COVID-19 came upon our nation earlier this year and has impacted our way of life and our economy in profound ways. The main stream media bombard us every day with the latest counts of cases and deaths attributed to COVID-19. There are those who make the case that our government’s response to COVID-19 was worse than the virus itself. The following articles are an attempt to shed light on this most important issue. As always, step back and look at multiple sources, questioning everything with an open but critical mind, including these sources and what Dr. Fauci and the government says. And you decide if COVID-19 is overblown.
1) The number of COVID-19 cases is vastly overstated.
NY TIMES: Up to 90% Who’ve Tested COVID-Positive Wrongly Diagnosed! TRUTH: A Whole Lot Worse! (Pt 3/3)
Posted at 11:30 am on September 3, 2020 by Michael Thau
“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false face for the urge to rule it.”
― H.L. Mencken
In the previous entry, we learned how a process invented to increase the size of research samples of DNA called polymerase chain reaction is used to test for viruses even though the guy who received a Nobel Prize for inventing it said using it that way doesn’t work.
Kary Mullis’s PCR process takes segments of DNA through a “cycle” that doubles the amount. If you run a single segment of DNA through just 40 cycles, you’ll end up with 1 x 240, which is over a trillion copies. Remember that number, it’s going to be important later.
We also saw that the COVID-19 virus, like any other virus, is just some genetic code surrounded by a shell that acts as a “Trojan horse,” allowing the virus to invade the cells of living organisms. Once inside, the genetic code exits the shell, hijacking the cell’s functions to make it produce more copies of the virus.
The genetic code inside the COVID-19 virus’s shell is RNA. So, since the PCR cycle only works on DNA, before a sample is tested for COVID-19 another process is used to convert the former into the latter. Once that’s done, the sample is run through a number of PCR cycles to amplify the amount of any converted-viral-RNA that was originally in it so there’s enough be detected.
But two factors are responsible for creating the massive unreliability of PCR testing that, as we saw in part 1, the New York Times reported on but downplayed to push for mass testing of a different kind without discrediting the whole concept.
- The bits of genetic material whose amount is being amplified ARE NOT viruses. They’re just small segments of inert genetic material found inside a virus’s shell. Without the shell, they don’t have any ability to infect a cell and reproduce. The PCR test doesn’t detect “live” viruses, at best it only detects their “remains.”
- The detection of viral remains involves massively amplifying the amount in the original sample by running it through successive PCR cycles. And nothing about the PCR test itself will tell you if there was actually any “live” virus in the original sample.
The number of PCR cycles it takes to amplify a sample containing viral remains to the point where they can be detected is called its cycle threshold.
And if the New York Times were interested in producing journalism rather than shilling for mandatory testing, they would have focused their whole story on something you have to read three-fourths of the way in to even find out.
The Food and Drug Administration said in an emailed statement that it does not specify the cycle threshold ranges used to determine who is positive, and that “commercial manufacturers and laboratories set their own.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said it is examining the use of cycle threshold measures “for policy decisions.” The agency said it would need to collaborate with the F.D.A. and with device manufacturers to ensure the measures “can be used properly and with assurance that we know what they mean.”
So the FDA and CDC have spent months hyping a test that involves amplifying tiny samples of viral remains until there’s enough to detect. But, according to the New York Times, there are no rules or even any guidelines for how much amplification the testing companies do.
Even though obviously, the more positive test results they churn out, the more downstream business they’ll get from people who are worried because they had contact with someone that tested positive and the general increased concern over the virus.
And, of course, the Times neglected to mention any of that but, instead, focused on pushing for continuing to mass test for COVID-19 but using a different test.
As we saw in the previous entry, they also failed to mention that, since any test will have a false positive rate, mass testing will mean that an alarming number of bogus COVID-19 cases will continue to be reported every single day from now til eternity even after the virus has run its course, creating an illusory pandemic that never goes away.
But what the New York Times says about the unreliability of PCR testing also significantly understates how badly the cycling process is being abused to inflate the number of positive test results.
And it’s probably no coincidence that, had they been upfront about just how unreliable the data we’ve thus far gotten from PCR-testing is, they would have had a tough time claiming there was any justification for mass testing by other means.
Their article informs us that most testing companies run the samples they receive through 40 cycles. As we saw above, that means any genetic material in them is being multiplied over a trillion times. We’re told that a few companies run samples through only 37 cycles, which is still multiplying the amount of converted viral-RNA by a factor of almost 140 billion.
The New York Times goes on to say that the “C.D.C.’s own calculations suggest that it is extremely difficult to detect any live virus in a sample above a threshold of 33 cycles.” But, this is a deceptive way of stating what the CDC’s data shows that significantly understates how using 40 or even 37 cycles is going to result in massive amounts of positive diagnoses that ought to be negative.
The CDC didn’t just have “extreme difficulty” finding any live virus in samples whose cycle threshold was above 33. They were straight-up unable to find any. Moreover, they were frequently unable to find any live virus even in samples with lower cycle thresholds.
But the worst is yet to come.
