last updated: 8 January 2021
We focussed too much on the novel coronavirus
and lost sight of everything else.
Being obsessed about avoiding death,
we lose our lives.
SARS-COV-2 is a virus many of us carry without any symptoms.
Covid-19 is a respiratory disease caused by the SARS-COV-2 virus
This whole legal chapter has now moved to:
The video links below will be left here for your convenience.
Why Did We Think We Need To Stop The Virus?
updated: 27 December
According to the latest immunological studies, the overall lethality of Covid-19 (IFR) is about 0.1% to 0.3% and thus in the range of a severe influenza (flu). In most places, the risk of death for the general population of school and working age is in the range of a daily car ride to work.
Up to 80% of all test-positive persons remain symptom-free.
Even among 70-79 year olds, about 60% remain symptom-free.
About 95% of all people develop at most moderate symptoms.
The Mail Online published statistics and facts on 20 November (updated 23 Nov) CLEARLY showing that there is nothing justifying a lockdown.
All infectious diseases in 2020 have DRAMATICALLY DECREASED
in the UK (see chapter Covid deaths & Statistics below)
“COVID-19 Study of Almost Ten Million Finds No Evidence of Asymptomatic Spread” [20 December]
Not a single transmission of Coronavirus from a person without symptoms. The research paper also indicates that “virulence of SARS-CoV-2 virus may be weakening over time”.
“If asymptomatic transmission is not happening,… then all of the current lock-down regulations, mask wearing requirements and social distancing rules/decrees are based on a complete fallacy of false assumptions.”
Dr. Mike Yeadon wrote “What SAGE Got Wrong” [21 October]
Dr. Tom Cowan discovered an astonishing research article by the CDC by a group of about 20 virologists from June 2020. He published his analysis of this article on sott.net on 15 October. He writes:
“the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this “new coronavirus” is not infectious to human beings.”
“These virologists, published by the CDC, performed a clear proof, on their terms, showing that the SARS-CoV- 2 virus is harmless to human beings. That is the only possible conclusion, but, unfortunately, this result is not even mentioned in their conclusion.“
20 virologists find that the SARS-CoV- 2 virus is harmless to human beings
Humans have evolved with viruses and have more viruses in us than body cells. The dance between our immune system and the virus usually ends with our immune system learning a new skill, getting more resilient and long term protection – and the virus is retreating and mutating.
Farr’s Law of Epidemics states that epidemics tend to rise and fall in a roughly symmetrical pattern or bell-shaped curve.
“Expansion begins exponentially but fades quickly after about eight weeks,” Professor Yitzhak Ben Israel
Here is a very good video, explaininng Science, Logic and Data from September 2020.
Neil Ferguson, mathematical biology professor at Imperial College London, has a track record of wrong pred. ictions. His 2001 model of mad cow disease predicted fatalities up to 150,000 deaths in England, when in fact only 177 people died until 2020 1, but 6 million cows and sheep were culled.
2005 he said: “up to 200 million people could be killed by the bird flu“ Reality check: less than 200 died.
Dr. Paul Offit, one of the leading proponents of vaccination (the man who infamously stated that babies can safely receive 100,000 vaccines at once) posted a statement on his Facebook page regarding this matter. His message is calm, rational, and reasonable:
“Which will do more harm, the virus or the fear of the virus? Why are we so scared of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19? People are usually scared of viruses for three reasons:
One: the virus causes gruesome, disfiguring, permanent symptoms. Smallpox, for example, not only caused life-long facial scarring, it also was a frequent cause of blindness in those who survived.
Two: the virus has a predilection for children. Polio paralyzed tens of thousands of young children every year until a vaccine finally eliminated the disease from the United States.
Three: the virus is likely to kill you. Rabies kills virtually 100 percent of people who develop symptoms after a bite from a rabid animal.
The novel coronavirus currently circulating in the United States–the one that has caused us to shut down schools, restaurants, sporting events, and virtually every aspect of our culture–falls into none of these categories.”
The WORLD DOCTORS ALLIANCE wrote an “Open letter to governments and citizens of the world” with regularly updated information and a VERY good, most coherent summing up of the covid situation.
Coronaviruses Are Seasonal
Coronaviruses are seasonal just like the flu, peaking January to March in the northern hemisphere [see “Human coronavirus circulation in the United States 2014-2017” and the Glasgow study 2005-2013.
Viruses stay a few weeks before they mutate and disappear and natural herd immunity is achieved.
Covid-19 may be new, but it is still part of the coronavirus family.
So you can relax and stop worrying: coronaviruses are not more dangerous than the flu: the infection rate and mortality are about the same or less. And by now we know how to treat coronavirus.
Here is a good video, explaininng Science, Logic and Data.
Coronaviruses mutate fast. SARS-CoV-2 lineages tracing in over 80 countries shows, that after six months the original Wuhan virus has mutated into 100 lines and gets less virulent. According to Johannes Kreis, the original virus has disappeared by now.
Different seasons for different viruses – see table on the right.
Seasonal variations in frequency of selected upper respiratory tract infection pathogens.
PIV = parainfluenza virus; RSV = respiratory syncytial virus; MPV = metapneumovirus; Group A Strept = group A streptococcus.
Another study in Glasgow / UK over a period of nine years found a similar pattern of coronaviruses peaking from January to March
“We analyzed diagnostic data from 44,230 cases of respiratory illness that were tested for 11 taxonomically broad groups of respiratory viruses over 9 y… including CoV = human coronaviruses (229E, NL63, HKU1)”
The three known groups of coronavirus are associated with a variety of diseases of humans and domestic animals (for example, cattle, pigs, cats, dogs, rodents, and birds), including gastroenteritis and upper and lower respiratory tract disease. Known coronaviruses include human Coronavirus 229E (HCoV-229E), canine coronavirus (CCoV), feline infectious peritonitis virus (FIPV), porcine transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV), porcine epidemic diarrhea virus (PEDV), human coronavirus OC43 (HCoV-OC43), bovine coronavirus (BCoV), porcine hemagglutinating encephalomyelitis virus (HEV), rat sialodacryoadenitis virus (SDAV), mouse hepatitis virus (MHV), turkey coronavirus (TCoV), and avian infectious bronchitis virus (IBV-Avian)
[source: Coronavirus isolated from humans, US patent May 2007]
Ventilators: Wrong and Deadly
Did we need more ventilators to treat covid patients?
The UK government was repeating the slogan “we need more ventilators!” and rush-ordered them. The medical and research community should have known what was killing people with SARS in 2003. It wasn’t viral pneumonia. It was their own immune systems in overdrive in a so-called “cytokine storm” that can be more deadly than the virus itself. [source ]
A study published in JAMA April 22 describing the outcomes for 5,700 patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the New York City area reported:
“Mortality rates for those who received mechanical ventilationhttps://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/05/06/adverse-effects-of-mechanical-ventilation.aspx
in the 18-to-65 and older-than-65 age groups were 76.4% and 97.2%, respectively.
Mortality rates for those in the 18-to-65 and older-than-65 age groups who did not receive mechanical ventilation were 19.8% and 26.6%, respectively. There were no deaths in the younger-than-18 age group.”
“Mortality rate for those who received mechanical ventilation in the older-than-65 age group was 97.2%”
People are four times more likely to survive
WITHOUT a ventilator
The cytokine storm needs to be addressed. Not the virus. Yet all the focus was on anti-viral medications that would do nothing to address the immune system dysfunction.
Neither the “Health” Ministry, not the media were telling the public anything about the immune system – it was all about “the virus” and “there is no treatment” and “only a vaccine can help”; none of this is true.
By March 2020, we had evidence, that high doses of Vitamin C could help coronavirus patients in Wuhan and Shanghai [see also http://orthomolecular.org/resources/omns/v16n14.shtml and HERE
Lockdown Loneliness & Isolation
“Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or other physical impairment” [WHO constitution, 1948]
“Social relationships, or the relative lack thereof, constitute a major risk factor for health—rivaling the effect of well established health risk factors such as cigarette smoking, blood pressure, blood lipids, obesity and physical activity”
“social relationships influence the health outcomes of adults and should take social relationships as seriously as other risk factors that affect mortality, the researchers conclude.” [Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review]
“There is robust evidence that social isolation and loneliness significantly increase risk for premature mortality, and the magnitude of the risk exceeds that of many leading health indicators,”
“Loneliness and social isolation are twice as harmful to physical and mental health as obesity”
Loneliness contributes to higher rates of heart disease, cancer, high blood pressure, diabetes, infection, anxiety, depression, insomnia, addiction and suicide.
Isolating old people from their friends, families, children and grand children is heartless and cruel. No soldier in combat will be left alone to die by his comrades – but we let our old people die without their loved ones around.
Anxiety from reactions to COVID-19 will destroy at least seven times more years of life than can be saved by lockdowns.
The study, conducted by Just Facts, computed based on a broad array of scientific data that stress is one of the deadliest health hazards in the world, and stay-at-home orders, business shutdowns, media frenzy, as well as legitimate concerns about the virus can ultimately cost more lives than lockdowns can save.
“By choosing to lockdown, policymakers are choosing the greater of two evils, not the lesser.”
“Frequent in-person connections were associated with lower depression and loneliness; frequent remote connections were not. Conclusions: Depression and loneliness were elevated during the early US COVID-19 response. Those who maintained frequent in-person, but not remote, social and sexual connections had better mental health outcomes.” [US lockdown study April 2020]
Study “Social regulation of gene expression in human leukocytes” “These data provide the first indication that human genome-wide transcriptional activity is altered in association with a social epidemiological risk factor.
Impaired transcription of glucocorticoid response genes and increased activity of pro-inflammatory transcription control pathways provide a functional genomic explanation for elevated risk of inflammatory disease in individuals who experience chronically high levels of subjective social isolation.”
“High subjective social isolation is associated with a statistically significant net reduction in the number of expressed genes (131 down-regulated versus 78 up-regulated, p value by exact binomial test).”
Report 10 Sept: COVID-19 Pandemic Has Decimated Mental Health
53% of American adults said their mental health “has been negatively impacted due to worry and stress over the coronavirus”
40.9% of respondents reported anxiety, depression or symptoms of trauma- and stressor-related disorder relating to the pandemic.
36% report having trouble sleeping, 32% have trouble eating, 12% report increased alcohol consumption and/or substance use and 12% report worsening of chronic health conditions due to worry and stress.
13.3% of American adults reported new or increased substance use as a way to manage stress, and 10.7% of adults said they’d seriously contemplated suicide in the past 30 days.
Unpaid caregivers for adults had the highest rate of suicidal ideation at 30.7%, followed by young adults, age 18 to 24 (25.5%) and essential workers (21.7%)
Those faring the worst are people sheltering in place, 47% of whom report negative health effects, compared to 37% of those not sheltering in place.
“More than 1 in 3 adults in the U.S. have reported symptoms of anxiety or depressive disorder during the pandemic (weekly average for May: 34.5%; weekly average for June: 36.5%; weekly average for July: 40.1%).” For comparison, from January to June 2019, the rate of anxiety or depressive disorder was 11%.
The week of April 20, which, looking back, coincided with the peak of COVID-19 deaths in the U.S., suicides exceeded COVID-19 deaths in Tennessee.
At the peak of COVID-19,
suicides exceeded COVID-19 deaths
in Tennessee / US
10.7% of US adults said they’d seriously contemplated suicide (July)
Staying at home, using zoom and ordering on-line orders is an unhealthy form of torture
These government instructions led to an increase of time spent in front of computer and TV screens, including for children. This has a negative effect on healthy sleep, eye sight and healthy child development.
The increased exposure to mass media manipulation increases fear and stress, reduces creativity and phantasy, resulting in apathy.
“no hope, no future” – passive giving up people feeling victimised…
We are coaxed to turn into “zoombies”.
On top of the negative screen impact on health, this cyber time is lost for a REAL experience of nature and other people.
On-line shopping has skyrocket, and amazon and other big tax dodging companies’ make enormous profits – while the local High Streets and small business are facing a financial abyss.
The BBC launched the Loneliness Experiment on Valentine’s Day 2018 with 55,000 people from around the world completing the survey.
Find ‘Health Studies’ on ‘Collateral Global’ collateralglobal.org global repository for research into collateral effects of the covid-19 lockdown measures
The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating.and the alleged infection rates were already dropping again.
Suicides due to lockdown loneliness are mentioned in the chapter ‘Lockdown Isolation & Loneliness’ above.
The majority of “covid deaths” were actually “lockdown deaths”
a shocking analysis Lockdown Deaths, Not Covid Deaths by the UK Column revealed on 14 July.
The UK’s largest domestic abuse charity, Refuge, has reported a 700% increase in calls to its helpline in a single day
“government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of COVID-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality.”
[A country level analysis , published in The Lancet on 21 July]
“The lockdown regime was detrimental to the health of the very demographic it was supposedly designed to ‘keep safe.”
Whether by design or criminal neglect, lockdown policy has actively targeted the most vulnerable, singling them out for unusual and cruel treatment. Premature mortality is the inevitable and obvious result.”
We know that it is likely that SARS-CoV-2 had already spread around the world before any lockdowns were initiated. We also know that the virus lay virtually dormant and only decided to cause statistically significant mortality after the lockdowns began. Once the WHO identified the “novel” virus and declared a global pandemic, it was the ensuing Lockdown regimes which prompted unseasonable spikes in mortality.
The lockdown regime was detrimental to the health of the very demographic it was supposedly designed to “keep safe.”
