Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘CDC’

Important Quotes From Virology and Vaccinology Experts Never Interviewed on the Mainstream Media – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 6, 2020


(The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the US Public Health Services at the National Institutes of Health, CDC and NIAID Have Serious Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest)

“The initial COVID-19 panic (and the ultimate economic shut-down that will kill small businesses) was no mistake; it wasn’t an overly cautious WHO or Dr. Fauci that made the call in haste. The panic and over-reaction was planned and prepared for. Bill Gates (and his billionaire’s club [the World Economic Forum]) held an exercise called “Event 201” in preparation for a coronavirus pandemic in which he calculated 33 million deaths would occur world-wide. Anthony Fauci also predicted a pandemic would happen while Donald Trump was president. Fauci worked for Gates. Fauci (and his NIAID) also sponsored work on coronaviruses in the Wuhan laboratory with US taxpayer money. We see the actions of the WHO, Fauci, and Bill Gates – who somehow is the go-to authority on SARS COV 2 having never taken a medical course in his life. Laugh all you want but this is the New World Order attempting to take over. And they can do it. They own the media, even FOX. They even own two of the major news outlets, Reuters and the AP. They have created a false reality in which anyone that questions what they are doing is labeled a conspiracy theorist. There IS a conspiracy and you are witnessing it right now. This makes no sense at all unless you factor in an active conspiracy of disinformation and lies.” – An anonymous respondent, reacting to an important Tony Robbins video (that interviewed a handful of highly-qualified health experts who never get interviewed by Mainstream Media journalists, whose narrative, though false, misleading and corporate-controlled, appears to be sacrosanct.

“The Gates Foundation and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a part of the NIH, are both currently exploring gene-based treatments for HIV, together with other therapies … This collaboration is an ambitious step forward, harnessing the most cutting-edge scientific tools and NIH’s sizable global HIV research infrastructure to one day deliver a cure and end the global HIV pandemic.” — NIAID director Anthony S. Fauci, MD

“Bill Gates wants the entire population vaccinated with a new mRNA-based COVID19 vaccine, and he wants the lock downs to continue until this vaccine is developed. Once it is developed, only those who have a COVID19 vaccine certificate will be allowed to travel.”Brian Shilhavy, Editor, Health Impact News (

“Moderna dispatched vaccine vials to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) in Bethesda, Md. The NIAID clinic aims to test the vaccine on about 20 to 25 healthy volunteers by late April (2020). The goal of the study will be to see if two doses of the vaccine are safe and produce a response in the immune system to fight off COVID-19 infection.” — NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, commenting on the unprecedented speed at which a potential vaccine for a global disease outbreak could be created.

“Deborah Birx sits on the Board of The Global Fund, which is heavily funded by Bill Gates’ organizational network … The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation gave The Global Fund a $750 million promissory note in 2012.“ — Journalist Jordan Schactel

 “The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is a key partner of the Global Fund, providing cash contributions, actively participating on its board and committees, and supporting the Global Fund’s advocacy, communications and fundraising efforts. The Gates Foundation has contributed US$2.24 billion to the Global Fund to date, and pledged US$760 million for the Global Fund’s Sixth Replenishment, covering 2020-2022.” – From the Global Fund’s website

“The media hacks who push the pro-vaccine propaganda and hide the truth are complicit in crimes against humanity…The entire vaccine machine is built on lies of omission and fraudulent science. billions of dollars are quietly paid out by NVICP to vaccine injured people, but the overwhelming majority of vaccine injuries are never reported. Of the thousands that are reported, only a tiny few are compensated. Therefore, the real amounts that should have been paid out to vaccine injured people is in the trillions.– Dr William Christenson

“Fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. The CDC’s entire vaccination propaganda campaign rests on their claim that side effects from vaccination are exceedingly rare, but according to the blatantly pro-over-vaccination, and Big Pharma-funded CDC, in 2016 alone, VAERS received 59,117 vaccine adverse event reports. Among those reports were 432 vaccine-related deaths, 1,091 permanent vaccine-related disabilities, 4,132 vaccine-related hospitalizations, and 10,274 vaccine-related emergency room visits. What if these numbers actually represent less than 1% of the total as this report asserts? You multiply those numbers by 100.” – William Christenson

“The second point I could make is that in relationship to aluminum, being a nephrologist for a long time, is the potential for aluminum and central nervous system toxicity was well established by dialysis data. To think there isn’t some possible problem here is unreal.” — Dr. Weil (Pediatrician representing the Committee on Environmental Health of the Academy, testifying at the CDC’s infamous Simpsonwood conference – 2000)

 “Aluminum and mercury are often simultaneously administered (ie, injected intramuscularly) to infants … However … there is absolutely no data, including animal data, about the potential for synergy, additivity, or antagonism … from the simultaneous exposure to these two (metallic) salts in vaccines.” – Dr Walt Ornstein (testifying at the Global Vaccine Safety Summit 2019)

”… vaccines like DPT contain the neurotoxin aluminum!! This vaccine adjuvant is causing huge problems … especially in vaccines such as Gardasil 9, which has the highest levels of aluminum of any vaccine. But research into its toxic effects is being suppressed. Professor Chris Exley, who is the World Expert in aluminum toxicity in living organisms, has found the link between aluminum adjuvants and autism, MS (multiple sclerosis), CFS (chronic fatigue syndrome), Alzheimer’s dementia (AD) and other chronic conditions. Exley’s research funding has dried up. ‘They’ don’t want you to know that aluminum (in vaccines) is harmful and has never been tested for safety ….” – Angio Svizzera

Our very great concern is that children worldwide are being exposed to unrecognised toxic chemicals that are silently eroding intelligence and causing disrupting behaviours, truncating future achievements, and damaging societies, perhaps most seriously in developing countries.” – Philippe Grandjean, MD, MPH

“Safety testing, which typically requires months and years for other medical products, often lasts only a few days with vaccines – not nearly long enough to spot cancers or chronic conditions like autoimmune diseass (e.g. juvenile diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis), allergic illnesses (e.g. food allergies, allergic rhinitis, eczema, asthma), or neurological and neurodevelopmental injuries (e.g. ADD, ADHD, narcolepsy, epilepsy, seizure disorders, and autism). Vaccine manufacturer’s vaccine inserts that accompany every vial of mandated vaccines include warnings about these and over 400 other injuries including many serious immune, neurological, and chronic illnesses for which FDA suspects that vaccines may be the cause.” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

“Many of these illnesses became epidemic in American children after 1986, coterminous with the exploding vaccine schedule. For American kids born in 1986, only 12.8% had chronic diseases. That number has grown to 54% among the vaccine generation (those born after 1986) in lockstep with the expanding schedule.” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

The children who comprise this vaccine-injured generation are now aging out of schools that needed to build quiet rooms and autism wings, install wobble chairs, hire security guards and hike special ed spending to 25% to accommodate them. They are landing on the social safety net which they threaten to sink. … The good news for Big Pharma, of course, is that many of these vaccine-injured children have lifelong dependencies on unaffordable blockbuster drugs like insulin, Adderall, anti-psychotic drugs, Epi-Pens, asthma inhalers, and diabetes, arthritis, and anti-seizure meds made by the same companies that made the vaccines.” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

“An overwhelming majority of the FDA officials directly charged with licensing vaccines, and the CDC officials who effectively mandate them for children, have personal financial entanglements with vaccine manufacturers. These ‘public servants’ are often shareholders in, grant recipients from, and/or paid consultants to vaccine manufacturers, and, occasionally, even patent holders of the very vaccines they vote to approve. Those conflicts of interest motivate them to recommend ever more vaccines with minimal support from evidence-based science” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

“The FDA receives 45% of its annual budget from the pharmaceutical industry. The World Health Organization (WHO) gets roughly half its budget from private sources, including Pharma and its allied foundations. And the CDC, frankly, is a vaccine company; it owns 56 vaccine patents and buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which is over 40% of its total budget.” — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

“The HHS (US Health and Human Services partners with vaccine makers to develop, approve, recommend, and pass mandates for new products and then shares profits from vaccine sales. HHS employees can personally collect up to $150,000 annually in royalties for products they work on. For example, key HHS officials collect money on every sale of Merck’s controversial HPV vaccine Gardasil, which also yields tens of millions annually for the agency in patent royalties.” — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

“In 1986, Congress—awash in Pharma money (the pharmaceutical industry is number one for both political campaign contributions and lobbying spending on legislators over the past 20 years) enacted a law granting vaccine makers blanket immunity from liability for injuries caused by vaccines. The subsequent gold rush by pharmaceutical companies boosted the number of recommended inoculations from twelve shots of five vaccines in 1986 to 54 shots of 13 vaccines today. A billion-dollar sideline grew into the $50 billion vaccine industry behemoth.” — Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

“Since vaccines are liability-free – and effectively compulsory to a captive market of 76 million children – there is meager market incentive for companies to make them safe. The public must rely on the moral scruples of Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, and Pfizer. But these companies have a long history of operating recklessly and dishonestly, even with (the many drug) products for which they can be sued for injuries. The four companies that make virtually all of the recommended vaccines are all convicted felons.  Collectively they have paid over $35 billion since 2009 for defrauding regulators, lying to and bribing government officials and physicians, falsifying science, and leaving a trail of (incurable chronic illnesses) injuries and deaths from products they knew to be dangerous and still sold under pretense of safety and efficacy.” – Robert F. Kennedy, Jr

