic about life
and death (that is a polite way of saying that they care less about individual human lives
than we do). And what about the Italians. Were they just nervous nellies who had an
irrational panic attack over nothing? OBVIOUSLY they, and many other countries, think this is
a lot more serious than influenza.
my chance of dying from the virus even if contracting it is, as a sub-60 year old, healthy
person still at roughly 1%, not much higher than viruses that gain little to no media or
political attention. The fact that it affects old people, but unlike many other viruses not
babies is another factor that should lessen fear, rather than increase it
Nobody really has *any* solid idea of the epidemiology of this yet, so your blithe 1% is a
kind of wish-thinking. In the States, thanks to the lack of testing (i.e., the failure to
ramp up basic precautionary public health responses), **any** confident assertions of rates
and chances really just serve to flag the speaker as somebody who doesn't know how much he
doesn't know. Nassim Yaleb has some interesting thoughts about the real logic of our
situation:
First of all, you assume that I don't give a damn. I do. I don't think the virus is
unimportant. No virus is.
Second, the lack of certainty plays in favor of my argument rather than yours: We do
already have numbers on the amount of people infected, the amount of people who recovered and
the amount of people who died. From the latter two, we can surmise the percentage chance of a
person surviving an infection. Combining this with the percentage of people who died who were
over the age of 60 (80%) and the number of those people who had pre-existing, severe
conditions (75%) gives us a good idea.
Those who became infected with the virus but either didn't know that it was more than a
common fever or who became infected and had symptoms mild or even non-existent won't figure
into the number of people infected. Hence, the actual percentage chance of dying from the
virus is even lower, since only those who had symptoms severe enough and got tested will
figure into it. The reverse doesn't apply.
Hence, the actual risk of dying is even lower than the numbers suggest.
We don't even know if reinfection is a possibility. As I said, at this point *all*
serene predictions of the disease's likely course are fatuous. What the hell are you, The
Hobby Epidemiologist?
Funny how you specify that "serene" predictions in particular are fatuous while excluding
pessimistic ones. Perhaps it's you who is driven not by data but something else, rather than
me?
You are right. We are flying blind as long as we are not testing widely. However, there is
a lot of data available from other places and using that data we can actually extrapolate
quite a bit. Check this out:
I'm agnostic on the subject of COVID-19: its origin, how it first infected humans, its
epidemiological spread
Perhaps agnostic is not the best choice of words, but overall, I agree.
It is not impossible that the virus did not "escape" from the Wuhan Lab, but it is
unlikely.
That the Chinese have sequenced a virus to do something unexpected, then published it, is
unremarkable. That others may have done the same or similar and not published it,
would be remarkable. I would consider the "Five Eyes" and Israel entirely capable – and
likely to do that, given they operate as one.
I look to the narrative we get in North America, irrespective of the topic, and the
pattern is the same:
1- "report" the topic;
2- announce "breaking news" to establish the narrative;
3- repeat the narrative endlessly saturating the media;
4- ignore contrary evidence;
5- if #4 becomes too difficult, discredit it by a bait and switch;
6- pronounce the narrative is still solid and alternative information false;
7- rinse and repeat.
(I suppose, if all else fails, blame Russia/Putin could be added.)
In context of the above, I am leaning toward that it wasn't an accident and in all
likelihood it wasn't China.
The corona hype is not based on any extraordinary public health danger. However, it
causes considerable damage to our freedom and personal rights through frivolous and
unjustified quarantine measures and restrictions. The images in the media are frightening
and the traffic in China's cities seems to be regulated by the clinical thermometer.
Evidence based epidemiological assessment is drowning in the mainstream of fear mongers
in labs, media and ministries.
The carnival in Venice was cancelled after an elderly dying hospital patient was tested
positive. When a handful of people in Northern Italy also were tested positive, Austria
immediately closed the Brenner Pass temporarily.
Due to a suspected case of coronavirus, more than 1000 people were not allowed to leave
their hotel in Tenerife. On the cruise ship Diamond Princess 3700 passengers could not
disembark., Congresses and touristic events are cancelled, economies suffer and schools in
Italy have an extra [holiday].
At the beginning of February, 126 people from Wuhan were brought to Germany by plane and
remained there in quarantine two weeks in perfect health. Corona viruses were detected in
two of the healthy individuals.
We have experienced similar alarmist actions by virologists in the last two decades.
WHO's "swine flu pandemic" was in fact one of the mildest flu waves in history and it is
not only migratory birds that are still waiting for "birds flu". Many institutions that are
now again alerting us to the need for caution have let us down and failed us on several
occasions. Far too often, they are institutionally corrupted by secondary interests from
business and/or politics.
If we do not want to chase frivolous panic messages, but rather to responsibly assess
the risk of a spreading infection, we must use solid epidemiological methodology. This
includes looking at the "normal", the baseline, before you can speak of anything
exceptional.
Until now, hardly anyone has paid attention to corona viruses. For example, in the
annual reports of the Robert-Koch-Institute (RKI) they are only marginally mentioned
because there was SARS in China in 2002 and because since 2012 some transmissions from
dromedaries to humans have been observed in Arabia (MERS). There is nothing about a
regularly recurring presence of corona viruses in dogs, cats, pigs, mice, bats and in
humans, even in Germany.
However, children's hospitals are usually well aware, that a considerable proportion of
the often severe viral pneumonia is also regularly caused or accompanied by corona viruses
worldwide.
In view of the well-known fact that in every "flu wave" 7-15% of acute respiratory
illnesses (ARI) are coming along with coronaviruses, the case numbers that are now
continuously added up are still completely within the normal range.
About one per thousand infected are expected to die during flu seasons. By selective
application of PCR-tests – for example, only in clinics and medical outpatient
clinics – this rate can easily be pushed up to frightening levels, because those, who
need help there are usually worse off than those, who are recovering at home. The role of
such s selection bias seems to be neglected in China and elsewhere.
Since the turn of the year, the focus of the public, of science and of health
authorities has suddenly narrowed to some kind of blindness. Some doctors in Wuhan (12
million inhabitants) succeeded in attracting worldwide attention with initially less than
50 cases and some deaths in their clinic, in which they had identified corona viruses as
the pathogen.
The colourful maps that are now being shown to us on paper or screens are impressive,
but they usually have less to do with disease than with the activity of skilled virologists
and crowds of sensationalist reporters.
We are currently not measuring the incidence of coronavirus diseases, but the activity
of the specialists searching for them.
Wherever such the new tests are carried out – there about 9000 tests per week
available in 38 laboratories throughout Europe on 13 February 2020 – there are at
least single cases detected and every case becomes a self-sustaining media event. The fact
alone that the discovery of a coronavirus infection is accompanied by a particularly
intensive search in its vicinity explains many regional [clusters].
The horror reports from Wuhan were something, that virologists all over the world are
waiting for. Immediately, the virus strains present in the refrigerators were scanned and
compared feverishly with the reported newcomers from Wuhan. A laboratory at the
Charité won the race at the WHO and was the first to be allowed to market its
in-house tests worldwide. Prof C. Drosten was interviewed on 23rd of january 2020 and
described how the Test was established. He said, that he cooperated with a Partner from
China, who confirmed the specific sensitivity of the Charitè-Test for the Wuhan
coronavirus. Other Tests from different Places followed soon and found their market.
However, it is better not to be tested for corona viruses. Even with a slight "flu-like"
infection the risk of coronavirus detection would be 7% – 15% . This is, what a
prospective monitoring in Scotland (from 2005 to 2013) may teach us. The scope, the
possible hits and the significance of the new tests are not [yet] validated. It would be
[interesting] to have [some] tests not only on airports and cruising ships but on [German]
or [Italian] cats, mice or even bats.
If you find some new virus RNA in a Thai cave ore a Wuhan hospital, it takes a long time
to map its prevalence in different hosts worldwide.
But if you want to give evidence to a spreading pandemic by using PCR-Tests only, this
is what should have been done after a prospective cross sectional [protocol].
So beware of side effects. Nowadays positive PCR tests have tremendous consequences for
the everyday life of the patient and his wider environment, as can be seen in all media
without effort.
However, the finding itself has no clinical significance. It is just another name for
acute respiratory illnesses (ARI), which as every year put 30% to 70% of all people in our
countries more or less out of action for a week or two every winter.