Though the CDC replied to the Times by saying they were “examining the use of cycle threshold measures for policy decisions,” the New York Times either didn’t know or didn’t want you to know that the CDC already has guidelines that recommend … wait for it… 40 amplification cycles. Even though their own researchers were unable to find any live virus in samples with a cycling threshold greater than 33!
That’s right folks. The CDC issued guidelines for COVID-19 testing that their own research shows are bound to mean that a lot of people not infected by the virus would get back test results falsely saying they were.
Moreover, even running samples through the 33 cycles the New York Times mentions as the cutoff point in the CDC’s research appears to be way too much amplification.
One paper the CDC cites reports finding no “live” virus in any samples whose cycle threshold is greater than 24. And, even the CDC found a lot more samples that had no live virus than they did samples that did for cycle thresholds between 24 and 33.
Moreover, a pooled analysis of several different studies by a team of researchers at Oxford also concluded that positive PCR test results from samples with cycle thresholds over 24 shouldn’t be taken to indicate the presence of any actual virus.
The upshot of all of this is that the 40 amplification cycles recommended by the CDC and used in the majority of U.S labs looks like it will generate a lot more bogus positive test results than even the New York Times said.
The Times claimed that around 90% of samples taken from a set of positive tests that used 40 cycles were really negative because, when they were run through only 30 cycles, no viral remains were detected.
But given that 30 cycles also appear to be way too much amplification, it’s likely that a lot more than just 90% were actually bogus. Who knows how few positive diagnoses would have been verified if they’d used the much lower 24 number of amplifying cycles recommended by the Oxford team and above which the other research cited by the CDC found no live virus.
Moreover, though that other research did at least sometimes find actual virus in some samples with cycle thresholds at or below 24, they still frequently found none. Meaning that, so far as the available research goes, positive PCR test results appear to never be very reliable regardless of how few amplification cycles are used.
But it gets even worse. All the studies cited by the CDC were done only on people with symptoms. And it turns out that the number of days after onset seems to have a huge effect on whether positive PCR test results are reliable.
According to that study the CDC cited that found no virus at cycle thresholds above 24, if a sample testing positive is taken more than seven days after the onset of symptoms, the probability that the test is indicating the presence of live virus is… wait for it…. zero.
But even positive test results from samples taken within 7 days of the onset of symptoms don’t turn out to be very reliable. The study only found a 40% or less chance of discovering any live virus in samples testing positive for viral remains that were taken on any of the first seven days after symptom onset except the third and fourth. And the ones taken on the third day only had an 80% chance of containing any virus while the ones taken on the fourth only had a 70% chance.
Even for people with symptoms, the research seems to show that regardless of how few cycles you use the PCR test is going to diagnose a lot of people who aren’t actually infected with the COVID-19 virus as positive.
But what’s worse for the regime of mass testing is that none of these studies was done on asymptomatic patients at all. So we have no reason whatsoever to believe that PCR testing is ever reliable for discovering infections in people who don’t show symptoms.
- The study which kept track of the amount of time after symptom onset samples were taken found no live virus in samples testing positive taken more than 7 days after symptoms began.
- The CDC didn’t find any virus in most samples that tested positive after being run through more than 24 cycles. The other study found no virus in any samples with a cycle threshold greater than 24. And the Oxford pooled analysis also found that more than 24 amplification cycles is too many.
Given that most labs in the U.S are running samples through 40 amplification cycles and the few that aren’t are amplifying them 37 times, as hard as it is to believe, it’s very possible that, for all intents and purposes, no one in America who tested positive but didn’t have symptoms was really infected.
And even if some were, the percentage who weren’t is likely to be a lot more than the 90% upper bound suggested by the New York Times.
Moreover, given the available research, a positive PCR test isn’t even a reliable indicator of COVID-19 infection even if you do have symptoms. It wouldn’t be at all surprising if most of the people with symptoms who’ve been led to believe they have COVID-19 by a positive PCR test really have something else.
In short, all the available research seems to indicate that positive PCR test results are utterly meaningless.
It turns out that the guy who won a Nobel Prize for inventing the process was right.
And, since PCR tests are the standard diagnostic tool that’s been used to detect COVID-19 infection, all the data we’ve been given is worthless too. We don’t have a clue how many people have really been infected with the COVID-19 virus or what its fatality rate is.
The numbers the medical bureaucrats in charge have been throwing at us might as well have come from a Ouija board.
But there’s something that’s, in a way, even more scandalous going on here.
The CDC was hyping PCR tests for COVID before any of this research was even done. They were also using the results to compile data about it which was then used to scare the public and justify the never-before-seen widespread adoption of extreme measures to slow down its spread.
They even ignored all the precautions they took to limit the use of PCR-testing in every single one of the previous four viral pandemics that occurred this century.
Clearly someone needs to investigate why the CDC recommended that COVID testing labs run samples through 40 amplification cycles.
Why PCR testing is even still being used to generate data that keeps the country in a state of panic when it’s clearly worthless is another thing that obviously needs to be looked into seriously.