 “The CDC takes funding from industry… It is outrageous that industry is apparently allowed to punish the CDC if the agency conducts research that has potential to cut into profits.” — Jerome R. Hoffman, MD – UCLA Professor of Medicine

“…there is no data that shows that vaccines only have protective effects. It is time to change our perception of vaccines. Vaccines are not merely a protective tool against a specific disease, they affect the immune system broadly. In spite of protecting against the diseases, DTP-vaccinated children had fivefold higher mortality than children who didn’t receive the vaccine.” — Dr. C. Stabell Benn, M.D. Ph.D. Professor in Global Health University of Southern Denmark

“The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical (and vaccine) industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful.”Arnold Seymour Relman, MD (1923-2014), Harvard Professor of Medicine and former Editor-in-Chief of the New England Journal of Medicine

 (The American Academy of Pediatrics derives a majority of its outside contributions – estimated at more than $25 million per year – from pharmaceutical companies that make vaccines. The pediatricians that the AAP represents derive the majority of their annual revenues from the administration of vaccines to their pediatric patients.) — J.B. Handley

“The majority of studies that authorities point to as proof that vaccines do not cause autism have been published in a journal called Pediatrics, the official journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. As we know, the AAP is a trade union for pediatricians.” – J.B. Handley

“You’d be amazed at the number of physicians who don’t know what’s in a vaccine. They’ll say, well, there’s the bacteria, the virus you want to vaccinate against, and then there’s a little immune stimulant in there to help stimulate the immunity so they react against those viral antigens. They don’t know about these other chemicals in there like aluminum, mercury, formaldehyde, special proteins, special lipids that are known to be brain toxic, that are known to induce autoimmunity in the brain. They’re not aware of that. They don’t know that MSG is in a lot of vaccines―monosodium glutamate, a brain excitotoxin. They’re not aware of what’s in the vaccine they’re giving!  — Russell Blaylock, MD

“Most physicians haven’t got a clue about vaccines. Physicians are undeservedly endowed with a mantle of authority and therefore most of their patients think vaccines are simple, safe and effective. And therefore there is nothing much to know about vaccines except that they somehow illicit an immune response and magical antibodies will protect the inoculated patient for life. Total ignorance. But that’s what ‘The Snake’ tells physicians starting in medical school; and, since medical school (and nursing school) professors are also undeservedly endowed with a mantle of authority, both of whose healthcare professional group believed it from the start.  Until they get bit.” – Anonymous Anti-Over-Vaccination activist parent

“The vaccine manufacturers, the Center for Disease Control, the FDA, and the various medical associations have failed miserably in their duty to protect our children….As a full-time professional research scientist for 50 years, and as a researcher in the field of autism for 45 years, I have been shocked and chagrined by the medical establishment’s ongoing efforts to trivialize the solid and compelling evidence that faulty vaccination policies are the root cause of the epidemic.…Mercury, one of the most toxic substances known, is used as a preservative in many vaccines. Some infants have had 125 times the maximum allowable limit of mercury injected … in one day, in vaccines.” — Dr. Bernard Rimland, Director, Autism Research Institute and editor of Autism Research Review International, issued in a statement on July 14, 2003: “The Autism Epidemic Is Real, And Excessive Vaccinations Are the Cause”

“The really sad thing is the amount of doctors I’ve spoken to who say to me, ‘Del, I know that vaccines are causing autism, but I won’t say it on camera because the pharmaceutical industry will destroy my career just like they did to Andy Wakefield.’” — Del Bigtree, Producer of Vaxxed: From Cover-up to Catastrophe

Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Problem with Government “Contact Tracing” | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2020

But government jobs programs don’t actually create employment in any way besides superficially. The reality is that they siphon labor away from potentially productive ventures at wages propped up at artificially high rates. This too will defer the economy’s recovery and must—for the good of private enterprise—be halted immediately. But by the looks of it, the program will continue forward uninterrupted, as it plays perfectly into the narrative that the state can solve all of society’s ills—no matter what the economics and epidemiology really say about it.

On the flip side, if asymptomatic transmission is “very rare,” as Van Kerkhove asserted, contact tracing may be a successful strategy. If only symptomatic patients are spreading the virus, though, the whole rationale for the lockdowns is then completely destroyed. For all the economic, political, social, and psychological damage that the lockdowns caused, they will have yielded absolutely no public health benefit. It boils down to this: it’s either (1) that the lockdowns were effective or (2) that the contact tracing is effective, but politicians can’t have it both ways.

As states move through phases of reopening, “contact tracing” has remained a topic of national interest. For months now, talking heads in the government and media have hailed the strategy as the country’s saving grace. One NBC headline read, “Coronavirus contact tracing could stop COVID-19 and reopen America,” and a CNN article declared, “the US — or really any country — can’t safely reopen without significant amounts of contact tracing and testing.” With this starry-eyed perception, dozens of states have rushed to train and hire tens of thousands of contact tracers—what former CDC director Tom Frieden gleefully described as an “army” of tracers.

It’s true that contact tracing has been an indispensable asset many times in the past, helping to snuff out viruses by diligently tracking their spread. So it’s no mystery why some health experts are flocking to it in the current crisis.

In short, this is how it works: contact tracers conduct short, over-the-phone interviews of newly diagnosed patients about who they have recently been in close physical contact with. The fear is that these recent contacts may have contracted the virus from the patient before he was diagnosed. These contacts are then phoned by tracers, informing them of this risk and encouraging them to seek testing and self-quarantine immediately. Tracers continue this process on down the line with the aim of reducing the instances in which the virus is transmitted

A few states have also begun developing smartphone apps to conduct a digital form of contact tracing. Phones running the app exchange unique encrypted numbers via Bluetooth, which are then stored on the devices. If an app user is diagnosed with COVID, he’s supposed to notify the app, which then publishes the log of numbers his phone received in the last fourteen days. If one of these numbers matches one stored on another user’s device, the app will send that user an alert that he’s been in recent contact with a newly diagnosed COVID patient.

So far, the adoption of these apps has been left completely voluntary in the US, unlike in other countries like China and South Korea. Overall, though, most of the states have yet to show much excitement toward digital tracing. The main focus remains on building an “army” to track the virus’ spread, no matter what it might cost the country.

Financial Costs

Contact tracing jobs are temporary, lasting for months or up to a year, with annual salaries ranging from $40,000 to $70,000. Those numbers are about on par with the entry-level salaries of registered nurses for a job that anyone completing a free six-hour course can be hired to do. Few, however, have questioned whether such pay is excessive or this use of taxpayer money prudent. It’s all been blindly okayed under the hallowed pretense of “public health.”

With experts recommending that the country hire a total of 150,000 contact tracers, these programs may end up costing the states somewhere between $1 billion and $10.5 billion altogether. On top of that sum lie whatever additional costs the handful of states developing digital tracing apps incur. Worse, bills currently floating around the House and Senate would, if made law, establish a federally led contact tracing program with a price tag as high as $100 billion. To government budget breakers, that may just look like zeros and decimal places, but there’s a serious economic toll to be reckoned with.

Increased government spending is often accompanied by a rise in taxes, and almost always by an expansion of the money supply. In either case, people’s wealth is subsequently decreased. Individuals and their families must, accordingly, cut back on how much they save, which in turn decreases the stock of loanable funds from the amount that would have otherwise been available. As a result, the amount of investment in the economy falls, dulling the momentum of economic growth. That could severely dampen the economy’s postrecession recovery.

In our present crisis—unlike any before—many businesses were shut down for months not by economic circumstance, but by state decree. That has contributed to the sharpest ever employment crisis in the US, with more than 20 million workers cut from payrolls in April alone. Some of these cuts were temporary furloughs, but a part of that number reflects permanent job loss—either from companies being forced to slash operating costs or going bankrupt outright.

Some of the proponents of the state’s contact tracing programs see themselves as killing two birds with one stone—helping to eliminate COVID while also putting people back to work. Senator Kamala Harris (D-CA) made this clear when stumping for the federal contact tracing bill she cosponsored: “Our policies must meet the needs of the current moment, and that means getting creative about how we get people back to work.”

But government jobs programs don’t actually create employment in any way besides superficially. The reality is that they siphon labor away from potentially productive ventures at wages propped up at artificially high rates. This too will defer the economy’s recovery and must—for the good of private enterprise—be halted immediately. But by the looks of it, the program will continue forward uninterrupted, as it plays perfectly into the narrative that the state can solve all of society’s ills—no matter what the economics and epidemiology really say about it.

Public Health Doublethink

Much of how the public should respond to the virus hinges on the question of how common asymptomatic transmission of it is. Unfortunately, the research available on this is limited and contradictory, allowing cunning politicians to play both sides of the fence in order to get their way.

Some early findings suggest that the virus undergoes considerable shedding in patients not showing symptoms, meaning that asymptomatic transmission is indeed common. Viewed through this narrow lens, it would seem that there’s cause to worry. However, the data suggesting the prevalence of asymptomatic transmission is ultimately rather paltry, and there’s evidence pointing to the contrary.

World Health Organization spokeswoman Maria van Kerkhove recently claimed that based on “a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing,” asymptomatic transmission is “very rare”—directly contradicting what public health officials had long assumed about the virus. If the risk of contagion remains low until symptoms appear, patients are far less likely to spread the virus to others. This notion too, though, is based on data that is, of yet, incomplete, leaving the question of asymptomatic transmission unsolved and open to further inquiry. But whatever the underlying reality is, a significant problem must inevitably emerge for defenders of the government’s pandemic response efforts.