According to a prospective ARI-virus monitoring in Scotland from 2005 to 2013, the most
common pathogens of acute respiratory diseases were: 1. rhinoviruses, 2. influenza A
viruses, 3. influenza B viruses, 4. RS viruses and 5. coronaviruses.
This order changed slightly from year to year. Even with viruses competing for our
mucous membrane cells, there is apparently a changing quorum, as we know it from our
intestines in the case of microorganisms and from the Bundestag in the case of political
groups.
So if there is now to be an increasing number of "proven" coronavirus infections. in
China or in Italy: Can anyone say how often such examinations were carried out in previous
winters, by whom, for what reason and with which results? When someone claims that
something is increasing, he must surely refer to something, that has been observed
before.
It can be stunning, when an experienced disease control officer looks at the current
turmoil, the panic and the suffering it causes. I'm sure many of those responsible public
health officers would probably risk their jobs today, as they did with the "swine flu" back
then, if they would follow their experience and oppose the mainstream.
Every winter we have a virus epidemic with thousands of deaths and with millions of
infected people even in Germany. And coronaviruses always have their share.
So if the Federal Government wants to do something good, it could learn from
epidemiologists in Glasgow and have all clever minds at the RKI observe prospectively (!!!)
and watch how the virom of the German population changes from year to year.
Some questions for the evaluation of the current findings:
1) Which prospective, standardised monitoring of acute respiratory diseases with or
without fever (ILI, ARI) is used for the epidemiological risk assessment of coronavirus
infections observed in Wuhan Italy, South Korea, Iran and elsewhere (baseline).
2) How do the comparable (!) results of earlier observations differ from those now
reported by the WHO? (in China, in Europe, in Italy, in Germany, etc.)
3) What would we observe this ARI-season if we would ignore the new PCR-testing?
4) How valid and how comparable are the detection methods used with regard to
sensitivity, specificity and pathogenetic or prognostic relevance?
5) What is the evidence or probability that the observed corona viruses 2019/2020 are
more dangerous to public health than previous variants?
6) If you find them now, how can you [prove], they were not there (e.g. in animals)
before.
What considerations have been made or taken into account to exclude or minimise sources of
bias (sources of error)?
Note: the original source of this quote contains embedded links not here apparent.
Finally, a great perspective on this fiasco. I agree, we
cannot make such important decisions with so little data to back it up. I would also add that
we do have some data that suggests that it's not an extinction level event as it's being
portrayed.
Look at the numbers in the countries that have been through it already, number of
cases are exponential for about 2 weeks and then they begin to decrease. That's happened in
China, South Korea, and is happening in Italy and Iran right now.
If China has 3,200 deaths
(plus 2600 critical condition patients) and Italy has 2500 deaths (plus 2000 critical
condition cases), why would we expect much more in the US?
According to the CDC MMWR, during
week 9 of 2020, pneumonia killed 2280 people and the flu another 384; during week 8 of 2020,
2911 died of pneumonia and the flu killed another 415.
That's more deaths in 2 weeks in the
US than all of China's deaths due to covid-19 since the epidemic started.
Why are we not
talking about this? I know that we have a pretty good idea of what the flu does every year
and I agree that we had no idea what covid-19 was going to do in a country in January, but
it's March and we have seen what it's done in a couple of countries and it's not any worse
than any other disease that we encounter every year.
I also agree that when this is all done
and we finally get more data, the fatality rate for covid-19 will certainly be less than 1%.
Then what? After the extensive damage to every part of our society? For what? What about the
people that rely on a weekly paycheck? The small business that rely on heavy customer
traffic? Will we hold someone responsible? Will it be the news media trying to sell
newspapers with negative headlines?
Scientists that arrive to a conclusion with no evidence
to support it? Are we going to freak out every year because bad things can possibly happen?
Maybe if we work really hard this year we can come up with something for next year that will
really kill us all but it won't be a virus this time, it will be our own stupidity and lack
of common sense.
The more the fear porn ramps up, the less certain I become of any aspect of the narrative
surrounding it. We are definitely all being discouraged from questioning its virulence,
discouraged from referring to its official fatality and case numbers, which do not correlate
with the level of fear we are being told is appropriate. There is certainly a massive and
multifaceted attempt to fudge and inflate those numbers to bring them in line with the
'response'.
This brings us back to our revelation that good old
Wikipedia have been downgrading the CFR of the Spanish Flu. It's hard not to see this as
part of the same process.
The actual death rates just aren't high enough. So talk them up, play pea and thimble
games with the stats, and do some Memory-Holing so that the 1918 pandemic suddenly has a very
similar CFR, allowing your tame media to make all the right comparisons in their op eds and
editorials, pointing out how many millions died back then despite it only having a fatality
ratio of 2.5%.
They seem aware of the discrepancy, and are making efforts to prevent people researching
it. The WHO are warning people not to read "too much" about the disease in order to protect
their mental health. In a write up on the reccomendations, the BBC says this :
There is a lot of misinformation swirling around – stay informed by sticking to
trusted sources of information such as government and NHS websites
Whether this virus is as imaginary as some are saying, or entirely real, it's being hyped
to a point beyond any connection with reality, and not just in the media. It's a
multi-pronged assault on our minds right now. Allegedly reliable and authoritative medical
professionals are just as likely to talk propaganda at you as some government minister or
media halfwit.
Gary Weglarz ,
Veterans Today describes itself as follows at its website: ("VeteransToday.com (VT) is an
independent alternative journal for the clandestine services focused on U.S. Foreign Policy
and Military Issues.")
A rather interesting report from VT to say the least.
RT has a headline "21 year old Spanish football coach dies of corona virus" Click on the
story. He had leukemia.
Dungroanin ,
Will just sticking to actual facts make a blind bit of difference to the panicked? I fear
not.
97% of all infected in the whole world seem to have recovered.
Of the 3% who didn't the AVERAGE age is above 70.
There is a trade off between a shorter period and more cases at the same time and the
same total number but not so many at the same time over a longer period by trying to
isloate people who do get it.
A safe vaccine must be ar least a year away for the NEXT return of the virus.
Is there any objection to these facts?
-- --
Facts?
Apparently italians are so far advanced in their doom they are letting a body remain in a
house without collecting it .
Apparently the 'young man' in his 50's was killed by the virus in the UK.
Are These 'facts' true? Can anyone post any links to them?
Thom ,
It's fairly clear the coronavirus is both a cover and an excuse for a) temporary financial
collapse; b) a vicious trade war with China and c) gaslighting the peoples of western
'democracies' into accepting semi-fascist government. As soon as the markets are at rock
bottom and China, Iran and the eurozone damaged as much as possible, a vaccine will most
probably be 'found', the markets will 'soar' and the majority will thank their political
leaders for pulling them back from the abyss – forgetting that many of the control
measures will still be in place and their pensions, investments and, quite likely, bank
accounts will have been quietly ransacked.
aspnaz ,
Totally agree. Here in HK we have had 4 deaths from Covid-19 over the past three months.
Here is a link to the HK covid-19 website that even gives you details of every case
https://wars.vote4.hk/en/ .
Initially the HK people paniced and most improved their personal hygiene: hand washing,
masks etc. All public gathering facilities were closed, such as all the public sports
facilities, but now they are all opening again and things are returning to normal as the
predictions of massive death prove to be false. I don't know what is happening in other
countries, but here in HK (and the same according to relatives in Taiwan) it has turned out
to be a bit of a nothing burger. Strangely, I have posted this comment on a number of fear
porn alt websites and had it removed.
Bryan ,
The modelling suggests that people over 60 are particularly vulnerable (for obvious age
related issues) and that the sheer numbers from this group will quickly overwhelm health
provision – so few will be priority treated and many will die from avoidable
complications. This is not hype and requires a serious intetventionalist response. I do not
doubt however that such measures may be come a permanent part of our slide towards the
authoritarian Right.
Jen ,
There is now news of a 21-year-old Spanish football coach,
a guy called Francisco Garcia , dying from COVID-19. He had an underlying condition
(leukaemia) which he did not know of until he had symptoms of COVID-19 infection and went
to hospital.
