Coronavirus Information
(This page is a very long one. All the other "info" pages are short.)

 

 

An interview with Dr. Zach Bush

A medical doctor speaks out

Dr. Erickson COVID-19 Briefing

Update From Andrew Saul about Vitamin C

Live Longer, Feel Better with Andrew Saul

Hospital treatment using high amounts of Vitamin C

Is there an Agenda Behind Covid-19?

The Myth of Vaccination

A Message From Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

The Downsides of Mask-Wearing and Why They're Not Needed

Masks don't help and this has been known for a long time - February 2023

Bill Gates' Plan to Vaccinate the World
Bill Gates and the Population Control Grid
Meet Bill Gates
How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health

 

FACT: Over 99% of the people who are infected with SARS-CoV-2 (the name of this virus) do not need to go to the hospital and will recover. Of the remaining amount, 1% of them will die (if not treated). Very similar to the seasonal flu, and yet we are not just quarantining the sick (which is normal), but we are quarantining the healthy, and we don't do this during flu season. Hmmm.

And Covid-19 (the name of the condition) will be the SECONDARY Cause Of Death; the PRIMARY cause will be co-morbidities like an unhealthy respiratory system, being on drugs that tank the immune system, COPD, they've had a heart attack, etc. And it is pneumonia that kills those people as a result. So why are we devastating the lives of millions of people? Why are we not taking into consideration the secondary effects of isolation, like the uptick in child molestation, spousal and child abuse, alcoholism, and suicide because of lost wages? And what about the thousands of small businesses that will never reopen... all to quarantine that 92-96%. Doesn't it make more sense to isolate the at-risk group and NOT ruin the economy? And certainly isolate those who are sick (just as we normally do with flu infections).

Was this simply seen as an opportunity to push the agenda for global mandatory vaccinations that will result in multi-billions of dollars for certain people? For me, the evidence is clear. And for the record, I believe the Earth is a globe, not flat, I believe we did land on the moon, I believe the Holocaust was real, and I do not believe we are ruled by lizard people who look human. So I am not what one would call a "conspiracy theorist"... but make no mistake, there is a conspiracy going on.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

'We paid for the damn virus that’s killing us':
Giuliani rips Fauci over grants to Wuhan laboratory

[Think what you will about Rudy Giuliani, but he is dealing with facts here.]

Rudy Giuliani questioned Dr. Anthony Fauci's involvement in grants from the United States to a laboratory in Wuhan, China, that has been tied to the coronavirus pandemic.

According to a report, the U.S. intelligence community has growing confidence that the current coronavirus strain may have accidentally escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology rather than having originated at a wildlife market, as the Chinese Communist Party first claimed. During a Sunday interview on The Cats Roundtable, Giuliani questioned why the U.S. gave money to the lab.

"Back in 2014, the Obama administration prohibited the U.S. from giving any money to any laboratory, including in the U.S., that was fooling around with these viruses. Prohibited! Despite that, Dr. Fauci gave $3.7 million to the Wuhan laboratory, even after the State Department issued reports about how unsafe that laboratory was, and how suspicious they were in the way they were developing a virus that could be transmitted to humans," Giuliani said.

He added, "We never pulled that money. So something is going on here John. I don’t want to make any accusations. But there was more knowledge about what was going on in China with our scientific people than they disclosed to us when this first came out. Just think of it: If this laboratory turns out to be the place where the virus came from, we paid for it. We paid for the damn virus that’s killing people.”

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Coronavirus: Bill Gates calls for 10 more weeks of lockdown

Bill Gates has claimed that the U.S. needs to have ten more weeks of shutdown to fight the coronavirus pandemic.

Writing in an op-ed for The Washington Post, Mr. Gates said the country needs to unite around an approach in order to be successful.

Each state offers different advice and only five have stay-at-home orders in place, meaning residents can only leave the house for essential needs.

Mr. Gates thinks this needs to change: “First, we need a consistent nationwide approach to shutting down. Despite urging from public health experts, some states and counties haven’t shut down completely,” he wrote.

“In some states, beaches are still open; in others, restaurants still serve sit-down meals.”

Mr. Gates added that “any confusion about this point will only extend the economic pain, raise the odds that the virus will return, and cause more deaths”.

The co-founder of Microsoft also argued that the amount of testing should increase, and praised New York’s responses to the virus, where they have increased their testing capacity to 20,000 people a day.

He praised Seattle’s self-swab testing, which means patients avoid the risk of infecting a medical professional, and wrote: “I hope this and other innovations in testing are scaled up across the country soon”.

Mr. Gates also advocated for a vaccine to be developed within 18 months and praised the government for making deals with companies to prepare for manufacturing.

“It’s a great sign that the administration made deals this week with at least two companies to prepare for vaccine manufacturing. I hope more deals will follow,” he wrote.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the chief infectious disease expert leading the U.S. response, echoed Mr Gates’s claims and said he doesn’t understand why states aren’t working together to tackle the virus.

Dr. Fauci told CNN: “You know, the tension between federally mandated versus states’ rights to do what they want is something I don’t want to get into ... But if you look at what’s going on in this country, I just don’t understand why we’re not doing that.”

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

An observation: Many U.S. citizens acknowledge that the Federal government is not entirely honest with them, and that elected and appointed officials lie to them, about all kinds of things, all the time. The alternative press does plenty of news stories about the BS that's flung at us, and about how we're being deceived (having nothing to do with National security). And yet, these same citizens have full faith and trust in whatever the government says when it comes to public health issues, for example: vaccinations, the need to shut down the economy so everyone will stay home, and the stats on the number of cases and deaths due to Covid-19. And unlike every other issue, these citizens won't question anything about these particular issues. They'll admit that govt officials are disingenuous liars, except for Anthony Fauci and Deborah Burke. What's up with that? Why does their incredulousness and skepticism go disappear when it comes to health information? They know the government lies about the importance of meat and dairy in the diet, but are you telling me that they DON'T lie about the need for vaccinations? Consider that of all the industries in existence, the #1 industry for giving money to politicians is the industry that makes vaccinations, the pharmaceutical industry. Collectively they give billions of dollars to politicians, in BOTH parties. There must be a reason. We need to wake up, fast, or all the classes below the upper class will be facing a new reality that is NOT in our best interest.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

More blatant lies from govt and its minions
(the NY Times in this case) about this virus

False. There are plenty of examples around the world of it "dying out" as all viral infections do. This one is not magical. It is no different than an influenza virus as far as herd immunity is concerned.

Bullshit! Taking vitamin C and keeping your hands away from your eyes and nose are the BEST ways to prevent infection. But preventing infection for those who will only be inconvenienced by a viral infection should NOT be done if we want this strain of virus to "die out". And over 99% of those who contract this virus will NOT die (unless the hospital does things like intubation when it doesn't have to, and it doesn't take the person off ACE inhibitors and statins).

Also bullshit. These people – who have an agenda of world-wide vaccination – figure that the public won't know what they're saying is bullshit, so they say it, knowing they will be backed up by public health officials in govt, and anyone who calls them on their bullshit will simply be seen as a conspiracy theory nut case (like me).

More fear-mongering. The BEST thing we can do is inform the "at risk of dying" people to be careful, and allow everyone else to "catch" the infection, and get it over with. This herd immunity is the BEST thing to protect the small percentage of people in the "at risk of dying" category. But this approach doesn't support the mandatory vaccination agenda which is why it isn't being done.

If you're not in the "at risk of dying" category, NO YOU SHOULDN'T!!! Mask wearing brings with it its own set of problems, and can make you MORE prone to ill health.

Folks, PLEASE get educated on this issue. Or do you want to be forced to get injected with something that is very likely to harm you somewhere down the road (some even immediately)?

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Studies on the dangers of vaccinations

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3878266/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21623535
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25377033
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24995277
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12145534
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22099159
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17454560
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19106436
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3774468/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3697751/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21299355
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21907498
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11339848
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17674242
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21993250
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15780490
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12933322
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16870260
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19043938
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12142947
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24675092

Causal relationship between vaccine induced immunity and autism

Subtle DNA changes and the overuse of vaccines in autism

Vaccine and Autism - a New Scientific Review

157 Research Papers Supporting Vaccine Autism Causation

Mercury toxic encephalopathy manifesting with clinical symptoms of regressive autistic disorders.

Relation of mercury to high autism rates in boys

Elevated levels of measles in children with Autism

Abnormal MMR antibodies in children with autism

Tylenol, MMR and Autism - A parent survey study

Autism and mercury poisoning

Hypothesis: conjugate vaccines may predispose children to autism spectrum disorders

A Positive Association Found Between Autism Prevalence and Childhood Vaccination Uptake Across the U.S. Population

A two-phase study evaluating the relationship between Thimerosal-containing vaccine administration and the risk for an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis in the United States

Elevated levels of measles antibodies in children with autism.
A study published in the Journal of Biomedical Sciences determined that the autoimmunity to the central nervous system may play a causal role in autism. Researchers discovered that because many autistic children harbour elevated levels of measles antibodies, they should conduct a serological study of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and myelin basic protein (MBP) autoantibodies. They used serum samples of 125 autistic children and 92 controlled children. Their analysis showed a significant increase in the level of MMR antibodies in autistic children. The study concludes that the autistic children had an inappropriate or abnormal antibody response to MMR. The study determined that autism could be a result from an atypical measles infection that produces neurological symptoms in some children. The source of this virus could be a variant of MV, or it could be the MMR vaccine.

 

 

EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY NEEDS TO READ THIS AND ABSORB IT. THOSE STILL ASLEEP, YOU BETTER WAKE UP BECAUSE THIS SHAM AND DRESS REHEARSAL WILL CERTAINLY BE YOUR LAST CHANCE;
THOSE CHOOSING TO REMAIN IN DENIAL, GIVING THE FINGER TO REALITY, YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN.

"CDC admitted they screwed up COVID-19 infection counts and intentionally misled the public and have apologized, clarifying that the amount of people truly infected is much lower than what was originally reported – an error so egregious it made the director of the Harvard Global Health Institute say “how could the CDC make this mistake? This is a mess."

The American Coronavirus Task Force also admitted to fudging the National COVID-19 death count when Dr. Birx said the deaths are people who died “with” COVID-19 not “from” COVID-19, thus making the real death count much lower than what is currently being reported.

For-profit hospitals were financially incentivized to code patients as "Covid" so they would get large financial reimbursements, and they were incentivized to put people on ventilators when they weren't needed because the hospital gets a nice fat check for every intubation, and this practice resulted in needless deaths (which were listed as "Covid").

Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted masks won’t help against the virus and mask manufacturers are now including warnings that their products do not deter COVID-19.
Fauci also said that continuing to close the country could cause irreparable damage.

CDC backtracked their initial claim that led governors to shutdown their states & clarified that COVID-19 does not spread easily on surfaces.

Governor of New York Andrew Cuomo confirmed a recent health study showing that 70% of new infections actually originate at home, thus making stay at home orders one of the most dangerous mandates currently in place.

The CDC, WHO, Dr. Fauci, our governors, and many more were completely wrong about the potential threat of this virus. But wrong on purpose, not out of ignorance.

Even California is opening up sooner than anyone expected because the evidence contradicts the long standing and inaccurate narrative still upheld by the extremely dishonest and corrupt media.

If you are still living in fear, don’t be. The media, global organizations, the government, and its agencies misled and continue to mislead the public.

People called those of us who knew this all along "conspiracy theorists", but it turns out we were just following the facts... and there was a conspiracy, and it wasn't a theory.

Open up your businesses, churches, and homes. Don’t fall for the lies any longer. If you fell for the lies this time, wake up and join the thousands of truth seekers fighting the lies.

The CDC just confirmed a 0.2% death-rate for COVID-19 ...

For that, we have:

• Added nearly 6 trillion to the National Debt
• Laid-off or furloughed 50 million workers
• Placed 60 million people on food stamps
• Gone from 3.5% to 14.7% unemployment (20% in real numbers)
• Crippled the petroleum industry
• Ruined the tourism industry
• Bankrupted the service industry
• Bankrupted thousands of small businesses who will not re-open
• Bankrupted tens of thousands of people
• Caused an impending food crisis
• Caused impending fruit and vegetable shortages
• Threatened, fined, and arrested church leaders
• Exacerbated mental health problems
• Shut down schools and colleges
• Given unbridled power to unelected officials
• Increased the number of suicides higher than the number of COVID deaths
• Delayed surgeries and treatments for life-threatening illnesses, with death resulting
• Infringed upon countless Constitutionally protected civil liberties
• Effectively terrorized 320 million Americans

Bill Gates has placed himself in such a position of influence by heavily funding all corners to make this lie happen. He is the largest donor to the W.H.O.

We need to start treating it as the BS that it is.

Seriously, our whole way of life is at stake, and they have plans to make it much worse now introducing upcoming plans as "the grand reset".

Welcome to their much sought after "New World Order".

Don't forget, we can imagine and bring about our own future.
So let's together make it much different from their plan for us, and get those people involved jailed for fraud and crimes against the people.

 

---

 

Going by the CDC's own figures

The CDC tracks all-cause mortality in the U.S. year-to-year. So we can compare the first half of 2020 to the first half of 2019, 2018 etc. And when we do, the first half of 2020 has slightly less deaths than the same period for 2019. So how could that be with such a deadly virus affecting us in the first half of 2020? And this is according to the CDC. Is this being reported on the mainstream media? Hell no. You've got to go look it up.

UPDATE: People are now telling me that when you go to check now, the CDC data is showing that there is an uptick in deaths in the first half of 2020 commensurate with the "deadly pandemic" narrative. Hmmm. Question: Did those who looked at this data previously and found no uptick in the death rate in the first half of 2020, and started reporting this widely grab the attention of certain people at CDC who thought, "Oops!" and then adjusted the figures to support the "deadly pandemic" narrative? I have no proof of this other than some researchers reporting one set of figures and now we see a different set. But since I look at things on balance, all things considered, so I consider the reports of the on-the-ground health care workers who are speaking out about the inflated "Covid" CODs, and I consider that upwards of 60,000 people can die from a flu season, I have to wonder.

 

Kim: What about death by lockdown? They say suicide is up 300% and that some people are dying at home too scared to head to emergency. The increase in deaths are up, because we have lost our reason to live or are scared to death of getting medical assistance.

Don: This is a good point Kim, and it is very true. Add to this those who died due to not being able to be seen or were too afraid to go to a hospital because they didn't want to "catch" the deadly disease, and those whose lives were ruined financially who died at home from a fatal heart attack (that scenario has risen too). And the uptick in suicides, and those who couldn't get their treatments for their life-threatening conditions, etc, etc. And then if the CODs for these people were "inadvertently" listed as Covid related, you'd have the inflated Covid deaths we are seeing.

And isn't is fascinating that the mainstream media is not reporting on the deaths due to lockdown... almost as if they have been given a mandate not to. Hmmm. Maybe they don't do real investigative reporting, and merely spout corporate approved narratives that are influenced by higher ups? No, that couldn't be... they wouldn't do that... they have too much integrity. Actually, there WERE journalists who DID have that kind of integrity, and they were all fired... Ashleigh Banfield, Ed Shultz, Krystal Ball, Chris Hedges, Dylan Ratigan, Phil Donahue, Jesse Ventura, and Cenk Uygur. Sadly, Ed has passed away, but the others are still reporting, just on "new media" (online).

Matt: Over 80,000 flu deaths in 2018. No lockdown.

Michael: I have also seen other people doing this comparison in the first 6 weeks of the lockdown comparing it to the average overall deaths of the last 3 years. Using the CDC's data they also said the actual death total was down by 2%. So it looks like the CDC did change the figures, because it would prove that overall the deaths are not much higher then normal which would show that there is no reason for lockdown. The reason they did this because of how the deaths were being counted which makes no sense. Also problems with accurate testing and even cases faulty testing that is why 2 African countries left the WHO.

Michael: I just talked to a nurse I know that works in the critical care for elderly and she told me just yesterday. That covid positive patients were routinely mixed with patients who were dying of other causes. Once they died, they were tested for covid and if they tested positive they marked covid as the death. She actually said practically all deaths were being marked covid. It's the same story as the nurse from New York, I am from Canada by the way so its not just the U.S.

 

---

 

"But I read that perfectly healthy young people
are dying from Covid-19!"

There are so many stories being published that are simply not true. I could write a story like that, with made-up stuff and quotes from people who aren't real, and no one would know the difference. And if it supported the pharma and govt narratives, it would be published and "pushed". The point is, you can't trust what you read in many publications because many have agendas and false narratives that support their agendas.

What I'm hearing from nurses and virologists who are willing to speak out is that the virus harms people who are in really poor health. And there are people who honestly believe they are in great health but aren't (I counsel them when their poor health becomes noticeable to them).

And you'll notice that when any truthful memes start to circulate, like, "only those in poor health are at risk from the virus" soon you'll find counter-narratives meant to confuse you. Many of these so-called health organizations are astroturf organizations created by the very people who want to spread misinformation (the pharma industry and pharma lobbyist groups). So I would take these articles with a grain of salt because they don't square with reality... which is that over 95% of those who are infected, don't have to go to a hospital (good thing) and they recover. But even that fact now has counter-narratives that say that, yes, you can recover, but you can be harmed for life. There is zero evidence of this yet people are believing it because of the fear factor. Believe me, for every true statement that goes against the pharma industry narrative, there eventually will be a very believable counter-narrative.

Also, some of the cases that have been touted of young "perfectly healthy people" dying from Covid-19 were found to be one of two things: A) The person in question, in reality, wasn't healthy and had a chronic condition that was conveniently not mentioned, and B) The person was healthy but was scared and went to a public for-profit hospital where he was intubated when he didn't have to be (because of the financial incentive for hospitals to do so), and was given drugs he didn't need. In-other-words, their COD (Cause of Death) was actually iatrogenic illness (doctor/hospital/medication caused) but Covid-19 was listed as the COD because of the financial incentive for hospitals to do so. In reality, if that person had stayed home and "rode out" the viral infection, they would very likely still be alive.

This blog post should trigger the fear factor... the fear of being forced to get Coronavirus vaccines (and others) that are not "safe and effective" as we're all told they are. THAT should be the thing that's feared.

 

---

 

 

The headline above is true. But, is that what's best for the general population? No. If everyone wore these, the virus would continue to hang around because herd immunity would never develop. And so would other viruses that would develop in the future. And the gen pop's immunity would plummet since they would never get a viral infection. And that would give the pharma industry time to make vaccines. The problem is, those vaccines are not "safe and effective" as we've been told and led to believe. So they're not good for the gen pop, but they are GREAT for the pharmaceutical industry and those who make money when the pharmaceutical industry makes money.

So, is it really what's best for the human species... for everyone to wear these things and to distance themselves from other people from now on? I wouldn't want to live in that world, especially when it's not necessary. "But..." you say "...less people would die!" Really? The experts who know what's really going on disagree. Why? Because since viruses would never go away on their own due to herd immunity developing (what Nature intended), everyone will be eager to get the vaccinations that are developed (or will be forced to get them by law), and since vaccines are not "safe and effective", and cause health issues with some leading to premature death, there will still be people suffering and dying from the alternative to herd immunity. And the suffering will be far worse than the suffering from getting a viral infection and being miserable for a week or two and then never being able to get that particular viral infection again (personal immunity).

So, what kind of world do YOU want to live in? One that benefits a very powerful industry that gives billions of dollars to politicians to influence them into making laws that benefit that industry and those who profit when that industry does, but also harms you? A better question is: Are enough people going to wake up to reality so that this doesn't happen? (Because, ultimately, what happens is up to the gen pop.)

 

---

 

A NOTE ABOUT MASKS

 

I saw this on Facebook, and since I agree with it, here it is...

 

 

More info about mask wearing
(with some solid resources)
Supporting the contention that most of the people
who are wearing them, don't need to be, and shouldn't be.
(even though we're told different)

 

“Face masks should not be worn by healthy individuals to protect themselves from acquiring respiratory infection because there is no evidence to suggest that face masks worn by healthy individuals are effective in preventing people from becoming ill.”
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762694

U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams said Monday that wearing face masks could actually increase a person's risk of contracting COVID-19, echoing remarks he made on Saturday that called for people to "stop buying masks.".
https://www.businessinsider.com/americans-dont-need-masks-pence-says-as-demand-increases-2020-2

Masks trials

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.full

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/data-do-not-back-cloth-masks-limit-covid-19-experts-say

Cloth masks can increase infection
https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/advice-on-the-use-of-masks-in-the-community-during-home-care-and-in-healthcare-settings-in-the-context-of-the-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)-outbreak

From the WHO: There is limited evidence that wearing a medical mask by healthy individuals in the households or among contacts of a sick patient, or among attendees of mass gatherings may be beneficial as a preventive measure. However, there is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can prevent them from infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.

Masks

"Prolonged wearing of the surgical mask causes loss of intellect potential and cognitive performance due to a decrease in blood oxygen and subsequent brain hypoxia. Note - some changes may be irreversible." Dr. Terry Tillaart, PhD

"Report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18500410

"Seventy percent of the patients showed a reduction in partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), and 19% developed various degrees of hypoxemia. Wearing an N95 mask significantly reduced the PaO2 level"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15340662

"Wearing N95 masks results in hypooxygenemia and hypercapnia which reduce working efficiency and the ability to make correct decision."

"Medical staff are at increased risk of getting 'Severe acute respiratory syndrome' (SARS), and wearing N95 masks is highly recommended by experts worldwide. However, dizziness, headache, and short of breath are commonly experienced by the medical staff wearing N95 masks. The ability to make correct decision may be hampered, too."

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00173017

"Chronic hypoxia-hypercapnia influences cognitive function"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18331781

"Hypercapnia status has been shown to predict mild cognitive impairment
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-35797-3

Chronic hypoxia – hypercapnia has been seen as a cause of cognitive impairment

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31479137

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26952529

Fit testing matters less vs it’s an N95 mask:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21477136

Masks don’t appear to impact family infection as much: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28039289

Cloth masks not effective relative to normal medical masks: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20584862

Gotta use the mask and do all the other things too: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22188875

Medical or N95 isn’t that different:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31479137

Cloth masks worse than surgical masks for anything <2.5 uM: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27531371

What kills things on masks?
YES: bleach, UVC, autoclave, TERC.   NO: UVA, alcohol
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29855107

UVGI (Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation) is a yes:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29678452

UVGI works, and mask still good, but much more fragile (90% more)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25806411

Distribution of particle sizes in a cough maxes out at ~900 nm: https://bmcpulmmed.biomedcentral.com/…/10.…/1471-2466-12-11…

Most particles under 1 um: Fabian P, Mcdevitt JJ, Dehaan WH et al. (2008) Influenza virus in human exhaled breath: an observational study.

Cloth masks not very efficient with small particles (in some cases negligible filtering):
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.full

Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with medical masks (44%) (used in trial) and 3M 9320 N95 (<0.01%), 3M Vflex 9105 N95 (0.1%).

Particle size breakdown and fabric differences for cloth masks and particle penetration:
https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/meq044

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0843-2

In conclusion, both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS-COV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the environment and external mask surface.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

Mask wearing can increase infection. Most people do not even know how to wear or use them.
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200315/Wearing-masks-may-increase-your-risk-of-coronavirus-infection-expert-says.aspx

Here is what wearing a mask and rebreathing carbon dioxide long enough does for you. It's called carbon dioxide toxicity.

* Shortness of breath
* Sweating
* Confusion
* Dizziness
* Drowsiness
* Headaches
* Increased heart rate
* Increased blood pressure
* Unconsciousness

 

---

 

FACEBOOK POST: I'm very curious. Do any of you know anyone that died of covid 19? A healthy individual?

DON: It must be remembered that there are people who are thought to be "healthy" when they are not. At least not healthy enough to effectively deal with a viral infection. The organs of the body that are tasked with dealing with a viral infection require enough of all the nutrients they need to operate optimally. No argument there. But many people think they are getting "enough of all" when they are not, even some raw vegans. I've been researching health issues, including viral infections, for over 45 years, and have been counseling raw vegans for 17 years, so I know of what I speak. Then factor in that a healthy person who got a flu shot can be more susceptible to negative reactions from a novel viral infection. And then there are genetic components. And then there are the people who contracted the virus who went to the hospital (when they really didn't have to but they were worried), who never come out, but they'd still be alive today had they not gone. So the intent of your question is a good one, but a definitive answer for it is not so straightforward.

 

---

 

An ominous letter of warning from German Naturopath, Annette Lillinger, to all of her patients inquiring about the upcoming coronavirus vaccine.

 

"For all my patients: I would like to urgently draw your attention to important issues regarding an upcoming Covid-19 vaccination:

Over the past 20 years, patients came to me again and again, who had developed symptoms after being vaccinated, which I then had to treat. Of course, such artificially produced symptoms/diseases were always a special challenge in individual cases and somewhat more difficult to treat than the predominant diseases that arise from the nature of the patient, i.e. are of natural origin.

However, because the consequences of vaccination have up to now been mainly based on the already frequently mentioned adjuvants (active substance boosters), whose excretion the body could not cope with in individual cases and therefore developed a corresponding mild to severe symptomatology, a therapy in which the individual's physiology was stimulated to excrete the toxins from the body was successful in the end, and the side-effects of vaccination disappeared, even if it often took many months.

Due to the novel mode of action of the future coronavirus vaccine, however, such healing successes will no longer be possible in the future. For the first time in the history of vaccination, the so-called mRNA vaccines of the latest generation intervene directly in the genetic material of the patient and thus change the individual genetic material, which represents a genetic manipulation – something that has been banned, even considered criminal up to now. This intervention can be compared with that of genetically manipulated food, which is also highly controversial. As much as the media and politicians are currently trivializing the issue and even unreflectively calling for such a new type of vaccination in order to be able to return to normality, such a vaccination is problematic in terms of health, moral and ethical issues and also in terms of genetic damage, which, unlike the damage caused by previous vaccinations, will now be irreversible and irreparable.

Dear patients, after such a novel mRNA vaccination, you will no longer be able to have the symptoms of the vaccination cured in any complementary way. You will have to live with the consequences, because they can no longer be cured simply by removing toxins from the human body, just as one cannot cure a person with a genetic defect such as Trisomy 18 or 21, Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome, genetic heart diseases, hemophilia, cystic fibrosis, Rett syndrome etc., because the genetic defect remains once present forever!

In plain language this means: Should you develop a vaccination symptomatology after an mRNA vaccination, neither I nor any other therapist will be able to help you causally, because the vaccination damage will be genetically irreversible.

In my opinion, these novel vaccines represent a crime against humanity that has never before been committed in such a broad form in history.

As Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, an experienced physician, put it just yesterday: "In reality, this 'promising vaccine' for the vast majority of people is in fact a forbidden genetic manipulation!"

 

---

 

In response to people who tell me that I'm selfish...

 

---

 

 

---

 

 

 

The Facebook "fact check" that appears at the video's link is itself false. That meter responds fast enough to show the CO2 environment within the mask. The "fact check" is what people say who are tasked with downplaying the facts about mask wearing. They come up with sciency sounding explanations as to why whatever is being demonstrated is false or faulty, even though the demonstration has merit. (If you want to watch the video at that link, you must click "See video".)

FACT: In today's "alternative facts" world, we can't automatically trust the fact checkers... unless they have no agendas, no biases, and employ the ethos of science, and are not working on behalf of people with hidden agendas. FB's fact checkers do not fit this criteria. And Youtubes taking down of all videos that talk about the use of high dose vitamin C with viral infections shows that it too is doing the bidding of people with hidden agendas, because that info has been around since the 1940s in the medical literature.

 

 

---

 

Here's a new style of mask that allows it to open so you can put food into your mouth, so you don't have to remove your mask when sitting down to eat. These are worn by people who are not educated about masks, worn by people who've allowed themselves to be miseducated by public health officials who are acting in the best interests of people other than the voters. Worn by people who are reacting out of fear.

Personally, I don't like to be taken advantage of, so I have a natural distrust of anything public officials say, and of anything the major media reports. So I vet the important info, like mask wearing, and I do so as a researcher, not as someone trying to prove what I prefer to believe. Conclusion? No one needs to wear masks to protect themselves from SARS-COV-2 (the name of the present virus that's making the rounds). Don't believe me? Read the mask related info here on this page (or continue to put yourself at risk).

 

---

 

It's the CDC's Own Data!

 

Check out the charts below from the CDC. Using the official figures, Covid-19 is a Category 2 for the U.S. If the figures weren't skewed as they have been, AND if treatments like IV vitamin C and Hydroxychloroquine+Zinc were used more broadly than they are being used (which would result in far less fatalities), AND if there were no financial incentives for hospitals to intubate people and code their Cause-Of-Death as "Covid-19", then this Coronavirus would be a Category 1 by CDC's own standards. But read the second chart to see what the CDC recommends for a Category 2 pandemic. They do NOT recommend isolating healthy people, only the ill. And what we should be doing is what they recommend for a Category 1.

Do we wreck the economy and ruin millions of people's lives for Category 1 pandemics? No. So you have to wonder why is this being done?

 

---

 

Dr. Stella Immanuel spoke at a press conference in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. with six other medical doctors (one of whom was fired for speaking out). The press conference was covered and got millions of views, but was quickly deleted from all the big social media platforms. Why? The pharma industry does not want hydroxychloroquine being used to dramatically reduce the SARS-COV-2 outbreak, because that protocol costs $20 per person and would only be needed for about 5% of those who were infected (the people in the at-risk group), and pharma wants instead to make trillions of dollars from everyone in the world getting multiple vaccinations. Don't think so? Then you're not paying attention.

(Note: You can find the videos of this press conference on video streaming platforms that don't do any censorship or curating, but those platforms will also have videos from white supremacists who want all Jews to die. Don't make the mistake of assuming that all the videos on these platforms are horrible and wrong.)

This is the transcript of Dr. Immanuel's portion.

"Hello, I’m Dr. Stella Immanuel. I’m a primary care physician in Houston, Texas. I actually went to medical school in West Africa, Nigeria, where I took care of malaria patients, treating them with hydroxychloroquine and stuff like that. So I’m actually used to these medications. I’m here because I have personally treated over 350 patients with COVID. Patients that have diabetes, patients that have high blood pressure, patients that have asthma, old people … I think my oldest patient is 87 year olds. And the result has been the same. I put them on hydroxychloroquine, I put them on zinc, I put them on Zithromax, and they’re all well.

For the past few months, after taking care of over 350 patients, we’ve not lost one. Not a diabetic, not somebody with high blood pressure, not somebody with asthma, not an old person. We’ve not lost one patient. And on top of that, I’ve put myself, my staff, and many doctors that I know on hydroxychloroquine for prevention, because by the very mechanism of action, it works early and as a prophylaxis. We see patients, 10 to 15 COVID patients, everyday. We give them breathing treatments. We only wear surgical mask. None of us has gotten sick. It works.

So right now, I came here to Washington DC to say, America, nobody needs to die. The study that made me start using hydroxychloroquine was a study that they did under the NIH in 2005 that say it works. Recently, I was doing some research about a patient that had hiccups and I found out that they even did a recent study in the NIH, which is our National Institute of Health. They actually had a study and go look it up. Type hiccups and COVID, you will see it. They treated a patient that had hiccups with hydroxychloroquine and it proved that hiccups is a symptom of COVID. So if the NIH knows that treating the patient would hydroxychloroquine proves that hiccup is a symptom of COVID, then they definitely know the hydroxychloroquine works.

I’m upset. Why I’m upset is that I see people that cannot breathe. I see parents walk in, I see diabetic sit in my office knowing that this is a death sentence and they can’t breathe. And I hug them and I tell them, “It’s going to be okay. You’re going to live.” And we treat them and they leave. None has died. So if some fake science, some person sponsored by all these fake pharma companies comes out and says, “We’ve done studies and they found out that it doesn’t work.” I can tell you categorically it’s fixed science. I want to know who is sponsoring that study. I want to know who is behind it because there is no way I can treat 350 patients and counting and nobody is dead and they all did better.

I know you’re going to tell me that you treated 20 people, 40 people, and it didn’t work. I’m a true testimony. So I came here to Washington DC to tell America nobody needs to get sick. This virus has a cure. It is called hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and Zithromax. I know you people want to talk about a mask. Hello? You don’t need mask. There is a cure. I know they don’t want to open schools. No, you don’t need people to be locked down. There is prevention and there is a cure.

And let me tell you something, all you fake doctors out there that tell me, “Yeah. I want a double blinded study.” I just tell you, quit sounding like a computer, double blinded, double blinded. I don’t know whether your chips are malfunctioning, but I’m a real doctor. I have radiologists, we have plastic surgeons, we have neurosurgeons, like Sanjay Gupta saying, “Yeah, it doesn’t work and it causes heart disease.” Let me ask you Dr. Sanjay Gupta. Hear me. Have you ever seen a COVID patient? Have you ever treated anybody with hydroxychloroquine and they died from heart disease? When you do, come and talk to me because I sit down in my clinic every day and I see these patients walk in everyday scared to death. I see people driving two, three hours to my clinic because some ER doctor is scared of the Texas board or they’re scared of something, and they will not prescribe medication to these people.

I tell all of you doctors that are sitting down and watching Americans die. You’re like the good Germans that watched Jews get killed and you did not speak up. If they come after me, they threaten me, they’ve threatened to … I mean, I’ve gotten all kinds of threats. Or they’re going to report me to the boards. I say, you know what? I don’t care. I’m not going to let Americans die. And if this is the hill where I get nailed on, I will get nailed on it. I don’t care. You can report me to the boards, you can kill me, you can do whatever, but I’m not going to let Americans die.

And today I’m here to say it, that America, there is a cure for COVID. All this foolishness does not need to happen. There is a cure for COVID. There is a cure for COVID; it's called hydroxychloroquine along with zinc and Zithromax. And it is time for the grassroots to wake up and say, “No, we’re not going to take this any longer. We’re not going to die.” Because let me tell you something, when somebody is dead, they are dead. They’re not coming back tomorrow to have an argument. They are not come back tomorrow to discuss the double blinded study and the data. All of you doctors who are waiting for data, if six months down the line you actually found out that this data shows that this medication works, how about your patients that have died? You want a double blinded study when people are dying? It’s unethical. So guys, we don’t need to die. There is a cure for COVID."

 

---

 

While I applaud doctor's ethics in speaking out about Hydroxychloroquine+Zinc, I'm not thrilled with how political operatives and partisan pundits are taking advantage of the doctors who are speaking out, using them to score political points for "their side". I think some of these docs don't even know this opportunistic behavior is going on, they're just happy to have a platform to speak out. Let me be clear: the politicizing of hydroxychloroquine, and the lack of unpoliticizing it by the docs, will result in some people who are easily triggered by the politicization of issues not believing in the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine+Zinc, which can result in some people dying when it could have been prevented. But I guess this is the ban of the human species, and yet another reason we will not be a long term species.

That said, here is a video of one of those partisan pundits [Glen Beck] interviewing one of those docs [Simone Gold].