But a more basic question is why PCR tests were being hyped as “the gold standard” for COVID-19 detection before any testing was done to verify that claim when they don’t even detect the virus.
The American people have been frightened into surrendering their most basic liberties based on a test that both Anthony Fauci and CDC director Robert Redfield had to know there was no reason to think was at all reliable.
And once the research showed that the test is likely falsely diagnosing millions of Americans who don’t really have COVID-19, they not only did nothing to end its use, they continued scaring us with its results.
We’re witnessing perhaps the greatest political scandal in all of history and certainly one of its greatest crimes. And it’s about time someone with authority found out what those responsible were trying to accomplish and make sure that, whatever it was, they’re made to pay the steep price justice demands.
We’ve suffered way too much carnage and been told way too many lies to let this pass.
…If you missed part 1 or need another look, you can find it here…
Part 2 can be found here.
IMPORTANT! COVID-9 SUPER SCAM: Very Well Exposed by Insider
JULIAN ROSE March 27, 2020
The below was sent to me by a widely respected professional scientist in USA. While we may know it’s a scam – this insider evidence on the methodology of the madness is second to none. Please use!!
The following is from a medical forum. The writer prefers to stay anonymous, because presenting any narrative different than the official one can cause you a lot of stress in the toxic environment caused by the scam which surrounds COVID-19 these days.
I work in the healthcare field. Here’s the problem, we are testing people for any strain of a Coronavirus. Not specifically for COVID-19. There are no reliable tests for a specific COVID-19 virus. There are no reliable agencies or media outlets for reporting numbers of actual COVID-19 virus cases. This needs to be addressed first and foremost. Every action and reaction to COVID-19 is based on totally flawed data and we simply cannot make accurate assessments.
This is why you’re hearing that most people with COVID-19 are showing nothing more than cold/flu like symptoms. That’s because most Coronavirus strains are nothing more than cold/flu like symptoms. The few actual novel Coronavirus cases do have some worse respiratory responses, but still have a very promising recovery rate, especially for those without prior issues.
The ‘gold standard’ in testing for COVID-19 is laboratory isolated/purified coronavirus particles free from any contaminants and particles that look like viruses but are not, that have been proven to be the cause of the syndrome known as COVID-19 and obtained by using proper viral isolation methods and controls (not the PCR that is currently being used or Serology /antibody tests which do not detect virus as such).
PCR basically takes a sample of your cells and amplifies any DNA to look for ‘viral sequences’, i.e. bits of non-human DNA that seem to match parts of a known viral genome.
The problem is the test is known not to work. It uses ‘amplification’ which means taking a very very tiny amount of DNA and growing it exponentially until it can be analyzed. Obviously any minute contaminations in the sample will also be amplified leading to potentially gross errors of discovery.
Additionally, it’s only looking for partial viral sequences, not whole genomes, so identifying a single pathogen is next to impossible even if you ignore the other issues.
The Mickey Mouse test kits being sent out to hospitals, at best, tell analysts you have some viral DNA in your cells. Which most of us do, most of the time. It may tell you the viral sequence is related to a specific type of virus – say the huge family of coronavirus. But that’s all. The idea these kits can isolate a specific virus like COVID-19 is nonsense.
And that’s not even getting into the other issue – viral load. If you remember the PCR works by amplifying minute amounts of DNA. It therefore is useless at telling you how much virus you may have. And that’s the only question that really matters when it comes to diagnosing illness.
Everyone will have a few virus kicking round in their system at any time, and most will not cause illness because their quantities are too small. For a virus to sicken you, you need a lot of it, a massive amount of it. But PCR does not test viral load and therefore can’t determine if an osteogenesis is present in sufficient quantities to sicken you.
If you feel sick and get a PCR test any random virus DNA might be identified even if they aren’t at all involved in your sickness which leads to false diagnosis.
And coronavirus are incredibly common. A large percentage of the world human population will have covid DNA in them in small quantities even if they are perfectly well or sick with some other pathogen.
Do you see where this is going yet? If you want to create a totally false panic about a totally false pandemic – pick a coronavirus.
They are incredibly common and there’s tons of them. A very high percentage of people who have become sick by other means (flu, bacterial pneumonia, anything) will have a positive PCR test for covid even if you’re doing them properly and ruling out contamination, simply because covids are so common. There are hundreds of thousands of flu and pneumonia victims in hospitals throughout the world at any one time.
All you need to do is select the sickest of these in a single location – say Wuhan – administer PCR tests to them and claim anyone showing viral sequences similar to a coronavirus (which will inevitably be quite a few) is suffering from a ‘new’ disease.
Since you already selected the sickest flu cases a fairly high proportion of your sample will go on to die. You can then say this ‘new’ virus has a CFR higher than the flu and use this to infuse more concern and do more tests which will of course produce more ‘cases’, which expands the testing, which produces yet more ‘cases’ and so on and so on.
Before long you have your ‘pandemic’, and all you have done is use a simple test kit trick to convert the worst flu and pneumonia cases into something new that doesn’t actually exist.