Garcia is likely to be the tip of the proverbial iceberg of young people who do not know
that they have dormant health issues until their immune systems become stressed or
infection with COVID-19 stirs up the dormant health problems.
During their late teenage / young adult years, people often pick up diseases or
pathogens – the various herpes viruses and the Epstein-Barr virus that causes
glandular fever come to mind – and for the most these issues resolve or their
symptoms go away but the viruses that cause them continue to stay in the body and create
problems later when the immune system is stressed by another pathogen.
How many young people these days might have dormant conditions, viruses or bacteria
causing no problems at all until they come into situations where their immune systems are
stressed, such as but not limited to situations like working two or more jobs in insecure
or dangerous conditions, living in share arrangements with strangers whose medical
histories are unknown, and being unsure of future prospects? They may also be vulnerable to
COVID-19 more than we realise.
Mucho ,
"If you ever doubted that corruption is now endemic and all our institutions –
political, legal, medical – are stacked with yes-men and jobsworths or fools prepared
to put their names to any junk proclamation that might get them a raise or save their
professional skins, just think of this article."
Not forgetting the enormous army of dependable chaps from "The Lodge", who can always be
relied upon to grit their teeth and say whatever is required to "retain order."
George Mc ,
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Attributed to Mark Twain.
Dave Hansell ,
Presumably that would also include statistics on previous years flu cases, suicide
statistics, deaths from car accidents statistics, deaths from knife crime, or Ben
population statistics?
Or are some statistics more valid than others depending on their utility in arguing a
particular case or agenda?
George Mc ,
Twain – or whoever- was drawing attention to the easiness of manipulating statistics
– which is why we should scrutinise them as Catte has done above.
George Mc ,
By a coincidence this wondrous Lancet article is one I accessed myself just a few days back
and I noted that arresting statement:
We re-estimated mortality rates by dividing the number of deaths on a given day by the
number of patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection 14 days before. On this basis, using
WHO data on the cumulative number of deaths to March 1, 2020, mortality rates would be
5·6% (95% CI 5·4–5·8) for China and 15·2%
(12·5–17·9) outside of China.
i.e. mortality rates outside China are three times greater than inside. Scary stuff. I
presume that the number of deaths mentioned are from within the confirmed infected sample?
Surely it would be too cynical to assume that they added in deaths from outside? But, as
with the UK deaths so far, the dead may have had other illnesses too.
... ... ...
Willem ,
Here is a report from Northern Italy of an Italian dr that I consider to be true.
He says that the origen of the virus is the media who created a panic instead of a
pandemic and much more. Tempting to quote but better read for yourself.
Hat tip to Milosovic who previously added this link
I'd be very cautious about anything that 'authority' tells you. I'm in a part of south west
France that geographically is not far from northern Italy.
Just about everyone where I am is saying that the covid 19 stuff is complete and utter
bullshit.
Remember, covid 19 is brought to you by exactly the same people who brought to you 9/11,
and the invasion of Iraq, etc, etc, etc.
Ivan ,
In Italy today there were 345 deaths from coronavirus, 368 yesterday. There is an endless
flood of patients in the hospitals, hospitals are being divided into hospitals trating
coronavirus cases and hospitals for non infected people. An emergency call for which the
medics arrived before in 10 minutes, now takes 50 minutes (Lombardia).
You don't know what you are talking about. Go take a look at the Italian news sites
(google translate).
Hmmm . Well I'm almost 75 with a heart condition and don't want to die gasping for breath.
So yes, for most, it's no big deal but anyone over 40 is at risk, so even if 'only' 1% die
in the UK, that's a lot of people. But most important of all, is the threat (potentially)
it poses to capitalism. Things will never be the same again.
Ieuan Einion ,
As I understand it, 30,000 people have died of this winter's particular strain of influenza
in the USA, which is par for the course, around 0.01% of those infected. If the Italian and
Iranian experiences to date are anything to go by, the infection/mortality ratio is much
greater for CorviD-19.
In line with the vitally important reference in the article to WHO estimates that 290 000-650
000 respiratory deaths occur each year associated with seasonal flu, the following cannot be
repeated often enough.
The ONS reported that in the 2017 to 2018 winter period, there were an estimated 50,100
excess winter deaths in England and Wales alone. The report attributed these deaths to "the
predominant strain of flu, the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine and below-average
winter temperatures".
So far, nCov has killed fewer than 50 people in the entire UK.
And yet, two years ago, not a single person wore a face mask, no flights were cancelled,
nobody refused to shake hands, not a single academic institution switched to distance
learning, no football was postponed, the England cricket team was not called home from a
sunlit corner of the former empire and no damn fools ran out to Tesco to clear the shelves of
toilet rolls and pasta.
And while we are talking about infectious respiratory diseases, the following are WHO
statistics for 2018. The name of the disease (see if you can guess) comes at the end.
• A total of 1.5 million people died from this disease in 2018.
• An estimated 10 million people fell ill with this disease worldwide.
• In 2018, 1.1 million children fell ill with it globally, and there were 205 000 child
deaths due to it.
• There were cases in all countries and age groups.
But this disease is curable and preventable.
The fact is though that the western media, governments and the ignorant population do not
give a shit about it because eight countries account for two thirds of the total, namely
India followed by China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh and South
Africa.
The Coronavirus Conundrum as interpreted by Average Joe.
Reporter: "Excuse me sir, have you been tested for coronavirus yet?"
Average Joe: "No, I haven't."
Reporter: "Aren't you worried?"
Average Joe: "No."
Reporter: "Why not?"
Average Joe: "I don't have any symptoms."
Reporter: "But you could be a carrier and not know it."
Average Joe: "Uh huh. Say, can I ask you a question?"
Reporter: "Sure, go ahead."
Average Joe: "What are the symptoms of coronavirus?"
Reporter: "Well, that would be coughing, sneezing, chills, intestinal disorder and
fever."
Average Joe: "And what are the symptoms of influenza?"
Reporter: " I think they are the same."
Average Joe: "Aren't there millions of cases of influenza compared to coronavirus?"
Reporter: "Well yes, that's true."
Average Joe: "And people could have influenza and not know it and spread it, too?"
Reporter: "Yes, I guess so."
Average Joe: "So why aren't you asking me if I should be tested for influenza, instead?"
Reporter: "Because coronavirus has killed about 50 people in the U.S. so far"
Average Joe: "Influenza has killed over 4,500 Americans so far."
Here we witness Average Joe thinks logically. Since there are more people infected with
influenza than coronavirus and the symptoms are the same and more people have died, he should
be tested for influenza before coronavirus. But the media isn't focused on influenza, they
want people to be afraid of coronavirus because of the huge amount of attention it is getting
in the press around the world. And that's the truth.
In most countries COVID-19 is regional with one province (and within this province one large city) as the epicenter.
Jim Bianco's model is too primitive and as such unnecessary alarmist.
The early stages of any flu epidemic are always exponential. But from some point propagation slows down considerably as the
virus has difficulties to find new vulnerable people either because number of people with immunity increases (COVID-19 on average
lasts less then a month; often just two weeks and around 90% of cases are mild ), or the measures were taken to "flatten the curve",
or the weather or other conditions became unfavorable to the virus.
Current exponential growth can also be explained by the fact that CDC completely botched testing. So a better availability
of tests with time produces a false exponential increase in cases.
In a sense the first half of March in the USA corresponds to the first half of Jan in Wuhan when the authorities did not yet
resort to drastic actions (especially true for NYC, which looks like a giant cruise ship to me with all corresponding problems
with AC, high density of population, frequent interaction with sick people via public transport including subway as infection
points, etc ).
This is also the period when the medical personnel became the most prominent victim of the authorities incompetence.
I am no so much concerned with number of infection among "commoners" as with the number of infections of medical personnel.
Depletion of medical personnel will greatly complicate the picture.
Working in hazmat suits exhaust people, especially women, very quickly and thus make them more susceptible to the infection.
In many cases you also need to wear adult pampers. It might well be that this is an overkill for this particular infection and
less drastic measures like surgical scrubs can be as effective to protect medical workers.
