Covid19: Cui Bono? What's the real agenda?

[Kryztian]

Bill Gates claims pandemic's 'misery' will 'happen regularly' if climate change is not stopped
Microsoft co-founder says climate change death toll will match that of COVID-19 in 40 years.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/bill-g...climate-change

Billionaire Bill Gates wants the United States to treat climate change with the "same sense of urgency" with which it has responded to COVID-19, arguing that the impacts of the former will be much worse without corrective action.

"If you want to understand the kind of damage that climate change will inflict, look at COVID-19 and spread the pain out over a much longer period of time," the Microsoft co-founder wrote on his blog Tuesday.

"The loss of life and economic misery caused by this pandemic are on par with what will happen regularly if we do not eliminate the world’s carbon emissions."

Gates estimated that the death toll from climate change would match that of the pandemic by 2060, and exceed it fivefold by 2100. The economic impact of climate change over the next two decades, he added, could be "as bad as having a COVID-sized pandemic every ten years."

BILL GATES SAYS CORONAVIRUS VACCINE COULD REQUIRE MULTIPLE DOSES

Early in the pandemic, some drew comparisons between the virus and climate change, and credited economic shutdowns with reducing carbon emissions. Gates acknowledged this effect, but said such temporary restrictions aren't nearly enough to address rising emissions.

“What’s remarkable is not how much emissions will go down because of the pandemic, but how little," he said, pointing to a July report estimating the cost of emissions reductions.

"Has closing off major parts of the economy avoided emissions at anything close to $100 per ton?" Gates asked. "No. In the United States, according to data from the Rhodium Group, it comes to between $3,200 and $5,400 per ton. In the European Union, it’s roughly the same amount. In other words, the shutdown is reducing emissions at a cost between 32 and 54 times the $100 per ton that economists consider a reasonable price."

At the end of his blog post, Gates called for drastic change and noted that flying or driving less wasn't going to cut it.

"So just as we need new tests, treatments, and vaccines for the novel coronavirus, we need new tools for fighting climate change: zero-carbon ways to produce electricity, make things, grow food, keep our buildings cool and warm, and move people and goods around the world," he said.

BILL GATES PARTLY BLAMES FACEBOOK, TWITTER FOR CORONAVIRUS SPREAD

"And we need new seeds and other innovations to help the world’s poorest people — many of whom are smallholder farmers — adapt to a less predictable climate."

Meanwhile, a Duke University professor told lawmakers Wednesday that the U.S. could prevent 4.5 million premature deaths if it worked towards to keep temperature increases below two degrees Celsius.

[pueblo]

The agenda comes more sharply into focus daily.

I am currently in Spain returning home to Ireland soon. By law when arriving in Ireland all passengers must fill out a 'Passenger Locator Form', where you enter the details of where you will be self isolating for, for 2 weeks on your return.

This is very soon to be replaced by an "Electronic Passenger Locator Form' which is basically an app they can use to check where you are at all times as well as spam you fear based 'public health warnings'.

Under no circumstances will I put this crap on my phone. It's push back time.

New call centre to track passengers arriving at the State's ports and airports
Online passenger locator form being developed by HSE due to launch this month

A new call centre to track passengers arriving into Ireland from non-green list countries will begin operations next Monday.

The call centre has been set up by DAA, but its operations will be contracted to an outside company, specifically to tackle the very low rate of follow-up by State authorities on passengers arriving into Ireland who are required to quarantine for 14 days.

Until now it has been the Department of Justice which has been responsible for follow-up calls to locate incoming passengers.

However, only 7 per cent of passengers arriving from non-green list countries were contacted, and only half of those answered the calls.

The low rate of contacting incoming passengers was described by Social Democrats co-leader Róisín Shortall as a weakness in Government plans to tackle Covid-19 in Ireland.

He confirmed the e-form for locating passengers will include a “text-messaging facility with the capability to issue daily reminders and public health information to persons required to restrict their movement”.

The locator office will also be in a position to check that passengers are where they claimed they would be on the form they supplied upon arrival into Ireland.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/irel...orts-1.4325977

[Gwin Ru]

There you go... plain as day; what "they" want, what "they" believe:

Professor of Bioethics: 'Induce compliance from Covid-19 defectors by subjecting them to moral enhancement via water supply'

Parker Crutchfield
The Conversation
Mon, 10 Aug 2020 10:37 UTC

People in California protested stay-at-home orders in May – prioritizing the personal over the collective. Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images

A US bioethicist proposes that 'Covid-19 defectors be covertly morally-enhanced.'

COVID-19 is a collective risk. It threatens everyone, and we all must cooperate to lower the chance that the coronavirus harms any one individual. Among other things, that means keeping safe social distances and wearing masks. But many people choose not to do these things, making spread of infection more likely.

SOTT Comment: Social distancing and wearing facemasks have no proven impact on the reduction of viral transmission, particularly for coronaviruses and other highly contagious viruses that cause the common cold and influenza-like illnesses.

When someone chooses not to follow public health guidelines around the coronavirus, they're defecting from the public good. It's the moral equivalent of the tragedy of the commons: If everyone shares the same pasture for their individual flocks, some people are going to graze their animals longer, or let them eat more than their fair share, ruining the commons in the process. Selfish and self-defeating behavior undermines the pursuit of something from which everyone can benefit.

SOTT Comment: Indeed, and what could be more selfish and self-defeating than trashing people's lives to pursue an aim that is impossible to achieve?

Democratically enacted enforceable rules - mandating things like mask wearing and social distancing - might work, if defectors could be coerced into adhering to them. But not all states have opted to pass them or to enforce the rules that are in place.

SOTT Comment: Not a single 'rule', 'law' or 'recommendation' on Covid-19 was democratically enacted. All of it is constitutionally illegal.

My research in bioethics focuses on questions like how to induce those who are noncooperative to get on board with doing what's best for the public good. To me, it seems the problem of coronavirus defectors could be solved by moral enhancement: like receiving a vaccine to beef up your immune system, people could take a substance to boost their cooperative, pro-social behavior. Could a psychoactive pill be the solution to the pandemic?

SOTT Comment: Ironically, that's most likely what the 'gain-of-function' SARS-Cov-2 virus was meant to be; a virus that would 'improve' the population's DNA by making people more compliant. But it apparently backfired, causing the system managers to freak out and irrationally 'lock it all down'.

It's a far-out proposal that's bound to be controversial, but one I believe is worth at least considering, given the importance of social cooperation in the struggle to get COVID-19 under control.

Public goods games show scale of the problem
Evidence from experimental economics shows that defections are common to situations in which people face collective risks. Economists use public goods games to measure how people behave in various scenarios to lower collective risks such as from climate change or a pandemic and to prevent the loss of public and private goods.

The evidence from these experiments is no cause for optimism. Usually everyone loses because people won't cooperate. This research suggests it's not surprising people aren't wearing masks or social distancing - lots of people defect from groups when facing a collective risk. By the same token, I'd expect that, as a group, we will fail at addressing the collective risk of COVID-19, because groups usually fail. For more than 150,000 Americans so far, this has meant losing everything there is to lose.

But don't abandon all hope. In some of these experiments, the groups win and successfully prevent the losses associated with the collective risk. What makes winning more likely? Things like keeping a running tally of what others are contributing, observing others' behaviors, communication and coordination before and during play, and democratic implementation of an enforceable rule requiring contributions.

SOTT Comment: A social credit system, in other words, requiring maximal, and ideally total, compliance - even in the face of later developments indicating that the system's orthodoxies are objectively false.

For those of us in the United States, these conditions are out of reach when it comes to COVID-19. You can't know what others are contributing to the fight against the coronavirus, especially if you socially distance yourself. It's impossible to keep a running tally of what the other 328 million people in the U.S. are doing. And communication and coordination are not feasible outside of your own small group.

SOTT Comment: Oh the NSA and assorted intel agencies would beg to differ. They have a very clear idea of what 'the mass mind' is up to - hence their daily fine-tuning of mass programming.

Even if these factors were achievable, they still require the very cooperative behavior that's in short supply. The scale of the pandemic is simply too great for any of this to be possible.

Promoting cooperation with moral enhancement
It seems that the U.S. is not currently equipped to cooperatively lower the risk confronting us. Many are instead pinning their hopes on the rapid development and distribution of an enhancement to the immune system - a vaccine.

But I believe society may be better off, both in the short term as well as the long, by boosting not the body's ability to fight off disease but the brain's ability to cooperate with others. What if researchers developed and delivered a moral enhancer rather than an immunity enhancer?

Moral enhancement is the use of substances to make you more moral. The psychoactive substances act on your ability to reason about what the right thing to do is, or your ability to be empathetic or altruistic or cooperative.

For example, oxytocin, the chemical that, among other things, can induce labor or increase the bond between mother and child, may cause a person to be more empathetic and altruistic, more giving and generous. The same goes for psilocybin, the active component of "magic mushrooms." These substances have been shown to lower aggressive behavior in those with antisocial personality disorder and to improve the ability of sociopaths to recognize emotion in others.

These substances interact directly with the psychological underpinnings of moral behavior; others that make you more rational could also help. Then, perhaps, the people who choose to go maskless or flout social distancing guidelines would better understand that everyone, including them, is better off when they contribute, and rationalize that the best thing to do is cooperate.

Moral enhancement as an alternative to vaccines
There are of course pitfalls to moral enhancement.

One is that the science isn't developed enough. For example, while oxytocin may cause some people to be more pro-social, it also appears to encourage ethnocentrism, and so is probably a bad candidate for a widely distributed moral enhancement. But this doesn't mean that a morality pill is impossible. The solution to the underdeveloped science isn't to quit on it, but to direct resources to related research in neuroscience, psychology or one of the behavioral sciences.

SOTT Comment: 'Science can't do this, but we can make science do this for us!'

Another challenge is that the defectors who need moral enhancement are also the least likely to sign up for it. As some have argued, a solution would be to make moral enhancement compulsory or administer it secretly, perhaps via the water supply. These actions require weighing other values. Does the good of covertly dosing the public with a drug that would change people's behavior outweigh individuals' autonomy to choose whether to participate? Does the good associated with wearing a mask outweigh an individual's autonomy to not wear one?

The scenario in which the government forces an immunity booster upon everyone is plausible. And the military has been forcing enhancements like vaccines or "uppers" upon soldiers for a long time. The scenario in which the government forces a morality booster upon everyone is far-fetched. But a strategy like this one could be a way out of this pandemic, a future outbreak or the suffering associated with climate change. That's why we should be thinking of it now.

About the author

Parker Crutchfield is Associate Professor of Medical Ethics, Humanities and Law, Western Michigan University

SOTT Comment: And there you have it. This 'top thinker' from among their 'side' or 'type' just articulated exactly what is going on here. His genius plan may not literally be in effect ('morality pills'), but elements of it certainly are, and, in toto, it is metaphorically or energetically in effect - and has been for some time, i.e. since pre-Covid-19. One thing that comes to mind is the fluoridation of the water supply, something that has been implemented globally, to varying degrees, since WW2.

How does someone in his position - someone who we have no reason to doubt ostensibly lives 'a normal life' and who 'means well' - come up with such a psychopathic, anti-human scheme?

Our best guess is that, like the scientists working for the secret consortium who took a coronavirus and genetically tweaked it to 'improve human DNA' then introduced it to the general population by using US soldiers as guinea pigs, his own DNA is 'antenna-aligned' to the same or similar 'sources of inspiration' in the Information Field. He's able to conceive 'solutions' like he proposes above because that's the sort of thing 'like-minded' people are actively conceiving and doing all the time.

At each stage, when things backfire, they double-down and intensify their efforts to 'make better people, for a better world', completely oblivious to their role in producing increasing numbers of brain-disordered and character-disturbed people.


Related:

• BRAVE NEW WORLD: Health 'Experts' Propose Spiking Water Supply with Lithium to Stop COVID-19 Suicides

[Goba]

its actually more about Covid and Australia

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=eEoJibTMg6o

[Goba]

Posted by Kryztian (here)
Kissinger: Failure to establish post-COVID new world order ‘could set the world on fire’

I just had a bad case of Mandela-Effect, I was certain this piece of human excrement had died already!