At the outset, governors imposed the lockdowns for fear that asymptomatic carriers were spreading the virus. Since anybody could unknowingly be infected and contagious, lockdowns were put in place as a proactive quarantine on the entire population. But according to Dr. Don Printz, a former research leader at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, if there’s “shedding 2-5 days before any signs or symptoms, I would think [contact tracing] would be almost impossible.” Indeed, with an incubation period lasting between two and fourteen days, many patients would remain contagious for a long time without ever showing symptoms. New chains of transmission would easily emerge, generating exponential growth in the number of new cases. By the time contact tracers tried to map the probable path of transmission, the virus would have already spread to a number of other people—and on and on after that.

On the flip side, if asymptomatic transmission is “very rare,” as Van Kerkhove asserted, contact tracing may be a successful strategy. If only symptomatic patients are spreading the virus, though, the whole rationale for the lockdowns is then completely destroyed. For all the economic, political, social, and psychological damage that the lockdowns caused, they will have yielded absolutely no public health benefit. It boils down to this: it’s either (1) that the lockdowns were effective or (2) that the contact tracing is effective, but politicians can’t have it both ways.

Still, the government’s big spenders have pushed forward without delay. In fact, they’ve doubled down on their self-contradictions. The CDC, for instance, declared that “asymptomatic transmission enhances the need to scale up the capacity for…thorough contact tracing.” That is, of course, a repetition of the perennial call for more funding—oh, how our problems would disappear if only we spent more. Funneling more money toward programs that are inherently faulty won’t lead to better or more effective results, but to programs just as faulty, only with larger personnels.

Trying to Trace COVID Probably Won’t Work Anyway

Even casting aside politicians’ obvious public health duplicity, their contact tracing plans don’t stand up to scientific scrutiny. Whatever the case with asymptomatic transmission may be, COVID’s characteristics pose contact tracers unique and probably insurmountable challenges, leaving the US tracing “army” already besieged.

The first problem is that catching COVID is not activity specific, unlike other viruses like, say, HIV. Anyone in close proximity to a contagious COVID patient is at risk for inhaling virus-ridden droplets that had been coughed, sneezed, or breathed out—it doesn’t matter where people are or what they’re doing. That suggests that the virus may often be transmitted between complete strangers, in which case contact tracing is rendered impossible, as tracing relies upon patients recalling their recent contacts.

This has only been exacerbated over the past month with the Black Lives Matter riots springing up across the country—a perfect storm for the virus’ spread. Research has shown activities like yelling, singing, and chanting to extend the distance that infectious droplets are spewed into the air. Not only does this lead to more new cases, but it also makes it much more difficult—even impossible—for tracers to figure out who passed the virus to whom.

The second problem arises once symptoms begin to show. The way COVID manifests itself is multifarious, with some patients only exhibiting irregular symptoms not usually associated with the virus, like loss of smell, rash, and delirium. Many of its key symptoms—including dry cough, fever, and shortness of breath—are found in a variety of other illnesses, further muddying the waters. That leaves gaping holes in the health record and may lead to new, hard-to-trace outbreaks.

Though meant to increase efficiency and efficacy, digital tracing apps are also riddled with significant problems. If the apps aren’t downloaded by enough residents, many may easily fall through the cracks and infect others. The apps only confer public health boons if they’re in common and widespread use. But today, nearly 20 percent of Americans still don’t own smartphones and a recent poll indicated that only half of those who do would consider downloading a tracing app. And that’s not even to mention the fact that people don’t always have their phones on their persons, meaning that many interactions could take place untraced and under the radar.

In focusing entirely on proximity, digital tracing continues to get it wrong. Indoor airflow poses a risk of spreading infectious droplets across rooms and throughout entire buildings—far beyond the six-foot proximity the apps look for. This summer, that risk may be augmented by AC ventilation. Then there’s also the risk of touching infected surfaces, which may harbor traces of the virus for hours or up to a few days. The apps simply can’t account for this sort of spread, chipping further away at their overall effectiveness.

Moreover, there are some instances where people who are physically close together are extraordinarily unlikely to become infected, like in a supermarket checkout line, separated from the clerk by a plexiglass shield. Nonetheless, this would trigger an alert to be sent to people’s phones, warning them of possible COVID exposure with no further explanation, setting off a false alarm and probably a lot of worry and confusion. Divorcing the human factor from the process takes an undeniable toll on its reliability, when it was never that reliable in the first place.

Why should anyone still have faith in the government when it’s made fatal stumbles at every step of the pandemic? Public health officials were unable to stop the first instances of community spread of COVID in late January and even remained in denial that the virus was spreading uncontrollably until the end of February. The notion that contact tracing is right now serving as a useful strategy in the US—with active cases hovering around 1 million—is preposterous.

Officials may feign confidence in the decisions they make, but that’s fueled by pure optics, not science. Across all fifty states, these programs are on track to reroute billions of dollars and more than one hundred thousand workers away from otherwise valuable uses. And for what? All to spin our wheels and sink into a false sense of hope and security.


Be seeing you


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Huge COVID case-counting deception at the CDC « Jon Rappoport’s Blog

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2020

For this piece, we have to enter the official world (of the insane)—where everyone is quite sure a new coronavirus was discovered in China and the worthless diagnostic tests mean something and the case numbers are real and meaningful. Once we execute all those absurd maneuvers, we land square in the middle of yet another scandal—this time at our favorite US agency for scandals, the CDC.

The Atlantic, May 21, has the story, headlined, “How could the CDC make that mistake?”

I’ll give you the key quotes, and then comment on the stark inference The Atlantic somehow failed to grasp.

“We’ve learned that the CDC is making, at best, a debilitating mistake: combining test results that diagnose current coronavirus infections with test results that measure whether someone has ever had the virus…The agency confirmed to The Atlantic on Wednesday that it is mixing the results of viral [PCR] and antibody tests, even though the two tests reveal different information and are used for different reasons.”

“Several states—including Pennsylvania, the site of one of the country’s largest outbreaks, as well as Texas, Georgia, and Vermont—are blending the data in the same way. Virginia likewise mixed viral and antibody test results until last week, but it reversed course and the governor apologized for the practice after it was covered by the Richmond Times-Dispatch and The Atlantic. Maine similarly separated its data on Wednesday; Vermont authorities claimed they didn’t even know they were doing this.”

“’You’ve got to be kidding me,’ Ashish Jha, the K. T. Li Professor of Global Health at Harvard and the director of the Harvard Global Health Institute, told us when we described what the CDC was doing. ‘How could the CDC make that mistake? This is a mess’.”

“The CDC stopped publishing anything resembling a complete database of daily [COVID] test results on February 29. When it resumed publishing test data last week [the middle of May]…”

First of all, the CDC’s basic mission is publishing disease statistics on an ongoing basis. Reporting partial data flies in the face of what they’re supposed to be all about.

But the big deal, of course, is combining results from two different tests—the PCR and the antibody—and placing them in one lump.

I’ve read the Atlantic article forwards, backwards, and sideways, and it appears the experts believe only PCR viral tests should be used to count the number of COVID cases.

So here is a takeaway I find nowhere in the Atlantic article: COMBINING THE TWO TESTS WILL VASTLY INFLATE THE NUMBER OF CASES.

I’m not talking about categories like “rate of infection” or “percentage.” I’m talking about plain numbers of cases.

Some PCR tests will indicate COVID and some antibody tests will indicate COVID, and adding them together will pump up the number of cases. You know, that big number they flash on TV screens a hundred times a day.

“Coronavirus cases jumped up again yesterday, and the grand total in the US is now…”

THAT number.

The number media and government and related con artists deploy to scare the people and justify lockdowns and use to stop reopening the economy.

The brass band circus with flying acrobats and elephants and clown numbers.

Therefore, I’m not characterizing what the CDC is doing as a mistake. They’ve managed to create the illusion that absolute case numbers are higher than they should be.

Somehow, these “mistakes” always seem to result in worse news, not better news. The “errors” are always on the high side rather than the low side.

Case in point: the computer prediction of COVID deaths in the UK and US made by that abject failure, Neil Ferguson, whose track record, going back to 2001, has been one horrendous lunatic exaggeration after another. His 2020 projections of 500,000 COVID deaths in the UK and two million in the US were directly used to justify lockdowns in many countries.

The CDC, back in 2009, stopped reporting the number of Swine Flu cases in the US—while still claiming that number was in the tens of thousands. I’ve written in great detail about the scandal, which was exposed by then-CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson. The CDC stopped counting cases, because the overwhelming percentage of tissue samples from patients was coming back from labs with no sign of Swine Flu or any other kind of flu. And yet, in a later retrospective “analysis,” the CDC claimed that, at the height of the “epidemic,” there were 22 MILLION cases of Swine Flu in the US.

Going all the way back to 2003 and SARS, the CDC and other public health agencies around the world hyped the dangers to the sky; the final official death count, globally, when the dust cleared? 800.

There is a tradition of lying on the high side, blowing up figures in order to create the illusion of destruction.

CDC? Mistake? The agency is certainly incompetent. But that’s just the beginning of the story.

The only time they say there is no danger is when they’re lying about the effects of vaccines.

My headline for the Atlantic article would read: SO HOW MANY COVID CASES SHOULD WE SUBTRACT TO GET THE ACTUAL NUMBER?