Research published in Feb had found that out of 138 patients studied at one Wuhan hospital, 29% were healthcare workers. Over
3K medical workers in China were infected and at least 18 died with ~ half of them under 40. Looks like heavy contact with infected
patients make medical workers prognosis worse than for "commoners"
Retired people over 70 now should self-quarantine and outside of senior facilities they are by-and-large responsible for their
own health. When I see them on cruse ships in late Feb and March I just think how many reckless persons are among older folk.
Most of them are also wealthy enough to order food via home delivery, not to drive to the store.
Still on recent visit to department store there were a lot of grannies in the lines (and completely depleted shelves ;-). Looks
like they are braving possible infection with the regular flu, if not coronavirus as typically several people cough within the
large store.
There should be some level of individual responsibility here , especially among seniors who are retired.
But, at the same time, "Whom the Gods would destroy they first make mad"
likbez , March 16, 2020 12:34 am
Terry, March 15, 2020 7:25 pm
Thanks for your last comment Run. You saved me the trouble.
Famous quote “They had learned nothing and forgotten nothing” is applicable to the current situation in the USA. Looks like
the US authorities learned nothing from SARC epidemics, which BTW hit Toronto.
Let me clarify my previous post (which does suffers from wordiness as run75441 correctly pointed out).
There are two diseases bunged into one in COVID-19: one is flu-like and is no threat (just a nuisance and Bert Schlitz is absolutely
correct about this part) and the second is the SARC-like destructive virus pneumonia which is an extremely serious threat that
has long time health consequences for survivors (lung fibrosis of various degrees similar to those which is the consequence of
pneumonia caused by electronic cigarettes.)
Those curves above do not distinguish between them and as such have no value.
IMHO the curves that matter are “serious and critical cases” and the “medical workers who are in serious or critical conditions.”
There is a wide divergence in the death rates between countries. Those that bent the
curve enough to keep their health care providers from being overwhelmed and who have
enough tests administered to get a better count of infections, seem to be slightly less
than 1% mortality. Those with overwhelmed systems and hospitals are 3 or 4% or higher.
That is still close to 10 times the flu at best. If we do get to the "overwhelmed"
category, the death rate may go much much higher.
This is a really brilliant satire !!! Another outstanding work. "Spread the message, not the virus" and "...when they threaten the
Stock Market." Priceless
What makes a nation civilized is not how it acts in times of peace but how it chooses to conduct itself in moments of crisis. Hoarding
stuff for months selfishly and fighting people in markets like animals is not how civilized societies deal with crisis.
Notable quotes:
"... Toilet paper is such a weird thing to be panic-buying... ..."
"... "Global emergencies- when they threaten the stock market" So sad but true ..."
"... "When they threaten the stock market." Boom. ..."
"... I love the term "local government franchise". sounds pretty synonymous to a government run by crooks and impotent political dynasties. ..."
"... I like how this started off completely taking the mick, but then turned, depressingly, into one of the most sensible summaries of our current situation. (I mean it's depressing that comedians seem to be better at communicating than our glorious leaders). ..."
"... "Italians are freaking out the Chinese are hiding out" That was just so freaking hilarious oh my God I love this channel ..."
I like how this started off completely taking the mick, but then turned, depressingly, into one of the most sensible summaries
of our current situation. (I mean it's depressing that comedians seem to be better at communicating than our glorious leaders).
Lucy's heavenly voice and impeccable pronunciation – which transform the coarse language into music to our ears – perfectly
convey the urgent educational message.
Thank you for the "flatten the curve" message. To be honest, I had wondered whether delaying the inevitable was the way to
go - especially in view of the fact that there are going to be, indeed, already have been deaths that are due to knock-on effects
from the corona virus.
Johnthan Pie as expected sharp insightful with a wicked cutting edge, but most importantly
so on point with home truths. Well done good man, please keep them coming we need you more
than ever 😁
-text" role="article"> Well done JP, a brilliant summation as always :) Particularly
poignant: "The only people we can look to for help are our leaders, who we would hope, are
looking to scientists & experts to guide them."
We dont actually know the CFR for covid-19 or influenza. Few people are tested for
influenza. Cdc uses models. Cdc says between about 70 percent and 85 percent of seasonal
flu-related deaths have occurred in people 65 years and older. A typical year has 30,000 flu
deaths so thats 20,000 -25,000 deaths in elderly per year and thats with vaccination.
The elderly with severe pneumonia from flu requiring a hospital stay have a 20% fatality
rate
The true case fatality rate, known as CFR, of this virus is likely to be far lower than
current reports suggest. Even some lower estimates, such as the 1 percent death rate recently
mentioned by the directors of the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, likely substantially overstate the case.
We shouldn't be surprised that the numbers are inflated. In past epidemics, initial CFRs
were also exaggerated. For example, in the 2009 H1N1 pandemic some early estimates of 12% CFR,
declined to 1.28 percent in the end (probably overstated since cdc recommended no testing by
summer of 2009 and used models ). In Wuhan, the CFR was more than 4 percent. As the virus
spread to other parts of Hubei, the number fell to 2 percent. As it spread through China, the
reported CFR dropped further, to 0.2 to 0.4 percent. As testing begins to include more
asymptomatic and mild cases, more realistic numbers are starting to surface. John Hopkins
University published a report suggesting actual cases in Hubei were an order of magnitude
higher since they did few testing for 2 months, testing only serious/cases. That brings the cfr
down in hubei to 0.3% like the rest of China which is heavily polluted with most of the male
population smoking
In China, 9 million people die per year, which comes out to 25,000 people every single day,
or around 1.5 million people over the past two months alone. Many of these deaths results from
diseases like emphysema/COPD, lower respiratory infections, and cancers of the lung and airway
whose symptoms are clinically indistinguishable from the nonspecific symptoms seen in severe
COVID-19 cases. During the peak of the outbreak in China in January and early February, around
25 patients per day were dying with SARS-CoV-2. Most were older patients in whom the chronic
diseases listed above are prevalent.
This is where the Diamond Princess data provides important insight. Of the 3,711 people on
board, at least 705 have tested positive for the virus . Of those, more than half are
asymptomatic, while very few asymptomatic people were tested in China. With flu we know 16% of
those infected are asymptomatic. Some estimates put it as high as 60%. Especially if you use
pcr tests which dont tell you anything about if thr RNA fragments were from currently
infectious particles. On the Diamond Princess, 7 deaths have occurred among the passengers,
constituting a case fatality rate of 1% percent. 0.2% of the ships passengers died. All of the
passengers were elderly while the younger crew members /passengers were much better off. Its
not unknown what percentage of passengers were elderly but lets assume 25%. That gives a
fatality rate among the elderly of 0.8%. Same as flu.
@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.
@John Dowser #130
Zero credibility numbers.
Of the 3500 people trapped on the first cruise ship - less than 20% got it. You can't get a
better infection setup than having people breathing the same air with infected people, with
another 1000 service people sharing a huge dorm with no walls and bringing food to
everyone.
So 20% is very likely the worst case in 1 year.
1% of that is still bad, but again, a function of timing. Are they evenly spread out over,
say, 6 week time frames? Then its bad but doable.
If they're getting it all in the same quarter, then it is really bad.
But that's why states are ordering lockdowns: pro and college sports cancelled,
music/entertainment cancelled, conferences etc.
@conspiracy theorists: try and use some critical thinking.
We have had a number of novel viruses break out in the recent past: Ebola, swine flu, SARS,
MERS among the major ones.
Why is it so surprising that we finally got one that happens to be significantly
transmissible (unlike SARS), deadly but not too deadly (unlike Ebola) and situated in a
region where people travel to/from a lot (unlike MERS)?
Secondly, the genetic sequencing is quite advanced and in the hands of a lot of different
people. There is a 96% match between Wuhan bat coronavirus and nCOV; 99% match between
pangolin coronavirus and nCOV. Secondly, viruses in general mutate because they are mostly
really shitty in error correcting when replicating - so we know they will change over
time.
The reality is that governments and scientists simply do not have the capabilities to
design a virus to this specification - at least, not yet.
In another article, Foreign Policy also suggests the pandemic should be a reason to
suspend the presidential election campaigning in the US. Opening the article with the
foreboding line:
It's time to ask, during a time of plague, whether -- and if so, in what form -- democracy
can continue as usual.
