Covid19: Don't trust the statistics (or the science re the tests/the cause of the sickness)

[ExomatrixTV]

Rigged "covid" tests - rigged mass media (mass hypnotism) - rigged puppet politicians - rigged push for mass surveillance "contact tracing apps" - rigged (corrupted) statistics / computer-models to scare people in to submission 24/7 to push for mandatory (toxic) vaccines serving Agenda 2030 A.I. & Psychopathic Technocrats micromanaging everybody to "save the earth" bs.

• If we are somehow able to counter all of that ... we must have much more allies than BEFORE the mass hysteria!
• ⚠️ tinyurl.com/My-2020-2030-Perspectives

cheers,
John Kuhles aka 'ExomatrixTV'
October 02, 2020


Paul Weston - Is CV-19 A Global Fraud?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=tpWa_-CaOs0

[ExomatrixTV]

• A "Covid-19" Nasal Swab Test Punctured Woman's Brain Lining and Leaked Brain Fluid From Her Nose

• BREAKING: Major Investigative Report by Association of French Reserve Army Officers Finds COVID-19 “Pandemic” to Have a Hidden Agenda for Global Totalitarianism, Nanotech Chipping of All, 5G Irradiation, & Genocide

[Tintin]

Mike Yeadon writing today on Twitter and sharing some interesting insights and information. I’ve made an attempt to pull all his thread commentary into one stream, here, but you can of course follow the thread – while it’s still there! – via the link, in the usual way, if you prefer.

_______________________

A source just gave me the following information. A hospital in Wales, Nevill Hall in Abergavenny, has 250 beds. 200 beds are empty. The surgeons are bored & pass much time on the nearby golf course. I think this might be one answer to why UK doctors are not investigating to find out why hospitals have no patients in them! Apparently all covid cases are currently being sent to this hospital.

This story tallies with the original evidence which drew me into this ghastly mess we’ve made of our country. I’ve not mentioned this for quite a while but you all should be incandescent about it.

A good friend who’s a professor of cell biology was playing hockey many miles from home. He fell into conversation with one of the opposing team. This person is a fairly senior manger in NHS England & has daily sight of bed disposition across the service. He was upset to have realised that, as intensive care beds emptied because the many covid19 patients either recovered or sadly died, they were not being replaced by elective surgical patients. To the best of my recollection, this was late June.

I was put in touch with the NHSE staffer by my friend, because he knew I was, by then, telling him all the time that “something is seriously wrong”. I met up with the NHSE manager who, by good fortune, lives less than 10 miles from me. He told me that the utilisation of the ICU beds was at a far lower % than ever in his whole career. Worse, he told me the reason, showing me part of a management briefing he’d recently attended.

To my surprise, in the section entitled NHS Priorities, the top one wasn’t what I expected to see to get the NHS back to normal service ASAP. No, that was there, but it was second. The top priority was entirely contradictory to the second & essentially said “Run the NHS as lightly loaded as possible in order to be prepared to cope with the second wave”.

Just so we’re clear, it’s not an accident that it’s hard to get access to the NHS at present. No, it’s a strategic choice: they’re not seeing you, doing fewer elective surgeries, to protect the NHS. Kafka would probably have rejected this as a plot line on grounds that it’s absurd.

While there has recently need an increase in utilisation of ITU beds, I don’t know about you, it’s completely unacceptable that someone’s decided it’s ok not to replace your heart valve & certain other elective surgeries. Why? To cope with an expected “second wave”. This is where & why I got stuck in.

Viruses do not do waves.

It’s not possible to have a second wave of infections & deaths in a country which has already been intensely infected in spring. This is because those infected & survived, which is 99.8%, are then immune. When a pandemic was self-limiting, as it was in U.K. and almost everywhere I’ve looked, it’s now not possible for the population to enable & support a large, consolidated & growing epidemic.

I knew that back in June & of course we’re not experiencing a second wave, but a #SecondaryRipple

This, too, will self-limit. I’m sceptical about, but open-minded to, the possibility that what are being labelled as ‘covid19 deaths’ actually are as advertised. More likely, the majority are simply people who’ve died of other causes, some of which are respiratory deaths, within 28d of a positive PCR test.

PCR testing is wholly unsuitable for the role it’s asked to do. Scandalously, Govt either cannot or has chosen not to tell us what at present in the operational false positive rate.

My own inferences are that is not implausible that most positive tests are false (subclinical infection, fragments of destroyed virus, cross reactivity with common cold coronaviruses, old fashioned contamination). A total operational FPR of 5% would yield 15-20k positives per day, which is what we’re seeing.

In direct contradiction to its own edict, issued after relentless & appropriate criticism of community testing during summer, no steps at all to assess & remove these problems. Based on that internal instruction, testers were required to retest positives, certainly weak positives.

They were also charged with responsibility for assessing then limiting the number of amplification cycles used in PCR, so to greatly reduce FPs. You might ask yourself why they’ve not fixed that glaring error. I can see no reason they’d fly in the face of they’d own, very good advice, other than to keep people fearful for longer.

It’s certainly not saving anyone’s lives. But it provides the cover to order lockdowns. Put simply, it’s terrible practical science, it’s suspicious & you should completely reject the output of mass testing. I think it is telling us less than nothing. If I’m right that, even now, most positives are false, then if unexpectedly they genuine prevalence of virus in the population was to increase, it would be missed.

To finish where I started, If there is ample justification to be absolutely furious at the incompetence - at best - and lethally incorrect advice coming from SAGE. They’re either the wrong people to advise us, because they lack the expertise I & others have to assess the underlying science, in which case they should immediately resign or be.dismissed.

Or more worryingly, some on SAGE know exactly what they’re doing, in which case they should be arrested & charged with numerous crimes of conspiracy.

But whatever you think of the science of testing, you should be appalled to learn that no serious scientist talks of second waves. It’s an absurdity which doesn’t happen, yet Govt & SAGE have persuaded many to expect as axiomatic & almost certain.

But for me the final straw should be to learn that the NHS chose to allow you, your family & friends go untreated, to suffer & even to die, ...in order to prepare for a lie. In closing, followers know I’ve been on about pre-existing immune response, before the virus arrived. Some have said I’m building in sand. I say no. This is to be expected. We even know why it occurs. It’s exposure to related viruses that does. it, leaving behind a robust & durable immune memory.

Here’s an interesting review of that very field in that rather edgy journal, the BMJ.

___________________

BMJ Article:
Link: https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/370/bmj.m3563.full.pdf

[Sue (Ayt)]

Posted by Tintin (here)

To my surprise, in the section entitled NHS Priorities, the top one wasn’t what I expected to see to get the NHS back to normal service ASAP. No, that was there, but it was second. The top priority was entirely contradictory to the second & essentially said “Run the NHS as lightly loaded as possible in order to be prepared to cope with the second wave”.

Just so we’re clear, it’s not an accident that it’s hard to get access to the NHS at present. No, it’s a strategic choice: they’re not seeing you, doing fewer elective surgeries, to protect the NHS. Kafka would probably have rejected this as a plot line on grounds that it’s absurd.