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikoqBWBiUMU

 

---

 

Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe:
A Summary of the Science
Colleen Huber, NMD

 

At this writing, there is a recent surge in widespread use by the public of facemasks when in public places, including for extended periods of time, in the United States as well as in other countries. The public has been instructed by media and their governments that one’s use of masks, even if not sick, may prevent others from being infected with SARS-CoV-2, the infectious agent of COVID-19.

A review of the peer-reviewed medical literature examines impacts on human health, both immunological, as well as physiological. The purpose of this paper is to examine data regarding the effectiveness of facemasks, as well as safety data. The reason that both are examined in one paper is that for the general public as a whole, as well as for every individual, a risk-benefit analysis is necessary to guide decisions on if and when to wear a mask.

Are masks effective at preventing transmission of respiratory pathogens?

In this meta-analysis, face masks were found to have no detectable effect against transmission of viral infections.(1) It found: “Compared to no masks, there was no reduction of influenza-like illness cases or influenza for masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”

This 2020 meta-analysis found that evidence from randomized controlled trials of face masks did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.(2)

Another recent review found that masks had no effect specifically against Covid-19, although facemask use seemed linked to, in 3 of 31 studies, “very slightly reduced” odds of developing influenza-like illness.(3)

This 2019 study of 2862 participants showed that both N95 respirators and surgical masks “resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory confirmed influenza.”(4)

This 2016 meta-analysis found that both randomized controlled trials and observational studies of N95 respirators and surgical masks used by healthcare workers did not show benefit against transmission of acute respiratory infections. It was also found that acute respiratory infection transmission “may have occurred via contamination of provided respiratory protective equipment during storage and reuse of masks and respirators throughout the workday.”(5)

A 2011 meta-analysis of 17 studies regarding masks and effect on transmission of influenza found that “none of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”(6) However, authors speculated that effectiveness of masks may be linked to early, consistent and correct usage.

Face mask use was likewise found to be not protective against the common cold, compared to controls without face masks among healthcare workers.(7)

Airflow around masks

Masks have been assumed to be effective in obstructing forward travel of viral particles. Considering those positioned next to or behind a mask wearer, there have been farther transmission of virus-laden fluid particles from masked individuals than from unmasked individuals, by means of “several leakage jets, including intense backward and downwards jets that may present major hazards,” and a “potentially dangerous leakage jet of up to several meters.”(8) All masks were thought to reduce forward airflow by 90% or more over wearing no mask. However, Schlieren imaging showed that both surgical masks and cloth masks had farther brow jets (unfiltered upward airflow past eyebrows) than not wearing any mask at all, 182 mm and 203 mm respectively, vs none discernible with no mask. Backward unfiltered airflow was found to be strong with all masks compared to not masking.

For both N95 and surgical masks, it was found that expelled particles from 0.03 to 1 micron were deflected around the edges of each mask, and that there was measurable penetration of particles through the filter of each mask.(9)

Penetration through masks

A study of 44 mask brands found mean 35.6% penetration (+ 34.7%). Most medical masks had over 20% penetration, while “general masks and handkerchiefs had no protective function in terms of the aerosol filtration efficiency.” The study found that “Medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs were found to provide little protection against respiratory aerosols.”(10)

It may be helpful to remember that an aerosol is a colloidal suspension of liquid or solid particles in a gas. In respiration, the relevant aerosol is the suspension of bacterial or viral particles in inhaled or exhaled breath.

In another study, penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%.(11)

N95 respirators

Honeywell is a manufacturer of N95 respirators. These are made with a 0.3 micron filter.(12) N95 respirators are so named, because 95% of particles having a diameter of 0.3 microns are filtered by the mask forward of the wearer, by use of an electrostatic mechanism. Coronaviruses are approximately 0.125 microns in diameter.

This meta-analysis found that N95 respirators did not provide superior protection to facemasks against viral infections or influenza-like infections.(13) This study did find superior protection by N95 respirators when they were fit-tested compared to surgical masks.(14)

This study found that 624 out of 714 people wearing N95 masks left visible gaps when putting on their own masks.(15)

Surgical masks

This study found that surgical masks offered no protection at all against influenza.(16) Another study found that surgical masks had about 85% penetration ratio of aerosolized inactivated influenza particles and about 90% of Staphylococcus aureus bacteria, although S aureus particles were about 6x the diameter of influenza particles.(17)

Use of masks in surgery were found to slightly increase incidence of infection over not masking in a study of 3,088 surgeries.(18) The surgeons’ masks were found to give no protective effect to the patients.

Other studies found no difference in wound infection rates with and without surgical masks.(19)(20)

This study found that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.”(21)

This study found that medical masks have a wide range of filtration efficiency, with most showing a 30% to 50% efficiency.(22)

Specifically, are surgical masks effective in stopping human transmission of coronaviruses? Both experimental and control groups, masked and unmasked respectively, were found to “not shed detectable virus in respiratory droplets or aerosols.”(23) In that study, they “did not confirm the infectivity of coronavirus” as found in exhaled breath.

A study of aerosol penetration showed that two of the five surgical masks studied had 51% to 89% penetration of polydisperse aerosols.(24)

In another study, that observed subjects while coughing, “neither surgical nor cotton masks effectively filtered SARS-CoV-2 during coughs by infected patients.” And more viral particles were found on the outside than on the inside of masks tested.(25)

Cloth masks

Cloth masks were found to have low efficiency for blocking particles of 0.3 microns and smaller. Aerosol penetration through the various cloth masks examined in this study were between 74 and 90%. Likewise, the filtration efficiency of fabric materials was 3% to 33%.(26)

Healthcare workers wearing cloth masks were found to have 13 times the risk of influenza-like illness than those wearing medical masks.(27)

This 1920 analysis of cloth mask use during the 1918 pandemic examines the failure of masks to impede or stop flu transmission at that time, and concluded that the number of layers of fabric required to prevent pathogen penetration would have required a suffocating number of layers, and could not be used for that reason, as well as the problem of leakage vents around the edges of cloth masks.(28)

Masks against Covid-19

The New England Journal of Medicine editorial on the topic of mask use versus Covid-19 assesses the matter as follows:

“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 20 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”(29)

Are masks safe?

During walking or other exercise

Surgical mask wearers had significantly increased dyspnea after a 6-minute walk than non-mask wearers.(30)

Researchers are concerned about possible burden of facemasks during physical activity on pulmonary, circulatory and immune systems, due to oxygen reduction and air trapping reducing substantial carbon dioxide exchange. As a result of hypercapnia, there may be cardiac overload, renal overload, and a shift to metabolic acidosis.(31)

Risks of N95 respirators

Pregnant healthcare workers were found to have a loss in volume of oxygen consumption by 13.8% compared to controls when wearing N95 respirators. 17.7% less carbon dioxide was exhaled.(32) Patients with end-stage renal disease were studied during use of N95 respirators. Their partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) decreased significantly compared to controls and increased respiratory adverse effects.(33) 19% of the patients developed various degrees of hypoxemia while wearing the masks.

Healthcare workers’ N95 respirators were measured by personal bioaerosol samplers to harbor influenza virus.(34) And 25% of healthcare workers’ facepiece respirators were found to contain influenza in an emergency department during the 2015 flu season.(35)

Risks of surgical masks

Healthcare workers’ surgical masks also were measured by personal bioaerosol samplers to harbor for influenza virus.(36)

Various respiratory pathogens were found on the outer surface of used medical masks, which could result in self-contamination. The risk was found to be higher with longer duration of mask use.(37)

Surgical masks were also found to be a repository of bacterial contamination. The source of the bacteria was determined to be the body surface of the surgeons, rather than the operating room environment.(38) Given that surgeons are gowned from head to foot for surgery, this finding should be especially concerning for laypeople who wear masks. Without the protective garb of surgeons, laypeople generally have even more exposed body surface to serve as a source for bacteria to collect on their masks.

Risks of cloth masks

Healthcare workers wearing cloth masks had significantly higher rates of influenza-like illness after four weeks of continuous on-the-job use, when compared to controls.(39)

The increased rate of infection in mask-wearers may be due to a weakening of immune function during mask use. Surgeons have been found to have lower oxygen saturation after surgeries even as short as 30 minutes.(40) Low oxygen induces hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha (HIF-1).(41) This in turn down-regulates CD4+ T-cells. CD4+ T-cells, in turn, are necessary for viral immunity.(42)

Weighing risks versus benefits of mask use

In the summer of 2020 the United States is experiencing a surge of popular mask use, which is frequently promoted by the media, political leaders and celebrities. Homemade and store-bought cloth masks and surgical masks or N95 masks are being used by the public especially when entering stores and other publicly accessible buildings. Sometimes bandanas or scarves are used. The use of face masks, whether cloth, surgical or N95, creates a poor obstacle to aerosolized pathogens as we can see from the meta-analyses and other studies in this paper, allowing both transmission of aerosolized pathogens to others in various directions, as well as self-contamination.

It must also be considered that masks impede the necessary volume of air intake required for adequate oxygen exchange, which results in observed physiological effects that may be undesirable. Even 6- minute walks, let alone more strenuous activity, resulted in dyspnea. The volume of unobstructed oxygen in a typical breath is about 100 ml, used for normal physiological processes. 100 ml O2 greatly exceeds the volume of a pathogen required for transmission.

The foregoing data show that masks serve more as instruments of obstruction of normal breathing, rather than as effective barriers to pathogens. Therefore, masks should not be used by the general public, either by adults or children, and their limitations as prophylaxis against pathogens should also be considered in medical settings.

[There is other mask related info above this piece.]

Endnotes

1 T Jefferson, M Jones, et al. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 7.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2

2 J Xiao, E Shiu, et al. Nonpharmaceutical measures for pandemic influenza in non-healthcare settings – personal protective and environmental measures. Centers for Disease Control. 26(5); 2020 May.

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

3 J Brainard, N Jones, et al. Facemasks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID19: A rapid systematic review. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 1.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1.full.pdf

4 L Radonovich M Simberkoff, et al. N95 respirators vs medical masks for preventing influenza among health care personnel: a randomized clinic trial. JAMA. 2019 Sep 3. 322(9): 824-833.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214

5 J Smith, C MacDougall. CMAJ. 2016 May 17. 188(8); 567-574.

https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567

6 F bin-Reza, V Lopez, et al. The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence. 2012 Jul; 6(4): 257-267.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5779801/

7 J Jacobs, S Ohde, et al. Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Infect Control. 2009 Jun; 37(5): 417-419.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/

8 M Viola, B Peterson, et al. Face coverings, aerosol dispersion and mitigation of virus transmission risk.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.10720, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2005/2005.10720.pdf

9 S Grinshpun, H Haruta, et al. Performance of an N95 filtering facepiece particular respirator and a surgical mask during human breathing: two pathways for particle penetration. J Occup Env Hygiene. 2009; 6(10):593-603.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15459620903120086

10 H Jung, J Kim, et al. Comparison of filtration efficiency and pressure drop in anti-yellow sand masks, quarantine masks, medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs. Aerosol Air Qual Res. 2013 Jun. 14:991-1002.

https://aaqr.org/articles/aaqr-13-06-oa-0201.pdf

11 C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long

12 N95 masks explained. https://www.honeywell.com/en-us/newsroom/news/2020/03/n95-masks-explained

13 V Offeddu, C Yung, et al. Effectiveness of masks and respirators against infections in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Inf Dis. 65(11), 2017 Dec 1; 1934-1942.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747?

14 C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x?fbclid=IwAR3kRYVYDKb0aR-su9_me9_vY6a8KVR4HZ17J2A_80f_fXUABRQdhQlc8Wo

15 M Walker. Study casts doubt on N95 masks for the public. MedPage Today. 2020 May 20.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/86601

16 C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x?fbclid=IwAR3kRYVYDKb0aR-su9_me9_vY6a8KVR4HZ17J2A_80f_fXUABRQdhQlc8Wo

17 N Shimasaki, A Okaue, et al. Comparison of the filter efficiency of medical nonwoven fabrics against three different microbe aerosols. Biocontrol Sci. 2018; 23(2). 61-69.

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bio/23/2/23_61/_pdf/-char/en

18 T Tunevall. Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: A controlled study. World J Surg. 1991 May; 15: 383-387.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01658736

19 N Orr. Is a mask necessary in the operating theatre? Ann Royal Coll Surg Eng 1981: 63: 390-392.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/pdf/annrcse01509-0009.pdf

20 N Mitchell, S Hunt. Surgical face masks in modern operating rooms – a costly and unnecessary ritual? J Hosp Infection. 18(3); 1991 Jul 1. 239-242.

https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/0195-6701(91)90148-2/pdf

21 C DaZhou, P Sivathondan, et al. Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of facemasks in surgery. JR Soc Med. 2015 Jun; 108(6): 223-228.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/

22 L Brosseau, M Sietsema. Commentary: Masks for all for Covid-19 not based on sound data. U Minn Ctr Inf Dis Res Pol. 2020 Apr 1.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

23 N Leung, D Chu, et al. Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks Nature Research. 2020 Mar 7. 26,676-680 (2020).

https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-16836/v1

24 S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.

https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744

25 S Bae, M Kim, et al. Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS-CoV-2: A controlled comparison in 4 patients. Ann Int Med. 2020 Apr 6.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

26 S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.

https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744

27 C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long?

28 W Kellogg. An experimental study of the efficacy of gauze face masks. Am J Pub Health. 1920. 34-42.

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.10.1.34

29 M Klompas, C Morris, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the Covid-19 era. N Eng J Med. 2020; 382 e63.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

30 E Person, C Lemercier et al. Effect of a surgical mask on six minute walking distance. Rev Mal Respir. 2018 Mar; 35(3):264-268.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29395560/

31 B Chandrasekaran, S Fernandes. Exercise with facemask; are we handling a devil’s sword – a physiological hypothesis. Med Hypothese. 2020 Jun 22. 144:110002.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32590322/

32 P Shuang Ye Tong, A Sugam Kale, et al. Respiratory consequences of N95-type mask usage in pregnant healthcare workers – A controlled clinical study. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2015 Nov 16; 4:48.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26579222/

33 T Kao, K Huang, et al. The physiological impact of wearing an N95 mask during hemodialysis as a precaution against SARS in patients with end-stage renal disease. J Formos Med Assoc. 2004 Aug; 103(8):624-628.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15340662/

34 F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods. 2018 Oct; 260:98-106.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/

35 A Rule, O Apau, et al. Healthcare personnel exposure in an emergency department during influenza season. PLoS One. 2018 Aug 31; 13(8): e0203223.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30169507/

36 F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods. 2018 Oct; 260:98-106.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/

37 A Chughtai, S Stelzer-Braid, et al. Contamination by respiratory viruses on our surface of medical masks used by hospital healthcare workers. BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Jun 3; 19(1): 491.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31159777/?

38 L Zhiqing, C Yongyun, et al. J Orthop Translat. 2018 Jun 27; 14:57-62.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30035033/

39 C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

?40 A Beder, U Buyukkocak, et al. Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery. Neurocirugia. 2008; 19: 121-126.

http://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/neuro/v19n2/3.pdf

41 D Lukashev, B Klebanov, et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha and its activation-inducible short isoform negatively regulate functions of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. J Immunol. 2006 Oct 15; 177(8) 4962-4965.

https://www.jimmunol.org/content/177/8/4962

42 A Sant, A McMichael. Revealing the role of CD4+ T-cells in viral immunity. J Exper Med. 2012 Jun 30; 209(8):1391-1395.

https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/3420330

The above is from https://www.primarydoctor.org/masks-not-effect

 

---

 

From Dr. Tim O'Shea

 

We have been duped into thinking there is a novel disease rampaging the world – and worse – that it is a permanent, unrelenting threat.

It’s insulting that the lies they’re telling these days aren’t even that clever. One of the main ones being that everyone who tests positive for COVID-19 is now a confirmed case, when only 1% of positive tests become cases, and only 1% of those require treatment. The rest are better in a week or so. Corporate media is desperate to keep that scientific fact from the public.

THE COMING VACCINE

The only problem with the coming vaccine is whether or not they will try to make it mandatory.

If it’s voluntary, well, feel free to indulge yourself – Darwinian selection will take over, as always. Whether it’s Fauci’s one shot in each arm trick, or Gates’ recommendation for multiple doses – let nothing hold you back in your efforts to cull the herd with your own numbers.

Just don’t make everybody a guinea pig.

The greater the number of the vaccinated, the less the chance for creating viable progeny. This is already self-evident, with the 72 vaccines on the present Schedule and the resulting proliferation of defectives. Just look around.

But this rush job they’ve got cooking right now – wherein the Moderna vaccine is a front runner out of a dozen - will be much worse.

In addition to the usual toxicity and neurodevelopmental assault characteristic of all vaccines – Moderna will almost certainly set new records for immunosuppression and outright injury.

Why? Let us count the ways.

First off, everybody knows it takes a minimum of 2 years to create a new vaccine. All vaccines have abysmal track records for both safety and efficacy Safety testing has never been required.

Wait, that’s not quite true – actually the Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 does require safety testing. It’s just that such tests have NEVER been done for any vaccine, as HHS admitted in court in 2018. [2]

Got that? Remember, vaccines are the only class of pharmaceuticals ever created for which safety tests are not performed before they’re released onto the market. [3]

And also remember that American kids are the most vaccinated demographic in mammalian history, getting twice as many shots as kids from other countries. Probably why the U.S. has the worst infant mortality rate of any developed country on earth.

And why 54% of American kids already have a chronic illness.

These are just a few of the requisite perils associated with any vaccine. But Moderna is a brand new animal. It’s having a go at being the second in a class of completely experimental vaccines – the DNA vaccines.

Google the term DNA vaccine and watch your monitor explode with entries from every biotech PR source in the world.

Here’s the short version of what DNA vaccine means:

Traditionally, the theory of vaccination has always been this: that a laboratory version of some microbes that is associated with a wild disease, is injected into the patient. Those mutated microbes are foreign antigens of course, which will supposedly trigger the production of antibodies. Which will be able to recognize and destroy the actual disease microbe, should he ever make his appearance.

That’s the pitch, for the last 200 years.

Impossible and unscientific though it is, this is the fundamental canon of the entire vaccine religion, since the time of Edward Jenner. Lab version of bug, put into vaccine, injected, creates antibodies to disease.

Most obedient people never think about this. They just get the shot. For the few that do think about it, most just accept the whole theory on blind faith. And for that small subset of literate folks who are capable of critical thinking and rational thought, and are concerned enough about their children’s survival that they might actually read something, there is a textbook that discusses many of the problems with vaccines in general: Vaccination Is Not Immunization. [1]

Back to Moderna now. Vax makers have no time for all this tedious lab work required to create a new vaccine. No, no, this rush order will have to be a DNA vaccine, which is much faster to market.

What in the world is a DNA vaccine?

This extravagant notion was first introduced to the world in 2006 with the addition of HPV vaccine to the Schedule. You can read the story on p.167 of your vaccine text. [1]

Human Papilloma Virus vaccine was the first DNA vaccine to be proposed. The novel claim was that it prevented a uterine disease of 50 year old women. And even though the vaccine only claimed a 5 year immunity, guess who the geniuses decided to mandate it to? Right. Twelve year old girls.

Many girls died in the test trials and many more died and were injured after HPV vaccine became part of the Schedule in 2006.

But that’s not the worst of it.

To make the HPV vaccine, the manufacturer discovered some particles floating around the HPV virus. With no proof whatsoever, they made the wild claim that these particles were fragments of the virus, and even more recklessly, said that these particles could trigger the production of antibodies specific to HPV virus. And thereby confer immunity.

Just a wild theory out of left field. Never tested. Never proven.

The good news was it would be very easy to manufacture because the model was faith-based – no science necessary. Merck then sold this lame turkey to CDC, and the vaccine with the mysterious particles has been part of the Schedule ever since. Gardasil.

Now with today’s hoax, since they’re under the gun from stockholders like Fauci and Gates, vaccine manufacturers excused themselves from standard science protocols, and came up with a new model, even more far-fetched.

With Moderna, they claim to have isolated the exact viral sequence that produces antibodies. They say they have learned to magically extract this segment, grow it in culture, and incorporate it into a vaccine. Then when mixed into a vaccine and injected, the fragment will survive intact and magically splice itself into the host’s DNA.

The DNA will then be able to trigger production of huge amounts of antibodies to the entire COVID virus! Thus conferring immunity.

So we're talking about a vaccine that alters your DNA.

This is just one of the experimental vaccine ingredients we’re injecting this into perfectly healthy people, including children [5] for a disease that is not serious for over 98% of the population.

Every step of this pipe dream is purest science fiction.

Even if such a hypothesis were possible, which it definitely is not, it would take years to test and prove. Not three months. But there are other serious problems with Moderna that you won't hear from the mainstream media.

To deliver the fragments into the DNA, manufacturers are including in the vaccine an industrial chemical called polyethylene glycol. PEG is also used in making inks, adhesives, industrial solvents, dyes, and paints. It’s used for its permanence and resistance to breakdown.

Like all the shortcuts they’re taking, animal testing is one of the first phases of any new vaccine trial. That was skipped entirely and they went right into human testing.

Instead of finding a test sample representative of the people who would get the vaccine, they assembled a special group of extremely healthy people: [3]

After testing the vaccine on just 45 of these extremely healthy subjects, four of them had to be hospitalized. And more than half of them had side effects. So, was it back to the drawing board, right? No. They immediately took a deposit of $500 million (of taxpayer money) for an order of 2 billion doses! No safety testing. No more testing at all. After 45 subjects.

$500 million can buy a lot of shortcuts. Especially when that’s just for starters. Drooling with anticipation, Gates has big plans – world market domination plans. Fauci has at least five subordinates who are in for a percentage of Moderna sales. [3] And did we fail to mention that Fauci himself owns 50% of the patent?

That must be why Fauci announced yesterday on TV that the new vaccine would be: “70% effective. But even if it was only 50%, that would still be value added.”

The vaccine is still in production! Not finalized at all – they don’t even know what it is yet. There’s no way anyone could know its efficacy rate, or its injury rate, in the absence of safety testing.

Even vaccine reichsmarshall Paul Offit admitted it was completely unknown whether this vaccine would be effective at all against COVID-19, in view of the its current progress in development.

This is an experiment that is absolutely being done on the live population. On anyone reckless enough to be inoculated.

Think there’s any room for corruption in this cozy scenario?

It’s not so much we mind being lied to – we’re used to that. But it’s the clumsy lies, the bad lies that are so insulting. Like we’re not even worth the effort of making up a decent lie.

References

1. Vaccination Is Not Immunization
https://thedoctorwithin.com/product/vaccination-is-not-immunization-the-war-on-children-2/

2. U.S. District Court Southern District of New York, 2018
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/rfk-complaint-against-united-states-department-of-health-and-human-services.pdf

3. Heated Vaccine Debate - Kennedy vs Dershowitz 2020
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfnJi7yLKgE&t=2303s

4. Components of mRNA Technology Childrenshealthdefense 2020
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/components-of-mrna-technology-could-lead-to-significant-adverse-events-in-one-or-more-of-our-clinical-trials-says-moderna/?itm_term=home

5. Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) 200 Chemical Name: Poly (ethylene glycol)
https://www.acme-hardesty.com/product/polyethylene-glycol-peg-200/

---

 

The Andrew Wakefield interview
that Facebook won't allow to be viewed

https://www.brighteon.com/6124310f-ecef-4f27-80e7-ae7f5199b52c

 

---

 

OP-ED

 

The most egregious example of Americans swallowing scraps of nonsense data is the COVID-19 “cases data.” Suddenly, everyone in the neighborhood is an epidemiologist, and with a religious fervor. But, self-righteous though they may be, they are largely incorrect.

While real epidemiologists at Stanford, UCLA and the University of Southern California, among others, have tried to set the record straight about the huge overstatement of COVID-19 risk, Americans remain focussed on trends in “new cases” and “hot spots.” The data have led to suggestions for renewed lockdowns. They have prompted national teachers’ unions to threaten school shutdowns.

The problem with all of this is that “cases data” and “trends” are statistically meaningless. Reported cases’ trends are the result of increased testing. It has obvious selection bias and is in no way a random sample, and it should be noted that positive test results do not count as cases, but are, but shouldn't be because of the false positives. It has zero relationship to any reality regarding COVID-19 “increasing trends.” And draconian policies based upon “cases” are purely political, fraudulent and irresponsible. Slanted news stories about “outbreaks” and “rising trends” appear to be designed to scare the public so they will welcome with open arms a mandatory vaccine policy – and they are succeeding. Even hospitalization data have selection bias and are not a reliable “trend.”

The only useful trend data are fatalities – it is presumably a 100 percent sample and there are fewer ways to fudge it, and that trend is stable or declining in most parts of the country, even though we hear otherwise from the mainstream media, who misrepresent information all the time, providing “alternative facts”.

 

---

 

Here's how "loaded" studies and non-studies are used to make us believe something that, in reality, is not true. In reality, when Hydroxychloroquine+Zinc is used early on in Covid-19, it is VERY beneficial, helping to prevent hospitalization for those most at risk of needing hospitalization. But since widespread use of this protocol will dial down the pandemic, which will douse the fire of the "the entire world's population must be vaccinated" agenda, this protocol must be discredited. And here's how it's done. Look at the headlines about Hydroxychloroquine below and then watch the video.

https://youtu.be/dLSYRqcg0wo?t=249

 

 

---

 

From the "You've got to be kidding me" Department

 

Even Asymptomatic People
Carry the Coronavirus in High Amounts
The New York Times

 

---

 

Is There a Pandemic?

From CDC data: 2020 has the lowest weekly death rate
in a decade so far. The second lowest in 20 years.

A pandemic that commands the attention of the public, and action by the medical field, is one that sickens many people, overwhelms healthcare resources, and raises the total death rate above that of a typical year or season. The COVID-19 era that began in early 2020 has received much attention in the United States for deaths that have occurred during this time. Has COVID-19 resulted in more deaths (known as "excess deaths") than would have happened in a typical year? An obstacle to answering that question is that testing for COVID-19 is flawed due to being both inaccurate and imprecise, for reasons discussed herein, and it is difficult to distinguish COVID-19 from other respiratory illnesses due to symptoms and signs that are mostly indistinguishable from the common cold, flu or pneumonia. It appears that flu and pneumonia deaths, and perhaps others, have been incorrectly ascribed to COVID-19, especially due to peculiarities in mortality reporting discussed below.

Therefore, a year-over-year comparison of deaths from all causes is the best analysis of available evidence of whether or not the United States is now experiencing a deadly pandemic.

However, only 32 weeks have elapsed in 2020. For each previous year, 52 weeks were counted, so how then can we compare deaths from all causes in 2020 to previous years? Here, the total number of deaths is divided by the number of weeks to arrive at number of deaths per week for each of the last 21 years, January 1, 2000 through August 8, 2020.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) lists total deaths from all causes in 2020. On examination of the data for the first two decades of the 21st century, it is seen that the 2020 weekly total death rate in the U.S. is the lowest in a decade, and second lowest in the 21st century so far.

So where is the data that supports a pandemic in the U.S.?

 

Although some of 2020's lower death rate may be due to a reporting lag,
that lag is likely too small to explain the lower weekly death rate in 2020 compared to previous years.

 

---

 

Who is the WHO Really Working For?
Could they favor the pharmaceutical industry?

The chart below shows who is funding the World Health Organization (contrary to what some people assume, the WHO is a private organization).

Here's some interesting tidbits: Anthony Fauci is part of the GAVI Alliance. Gavi is a vaccine alliance. And Bill Gates is heavy into vaccines; he wants the entire world's population vaccinated against a viral infection that's on par with a very bad flu season. And look at who are two of the biggest funders of the WHO. Together, they are the biggest funder. Maybe they have some influence with the WHO?

No maybes about it.

Just as Federal Express is not connected at all with the Federal government, because the word "Health" appears in the name of an organization doesn't mean they care about people's health. There are organizations with equally nice sounding names such as "The American Freedom Foundation" that are white supremacist organizations who want all Jews dead. You can't go by names when dealing with the human species.

 

---

 

Additional Mask Info
(Much more above)

 

Are Face Masks Effective?
The Evidence.

Published: July 30, 2020; Updated: August 14, 2020

An overview of the current evidence
regarding the effectiveness of face masks.

 

1. Studies on the effectiveness of face masks

So far, most studies found little to no evidence for the effectiveness of cloth face masks in the general population, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control.

Additional aspects

2. Studies claiming face masks are effective

Some recent studies argued that cloth face masks are indeed effective against the new coronavirus and could at least prevent the infection of other people. However, most of these studies suffer from poor methodology and sometimes show the opposite of what they claim.

Typically, these studies ignore the effect of other measures, the natural development of infection numbers, changes in test activity, or they compare countries with very different conditions.

An overview:

3. Risks associated with face masks

Wearing masks for a prolonged period of time is not harmless, as the following evidence shows:

Conclusion

It's said that cloth face masks in the general population might be effective in certain circumstances, but there is currently little to no evidence supporting this proposition. If the SARS-2 virus is indeed transmitted via aerosols, cloth masks are unlikely to be protective.

 

---

 

Too far? Some Don't Think So.

 

---

 

Additional Mask Info
(Much more above)

 

Face Masks Pose Serious Risks to the Healthy
Posted By: Russell Blaylock, MD May 11, 2020

 

Dr. Russell Blaylock warns that not only do face masks fail to protect the healthy from getting sick, but they also create serious health risks to the wearer. The bottom line is that if you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask. As businesses reopen, many are requiring shoppers and employees to wear a face mask. Costco, for example, will not allow shoppers into the store without wearing a face mask. Many employers are requiring all employees to wear a face mask while at work. In some jurisdictions, all citizens must wear a face mask if they are outside of their own home. – TN Editor

 

With the advent of the so-called COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen a number of medical practices that have little or no scientific support as regards reducing the spread of this infection. One of these measures is the wearing of facial masks, either a surgical-type mask, bandana or N95 respirator mask. When this pandemic began and we knew little about the virus itself or its epidemiologic behavior, it was assumed that it would behave, in terms of spread among communities, like other respiratory viruses. Little has presented itself after intense study of this virus and its behavior to change this perception.

This is somewhat of an unusual virus in that for the vast majority of people infected by the virus, one experiences either no illness (asymptomatic) or very little sickness. Only a very small number of people are at risk of a potentially serious outcome from the infection – mainly those with underlying serious medical conditions in conjunction with advanced age and frailty, those with immune compromising conditions and nursing home patients near the end of their lives. There is growing evidence that the treatment protocol issued to treating doctors by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), mainly intubation and use of a ventilator (respirator), may have contributed significantly to the high death rate in these select individuals.

As for the scientific support for the use of face mask, a recent careful examination of the literature, in which 17 of the best studies were analyzed, concluded that, “ None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”1 Keep in mind, no studies have been done to demonstrate that either a cloth mask or the N95 mask has any effect on transmission of the COVID-19 virus. Any recommendations, therefore, have to be based on studies of influenza virus transmission. And, as you have seen, there is no conclusive evidence of their efficiency in controlling flu virus transmission.

It is also instructive to know that until recently, the CDC did not recommend wearing a face mask or covering of any kind, unless a person was known to be infected, that is, until recently. Non-infected people need not wear a mask. When a person has TB we have them wear a mask, not the entire community of non-infected. The recommendations by the CDC and the WHO are not based on any studies of this virus and have never been used to contain any other virus pandemic or epidemic in history.

Now that we have established that there is no scientific evidence necessitating the wearing of a face mask for prevention, are there dangers to wearing a face mask, especially for long periods? Several studies have indeed found significant problems with wearing such a mask. This can vary from headaches, to increased airway resistance, carbon dioxide accumulation, to hypoxia, all the way to serious life-threatening complications.

There is a difference between the N95 respirator mask and the surgical mask (cloth or paper mask) in terms of side effects. The N95 mask, which filters out 95% of particles with a median diameter >0.3 µm2 , because it impairs respiratory exchange (breathing) to a greater degree than a soft mask, and is more often associated with headaches. In one such study, researchers surveyed 212 healthcare workers (47 males and 165 females) asking about presence of headaches with N95 mask use, duration of the headaches, type of headaches and if the person had preexisting headaches.2

A more recent study involving 159 healthcare workers aged 21 to 35 years of age found that 81% developed headaches from wearing a face mask.3 Some had pre-existing headaches that were precipitated by the masks. All felt like the headaches affected their work performance.

Unfortunately, no one is telling the frail elderly and those with lung diseases, such as COPD, emphysema or pulmonary fibrosis, of these dangers when wearing a facial mask of any kind – which can cause a severe worsening of lung function. This also includes lung cancer patients and people having had lung surgery, especially with partial resection or even the removal of a whole lung.

The importance of these findings is that a drop in oxygen levels (hypoxia) is associated with an impairment in immunity. Studies have shown that hypoxia can inhibit the type of main immune cells used to fight viral infections called the CD4+ T-lymphocyte. This occurs because the hypoxia increases the level of a compound called hypoxia inducible factor-1 (HIF-1), which inhibits T-lymphocytes and stimulates a powerful immune inhibitor cell called the Tregs. This sets the stage for contracting any infection, including COVID-19 and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, your mask may very well put you at an increased risk of infections and if so, having a much worse outcome.5,6,7

People with cancer, especially if the cancer has spread, will be at a further risk from prolonged hypoxia as the cancer grows best in a microenvironment that is low in oxygen. Low oxygen also promotes inflammation which can promote the growth, invasion and spread of cancers.8,9 Repeated episodes of hypoxia has been proposed as a significant factor in atherosclerosis and hence increases all cardiovascular (heart attacks) and cerebrovascular (strokes) diseases.10

There is another danger to wearing these masks on a daily basis, especially if worn for several hours. When a person is infected with a respiratory virus, they will expel some of the virus with each breath. If they are wearing a mask, especially an N95 mask or other tightly fitting mask, they will be constantly rebreathing the viruses, raising the concentration of the virus in the lungs and the nasal passages. We know that people who have the worst reactions to the coronavirus have the highest concentrations of the virus early on. And this leads to the deadly cytokine storm in a selected number.

It gets even more frightening. Newer evidence suggests that in some cases the virus can enter the brain.11,12 In most instances it enters the brain by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves), which connect directly with the area of the brain dealing with recent memory and memory consolidation. By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and can travel into the brain.13

It is evident from this review that there is insufficient evidence that wearing a mask of any kind can have a significant impact in preventing the spread of this virus. The fact that this virus is a relatively benign infection for the vast majority of the population and that most of the at-risk group also survive, from an infectious disease and epidemiological standpoint, by letting the virus spread through the healthier population we will reach a herd immunity level rather quickly that will end this pandemic quickly and prevent a return next winter. During this time, we need to protect the at-risk population by avoiding close contact, boosting their immunity with compounds that boost cellular immunity and in general, care for them.

One should not attack and insult those who have chosen not to wear a mask, as these studies suggest that is the wise choice to make.