Which means no big crowds chanting Bernie's name, no televised debates where Biden forgets
where he is, and no lines of voters being turned away from the democrat primaries over
"misunderstandings".
The article even dances around the idea of postponing the vote itself. Voting "during a
time of plague" can have an impact on the turnout and result, Laurie Garrett argues. She
stops short of that, but only because "Orange Man Bad". If it was Hillary in the White House,
not Trump, the media would already have vociferously called for a postponement of the election
altogether.
As it is, they make do with this:
Actual voting can, and should, proceed with heavy emphasis on mailed ballots .
Total tested: 37,746
Total tested positive: 1,140
Infected as a percentage: 3%
Total deaths: 21
Mortality rate: 1.8%
Deaths as a percentage of all tested: 0.06%
Is this a catastrophe? Well I did a bit of extrapolating and found that, projected onto
the UK population (given as 66.44 million), the total number of deaths we could expect would
be just under 40,000. Sounds impressive – until you look at the 21 victims and consider
the age groupings:
CCTV footage has captured the moment toilet paper-hungry Australians caused unrest at an
Aldi store where a crowd of shoppers can be seen rushing down an aisle to claim the scarce
commodity before it was all taken.
I honestly never thought this would happen in my own country and I feel disgusted by this
behavior. 3 people over the ages of 70 have died in the entire nation or 30 million people.
Stop being selfish and ridiculous. This is not they end of the world and if citizens went
about their shopping as per normal there would be plenty for all. I have 4 rolls in my
cupboard at home and no idea where to buy more but I'll do the best with what I've got. its
worrying me that people in a 1st world nation have fallen to these lows.
The only reason there is a shortage here in America is because of the media. They have
everyone so panicked that if one person sneezes 9 others shit their pants in fear.
Sorry. Hysteria. China which was ground zero for this particular flavor of a respiratory
virus only had about 81,000 cases (so far) out of a population of how many billions? These
projections that posit that half the US population will become infected are wildly excessive.
And, yes, the fatality rate for COVID 19 is larger than the seasonal flu, it's larger than a
small number which is, itself, a small number. You guys have been watching too much disaster
porn.
I would like someone to explain why there have been so few infections and even fewer
fatalities on board the cruise ships.
We have 9000 (nine thousand) people, the majority of whom are well over the age of 50,
aboard 3 ships that have lived at very close quarters, in a confined environment where
Covid19 had been detected.
Where are the infections and where are the dead? By my last count, 6 elderly passengers
from the Diamond Princess passed away of complications related to Covid19. It is now over 6
weeks since that incident has taken place. In California, so far, 1 former passenger from the
Grand Princess has succumbed and there seems to be 29 infected people that are now under
observation or in care.
"... The "worst case scenario" doesn't look very credible. If less than 20% of the people on a cruise ship - trapped for multiple weeks - contracted nCOV, the notion that 2/3rds of Americans will seems far too high. ..."
"... And just for extra fun: The number of hospital beds in the US declined 5% from 2005 to 2017 ..."
"... The explosion of hate and blame and fear flying around online with regard to this pandemic is more than alarming and ultimately useless and damaging. In a way it scares me more than the flu itself at the moment because of the implications of how it will hinder our ability to cooperate and deal with this. ..."
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.
Why are you stoking this irrational panic? Quoting the New York Times. What's the matter with
you? I find it reassuring that high profile figures here and there have caught the COVID-19
flu. Madamm Trudeau, President Bolsinaro, etc. When they're back at their regular public
duties in a week or so maybe it will sink into peoples thick skulls what a bunch of scardey
cat ninnies the politicians are. The panic is doing more damage than the virus. IMHO. Time
will tell.
The "worst case scenario" doesn't look very credible. If less than 20% of the people on a
cruise ship - trapped for multiple weeks - contracted nCOV, the notion that 2/3rds of
Americans will seems far too high.
However, a lockdown has its own issues:
Reportedly 100,000 children in New York will starve if they can't go to school and get
fed. Is this going to be a lot different elsewhere?
What about the salaries, vs. the debts, for the hourly workers that won't be able to
work in a lockdown situation? A large percentage of Americans are extremely financially
precarious.
Then there's the US health care system. Even disregarding the secondary economic/social
effects noted above - how will $500-$3000 nCOV testing impact people? Much less the cost of
hospitalizations?
And just for extra fun: The number of hospital beds in the US declined 5% from 2005 to
2017: source
The number of hospital beds is rising in prosperous zip codes and falling everywhere else.
The amount of hospital beds fell by five percent nationally between 2006 and 2017. Over the
same time period, the number of beds increased by 10 percent in prosperous zip codes, which
were the only group to see an increase. Prosperous zip codes tend to be growing quickly:
The number of residents of prosperous zip codes increased by an estimated 20 percent over
the study period, faster than the population of any other quintile. Combined with their
initially low bed-counts, the rise in hospital beds in prosperous communities may reflect a
rebalancing in the landscape of beds towards the locations where more and more Americans
live.
So while richer areas got more hospital beds, the number don't reflect the
population increase. The other areas are just SOL.
The explosion of hate and blame and fear flying around online with regard to this pandemic is
more than alarming and ultimately useless and damaging. In a way it scares me more than the
flu itself at the moment because of the implications of how it will hinder our ability to
cooperate and deal with this.
The panic has set in, to some extent, but people are adjusting. There is a hyper focus on
the federal government and opportunistic political attacks with the goal of ruining the
current administration in the lead up to 2020 elections (an administration already paranoid
from 3+ years of being targeted to an extent I've never seen in my life). That much is really
obvious if you can look at things rationally, even if, like me, you're opposed to this
administration ideologically, politically and in almost every other way. I think that's
beyond reckless and extremely dangerous at a time like this, but my opinion won't change much
in a political environment that has been so carefully manipulated to a level of toxicity that
is maybe unprecedented. Maybe people will get their priorities straight when/if things get
really rough. Remains to be seen.
What the media and others aren't paying attention to at all to local and state authorities
who have been mobilizing. We don't rely on the federal government for everything. We have
extensive town, city, county and state infrastructures that handle most things in daily life.
The states themselves vary but every one has an extensive infrastructure.
The testing issue is clearly a major league failure. How important is it compared to
mobilizing? It's important because information is important for supply networks and decision
making. But is it more important in the short term than getting the population to prepare at
home, isolate to varying extents, to be informed about symptoms etc and be able to ride this
out as well as possible until the bigger, higher level infrastructure catches up?
And that is happening here in the US, at least in my state of NJ (bumped up
against/integrated with 2 of the biggest cities in the country). There is massive
mobilization. Colleges going into spring break right now and switching to online instruction
after spring break, large events canceled, people working from home when possible, state
government hotlines and online reporting in place, and tons of other things. This is
anecdotal but my son told me today that friends who work in electronics stores, restaurants
will be paid for furloughs, which surprised me. He's a student with a part time restaurant
job and no shut down or word of furlough pay as yet.
At a recent small biz related gathering - people already adopted modified non-handshakes
on their own. Maybe seems a little silly but shows how quickly people adapt in real world
regardless of the hate and panic flying around in MSM and social media. That doesn't get us
more hospital beds and respirators but it's important at the prevention end of things. As for
possible need for rapid expansion of medical facilities, I guess we'll find out soon if the
trillions we spend on military/national guard can benefit people at home if we hit that
crisis point. Supposedly, this type of logistics is one of their strengths.
Fun fact: the European Union actually has no authority over health issues whatsoever. This
is a strict Member State prerogative. The countries can coordinate voluntarily (which is what
is currently arranged by the European Commission, but since there is no precedence it takes
time) - but there was no way to make any decision about that in Brussels.
Greetings from Europe. In these hard times I'd like to thank Trump for providing such gold
comedy material from just being a moron and reminding us all that it could always be
worse.
" the percentage of patients admitted to intensive care units reported daily in Italy,
from March 1, up until March 11, was consistently between 9% and 11% of patients who were
actively infected."
"If this trend continues for 1 more week, there will be 30 000 infected patients.
Intensive care units will then be at maximum capacity; up to 4000 hospital beds will be
needed by mid-April, 2020."
"Considering that the number of available beds in intensive care units in Italy is close
to 5200, and assuming that half of these beds can be used for patients with COVID-19, the
system will be at maximum capacity, according to this prediction, by March 14, 2020."