Now just run the same scam in other countries. Making sure to keep the fear message running high so that people will feel panicky and less able to think critically.
Your only problem is going to be that – due to the fact there is no actual new deadly pathogen but just regular sick people, you are mislabeling your case numbers, and especially your deaths, are going to be way too low for a real new deadly virus pandemic.
But you can stop people pointing this out in several ways.
1. You can claim this is just the beginning and more deaths are imminent. Use this as an excuse to quarantine everyone and then claim the quarantine prevented the expected millions of dead.
2. You can tell people that ‘minimizing’ the dangers is irresponsible and bully them into not talking about numbers.
3. You can talk crap about made up numbers hoping to blind people with pseudoscience.
4. You can start testing well people (who, of course, will also likely have shreds of coronavirus DNA in them) and thus inflate your ‘case figures’ with ‘asymptomatic carriers’ (you will of course have to spin that to sound deadly even though any virologist knows the more symptom-less cases you have the less deadly is your pathogen.
Take these 4 simple steps and you can have your own entirely manufactured pandemic up and running in weeks. They cannot “confirm” something for which there is no accurate test.
“The Truth about COVID-19 Mortality Rates” – An interview with Dr. Michael Lovett, Nobel Laureate and Stanford Professor
Age of COVID-19 Patients:
- Of all the COVID-19 deaths in the world, just 8% on average are under the age of 65, and 50% are over 85 years of age.
- Almost half of the deaths in the country are from people in nursing homes.
- In all of Europe, more than 90% of all deaths are of people over 65 years of age. This does not come from reporting from those countries (which is flawed), but from the excess deaths over the norm.
- The death rate is more important than the number of cases, because 98% of people who test positive have no symptoms or mild symptoms.
- Coronavirus is basically taking out people who are not very healthy either because of pre-existing conditions or old age; the death profile for coronavirus is basically the same as old age or infirmity.
Comparison With Flu
- The death rate for COVID-19 isn’t much worse than the flu. But flu is a serious disease.
- In Europe, COVID-19 deaths plateaued at 153,006, just 15% more than the 2017-2018 flu season.
- New York City now has a death rate of 1.3 per thousand people, which is not that different from flu.
- Epidemiologists don’t mind being wrong on the high side; they tend to exaggerate.
- The CDC predicted 2.2 million deaths from COVID-19, and this is with social distancing!
- The World Health Organization has a record of exaggerating on the high side, perhaps to get more attention.
- There is huge collateral damage from lock downs, caused by things like shutting down economies, people going hungry, and people losing their savings, which apparently epidemiologists don’t consider.
- Four countries did not immediately shut down, and did not legally require social distancing: Belarus, Japan, Sweden, and Thailand.
- The percentage of deaths in Sweden was lower than in states like New York and New Jersey, that had major lock downs.
- Japan has 127 million people, with 558 deaths total, the slowest progress of coronavirus in the world. They have a high population density and did not have a lock down.
- The deaths tend to stop at 1 in 1000 people, a natural saturation immunity, which is about the same as 1 month of normal deaths.
- The PCR test for COVID-19 has flaws; there is a race to increase the number of deaths.
“CDC admits COVID-19 ‘positive result’ just means you’ve previously contracted the “common cold”
July 8, 2020
“A positive test result shows you may have antibodies from an infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. However, there is a chance a positive result means that you have antibodies from an infection with a virus from the same family of viruses (called coronaviruses), such as the one that causes the common cold.”
“Dr. Scott Atlas Stanford Hoover Institute Confirms What I’ve Said for Months 12 04 28”
Dr. Scott Atlas, Senior Research Fellow at the Stanford Hoover Institute:
- Young people have almost zero chance of having serious health consequences from COVID-19 unless they have underlying health issues.
- The median age of teachers is 41, and 85% are under 55.
- So 15% could teach from home.
- Retention rate from on-line education is 30% less than classroom instruction.
- There is no reason to keep schools closed; schools need to open and open now.
- Some COVID patients come from “presumptive diagnoses” – we think it looks COVID, so they are counted as COVID patients.
- In the ICUs – how many are truly COVID patients?
- We can’t even trust the tests; FDA has stated they do not require the manufacturers to certify the tests. This is all fraudulent.
- The most important number is the death rate, not the number of cases.
- The death rate is down dramatically, and for people in vulnerable populations it is down by half.
- San Diego County – keep your restaurants and gyms open, and to go the beach!
“Coronavirus tests are a LIE… false positives vastly outnumber real positives … official infection counts wildly overstated”
- The African nation of Tanzania recently sent samples to the WHO for coronavirus testing. Among those items that tested positive for the coronavirus were samples from a goat, a papaya and a pheasant, all at once exposing the total science fraud behind coronavirus testing. (When the president heard the news, he reportedly confronted the WHO, then kicked the organization out of the country.)
- As we’ve warned for over a month, most coronavirus tests produce huge numbers of false positives. The testing kits are largely made in China, and either through gross incompetence or malicious intent, China-made lab tests are notorious for being so inaccurate that they’re practically useless.