Does anyone remember the opening ceremony for the 2012 Summer Olympics?
Speaking of a kafkaesque scenario. Geesh! I remember being very creeped out watching this thing, but it sure seems like foreshadowing of the 2020 situation, doesn't it? (just something I've pondered again lately)
(pull forward to watch the show from 44:00-55:00.)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=4As0e4de-rI

(pull forward to watch the show from 44:00-55:00.)
The theme song of Oldfield's Tubular Bells alone sets a creepy atmosphere. Be sure to watch right through til the end, with the children in cages scenes. (my impression)
I had a surprisinly hard time finding this scene. Perhaps it is something that should be archived and stored before it is totally gone...

[onawah]

How COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Rigged
10/27/20
by Dr. Mercola
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...&rid=997224455


STORY AT-A-GLANCE
While vaccine makers insist any COVID-19 vaccine reaching the market will have undergone rigorous testing, the way trial protocols are designed suggests these vaccines will not have a significant impact on infection rates, hospitalizations or deaths
Shockingly, preventing infection with SARS-CoV-2 is not a criterion for success in these vaccine trials. The only criterion for a successful COVID-19 vaccine is a reduction of symptoms shared by both COVID-19 and the common cold
In AstraZeneca’s case, the interim analysis includes 50 vaccine recipients. The vaccine will be a success if 12 or fewer develop symptoms after exposure to SARS-CoV-2, compared to 19 in the 25-person control group
At least two cases of transverse myelitis (severe inflammation of the spinal cord) has been documented in AstraZeneca’s trial, and the company temporarily halted its trial in September 2020. In October, Johnson & Johnson also paused its trial due to an undisclosed “unexplained illness” in one of its participants
If the vaccine cannot reduce infection, hospitalization or death, then it cannot end the pandemic, which means everyone who takes the vaccine will be doing so in vain

"There’s been a lot of talk lately about whether or not the fast-tracked COVID-19 vaccine will in fact be safe and effective. While vaccine makers insist that any vaccine reaching the market will have undergone rigorous testing, the way trial protocols are designed suggests these vaccines may leave a lot to be desired.

As reported1 by Forbes contributor William Haseltine, a former professor at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health, while Moderna, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson have all published their vaccine trial protocols in a rare display of transparency, “close inspection of the protocols raises surprising concerns.”

In a nutshell, the trial designs are such that the vaccines will get a passing grade even if their efficacy is minimal. Of course, we must also consider vaccine side effects and I’ve also written several articles about mounting safety concerns.

COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Rigged to Pass Efficacy Test
As noted by Haseltine, prevention of infection would typically be a critical endpoint of any vaccine trial. In other words, you want to ensure that when you take the vaccine, your risk of infection is significantly reduced.

However, when it comes to the COVID-19 vaccine, shockingly, preventing infection is not a criterion for success in any of these trials. The only criterion for a successful COVID-19 vaccine is a reduction of COVID-19 symptoms, and even then, the reduction required is minimal.

“We all expect an effective vaccine to prevent serious illness if infected. Three of the vaccine protocols — Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca — do not require that their vaccine prevent serious disease only that they prevent moderate symptoms which may be as mild as cough, or headache,” Haseltine writes,2 adding:

“The pharmaceutical companies intend to do trials ranging from 30,000 to 60,000 participants. This scale of study would be sufficient for testing vaccine efficacy.

The first surprise found upon a closer reading of the protocols reveals that each study intends to complete interim and primary analyses that at most include 164 participants. These companies likely intend to apply for an emergency use authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with just their limited preliminary results.”

To get a “passing” grade in the limited interim analysis, a vaccine must show a 70% efficacy. However, again, this does not mean it will prevent infection in 7 of 10 people. As explained by Haseltine:3

“For Moderna, the initial interim analysis will be based on the results of infection of only 53 people. The judgment reached in interim analysis is dependent upon the difference in the number of people with symptoms … in the vaccinated group versus the unvaccinated group. Moderna’s success margin is for 13 or less of those 53 to develop symptoms compared to 40 or more in their control group.”

The other vaccine makers are basing results on a similar protocol, where only a limited number of vaccinated participants are exposed to the virus to evaluate the extent of their symptoms.

Johnson & Johnson’s interim analysis will include results from 77 vaccine recipients who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2, and if fewer than 18 of them develop symptoms of COVID-19, compared to 59 in the control group, the vaccine will be considered successful.

In AstraZeneca’s case, the interim analysis includes 50 vaccine recipients. The vaccine will be a success if 12 or fewer develop symptoms after exposure to SARS-CoV-2, compared to 19 in the 25-person control group.

Pfizer’s interim analysis is the smallest of the bunch, with just 32 vaccine recipients. Their success margin is seven or fewer vaccine recipients developing symptoms, compared to 25 in the control group. In the primary analysis, efficacy is set to about 60%, and at most, 164 volunteers will be included in that analysis.

Especially concerning are that those receiving the vaccine in these trials are young and healthy individuals who are not really at high risk of dying from COVID-19. This makes the results of these trials highly questionable in the far more vulnerable population of the elderly.

Trials Are Merely Testing Reduction of Common Cold Symptoms
As if that’s not eyebrow-raising enough, the minimum qualification for a “case of COVID-19” amounts to just one positive PCR test and one or two mild symptoms, such as headache, fever, cough or mild nausea. As noted by Haseltine, “This is far from adequate.”

All they’re doing is testing to see if this COVID-19 vaccine will minimize common cold symptoms. They are not actually ensuring the vaccine will prevent serious COVID-19 complications. Johnson & Johnson’s trial is the only one that requires at least five severe COVID-19 cases to be included in the interim analysis.

“One of the more immediate questions a trial needs to answer is whether a vaccine prevents infection. If someone takes this vaccine, are they far less likely to become infected with the virus?

These trials all clearly focus on eliminating symptoms of COVID-19, and not infections themselves. Asymptomatic infection is listed as a secondary objective in these trials when they should be of critical importance.

It appears that all the pharmaceutical companies assume that the vaccine will never prevent infection. Their criteria for approval is the difference in symptoms between an infected control group and an infected vaccine group. They do not measure the difference between infection and noninfection as a primary motivation,” Haseltine writes.4

Severe illness and death are also secondary objectives in these trials, and none of them include failure to prevent hospitalization or death as an important barrier to success. The increasingly disappearing common sense tells us that if the vaccine cannot reduce infection, hospitalization or death, then it cannot end the pandemic, which means everyone who takes the vaccine will be doing so in vain.

Some COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Not Using Inert Placebos
In addition to all of that, some COVID-19 vaccine trials are using other vaccines as “placebo” rather than truly biologically inert substances such as saline, which effectively makes if far easier to hide any vaccine side effects. While Moderna is using a saline solution placebo,5 AstraZeneca is using injected meningococcal vaccine rather than a true placebo.6

Another way AstraZeneca is masking potential side effects is by administering the vaccine along with certain drugs. In one of its study arms, subjects are given acetaminophen every six hours for the first 24 hours after inoculation. The pain and fever reducer could potentially mask and downplay side effects such as pain, fever, headache or general malaise.