The vast majority of those claimed coronavirus deaths were not related to COVID-19. We have clear evidence that the Lockdown regime has caused, and will continue to cause, ill health and death.
[from Lockdown Deaths, Not Covid Deaths | UK Column]
Statistics world wide show a precise and exact correlation between the start of lockdowns and significant rises in overall mortality
If health authorities vastly underestimated the prevalence of the virus at the beginning of the pandemic, why did the virus nevertheless wait until lockdowns were imposed to suddenly start killing at levels which exceeded normal deaths?
Registered deaths in England and Wales have currently fallen below the five-year average for the last five weeks.
Over this same period there have been over 700 excess deaths per week, or 3,799 fatalities in total, occurring at home. only 179 of those deaths have Covid-19 mentioned on their certificate.
This represents a huge number of unexplained – and potentially avoidable deaths – particularly if they represent individuals deterred from visiting hospitals.’ 3,799 is almost 50 per cent higher than the number of people who have sadly lost their lives (2,582) to coronavirus in any setting over the same period.
This suggests that it is possible that more people are dying from direct or indirect effects of Covid-19 prevention rather than the virus itself. Dr Waqar Rashid in the Spectator, 30 July 2020
“Extra 10,000 dementia deaths in England and Wales in April amid reduced medical care and family visits” repots The Guardian; “There were 83% more deaths from dementia than usual in April… a reduction in essential medical care and family visits were taking a devastating toll.”
The British Medical Journal reports 20 000 unexplained deaths in senior care facilities of elderly people in the UK in April and May, ON TOP OF the 10 000 deaths labelled with coronavirus.
Clearly, the aim to “protect the vulnerable and over 70s” was not achieved.
“As national restrictions were imposed, experts from the Department of Health, the Office of National Statistics (ONS), the government’s Actuary Department and the Home Office forecast the collateral damage from delays to healthcare and the effects of recession arising from the pandemic response.
It estimated that in a reasonable worst case scenario, around 50,000 people would die from coronavirus in the first six months of the pandemic, with mitigation measures in place.
The report published in April calculated that up to 25,000 could die from delays to treatment in the same period and a further 185,000 in the medium to long term – amounting to nearly one million years of life lost.” From Telegraph.co.uk 19 July and 20 July on Metro.co.uk
Dr. Kendrick in an interview: “I have looked at the impact of social upheaval in the post-Soviet Union countries in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Russia had five million excess deaths in that period due to economic problems. That is how powerful the effects can be. We are going to see the downsides of lockdown policies around the world.
South Africa is already bursting at the seams. We have to look at this with a global perspective. This is going to be extremely costly and destructive of huge sections of the population.“
Hospitals became essentially ‘covid only’ centres vast numbers of patients were wilfully neglected, resulting in many thousands of unnecessary deaths.
Staying home leads to “sunshine” vitamin D deficiency,
increasing chances of getting asthma & wheezing, influenza, tuberculosis, depression, schizophrenia, high blood pressure & coronary heart disease, type 1 diabetes, osteoporosis, rickets, muscle weakness & aches, Crohn’s Disease, multiple Sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and cancer.
The UK government caused avoidable illness and deaths by instructing people to stay home.
Conclusion of the German Interior Ministry Crisis Management KM4
“It’s classified content shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that in fact the population was deliberately driven to panic by politicians and mainstream media.” [Dr. Reiner Fuellmich in ‘Crimes against Humanity‘]
“False Alarm” (7 May 2020)
- The information about the dangers is incomplete and only deal with a narrow segment of the danger’s complexity. Without a proper assessment of the situation, appropriate measures cannot be efficient. Politicians had little chance to make appropriate decisions
- There is no evidence that this is more than a false alarm. There has been no increased danger for the population. Most people dying would have died anyway later this year. The danger of Covid-19 has been exaggerated. It is likely we have a global false alarm situation. This conclusion was checked by KM4 and is in alliance with the data provided by RKI [Robert Koch Institut].
- The crisis management did not have tools to stop and revoke the state of emergency when it became clear, that the damage of the emergency procedures would be bigger than their benefit.
- The collective damage is already higher than the benefit, which is reflected in the casualties outnumbering the virus deaths
- The damage caused by the corona crisis for the whole society is already gigantic; most of it will show in the near and far future; we cannot stop it any more, but may be able to limit it.
- The resilience of complex and interdependent essential infrastructures of our society has deteriorated, leaving our society more vulnerable to future crises.
- The state implemented protection measures have lost any sense by now, but are still in place, and should be lifted ASAP to prevent additional deaths and to stabilise the complex interdependent critical infrastructures.
- The incompetence and mistakes of the crisis management with inconsistent and contradicting information have caused a disinformation of the population, and might be perceived as not trustworthy.
3. The crisis management did not have tools to stop and revoke the state of emergency
when it became clear, that the damage
of the emergency procedures
would be bigger than their benefit.
[the above text is a shortened translated summary of the German summary of the crisis analysis] – here is an article in English.
The analysis results were too embarrassing for the government – it needed a whistleblower to publish it. The 93 page German original is here.
The situation in Britain is very similar to the findings of this analysis.
Professor Haditsch, Austria, said the following on 20 June
at the ACU (Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee):
“It should also become visible for all,
- that the German health care system has never even been close to running the risk of decompensating, i.e. being overburdened;
- that measurement figures, such as the doubling rate and this dreadful number “R 0”, had the primary purpose of creating fear and putting pressure on the population, and were communicated in an incomplete and manipulative way for lack of reference to the number of tests carried out;
- that false and untrustworthy fatality figures have been misused for intimidation purposes;
- that the number of cases was already significantly declining well before the lockdown;
- that a general mask-wearing obligation ordered 4 weeks later, I repeat 4 weeks later, was factually unfounded, unlawful and psycho-socially irresponsible;
- that the incorrigible sticking to measures and already refuted statements, i.e. against better knowledge and proven evidence, is a criminal offence in this context; and
- that ultimately a drastic change in the party-political decision-making structures is overdue because this is the only way to reliably prevent this anti-democratic approach from being continued or repeated.”
PCR Test for “Cases”
last updated: 30 December 2020
Polymearase Chain Reaction (PCR) test Summary:
The pcr tests for fragments of the SARS-COV-2 virus,
NOT for the Covid-19 disease.
Healthy people testing “positive” are not “cases”. A medical “case” has to be ill
or show symptoms needing hospital admission.
To get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at no more than 17 amplification cycles.
Patients cannot be contagious above 25 cycles.
The maximum reasonably reliable Ct value is 30 cycles.
Above 35 cycles, 97% false positives can be expected.
The UK NHS is using up to 45 amplification cycles.
In an independent peer review, 22 international scientists found ten fatal problems with the Corman-Drosten paper the PCR test is based on.
The PCR test is useless as a specific diagnostic tool
Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is a method widely used to rapidly make millions to billions of copies of a specific DNA sample, allowing scientists to take a very small sample of DNA and amplify it to a large enough amount to study in detail.
A limitation of PCR is that even the smallest amount of contaminating DNA can be amplified, resulting in misleading or ambiguous results.
According to an April 2020 study in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at no more than 17 amplification cycles.
“The threshold value cutoff for the CDC’s PCR test is 40 cycles [of amplifications], a value that many medical experts believe returns false positives, as fragments of a killed virus may be picked up….
What the Cycle threshold [Ct] cutoff value should be varies in discussions among the scientific community, but generally ranges between 25 and 30 with agreement that patients cannot be contagious above these numbers.“
Another viral culture study… reported that patients with threshold values at 34 or above did not “excrete infectious viral particles.”
““We know that after about one week of infection from SARS-CoV-2, people are no longer infectious to others, but they still will be positive with PCR testing because they’ll still have bits of the virus within their body.”
[from: COVID Test Scam: Cycle Threshold Values Being Deliberately Omitted]
The NHS / UK is using 45 cycle amplifications
in the PCR test:
If you want to dive deep into the science, read “PCR Amplification“
Update 28 Nov: Portuguese Court Rules PCR Tests “Unreliable” & Quarantines “Unlawful” [Nov 11]
“An appeals court in Portugal has ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2, and therefore any enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful.
Further, the ruling suggested that any forced quarantine applied to healthy people could be a violation of their fundamental right to liberty.“
“Most importantly, the judges ruled that a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.”
“The ruling goes on to conclude that, based on the science they read, any PCR test using over 25 cycles is totally unreliable.”
THIS court ruling, based on THIS STUDY, has huge implications for other countries, and was ignored in the main stream media.
[Read more further down “Review report Corman-Drosten”]
More legal update info on “Can the Law Save Us?“
There is a huge difference between being infected – and being ill.
Healthy people testing positive for coronavirus should not be labelled as “cases”; a “case” has to be ill or show symptoms needing hospital admission. Calling asymptomatic people “a case”, is medically and psychologically wrong.
Testing infections in a hospital intensive care unit (ICU) brings naturally MUCH higher results than tests including the healthy population (“tier 2” in the UK). A lot of the same people are being tested once a week, such as nurses and care assistants and people going in to hospitals, so although they may have done say ‘20,000’ tests, that’s 5000 people tested four times each.
“And a word on testing: I do want to emphasize that I’m in the business of testing for Covid. I do want to emphasize that positive test results do not, underlined in neon, mean a clinical infection. It’s simply driving public hysteria and all testing should stop. Unless you’re presenting to hospital with some respiratory problem.”
[23 Nov. Dr. Roger Hodkinson, ex-president of the pathology section of the Medical Association and chairman of a bio technology company in North Carolina selling the COVID-19 test. Full audio is HERE]
What is an ANTIGEN TEST?
An antigen test is a diagnostic test that checks to see if you’re infected with the coronavirus. The test looks for proteins (antigens) in a sample taken from your nose or throat. Antigen tests are faster than PCR tests, but they have a higher risk of false positives (meaning that they’re more likely to say you have the infection when you don’t). This may also be called a rapid test or rapid diagnostic test. [from webmd.com]
Antigen testing in Liverpool has shown
that the hardest hit area only has 0.7% positives.
That is the false positive rate of the antigen test.
[M.Yeadon tweet 11 Nov]
The UK government posted the following study on 3rd of June 2020: “Impact of false-positives and false-negatives in the UK’s COVID-19 RT-PCR testing programme“:
What is the UK operational false positive rate?
“The UK operational false positive rate is unknown… An attempt has been made to estimate the likely false-positive rate of national COVID-19 testing programmes by examining data from published external quality assessments (EQAs) for RT-PCR assays for other RNA viruses carried out between 2004-2019 … giving a median false positive rate of 2.3% (interquartile range 0.8-4.0%).”
“What is the UK operational false negative rate?
The UK operational false negative rate is unknown. A recent study  combined results from seven studies… Their model suggested that in the first four days of infection (presymptomatic phase) the probability of a false negative in an infected person decreased from 100% on day 1 (i.e. a false negative was certain) to 67% on day 4.
It then decreased to 38% on day 5 (day of symptom onset) to a minimum of 20% on day 8 of infection.
The false negative rate then increased from day 9 (21%) to day 21 (66%).”
[The “Figure 3” graphic further down illustrates these findings]
Bullard et al reported that patients could not be contagious with PCR Cycle threshold Ct >25 as the virus is not detected in culture above this value.
[this means: if you don’t find a positive virus test result with 25 cycles / amplifications, there is no point increasing the cycles any further]
“The maximum reasonably reliable Ct value is 30 cycles. Above a Ct of 35 cycles, rapidly increasing numbers of
false positives must be expected.“
“only non-infectious (dead) viruses are detected with Ct values of 35.”
[CORMAN-DROSTEN REVIEW REPORT]
On 27th of November, 22 scientists published an
“External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results“
“There are ten fatal problems with the Corman-Drosten paper”
“The published RT-qPCR protocol for detection and diagnostics of 2019-nCoV and the manuscript suffer from numerous technical and scientific errors, including insufficient primer design, a problematic and insufficient RT-qPCR protocol, and the absence of an accurate test validation.
Neither the presented test nor the manuscript itself fulfils the requirements for an acceptable scientific publication.”
This has huge world wide implications, as the WHO-protocol directly derives from the Corman-Drosten paper.
“Further, serious conflicts of interest of the authors are not mentioned. Finally, the very short timescale between submission and acceptance of the publication (24 hours) signifies that a systematic peer review process was either not performed here, or of problematic poor quality.”
We provide compelling evidence of several scientific inadequacies, errors and flaws.
“Considering the scientific and methodological blemishes presented here, we are confident that the editorial board of Eurosurveillance has no other choice but to retract the publication.”
[from Review report Corman-Drosten et al. Eurosurveillance 2020, 27 November]
The CORMAN-DROSTEN REVIEW REPORT continues:
“In case of virus detection, >35 cycles only detects signals which do not correlate with infectious virus as determined by isolation in cell culture [reviewed in 2]; if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%“
“There exists no specified reason to use these extremely high concentrations of primers in this protocol. Rather, these concentrations lead to increased unspecific binding and PCR product amplification.
“The design variations will inevitably lead to results that are not even SARS CoV-2 related. Therefore, the confusing unspecific description in the Corman-Drosten paper is not suitable as a Standard Operational Protocol.
“…in nearly all test procedures worldwide, merely 2 primer matches were used instead of all three. This oversight renders the entire test-protocol useless with regards to delivering accurate test-results of real significance.