And the first paragraph would go this way: “Just when governors are trying to reopen their economies, a gigantic case-counting deception at the CDC is taking the wind out of their sails. The millions of Americans suffering financial devastation could be pushed back into a hole. Who is screaming to high heaven about THAT on the nightly news? No one. Why not?”



* (video: “CDC Admits Mistakes in Covid Case Numbers,” 7/1/2020)



Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Another day, another bogus report from CDC seeking to entice the public to continue wearing masks – American Thinker

Posted by M. C. on June 17, 2020

If they wanted a legitimate story, they would have looked at cases in states without the face mask requirement to see how many cases they had from April 17 to May 9.  Instead of doing that, they just made numbers up, and the media, like puppets, repeat the bogus numbers to indoctrinate people into wearing masks.

The CDC now says it has proof that wearing face masks reduced COVID-19 cases in NYC by 66,000 from April 17 to May 9.

Face masks reduce New York coronavirus cases by over 66,000, study deems it most effective way to check spread

Health experts have been advising people to wear face masks in public to prevent the spread of Covid-19 and now numbers indicate that it works. A new study shows that wearing a face mask dramatically decreases a person’s chances of being infected by the new coronavirus. Researchers found that using a face mask alone reduced the number of Covid-19 infections by more than 66,000 in New York City from April 17 to May 9.

There is no way they would know this, and it is as made up as the modeling numbers that CDC put out in March that showed that hundreds of millions would get the disease and millions would die.  That is the study that destroyed the economy and caused governors throughout the country to require us to wear masks, social distance, and avoid large groups for the first time in our lives.

If they wanted a legitimate story, they would have looked at cases in states without the face mask requirement to see how many cases they had from April 17 to May 9.  Instead of doing that, they just made numbers up, and the media, like puppets, repeat the bogus numbers to indoctrinate people into wearing masks.

Here are more made up modeling reports, without scientific facts, that have destroyed the U.S economy and forced much of the public to wear face masks, social distance, and gather in small groups for the first time in most of our lives:

Could Coronavirus Kill a Million Americans?

COVID-19 predicted to infect 81% of U.S. population, cause 2.2 million deaths in U.S.

We were told that millions would die, and hundreds of millions would get COVID-19.  The death projections were over-projected by over 1,000 percent and cases by an exponential amount.  So far, six tenths of a percent of the population has tested positive, including people with no symptoms.

How many fewer deaths would there have been if idiotic governors like Cuomo hadn’t forced nursing homes to take in people they knew had COVID-19?

How many fewer deaths would there be associated with COVID-19 if the CDC didn’t politically dictate to medical professionals to count cancer, heart, stroke, lung, diabetes, obesity, kidney, and other deaths as COVID-19 if they happened to get COVID?  As far as I can tell, we have never had that mandate with the swine flu or seasonal flu.

How many fewer deaths from suicide, drug overdose, and other causes would we have if these bogus modeling numbers hadn’t been used to destroy the economy?

Can anyone imagine if millions of people with no symptoms went to the doctor or a clinic and demanded that they be tested for the flu?  When the medical professionals asked why they wanted to be tested, they would say because the media, bureaucrats, and politicians were demanding they be tested because they might be killing people.  The insurance companies and doctors would refuse to test, but that is what we are doing now to goose the daily numbers to scare the public.

Then the media widely regurgitated a made up report, with no scientific evidence, that said 200,000 people per day would be testing positive for COVID-19 and 3,000 people per day would be dying because, heaven forbid, people were going back to work and gathering a little bit.  The numbers were overestimated by 900% on cases and 200% on deaths, but the public was scared into submission.  The power-hungry governors really cared, but facts don’t matter.

Draft report predicts covid-19 cases will reach 200,000 a day by June 1

draft government report projects covid-19 cases will surge to about 200,000 per day by June 1, a staggering jump that would be accompanied by more than 3,000 deaths each day.

One of the most humorous made up reports that was also repeated, was from the brilliant, highly esteemed Columbia University that essentially blamed Trump for 36,000 deaths.  You see, according to their brilliant educators, Trump should have instituted strict policies while Fauci  and the CDC were saying it wasn’t very dangerous in the U.S.  The highly educated journalists just repeated what they were told with no questions.

U.S. Could Have Saved 36,000 Lives If Social Distancing Started 1 Week Earlier: Study

The U.S. could have prevented roughly 36,000 deaths from COVID-19 if broad social distancing measures had been put in place just one week earlier in March, according to an analysis from Columbia University.

Underlining the importance of aggressively responding to the coronavirus, the study found the U.S. could have avoided at least 700,000 fewer infections if actions that began on March 15 had actually started on March 8.

Here are some of the other hoaxes, lies, talking points and propaganda that most of the media, entertainers, bureaucrats have used to indoctrinate the public into submission on COVID 19 and to destroy the economy:

  • President Trump never said that COVID 19 was a hoax, but we still hear that Democrat talking point. Trump was one of the first to react with his China travel ban and much of the media and other democrats called that racist, xenophobic and an overreaction. He’s called a racist and xenophobe no matter what he does.
  • That the disease wouldn’t spread human to human: by WHO, Bill Gates among others. Those were the people spreading a hoax, not Trump.
  • That the mortality rate was much higher than the seasonal flu.
  • That millions of asymptomatic people were spreading the disease. A spokesman at WHO recently said that there was no scientific evidence this is true but the next day caved and said we misunderstood so the lie continued.
  • That the hospitals would be overwhelmed. Most hospitals have been underwhelmed and are starving because politicians deemed elective medical care as non-essential.
  • That children would spread the disease to Grandparents and kill them.
  • That COVID 19 is easily spread off surfaces. After months, we were told by CDC that this wasn’t true.
  • That children at schools were very vulnerable. Schools that remained open are fine.
  • That states that had less strict shutdowns would be a disaster and wanted people to die.
  • That rates would skyrocket because of the reopening.
  • That the disease is racist. It kills people who are less healthy no matter what race they are. Why don’t we ask why minorities are more vulnerable since the Democrats have been taking care of them for fifty years with Medicaid and other great society programs? The disease is also not sexist even though it kills more men and women.

We are now getting daily reports that states that have reopened and are less restrictive are having huge problems to scare the public. We are told that is why the stock market is plunging

The actual numbers are readily available, but we won’t see them because the public wouldn’t be scared.

Here are some actual numbers through June 14th:

States with very strict restrictions:

  • New York, Population 19.5 million, deaths 31,662 Last seven-day deaths 507.
  • New Jersey, Population 8.9 million, deaths 12,625 Last seven-day deaths 449.
  • Illinois, Population 12.7 million, deaths 6,308 Last seven-day deaths 404.
  • Michigan, Population 10.0 million, deaths 6,016 Last seven-day deaths 364.

States that are less restrictive and more open:

  • Florida, Population 21.5 million, deaths 2,931 Last seven-day deaths 231.
  • Texas, Population 29.0 million, deaths 1,973 Last seven-day deaths 158.
  • Georgia, Population 10.6 million, deaths 2,451 Last seven-day deaths 271.
  • Colorado, Population 5.8 million, deaths 1.348 Last seven-day deaths 74.
  • Arizona, Population 7.3 million, deaths 1,186 Last seven-day deaths 142.

In all these cases the states that are less restrictive have better results from the start, including the last seven days yet that is not the story the media is presenting. Facts don’t matter.
Read more:
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Be seeing you


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

COVID-19 Lockdowns are Neither Necessary, nor Scientific, nor Helpful | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on June 16, 2020

During the debate over secession from Britain at the Second Virginia Convention held in 1775, Patrick Henry asked the audience, which included Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?” Patrick Henry concluded his address with a passionate answer: “but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!” This quote is synonymous with a core American value: that the freedom to live one’s life as one chooses is even more important than life itself. Individuals should choose whether the risks of socializing (including risks of contracting COVID-19) are worth the benefits of social exchange. It is not a matter of putting a dollar value on life; it is a recognition that people regularly risk their lives voluntarily in pursuit of happiness.

A viral disease known as COVID-19 has been declared the cause of death of over one hundred thousand Americans. When cases first appeared in the United States, individual states considered and then implemented various forms of mandatory lockdown to “flatten the curve” of new cases and minimize the death toll. I have previously questioned the wisdom of these lockdowns here. Although some of the lockdowns have been relaxed or lifted, there is ongoing debate over whether the lockdowns should be reinstated to avoid a second wave of COVID-19 cases.

A lockdown is one form of mandatory restriction of freedom of action. Restrictions in the US have included bans on serving customers in restaurants and other places of business, bans of peaceful gatherings of too many people in one location (in violation of “social distancing” requirements), and bans on religious worship by groups deemed to have too many people in one place of worship.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution lists the right to peaceably assemble and the right to free exercise of religion. The First Amendment is part of what is called the Bill of Rights. Note that these amendments are not known as the Bill of Privileges or the Bill of Nice Things to be Purchased by Taxes. The US Constitution could not have been ratified without the Bill of Rights, so these rights are fundamental to what it means to be an American. There is no question that the COVID-19 lockdowns denied Americans these fundamental rights. The only question is whether the denial of these rights was necessary.

Some proponents of lockdown start and end their argument by stating the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19. The magnitude of the number is supposed to end any further discussion. Anyone who questions whether the lockdowns have actually saved any lives are dismissed as having a callous disregard for human life. Back when the death toll from COVID-19 was around thirty thousand, I compared COVID-19 deaths to the annual deaths from influenza. Some of my colleagues repeatedly notify me when the death toll from COVID-19 is updated. Their point is that if deaths from COVID-19 exceed some arbitrary number the lockdowns will have been vindicated. It doesn’t seem to matter whether the deaths occurred during lockdowns or not; deaths from COVID-19 justify any action by government.