In addition to masking side effects, it is widely recognized among literate natural medicine physicians that using acetaminophen during acute viral infections is not a wise strategy as it impairs the immune response to fight the infection.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=dT6mHi_8V5E

As reported by Wired:7

“The press release for … results from the Oxford vaccine trials described an increased frequency of ‘minor side effects’ among participants. A look at the actual paper, though, reveals this to be a marketing spin …

Yes, mild reactions were far more common than worse ones. But moderate or severe harms — defined as being bad enough to interfere with daily life or needing medical care — were common too.

Around one-third of people vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine without acetaminophen experienced moderate or severe chills, fatigue, headache, malaise, and/or feverishness.

Close to 10 percent had a fever of at least 100.4 degrees, and just over one-fourth developed moderate or severe muscle aches. That’s a lot, in a young and healthy group of people — and the acetaminophen didn’t help much for most of those problems.”

Two Trials Paused Due to Safety Concerns
September 6, 2020, AstraZeneca paused its Phase 3 vaccine trial due to a “suspected serious and unexpected adverse reaction” in a British participant.8,9 The company did not initially divulge the nature of the adverse reaction, but it has since been revealed the volunteer developed severe inflammation of the spinal cord, known as transverse myelitis.10,11

September 12, 2020, the British Medicines Health Regulatory Authority gave AstraZeneca the go-ahead to resume its Phase 3 trial in the U.K., after an independent review found it “safe to do so.”12,13 According to an AstraZeneca spokesperson, the incident was a case of undiagnosed multiple sclerosis.14

Days later, September 19, 2020, The New York Times reported15 a second case of transverse myelitis had occurred in the AstraZeneca trial. According to one expert consulted by the NYT, the occurrence represented a “dangerous pattern,” and that a third incidence might shut down the vaccine trial indefinitely.

AstraZeneca, however, claims the two cases are “unlikely to be associated with the vaccine,” and that there’s “insufficient evidence to say for certain that the illnesses were or were not related to the vaccine.”16 October 21, 2020, it was reported17 that one of the volunteers in AstraZeneca’s Brazilian trial had died from COVID-19 complications, but that the trial would continue anyway.

October 12, 2020, Johnson & Johnson halted its trial due to “unexplained illness” in one of its participants.18,19 Like AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson has kept mum about the details of the illness, saying “it’s important to have all the facts before we share additional information.”

Side Effects Are Commonplace
The fact that more trials have not been halted is surprising considering the rate of side effects20 occurring in perfectly healthy volunteers. As reported in “Gates Tries to Justify Side Effects of Fast-Tracked Vaccine,” after the first of two doses of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, 80% of Phase 1 participants receiving the 100 microgram (mcg) dose developed systemic side effects.21

After the second dose, 100% reported side effects ranging from fatigue (80%), chills (80%), headache (60%) and myalgia or muscle pain (53%).

Despite that, the 100-mcg dose was ultimately chosen to move on to Phase 3 trials.22 In the highest dosage group, which received 250 mcg, 100% of participants suffered side effects after both the first and second doses.23 Three of the 14 participants (21%) in the 250-mcg group suffered “one or more severe events.”

An October 1, 2020, report24 by CNBC reviews the experiences of five participants in Moderna’s and Pfizer’s SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials. One of the participants in Pfizer’s vaccine trial “woke up with chills, shaking so hard he cracked a tooth after taking the second dose.”

A Moderna trial participant told CNBC he had a low-grade fever and felt “under the weather” for several days after his first shot. Eight hours after his second shot he was “bed-bound with a fever of over 101, shakes, chills, a pounding headache and shortness of breath. He said the pain in his arm, where he received the shot, felt like a ‘goose egg on my shoulder.’ He hardly slept that night, recording that his temperature was higher than 100 degrees for five hours.”25

Two others reported similar side effects, and a third warned you would need to take a day off after the second shot. CNBC also noted that “as companies progressed through clinical trials, several vaccine makers abandoned their highest doses following reports of more severe reactions.”

Might Certain COVID-19 Vaccines Raise Risk of AIDS?
Disturbingly, a group of researchers are now expressing concern that some COVID-19 vaccine candidates might put certain people at a higher risk of acquiring HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.26,27,28

Using the failed attempt to create an HIV vaccine as an example, researchers explain29 that the genetically engineered adenovirus, Ad5, used in the HIV vaccine trials, is the same one being used now in four COVID-19 candidates being studied in the U.S., Russia and Pakistan.

At the time of the failed HIV vaccine, scientists were unable to identify the exact reason why Ad5 seemed to increase the risk of HIV; it just inexplicably did. Interestingly, Dr. Anthony Fauci was the lead author on the HIV study,30 in which he questioned “whether the problem extends to some or all of the other recombinant vectors currently in development or to other vector-based vaccines.”

Reflecting on that question, the researchers say they decided to go public with this information now, because Ad5 vaccines for COVID-19 might soon be tested in populations with high HIV prevalence, and they believe that informed consent about the HIV/AIDS risk should be part of the COVID-19 clinical studies.

Will COVID-19 Vaccine Be Mandatory?
According to one September 2020 poll,31 only 51% of Americans said they “definitely or probably” would get the COVID-19 vaccine when it comes out. Another survey32 found only 44% would take the first-generation vaccine even if they were paid $100. Mounting vaccine hesitancy was bemoaned in an October 1, 2020, article33 in the New England Journal of Medicine, and the answer, the article suggests, is to make it mandatory for all.

And, to entice compliance, the authors recommend implementing severe penalties for noncompliance, such as the suspension of employment and/or house arrest.

An October 19, 2020, article 34 by Wisconsin Public Radio also warns that if precedents hold, employers may have the right to force workers to get vaccinated. Potential exceptions might include certain medical issues, bona fide religious objections, and certain union contracts that bar vaccine requirements.

Operation Warp Speed recently selected Walgreens and CVS as nationwide partners in the coming vaccine distribution effort.35 Nursing homes and long-term care facilities around the U.S. can opt in by signing up to have either of these companies come and administer the vaccine to its residents and staff, once available.

So-called “health passports” are also becoming reality. Ireland, for example, has already begun its national trial. The Health Passport Ireland initiative uses an app to track and display results of COVID-19 testing. Vaccination status will be added once a vaccine becomes available.

Untold amounts of money are also being spent on programs to tag, track and trace the human population in the name of public health and safety. According to an article36 in the journal JAMA, the estimated cumulative costs of the COVID-19 pandemic related to lost output and health reduction amounts to more than $16 trillion in the U.S. alone, or about 90% of our annual gross domestic product.

