How relieved are we all now that we can walk the streets freely without the fear of having to step over the corpse of a “Covid-19” victim? It seems like it was only yesterday when we would have to think twice about taking a leisurely stroll around the neighborhood in order to avoid having someone randomly drop dead in front of us. Remember those terrifying early days?
Wait…what? You don’t have any personal stories of people dropping like fumigated flies in front of you? You don’t know of anyone who, while riding their bike, happened upon the grisly scene of some poor soul taking a dirt nap on the pavement? You don’t recall the hazmat teams setting up quarantine zones to protect the citizens in case the corpse reanimated with a bloodthirsty taste for human brains?
Yeah…now that I come to think about it, me neither. Funny how that was the initial story sold to us back in early 2020…minus the flesh-eating zombies…that part came in 2021…
You can not sell the public on a “pandemic” without sensationalized propaganda aimed at generating massive amounts of fear. Without the initial terrifying headlines proclaiming the deadly toll this new “virus” took upon the Chinese citizens in Wuhan, would the rest of the world have believed in the existence of a “SARS-COV-2?” Would we have allowed them to lock down, quarantine, and mask ourselves and our loved ones in order to protect us all from this new pathogenic threat? Would we have allowed them to inject us with experimential “vaccines” never proven safe and effective provided by companies with lengthy criminal pasts? Would we have allowed them to use unapproved and highly inaccurate “tests” never calibrated and validated against actual “virus” in order to tell us we were infected even while entirely healthy?
The answer is an obvious and emphatic “NO.” All of the measures enacted, from the lockdowns to the masks along with inaccurate case numbers and fear-mongering headlines, were used to sell the public on a pandemic. These were the visual reminders of an invisible threat for which many never encountered in any way whatsoever. In my own experience, I struggle to name a single person who tested positive who had nothing more than sniffles. I definitely know of no one who happened upon the random “Covid” corpse in the street. Without these visual cues, no one would have known there was a “pandemic” going on around them. Without the pandemic and the threat of an emergency, there would be no justification for the harsh restrictions enacted upon the populace. Most importantly, there would be no justification for the activation of the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) trick used to push the inaccurate tests upon the fearful.
What is the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)?
Many people do not realize that nearly all “Covid” tests, the vaccines, and the treatments are out on the market only because of the EUA. The EUA is an expedited authorization process for medical devices and interventions started in 2004 by the FDA which is only granted during an emergency:
WHAT IS AN EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION (EUA)?
“In an emergency, like a pandemic, it may not be possible to have all the evidence that the FDA would usually have before approving a drug, device, or a test.
When there is a declared emergency, the FDA can make a judgment that it’s worth releasing something for use even without all the evidence that would fully establish its effectiveness and safety. If there’s evidence that strongly suggests that patients have benefited from a treatment or test, the agency can issue an EUA to make it available.”
HOW OFTEN IS EUA GRANTED?
“Outside of a declared emergency, never. The agency doesn’t have the power to issue an EUA without a declared emergency. The agency has issued EUAs for anthrax, ebola, enterovirus, H7N9 influenza, and Middle East respiratory syndrome.”
https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2020/what-is-emergency-use-authorization
As can be seen by the above source, the EUA is available when there is not enough evidence to approve products during a “pandemic.” It is only allowed to be used during an emergency so that the FDA can authorize products that have not been proven safe nor effective. They rely on the determination as to whether the evidence strongly suggests that there may be a benefit. If there was no emergency, these products would not be allowed to be authorized and released.
This next source provides some further clarification as to how an EUA is determined, including the four criteria that must be met. It also explains that certain regulatory requirements will be waived which allow unapproved products or approved products to be used in unapproved situations, even going so far as to forego informed consent:
Emergency Use Authorization
“The determination of an emergency can be made by HHS, Department of Homeland Security, or Department of Defense. The emergency can be a military, domestic, or public health emergency that affects, or has a significant potential to affect, national security. Agents involved include chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agents. Both the determination and the declaration of the emergency must state the nature of the threat involved.
Once a determination of an emergency has been made and an emergency has been declared, the FDA reviews the EUA request and, if feasible and appropriate given the circumstances of the emergency, consults with the National Institutes of Health and the CDC. If the request is found to meet statutory criteria, the FDA Commissioner issues an EUA. The termination of an EUA is linked to the declaration—once the declaration expires, so does the EUA. A single declaration can support multiple EUAs as necessary.”
“An EUA must meet the following four statutory criteria to be considered. The goal of these criteria is to ensure that even in an emergency, the public is receiving the best, safest, most appropriate care possible.
- There must be a serious or life-threatening illness caused by a specified chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agent.
- It must be reasonable to believe that the product covered by the EUA is going to be effective for the intended use—diagnosing, treating, or preventing either an illness or condition caused by a specific agent, or an illness or condition caused by an approved or authorized medical countermeasure deployed against the agent.
- The known and potential benefits need to outweigh the known and potential risks.
- There must be no adequate approved, alternative medical countermeasures available for the situation.
EUAs may waive a number of regulatory requirements to allow unapproved products or approved products to be used in unapproved situations as emergency medical countermeasures. Typically, for instance, when an unapproved product is used in a clinical setting, it requires either informed consent or review and approval by an institutional review board. EUAs can waive that requirement for the duration of the emergency. For example, one EUA issued for the 2009 H1N1 pandemic allowed the use of the (as-yet-unapproved) peramivir IV in clinical settings to combat severe influenza, without either informed consent or board review. In this case, no other intravenous antivirals were effective against these severe infections, and the FDA determined that there were sufficient data and need to allow administration of peramivir IV under an EUA.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53122/
As can be seen, without an emergency, there can be no EUA. However, the only way the emergency can be declared is through confirmed cases of “Covid-19” which is done by PCR tests. Yet all of the “Covid” tests available are only out on EUA.
Without the tests, there can be no cases. Without the cases, there can be no emergency. Without the emergency, there can be no EUA and thus no authorized tests. Can you see the problem with the circular reasoning fallacy here? Let’s see if we can break this down a bit further.
How was the Emergency Determined?
What constitutes an emergency? How was this determined and what are the criteria for the emergency to officially be declared over? According to the FDA, the EUA emergency declaration was NOT based on the Janurary 31st, 2020 determination that a public health emergency exists by Alex M. Azar II, under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act. In this declaration, Azar made the determination based on confirmed cases as seen here:
Determination that a Public Health Emergency Exists
“As a result of confirmed cases of 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV), on this date and after consultation with public health officials as necessary, I, Alex M. Azar II, Secretary of Health and Human Services, pursuant to the authority vested in me under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act, do hereby determine that a public health emergency exists and has existed since January 27, 2020, nationwide.”
https://www.phe.gov/emergency/news/healthactions/phe/Pages/2019-nCoV.aspx
The declaration that the FDA states that it used to enact the EUA was based on Alex M. Azar’s determination of the public health emergency four days later on February 4th, 2020. This act granted the FDA the power to use the EUA to bypass its normal testing and approval process and provide liability immunity to the manufacturers of the products. They are allowed to do this on the basis that there are no better alternative tests and treatments available.
Looking at the EUA declaration by Alex M. Azar on February 4th, 2020, you’d be hard-pressed to find anything in way of the actual criteria used to declare the emergency or what needs to happen for it to be over. The best we can uncover is that the HHS Secretary made the determination of an emergency on January 31st due to “confirmed” cases and then made a separate declaration on February 4th claiming that the spread of “SARS-CoV-2” or a “virus” mutating from it and the resulting disease constituted a public health emergency. It is also stated that the immunity granted extends until October of 2024. No information is provided as to how the HHS Secretary came to his conclusions:
Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act for Medical Countermeasures Against COVID-19
“To date, United States traveler-associated cases have been identified in a number of States and community-based transmission is suspected. On January 31, 2020, Secretary Azar declared a public health emergency pursuant to section 319 of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 247d, for the entire United States to aid in the nation’s health care community response to the COVID-19 outbreak.[1] The outbreak remains a significant public health challenge that requires a sustained, coordinated proactive response by the Government in order to contain and mitigate the spread of COVID-19.[2]“
Section I. Determination of Public Health Emergency or Credible Risk of Future Public Health Emergency
“Before issuing a Declaration under the PREP Act, the Secretary is required to determine that a disease or other health condition or threat to health constitutes a public health emergency or that there is a credible risk that the disease, condition, or threat may constitute such an emergency. This determination is separate and apart from the Declaration issued by the Secretary on January 31, 2020 under Section 319 of the PHS Act that a disease or disorder presents a public health emergency or that a public health emergency, including significant outbreaks of infectious diseases or bioterrorist attacks, otherwise exists, or other Declarations or determinations made under other authorities of the Secretary. Accordingly in Section I of the Declaration, the Secretary determines that the spread of SARS-CoV-2 or a virus mutating therefrom and the resulting disease, COVID-19, constitutes a public health emergency for purposes of this Declaration under the PREP Act.”
Section XII. Effective Time Period
“The Secretary must identify, for each Covered Countermeasure, the period or periods during which liability immunity is in effect, designated by dates, milestones, or other description of events, including factors specified in the PREP Act. Section XII of the Declaration extends the effective period for different means of distribution of Covered Countermeasures through October 1, 2024.”
DETERMINATION OF PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY
“I have determined that the spread of SARS-CoV-2 or a virus mutating therefrom and the resulting disease COVID-19 constitutes a public health emergency.”
In the first paragraph, we do find a link to section 319 of the PHS Act, 42 U.S.C. 247d, which provides a scant amount of additional detail as to on what goes into determining the emergency declaration as well as to how it eventually ends:
§ 247d. Public health emergencies
(a) Emergencies
“If the Secretary determines, after consultation with such public health officials as may be necessary, that— (1) a disease or disorder presents a public health emergency; or (2) a public health emergency, including significant outbreaks of infectious diseases or bioterrorist attacks, otherwise exists, the Secretary may take such action as may be appropriate to respond to the public health emergency, including making grants, providing awards for expenses, and entering into contracts and conducting and supporting investigations into the cause, treatment, or prevention of a disease or disorder as described in paragraphs (1) and (2). Any such determination of a public health emergency terminates upon the Secretary declaring that the emergency no longer exists, or upon the expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which the determination is made by the Secretary, whichever occurs first. Determinations that terminate under the preceding sentence may be renewed by the Secretary (on the basis of the same or additional facts), and the preceding sentence applies to each such renewal. Not later than 48 hours after making a determination under this subsection of a public health emergency (including a renewal), the Secretary shall submit to the Congress written notification of the determination.”
https://www.govinfo.gov/link/uscode/42/247d
What we can glean from all of this is that Alex Azar made the decision to state a public health emergency in the US on January 31st, 2020 based on the number of confirmed cases in the US. At that time, there were only 6 “confirmed” US cases. How were these cases confirmed? Since the “Covid-19” symptoms are common to other diseases, there is no way to diagnose it based on clinical symptoms alone. The only way to confirm a “Covid-19” case is by using molecular testing as stated by the CDC:
“Diagnosis of COVID-19 requires detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen in respiratory specimens.”
This means that the unauthorized PCR tests created from in silico (computer-generated) sequences, as no “virus” isolates were available and which are still MIA, were used to confirm the initial “Covid” cases before January 31st, 2020 in order to declare an emergency. Four days later, the EUA was enacted in order to allow for the FDA to authorize the PCR tests to be used to confirm more cases. The reason given was due to the spread of the “virus” as they had 11 confirmed cases in the US as of February 4th. This increase from 6 cases to 11 cases constituted the “spread” needed to justify the EUA. In other words, the unauthorized tests were used to create the cases for the emergency which was then used to authorize the tests. Again, notice the circular reasoning fallacy?
This fraudulent emergency declaration has been renewed repeatedly throughout this “pandemic” based on the case results determined by these faulty and inaccurate tests:
“As a result of the continued consequences of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, on this date and after consultation with public health officials as necessary, I, Xavier Becerra, Secretary of Health and Human Services, pursuant to the authority vested in me under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act, do hereby renew, effective January 16, 2022, the January 31, 2020, determination by former Secretary Alex M. Azar II, that he previously renewed on April 21, 2020, July 23, 2020, October 2, 2020, and January 7, 2021, and that I renewed on April 15, 2021, July 20, 2021, and October 18, 2021 that a public health emergency exists and has existed since January 27, 2020, nationwide.”
https://aspr.hhs.gov/legal/PHE/Pages/COVID19-14Jan2022.aspx
It is set once again to expire on April 16th, 2022. Any takers on the HHS Secretary not extending the determination again in April? Yeah, I wouldn’t place that bet either.
What Emergency?
In December 2020, German vorologist Christian Drosten, a man heavily involved with the original “SARS” hoax and currently responsible for the first and most widely used PCR test for “SARS-COV-2,” was asked why people were losing trust in himself and the other health officials. His response was rather revealing:
“The disease is not existing. It’s not there. And now what we see is the typical finding…even though the incidence goes up, the fatalities don’t go up. There are no dead people and so this actually prevents people who are not into the numbers and who don’t, have no adherence to the principles of the whole phenomenon…who don’t see the continuancy of how infections come about, and how fatalities come about somewhat later, how fatalities expectedly lower once you have students infected instead of inhabitants of care homes. If you don’t make this connection, you lose the belief. You stop believing. You just see some numbers and some charts and you think what the hell is going on here.”
The disease does not exist and there are no dead people. Unless people can be fooled by statistics, they were not seeing a “pandemic.” There was no emergency. Statistics from one of the most trusted sites, Worldometers.com, supports this notion as it revealed that there were no excess global deaths in 2020:
LATEST DATA SHOWS NO EXCESS DEATHS FROM ALL CAUSES GLOBALLY IN 2020
“The latest data from a respected statistics website shows that, globally, the number of deaths from all causes for 2020 was no higher than expected, given previous years’ totals.”
“In addition, the annual world death rate, per one thousand in population, has been steadily declining since 1950, from 20 per thousand in 1950, to 7.6 per thousand in 2020, the same as in 2019 and 2018.”
“The data shows that total world deaths from all causes held steady at about 58.8 million per year since 2019. In 2017 the total was 58.7 million. If anything, global deaths were lower than expected last year, due to aging Baby Boomer demographics, which accounts for a slight, normal rise in deaths in most years.”
In global terms, if excess deaths are the criteria, there was no pandemic.”
If people did not receive the visual cues that there was a “pandemic” in the ways of lockdowns/quarantines, social distancing stickers, masks, hand sanitizers, plastic shields, and media propaganda, the public health emergency did not exist. The only way the “scary” statistics could be created was through the use of PCR tests never calibrated nor validated against purified/isolated “virus” particles to generate cases in people based on small non-specific genetic fragments pieced together in a computer. The cases from these unauthorized tests were used to sell the public on a health threat so that the emergency could be declared in order to authorize the tests to be used to continue to generate further cases to sell fear. Without these fraudulent case numbers, there is no emergency nor any pandemic, as noted by Drosten and the data from Worldometers.com.
In Summary:
- In an emergency, like a pandemic, it may not be possible to have all the evidence that the FDA would usually have before approving a drug, device, or a test
- When there is a declared emergency, the FDA can make a judgment that it’s worth releasing something for use even without all the evidence that would fully establish its effectiveness and safety
- The agency doesn’t have the power to issue an EUA without a declared emergency
- The determination of an emergency can be made by HHS, Department of Homeland Security, or Department of Defense
- Both the determination and the declaration of the emergency must state the nature of the threat involved
- The termination of an EUA is linked to the declaration—once the declaration expires, so does the EUA
- A single declaration can support multiple EUAs as necessary
- An EUA must meet the following four statutory criteria to be considered:
- There must be a serious or life-threatening illness caused by a specified chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agent.
- It must be reasonable to believe that the product covered by the EUA is going to be effective for the intended use—diagnosing, treating, or preventing either an illness or condition caused by a specific agent, or an illness or condition caused by an approved or authorized medical countermeasure deployed against the agent
- The known and potential benefits need to outweigh the known and potential risks
- There must be no adequate approved, alternative medical countermeasures available for the situation
- EUAs may waive a number of regulatory requirements to allow unapproved products or approved products to be used in unapproved situations as emergency medical countermeasures
- EUAs can waive the informed consent and review requirement for the duration of the emergency
- HHS Secretary Alex Azar, as a result of 6 “confirmed” cases of “SARS-COV-2,” declared that a public health emergency exists and had existed since January 27, 2020, nationwide
- Before issuing a Declaration under the PREP Act, the Secretary is required to determine that a disease or other health condition or threat to health constitutes a public health emergency or that there is a credible risk that the disease, condition, or threat may constitute such an emergency
- This determination is separate and apart from the Declaration issued by the Secretary on January 31, 2020 under Section 319 of the PHS Act
- Accordingly in Section I of the Declaration, the Secretary determined that the spread of “SARS-CoV-2” or a “virus” mutating therefrom and the resulting disease, “COVID-19,” constitutes a public health emergency for purposes of this Declaration under the PREP Act
- This spread was from 6 “confirmed” cases on January 31st to 11 cases on February 4th
- Section XII of the Declaration extends the effective period for different means of distribution of Covered Countermeasures through October 1, 2024
- Any such determination of a public health emergency terminates upon the Secretary declaring that the emergency no longer exists, or upon the expiration of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which the determination is made by the Secretary, whichever occurs first
- Determinations that terminate under the preceding sentence may be renewed by the Secretary (on the basis of the same or additional facts)
- The only way for the cases to be “confirmed” in order to declare an emergency would have been through unauthorized PCR testing as “Covid” can not be diagnosed clinically due to overlapping and non-specific symptoms
- According to the CDC, diagnosis of “COVID-19” requires detection of “SARS-CoV-2” RNA or antigen in respiratory specimens
- The emergency was declared based on 11 cases generated by unauthorized and inaccurate PCR tests in order to authorize the tests by EUA
- According to a December 2020 interview by German virologist Christian Drosten:
- The disease is not existing and it’s not there
- There are no dead people
- If you don’t make this (statistical) connection, you lose the belief and you stop believing
- According to Worldometers.com, the number of deaths from all causes for 2020 was no higher than expected, given previous years’ totals
- The data shows that total world deaths from all causes held steady at about 58.8 million per year since 2019
- If anything, global deaths were lower than expected last year
- In global terms, if excess deaths are the criteria, there was no pandemic
Without the tests, there would be no cases. Without the cases, there would be no pandemic. Without the pandemic, there would be no emergency. Without the emergency, there would be no tests, no vaccines, and no restrictions for the unvaccinated. This whole scam implodes upon the realization that the unauthorized test was used to create an emergency in order to authorize the test. The criteria used to determine the emergency was based on case numbers from these tests. This is why it has always been a Testing Pandemic and never a “viral” one.
With the current rollback of the restrictions placed upon the populace in the US and around the world, one would immediately assume that the emergency-that-never-was is finally over. However, a declaration ending the emergency will not occur. If they were to declare the emergency over, the EUA goes away. If the EUA goes away, the test, the vaccines, and any of the treatments authorized under it will immediately be illegal unless they are approved by the FDA. We are over two years into this “pandemic” and only the Pfizer vaccine has been “approved,” which is somewhat debatable. One has to wonder why not a single test has been fully approved nor any of the numerous (over 1900) autohorized medical interventions. They will not let this “emergency” go, as with it, so too goes the profit and control. We can either expect excuses of an endemic to continue to justify the use of these unapproved products or we should be prepared for the next “deadly and highly contagious” variant to emerge. In either scenario, we can be assured that, just like the non-existent “Covid” corpses in the streets or the ensuing zombie apocalypse, there never was any emergency to authorize the use of these unapproved products in the first place.
ViroLIEgy 
Excellent!! Thanks for your hard work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for the support! 🙂
LikeLike
Great job as always Mike. Just stumbled across this link today. How convenient, right before the scam started.. Looks like this is where they finalized their plan.
https://viraldynamics.sciencesconf.org/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks! Yes, it has been planned for quite some time which is how they had the tests and vaccines ready from the start. This was in the making for a long time, at least since 2003 with the original “SARS,” although I’m sure it extends back even further than that.
LikeLike
Nice. Let’s suppose that there was some kind of “national” health emergency. Who the heck is gonna save you anyway? The CDC? Truth be told, they wouldn’t have a clue as to what to tell us to do that would be even somewhat effective. Using the recent fake pandemic over the last 2 years, the CDC is still fudging/changes it opinions and advice as well as stats. And certainly no spineless, cowardly politician or big tech big wig is gonna know what to do. It is useless to become full of fear and panic. Death comes to us all when it comes and there is no rhyme or reason to it.
I am really beginning to believe that there are no viruses and plagues (not even in the past) and that there were/are only conditions that cause massive illnesses. These would be bad food, starvation, bad water, lack of vits and mins, extreme toxicity, lack of sanitary conditions, extreme stress, lack of good sleep and perhaps many other lesser known interventions. After all, most of the medical system is not concerned about anything other than over testing, useless bodily invasions and the biggie…prescribing drugs for life.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely 💯. The plagues/illnesses of the past were just the same exact detoxification symptoms given different names by different societies. Only in modern times have we tried to claim the same symptoms are new diseases caused by bacteria/”viruses” based on the stage of detox and the order of symptoms. They can try this trick as long as people believe in the underlying lies of Germ Theory.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What’s the exit strategy?
If PCR tests continue to be used, they will continue to “find more covid cases,” and many people will presumably continue to be scared if they were before.
Perhaps they lower the PCR cycle threshold? Or phase in other types of tests that give way fewer positives? Or change reporting guidelines or other such sneakiness?
Maybe CDC’s announcement about tests late last year was the signal that the operation is winding down.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As long as people accept the lie and trust the tests, this will continue. We must challenge the information by showing the lack of purified/isolated “viruses” and the inability of PCR to be used as a diagnostic test. We must continue to poke enough holes in this ship until it sinks.
LikeLike
Sure, they can lower the cycle threshold, but they still won’t be able to say conclusively that what they find is any virus, let alone covid. The inventor of this test said it can not be used as a diagnostic test.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly. They are misusing and abusing a DNA Xerox machine which results in meaningless data.
LikeLike
Hello. I tried to retrieve the annual mortality data from the link you cited in the article at https://web.archive.org/web/20200701000000*/https://www.worldometers.info/
After selecting December 31, 2020 I didn’t get any result. The same happened for all the days I selected. The webpage is always stuck in “retrieving data”. How is it possible to verify this data?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not sure it is possible to verify anymore. Sadly, it seems they may have nuked that information. The problem with statistics is that they can be manipulated to say whatever one wants to say. There are sources put there claiming excess deaths while others show there were no excess deaths. Here are a few more sources claiming no excess deaths:
https://covid19reporter.com/global-death-numbers-show-no-excess-deaths-in-2020/
https://libertariannews.org/2020/11/26/study-covid-has-had-no-effect-on-us-death-rate/
https://ugetube.com/watch/bjm-data-shows-no-excess-deaths-in-2020_Q94twdxJySHqQv9.html
It all depends on where you look.
LikeLike
Past archive.org records can be adjusted via robots.txt
Will be interesting to see if Worldometers has actually changed the data or just the format.
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/WLD/world/death-rate for example explains that “All 2020 and later data are UN projections and DO NOT include any impacts of the COVID-19 virus.”
In fact it seems to me that many of them are just projections and not the real numbers. Is seems to me that the last real annual mortality number is for 2019.
In my country (Italy) we do had a slight increase in mortality in 2020 (rate of death 10,6 in 2019 and 12,4 in 2020, source: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demografia_d%27Italia ), but that increase was due to the draconian measures of our government, the lack of treatments, the wrong treatments and the killing of hospitalized patients by our physicians.
However it seems to me they don’t want us to know what is the real annual global mortality rate after 2019.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, they are just inaccurate projections and estimates. If there were any excess, it was a slight bump at the beginning due to the invasive medical procedures and the trauma and fear generated. The elderly were hut the hardest. Any out-of-the-norm deaths for 2021 could potebtially be explained by the vaccines. They know how to manipulate amd lie with the statistics.
LikeLike
If there’s a coverup on the global data, the next step would be to find the country-by-country data. And perhaps exclude the countries that are closely aligned with the agenda. (But also exclude those that have no good data keeping in general.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
However, I totally agree with you, this is an infodemic, one of the biggest fraud in all history. Viruses don’t exist. Excess death in some hotspots, and for a short period of time, was due to the draconian measures of tyrannical governments, panic and fear spread by Tv and mainstream media, use of ventilators and dangerous drugs and isolation and abandonment of elderly people in nursing homes. Here in Italy the peak of death appeared only for a short period of time in only ONE region, Lombardy, in the north of Italy, especially in two cities, Bergamo and Brescia, two of the most polluted cities in all Europe. Excess death appeared AFTER our government introduced the draconian lockdown with people segregated in their homes watching terrorizing reports from TV. Moreover here the police discovered that doctors killed a lot of elderly people that, left without home care assistance, rushed into the hospitals; here the doctors killed them by giving them the dangerous drug named Propofol; use google translate to read this article https://www.lantidiplomatico.it/dettnews-
propofol_e_morti_covid_alcune_semplici_domande/29296_39398/
Covid 19 is a military operation to lead the so called democratic countries (alongside the rest of the world) to the World Economic Forum Great Reset.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, we saw the exact same scenario play out here. They orchestrated it well and used very effective propaganda to sell the public on a “virus” to cover up for their own insidious actions and crimes against humanity.
LikeLike
Another great article. But it leads to a disturbing question.
I’m a virus skeptic, but there are people like Dr. Peter Mccullough, Dr. Zelenko, Dr. Tenpenny, America’s Frontline Doctors, etc. who claim they treated hundreds, if not thousands of sick “COVID” patients. And yet, how can we reconcile that with no excess deaths in 2020? (There were excess deaths in 2021 due to the clot shots.) Could they all be controlled opposition? We know the vast majority of “COVID” cases were false positives due to the invalid PCR test. We also know the vast majority of “COVID deaths” were due to “treatment” with Remdesivir, sedatives and ventilators. But were people really sicker in 2020/2021 or was that all a PSYOP? The vast majority believes there really was an infectious disease and that’s why they stay in the virus camp. If people really were sicker in 2020/2021 and it wasn’t a virus, then we need to invoke something like chemtrails, EMF (5G) or graphene oxide in 2019 flu shots i.e. conspiracy theory- and most people won’t go there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I haven’t seen any reason to think people were any sicker in 2020 than in 2019. Data manipulation, the circular reasoning and PCR “tests” (covered in the article), and propaganda were perfectly sufficient to create the illusion.
The data manipulation is truly amazing when you look into it; every trick in the book (from past disease scares, especially AIDS) was used.
The docs you mentioned treated hundreds of flu patients. That’s it. No new symptoms. Nothing but spin, 25/7 maxxed-out propaganda, unprecedented censorship, panic begetting some local hotspots of extra deaths by overaggressive treatments, and circular reasoning. Truly an infodemic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well said! 🙂
LikeLike
Good answer- but some of these doctors claim that “COVID lung” was truly novel in 2020/2021. Due to Graphene oxide/EMF??
LikeLike
Due to ventilators?
The CDC website says covid is clinically indistinguishable from flu. Lists the very same symptoms. Only slight difference is they say, “Loss/change in taste/smell is common in both, but more common in Covid-19.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly 💯. Same exact symptoms of disease relabelled and resold.
LikeLike
Are you referring to the ground-glass opacity claims? That finding was not new and was seen in many other diseases, including the flu, prior to “Covid-19.” They do a good job trying to make it seem as if old symptoms of disease are somehow new and specific when they in fact are not.
LikeLike
Thanks! The “excess” deaths were due, as you said, to invasive and unnecessary medical treatments. The fear, trauma, and isolation of the elderly had an impact as well. These effects were primarily seen the first few months and then went away.
LikeLike
I 100% agree the vast majority of “COVID” cases were really reclassifications of existing illnesses or were false positives. The only person I know who died of COVID was 94 and he definitely died “with COVID”, not from COVID.
However, some doctors claim there really was a novel illness in 2020. For example, in an interview with Dr. Mercola, Dr. Zelenko, who used to practice in New York State, claims he used to see several hundred patients during flu season and that spiked to thousands of sick patients in 2020. Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, who blogs exensively about heart disease, says he saw patients gasping for breath in the hospital (UK), which is why some were put on ventilators. Kendrick says he never saw so many cases before, which is why he’s a true-believer in COVID as a novel virus. So there are 3 possibilties:
1) These doctors are controlled opposition and a “novel respiratory illness” in 2020/21 is a complete PSYOP.
2) Some areas really did see a spike in illness due to a novel non-viral cause (toxins, EMF, etc.) If you read “Invisible Rainbow”, then you’ll be much more open to the idea that EMF could be responsible. Some claim the Deep State weaponized EMF decades ago and can induce illness and death from afar.
3) Your blog shows that viruses have never been scientifically proven to exist. But perhaps viruses are real after all and we simply lack the technology to properly purify and sequence them. In that case, virus “genomes” are really SWAGs (scientific wild-ass guesses) and any vaccine based on them would be nonsense as well.
LikeLike
I’m of the belief that any increase in respiratory disease is likely due to the increase in air pollution. I don’t believe it is the only factor but I do believe it is the biggest factor when looking at respiratory distress. PM2.5 pollution has been linked to every single symptom seen in “Covid-19.” Our air pollution increased every year leading up to 2020, and 2018 was a particularly bad year for these symptoms as well (although it was blamed on the flu).
I won’t say these Dr.’s are lying (however, association with Mercola sends red flags to me), but I have seen many other Dr.’s claiming the opposite as far as seeing any increase in illness. Don’t forget the nocebo effect as well. People were constantly fed fear propaganda and told they could not breathe. Even the George Flioyd situation promoted the idea of “I can’t breathe.” There is a powerful mental component to the fear propaganda people were bombarded with. They were terrified of every little symptom, over-sanitizing, staying indoors and avoiding people, and blocking their airways with masks. All of these factors could have made things temporarily worse on the ability to breathe.
LikeLike
To elaborate on what Mike said, the most insidious thing about everyone believing there’s a pandemic is that the bad 50% of all normal happenstance will be attributed to it. That is to say, in any normal time about 50% of the random data points will be better than the norm, and about 50% will be worse than the norm. 10% will be much better and 10% will be much worse. And so on.
There will be hotspots and cold spots every flu year, some doctors who are slammed with flu patients and some who see unusually few, and certain less common symptoms from the suite of flu symptoms (and even other illnesses, possibly, due to random events such as mass rollout of a particularly bad vaccine or some new food additive or pesticide or drug) will be pronounced while some common ones are subdued.
The good half – the quiet hospitals, the physicians who see less action, the usually vexing flu symptoms that are absent – will not be news or at least not signal boosted to reach national news or twitter “virality” (except maybe among the skeptics, leading to a mass rift between the believers and the disbelievers).
Once the presumption of a pandemic has taken root, every piece of this bad or unusual half of happenstance that never is normally news (other than local news¹) becomes more “proof” (via confirmation bias) of the “pandemic” and even its specific “macabre details”: altitude sickness, ground-glass pattern in lungs, persistent loss of smell², “long covid,” and eventually everything under the sun as people tweet out and signal boost stuff and doctors come out with theories based on local experiences and of course the side effects of drugs and other panicked overaggressive treatments (and later the vaccines) that get blamed on “the virus.”
I hope I’ve started to convey the overwhelming difficulty of removing the supposition that there’s a new disease once that assumption takes root.
This is why once I saw we were over that hump and into the realm of a notion that would self-reinforce no matter what the truth was, around March/April 2020, I knew we were in for a very rough ride. (It’s also part of why the Big Lie technique works so well; propaganda and censorship campaigns dialed up to 11 accomplish mindblowing things.)
¹The first thing I did in 2020 when they said “hospitals are overwhelmed” was to check if that phrase had been used in past years, and sure enough it was used a lot in various countries and cities, while other locales were uncharacteristically quiet and thus not even news.
²See Mike’s excellent article on loss of smell being in no way specific to “covid-19.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very well said! 👏
LikeLike
About Mercola and his guys I recommend you to watch this response by Kaufman:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/UnpfmjmXNH0O/
Of course in some hotspots there were doctors who saw many cases. But consider that:
1) There was a massive campaign of terror and fear spread by all the mainstream media. In the literature it is known that “Psychological stress and negative mood have been related to increased vulnerability to influenza-like illness (ILI).” https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2458-7-339?fbclid=IwAR2vcxRkXGedjuCQ0suzRR2QITsomXROL1otZe3Ym8utyQWOdjKH4bKfQIo
2) During lockdowns many of elderly people were left alone without any assistence at all. if they had a normal pneumonia and they had not received any assistance at home their symptoms of course get worse.
3) During lockdowns many of elderly people were locked in their homes. Of course if elderly people never walk and they stay seated all day in front of the TV there is an increase risk of developing clots. As you can see in BMJ “Physical inactivity is associated with incident pulmonary embolism in women. Interventions that decrease time sitting could lower the risk of pulmonary embolism.”
https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d3867 Polmunary embolism is “gasping for breath”..
4) The hotspots, like in my country (Lombardy, Italy), were extremely confined, and from there never spread “viruses” to other regions, despite many people run away from there immediately before the lockdown. When the lockdown ended and people started moving all around the country we had a decrease of mortality, despite catastrophic government forecasts. This is against viral theory of course.
In my opinion for this fake pandemic there is no need at all of exotic explanation. “But perhaps viruses are real after all” is just an unproven speculation.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well said! 🙂
LikeLike
As you said there is some truth in the correlation between pollution and “covid deaths”
These are my discoveries:
1) Bergamo and Brescia, the main “covid death” hotspots in Italy, are the most polluted cities in Europe, as you can see in The Lancet:
“For PM2·5, cluster 1 contained 38 cities with the highest mortality burden, including cities in the Po Valley (northern Italy), southern Poland, and eastern Czech Republic (table 1, figures 3A, appendix pp 106–31). Among these cities, the top ten cities with the highest burden were: (1) Brescia (Italy), (2) Bergamo (Italy), (3) Karviná (Czech Republic), (4) Vicenza (Italy), (5) Górnośląsko-Zagłębiowska Metropolia (Poland), (6) Ostrava (Czech Republic), (7) Jastrzębie-Zdrój (Poland), (8) Saronno (Italy), (9) Rybnik (Poland), and (10) Havirov (Czech Republic; Table 2, Table 3).”
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(20)30272-2/fulltext#sec1
2) But this is not all the truth. Because immediately before the national lockdown our government issued a newsletter for all the general practitioner, telling them not to go anymore to visit their patients at home…so..
3) The elderly in the country most polluted cities remained alone without home assistance, without seeing any doctors. So, what happened?
4) Normally general practitioner administer macrolids to the patients with pneumonia at home. No need of hospitalization.
5) As I said Just before lockdonw (and during it) general practitioner were unable to visit their patients at home and administer them macrolid antibiotics in case of pneumonia.
6) In the literature it is shown that macrolids protect people from air pollution:
“This seemingly protective effect of macrolides on air pollution is not unexpected as these drugs are known to reduce innate (neutrophilic) immune activation in many chronic respiratory disorders, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [12], CF [13], non-CF bronchiectasis [14], severe asthma [15] and CLAD [4, 16]. More indirect evidence to support a protective effect of macrolides originates from a randomised placebo-controlled trial that demonstrated maintenance azithromycin therapy is able to prevent COPD exacerbations [12], which are also linked with short-term exposure to air pollution [17]”
https://erj.ersjournals.com/content/49/1/1600484.long
7) Of course we see a worsening of the symptoms if a general practitioner can’t administer macrolids anymore to their patients with pneumonia living in the most pulluted cities of the country.
8) These elderly people were then hospitalized and killed by ventilators and propofol
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, it was a combination of toxic environment mixed with lack of proper care and unnecessary invasive medical interventions.
LikeLike
The bit about macrolides is interesting, because while antiobiotics don’t aid in health they do suppress detox symptoms and thus help people avoid being sent to hospital, where the *really* bad treatments tend to happen (but especially in 2020 with the new horrific treatment policies for covid, at least in the US, UK, and Italy).
We also saw a mix of good and bad effects from people simply unable to see their doctors. Good: people avoided chronic medical “care” that is almost all counterproductive and either did nothing or tried some less bad alternative. Bad: some people reliant on insulin couldn’t get it, trauma care was stymied, or people tried random wacky things in the absence of their normal care.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Totally agree with you ClariFire. Macrolids just suppress the symptoms…of air pollution detoxification; in most of the cases after tacking macrolids people continue to live but their bodies are full of toxic substances that inhibits full health. With all that pollution in their bodies they will die sooner or later. But here the difference were between suppress the symptoms of detoxification by macrolids and suppress their life instantly without the use of macrolids and by the use of ventilators and propofol, as you have fully understood.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This video explains that nasal swab PCR tests are very dangerous and can cause illness! So this is another non-viral explanation for what’s making some people sick!
https://www.bitchute.com/video/agntmP5gYTfW/
HIV=AIDS was a total scam because testing “HIV positive” would lead to “treatment” with AZT, which causes AIDS-like symptoms and death i.e. a self-fulfilling prophecy. With COVID, the PCR test itself can cause illness and a false positive -> “treatment” -> death.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, the test is the linch pin for both. Without the PCR results, no one would be subjected to the unfair label nor the toxic drugs. The tests are dangerous weapons.
LikeLike
It may be telling that the HIV Innocence Group had great success in criminal HIV cases (wins or radically reduced sentences in about 50 out of 50 of the cases they got involved with) with the tactic of treating the HIV test like a breathalyzer test and doing what defense lawyers do in DUI cases. They were able to argue that the tests were fundamentally unreliable and completely shred the state’s expert witnesses, often in like 20 minutes, resulting in impeachment or recusal of the witness and wins or gigantic concessions. One of their cases even resulted in the US military ceasing all prosecution of HIV offenses within its ranks.
I think back to the horrifying cases where mothers who tested positive were forced to choose between giving their newborns AZT and giving them up to Child Protective Services. (For all I know, this is still going on. The HIV Innocence Group seems not to be operating anymore though, despite their amazing track record.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
It amazes me that there are not more lawyers challenging this as bringing down the testing scam would be a great way to establish a career. The evidence is easily available. I know there are lawyers supposedly working on cases, however they seem to be going at a snails pace. Maybe this is necessary, maybe not? I’m not sure as I am not a lawyer. However, I have suspicions they are purposefully being slow-footed.
LikeLike
I think most of them are either being purposely slow or are simply not striking the root of the science. Some success has been had, not widely reported. Going after bonded officials is one way.
I think generally there’s just very little overlap between lawyers and people who get this stuff. Yet another way the modern (Prussian) schooling and professional education system controls us by keeping us in our lanes.
Also, we saw what happened to Andrew Moulden (“every vaccine causes harm”) after he started participating in the courtroom.
If it were up to me, I’d like to see lawyers invited into these circles and redpilled out the wazoo. It’s worth reading the many astonished letters that the HIV Innocence Group received from lawyers they helped. (I verified several of the lawyers are real lawyers with real practices via Google myself.) The lawyers of course had no earthly idea how shaky HIV testing was, because to them it’s common “knowledge” that HIV positivity is something of a death sentence, so how could the test be shaky? That’d be absurd. Society would’ve gone bonkers. Well, they don’t know the half of it.
Here are some of those letters:
https://www.omsj.org/about
And here’s a deposition of the Indiana state health department director for HIV-related affairs:
Click to access perkins%20duwve.pdf
Spoiler: it didn’t go well for her.
It’s so satisfying seeing how differently a debate with an expert goes when they are forced to answer each valid question and do so under penalty of perjury and it’s all recorded and fastidiously checked, all statements must be referenced, etc. I can only imagine the gloriousness of you grilling one of these expert witnesses in a deposition. It’d be pay-per-view material!
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s awesome! Thanks for the links! I am excited to read these. 😁
I imagine even Fauci himself would crumble under examination. It’s hard to defend fiction. Eventually, the absurdity can not keep up under logical questioning. Logic always wins.
LikeLike
Definitely would be amazing to watch. That particular deposition was an hour so it’s pretty long reading, but what strikes me over and over is how the standards for something like an HIV diagnosis are so staggeringly much lower than the standards used in a criminal case, yet usually in criminal cases an HIV diagnosis is treated like an immovable rock of pure truth even by the side being damned by it.
If short on time, skip to the very end of the deposition where the lawyer asks the health dept expert,
“Have you ever heard the sentence, ‘Clinical implications of antibodies to HIV-1 in an asymptomatic person are not known’?” and she says, “On AIDS denial sites,” then the lawyer says, “What about in this HIV Western Blot kit, produced by Biorad?” “No.” ” What about this other Western Blot kit, produced by Cambridge Biotech Corporation?” “No. …Those are just medical disclaimers.” “That’s not relevant to the diagnosis? What’s the purpose of a disclaimer?” “So you don’t get involved in a lawsuit.”
There’s nothing remotely like an unbroken chain of people vouching at each step of the way that the diagnosis process is valid, and at some steps the relevant party is even openly declaring they don’t know whether it’s valid but the band plays on in the world of “The Science” (but not in court, if counsel knows the problems with the “science”).
Another great part is where the expert says they rely on Montagnier, and the CDC, yet (as you may guess) they both directly contradict her.
The utter Swiss cheese made of these cases in court under knowledgeable questioning reveals just how much the common practice of “science” these days, in the medical fields at least, is divorced from scientific discipline. Assumptions and guesswork and pronouncements from on high are allowed to fill in hundreds of gaps in a single diagnosis, gaps that legal procedure doesn’t allow them to fill.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, it is all assumptions and guesswork propped up by consensus agreement which is never allowed to be challenged. Science, in its current state, is as unscientific as it can get.
LikeLike
I guess I was under the impression that science today was like a solid rock with quite a few holes in it, but it turns out it’s more like total pandemonium with all its solid appearance deriving solely from the solidity of the social structure and social norms of academia and the particular makeup of the bigwigs, funding sources, and political pressures of that subfield.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s an accurate description. I would only change rock to a boat with numerous holes sailing on top of unscientific lies and slowly filling up until it sinks into its own bullshit. 😉
LikeLike
Another great summary on this monumental scam that’s been perpetrated on humanity. Interesting point about the EUA revoking informed consent. I had assumed that informed consent was sacrosanct and could always be held up as a trump card. For example, masks were prescribed under EUA as a medical prophylactic. Therefore, the non-medically trained, non-licensed grocery store worker cannot insist I wear a mask as they cannot adequately provide me with informed consent. Apparently, that reasoning flies out the window in light of the maddening cacophony of fear, mass psychosis and brainwashing that pervades these times.
On a few other random notes: have you read The Invisible Rainbow by Arthur Firstenberg which lays out the history and pathologic consequences of the electrification of the planet since the 1800’s. Fascinating read, especially his look into cancer, heart disease and diabetes. He traces their rise in incidence rates since the late 1800’s and the connection to ever-increasing electrical technology rollouts (telegraph, phone and power lines, radio, radar, satellite and wireless communication culminating with 5G radiation).
Also, have you done any research into alternate theories that dispute the central dogma of Watson-Crick DNA genetics? Specifically as noted by the theories around the 4th phase of water (structured or crystalline water) and the energy field (aura, perhaps?) which may actually be the locus of the ‘information’ which determines our biology?
Just curious…
Thanks again for all your hard work, deep-dive research and perseverance.
Keith
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks and you are very welcome! I have yet to read The Invisible Rainbow. It is high up on my list however. I just haven’t had much extra time to read recently beyond what I’ve been researching. I hope to get to it soon.
As for DNA, I’ve only broken down the genome process (which i am posting tomorrow) but I have not yet investigated the original evidence by Watson-Crick. I’ve been too focused on the “virus” lie. I do have friends investigating it and I’m trying to get them to write something up to share. I hope to delve into more in the future but it is a huge can of worms. Upon a cursory look, the “science” behind DNA/RNA is just as faulty as that used in virology.
LikeLike
Thank you, I always appreciate the time and care you put into responding to every comment. I ask these questions because, like you, I am always searching around in the dark for more information each time a new thread is revealed. It was difficult enough to even find dissenting voices at the beginning of the “pandemic”.
Also, just finished listening to your interview on Fakeologist. Great stuff and I’m glad you addressed the challenges in getting your voice and insights out into the world. Keep it up! (I try my best to disseminate my knowledge in small ways but it’s an uphill battle to say the least).
Regards,
Keith
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks Keith for the kind words and continued support! 🙂 I love answering comments and questions. I find that I often come away with new information and/or perspectives from others. Sometimes, a question challenges me to look a bit further. I find all comments and questions extremely valuable.
I’m glad you enjoyed the Fakeology discussion. I enjoyed doing that show as he covered many interesting topics. I had to think about things I hadn’t really looked into in years outside of the virology lie. Sometimes it is good to step outside and look around at other things as well.
Getting this info out there is definitely an uphill battle but it is the most worthy one. If we can reach even one person, that may help to reach another and then another. Little by little we will get there.
LikeLike
Please please please do an article on anthrax… After 911, it was supposed to be deadly but how are we sure what those people died of and how many people died of anthrax before?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is high up on my list. I will try to get to it in the near future. 🙂
LikeLike