“A better primer design would have terminal primers on both ends of the viral genome. This is because the whole viral genome would be covered and three positive signals can better discriminate between a complete (and thus potentially infectious) virus and fragmented viral genomes (without infectious potency).
The CORMAN-DROSTEN REVIEW REPORT continues:
[All three primers have GC values BELOW the 40% minimum (28% 31% and 34.6%)]
“If the Tm-value is very low, as observed for all wobbly-variants of the RdRp reverse primers, the primers can bind non-specifically to several targets, decreasing specificity and increasing potential false positive results.”
A maximal Tm difference of 2° C within primer pairs was considered acceptable. Testing the primer pairs specified in the Corman-Drosten paper, we observed a difference of 10° C …
This is a very serious error and makes the protocol useless as a specific diagnostic tool.
“…the dNTPs (0.4uM) are 2x higher than recommended for a highly specific amplification“
“The design errors described here are so severe that it is highly unlikely that specific amplification of SARS-CoV-2 genetic material will occur using the protocol of the Corman-Drosten paper.“
“…the case of small fragments of qPCR (around 100bp):
It could be either 1,5% agarose gel or even an acrylamide gel.”
“The fact that these PCR products have not been validated at molecular level is another striking error of the protocol, making any test based upon it useless as a specific diagnostic tool to identify the SARS-CoV-2 virus.“
“the functionality of the published RT-PCR Test was not demonstrated with the use of a positive control (isolated SARS-CoV-2 RNA) which is an essential scientific gold standard.”
“the E gene used in RT-PCR test, as described in the Corman-Drosten paper, is not specific to SARS-CoV-2.“
“The E gene primers also detect a broad spectrum of other SARS viruses.
The genome of the coronavirus is the largest of all RNA viruses that infect humans and they all have a very similar molecular structure.
Still, SARS-CoV1 and SARS-CoV-2 have two highly specific genetic fingerprints, which set them apart from the other coronaviruses.
First, a unique fingerprint-sequence (KTFPPTEPKKDKKKK) is present in the N-protein of SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 [13,14,15]. Second, both SARS-CoV1 and SARS-CoV2 do not contain the HE protein, whereas all other coronaviruses possess this gene [13, 14].
In order to specifically detect a SARS-CoV1 and SARS-CoV-2 PCR product the above region in the N gene should have been chosen as the amplification target.
A reliable diagnostic test should focus on this specific region in the N gene as a confirmatory test. The PCR for this N gene was not further validated nor recommended as a test gene by the Drosten-Corman paper, because of being “not so sensitive” with the SARS-CoV original probe .”
“The Corman-Drosten paper does not contain this [the HE gene] negative control, nor does it contain any other negative controls. The PCR test in the Corman-Drosten paper therefore contains neither a unique positive control nor a negative control to exclude the presence of other coronaviruses. This is another major design flaw“
“There should be a Standard Operational Procedure (SOP) available, which unequivocally specifies the above parameters, so that all laboratories are able to set up the identical same test conditions. To have a validated universal SOP is essential, because it facilitates data comparison within and between countries. It is very important to specify all primer parameters unequivocally. We note that this has not been done... The protocol as described is unfortunately very vague and erroneous in its design“
“It is inevitable that this test will generate a tremendous number of so-called “false positives”.”
“The Corman-Drosten paper was not peer-reviewed“
“two authors of the Corman-Drosten paper, Christian Drosten and Chantal Reusken, are also members of the editorial board of this journal . Hence there is a severe conflict of interest” [source]
Understanding cycle threshold (Ct) in SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR: a guide for health protection teams [by gov.uk, 28 October]
“Cycle threshold (Ct) is a semi-quantitative value that can broadly categorise the concentration of viral genetic material in a patient sample following testing by RT PCR as low, medium or high –that is, it tells us approximately how much viral genetic material is in the sample.
A low Ct indicates a high concentration of viral genetic material, which is typically associated with high risk of infectivity.
A high Ct indicates a low concentration of viral genetic material which is typically associated with a lower risk of infectivity.
In the context of an upper respiratory tract sample a high Ct may also represent scenarios where a higher risk of infection remains –for example, early infection, inadequately collected or degraded sample.
The cycle threshold (Ct) can be defined as the thermal cycle number at which the fluorescent signal exceeds that of the background and thus passes the threshold for positivity (Figure 1, page 5).”
gov.uk continues: “A typical RT-PCR assay will have a maximum of 40 thermal cycles… A 3-point increase in Ct value is roughly equivalent to a 10-fold decrease in the quantity of viral genetic material [in the sample].”
Ct values cannot be directly compared between assays of different types due to variation in the sensitivity (limit of detection), chemistry of reagents, gene targets, cycle parameters, analytical interpretive methods, sample preparation and extraction techniques.
Additionally, Ct values are not provided for all SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection methods. Some commercial RT-PCR techniques are closed ‘black box’systems whereby the operator cannot observe the reaction in real-time and the result is interpreted by software into a qualitative non-interrogatable positive or negative result. [gov.uk]
“A single Ct [Cycle threshold] value in the absence of clinical context cannot be relied upon for decision making about a person’s infectivity.
There are many different SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assays/platforms in use across the UK. Ct values cannot be directly compared between assays of different types – not all laboratories use the same assay, and some may use more than one.” [gov.uk]
“Positive results with low viral load (high Ct) can be seen in the early stages of infection (before the person becomes capable of transmission of the infection) or late in infection when the risk of transmission is low (periods indicated by the dotted red line).
Recovery phase of infection with diminishing viral load.
Prolonged detection of viral genetic material that is likely to be non-infectious has been observed for SARS-CoV-2.” [gov.uk]
[bold highlighted by HealthTruth.info]
A peer reviewed article in Nature.com (20 November) looking at PCR test data from nearly 10 million residents in Wuhan city found that not a single one of those who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual tested positive
Of the 34,424 residents with a history of COVID-19, 107 individuals tested positive a second time, but none were symptomatic and none were infectious.
This research paper also indicates that “virulence of SARS-CoV-2 virus may be weakening over time“
Without asymptomatic transmissions, all of the current lock-down regulations, mask wearing requirements and social distancing rules have no scientific basis, and can be challenged in court.
[summarised by Dr. Mercola 4 Dec & The Last refuge 20 Dec]
[Read more about Natural Immunity after covid-19]
Dr Michael Yeadon @MichaelYeadon3, 21 Nov. on Twitter:
“The first time the notion of “asymptomatic transmission” was mentioned, I smelled a rat. It’s biologically implausible. Not saying it’s never happened once, but as an important contribution to transmission? No. To be a source, you need lots of virus in your airway. But once that happens, you will be symptomatic, either because the virus is injuring your lung lining (epithelium) or because you’re fighting it off (or both). You can’t be both a virulent source AND not have symptoms.
Yet it was on the basis that you often wouldn’t show symptoms yet place others at risk that MASS TESTING, all the time, in ever-increasing numbers, was commenced. Now we formally know what basic biology and immunology told us, we can HALT MASS TESTING OF THE ASYMPTOMATIC. We’ve said it for months.
Mr Hancock, stop it now.”
“Asymptomatic transmission”… To be a source, you need lots of virus in your airway.
Once that happens, you will be symptomatic.
You can’t be both a virulent source
AND not have symptoms.
[Dr Michael Yeadon]
Dr. Anthony Fauci, U.S. Director of National Institute
of Allergies and Infectious Disease: “In all the history of respiratory-borne viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is ALWAYS a symptomatic person.” – youtu.be/JIOzN03ZWXY
6 December: “All 31 Colleges of the University of Cambridge [UK], and 6 Houses of the Cambridge Theological Federation, participated in the programme. Based on these data, we did not detect any new cases of asymptomatic COVID-19 amongst 9,376 students living in College accommodation screened this week.” [source]
[10 tests were originally positive, but were all found to be “false positives” after confirmatory tests.] See table below.
this could indicate the end of the pandemic. Due to mingling and mixing at university, a healthy natural immunity is likely to have been aquired among the students.
“The PCR swabs take one or two sequences of a molecule that are invisible to the human eye and therefore need to be amplified in many cycles to make it visible. Everything over 35 cycles is, as reported by The NewYork Times and others, considered completely unreliable and scientifically unjustifiable. However, the Drosten test, as well as the WHO recommended tests that followed his example, are set to 45 cycles.”
“The test cannot distinguish inactive and reproductive matter. That means that a positive result may happen because the test detects, for example, a piece of debris, a fragment of a molecule which may signal nothing else, then that the immune system of the person tested won a battle with a common cold in the past.” [‘from Crimes against humanity‘]
CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV)
Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel
For Emergency Use Only
Instructions for Use Catalog # 2019-nCoVEUA-01
– – – Quotes from page 38 – – –
• Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms.
• The performance of this test has not been established for monitoring treatment of 2019-nCoV infection.
.• This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.
This OFF-Guardian research article COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless, digs deep into the science, and painstakingly shows why we should not use these tests or even base a lockdown decisions on them.
PCR is extremely sensitive, which means it can detect even the smallest pieces of DNA or RNA — but it cannot determine where these particles came from. None of the science teams of the relevant papers which are referred to in the context of SARS-CoV-2 for proof could confirm the electron-microscopic shots depicted in their in vitro experiments show purified viruses.
“sleek polymerase chain reaction… tells little or nothing about how a virus multiplies, which animals carry it, [or] how it makes people sick. [It is] like trying to say whether somebody has bad breath by looking at his fingerprint.”
There is no scientific proof that those RNA sequences are the causative agent of … COVID-19, and there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19.
“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms” [CDC RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel]
Many PCR tests have a “cycle quantification” (Cq) value of over 35.
If you are looking for presumed RNA viruses such as SARS-CoV-2, the RNA must be converted to complementary cDNA with the enzyme Reverse Transcriptase—hence the “RT” at the beginning of “PCR” or “qPCR.” But this transformation process is widely recognised as inefficient and variable, as the amount of DNA obtained with the same RNA base material can vary widely, even by a factor of 10.
On July 7th Politifact published a “fact check” response to this article, claiming the article is ‘inaccurate’, without contacting either OffGuardian or the authors for comment. Here is Open Letter: Refuting Politifact’s “fact check” by Torsten Engelbrecht.
A doctor reports – from jbhandleyblog.com:
During my career in family medicine, including several years as an Army physician, I have cared for patients with chickenpox, shingles, Lyme disease as well as measles, tuberculosis, malaria, and AIDS.
The “case definition” established for all of these diseases by the CDC requires the presence of signs and symptoms of that disease. Having now been privileged to care for sick patients with COVID-19, both in and out of the hospital setting, I am happy to see the number of these sick patients dwindle almost to zero in my community – while the “case numbers” for COVID-19 continue to go up.
Why is that?
In marked contrast to measles, shingles, and other infectious disease, “cases” of COVID-19 do NOT require the presence of ANY symptoms whatsoever. Health departments are encouraging everyone and anyone to come in for testing, and each positive test is reported as yet another “new” case of COVID-19!
Hence, anyone who has a positive PCR test (the nasal swab, PCR test for COVID Antigen or Nucleic Acid) or serological test (blood test for antibodies –IgG and/or IgM) would be classified as a “case” – even in the absence of symptoms.
In our hospitals at this time, there are hundreds of former nursing home residents sitting in “COVID” units who are in their usual state of good health, banned from returning to their former nursing home residences simply because they have TESTED Positive for COVID-19 during mass testing programs in the nursing homes.
The presence of a positive lab test for COVID-19 in a person who has never been sick is actually GOOD news for that person and for the rest of us.
The positive test indicates that this person has likely mounted an adequate immune response to a small dose of COVID-19 to whom he or she was exposed – naturally (hence, no need for a vaccine vs. COVID-19). John Thomas Littell, MD, Florida
Former CSO and VP, Allergy and Respiratory Research Head with Pfizer Global R&D and co-Founder of Ziarco Pharma Ltd., Dr Mike Yeadon writes:
“I have identified a serious, really a fatal flaw in the PCR test used in what is called by the UK Government the Pillar 2 screening – that is, testing many people out in their communities… the Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, misled the House of Commons and also made misleading statements”
Dr Mike Yeadon explains, that a pcr test with 0.8% false positive results means, that 89-94% of pcr “cases” are FALSE positives, as only about 0.1% of the population have coronavirus.
The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine investigates on 2nd of August: COVID cases in England aren’t rising: here’s why
Dr. Wolfgang Wodard: “How can a test that turns out positive for the many different SARS viruses of bats, dogs, tigers, lions, domestic cats and humans, which have been changing and spreading worldwide for many years, be called specific for the detection of an allegedly only four-month-old SARS-CoV-2?”
“The test seemingly also measures earlier SARS variants that are constantly altering, can change hosts quickly and are not found in virologists’ databases. However, these were and are obviously not considered to be extraordinarily dangerous.”
In the US, “the sudden jump in cases in February correlates with the emergence of test kits sent out by the CDC. Once those test kits were used up, the number of “cases” again dried up. Then, once test kits became readily available again in early April, the number of cases skyrocketed — as you’d expect. But again, this doesn’t mean the disease was spreading like wildfire….Increased Testing = Increased ‘Cases’“
The British Government ordered over three million of test kits from China in spring, and found they are not useable.
In August they called back 750 000 PCR test kits as faulty. They seem to be spending and wasting vast amounts of money towards big companies.
What are these pcr tests good for?
Despite the faults and problems of the PCR test, the UK government decided to spend more money on this project:
UPDATE 19 October: Patrick Vallance, the Chief Scientist, said: ‘At the moment we think that the epidemic is doubling roughly every seven days.”