- We now have enough knowledge of the “false positives” testing fiasco to be able to say, with confidence, that the official coronavirus infection numbers are wildly over-stated. Nowhere near that number of people have actually been infected.
“COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless”
- Lockdowns and hygienic measures around the world are based on numbers of cases and mortality rates created by the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests used to identify “positive” patients, whereby “positive” is usually equated with “infected.”
- But looking closely at the facts, the conclusion is that these PCR tests are meaningless as a diagnostic tool to determine an alleged infection by a supposedly new virus called SARS-CoV-2.
- It is very remarkable that Kary Mullis, the inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology,
regarded the PCR as inappropriate to detect a viral infection.
- The reason is that the intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique, being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and not as a diagnostic tool to detect viruses.
“CDC Blows the COVID Narrative – Media Goes into High Gear to Cover it up Fast!”
- Collin County Texas had an increase in coronavirus cases, and stated that they have redefined COVID-19 cases to include “probable cases”. If a COVID-19 positive person has interacted with 5 other people, they are identified as “probable cases” and added to the COVID-19 case count.
De-mystifying the Coronavirus Statistics. Read Carefully: The Risks Are Exceedingly Low!
Only a small fraction of one percent of the population of China ever got COVID, despite well-propagandized media reports that successfully made most of us think that the entire population of China was at risk.
The CDC’s Bureau of Statistics is strongly encouraging (actually ordering?) all American physicians to list “COVID” as the cause of death on discharge and death certificates of every patient that was either test-positive or simply suspected of having COVID during the hospitalization, illness or death at home or on the street. This is true even if the patient was actually a terminally-ill, Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) elderly patient who would be expected to succumb to their pre-existent cardiac, pulmonary, renal, immunologic and/or hepatic diseases that were therefore also being “treated” with large numbers of potentially toxic prescription drugs.
Because of the significant incidence of faulty and unapproved PCR tests, it is important to be mindful that an unknown, but significant percentage of coronavirus test-positive cases are actually false positive cases and therefore patients with common colds (or even no symptoms at all) can easily be erroneously confirmed as COVID-19!
Consistent Inaccuracies in COVID-19 Testing and Reporting
- A suspiciously high number of laboratories in Florida are reporting 100% of COVID-19 viral tests as positive. It appears many labs may be submitting positive results only, omitting negative results altogether. In Florida, while each positive test result is counted as a “case,” a single person may have two or more test results. So, one infected individual can be counted as two “cases. Faulty or contaminated tests have been used and reporting guidelines have been changed and updated multiple times, virtually eliminating any possibility of accurately tracking infected cases and deaths. Add to that the fact that in many areas, “assumed” cases — obtained through contact tracing — are counted as “positive cases” as well (or have been in the past), even without laboratory confirmed testing.
The media is intentionally confusing a positive test result with COVID-19 to deliberately mislead the public into believing the disease is far more serious than it is. They know better but consciously choose this despicable practice. A recent example would be CNN’s article, “Florida Has More COVID-19 Than Most Countries in the World.
As explained by Dr. Deborah Birx during an April White House Coronavirus Task Force briefing, “If you have 1% of your population infected, and you have a test that’s only 99% specific, that means that when you find a positive, 50% of the time will be a real positive and 50% of the time it won’t be,” Birx said. Meanwhile, hospitalizations and actual deaths have dramatically declined. The week of July 4, a grand total of 522 Americans died with or from COVID-19. The week of July 11, the death toll was down to 181, and that’s for the entire nation.
Antibody Tests Are Equally Unreliable:
Antibody tests are also turning out to have their share of quality problems. At relatively low population prevalences, which likely reflect current conditions in the United States and elsewhere, we would argue that false-positive rates are unacceptably high with the Cellex test.” Common cold antibodies can trigger false positive test.
COVID-19 Lethality Has Been Massively Overestimated
This means they were exposed to the virus, got infected and fought it off, all while experiencing few or no symptoms. Based on these data, the overall death rate appears to be around 0.1%.
Continued Testing Now Merely Drives Irrational Fearmongering
The primary justification for the tyrannical governmental interventions of COVID-19 was to slow the spread of the infection so that hospital resources would not be overwhelmed, causing people to die due to lack of medical care. The only rational reason for any of the government interventions is to continue to erode your personal freedoms and civil liberties and transfer wealth to those in control. It’s all fearmongering based on a combination of wildly manipulated data and flawed tests. Hopefully, local and federal leaders will wise up and start issuing saner guidance sooner rather than later.
COVID CRIMINALS: Nashville officials buried numbers showing very low infections in order to gaslight the public over need to keep bars and restaurants shut down
Thursday, September 17, 2020 by: Mike Adams
(Natural News) Today we are calling for the arrest and prosecution of top government officials in Nashville, TN, who have now been caught red-handed covering up the very low numbers of infections at restaurants and bars in order to gaslight the public and justify draconian business closures and lockdowns. While nursing homes and construction sites were found to have produced over 1,000 cases of coronavirus infections (each), bars and restaurants reported only 22 cases, reports Fox 17.
Covid-19 A Once in a Century Fiasco in the Making
Thursday, July 9th 2020 at 10:00 am
Back in March at the beginning of the COVID 19 outbreak, the highly respected Stanford Epidemiologist John Ioannidis drew heavy criticism for expressing his view that governments were making decisions without reliable data. On March 17, 2020, Dr. John Ioannidis writes: “The current coronavirus disease, Covid-19, has been called a once-in-a-century pandemic. But it may also be a once-in-a-century evidence fiasco.”
The Data Has Accumulated and Dr. John Ioannidis was RIGHT !!
In a recent interview June 27, 2020, Dr Ioannidis spells out the accumulated data which is now available. Sadly, he was right all along. Regarding the infection fatality rate, remarkably, Dr John Ioannidis says for people younger than age 45, the infection fatality rate is ZERO !!! And, for people age 45 to 70, the infection fatality rate is probably about 0.05-0.3%, historically similar to other seasonal respiratory viruses. However, fatality rate for frail nursing home patients may be as high as 25%.
Draconian lockdowns put 1.1 billion at risk of starvation. Dr. Ioannidis replies:
“Globally, the lockdown measures have increased the number of people at risk of starvation to 1.1 billion, and they are putting at risk millions of lives, with the potential resurgence of tuberculosis, childhood diseases …, and malaria. I hope that policymakers look at the big picture of all the potential problems and not only on the very important, but relatively thin slice of evidence that is COVID-19.”
PEOPLE WHO NEVER TOOK TEST BEING TOLD THEY’RE COVID-POSITIVE
How accurate are coronavirus numbers?
Kelen McBreen | Infowars.com – JULY 21, 2020
By Arjun Walia, September 14, 2020
“We have a lot of evidence that it (the new coronavirus) is a fake story all over the world.” To put it in context, he wasn’t referring to the virus being fake, but simply that it’s no more dangerous than the seasonal flu (or just as dangerous) and that there is no justification for the measures being taken to combat it.
I also think it’s important to mention that a report published in the British Medical Journal has suggested that quarantine measures in the United Kingdom as a result of the new coronavirus may have already killed more UK seniors than the coronavirus has during the peak of the virus.
Open Letter from Medical Doctors and Health Professionals to All Belgian Authorities and All Belgian Media
- The current crisis management has become totally disproportionate and causes more damage than it does any good.
- We believe that the policy has introduced mandatory measures that are not sufficiently scientifically based, unilaterally directed, and that there is not enough space in the media for an open debate in which different views and opinions are heard.
- The use of the non-specific PCR test, which produces many false positives, showed an exponential picture. This test was rushed through with an emergency procedure and was never seriously self-tested. The creator expressly warned that this test was intended for research and not for diagnostics.
- Lockdown – if we compare the waves of infection in countries with strict lockdown policies to countries that did not impose lockdowns (Sweden, Iceland …), we see similar curves. So there is no link between the imposed lockdown and the course of the infection. Lockdown has not led to a lower mortality rate.
- Studies have shown that the more social and emotional commitments people have, the more resistant they are to viruses. It is much more likely that isolation and quarantine have fatal consequences.
- Mortality turned out to be many times lower than expected and close to that of a normal seasonal flu (0.2%).
- Meanwhile, there is an affordable, safe and efficient therapy available for those who do show severe symptoms of disease in the form of HCQ (hydroxychloroquine), zinc and AZT (azithromycin). Rapidly applied this therapy leads to recovery and often prevents hospitalization. Hardly anyone has to die now.
Contact tracing and epidemiological studies show that healthy people (or positively tested asymptomatic carriers) are virtually unable to transmit the virus. Healthy people therefore do not put each other at risk. All this seriously calls into question the whole policy of social distancing and compulsory mouth masks for healthy people – there is no scientific basis for this.
Oral masks belong in contexts where contacts with proven at-risk groups or people with upper respiratory complaints take place, and in a medical context/hospital-retirement home setting. They reduce the risk of droplet infection by sneezing or coughing. Oral masks in healthy individuals are ineffective against the spread of viral infections.
Wearing a mask is not without side effects. Oxygen deficiency (headache, nausea, fatigue, loss of concentration) occurs fairly quickly, an effect similar to altitude sickness. Every day we now see patients complaining of headaches, sinus problems, respiratory problems and hyperventilation due to wearing masks. Inappropriate use of masks without a comprehensive medical cardio-pulmonary test file is therefore not recommended by recognized safety specialists for workers.
Survey studies on influenza vaccinations show that in 10 years we have only succeeded three times in developing a vaccine with an efficiency rate of more than 50%. Vaccinating our elderly appears to be inefficient. Over 75 years of age, the efficacy is almost non-existent.
Due to the continuous natural mutation of viruses, as we also see every year in the case of the influenza virus, a vaccine is at most a temporary solution, which requires new vaccines each time afterwards. An untested vaccine, which is implemented by emergency procedure and for which the manufacturers have already obtained legal immunity from possible harm, raises serious questions. We do not wish to use our patients as guinea pigs.