Comparisons with flu epidemics provide a frame of reference. The point is that in the past American civilization somehow survived comparable crises with similar death tolls without requiring lockdowns. Freedom of worship and freedom of peaceable assembly are constitutionally protected rights. The only plausible justification for suspending those rights would be an imminent and credible threat to the existence of America that required immediate and united effort to avoid. A final death toll from COVID-19 of two hundred thousand or even 1 million would not change the argument despite being a substantially greater tragedy.

Some of my colleagues argue that life is priceless and is more important than any economic consideration. This is contrary to the foundation of America. During the debate over secession from Britain at the Second Virginia Convention held in 1775, Patrick Henry asked the audience, which included Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?” Patrick Henry concluded his address with a passionate answer: “but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!” This quote is synonymous with a core American value: that the freedom to live one’s life as one chooses is even more important than life itself. Individuals should choose whether the risks of socializing (including risks of contracting COVID-19) are worth the benefits of social exchange. It is not a matter of putting a dollar value on life; it is a recognition that people regularly risk their lives voluntarily in pursuit of happiness. We could completely eliminate deaths from motor vehicle accidents by banning motor vehicles. We continue to voluntarily use them, because the economic benefits of doing so are more valuable to us than the risks to our lives.

Another argument made by lockdown proponents is to “follow the science.” This is another phrase intended to end further discussion. Scientific hypotheses must be falsifiable by observation. The scientific method is the process of testing falsifiable hypotheses by empiric observations that either support or reject them. The “science” is never settled and is never closed to challenge or discussion. What proponents of lockdowns mean by “follow the science” is that statements made by scientists should be accepted as axioms and that anyone who challenges these statements is an ignoramus or a conspiracy nut. An obvious problem exists when different scientists make conflicting statements. This problem is worse when the same scientist makes conflicting statements at different times.

As the debates over continuation or resumption of lockdowns continue, what is the current state of knowledge? The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently released their best estimate of symptomatic case fatality rates based on records of symptomatic cases, records of deaths, and antibody tests of wider populations. The symptomatic case fatality rate is the risk of death after developing symptomatic disease. This is different from the mortality rate, which is the number of deaths per hundred thousand. The symptomatic case fatality rates are 0.5 deaths per thousand symptomatic cases for those under 50 years of age, 2 per thousand for those age 50–64, and 13 per thousand for those over 65. As a frame of reference, the case fatality rate for the Spanish flu of 1918 was greater than 25 deaths per thousand cases. The existing scientific data for COVID-19 do not justify the suspension of civil liberties.

The debate will always return to the total deaths, which now exceed one hundred thousand for the United States. There is nothing extraordinary about the death toll from COVID-19. Total deaths in the US from all causes were 2,839,205 in 2018. The current mortality rate from COVID-19 in the US is 31.7. The total mortality rate in the US from all causes was 723.6 in 2018. The mortality rate in the US in 2018 was 163.6 for heart disease, 149.1 from cancer, 48.0 from unintentional injury (including motor vehicle accidents), 39.7 from chronic noninfectious lung disease (mostly chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD]), 37.1 from stroke, and 30.5 from Alzheimer’s disease. The mortality rate from suicide was 14.2 in 2018. These comparisons do not ignore the tragedy of deaths from COVID-19; the figures provide a frame of reference.

There is no evidence that lockdowns saved any lives. Different political entities have tried different severities of lockdown. Sweden tried a very liberal approach; their mortality rate from COVID-19 was lower compared with some other countries with more severe lockdowns such as Britain, Spain, Italy, and France. There is no clear relationship between severity of lockdown and mortality rates from COVID-19 for different states in the United States either. New York had one of the strictest lockdowns and has the highest mortality rate from COVID-19 of all states at 152.9. My own state of Texas had a relatively liberal lockdown and has a mortality rate from COVID-19 of 5.7. Texas had a mortality rate from motor vehicle accidents of 12.7 in 2018. More than twice as many people in Texas died from motor vehicle accidents in 2018 than have died from COVID-19. Each lockdown represents a different experiment in policy. If we “follow the science,” we will conclude that lockdowns had little or no beneficial effect and that policy should be set at local levels rather than state, national, or global levels.

Mandatory lockdowns should be ended. We have enough data for individuals to make decisions about whether they should stay in the safety of their homes or risk their lives by socializing. Young people are at the least risk from COVID-19 and have the most to lose by economic deprivation. The elderly are at the highest risk and have the least to lose by staying at home since many are retired or disabled. People who live in New York may very well make different choices from people in Texas.

In my home community of Lubbock, Texas, people have changed their behavior voluntarily. Some people wear masks and others do not. If you are afraid of those who do not, it is easy enough to avoid them. I take outdoor walks. During these walks, people wave to each other. We give each other space voluntarily, but nobody calls in a SWAT team if some child or pet breaches the capricious and arbitrary six-foot barrier. Calls for resuming lockdowns out of fear of second waves should be ignored. The lockdowns have dug a very deep economic hole, and we need to stop digging it deeper.


Be seeing you


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Coronavirus and the Gates Foundation

Posted by M. C. on June 8, 2020

By F. William Engdahl

Arguably, no one has been more active in promoting and funding research on vaccines aimed at dealing with coronavirus than Bill Gates and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. From sponsoring a simulation of a coronavirus global pandemic, just weeks before the Wuhan outbreak was announced, to funding numerous corporate efforts to come up with a novel vaccine for the apparently novel virus, the Gates presence is there. What does it actually entail ?

We must admit that at the very least Bill Gates is prophetic. He has claimed for years that a global killer pandemic will come and that we are not prepared for it. On March 18, 2015 Gates gave a TED talk on epidemics in Vancouver. That day he wrote on his blog, “I just gave a brief talk on a subject that I’ve been learning a lot about lately—epidemics. The Ebola outbreak in West Africa is a tragedy—as I write this, more than 10,000 people have died.” Gates then added, “As awful as this epidemic has been, the next one could be much worse. The world is simply not prepared to deal with a disease—an especially virulent flu, for example—that infects large numbers of people very quickly. Of all the things that could kill 10 million people or more, by far the most likely is an epidemic.”

That same year, 2015, Bill Gates wrote an article for the New England Journal of Medicine titled, “The Next Epidemic: Lessons from Ebola.” There he spoke of a special class of drugs that “involves giving patients a set of particular RNA-based constructs that enables them to produce specific proteins(including antibodies).Although this is a very new area, it is promising because it is possible that a safe therapy could be designed and put into large-scale manufacture fairly rapidly. More basic research as well as the progress of companies like Moderna and CureVac could eventually make this approach a key tool for stopping epidemics.” Moderna and CureVac both today receive funds from the Gates Foundation and are leading the race to develop an approved COVID-19 vaccine based on mRNA.

2017 and Founding of CEPI

A global flu-like pandemic in fact is something that Gates and his well-endowed foundation have spent years preparing for. In 2017 during the Davos World Economic Forum, Gates initiated something called CEPI, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, together with the governments of Norway, India, Japan, and Germany, along with the Wellcome Trust of the UK. Its stated purpose is to “accelerate the development of vaccines we’ll need to contain outbreaks” of future epidemics. He noted at the time that “One promising area of vaccine development research is using advances in genomics to map the DNA and RNA of pathogens and make vaccines.” We will return to that.

Event 201

By 2019 Bill Gates and the foundation were going full-tilt boogie with their pandemic scenarios. He made a Netflix video which made an eerie imaginary scenario. The video, part of the “Explained” series, imagined a wet market in China where live and dead animals are stacked and a highly deadly virus erupts that spreads globally. Gates appears as an expert in the video to warn, “If you think of anything that could come along that would kill millions of people, a pandemic is our greatest risk.” He said if nothing was done to better prepare for pandemics, the time would come when the world would look back and wish it had invested more into potential vaccines. That was weeks before the world heard about bats and a live wet market in Wuhan China.

In October, 2019 the Gates Foundation teamed up with the World Economic Forum and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security to enact what they called a “fictional” scenario simulation involving some of the world’s leading figures in public health. It was titled Event 201.

As their website describes it, Event 201 simulated an “outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people that eventually becomes efficiently transmissible from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic. The pathogen and the disease it causes are modeled largely on SARS, but it is more transmissible in the community setting by people with mild symptoms.”

In the Event 201 scenario the disease originates at a pig farm in Brazil, spreading through low-income regions and ultimately explodes into an epidemic. The disease is carried by air travel to Portugal, the USA and China and beyond to the point no country can control it. The scenario posits no possible vaccine being available in the first year. “Since the whole human population is susceptible, during the initial months of the pandemic, the cumulative number of cases increases exponentially, doubling every week.”

The scenario then ends after 18 months when the fictional coronavirus has caused 65 million deaths. “The pandemic is beginning to slow due to the decreasing number of susceptible people. The pandemic will continue at some rate until there is an effective vaccine or until 80-90 % of the global population has been exposed.”

Event 201 Players

As interesting as the prescient Gates-Johns Hopkins Event 201 fictional scenario of October, 2019 may be, the list of panelists who were invited to participate in the imaginary global response is equally interesting.