[Gwin Ru]

Illuminati Vowed in 1969: "Travel Will Be More Difficult"

By Henry Makow
August 15, 2020

Wake up, folks. The coronavirus is a pretext for the radical undemocratic reorganization of society.

1969:

" Travel ... would become very restricted. People would need permission to travel and they would need a good reason to travel. If you didn't have a good reason for your travel you would not be allowed to travel, and everyone would need ID... later on, some sort of device would be developed to be implanted under the skin that would be coded specifically to identify the individual."

Updated from Nov 12, 2010
By Henry Makow Ph.D.

Like sheep, humanity had better adjust to constant harassment as long as it tolerates Illuminati control of all important government and social institutions.

On March 20, 1969, Rockefeller Insider Dr. Richard Day (1905-1989) gave a speech to the Pittsburgh division of the American Medical Association in which he predicted:

" Travel ... would become very restricted. People would need permission to travel and they would need a good reason to travel. If you didn't have a good reason for your travel you would not be allowed to travel, and everyone would need ID... later on some sort of device would be developed to be implanted under the skin that would be coded specifically to identify the individual." (Tape two)

Although prohibited, Dr. Lawrence Dunegan made notes and related the contents of the speech to Randy Engel who made them available on tape.

Dr. Dunegan reveals not just "WHAT" is intended for America and all people in the world, but "HOW" the controllers intend to carry out their plan.

Dr. Day said -- "Everything is in place and nobody can stop us now . . ."

"Some of you will think I'm talking about Communism. Well, what I'm talking about is much bigger than Communism!" "Everything has two purposes. One is the ostensible purpose which will make it acceptable to people; and second, is the real purpose which would further the goals of establishing the new system and having it."

He covers topics such as:

• People will have to get used to change - everything will change, constantly

• The REAL and the "STATED" goals

• Population Control

• Permission to have babies

• Redirecting the purpose of sex - sex without reproduction and reproduction without sex

• Sex education as a tool of World Government

• Encouraging homosexuality... Sex, anything goes

• Euthanasia and the "Demise Pill"

• Limiting access to affordable medical care makes eliminating the elderly easier

• Planning the control over medicine

• Elimination of private doctors

• New Difficult to diagnose and untreatable diseases

• Suppressing cancer cures as a means of population control.

• Inducing heart attacks as a form of assassination

• Education as a tool for accelerating the onset of puberty and pushing evolution

• and MUCH, MUCH MORE

The complete transcript of these tapes are available here.

DENIAL
As long as the masses refuse to acknowledge the Illuminati conspiracy, they will continue to be complicit in their own destruction.

For the last six months (in 2010), we have been bombarded with propaganda about the Swine Flu. Millions have been vaccinated. Billions of profits have been made. These vaccines might have been harmless. Who knows about the next? What we do know is that, generally speaking, Swine Flu proved to be less dangerous than seasonal flu.

Then, recently for over a week, we were bombarded with hysteria about weather change (aka "climate change.") The Club of Rome concocted this bogeyman back in the 1980s.

We must regard official society as a brainwashing chamber where we are being subjected to trauma-based mind control. Other traumatic events from the last decade include 9-11, the Tsunami, Hurricane Katerina, the great Northeastern power black-outs, the financial meltdown, and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's been a good decade for the Illuminati. Society is far more fearful and pessimistic, far more willing to accept totalitarian control.

THE KEY TO OUR EXASPERATION
In the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the author writes that their goal is:

"To wear everyone out by dissensions, animosities, feuds, famine, inoculation of diseases, want, until the Gentiles sees no other way of escape except by appeal to our money and our power." (Protocol 10)

"We will so wear out and exhaust the Gentiles by all this that they will be compelled to offer us an international authority, which by its position will enable us to absorb without disturbance all the governmental forces of the world and thus form a super-government." (Protocol 5)

Harold Rosenthal who was a member of this cabal boasted that they even implanted a "guilt complex" over the holocaust and anti-Semitism that prevents society from addressing the threat.

Through control of banking, they acquired a total monopoly of

"the movie industry, the radio networks and the newly developing television media...we took over the publication of all school materials... Even your music! We censor the songs released for publication long before they reach the publishers...we will have complete control of your thinking."

We "have put issue upon issue to the American people. Then we promote both sides of the issue as confusion reigns. With their eyes fixed on the issues, they fail to see who is behind every scene. We, Jews, toy with the American public as a cat toys with a mouse."

It would be great if the problem could be confined to "Jews" but literally everyone who advances the New World Order agenda wittingly or unwittingly is implicated, and that is, millions of people, i.e. the "Establishment."

SOCIETY OF SHILLS
The Illuminati central banking cartel controls government credit, media, banking, corporations, education, professional associations, justice, military ..you name it. They use Freemasonry as their instrument. Recently, I posted an article about how they control the US Black community using the Masonic "Boule." The same principle applies everywhere.

Society operates on two rails. The formal--the image of a democracy ruled by law that dupes the masses and ensures their cooperation. The informal-- the Illuminati club, which actually makes the decisions regardless of what's happening on the formal level. The informal infiltrates the formal until the latter is merely a mask for the former.

Want to succeed? Join the club of secret Satan worshipers. That's what Barack Obama did.

In a post May 29, 2009, Emily Gyde, an Illuminati defector who claims to be the real author of the Harry Potter series, says Obama told her this:

"I remember PRESIDENT OBAMA talking to me about how he had joined the ILL CULT - he didn't want to - but he described himself as just an ordinary guy who wanted to take a wage packet home...that is how it was...he didn't want to end up on the streets...at the end of the day, it was all about money...you had to have it to live...if he hadn't joined the ILL CULT...he would have been disbarred...he wouldn't have got a job...wouldn't have been able to live...that's how a lot of people get conned into joining the ILL. You are young, you want to prove yourself in life - you are told that you will 'never get a job' if you don't...the ILL prove how powerful they are."

CONCLUSION
When I was a sixties radical, we used to think people who worked for the Establishment had sold their souls to the devil. I didn't imagine it was literally true, as the Illuminati are Satan worshipers, so you're unwittingly working for his disciples.

The world has been colonized by this Satanic cult. What we are experiencing, while trying to maintain some civilized traditions over Christmas, is their relentless attempt to induct us into their cult as mind-controlled servants.

----

I reckon that "TSA" is part and parcel of making traveling more difficult... as well as "demerit points" or the Chinese "Social Credit System"

[onawah]

DR. ROBERT YOUNG on Camelot: VACCINES, VIRUSES, HCQ, NANO & RADIATION
August 6, 2020
https://projectcamelotportal.com/202...-hcq-and-more/

"I received the following statement and articles from Dr. Robert Young regarding viruses and vaccines:

..”The virus has never been identified, isolated, purified and cultured and proven to cause infections. So what is a virus – chemical and radiation poisoning. The rest is just a fairy tale that virologists like to tell themselves to give them a purpose. Virology is a religion based upon the faith that a virus might exist. It is the smoke screen for Big Pharma to poison babies, children and adults to reduce the surplus population for money. The viral theory is pure propaganda and Luciferian.”–Dr Robert O. Young

Hi Kerry, I wanted you to be aware the the vaccine from Moderna will kill millions in the name of a fake virus. I am sure you have heard that Moderna is in stage 3 of their vaccine testing. If all goes “well”, which it will (as a killer poison) it’ll become federal law in the USA for mandatory vaccination. [SIZE="2"]Here’s something you may not know. Guess who the first CEO of Moderna was? A Cornell graduate by the name of Anthony Fauci, who was a roommate with none other than Bill Gates. Are you paying attention? It was at Cornell that Bill Gates designed the RFID (Radio-frequency identification) and patented it under US2006257852. Are you awake yet? Now let’s really go down the rabbit hole. Moderna was a pharmaceutical company that started in Germany under the name IG Farben. IG Farben is infamous for it’s mass production of Zyklon-B, the primary gas used to kill millions during the Holocaust. After Germany fell, IG Farben was dissolved and its assets sold off by a Nazi turned American by the name of, you guessed it, George Soros. Soros rebranded the company as Moderna. And who was the primary stockholder of Moderna until his death? Jeffrey Epstein. His role in Moderna is where he made his fortune and established his connections. Let that sink in. Please help wake up the people! We are all being conditioned and controlled. Please share this information with everyone you love and care about.

Link to article:
http://www.drrobertyoung.com/post/ai...ro-wuhan-china

Titanium Dioxide Poisoning

Nanoparticles (NP) are increasingly being in used in a wide range of applications, including biomedical and environmental. The potential hazard they may present is the focus of current nanotoxicology research. Among the nanoparticles with a broad spectrum of applications and known cellular responses are the carbon nanotubes, nano-titanium dioxide (TiO2) and nano-cerium oxide. TiO2 is a widely used pigment found in many consumer products that include cosmetics and sunscreens, toothpaste, food products (FDA approved) and prosthetic implants. TiO2 exists in three mineral forms: anatase, rutile and brookite; anatase and rutile have a tetragonal crystalline structure, brookite is orthorhombic. Anatase has high photocatalytic activity under UV light (an application of photocatalysis is the oxidation of organic pollutants in waste waters). The major routes of TiO2. NP exposure are inhalation and the skin. Studies conducted in parallel in mice and rats show similar patterns of lung neutrophilia in the two rodents and dependent on the form of TiO2 used. Intravenous and/or intraperitoneal administration leads to accumulation of TiO2 in the liver, spleen, kidney and lung but at different levels. Under various types of toxicity conditions, pulmonary toxicity in response to TiO2 is observed. It is believed that the observed pulmonary inflammation caused by TiO2 relates to oxidative stress and the expression of inflammatory cytokines. The in vivo studies show DNA strand breaks, chromosomal damage, endocrine and reproductive systems-related issues. TiO2, in its anatase form can interact with DNA in rat and mouse liver cells, either by inserting itself in-between DNA base pairs or binding to DNA nucleotide with three DNA oxygen or nitrogen atoms and two phosphorus. In vitro studies in human cell lines point to the genotoxic and cytotoxic effects of TiO2. Results show impairment of DNA repair pathways, induction of oxidative stress and intrinsic apoptosis via activation of p53 signaling. P53 tumor suppressor transcription factor is a master regulator at the hub of many signaling and regulatory networks. TiO2 activates both the intrinsic and extrinsic apoptotic pathways via increased expression of Bax and Casp3 and of Fas and Casp8, respectively. TiO2 has also been shown to induce inflammatory responses via Toll-like receptor signaling involving Tlr4. Toll-like receptors represent a large family of pattern recognition receptors (PRR) that respond to a diverse array of exogenous and endogenous molecules. There are 10 known Toll-like receptors in mammals of which receptors 1 to 9 are conserved. All rely on adaptor proteins to initiate downstream events of which Myd88 represent the main adaptor protein. Thus, downstream events take place in an Myd88-dependent or independent manner. Tlr4 is the only receptor that employs both routes, albeit with different kinetics. Of note, TiO2 activation of Tlr4 is independent of Lbp and Cd14 – the proteins needed to facilitate LPS (lipopolysaccharide) binding by the Tlr4-Ly96 complex. In human keratinocytes, TiO2 diminishes mitochondrial function and affects carbohydrate, amino acids and polyamine metabolism. It has to be mentioned that the literature points to contradictory and conflicting results and data regarding both the toxicity and the particle size effects of TiO2 emphasizing the need for further experimental assessment. In addition, there may be variation in the responses of different species.

It is all about chemical and radiation poisoning. The viral theory is the smoke screen that has been used by those in power to control humanity.