" we can assume that we will need approximately 4000 beds in intensive care units during
the worst period of infection, which is expected to occur in about 4 weeks from March 11.
This is challenging for Italy, as there are now just over 5200 intensive care beds in
total. "
"We predict that if the exponential trend continues for the next few days, more than
2500 hospital beds for patients in intensive care units will be needed in only 1 week to
treat ARDS caused by SARS-CoV-2-pneumonia in Italy."
And age mortality profile
"Of the patients who died, 42·2% were aged 80–89 years, 32·4% were
aged 70–79 years, 8·4% were aged 60–69 years, and 2·8% were aged
50–59 years (those aged >90 years made up 14·1%). The male to female ratio
is 80% to 20% with an older median age for women (83·4 years for women vs
79·9 years for men)."
Something a little more positive from the China perspective
We are increasing our understanding of this disease. It is clearly very infectious, at
least in some circumstances. As we have explained this means that the case severity is likely
to be lower than the crude fatality rates in many media reports. We have explained the
dilemma of mortality early in epidemics here. The academic consensus for mortality is
currently around 0.3-1% (WHO). It could be higher but it could be lower if blood testing
eventually confirms more widespread, mild disease. The hospital mortality over the age of 80
years is 15%. Another way of looking at this data is that of every 100 people over the age of
80 who contract COVID-19 and become ill enough to go to hospital. 85% make a full
recovery.
The mean age of those who died in Italy was 81 years and more than two-thirds of these
patients had diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, or cancer, or were former smokers.
Of the patients who died, 42·2% were aged 80–89 years, 32·4% were
aged 70–79 years, 8·4% were aged 60–69 years, and 2·8% were
aged 50–59 years (those aged >90 years made up 14·1%). The male to female
ratio is 80% to 20% with an older median age for women (83·4 years for women vs
79·9 years for men).
Dr. Brian Monahan, attending physician of Congress, told a closed-door meeting of Senate
staffers this week that 70 million to 150 million Americans -- a third of the nation -- could
contract the coronavirus. Dr. Anthony Fauci testified that the mortality rate for COVID-19 will
likely run near 1 percent.
Translation: between 750,000 and 1.1 million Americans may die of this disease before it
runs its course. The latter figure is equal to all the U.S. dead in World War II and on both
sides in the Civil War.
Chancellor Angela Merkel warns that 70 percent of Germany's population -- 58 million people
-- could contract the coronavirus. If she is right, and Fauci's mortality rate holds for her
country, that could mean more than half a million dead Germans.
Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis called Merkel's remark "unhelpful" and said it could cause
panic. But Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch seemed to support Merkel, saying between 40
percent and 70 percent of the world's population could become infected.
Again, if Fauci's 1 percent mortality rate and Lipsitch's estimate prove on target, between
3 billion and 5 billion people on earth will be infected, and 30 million to 50 million will
die, a death toll greater than that of the Spanish Flu of 1918.
There is, however, some contradictory news.
China, with 81,000 cases, has noted a deceleration in new cases and South Korea appears to
be gradually containing the spread of the virus.
Yet Italy, with its large elderly population, may be a harbinger of what is to come in the
West. As of Thursday, Italy had reported 12,000 cases and 827 deaths, a mortality rate of
nearly 7 percent. This suggests that the unreported and undetected infections in Italy are far
more numerous.
In the U.S., the death toll at this writing is 40, a tiny fraction of the annual toll of the
tens of thousands who die of the flu.
But the problem is this: COVID-19 has not nearly run its course in the United States, while
the reaction in society and the economy approaches what we might expect from a boiling national
disaster.
The stock market has plunged further and faster than it did in the Great Crash of 1929.
Trillions of dollars in wealth have vanished. If Senator Bernie Sanders does not like
"millionaires and billionaires," he should be pleased. There are fewer of them today than there
were when he won the New Hampshire primary.
@Carlton
Meyer I've been following a few doctors on Youtube, for about a month now (dispassionate,
evidence-based docs), and their opinions vary on how serious this is.
What I don't is, if this is as contagious as they say (and it does seem to be) and as
life-threatening as they say, then given that there are several cases in NYC, why are we not
already seeing thousands of deaths there- a city where millions are crammed together daily,
many without good hygiene, many who have been for several weeks now, using public
transportation. I don't get it. It would seem the effects of any virus that were as bad as
they're saying, would already be reaching peak zombie level conditions in places like NYC,
Chicago, Boston, SF and DC.
Like the man on viriculture.com used
to say, healthy life =/= long life. We work towards extending one's lifespan, yet we don't
extend their "health span". We just extend the period when one is already falling apart. The
older you are, the more meds you need, the more healthcare you need etc etc.
So the longer the lifespan the bigger the load on healthcare and pension funds.
The main problem is, that our economic and cultural systems are at this point, 90%
biologically incompatible with us. A good chunk of our lives we study (especially so when you
study something like medicine, i believe at this point it's for genuine masochists). By the
time you get to a nice position in your career you're probably going to be older than 35. For
good birth rates etc that's unnaceptable.
So, the solution is to extend the "health-span". Preferably, you need to slow aging down at
least by 10, maybe even 15 years, while keeping the overall lifespan the same. The current way
is simply unsustainable
@Kratoklastes ...Like all the
other viruses that have floated around over the years be this one is being hyped up.
The hype works precisely because of your remark #3 but it will die a natural death after
everyone makes their money and the public gets bored.
I mean if just 1B people get a shot costing $50 that is a whole lot of Yuan. Store owners
also appear to be sneaking that extra markup on soaps and disinfectants and toilet paper. Y2K
also comes to mind and I am sure that Aids /HIV continues to kill more people annually than
this virus ever will. In the meantime I caution all nose pickers to leave those buggers alone
and not report any unusually large specimens. It will only skew the statistics and increase
the panic.
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.
You request that opinions should be limited to fact based
but in the next sentence you state "The truth is that NONE OF US really knows for a fact what
this virus can do, we are all guessing."
well .whether fact based or speculative here are two alternate views>
"My own view on the Coronavirus situation, is that I trust the Chinese Government to be
doing all it can possibly do, to contain the epidemic.
There are a lot of people there, living in close proximity
In that context, Steve Bannon is just using inflammatory language throughout, to diss the
CCP
I can well understand why the CCP will not allow any US personel anywhere near the
patients, nor allow them to have access to any of the medical data.
If Bannon is implying that the CCP has something to hide, then the CCP also has its own
suspicions as to how this virus suddenly appeared
A lot of stuff has in the past come out of Livermore Labs and in the UK from Porton Down,
which "should not" be released I know of southern coastal cities in the UK being sprayed with
viruses from the air in the 1950s – a deliberate programme supported by the UK
government
The CCP will also be fully aware of British activities within Syria and then there is the
Skripal incident, a home-grown Boris the Buffoon manufactured crisis
If one looks at UK and US official government behaviour towards Hong Kong, then one can
easily surmise that there are attempts to find other means to destabilise China
Just saying "
Another view >
"There was an interesting item on Facebook a few days back, claiming to be written by a
Chinese military official, a staunch supporter of the communist party and the government, but
a man 'with a conscience.'
He claimed the virus was manufactured with a view to causing reduction of higher brain
functions (i.e. lowering the IQ) and inducing docility into those who are protesting in Hong
Kong.
It was first tested, according to his narrative, more discreetly on rounded-up Uighurs in
the prison camps, well away from anywhere likely to be observed, and everyone who was
exposed, died. There was a massive clean-up and cover-up operation
Realising it needed more work if it was to be deployed in HK, they did some further
modifications and had intended to do a new test in Hubei, but this was pre-empted by a
shoot-out near the meat market that has been mooted as the source of the outbreak. Someone,
I'm not sure now who he reckoned it was, attempted to 'kidnap the bio weapon in order to grab
the technology it represented, but the consignment was hit by a bullet and the virus escaped.
Those in charge ensured there were no survivors as witnesses in that area.