Among the selected “players” as they were called, was George Fu Gao. Notably, Prof. Gao is director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention since 2017. His specialization includes research on “influenza virus interspecies transmission (host jump)… He is also interested in virus ecology, especially the relationship between influenza virus and migratory birds or live poultry markets and the bat-derived virus ecology and molecular biology.” Bat-derived virus ecology…

Prof. Gao was joined among others at the panel by the former Deputy Director of the CIA during the Obama term, Avril Haines. She also served as Obama’s Assistant to the President and Principal Deputy National Security Advisor. Another of the players at the Gates event was Rear Admiral Stephen C. Redd, Director of the Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The same CDC is at the center of a huge scandal for not having adequate functioning tests available for testing cases of COVID-19 in the USA. Their preparedness was anything but laudable.

Rounding out the group was Adrian Thomas, the Vice President of scandal-ridden Johnson & Johnson, the giant medical and pharmaceutical company. Thomas is responsible for pandemic preparedness at J&J including developing vaccines for Ebola, Dengue Fever, HIV. And there was Martin Knuchel, Head of Crisis, Emergency & Business Continuity Management, for Lufthansa Group Airlines. Lufthansa has been one of the major airlines dramatically cutting flights during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.

All this shows that Bill Gates has had a remarkable preoccupation with the possibility of a global pandemic outbreak he said could be even larger than the alleged deaths from the mysterious 1918 Spanish Flu, and has been warning for at least the past five years or more. What the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation also has been involved in is funding development of new vaccines using bleeding-edge CRISPR gene-editing and other technologies.

The Coronavirus Vaccines

Gates Foundation money is backing vaccine development on every front. Inovio Pharmaceuticals of Pennsylvania received $9 million from the Gates-backed CEPI, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, to develop a vaccine, INO-4800, which is about to test on humans in April, a suspiciously rapid time frame. In addition Gates Foundation just gave the company an added $5 million to develop a proprietary smart device for intradermal delivery of the new vaccine.

In addition Gates Foundation monies via CEPI are financing development of a radical new vaccine method known as messengerRNA or mRNA.

They are co-funding the Cambridge, Massachusetts biotech company, Moderna Inc., to develop a vaccine against the Wuhan novel coronavirus, now called SARS-CoV-2. Moderna’s other partner is the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Head of NIAID is Dr Anthony Fauci, the person at the center of the Trump Administration virus emergency response. Notable about the Fauci-Gates Moderna coronavirus vaccine, mRNA-1273, is that it has been rolled out in a matter of weeks, not years, and on February 24 went directly to Fauci’s NIH for tests on human guinea pigs, not on mice as normal. Moderna’s chief medical adviser, Tal Zaks, argued, “I don’t think proving this in an animal model is on the critical path to getting this to a clinical trial.”

Another notable admission by Moderna on its website is the legal disclaimer, “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements: …These risks, uncertainties, and other factors include, among others: … the fact that there has never been a commercial product utilizing mRNA technology approved for use.” In other words, completely unproven for human health and safety.

Another biotech company working with unproven mRNA technology to develop a vaccine for the COVID-19 is a German company, CureVac. Since 2015 CureVac has received money from the Gates Foundation to develop its own mRNA technology. In January the Gates-backed CEPI granted more than $8 million to develop a mRNA vaccine for the novel coronavirus.

Add to this the fact that the Gates Foundation and related entities such as CEPI constitute the largest funders of the public-private entity known as WHO, and that its current director, Tedros Adhanom, the first WHO director in history not a medical doctor, worked for years on HIV with the Gates Foundation when Tedros was a government minister in Ethiopia, and we see that there is practically no area of the current coronavirus pandemic where the footprints of the omnipresent Gates are not to be found. If that is to the good of mankind or grounds to be worried, time will tell.

Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Jon Rappoport’s Blog « Contact Tracing

Posted by M. C. on June 2, 2020
“Hi Hank. So glad your deli is
finally open. I’ll have the Fauci baloney on rye with apocalypse sauce
and extra Birx pickles on the side…you know, the sandwich with the tiny
microchip in it…”

by Jon Rappoport

So I chose a state at random and started to look at their rollout of
contact tracing. The first group I found—what were they? A non-profit,
a government agency, a bunch of nameless robots with cushy jobs pulling
down secure paychecks for the rest of their lives?

Finally, on their site, way down on a page, I saw references to a
CEO. They’re a company. A business. Their new money maker is hiring,
training, and launching contact tracers.

They’re collaborating with two other groups I’ve never heard of, and
all three groups are plugged into state public health officials.

It’s as if these people want to conceal themselves, or perhaps more
accurately, distance themselves from the population, in their “vital

“Thanks for getting in touch with your question, Mr. Citizen.
Actually, that contact tracing issue comes under the CVDR. You can
contact them at their office. They may in turn refer you to the BGTD or
the GKTH2V…”

Vagueness is the cardinal feature of the whole contact tracing
program. Intentionally so. Words like “could” and “may” show up at key
junctures. We could do this, we may do that.

For example, when some pleasant android of the State shows up at your
home and knocks on the door, because you shopped at a hole-in- the-wall
hardware store where an employee was later found to be “positive for,”
or “infected by,” or “sick from” (which one is it?) the virus, and this
contact tracer asks you about your health, and asks you to get tested,
what happens if you say NO?

Are you put into isolation in your home, alone? For 10 days?
Fourteen days? Do other people in the home have to leave? Do you have
to leave? Do they take you to some fleabag hotel prison and put you in a
room and deny you visitors? If so, for how long? Suppose, while in
the fleabag, you still refuse to get tested? Do they keep you there for
a year? The rest of your life? Suppose you start coughing in the
middle of the night because the room is full of mold? Do they break in
and hold you down and take a swab and test it and then ship you with
your brand new false-positive result to a hospital and put you on a
ventilator? Meanwhile, are your children sent to live with relatives,
or are they hustled into foster care? And if the vaccine has been
approved, do they shoot you with it whether you consent or refuse? If
they let you refuse, do they extend your stay at the fleabag hotel? For
how long?

State governors are running the following psyop: “Yes, we’re opening
up the economy, but this is CONTINGENT on doing more and more contact
tracing and testing.” On a national level, Pelosi tried to make that
point the other day, but her Thorazine kept kicking in and caused gaps
in her speech. Finally, she managed to remember—“It’s the three t’s;
tracing, testing, and treatment.” Really. She and Joe Biden should run
together on the Mental Lapse ticket in the fall.

Go ahead. Read the CDC guidelines on contact tracing. Read HR 6666
and the new Hero Bill. Try to figure out EXACTLY how the tracing
program works. Count how many holes there are in the Swiss Cheese.

The bottom line is: they’ll do what they can get away with. They’ll make up reasons for doing it.

They’ll tap into every latent little fascist in your community and
put them to work tracing and snitching and testing and shooting up as
many people as possible. Including you.

“Hi, Jolene. What are you doing here? I thought you were cleaning
teeth at Dr. Homunculus’ office? What? You’re a contact tracer now?
It’s not enough to pretend you’re a Hell’s Angel chick on weekends?
You’re now an agent of the State? What’s that patch on your sleeve?
Didn’t the Stasi wear that in East Germany?”

In India, the government has released a contact tracing app. It’s
voluntary and mandatory. In “containment areas,” you have to have it.
Apparently, it’s been accepted on a hundred million cell phones so far.
Well, it would be. Don’t leave home without it. Otherwise, you can’t
gain access to work, or stores. India is chasing China for
most-repressive-government awards.

Of course, it’s happening in America, too. “We’d love to get you on
board. Install our new app and let us spy on you 24/7. It’s fun.
We’re all in this spying together. It’s Heaven on Earth. By the way,
your employer won’t let you work at the office without the app.”

Here, from the CDC, are a few statements about contact tracing.

“Based on our current knowledge, a close contact is someone who was
within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes starting
from 48 hours before illness onset until the time the patient is
isolated. They should stay home, maintain social distancing, and
self-monitor until 14 days from the last date of exposure.”

The precision is breathtaking, isn’t it? And they’re talking about
“close contacts.” Do the same rules apply to “ordinary contacts?”
They’re really going to try to estimate the “48 hours before” and the
“15 minutes?” Does the contact who maintains social distancing at home
stay at least six feet away from other family members at all times for
14 days? The answer: yes. Are you kidding?

“Contacts are encouraged to stay home and maintain social distance
from others (at least 6 feet) until 14 days after their last exposure,
in case they also become ill. They should monitor themselves by checking
their temperature twice daily and watching for cough or shortness of
breath [hopefully inducing fear and consequent illness]. To the extent
possible, public health staff should check in with contacts to make sure
they are self-monitoring and have not developed symptoms. Contacts who
develop symptoms should promptly isolate themselves and notify public
health staff. They should be promptly evaluated for infection and for
the need for medical care.”

So, again…just because you came in contact with someone who is
“infected,” you need to self-isolate at home, more than six feet apart
from family members, for 14 days? Yes.

“If possible, contacts should be asked to voluntarily stay home,
monitor themselves, and maintain social distancing from others.
However, health departments have the authority to issue legal orders of
quarantine, should the situation warrant that measure.”

Wait. What’s the difference between self-isolating at home and
quarantine? Well, quarantine must mean everyone except “the contact”
clears out of the house and stays elsewhere; or the contact is taken
from the house and put in a “facility.”

And under what circumstances would quarantine be ordered? Let’s see.
Refusal to get tested. Refusal to maintain the six-feet rule.
Refusal to stay home. Refusal to have a cell phone with the tracing app
installed. Refusal to take the vaccine. That would be my surmise.