Vallance said “If, and that’s quite a big if, but if that continues unabated… you would end up with something like 50,000 cases in the middle of October per day.”
The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine in Oxford put the doubling to the test by creating a tracker of the projection.
“At the moment there is a significant divergence in the case data”.
Did we not learn from prof Neil Ferguson to distrust mathematical projections? Still they are used to terrify us and justify lockdown.
“The COVID-19 PCR-Test – A Shot of Nanoparticles for Your Brain?” [14 Nov]:
Could it be, that the tips of the pcr test swabs contain nanoparticles, and when insterted deep through the nose to the the thin, sensitive, fragile cribriform plate (which is like an entry to the brain, perforated with fine holes), and when the long swab is turned, it depostis these near the brain? These holes are traversed by nerve cells (neurons) of the olfactory nerve.
“RNA vaccines offer many advantages. The physicians would not necessarily have to inject the vaccine. Most RNA vaccines are directly nasally administered. This seems to make sense, since many infections start in the upper mucous membranes“.
There are lots of links and references and some videos in this article, for example this: Johns Hopkins Researchers Engineer Tiny, Shape-Changing Machines That Deliver Medicine Efficiently to the GI Tract
“Inspired by a parasitic worm that digs its sharp teeth into its host’s intestines, Johns Hopkins researchers have designed tiny, star-shaped microdevices that can latch onto intestinal mucosa and release drugs into the body.”
Read on under: 6) “What Effects Can These Nanoparticles Have in Your Brain?”
Jmviverlivre asks :
People complain about the tests being excruciatingly painful with the pain lasting for days. “They are claiming the virus wrecks the nervous systems of a large percentage of people, leaving lasting neurological problems and brain damage. But I’d like to ask – is it really a virus doing that, or are the tests doing that?”
Many of the tests, (all of them that use the incredibly long “swab”) take their samples from the cribriform plate, which is a millimeter thick bone at the top of the nasal cavity that is perforated with many holes that go directly into the brain cavity. These holes are what your olefactory nerves pass through, and there are many (the bone is similar to a coarse screen)
“getting your olefactory nerves nailed by whatever is on that swab is probably what is causing people to permanently lose their sense of smell.”
Link to this chapter above: PCR Test for ‘Cases’
The R Number
Wikipedia writes: In epidemiology, the basic reproduction number, or basic reproductive number (sometimes called basic reproduction ratio or basic reproductive rate), denoted (pronounced R nought or R zero), of an infection can be thought of as the expected number of cases directly generated by one case in a population where all individuals are susceptible to infection.
…not to be confused with the effective reproduction number R (usually written [t for time], sometimes R e ), which is the number of cases generated in the current state of a population, which does not have to be the uninfected state.
is not a biological constant for a pathogen as it is also affected by other factors such as environmental conditions and the behaviour of the infected population.
values are usually estimated from mathematical models, and the estimated values are dependent on the model used and values of other parameters. … it is recommended not to use obsolete values or compare values based on different models.
does not by itself give an estimate of how fast an infection spreads in the population. [end of Wikipedia quote]
A major problem with the R number (or: R value) is, that models are based on homogeneous population behaviour and mixing.
In reality some people mix and meet others a lot, while others stay home alone.
See the SIR model in the chapter “Herd Immunity threshold HIT” in the next article “We Need To Focus On The Immune System…“
“The ‘R value’ is not a strong enough number to bear the burden of any Government policy.”
“‘R‘ is an artificial figure calculated using mathematical models which have repeatedly been found to reach wrong-headed conclusions.” [Dr. John Lee]
Researchers at the South Korean centre for disease control and prevention (CDC) say, that natural immunity is gained after infection with Covid-19.
Link to this chapter above ‘The ‘R’-Number’
Face Masks and Coronavirus
last updated: 8 January 2021
23 Dec: Study: Mask Mandates Increase Rates of COVID Compared to States with No Mask Mandates
“Protective-mask mandates aimed at combating the spread of the CCP virus that causes the disease COVID-19 appear to promote its spread, according to a report from RationalGround.com, a clearinghouse of COVID-19 data trends that’s run by a grassroots group of data analysts, computer scientists, and actuaries. Researchers examined cases covering a 229-day period running from May 1 through Dec. 15 and compared the days in which state governments had imposed mask mandates and the days when they hadn’t. “The reverse correlation between periods of masking and non-masking is remarkable,” RationalGround.com co-founder Justin Hart tweeted on Dec. 20.”
Research shows that face masks do neither protect the wearer nor others, but they may cause health problems for the wearer.
Here is a science summary: Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe
Reminder from the Sydey Morning Herald:
“Farce mask: it’s safe for only 20 minutes“
Retailers who cash in on community fears about SARS by exaggerating the health benefits of surgical masks could face fines of up to $110,000.
NSW Fair Trading Minister Reba Meagher yesterday warned that distributors and traders could be prosecuted if it was suggested the masks offered unrealistic levels of protection from the disease.
“Those masks are only effective so long as they are dry,” said Professor Yvonne Cossart of the Department of Infectious Diseases at the University of Sydney. “As soon as they become saturated with the moisture in your breath they stop doing their job and pass on the droplets.” [this article is from April 27, 2003 when the world was in a global SARS scare – just like today]
Dr. Eric Loridan, surgeon in Boulogne-sur-Mer, Pas-De-Calais, France: “If a study shows that the mask helps to limit infections, please tell me, thank you!” [source]
UPDATE 24 November: Medical Doctor Warns that “Bacterial Pneumonias Are on the Rise” from Mask Wearing:
Dr. James Meehan, MD followed by warning that mask wearing has “well-known risks that have been well-studied and they’re not being discussed in the risk analysis.”
“I’m seeing patients that have facial rashes, fungal infections, bacterial infections. Reports coming from my colleagues, all over the world, are suggesting that the bacterial pneumonias are on the rise.
“Why might that be? Because untrained members of the public are wearing medical masks, repeatedly… in a non-sterile fashion… They’re becoming contaminated. They’re pulling them off of their car seat, off the rearview mirror, out of their pocket, from their countertop, and they’re reapplying a mask that should be worn fresh and sterile every single time.”
“New research is showing that cloth masks may be increasing the aerosolization of the SARS-COV-2 virus into the environment causing an increased transmission of the disease…”Medical Doctor Warns that “Bacterial Pneumonias Are on the Rise” from Mask Wearing
“In February and March we were told not to wear masks. What changed? The science didn’t change. The politics did.”
The WHO states in “Non-pharmaceuticalpublic health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza“ 2019:
“Face masks worn by asymptomatic people are conditionally recommended in severe epidemics or pandemics, to reduce transmission in the community. Although there is no evidence that this is effective in reducing transmission, there is mechanistic plausibility for the potential effectiveness of this measure.”
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.
“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,”
“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 table above from the CDC study “Community and Close Contact…” shows, that from 154 hospital outpatients with positive covid-19 test results 70% ALWAYS wore a cloth mask – and only 4% never used one.
The control group had similar results. This is an interesting correlation raising questions about health impacts of wearing face masks – however, this does not prove any ‘causation’.
Our immune system NEEDS bacteria, viruses and germs “to practice on”. A sterile environment will turn it into an “unfit couch potato”, unfit to fight off diseases and infections.
Most facemasks contain plastic fibres, which – especially in humid conditions – release microparticles when inhaled into the lungs.
Reusable home made and cloth masks need washing; washing powder contains ingredients which may irritate the skin, and the epitelium of the liungs is very sensitive.
Wearing a face mask for a prolongued time can cause skin irritations, known as “maskne” (mask+akne) and is not recommended.
A 2015 study indicated that hypoxia inhibits T-lymphocytes (the main immune cells used to fight infections) by increasing the level of a compound called hypoxia inducible factor-1 (HIF-1). In other words, wearing a mask, which has been shown to cause hypoxia, may actually set the stage for contracting COVID-19 and make the consequences much worse.
The Times writes in Sweden claims fall in coronavirus infection rate is down to immunity: As cases surge across Europe, leading to new restrictions such as the mandatory wearing of masks in many public areas, the infection rate in Sweden is falling. The infection rate in France is more than 60 per cent higher than that of Sweden. France implemented a strict lockdown in the spring and requires masks to be worn in many public areas but has a fortnightly infection rate of 60 cases per 100,000 people.
Sweden, which decided not to implement compulsory measures at that time and which rejected the use of masks, has a rate of 37 cases per 100,000 people. The government is recording between 200 and 300 new cases a day, with deaths down to three last Friday.
Anders Tegnell, the Swedish state epidemiologist leading the response to the pandemic, has noted, based on the statistics, that infection rates have increased in countries such Spain, Belgium and France during and following the mandatory wearing of masks in many public areas. “The belief that masks can solve our problem is very dangerous,”
Wearing face masks makes sense in a dusty environment. And they catch droplets when snezing or caughing.
But wearing a mask for a long time can weakens the immune system.
Introducing face masks in the summer, and months after the infections have peaked, is compared to bringing condoms to a baby shower.
Dr. Orr’s study: “Is a mask necessary in the operating theatre?“
From March through August 1980, Dr. Orr’s surgeons and staff in the Severalls Surgical Unit in Colchester wore no masks, and compared the rate of surgical wound infections with the rate of wound infections from March through August of the previous four years.
They discovered, when nobody wore masks during surgeries, the rate of wound infections was less than half what it was when everyone wore masks. Their conclusion:
“It would appear that minimum contamination can best be achieved by not wearing a mask at all” and that wearing a mask during surgery “is a standard procedure that could be abandoned.”
When nobody wore masks during surgeries,
the rate of wound infections was less than half
what it was when everyone wore masks
Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of facemasks in surgery states: “While there is a lack of evidence supporting the effectiveness of facemasks, there is similarly a lack of evidence supporting their ineffectiveness”
“Annual NHS England expenditure on facemasks lies somewhere in the region of £2.5 to £9.1 million.”
The science: Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses systematic review and meta-analysis:
“Compared to no masks there was no reduction of influenza-like illness (ILI) cases or influenza for masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”
“There was insufficient evidence to provide a recommendation on the use of facial barriers without other measures. We found insufficient evidence for a difference between surgical masks and N95 respirators and limited evidence to support effectiveness of quarantine.”
Below, doctor Ted Noel, an anesthesiologist with 36 years experience wearing masks in operating rooms explains why masks don’t work
The Independent reported, that one of England’s most senior doctors has warned members of the public they could be putting themselves more at risk from contracting coronavirus by wearing face masks, Jenny Harries, deputy chief medical officer, said the masks could “actually trap the virus” and cause the person wearing it to breathe it in.
“For the average member of the public walking down a street, it is not a good idea” to wear a face mask in the hope of preventing infection, she added.
The experiment with petridishes shows, that mask use while talking or singing does not make much difference. Unsurprisingly, a sneeze brings out most bacteria, followed by coughing. Nothing new.
Conclusion: wearing a mask while sneezing or coughing makes sense.
Using a handkerchief or coughing into one’s ellbow will probably also do the job.
“Masks dehumanize us” Nonverbal Communication in Psychotherapy. “An estimated 60 to 65 percent of interpersonal communication is conveyed via nonverbal behaviors.”
“Masks distort the structure of the face. The lower part of their face is disguised. Identity is concealed. No non-verbal cues or emotion is communicated to a fellow human being can be discerned; all facial communication is hidden under the mask”
Here is a personal report from Michelle Krinsky:
“Just a little review of my termination in 2018 from a 35 year career in nursing. I declined the mandatory flu shot. I requested to wear a mask during the duration of “flu season,” which had always been hospital policy.
I was told that surgical masks as well as N95 masks are not effective in filtering viral particulate.
Masking was no longer an option and I was fired.”
Reasonable excuse [from wearing face coverings]:
4.—(1) For the purposes of regulation 3(1), the circumstances in which a person (“P”) has a reasonable excuse include those where—
(a) P cannot put on, wear or remove a face covering—
(i) because of any physical or mental illness or impairment,
or disability (within the meaning of section 6 of the Equality Act 2010(1)), or
(ii) without severe distress;… [from legislation.gov.uk 2020]
The WHO themselves have been careful to note that they are NOT instructing governments to implement mandatory masks.
The WHO writes in a Scientific Brief on 9 July 2020 “Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: implications for infection prevention precautions“:
The physics of exhaled air and flow physics have generated hypotheses about possible mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 transmission through aerosols.(13-16) These theories suggest that
1) a number of respiratory droplets generate microscopic aerosols (<5 µm) by evaporating, and
2) normal breathing and talking results in exhaled aerosols.
Thus, a susceptible person could inhale aerosols, and could become infected if the aerosols contain the virus in sufficient quantity to cause infection within the recipient. However, the proportion of exhaled droplet nuclei or of respiratory droplets that evaporate to generate aerosols, and the infectious dose of viable SARS-CoV-2 required to cause infection in another person are not known, but it has been studied for other respiratory viruses.(17)
One experimental study quantified the amount of droplets of various sizes that remain airborne during normal speech. However, the authors acknowledge that this relies on the independent action hypothesis, which has not been validated for humans and SARS-CoV-2.(18) Another recent experimental model found that healthy individuals can produce aerosols through coughing and talking (19), and another model suggested high variability between individuals in terms of particle emission rates during speech, with increased rates correlated with increased amplitude of vocalization.(20)
To date, transmission of SARS-CoV-2 by this type of aerosol route has not been demonstrated; much more research is needed given the possible implications of such route of transmission.