 

 

Dr. Russell Blaylock is a nationally recognized board-certified neurosurgeon, health practitioner, author, and lecturer. He attended the Louisiana State University School of Medicine and completed his internship and neurological residency at the Medical University of South Carolina. For 26 years, practiced neurosurgery in addition to having a nutritional practice. He recently retired from his neurosurgical duties to devote his full attention to nutritional research. Dr. Blaylock has authored four books, Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills, Health and Nutrition Secrets That Can Save Your Life, Natural Strategies for Cancer Patients, and his most recent work, Cellular and Molecular Biology of Autism Spectrum Disorders.

 

---

 

Additional Mask Info
(Much more above)

By Gabriel Cousens, MD

There is a lot of controversy today about the wearing of face masks. This is an appropriate time to document what the research shows. I’ll begin with a study review of 14 studies published by the CDC:

In essence, this analysis shows that in 14 randomized control trials (RCT), wearing a mask did not support or have a significant effect on the laboratory confirmed influenza.

Xiao J, Shiu E, Gao H, et al. Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings – Personal Protective and Environmental Measures. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2020;26(5):967-975. doi:10.3201/eid2605.190994.
Link: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

 

Holland's top scientists say there's no solid evidence coverings work and warn they could even hamper the fight against Covid-19

(From the article...)

Europe's Top Health Officials Say Masks Aren't Helpful in Beating COVID-19

(From the article...)

Science does not show that masks prevent the spread of COVID-19

• New England Journal of Medicine:
“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection.” – LINK HERE

• CAL-OSHA Regulations:
”Cloth face coverings do not protect against COVD-19”

• California Department of Health:
“Face coverings may increase risk if users reduce their use of strong defenses.” “There is limited evidence to suggest that use of cloth face coverings by the public during a pandemic could help reduce disease transmission.” – LINK HERE

• FDA – “Even a properly fitted N95 mask does not prevent illness or death...” – LINK HERE

• CDC –"There is no scientific evidence for healthy people wearing masks." – Watch “CDC Mask Deception”

• Neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock:
”There is no scientific evidence that masks are effective. If you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask.” – LINK HERE

• Columbia University: Psychological Harms of Face Masks:
“Many young children burst into tears or recoil when someone wearing a mask approaches. By putting on masks, we take away information that makes it especially difficult for children to recognize others and read emotional signals, which is unsettling and disconcerting.” – LINK HERE

• US Surgeon General Jerome Adams:
”Masks are not effective in preventing the general public from catching coronavirus.”

 

• Dr. Anthony Fauci:
“People should not be walking around wearing masks. Masks do not provide the protection people think they do.” – LINK HERE
(It’s interesting to see that he’s changed his position without any apparent scientific evidence to support his reversal of position.)

• The WHO, Dr. Mike Ryan:
”There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit. In fact, there’s some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly. – LINK HERE

• US Department of Labor – OSHA:
”Oxygen deficient is any atmosphere that contains less than 19.5%.” This happens when the oxygen is displaced by inert gas such as CARBON DIOXIDE and is the leading cause of FATALITIES.” – LINK HERE
(This of course happens because wearing a facemask cuts down on oxygen by 20% and increases carbon dioxide in the system.)

The Annals of Internal Medicine (in a now retracted statement) suggest that neither surgical nor cloth masks are effective in stopping Coronavirus: (https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342)

Given the fact that there is no peered reviewed research published in a reputable medical journal that scientifically and conclusively shows that healthy people wearing face masks slows the spread of disease, it is illogical and potentially detrimental for a healthy person to be wearing a mask.

I hope I've given you enough information and insight that you can make an informed decision whether or not it's appropriate and healthy, physically, emotionally, and mentally, for you to choose or not to choose to wear a mask.

 

---

 

Coronavirus: Why Everyone Was Wrong

The coronavirus is slowly retreating.
What actually happened in the past few weeks?
The experts have missed some basic connections.
The immune response against the virus is much stronger than we thought.

By Beda M. Stadler

 

Firstly, it was wrong to claim that this virus was novel. Secondly, it was even more wrong to claim that the population would not already have some immunity against this virus. Thirdly, it was the crowning of stupidity to claim that someone could have Covid-19 without any symptoms at all or even to pass the disease along without showing any symptoms whatsoever.

But let’s look at this one by one.

At the end of 2019 a coronavirus, which was considered novel, was detected in China. When the gene sequence, i.e. the blueprint of this virus, was identified and was given a similar name to the 2002 identified Sars, i.e. Sars-CoV-2, we should have already asked ourselves then how far this virus is related to other coronaviruses, which can make human beings sick. But no, instead we discussed from which animal as part of a Chinese menu the virus might have sprung. In the meantime, however, many more people believe the Chinese were so stupid as to release this virus upon themselves in their own country. Now that we’re talking about developing a vaccine against the virus, we suddenly see studies which show that this so-called novel virus is very strongly related to Sars-1 as well as other beta-coronaviruses which make us suffer every year in the form of colds. Apart from the pure homologies in the sequence between the various coronaviruses which can make people sick, scientists are currently working on identifying a number of areas on the virus in the same way as human immune cells identify them. This is no longer about the genetic relationship, but about how our immune system sees this virus, i.e., which parts of other coronaviruses could potentially be used in a vaccine.

So: Sars-Cov-2 isn’t all that new, but merely a seasonal cold virus that mutated and disappears in summer, as all cold viruses do — which is what we’re observing globally right now. Flu viruses mutate significantly more, by the way, and nobody would ever claim that a new flu virus strain was completely novel. Many veterinary doctors were therefore annoyed by this claim of novelty, as they have been vaccinating cats, dogs, pigs, and cows for years against coronaviruses.

2. The fairy tale of no immunity

From the World Health Organisation (WHO) to every Facebook virologist, everyone claimed this virus was particularly dangerous, because there was no immunity against it, because it was a novel virus. Even Anthony Fauci, the most important advisor to the Trump administration noted at the beginning at every public appearance that the danger of the virus lay in the fact that there was no immunity against it. Tony and I often sat next to each other at immunology seminars at the National Institute of Health in Bethesda in the US, because we worked in related fields back then. So for a while I was pretty uncritical of his statements, since he was a respectable colleague of mine. The penny dropped only when I realised that the first commercially available antibody test [for Sars-CoV-2] was put together from an old antibody test that was meant to detect Sars-1. This kind of test evaluates if there are antibodies in someone’s blood and if they came about through an early fight against the virus. Scientists even extracted antibodies from a llama that would detect Sars-1, Sars-CoV-2, and even the Mers virus. It also became known that Sars-CoV-2 had a less significant impact in areas in China where Sars-1 had previously raged. This is clear evidence urgently suggesting that our immune system considers Sars-1 and Sars-CoV-2 at least partially identical and that one virus could probably protect us from the other.

That’s when I realised that the entire world simply claimed that there was no immunity, but in reality, nobody had a test ready to prove such a statement. That wasn’t science, but pure speculation based on a gut feeling that was then parroted by everyone. To this day there isn’t a single antibody test that can describe all possible immunological situations, such as: if someone is immune, since when, what the neutralising antibodies are targeting, and how many structures exist on other coronaviruses that can equally lead to immunity.

In mid-April, work was published by the group of Andreas Thiel at the Charité Berlin. It was a paper with 30 authors, amongst them the virologist Christian Drosten. It showed that in 34% of people in Berlin who had never been in contact with the Sars-CoV-2 virus showed nonetheless T-cell immunity against it (T-cell immunity is a different kind of immune reaction, see below). This means that our T-cells, i.e. white blood cells, detect common structures appearing on Sars-CoV-2 and regular cold viruses and therefore combat both of them.

A study by John P A Ioannidis of Stanford University — according to the Einstein Foundation in Berlin, one of the world’s ten most cited scientists — showed that immunity against Sars-Cov-2, measured in the form of antibodies, is much higher than previously thought. Ioannidis is certainly not a conspiracy theorist who just wants to swim against the stream; nontheless he is now being criticised, because the antibody tests used were not extremely precise. With that, his critics admit that they do not have such tests yet. And aside, John P A Ioannidis is such a scientific heavy-weight that all German virologists combined are a light-weight in comparison.

3. The failure of modellers

Epidemiologists also fell for the myth that there was no immunity in the population. They also didn’t want to believe that coronaviruses were seasonal cold viruses that would disappear in summer. Otherwise their curve models would have looked different. When the initial worst case scenarios didn’t come true anywhere, some now still cling to models predicting a "second wave". Let’s leave them their hopes — I’ve never seen a scientific branch that maneuvered itself so much into the offside. I have also not yet understood why epidemiologists were so much more interested in the number of deaths, rather than in the numbers that could be saved.

4. Immunology of common sense

As an immunologist, I trust a biological model, namely that of the human organism, which has built a tried and tested, adaptive immune system. At the end of February, driving home from the recording of a Swiss political TV debate show, I mentioned to Daniel Koch [former head of the Swiss federal section “Communicable Diseases” of the Federal Office of Public Health] that I suspected there was a general immunity in the population against Sars-Cov-2. He argued against my view. I later defended him anyway, when he said that children were not a driving factor in the spread of the pandemic. He suspected that children didn’t have a receptor for the virus, which is of course nonsense. Still, we had to admit that his observations were correct. But the fact that every scientist attacked him afterwards and asked for studies to prove his point, was somewhat ironic. Nobody asked for studies to prove that people in certain at-risk groups were dying. When the first statistics from China and later worldwide data showed the same trend, that is to say that almost no children under ten years old got sick, everyone should have made the argument that children clearly have to be immune. For every other disease that doesn’t afflict a certain group of people, we would come to the conclusion that that group is immune. When people are sadly dying in a retirement home, but in the same place other pensioners with the same risk factors are left entirely unharmed, we should also conclude that they were presumably immune.

But this common sense seems to have eluded many, let’s call them “immunity deniers” just for fun. This new breed of deniers had to observe that the majority of people who tested positive for this virus, i.e. the virus was present in their throats, did not get sick. The term “silent carriers” was conjured out of a hat and it was claimed that one could be sick without having symptoms. Wouldn’t that be something! If this principle from now on gets naturalised into the realm of medicine, health insurers would really have a problem, but also teachers whose students could now claim to have whatever disease to skip school, if at the end of the day one didn’t need symptoms anymore to be sick.

The next joke that some virologists shared was the claim that those who were sick without symptoms could still spread the virus to other people. The “healthy” sick would have so much of the virus in their throats that a normal conversation between two people would be enough for the “healthy one” to infect the other person. At this point we have to dissect what is happening here: If a virus is growing anywhere in the body, also in the throat, it means that human cells decease. When human cells decease, the immune system is alerted immediately and an infection is caused. One of five cardinal symptoms of an infection is pain. It is understandable that those afflicted by Covid-19 might not remember that initial scratchy throat and then go on to claim that they didn’t have any symptoms just a few days ago. But for doctors and virologists to twist this into a story of “healthy” sick people, which stokes panic and was often given as a reason for stricter lockdown measures, just shows how bad the joke really is. At least the WHO didn’t accept the claim of asymptomatic infections and even challenges this claim on its website.

Here is a succinct and brief summary, especially for the immunity deniers, of how humans are attacked by germs and how we react to them: If there are pathogenic viruses in our environment, then all humans — whether immune or not — are attacked by this virus. If someone is immune, the battle with the virus begins. First we try to prevent the virus from binding to our own cells with the help of antibodies. This normally works only partially, not all are blocked and some viruses will attach to the appropriate cells. That doesn’t need to lead to symptoms, but it’s also not a disease. Because the second guard of the immune system is now called into action. That’s the above mentioned T-cells; white blood cells, which can determine from the outside which other cells the virus is now hiding in to multiply. These cells, which are now incubating the virus, are searched throughout the entire body and "killed" by the T-cells until the last virus is "dead".

So if we do a PCR corona test on an immune person, it is not a virus that is detected, but a small shattered part of the viral genome. The test comes back positive for as long as there are tiny shattered parts of the virus left. Correct: Even if the infectious viruses are long dead, a corona test can come back positive, because the PCR method multiplies even a tiny fraction of the viral genetic material enough to be detected. That’s exactly what happened, when there was the global news, even shared by the WHO, that 200 Koreans who already went through Covid-19 were infected a second time and that there was therefore probably no immunity against this virus. The explanation of what really happened and an apology came only later, when it was clear that the immune Koreans were perfectly healthy and only had a short battle with the virus. The crux was that the virus debris registered with the overly sensitive test and therefore came back as “positive”. It is likely that a large number of the daily reported infection numbers are purely due to viral debris.

The PCR test with its extreme sensitivity was initially perfect to find out where the virus could be. But this test cannot identify whether the virus is still viable, i.e. still infectous. Unfortunately, this also led some virologists to equate the strength of a test result with viral load, i.e. the amount of virus someone can breathe out. Luckily, our day care centers stayed open nontheless since German virologists missed that part, because, out of principle, they do not look at what other countries are doing, even if other countries’ case numbers are falling more rapidly.

5. The problem with corona immunity

What does this all mean in real life? The extremely long incubation time of two to 14 days — and reports of 22 to 27 days — should wake up any immunologist. As well as the claim that most patients would no longer secrete the virus after five days. Both claims in turn actually lead to the conclusion that there is — sort of in the background — a base immunity that contorts the events, compared to an expected cycle of a viral infection — i.e. leads to a long incubation period and quick immunity. This immunity also seems to be the problem for patients with a severe course of the disease. Our antibody titre, i.e. the accuracy of our defence system, is reduced the older we get. But also people with a bad diet or who are malnourished may have a weakened immune system, which is why this virus does not only reveal the medical problems of a country, but also social issues.

If an infected person does not have enough antibodies, i.e. a weak immune response, the virus slowly spreads out across the entire body. Now that there are not enough antibodies, there is only the second, supporting leg of our immune response left: The T-cells beginn to attack the virus-infested cells all over the body. This can lead to an exaggerated immune response, basically to a massive slaughter; this is called a Cytokine Storm. Very rarely this can also happen in small children, in that case called Kawasaki Syndrome. This very rare occurrence in children was also used in our country [Switzerland] to stoke panic. It’s interesting, however, that this syndrome is very easily cured. The affected children get antibodies from healthy blood donors, i.e. people who went through the coronavirus. This means that the hushed-up supposedly non-existent immunity in the population is in fact used therapeutically.

What now?

The virus is gone for now. It will probably come back in winter, but it won’t be a "second wave", but just a cold. Those young and healthy people who currently walk around with a mask on their faces would be better off wearing a helmet instead, because the risk of something falling on their head is greater than that of getting a serious case of Covid-19.

If we observe a significant rise in infections in 14 days [after the Swiss relaxed the lockdown], we’d at least know that one of the measures was useful. Other than that I recommend reading John P A Ioannidis’ latest work in which he describes the global situation based on data on May 1st 2020: People below 65 years old make up only 0.6 to 2.6 % of all fatal Covid cases. To get on top of the pandemic, we need a strategy merely concentrating on the protection of at-risk people over 65. If that’s the opinion of a top expert, a second lockdown is simply a no-go.

On our way back to normal, it would be good for us citizens if a few scaremongers apologised. Such as doctors who wanted a triage of over 80 year old Covid patients in order to stop ventilating them [because ventilators were in short supply]. Also, media that kept showing alarmist videos of overfilled Italian hospitals to illustrate a situation that as such didn’t exist. All politicians calling for “testing, testing, testing” without even knowing what the test actually measures. And the federal government for an app they’ll never get to work and will warn me if someone near me is positive, even if they’re not infectious.

In winter, when the flu and other colds make the rounds again, we can then go back to kissing each other a little less, and we should wash our hands even without a virus present. And people who’ll get sick nonetheless can then don their masks to show others what they have learned from this pandemic. And if we still haven’t learned to protect our at-risk groups, we’ll have learned nothing.

 

The original article was published in the Swiss magazine Weltwoche (World Week) on June 10th. The author, Beda M. Stadler is the former director of the Institute for Immunology at the University of Bern, a biologist and professor emeritus. Stadler is an important medical professional in Switzerland.

 

---

 

 

---

 

The CDC is being forced to slowly come
around in its recommendations.
I guess it doesn't want to lose credibility
(or maybe it's taking an opportunity created by Anthony Fauci being sidelined).

 

---

 

 

---

 

CDC Admits to Inflating COVID Death Count

By Ty and Charlene Bollinger
September 1, 2020

The CDC recently released data showing that 94% of reported COVID-19 deaths may have been falsely reported. According to recent data from this government agency, only 6% of deaths attributed to COVID-19 can actually be attributed to the virus.

We’ve been told that the drastic measures which have destroyed small business, put millions out of work, and officially revoked religious freedoms are necessary. We’ve been told that this virus has killed over 180 THOUSAND Americans since March. But what if that number was lower? What if 94% of the 180,000 fatalities attributed to the disease were lies?

According to the newly released CDC data, only 10,800 of those 180,000 can truly be attributed to the virus. The “pandemic” that has crippled our economy and society is a lie. The CDC and our politicians know it. We said the same thing months ago. Millions out of work. Billions in tax bailouts. Suicides, hunger, and abuse skyrocketing.

And the numbers driving this devastation are 94% inaccurate.

Let’s repeat that:

Only 6% of COVID-19 deaths can actually be attributed to the virus itself.

Our government has lied to us, and that lie has been catastrophic. The rise in the number of unemployed workers due to COVID-19 is substantially greater than the increase due to the Great Recession. Substance abuse has increased. Mental health issues have increased. Suicides have increased.

In fact, a survey last month found that at least 40% of adults in the U.S are struggling with mental illness or drug abuse. In fact, 11% of those surveyed said that they have “seriously considered suicide” since the outbreak.

That's 11 percent!

Domestic abuse is up. Defaults on loans and mortgages are up. Child abuse is up. Drunk driving and deaths due to drunk driving are up. Abuse of people with special needs is up. Americans are depressed, poor, isolated, and hopeless. And it’s exclusively due to false data and media lies.

This is going to be a long read, so we’ll break it into three main sections for you.

First, we’re going to demonstrate that the mortality rate of the disease (and the narrative that hospitals are overwhelmed) is not true. Second we’ll discuss the fact that masks, social distancing, and business closures are ineffective and can be dangerous. Finally, we’ll talk about how the government and the elite have used this fake pandemic to gain more control, steal more money, and wage a guerrilla war on liberty.

Most of What You Know About COVID-19 is a Lie

We’ve been told that COVID-19 is lethal. That it has killed nearly 200,000 Americans. That masks, social distancing, and the sudden shutdown of our economy are the only reason many more haven’t died. But there’s a big difference between dying FROM the virus and dying WITH the virus.

According to the CDC, only 6% of coronavirus deaths can be confirmed as having been caused by coronavirus. “For deaths with pre-existing conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death,” they say. (You can look at the official data here.)

So, for over 94% of reported deaths (the same deaths that have led to economic collapse and significant loss of life), there were almost 3 additional causes of death. People who have drowned, people with late-stage cancer, people involved in traffic collisions… ALL of these people we classified as COVID-19 deaths simply because they tested positive at the time of their death.

There are 3 fundamental truths that you need to understand:

Reporting is Faulty

That’s really the headline here. 94% of reported fatalities had other causes of death. But it gets worse. Reliable data and information are essential to making decisions. You can’t plan a dinner party if you don’t know what’s on the menu or how many guests will attend. You can’t order parts to fix your car if you haven’t diagnosed the problem.

It follows that you can’t effectively implement drastic, global, “protective” protocols if you don’t yet understand the extent of the virus.

And yet that’s exactly what’s been happening. Scarce and unreliable data haven’t stopped entire nations from issuing “stay at home” orders and forcibly closing millions of businesses (some which will never reopen). A massive amount of the U.S. population is now out of work and quarantined in their homes despite virtually no reliable data to support the effectiveness of these measures.

Professor John Ioannidis (an expert in medicine, epidemiology, population health, biomedical data science, and statistics) may have summed it up best:

“The numbers are almost meaningless,” says Steve Goodman, a professor of epidemiology at Stanford University. There’s a huge amount of people who have mild cases and would not likely seek testing, he says. The rate of increase in positive results reflects a mixed-up combination of increased testing rates and spread of the virus.

It’s also worth mentioning that many COVID-19 cases are diagnosed without tests. If a person dies with COVID symptoms (which are common among MANY diseases), doctors may diagnose them without ever testing to confirm.

If a person dies and tests positive for the virus, they’re added to the Covid body count. However, that’s scientifically irresponsible at best and criminally negligent at the worst. In Italy, New York, and other parts of the world where the outbreak has been most severe, the likelihood that many of these fatalities weren’t caused by the virus is high.

We know that COVID-19 is much worse for the older population. Those aged 0-64 make up about 84% of the U.S. population. But they only account for a little over half of the documented hospitalizations and about 20% of all deaths. Meanwhile, those aged 65-84 make up a little over 14% of the population but account for 36% of hospitalizations and 46% of the deaths. Those 85+ comprise only 2% of our population, yet they account for 9% of hospitalizations and a whopping 34% of deaths!

Now, we’re not saying that every life isn’t precious and irreplaceable. Anyone who knows us (or our mission) can see that preserving every human life is our primary objective. But when you look at the numbers in context, things just don’t add up.

We know that this disease disproportionately affects the elderly. It also disproportionately affects those with compromised immune systems. But so does almost every disease known to man. Did you know that the median life expectancy in the U.S. is about 78 years? The sad truth is that people die every day… and older people die more often than younger people.

If an elderly person comes in with health issues, passes away, and is diagnosed with the virus, they are added to the number of people killed by COVID-19 – EVEN IF THEY HAD OTHER SEVERE UNDERLYING CONDITIONS!

To put that into perspective, there have been reports of people around the country dying from car accidents, drowning, or premature birth who have been counted among the coronavirus victims. But the testing has been notoriously unreliable, and the causation simply isn’t there. Just last month, it was confirmed that a positive test is no longer required to attribute a fatality to the virus.

Which brings us to point #2…

Tests Are Faulty

The U.S. government has mismanaged COVID testing so badly that we were both the slowest and the most inaccurate when it came to COVID testing. Rather than allow the free market to create testing kits, the government assigned the task to the CDC, who rolled out an inaccurate test, contaminated thousands of samples, and refused to test a patient in Northern California who turned out to be one of the first probable COVID-19 cases.

The more data and information we have, the more we can make informed decisions. In this case, bad and missing data resulted in catastrophically terrible decisions. And testing today is still wildly inaccurate. Earlier this month, shortly before Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine was due to meet President Donald Trump at a Cleveland airport, the governor tested positive on a rapid antigen test for the new coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19.

Two follow-up tests, using a more accurate polymerase chain reaction, or PCR test, showed the governor didn’t have COVID. This kind of false positive with an antigen test isn’t an isolated incident.

Dozens of people who took a rapid SARS-CoV-2 test developed by biotech company Quidel at a Manchester, Vermont, clinic in July were told they had COVID. Subsequent PCR tests run by the state’s Department of Health found that only 4 out of those 65 were positive.

Testing is inaccurate. Patients are sometimes diagnosed without being tested. There are likely millions of infected people with no symptoms. And the death toll is a flat-out lie.

And even when tests are accurate, they can still be misleading.

Most Patients Are Not Contagious

The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus. We’ve known for months (based on the available data) that the coronavirus does not act like normal cough and cold viruses that we often catch from children. In a surprise to pediatricians, teachers and parents alike, the virus behaves the opposite of what we are used to. Children and adolescents do not seem to get sick with Covid-19 as frequently as adults. And children, especially elementary school-age children, do not seem to transmit it effectively to one another, nor to adults.

This has been documented in countries around the world, including Greece, Switzerland, and Australia. Even when schools are open, most children who get ill are found to have been infected by someone in their household, not from a school contact.

According to the CDC’s own data, people aged 0-24 account for 0.2% of documented COVID-19 deaths. And remember – only 6% of those are actually confirmed!

And since the vast majority of infections seem to be asymptomatic, there is an extremely high likelihood that there are thousands – even millions – of infected Americans who have not been tested or diagnosed.

So the tests are bad, the data is bad, and most people probably aren’t even carriers. But there’s one more lie we need to address before we move on. And it involves the fundamental rhetoric of “flattening the curve”.

Despite the narrative you may have heard from the mainstream media, our health system (while riddled with flaws), was prepared for an event like this. While the federal government’s pandemic preparedness was sorely lacking, the fact is that America’s system of private medicine has left us far better positioned for today’s crisis than other nations.

As former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb explained in an interview, here in the United States, “We’re going to have a better experience [with COVID-19] than a lot of other countries because of how good our system is at delivering critical care.”

And while we hate to say it, Gottlieb is right. The United States has 20 to 30 intensive care unit beds for every 100,000 people, the most per capita of any country in the world. That is at least 75% more than in the United Kingdom, where the government-run National Health Service had a meager 5,900 ventilators before the pandemic struck.

Here’s some quick math:

And while that number may seem high at first, remember that the CDC confirmed that 94% of reported COVID deaths were accompanied with other morbidity factors. As we’ve already mentioned, cancer patients, people injured in car accidents, drowning victims, and people with existing heart or respiratory disease were routinely counted among the death toll for the virus. (And the doctors who filled out the Death Certificates were being instructed by hospital adminstrators to do this. Financial incentives were to blame).

Admittedly, the virus may well have exacerbated some preexisting conditions. It would be unfair to claim that 94% percent of cases weren’t caused – at least in part – by the virus. But the reality is that people go to the hospital all the time.

Approximately 4 million people are admitted to the ICU each year. Given that 94% of patients had other illness or injury, it may well be that the number of ICU admissions for COVID-19 is around 12,424. That number, while serious for patients and their families, barely registers against the 4 million ICU admissions normally seen each year.

And as usual, the U.S. government found a way to squander millions of dollars responding to a threat that never really existed. Early this spring, the Army Corps of Engineers mobilized in the U.S., hiring private contractors to build emergency field hospitals around the country.

The endeavor cost more than $660 million, according to an NPR analysis of federal spending records. But nearly four months into the pandemic, most of these facilities haven’t treated a single patient. In fact, of the 13,727 beds made available, only 1,177 patients were ever even used. The majority of these field hospitals saw exactly zero patients. That’s $560,747.66 per patient.

But squandering money on unnecessary field hospitals is not the only mistake the government made in response to the virus.

Safety Measures Don’t Help

Let’s go over the FACTS about masks and COVID-19.

Here are 12 FACTS that we KNOW…

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidance about when to wear a face mask may seem confusing to Americans, who have been advised by the CDC to wear cloth face masks in public to help slow the spread of COVID-19.

“If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19,” the WHO guidelines read. And at first, the CDC agreed. After months of maintaining that healthy people didn’t need to wear masks in public to prevent the coronavirus, the country’s top public health officials reversed their position, recommending that everyone wear a face mask in public places where social distancing is difficult.

That's a stark change from the early weeks of the outbreak, when the CDC said only two groups of people needed to wear masks: people who were showing symptoms and people who were taking care of someone who was sick. Sound familiar?

And the fallout of shutting down our economy will be far more severe than the virus itself.

Economy and Public Health

One of the most common attacks we’ve heard on those who support reopening our economy and salvaging our liberties is that we care more about the economy than human life. But the truth is that the two are invariably intertwined.

The more damage we do to our society and economy, the higher the death toll will be. In fact, there will almost certainly is and will be more loss of life from the reaction to coronavirus than from the disease itself. Reuters summarized a few of them beautifully:

Domestic Violence

Trapped at home with their abusers, some domestic violence victims are already experiencing more frequent and extreme violence, said Katie Ray-Jones, the chief executive officer of the National Domestic Violence Hotline.

Domestic violence programs across the country have cited increases in calls for help, news accounts reported – from Cincinnati to Nashville, Portland, Salt Lake City and statewide in Virginia and Arizona. The YWCA of Northern New Jersey, in another example, told Reuters that its domestic violence calls have risen up to 24%.

“There are special populations that are going to have impacts that go way beyond COVID-19,” said Ray-Jones, citing domestic violence victims as one.

Vulnerable Students

Students, parents, and teachers all face challenges adjusting to remote learning, as schools nationwide have been closed and online learning has begun.

Some experts are concerned that students at home, especially those living in unstable environments or poverty, will miss more assignments. High school students who miss at least three days a month are seven times more likely to drop out before graduating and, as a result, live nine years less than their peers, according to a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation report.

Among the most vulnerable: The more than 6 million special education students across the United States. Without rigorous schooling and therapy, these students face a lifetime of challenges.

Special needs students “benefit the most from highly structured and customized special education,” said Sharon Vaughn, executive director of the The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk at the University of Texas. “This means that they are the group that are most likely to be significantly impacted by not attending school both in the short and long term.”

For example, in New Jersey, Matawan’s Megan Gutierrez has been overwhelmed with teaching and therapy duties for her two nonverbal autistic sons, eight and 10. She’s worried the boys, who normally work with a team of therapists and teachers, will regress. “For me, keeping those communications skills is huge, because if they don’t, that can lead to behavioral issues where they get frustrated because they can’t communicate,” Gutierrez said.

Furthermore, we can’t even begin to imagine the effect of these dramatic changes on the mind and mental health of students. How will they be permanently impacted by living in fear and masks; by oftentimes literally studying in plastic boxes?

Soaring Suicides

In Europe and the United States, suicide rates rise about 1% for every one percentage point increase in unemployment, according to research published by lead author Aaron Reeves from Oxford University. During the last recession, when the unemployment in the United States peaked at 10%, the suicide rate jumped, resulting in 4,750 more deaths. If the unemployment rate increases to 20%, the toll could well rise.

“Sadly, I think there is a good chance we could see twice as many suicides over the next 24 months than we saw during the early part of the last recession,” Reeves told Reuters. That would be about 20,000 additional dead by suicide in the United States and Europe.

Less than three weeks after extreme suppression measures began in the United States, unemployment claims rose by nearly 10 million. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warned the rate could reach 20% and Federal Reserve economists predicted as high as 32%. Europe faces similarly dire forecasts.

Some researchers caution that suicide rates might not spike so high. The conventional wisdom is that more people will kill themselves amid skyrocketing unemployment, but communities could rally around a national effort to defeat COVID-19 and the rates may not rise, said Anne Case, who researches health economics at Princeton University. “Suicide is hard to predict even in the absence of a crisis of Biblical proportions,” Case said.

This week, the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado, relaxed its strict social isolation policies after the apparent suicides of two cadet seniors in late March. (This reported by the Gazette, a Colorado Springs newspaper.) While juniors, sophomores, and freshmen had been sent home, the college seniors were kept isolated in dorms, and some had complained of a prison-like setting. Now, the seniors will be able to leave campus for drive-thru food and congregate in small groups per state guidelines.

Public Health Crippled

Typically, local health departments run programs that treat chronic diseases such as diabetes. They also help prevent childhood lead poisoning and stem the spread of the flu, tuberculosis and rabies. A severe loss of property and sales tax revenue following a wave of business failures will likely cripple these health departments, said Adriane Casalotti, chief of government affairs with the National Association of County and City Health Officials, a nonprofit focused on public health.

After the 2008 recession, local health departments in the U.S. lost 23,000 positions as more than half experienced budget cuts. While it’s become popular to warn against placing economic concerns over health, Casalotti said that, on the front lines of public health, the two are inexorably linked. “What are you going to do when you have no tax base to pull from?” she asked.

Carol Moehrle, director of a public health department that serves five counties in northern Idaho, said her office lost about 40 of its 90 employees amid the last recession. The department had to cut a family planning program that provided birth control to women below the poverty line and a program that tested for and treated sexually transmitted diseases. She worries a depression will cause more harm.

“I honestly don’t think we could be much leaner and still be viable, which is a scary thing to think about,” said Moehrle.

Job-loss Mortality

Rises in unemployment during large recessions can set in motion a domino effect of reduced income, additional stress and unhealthy lifestyles. Those setbacks in income and health often mean people die earlier, said Till von Wachter, a University of California Los Angeles professor who researches the impact of job loss. Von Wachter said his research of past surges in unemployment suggests displaced workers could lose, on average, a year and a half of their lifespan. If the jobless rate rises to 20%, this could translate into 48 million years of lost human life.

Von Wachter cites measures which he believes could mitigate the effects of unemployment. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act approved by the White House last week includes emergency loans to businesses and a short-time compensation program that could encourage employers to keep employees on the payroll (even though in some other countries, like Germany, workers who were made to stay home still got paid because businesses received governement assistance to be able to do this).

Young People Suffer

Young adults entering the job market during the coronavirus suppression may pay an especially high price over the long term. First-time job hunters seeking work during periods of high unemployment live shorter and unhealthier lives, research shows. An extended freeze of the economy could shorten the lifespan of the 6.4 million Americans entering the job market by an average of about two years, said Hannes Schwandt, a health economics researcher at Northwestern University, who conducted the study with Von Wachter. This would be 12.8 million years of life lost.

Thousands of college graduates will enter a job market at a time global business is frozen. Jason Gustave, a senior at William Paterson University in New Jersey who will be the first in his family to graduate from college, had a job in physical therapy lined up. Now, his licensure exam is postponed and the earliest he could start work is September.

“It all depends on where the economy goes,” he said. “Is there a position still available?”

Even the U.N., which has vigorously supported the draconian suspension of industry, society, and freedom, says that “hundreds of thousands of children could die this year due to the global economic downturn sparked by the coronavirus pandemic and tens of millions more could fall into extreme poverty as a result of the crisis”

Every day that our country remains closed, more people will die. And that fatal decision has been made by a few public servants who would fancy themselves omnipotent overlords.

And as Americans suffer, the government and the extremely wealthy are taking advantage.

The Elite Class is Scamming Us

The powers that be – billionaires, the tech and pharmaceutical industries, and governments around the world – have used fear as a means to seize the very freedoms that define our society... a time-honored tradition. Many of us are at the mercy of these authorities. Businesses are failing, citizens are hurtling towards financial ruin, and the rights enshrined in the Constitution have been stripped.

Practicing safe habits as a virus spreads is important. Supporting your immune system, practicing proper hygiene, and taking care of those most vulnerable among us is of paramount importance. But the oppressive measures that have been taken against us will cause far more damage than this virus ever could.

Yes, there are ways to improve your immune system. Yes, you should absolutely practice proper hygiene and responsible social distancing to protect those most who are most vulnerable to disease. And yes, this is a very real disease that will inevitably claim some lives no matter what is done.

But the government has quietly stripped us of our freedoms and they will start demanding concessions before they return them. Increased taxes. Bailouts for mega-corporations. New vaccine requirements. Medical tracking and registration. Communist-era social surveillance. If we comply with their demands in exchange for our liberty, we are acknowledging that our liberties are subject to the whims of a few self-important government officials and the too-powerful corporations that support them.

The inevitable conclusion to this chapter of our history will be a bargain: Comply with government orders and they will return to you some of your freedoms. But conditional freedom is no freedom at all. And it’s time we sent that message loud and clear.

The $2 trillion stimulus package approved by the government is intended to help ease some of the strain the country is feeling, but a closer look under the hood reveals an unsatisfactory distribution of funds for a potentially cataclysmic crisis.