“For this reason, policies that can materially reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 have enormous social value,” the article claims. However, testing, tracing and isolation rules, all of which are promoted in this article, also have a price, and it’s one that any sensible person would reject, namely the loss of privacy and liberty.

As reported37 by The Last American Vagabond, governments are selling our freedom in the name of public health. Do we really want to live in a “biosecurity state”? These freedom-robbing strategies are being sold to us as the path back to normalcy, but the reality will be anything but normal.

As detailed in “The Global Takeover Is Underway,” the pandemic and the global response to it is far from accidental. Overwhelmingly, the evidence points to it being part of a much larger scheme to implement the last stages of a technocratic takeover.

I’ve also covered various aspects of this globalists agenda in “COVID Symptoms of Power: Tech Billionaires Harvest Humanity,” “Tech Billionaires Aiming at a Global Currency,” “Harvard Professor Exposes Surveillance Capitalism,” “How Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible” and “US Surveillance Bill 6666: The Devil in the Details.”

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically widened the economic gap between average people and the wealthy elite,38,39 and continuing down the path we’re currently on will only make this disparity worse, not better.

The globalist plan isn’t about creating a better world for the average person, it’s about enslaving us so that we cannot reject or even resist what’s ultimately coming. Forced vaccinations are but one aspect of the plan that must be resisted at all cost.

One of the Most Powerful Videos I've Ever Seen
The following video from Barbara Loe Fisher is one of the most powerful videos that I have ever seen. I am hopeful that watching this video will inspire you to take up the cause and join the fight for vaccine freedom and independence.

There is a cultural war and collusion between many industries and federal regulatory agencies that results in a suppression of the truth about vital important health issues. If this suppression continues we will gradually and progressively erode our private individual rights that our ancestors fought so hard to achieve. Please take a few minutes to watch this video.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=xEcYQydhY9E

Protect Your Right to Informed Consent and Defend Vaccine Exemptions
With all the uncertainty surrounding the safety and efficacy of vaccines, it's critical to protect your right to make independent health choices and exercise voluntary informed consent to vaccination. It is urgent that everyone in America stand up and fight to protect and expand vaccine informed consent protections in state public health and employment laws. The best way to do this is to get personally involved with your state legislators and educate the leaders in your community.

Think Globally, Act Locally
National vaccine policy recommendations are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.

It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being threatened by lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials, who are trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws.

Signing up for NVIC's free Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state legislators on your smartphone or computer so you can make your voice heard. You will be kept up to date on the latest state bills threatening your vaccine choice rights and will get practical, useful information to help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community.

Also, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have the up-to-date information and call-to-action items you need at your fingertips. So, please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.

JOIN THE NVIC ADVOCACY PORTAL

Share Your Story With the Media and People You Know
If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don't share information and experiences with one another, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up. Write a letter to the editor if you have a different perspective on a vaccine story that appears in your local newspaper. Make a call in to a radio talk show that is presenting only one side of the vaccine story.

I must be frank with you: You have to be brave because you might be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the "other side" of the vaccine story. Be prepared for it and have the courage to not back down. Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true about vaccination will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.

We cannot allow the drug companies and medical trade associations funded by drug companies or public health officials promoting forced use of a growing list of vaccines to dominate the conversation about vaccination.

The vaccine injured cannot be swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than "statistically acceptable collateral damage" of national one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination policies that put way too many people at risk for injury and death. We shouldn't be treating people like guinea pigs instead of human beings.

Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More
I encourage you to visit the website of the nonprofit charity, the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org:

Vaccine Requirements and Exemptions by State — Vaccine laws vary from one U.S. state to another. By knowing the specific policies where you live, you’ll learn how you can get exemptions and better protect your right to make informed vaccine choices.
NVIC Memorial for Vaccine Victims — View descriptions and photos of children and adults who have suffered vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths. If you or your child experiences an adverse vaccine event, please consider posting and sharing your story here.
If You Vaccinate, Ask 8 Questions — Learn how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms and prevent vaccine injuries.
Vaccine Freedom Wall — View or post descriptions of harassment and sanctions by doctors, employers and school and health officials for making independent vaccine choices.
Vaccine Failure Wall — View or post descriptions about vaccines that have failed to work and protect the vaccinated from disease.
Connect With Your Doctor or Find a New One Who Will Listen and Care
If your pediatrician or doctor refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don't want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor.

Harassment, intimidation and refusal of medical care are becoming the modus operandi of the medical establishment in an effort to stop the change in attitude of many parents about vaccinations after they become truly educated about health and vaccination. However, there is hope.

At least 15% of young doctors recently polled admit that they're starting to adopt a more individualized approach to vaccinations in direct response to the vaccine safety concerns of parents.

It is good news that there is a growing number of smart young doctors who prefer to work as partners with parents in making personalized vaccine decisions for children, including delaying vaccinations or giving children fewer vaccines on the same day, or continuing to provide medical care for those families who decline use of one or more vaccines.

So, take the time to locate a doctor who treats you with compassion and respect, and who is willing to work with you to do what is right for your child.

Subscribe to the Mercola Newsletter to Get Timely Vaccine News and Updates
Google has been censoring vaccine information providers, which means finding reliable information about this topic can be a real challenge.

To help you keep updated on vaccine issues and exemptions, I invite you to subscribe to my FREE health newsletter. You will receive the latest health news from Mercola.com straight to your inbox, with no threats to your security and privacy."

+ Sources and References
1, 2, 3, 4 Forbes September 23, 2020
5 Henryford.com Moderna COVE Vaccine Study
6, 7 Wired July 21, 2020
8, 12 AstraZeneca September 12, 2020
9 STAT News September 8, 2020
10 KHN September 14, 2020
11 New York Times September 8, 2020 (Archived)13 STAT News September 12, 2020
14 En.as.com September 21, 2020
15 The New York Times September 19, 2020 (Archived)
16 Covid19vaccinetrial.co.uk Participant Information Sheet (PDF)
17 Reuters October 21, 2020
18 JnJ.com
19 Channel3000 October 19, 2020
20 Observer October 20, 2020
21 NEJM July 14, 2020 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2022483
22 Neurology Live July 16, 2020
23 Reporter.am July 14, 2020
24, 25 CNBC October 4, 202026, 29 The Lancet October 19, 2020
27 Forbes October 20, 2020
28 Science October 19, 2020
30 Science April 4, 2014; 344(6179): 49-51
31 CIDRAP September 18, 2020
32 Axios September 24-27, 2020
33 NEJM 2020; 383:1296-1299
34 Wisconsin Public Radio October 19, 2020
35 Defense.gov October 17, 2020
36 JAMA 2020;324(15):1495-1496
37 The Last American Vagabond October 13, 2020
38 The Nation October 5, 2020
39 The Guardian October 6, 2020

[DaveToo]

Not that we can trust these stats, but it probably is worth mentioning that despite the U.S. entering its 3rd wave now of cases and racking up their largest number of alleged daily 'cases' since the plandemic started, it is not the leader in deaths/million.

The honors for that go to Peru (1047 deaths/million).