It seems, that wearing face masks is solely a political decision.
Please avoid using one way face masks, as they contribute to the contamination of our beautiful planet.
4 Sept: a French court rules mandatory masks in public places “serious and illegal infringement” of citizens’ liberties
Some French local authorities are being forced to revise orders making mouth and nose coverings compulsory as courts side with civil liberties groups. A court in Lyon ruled on Friday that making face masks mandatory in all public spaces in Lyon and neighbouring Villeurbanne constituted a “serious and illegal infringement” of citizens’ liberties.
A civil liberty group called “Les Essentialistes” brought the case against authorities arguing that the decrees were disproportionate and inefficient.
The ruling in Lyon followed two similar decisions earlier this week in Strasbourg, in the north-east of France, and in Seine-Maritime, in the north-west.
Mask wearing in the UK is likely to also be challenged in court.
If you do NOT wear a mask due to personal reasons and get verbally abused,
“You can claim for the emotional distress the discrimination has caused you – this is called ‘injury to feelings’. You’ll need to say how the discrimination made you feel. Ask your family, friends, medical professionals or support workers if they’ll be witnesses to how the discrimination affected you.”
“You can claim compensation for injury to feelings for almost any discrimination claim. “
“The minimum award for injury to feelings should be around £1,000.” [from citizensadvice.org, England]
This suggestion by the Terrence Higgins Trust from 10th of August is ridiculous, and if it is meant to be taken serious, it’s dangerously inhuman. What kind of understanding about the human nature and intimate connections does this show?
And not one critical word from the BBC Newsbeat?
‘Contact Track & Trace’: Dangerous and Unlawful
The government keeps repeating the message “We need the Track & Trace app to prevent the virus spread”. Apart from SERIOUS doubts about the data security as well as the reliance of such a system, this is a typical “focus on the symptoms” approach (even when there are no symptoms!), not addressing the problem:
• The virus is not the problem, but the immune system.
If you’re told to self-isolate by NHS Test and Trace
or the NHS COVID-19 app
“Self-isolate for 14 days
from the day you were last in contact with
the person who tested positive for coronavirus“
“Do not have visitors in your home,
including friends and family”
• The ‘Track & Trace’ is based on the PCR test identifying people who test ‘positive’ as well as those whom they met in the last days (including contacts too short to cause any infection).
The UK government has repeatedly wasted money by outsourcing contracts to incompetent businesses, ordering unsuitable (ventilators) or not fit for purpuse (tests, face masks, PPE) goods in huge quantities.
A WHO study on influenza pandemics in 2019 came to the conclusion that contact tracing is not useful from an epidemiological point of view. The WHO recommends (page 22):
“Active contact tracing is not recommended in general because there is no obvious rationale for it in most Member States. This intervention could be considered in some locations and circumstances to collect information on the characteristics of the disease and to identify cases, or to delay widespread transmission in the very early stages of a pandemic in isolated communities.”
We are neither in a very early stage, nor in an isolated community.
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden warned as early as March that governments could use the corona crisis as an occasion or pretext for expanding global surveillance and control, thus creating an “architecture of oppression”.
A whistleblower who had taken part in a training program for contact tracers in the US described it as “totalitarian” and a “danger to society”.
Privatised Failure The Conservatives Sidelined Public Health for the Market. by Molly Scott Cato, MEP, 5 June 2020
testing contracts have gone to a string of corporations with little or no medical expertise: Deloitte, Boots, Serco, G4S, Mitie, Levy and Sodexco. Together, they have appointed more than 5,000 staff overseeing testing at 50 regional test centres. These sites are being managed by one person qualified only as a first-aider.
Many of these contracts have been awarded ‘without competing or advertising the requirement’ – in other words, the situation of emergency has allowed Government departments to hand these contracts to these companies with no questions asked.
A story from the “New Normal” – meet Sally:
Sally has 2 kids and a husband. Sally was worried about Covid so she paid attention she followed the rules she worried about dying of covid she worried about her kids dying. So she followed the rules and she stayed in her home. She didn’t see anyone and only left the house to go shopping. She washed her hands and made sure the house was clean. She did her best to keep her family healthy. Sally watched the news Sally trusted the media and wanted to do what was right.
When lockdown was over Sally was happy to take her kids to the park and to see her friends again. She was glad that life was returning to normal. Sally decided to book a holiday to Spain because the goverment said their was no risk but a few weeks later the goverment changed their minds. If Sally and her family go on holiday they have to isolate for 2 weeks. Sally decided that her family had missed out on enough so she spoke to her boss and her boss agreed to give her 2 weeks unpaid leave. Money would be tight but it would be worth it to get away.
Sally followed all the rules in Spain she masked up when leaving her apartment. She didn’t mix with anyone and she had a lovely time on holiday with her family She kept her family safe and stuck to the rules. Her holiday wasn’t the same but Sally was glad to take a break from the UK enjoy the sunshine.
Sally didn’t realise how hard isolation would be when she returned to the UK No visitors, no walking of the dog, no trips to the supermarket, complete isolation was hard. She knew her family were healthy and free of corona but she had to follow the goverment rules. There was no way she could pay a fine for breaking the rules.
After 2 weeks the kids could go back to school oh how excited they were to see their friends. Kids are happy to get back into a routine. Life feels normal.
3 days after being back at school Sally gets a call from school to tell her someone in the kids year group has tested positve. The full year group has to go home and isolate for 14 days.
Sally doesn’t have anyone to help with childcare so Sally has to take 2 weeks unpaid leave. Only this time her boss is not as pleased to give her the time off.
Sally isolates with her kids obeys the rules. Home schools but life is getting harder and she can barely afford to feed her family her mental health is suffering. She needs something to look forward to so she makes a promise to herself they she will treat herself when kids go back to school.
Kids go back to school. Even though Sally is struggling financially she books to get her haircut. She knows this will make her feel good. She’s starting to feel normal again. Back at work her boss isn’t happy they’ve had to take on a temp to cover the time she’s been off. Her colleagues treat her differently because of the time of she’s had. Sally feels sad she feels hurt that people can’t see that the kids having to isolate is out with her control.
Sallys mental health is at breaking point but she needs this job the bills are piling up shes lost out on 4 weeks pay.
Sally takes the kids to school on the way to work she gets a text message from test and trace her beautician has tested positive for coronavirus and she has to isolate immediately.
Sally can’t go to work…her boss has to terminate her contract due to the amount of time off. Sally has no savings and the bills are stacking up.
6 months later Sally never had coronavirus she has been unable to find a job she has to go to local food banks for food. She’s at risk of losing her home. Sally thinks about suicide a lot!!
Sally worries constantly that her kids might have to isolate. She knows school is the only time they get a decent meal.”
[from a friend’s post]
Where might this lead to? MailOnline reports on 9 October:
“Big Brother is watching your social-distancing! Over 1,000 AI scanners are monitoring how close pedestrians are walking to each other in major UK cities. Manufacturers Vivacity said data is used by officials to ‘inform policy decisions’are now used to identify pedestrians from other traffic and work out distances. In response to privacy concerns said no footage is saved or personal data kept.”
Saving the NHS?
last updated: 12 December 2020
If you are a health care professional in the United Kingdom, you might like to join this Facebook group:
“NHS workers for choice, no restrictions for declining a vaccine“
“Staff are exhausted with significant numbers – 30,000 at last count – off work for Covid-related issues.“ [BBC, 2nd December]
Many of these 30 000 staff are probably absent from work because they need to self isolate – based on a medically meaningless “positiv” PCR test result, and NOT because they are ill.
Britain has fewer hospital beds than other European countries, so that is a factor to consider.
The NHS wrote a letter to “At Risk Patients” living at home with the following instructions:
– Try not to see anyone face-to face for at least 12 weeks
– keep 3 steps (2metres) between you and other people in your home
– Sleep in a different bed from other people if you can
– Try not to use the kitchen at the same time as other people
– If possible, eat by yourself in your room
– Try to keep yourself well and happy
These instructions feel more like punishment and isolation torture;
how can anyone hope to uplift an elderly person’s spirit with that?
Dr. Kendrick in an interview: “You cannot dissociate money and health. We are spending as much on Covid-19 as we would spend on the NHS in three normal years.”
“It is going to destroy the health of a lot of people… If you are not willing to accept that you might have done more harm than good, you cannot look at the situation accurately or objectively.”
Our western “modern” medicine focusses on treating symptoms rather than finding the cause of an illness, and often creates long term unhealthy side effects. Reducing the fever sabotages the natural immune system at work and supports the disease. Antibiotics severely damage the biome, home of the immune system, and a complex and well balanced rain forest like environment. The result is often a short term improvement with a long term weaker health condition or causing other diseases to develop.
On top of this systemic imbalance, almost 1,000 patients die needlessly in UK NHS hospitals every month because of basic errors by medical staff (UK study July 2012)
“Save our NHS” as it is) means cementing a rigid system, which provides income to pharmaceutical companies and their share holders.
Dr. Kendrick in an interview:
“we are going to miss the fact that the lockdown policies have caused an increase in deaths from many other things. There has been a 50 per cent reduction in people turning up to A&E. It is clear that people just do not want to bother the doctors. The clarion call was to clear the hospitals of patients. There was a point when my local hospital was a quarter full. Staff were wandering around with nothing to do… An awful lot of people have been standing around wondering what the hell to do with themselves. A&E has never been so quiet.
They basically just started throwing people out into the intermediate care sector. The average age of death from Covid-19 in the UK is around 82, and most of those people have co-morbidities… They had one objective – to clear the hospitals – and everything else was subordinate to that…
We locked down the population that had virtually zero risk of getting any serious problems from the disease, and then spread it wildly among the highly vulnerable age group.”
The Media and Bias
The media: “the first casualty in a war situation is the Truth”
At a time where 19 out of 20 news items in the main stream media revolve around the coronavirus, and Google, Facebook and Youtube, evenTwitter and Vimeo, are selectively removing content damaging their financial interests from their platforms, or labelling content with true, partly true or false warnings, fake and biased news, we need to face it:
Media are biased toward their financial supporters.
“A newspaper is a device
for making the ignorant more ignorant
and the crazy crazier.” H. L. Mencken
In August 2020, the Columbia Journalism Review examined nearly twenty thousand charitable grants the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation had made through the end of June and found more than $250 million going toward journalism.
Recipients included news operations like the BBC, NBC, Al Jazeera, ProPublica, National Journal, The Guardian, Univision, Medium, the Financial Times, The Atlantic, the Texas Tribune, Gannett, Washington Monthly, Le Monde, and the Center for Investigative Reporting… journalistic organizations such as the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, the National Press Foundation, and the International Center for Journalists; and a variety of other groups creating news content or working on journalism, such as the Leo Burnett Company, an ad agency that Gates commissioned to create a “news site” to promote the success of aid groups. In some cases, recipients say they distributed part of the funding as subgrants to other journalistic organizations—which makes it difficult to see the full picture of Gates’s funding into the fourth estate.
The foundation has long used its charitable giving to shape the public discourse on everything from global health to education to agriculture—a level of influence that has landed Bill Gates on Forbes’s list of the most powerful people in the world.
Other ties include “participating in dozens of conferences, such as the Perugia Journalism Festival, the Global Editors Network, or the World Conference of Science Journalism,” as well as “help[ing] build capacity through the likes of the Innovation in Development Reporting fund.”
PolitiFact and USA Today (run by the Poynter Institute and Gannett, respectively—both of which have received funds from the Gates Foundation) have used their fact-checking platforms to defend Gates from “false conspiracy theories” and “misinformation”
What about the medical experts and research scientists?
The British Medical Journal BMJ published a cross sectional study: Financial ties between leaders of influential US professional medical associations and industry in May 2020.
Results: 235 of 328 leaders (72%)
had financial ties to industry.
Among 293 leaders who were medical doctors or doctors of osteopathy, 235 (80%) had ties. Total payments for 2017-19 leadership were almost $130m (£103m; €119m), with a median amount for each leader of $31 805 (interquartile range $1157 to $254 272). General payments, including those for consultancy and hospitality, were $24.8m and research payments were $104.6m—predominantly payments to academic institutions with association leaders named as principle investigators.
Variation was great among the associations: median amounts varied from $212 for the American Psychiatric Association leaders to $518 000 for the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Conclusions: Financial relationships between the leaders of influential US professional medical associations and industry are extensive, although with variation among the associations. The quantum of payments raises questions about independence and integrity, adding weight to calls for policy reform.
Big companies and corporations find ways to secure their survival, through lobbying politicians and influencing media for their advantage – while small companies and businesses struggle to survive.
“Google is not a source of objective information.
They’re a very one-sided indoctrination machine.
Google’s basic strategy is ‘programming people.”
“Google manipulates mankind by hiding certain information
and imposing other information.
Their mission is to ‘program’ humanity.”
[Zach Vorhies, senior software engineer of Google]
“Coronavirus disease 2019: The harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures“:
“Based on Altmetric scores, the most discussed and most visible scientific paper across all 20+ million papers published in the last 8 years across all science is a preprint claiming that the new coronavirus’ spike protein bears “uncanny similarity” with HIV‐1 proteins.2 The Altmetric score of this work has reached an astronomical level of 13 725 points as of 5 March 2020. The paper was rapidly criticized as highly flawed, and the authors withdrew it within days.