 

 

Red flags run through the entire stimulus. Any cash deposit is always welcome, but a mere $1,000 is not going to sustain most Americans through to the other end of the economic recovery. And why are private airlines the largest recipients of the Big Business pool of money?

Even now, as Congress is attempting to pass a second stimulus bill, the two parties are in a deadlock. Both sides are using this bill to push their own agendas which are unrelated to the current economic crisis. A crisis they caused in the first place.

Americans are literally being held hostage and used as bargaining chips in a political showdown between the two parties.

As it turns out, all of this is the result of faulty data and lies [and agendas]. Artificially inflated statistics are responsible for the economic and social collapse which we’re currently experiencing. Enough is enough.

Politicians are supposed to work for us. They should use our tax dollars sparingly and responsibly, and they should protect our constitutionally protected rights instead of stripping them away (which they're not permitted to do). Our governments have crossed a line that they cannot uncross. They have taken freedom hostage. They’ve used lies and fear to force America into the most severe economic recession in history. Soon, they will support vaccines and other concessions as the terms for its release. It is of paramount importance that we do not accept their terms.

 

---

 

Study by UCLA and Stanford Finds COVID-19
“10 Times Less Fatal than First Thought”

The study from UCLA and Stanford found a 50-to-64-year-old person who has a single random contact has, on average, a 1 in 19.1 million chance of dying based on rates as of the last week of May. One of the researchers, Dr. Rajiv Bhatia, wrote, “After months of living with COVID-19, we have more certainty. The virus is 10 times less fatal than we first thought. The vast majority who catch it will have mild or no symptoms. Children are largely spared.” The mainstream media failed to report this on this study when it was published in late June.

The study by Rajiv Bhatia and Jeffrey Klausner was posted at medRXiv.

Results: Among US counties with populations greater than 500,000 people, during the week ending June 13,2020, the median estimate of the county level probability of a confirmed infection is 1 infection in 40,500 person contacts (Range: 10,100 to 586,000). For a 50 to 64 year-old individual, the median estimate of the county level probability of a hospitalization is 1 in 709,000 person contacts (Range: 177,000 to 10,200,000) and the median estimate of the county level probability of a fatality is 1 in 6,670,000 person contacts (Range 1,680,000 to 97,600.000).

Conclusions and Relevance: Estimates of the individual probabilities of COVID19 infection, hospitalization and death vary widely but may not align with public risk perceptions. Systematically collected and publicly reported data on infection incidence by, for example, the setting of exposure, type of residence and occupation would allow more precise estimates of probabilities than possible with currently available public data. Calculation of secondary attack rates by setting and better measures of the prevalence of seropositivity would further improve those estimates.

Dr. Bhatia wrote this about his findings:

After months of living with COVID-19, we have more certainty. The virus is 10 times less fatal than we first thought. The vast majority who catch it will have mild or no symptoms. Children are largely spared.

California counties have not needed mutual health aid. Hospitals retooled quickly for a tsunami that never came. California hospitals have about 40% of their beds empty.

 

---

 

Young MD explains why he’s
against forced Coronavirus vaccine

This is exactly what I've been saying. This MD mentions a vaccine's "risk/benefit" ratio, meaning: compare the risk of injury or death to the benefit of the vaccine, but this ratio must take into consideration any good treatments that are available, like hydroxychloroquine+zinc. And when thinking about mass mandatory vaccinations what must also be considered is what percentage of the gen pop would benefit from a Coronavirus vaccine even if it did prove to be safe and effective, which we've seen is a tiny segment of the population. So when all the facts are considered, the only logical reason for wanting mass mandatory vaccinations of all 7+ billion people on the planet with a vaccine of questionable efficacy and safety is profit. And people need to wake up to this reality, and refuse to be a "revenue generating unit" that is being taken advantage of, for the sake of profit, potentially at the expense of their health.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BegGXhBD4Lc

[If this link doesn't work because YouTube deleted the video,
please let me know and I will find another link to it.]

 

---

 

Chief Science Officer for Pfizer Says "Second Wave" Faked on False-Positive COVID Tests, "Pandemic is Over"

By Ralph Lopez, September 22, 2020

In a stunning development, a former Chief Science Officer for the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer says "there is no science to suggest a second wave should happen." The "Big Pharma" insider asserts that false positive results from inherently unreliable COVID tests are being used to manufacture a "second wave" based on "new cases."

Dr. Mike Yeadon, a former Vice President and Chief Science Officer for Pfizer for 16 years, says that half or even "almost all" of tests for COVID are false positives. Dr. Yeadon also argues that the threshold for herd immunity may be much lower than previously thought, and may have been reached in many countries already.

In an interview Dr. Yeadon was asked:

Dr. Yeadon answered with a simple "yes."

Dr. Yeadon said in the interview that, given the "shape" of all important indicators in a worldwide pandemic, such as hospitalizations, ICU utilization, and deaths, "the pandemic is fundamentally over."

Yeadon said in the interview:

In a paper published this month, which was co-authored by Yeadon and two of his colleagues, "How Likely is a Second Wave?", the scientists write:

In the data for UK, Sweden, the US, and the world, it can be seen that in all cases, deaths were on the rise in March through mid or late April, then began tapering off in a smooth slope which flattened around the end of June and continues to today. The case rates however, based on testing, rise and swing upwards and downwards wildly.

Media messaging in the US is already ramping up expectations of a "second wave."

Survival Rate of COVID Now Estimated to be 99.8%, Similar to Flu, Prior T-Cell Immunity

The survival rate of COVID-19 has been upgraded since May to 99.8% of infections. This comes close to ordinary flu, the survival rate of which is 99.9%. Although COVID can have serious after-effects, so can flu or any respiratory illness. The present survival rate is far higher than initial grim guesses in March and April, cited by Dr. Anthony Fauci, of 94%, or 20 to 30 times deadlier. The Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) value accepted by Yeadon et al in the paper is .26%. The survival rate of a disease is 100% minus the IFR.

Dr. Yeadon pointed out that the "novel" COVID-19 contagion is novel only in the sense that it is a new type of coronavirus. But, he said, there are presently four strains which circulate freely throughout the population, most often linked to the common cold.

In the scientific paper, Yeadon et al write:

The scientists argue that much of the population already has, if not antibodies to COVID, some level of "T-cell" immunity from exposure to other related coronaviruses, which have been circulating long before COVID-19.

The scientists write:

Introducing the idea that some prior immunity to COVID-19 already existed, the authors of "How Likely is a Second Wave?" write:

They go on to say that, because of this prior resistance, only 15-25% of a population being infected may be sufficient to reach herd immunity:

In the US, accepting a death toll of 200,000, and an infection survival rate of 99.8%, this would mean for every person who has died, there would be about 400 people who had been infected, and lived. This would translate to around 80 million Americans, or 27% of the population. This touches Yeadon's and his colleagues' threshold for herd immunity.

The authors say:

The False Positive Second Wave

Of the PCR test, the prevalent COVID test used around the world, the authors write:

The authors explain that what the PCR test actually measures is "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.

Overall, Dr. Yeadon builds the case that any "second wave" of COVID, and any government case for lockdowns, given the well-known principles of epidemiology, will be entirely manufactured.

In Boston this month, a lab suspended doing coronavirus testing after 400 false positives were discovered.

An analysis of PCR-based test at medical website medrxiv.org states:

The most famous incidence of PCR test unreliability, of course, was when the President of Tanzania revealed to the world that he had covertly sent samples from a goat, a sheep, and a pawpaw fruit to a COVID testing lab. They all came back positive for COVID.

Made in China

In August, the government of Sweden discovered 3700 false COVID positives from test kits made by China's BGI Genomics. The kits were approved in March by the FDA for use in the US.

Second Waves of Coronaviruses Not Normal

Dr. Yeadon challenged the idea that all pandemics take place in subsequent waves, citing two other coronavirus outbreaks, the SARS virus in 2003, and MERS in 2012. What may seem like two waves can actually be two single waves occurring in different geographical regions. They say data gathered from the relatively recent SARS 2003 and the MERS outbreaks support their contention.

In the case of the MERS:

In the interview, when questioned about the Spanish Flu epidemic of 1918, which came in successive waves during World War I, Yeadon pointed out that this was an entirely different kind of virus, not in the coronavirus family. Others have blamed general early century malnutrition and unsanitary conditions. World War I soldiers, hard hit, lived in cold mud and conditions the worst imaginable for immune resistance.

Lockdowns Don't Work

Another argument made by Yeadon et al in their September paper is that there has been no difference in outcomes related to lockdowns.

They say:

Mild-Mannered Yeadon Demolishes Man Who Started It All, Professor Neil Ferguson

The former Pfizer executive and scientist singles out one former colleague for withering rebuke for his role in the pandemic, Professor Neil Ferguson. Ferguson taught at Imperial College while Yeadon was affiliated. Ferguson's computer model provided the rationale for governments to launch draconian orders which turned free societies into virtual prisons overnight. Over what is now estimated by the CDC to be a 99.8% survival rate virus.

Dr. Yeadon said in the interview that "no serious scientist gives any validity" to Ferguson's model.

Speaking with thinly-veiled contempt for Ferguson, Dr. Yeadon took special pains to point out to his interviewer:

Yeadon joins other scientists in castigating governments for following Ferguson's model, the assumptions of which all worldwide lockdowns are based on. One of these scientists is Dr. Johan Giesecke, former chief scientist for the European Center for Disease Control and Prevention, who called Ferguson’s model “the most influential scientific paper” in memory, and also “one of the most wrong.”

It was Ferguson's model which held that "mitigation" measures were necessary, i.e. social distancing and business closures, in order to prevent, for example, over 2.2 million people dying from COVID in the US.

Ferguson predicted that Sweden would pay a terrible price for no lockdown, with 40,000 COVID deaths by May 1, and 100,000 by June. Sweden's death count is now 5800. The Swedish government says this coincides to a mild flu season. Although initially higher, Sweden now has a lower death rate per-capita than the US, which it achieved without the terrific economic damage still ongoing in the US. Sweden never closed restaurants, bars, sports, most schools, or movie theaters. The government never ordered people to wear masks.

Dr. Yeadon speaks bitterly of the lives lost as a result of lockdown policies, and of the "savable" countless lives which will be further lost, from important surgeries and other healthcare deferred, should lockdowns be reimposed, .

Yeadon is a successful entrepreneur, the founder of a biotech company which was acquired by Novartis, another pharmaceutical giant. Yeadon's unit at Pfizer was the Asthma and Respiratory Research Unit. (Yeadon, partial list of publications.)

Why is All This Happening? US Congressman Says He is Convinced of "Government Plan" to Continue Lockdowns Until a Mandatory Vaccine. Conspiracy Theories?

The list of news items grows which reflects unfavorably upon the narrative being played out on the major television networks, of a mysterious, "novel" virus which has been controlled only by an unprecedented assault on individual rights and liberties, now ready to pounce again, on already suffering populations with no choice but to submit to further government orders.

Governors have quietly extended their powers indefinitely by shifting the goalpost, without saying so, from "flattening the curve" to ease the strain on hospitals, to "no new cases." From "pandemic," to "case-demic."

In Germany, an organization of 500 German doctors and scientists has formed, who say that government response to the COVID virus has been vastly out of proportion to the actual severity of the disease.

Evidence of chicanery mounts. Both the CDC, and US Coronavirus Task Force headed by Dr. Deborah Birx, are candid that the definition of death-by-COVID has been flexible, and that the rules favor calling it COVID whenever possible. This opens the possibility of a vastly inflated death count. In New York, Governor Andrew Cuomo's administration is under federal investigation for all but signing the death warrants for thousands of nursing home elderly, when the state sent COVID patients into the nursing homes, over the helpless objections of nursing home executives and staff.

Why are the major media ignoring what would seem to be an eminently newsworthy item, an industry rockstar like Yeadon, calling out the biggest guns in the public health world? Would not the Sunday talk shows, the Chris Wallaces and Meet the Press, want to grill such a man for record audiences?

Here the talk may turn to dark agendas, and not just mere incompetence, obtuseness, and stupidity.

One opinion was put forth by US Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) when he said on the Tom Woods Show on August 16th:

Another theory is that the COVID crisis is being used to consolidate never-before-imaged levels of control over individuals and society by elites. This is put forth by the nephew of the slain president, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., son of also-assassinated Bobby Kennedy. In a speech at a massive anti-lockdown, anti-mandatory vaccination rally in Germany, Bobby Jr. warned of the existence of a:

The warnings of dire intentions of Kennedy's "elite" are coming from more mainstream sources. Dr. Joseph Marcela, of the highly trusted, mega-traffic medical information site Mercola.com, has penned a careful review of one doctor's claims of genetics-altering vaccines coming our way.

And it does not assuage fears that a defense establishment website, Defense One, reports that permanent under-the skin biochips, injectable by the same syringe that holds a vaccine, may soon be approved by the FDA.

In 1957, a pandemic hit, the H2N2 Asian Flu with a .7% Infection Fatality Rate, which killed as many people per capita in the US as the COVID has claimed now. There was never a single mention of it in the news at the time, never mind the extraordinary upheaval that we see now. In 1968 the Hong Kong Flu hit the US (.5% IFR,) taking 100,000 people when the US had a markedly lower population. Not a single alarm was raised, not a single store closed nor even a network news story. The following summer the largest gathering in US history took place, Woodstock.

Mass hysteria is never accidental, but benefits someone. The only question left to answer is, who?

 

---

 

New Report Sheds Light on SARS-CoV-2 Origin

July 31, 2020, I wrote about a Hong Kong whistleblower scientist who claims the Chinese government and World Health Organization representatives in Hong Kong covered up the Wuhan outbreak, allowing it to spread unchecked around the world.

In a Fox News interview in July 2020, the whistleblower, Dr. Li-Meng Yan — who worked at the University of Hong Kong School of Public Health, a top coronavirus research lab — said her investigation into the SARS-like outbreak in Wuhan could have helped prevent a global pandemic from developing, had her supervisors shared her findings.

Yan was interviewed by Fox News again September 15, 2020 (above), this time about the report she just published, and Twitter promptly began censoring the interview from its platform.

Yan claims her supervisor, WHO consultant Leo Poon, asked her to, secretly, investigate reports of a SARS-like illness spreading in Wuhan, China, in late December 2019. The Chinese government had refused overseas experts from getting involved, and Poon wanted her to figure out what was really going on.

Yan turned to a professional colleague who works in the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention and had first-hand information about the outbreak. Yan was told there was likely human-to-human transmission occurring, as they had found family clusters of cases.

The WHO, however, did not confirm the human-to-human spread potential for several weeks. On the contrary, an official WHO statement said the virus “does not transmit readily between people.”

January 16, 2020, Yan was again asked to reach out to her contacts in China to see if she could learn more. Her CDC contacts were fearful, but it became clear that patients and front-line doctors were not being properly protected, and that Chinese authorities were trying to keep a lid on the flow of information.

When she updated Poon, he told her to stay silent and not cross the Chinese government, or else they’d both be “disappeared.” The co-director of the University of Hong Kong School of Public Health laboratory, professor Malik Peiris, also stayed quiet. Yan told Fox News she believes WHO colluded with the China Communist Party (CCP) government to prevent information about the virus from coming out.

The Yan Report Is Instantly Censored

Back in July 2020, Yan claimed she had proof that SARS-CoV-2 was manmade, and that once she released it, she would make it accessible to all. September 11, 2020, The Sun quoted statements made by Yan during a British TV interview that same morning, in which she said:

 

Three days later, September 14, 2020, Yan and her Ph.D. colleagues, Shu Kang, Jie Guan and Shanchang Hu, published the report, “Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route” on Zenodo.

On the morning of September 14, Yan posted a link to the paper on her Twitter account. Shortly thereafter, she posted another tweet saying Zenodo was “immediately hacked” once the report was posted. The following day, September 15, Twitter suspended her account. According to Yan’s report:

Before I get into the content of Yan’s report, it’s worth noting that questions have arisen as to whether she might be “controlled opposition.” Her report also appears very similar to the work of Yuri Deigin. In a September 16 Twitter post, Deigin says:

Interestingly, a formerly anonymous scientist has now stepped forward as one of the three co-authors of Yan’s paper. The anonymous scientist has detailed scientific evidence showing SARS-CoV-2 is a manmade virus, and that there appears to be a concerted effort to promote the idea that SARS-CoV-2 is a natural occurrence, in a blog called Nerd Has Power.

I reviewed some of the key take-home points of this work in “Why Was Wuhan Lab Locked Down When Outbreak Began” and “Undetectable Engineering Methods Used to Create SARS-CoV-2.”

Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute (a nonprofit research group that exposes human rights abuses and the myth of overpopulation) has previously noted that because Nerd Has Power “published his raw data, I and others have been able to check and verify his work.”

In a September 14, 2020, Twitter post, Nerd Has Power identifies himself as Shu Kang, one of the four authors of the Yan report. “Like my co-authors, I stand by this report 100%,” Kang says.

Yan Report Claims SARS-CoV-2 Was Genetically Engineered

As of this writing, the Zenodo website is back up and Yan’s paper is again available for viewing. Below are a few chosen excerpts. (If you like, you can compare it to Yurin’s Medium article.)

Why Natural Origin Theory Fails

Yan’s paper goes on to explain why the natural evolution origin theory fails to hold water. She points out that were it the result of wholly natural evolution, its RBM would have to have been acquired either through a) an ancient recombination event followed by convergent evolution, or b) a natural and fairly recent recombination event. Yan dismisses the ancient recombination/convergent evolution option, stating, in part:

She also dismisses the second, recent recombination event, option stating:

Pangolin and Other Animals Are Unlikely Intermediary Hosts

There is a third possibility for natural evolution, Yan notes, that of an intermediary host, but this theory also has a significant flaw. “The ZC45/ZXC21-like virus and a coronavirus containing a SARS-like RBM could have recombined in an intermediate host where the ACE2 protein is homologous to hACE2,” the paper states.

It also added that several laboratories have reported that Sunda pangolins carrying coronaviruses with a near-identical receptor-binding domain to that of SARS-CoV-2 have been smuggled into China from Malaysia. Some have argued that these pangolins were likely intermediary hosts. There are several problems with this theory, however, including the following:

Restriction Enzyme Digestion — The Smoking Gun?

Yan goes on to review what she believes is the smoking gun proving SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory creation. In a nutshell, she and her colleagues believe SARS-CoV-2 was created by swapping out the receptor-binding motif or RBM, not the entire spike protein.

The feasibility of such a swap has already been proven by none other than Dr. Zhengli Shi, one of the researchers arguing for a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 (as reviewed in this September 10, 2020, article on Minerva). According to Yan:

Yan’s paper also details evidence suggesting the Chinese scientists tried to cover their tracks to hide the genetic manipulation, and reviews how the furin-cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 is further indication that genetic engineering was used.

Summary

In summary, Yan and colleagues propose SARS-CoV-2 was made using the ZC45/ZXC21 bat coronavirus as the backbone. The RBM in the spike protein was then manipulated to give the virus the ability to strongly bind to the human ACE2 receptor.

The diagram below illustrates the steps required to create SARS-CoV-2:

Why the Cover-Up?

As reported by Aksel Fridstrom in a September 10, 2020, article posted on Minerva, as well as a September 9, 2020, article written by Rowan Jacobsen in Boston Magazine, Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, is yet another scientist who questions the zoonotic nature of SARS-CoV-2.

Importantly, Chan discovered that SARS-CoV-2 has not evolved in the manner you’d expect had it jumped from an animal to a human. It sprang into action fully evolved for human transmission. Like Yan and several other scientists, Chan has come to the conclusion that the missing intermediate phase of evolution from animal to human transmissibility must have taken place in a lab.

Chan published her paper,“SARS-CoV-2 Is Well Adapted for Humans. What Does This Mean for Re-Emergence?” on the preprint server bioRxiv May 2, 2020. As in most cases, the pushback she and her co-authors received was enormous.

In his article, Jacobsen points out that one of the obvious reasons for this response is that “if the public and politicians really knew about the dangerous pathogen research being conducted in many laboratories, they’d be outraged.” Hence, “Denying the possibility of a catastrophic incident like this … could be seen as a form of career preservation.”

Interestingly, The Lancet COVID-19 Commission, which has vowed to “leave no stone unturned” in its investigation into the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and the possibility of a lab escape, is being led by none other than Dr. Peter Daszak, a scientist who has already concluded the virus is natural.

As the president of the EcoHealth Alliance, Daszak is also steeped in conflicts of interest, seeing how EcoHealth Alliance received grants from the NIH for coronavirus research that was then subcontracted to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

What’s more, the NIH is demanding EcoHealth Alliance produce records detailing its work with the Wuhan lab before further funding will be released. It seems the purpose for this “fix” is best summarized by a quote from Boston Magazine:

Indeed, safeguarding the continuation of dangerous gain-of-function research would be a powerful motivator to preserve the zoonotic origin narrative.

According to Chan, there are solutions, however. One would be to conduct this kind of research using “neutered viruses that have had their replicating machinery removed in advance, so that even if they escaped confinement, they would be incapable of making copies of themselves,” Jacobsen writes. Another would be to locate high biosafety level laboratories in sparsely populated areas rather than right smack in the middle of large cities.

New Engineered Coronaviruses Are Under Development

Getting to the bottom of where SARS-CoV-2 actually came from is important, because if it came from a high-security bioweapons lab, then it’s proof positive that something must be done to prevent a repeat. This is even more important now that biosafety labs around the world are looking at modifying live SARS-CoV-2 even further.

As just one example, researchers at the University of Pittsburgh are looking to insert the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which is what allows the virus to gain entry into human cells, into Bacillus anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax, an already devastatingly dangerous pathogen.

Researchers are also arguing for infectious SARS-CoV-2 research to be permitted in biosafety level 2 laboratories, which have nowhere near the same level of biosafety procedures in place as BSL 3 and BSL 4 labs do.

If the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is in fact the result of a lab escape, then the responsible way forward is to halt all gain-of-function research until safety protocols are massively upgraded. If we really want to avert another catastrophe, this kind of research should probably be abolished altogether.

Be Prepared

As it stands right now, the weaponization of pathogens continues unabated, and is likely to continue unless or until the public becomes sufficiently aroused to demand real change.

In the meantime, it is important to make sure you’re prepared at home. I strongly recommend reviewing my interview with Dr. David Brownstein, in which he explains the benefits of nebulized hydrogen peroxide. It’s important to have something in your own arsenal to protect yourself against whatever they come up with next. I also added a new video to the page that describes how to do the nebulization therapy.

This needs to be a central player in your emergency medical kit as I fully believe it could be the difference for many, especially the elderly, those who are vitamin D deficient and/or metabolically unfit and insulin resistant. I believe nebulized hydrogen peroxide is one of the best options available for any respiratory virus, including even more dangerous ones than SARS-CoV-2 that are likely to be introduced in the future.

 

---

 

Open Letter from Medical Doctors and Health Professionals to All Belgian Authorities and All Belgian Media

AIER Staff – September 20, 2020

 

The following letter has made an impact on public health authorities not only in Belgium but around the world. The text could pertain to any case in which states locked down their citizens rather than allow people freedom and permit medical professionals to bear the primary job of disease mitigation.

So far it has been signed by 394 medical doctors, 1,340 medically trained health professionals, and 8,897 citizens.

* * * * *

We, Belgian doctors and health professionals, wish to express our serious concern about the evolution of the situation in the recent months surrounding the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We call on politicians to be independently and critically informed in the decision-making process and in the compulsory implementation of corona-measures. We ask for an open debate, where all experts are represented without any form of censorship. After the initial panic surrounding covid-19, the objective facts now show a completely different picture – there is no medical justification for any emergency policy anymore.

The current crisis management has become totally disproportionate and causes more damage than it does any good.

We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties.

‘A cure must not be worse than the problem’ is a thesis that is more relevant than ever in the current situation. We note, however, that the collateral damage now being caused to the population will have a greater impact in the short and long term on all sections of the population than the number of people now being safeguarded from corona.

In our opinion, the current corona measures and the strict penalties for non-compliance with them are contrary to the values formulated by the Belgian Supreme Health Council, which, until recently, as the health authority, has always ensured quality medicine in our country: “Science – Expertise – Quality – Impartiality – Independence – Transparency”. 1

We believe that the policy has introduced mandatory measures that are not sufficiently scientifically based, unilaterally directed, and that there is not enough space in the media for an open debate in which different views and opinions are heard. In addition, each municipality and province now has the authorisation to add its own measures, whether well-founded or not.

Moreover, the strict repressive policy on corona strongly contrasts with the government’s minimal policy when it comes to disease prevention, strengthening our own immune system through a healthy lifestyle, optimal care with attention for the individual and investment in care personnel. 2

The concept of health

In 1948, the WHO defined health as follows: ‘Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or other physical impairment’. 3

Health, therefore, is a broad concept that goes beyond the physical and also relates to the emotional and social well-being of the individual. Belgium also has a duty, from the point of view of subscribing to fundamental human rights, to include these human rights in its decision-making when it comes to measures taken in the context of public health. 4

The current global measures taken to combat SARS-CoV-2 violate to a large extent this view of health and human rights. Measures include compulsory wearing of a mask (also in open air and during sporting activities, and in some municipalities even when there are no other people in the vicinity), physical distancing, social isolation, compulsory quarantine for some groups and hygiene measures.

The predicted pandemic with millions of deaths

At the beginning of the pandemic, the measures were understandable and widely supported, even if there were differences in implementation in the countries around us. The WHO originally predicted a pandemic that would claim 3.4% victims, in other words millions of deaths, and a highly contagious virus for which no treatment or vaccine was available. This would put unprecedented pressure on the intensive care units (ICUs) of our hospitals.

This led to a global alarm situation, never seen in the history of mankind: “flatten the curve” was represented by a lockdown that shut down the entire society and economy and quarantined healthy people. Social distancing became the new normal in anticipation of a rescue vaccine.

The facts about covid-19

Gradually, the alarm bell was sounded from many sources: the objective facts showed a completely different reality. 5 6

The course of covid-19 followed the course of a normal wave of infection similar to a flu season. As every year, we see a mix of flu viruses following the curve: first the rhinoviruses, then the influenza A and B viruses, followed by the coronaviruses. There is nothing different from what we normally see.

The use of the non-specific PCR test, which produces many false positives, showed an exponential picture. This test was rushed through with an emergency procedure and was never seriously self-tested. The creator expressly warned that this test was intended for research and not for diagnostics.7

The PCR test works with cycles of amplification of genetic material – a piece of genome is amplified each time. Any contamination (e.g. other viruses, debris from old virus genomes) can possibly result in false positives. 8

The test does not measure how many viruses are present in the sample. A real viral infection means a massive presence of viruses, the so-called virus load. If someone tests positive, this does not mean that that person is actually clinically infected, is ill or is going to become ill. Koch’s postulate was not fulfilled (“The pure agent found in a patient with complaints can provoke the same complaints in a healthy person”).

Since a positive PCR test does not automatically indicate active infection or infectivity, this does not justify the social measures taken, which are based solely on these tests. 9 10

Lockdown

If we compare the waves of infection in countries with strict lockdown policies to countries that did not impose lockdowns (Sweden, Iceland …), we see similar curves. So there is no link between the imposed lockdown and the course of the infection. Lockdown has not led to a lower mortality rate.

If we look at the date of application of the imposed lockdowns we see that the lockdowns were set after the peak was already over and the number of cases decreasing. The drop was therefore not the result of the taken measures. 11

As every year, it seems that climatic conditions (weather, temperature and humidity) and growing immunity are more likely to reduce the wave of infection.

Our immune system

For thousands of years, the human body has been exposed daily to moisture and droplets containing infectious microorganisms (viruses, bacteria and fungi).

The penetration of these microorganisms is prevented by an advanced defence mechanism – the immune system. A strong immune system relies on normal daily exposure to these microbial influences. Overly hygienic measures have a detrimental effect on our immunity. 12 13 Only people with a weak or faulty immune system should be protected by extensive hygiene or social distancing.

Influenza will re-emerge in the autumn (in combination with covid-19) and a possible decrease in natural resilience may lead to further casualties.

Our immune system consists of two parts: a congenital, non-specific immune system and an adaptive immune system.

The non-specific immune system forms a first barrier: skin, saliva, gastric juice, intestinal mucus, vibratory hair cells, commensal flora, … and prevents the attachment of micro-organisms to tissue.

If they do attach, macrophages can cause the microorganisms to be encapsulated and destroyed.

The adaptive immune system consists of mucosal immunity (IgA antibodies, mainly produced by cells in the intestines and lung epithelium), cellular immunity (T-cell activation), which can be generated in contact with foreign substances or microorganisms, and humoral immunity (IgM and IgG antibodies produced by the B cells).

Recent research shows that both systems are highly entangled.

It appears that most people already have a congenital or general immunity to e.g. influenza and other viruses. This is confirmed by the findings on the cruise ship Diamond Princess, which was quarantined because of a few passengers who died of Covid-19. Most of the passengers were elderly and were in an ideal situation of transmission on the ship. However, 75% did not appear to be infected. So even in this high-risk group, the majority are resistant to the virus.

A study in the journal Cell shows that most people neutralise the coronavirus by mucosal (IgA) and cellular immunity (T-cells), while experiencing few or no symptoms 14.

Researchers found up to 60% SARS-Cov-2 reactivity with CD4+T cells in a non-infected population, suggesting cross-reactivity with other cold (corona) viruses. 15

Most people therefore already have a congenital or cross-immunity because they were already in contact with variants of the same virus.

The antibody formation (IgM and IgG) by B-cells only occupies a relatively small part of our immune system. This may explain why, with an antibody percentage of 5-10%, there may be a group immunity anyway. The efficacy of vaccines is assessed precisely on the basis of whether or not we have these antibodies. This is a misrepresentation.

Most people who test positive (PCR) have no complaints. Their immune system is strong enough. Strengthening natural immunity is a much more logical approach. Prevention is an important, insufficiently highlighted pillar: healthy, full-fledged nutrition, exercise in fresh air, without a mask, stress reduction and nourishing emotional and social contacts.

Consequences of social isolation on physical and mental health

Social isolation and economic damage led to an increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse. 16

Studies have shown that the more social and emotional commitments people have, the more resistant they are to viruses. It is much more likely that isolation and quarantine have fatal consequences. 17

The isolation measures have also led to physical inactivity in many older people due to their being forced to stay indoors. However, sufficient exercise has a positive effect on cognitive functioning, reducing depressive complaints and anxiety and improving physical health, energy levels, well-being and, in general, quality of life. 18

Fear, persistent stress and loneliness induced by social distancing have a proven negative influence on psychological and general health. 19

A highly contagious virus with millions of deaths without any treatment?

Mortality turned out to be many times lower than expected and close to that of a normal seasonal flu (0.2%). 20

The number of registered corona deaths therefore still seems to be overestimated.

There is a difference between death by corona and death with corona. Humans are often carriers of multiple viruses and potentially pathogenic bacteria at the same time. Taking into account the fact that most people who developed serious symptoms suffered from additional pathology, one cannot simply conclude that the corona-infection was the cause of death. This was mostly not taken into account in the statistics.

The most vulnerable groups can be clearly identified. The vast majority of deceased patients were 80 years of age or older. The majority (70%) of the deceased, younger than 70 years, had an underlying disorder, such as cardiovascular suffering, diabetes mellitus, chronic lung disease or obesity. The vast majority of infected persons (>98%) did not or hardly became ill or recovered spontaneously.

Meanwhile, there is an affordable, safe and efficient therapy available for those who do show severe symptoms of disease in the form of HCQ (hydroxychloroquine), zinc and AZT (azithromycin). Rapidly applied this therapy leads to recovery and often prevents hospitalisation. Hardly anyone has to die now.

This effective therapy has been confirmed by the clinical experience of colleagues in the field with impressive results. This contrasts sharply with the theoretical criticism (insufficient substantiation by double-blind studies) which in some countries (e.g. the Netherlands) has even led to a ban on this therapy. A meta-analysis in The Lancet, which could not demonstrate an effect of HCQ, was withdrawn. The primary data sources used proved to be unreliable and 2 out of 3 authors were in conflict of interest. However, most of the guidelines based on this study remained unchanged … 48 49

We have serious questions about this state of affairs.

In the US, a group of doctors in the field, who see patients on a daily basis, united in “America’s Frontline Doctors” and gave a press conference which has been watched millions of times. 21 51

French Prof Didier Raoult of the Institut d’Infectiologie de Marseille (IHU) also presented this promising combination therapy as early as April. Dutch GP Rob Elens, who cured many patients in his practice with HCQ and zinc, called on colleagues in a petition for freedom of therapy. 22

The definitive evidence comes from the epidemiological follow-up in Switzerland: mortality rates compared with and without this therapy. 23

From the distressing media images of ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) where people were suffocating and given artificial respiration in agony, we now know that this was caused by an exaggerated immune response with intravascular coagulation in the pulmonary blood vessels. The administration of blood thinners and dexamethasone and the avoidance of artificial ventilation, which was found to cause additional damage to lung tissue, means that this dreaded complication, too, is virtually not fatal anymore. 47

It is therefore not a killer virus, but a well-treatable condition.

Propagation

Spreading occurs by drip infection (only for patients who cough or sneeze) and aerosols in closed, unventilated rooms. Contamination is therefore not possible in the open air. Contact tracing and epidemiological studies show that healthy people (or positively tested asymptomatic carriers) are virtually unable to transmit the virus. Healthy people therefore do not put each other at risk. 24 25

Transfer via objects (e.g. money, shopping or shopping trolleys) has not been scientifically proven. 26 27 28

All this seriously calls into question the whole policy of social distancing and compulsory mouth masks for healthy people – there is no scientific basis for this.

Masks

Oral masks belong in contexts where contacts with proven at-risk groups or people with upper respiratory complaints take place, and in a medical context/hospital-retirement home setting. They reduce the risk of droplet infection by sneezing or coughing. Oral masks in healthy individuals are ineffective against the spread of viral infections. 29 30 31

Wearing a mask is not without side effects. 32 33 Oxygen deficiency (headache, nausea, fatigue, loss of concentration) occurs fairly quickly, an effect similar to altitude sickness. Every day we now see patients complaining of headaches, sinus problems, respiratory problems and hyperventilation due to wearing masks. In addition, the accumulated CO2 leads to a toxic acidification of the organism which affects our immunity. Some experts even warn of an increased transmission of the virus in case of inappropriate use of the mask. 34

Our Labour Code (Codex 6) refers to a CO2 content (ventilation in workplaces) of 900 ppm, maximum 1200 ppm in special circumstances. After wearing a mask for one minute, this toxic limit is considerably exceeded to values that are three to four times higher than these maximum values. Anyone who wears a mask is therefore in an extreme poorly ventilated room. 35

Inappropriate use of masks without a comprehensive medical cardio-pulmonary test file is therefore not recommended by recognised safety specialists for workers.

Hospitals have a sterile environment in their operating rooms where staff wear masks and there is precise regulation of humidity / temperature with appropriately monitored oxygen flow to compensate for this, thus meeting strict safety standards. 36

A second corona wave?