It is also worth mentioning that despite its relatively small size, Ecuador is leading the U.S. in Covid deaths/million:

Ecuador: 719 deaths/million
U.S.: 698 deaths/million

[onawah]

CDC Reveals Hospitals Counted Heart Attacks as COVID-19 Deaths
241,953 views•Oct 27, 2020
One America News Network
963K subscribers
"The latest numbers from the CDC reveal hospitals have been counting patients who died from serious preexisting conditions as COVID-19 deaths. One America’s Pearson Sharp has more, as the CDC counts over 51-thousand patients who actually died from heart attacks, as opposed to the coronavirus."

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=7x-biB_JrcU

[Tintin]

Here's an extraordinarily courageous young nurse from a Cornish hospital in England sharing her experience and outlining her reasons for resigning her post. Very sad.

As she states in this clip she had the wit to take a screenshot of hospital information and shared it on an email. This is just 02:20 in length. If a longer version appears and I can grab it I'll try and share it. (I have already downloaded this two minute clip)

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by DaveToo (here)
It is also worth mentioning that despite its relatively small size, Ecuador is leading the U.S. in Covid deaths/million:

Ecuador: 719 deaths/million
U.S.: 698 deaths/million

And Ecuador ended its lockdown on 12 September, nearly two months ago. The country had to get back to work, and the government, apparently having not got the memo from the WHO, absolutely knew that.

Apart from mandatory masks when entering a store (a tiny thing considering), there are no other inconveniences at all. There are no in-country travel or gathering restrictions, and everything's open. See this thread:

• About Ecuador

[onawah]

Dr. Andrew Kaufman - The Pandemic Fraud Runs Deep - Red Pill Expo (Oct 10, 2020)
October 23rd, 2020
2,992 views

https://odysee.com/@Alin:7/y2mate.co...ns-Deep_480p:f

[pueblo]

This is excellent (and he has a sharp sense of humour/irony which I like!), just under 20mins.

The Covid Cult | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=mcm8Sc8f66o

Edit: I hadn't heard of Tom Woods previously..

"Thomas Ernest Woods Jr. (born August 1, 1972) is an American author, historian and libertarian who is currently a senior fellow at the Mises Institute.[2][3][4] Woods is a New York Times Best-Selling author and has published twelve books.[3] He has written extensively on subjects including the history of the United States, Catholicism, contemporary politics, and economics. Although not an economist himself, Woods is a proponent of the Austrian School of economics.[5] He hosts a daily podcast, The Tom Woods Show, and he formerly co-hosted the now defunct Contra Krugman.[4][6][7]

- Wiki"

[DaveToo]

Posted by onawah (here)
Dr. Andrew Kaufman - The Pandemic Fraud Runs Deep - Red Pill Expo (Oct 10, 2020)
October 23rd, 2020
2,992 views

https://odysee.com/@Alin:7/y2mate.co...ns-Deep_480p:f

Thanks onawah.
I started to watch the video but see he is basically going over what I have heard him talk about many times.

I have a science background but am open to both the terrain and germ theory.

I have a question for all here that Dr. Kaufman has not covered nor have I seen anyone else cover when
they talk about exosomes.

If we assume that there is no Covid-19 virus, that everyone who is getting sick with the same symptoms of
shortness of breath, fever, cough etc. etc., is just undergoing an exosome detox,
how do we explain the following.

How could so many people from all around the world, at one and the same time,
be affected by such varying local toxic terrains, yet all come down with the same symptoms?

That is the burning question that Dr. Kaufman and Dr. Cowan avoids.

If anyone has a good answer that makes logical sense, I will embrace the exosome/terrain theory with
open arms!


P.S. I would have posted this in the Exosome thread, except no one there seemed to have the knowledge to answer it.

[onawah]

I think 5G and possibly other toxic frequencies and possibly other toxins probably have a lot to do with it.
Even though all the technology for 5G has yet to be installed everywhere, there are still thousands of 5G satellites that have been launched and continue to be launched.
Chemtrails are still filling the skies and the air with toxins, and it's so widespread that everything that is being dropped on us cannot be thoroughly monitored.
Nanotechnology is finding its way into our bodies and is still largely kept under the public's radar.
We are being exposed to so many toxins in unprecedented amounts that it's no wonder if people are getting sick and dying in record numbers.
But at the same time, we know those statistics are skewed, so it's still largely a matter of speculation to know the real numbers and which is causing what.

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by onawah (here)
Dr. Andrew Kaufman - The Pandemic Fraud Runs Deep - Red Pill Expo (Oct 10, 2020)
October 23rd, 2020
2,992 views

https://odysee.com/@Alin:7/y2mate.co...ns-Deep_480p:f

Thanks onawah.
I started to watch the video but see he is basically going over what I have heard him talk about many times.

I have a science background but am open to both the terrain and germ theory.

I have a question for all here that Dr. Kaufman has not covered nor have I seen anyone else cover when
they talk about exosomes.

If we assume that there is no Covid-19 virus, that everyone who is getting sick with the same symptoms of
shortness of breath, fever, cough etc. etc., is just undergoing an exosome detox,
how do we explain the following.

How could so many people from all around the world, at one and the same time,
be affected by such varying local toxic terrains, yet all come down with the same symptoms?

That is the burning question that Dr. Kaufman and Dr. Cowan avoids.

If anyone has a good answer that makes logical sense, I will embrace the exosome/terrain theory with
open arms!


P.S. I would have posted this in the Exosome thread, except no one there seemed to have the knowledge to answer it.

[Constance]

ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

[DaveToo]

Posted by onawah (here)
I think 5G and possibly other toxic frequencies and possibly other toxins probably have a lot to do with it.
Even though all the technology for 5G has yet to be installed everywhere, there are still thousands of 5G satellites that have been launched and continue to be launched.
Chemtrails are still filling the skies and the air with toxins, and it's so widespread that everything that is being dropped on us cannot be thoroughly monitored.
Nanotechnology is finding its way into our bodies and is still largely kept under the public's radar.
We are being exposed to so many toxins in unprecedented amounts that it's no wonder if people are getting sick and dying in record numbers.
But at the same time, we know those statistics are skewed, so it's still largely a matter of speculation to know the real numbers and which is causing what.

Thanks onawah.

While I certainly look to 5G as a possible culprit/explanation for some of the "Covid symptoms",
(certainly the 5G that was on the cruise ships early on) I have a hard time
taking such diverse toxins as 5G, chemtrails, nanotech et al. and lumping them
altogether to produce essentially the exact same symptoms we see in CV patients.

That's where I can't feel satisfied about connecting the dots or completing the puzzle.
The toxins seem far too different in nature to all produce the same symptoms.

Do you find the explanation to be convincing?

[DaveToo]

Posted by Constance (here)

Hi DaveToo

Adding to what Onawah had to share, Dr. Zach Bush might have some answers for you. In this video, Zach addresses what he believes has happened in relation to the questions you ask here.

It's a long video but well worth the listen...