Regardless, major harm was already done”
“The first report documenting transmission by an asymptomatic individual was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on January 30. However, the specific patient did have symptoms, but researchers had not asked.3“
We should ensure that the media do not use the power of images to generate emotions that influence our judgment. If you get pictures of coffins and death departments from Italy or pictures of completely empty shelves, then their effects exceed the facts mentioned.
|“Virus Mania is a social disease of our highly developed society. |
To cure it will require conquering fear,
fear being the most deadly contagious virus,
most efficiently transmitted by the media.”
Even though the COVID-19 curve has been flattened,
mainstream media outlets continue to push doomsday predictions of an impending explosion of deaths
• According to Stanford University’s disease prevention chairman Dr. John Ioannidis, the COVID-19 fatality rate for those under the age of 45 is “almost zero,” and between the ages of 45 and 70, it’s somewhere between 0.05% and 0.3%
• So, the fact that young and middle-aged adults are testing positive in droves is not a warning sign of an impending onslaught of deaths, as the risk of death in these age groups is minuscule
• According to the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, the COVID-19 mortality — which had declined for the last 10 weeks straight — “is currently at the epidemic threshold,” meaning if it declines just a little more, COVID-19 will no longer be considered an epidemic [14 July 2020]
The Spanish Flu Was Different
Some previous pandemics were caused by volcanic eruptions leading to obscured sunshine resulting in food shortages and vitamin D deficiencies.
Spanish Flu casualties were partly due to administration of aspirin, which lowers the fever (“shooting the immune system in the food”) and impedes on the vitamin C absorption in the body (vitamin C was not discovered yet), which is a fatal combination for stressed malnourished bodies fighting an infection.
The “Second Wave” was most certainly caused by a different virus than in the first winter – but that is difficult to proove or disprove in hindsight. We know however, is that this was a dire war situation, causing lots of fear and stress, which turns the immune system off – an open invitation for germs, bacteria and viruses to invade without much resistance.
We can also assume, that the quality of sleep was bad in a war situation, which is a precondition for many diseases.
Bacterial Pneumonia Caused Most Deaths in 1918 Influenza Pandemic:
“The majority of deaths during the influenza pandemic of 1918-1919 were not caused by the influenza virus acting alone, report researchers from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health. Instead, most victims succumbed to bacterial pneumonia following influenza virus infection. The pneumonia was caused when bacteria that normally inhabit the nose and throat invaded the lungs along a pathway created when the virus destroyed the cells that line the bronchial tubes and lungs.”
Dr. Alan Palmer writes:
“More important than the pathogen is the resistance of the host:
In the late 1800s and early 1900s, infectious disease ravaged the large cities here and in Europe. Small Pox, Dysentery, Cholera, Diphtheria, the Spanish Flu and even Measles were very deadly. During that time period, livestock, horses, dogs and other animals walked down the streets, defecating and urinating as they went. The cities were greatly over-crowded. There was no efficient way to dispose of human and animal waste, the air was putrid, the water unclean, the food supply providing only basic needs and most people smoked and chewed tobacco. People’s bodies were living petri dishes, crawling with pathogenic (harmful) organisms, disease causing bacteria, parasites, viruses and fungi. Their “terrain” was fertile soil, ripe for infection as their immune systems were weak and overwhelmed.”
Today we still find similar conditions and malnutrition in third world countries. For example: vitamin A deficiency is a common condition that contributes to illness, blindness, and death.
In today’s “modern” world, we face different problems: pollution and contaminated processed foods weaken the immune system, and life expectancy in the US is going DOWN – that should be a warning.
Politics of Fear
“Fear is experienced in your mind, but it triggers a strong physical reaction in your body. As soon as you recognize fear, your amygdala (small organ in the middle of your brain) goes to work. It alerts your nervous system, which sets your body’s fear response into motion. Stress hormones like cortisol and adrenaline are released. Your blood pressure and heart rate increase. You start breathing faster. Even your blood flow changes — blood actually flows away from your heart and into your limbs, making it easier for you to start throwing punches, or run for your life. Your body is preparing for fight-or-flight.” [source]
“For every complex problem there is an answer
that is clear, simple, and wrong” H. L. Mencken
“As some parts of your brain are revving up, others are shutting down. When the amygdala senses fear, the cerebral cortex (area of the brain that harnesses reasoning and judgment) becomes impaired — so now it’s difficult to make good decisions or think clearly.
As a result, you might… [be] unable to rationalize that the threat is not real. [source]
Children are made feel responsible for the painful, tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the Corona rules and don’t stay away from their grandparents. [from ‘Crimes against humanity‘]
Asking people to spy on each other, on their neighbours and local businesss seeds distrust and destroys communities. Using threats triggering fear in order to manipulate people is an old political strategy, ubiquitous in today’s politics and media, labelled as “war on the virus”
“The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders” said Nazi bigwig Hermann Goering after his conviction at Nuremberg. “That is easy. Of course, the people don’t want war,… neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood.”
“After all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.”
“the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
Gaslighting is a tactic in which a person or entity, in order to gain more power, making a victim question their reality. It is done slowly, so the victim doesn’t realise how much they’ve been brainwashed.
Gaslighters typically use the following techniques:
1. They tell blatant lies. setting up a precedent.
2. They deny they ever said something, even though you have proof.
3. They use what is near and dear to you as ammunition.
4. They wear you down over time.
5. Their actions do not match their words.
6. They throw in positive reinforcement to confuse you.
7. They know confusion weakens people.
8. They project. (accusing you of what they are doing)
9. They try to align people against you.
10. They tell you or others that you are crazy.
11. They tell you everyone else is a liar.
Details described in the article seem to match the current situation.
The UK government, supported by the media, creates a lot of fear and uncertainty through contradicting instructions which “do not seem to make any sense.” There is no political opposition or questioning of the lockdown, as a war style situation is created with help of the media who thrive in conflict situations, and the message “we are all in this together” signal: “if you don’t do what we say, you endanger the lives of all of us”
Another psychological aspect of the current situation is “The Stockholm Syndrome“, where hostages / victims begin to bond with their kidnappers / abusers, in order to save their lives. Being in a manipulative relationship can cause cognitive dissonance (“this doesn’t make sense”). This means the victim’s intuition has been damaged, and they may be confused about reality. Victims of Stockholm syndrome can become dedicated to a cause or an unspoken desire. They may over-identify with the perpetrator in a dysfunctional way in order to fulfil a personal need. This is the “hook.” A clever political strategy.
How to Help People Who May Have Stockholm Syndrome
The whole political re-action to the coronavirus, fired up by the media, is steped in psychological aspects – here is another one:
Munchausen syndrome by proxy (MSP) — or Munchausen by proxy — is a psychological disorder marked by attention-seeking behavior by a caregiver through those who are in their care.
“People with MSP may create or exaggerate a child’s symptoms in several ways. They may simply lie about symptoms, alter tests (such as contaminating a urine sample), falsify medical records, or they may actually induce symptoms through various means, such as poisoning, suffocating, starving, and causing infection.”
The UK government’s chief scientific adviser has £600,000 of shares in vaccine maker contracted by the government. The government is “following scientific advice” of the SAGE committee. From 20 permanent members [as of 15 August], only five are independent.
That means, 3/4 of them have ties to industries or other bias, which unavoidably has an influence on what advice they give. Below are excerpts from one SAGE report, showing psychological manipulation methods:
Much fear and panic was created around this new virus, contributing to stress and dis-ease. This led to the acceptance of the government’s lockdown.
On March 19th, a French study “SARS-CoV-2: Fear Versus Data” was published, concluding: “There does not seem to be a significant difference between the mortality rate of SARS-CoV-2 in OECD countries and that of common coronaviruses” and:
“Fear could have a larger impact than the virus itself”
So the same day, the British government decided: “COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) in the UK”. But four days later they ordered a lockdown and voted on a Bill, spanning a period of two years. TWO YEARS – for a seasonal virus?
By the time it turned out the virus was not so dangerous, the decision makers seemed too afraid to admit this and return to normal.
Due to lockdown and “flattening the curve”, we haven’t achieved the level of herd immunity yet, so some people will catch up with the virus later.
“Liberty is of small value to the lower third of humanity.
They greatly prefer security, which means protection
by some class above them.
They are always in favor of despots who promise to feed them.”
The No-cebo effect of fear
Just like any medication and placebo works better, when people believe in them, any virus will make people more ill when they fear it.
Fear induces stress, which disables the immune system, which makes people more receptive to any infection – a self fulfilling prophecy.
Fear intoxicates our common sense, and especially those who have locked themselves in have been exposed to multiple repeated slogans on all channels to be scared.
Coronaviruses regularly recur in dogs, cats, pigs, mice, bats and in humans, and after all Covid-19 is part of the coronavirus family.
HCQ Studies Set Up To Fail
WHO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust and the U.K. government used wrong dosage and missed a main ingredient in their studies – How a False Hydroxychloroquine Narrative Was Created
• The U.K. Recovery Trial— Funded in part by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust and the U.K. government through Oxford University, this study randomly assigned patients to usual care or to one of five primary drug treatments: lopinavir-ritonavir; a corticosteroid (low-dose dexamethasone); hydroxychloroquine; tociizumab; or azithromycin. They also used convalescent plasma.
Patients received 2,400 mg of hydroxychloroquine during the first 24 hours — three to six times higher than the daily dosage recommended followed by 400 mg every 12 hours for nine more day for a cumulative dose of 9,200 mg over 10 days. The trial ended its hydroxychloroquine arm on June 4, reporting “no benefit.”
• The Solidarity Trial — Launched by the World Health Organisation and funded by 43 countries and 203,000 individuals and organisations, this trial also compares standard of care against four drug options, including hydroxychloroquine, among patients in 35 countries.
the Canadian and Norwegian portions of the trial lists a dosage of 2,000 mg on the first day, and a cumulative dose of 8,800 mg over 10 days. This is only 400 mg less than the U.K.32 Recovery Trial’s toxic dose.
…the study was retracted for using fabricated data, (and this despite having undergone peer-review), the hydroxychloroquine arm was restarted.
June 17, 2020, the hydroxychloroquine arm was stopped again, this time “based on evidence from the Solidarity trial, U.K.’s Recovery trial and a Cochrane review of other evidence on hydroxychloroquine.”
• The REMAP-CAP Trial (Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia)39 — Here, patients either received nothing, a combination of lopinavir and ritonavir, or hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with lopinavir and ritonavir.
REMAP used the same toxic dose as the Recovery Trial but for six days instead of 10. What’s more, only critically ill hospitalised patients were included in this trial..
By using the WRONG dose, the WHO,
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,
Wellcome Trust and the UK government caused avoidable deaths.
All three trials above that used toxic hydroxychloroquine doses also failed to include zinc, which appears to be a key factor; the hydroxychloroquine is really only used to drive the zinc in to the cells.
[from How a False Hydroxychloroquine Narrative Was Created]
Children and Covid-19
last updated: 6 January 2021
“Corona children studies “Co-Ki”: First results of a Germany-wide registry on mouth and nose covering (mask) in children“:
“By 26.10.2020 the registry had been used by 20,353 people. In this publication we report the results from the parents, who entered data on a total of 25,930 children. The average wearing time of the mask was 270 minutes per day. Impairments caused by wearing the mask were reported by 68% of the parents. These included irritability (60%), headache (53%), difficulty concentrating (50%), less happiness (49%), reluctance to go to school/kindergarten (44%), malaise (42%) impaired learning (38%) and drowsiness or fatigue (37%).“
Our children are severely affected: “Socially isolated children were at significant risk of poor adult health compared with non-isolated children… longitudinal findings showed that chronic social isolation across multiple developmental periods had a cumulative, dose-response relationship to poor adult health”
[Study August 2006: Socially Isolated Children 20 Years Later – Risk of Cardiovascular Disease]
Kids aren’t superspreaders, and they may even be superbarriers [ANH, 19 Nov. 2020]
“in July, Swedish epidemiologist, Dr Jonas Ludvigsson from the Karolinska Institute, well and truly put the nail in the coffin of the idea that kids might be the problem, pointing to evidence that showed that is was unlikely that kids were the main driver of the pandemic.”
“Now we have a new insight. Kids are not only unlikely to be superspreaders, they could actually be a significant part of the solution. It seems their exposure to the virus may create one of the most effective ways of breaking transmission cycles of SARS-CoV-2.“
“Now we have a new insight.
Kids… exposure to the virus may create
one of the most effective ways of
breaking transmission cycles of SARS-CoV-2.”
“The latest insight comes from a very detailed case study on a single family published by a group from the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute and the University of Melbourne, led by Dr Shidan Tosif, just published in the journal Nature Communications.”
“all three kids developed strong antibody responses as measured in saliva and blood plasma. Additionally, the adults developed strong and sustained T-cell responses which would have conferred long-term immunity.”
“The youngest child who never had symptoms developed the strongest antibody response and that response was especially strong in the saliva. The authors of the study rightly suggest that this could mean that children can develop a very strong innate mucosal response to virus particles that land in the nose, mouth and airways that prevents the virus from gaining entry to the body and replicating. Hence the lack of evidence of replicating virus in these three children.”
What can we learn? “Young kids who are exposed to the virus may be among the most effective neutralisers of the virus, so when they are in the transmission chain, they could break the transmission chain and reduce rather increase total viral loads” [end of ANH quotes]
A Durham teacher reported, that 5 out of 70 children he has been teaching via zoom did well – but the 65 others were really struggling and did not like on-line learning.