Over 1000 chemicals added to cigarettes and look at the denial and legal battle for years that smoking causes cancer. Over 90 percent of all cancers are cancers of the lung and 90 percent of those cancers are ALL preventable if one would just stop smoking cigarettes. There is no virus associated with or directly causing severe acute lung disease (SARS) There are zero deaths caused by the invisible virus. Why is it invisible? Because it does not exist except to those who want to destroy our economy, our country, our way of life and our belief in God! Over 500,000 people a month die from chemical poisoning from air pollution! Please read my latest article on chemical and radiation poisoning at:
http://www.drrobertyoung.com/post/ai...ro-wuhan-china

Chemical & Radiation Poisoning at Ground Zero – Wuhan, China & New York City, New York

www.drrobertyoung.com

Yale study is focus group for vaccine language Message: This is Unbelievable. PLEASE use every means of getting this on the web, people need to know that the language coming down the pike on why they should get the vaccine is not the truth, nor is it a reflection of any confidence in the vaccine, it’s just the messaging that worked best in the focus group. If that doesn’t get people to wake up and realize that the FDA and CDC have been captured and now they are even using research resources to do market research for pharma. This is insane!
How can anyone believe anything that is being said when they see and understand what is really going on?
clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04460703

Virologists continually operate under the assumption that viruses are foreign infectious agents that “hijack” the human cell. They give details of mechanisms of how the virus works, and constantly superimposes this idea on top, despite, they do not make logical sense based on the information that they are explaining. Example: they go into great detail to explain the complicated coupling procedure that does not just require an ACE2 receptor, but requires host proteins to be embedded in the phantom virus in order for the membranes to merge so that the contents of the RNA are delivered to the interior of the cell. The virologist will state\ that this process is tightly controlled! At this point, the invisible virus essentially ceases to exist as it dumps a little bit of its genetic material “messenger RNA” into the cell!

It requires a leap of faith to believe that a bit of messenger RNA information would be harmful to any cell, or anything other than a report that it reads so that it can make an intelligent decision on how to proceed with its daily activity! There are 5 other issues that are quite disturbing!

1) Virologists attempt to show electron micrographs of the exosome which are all identical to each other when suggesting that the HIV exosome is different from the Coronavirus exosome.

2) Virologists completely ignore the idea of XMRVs which are foreign coronaviruses from a monkey or mouse. Do these coronaviruses have the embedded host proteins? Are they able to merge with “host” cells?

3) Virologists call HIV an “exosomal virion” which is the admittance that they are a normal part of human physiology! This is a huge problem when an entire field of science is based on an assumptive, lie, error or belief based on faith. This makes virology a religion and not a science. The whole basis of the virologist is to differentiate “viruses” from “exosomes” but they cannot because they have NO anatomical, genetic or biochemical evidence of its existence let alone its infectivity.

4) Virologists also state that dindridic cells that transport the so-called HIV virus from one place to another do so without being “infected”. Clearly this is another fact that supports that the human body is intelligently driving and cooperating with the function of these vesicles. This makes the dindridic cells pawns in a game that they can do little about. Acknowledging this fact by virology would be the logical jump rather than calling dindridic cells the Trojan Horse.

5) Exosomes share the surface proteins, they carry RNA, and they use the same pathways for use, but if you buy-in to the virus theory you have to make the distinction that viruses have an “evil genius” behind the scenes that cause them to be infectious. My recommendation is to dismantle the viral theory and focus on the real ’cause and effect’ relationships between health and disease. May I suggest the ‘terrain theory’ and that all dis-ease is born in us and from us due to personal choices of what we eat, what we drink, what we breathe, what we think, what we feel and what we believe. The viral theory is ONLY a concept that exists on a piece of paper.

See his website and further articles:

www.drrobertyoung.com/Also see:

DR. ROBERT O. YOUNG: COVID19 REVELATIONS AND BRINGING THE VIRUS MODEL INTO QUESTION

projectcamelotportal.com/2020/06/25/dr-robert-o-young-covid19-revelations-and-bringing-the-virus-model-into-question/

DR. ROBERT O. YOUNG: COROVIRUS IS JUST A CONCEPT THAT ONLY EXISTS ON PAPER. — LATEST ARTICLE

http://www.drrobertyoung.com/post/th...xists-on-paper

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=JOAk0tCH2es

Dr. Robert O. Young Speaking in Bali. – Recommended

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=W3Nj60gaSnY

[mountain_jim]

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/do...ating-covid-19

Doctors Pen Open Letter To Fauci Regarding The Use Of Hydroxychloroquine for Treating COVID-19

Authored by George C. Fareed, MD Brawley, California Michael M. Jacobs, MD, MPH Pensacola, Florida Donald C. Pompan, MD Salinas, California,

August 12, 2020

Anthony Fauci, MD
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
Washington, D.C.

Dear Dr. Fauci:

You were placed into the most high-profile role regarding America’s response to the Coronavirus pandemic. Americans have relied on your medical expertise concerning the wearing of masks, resuming employment, returning to school, and of course medical treatment.

You are largely unchallenged in terms of your medical opinions. You are the de facto “COVID-19 Czar”. This is unusual in the medical profession in which doctors’ opinions are challenged by other physicians in the form of exchanges between doctors at hospitals, medical conferences, as well as debate in medical journals. You render your opinions unchallenged, without formal public opposition from physicians who passionately disagree with you. It is incontestable that the public is best served when opinions and policy are based on the prevailing evidence and science, and able to withstand the scrutiny of medical professionals.

As experience accrued in treating COVID-19 infections, physicians worldwide discovered that high-risk patients can be treated successfully as an outpatient, within the first 5 to 7 days of the onset of symptoms, with a “cocktail” consisting of hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin (or doxycycline). Multiple scholarly contributions to the literature detail the efficacy of the hydroxychloroquine-based combination treatment.

Dr. Harvey Risch, the renowned Yale epidemiologist, published an article in May 2020 in the American Journal of Epidemiology titled “Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk COVID-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to Pandemic Crisis”. He further published an article in Newsweek in July 2020 for the general public expressing the same conclusions and opinions. Dr. Risch is an expert at evaluating research data and study designs, publishing over 300 articles. Dr Risch’s assessment is that there is unequivocal evidence for the early and safe use of the “HCQ cocktail.” If there are Q-T interval concerns, doxycycline can be substituted for azithromycin as it has activity against RNA viruses without any cardiac effects.

Yet, you continue to reject the use of hydroxychloroquine, except in a hospital setting in the form of clinical trials, repeatedly emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting its use. Hydroxychloroquine, despite 65 years of use for malaria, and over 40 years for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, with a well-established safety profile, has been deemed by you and the FDA as unsafe for use in the treatment of symptomatic COVID-19 infections. Your opinions have influenced the thinking of physicians and their patients, medical boards, state and federal agencies, pharmacists, hospitals, and just about everyone involved in medical decision making.

Indeed, your opinions impacted the health of Americans, and many aspects of our day-to-day lives including employment and school. Those of us who prescribe hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin/doxycycline believe fervently that early outpatient use would save tens of thousands of lives and enable our country to dramatically alter the response to COVID-19. We advocate for an approach that will reduce fear and allow Americans to get their lives back.

We hope that our questions compel you to reconsider your current approach to COVID-19 infection.

Questions regarding early outpatient treatment

1. There are generally two stages of COVID-19 symptomatic infection; initial flu like symptoms with progression to cytokine storm and respiratory failure, correct?

2. When people are admitted to a hospital, they generally are in worse condition, correct?

3. There are no specific medications currently recommended for early outpatient treatment of symptomatic COVID-19 infection, correct?

4. Remdesivir and Dexamethasone are used for hospitalized patients, correct?

5. There is currently no recommended pharmacologic early outpatient treatment for individuals in the flu stage of the illness, correct?

6. It is true that COVID-19 is much more lethal than the flu for high-risk individuals such as older patients and those with significant comorbidities, correct?

7. Individuals with signs of early COVID-19 infection typically have a runny nose, fever, cough, shortness of breath, loss of smell, etc., and physicians send them home to rest, eat chicken soup etc., but offer no specific, targeted medications, correct?

8. These high-risk individuals are at high risk of death, on the order of 15% or higher, correct?

9. So just so we are clear—the current standard of care now is to send clinically stable symptomatic patients home, “with a wait and see” approach?

10. Are you aware that physicians are successfully using Hydroxychloroquine combined with Zinc and Azithromycin as a “cocktail” for early outpatient treatment of symptomatic, high-risk, individuals?

11. Have you heard of the “Zelenko Protocol,” for treating high-risk patients with COVID 19 as an outpatient?

12. Have you read Dr. Risch’s article in the American Journal of Epidemiology of the early outpatient treatment of COVID-19?

13. Are you aware that physicians using the medication combination or “cocktail” recommend use within the first 5 to 7 days of the onset of symptoms, before the illness impacts the lungs, or cytokine storm evolves?

14. Again, to be clear, your recommendation is no pharmacologic treatment as an outpatient for the flu—like symptoms in patients that are stable, regardless of their risk factors, correct?

15. Would you advocate for early pharmacologic outpatient treatment of symptomatic COVID-19 patients if you were confident that it was beneficial?

16. Are you aware that there are hundreds of physicians in the United States and thousands across the globe who have had dramatic success treating high-risk individuals as outpatients with this “cocktail?”

17. Are you aware that there are at least 10 studies demonstrating the efficacy of early outpatient treatment with the Hydroxychloroquine cocktail for high-risk patients — so this is beyond anecdotal, correct?

18. If one of your loved ones had diabetes or asthma, or any potentially complicating comorbidity, and tested positive for COVID-19, would you recommend “wait and see how they do” and go to the hospital if symptoms progress?

19. Even with multiple studies documenting remarkable outpatient efficacy and safety of the Hydroxychloroquine “cocktail,” you believe the risks of the medication combination outweigh the benefits?

20. Is it true that with regard to Hydroxychloroquine and treatment of COVID-19 infection, you have said repeatedly that “The Overwhelming Evidence of Properly Conducted Randomized Clinical Trials Indicate No Therapeutic Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)?”

21. But NONE of the randomized controlled trials to which you refer were done in the first 5 to 7 days after the onset of symptoms- correct?

22. All of the randomized controlled trials to which you refer were done on hospitalized patients, correct?

23. Hospitalized patients are typically sicker that outpatients, correct?

24. None of the randomized controlled trials to which you refer used the full cocktail consisting of Hydroxychloroquine, Zinc, and Azithromycin, correct?

25. While the University of Minnesota study is referred to as disproving the cocktail, the meds were not given within the first 5 to 7 days of illness, the test group was not high risk (death rates were 3%), and no zinc was given, correct?

26. Again, for clarity, the trials upon which you base your opinion regarding the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine, assessed neither the full cocktail (to include Zinc + Azithromycin or doxycycline) nor administered treatment within the first 5 to 7 days of symptoms, nor focused on the high-risk group, correct?

27. Therefore, you have no basis to conclude that the Hydroxychloroquine cocktail when used early in the outpatient setting, within the first 5 to 7 days of symptoms, in high risk patients, is not effective, correct?

28. It is thus false and misleading to say that the effective and safe use of Hydroxychloroquine, Zinc, and Azithromycin has been “debunked,” correct? How could it be “debunked” if there is not a single study that contradicts its use?

29. Should it not be an absolute priority for the NIH and CDC to look at ways to treat Americans with symptomatic COVID-19 infections early to prevent disease progression?

30. The SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 virus is an RNA virus. It is well-established that Zinc interferes with RNA viral replication, correct?

31. Moreover, is it not true that hydroxychloroquine facilitates the entry of zinc into the cell, is a “ionophore,” correct?

32. Isn’t also it true that Azithromycin has established anti-viral properties?

33. Are you aware of the paper from Baylor by Dr. McCullough et. al. describing established mechanisms by which the components of the “HCQ cocktail” exert anti-viral effects?

34. So- the use of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin (or doxycycline) and zinc, the “HCQ cocktail,” is based on science, correct?

Questions regarding safety

1. The FDA writes the following: “in light of on-going serious cardiac adverse events and their serious side effects, the known and potential benefits of CQ and HCQ no longer outweigh the known and potential risks for authorized use.” So not only is the FDA saying that Hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work, they are also saying that it is a very dangerous drug. Yet, is it not true the drug has been used as an anti-malarial drug for over 65 years?

2. Isn’t true that the drug has been used for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis for many years at similar doses?

3. Do you know of even a single study prior to COVID -19 that has provided definitive evidence against the use of the drug based on safety concerns?

4. Are you aware that chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine has many approved uses for hydroxychloroquine including steroid-dependent asthma (1988 study), Advanced pulmonary sarcoidosis (1988 study), sensitizing breast cancer cells for chemotherapy (2012 study), the attenuation of renal ischemia (2018 study), lupus nephritis (2006 study), epithelial ovarian cancer (2020 study, just to name a few)? Where are the cardiotoxicity concerns ever mentioned?