Thanks for the video Constance.
That was cruel of you to make me watch such a long video just to find the answers to my question!

I like Dr. Zach Bush and have watched some of his videos early on in the pandemic.

I was a bit surprised to see that this video was made only two months into the pandemic (May 26, 2020).


1. He talks as if this pandemic might be the '6th extinction' holding at just 50% loss of life of the earth's population!
With the previous five extinctions where we lost 85-90% of the world's population.
Me thinks he will prove to be off just slightly with his prediction.

2. He talks about many people actually celebrating the lockdowns
giving them a much needed work break, instead of highlighting all the devastation they are causing worldwide.
That was a bit of a shocker. (Mind you maybe two months into the pandemic it did feel a bit party-like).

3. He compares the tragedy and loss of life due to volcanoes to Covid!!
Another shocker!


He finally lays out his thoughts on what is causing the CV symptoms:

Air pollution, toxins, (cyanide poisoning) around the world.

OK, fair enough.
But we have had a steady building of air pollution for decades now.
Why did it 'explode' all at once starting this year 2020 causing
the symptoms that we see with CV patients?

If he has any other ideas as to what is causing the CV symptoms please let me know Constance!
I would appreciate it. 90 minutes is 90 minutes. Time is money, money is time. Life is short.

[onawah]

The combination of different toxins have to be causing an overall challenge to the immune system, and when the final straw is introduced (that being whatever Covid is--if it really is a virus, or if such a thing as a virus exists), there is little resistance to it left , and then it's not illogical that similar symptoms would manifest in everyone.

Posted by DaveToo (here)

Posted by onawah (here)
I think 5G and possibly other toxic frequencies and possibly other toxins probably have a lot to do with it.
Even though all the technology for 5G has yet to be installed everywhere, there are still thousands of 5G satellites that have been launched and continue to be launched.
Chemtrails are still filling the skies and the air with toxins, and it's so widespread that everything that is being dropped on us cannot be thoroughly monitored.
Nanotechnology is finding its way into our bodies and is still largely kept under the public's radar.
We are being exposed to so many toxins in unprecedented amounts that it's no wonder if people are getting sick and dying in record numbers.
But at the same time, we know those statistics are skewed, so it's still largely a matter of speculation to know the real numbers and which is causing what.

Thanks onawah.

While I certainly look to 5G as a possible culprit/explanation for some of the "Covid symptoms",
(certainly the 5G that was on the cruise ships early on) I have a hard time
taking such diverse toxins as 5G, chemtrails, nanotech et al. and lumping them
altogether to produce essentially the exact same symptoms we see in CV patients.

That's where I can't feel satisfied about connecting the dots or completing the puzzle.
The toxins seem far too different in nature to all produce the same symptoms.

Do you find the explanation to be convincing?

[onawah]

Why COVID-19 Testing Is a Tragic Waste
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
November 13, 2020
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1010255044

STORY AT-A-GLANCE
PCR tests are not designed to be used as a diagnostic tool as they cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and “live” or reproductive ones
Amplification over 35 cycles is considered unreliable and scientifically unjustified, yet many labs use 45 cycles. This amplifies any tiny sequence of viral DNA that might be present to the point that the test reads “positive” even if the viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive
The PCR test can also pick up the presence of other coronaviruses, so a positive result may simply indicate that you’ve recuperated from a common cold in the past
Millions of people are simply carrying inactive viral DNA that pose no risk to anyone, yet positive test results are being used by the global technocracy to implement a brand new economic and social system based on draconian surveillance and totalitarian controls
Research shows the global lockdown strategy harms public health to a greater degree than the virus itself


"From the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the clarion call has been to test, test and test some more. However, right from the start, serious questions arose about the tests being used to diagnose this infection, and questions have only multiplied since then.

Positive reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests have been used as the justification for keeping large portions of the world locked down for the better part of 2020.

This, despite the fact that PCR tests have proven remarkably unreliable with high false result rates, and aren't designed to be used as a diagnostic tool in the first place as they cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and "live" or reproductive ones.

Dr. Mike Yeadon, former vice president and scientific director of Pfizer, has even gone on record stating1 that false positive results from unreliable PCR tests are being used to "manufacture a 'second wave' based on 'new cases,'" when in fact a second wave is highly unlikely.

Understanding PCR Tests

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=xd4De47ldYs

Before his death, the inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, repeatedly yet unsuccessfully stressed that this test should not be used as a diagnostic tool for the simple reason that it's incapable of diagnosing disease. A positive test does not actually mean that an active infection is present. As noted in a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and prevention publication on coronavirus and PCR testing dated July 13 2020:2

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.
So, what does the PCR test actually tell us? The PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. However, the genetic snippets are so small they must be amplified in order to become discernible. Each round of amplification is called a cycle.

Amplification over 35 cycles is considered unreliable and scientifically unjustified, yet Drosten tests and tests recommended by the World Health Organization are set to 45 cycles.

What this does is amplify any, even insignificant sequences of viral DNA that might be present to the point that the test reads "positive," even if the viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive. As a result of these excessive cycle thresholds, you end up with a far higher number of positive tests than you would otherwise.

We've also had problems with faulty and contaminated tests. As soon as the genetic sequence for SARS-CoV-2 became available in January 2020, German researchers quickly developed a PCR test for the virus.

In March 2020, The New York Times3 reported the initial test kits developed by the CDC had been found to be flawed. The Verge also reported4 that this flawed CDC test in turn became the basis for the WHO's test, which the CDC ended up refusing to use.

PCR Tests Cannot Detect Infection
Perhaps most importantly of all, the PCR tests cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and "live" or reproductive ones. What that means is that PCR tests cannot detect infection. Period. It cannot tell you whether you're currently ill, whether you'll develop symptoms in the near future, or whether you're contagious.

The tests may pick up dead debris or inactive viral particles that pose no risk whatsoever to the patient and others. What's more, the test can pick up the presence of other coronaviruses, so a positive result may simply indicate that you've recuperated from a common cold in the past.

An "infection" is when a virus penetrates into a cell and replicates. As the virus multiplies, symptoms set in. A person is only infectious if the virus is actually replicating. As long as the virus is inactive and not replicating, it's completely harmless both to the host and others.

Chances are, if you have no symptoms, a positive test simply means it has detected inactive viral DNA in your body. This would also mean that you are not contagious and pose no risk to anyone.

For all of these reasons, a number of highly respected scientists around the world are now saying that what we have is not a COVID-19 pandemic but a PCR test pandemic. In his September 20, 2020, article5 "Lies, Damned Lies and Health Statistics — The Deadly Danger of False Positives," Yeadon explains why basing our pandemic response on positive PCR tests is so problematic.

In short, it appears millions of people are simply being found to carry inactive viral DNA that pose no risk to anyone, yet these test results are being used by the global technocracy to implement a brand new economic and social system based on draconian surveillance and totalitarian controls.