A second wave is now being discussed in Belgium, with a further tightening of the measures as a result. However, closer examination of Sciensano’s figures (latest report of 3 September 2020)37 shows that, although there has been an increase in the number of infections since mid-July, there was no increase in hospital admissions or deaths at that time. It is therefore not a second wave of corona, but a so-called “case chemistry” due to an increased number of tests. 50

The number of hospital admissions or deaths showed a shortlasting minimal increase in recent weeks, but in interpreting it, we must take into account the recent heatwave. In addition, the vast majority of the victims are still in the population group >75 years.

This indicates that the proportion of the measures taken in relation to the working population and young people is disproportionate to the intended objectives.

The vast majority of the positively tested “infected” persons are in the age group of the active population, which does not develop any or merely limited symptoms, due to a well-functioning immune system.

So nothing has changed – the peak is over.

Strengthening a prevention policy

The corona measures form a striking contrast to the minimal policy pursued by the government until now, when it comes to well-founded measures with proven health benefits such as the sugar tax, the ban on (e-)cigarettes and making healthy food, exercise and social support networks financially attractive and widely accessible. It is a missed opportunity for a better prevention policy that could have brought about a change in mentality in all sections of the population with clear results in terms of public health. At present, only 3% of the health care budget goes to prevention. 2

The Hippocratic Oath

As a doctor, we took the Hippocratic Oath:

“I will above all care for my patients, promote their health and alleviate their suffering”.
“I will inform my patients correctly.”
“Even under pressure, I will not use my medical knowledge for practices that are against humanity.”

The current measures force us to act against this oath.

Other health professionals have a similar code.

The ‘primum non nocere’, which every doctor and health professional assumes, is also undermined by the current measures and by the prospect of the possible introduction of a generalised vaccine, which is not subject to extensive prior testing.

Vaccine

Survey studies on influenza vaccinations show that in 10 years we have only succeeded three times in developing a vaccine with an efficiency rate of more than 50%. Vaccinating our elderly appears to be inefficient. Over 75 years of age, the efficacy is almost non-existent.38

Due to the continuous natural mutation of viruses, as we also see every year in the case of the influenza virus, a vaccine is at most a temporary solution, which requires new vaccines each time afterwards. An untested vaccine, which is implemented by emergency procedure and for which the manufacturers have already obtained legal immunity from possible harm, raises serious questions. 39 40 We do not wish to use our patients as guinea pigs.

On a global scale, 700 000 cases of damage or death are expected as a result of the vaccine. 41

If 95% of people experience Covid-19 virtually symptom-free, the risk of exposure to an untested vaccine is irresponsible.

The role of the media and the official communication plan

Over the past few months, newspaper, radio and TV makers seemed to stand almost uncritically behind the panel of experts and the government, there, where it is precisely the press that should be critical and prevent one-sided governmental communication. This has led to a public communication in our news media, that was more like propaganda than objective reporting.

In our opinion, it is the task of journalism to bring news as objectively and neutrally as possible, aimed at finding the truth and critically controlling power, with dissenting experts also being given a forum in which to express themselves.

This view is supported by the journalistic codes of ethics. 42

The official story that a lockdown was necessary, that this was the only possible solution, and that everyone stood behind this lockdown, made it difficult for people with a different view, as well as experts, to express a different opinion.

Alternative opinions were ignored or ridiculed. We have not seen open debates in the media, where different views could be expressed.

We were also surprised by the many videos and articles by many scientific experts and authorities, which were and are still being removed from social media. We feel that this does not fit in with a free, democratic constitutional state, all the more so as it leads to tunnel vision. This policy also has a paralysing effect and feeds fear and concern in society. In this context, we reject the intention of censorship of dissidents in the European Union! 43

The way in which Covid-19 has been portrayed by politicians and the media has not done the situation any good either. War terms were popular and warlike language was not lacking. There has often been mention of a ‘war’ with an ‘invisible enemy’ who has to be ‘defeated’. The use in the media of phrases such as ‘care heroes in the front line’ and ‘corona victims’ has further fuelled fear, as has the idea that we are globally dealing with a ‘killer virus’.

The relentless bombardment with figures, that were unleashed on the population day after day, hour after hour, without interpreting those figures, without comparing them to flu deaths in other years, without comparing them to deaths from other causes, has induced a real psychosis of fear in the population. This is not information, this is manipulation.

We deplore the role of the WHO in this, which has called for the infodemic (i.e. all divergent opinions from the official discourse, including by experts with different views) to be silenced by an unprecedented media censorship. 43 44

We urgently call on the media to take their responsibilities here!

We demand an open debate in which all experts are heard.

Emergency law versus Human Rights

The general principle of good governance calls for the proportionality of government decisions to be weighed up in the light of the Higher Legal Standards: any interference by government must comply with the fundamental rights as protected in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Interference by public authorities is only permitted in crisis situations. In other words, discretionary decisions must be proportionate to an absolute necessity.

The measures currently taken concern interference in the exercise of, among other things, the right to respect of private and family life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association, the right to education, etc., and must therefore comply with fundamental rights as protected by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

For example, in accordance with Article 8(2) of the ECHR, interference with the right to private and family life is permissible only if the measures are necessary in the interests of national security, public safety, the economic well-being of the country, the protection of public order and the prevention of criminal offences, the protection of health or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others, the regulatory text on which the interference is based must be sufficiently clear, foreseeable and proportionate to the objectives pursued. 45

The predicted pandemic of millions of deaths seemed to respond to these crisis conditions, leading to the establishment of an emergency government. Now that the objective facts show something completely different, the condition of inability to act otherwise (no time to evaluate thoroughly if there is an emergency) is no longer in place. Covid-19 is not a cold virus, but a well treatable condition with a mortality rate comparable to the seasonal flu. In other words, there is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to public health.

There is no state of emergency.

Immense damage caused by the current policies

An open discussion on corona measures means that, in addition to the years of life gained by corona patients, we must also take into account other factors affecting the health of the entire population. These include damage in the psychosocial domain (increase in depression, anxiety, suicides, intra-family violence and child abuse)16 and economic damage.

If we take this collateral damage into account, the current policy is out of all proportion, the proverbial use of a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

We find it shocking that the government is invoking health as a reason for the emergency law.

As doctors and health professionals, in the face of a virus which, in terms of its harmfulness, mortality and transmissibility, approaches the seasonal influenza, we can only reject these extremely disproportionate measures.

Distribution of this letter

We would like to make a public appeal to our professional associations and fellow carers to give their opinion on the current measures.

We draw attention to and call for an open discussion in which carers can and dare to speak out.

With this open letter, we send out the signal that progress on the same footing does more harm than good, and call on politicians to inform themselves independently and critically about the available evidence – including that from experts with different views, as long as it is based on sound science – when rolling out a policy, with the aim of promoting optimum health.

With concern, hope and in a personal capacity.

 

References and original article are here.

 

---

CNN's Anderson Cooper and I Interview Bill Gates

Gates lies about Coronavirus for the purpose of
fear-mongering so more people will want the vaccines,
but he tells me the truth

 

GATES (to Cooper): "The forecasts show that the level of infections will go back up almost to the levels they were in the spring."

There's a flu season every year, and that season is getting closer. Gates wants people to believe that when they start coming down with symptoms of the flu, they should immediately think "OMG, it's Coronavirus...I'm gonna die!!!" Relax, it's just the flu. But just like Coronavirus, the flu kills 30,000-80,000 people each year... the most vulnerable health-wise.

GATES: "The compliance with distancing and mask wearing is going down in many areas ... so this will be a very difficult fall. The economic effects, the tiredness, the kids not being able to go to school, this continuation is a very difficult thing." Hey Mr. Gates, as I'm sure you know, the science now clearly shows that mask-wearing does not help protect against getting or spreading Covid-19, so please stop with the fear-mongering tactics. Oh, you won't because you stand to make trillions of dollars from worldwide vaccines? Yes, I forgot about that.

ANDERSON COOPER: The Regeneron therapeutic drug that President Trump received, is that a cure?

GATES: "The word 'cure' is an over-promise. It makes it sound like it works for everyone and the disease will now go away, and that's the LAST thing we want people to think (because I want to sell many billions of vaccines)."

If I was the interviewer, and could shine a 'truth ray' on Gates to force him to answer my questions honestly, I'd ask, "Mr. Gates, why not simply be in favor of the non-at-risk people being able to get Covid-19 – which is over 99% of the population – and if they become symptomatic, give them hydroxychloroquine plus zinc which allows them to get well quickly, and allows for herd immunity? After all, the vast majority of the U.S. population will not become infected to begin with." He'd say...

GATES (under the influence of my ray): Well, that treatment has been around for a long time, so no one pharma company can make money off it, and even if they could, that treatment is only $20, and I want the entire planet to be getting multiple high-cost vaccinations, which stands to make me the richest man in the world, which has always been my goal. Also, the last thing I want is for there to be herd immunity, which is already happening due to the stubbornness of some people who aren't buying into the mask-wearing and distancing, so these people – who I hate by-the-way – are contributing to herd immunity which has the effect of taking the steam out of a mass vaccination program... I mean, why would anyone want to get a potentially dangerous vaccine if the virus is going away on its own. So my goal is to help downplay the notion of herd immunity, and to promote continued fear of the virus and a welcoming of a vaccine through continued economic injury, continued inflated case numbers and deaths due to Covid-19.

ME: "But isn't continued economic injury harming millions of people?"

GATES (under the influence of my ray): Yes, and that's the idea. The more they want things to get back to normal so they don't lose their home or are kicked out of wherever they are living, the better. And since this economic devastation doesn't affect me or most politicians, this makes it easy to institute.

COOPER: "What about President Trump's reaction..."

GATES: "When I met with him, the whole idea of vaccines... he was a vaccine skeptic, and got me talking with people who just didn't believe in vaccines, now yuh know, [smiling] we need leadership, uh, to show that we're really not going to approve something until it's safe and the country really depends on getting back to normal on vaccine progress."

ME (with my ray): "But since vaccine makers in the past have not done proper testing of vaccines because they have no liability if anyone gets damaged, and the same is now true for all the Coronavirus vaccines that will come out, why should people believe the vaccines are safe?"

GATES (under the influence of my ray): Well, they won't be safe, because vaccines aren't generally safe or effective, they're sold to make money for the manufacturers like myself, and of course we want to be protected from any liability for injury, so the vaccine industry is the only industry in the world to have that protection, because if we didn't, we'd be put out of business by all the injuries vaccines have caused to date, and certainly by all the injuries that a Coronavirus vaccine will cause. And we can't do proper testing, because that would take years, and by then herd immunity would have made this strain of Coronavirus moot so there would be no need for a vaccine. Now, we could simply try to continue lying about the number of cases and deaths to make it appear that it's still around, but now that there are so many more doctors and other health professionals coming out and alerting the public to the fact that the numbers have been inflated, and that the infection rate has, in reality, dropped, as all such infections would do, I don't know that myself and the others who would financially benefit from a mass vaccination program could continue fooling the people. So the vaccines have to be rushed out quickly, so of course proper testing can't be done, because that would take too long, and really because accurate, honest testing would show that they are not safe.

COOPER: "If there is a vaccine that actually works, will people actually take it? What do you look for when deciding to take something or not? I assume you follow the science."

GATES: "Sure, it was bizarre that the White House, uhh, was trying to block the FDA from [big swallow] requiring, uhh, two month safety database, uhh, and very, you know, they claimed the companies were pushing that, there's no way that's true [which probably means it is true], ahhh, and so, it's really novel that you get political interference with the regulatory agency that has its integrity and independence, so I don't think they [the White House] will make that mistake again with the vaccine announcement, in fact they [FDA] stood up to the White House, uhh, and the guidelines were updated, uhh, which is a very positive thing, so you know, the FDA, uhh, the data will come out, uhh, not everyone will be willing to take it right away, but as they see the first 20-30 percent taking it, and they see that they're getting a benefit and you're not reading about a lot of adverse side effects, then I think more people will be willing, and we need to really, uhhh, drive this thing down to get well over 70 percent, uhh, so eventually it's gotta be [smiling] quite broadly accepted.

ME (with my ray): "Isn't it true that the regulatory agencies have been influenced by the pharmaceutical industry to the point where the general public shouldn't feel safe about them playing a real safety-oriented role that would protect the public?

GATES (under the influence of my ray): Well of course, the pharmaceutical industry is just like any other industry, trying to sell as many products and as much of them as possible, and anything that can interfere with this goal must be dealt with, so this is why vice presidents of pharma companies leave their job and go to work for the FDA, and while there, they help fast-track the drug that their former employer is trying to get to market as quickly as possible, even if it could have safety issues, and then after that is accomplished, that person leaves FDA and goes back to work at his previous employer, with a raise. This is what's called the "revolving door" by the anti-vaxxers, and it's an accurate term.

ME (with my ray): "But why don't the drug and vaccine makers not care about the safety of these things?"

GATES (under the influence of my ray): Well, as I said before, they don't have to because we have immunity from prosecution due to any harm our vaccines cause, but even for other drugs, all we care about is that the drug doesn't kill a person immediately, because that would be impossible to cover up. But if a drug or vaccine causes harm in the long term to where the harm can't be directly attributed to the drug or vaccine, that's fine, and is what we shoot for.

ME (with my ray): So when you infer that you care about safety and care about the public, that's being done "for show"?

GATES (under the influence of my ray): Of course. The only thing we care about is making more money... as much money as possible. And look, as I've said before, the planet is overpopulated, so if our drugs and vaccines cause the world's population to even be cut in half, that's a good thing from the perspective of the continued existence of our species.

ME (with my ray): So what about when the scientists, immunologists, and virologists and others in the public health community talk about the risk:benefit ratio when it comes to a virus like Coronavirus?

GATES (under the influence of my ray): Well sure, if you want to look at it that way, the risks of a Coronavirus vaccine far outweigh the benefits, even if they had benefit, because that benefit would only be applicable to a very small percentage of the population... that portion of the population who would have contracted the virus, which is a tiny percentage of the population. So, to vaccinate against something that would only effect a small percentage of the population, and even of that segment of people, only a small portion would be at risk of needing medical intervention requiring hospitalization, the risk:benefit ratio of a vaccine would clearly indicate that it shouldn't even be developed in the first place because of the potential risks, especially from the new vaccines that will alter your RNA and therefore your DNA. But you have to understand that the reason the vaccines are being developed is not to protect the people from an infection, it's to make us trillions of dollars. So this is why we don't consider the risk:benefit ratio, and the reason that if we're asked about it, we lie and say that the benefits far outweigh the risks, when in reality it's the other way around, and will you please turn off that truth ray because I'm about to have a heart attack. Hey... how come you're not turning it off?!!

 

---

 

A note about fact-checking

Note: I'm posting this here, on my website, because when I posted it on Facebook, they said, ironically...

The photo below is a tip from a fact-checking expert. She's showing you how to react to a family member who posts something so that you don't get into an argument. But notice how the person replying (the Dad's daughter) said that what the Dad said was inaccurate, as if it's established fact. How does the daughter know that it's "inaccurate"? Because she listens to the mainstream media and public health officials (who happen to have hidden agendas). In reality, this particular piece of info from the Dad is not inaccurate. There is compelling evidence that the 2020 strain of Coronavirus was lab-made, in a lab in China. It may have been a "lab escape" (unintentional, accidental release), they do happen, but for the average person to say, categorically, that the Dad is wrong, when the Dad may be 100% correct does a disservice to everyone. Yet this is what the "expert in fact-checking" is saying.

The point is: You shouldn't automatically trust the mainstream fact-checkers because they can be fooled too, but more likely, they know the truth but they go along with the hidden agendas for reasons I won't get into here (and BTW, a hidden agenda is not a conspiracy theory). Sadly, because we can't trust them OR the public health officials OR the mainstream media, if you want the truth, you have to do your due diligence and hit up the Internet, and even there you have to weed out facts from fiction (because there's a lot of BS there too (such as, "China made and released this virus as an attack on the U.S."and "It came from a wet market in China where people were eating bat soup.")

And the fear that many are feeling is misplaced. The fear that people are feeling is a tool being used by those who would profit immensely from global vaccinations for this virus. They want people to be fearful of a virus that, in reality, is in the same category as a bad flu virus because they want people to be in favor of and even welcome mass, mandatory vaccinations. But that's not going to happen because people are (slowly) waking up to the facts, and to seeing that just because the media or a public health organization states some numbers, doesn't mean that those numbers are accurate. (The "number of cases" and "number of deaths due to Covid-19" have been inflated for that same "fear" agenda.) And even the truth about mask wearing is slowly becoming more well known (lots of accurate info here). But some people, no matter what evidence you share with them, no matter what the science or credible experts say, they will not believe you, because that would mean they can't believe what they're being told by their own public officials, and that scares them more than the virus.

 

 

---

 

Lawsuits against the Lockdowns

Think about it: If the lockdowns were done, not as a way to protect the public's health, but as a way to instill fear of a virus that, in reality, was no more dangerous than a bad flu season, all the economic devastation that those lockdowns caused would be actionable in court... those who instituted them to help push forward massive testing programs and the global vaccination agenda which would create trillions in profits, would be subject to prosecution for all the economic harm and the deaths directly attributable to the lockdowns.

Despite what the media is reporting, there has been no "second wave" or "third wave". These are manufactured, meant to reinvigorate the fear that had been waning because of all the truth about the so-called pandemic that has been getting out to the general public, thanks to brave people who are speaking up.

Dr. Mike Yeadon, former vice president and scientific director of Pfizer [a pharmaceutical company] went on record stating "there is no science to suggest a second wave should happen," and that false positive results from unreliable PCR tests are being used to "manufacture a 'second wave' based on 'new cases.'" Let's be clear: A false positive Covid-19 test result is not a "case", yet they are being counted as cases. If this isn't a nail in the coffin of the major media's reporting and the public health officials' assessments, I don't know what would be. I know it's difficult to believe that they're all "in on it", but for those who know how things really work out of the eyes of the public, it's easy to understand.

The article that I quoted from above (which is about massive lawsuits regarding the unnecessary lockdowns) says, in summary...

* The German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee launched July 10, 2020, was founded by four trial attorneys to investigate and prosecute those responsible for implementing the economically devastating lockdowns around the world, as well as using fraudulent testing to engineer the appearance of a dangerous pandemic

* The Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee will be working with an international network of lawyers to argue the most massive tort case ever — a case described as “probably the greatest crime against humanity ever committed”

* They argue that pandemic measures were intended to sow panic so that the pharmaceutical and tech industries can generate huge profits from the sale of PCR tests, antigen and antibody tests and vaccines, and the harvesting of our genetic fingerprints

* Lockdowns were unnecessary, and any claim to the contrary is wrong, the Inquiry Committee insists. The virus was already in retreat and infection rates were starting to decline when lockdowns were imposed; scientific evidence shows a majority of people already have built-in protection against the virus due to cross-reactive T cell immunity, and the PCR test cannot be used to identify an active infection with SARS-CoV-2 or any other virus

* While mortality statistics during the pandemic have been within the norms of any given year, meaning the pandemic has not resulted in an excess number of deaths or a death toll higher than normal, the collateral damage from pandemic response measures is nearly incalculable

The article is here.

 

---

 

Did you ever wonder...

...since those ads on TV for prescription meds don't make the pharma companies any money in sales, why do they spend millions of dollars on those ads? And why do all other countries in the world prohibit pharma companies from running ads for prescription meds?

ANSWER: It's legal bribery. It's a way of giving money to TV networks so those networks' news departments won't report anything negative about pharma companies, and so those news departments will report whatever those pharma companies want them to report. Think that kind of thing can't happen? Think again.

And while you're thinking, think about this factoid: Of all the industries in the world, what industry gives the most money to U.S. politicians? If you guessed the pharma industry, you'd be right. Yes, another form of legalized bribery. That's why certain legislation that should be passed to protect the people doesn't get passed, and why certain legislation gets passed that shouldn't be passed... like the Vaccine Injury Exemption law that protects pharma companies from liability due to all the people who've been injured by their vaccines. Yep, if your child is injured or killed by a vaccine, you can't sue the pharma company. You'd bring your "complaint" to the Vaccine Injury Court, run by the federal govt, and if you win, the money you get (which is capped) comes not from the pharma company, but from the U.S. taxpayers. Sounds like I'm making this up? I'm not. This, folks, is the reality we've allowed to be created. Had enough of this BS yet? Or will you simply comply and keep wearing masks even though it's been proven by science they don't help protect you or others... they're mandated to instill fear and so you'll welcome the mass vaccination program with open arms. Don't be a pawn, or a revenue generating unit.

 

---

 

Let's be clear:

The PCR test for Coronavirus...
A) does not tell you if you are sick or infectious
B) has lots of false positives
C) is being counted as a "case" if it is positive

So it really shouldn't be classified as a "test". At least not as a reliable one. Yet it's being relied on for all the numbers you hear 20 times a day from the media and public health officials. When will you ask yourself why this is?

If you don't like these facts, sorry, but reality is what it is. I can't change that. But the media and corrupt public health officials seem to be able to.

Ever wonder why there was a correlation between "new cases" and increased testing? Throughout history, a "case" was only something where there were symptoms. This changed with SARS-CoV-2. Why? To be able to exaggerate the number of cases to make the public fearful so they will welcome with open arms the push to vaccinate everyone on the planet, multiple times. But fear of getting sick doesn't work on everybody, so fear of financial peril is also being used to make people want a vaccine, coupled with the relentless talking point, "We will not get back to normal until there is a vaccine". This began with a person who will profit greatly from a vaccine: Bill Gates, and now you hear lots of corrupt public health officials and media saying the exact same talking point. The fear of losing your home and not having a job will help fulfill their vaccine agenda.

The solution? Just say no. No to lockdowns, no to masks (which have been proven not to be effective), and no to the fear-mongering. The vast majority of people are not afraid of getting the flu. Sure, they'd rather not get it, and it's an inconvenience, and it doesn't feel good, but they are not in danger of dying from the flu. The same is true for SARS-CoV-2. So why spread so much fear about this other virus? Money. BIG money. Money from "tests" and vaccinations. But at what cost? Losing your job, your home, not being able to see people's faces, being forced to stay away from others, no more hugging, and the risk of vaccine injury? I'll keep talking about the risk:benefit ratio until enough people wake up to this. And millions of people around the world have woken up to what's going on, but not so much here in the U.S., thanks to the 100% corrupted media.

 

---

 

Medical Doctors Speak Out... Again

A bunch of Medical Doctors who were fed up with the misinformation being fed to the American public about Coronavirus and Covid-19 formed a group and held a press conference on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington. D.C. back in July. No coverage of this by the mainstream media of course. Well, they held another press conference at the same place recently. And more people need to listen to what honest, brave, and independent Medical Doctors have to say, and listen less to the corrupted "public health officials" and the afraid-for-their-jobs doctors, or the doctors who are saying things for political reasons.

You have to register with their website to have access to all their videos, but it's well worth it to be able to watch their videos. After registering, the URL you want to end up at is this one below, and watch the 36 minute "Welcome" video.

https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/summit2/

CAUTION: Since some of what these doctors are saying happen to align with some of the things that President Trump has said, there are Trump supporting far right wing organizations – very biased organizations – who are hosting these doctors' videos. But that does not mean that these doctors are affiliated with those organizations, or that their positions are politically motivated. The doctors happen to have all kinds of political leanings; left, right, centrist, conservative, liberal, progressive, Republican, Democrat, Independent, etc.

---

 

A great interview of a Medical Doctor who is not afraid
to speak out about Coronavirus and Covid-19

(And think about this: I can't place the link to this interview
in a Facebook post because Facebook will delete it!)

https://thehighwire.com/videos/the-frontline-doctor-who-went-viral/

Please share this interview with others. People need to hear how they are being
taken advantage of, for the sake of profit, at the expense of their health.

 

---

 

Physicians: ‘Masks don’t control viruses,
they control you,’ ‘pandemic is over’

By Patrick Delaney

WASHINGTON, D.C., October 29, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – A rapidly growing group of doctors critical of the government’s and the media’s response to the coronavirus crisis characterized mask wearing as “completely irrelevant to blocking the … virus.”

America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLD), a “diverse, exceedingly well-credentialed” group of physicians, gathered in the nation’s capital on October 16 and 17 for a second “White Coat Summit” aimed at countering “the massive disinformation campaign regarding the [COVID-19] pandemic,” according to the official website.

Physician, attorney, and founder of AFLD, Dr. Simone Gold, began their press conference affirming the event’s purpose to bring to “the American people truth … hope … optimism” and more reasons “to not live in fear” of the coronavirus.

She affirmed that there “continues to be a great deal of disinformation and outright censorship,” which since July “has [only] gotten worse.”

In response, the emergency doctor announced that AFLD had established a website where all can access information on these issues which “is not censored,” and will serve to “dispel the myths” created by the media who has “lied to” the American people.

The website even provides practical help for finding a physician who may prescribe hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), a pharmacy that would likely fill the prescription and a map of US states where HCQ use for COVID is not restricted.

There is also detailed information to give to a physician who may need convincing information about the effectiveness of HCQ. The website has a page that provides the simple details of the most effective protocols for using HCQ and lists other medications and supplements for both prevention and treatment of coronavirus infection.

Masks as “lucky charms”

With regards to masks, Gold did not mince her words, stating, “The facts are not in dispute: masks are completely irrelevant to blocking the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”

Encouraging all to do their own research, she affirmed they would “discover that prior to masks becoming political in March 2020, there was never even an attempt at a pretense that masks, let alone bandanas, stop a virus. It’s a complete fabrication. A virus is 1/1000 the size of a hair.”

Gold referred to Dr. Anthony Fauci, a key member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force who confirmed the same about masks in a March 2020 interview, as “Emperor Fauci.”

She then cited the New England Journal of Medicine which acknowledged that “masks serve symbolic roles” and are thus mere “lucky charms that may help increase” a person’s “perceived sense of safety.”

In addition to having no effect on curbing the spread of the virus, Gold also made strong arguments that masks are “socially divisive,” “cause an insurmountable civil libertarian issue,” and even threaten national security.

Illustrating the absurdity of the dominant narrative, she said, “Notice that what the ‘experts’ have said for months has been wrong – there are not two million dead, our healthcare system was not overwhelmed, there were 10x the ventilators we needed, nearly everyone survives, and early treatment works.”

“You must not ignore your own life experience!” she exclaimed. “If all you had to do to stop a virus is hold a tissue paper to your face, our ancestors would have learned this centuries ago and your grandmother would have taught you this!”

“The tiny Emperor Has No Clothes!” she concluded.

The deleting of history

In his brief statement, Dr. James Todaro, an investigative physician with a medical degree from Columbia University in New York City, emphasized not “the censorship of the present,” but “the deletion and rewriting of history” which is being committed by news organizations on a routine basis.

“Unbeknownst to many, news organizations are deleting articles from the past that no longer fit the narrative today … of fear, panic and lockdown,” Todaro said. “Case in point, earlier this week I tweeted-out a Forbes article … called ‘Why the World Health Organization faked a pandemic.’ It was a scathing review of the WHO’s overexaggerated response to the swine flu ten years ago. [It was] a 10-year-old article. “

“About 12 hours after I tweeted out that article, Forbes deleted it from their database,” he continued. “Forbes actually deleted their own story from ten years ago, overnight, when I drew attention to it. And that is going on unnoticed, continually. News organizations are deleting history.”

“The pandemic is over”

Dr. Richard Urso, an ophthalmologist and graduate of the University of Texas Houston School of Medicine, explained how “early on” he realized that “we had a treatment for this virus,” and thus, the “lockdown … never made sense.” Viruses involve infection, and often “inflammation, blood clots, and breathing problems,” he stated. Since “every doctor” knows how to treat these issues, successful treatment was always available.

And, if anybody “tells you different, that is science fiction … not science,” he affirmed.

In using a chart to describe current statistics with regards to “cases” and deaths, Urso demonstrated that “we don’t have a pandemic any longer.”

Viruses, he explained, act in a consistent way. They have “a large peak early on,” with many people “getting cases (and) a lot of people dying.” Then, “about 110 days later … You get a small peak follow-up,” and next, the curve diminishes and flattens.

On his chart, Urso showed where the two peaks were, in March and July, and then pointed out the very low death rate in September despite a high number of reported “cases,” emphasizing again, “the pandemic is over.”

He also charged the media with “driving” what he referred to only as a “casedemic” with “fear and … trying to make us believe that we need to stay locked down.”

“Masks don’t control viruses, they control you”

A graduate of the University of Rochester Medical School, Dr. Lee Merritt, served for 10 years as a military surgeon and also on a congressional committee investigating technology for the U.S. Navy.

As a spine surgeon, she explains, “I spent 40% of my life in a mask. And I can tell you in my entire career … nobody was talking about masks as a control mechanism for viruses.”

Viruses are passed by tiny “.12 micron” particles “that sneak out through the mask and around the mask … Even the very best medical masks cannot screen out, cannot protect, from this type of small particle virus.”

Indeed, “the atmosphere and the whole air fluidity is filled with viruses. We have it around us all the time. You can’t mask that away.”

Therefore, Merritt affirms, “masks don’t control viruses, they control you.” She calls the notion that they are not damaging to individuals, children and society, “a myth.”

“Besides what they’re doing to society as a whole, separating us, isolating us, think about what they’re doing to our children,” she said. “Children need to look at faces to learn how to be a human. Reading faces is part of humanity – interacting with people. We are creating a generation of children that have an inchoate fear of things … children who are afraid of their environment.”

“The masks may look like they are not much … just a little soft piece of cloth over your face. What’s the big deal? The big deal is, they may be soft, and they may look okay, but this is George Orwell’s boot on a human face forever if we don’t get this off,” she concluded.

Hydroxychloroquine and dramatically better results

Having studied COVID-19 death rates in Africa, Dr. Geoff Mitchell, a medical doctor and an attorney, discovered that “a person is 35 times more likely to die from a coronavirus in the United States then in the malaria endemic in sub-Saharan Africa.”

In his individual presentation on the subject, he affirmed that the “evidence strongly suggests this is due to travelers universally taking hydroxychloroquine-related prophylactic anti-malarial drugs” in those regions, which the FDA regulated in the U.S.

Schools in U.S. must be open

Certified primary care physician, and former 12-year elected school board member, Dr. Jeffrey Barke, made a strong case that there remains no scientific justification for the closing of schools in the U.S.

“The data is clear from the CDC’s own website,” he affirmed. “If you’re less than 20 years old the survivability of COVID-19 is 99.997%.”

Giving examples, he showed that while “every death is a tragedy,” a child is about 5 times more likely to die from drowning, 8.3 times more likely to die in a traffic accident, and 25 times more likely to die from cancer, than from the coronavirus.

Secondly, he addressed “the notion that somehow our children spread this virus to at-risk adults,” confirming that this “just isn’t true.”

Demonstrating the point, he cited a study from The Atlantic, which “looked at 200,000 kids in 47 states,” and concluded that “kids barely get ill and they don’t spread this virus to at-risk adults.” Similarly, a German study of “over 2,000 students in 13 schools” concluded “that in fact children act as a break upon the virus spreading to adults.”

“Schools in United States must be open,” he said. “The fear of this virus is causing more harm than the virus itself: with increased anxiety, increased suicide, and increased depression. We must open the schools and we must stop spreading unnecessary fear to our children.”

Early treatment and “zero deaths”

Coming from El Centro, CA, Dr. Brian Tyson, a board-certified family medicine doctor, explained how he rejected the directives of public health officials who advised doctors to send COVID-19 patients home until their symptoms had reached a certain level of severity.

Instead, using hydroxychloroquine, “we treated this virus early. We treated this virus aggressively.” And in what he described as being “one of the highest-risk populations in the nation,” with patients ranging between the ages of 11 months to 90 years old, they treated “over 1,900 positive patients,” and “had only one hospitalization and zero deaths. Zero deaths!”

“I’m here to tell you, at the beginning of this, we were all afraid,” he said. But “we’re no longer afraid,” since excellent early treatment is available. “We can go back to school again. We can go back to work again … And we can go back to being Americans, again. We do not need to let fear take our freedom.”

“The media has lied, and people have died”

Certified internal medicine physician from Texas, Dr. Robin Armstrong, told a story of the contrast between treating his patients in the hospital and those in the nursing home. In the former case he used a treatment regimen including “dexamethasone and convalescent plasma,” with limited success. “We’ve seen a lot of patients die” in these circumstances, “and we’ve seen some of those patients get better.”

By contrast, in his nursing home practice, he explained, they had “the opportunity to … successfully treat” these “frail patients, very sick, the elderly patients,” with “hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and zinc, and those patients got better.”

“Now the media, and a lot of fake doctors on television will tell you that hydroxychloroquine is not safe,” he said. “And I’m here to tell you, that is an absolute lie! The media has lied, and people have died.”

“Early treatment is the key and there is an inexpensive alternative. We are here today to say that COVID-19 does not have to kill. COVID-19 has therapeutics that you can be treated with if you’re treated early, and that you do not need to walk in fear any longer,” he concluded.

“A pandemic of hysteria”

Child and adolescent psychiatrist Dr. Mark McDonald discussed his experience with children over the last several months. “I’ve seen hundreds and hundreds of children since early 2020. They are all afraid,” he said.

Decrying the environment of fear in which children are being raised today, he stated, “Not only have Americans become afraid, they have become infected by … a pandemic of hysteria … a delusional psychosis. A delusion is a fixed false belief contrary to reality. Americans today believe that we must keep our businesses closed, that we must keep our children at home, that we must wear masks over our faces and isolate ourselves from human beings in order to keep us alive. That is false. That is a lie. And it is killing us. It is killing us physically, mentally, socially, psychologically, it is killing our country, and it must stop.”

A call to physicians

Capping off the press conference, Dr. Gold again stepped to the microphone to speak directly to her physician peers across the nation.

“Fellow doctors, our country is in a crisis, and there are forces at work using doctors as tools in their war games,” she said. “I say to you now, my doctor peers, that the evidence that early treatment works is overwhelming. You are a physician. You must look at the science yourself. You are not allowed by the oath that you took yourself to follow the orders of another person saying it does not work, not the CDC, not the NIH, not the FDA, not Dr. Fauci, not Dr. [Deborah] Birx, not Dr. [Robert] Redfield.”

“There is no reason to be living in fear,” Gold exclaimed. “Even patients over 70 have a 95% success rate with a virus but the truth is it could be virtually 100% with the early treatment.”

Addressing all Americans, she said, “To all Americans, when you are sick, who do you call? Do you call the CDC? The NIH? The FDA? No, you call your doctor. Don’t believe a bureaucratic agency that is censoring your doctor. Go to our website. Become informed. Then go to your doctor knowing that early treatment works, masks do not. And if your doctor responds with fear, you need a new doctor, one who honors the Hippocratic oath.”

Big tech censorship

In late July, America’s Frontline Doctors met for their first “White Coat Summit.” Video of the press conference went viral on social media, garnering 17 million views within 8 hours, including 185,000 concurrent viewers at the time it was streamed.