He further claimed that the mortality rate is actually 100% but that it has been put about
that it is only 2% – this underplaying being with the complicity of the USA, Russia and
the UK and presumably the EU, in order to forestall mass panic. He claimed only those wearing
hazmat suits stand any chance, and that the pandemic will claim the lives of all but top
officials who have recourse to protective measures. He said that the actual symptoms in the
final stages are up to five days of agonising pain with internal organs haemorrhaging in a
similar way to Ebola.
Of course, the article was anonymously written, as he said his life and that of his family
would be forfeit if he were to be identified. Which makes it a narrative that is easy to fake
but impossible to completely refute. "
Like the Saker, I do not think the corona virus outbreak was deliberate. The first thing that
people crafty enough to unleash this sort of thing would think of is blowback.
Perhaps the depopulationists–but this is a really ineffective way of going about
it.
I do think, however, that it arose in a "laboratory" of tens of millions of human subjects
all undergoing an enormous experiment. Please humor me a moment.
If there were a deliberate element in all of this, it would be the hype and rush be the
first to implement an untested technology about which dire warnings were already being
sounded.
Virologists and epidemiologists have yet to discount that the coronavirus was a bio attack.
This does NOT mean that it was an attack, merely that the possibility of a bio attack cannot
be discounted. While there remains a lot of circumstantial and anecdotal "evidence" that this
was an economic attack perpetrated by America against China, this does NOT prove conclusively
that such an attack took place, nor does it prove that such an attack did not take place.
There is an abstract submitted to ChinaXIV (a research website) that, although not yet peer
reviewed, suggests that the virus dd NOT originate at the Wuhan Seafood Market and that it
was introduced:
Any reference as to who introduced the coronavirus to the market is pure speculation at
this juncture, although the circumstantial and anecdotal evidence could be construed as
overwhelming against the US considering the timing, geographic location and proximity to the
Wuhan Seafood Market of the US soldiers present for the International Military Games.
I am not a virologist or epidemiologist (I am an engineer), however it is not completely
out of the realms of possibility for a virus to make the transition from animal to human
host; and the conditions in which animals are kept in Wuhan and surrounding areas is
certainly not of the same standard as the West – both from the perspective of hygiene
and humanitarian considerations. Another abstract that does looks into the origins of the
virus states:
"The genomic features described here may in part explain the infectiousness and
transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 in humans. Although genomic evidence does not support the
idea that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory construct, it is currently impossible to prove or
disprove the other theories of its origin described here, and it is unclear whether future
data will help resolve this issue. Identifying the immediate non-human animal source and
obtaining virus sequences from it would be the most definitive way of revealing virus
origins."
Much mention has been made of the corona-virus in question (COVID-19) binding to the ACE-2
receptors found in the lungs and heart – most particularly in those of Asian heritage.
It would not be outside the realms of science for this to be a logical target for the virus,
given its geographic location, but the hypothesis of it being engineered to target a specific
racial genotype is also not outside the realms of possibility.
"Our findings indicated that no direct evidence was identified genetically supporting
the existence of coronavirus S-protein binding-resistant ACE2 mutants in different
populations (Fig. 1a). The data of variant distribution and AFs may contribute to the
further investigations of ACE2, including its roles in acute lung injury and lung
function12. The East Asian populations have much higher AFs in the eQTL variants associated
with higher ACE2 expression in tissues (Fig. 1c), which may suggest different
susceptibility or response to 2019-nCoV/SARS-CoV-2 from different populations under the
similar conditions."
I agree with Andrei's analysis that a bio-weapon is both unwieldy and difficult to control
when used in a purely military application, but when used as an economic weapon, the
possibility is mentioned in the odious The Project for a New American Century's (PNAC) report
titled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century."
"advanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform
biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool."
This does not prove that the tragedy unfolding out of Wuhan was a bio-weapon, but
certainly demonstrates the possibility of intent. At this juncture, neither side of the
argument can provide any proof, so the the hypothesis remains pure speculation. The Chinese
government is not directly accusing the US of a bio attack, but it is extremely worrying that
both the Russian and Chinese governments remain highly suspicious.
"CORONAVIRUSES HAVE ALWAYS INFECTED HUMANS, PANIC IS UNWARRANTED"
Posted by agencycyta | Mar 9, 2020 | Science , Featured , Health | 0 |
"Coronaviruses have always infected humans, panic is unwarranted"
According to an Argentine virologist in France, Pablo Goldschmidt, there is no evidence to
indicate that the fatality or morbidity of COVID-19 is superior to that caused by influenza
viruses or the common cold.
(CyTA-Leloir Foundation Agency) -. For the virologist and infectious disease specialist
Pablo Goldschmidt, the panic surrounding the strain of coronavirus identified in China
(COVID-19) is as unwarranted as the one created in 2003 with severe acute respiratory
syndrome (SARS). ) or in 2009 with the influenza A (H1N1) virus.
"The ill-founded opinions expressed by international experts, replicated by the media and
social networks repeat the unnecessary panic that we have previously experienced. The
coronavirus identified in China in 2019 causes neither more nor less than a strong cold or
flu, with no difference until today with the cold or flu as we know it, "says Professor
Goldschmidt, also a biochemist, pharmacist and psychologist graduated from the UBA, volunteer
for the World Health Organization (WHO), former praticien hospitalier of the public hospitals
in Paris and author of the book "People and microbes, invisible beings with whom we live and
make us sick" (2019).
The Argentine specialist lives more than four decades in Europe. At the Faculty of
Medicine of the hospital center de la Pitié-Salpetrière in Paris, he obtained
diplomas in pharmacokinetics, clinical pharmacology, neuro-psychopharmacology and
pharmacology of antimicrobials. At the Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris VI he
received a doctorate in molecular pharmacology. The theoretical and practical training of the
Paris Curie and Pasteur Institutes also concluded with degrees in fundamental virology and
molecular biology. As a volunteer at the WHO, he integrates humanitarian missions in Guinea
Conakry, Bissau, Pakistan, Ukraine, Cameroon, Mali and the Chad border with Nigeria. And it
aspires to obtain from the Argentine State a mandate to exercise the right to speak before
the international organization.
In dialogue with the CyTA-Leloir Agency, Goldschmidt expresses its tension in the face of
the global terror generated by the quality of information that is disseminated about the new
coronavirus and considers it necessary that the data that is propagated be placed in the
geographical and social context. "You can't create hysteria on the entire planet," he
says.
-Which viruses are considered responsible for respiratory diseases?
Viral respiratory conditions are numerous and are caused by several viral families and
species, among which the respiratory syncytial virus (especially in infants), influenza
(influenza), human metapneumoviruses, adenoviruses, rhinoviruses, and several coronaviruses,
already described years ago. It is striking that earlier this year global health alerts have
been triggered as a result of infections by a coronavirus detected in China, COVID-19,
knowing that each year there are 3 million newborns who die in the world of pneumonia and
50,000 adults in the United States for the same cause, without alarms being issued.
– The fact that it is transmitted by saliva or by cough increased the fear of the
population?
Many microorganisms are transmitted by this route in humans. The cold, transmitted by
saliva and cough, is caused by more than 150 rhinoviruses. Ten million people were infected
by saliva and cough with the tuberculosis agent in 2018, of which 1 million were children and
205 thousand died. The same happened with bacterial meningitis, transmitted by saliva, which
affected more than a million people in a year. Measles is also transmitted by saliva, hence
the urgency to protect the population with vaccines.
-You. Do you consider the international alerts launched due to the coronavirus to be
exaggerated?
Our planet is the victim of a new sociological phenomenon, scientific-media harassment,
triggered by experts only on the basis of laboratory molecular diagnostic analysis results.
Communiqués issued from China and Geneva were replicated, without being confronted
from a critical point of view and, above all, without stressing that coronaviruses have
always infected humans and always caused diarrhea and what people call a banal cold or common
cold. Absurd forecasts were extrapolated, as in 2009 with the H1N1 influenza virus.
And the risk of complications?
A cold can present as a benign, self-limiting disease; but it is known that all
respiratory diseases, however banal they may be considered, can severely affect the frailized
people, people with cardiocirculatory problems over 65 years, people with metabolic
disorders, immunosuppressed, transplanted and, above all , to poorly fed people without
shelter, and to those who do not have access to competent health teams that provide them with
effective medicines. This situation, clearly revealed for so many other diseases, is repeated
in all infections and COVID-19 is no exception.