Artificially Created Justifications for Totalitarian Controls
As reported by The Vaccine Reaction, September 29, 2020:6

"The test's threshold is so high that it detects people with the live virus as well as those with a few genetic fragments left over from a past infection that no longer poses a risk. It's like finding a hair in a room after a person left it, says Michael Mina, MD, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.7

In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90% of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The New York Times found8 …

'We've been using one type of data for everything, and that is just plus or minus — that's all,' Dr. Mina said. 'We're using that for clinical diagnostics, for public health, for policy decision-making.'

But 'yes' or 'no' isn't good enough, he added. It's the amount of virus that should dictate the infected patient's next steps. 'It's really irresponsible, I think, to forgo the recognition that this is a quantitative issue,' Dr. Mina said."

Again, medical experts agree any cycle threshold over 35 cycles makes the test too sensitive, as at that point it starts picking up harmless inactive DNA fragments. Mina believes a more reasonable cutoff would be 30 or less.

Changing the cycle threshold from 40 cycles to 35 cycles eliminated about 43% of the positive results. Limiting it to 30 cycles eliminated a whopping 63%.
According to The New York Times,9 the CDC's own calculations show it's extremely unlikely to detect live viruses in samples that have gone through more than 33 cycles, and research10 published in April 2020 concluded patients with positive PCR tests that had a cycle threshold above 33 were not contagious and could safely be discharged from the hospital or home isolation.

Importantly, when officials at the New York state laboratory, the Wadsworth Center, reanalyzed testing data at The Times' request, they found that changing the threshold from 40 cycles to 35 cycles eliminated about 43% of the positive results. Limiting it to 30 cycles eliminated a whopping 63%.11 The Vaccine Reaction adds:12

"In Massachusetts, from 85 to 90% of people who tested positive in July with a cycle threshold of 40 would have been deemed negative if the threshold were 30 cycles, Dr. Mina said. 'I would say that none of those people should be contact-traced, not one,' he said.

'I'm really shocked that it could be that high — the proportion of people with high CT value results,' said Ashish Jha, MD, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute. 'Boy, does it really change the way we need to be thinking about testing'13 …

In late August, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first rapid coronavirus test that doesn't need any special computer equipment. Made by Abbot Laboratories, the 15-minute test [BinaxNOW] will sell for U.S. $5 but still requires a nasal swab to be taken by a health worker.14

The Abbot test is the fourth rapid point-of-care test that looks for the presence of antigens rather than the virus's genetic code as the PCR molecular tests do.15"

Massive Waste of Resources
As noted by Dr. Tom Jefferson and professor Carl Henegan in an October 31, 2020, article in the Daily Mail,16 mass PCR testing has been a massive waste or resources, as it doesn't provide us with the information we actually need to know — who's infectious, how far is the virus spreading and how fast does it spread?

Instead, it has led to economic devastation from business shutdowns and isolating noninfectious people in their homes for weeks and months on end. Jefferson and Henegan claim they shared their pandemic response plan with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson over a month ago, and just presented it to him again. "We urge him to pay attention and embrace it," they write, adding:

"There are only two things about which we can be certain: first, that lockdowns do not work in the long term … The idea that a month of economic hardship will permit some sort of 'reset', allowing us a brighter future, is a myth. What, when it ends, do we think will happen? Meanwhile, ever-increasing restrictions will destroy lives and livelihoods.

The second certainty is this: that we need to find a way out of the mess that does no more damage than the virus itself … Our strategy would be to tackle the four key failings."

These four areas are:

Addressing the problems in the government's mass testing program
Addressing "the blight of confused and contradictory statistics"
Protect and isolate the vulnerable — primarily the elderly, but also hospitalized patients in general and staff — while allowing the rest to maintain "some semblance of normal life"
Inform the public about the true and quantifiable costs of lockdown that "kill people just as surely as COVID-19"
"If we do these things, there is real hope that we can learn to live with the virus. That, after all, was supposed to be the plan," Jefferson and Henegan note. With regard to testing, the pair call "for a national program of testing quality control to ensure that results are accurate, precise and consistent."

Importantly, we must not rely on positive/negative readings alone. The results must be assessed in relation to other factors, such as the age of the subject and whether they are symptomatic, to determine who actually poses an infectious risk. You can review the full details of their proposed plan at the end of their Daily Mail article.17

Lockdown Dangers Have Been Kept Out of Public Discussion
Jefferson and Henegan aren't the only ones highlighting the fact that the global lockdown strategy is causing more harm and destruction than the virus itself. In a June 16, 2020 article in The Federalist, James Lucas, a New York City attorney, wrote:18

"If we're going to allow models and modelers to dictate the entire nature of our society, one would hope that the models are as complete as possible. Yet the epidemiological models that have so transformed our world are seriously incomplete, and therefore fundamentally inadequate.

Any medical therapy is supposed to be tested for both efficacy and safety. There have been several studies19 examining the effectiveness of the lockdowns in combating the spread of the COVID-19 virus, with mixed conclusions.

So far, however, none of these studies or models have analyzed the safety side of the lockdown therapy. In response to questions from physician Sens. Rand Paul and Bill Cassidy, Dr. Anthony Fauci admits20 this side of the equation has not been accounted for in the models now driving our world.

As noted in an open letter21 recently signed by more than 600 health-care professionals, the public health costs from the lockdowns — described as a 'mass casualty incident' are real and growing.

These models are estimations based on existing research. The constantly changing projections of coronavirus deaths are extrapolations from research on previous epidemics. Yet modelers have no excuse for leaving evaluations of the lockdowns' massive costs to public health out of their models."

The Hidden Costs of Lockdowns
How does the "lockdown therapy" affect public safety? In his article, Lucas highlights the following:22

•Increased chronic disease rates due to unemployment, poverty and putting non-COVID medical care on hold — Research23 by the Veterans Administration has shown delaying cancer treatment for just one month led to a 20% increase in mortality. Another study24 found each one-month delay in breast cancer diagnosis increased mortality by 10%

•Increased rates of mental health problems due to unemployment and isolation

•Increased mortality rates from suicide — In one study,25 being unemployed was associated with a twofold to threefold higher relative risk of suicide. A more recent study26 estimates "deaths of despair" linked to lockdowns may be around 75,000 in the U.S.

•Reduced collective life span — Extended unemployment is also associated with shorter, unhealthier lives. Hannes Schwandt, a health economics researcher at Northwestern University, estimates an extended economic shutdown could shorten the lifespan of 6.4 million Americans entering the job market by an average of about two years.27 Lucas notes:

"If epidemiologists don't care to take account of this toll, another profession must. A study28 just released by a group of South African actuaries estimates that the net reduction in lifespan from increased unemployment and poverty due to a national lockdown will exceed the increased lifespan due to lives saved from COVID-19 by the lockdown by a factor of 30 to 1.

In other words, each year of additional life attributable to isolating potential coronavirus victims in the lockdown comes at a cost of 30 years lost due to the negative public health effects of a lockdown …"

Lack of education is also associated with significantly shorter life spans and poorer health. High school drop-outs die on average nine years sooner than college graduates,29 and school closings disproportionally affect poorer students.