Frankly, I prefer a Mussolini approach, if you’re going to install contact tracing:

“Listen up, everyone. The researchers never used proper procedures
to prove a new virus existed in the first place. That, and the fact
that the diagnostic tests churn out false positives like Niagara Falls
in the rainy season, make all case numbers and death numbers
meaningless. The whole COVID narrative is a fairy tale. No need for
masks, gloves, social distancing, or lockdowns. Get it? But we want to
know everything about you 24/7, so we’re doing contact tracing. This
is a police state. Cooperate, or pay the price.”

Contact tracing is just the forward edge of a MUCH larger program of surveillance.

In his devastating article, “The Brave New World of Bill Gates and Big Telecom,”
May 8, 2020, Robert F Kennedy, Jr. writes: “Suppose that computers
discover your [anti-lockdown] beach trip by tracking your movements
using a stream of information from your cell phone, your car, your GPS,
facial recognition technology integrated with real-time surveillance
from satellites, mounted cameras, and implanted chips. Desk-bound
prosecutors or robots will notify you of your violation by text while
simultaneously withdrawing your $1,000 penalty in cryptocurrency from
your payroll account. Welcome to Bill Gates’ America. It’s right around
the corner.”

“Recently, Bill Gates announced his financial support for a $1
billion plan to blanket Earth in video surveillance satellites. The
company, EarthNow, will launch 500 satellites to live-stream monitor
almost every ‘corner’ of the Earth, providing instantaneous video
feedback with only a one-second delay. According to Wikipedia, the
company expects its customers to include ‘governments and large
enterprises.’ 5G Antennas¬¬¬ deploying a vast array of ground-based 5G
spy antennas. Through his Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Gates
purchased 5.3 million Crown Castle shares currently worth a billion
dollars. The Foundation’s second-largest tech holding after Microsoft,
Crown Castle owns 5G infrastructure in every major U.S. market. It
operates and leases more than 40,000 cell towers, 65,000 small cell
nodes which are the central infrastructure for 5G and 75,000 route miles
of fiber to every major U.S. market that, instead of going to your
home, providing you safe, fast, wired internet, has been confiscated to
connect 5G cell towers.”

“Corporations will use Gates’ 5G surveillance system to sell products
and escalate AI capacity. Governments will use it to transition the
globe to a totalitarian singularity more despotic than Orwell ever
imagined. Silicon Valley titans like Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and
Google’s Chief Engineer Ray Kurzweil talk longingly of ‘transhumanism,’
the process by which humanity will transition to become part-human,
part-machine via genetic engineering and surgical implants.”

“Bill Gates is investing heavily to accelerate this altered reality.
His ambition to tag us all with injected subdermal vaccine data chips
seems to be merely a steppingstone toward an all-encompassing
surveillance state.”

“…Microsoft has patented a sinister technology that utilizes
implanted sensors to monitor body and brain activity. It will reward
compliant humans with crypto currency payments when they perform
assigned activities.”

“The patent, WO [2020] 060606 has gained notoriety and the nickname
‘World Order 2020 666.’ Microsoft describes this device as a ‘Crypto
Currency System’ and explains that it is ‘capable of’ using body
activity data to mine bitcoin in response to compliance with assigned
tasks. People who agree to install the Microsoft harmful wireless
sensors will receive periodic ‘duty’ smart phone instructions to watch a
certain advertisement, listen to a specific song, walk down a specific
grocery store aisle, or to take a certain vaccine. This chip will
collect data from embedded sensors that monitor brain waves, blood flow,
and other body reactions. The system will transfer cryptocurrency into
the subject’s account after completion of the assigned task…”

Contact tracing? It’s a euphemism for Updated Slavery.

In the same way, Google and Facebook were just euphemisms for National Security Agency (NSA) Worldwide.

Memo to police departments everywhere: You know how sensitive and
finicky you are about private citizens videotaping you while you’re on
the job? Well, imagine how a few billion people are beginning to feel
about being surveilled inside and out, all the time. Take a look into
the immediate future. Your work is going to get a lot harder.

I had a dream the other night. As a 100-year-old crone, after
several plastic surgeries, fugitive Tony Fauci was sitting on his
country porch, in an undisclosed location, musing about the long-gone
days when he was king of the hill.

A dusty car pulled up in his driveway. A little fascist contact tracer stepped out and approached him.

“Hello, sir,” the tracer said. “Just here to check your body temperature…what’s that noise?”

“Oh,” Fauci said, “some old-school equipment cranking up. Pals of
mine at…installed it. You know, video cameras, movement sensors, remote
fever guns. They’re checking your temp right now. Laser probes are
taking a readout of your brain waves, blood flow, adrenaline levels.
That sort of thing.”

Fauci glances at his cell phone. “I see you bought two porn site
memberships on the Dark Web last week. Your wife is filing for divorce.
Oh…better watch out. Her lawyer is a tiger. And that Walmart
robbery? The cops have you down as a person of interest. Now what was
it you wanted?”

The tracer tries to stand his ground. But as he looks around, he
spots a group of men standing at the edge of the woods looking at him.
“Who are they?” he says.

“Some locals,” Fauci says. “They set fires in certain key locations.”

“What? What the hell does that mean?”

Fauci shrugs. “You’d have to ask them. Back in the day, they were
dispossessed during the COVID lockdown. They didn’t like that. I hear

“What rumors?”

“They’ve found a way to reverse-vector 5G. They send it back where it came from.”

Agitated—“Where did it come from?”

“Who knows? But I hear wherever that is, it doesn’t exist anymore.
Don’t pay any attention to me. I’m just an old man. Out of the loop
for long time.”

The tracer turns around and stumbles back to his car.

When he’s gone, another man steps out of the house and sits down next
to Fauci. He has a long beard. He’s wearing a baseball cap pulled
down low, and shades.

It’s Bill Gates.

Fauci says, “I gave you a few days of sanctuary, Bill, because I
needed company. But I think it’s time you took off. It’s not safe for
you, and it wouldn’t be safe for me, if a few of the good old boys in
the neighborhood found out you’re here. Know what I mean?”

Bill nods. “I had it going for a while,” he says. “I really thought we could…but then…”

“Face it, Bill. You didn’t think it through. Not far enough. Your
projections were based on incomplete data. About people. About how
much surveillance they would stand for. About how many brain-damaged
kids from your vaccines they would allow before they revolted…”

“But why? Why would I make such obvious mistakes?”

“Maybe it’s a genetic flaw in you, Bill. You should think about getting that fixed.”

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The CDC Slashed the COVID-19 Fatality Rate to a Fraction of Earlier Estimate Used to Justify Lockdowns | Mises Institute

Posted by M. C. on May 29, 2020

So actual data, science, or respect for human rights suddenly became
meaningless. All that mattered was getting those lockdowns. So the
lockdown crowd destroyed the lives of millions in the developed
world—and more than a hundred million in the developing world—to satisfy the hunches of a tiny handful of politicians and technocrats.

Ryan McMaken

Governments throughout the world and across the US justified extreme, draconian, undemocratic, and unconstitutional (in most US states) “lockdown” and stay-at-home orders on the grounds that the COVID-19 virus was exceptionally fatal.

In March, the World Health Organization (WHO) was claiming that the fatality rate was a very high 3.4 percent.

Yet as time went on, it became increasingly clear that such high estimates were essentially meaningless because researchers had no idea how many people were actually infected with the disease. Tests were largely being conducted on those with symptoms serious enough to end up in emergency rooms or doctors’ offices.

[RELATED: “The Experts Have No Idea How Many COVID-19 Cases There Are” by Ryan McMaken]

By late April, many researchers were publishing new studies showing that the number of people with the disease was actually much higher than was previously thought. Thus, it became clear that the percentage of people with the disease who died from it suddenly became much smaller.

Now, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released new estimates suggesting that the real fatality rate is around 0.26 percent.

Specifically, the report concludes that the “symptomatic case fatality ratio” is 0.4 percent. But that’s just symptomatic cases. In the same report, the CDC also claims that 35 percent of all cases are asymptomatic.

Or, as the Washington Post reported this week:

The agency offered a “current best estimate” of 0.4 percent. The agency also gave a best estimate that 35 percent of people infected never develop symptoms. Those numbers when put together would produce an infection fatality rate of 0.26, which is lower than many of the estimates produced by scientists and modelers to date.”

Of course, not all scientists have been wrong on this. Back in March, Stanford scientist John Ioannidis was much, much closer to the CDC’s estimate than the WHO. The Wall Street Journal noted in April:

In a March article for Stat News, Dr. Ioannidis argued that Covid-19 is far less deadly than modelers were assuming. He considered the experience of the Diamond Princess cruise ship, which was quarantined Feb. 4 in Japan. Nine of 700 infected passengers and crew died. Based on the demographics of the ship’s population, Dr. Ioannidis estimated that the U.S. fatality rate could be as low as 0.025% to 0.625% and put the upper bound at 0.05% to 1%—comparable to that of seasonal flu.

Not that this will settle the matter. Proponents of destroying human rights and the rule of law in order to carry out lockdowns will continue to insist that “we didn’t know” what the fatality rate was back in March. The lack of evidence, however, didn’t stop proponents of lockdowns from implementing policies that destroyed the ability of families to earn a living, and which also created social conditions that caused child abuse and suicides to spike.