The video was, however, swiftly removed from YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook for violating the sites’ respective COVID-19 “misinformation” policies, even though the tech giants made no attempt to present any evidence for where these board-certified physicians provided “misinformation.”

The tech companies have been heavily censoring any information that does not completely align with the World Health Organization. The WHO has been severely criticized by President Trump and many others for false information they gave on the coronavirus, their close connection to China’s Communist Party, and many other reasons.

Multiple AFLD presentations related to COVID-19 can be accessed here.

 

---

 

A letter from Ron Paul (not Rand Paul)
(Ron Paul was one of the honest politicians)

 

Dear Robert,

Mandated face masking for children to attend school . . .

Biochips required for travel . . .

Mandated vaccines to access basic services . . .

The real “super-spreader” in 2020 is TYRANNY.

The political class and Big Pharma are on the war path against your health freedom. They will not stop with their agenda to profit off the fear and uncertainty over the overblown coronavirus, even after seven months.

They will tell you to “trust the science,” until something scientific comes out that doesn’t promote their narrative of mass testing, masking, contact tracing, and vaccinations.

That’s how you know they are willing to lie, even if it causes more harm to your health.

The truth just isn’t as profitable.

If they’re not lying, the stretching of the truth has been just as damaging. Remember just a few short weeks ago when the CDC started revising their statistics? They released numbers in September showing that the coronavirus is quite a bit less deadly than the seasonal flu.

Their numbers are so much lower than any of their projections or statistics that had been reported prior – it really makes you wonder what the motivation is. In fact, only one age bracket (those over 70) even has more than a 0.5% chance of dying from a COVID-19 infection.

That’s lower than the flu, but that didn’t stop all the plans to interfere with our daily lives and shut down businesses, schools, and churches.

Have all the quarantines, mask mandates, business, school, and church shutdowns just been one large submission ritual to runaway government?

Just look at the results:

The ability for the political class to pit us against each other and force us to make poor decisions about our own personal health and well-being has never been more on display than it is right now.

Another form of complete intrusion into our daily lives we’ve had forced upon us by Big Tech are these “Contact Tracing Apps.” These apps have been either covertly installed on our phones or made available as a “tech solution” to our health woes. There’s no way to restrict them from sharing our private information with the government, once they’ve been installed. The only problem is there’s no evidence they work, even after months of use. Just yesterday, Medical Xpress published an article calling into question any effectiveness of these apps and openly asked if it’s even worth the legal risks of implementing them through government bureaucracies. Perhaps they’re wising up to the fact that forcing people into quarantine over a cell phone app is a recipe for a lawsuit.

Ever since this virus started making its way to our country, the big obsession has been over rushing a vaccine, as if that’s the only way we’ll ever get out of these lockdowns and mandates being forced on every part of our lives. What about the risk:benefit ratio of vaccinations? The truth about this virus is that the risk of dying from it doesn't warrant a vaccine! But the sellers of vaccines don't want you to know this fact.

Then consider that one of the largest counties in the U.S., Maricopa County, which includes Phoenix, AZ, has mandated through their Board of Supervisors that everyone must wear masks when they leave their house until 40% of their population has taken this conceptual vaccine, which doesn’t exist and may never be released, especially considering the "pandemic" is over; the virus is dying out, so no vaccine is needed even if it would work. But, again, the sellers of vaccines don't want you to know this fact.

Yesterday, it was announced that one of the volunteers in a major Big Pharma vaccine trial has died. Many more have reported becoming sick in various other coronavirus vaccine trials this year. Some researchers issued a warning yesterday that at least FOUR of the vaccines currently being tested could increase the risk of contracting HIV!

So will Maricopa, a county of 4.5 Million people, continue their mandate despite the fact that it’s contingent on a vaccine with legitimate safety concerns becoming available?

It’s time to fight this now, on every front.

Let’s all make sure we make our feelings known to the politicians, bureaucrats, their cronies in Big Pharma, and Big Tech that we’re not going to sacrifice our health freedom for their financial bottom line.

For Liberty,

Ron Paul, MD

---

 

Sweden Didn't Over-react with Extended Lockdowns and Masking
and Allowed Herd Immunity to Develop
(just like humanity had always done with all other viral outbreaks of this type)

No vaccines will be needed in Sweden, which is NOT the goal of Big Pharma

 

What has Sweden taught us? Plenty, if you know where to look, and you know who NOT to listen to. Sweden's dealing with Coronavirus has been a success story, but not according to CNN, MSNBC, ABC, Newsweek, The New York Times, etc. Sweden's success can't be allowed to confuse the public and get them to question the official narrative. So the spin doctors went to work, and lie after lie poured forth like water from a waterfall. But the truth can be discovered...

 

 

Also note that deaths due to Covid-19 have been inflated in many countries due to 'new criteria' death certificates listing Covid-19 as the Cause of Death even though it wasn't the primary Cause of Death. Sweden did not participate in this BS tactic designed to frighten the population into submission in preparation for a global vaccination agenda.

So lockdowns and masking don't work – except to suck the joy out of life; decimate people's savings; ruin their livelihoods; delay necessary health procedures; disrupt supply chains thereby threatening food shortages; cause 2 million excess deaths from TB, HIV, malaria, heart attacks, drunk driving, and suicides; and lead to depression and despair. This should be excruciatingly obvious by now, and yet we have a shocking number of people who think lockdowns and masks are what needs to be done, and they welcome with open arms the savior vaccine. But "The Show Must Go On"... because this is not, and never has been about a virus or public health. It's always about money; BIG money (testing and vaccines).

 

---

The Virus-Story:
Breaking the Chains of Medical Civilization
by Jon Rappoport

In the same way the CIA invented foreign enemies which required us to go to war, there are people who have invented stories of fearful germs that demand medical treatment and prevention. The story tellers know that among the public, many people WANT the germ, need it, and even love it. Yes, love it, after enough conditioning has helped them along the path of surrender.

The COVID operation aims to engulf all of civilization in a preposterous and fake medical nightmare.

The operation has its roots in “modifying” citizens to accept medical dictates.

There are many kinds of such dictates, and it would take volumes to explore them all. Here I present a set of numbers from the US National Center for Health Statistics, a division of the CDC, covering the year 2018:

Percent of adults who had contact with a health care professional: 84.3%.

Percent of children who had contact with a health care professional: 93.6%.

Number of physician office visits (2016): 883.7 million.

Here is another related estimate: according to the US National Alliance on Mental Illness, in a recent year, “More than 25 percent of college students have been diagnosed or treated by a professional for a mental health condition…”

Try to grasp how this unprecedented rate of exposure to doctors shapes the minds of Americans. Appointments, tests, diagnoses, advice, orders, prescriptions, drugs and vaccines, follow-ups, referrals to specialists.

These factors alone – never mind the toxic effects of treatments, or wall to wall medical ads and other propaganda – add up to a medical civilization.

Given this reality, how do you think people are going to respond when they are told there is a pandemic and they must follow orders?

After a hundred years of Rockefeller Medicine…new normal? We’ve been living under the new normal for a long time.

How many drug prescriptions do you think are written in the US every year? According to statista.com, “It is estimated that in 2019, 4.38 billion retail prescriptions will be filled throughout the United States.”

Many, many people accept the ubiquitous medical civilization without thought or pause. It’s “just the way things are.”

Pretended pandemics are an arm of medical civilization. But now we’ve reached a point where The Medical is a gateway into a technocratic Brave New World.

This attempted transition is launched from the foundation of lifelong conditioning of the public to doctors and everything those doctors order and represent.

Mind control par excellence

Two important groups of people – politicians and journalists – are operating from bias in their decisions, because they, too, have been trained to place themselves under the care of doctors on an ongoing basis. Are they going to rip out that hard wiring of their own experience when the rubber meets the road, when they’re faced with professional questions about medical credibility? No. They’re going to side with the CDC and WHO and university experts. And besides, which of all the industries on the planet has given the most money to U.S. politicians, and which industry gives millions of dollars to U.S. broadcast networks for ads that make them no money, and which industry has zero liability for faulty products? Big Pharma, and they have massive influence over what's taught in medical schools, what gets reported on the evening news, and what laws are made or not made that affect the medical model. And if their vaccines injure or kill children, they are not liable and they pay out not one penny in damages. Why? Because this is how they want it.

What I’m describing in this article goes beyond the acceptance of “Science” as the dominant paradigm. This conditioning is deeply personal and deeply seated in the minds of people who have been trudging along the bleak path of medical care since early childhood. Medical care for every so-called “symptom.”

I have spent many hours exposing the actual death and maiming effects of pharmaceuticals on the population. Again, here I’m simply discussing the up-close connection between eternal patient and doctor.

In that sense, telling a dedicated person to take off his mask is telling him to destroy what he believes is a deep lifeline, without which he might very well drown.

Medical civilization’s leaders want us to bow down to the germ. They want us to drool like Pavlov’s dogs, when they ring the bell signaling the presence of a “new virus.” Our anticipated food, in this case, is supposed to be treatment. Treatment and containment measures.

Surely, a Declaration of Medical Independence is needed. “When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the medical bands which have connected them with some Health Authority…whenever any Form of Medicine becomes destructive…it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Medicine, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…”

Under the heading of “such principles,” one statement would make it clear that every person has the natural right to reject false faith in the germ, in its power, and in its very existence.

Let those who fear the germ, or want it, cling to it like an idol, if they must, if they refuse to be dissuaded. The rest of us will go our way, secure in our freedom from the idolatry, knowing that medicalized civilization is a tyrant, built without our consent.

Keeping freedom is now the great challenge

The global lockdowns, present and future; the business closures; the bankruptcies; the resultant family breakups and suicides and drug addictions; the expansion of poverty, hunger, starvation; the desolation of once-great cities – on what basis has all this destruction been launched?

A story about a virus

So pardon me if I keep attacking that story. If I keep pointing out gaping holes in that story. My basic position is this: I reject the cultish rhetoric coming out of labs. It is divorced from the world of human beings. It aims to claim ownership over our bodies, minds, and souls. Through one abstraction piled on another, its proponents have staked out a cause that is anti-life. With the data they derive and invent from their serums and sequencing, they set up a prison in which we are supposed to be biological machines that merely react to the stimuli of microbes.

Reject the lunatic non-reality

The set-up and the con are clear: “We say there is a deadly virus on the loose. We describe it and promote it. We run the game and make the rules. We say you are unprotected unless we protect you with treatment and containment measures. We can quibble about which treatments. We can quibble about how much containment, where and when, and under what circumstances, since we define the circumstances; and we can loosen and tighten the rules at our discretion. But in the end, we are the sellers and you are the buyers. You buy our story. We are a protection racket. You give us your lives or we close you down. And guess what? Either one of those choices produces the same result. Get it?”

So when I hear someone say, in effect, THIS containment measure is necessary and effective, but THAT one is minimally effective, and THIS country did well by adopting a LESS RESTRICTIVE MODEL, BUT SMART CONTAINMENT WOULD LOOK LIKE THIS... I know that this person has bought enough of the story to keep the basic con going; and the elite planners are winning.

The war is long. They must not win. The health of billions of people hangs in the balance.

 

---

 

Fauci's Treacherous Ties to China and Globalists

 

Story at-a-glance • A report by Dr. Peter Breggin reveals Dr. Anthony Fauci’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and globalists who have profited from the pandemic measures promoted by him as the leader of the U.S. Coronavirus Task Force • Fauci has been the major force behind research activities that enabled the Chinese Communist Party to manufacture lethal SARS coronaviruses, which in turn led to the release – whether accidental or not – of SARS-CoV-2 from the Wuhan Institute of Virology • In collaboration with the CCP and the World Health Organization, Fauci initially suppressed the truth about the origins and dangers of the pandemic, thereby enabling the spread of the virus from China to the rest of the world • Fauci has supported and praised Director-General of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, a member of a Marxist-Leninist Ethiopian political party with a corrupt past and terrorist ties who has also been accused of covering up cholera outbreaks in Ethiopia • Fauci recently published a paper in which he dismisses the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 was created in and released from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, arguing instead for natural mutation. He also uses the pandemic to justify the “green new deal” and the globalist movement known as “the Great Reset”

 

Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) since 1984, this year rose to national prominence as the leader of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. By the time everything is said and done, he may end up wishing he’d gained less public exposure.

In the October 19, 2020, report1 “Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery,” Dr. Peter Breggin reveals Fauci’s “chilling ties” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its military.

A second, legal, report by Breggin titled “COVID-19 & Public Health Totalitarianism: Untoward Effects on Individuals, Institutions and Society,” was filed in a federal court in Ohio, August 31, 2020, as part of a lawsuit and injunction to put an end to the state’s pandemic measures.

According to Breggin, Fauci “has been the major force” behind research activities that enabled the CCP to manufacture lethal SARS coronaviruses, which in turn led to the release – whether accidental or not – of SARS-CoV-2 from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in Wuhan, China.

Breggin claims Fauci has helped the CCP obtain “valuable U.S. patents,” and that he, in collaboration with the CCP and the World Health Organization, initially suppressed the truth about the origins and dangers of the pandemic, thereby enabling the spread of the virus from China to the rest of the world.

Fauci has, and continues to, shield the CCP and himself, Breggin says, by “denying the origin of SARS-CoV-2” and “delaying and thwarting worldwide attempts to deal rationally with the pandemic.”

Gain-of-Function Research Supported by Fauci

In the executive summary of the report, Breggin documents 15 questionable activities that Fauci has been engaged in, starting with the fact that he funded dangerous gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses, both by individual Chinese researchers and the WIV in collaboration with American researchers. This research, Breggin says, allowed the CCP and its military to create their own bioweapons, including SARS-CoV-2.

He points out that the American-Chinese collaboration was initially detailed in a paper written by two Chinese researchers, Botao Xiao (trained at Northwestern University and Harvard Medical School) and Lei Xiao back in February 2020. According to Breggin, the CCP forced them to recant and the paper was withdrawn.

As previously reported by Newsweek, the NIAID-funded gain-of-function research into bat coronaviruses was conducted in two parts. The first, which began in 2014 and ended in 2019 focused on “understanding the risk of bat coronavirus emergence.” Initial findings were published in Nature Medicine in 2015.

The program, which had a budget of $3.7 million, was led by Wuhan virologist Shi Zheng-Li and sought to catalogue wild bat coronaviruses. It also involved U.S. scientists such as Ralph Barric from the University of North Carolina and Charles Lieber from Harvard.

The second phase that began in 2019 included additional surveillance of coronaviruses along with gain-of-function research to investigate how bat coronaviruses might mutate to affect humans. This second phase was run by the EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit research group led by Peter Daszak, an expert on disease ecology. According to Newsweek, the project proposal explained the research to be conducted as follows:

Why Did Fauci Continue Gain-of-Function Research?

While President Trump canceled funding for dangerous gain-of-function research on viruses in April 2020 after the Chinese-American collaborations became publicly known, Fauci has since “unleashed a deluge of new funding that will almost certainly” benefit Chinese scientists with CCP ties who are still working in various U.S. universities and other research facilities.

Part of the funding is again directed to the EcoHealth Alliance, which for years has outsourced its research projects to WIV and other Chinese researchers. That said, recent reports indicate the NIH is now demanding the organization produce records detailing its work with the Wuhan lab before the funding is released.

Fauci also continued outsourcing gain-of-function research to the WIV back in 2014, after then-President Obama ordered a stop to such research. At the time, he also continued to fund collaborations between U.S. and WIV researchers, led by Vineet Menachery, Ph.D., at the University of North Carolina.

Interestingly, while the original moratorium on gain-of-function research was a direct order by the President, when the moratorium was lifted at the end of 2017, it was done so by the National Institutes of Health and the NIAID.

Fauci also defended and promoted gain-of-function research on bird flu viruses a decade ago, saying such research was worth the risk because it allows scientists to prepare for pandemics. However, as noted by Breggin, this kind of research does not appear to have improved governments’ pandemic responses one whit.

Downplaying COVID-19 Risks

Next, Breggin points out Fauci’s connections to and support of Director-General of the World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, a member of a Marxist-Leninist Ethiopian political party whose corrupt past and terrorist ties have been highlighted ever since his controversial nomination. Incidentally, Tedros has also been accused of covering up cholera outbreaks in Ethiopia.

Fauci’s Globalist Ties

Interestingly, Fauci recently published a paper in which he again dismisses the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 was created in and released from the WIV, arguing instead for a natural mutation.

The globalist, technocratic agenda also shines through Fauci’s call for a political agenda that protects the population from pathogens by limiting or eliminating “aggressive” and manmade interventions into nature. Fauci’s paper, published in the journal Cell in September 2020, reads in part:

Indeed, this language is straight out of the technocratic handbook, now rebranded as “the Great Reset.” As noted by Breggin:

Fauci Continues to Hype COVID-19 Risks

In the main body of the report (Page 7 onward), Breggin goes on to detail Fauci’s role in the media fearmongering that has allowed pandemic measures to stretch from an initial call for a two-week lockdown to eight months and counting. “Most people have very unrealistic fears about the risk of dying from COVID-19,” Breggin notes, and “This is due in part to the CDC and to Dr. Anthony Fauci who inflate the risk of COVID-19 deaths.”

According to data released by the CDC August 26, 2020, only 6% of the total COVID-19-related deaths in the U.S. had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause of death on the death certificate. The remaining 94% had an average of 2.6 health conditions that contributed to their deaths.

COVID-19 Is Less Lethal Than the Flu for Most

According to a September 2, 2020, article in Annals of Internal Medicine, the infection fatality ratio has been overestimated due to the fact that many who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 remain asymptomatic, which makes it difficult to estimate the true infection rate.

The researchers found that, when excluding those residing in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities, the infection fatality rate for the average person is as follows:

The estimated infection fatality rate for seasonal influenza listed in this paper is 0.8%. Other sources put it a little higher. In either case, this means that if you’re under the age of 60, your chance of dying from the flu is greater than your chance of dying from COVID-19.

Breggin cites CDC data, noting that the CDC is using inflated numbers, but even at that, the risk of death for people under the age of 70 is lower than that of the flu. According to CDC estimates, the infection fatality ratios are as follows:

As noted by Breggin, the risk to children and youths is exceedingly small, “Yet Dr. Fauci and other public health officials continue to act as if there is a grave risk of exposing children and young adults to SARS-CoV-2, when there is not,” Breggin writes.

Breggin’s 55-page report is well worth reading in its entirety. It contains far more details than I’ve been able to provide in this overview, and is fully referenced.

Fauci Continues to Dismiss Hydroxychloroquine

Breggin’s legal report, “COVID-19 & Public Health Totalitarianism: Untoward Effects on Individuals, Institutions and Society,” is also worth reading. It addresses the totalitarian threat posed by the global response to the pandemic, and details the psychological operations behind the fearmongering and the underhanded methods used to discredit Hydroxychloroquine, among other things.

Included is an open letter to Fauci about his dismissal of Hydroxychloroquine, signed by Drs. George C. Fareed, Michael M. Jacobs and Donald C. Pompan, which reads, in part:

“Dear Dr. Fauci: You were placed into the most high-profile role regarding America’s response to the coronavirus pandemic. Americans have relied on your medical expertise concerning the wearing of masks, resuming employment, returning to school, and of course medical treatment. You are largely unchallenged in terms of your medical opinions … This is unusual in the medical profession in which doctors’ opinions are challenged by other physicians in the form of exchanges between doctors at hospitals, medical conferences, as well as debate in medical journals. You render your opinions unchallenged, without formal public opposition from physicians who passionately disagree with you. It is incontestable that the public is best served when opinions and policy are based on the prevailing evidence and science, and able to withstand the scrutiny of medical professionals. As experience accrued in treating COVID-19 infections, physicians worldwide discovered that high-risk patients can be treated successfully as an outpatient, within the first five to seven days of the onset of symptoms, with a ‘cocktail’ consisting of Hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and Azithromycin (or Doxycycline). Multiple scholarly contributions to the literature detail the efficacy of the Hydroxychloroquine-based combination treatment. Dr. Harvey Risch, the renowned Yale epidemiologist, published an article in May 2020 in the American Journal of Epidemiology titled ‘Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk COVID-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to Pandemic Crisis’ … Dr. Risch is an expert at evaluating research data and study designs, publishing over 300 articles. Dr. Risch’s assessment is that there is unequivocal evidence for the early and safe use of the ‘HCQ cocktail’ … Yet, you continue to reject the use of Hydroxychloroquine, except in a hospital setting in the form of clinical trials, repeatedly emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting its use. Hydroxychloroquine, despite 65 years of use for malaria, and over 40 years for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, with a well-established safety profile, has been deemed by you and the FDA as unsafe for use in the treatment of symptomatic COVID-19 infections. Your opinions have influenced the thinking of physicians and their patients, medical boards, state and federal agencies, pharmacists, hospitals, and just about everyone involved in medical decision making. Indeed, your opinions impacted the health of Americans, and many aspects of our day-to-day lives including employment and school. Those of us who prescribe Hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and Azithromycin/Doxycycline believe fervently that early outpatient use would save tens of thousands of lives and enable our country to dramatically alter the response to COVID-19. We advocate for an approach that will reduce fear and allow Americans to get their lives back. We hope that our questions compel you to reconsider your current approach to COVID-19 infection.”

Fauci – ‘An Extraordinarily Destructive Force’

In Breggin’s estimation, Fauci “has been and continues to be an extraordinarily destructive force in the world.” Not only did he play a role in China’s ability to create SARS-CoV-2 and other potential biological weapons, he’s also covering up its origin, and initially tried to downplay the threat of the novel virus.

To top it off, “he became the go-to scientist and management czar for the very pandemic that he helped to create, enormously increasing his power and influence, and the wealth of his institute and his global collaborators, including Bill Gates and the international pharmaceutical industry,” Breggin writes, adding, in conclusion:

[In my opinion, Fauci should be charged with crimes against the people, prosecuted, and imprisoned. But the person below disagrees with me...]

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

...An example of how deceived people can be...

Dr. Fauci has been a prominent face in 2020 - guiding the nation’s knowledge and response to the coronavirus pandemic. Petition starter Laura thinks Dr. Fauci deserves Time Magazine’s 2020 Person of the Year. "In the middle of a full-on war against COVID-19, is when we should be most grateful for the work and tenacity of Dr. Fauci," she writes. Sign her petition to tell Time Magazine to honor Dr. Fauci.

[The article above this one explains why Fauci should not be Time Magazine's Person of the Year.]

 

---

 

A 'must watch' video!

Coronavirus Fraud Scandal -
Lawyers to Argue the Biggest Tort Case in History

https://www.bitchute.com/video/PstZsoTXyUsA/

 

---

 

OP-ED

 

The New York State Bar Association House of Delegates approved resolutions on Nov. 7, 2020 that included urging the state to consider mandating a COVID-19 vaccine once “scientific consensus” emerges that it is safe, effective and necessary.

“Scientific consensus”? Go ask any medical doctor, especially endocrinologists, if there is a cure for Type 2 Diabetes, and they will all say 'no'. They will say that the best thing a person can do who has been diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes is to manage it. But in reality, this is all untrue. If that person goes and sees a non-medical practitioner who knows how to get rid of Type 2 Diabetes, they can be rid of of it. So, why is the medical profession giving out false info? $$$. Big $$$. And how do they recommend people manage their diabetes? With drugs. Those drugs come from pharmaceutical companies. Those companies have entire departments devoted to creating new products. Why? $$$$$$. One of their product lines is vaccines. Huge $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. So is it far fetched to think that this industry wants every person on the planet to get a Covid vaccine... multiple Covid vaccines? Not at all. And here is a hard pill to swallow... they don't care if the vaccine is effective (because they know there is nothing for it to be effective against). And the most difficult pill to swallow? They don't care if the vaccine injures or kills people. Why not? Shouldn't they? They could be sued for trillions of dollars! Nope, they can't be. If one of their vaccines kills a family member of yours, you can't sue them. It's the law. They are the only industry on the planet to have that liability protection. Who was responsible for instituting that? THEY WERE! So you'd have to take your case to the U.S. Vaccine Injury Court. Didn't know there was one? WAKE UP!!!! And there is a cap on how much the award for damages can be. And who pays that money? YOU DO!!!! The U.S. taxpayer because the payouts -- of which there have been billions -- come from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

So will there be a "scientific consensus" that a vaccine is safe, effective and necessary? That very powerful industry will make sure there is... even if it isn't. EVEN IF IT ISN'T. And the only thing that can stop this madness is the people... not the govt, because that industry "owns" politicians. Yep. Of all the industries on the planet, the one that gives the most money to politicians is the pharma industry. And they give many millions of dollars to TV networks too, to make sure those news departments do NOT tell the truth about them. How do they give that "hush money" to TV networks? For ads for prescription meds... ads that make the pharma companies NO MONEY FROM SALES!!! Get the grift?

Do you not mind being taken advantage of, for the sake of profit, at the expense of your health? I mind.

 

---

 

Okay, it's about time the general public became aware of the realities of the dangers of vaccinations... the actual facts, and not what the pharma industry (the manufacturers of those products) wants you to believe, or what you will be told by the pharma industry's minions (CDC, WHO, media). Why now? Because we are getting close to a mandatory vaccination program for a vaccine that is not safe, not effective, and not necessary (even though those three criteria are required for the police powers of a state to be able to force people to get a vaccine). And those minions are actually mentioning that "vaccine hesitancy" must be stamped out (it seems truth-tellers like me have been more effective lately, and Big Pharma is getting worried). [UPDATE: Mandatory vaccine programs have arrived, with some politicians ordering them and other politicians saying 'No!' This subject should not be politicized.]

And what is the real agenda behind this vaccine program. No surprise, it's money. Huge money. Trillions in profits over time. [Already many billionaires have been created from the Covid scare.]

Here is a little bit of the info I've compiled over the last 30 years (yes, I research things very thoroughly. Why? Because I want to know the truth, and I want to know if we're being lied to and taken advantage of... because government does that all the time).

http://health101.org/info19
https://www.bitchute.com/video/LuyQbGuIzuhF/
https://vaxxedthemovie.com
https://www.vaxxed2.com
https://1986theact.com
http://health101.org/art_vaccination
http://health101.org/art_vaccination2
http://health101.org/art_vaccination3
http://health101.org/art_vaccination4
http://health101.org/art_vaccination5
http://health101.org/art_vaccination6
http://health101.org/art_vaccination7
http://health101.org/art_vaccination8
http://health101.org/art_vaccination9
http://health101.org/art_vaccination10
http://health101.org/art_vaccination11
http://health101.org/art_vaccination12
http://health101.org/art_vaccination13
http://health101.org/art_vaccination14
http://health101.org/art_unnecessary_vaccines
http://health101.org/art_vaccination_myth
Book: http://health101.org/art_vaccination_book
http://health101.org/art_vaccination_interview
http://health101.org/blog.htm#NY
Free Book: https://archive.org/details/b2136140x
Book: Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History

 

---

 

Vaccination Agenda Continues
Why?
BIG Money.
And where there's big money to be made,
fear mongering will be used to sell the products (vaccines).

See how The New York Times acts on behalf of Big Pharma...

That was the lie. Here's the truth. Measles is not a problem. Not worldwide and not in the U.S. There is no measles epidemic, regardless of what the news media reports. We are living in the era of "alternative facts" and big lies. Lying is now more prevalent than ever. When a child first lies and gets away with it, does he lie less? No. He lies more. So does the media and all the other minions of Big Pharma. Why not? It results in more profits. And there is no law against lying. Sure, there are laws that are supposed to protect the public from unsafe products like vaccines, but when pharma companies have been found guilty of fraud regarding their medications, even though people died, the companies only pay fines... no one ever goes to jail. This is because of the two-tier criminal justice system. Very powerful people do not go to jail... even if people die. In fact, pharma companies can't even be sued by the family of a child that was killed by one of their vaccines. The family can go to "court", and if they win their case, the award is paid by the American people (through the Department of Health and Human Services), not by the pharma company. And no criminal blame is placed upon the pharma company. None. And this liability protection has now been extended to adult vaccines too, in preparation for the Coronavirus vaccinations. Want to get one when they are not safe, effective... or necessary?

 

---

 

OP-ED

 

The first thing anyone needs to understand before researching the mask issue or the coronavirus issue or the vaccine issue, is: How trustworthy is the resource? And in the 21st Century, we can't assume that The New York Times, CNN, Nature, et al are trusted sources of information. Yes, this is sad, but it is also reality. And before beginning to investigate the issues, people need to know why these are not trusted sources of facts. They need to understand that the mainstream media has been influenced by the pharmaceutical industry. Some in the media know this and "go along to get along", and some are unaware, assuming that those who report that vaccines are not safe or that masks are not effective are simply "conspiracy theorists", and they report what their editors tell them to. And any whistle-blowers who are telling the truth are immediately condemned and discredited.

After realizing what resources can and can't be trusted, then the person can start investigating the issues. But if the person assumes they can trust the mainstream media, ultimately they will learn what the pharmaceutical industry wants them to learn. And that is in the best interests of the pharmaceutical industry only... not in the people's best interest.

Oh, and if you think that govt agencies will protect you from falsehoods that have the potential to harm you, think again. Agencies like EPA, FDA, USDA, and yes, even the CDC have been "captured" by corporate interests. And it's sad that you can't even trust your own govt to protect you, but they don't, so get over it. Only you can protect you. And fortunately there are some honest truth-tellers (that have been censored off the major social media platforms), that also care about people knowing the truth.

https://thehighwire.com/watch/

 

---

 

OP-ED

 

I was asked, "Which facts would you say are most effective at making people question the official narrative about this outbreak and vaccines?"

That's a great question. And one that I wish more people would ask.

Here are some compelling facts (along with some necessary conjecture)...

* For the first time in human history, a "case" of a viral infection is being defined by a positive PCR test. Prior to SARS-COV-2, a "case" of a viral infection was defined by having symptoms. And no, this wasn't changed because SARS-COV-2 is a very different kind of virus; one that can infect you without you having any symptoms so that you are a "carrier" and thus a "spreader". In the "infectious" category, this coronavirus is the same as a flu virus, and flu viruses are treated as cases by considering if a person has symptoms of a viral infection. So why else would a "case" of Covid-19 be defined by a test that has lots of false positives... the only conclusion is to inflate the number of cases to make the outbreak look worse than it really is. Why? To push the worldwide vaccine agenda which the pharma industry tried to do with SARS-COV-1, but herd immunity developed before they could roll out a vaccine. They learned their lesson... the outbreak has to be kept going long enough to bring a vaccine to market. [Interesting side note: Despite their best efforts at minimizing it, herd immunity has developed for SARS-COV-2, but you wouldn't know it from the media's reporting about the outbreak getting worse, but the numbers continue to be "cooked".]

* The pharma industry is the only industry in the world that has 100% liability protection for a product in the U.S. That product is childhood vaccines. If your child is injured or killed by a vaccine, the law that the pharma industry persuaded Congress to pass prohibits the parents of that child from suing the maker of that vaccine. You can instead bring your case to "Vaccine Injury Court", and if you win, the award (which is capped) is paid by the U.S. taxpayers via the Department of Health and Human Services. When the vaccine for SARS-COV-1 was being readied, the pharma industry got Congress to include all adult vaccines in that law too. And that "court" has paid out many billions of dollars due to children being injured or killed. But some parents never brought a case to that court, so the pay-out figure doesn't truly represent all the suffering and death that vaccines have caused. When you research vaccines in depth, it is clear that they are a revenue generating product, and the only product with liability protection so that the makers of those products are not incentivized to make their products safe. And when you listen to those who have blown the whistle on the pharma industry, you will feel like throwing up because such a thing is allowed to go on in what is supposed to be the greatest country in the world (and it is, but for the pharma industry).

* The pharma industry is not permitted to advertise prescription meds on TV in any country on the planet... except the U.S. This is because the ONLY reason a company would give millions of dollars to a broadcast network to run ads for a product that viewers/consumers can't buy over-the-counter and can't simply tell a medical doctor to write them a prescription for is to influence that network's news department to treat them favorably and to push their narratives. A form of legalized bribery. But the pharma industry was successful in getting the U.S. government to allow them to do this because...

* Of all the industries on the planet, the one that gives the most money to politicians in the U.S. Federal government is the pharma industry. They don't do this for political reasons because they give to both parties, and they don't do this out of the goodness of their hearts; they require a return on their investment. And this comes in the form of beneficial legislation and legislation that is not done (legislation that would hurt the profits of pharma companies).

* Hospitals in the U.S. were given financial incentives to classify someone who died as having their COD (Cause of Death) as "Covid-19". So many (not all) hospitals did this even if the person died of something else; as long as a PCR test was positive for SARS-COV-2, their COD said "Covid-19" (and remember that there are more false positives than positives with that test).

* Hospitals in the U.S. were given financial incentives to put people on ventilators during the outbreak, and when someone is intubated when they don't need to be, this INCREASES their risk of death. Nurses were speaking out about this horrible practice, even arguing with doctors who were ordering ventilators for people when a simple and safe CPAP or BIPAP would have sufficed. This also inflated the "Covid deaths" numbers.

The running theme through all of the above is one singular thing... money. Big money. And the want of big money is the root of all evil. Nothing evil about desiring an honest profit, but if it's at the expense of people's health, this is the work of people with sociopathic personality traits. It's been estimated that about 4% of people in the U.S. are sociopaths... that's over 13 million people. And there are also plenty of those people in government, and they enable the companies run by sociopathic people. THIS is what the general public first needs to comprehend, so that they can understand how all of the above can happen, and is happening... how government agencies like FDA, USDA, EPA, and CDC can act in the best interests of corporations and the wealthy elite, even though doing so is harmful to the general public... who they are supposed to work for.

But the people truly do have the final say. If a Nationwide vaccination mandate is passed into law, the people can simply say 'no dice'. What will the feds do? Arrest everyone? True, not everyone will say no... many who have been conned by CDC, corrupt public health officials, and the media will welcome the vaccine with open arms. But we don't need everyone to stop the "mandatory" aspect of the vaccine. Just enough people saying 'no'. And when enough say 'no', other people who had been conned will listen. And then the tide will turn against the pharma industry and corrupt politicians. At least that's the hope. Otherwise humanity is screwed, because the Covid-19 vaccines will be the first RNA altering vaccine, and this will alter DNA permanently, for all future generations. And I'm not trusting an industry that has had such an abysmal safety track record to make a DNA altering drug. Are you? Remember, all they care about is short term profits. They don't give a rat's ass about future generations. But I do. That's why I'm speaking out.

See this for more info about vaccinations.
See this for more info about masks.

 

---

 

Why Won’t Anyone Publish the Danish Mask Study?
By GreenMedInfo Research Group

 

A study of 6,000 Danes was set to reveal whether wearing a face mask actually reduces the risk of COVID-19. The only problem is leading medical journals are refusing to publish the data, and the study's lead author hinted it's because they're not "brave enough" to do it.

 

Does a mask work? It's a question recently posed by the Danish newspaper Berlingske,[i] and one that would seem to demand an answer from scientists and public health officials alike.

Researchers from Denmark wanted to change that, conducting what may be the only randomized trial[iii] to determine if masks actually protect against COVID-19,[iv] but multiple medical journals have refused to publish the findings.

Thomas Benfield, a researcher at the University of Copenhagen and one of the study's lead authors,[v] was asked when it would be published. Former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson published Benfield's emailed response on Twitter, which is simply: "As soon as a journal is brave enough …"[vi]

What Does the Danish Mask Study Reveal?

Speaking to Nature in October 2020, Benfield said his team wasn't yet ready to share the study's results.[vii] In truth, three medical journals – The Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association – have refused to publish the study, leading to speculation that it reveals a message that goes against the status quo.

Berlingske, which is the oldest daily newspaper in Denmark, suggests this is so, stating (loosely translated), "The researchers behind a large and unique Danish study on the effect of wearing a mask even have great difficulty in getting their research results published. One of the participating professors in the study admits that the still secret research result can be perceived as 'controversial.'"[viii],[ix]

The study included 6,000 participants who were randomly assigned to wear a face mask or not for a 30-day period. Participants were confirmed to not have COVID-19 or symptoms of it at the start of the study, and they were required to spend more than three hours per day outside of the home with exposure to other people during the study period.[x]

Described as an "outstanding sample," the Berlingske article, which was written by Lars Henrik Aagaard, praised the study, noting, "The study and its size are unique in the world, and the purpose was once and for all to try to clarify the extent to which the use of masks in public space provides protection against corona infection."[xi]

While the results were originally expected to be published in August 2020, Benfield later said that his comment was taken "a bit out of context" and, "The article is being reviewed by a respected journal. We have decided not to publish data until the article has been accepted."[xii]

Study Co-Author Hints at Controversial Results

Aagaard interviewed another of the study's researchers, Christian Torp-Pedersen, a chief physician at North Zealand Hospital's research department, who similarly said, "We cannot start discussing what they (the medical journals) are dissatisfied with because, in that case, we must also explain what the study showed, and we do not want to discuss that until it is published."[xiii]

He then went on to say that he "might also have dared to go as far as Benfield," had he been asked why the results haven't been published, referring to his "brave enough" comment. Aagaard asks, "Does this mean that your research results may be perceived as controversial in the eyes of some?" to which Torp-Pedersen replies, "That's how I want to interpret it, too."

Aagaard then states, "Can one interpret a controversial research result in the sense that no significant effect of mask use is demonstrated in your study?" Torp-Pedersen says, "I think that's a very relevant question you are asking."[xiv]

Dr. Henning Bundgaard with Denmark's Rigshospitalet is another of the study's authors. In speaking with Bloomberg in July 2020 – when he still expected the study's results to become public the next month – he said, "All these countries recommending face masks haven't made their decisions based on new studies."[xv]

Denmark was one of the latest countries to institute a mask mandate, which took effect October 29, 2020 for all public indoor spaces.[xvi] In July, however, Bundgaard told Bloomberg he worried mask mandates may offer a "false sense of security" and make people "sloppy" when following other guidelines like handwashing, self-isolating if you're sick and social distancing. Also revealing is Bloomberg's last paragraph:

Masks have become a contentious topic in the U.S., dividing neighbors, colleagues and families over whether or not they slow the spread of infectious disease. The controversy continues to grow, particularly since public health officials have been giving conflicting information from the start,[xviii] and solid data, such as what may be revealed via the Danish study, is sorely lacking.

 

More "mask" info here.

 

References:

[i] Washington Examiner October 22, 2020 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/top-scientific-journals-reject-controversial-danish-study-on-effectiveness-of-face-masks-against-coronavirus-report

[ii] Axios August 4, 2020 https://www.axios.com/states-face-coverings-mandatory-a0e2fe35-5b7b-458e-9d28-3f6cdb1032fb.html

[iii] Twitter October 18, 2020 https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1317875526997102594

[iv] ClinicalTrials.gov, Reduction in COVID-19 Infection Using Surgical Facial Masks Outside the Healthcare System https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337541

[v] Nature October 6, 2020 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8

[vi] Twitter October 18, 2020 https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1317875526997102594

[vii] Nature October 6, 2020 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8

[viii] The Blaze October 22, 2020 https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-danish-newspaper-reveals-largest-study-masks-rejected

[ix] Berlingske October 19, 2020 https://www.berlingske.dk/videnskab/professor-stort-dansk-maskestudie-afvist-af-tre-top-tidsskrifter

[x] Washington Examiner October 22, 2020 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/top-scientific-journals-reject-controversial-danish-study-on-effectiveness-of-face-masks-against-coronavirus-report

[xi] The Blaze October 22, 2020 https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-danish-newspaper-reveals-largest-study-masks-rejected

[xii] Washington Examiner October 22, 2020 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/top-scientific-journals-reject-controversial-danish-study-on-effectiveness-of-face-masks-against-coronavirus-report

[xiii] The Blaze October 22, 2020 https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-danish-newspaper-reveals-largest-study-masks-rejected

[xiv] The Blaze October 22, 2020 https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-danish-newspaper-reveals-largest-study-masks-rejected

[xv] Bloomberg July 26, 2020 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-26/face-mask-photo-op-adds-to-bewilderment-over-non-use-in-denmark

[xvi] The Local October 29, 2020 https://www.thelocal.dk/20201029/denmarks-extended-face-mask-requirement-takes-effect-these-are-the-rules-you-need-to-know

[xvii] Bloomberg July 26, 2020 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-26/face-mask-photo-op-adds-to-bewilderment-over-non-use-in-denmark

[xviii] Twitter February 29, 2020 https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/1233725785283932160

 

---

 

OP-ED

 

In a NY Times interview, Dr. Anthony Fauci urged a “uniform” virus strategy, not “disjointed” moves by states. Dr. Fauci’s remarks suggested that his own thinking is in line with that of President-elect Joe Biden, who has promised a far more muscular federal approach to the pandemic.

Make no mistake about it, this is being done so there can't be any states that refuse to pass mandatory vaccine laws (because there would be people who would move to those states to keep from being forced to get unsafe, ineffective, and unnecessary vaccines... and I'd be one of them).

Be aware that what's being done is being done for the benefit of corporations NOT the people. This is the way it's been for a while now, which is why, for the past 40 years, the productivity curve and the income curve have been getting further and further apart (they used to correlate closely). This meant the rich got even richer from the money that was supposed to be going to those who were directly responsible for the increases in productivity... the working class.

But that's just money. Now we're talking about our health being taken from us. Seems weird when the narrative is saying the opposite: "You need the vaccines to keep you safe from the evil virus!" No. The vaccines are needed to increase profits for pharmaceutical companies, and some of that wealth finds its way to those who enabled the pharmaceutical companies to force people to be vaccinated (politicians and media)... this has been Big Pharma's plan for many decades. First were the children, and now it's time for the adults... all the adults, everywhere on the planet. Why? Covid? Nope. Profits.

Just say 'no'. The power rests with the people... but corrupt politicians and corporate heads don't want you to know this. Because if enough people do, it's 'game over' for them.

 

---

 

PUBLIC SAFETY ALERT?
More like Public Scare Tactic

Well-intentioned, misguided or not, the primary reason for these cell phone alerts like the one below is as a fear tactic. Those at the "top" know this because this is their intention. 2016 ushered in the era of lies. Goverment has always lied to the public, but it's now at a whole new level. Case rates are not rising, and hospitals are not in danger of being at capacity. These are scare tactics initiated to combat the ever-growing spreading of the truth about this virus. The simple truth is that the truth about the virus stands to harm a very powerful industry that wants every person in the world to have to use their products – vaccines. Don't be misled by their BS courtesy of their bought-and-paid-for public officials and media.

[BTW, I placed the "false info" warning on it. Two can play at that game Facebook.]

 

 

A comment on my Facebook page...

"I’m from PA. I got the same damn message. Woke me up at 2:46 AM. Such a fear tactic. I heard of hundreds other friends of mine getting those same alerts at different intervals between the hours of 2-5am to wake people up and fear monger."

My reply...

Fear is an effective motivator. Salespeople are taught all about the "fear of loss" so fear can be used against people to make a sale. Hitler used fear to get people to be okay with him carrying out atrocities. Same concept.

Here, Huge Pharma (formerly Big Pharma) is employing fear tactics and disinformation to artificially keep the virus around long after herd immunity has dialed it way down to be able to come out a vaccine... multiple doses of a vaccine... made mandatory so that every human being on the planet must get them to be able to wipe out this (non-existent) deadly scourge. THIS is what people need to wake up to. And the concepts of "profit" and "insatiable greed" and "corruption" should be easy for most people to understand. We've all heard the expression, "follow the money". If not, we all need to hear and understand it because it applies 100% to the Covid-19 scam (the virus is real, the extent of Covid-19 is the scam).

 

---

 

Actors pretend to be someone they're not. Non-actors can do this too. The difference is that actors get paid to do that. That's where the difference ends. Take Bill Cosby for example. He convinced lots of people he was "America's Dad", and a great husband. In real life, he wasn't. Take Bill Gates for example. He's convinced lots of people he's a good man. A caring man. And he is a caring man... about money. In real life he pretends to care about people, but he doesn't. Do you pretend to care about people but don't? No. Because you're not a greedy, sociopath. But some people are. And they don't care if you're harmed by their greed. Do you care if you're harmed by their greed? Yes? Then say no to Bill Gates' vaccinations. They are potentially harmful, but more important: they are not necessary.

More about Gates here.

 

---

 

A few days ago Johns Hopkins
published a study saying corona is no big deal.
They then deleted it.
Read it here in its entirety
Nov 26th, 2020, NotTheBee.com

 

Johns Hopkins published this study on Sunday which posits that Covid is nowhere near the disaster we're being told it is. I would summarize it for you or offer pull-quotes but honestly you just have to read it for yourself because it's mind-blowing. The original article is now deleted from the Johns Hopkins website ... for some reason. Luckily the internet is forever and it's available via the Wayback Machine. Here is the article in its entirety:

 

* * *

 

A closer look at U.S. deaths due to COVID-19
By YANNI GU | November 22, 2020

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 2020.

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.

This comes as a shock to many people. How is it that the data lie so far from our perception?

To answer that question, Briand shifted her focus to the deaths per causes ranging from 2014 to 2020. There is a sudden increase in deaths in 2020 due to COVID-19. This is no surprise because COVID-19 emerged in the U.S. in early 2020, and thus COVID-19-related deaths increased drastically afterward.

Analysis of deaths per cause in 2018 revealed that the pattern of seasonal increase in the total number of deaths is a result of the rise in deaths by all causes, with the top three being heart disease, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia.

"This is true every year. Every year in the U.S. when we observe the seasonal ups and downs, we have an increase of deaths due to all causes," Briand pointed out.

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.

 

Graph depicts the number of deaths per cause during that period in 2020 to 2018

 

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.

The CDC classified all deaths that are related to COVID-19 simply as COVID-19 deaths. Even patients dying from other underlying diseases but are infected with COVID-19 count as COVID-19 deaths. This is likely the main explanation as to why COVID-19 deaths drastically increased while deaths by all other diseases experienced a significant decrease.

"All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary," Briand concluded.

In an interview with The News-Letter, Briand addressed the question of whether COVID-19 deaths can be called misleading since the infection might have exacerbated and even led to deaths by other underlying diseases.

"If [the COVID-19 death toll] was not misleading at all, what we should have observed is an increased number of heart attacks and increased COVID-19 numbers. But a decreased number of heart attacks and all the other death causes doesn't give us a choice but to point to some misclassification," Briand replied.

In other words, the effect of COVID-19 on deaths in the U.S. is considered problematic only when it increases the total number of deaths or the true death burden by a significant amount in addition to the expected deaths by other causes. Since the crude number of total deaths by all causes before and after COVID-19 has stayed the same, one can hardly say, in Briand's view, that COVID-19 deaths are concerning.

Briand also mentioned that more research and data are needed to truly decipher the effect of COVID-19 on deaths in the United States.

Throughout the talk, Briand constantly emphasized that although COVID-19 is a serious national and global problem, she also stressed that society should never lose focus of the bigger picture — death in general.

The death of a loved one, from COVID-19 or from other causes, is always tragic, Briand explained. Each life is equally important and we should be reminded that even during a global pandemic we should not forget about the tragic loss of lives from other causes.

According to Briand, the over-exaggeration of the COVID-19 death number may be due to the constant emphasis on COVID-19-related deaths and the habitual overlooking of deaths by other natural causes in society.

During an interview with The News-Letter after the event, Poorna Dharmasena, a master's candidate in Applied Economics, expressed his opinion about Briand's concluding remarks.

"At the end of the day, it's still a deadly virus. And over-exaggeration or not, to a certain degree, is irrelevant," Dharmasena said.

When asked whether the public should be informed about this exaggeration in death numbers, Dharmasena stated that people have a right to know the truth. However, COVID-19 should still continuously be treated as a deadly disease to safeguard the vulnerable population.

* * *

Facebook and Twitter will certainly block this article within hours of its publication. Just like Johns Hopkins deleted it from its site. The question is ... why? [I have a pretty good idea why. – Don]

* * *

UPDATE: Johns Hopkins University tweeted that they deleted the article because it "was being used to support false and dangerous inaccuracies about the impact of the pandemic."

Importantly, they didn't say anything in the article was incorrect. So, what, we're just memory-holing* studies that don't align with the narrative? Got it.

* A memory-hole is an imaginary place where inconvenient or unpleasant information is put and quickly forgotten.

 

---

 

The Great Awakening!

Worldwide Protests Against the Deception
and Forced Vaccination are Effective

France, Portugal, Spain, Denmark, Germany, U.K., U.S.,
Canada, Slovakia, Netherlands, Italy, Brazil

Why is the media not covering them?

Could it be that the major media is somehow influenced by Big Pharma? And Big Pharma doesn't want it to be known that there are such huge protests against their agenda of worldwide mandatory vaccination with a vaccine that is not safe, or effective,
or necessary!

A survey shows that 43% of people polled say they will not get the vaccine. That shows that the truth about the vaccine agenda is getting out there. But it also shows Big Pharma and the Gates Foundation that the vaccine must be made mandatory. So their bought-and-paid-for politicians will try to do this. They must be stopped.

 

These are all separate protests, from all around the world.
(Why are the largest gatherings in Europe, and not in the U.S.?)

 

Notice what it says above!

The powers-that-be don't want protests. We don't care what they don't want.

 

Get educated. Read the information on this page, from the top.
Be an informed citizen, not a conned citizen.

If you want to watch these protests in a live video
where you can have a better idea of how large these protests are,
there's a compilation of many of them here.

 

---

 

Masks were not recommended in the
2003 SARS coronavirus pandemic, and
people were fined for recommending masks

In the 2003 SARS-COV-1 coronavirus pandemic, health officials and scientific experts were recommending that people NOT wear a mask, as they were not an effective protection against the virus.

In Australia, individuals and companies that were "cashing in" on the promotion of masks for prevention were being fined $22,000 and $100,000 respectively as a penalty, as there was no scientific evidence that they were effective. The same studies show this today with the SARS-COV-2 coronavirus, despite what "common sense" or logic may suggest.

Nothing has changed with the science, except that masks are now being recommended and people are being fined for not wearing one (of any dubious quality or material), despite the evidence that they don't work. Why? It's part of a fear tactic. Why make you unjustifiably fearful of a virus? So that you will welcome the vaccine with open arms. Why? Huge profits. Huge!

Do you like being seen as a revenue generating unit? A pawn? Can the State force you to be vaccinated? Yes, if the vaccine is shown to be safe and effective and necessary for public safety. The soon to be released vaccine will be none of those. I hope you have the guts to 'just say no'... your future health depends on it. (And ill health caused by vaccines means even more money for the pharma and medical industries.)

More "mask" info here.

 

---

 

OP-ED

 

This is long, but it's worth reading, if you care about your health. Ever since I was a teenager, I realized a few things: 1) There's this thing called reality, that everyone lives/exists in, and no amount of believing something else changes how reality affects a person. 2) Adults lie... a lot, especially when they have have something to gain from doing it, and money is a huge motivator to lie. From used car salespeople to politicians to CEOs of companies doing illegal and immoral things. Tons of lies. And the liars do what needs to be done to propagate their lies and for their lies to be supported (payoffs, bribes, etc). To understand what's going on with this coronavirus, you have to acknowledge #1 and #2 above. If you don't or can't, stop reading, because it will just be a waste of your time.

I should also say, regarding my background, I do not believe the Earth is flat, or that we didn't land on the moon, or that 9-11 was an inside job, or that lizard people are in positions of power. So it's obvious I am not a "conspiracy theorist", but I do acknowledge that people do conspire to do horrible things, like the people who flew planes into the World Trade Towers, and the people who illegally dump their company's toxic waste to save their company lots of money. But the pharmaceutical industry is in this category also. If your knee-jerk reaction is, "No it's not!!!" stop reading, because it will just be a waste of your time.

With a few notable exceptions, the goal of any company or industry is to maximize profits. However when companies and whole industries are run by sociopathic people, they will not care if the health of the general public is harmed in the process. This has been demonstrated over and over again. Just look into the history of the tobacco and fossil fuel industries. And the pharmaceutical industry is no exception. They have been fined billions of dollars for doing things that harmed people (and magically no one has gone to jail... hmmm).

Big Pharma has always tried to think up new products to sell, just like the footwear and consumer electronics industries. No difference. Please don't think that the upper management of pharma companies do what they do because they care about you. If you think they would never do anything that would harm anyone, stop reading, because it will just be a waste of your time.

When I was a child there were 3 vaccines on the schedule. Now there are over 72. Why? Those other 69 vaccines did not improve the health of the population or protect them from anything life-threatening. So why? $$$. Lots of it. Even if the vaccines are free to the end user, the drug companies are getting paid to sell them (even when they say they're not).

It has been a goal of the pharma industry to not have any liability for injuries or deaths resulting from the use of their products. No other company or product in the world has such liability protection, but so what? They wanted it. And they got it for all the childhood vaccines. If your child dies from a vaccine, you can't sue the company that made the vaccine. Congress passed this law in 1986, and has now updated it to include all adult vaccinations, like for SARS-COV-2 and all the other natural viruses that will occur... viruses that kill only a tiny percentage of the population, and the virus is only the "last straw" because it brings about the death of the person because of co-morbidities (poor health, an existing respiratory condition, etc). For the vast majority of the population, these viral infections are only an inconvenience and not a death sentence. They make you feel like hell for a while, and you have to stay home from work because of that. A vaccine that has safety issues and that isn't effective at preventing you from getting that viral infection is not called for. It is not "necessary" as the public health officials would have you believe. But vaccines represent big money for Big Pharma, especially when every human being on the planet has to get one... actually more than one. So the safety and effectiveness issues are not an issue for Big Pharma. If this is making you mad, then keep reading.

You have to ask yourself, why do pharma companies collectively spend billions of dollars advertising a product that gets them no increase in sales for that product? I'm referring to prescription meds. You can't buy them over-the-counter, and just try telling a doctor to write you a prescription for one and see what happens. So why do they run these ads? Simple. To influence broadcast networks to do pharma's bidding... to not do negative stories about them, and to have the narratives that pharma wants them to have. A "conspiracy"? No. Just business as usual. This is why, up until a few decades ago, no country on earth allowed pharma companies to advertise prescription drugs on TV or in magazines, because it would be done only for the reasons I described. But then the U.S. allowed it. Go ask the Health Ministry of any other country why they don't allow pharma companies to advertise prescription meds, and they will tell you the exact same thing I just did. Are you beginning to get the picture?

This is why you can't trust what you are being told on mainstream news about the coronavirus or about the safety and efficacy and the necessity of vaccines.

But maybe politicians will protect us from the sociopathic behavior of the pharma companies. Nope, sorry. Of all the industries in existence, which one do you think gives the most money to politicians? Yep! Big Pharma gives big money to politicians to get what they want from them... the laws they want passed (like the vaccine injury indemnification act), and the laws they do not want passed... laws that would protect the public but harm Big Pharma's profits. And Big Pharma gives equally to both parties, so it doesn't care which one is in power.

As you can see, the perfect storm for selling products that can be harmful to people (doing more harm than the relatively small number of deaths from a widespread viral infection).

As an example of the influence pharma has on the narrative we all hear, this is the first time in human history where a "case" is defined by a test result only. No symptoms are required, no solid evidence of infection needed to qualify as a "case". This would be fine if the test used had close to a 100% accuracy rate. But the PCR test – the test that's being used to define a "case" of Covid-19 – can be close to providing 100% false positives. This is being done to inflate the "number of cases".

But what about the Covid-19 death rate? Surely that would be a good indicator of how serious this coronavirus is? Nope again. People who die of something other than a viral infection (most people), if a PCR test was positive for Covid-19, their Cause of Death (COD) is coded as "Covid-19" even though, in reality, this coronavirus had nothing to do with those deaths. See how the scam works? And if you don't think it's a scam of immense proportion, you need to read this again, with an open mind this time. Your health and millions of others' health depends on you saying 'no' to any vaccinations, and to spreading the truth about what's actually going on.

The info on this page above and below this article contains more facts. And here's a sample...

 

---

 

OP-ED

 

Tell me the reason you want the Covid-19 vaccination, considering:

1) "An FDA Pfizer briefing paper published December 10, 2020 revealed 43 percent more suspected cases of Covid-19 in the vaccinated group than in the placebo group within seven days of vaccination."
fda.gov/media/144245/download, page 42

2) Covid-19 vaccine manufacturers will be protected from all liability; if you are injured, you cannot sue them. Manufacturers will have complete indemnity even though all previous attempts at creating coronavirus vaccines caused harm and never advanced to regulatory approval.
www.phe.gov/Preparedness/legal/prepact/Pages/default.aspx
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7142689/

3) According to the CDC’s current best estimate, the “infection fatality rate” (IFR) for Covid-19 is less than 1% for people age 69 and younger, including a 0.003% IFR for children and adolescents.

4) Since there are highly effective and very safe treatments like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine+Zinc that can be administered at the hospital or doctor's office, why would you want a vaccine that's not effective or safe? In-other-words, a vaccine that's not necessary, especially since the vast majority of people who are infected don't need to go to the hospital or a doctor's office?

5) Two prominent doctors, including the ex-head of Pfizer’s respiratory research, warn that Covid-19 vaccines contain a spike protein called syncytin-1, vital for the formation of the placenta. If the vaccine triggers an immune response to this protein, then female infertility, miscarriage or birth defects could result.

6) Where's the data on what the vaccine could increase your chances of getting, like cancer? Oh, we'd need long term studies to determine this, and the pharma industry doesn't want that because of the pandemic (What pandemic? See #3 above). (Actually, the real reason pharma wants the vaccines out quickly is because the truth about the vaccines is becoming more known, and they want the highest rate of compliance possible.) What about the long term study of the Swine Flu vaccine... those who got it had a higher rate of cancer than those who didn't get it. Why roll the dice with cancer for a vaccine that isn't even necessary? Ask yourself, who would benefit from that scenario?

And why isn't any of this being discussed on mainstream media? Here's why.

 

---

 

More Mask Insights

 

I received this comment...

> The larger globules that contain virus particles arguably can be prevented from exhalation by the mask, helping to protect others.

My reply...

This is what we're told, but not true according to virologists (and the CDC).

Another way to looks at it is: If masks do prevent germs from being exhaled, if someone wants to wear a mask to protect the most vulnerable, "at risk" people (people who will likely die if they are infected with a viral infection because the infection will be the "last straw" due to their co-morbidities), that's one thing. But this demographic is tiny, and we know who they are. But masks shouldn't be worn to prevent the rest of the population from becoming infected because this prevents herd immunity from "knocking off" the virus, allowing it to remain in the population, and more important: giving it more opportunity/time to mutate into other "versions" (SARS-CoV-3, SARS-CoV-4 etc).

Herd immunity is the bane of the pharmaceutical industry... it is what thwarted their efforts at selling a vaccine for the SARS-CoV-1 infection back in 2014 (the "number of cases" fell quickly enough to make a vaccine for it moot). Big Pharma came to realize that in order to be able to make trillions of dollars from the sale of worldwide vaccines to everyone, they'd have to squash herd immunity, but not by stopping it (because it can't be stopped unless everyone wore tight-fitting respirators, and they know this), but by artificially inflating the "number of cases" statistics and the "COD=Covid" statistics, as this will create and maintain the demand for the vaccine, so there would be no rush to get it out there, giving them the opportunity to say "See, we're spending the time necessary to test the vaccine properly so those irresponsible anti-vaxxers can't say we're rushing it out without proper testing". And indeed this tactic was working, so they said the Covid-19 vaccine won't be out until about April of 2021. But they failed to account for the spread of the misinfo-busting info from people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Del Bigtree who interview doctors and virologists who are brave enough to tell the truth on camera... misinfo-busting info that simply made sense; info that explained all of the above along with how pharma is able to manipulate the media into doing their bidding, and how pharma is able to manipulate enough politicians into passing indemnification laws so that pharma companies can't be sued if their vaccine products harm or kill people, along with the info about how vaccines make pharma money also on the "back-end" by making people more predisposed to degenerative diseases, like cancer.

So, aversion to the vaccine started growing, therefore pharma had to move up the release of the vaccines before the truth spread enough to where there was a tipping point against them and their vaccines. And as part of their disinformation campaign, we are being shown on TV healthcare workers being vaccinated on camera to show the public, "See, the healthcare workers will take it, and they would be the ones who would know if the vaccine wasn't safe or not". But some health care workers know the truth and are refusing to take the vaccine. Uh oh. How to combat this? Fire those healthcare workers? No, that would become too public and would do more harm than good. The answer? Threaten to fire them, but tell them that they won't get the vaccine; it will just look like they're getting it (we've already seen videos of this, and if you know what to look for, you'll see the deception). If I was a nurse, I wouldn't be part of this sham, but many nurses have families to feed and mortgages to pay, so they bite their lip and "go along to get along".

Just as the childhood vaccines are a sham, so are vaccines for influenza and corona viruses... they are simply a revenue generating product that does more harm than good.

More mask info at http://health101.org/masks
See the photos below the URL links, especially the ones from the CDC.

 

---

The PCR Deception
By Derrick Broze

[A 15 minute audio version of this article is available at the link above,
and it begins with a quote from the inventor of the PCR test.]

Reports are streaming in, declaring a Dark Winter for the world due to COVID19. The media rushes to tell the public that case numbers are on the rise again. In response, case numbers are used to support calls for lockdowns, travel and dining restrictions, and the push for compulsory vaccines.

However, in recent months an abundance of evidence has shown that the “gold standard” procedure for detecting COVID-19 is unreliable and could be producing untold numbers of false positives. If this is the case, why are health officials around the world calling for more tests?
This report is a brief look into the history of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) procedure and the evidence that PCR is unreliable and should not be used as a determinant for the number of COVID-19 cases or as a factor in political decisions. Please share with friends and family to keep them informed, and if someone shared this with you, please watch with an open mind.

The PCR Deception

In the months since the COVID-19 panic began health authorities around the world have encouraged the public to “get tested” to help track the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the strain of coronavirus that causes COVID19. However, as fear and hysteria subside, the scientific community and public at large are calling into question the efficacy of the test used to determine a patients status.

The main test that is used to determine an individual status involves the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method. This incredibly sensitive technique was developed by Berkeley scientist Kary Mullis, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1993. The PCR method amplifies a small segment of DNA hundreds of times to make it easier to analyze. For COVID19, a process known as Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is used to detect SARS-CoV-2 by amplifying the virus’ genetic material so it can be detected by scientists.

PCR is sometimes described as a technique or process, but for simplicity we will refer to it as a test. PCR is viewed as the gold standard, however, it is not without problems. PCR amplifies a virus’s genetic material and then each sample goes through a number of cycles until a virus is recovered. This is known as the “cycle threshold” and has become a key component in the debate around the efficacy of the PCR test.

In late August 2020, I attended a press conference in Houston, Texas to ask Houston Health Authority Dr. David Persse about concerns about PCR.

Dr. Persse says that when the labs report numbers of COVID-19 cases to the City of Houston they only offer a binary option of “yes” for positive or “no” for negative. “But, in reality, it comes in what is called cycle-thresholds. It’s an inverse relationship, so the higher the number the less virus there was in the initial sample,” Persse explained. “Some labs will report out to 40 cycle-thresholds, and if they get a positive at 40 – which means there is a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of virus there – that gets reported to us as positive and we don’t know any different.”

Persse noted that the key question is, at what value is someone considered still infectious?

“Because if you test me and I have a tiny amount of virus, does that mean I am contagious? that I am still infectious to someone else? If you are shedding a little bit of virus are you just starting? or are you on the downside?.”

He believes the answer is for the scientific community to set a national standard for cycle-threshold. Unfortunately, a national standard would not solve the problems expressed by Dr. Persse.

UK Parliament and Scientists Have Concerns About PCR Test
In the first weeks of September 2020 a number of important revelations regarding PCR came to light. First, new research from the University of Oxford’s Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and the University of the West of England found that the PCR test poses the potential for false positives when testing for COVID-19. Professor Carl Heneghan, one of the authors of the study said there was a risk that an increase in testing in the UK will lead to an increase in the risk of “sample contamination” and thus an increase in COVID-19 cases.

The team reviewed evidence from 25 studies where virus specimens had positive PCR tests. The researchers state that the “genetic photocopying” technique scientists use to magnify the sample of genetic material collected is so sensitive it could be picking up fragments of dead virus from previous infections. The researchers reach a similar conclusion as Dr. David Persse, specifically they state:

A binary Yes/No approach to the interpretation RT-PCR unvalidated against viral culture will result in false positives with segregation of large numbers of people who are no longer infectious and hence not a threat to public health.”

Heneghan, who is also the the editor of BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, told the BBC that the binary approach is a problem and tests should have a cut-off point so small amounts of virus do not lead to a positive result. This is because of the cycle threshold mentioned by Dr. Persse. A person who is shedding an active virus and someone who has leftover infection could both receive the same positive test result. Heneghan also stated that the test could be detecting old virus which would explain the rise in cases in the UK and said setting a standard for the cycle threshold would eliminate the quarantining and contact tracing of people who are healthy and help the public better understand the true nature of COVID-19.

Shortly after Heneghan’s criticisms the UK’s leading health agency, Public Health England, released an update on the testing methods used to detect COVID-19 and appeared to agree with Professor Heneghan regarding the concerns on the cycle threshold. On September 9, 2020, PHE released an update which concluded, “all laboratories should determine the threshold for a positive result at the limit of detection.”

This is not the first time Heneghan’s work has directly impacted the UK’s COVID-19 policies. In July 2020, UK health secretary Matt Hancock called for an “urgent review” of the daily COVID-19 death numbers produced by Public Health England after it was revealed the stats included people who died from other causes. The Guardian reported that Professor Heneghan and a fellow scientist released a paper showing that if someone dies after having tested positive for COVID-19, their death is recorded in the COVID-19 death statistics. A source in the Department of Health and Social Care told The Guadian, “You could have been tested positive in February, have no symptoms, then hit by a bus in July and you’d be recorded as a COVID death.’”

Heneghan also recently told the BMJ , “one issue in trying to interpret numbers of detected cases is that there is no set definition of a case. At the moment it seems that a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive result is the only criterion required for a case to be recognised.”

“In any other disease we would have a clearly defined specification that would usually involve signs, symptoms, and a test result. We are moving into a biotech world where the norms of clinical reasoning are going out of the window. A PCR test does not equal covid-19; it should not, but in some definitions it does.”

Heneghan says he is concerned that as soon as there is the appearance of an outbreak there is panic and over-reacting. “This is a huge problem because politicians are operating in a non-evidence-based way when it comes to non-drug interventions,” he stated.

Heneghan is correct that the scientific authorities ought to take false positives seriously, especially when a person can be sent to isolate or quarantine for weeks due to a positive test result. Even the U.S. FDA’s own fact sheet on testing acknowledges the dangers posed by false positives:

“ in the event of a false positive result, risks to patients could include the following: a recommendation for isolation of the patient…. unnecessary prescription of a treatment or therapy, or other unintended adverse effects.”

A CDC fact sheet also acknowledges the possibility of false positives with the PCR test.

Professor Heneghan believes the confusion around COVID-19 has come as a result of a shift away from “evidence-based medicine.” In a recent opinion piece published at The Spectator, Heneghan wrote that patients have become a “prisoner of a system labelling him or her as ‘positive’ when we are not sure what that label means.” He warns:

“Governments are producing a series of contradictory and confusing policies which have a brief shelf life as the next crisis emerges. It is increasingly clear the evidence is often ignored. Keeping up to date is a full time occupation.”

More evidence for the unreliability of PCR came on November 11, 2020, when the Lisbon Court of Appeal ruled that PCR ““in view of current scientific evidence, this test shows itself to be unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that such positivity corresponds to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.”

The decision relates to an appeal by the Regional Health Administration of the Azores,Portugal which forced four German citizens to comply with a 14 day quarantine in a hotel room. After the four citizens appealed the decision, the panel of judges concluded that “the number of cycles of such amplification results in a greater or lesser reliability of such tests. And the problem is that this reliability shows itself, in terms of scientific evidence (…) as more than debatable.”

The ruling was criticized by some scientists in Portugal and has been completely ignored by the United States media and politicians.

More recently, On December 3, 2020, the Florida Department of Health announced a new update requiring all laboratories conducting COVID-19 tests to record new details for the PCR test.

The update notes that all Florida “laboratories are subject to mandatory reporting to the Florida Department of Health (FDOH),” including for “PCR, other RNA, antigen and antibody results.” The update adds new requirements for the PCR test, asking labs to record the “cycle threshold” (CT) values for the process. The FDOH document states:

“Cycle threshold (CT) values and their reference ranges, as applicable, must be reported by laboratories to FDOH via electronic laboratory reporting or by fax immediately.”

On December 14, the World Health Organization (WHO) posted a notice on their website warning that PCR may not be entirely accurate for detecting SARS-CoV-2. The WHO memo admits that using too high of a cycle threshold will likely result in false positives.

“Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result.”

“The design principle of RT-PCR means that for patients with high levels of circulating virus (viral load), relatively few cycles will be needed to detect virus and so the Ct value will be low. Conversely, when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain.”

The fact that the Florida Department of Health and the WHO is taking this step is another sign that an increasing number of health professionals and regulators are questioning the accuracy of PCR. Unfortunately, both of these stories have been ignored by the mainstream media.

As noted earlier, this incredibly sensitive technique was developed by Berkeley scientist Kary Mullis, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1993. By the mid-90’s, Mullis had become skeptical that PCR was able to detect HIV and made several statements towards the end of his life indicating that he believed the technique was being improperly used by researchers.

As we approach 2021 the public is being told that a Dark Winter is waiting, with governments and media predicting a rise in cases and deaths. However, it’s important that we pause to acknowledge the many concerns surrounding the PCR test before international health authorities crash the economy, send millions into poverty, and threaten civil liberties. We must help the public understand the limitations of the PCR test and the dangers of resting public health policy on such a flawed process.

Finally, we must also hold accountable those who continue to promote PCR and refuse to answer these questions or even acknowledge these concerns. We cannot ignore the disastrous results produced by policymakers who failed to heed warnings about PCR.

 

More about the PCR test's false positive rate here.

 

---

 

A Study: Iodine and Covid-19

 

Effect of 1% Povidone Iodine Mouthwash/Gargle, Nasal and Eye Drop in COVID-19 patients

Bioresearch Communications Volume 7, Issue 1, January 2021 Md. Iqbal Mahmud Choudhury, Nilufar Shabnam, Tazin Ahsan, Md. Saiful kabir, Rashed Md. Khan, S.M. Abu Ahsan

ABSTRACT:

Background: The sudden onset of COVID-19 began in late 2019 caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-COV2) and on 11th March, WHO declared it to have developed pandemic status. There is still no specific treatment and vaccine available for COVID-19; causing wide spread health problem and concern of the globe. Povidone iodine (PVP-I) is an antiseptic that has been used for over 150 years. It is already proved that different concentrations of PVP-I can deactivate the COVID-19 virus.

Methodology: In this randomized controlled clinical trial, out of 1113 patients, 606 patients were enrolled and divided in two groups by randomization. In Gr-A, 303 patients underwent mouthwash/gargle, nasal drops and eye drops with 1% povidone iodine every four hours for four weeks. as well as symptomatic treatment according to need. In Gr-B 303 patients were advised mouthwash/gargle, nasal cavity and eye wash with lukewarm water every four hours for four weeks, and symptomatic treatment according to need. An RT-PCR was test done every third, fourth and seventh day and Thyroid hormone level (TSH, T3, T4, FT4) at fourth week for follow up.

Results: The group of patients using 1% PVP-I showed significantly reduced mortality, morbidity and hospitalization.

Conclusion: Administration of 1% PVP-I as mouthwash/gargle, nasal or eye drop is a simple, rapid and cost effective treatment in reduction of mortality and morbidity by COVID-19.

Don's comments:

Better yet, why not make sure that people have proper iodine levels in their bodies. Iodine, just like calcium, sodium, and vitamin C, is an essential nutrient. The body relies on iodine for its antibacterial, antiviral, antifungal, and antimicrobial mechanisms. It's not a stretch to say that if the population had whole body tissue sufficiency of iodine, we would not be as affected by viruses (or bacterial infections or cancer). And why did they use povidone iodine when a Lugol's iodine would have been more effective? More info about iodine here.

Oh, and when the study says, "There is still no specific treatment...available for COVID-19...", they are saying something that is incorrect. Hydroxychloroquine+Zinc, and Ivermectin+Zinc are two very helpful treatments. But since they are so helpful and beneficial, this would negate the need for a vaccine, which the pharmaceutical industry is against for monetary reasons, so all their minions are saying that Hydroxychloroquine is not helpful and even harmful, same for Ivermectin, but these are falsehoods (and are lies when said by people who know the truth).

The full study is here.

 

---

Statement by Dr. David Martin
Jan 5th, 2021

”Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine. They are using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions. This is not a vaccine.

This is mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term under public health law; they are a legally defined term under CDC and FDA standards. And a vaccine specifically has to stimulate both the immunity within the person receiving it and it also has to disrupt transmission.

And that is not what this injection is. They (Moderna and Pfizer) have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop the transmission, it is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities because then people would say, “What other treatments are available?”

The use of the term "vaccine" is unconscionable for both the legal definition and also it is a sucker punch to open discourse. Moderna was started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARS-COV-2. If we said we are going to give people prophylactic chemotherapy for the cancer they don’t yet have, we’d be laughed out of the room because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is. This is a mechanical device in the form of a very small package of technology that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site.

And I refuse to stipulate in any conversations that this is in fact a vaccine issue. The only reason why the term is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobson case that has been misrepresented since it was written. And if we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within a cell. It is a medical device, not a drug because it meets the CDRH definition of a device. It is not a living system, it is not a biologic system, it is a physical technology – it happens to just come in the size of a molecular package.

So, we need to be really clear on making sure we don’t fall for their game. Because their game is: if we talk about it as a vaccine then we are going to get into a vaccine conversation, but this is not, by their own admission, a vaccine. As a result, it must be clear to everyone listening that we will not fall for this failed definition just like we will not fall for their industrial chemical definition of health. Both of these definitions are functionally flawed and are an implicit violation of the legal construct that is being exploited. I get frustrated when I hear activists and lawyers say, “We are going to fight the vaccine”. If you stipulate it’s a vaccine, you’ve already lost the battle. It’s not a vaccine.”

[It's technically an experimental biological agent. Call it what it is when talking about it.]

 

---

 

 

---

 

Wish more people would do their own research

By Ellie Grey

I signed both the kids up for the GP practice today only as they both needed their hearing tested. But the nurse came out and started having a chat with me. She said that she’d noticed that Marley hadn’t had a single vaccine, and that Skye was years overdue.

I told her that I absolutely would never consent to them having a single vaccine, and as soon as they’ve had their hearing tested that we will again be deregistering.

She then made a comment somewhere along the lines of "that’s a very uneducated decision to make, we are medically trained for a reason, so we can save lives... are you?"

This pissed me the fuck off! But boy was I glad she asked. My reply, "Thanks for assuming that I am uneducated, a bit of discrimination is great for a Monday morning. I’m actually studying my law degree, of which I have had a result of no lower than 89% for any of my assignments, and my medical sciences degree, no lower than 91%. I am studying to specialize in vaccine inury and pharmaceutical corruption. Can you name me three ingredients in a vaccine? Can you tell me how many human and animal DNA cell cultures are in the vaccines? Can you tell me what the VAERS database is? Can you tell me how many mcg of aluminum a baby receives in the routine 8 week jabs? Can you even tell me how many vaccines a child receives by age 12? Can you tell me how much compensation has been paid out for vaccine injury and deaths? Can you assure me that the safety of combined vaccines has been tested? Can you reassure me that you have done over 3000 hours of research like I have? Can you tell me you were aware that you are more likely to die from the MMR vaccine than from mumps, measles and rubella combined? No, you can't. So don’t you dare call me uneducated when I can wipe the floor with you on this topic. YOU are the uneducated one, who was trained purely to sell vaccines on behalf of $2 billion a year profit pharmaceutical companies."

Yep, I was rude. And nope, not a single fuck was given. After she left, the receptionist booked me in their hearing tests and I muttered loudly, "Babies don’t even start developing their own antibodies until they are a year old anyway, so even the idea is bullshit".

I wasn’t in a good mood.

 

---

 

See who the WHO really works for here.

 

---

 

How COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ May Destroy the Lives of Millions

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola

 

Story at-a-glance * The COVID-19 vaccine really isn’t a vaccine in the medical definition of a vaccine. It’s more accurately an experimental gene therapy that could cause the premature death of large amounts of the population and disable many people * Since mRNA normally rapidly degrades, it must be complexed with lipids or polymers. COVID-19 vaccines use PEGylated lipid nanoparticles, and PEG is known to cause anaphylaxis * Free mRNA can signal danger to your immune system and drive inflammatory diseases. As such, injecting synthetic thermostable mRNA (mRNA that is resistant to breaking down) is highly problematic as it can fuel chronic, long-term inflammation * Many commonly reported side effects from the COVID-19 gene therapy “vaccines” appear to be caused by brain inflammation * Anyone with an inflammatory disease such as rheumatoid arthritis, Parkinson's disease or chronic Lyme, and those with acquired immune deficiency/dysfunction from any microbial pathogen, brain trauma, or environmental toxin are at high risk of dying from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines

In April 2020, I interviewed Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., about the potential role played by human gammaretroviruses in COVID-19. Mikovits is a molecular biologist and researcher, and was the founding research director of the Whittemore Peterson Institute in Nevada.

Her book, “Plague of Corruption,” ended up being a No. 1 best seller on the lists of The New York Times, USA Today and The Wall Street Journal in 2020. Her new book, “Ending Plague: A Scholar’s Obligation in an Age of Corruption,” will hopefully do just as well. It’s available for preorder on Amazon.

She may be one of the most censored researchers on the planet at this point, thanks in no small part to her participation in the documentary “Plandemic,” which went viral in a big way (plandemicseries.com).

Case in point: YouTube suspended our account for one week as soon as we uploaded today’s interview — even though the video was UNLISTED and not available for public viewing yet. Even worse, Mikovits’ third and most recent book, “The Case Against Masks: Ten Reasons Why Mask Use Should Be Limited,” is so heavily censored, no one can buy it.

Clearly, Mikovits is considered a serious threat to the technocratic status quo, and once you hear what she has to say about COVID-19 vaccines — which as you’ll see is a complete misnomer — you may start to understand why.

COVID-19 Vaccines Aren’t Real Vaccines

The COVID-19 vaccine really isn’t a vaccine in the medical definition of a vaccine. It does not improve your immune response to the infection, nor does not limit you from getting the infection. It’s really an experimental gene therapy that could prematurely kill large amounts of the population and disable exponentially more.

Indeed, news and social media reports suggest recipients are starting to drop like flies. Many die of unknown causes within days, sometimes hours of getting the first or second shot.

Baseball legend Hank Aaron passed away two weeks after receiving the vaccine, yet this was not ever mentioned in his New York Times obituary. Surely, had he tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, he would have been declared a COVID-19 fatality, whether the virus actually had anything to do with it or not.

But when it comes to the vaccine, even eyebrow-raising timing is dismissed as coincidental and irrelevant. Now all of a sudden, old people dying shortly after vaccination are shrugged off with the excuse that they’re old and could have died any day anyway. Old people dying with SARS-CoV-2, however, must be stopped at any cost. Funny how that works.

The Problem With Synthetic RNA

The messenger RNA (mRNA) used in many COVID-19 vaccines are not natural. They’re synthetic. Since naturally produced mRNA rapidly degrades, it must be complexed with lipids or polymers to prevent this from happening. COVID-19 vaccines use PEGylated lipid nanoparticles, and PEG is known to cause anaphylaxis. Lipid nanoparticles may also cause other problems.

In 2017, Stat News discussed Moderna’s challenges in developing an mRNA-based drug for Crigler-Najjar, a condition that can lead to jaundice, muscle degeneration and brain damage:

However, if they call their drugs vaccines, they can bypass the safety studies. All of a sudden, they expect us to believe that all of these safety issues have been resolved? Another problem is related to how long the mRNA remains stable in your system. It’s encased in nanolipid to prevent it from degrading too rapidly, but what happens if the mRNA degrades too slowly, or not at all?

The idea behind mRNA vaccines is that by tricking your body into creating the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, your immune system will produce antibodies in response. But what happens when you turn your body into a viral protein factory, thus keeping antibody production activated on a continual basis with no ability to shut down?

In addition, your body sees these synthetic particles as non-self and much of the perpetual antibody response will be autoantibodies attacking your own tissues. Mikovits explains:

These High-Risk Groups Should Avoid COVID-19 Vaccine

According to Mikovits, research shows 4% to 6% of Americans have already been infected with XMRV gammaretroviruses via contaminated vaccines and blood supply for more than three decades, which is driving a number of chronic health conditions. Now, these synthetic gene therapies (the so-called COVID-19 vaccines) will further add to the chronic disease burden by triggering myalgic encephalomyelitis.

Making matters worse, the synthetic mRNA also has an HIV envelope expressed in it, which can cause immune dysregulation. “This is a nightmare,” Mikovits says. “I'm angry, as this should never be allowed.”

As we discussed in previous interviews, SARS-CoV-2 has been engineered in the lab with gain-of-function research that included introducing the HIV envelope into the spike protein.

Mikovits’ hypothesis is that those who are most susceptible to severe neurological side effects and death from the COVID-19 vaccines are those who have previously been injected with XMRVs, borrelia, babesia, mycoplasma, through contaminated vaccines, resulting in chronic disease. (Her book, “Plague of Corruption,” details the science and history of XMRVs, which is a fascinating read.)

The chart below lists 35 diseases associated with XMRV infection. If you have any of these, you may want to think long and hard before you line up for an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, as your chances of severe side effects or death are likely far higher than someone who does not have any of these diseases (and keep in mind that these are not like hitting your thumb with a hammer where your thumb is perfectly fine one moment, and the next moment you've got a problem; you can have these conditions but not know it yet because they take a long time to develop to the point where you notice something is wrong).

This is not a complete list. There may be many other conditions that can put you into a high-risk category. One example is idiopathic thrombocytopenia (ITP), a deadly bleeding disorder. According to Mikovits, her work shows 30% of all ITP are associated with XMRVs.

Interestingly, one example is the 58-year-old Florida doctor who recently got the COVID-19 vaccine and died from sudden onset of ITP two weeks later. Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at Johns Hopkins University, told The New York Times “it is a medical certainty” that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine caused the man’s death. Pfizer, of course, denies any connection.

Genetic Alterations May Last for Life

So, just how long will the synthetic RNA in COVID-19 vaccines be maintained within your body, causing your cells to produce this aberrant protein? Mikovits believes it will escape degradation for months, years, maybe even for life in some cases.

All of this is eerily reminiscent of previous attempts to create a coronavirus vaccine, all of which failed due to the vaccines causing paradoxical immune reactions, or antibody-dependent immune enhancement. While the animals appeared to have antibodies against the virus, and should theoretically have been protected, when they were exposed to wild coronavirus, they got severely ill and most died.

Such failures may be why so many vaccine makers decided to use mRNA rather than following conventional vaccine development strategies, but the end result is likely going to be the same or worse.

Breakthrough Genomics Could Save Millions of Lives

According to Mikovits, one solution is to use functional genomics technologies like Breakthrough Genomics, a company which uses machine learning to look at full genome sequences to determine which single nucleotide polymorphisms in ACE2 receptors, antiviral pathways like RNASEL and Interferons can make a person most susceptible to harm from these gene therapy “vaccines.”

While one size clearly doesn't fit all in any vaccine strategy, forcing a gene therapy on an entire population when it can be predicted that millions will die and develop deadly diseases like ITP is simply unconscionable. Yet anyone who dares speak about this, as Mikovits knows, risks having their careers and lives destroyed.

Symptoms of COVID-19 Vaccine Damage

Many of the symptoms now being reported are suggestive of neurological damage. They have severe dyskinesia (impairment of voluntary movement), ataxia (lack of muscle control) and intermittent or chronic seizures. Many cases detailed in personal videos on social media are quite shocking.

Equally shocking is that these videos are quickly removed by the social media platforms, ostensibly for violating some term of service. It’s hard to fathom how a personal experience can be considered “false information.”

Side effects are also suggestive of a dysregulated innate immune response and a disrupted endocannabinoid system, which acts as a dimmer switch on your immune system.

Another common side effect from the vaccine we’re seeing is allergic reactions, including anaphylactic shock. A likely culprit in this is PEG, which an estimated 70% of Americans are allergic to. “These instantaneous effects are almost certainly the PEG and that lipid nano particle, the toxic particle that's being injected,” Mikovits says.

In the longer term, she suspects we’ll see a significant uptick in migraines, tics, Parkinson’s disease, microvascular disorders, different cancers, including prostate cancer, severe pain syndromes like fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis, bladder problems, kidney disease, psychosis, neurodegenerative diseases such as Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) and sleep disorders, including narcolepsy. In young children, autism-like symptoms are likely to develop as well, she thinks.

We’ll End Up Killing the Most Susceptible

Aside from the chronic diseases listed earlier, others who are at high risk from these COVID-19 gene therapies include those who have gotten seasonal influenza vaccines, Blacks and Hispanics. Blacks and Hispanics are particularly at risk for antibody-dependent immune enhancement, in particular, due to genetics. Tragically, these vaccines are given to the most susceptible under the guise of racial and social justice.

Women of childbearing age may also be at risk for infertility, as syncytin (the gammaretrovirus envelope encoded in the human genome the expression of which can be dysregulated by the synthetic syncytin RNA in the vaccine) is required for proper fusion of the placenta in the uterus and implantation of the egg. Indeed, the World Health Organization is now saying pregnant women should not get the Moderna or Pfizer vaccines due to reports of late-term miscarriages.

Helpful Supplements

Nutritional supplementation can also be helpful. Among the most important are:

Vitamin D — Vitamin D supplements are readily available and one of the least expensive supplements on the market. All things considered, vitamin D optimization is likely the easiest and most beneficial strategy that anyone can do to minimize their risk of COVID-19 and other infections, and can strengthen your immune system in a matter of a few weeks.

N-acetylcysteine (NAC) — NAC is a precursor to reduced glutathione, which appears to play a crucial role in COVID-19. According to one literature analysis, glutathione deficiency may actually be associated with COVID-19 severity, leading the author to conclude that NAC may be useful both for its prevention and treatment.

Zinc — Zinc plays a very important role in your immune system’s ability to ward off viral infections. Like vitamin D, zinc helps regulate your immune function— and a combination of zinc with a zinc ionophore, like hydroxychloroquine or quercetin, was in 2010 shown to inhibit SARS coronavirus in vitro. In cell culture, it also blocked viral replication within minutes. Importantly, zinc deficiency has been shown to impair immune function.

Melatonin — Boosts immune function in a variety of ways and helps quell inflammation. Melatonin may also prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection by recharging glutathione and enhancing vitamin D synthesis, among other things.

Vitamin C — A number of studies have shown vitamin C can be very helpful in the treatment of viral illnesses, sepsis and ARDS, all of which are applicable to COVID-19. Its basic properties include anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antioxidant, antithrombotic and antiviral activities. At high doses, it actually acts as an antiviral drug, actively inactivating viruses. Vitamin C also works synergistically with quercetin.

Quercetin — A powerful immune booster and broad-spectrum antiviral, quercetin was initially found to provide broad-spectrum protection against SARS coronavirus in the aftermath of the 2003 SARS epidemic, and evidence suggests it may be useful for the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 as well.

B vitamins — B vitamins can also influence several COVID-19-specific disease processes, including viral replication and invasion, cytokine storm induction, adaptive immunity and hypercoagulability.

[Note: No mention of iodine, which is a shame since having "whole body tissue sufficiency" of iodine helps the body deal with viral infections very effectively.]

My personal choice for the treatment of COVID-19 symptoms is nebulized hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). It's the safest and most effective way to treat an acute upper respiratory infection. It’s a home remedy I recommend everyone familiarize themselves with, as in many cases it can improve symptoms in mere hours. You can also use it as a preventive strategy if you know you’ve been exposed to someone who is ill.

Nebulizing hydrogen peroxide into your sinuses, throat and lungs is a simple, straightforward way to augment your body’s natural expression of hydrogen peroxide to combat infections and can be used both prophylactically after known exposure to COVID-19 and as a treatment for mild, moderate and even severe illness.

Dr. David Brownstein, who has successfully treated over 100 COVID-19 patients with nebulized peroxide, published a case paper about this treatment in the July 2020 issue of Science, Public Health Policy and The Law. He also reviews its benefits in “How Nebulized Peroxide Helps Against Respiratory Infections.”

Nebulized hydrogen peroxide is extremely safe, and all you need is a desktop nebulizer and food-grade hydrogen peroxide, which you’ll need to dilute with saline to 0.1% strength. I recommend buying these items beforehand so that you have everything you need and can begin treatment at home at the first signs of a respiratory infection.

In this video, I go over the basics of this treatment. Be sure to buy a nebulizer that plugs into an electrical outlet, as battery-driven ones are too low-powered to be truly effective. Also make sure your nebulizer comes with a face mask, not just a mouthpiece, because you want to breathe the nebulized H2O2 into your sinuses as well as your lungs. If it doesn’t come with a face mask, you can pick one up separately.

Resources:
Nebulizer: https://www.healthproductsforyou.com/p-pari-trek-s-portable-compressor-nebulizer-aerosol-system.html
Mask: https://www.healthproductsforyou.com/p-pari-adult-aerosol-mask.html
12% H2O2: https://www.amazon.com/Hydrogen-Peroxide-Grade-Rapid-Shipping/dp/B086PHBHBF/

 

---

 

INCONVENIENT FACTS
about Covid-19 survival rates that the media will not report
and Facebook says is "false information"

 

This brings up the subject of the risk/benefit ratio regarding getting or not getting a vaccine... a vaccine that has been shown to have a potentially high risk of harm, acutely or in the future. In-other-word, why would healthy people in the "under 20 to 69" age group get a vaccine for something that has such a high survival rate, and that rate is without treatment for the tiny percentage that would not survive without that treatment. With that treatment (if started within 5 days of the onset of symptoms) those survival rates increase to very near 100%.

So when you weigh the risk/benefit of a vaccine that doesn't even prevent the contagious aspect of the virus, and your risk of injury from the vaccine is way higher than the risk of injury from the infection, why in heaven's name would you get a risky vaccination? Answer: Fear. But an unwarranted fear. And a fear instilled in you courtesy of those who stand to make trillions of dollars from never-ending vaccines. Think about it. Don't be a revenue generating unit.

P.S. The survival rate is the corollary of the fatality rate. And again, the fatality rate reporting was presented in such a way as to show a falsely high fatality rate. The below "hot mic" recording from the White House is from back in late April of last year. I read the USC report it referenced. It took into consideration antibody testing, which shows if a person had already had the infection. But since then, no mention of stats using antibody testing, just PCR testing to determine the number of "cases" (which is another part of the scam). Yes, of course this is suspicious behavior, obviously done to create a falsely high fatality rate – death being the ultimate fear – which will motivate the highest amount of people to get what is in reality a potentially injurious experimental vaccine (and one that is not needed). So, done to present a false risk/benefit ratio. Do you like being scammed?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_lWeHPtCq8
(If this video was deleted from Youtube let me know, and I will replace it.)

P.P.S. People who say there are no "excess deaths" year over year when looking at the period February to December 2020 are almost correct. There have actually been some spikes in the death rate but not due to direct deaths caused by the infection. Increases in: suicides, vehicular homicides due to increases in drunk driving, cardiovascular deaths due to people not going to the hospital when they should have but didn't due to fear of infection, and unnecessary deaths from people being put on ventilators when they didn't require intubation where CPAP or BIPAP were called for, and unnecessary deaths due to overdoses in some Hydroxychloroquine treatments. All these played a role in a slight increase in "excess deaths". But even so, we're not seeing an "excess death" rate that correlates with what we're being told as far as how deadly this outbreak is. But try telling people this was actually no more deadly than a bad flu season and watch heads explode due to the programming they've received from mainstream media and public health officials who are going along with the "pharma" narrative for reasons of money.

More facts here.

---

 

Flu Cases Being Counted as Covid Cases

 

Back in September I predicted this was going to happen, and it did. All the scare tactics, the mask mandates, the push for "social distancing", the inflated Covid death figures were all done to create a demand for highly profitable vaccines. And to keep that demand going strong, the outbreak has to be kept going, even after it is over (and make no mistake about it, it's over). So I knew this was a tactic that would be used (since there's no problem with fudging numbers).

---

 

Johns Hopkins scientist: ‘A medical certainty’ Pfizer vaccine caused death of Florida doctor

January 14, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) — The Florida Health Department and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are investigating the death of a Florida doctor who died January 3rd from an autoimmune disorder he developed on Dec. 21, three days after receiving Pfizer’s COVID vaccine.

As The Defender reported last week, Heidi Neckelmann, the wife of Dr. Gregory Michael, said that in her mind, her 56-year-old husband’s death was “100% linked” to the vaccine.

Now at least one doctor has come forward publicly to say he also believes the vaccine caused Michael to develop acute idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), the disorder that killed him.

According to the New York Times:

“Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at Johns Hopkins University, who was not involved in Dr. Michael’s care, said that based on Ms. Neckelmann’s description, ‘I think it is a medical certainty that the vaccine was related.’ Dr. Spivak, an emeritus professor of medicine, added, ‘It happened, and it could happen again.’”

Spivak told the Times he based his reasoning on the fact that Michael’s disorder came on quickly after the shot, and “was so severe that it made his platelet count ‘rocket’ down.”

Spivak also offered two other reasons to back up his theory. One, the fact that Michael was healthier and younger than most people who develop chronic forms of ITP. And two, the fact that about 70% of people who develop ITP are women.

As Spivak told the Times: “A sudden case in a man, especially a relatively young, healthy one, suggests a recent trigger.”

Pfizer said it is also investigating Michael’s death, though the drugmaker told multiple news outlets it doesn’t “believe at this time that there is any direct connection to the vaccine.”

Shortly after the first reports surfaced of Michael’s death, Pfizer told USA Today:

“There is no indication — either from large clinical trials or among people who have received the vaccine since the government authorized its use last month — that it could be connected to thrombocytopenia.”

But, as Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN, president of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), said last week, Pfizer’s statement doesn’t square with the facts — because ITP is a well-known adverse event associated with vaccinations.

The vaccine most often implicated in ITP is the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, where the disease occurs in approximately 1 in every 25,000 doses of the vaccine, Redwood said.

ITP has also been associated with hepatitis A and B virus (HBV), human papilloma virus (HPV), varicella-zoster, diphteria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTap), polio and pneumococcus vaccines.

According to Redwood, a study comparing adverse effects following influenza vaccination found that ITP was the third most common autoimmune condition (after Guillain Barre and rheumatoid arthritis).

Redwood also pointed out that ITP has been reported to occur following exposure to drugs containing polyethylene glycol (PEG), a compound used in both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.

“Considering that according to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, cases of ITP have been compensated in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), it is completely disingenuous for vaccine manufacturers to deny this risk,” Redwood said.

 

[The point of this story is to demonstrate the indifference and the misinformation on the part of the Pfizer pharmaceutical company, and to remind people that even if it is found that Dr. Michael's death was as a direct result of the vaccine, his widow cannot sue Pfizer because they and the other pharma companies got Congress to pass a law that protects them from any lawsuits, and injured people and the families of those killed by vaccines can only sue via the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, and even there there's a cap on how much the award can be, and that money is paid by the U.S. taxpayers. Such is the power of the pharma industry... an industry not interested in helping anyone but themselves, to as much profit as possible, even if it means that people will die. And if you think "Well some must die so that others may live, think again.]

 

---

 

MEDICAL SHOCKER: Scientists at Sloan Kettering discover mRNA inactivates tumor-suppressing proteins, meaning it can promote cancer

There's a secret layer of information in your cells called messenger RNA, that's located between DNA and proteins, that serves as a critical link. Now, in a medical shocker to the whole world of vaccine philosophy, scientists at Sloan Kettering found that mRNA itself carries cancer CAUSING changes – changes that genetic tests don't even analyze, flying completely under the radar of oncologists across the globe. So now, it's time for independent laboratories that are not vaccine manufacturers (or hired by them) to run diagnostic testing on the Covid vaccine series and find out if these are cancer-driving inoculations that, once the series is complete, will cause cancer tumors in the vaccinated masses who have all rushed out to get the jab out of fear and propaganda influence. Welcome to the world of experimental and dirty vaccines known as mRNA "technology."

Previously unknown cancer driving messengers are hiding in RNA, not DNA

This mind-blowing discovery should be published on every medical news site, newspaper, television news broadcast and on the CDC website, but unless you are reading this article and use DuckDuckGo as your search engine, you probably wouldn't ever see it. That's because Google is in on the fix, with Big Pharma and the VIC – the vaccine industrial complex. So here's a more in-depth explanation of what we're looking at, for real, regarding mRNA and vaccines. The information carrying molecule, messenger RNA, can instruct human cells ultimately in the same way as cancer drivers, playing a major role in causing cancer to thrive while inactivating natural tumor-suppressing proteins the human body creates to save you from cancer. This is the complete opposite of what the CDC and the vaccine manufactures are telling everyone right now about the Covid vaccines, and this is based on clinical research by molecular biologists at the Sloan Kettering Institute. Even sequencing the DNA in cancer cells doesn't reveal these changes, that's how sneaky the vaccines are. It's like a Trojan horse that tells your cells to allow these changes to be made, as if they were safe, but they're not. All assumptions being made about mRNA being 'safe' right now have been completely turned 180 degrees with this research. Consider this very carefully if you have not yet been vaccinated with mRNA technology, and you may want to 'lawyer-up' if you already got the jabs.

After your Covid vaccination, RNA is transported out of your cell's nucleus, and will no longer function properly as a cancer tumor suppressor

Bill Gates and the Vaccine Industrial Complex are very sinister, as we all know, but to create vaccines that truncate (disable by cutting short) cancer tumor suppressors, and destroy the human body's ability to protect against cancer, well, that's just complete insanity. Truncated tumor-suppressor proteins are similar to the DNA mutations that cause cancer cells to mutate and multiply uncontrollably. Will America see cancer cases skyrocket over the next few years due to Covid vaccines? Only time will tell, but right now, science is revealing that it's likely. Pay close attention. Therefore, anyone who is scared to death of the Covid vaccines is pro-science rather than anti-science, because the science shows the mRNA technology is very dangerous, especially concerning proteins that fuel cancer tumors. Let's say that again: Science shows mRNA technology can fuel cancer tumor growth.

Substantial amount of people with blood cancer have the SAME inactivation of tumor-suppressor genes at the mRNA level

Scientists also discovered that a substantial amount of people with blood cancer, a.k.a. chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), have the same exact inactivation of tumor-suppressor genes at the mRNA level. In fact, the mRNA changes they detected could possibly account for the missing DNA mutations, and that spells out bad news for everyone who thinks the Covid vaccine series is "safe and effective." It's effective alright, at suppressing anti-cancer proteins, one might conclude. Even if just half (partial truncation) mRNA changes in human cells take place, it's enough to "completely override the function of the normal versions that are present," according to the Sloan Kettering team of scientists. These changes can also apply to 100 different genes at the same time, so the changes can add up quickly and cause horrific health repercussions.

Of course, mainstream media will dismiss any connections made by these discoveries, but they're paid to support the pharma narrative, so that's not surprising at all. It is important to note that mRNA changes, according to researchers, are not limited to blood cancer, but have been linked to acute lymphatic cancer and breast cancer. Could this mean we're looking at a new population control mechanism hidden in messenger RNA? About 20,000 people in the US develop "CLL" chronic lympthocytic leukemia each year. How many will quietly begin developing it now, and then have it suddenly "show up" five years from now? Symptoms include fatigue, enlarged lymph nodes, and night sweats. Did you get mRNA vaccinated and experience those symptoms already? Are those symptoms on the warning label – the vaccine insert? Did you read them? There's only one "treatment" offered right now for CLL by the Pharma Industrial Complex, and that's stem cell bone marrow transplantation. Oh, but it's only recommended if your CLL is "likely" to advance. Do your mRNA vaccines now qualify you as "likely" to advance with CLL? Tune your internet dial to Vaccines.news for updates on human challenge trials for people interested in suppressing genes that fight cancer.

 

Side Note about Vaccines and Cancer Back in 2009, the Swine Flu vaccine was given to a lot of people, but many did not get it. Ten years later there was data to show that those who got the vaccine were more predisposed to getting cancer. In-other-word, their odds for getting cancer were higher than the national average. But while this scenario is bad for the people, it's great for those who profit from increased ill health. And since the pharma industry has liability protection for their vaccines, the fact that their vaccines increase ill health in the future is a win-win-lose (the first win is pharma, the second win is the medical industry, the lose is obvious the people).

 

Sources for this article include: mskcc.org  vaccines.news  mskcc.org

 

---

 

The PCR Test Was Never Intended
to be used the Way it's Being Used

 

The inventor of the PCR test has said so himself. But this article is about how it is being used.

The Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test was adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO) on January 23, 2020 as a means of detecting the SARS-COV-2 virus, following the recommendations of a virology research group (based at Charité University Hospital, Berlin) supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (For further details, see the Drosten Study)

Exactly one year later on January 20th, 2021, the WHO issues a retraction of sorts. They don’t say “We made a mistake”. The retraction is carefully worded. While the WHO does not deny the validity of their misleading January 2020 guidelines, they nonetheless recommend “re-testing” if you get a positive result.

The contentious issue pertains to the number of amplification threshold cycles. According to Pieter Borger, et al:

The WHO tacitly admits one year later that all PCR tests conducted at a 35 cycle amplification threshold or higher are invalid. But that is what they recommended in January 2020, in consultation with the virology team at Charité Hospital in Berlin.

If the test is conducted at a 35 threshold or above (which was recommended by the WHO), segments of the SARS-CoV-2 virus cannot be detected, which means that all the so-called confirmed “positive cases” tabulated in the course of the last 14 months are invalid.

According to Pieter Borger, Bobby Rajesh Malhotra, Michael Yeadon, et al, the >35 threshold has been the norm “in most laboratories in Europe and the US”.

From the outset, the PCR test has routinely been applied at an amplification threshold of 35 or higher, following the January 2020 recommendations of the WHO. What this means is that the PCR methodology as applied worldwide has, in the course of the last 12-14 months, led to the compilation of faulty and misleading Covid statistics.

And these are the statistics which are used to measure the progression of the so-called “pandemic”. Above an amplification cycle of 35 or higher, the test will not detect the virus. Therefore, the official “covid numbers” are meaningless.

It follows that there is no scientific basis for confirming the existence of a pandemic; an outbreak of a viral infection, yes, but we get them annually, and we have never reacted the way we did to this virus. According to scientific opinion:

Don't base your opinions on invalid data. It's best to wonder if there's a hidden agenda going on... one that involves trillions of dollars. Think twice before getting vaccinated (since they are, in reality, not necessary, and are damaging).

For more PCR test info, see here, but first, read the short piece at the very bottom of this page.

 

---

 

The Vaccines are Causing Many Deaths,
and the Vaccines are Not Necessary

A medical doctor testified before a Texas State Senate hearing on vaccine safety. Some very sobering facts. But what's always left out when making the points he makes is, "...and besides, this vaccine isn't warranted or necessary, and here are the facts that support that...". Without this aspect of the story, people can think, "It's horrible that thousands are dying from these vaccines, but the vaccines save many millions of lives." If that were true, it negates everything the doctor said during his testimony... but it's not true. Other articles on this page make that clear. But here's the doctor's testimony.

 

---

 

Probably the Most Important Question to Wonder About

 

Why did the FDA grant an Emergency Use Authorization for the use of these new Covid-19 mRNA vaccines if:

The risk/benefit ratio clearly favors not authorizing the vaccines, and yet they remain and will soon receive full approval. Hmmm. And the drugs that have been around for a long time and have been proven to be safe and are being used to treat the Covid infections and have been found to be highly effective are not being given Emergency Use Authorization to be used "off label". Hmmm. Could there be some corruption at the FDA courtesy of the pharmaceutical industry? It's happened before (the "revolving door" between pharma companies and FDA).

Bottom line: The risk/benefit ratio clearly suggests that the vast majority of people would be better off getting the virus than getting the vaccine. But the fear of death from Covid is what's been pounded into our heads, not the fear of injury or death from the vaccines, which is the reality. And this is because of the big money that's to be made from vaccine sales.

To hear about the adverse events reported (non-publicly) for the Covid-19 vaccines, see here.

 

---