5. Risch estimates the risk of cardiac death from hydroxychloroquine to be 9/100,000 using the data provided by the FDA. That does not seem to be a high risk, considering the risk of death in an older patient with co-morbidities can be 15% or more. Do you consider 9/100,000 to be a high risk when weighed against the risk of death in older patient with co-morbidities?

6. To put this in perspective, the drug is used for 65 years, without warnings (aside for the need for periodic retinal checks), but the FDA somehow feels the need to send out an alert on June 15, 2020 that the drug is dangerous. Does that make any logical sense to you Dr. Fauci based on “science”?

7. Moreover, consider that the protocols for usage in early treatment are for 5 to 7 days at relatively low doses of hydroxychloroquine similar to what is being given in other diseases (RA, SLE) over many years- does it make any sense to you logically that a 5 to 7 day dose of hydroxychloroquine when not given in high doses could be considered dangerous?

8. You are also aware that articles published in the New England Journal of Medicine and Lancet, one out of Harvard University, regarding the dangers of hydroxychloroquine had to be retracted based on the fact that the data was fabricated. Are you aware of that?

9. If there was such good data on the risks of hydroxychloroquine, one would not have to use fake data, correct?

10. After all, 65 years is a long-time to determine whether or not a drug is safe, do you agree?

11. In the clinical trials that you have referenced (e.g., the Minnesota and the Brazil studies), there was not a single death attributed directly to hydroxychloroquine, correct?

12. According to Dr. Risch, there is no evidence based on the data to conclude that hydroxychloroquine is a dangerous drug. Are you aware of any published report that rebuts Dr. Risch’s findings?

13. Are you aware that the FDA ruling along with your statements have led to Governors in a number of states to restrict the use of hydroxychloroquine?

14. Are you aware that pharmacies are not filling prescriptions for this medication based on your and the FDA’s restrictions?

15. Are you aware that doctors are being punished by state medical boards for prescribing the medication based on your comments as well as the FDA’s?

16. Are you aware that people who want the medication sometimes need to call physicians in other states pleading for it?

17. And yet you opined in March that while people were dying at the rate of 10,000 patient a week, hydroxychloroquine could only be used in an inpatient setting as part of a clinical trial- correct?

18. So, people who want to be treated in that critical 5-to-7-day period and avoid being hospitalized are basically out of luck in your view, correct?

19. So, again, for clarity, without a shred of evidence that the Hydroxychloroquine/HCQ cocktail is dangerous in the doses currently recommend for early outpatient treatment, you and the FDA have made it very difficult if not impossible in some cases to get this treatment, correct?

Questions regarding methodology

The Key to Defeating COVID-19 Already Exists. We Need to Start Using It

1. In regards to the use of hydroxychloroquine, you have repeatedly made the same statement: “The Overwhelming Evidence from Properly Conducted Randomized Clinical Trials Indicate no Therapeutic Efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine.” Is that correct?

2. In Dr. Risch’s article regarding the early use of hydroxychloroquine, he disputes your opinion. He scientifically evaluated the data from the studies to support his opinions. Have you published any articles to support your opinions?

3. You repeatedly state that randomized clinical trials are needed to make conclusions regarding treatments, correct?

4. The FDA has approved many medications (especially in the area of cancer treatment) without randomized clinical trials, correct?

5. Are you aware that Dr. Thomas Frieden, the previous head of the CDC wrote an article in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2017 called “Evidence for Health Decision Making – Beyond Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT)”? Have you read that article?

6. In it Dr. Frieden states that “many data sources can provide valid evidence for clinical and public health action, including “analysis of aggregate clinical or epidemiological data”-do you disagree with that?

7. Frieden discusses “practiced-based evidence” as being essential in many discoveries, such SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome)-do you disagree with that?

8. Frieden writes the following: “Current evidence-grading systems are biased toward randomized clinical trials, which may lead to inadequate consideration of non-RCT data.” Dr. Fauci, have you considered all the non-RCT data in coming to your opinions?

9. Risch, who is a leading world authority in the analysis of aggregate clinical data, has done a rigorous analysis that he published regarding the early treatment of COVID 19 with hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin. He cites 5 or 6 studies, and in an updated article there are 5 or 6 more-a total of 10 to 12 clinical studies with formally collected data specifically regarding the early treatment of COVID. Have you analyzed the aggregate data regarding early treatment of high-risk patients with hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin?

10. Is there any document that you can produce for the American people of your analysis of the aggregate data that would rebut Dr. Risch’s analysis?

11. Yet, despite what Dr. Risch believes is overwhelming evidence in support of the early use of hydroxychloroquine, you dismiss the treatment insisting on randomized controlled trials even in the midst of a pandemic?

12. Would you want a loved one with high-risk comorbidities placed in the control group of a randomized clinical trial when a number of studies demonstrate safety and dramatic efficacy of the early use of the Hydroxychloroquine “cocktail?”

13. Are you aware that the FDA approved a number of cancer chemotherapy drugs without randomized control trials based solely on epidemiological evidence. The trials came later as confirmation. Are you aware of that?

14. You are well aware that there were no randomized clinical trials in the case of penicillin that saved thousands of lives in World War II? Was not this in the best interest of our soldiers?

15. You would agree that many lives were saved with the use of cancer drugs and penicillin that were used before any randomized clinical trials–correct?

16. You have referred to evidence for hydroxychloroquine as “anecdotal”- which is defined as “evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony”- correct?

17. But there are many studies supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine in which evidence was collected formally and not on personal testimony, has there not been?

18. So it would be false to conclude that the evidence supporting the early use of hydroxychloroquine is anecdotal, correct?

Comparison between the US and other countries regarding case fatality rate

(It would be very helpful to have the graphs comparing our case fatality rates to other countries)

1. Are you aware that countries like Senegal and Nigeria that use Hydroxychloroquine have much lower case-fatality rates than the United States?

2. Have you pondered the relationship between the use of Hydroxychloroquine by a given country and their case mortality rate and why there is a strong correlation between the use of HCQ and the reduction of the case mortality rate.?

3. Have you considered consulting with a country such as India that has had great success treating COVID-19 prophylactically?

4. Why shouldn’t our first responders and front-line workers who are at high risk at least have an option of HCQ/zinc prophylaxis?

5. We should all agree that countries with far inferior healthcare delivery systems should not have lower case fatality rates. Reducing our case fatality rate from near 5% to 2.5%, in line with many countries who use HCQ early would have cut our total number of deaths in half, correct?

6. Why not consult with countries who have lower case-fatality rates, even without expensive medicines such as remdesivir and far less advanced intensive care capabilities?


Giving Americans the option to use HCQ for COVID-19

1. Harvey Risch, the pre-eminent Epidemiologist from Yale, wrote a Newsweek Article titled: “The key to defeating COVID-19 already exists. We need to start using it.” Did you read the article?

2. Are you aware that the cost of the Hydroxychloroquine “cocktail” including the Z-pack and zinc is about $50?

3. You are aware the cost of Remdesivir is about $3,200?

4. So that’s about 60 doses of HCQ “cocktail,” correct?

5. In fact, President Trump had the foresight to amass 60 million doses of hydroxychloroquine, and yet you continue to stand in the way of doctors who want to use that medication for their infected patients, correct?

6. Those are a lot of doses of medication that potentially could be used to treat our poor, especially our minority populations and people of color that have a difficult time accessing healthcare. They die more frequently of COVID-19, do they not?

7. But because of your obstinance blocking the use of HCQ, this stockpile has remained largely unused, correct?

8. Would you acknowledge that your strategy of telling Americans to restrict their behavior, wear masks, and distance, and put their lives on hold indefinitely until there is a vaccine is not working?

9. So, 160,000 deaths later, an economy in shambles, kids out of school, suicides and drug overdoses at a record high, people neglecting and dying from other medical conditions, and America reacting to every outbreak with another lockdown- is it not time to re-think your strategy that is fully dependent on an effective vaccine?

10. Why not consider a strategy that protects the most vulnerable and allows Americans back to living their lives and not wait for a vaccine panacea that may never come?

11. Why not consider the approach that thousands of doctors around the world are using, supported by a number of studies in the literature, with early outpatient treatment of high-risk patients for typically one week with HCQ + Zinc + Azithromycin?

12. You don’t see a problem with the fact that the government, due to your position, in some cases interferes with the choice of using HCQ. Should not that be a choice between the doctor and the patient?

13. While some doctors may not want to use the drug, should not doctors who believe that it is indicated be able to offer it to their patients?

14. Are you aware that doctors who are publicly advocating for such a strategy with the early use of the HCQ cocktail are being silenced with removal of content on the internet and even censorship in the medical community?

15. You are aware of the 20 or so physicians who came to the Supreme Court steps advocating for the early use of the Hydroxychloroquine cocktail.In fact, you said these were “a bunch of people spouting out something that isn’t true.”Dr. Fauci, these are not just “people”- these are doctors who actually treat patients, unlike you, correct?

16. Do you know that the video they made went viral with 17 million views in just a few hours, and was then removed from the internet?

17. Are you aware that their website, American Frontline Doctors, was taken down the next day?

18. Did you see the way that Nigerian immigrant physician, Dr. Stella Immanuel, was mocked in the media for her religious views and called a “witch doctor”?

19. Are you aware that Dr. Simone Gold, the leader of the group, was fired from her job as an Emergency Room physician the following day?

20. Are you aware that physicians advocating for this treatment that has by now probably saved millions of lives around the globe are harassed by local health departments, state agencies and medical boards, and even at their own hospitals? Are you aware of that?

21. Don’t you think doctors should have the right to speak out on behalf of their patients without the threat of retribution?

22. Are you aware that videos and other educational information are removed off the internet and labeled, in the words of Mark Zuckerberg, as “misinformation.”?

23. Is it not misinformation to characterize Hydroxychloroquine, in the doses used for early outpatient treatment of COVID-19 infections, as a dangerous drug?

24. Is it not misleading for you to repeatedly state to the American public that randomized clinical trials are the sole source of information to confirm the efficacy of a treatment?

25. Was it not misinformation when on CNN you cited the Lancet study based on false data from Surgisphere as evidence of the lack of efficacy of hydroxychloroquine?

26. Is it not misinformation as is repeated in the MSM as a result of your comments that a randomized clinical trial is required by the FDA for a drug approval?

27. Don’t you realize how much damage this falsehood perpetuates?

28. How is it not misinformation for you and the FDA to keep telling the American public that hydroxychloroquine is dangerous when you know that there is nothing more than anecdotal evidence of that?

29. Fauci, if you or a loved one were infected with COVID-19, and had flu-like symptoms, and you knew as you do now that there is a safe and effective cocktail that you could take to prevent worsening and the possibility of hospitalization, can you honestly tell us that you would refuse the medication?

30. Why not give our healthcare workers and first responders, who even with the necessary PPE are contracting the virus at a 3 to 4 times greater rate than the general public, the right to choose along with their doctor if they want use the medicine prophylactically?

31. Why is the government inserting itself in a way that is unprecedented in regard to a historically safe medication and not allowing patients the right to choose along with their doctor?

32. Why not give the American people the right to decide along with their physician whether or not they want outpatient treatment in the first 5 to 7 days of the disease with a cocktail that is safe and costs around $50?

Final questions

1. Fauci, please explain how a randomized clinical trial, to which you repeatedly make reference, for testing the HCQ cocktail (hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and zinc) administered within 5-7 days of the onset of symptoms is even possible now given the declining case numbers in so many states?

2. For example, if the NIH were now to direct a study to begin September 15, where would such a study be done?

3. Please explain how a randomized study on the early treatment (within the first 5 to 7 days of symptoms) of high-risk, symptomatic COVID-19 infections could be done during the influenza season and be valid?

4. Please explain how multiple observational studies arrive at the same outcomes using the same formulation of hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin + Zinc given in the same time frame for the same study population (high risk patients) is not evidence that the cocktail works?

5. In fact, how is it not significant evidence, during a pandemic, for hundreds of non-academic private practice physicians to achieve the same outcomes with the early use of the HCQ cocktail?

6. What is your recommendation for the medical management of a 75-year-old diabetic with fever, cough, and loss of smell, but not yet hypoxic, who Emergency Room providers do not feel warrants admission? We know that hundreds of U.S. physicians (and thousands more around the world) would manage this case with the HCQ cocktail with predictable success.