On a global scale, 700,000 cases of damage or death are expected as a result of the vaccine. If 95% of people experience Covid-19 virtually symptom-free, the risk of exposure to an untested vaccine is irresponsible.
The role of the media and the official communication plan
Over the past few months, newspaper, radio and TV makers seemed to stand almost uncritically behind the panel of experts and the government, there, where it is precisely the press that should be critical and prevent one-sided governmental communication. This has led to a public communication in our news media, that was more like propaganda than objective reporting.
In our opinion, it is the task of journalism to bring news as objectively and neutrally as possible, aimed at finding the truth and critically controlling power, with dissenting experts also being given a forum in which to express themselves.
The official story that a lockdown was necessary, that this was the only possible solution, and that everyone stood behind this lockdown, made it difficult for people with a different view, as well as experts, to express a different opinion. Alternative opinions were ignored or ridiculed. We have not seen open debates in the media, where different views could be expressed.
We were also surprised by the many videos and articles by many scientific experts and authorities, which were and are still being removed from social media.
The way in which Covid-19 has been portrayed by politicians and the media has not done the situation any good either. The relentless bombardment with figures, that were unleashed on the population day after day, hour after hour, without interpreting those figures, without comparing them to flu deaths in other years, without comparing them to deaths from other causes, has induced a real psychosis of fear in the population. This is not information, this is manipulation.
We deplore the role of the WHO in this, which has called for the infodemic (i.e. all divergent opinions from the official discourse, including by experts with different views) to be silenced by an unprecedented media censorship. We urgently call on the media to take their responsibilities here!
Covid-19 is not a cold virus, but a well treatable condition with a mortality rate comparable to the seasonal flu. In other words, there is no longer an insurmountable obstacle to public health. There is no state of emergency.
Immense damage caused by the current policies: we find it shocking that the government is invoking health as a reason for the emergency law. As doctors and health professionals, in the face of a virus which, in terms of its harmfulness, mortality and transmissibility, approaches the seasonal influenza, we can only reject these extremely disproportionate measures.
- We therefore demand an immediate end to all measures.
- We are questioning the legitimacy of the current advisory experts, who meet behind closed doors.
- Following on from ACU 2020 https://acu2020.org/nederlandse-versie/ we call for an in-depth examination of the role of the WHO and the possible influence of conflicts of interest in this organization. It was also at the heart of the fight against the “infodemic”, i.e. the systematic censorship of all dissenting opinions in the media. This is unacceptable for a democratic state governed by the rule of law.
“Media Lying about COVID-19 Testing”
“The government set the threshold for the commonly used PCR “swab” test for COVID-19 to be extraordinarily high, with the result that many people who “test positive” either have a 0% chance of getting sick or infecting another person, or an extremely low chance of being contagious.”
“The media is lying to the public about COVID-19 by making it seem as though the PCR “swab” testing used today has the ability to determine… yes you have COVID-19 or no you don’t.” If the PCR test doesn’t find a match until 39 cycles, it means that the test is only finding trace amounts of one of the genetic sequences associated with SARS-Cov-2 and the person being tested has a 0% chance of getting sick or infecting another person, but based on today’s CDC standards that person will count as a new positive case of COVID-19!
Taiwan’s has a “near perfect’ COVID-19 response with only 447 confirmed cases and 7 deaths. Realizing that COVID-19 patients with a CT value of 32 or higher are unlikely to get sick or be contagious, Taiwan only considers a person to be COVID-19 positive if they have a CT value of less than 35.
We know somebody who works in one of the largest U.S. diagnostic labs and in recent weeks over 90% of all “positive” PCR tests for COVID-19 have had a cycle threshold value of 33 or higher. The fear-mongering media refuses to report this fact. They refuse to even explain the meaning of a cycle threshold value.
So many false positives raises the question about “COVID cases” that are asymptomatic: If there are no symptoms and they don’t spread the disease; do they really have it?
2) The number of COVID-19 deaths is vastly overstated.
CDC states that if COVID-19 contributes to a death, it should be counted as a COVID-19 death.
U.S. Senator and physician Dr. Scott Jensen states: “We received instructions from the CDC that if COVID-19 contributed to a death, that it should be counted as a COVID-19 death.”
“The US Is Dramatically Overcounting COVID-19 Deaths”
“New York is classifying cases as Coronavirus deaths even when postmortem tests have been negative. Despite negative tests, classifications are based on symptoms, even though the symptoms are often very similar to those of the seasonal flu. Deaths that have absolutely nothing to do with the Coronavirus count as virus deaths. Add to that claims that the CDC is double counting some of these improperly identified cases and the perverse financial incentives created by the government, and you have a real mess when crucial decisions are being made based in large part on this data.”
“Coronavirus – the Truth and What You Need to Know”
* “Dr. Ngozi Ezike, director of the Department of Public Health (Illinois) admitted that anyone who passes away after testing positive for the virus must be counted as a Covid death, so “technically even if you died of a clear alternate cause, but you had COVID at the same time, it’s still listed as a COVID death.”