Why does each individual become infected and react differently to viral infections?
The first step for a virus to infect a person depends on the virus's ability to recognize
"locks" or proteins on the surface of cells in certain organs, not all. Once it attaches to
its lock, it can penetrate the cell and put all the cellular machinery of the infected
subject at its service to replicate itself. It has been determined that there are individuals
with many "locks", others with few and others with easier "locks" to open, which is
determined by the genes. On the other hand, there is a defensive apparatus of proteins
encoded in DNA that is known by the name of "reactoma". In short, all humans are unique
living beings against microbial aggression and against the malignant transformations of our
tissues. Therefore, in certain individuals,
Is the coronavirus detected in China a new agent?
Those who launched the international alerts did not take into account data that shows
whether this virus or other similar viruses circulated in previous years. Or if people who
were already exposed to other coronavirus variants have partial or total protection against
the 2019 strain.
-Why do you not accept the extrapolation from one country to the other of the forecasts
issued by international agencies?
First, it is appropriate to compare the mortality and morbidity data with the number of
positive cases (those confirmed by the laboratory in relation to the number of severe cases
or the number of deceased persons). The first thing that emerges from the data, beyond the
biological criteria referring to the individual capacity to get sick and defend against viral
aggression, are doubts regarding the figures, if it is not considered that the affected
people did or did not have access to competent and equipped health, and if they received
timely treatments with adequate and bioequivalent drugs.
– Would these factors contribute to explain the differences in mortality and
morbidity between countries?
If there is no biological justification for individual predisposition, the difference
could be due to the quality of the medical institutions, the reasons that caused the time to
pass before the affected people go to health centers, or the quality of the training of
medical centers and the availability of resources to treat acute respiratory diseases. We
must impose moderation and use concrete data. There is no evidence to show that the 2019
coronavirus is more lethal than respiratory adenoviruses, influenza viruses, coronaviruses
from previous years, or rhinoviruses responsible for the common cold.
Snip:
The average age of deceased and positive patients in Covid-2019 is 81 years, mostly men.
They, in more than two thirds of cases, have three or more pre-existing pathologies.
This was confirmed by an analysis conducted by the Istituto Superiore di Sanità on 105
Italian patients who died up to 4 March.
...
The average age of the patients examined is 81 years, about 20 years higher than that of the
patients who contracted the infection. There are 28 women (26.7%).
According to ISS data, 42.2% of the deaths are in the age group between 80 and 89 years.
32.4% were between 70 and 79, while 8.4% between 60 and 69, 2.8% between 50 and 59 and 14.1%
over 90 years.
end Snip:
With luck Congress will be cleaned out of old world thinking, and replaced with new world
thinking, (alas, same as old world thinking as it is controlled by the same thought group.
One lives in hope of change for the better.
Another thought has just come to me. The age of the Media Barons all seem to be in the high
to highest end of the fatality spectrum. Wonder if it is a coincidence we are having such a
panic media attack, free on facts yet huge on speculation and shunting blame to all and
sundry. Just a thought
Could it be ncov19 is no worse than the common cold, and what we are experiencing is the
power of the media as it follows the order to create a world wide panic designed to prop up
calls for a 1 world government. Deaths recorded are in the 80+ age range with at least 3
pre-existing conditions. The public can't get enough of this soap opera.
Raw figures for Italy and Iran at 14.00 GMT Friday Mar 6
Italy Infected 4636 Deaths 197 Recovered 523
Iran Infected 4747 Deaths 124 Recovered 913
Remember Iran is under very strict Sanctions from USA et al. not helping their situation.
Death rate is mostly those over 50 ramping up each decade over the 60 mark. (This get s rid
of old farts like me easier and faster :-) ) As for Israel, take that with a pinch of salt
they love to brag. I am not denying we live with truly evil people pulling strings for
profit. Cheers
....On Tuesday, the WHO noted that the global death rate for the novel coronavirus based
on the latest figures was 3.4% -- higher than earlier figures of about 2%. The WHO's
director-general, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, said the new coronavirus was "a unique virus
with unique characteristics.".....
....In the low-severity model -- or best-case scenario of the seven -- ANU researchers
estimate a global GDP loss of $2.4 trillion, with an estimated death toll of 15
million.....
The 3.4% 'mortality rate' is simply the raw number: # of deaths / # of confirmed
coronavirus cases. It's NOT comparable to the mortality
rate for the common flu, which has long been established as .1%.
The experts in your link
(see below) state that the rate will go down as more people are tested.
As far as I know,
only China and perhaps South Korea now have reliable figures on how many have been infected
with the virus. For example, the U.S. and Japan have been a tragic embarrassment when it
comes to actually testing people.
Business Insider:
The death rate is likely to change further as more cases are confirmed, though experts
predict that the percentage of deaths will decrease in the longer term since milder cases of
COVID-19 are probably going undiagnosed.
"There's another whole cohort that is either asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic,"
Anthony Fauci, the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,
said at a briefing last month. "We're going to see a diminution in the overall death
rate."
I saw a posting on Propublica that made an important point: death rates are skewed early
during an outbreak because deaths are solid markers (numerator) but number of infected known
is certainly a subset of actual people who have the disease - particularly when testing isn't
available and common.
Also, early during an outbreak, the known infected tend to be those that have serious cases
such that they end up in the hospital - so that also skews numbers.
If there is a significant number of symptomless infections the real (death rate) number
will be even lower.
That's the point. As long as not a significant number of all people in a certain area are
tested, regardless of whether they show symptoms or not, no one can tell the real death rate.
No one knows the number of symptomfree infectants.
The Last but not LeastTechnology is dominated by
two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt.
Ph.D
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains
copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available
to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social
issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such
copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which
such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free)
site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should
be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors
of this site
Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or
referenced source) and are
not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society.We do not warrant the correctness
of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be
tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without
Javascript.
AIER Staff – November 21, 2020 Reading Time: 20 minutes
Print Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Reddit Flipboard Email Share
Print Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Reddit Flipboard Email Share READ MORE
AIER Staff
Jordan Schachtel – May 20, 2021
How Team Biden Ended Covid Mania OvernightREAD MORE
Micha Gartz
Amelia Janaskie – May 20, 2021
Lockdowns in Taiwan: Myths Versus RealityREAD MORE
Aleksandra Przegalinska – May 19, 2021
What the Heck Is Bitcoin All About?READ MORE
Robert E. Wright – May 19, 2021
Beware the Rise of ScamericaREAD MORE
Ethan Yang – May 19, 2021
The Moralization of Covid-19READ MORE
Donald J. Boudreaux – May 17, 2021
Will 2020 Prove to Be the Beginning of the End of Modernity?READ MORE
Joakim Book – May 16, 2021
To Lean, Clean, or Reign SupremeREAD MORE
Twitter Facebook-f Youtube Pinterest Linkedin Google Flipboard Rss
AIER would like to update you with the latest economic research, articles, and news . Allow Cancel
+5
+5
+5
+5
Tier Three IS working: Coronavirus cases are falling in ALL...
Daily Covid-19 cases rose by 50% last week in England and 1...
+5
© Susan Walsh / Pool via Reuters 107 Follow RT on 
FILE PHOTO: A doctor checks the identity of a man before taking swabs. Toulouse. France. April
28th 2020 © Getty Images / Alain Pitton/NurPhoto 424 Follow RT on 
UK
health secretary claims rise in Covid-19 cases is 'very serious problem'
Covid-19 death toll tops 1 MILLION worldwide as pandemic spikes in US, Brazil & Europe
© EuroMOMO
Death toll from Covid-19 could 'very likely' reach 2 MILLION before vaccine widely available,
WHO says
Anti-lockdown protest in London, Britain, August 29, 2020 © REUTERS / Henry Nicholls 97
Follow RT on 
The NHS needs to stop being hysterical. Taking steps to shield the vulnerable elderly from
Covid is NOT 'age-based apartheid'
belongs to "with COVID-19" category
and in the USA constitutes probably 80% of reported COVID-19 deaths. In other words, most
of deaths reported are very sick people with significant percentage already of the death
bed.
Clashfan, 2 hours ago ...Read this! CDC guidelines for reporting. Everything is Covid19.
Coded.