Who Pays the Most?
As noted by Lucas, in addition to calculating the overall costs on society, modelers must also determine "on whom those costs fall," because the costs are not borne equally by all. The consequences of the lockdowns disproportionally affect those who are already the most vulnerable — financially and health wise — such as those living near the poverty line, the chronically ill, people with mental illness and minorities in general.

"Contrary to the PR slogan, we are NOT all in this together," Lucas writes.30 "We need less insipid pro-lockdown propaganda extolling the virtues of the 'essential' workers, and more serious analysis of the enormous public health toll the lockdowns are imposing on them. Otherwise, we may come to see the era of coronavirus as simply the time where pro-lockdown elites sacrificed the working class31 to protect themselves."

A Pandemic of Fearmongering
An October 28, 2020, article featured by the Ron Paul Institute points out that:32

"Ever since the alleged pandemic erupted this past March the mainstream media has spewed a non-stop stream of misinformation that appears to be laser focused on generating maximum fear among the citizenry.

But the facts and the science simply don't support the grave picture painted of a deadly virus sweeping the land. Yes, we do have a pandemic, but it' a pandemic of ginned up pseudo-science masquerading as unbiased fact."

Nine facts that can be backed up with data "paints a very different picture from the fear and dread being relentlessly drummed into the brains of unsuspecting citizens," the article states. In addition to the fact that PCR testing is practically useless, for all the reasons already mentioned, these data-backed facts include:

1.A positive test is NOT a "case" — As explained by Dr. Lee Merritt in her August 2020 Doctors for Disaster Preparedness33 lecture, featured in "How Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible," media and public health officials appear to have purposefully conflated "cases" or positive tests with the actual illness.

Medically speaking, a "case" refers to a sick person. It never ever referred to someone who had no symptoms of illness. Now all of a sudden, this well-established medical term, "case," has been completely and arbitrarily redefined to mean someone who tested positive for the presence of viral RNA. As noted by Merritt, "That is not epidemiology. That's fraud."

2.According to the CDC34 and other research data,35 the COVID-19 survival rate is over 99%, and the vast majority of deaths occur in those over 70, which is close to normal life expectancy.

3.CDC analysis reveals 85% of patients testing positive for COVID-19 wore face masks "often" or "always" in the two weeks preceding their positive test. As noted in the Ron Paul article,36 "The only rational conclusion from this study is that cloth face masks offer little if any protection from Covid-19 infection."

4.There are inexpensive, proven successful therapies for COVID-19 — Examples include various regimens involving hydroxychloroquine with zinc and antibiotics, quercetin-based protocols, the MATH+ protocol and nebulized hydrogen peroxide.

5.The death rate has not risen despite pandemic deaths — Data37,38 show the overall all-cause mortality has remained steady during 2020 and doesn't veer from the norm. In other words, COVID-19 has not killed off more of the population than would have died in any given year anyway.

As noted in the Ron Paul article,39 "According to the CDC as of early May 2020 the total number of deaths in the US was 944,251 from January 1 — April 30th. This is actually slightly lower than the number of deaths during the same period in 2017 when 946,067 total deaths were reported."

15,000 Doctors and Scientists Call for End to Lockdowns
All in all, there are many reasons to suspect that continued lockdowns, social distancing and mask mandates are completely unnecessary and will not significantly alter the course of this pandemic illness, or the final death count.

And, with regard to universal PCR testing where individuals are tested every two weeks or even more frequently, whether they have symptoms or not, this is clearly a pointless effort that yields useless data. It's just a tool to spread fear, which in turn allows for the rapid implementation of the totalitarian control mechanisms required to pull off The Great Reset. Fortunately, more and more people are now starting to see through this plot.

About 45,000 scientists and doctors worldwide have already signed the Great Barrington Declaration,40 which calls for the end to all lockdowns and implementation of a herd immunity approach to the pandemic, meaning governments should allow people who are not at significant risk of serious COVID-19 illness to go back to normal life, as the lockdown approach is having a devastating effect on public health — far worse than the virus itself.41,42 The declaration states:43

"Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health …

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to coronavirus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this focused protection."

The declaration points out that current lockdown policies will result in excess mortality in the future, primarily among younger people and the working class. As of November 5, 2020, The Great Barrington Declaration44 had been signed by 11,791 medical and public health scientists, 33,903 medical practitioners and 617,685 "concerned citizens."45"

+ Sources and References
1 The Huntingtonian October 6, 2020
2 CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel July 13, 2020 (PDF)
3 New York Times, March 20, 2020
4 The Verge, March 17, 2020, Current Gold Standards
5 Lockdownskeptics September 20, 2020
6, 11, 12 The Vaccine Reaction September 29, 2020
7 Daily Mail August 30, 2020
8, 9, 13 The New York Times August 29, 2020
10 Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases April 27, 2020; 39(6): 1059-1061
14 Abbott Press Release August 26, 2020
15 Business Insider September 21, 2020
16, 17 Daily Mail October 31, 2020
18, 22, 30 The Federalist June 16, 2020
19 National Review May 22, 2020
20 WSJ Opinion May 13, 2020
21 Letter from Doctors to President Donald Trump May 19, 2020
23 Health Services Research 2007 Apr; 42(2): 644–662
24 The ASCO Post April 14, 2016
25 Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health 2003; 57: 594-600
26 Well Being Trust Projected Deaths of Despair During COVID-19
27 Reuters April 3, 2020
28 Pandemic Data and Analytics — Quantifying Years of Lost Life
29 Center on Society and Health February 13, 2015
31 The Federalist May 4, 2020
32, 36, 39 Ron Paul Institute October 28, 2020
33 Doctors for Disaster Preparedness
34 CDC.gov Pandemic Planning Scenarios Updated September 10, 2020
35 Annals of Internal Medicine September 2, 2020 DOI: 10.7326/M20-5352
37 YouTube, SARS-CoV-2 and the rise of medical technocracy, Lee Merritt, MD, aprox 8 minutes in (Lie No. 1: Death Risk)
38 Technical Report June 2020 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.24350.77125
40, 43, 44 Great Barrington Declaration
41 Sky News October 7, 2020
42 Washington Times October 8, 2020
45 Great Barrington Declaration Signatures

[Constance]

ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff

[DaveToo]

Posted by onawah (here)
The combination of different toxins have to be causing an overall challenge to the immune system, and when the final straw is introduced (that being whatever Covid is--if it really is a virus, or if such a thing as a virus exists), there is little resistance to it left , and then it's not illogical that similar symptoms would manifest in everyone.

I can go along with that theory.
But as detective Columbo used to say "Just one more thing".....

Your theory doesn't cover a crucial element to this puzzle.
Clusters.

Time and time again we see/read of regular news stories around the world (U.S./Canada all over the place)
of cluster outbreaks in localities.

I need someone here to give me a full-proof explanation for these.