* Organizations like the CDC swallowed their embarrassment by admitting that “it’s much less dangerous for children than a typical influenza AND that the COVID-19 hospitalization rates are “similar to” those in the 65 and older category during “recent high severity influenza seasons.
* Doctors Dan Erickson, Artin Massihi and Rashid Buttar risked professional scorn to tell the truth: that lockdown orders are unnecessary.
I’ve Signed Death Certificates During COVID-19. Here’s Why You Can’t Trust Any of the Statistics on the Number of Victims
By Dr. Malcolm Kendrick Global Research, May 29, 2020
As an NHS doctor, I’ve seen people die and be listed as a victim of coronavirus without ever being tested for it. I do know that other doctors put down Covid-19 on anyone who died from early March onwards.
People may well be dying ‘because of’ Covid, or rather, because of the lockdown, because they are not going to hospital to be treated for conditions other than Covid.
If we do not diagnose deaths accurately, we will never know how many died of Covid-19, or because of’ the lockdown.
CDC: 94% of COVID-19 deaths had contributing medical conditions
by Dave Bondy, Mid-Michigan NOW, Sunday, August 30th 2020
ATLANTA, Ga. (NBC25/WKRC) –
The Centers for Disease Control released information showing how many people who died from COVID-19 had contributing medical conditions that contributed to their death. Click here to read the entire report from the CDC.
Other dimensions that lead to increased COVID-19 deaths:
* Forbidding hospitals to perform elective surgeries thus creating financial crises, and incentivizing false reporting on the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths ($14k/case and $39k/death).
* “CDC Chief Agrees There’s ‘Perverse’ Economic ‘Incentive’ for Hospitals to Inflate Coronavirus Deaths”, July 31, 2020
* Hospital administrators and/or government officials strongly encouraging / requiring health care professionals to designate patients and patient deaths as COVID if they have some symptoms, regardless of other health issues.
* Pressuring national, state, and local elected officials to lock down their jurisdictions in the name of science to reduce the “pandemic”.
3) Lock downs and other drastic measures are unwarranted and actually do more harm than they do good.
Studies show that the open states experienced less economic pain and less pain from the disease itself: “Why Social Distancing Should Not Be the New Normal”
* “According to some, Bill Gates prominently among them, social distancing is part of “the new normal.” However, there’s plenty of evidence to suggest social distancing and lockdowns will not be necessary at all, and were probably a bad idea in the first place.”
* “According to Nobel-prize-winning scientist Michael Levitt, the rate of SARS-CoV-2 mortality never experienced exponential growth, as was predicted, which suggests a majority of people may have had some sort of prior resistance or immunity.”
* “In other words, exposure to coronaviruses that cause the common cold appear to allow your immune system to recognize and fight off SARS-CoV-2 as well. This is great news.”
* “Quarantining the healthy was unnecessary… Quarantining is normally reserved for those infected, not for the healthy.”
* This really throws the idea of social distancing being an unavoidable part of the post-COVID-19 “new normal” into question. What’s more, once sensible behaviors such as staying home when sick are entered into this model, the effect of lockdown efforts “literally goes away,” Friston says.
Countries that used hydroxychloroquine to treat covid-19 saw a 73% lower fatality rate, meaning Fauci, the CDC and the FDA have conspired to KILL tens of thousands of Americans in order to protect the lucrative vaccine industry
Wednesday, September 02, 2020 by: Ethan Huff https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-09-02-hydroxychloroquine-covid-19-73-percent-lower-fatality-rate.html
An ongoing study that keeps track of how the nations of the world are faring with the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) contains some eye-opening revelations about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ). In all areas where HCQ is used – the United States is not one of them, thanks to Anthony Fauci and the left – the official death rate from the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is a shocking 73 percent lower, on average, than in areas where HCQ is prohibited.
What this all suggests, of course, is that Fauci, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and all other entities currently in the way of HCQ being made available to Americans are guilty of murder.
Mandating wearing masks in many or all situations is problematic: “Face Masks Pose Serious Risks to the Healthy”
* “By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain.” — Russell Blaylock, MD
* Researchers found that about a third of the workers developed headaches with use of the mask, most had preexisting headaches that were worsened by the mask wearing, and 60% required pain medications for relief.
* A more recent study involving 159 healthcare workers aged 21 to 35 years of age found that 81% developed headaches from wearing a face mask. Some had pre-existing headaches that were precipitated by the masks. All felt like the headaches affected their work performance.
* The importance of these findings is that a drop in oxygen levels (hypoxia) is associated with an impairment in immunity.
* People with cancer, especially if the cancer has spread, will be at a further risk from prolonged hypoxia as the cancer grows best in a microenvironment that is low in oxygen. Repeated episodes of hypoxia have been proposed as a significant factor in atherosclerosis and hence increases all cardiovascular (heart attacks) and cerebrovascular (strokes) diseases.
Mark Peterson, Ph.D.
Little Rock, Arkansas