Children are made feel responsible for the painful, tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the Corona rules and don’t stay away from their grandparents. [from ‘Crimes against humanity‘]
Social distancing and isolation destroys children
• Developed 70 years ago by the CIA to break down enemies of state.
• It is the equivalent of smoking 15 cigarettes a day AND being an alcoholic.
• It doubles the risk of death, and destroys the part of the brain responsible for learning.
Who would recommend doing THAT to our children?
It looks like trouble is brewing up in the current school generation.
Politicians and some media suggest considering to vaccinate children against SARS-COV-2. Here is a new very rare study of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children (November 2020), comparing how often both groups came to see a Doctor.
Dr. Rob Abbot analyses this study and asks:
Can Vaccines Alter a Child’s Health Trajectory?
Below is an interesting table of graphs from the study:
Statistics & Covid-19 Deaths
HealthTruth.info/weve-got-it-all-wrong-fighting-the-virus/#deaths-statistics last updated: 2 January 2021
“Dr. Mike Yeadon says the definition of a “coronavirus death” in the U.K. is anyone who dies, from any cause, within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test…
about 1,700 people die each day in the U.K. in any given year, but many of these deaths are now falsely attributed to COVID-19… the daily death count is absolutely bang-on normal” [source, 2 December]
Statistics: 2020 might be rememberd as the year with dramatic DECREASE of registered infectious diseases. Compare the full (and half) year “Cumulative Totals” 2018, 2019 and 2020 in the table below:
“Covid-19 vaccine 95% effective?” This should be exposed as fraud:
1) nearly 1 out of 5 healthy volunteers reported side effects after the 1st shot, and stronger effects after the 2nd shot. It is likely, that more of frail, old or those with underlying health conditions will suffer side effects.
2) in previous SARS vaccine animal models, they died when exposed to the wild SARS virus they were vaccinated against.
That will likely happen between January and March (coronavirus season in the northern hemisphere)
3) Side effects are only recorded from two weeks after the second vaccination in the trial setup.
Read more in the chapter ‘Covid Vaccine?‘
Update 22 Nov: the Daily Mail UK reports the latest official data: Covid UK: Facts about the risks, the death rate, and NHS capacity
(in short: it’s all normal for November)
Since the Coronavirus Bill was passed on 25 March, proper post mortem examinations are not required any more, and the real reason of death and underlying conditions may never be found out. The WHO guidelines allow using the emergency ICD-10 code “U07. COVID-19” as cause of death, if no virus was identified. www.who.int/classifications/icd/covid19/en/
This covid death count is basically useles.
An Italian post morten examination found over 95% of covid-19 deaths had underlying conditions likely being the cause of death.
Italian hospitals are the worst in Europe; an analysis from 2015 showed, that over 10 700 people died in Italian hospitals due to hospital acquired antibiotic resistant pathogens in one year.
There are numerous credible reports that doctors and hospitals worldwide had been paid money for declaring a deceased person a victim of covid-19 rather than writing down the true cause of death on the death certificate, for example, a heart attack or a gunshot wound. [from ‘Crimes against humanity‘]
Prominent forensic medicine professor Klaus Püschel, Hamburg, Germany, has vast experience in autopsying individuals who have died with the Chinese coronavirus:
“All [COVID-19] deaths for this region, which have now passed 100, have been autopsied, and each one had serious pre-existing diseases. The average age is 80 years old.”
“I think it’s really completely inappropriate when a president tells his people that we are at war, or when the German chancellor compares the situation with the last world war.”
The UK ONS: Where only COVID-19 was recorded on the death certificate, or COVID-19 and subsequent conditions caused by COVID-19 were recorded, we refer to these deaths as having “No pre-existing conditions”.
Who decides this? It is VERY likely, that the conditions which actually caused the death, may never appear in the statistics, leaving the impression that coronavirus was the cause of death.
Statistics and testing: according to the WHO, the flu has nearly been eradicated?
The Telegraph, 8 December: Office for National Statistics (ONS) data – which showed soaring coronavirus cases before the second lockdown – has been quietly revised down and now suggests that cases were largely plateauing at the time, it has emerged.
Why were Public Health England NOT counting covid recovered cases like the other countries?[from Why no-one can ever recover from COVID-19 in England – a statistical anomaly
By this PHE definition, no one with COVID in England was allowed to ever recover from their illness. A patient who has tested positive, but successfully treated and discharged from hospital, was still counted as a COVID death even if they had a heart attack or were run over by a bus three months later.
Anyone who tests positive with coronavirus und dies within 28 days, whatever the cause of death, is counted as “Covid-19 death” So there will always be some covid deaths.
Covid deaths as well as test “cases” seem to have a high degree in downward adjustment – in other words: they were highly inflated to start with, and it took rather a long time to correct.
The Off-Guardian reports on 8 October:
WHO (Accidentally) Confirms Covid is No More Dangerous Than Flu Head of Health Emergencies Program “best estimates” put IFR at 0.14%
They believe roughly 10% of the world has been infected with Sars-Cov-2. This is their “best estimate”. The global population is roughly 7.8 billion people, if 10% have been infected that is 780 million cases. The global death toll currently attributed to Sars-Cov-2 infections is 1,061,539.
That’s an infection fatality rate of roughly or 0.14%.
Right in line with seasonal flu
Statistics can do anything:
Playing around with death labels seems to be not unusual:
No male “influenza and pneumonia male deaths” 2011-1015 (red)?
No female “chronic lower respiratory diseases” (grey fields) in 2006 and from 2008 to 2011?
“Dementia and Alzheimers”(light blue): are women so different to men?
What surprises will we see for 2020 death labels in the UK?
Here is an interesting example how a fact check website interprets data: fullfact.org/health/flu-covid-deaths – headline: “Flu isn’t the underlying cause of death for more people than Covid-19“
“the ONS reports the number of “deaths involving COVID-19”, which means the number of death certificates that mention Covid-19 somewhere, whether or not it was the underlying cause.
The ONS also reports in the bulletin the number of “deaths in England and Wales [that] mentioned ‘Influenza and Pneumonia’”. Again, they didn’t have to be the underlying cause of death.
This matters, because “when Covid-19 is mentioned on a death certificate, it is much more likely to be the underlying cause of someone’s death than when pneumonia or influenza is.“
[THIS is the point of clear manipulation without proof nor logic]
“Up to the end of June 2020 in England and Wales, Covid-19 was the underlying cause of death on about 93% of the death certificates that mentioned it.”
[Now this is VERY questionable. In reality it is the other way around, that 95% of people WITH covid-19 have underlying conditions – see above, so the covid deaths number should be divided by 20 to get a realistic picture]
“a death counted in the “Influenza and pneumonia” category could be someone who died after having pneumonia, or after having flu, or after having both.”
Pneumonia is usually caused by a bacterial infection, but it can also be caused by a virus such as flu or the one that causes Covid-19. It’s worth noting that many people who die with Covid-19 have pneumonia as well, so the ONS explains that “deaths where both were mentioned have been counted only in the COVID-19 category”.
[WHY is covid-19 overriding pneumonia and the flu in the death statistic without explanation? That shows, that only SOME of the covid deaths are CAUSED by covid, so the covid death number needs to be reduced, and the pneumonia number needs to be increased accordingly.]
From the 26,342 who died from either influenza or pneumonia in 2019, only 4.6% died from flu – and 95,4% died from pneumonia.
A good reminder, that flu is REALLY not that dangerous – it is pneumonia which kills 19 out of 20 people in the flu/pneumonia category.
THANK YOU for reminding us that flu is MUCH less dangerous than the flu vaccine pushers want us to believe.
The Office for National Statistics has begun to include a note on its weekly deaths data, which says: “Figures for Influenza and Pneumonia represent where either of these causes have been mentioned anywhere on the death certificate meaning they will not necessarily be the underlying cause of death.”
Hopefully people will stay away from the flu vaccine this year, which needs 71 vaccinated people to avoid ONE case of flu.
[Quotes from fullfact.org/health/flu-covid-deaths]
“Covid-19: The Data Exposing the Deception“[by UK Column, 11 Oct]:
“When influenza, pneumonia and Covid-19 are on a Medical Certificate Cause of Death (MCCD) together, without a postmortem, it is ridiculous to suggest that nearly 96% of these deaths (18,642) must be Covid-19 deaths. The reason that they are reported as such has nothing to do with medical science and everything to do with the death registration system, created by the UK government, specifically for Covid-19.”
“for public sector workers who regularly interact with the public in the community, such as police officers, fire officers, park attendants and so forth, mortality was zero.“
[source of this investigation]
“The most obvious reason COVID-19 hospitalizations are going up is because of what’s happening in the hospital system.
Patients are returning to the hospitals for elective surgery that were all delayed during the lockdown.” [j.b. handley blog]
Exposing our skin to soap and gels, shampoos, deodorants and perfumes results in most of the ingredients being absorbed into the body. Some of the ingredients may have unwanted side effects – they also remove the protective fat layer on the skin (including sunshine induced vitamin D) and lead to the skin being more vulnerable to infections. It is recommended to reduce soap and gels on the skin.
What happens when you take antibiotics or regularly use antibacterial lotions and soaps? You literally kill the good bacteria and the bad ones take over. This, in turn, disturbs the symbiosis (balance) of your microbiome which will lead to digestive issues and immune reactions. [source]
“Since 2015, WAAW has been focusing on awareness-raising and education towards the responsible and prudent use of the antimicrobials. Since 2015, WAAW has been focusing on awareness-raising and education towards the responsible and prudent use of the antimicrobials. Previously World Antibiotic Awareness Week, the name was changed this year to World Antimicrobial Awareness Week to reflect the breadth of the initiative. Antimicrobials include antibiotic, antiviral, antifungal and antiprotozoal agents, which are critical tools for treating diseases in humans, animals and plants.Joint statement by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia, the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) Sub-Regional Representation for Central Asia, and WHO/Europe,
WAAW is particularly important this year as the COVID-19 crisis is increasing the misuse and overuse of antimicrobials, including antibiotics. Unless something is done, this could worsen the growing, long-term problems of antimicrobial resistance (AMR).
AMR is a global crisis. There is no time to wait. Everyone has a role to play in preserving the effectiveness of antimicrobials… Human and animal health agencies, the environment and food sectors, as well as civil society must unite efforts to preserve antimicrobial efficacy through a multisectoral One Health approach. The AMR crisis applies to everyone. So, let us act for the sake of all humanity.”
12 November 2020
Coronavirus Disinfectants May Be Extremely Hazardous to Health:
Toxic chemicals now being used are causing unprecedented levels of exposure with unknown consequences to human health.
studies on many of the chemicals have been linked to asthma and other respiratory conditions, reproductive effects and neurological and dermatological problems.[v]
Exposure to disinfectants and cleaning products has long been
linked to health risks. Among nurses, for instance, exposure to cleaning chemicals at work was associated with a 25% to 38% increased risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Research published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine also found that women responsible for cleaning at home, or who worked as house cleaners, had accelerated declines in lung function, and long-term respiratory health was impaired 10 to 20 years after cleaning activities.[vii]
Damage to respiratory function for women cleaners was similar to smoking a pack of cigarettes every day for 10 to 20 years.
Spraying the chemicals poses increased inhalation risks, as it generates micro-particles and possibly even smaller nanoparticles, which are absorbed into the body faster and in greater quantities than larger particles. The WHO warned, “In indoor spaces, routine application of disinfectants to surfaces via spraying is not recommended for COVID-19“.
Aggressive disinfection procedures being implemented in the name of COVID-19 could end up causing far more harm than good. [source]
Scientists warn that making deep-cleaning a priority is not going to have a significant impact on the spread of the virus, as surface transmission appears to be minimal in the first place. In a study in which the authors tried to mimic actual conditions in which a surface might be contaminated by a patient, no viable SARS-CoV was detected on surfaces.
Fogging students, as proposed in England, is both unwarranted and unwise. Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, poisonings related to cleaning solutions have also risen by as much as 20%.
Soap and water is likely one of the best alternative strategies here, as the soap will effectively inactivate viruses.
Negative effects of social isolation and distancing on the immune system have not been considered. Any environment, void of new bacteria, germs and viruses, does not stimulate the immune system; it is to be expected, that people who have avoided contact with others will be the first getting ill next winter.
Below is one of the BEST short videos explaining how good our immune system works – free laughter benefit included:
Professor Hendrik Streeck, virologist from the University of Bonn, is leading a study on Heinsberg, “Germany’s Wuhan” with a high number of “cases” and a low number of deaths. Most cases originate from people being together for an extended period of time, and not from touching surfaces with viruses on them. He believes there is little chance to be infected from surfaces like a door knob. “it would be necessary that someone coughs into their hand, immediately touches a doorknob, and then straight after that another person grasps the handle and goes on to touch their face”
Streeck’s, study found that: “There is no significant risk of catching the disease when you go shopping. Severe outbreaks of the infection were always a result of people being closer together over a longer period of time.”
Introducing Vaccines and Face Masks “After it is all over”?
Wearing face masks
may reduce the virus spread for the moment
but weakens our immune system in the long run:
the less viruses we are exposed to,
the less ‘exercise’ our immune systems gets.
Pandemic Reactions Out Of Proportion
In the last 40 years alone the UK has had seven official epidemics /pandemics; AIDS, Swine flu, CJD, SARS, MERS, Bird flu as well as annual, seasonal flu.
All were very worrying but schools remained open and the NHS treated everybody and most of the population were unaffected.
Compared to other causes of death and previous pandemics, coronavirus-19 should more be compared to a seasonal flu.
