Look Who's Coming to the Rescue! Bill Gates...

[sdv]

From AI ...
COVID-19 Symptoms: Cough, fever, loss of taste/smell, fatigue, sore throat, vomiting, diarrhea, runny nose.
Flu Symptoms: Fever, cough, sore throat, runny/stuffy nose, body aches, headache, vomiting, diarrhea.

These were my symptoms from Covid-19, which I presumed I had, which do not fit neatly into either category ...
Dry/unproductive cough
Complete loss of appetite
Fever (low grade)
Headache (low-grade but persistent)
Body aches (my body literally felt as if a freight train had barrelled through it)

No other symptoms. I was in bed for about a week (did not eat), felt better and was up and about for a few days, and then all symptoms returned for about 3 days. I took no medications because I had none and was unable to get to a chemist.

The mortality rate did rise during the two years when the Covid epidemic was at its height. Note that the statistics are an undercount because Covid was only recorded as a cause of death if there was a test to confirm and if it was a direct cause of death. In Africa, Covid was often not recorded as a cause of death but a complication if there was a existing condition that would have caused death, sooner or later, anyway. The statistics are thus complicated rather than deliberately misleading.

The following is a detailed study ...

https://sajid.co.za/index.php/sajid/.../view/679/1743

Personally, I do not think we should conclude that Covid did not exist, but rather establish where and how it originated, and why lockdowns were accepted pretty much as a global response.

I disagree with the rejection of all other recommendations/rules during the pandemic on the basis that 'they do not work'. Social distancing, wearing a mask, sanitizing, getting fresh air did not prevent infection, but they did reduce the amount of virus you were exposed to (and for how long) and thus gave your immune system a better chance of shutting down the virus before it spread in your body and caused damage, and reduced the possibility of having to be treated (symptoms) in a hospital. Even today, people in China and South East Asia will follow these guidelines when they have a cold or flu. The lie was that if you followed the guidelines, you would not be infected and would not pass on the virus. Promoting that lie was a political choice. Protecting the US and China from blame for the creation and spread of the virus was also a political choice. Lockdown was unnecessary. Many of those who were most vulnerable (TB, diabetes, chemotherapy patients, etc.) died anyway and thus the lockdown imposed on entire populations was not an effective way to protect them.

[ExomatrixTV]

source

In a conversation between Seth Holehouse and investigative journalist Jon Fleetwood, a critical picture is painted of a World Health Organization (WHO) plan regarding digital identity, vaccination registration, and artificial intelligence. This is prompted by an article by Fleetwood on Substack, in which he claims that the WHO, partly funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, is working on a global system that digitally maps individuals from birth. A document published in a WHO bulletin discusses a global digital identity system that retains vaccination data for life. This is presented as a fundamental building block for a broader system in which digital identification, health data, and artificial intelligence converge.

• From pandemic to permanent infrastructure

An important theme is the way in which the COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to an increase in surveillance and data collection. Holehouse and Fleetwood argue that measures introduced during the pandemic have become normalized to some extent.

They place this within the framework of the so-called “problem-reaction-solution” model, in which a crisis leads to societal acceptance of drastic solutions.

In their view, the pandemic constitutes a tipping point that has paved the way for further digitization of health data and identity systems on a global scale.

• Concerns about privacy and concentration of power

In the conversation, Fleetwood expresses concerns about the implications of such a system. He warns of risks such as loss of privacy, increased government control, and the combining of data from different domains. He also points out the possibility that artificial intelligence will be used for behavioral analysis and manipulation.

In addition, there is speculation about scenarios in which access to services could become dependent on personal data, such as vaccination status. This could lead to a form of conditional access to social services.

• Role of technology and major players

The growth of AI, the expansion of data centers, and the involvement of major technology companies are cited as factors that make such a system technically possible. Fleetwood emphasizes that his criticism is not partisan and states that no political leader offers a fundamental solution to the outlined developments.

The system is officially being set up with efficiency and better care in mind, but Holehouse and Fleetwood fear a shift towards more control and less privacy.