7. If you were in charge in 1940, would you have advised the mass production of penicillin based primarily on lab evidence and one case series on 5 patients in England or would you have stated that a randomized clinical trial was needed?

8. Why would any physician put their medical license, professional reputation, and job on the line to recommend the HCQ cocktail (that does not make them any money) unless they knew the treatment could significantly help their patient?

9. Why would a physician take the medication themselves and prescribe it to family members (for treatment or prophylaxis) unless they felt strongly that the medication was beneficial?

10. How is it informed and ethical medical practice to allow a COVID-19 patient to deteriorate in the early stages of the infection when there is inexpensive, safe, and dramatically effective treatment with the HCQ cocktail, which the science indicates interferes with coronavirus replication?

11. How is your approach to “wait and see” in the early stages of COVID-19 infection, especially in high-risk patients, following the science?

While previous questions are related to hydroxychloroquine-based treatment, we have two questions addressing masks.

1. As you recall, you stated on March 8th, just a few weeks before the devastation in the Northeast, that masks weren’t needed. You later said that you made this statement to prevent a hoarding of masks that would disrupt availability to healthcare workers. Why did you not make a recommendation for people to wear any face covering to protect themselves, as we are doing now?

2. Rather, you issued no such warning and people were riding in subways and visiting their relatives in nursing homes without any face covering. Currently, your position is that face coverings are essential. Please explain whether or not you made a mistake in early March, and how would you go about it differently now.

Conclusion

Since the start of the pandemic, physicians have used hydroxychloroquine to treat symptomatic COVID-19 infections, as well as for prophylaxis. Initial results were mixed as indications and doses were explored to maximize outcomes and minimize risks. What emerged was that hydroxychloroquine appeared to work best when coupled with azithromycin. In fact, it was the President of the United States who recommended to you publicly at the beginning of the pandemic, in early March, that you should consider early treatment with hydroxychloroquine and a “Z-Pack.” Additional studies showed that patients did not seem to benefit when COVID-19 infections were treated with hydroxychloroquine late in the course of the illness, typically in a hospital setting, but treatment was consistently effective, even in high-risk patients, when hydroxychloroquine was given in a “cocktail” with azithromycin and, critically, zinc in the first 5 to 7 days after the onset of symptoms. The outcomes are, in fact, dramatic.

As clearly presented in the McCullough article from Baylor, and described by Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, the efficacy of the HCQ cocktail is based on the pharmacology of the hydroxychloroquine ionophore acting as the “gun” and zinc as the “bullet,” while azithromycin potentiates the anti-viral effect. Undeniably, the hydroxychloroquine combination treatment is supported by science. Yet, you continue to ignore the “science” behind the disease. Viral replication occurs rapidly in the first 5 to 7 days of symptoms and can be treated at that point with the HCQ cocktail. Rather, your actions have denied patients treatment in that early stage. Without such treatment, some patients, especially those at high risk with co-morbidities, deteriorate and require hospitalization for evolving cytokine storm resulting in pneumonia, respiratory failure, and intubation with 50% mortality. Dismissal of the science results in bad medicine, and the outcome is over 160,000 dead Americans. Countries that have followed the science and treated the disease in the early stages have far better results, a fact that has been concealed from the American Public.


Despite mounting evidence and impassioned pleas from hundreds of frontline physicians, your position was and continues to be that randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have not shown there to be benefit. However, not a single randomized control trial has tested what is being recommended: use of the full cocktail (especially zinc), in high-risk patients, initiated within the first 5 to 7 days of the onset of symptoms. Using hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin late in the disease process, with or without zinc, does not produce the same, unequivocally positive results.

Dr. Thomas Frieden, in a 2017 New England Journal of Medicine article regarding randomized clinical trials, emphasized there are situations in which it is entirely appropriate to use other forms of evidence to scientifically validate a treatment. Such is the case during a pandemic that moves like a brushfire jumping to different parts of the country. Insisting on randomized clinical trials in the midst of a pandemic is simply foolish. Dr. Harvey Risch, a world-renowned Yale epidemiologist, analyzed all the data regarding the use of the hydroxychloroquine/HCQ cocktail and concluded that the evidence of its efficacy when used early in COVID-19 infection is unequivocal.

Curiously, despite a 65+ years safety record, the FDA suddenly deemed hydroxychloroquine a dangerous drug, especially with regard to cardiotoxicity. Dr. Risch analyzed data provided by the FDA and concluded that the risk of a significant cardiac event from hydroxychloroquine is extremely low, especially when compared to the mortality rate of COVID-19 patients with high-risk co-morbidities. How do you reconcile that for forty years rheumatoid arthritis and lupus patients have been treated over long periods, often for years, with hydroxychloroquine and now there are suddenly concerns about a 5 to 7-day course of hydroxychloroquine at similar or slightly increased doses? The FDA statement regarding hydroxychloroquine and cardiac risk is patently false and alarmingly misleading to physicians, pharmacists, patients, and other health professionals. The benefits of the early use of hydroxychloroquine to prevent hospitalization in high-risk patients with COVID-19 infection far outweigh the risks. Physicians are not able to obtain the medication for their patients, and in some cases are restricted by their state from prescribing hydroxychloroquine. The government’s obstruction of the early treatment of symptomatic high-risk COVID-19 patients with hydroxychloroquine, a medication used extensively and safely for so long, is unprecedented.

It is essential that you tell the truth to the American public regarding the safety and efficacy of the hydroxychloroquine/HCQ cocktail. The government must protect and facilitate the sacred and revered physician-patient relationship by permitting physicians to treat their patients. Governmental obfuscation and obstruction are as lethal as cytokine storm.

Americans must not continue to die unnecessarily. Adults must resume employment and our youth return to school. Locking down America while awaiting an imperfect vaccine has done far more damage to Americans than the coronavirus. We are confident that thousands of lives would be saved with early treatment of high-risk individuals with a cocktail of hydroxychloroquine, zinc, and azithromycin. Americans must not live in fear. As Dr. Harvey Risch’s Newsweek article declares, “The key to defeating COVID-19 already exists. We need to start using it.”

Very Respectfully,

George C. Fareed, MD, Brawley, California

Michael M. Jacobs, MD, MPH, Pensacola, Florida

Donald C. Pompan, MD, Salinas, California

[onawah]

SHEPARD AMBELLAS SUSPECTS MAJOR DISASTER IS ON THE WAY AS DEPT OF INTERIOR INSIDER BLOWS THE WHISTLE
8/16/20 1,668 views
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/she...s-the-whistle/

(Not sure what to think about this )

"If you’re not a zombie, you know that the global response to the coronavirus makes no sense. Why are our fearless leaders crashing the global economy, forcing all of us to wait for a vaccine – for a virus with a mortality rate of 0.02%?

A vaccine that many believe can’t even be made?

Shepard Ambelleas, publisher of IntellHub joins Jason Goodman of Crowdsource the Truth to discuss what it’s really about.

“‘COVID’, I was speculating, was some kind of operation that was allowing the military to be rolled-out, worldwide and put into place, possibly due to some kind of calamity that was coming; the eruption of Yellowstone to supervolcano or asteroid impacts or the passing of Planet X, which is going to cause a disruption and perturb things.

“If that’s the case, you know, they’ve openly admitted planets are moving into our solar system so…things could be happening.”

Ambellas refers to the Deagel 2025 Forecast, which I’ve been studying since mid-2015. The Deagel predictions are based on a merge of publicly-available reports from institutions such as the CIA, IMF and the UN. They also include a small amount of data coming from a variety of “shadow sources”.

Currently, the forecast is showing a population drop in the US by 2025 of over 99 million, with most of those fleeing/migrating out of the country. Deagel claims not to have a dog in this fight. The group are quite literally mercenaries. The site is focused on analyzing which markets are going to have budgets allocated to buy military aircraft, which is purportedly all they care about.

Ambellas says there are indications that all of the COVID measures we’ve been seeing are an exercise for a massive planetary catastrophe that’s headed our way."

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=h1Qywjt7Mm8

[greybeard]

Foster Gamble --Thrive
Depopulation Agenda

You might have to be a member to access this
Chris


https://www.awakeningchannel.com/pos...eady-warned-us

Ps the The Thrive2 movie coming out.
http://www.thrivemovement.com/

Money out of nothing-- how the banking system works

https://www.awakeningchannel.com/pos...trol-the-world

[greybeard]

Groundbreaking new material 'could allow artificial intelligence to merge with the human brain'
Anthony Cuthbertson
The Independent

Scientists have discovered a ground-breaking bio-synthetic material that they claim can be used to merge artificial intelligence with the human brain.

The breakthrough, presented today at the American Chemical Society Fall 2020 virtual expo, is a major step towards integrating electronics with the body to create part human, part robotic "cyborg" beings.

Connecting electronics to human tissue has been a major challenge due to traditional materials like gold, silicon and steel causing scarring when implanted.

Scars not only cause damage but also interrupt electrical signals flowing between computers and muscle or brain tissue. The researchers from the University of Delaware were able to overcome this after various types of polymers.

"We got the idea for this project because we were trying to interface rigid organic microelectrodes with the brain, but brains are made out of organic, salty, live materials," said Dr David Martin, who led the study.

"It wasn't working well, so we thought there must be a better way. We started looking at organic electronic materials like conjugated polymers that were being used in non-biological devices. We found a chemically stable example that was sold commercially as an antistatic coating for electronic displays."

The polymer, known as a Pedot, has exactly the properties needed to interface electronic hardware with human tissue without causing scarring while also dramatically improving the performance of medical implants.

The versatile Pedot polymer was also recently discovered to be capable of transforming standard house bricks into energy storage units, due to its ability to penetrate porous materials and conduct electricity.

The latest research used a Pedot film with an antibody that stimulates blood vessel growth after injury and could be used to detect early stages of tumour growth in the body.

Pedot polymers could also be used to help sense or treat brain or nervous system disorders, while versions could theoretically attach peptides, antibodies and DNA.

"Name your favourite biomolecule, and you can in principle make a Pedot film that has whatever biofunctional group you might be interested in," Dr Martin said.

The researchers made a polymer with dopamine, which plays a role in addictive behaviours.

Several companies and research institutions are already working on technology to connect brains to computers, with Elon Musk's Neuralink perhaps the closest to achieving a commercial product.

The startup plans to reveal more details about its brain chips later this month, which could one day provide "full-bandwidth data streaming" to the brain through a USB-C cable.

Mr Musk has made several claims about Neuralink's technology, stating earlier this year that it "could extend range of hearing beyond normal frequencies" and even allow people to stream music directly to their brains.

Such technology is essential for humans to compete with advanced artificial intelligence, according to Mr Musk. Last month he warned that humans risk being overtaken by AI within the next five years.


https://uk.yahoo.com/news/groundbrea...080230134.html

[Bill Ryan]

Posted by onawah (here)
[B]SHEPARD AMBELLAS SUSPECTS MAJOR DISASTER IS ON THE WAY AS DEPT OF INTERIOR INSIDER BLOWS THE WHISTLE
8/16/20 1,668 views
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/she...s-the-whistle/
(Not sure what to think about this )

I think you can disregard it. Too much of his information is incorrect or misunderstood. (Though I do agree there seems to be good cause to be on high alert for a few months. But we still don't know why.)

• He doesn't know much about asteroids. The 2 November object (see this JPL page) is only 1.8m—3.9m in diameter, and would certainly burn up in the atmosphere even it were to hit it — which it won't. At the moment, the closest possible approach to the earth is 0.02 LD (lunar distance), which is about 4,750 miles. There's absolutely zero risk.

• When he refers to the national boundary of the US, he forgets that half of that is with Canada or Mexico. (Not with the ocean! )

• The HIV component of SARS-CoV-2 (which I agree 100% seems to have been engineered,) seems to be a tiny specialized part of the HIV virus inserted into the SARS-Cov-2 spike protein that makes it more efficient as a virus to infect the healthy cells it targets. It's absolutely nothing to do with anyone getting AIDS.

[greybeard]

NEW DNA VACCINES WILL MUTATE OUR DNA, DOCTOR WARNS

NEW DNA VACCINES FOR CV19 & TRANSHUMANISM


https://www.awakeningchannel.com/pos...9d480017e4f3fb

I cant post the video
Perhaps a mod could

https://www.awakeningchannel.com/

This channel worth a visit -- quite a lot on it.
Chris

[graciousb]

Posted by Goba (here)

Posted by Kryztian (here)
Kissinger: Failure to establish post-COVID new world order ‘could set the world on fire’

I just had a bad case of Mandela-Effect, I was certain this piece of human excrement had died already!

The longevity of he and his ilk is really something isn't it?!

[Gwin Ru]

Posted by Gwin Ru (here)
Illuminati Vowed in 1969: "Travel Will Be More Difficult"

By Henry Makow
August 15, 2020
[...]
On March 20, 1969, Rockefeller Insider Dr. Richard Day (1905-1989) gave a speech to the Pittsburgh division of the American Medical Association in which he predicted:

" Travel ... would become very restricted. People would need permission to travel and they would need a good reason to travel. If you didn't have a good reason for your travel you would not be allowed to travel, and everyone would need ID... later on some sort of device would be developed to be implanted under the skin that would be coded specifically to identify the individual." (Tape two)

Although prohibited, Dr. Lawrence Dunegan made notes and related the contents of the speech to Randy Engel who made them available on tape.

Dr. Dunegan reveals not just "WHAT" is intended for America and all people in the world, but "HOW" the controllers intend to carry out their plan.

Dr. Day said -- "Everything is in place and nobody can stop us now . . ."

"Some of you will think I'm talking about Communism. Well, what I'm talking about is much bigger than Communism!" "Everything has two purposes. One is the ostensible purpose which will make it acceptable to people; and second, is the real purpose which would further the goals of establishing the new system and having it."

He covers topics such as:

• People will have to get used to change - everything will change, constantly

• The REAL and the "STATED" goals

• Population Control

• Permission to have babies

• Redirecting the purpose of sex - sex without reproduction and reproduction without sex

• Sex education as a tool of World Government

• Encouraging homosexuality... Sex, anything goes

• Euthanasia and the "Demise Pill"

• Limiting access to affordable medical care makes eliminating the elderly easier

• Planning the control over medicine

• Elimination of private doctors

• New Difficult to diagnose and untreatable diseases

• Suppressing cancer cures as a means of population control.

• Inducing heart attacks as a form of assassination

• Education as a tool for accelerating the onset of puberty and pushing evolution

• and MUCH, MUCH MORE

The complete transcript of these tapes are available here.

[...]

In a prequel of the above excerpt here is another piece of that agenda:


Revealing 1929 Magazine Article By Lord Birkenhead – Nothing New Under The Sun

By Alan Watt
Dec 29, 2013

NOTHING NEW UNDER THE SUN
(Alan Watt) Today, people are so overwhelmed with the amount of information and disinformation and just sheer data. They don’t know what to make of it all. They often end up in a bigger confusion than the one they started with, chasing rainbows, false leads and trying to make sense. The human mind, each individual has a logic which depends upon incoming data.

When you can understand this concept, you can also interfere with it if you have power. You can encourage each individual at the bottom level to be completely concerned with their immediate environment. –Their little area. –Their homes, their area, the people around them, their town. Everything they need immediately for day-to-day survival, you encourage that and you can cut them off from bigger realities beyond, by either giving them false data concerning the big picture of the world in general or even their country. You simply withhold data and encourage the trivia.

That’s what most television stations, your local television stations, are all about. That’s their job, to make you think everything you need to know and worry about and care about you is just around you; and that used to be true, at one time, to a great extent.

For over 100 years we’ve had, at least the public have been given forms of communication from telephone and radio and television followed up. Long before this was decided to be given to the public, it was debated at very high levels whether the public should have it in the first place

When you look at Francis Bacon’s “New Atlantis,” a fictional story written in the 1500’s, published in 1602, concerning a future society which would have its headquarters in the West. They meant America, of course. They call it Solomon’s Island, run on virtue, and a secret society running the whole show, comprised of high intellectuals and scientists. There’s no way that Bacon could have imagined a society which powered itself with an energy which could give off the light of the sun. That’s very familiar, isn’t it, if you think of nuclear energy? People think, “That’s impossible. He couldn’t have imagined that.” He couldn’t have imagined that, you’re quite right, in the days of wind sails, canvas sails, the horse and cart and a candle to write by. We could not have imagined that at all, and neither did he, but then atomic energy was speculated upon thousands of years ago, if you go into the writings of the Atomist Organizations in Ancient Greece. These supposed “intellectuals,” simply because they had nothing better to do but pass their time wearing their white robes, and chatting away, and speculating that everything’s composed of these minute particles that spun around. Worlds within worlds called ATOMS, which is just a play on Adam, by the way, the Microcosm. Everything is interrelated in this big joke.

The trick in all ages is to keep real high sciences—which are constantly being investigated by special teams, all down through the ages—secret from the public. To have ultimate control, you can never share all your high knowledge, because sharing power means you lose power, if you want to be dominant. Yet, there’s no doubt that Francis Bacon’s book was published at that time. Not the updated versions that spin in aliens and all that kind of stuff. That’s the New Age spin that the elite have promoted to confuse us even further, because it’s much easier to believe the game’s over if aliens superior to you run the whole world and always have. That’s called “psychological warfare.” The purpose being that you’d give up before anything starts. Actually, “New Atlantis” was written along with other books like Moore’s book on his utopia, along the same lines of this elitist utopic society run by the intellectuals; those who have the right to rule the rest by their vast intellectual powers.

Sometimes they use authors like H.G. Wells. Today, there’s a whole bunch of them being put out there to give us predictive programming; the idea being that if we accept it subconsciously as a possibility, then they can guide you with possibility upon possibility; and then, when it becomes reality, you think it’s a natural evolution. However, it’s nothing of the kind. It’s planned that way in advance and it’s predictive programming.

Once in while, the elite in Britain, this elite being a very, very old elite called “The Establishment,” they’re there regardless of what party yells at each other across the Parliamentary floor. The elite decide what’s to be done. They pick the top politicians. It doesn’t matter about the ones down below. They’re allowed to compete for their little share in the booty of the public purse and fame and glory and high contracts when they leave for lobbyist jobs. The ones at the top are always picked in advance and groomed before the public even hear their names, as long as the top cabinet below to The Royal Institute, then everything is hunky-dory.

I’m going to read an article written in a magazine. It was written in the 1920’s. Think about this. I’ll tell you at the end which one it is and where to find it. On the cover, you’ll see a young British Lord who couldn’t have been more than 22, with his big long braided wig on. In the House of Lords, the guys who have hereditary peer-ships wear these long wigs and they get their robes with the ermine. They dress like something from the 1700’s. No one has ever explained the purpose of these particular wigs, but if you count the curls going up and down, you see the degrees. He has this young arrogant face, as they all do, very solemn, stern, arrogant and all knowing.

This is Lord Birkenhead and this is what he says, and he says all of the following because he’s allowed in to a higher circle of science which already existed, at least the basics of it did. He was let in on “the know.” The ones at the bottom that the public hear about are doing research. They don’t know about the findings of those above them done long ago.


This is from February 1929.

“Babies will be produced by chemists in laboratories;”

He’s talking about the year 2029.

“…the entire institution of marriage will be changed; we will all live to be 150; no one will need to work more than two hours a day; agriculture will be abolished except as a hobby and all foodstuffs will be produced synthetically; man will be able to alter the geography of climate of the world.“

Think about that.

“Coal mining will be an extinct industry. A 48-hour day will come into being by retarding the rotations of the earth. Sitting in our homes we will see and hear events the world over.”

1929. I’m going to continue here. Remember, this guy isn’t sitting with a crystal ball. He’s not channeling. He doesn’t have a medium next to him from his channeling Zeta Reticuli or some far away place.

Here’s the story:

“A century hence. It appears probable that the application of scientific discoveries will have altered the conditions of human life at least as much as they’ve done in the past hundred years. A child born in 1829 arrived in a world that was just beginning to exploit the steam engine in which electricity was the useless byway of a few professors where anesthetics and antiseptics were unknown.

“A child of 2029 looking back on 1929 will consider it as primitive and quaint as 1829 seems to the children of the present day. Our means of travel, our sources of wealth, our medicine and even our ideas will change as drastically during the next century as they did in the course of the last. Applied physics, which has given us the steam engine, the internal combustion motor as well as wireless telephones and all the many other practical uses of electrical energy will certainly make prodigious advances before the year 2029.

“At the moment however, the theoretical basis of physics rests in an undetermined state. Physics is on the brink of a new synthesis, a fresh simplification and restatement of fundamental ideas. This when it comes, and it cannot long be delayed must radically change all our assumptions concerning time, space and the nature of change. Such a revolution of ideas must be accounted among the most important effects of science upon human life in the next century. But, it is of course very difficult to predict what direction this change of ideas will take. Until now, Newton who states physical theory one cannot determine how his restatement will react upon the everyday world. It is easier to prophesy concerning the material changes which will be wrought by applied physics in the next hundred years. The best scientific opinion believes that before 2029 physicists will have solved the problem of supplying the world with limitless amounts of cheap power.

“At present, we derive the energy which drives the wheels of industry from coal and oil. Both these substances are won from nature at the expenses of much money and vast stores of muscular energy, nor are their supplies inexhaustible. By means of the most efficient methods, moreover, a pound of coal can only be made to yield energy of the order of one horsepower for one hour. Yet, locked up in the atoms which constitute a pound of water, there is an amount of energy equivalent to ten million horsepower hour. There is no question that this colossal source of energy exists; but as yet physicists do not know how to release it, or having done so, how to make it perform useful work. This problem will be solved before 2029. Some investigator, at present in his cradle or unborn, will discover the match with which to light this bonfire, or the detonator needed to cause this terrific explosion.

“The consequences of tapping such stupendous sources of cheap energy are almost illimitable. For the first time in his history, man will be armed with sufficient power to undertake operations on a cosmic scale. It will be opened to him radically to alter the geography or climate of the world. By utilizing some 50,000 tons of water, the amount displayed by a larger liner, it would be possible to remove Ireland to the deeper portion of the Atlantic Ocean. The heat obtainable from the same quantity of water would suffice to maintain the Polar Regions at the temperature of the Sahara for a thousand years.”

Think about it.

“The liberation of this energy naturally will revolutionize travel and transport. Engines weighing one ounce for each horsepower they develop will become practical possibilities; and a power plant of six hundred horsepower will carry fuel for a thousand hours, working in a tank no bigger than a fountain pen.

Concerning the nature of the vehicles for which such engines will provide the motive power, is it rash to prophesy. Passengers will travel in enormously swift aeroplanes, which by 2029 will ascend and descend vertically. Goods will be carried cheaply and rapidly by land or sea, propelled by motors whose fuel bill will be almost nil.

The coming of this new energy obviously will be accompanied by acute social problems. Its adaptation to industry will entail for example the final extinction of coal mining. Since however it cannot but vastly reduce the cost of oil manufacturers it is hoped that the new wealth it creates will enable governments adequately to provide for the millions whose livelihood it destroys. Some authoritative scientists do not believe that the solution of the power problem will be reached along these lines consider either the winds or the tides will be forced to yield up their energy. Water power is to unevenly distributed over the earth’s surface and too much affected by seasonal variations ever to become the principal source of the world’s energy, but the winds are never still and the tides flow and ebb with unvarying precision. If the winds were harnessed, we could produce a super abundance of cheap power. During stormy weather the surplus energy could be stored in a variety of ways and so be available during calms.”

I’ll break for a second here to tell you that this character, this Lord had been given access to a future already decided upon. The reason being he was a hereditary peer of the realm, a Lord who gains access to the business plan; and they never change their plans.

“The exploitation of title energy presents difficulties which are yet to be solved in a satisfactory manner. These difficulties however are not those of principle but of technique and of the wealth and the serious engineering attention of the world were focused on the question for ten years, there’s no doubt that they would be overcome. The tides of the Bay of Fundy alone could supply the whole of North America with electrical energy by utilizing title energy to any large extent, which will diminish the speed of the earth’s rotation. As it is, the tides act as a break upon the rotation of the earth.”

That’s true. As we spin, it’s almost like a drag as it catches up and tries to catch up. For every action, there’s an equal and opposite reaction. That’s the old theory.

To continue:

“As it is, the tides act as a brake upon the rotation of the earth. Tidal friction occurs principally in the Bering Sea, which divides Alaska from Siberia. Its present effect is negligible, since it does but lengthens the day by a fraction less than a second in the course of each century.

“If sufficient energy were extracted from the tides to supply every imaginable future development of human enterprise with power, this braking effect would not be greatly increased. Many millions of years would elapse before the day grew as long as our present week. Five thousand years takes us back to the dawn of recorded human history.”

That’s his little lie, because he’s well aware it’s much older.

“So that even a tenth part of 1,000,000 years carries us forward beyond the reach of imagination. We need not therefore, grow alarmed that by harnessing the tides we shall so retard the rotation of the earth as to embarrass our remotest descendants. But the forty-eighthour day is a possibility in the far future. During the next hundred years, applied physics will certainly develop wireless telephony and television beyond our present most imaginative expectations. By 2029 it should be possible for any person sitting at home to be present at no matter what distant event stereoscopic television…”

This is before the public got TV, remember, even mono.

“…in full natural colors and perfected wireless telephony will enable him to see and hear any event which is broadcast as effectively as if he stood beside the transmitting apparatus. Such developments must influence the future of politics, but by their aid it will be feasible once more to revive that form of democracy which flourished in the city-states of ancient Greece. By 2029, the chosen spokesmen of each political party will be able to address every voter as effectively as they now can address the House of Commons and so the electorate itself rather than its representatives made decide each vital political issue.”

They’ve got to give you a bit of icing on the cake to make you believe it and want to eat the cake.

“After the spokesman of each party has had his or her say the votes for the entire country could be recorded and counted by mechanisms installed in telephone exchanges. Within 20 minutes from the end of the last speech the will of the national jury on any subject will be ascertained and announced.”

He’s talking about computer voting.

“Applied chemistry has not affected human life in a manner comparable with the changes produced by physical research. So far the ordinary man’s concern chemistry is only useful to him when it discovers new desirable substances or discovers a means of synthesizing material more cheaply than is produced in nature. In the past, chemists have enriched the resources of humanity with new metals and dyes, drugs, explosives and other substances useful in industry on private life.

“By 2029, thousands more, such new substances will be available. Aluminum will be cheaper than pig iron is today malleable and unbreakable glass will be a common place of domestic life. It’s also been suggested that chemical research will turn to the discovery of new physiologically pleasant substances. At present civilized mankind has discovered and adopted in the three such substances such as tobacco, alcohol and caffeine for tea and coffee. These certainly have added enormously to the amenities of existence and Dr. J.B.S. Haldane has proposed that chemists should seriously consider a search for many more such additions to human enjoyment.

“Most chemical substances are either disagreeable or dangerous in their physiological effects. Though a small number, not more than a few thousand are valuable to medicine. Should chemistry in the next hundred years be able to discover a dozen substances as pleasant and as harmless as tobacco each producing a different effect on the consumer it would have earned the thanks of every hard worked man and woman in the world.”

They love to dope us all, you see.

“Any developments in physics and chemistry which recently made and predicted to occur before 2029 do no more than alter the accidentals of human existence and biology, however developments may be predicted which will change the whole nature of life as we experience it today. Even those who know least about the confidently expect prodigious advances from medicine and surgery in the near future and their faith will not be in vain. The abolition of epidemic disease by 2029 is fairly certain as is the discovery of cures for such scourges as cancer and tuberculosis.”

That’s true. They do have all the cures. It’s just that the public will never see them.

“Complete and prolonged local anesthesia will become practicable so that not only will operations be painless but the patient will feel no pain afterwards as a result of them. Such an advance also entails completely painless childbirth. Biologists by 2029 will have learned the secrets of the living chemistry of the human body or at least enough of it to achieve startling results. Rejuvenation will be an ordinary and well recognized matter of a few injections at appropriate intervals.”

Certainly not for you, boys and girls, I can assure you that.

“The desire to keep old age at bay has ever been one of the dreams of humanity. At last, we can predict that it will be achieved. This mortal must put off immortality by extending the length of his days on earth. The attraction of such an idea, especially to women, who will no longer grow old quickly, is far too clear to require emphasis. But the universal practice of rejuvenation will be accompanied by grave social problems, the least of which would be the immensely increasing population. Suppose it possible to guarantee 150 years of life to every healthy child. How will the youths of twenty be able to compete in the professions or in business or against vigorous men still in their prime at 120 with a century of experience on which to draw? The benefit to humanity, which will accrue if the lives of men of genius are so prolonged, is obvious. Before 2029, biologists will have solved some of the mysteries of human heredity. Heredity is determined by certain ‘genes’ or units, concerning which science already knows much. They are minute bodies, so small that if a hen’s egg were magnified to the size of the world, one of the genes in it would lie on a fair-sized dining table. When biologists can control these they will be able to control heredity.“

This, remember, is 1929, you know before they discovered a lot of stuff.

“Most probably by 2029 a clever young man will consider his fiancée’s hereditary complexion before proposing marriage…”

He’s talking about eugenics here.

“…and the young woman of that day will refuse him because he has inherited a gene from his father which will predispose their children to quarrelsomeness.”

He’s talking about behavior you see, personal behavior. It’s interesting he doesn’t touch on the physical disability part. These guys are eugenicists. This is the elite talking here.

“By intelligent combination of suitable genes it will be possible to predict with reasonable certainly that truly brilliant children shall be born of a marriage.”

That’s called “genetic enhancement” today. They had that term back then, but we didn’t know about that. We’re kept in the dark. He’s talking in the days of the dirigible balloon and the bi-plane. He’s talking about taking out the bad genes. You know the inferior types that might make you quarrelsome or disobedient to your superiors. That’s what he’s talking about, it was all discussed even before this guy was born that’s writing this.

“It is possible, however, that by 2029 the whole question of human hereditary and eugenics will be swallowed up by the prospect of ectogenetic birth, By this is meant the development of a child from a fertilized cell outside its mother’s body in a glass vessel filled with serum on a laboratory bench. Such a proceeding is neither incredible nor indeed impossibly remote. The result of much research shows that the connection between a mother and her growing child are purely chemical; there is no valid reason why one day biologists should not be able perfectly to imitate that chemical connection in the laboratory.”

What it means really is you’ll be born and immediately you go “ga-ga-ga” and start trying to cuddle your Petri dish as your mother or the bench you’re on; because this love bonding stuff is, just you know, it’s all ‘nonsense’. It’s purely chemical. This was all decided about long, long before the public heard about the little tidbits that we’re given from the ‘60’s onwards, as though it was a brand new idea. Here’s this guy in 1929 writing about it, because he didn’t come up with this either. He was let in on “the know.” It was all decided in the previous century, the 1800’s.

‘The possibility of ectogenetic children will naturally arouse the fieriest antagonism. Religious bodies of many different creeds will rally their adherence to fight such a fundamental biological invention. In fact, the near mention of its possibility here may strike many readers as gratuitously disgusting. Nevertheless the thing is possible and since it’s possible it is certain that scientists will be deterred by no persecution from straining after it.”

All the reactions of the public are already figured out in advance and overcome when they announce these things. All the debating or the problems they foresee are debated and overcome before they tell us any of this stuff, and then retell us later on as though it was brand new again.

“Should ectogenesis ever become an established part of human society its effects will be shattering. Primarily it will separate reproduction from marriage and the latter institution will become wholly changed. Further, the character of the future inhabitants of any state could be determined by the government which happened temporarily to enjoy power.”

Remember too, this character is the same age group as Aldous Huxley that wrote “Brave New World” in the 1930’s. They all knew this stuff because they were in on “the know.” All this stuff they’re talking about had already been done secretly a long time ago.

“Further, the character of the future inhabitants of any state could be determined by the government…”

Further, I’ll say that again.

“…the character of the future inhabitants of any state could be determined by the government which happened temporarily to enjoy power by regulating the choice of the ectogenic parents of the next generation. The cabin of the future could breed a nation of industrial dullards.”

That means morons, folks.

“…or live in the population with fifty thousand charmingly irresponsible mural painters.”

This is a little high-class joke, chuckle, chuckle.

“A further immediate consequence of ectogenesis would be a plea that society should be allowed to produce the human types it most needs instead of being forced to absorb all the unsuitable types which happen to be born.”

Eugenics again and the planned society, arranged long ago, long before you were even born or your parents were born.

“If it were possible to breed a race of strong healthy creatures intelligent to perform intricate drudgery yet lacking all ambition, what ruling class would resist the temptation? Many of the arguments brought against slavery would be powerless in such a case, for the ectogenic slave of the future would not feel his bonds. Every impulse which makes slavery degrading and irksome to ordinary humanity would be removed from his mental equipment. He wouldn’t care as long as happiness would be his task. He would be the exact human counterpart of the worker bee.”

Oh, where have we heard that before, going all the way back to ancient Egypt? Oh boy, oh boy, as above, so below.

“Only the arguments of religion could be used to prevent this evolution.”

Evolution, here we go.

“His emancipation could never be considered, for in freedom he would find only crushing boredom and misery.“

I’ve got to work. I’ve got to work. I’ve got to just work a hundred hours. I just have to do it to make me happy.

“It seems improbable however that the future developments of industry will call for such a being to tend it wheels. Production will become so cheap, and barring political international upheavals, wealth will accumulate to such an extent that the ectogenetic robot will never be needed.”

The humans now are robots. These are Golem.

“It is far more likely that men will work as machine minders for one or two hours a day and be free to devote the rest of their energies to whatever form of activity they enjoy. Such a condition obviously presupposes that all drudgery, not only the drudgery of the coal mine and the machine shop will be abolished by science. It predicates the end of agriculture as the fundamental industry upon which human life rests.”

Think about that.

“Probably biology in alliance with chemistry will make an end of agriculture even sooner and the cheapening of production will render a ten hour maximum week universal in the workshops of the world. By 2029 agriculture if not abolished will be in decay at least in civilized lands.“

They knew that back then you see and long before.

“The first step towards the end of agriculture will be the production of benevolent bacteria able to fix the atmospheric nitrogen which is essential to the growth of plant life. Such bacilli never could develop naturally since many of their ancestors will be unable to live except under entirely artificial conditions in the laboratory; and when the active nitrogen fixing bacteria are at last hardened off and allowed to multiply in agricultural land, their immediate effect would be to act as a super efficient manure by their aid. Five or even ten years of wheat will grow where one grows now, while the pasture which now feeds ten beasts will feed fifty.

“Such a development will of course be watched with anxious eyes by all governments. Food prices will slump. Millions of laborers all over the world will find their livelihood vanished. Hard on the heels of this development will come the perfection of synthetic foodstuffs. At present, we nourish ourselves by a curiously wasteful and roundabout method. Solar energy is absorbed by plants and stored by them in their structures mainly in the form of cellulose. The human body is unable to digest cellulose and so to extract nourishment from it. Many animals however aided by obliging bacteria are able to perform this feat and keep herds of sheep, cattle and pigs all on the base new task of digesting cellulose and transforming it into the meat and milk upon which we live. Already it is impossible to convert indigestible cellulose into digestible sugar. But as yet, the cost of the operation prevents its being carried out except as a laboratory experiment. Such processes as this will certainly be further investigated and developed so that by 2029 starch and sugar, two of our most valuable foods will be as cheap as sand or sawdust today.

“Concerning proteins, the other most important human foods, two possibilities exist. Either they too will be produced synthetically or else the more highly prized varieties of animal foods such for example as beef steak or chickens breast will be grown in suitable media in the laboratory. From one parent’s steak of choice tenderness it will be possible to grow as large and as juicy steak as can be desired, so long as the parent is supplied with the correct chemical nourishment. It will continue to grow indefinitely and perhaps eternally. Whenever it is sufficiently large, a few pounds can be cut from it and sent to market.

“Synthetic foods and the production of animal tissues in vitro will finally set at rest those tissues of those timid minds which prophesied a day when the earth’s resources will not feed her children. But if all the inhabitable surface of the globe were inconveniently crowded, the millions of mankind could still be feed to repletion by such means. This second revolution in food production will consummate the decay of agriculture, which can only survive as a rich man’s hobby. Probably however, the synthetic foods of the next century will be so much more easily digested and appetizing that their present equivalents that agriculture will survive only in historical romances. Since the beginnings of history the city has been the parasite of the countryside.”

Boy, he’s right there.

“In 2029 science will make the city a self-supporting unit and Britain the land of laboratories capable of feeding no matter how many millions of mouths without importing a ton of foodstuffs. Many will bewail such a prospect for they insist that a flourishing agricultural peasantry is the only sound basis of any political life. It will be necessary when agriculture goes into irrevocable decay to plan the evolution of a stable industrial society. Such an undertaking should not lie beyond human wit. The agricultural basis of society, which has existed for so many centuries, was itself evolved from nomads and savages to reconcile such folk with a peaceful static life of the husbandman’s need far more violent adjustment, than will be necessary to urbanize the descents of the world’s present agriculturalists.

“It’s conceivable that not all these changes will have occurred by 2029. The progress of scientific discovery is checkered and subject to no ascertainable regularity or period. In many instances, an applied science after a few years of violent progress stagnates or at best is advanced by small refinements and simplifications. The history of the locomotive steam engine provides an illustration. During the last century railroad trains have grown steadily longer and heavier. In consequence, larger and more powerful engines have evolved to draw them to their destinations, but the huge locomotive of today differs only in size and power from its parent of the 1860’s and 1870’s. No new principle of any importance has been introduced into its design or construction.

“A similar stagnation may overtake the development of airplanes or of wireless telephony. Such halts in the progress of any applied science however are comparative and not final. A fresh mind produces a new idea or a simplification which inaugurates another period of rapid and speeding activity. I have assumed therefore that the rate of progress in applied physics, chemistry and biology during the next hundred years will be maintained approximately at its present level. It may even be greatly accelerated by the ever-increasing interest in scientific research on the part of industrialists and governments.

“Nevertheless, unless science is able to change their ideas no less rapidly than our environment, some of the developments of which I have hinted may not come to pass. Unless, for example the ideas of Asiatic peoples have drastically changed, it will impossible to stamp out epidemic disease from the world. But it is not self evident that all applications of scientific discovery deserve the support of intelligent men and women; because science has benefited humanity in the past, there’s no reason why it always should do so in the future. A biological discovery may well plunge the world into such a catastrophe as it would destroy civilization for a thousand years. As you are reading these words, some disinterested researcher may detonate an atomic explosion which will involve the world and reduce it to a flaring vortex of incandescent gas.”

There you have that one. That is from the Cosmopolitan Magazine, February 1929 when it was owned by Randolph Hearst. This little talk on our future, with much of what we’re seeing happen today and much of this information re-released in the 1960’s and onwards, as though it was brand new. It was written in 1929 by Lord Birkenhead of England, one of those “in the know.” You’ll see his photograph on the first page of his talk in the magazine, with his big wig on and all his curls of this artificial rug that he wears and the arrogant upper class official appearance that he puts on there. I think they must practice that from birth, and a little emblem of Saturn on the left, Old Kronos, who eats his children. Then you have two lighting bolts behind him, which turned out eventually to be the sign and the symbols of the Nazis. What does it all have in common? I do wonder.

Science is not new. All the things we’re told about are obsolete. All the stuff that we use is obsolete; and in fact, before we get any of it, there’s massive debates at very high levels as to whether they should give it to the public. There’s always a material purpose in doing so, as we snap up all the goodies and say, “my goodness, isn’t this fun, fun, fun. I can play longer and more,” and yet we’re all brought into a catch-22, where we can’t think for ourselves anymore because it’s all done for us. Many people in today’s world are quite happy with that arrangement. They haven’t consciously thought it through. In fact, most people (and it’s true) don’t really consciously think much through it all. Their ideas are marketed to them and downloaded into them, as efficiently as a program is downloaded into the computer; because essentially, we are just “walking computers,” in a sense.

You can also detect the double-speak of Lord Birkenhead as he talks about methods of controlling the population growth. On the other hand, he talks about millions of people being able to eat because of they can easily synthesize foods. The double-speak. He didn’t want to panic the general herd too quickly. He left that to his later offspring and relatives who’ve been drumming the drums, since about the ‘60’s onwards, about crisis, crisis; too many people. “My goodness, what shall we do?” Hence all the abortion clinics opened up all over the place and free sex was promoted; free love in order to create the problem to give the solution and need more abortion clinics and legalize it all. Before you know it, a fetus (which is a baby) is just a wart and you can get rid of that, can’t you?

There’s nothing happens in society that isn’t planned long ago and debated long ago by those who already ruled the world and ruled this system. This one financial system of commerce, working and laboring, and buying and selling that we are all taught to grow up and compete in. When he gave the speech, of course, the agriculturalists couldn’t really picture being out of work, even if it was “ha-ha, that’s silly. We’ll always be rearing these cows here.” We’ve already seen the agribusinesses being promoted. These big foundations and businesses that have buildings opposite every capital of the world and they lobby all the politicians. Most of them either having been politicians themselves, or they will be after they leave their CEOs position back into politics, back and forth like ping-pong balls. We’re under this corporate fascistic system already; and we have been really all our lives.

The purpose of life has never been discussed by the ordinary people. They’ve never had a say in anything, to be honest with you. Even when we think we’re winning a little bit and getting a little bit more of the material world, the goodies, even the things you need to survive have a temporary respite. They’re already designing the plug to be pulled a little further down the road. So the Lord giveth, the Lord taketh away—Lords like Lord Birkenhead.

If you’re allowed to clear land and create a farm with hard work and sweat and tears, it’s all right; because once you’ve done it, they’ll simply tax it from you to get you off the land or put you out with massive fines because you can’t keep up with the ever increasing standards—building standards and codes and land codes et cetera. Yes, two or three generations down the road they can take it back from you. You’ve created some real estate and the big agri-businesses move in and say, “thank you very much for your hard work and now it’s ours for peanuts.”

Remember, the releases of this Birkenhead are just the same kind of releases of Francis Bacon or Moore (the “Utopia”) and many others who have been given inside information from higher sciences. Not from the professors down, but much higher up where they’d already been investigating many different areas to do with everything we now think they’re investigating today. It’s all been done a long time ago. That’s why they all it research: RE-search. At the bottom level, they don’t know that it’s all been done before by much higher levels that are kept secret from everyone, except those at the top.

That’s how power really is. It doesn’t share itself. It gives you an illusion occasionally of having choices, but in reality all of your decisions were made a long time ago with “your betters.” You know those people who are your betters, because “we have better genes than you,” you see. They’re not Levis. They’re good genes [jeans], better ones, old genes that are mated up with other good genes. These genes last a long while before they wear out, obviously, and they’re still here today, as they mate each other up and marry their power and add to power and money; and, of course, the psychopathic trait of the gene that they have is passed on to their offspring. They’re not as silly as people would like to make out. They have a natural instinct for power and control and dominating others, sometimes with the most pleasant faces—another gift of the psychopath. Always depending on the fact that ordinary normal people with empathy, with consciences will believe them, whatever they say. They cannot believe (the ordinary people with empathy) that there are such evil cruel people who would do the most horrific things to not just us, but anyone across the planet—because the end justifies the means, and they sleep well at night. That’s why they get away with it. They start wars. They’ll continue wars. They profit from wars.

The structure of society is held together by natural laws, which are well understood and exploited by those that know the sciences. Formulas that worked thousands of years ago are RE-applied in the same sequence, always with the same results with the populations. We believe what we’re told. We do what we’re told and then we look towards these benefactors at the top, these superior people to take care of us. Many people like it that way when they’re reared in this socialistic system of expert rule, scientific rule. We have no time to go and play while these weighty decisions are all made for us by the superior ones above us. We’re well managed and dictated to, from cradle to grave, and it’s getting worse all the time as each department above us of bureaucracy shows their teeth and shows their power with more and more powers being demanded over the public.

This is a battle for the heart and soul and the mind, and the right to decide a future for ourselves. Where do you stand on this?


Full transcript
Download the MP3 audio of the full transcript
For detailed information own the Cutting Through three volume book by Alan Watt


Alan Watt Blurb - Hereditary Peer's 1929 Article Describes The World In 2029 - July 18, 2007 1:00:37

Mar 23, 2013

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=D2AHNGnooxY

[pueblo]

This video is a beautiful case of ' tables turned' on TV journalists live on air.

The Spanish doctor (Dr. Luis de Benito) blows the lid off the media's fear generating hype, the presenters were not able to deal with this guy's truth saying.

Satisfying to watch.

(Spanish with Eng Sub)

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SwlkumcRf6w

[Gwin Ru]

Posted by pueblo (here)
This video is a beautiful case of ' tables turned' on TV journalists live on air.

The Spanish doctor (Dr. Luis de Benito) blows the lid off the media's fear generating hype, the presenters were not able to deal with this guy's truth saying.
...

See this post as well : https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1373304

[pueblo]

Posted by Gwin Ru (here)

Posted by pueblo (here)
This video is a beautiful case of ' tables turned' on TV journalists live on air.

The Spanish doctor (Dr. Luis de Benito) blows the lid off the media's fear generating hype, the presenters were not able to deal with this guy's truth saying.
...

See this post as well : https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1373304

Thanks, hadn't seen that, apologies for the double post.

[Franny]

From CA Fitts. The article she references is posted below.

MODERNA PARTNERS WITH AWS TO EXPLORE THE ‘SOFTWARE OF LIFE’

Published: Jan. 16, 2020

By Alex Keown

BioSpace

The software of life. That’s how Stephane Bancel, the chief executive officer of Moderna, described messenger RNA (mRNA), which is at the core of Moderna’s drug development process.

Moderna is pioneering mRNA drugs that are believed to be able to direct the body to produce any protein of interest, including antibodies and other proteins that can create therapeutic activity. Bancel said mRNA is an information molecule.

“It’s like software,” he said.

The company, which has secured enormous investments over the past few years, is inching closer to being a commercial company in developing personalized therapies for a wide range of diseases, including cancer. In order to create those personalized medicines, the Cambridge, Mass.-based company relies on gene sequencing and a partnership with one of the world’s largest companies – Amazon.

In an interview with CNBC’s Jim Cramer during the J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference this week, Bancel said the company relies on Amazon Web Services to “compare every letter of DNA” in the sequencing process. Once that is done, the company can deduce what needs to be done to develop personalized medicine, Bancel explained.

Amazon Web Services, the fastest growing division of the company, according to CNBC, provides on-demand cloud computing platforms to companies. Moderna is currently using Amazon Web Services with more than a dozen drug candidates in its pipeline, which means the high-tech platform plays a central role in the company’s drug development program. As CNBC explains, the company is using the powerful cloud-based service to speed up the time it takes a drug candidate to move from the preclinical to the clinical phase. In addition to Moderna, Amazon Web Services is being used by several pharmaceutical companies, including San Diego-based Human Longevity Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and more.

The reliance on the high-speed program could lead to the company finally becoming a commercial entity 10 years after it was launched. Last week, just ahead of JPM, Bancel pointed to one of the company’s clinical candidates as a potential blockbuster, an experimental treatment for cytomegalovirus (CMV), the most common infectious cause of birth defects in the United States.

Moderna said the analysis following a Phase I trial, which was taken after the third and final vaccination, shows continued boosting of neutralizing antibody titers in patients. The mRNA-based vaccine, mRNA-1647, is designed to protect against CMV infection. Cytomegalovirus is a common pathogen and is the leading infectious cause of birth defects in the United States with approximately 25,000 newborns in the U.S. infected every year. CMV is passed from the mother to her unborn child. Birth defects occur in about 20% of infected babies. The defects can include neurodevelopmental disabilities such as hearing loss, vision impairment, varying degrees of learning disability and decreased muscle strength and coordination. There is no approved vaccine to prevent CMV infection.

In October, the company received Fast Track Designation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for mRNA-3927, its investigational mRNA therapeutic for propionic acidemia, which is caused by the inability of the body to breakdown certain proteins and fats which leads to the build-up of toxic chemicals. Moderna plans to initiate an open-label, multi-center, dose-escalation Phase I/II study of multiple ascending doses of mRNA-3927 in primarily pediatric patients.

BioSpace source:

https://www.biospace.com/article/mod...ized-medicines

[onawah]

More from "Making Sense of the Madness" here:
Flu d'État:Infiltration, Not Invasion
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1373570