World wide, 1 person in every 50,000 died of coronavirus.
Cardiovascular disease kills about 46,575 people each day.
Heart disease has killed more people in the last 4 days than COVID-19 has killed in the last 4 months…
As shown in the previous article, Coronavirus Lockdown was not Necessary. WHY suddenly such a panic with such a huge collateral damage?
The WHO states in “Non-pharmaceuticalpublic health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza“ 2019, page 3:
Not recommended in any circumstances:
• UV light
• Modifying humidity
• Contact tracing
• Quarantine of exposed individuals
• Entry and exit screening
• Border closure
“This is not Ebola. It’s not SARS. It’s politics playing medicine and that’s avery dangerous game. There is no action of any kind needed other than what happened last year when we felt unwell. We stayed home, we took chicken noodle soup, we didn’t visit granny, and we decided when we would return to work. We didn’t need anyone to tell us.”
“There is utterly unfounded public hysteria driven by the media and politicians. It’s outrageous. This is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public. There is absolutely nothing that can be done to contain this virus. Other than protecting older, more vulnerable people. It should be thought of as nothing more than a bad flu season.” [Dr. Roger Hodkinson 23 Nov. – full audio is HERE]
“The real question is, is this serious enough to warrant putting most of our population into house imprisonment, wrecking our economy for an indefinite period, destroying businesses that honest and hardworking people have taken years to build up, saddling future generations with debt, depression, stress, heart attacks, suicides and unbelievable distress inflicted on millions of people who are not especially vulnerable, and will suffer only mild symptoms or none at all?”
[former Supreme Court Judge , Lord John Sumption, discussing the UK response to COVID-19, BBC interview 2019-03-30 [spiked-online.com]
Examples of collateral lockdown damage:
Brave “New Normal”?
Computers are taking over our lives in the name of “Health”.
We are all connected – but
our life quality suffers.
Big Brother is watching you.
Freedom in isolation?
The “new abnormal” is eroding
our society as a well balanced interconnected system of people, groups, clubs, businesses, organisations, and public institutions – a complex network of interwoven connections.
We humans are social animals and need each other’s company.
In Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’, no Big Brother is required to deprive people of their autonomy, maturity and history. People will come to love their oppression, to love the technologies that undo their capacities to think.
Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book,
for there would be no one who wanted to read one.
Huxley feared those who would give us so much information, that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism, and the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance.
As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.”
In 1984, George Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, people are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short: what we desire will ruin us.
Learning from Health History?
chapter updated 13 December 2020
The officials did get it wrong in the past, remember?
“Most doctors smoke Camels”, including most outrageous ads like
“Give your throat a vacation”
In 2020, the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on politics, media and the health sector is obvious, when you follow the money.
CNN writes on 1 Sept 2020 about Past vaccine disasters…
On April 12, 1955 the government announced the first vaccine to protect kids against polio. Within days, labs had made thousands of lots of the vaccine. Batches made by one company, Cutter Labs, accidentally contained live polio virus and it caused an outbreak.
More than 200,000 children got the polio vaccine, but within days the government had to abandon the program. Forty thousand kids got polio. Some had low levels, a couple hundred were left with paralysis, and about 10 died.
CNN continues: in 1976, scientists predicted a pandemic of a new strain of influenza called swine flu. More than 40 years later, some historians call it “flu epidemic that never was.” President Ford was basically told by his advisers, that “look, we have a pandemic flu coming called swine flu that may be as bad as Spanish flu.” Ford was being cajoled to put forward a vaccine that was hastily put together. The government launched the program in about seven months and 40 million people got vaccinated against swine flu, according to the CDC. That vaccination campaign was later linked to cases of a neurological disorder called Guillain-Barre syndrome. There were a few hundred cases of Guillain-Barre.
The different definition of a pandemic was changed in 2008. Until then, a pandemic was considered to be a disease that spread worldwide and which led to many serious illnesses and deaths. Suddenly, and for reasons never explained, it was supposed to be a worldwide disease only.
Due to this change, the WHO, which is closely intertwined with the global pharmaceutical industry, was able to declare the swine flu pandemic in 2009.
The Swine Flu vaccines proved to be completely unnecessary. as it turned out to be a mild flu and never became the horrific plague that the pharmaceutical industry and its affiliated universities kept announcing it would turn into. These vaccines also led to serious health problems. About 700 children in Europe fell incurably ill with narcolepsy and are now forever severely disabled.
[from “Crimes against humanity“]
In 2011 in a split decision in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, the US Supreme Court majority ruled that vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” and effectively removed all liability from drug companies, even if there was evidence a drug company could have made a vaccine safer. [CNN]:
The Emperor’s New Clothes
This fairytale is so appropriate in today’s “strange times” –
text from Wikipedia – [bold added]
The Emperor’s New Clothes – the plot:
Two swindlers arrive at the capital city of an emperor who spends lavishly on clothing at the expense of state matters. Posing as weavers, they offer to supply him with magnificent clothes that are invisible to those who are stupid or incompetent.
The emperor hires them, and they set up looms and go to work.
A succession of officials, and then the emperor himself, visit them to check their progress. Each sees that the looms are empty but pretends otherwise to avoid being thought a fool.
Finally, the weavers report that the emperor’s suit is finished.
They mime dressing him and he sets off in a procession before the whole city. The townsfolk uncomfortably go along with the pretense, not wanting to appear inept or stupid, until a child blurts out that the emperor is wearing nothing at all.
The people then realize that everyone has been fooled.
Although startled, the emperor continues the procession, walking more proudly than ever.
[“The Emperor’s New Clothes” is a literary folktale written by Danish author Hans Christian Andersen, about a vain emperor]
Who are the swindlers today?
How Did We Get Into All This?
It is complicated. In times when people face existential threats (losing their health, work, or even their own life), government announcements “don’t make any sense” and conspiracy theories are abundant – and it is difficult to figure out what are news, fake or biased news, and what news we never hear about. Confusion and uncertainty spread and make it difficult to think clearly and to see the situation objectively.
Journalist Roberto Saviano, who has dedicated his career to exposing the Italian mafia, claims that Britain is the most corrupt country on Earth – not exactly a compliment…
90 per cent of the owners of capital in London have their headquarters offshore. Where there is a lot of money, there is also a lot of influence and lobbying.
The British government and politicians have frequently tried to hide misconduct, and were often caught serving their own interests rather than that of the people.
Just like the oil industry has been influencing science and media for years through financing research and studies, which unsurprisingly found that human energy consumption and pollution have no major influence in climate change, the pharmaceutical industry has and is using their influence in science, the media and in politics for their advantage.
Following the money explains a lot. Foundations and Trusts are used to avoid paying tax; funding universities and scientific research institutions avoids paying tax; advertising in newspapers and TV will be written off as expenses – internationally. Nothing new so far.
What seems to have happened:
our government – and others – were lured into “wouldn’t it be good to be prepared for a possible deadly pandemic?“ On the 18th of October 2019 a pandemic tabletop exercise Event 201 simulating a “series of dramatic, scenario-based facilitated discussions, true-to-life dilemmas associated with response to a hypothetical, but scientifically plausible, pandemic.” was held in New York.
Of course it’s good to be prepared – so they adopted emergency procedures for the worst case scenario. And when the emergency procedures had been prepared, coronavirus-19 came. The government is influenced by media, corporate interests and corporate science with their agendas.
And some company made more profit than ever during lockdown,
first of all Amazon. From their point of view lockdown is brilliant.
Either the UK government was naive – or incompetent – or they might have had sinister plans, when they decided to pass the Coronavirus Bill in March. They choose to appoint biased scientific advisers on the SAGE committee (consisting of five independent, and 15 not independent members).
Insiders of the banking sector have predicted a crash of the global economies for 2020, as they are not sustainable any more. Might it be too far off to suspect that politicians feel tempted to use the virus as a culprit, and use their emergency legislation for the expected civil unrest after a financial crash?
The virus spread projections and deaths were scaringly high and massively exaggerated by scientists working for institutions or companies who always need research funds and grants. Dramatizing possible virus threats will result in money coming in. Scientists calling for no action, or suggesting to “let the virus run it’s course” are endangering their job and their research department’s budget. This may explain, why relatively few, mostly retired scientists oppose the official narrative.
Most of the main stream media are directly or indirectly influenced by advertisement revenue or somehow biased by being part of a big international profit orientated investors. For example, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been funding the BBC nearly every year, last in 2019:
|BBC Media Action||2019||Empower Women and Girls||Global Growth & Opportunity||$2,034,790|
|BBC Media Action||2019||Water, Sanitation and Hygiene||Global Growth & Opportunity||$2,994,305|
The Guardian received $5,686,494 in 2011, $550,000 in 2016, $2,893,865 in 2017 and $150,000 in 2018 from the B&M Gates Foundation. As a result, no articles criticising vaccine safety were published in the last 10 years.
Here is an in-depth analysis by the OFF-Guardian:
COVID19: The Big Pharma players behind UK Government lockdown
Here is a detailed investigative film about corporate influence in politics, science, media & medicine from 18 August 2020: “INDOCTORNATION”: we.tl/t-zaQKHTYOez
Independent Critics & Questions
There are many critical voices disputing the lockdown, the emergency legislation and the covid-19 procedures imposed by officials (some are quoted on this web site above); they are often retired (without fear of losing their job) or work independently.
In the UK government’s advisory group SAGE only five out of 20 members are independent; what advice can we expect?
WORLD DOCTORS ALLIANCE Open letter to the UK government, governments of the world and the citizens of the world
12 Experts Questioning the Coronavirus Panic
640 Doctors Claim that “COVID-19 is a Global Scam” (now over 1000 doctors, scientists and lawyers by ACU2020.org) – Videos in English
Open Letter by 394 Belgian Medical Doctors and 1,340 medically trained health professionals addressed to their civil authorities and media about the Covid-19 outbreak. “there is no medical justification for any emergency policy anymore.”
“The Great Barrington Declaration – gbdeclaration.org” (from 4 Oct), signed by 8,795 Medical & Public Health Scientists,
22,290 Medical Practitioners and 388,335 general public (by 12 Oct).
UK: BBC reports: Coronavirus: Health experts join global anti-lockdown movement (7 Oct)
“Sixty-six GPs, including TV doctors Dr Phil Hammond and Dr Rosemary Leonard and a number of medics who have held senior roles at the British Medical Association, have written to the health secretary, saying there is insufficient emphasis on “non-Covid harms” in the decision-making.”.
Powerful editorial in the British Medical Journal Fri 13 Nov, by Kamran Abbasi, executive editor:
“Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science…..”
“Politicians and governments are suppressing science. They do so in the public interest, they say, to accelerate availability of diagnostics and treatments. They do so to support innovation, to bring products to market at unprecedented speed. Both of these reasons are partly plausible; the greatest deceptions are founded in a grain of truth. But the underlying behaviour is troubling…”
“The UK’s pandemic response relies too heavily on scientists and other government appointees with worrying competing interests, including shareholdings in companies that manufacture covid-19 diagnostic tests, treatments, and vaccines. Government appointees are able to ignore or cherry pick science—another form of misuse—and indulge in anti-competitive practices that favour their own products and those of friends and associates…”
“When good science is suppressed, people die.”
MORE critical voices are listed in the LINKS below
Lots of questions remain – like:
- US Patent for Coronavirus isolated from humans Patent (Patent # 7,776,521), 14 May 2007
- METHODS FOR PRODUCING RECOMBINANT CORONAVIRUS, United States Patent US 7,279,327 BThis letter2
from 9 Oct 2007 [why would anyone patent this virus?]
What Can I do?
“What can I do” is now a separate article:
=>What can I do?
Links to the chapters above:
• Legal Update 1 December • Why did we want to stop the virus? • Coronaviruses are seasonal • Deadly ventilators • Lockdown Loneliness • Lockdown Deaths • “False Alarm” (German Interior Ministry Report) • PCR Tests • R Number • Facemasks • Contact Track & Trace • Saving the NHS? • Media and bias • The Spanish Flu • Politics of Fear • Hydroxychloroquine Study to fail • Children and covid-19 • Covid-19 deaths and statistics • Preventing infections? • introducing face masks and vaccines when ‘it is all over’? • Pandemic reactions out of proportion • Brave New Normal? • Learning from health history? • The Emperor’s New Clothes • How did we get into all this? • Independent Critics • LINKS below
Articles & Studies:
External peer review of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results
Facts about Covid-19 swprs.org/a-swiss-doctor-on-covid-19/
Questions for lockdown apologists (showing lockdown deaths)
http://inproportion2.talkigy.com shows statistical manipulation
George Carlin 6 minute comedy: Germs, Immune System
OFF-Guardian: The Big Pharma players behind UK Government lockdown
Updated News pages:
Covid – Adapt, Don’t Fight Campaign
Alliance for Natural Health
‘Collateral Global’ collateralglobal.org global repository for research into collateral effects of the covid-19 lockdown measures
WORLD DOCTORS ALLIANCE Open letter to governments and citizens of the world
CoviLeaks covileaks.co.uk/ response to media propaganda and government misinformation re. COVID-19 ‘pandemic’
VERY good analysis of mistakes
Facts about Covid-19 in 25 languages
“What’s Below The Surface”
www.ukcolumn.org (news, opinion, showing media manipulation)
The OFF-Guardian.org independent (former Guardian commentators)
mercola.com/coronavirus-resources.htm Coronavirus related resource page
videos & articles
Children’s Health Defense Europe