But for more sane people, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Those who have claimed that lockdowns are “the only option” had virtually no evidence at all to support their position. Indeed, such extreme over-the-top measures as the general lockdowns required an extreme level of high-quality, nearly irrefutable evidence that lockdowns would work and were necessary in the face of a disease with an extremely high fatality rate. But the only “data” the prolockdown people could offer was speculation and hyperbolic predictions of bodies piling up in the streets.  But that became politically unimportant. The people who wanted lockdowns had gained the obeisance of powerful people in government institutions and in the media. So actual data, science, or respect for human rights suddenly became meaningless. All that mattered was getting those lockdowns. So the lockdown crowd destroyed the lives of millions in the developed world—and more than a hundred million in the developing world—to satisfy the hunches of a tiny handful of politicians and technocrats.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

State Superintendent meets with CDC to discuss guidelines on going back to school in the fall |

Posted by M. C. on May 25, 2020

CDC begins home schooling advocacy program.



OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) –Oklahoma State Superintendent Joy Hofmeister met with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Thursday afternoon to discuss the guidelines they released for going back to school in the fall.

“We are working to have a state level plan for the reopening of schools,” Hofmeister said.

The main point Hofmeister said she learned from the CDC was context.

“The most important thing is to think about safeguard snaps as layers or important ingredients that work together,” she said.

Hofmeister added that what some districts adopt may be different than others, citing things like resources and school population as reasons for schools implementing what guidelines work best for them.

The CDC’s guidelines read as follows:

◦ Wear masks over the age of 2

◦ No sharing of any items or supplies, all belongings in individual cubbies or labeled containers; no sharing electronic devices, toys, games, learning aids

◦ Desks 6 feet apart, all facing the same way

◦ Distance on school buses- one child per seat, skip rows

◦ Install sneeze guards and partitions wherever you cannot space 6ft apart

◦ One way routes in hallways; tape on sidewalks and walls to assure kids stay 6ft apart

◦ No communal shared spaces – cafeterias, playgrounds

◦ Physical barriers or screens between sinks in bathrooms

◦ Only pre-packages boxes or bags of food instead of cafeteria food; kids eat in classrooms

◦ No field trips, assemblies, or external organizations in the schools. Limit volunteers and visitors.

◦ Same children stay with same staff all day, no switching groups or teachers.

◦ Stagger arrival and departure times for students to limit exposure to crowds of kids.

◦ If possible, daily health and temperature checks.

◦ And several rules about cleaning and disinfecting throughout the day and hand washing frequently.

“All of this has to work in context, and it’s important that stakeholders give their feedback and share what their comfort level is,” Hofmeister said.

Those stakeholders, or parents, have already started chiming in.

“I think they are extremely strict,” said Cara O’Daniel, a woman whose children go to Edmond Public Schools. “Especially for somewhere here in Oklahoma, a lot of ways they are not feasible.”

“I think they’re a little extreme,” said Beth Gentry, a woman whose children go to Oklahoma City Public Schools. “When my 11-year-old and I were talking this morning, I was reading them with her, and she was like, ‘We’re going to be like mice in cages.’”

While both O’Daniel and Gentry agreed that the guidelines are strict, they had differing opinions on whether the children should be going back to school in August. Gentry said she was ready for her kids to go back. O’Daniel was a little more hesitant. She said she wanted to wait for Edmond Public Schools to make a decision on the guidelines being implemented, then she would make a decision if she want to enroll her kids there again.

Oklahoma City Public Schools also released a statement that reads as follows:

“Although we are not sure what it will look like just yet, OKCPS does plan to begin school on August 10th. District teams are closely monitoring the guidelines being shared by local, state and federal officials as we work with other districts across the country to prepare for a number of back-to-school scenarios, including in-person, virtual and blended learning solutions. As circumstances shift in the coming weeks, OKCPS will continue to be nimble while always keeping safety at the forefront. Although it’s especially hard to do in these times of uncertainty, we encourage our students, staff and families to please remain patient. District leaders are hard at work and will share more information as soon as it is available.”

Oklahoma City Public Schools

Hofmeister said she hopes schools will find ways to implement these guidelines over the summer break.

“This is about a culture of thinking of others and thinking how to protect others and yourself,” she said.

Continued Coronavirus Coverage

Be seeing you


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Masks: Are There Benefits or Just a Comfort Prop? Let the Facts Speak – Collective Evolution

Posted by M. C. on May 22, 2020


In Brief

  • The Facts:While more and more places roll out mandatory mask policies the facts suggest that they may not be providing us with the protection that we think they are.
  • Reflect On:What’s your stance on mask wearing in public places? Have you done the research on both sides to come to an informed rather than fear-based decision?

Initially I respected the call by my local Governor in Connecticut to protect our fellow citizens. Deep down I thought it was a little foolish to mandate masks, but love all people and thought I would wear one to help others feel safer. Then, I started digging a little further into the scientific literature. I have discovered that masks are neither safe nor effective. So, as schools prepare to create policies for children returning to school in the fall, we must keep these things in mind.

Masks are Ineffective and Risky, So Stop Calling Us Selfish

In  Epidemics 2017, a meta-analysis concluded that masks had a non-significant protective effect. In the Annuals of Internal Medicine, April 2020, “neither surgical nor cotton masks effectively filtered SARS-CoV-2 during coughs by affected people.”

According to a  University of New South Wales, the widespread use of masks by healthcare workers may put them at increased risk of respiratory illness and viral infections, and their global use should be discouraged.

In the  British Medical Journal 2015, “Over three times, the risk of contracting influenza-like illness if a cloth mask is used versus no mask at all.” Contaminated masks and masks holding moisture and pathogen retention can increase the risk of infection.

A 2016 study in the  Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology found 97% of particles penetrated cloth masks, and 44% of particles penetrated medical masks. They reported that cloth masks are only marginally beneficial in protecting individuals from particles less than 2.5 micrometers. As referenced in the  New England Journal of Medicine, the size of Coronavirus particles varied between 0.06 micrometers and 0.14 micrometers.

Cloth and surgical masks do not have a fit test. When worn, gaps around the edges allow small particles to enter the respiratory system. Also, according to the May 2010 edition of  PLoS One, lack of eye protection was a primary risk factor of SARS-CoV transmission.

Wearing a mask for seven hours straight may not be safe. Carbon dioxide (CO2) rebreathing has been recognized as a concern in the  Ergonomics Journal. The CDC has also admitted that the CO2 slowly builds up in the mask over time. This build-up can cause a condition called Hypercapnia. Essentially, CO2 poisoning – can cause mild symptoms of drowsiness or a headache. More severe symptoms can cause shortness of breath and even death. On May 6th, 2020,  the New York Post reported the death of two boys dying within a week of each other while wearing a face mask during gym class.

In February, the CDC said they don’t recommend people use face masks. The World Health Organization also advised people to wear a mask only if they are displaying symptoms of Coronavirus or “taking care of a person with a suspected 2019-nCoV infection.”

There is zero scientific evidence that wearing a mask, especially for more extended periods, protects us. However, several studies found significant problems with wearing one. Side-effects range from headaches to increased airway resistance, carbon dioxide accumulation, hypoxia, to more severe complications.

In the Head and Neck Pain Journal, most healthcare workers develop de novo PPE‐associated headaches or exacerbation of their pre‐existing headache disorders.

When a person is infected with a respiratory virus, they will expel some of the virus with each breath. Wearing a mask creates a situation in which the individual continually breathes back in their viruses—breathing viruses back in raises the concentration of the virus in the lungs and nasal passages. It has been studied that those with a higher number of viral particles can develop a more severe illness. A recent study out of China published in the Lancet Journal reported a strong association between Covid19 disease severity and the amount of virus present in the nose.

The Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control Journal demonstrated, “Breathing through N95 mask materials have been shown to impede gaseous exchange and impose an additional workload on the metabolic system of pregnant healthcare workers. The benefits of using an N95 mask to prevent serious emerging infectious diseases should be weighed against potential respiratory consequences associated with extended N95 respirator usage.

Wearing a mask could put you at a greater risk of getting Covid19. Regular cloth or surgical masks, irritate the user, causing the user to touch their face with dirty hands more often. Also, the Coronavirus spreads in droplets, which most masks do not block. These masks can actually trap droplets inside, increasing risk instead of reducing it.

Masks also hamper oxygen intake; the body and the immune system require optimal levels of oxygen to feed cells and fight off illness, including Covid19. When studied, surgeons who wore surgical masks had a decrease in blood O2 saturation and an increase in pulse rates of the surgeons after the operations due to surgical mask usage.

According to the Journal of Biomedicines, our oxygen concentration is closely associated with cell survival and immune functioning, making one more susceptible to illness.

Masks can cause difficulty and labored breathing – even in a healthy individual. Blocking air even partially puts excess stress on thoracic muscles and the diaphragm, causing a person to feel out of breath. Wearing a mask can also make a person feel anxiety and panic. Claustrophobia and a feeling of suffocation must be acknowledged, especially among individuals who have Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and other mental health issues.

So, in summary, mask-wearing can be dangerous and is shown over and over again to be ineffective. It appears masks are more effective in helping to spread illness, by providing a surface for viruses to collect on, like carrying a petri dish in front of your face. According to the Americans with Disabilities Act, if wearing a mask poses a mental or physical risk, there are exemptions. So please don’t mandate them to attend school, and please don’t teach the masses to hate and shame those that do not comply. This conditioning leads people to be more willing to follow irrational orders and do things without questioning authority, or logic, in the future. When there is a risk, there should always be a choice.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »