Dr. Yeadon has pointed out before that it is most peculiar that all the COVID vaxes targeted spike protein only, not multiple antigenic sites, where spike protein can cause coagulopathies and other morbidity indistinguishable from SARScovid 2 morbidity. This implies a plan to cause illness from the vax as the real purpose of the vax. More fear porn, more mortality were sure to follow.
I think the end of COVID was the Canadian trucker protest which showed a heavy handed government response was at risk of spreading civil disobedience across the west. This lesson must be recalled for the next ‘big event’. The fact the lockdown mentality stopped with this protest shows it was always political as opposed to the virus was disappearing on its own.
"The WHO estimates that the global excess mortality associated with COVID-19 was 14.91 million in the 24 months between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021, which represents 9.49 million more deaths than those globally reported as directly attributable to COVID-19".
Excellent, I wholly agree. Indeed in summary, NONE of nine or so government policies worked, all were unnecessary and caused great harm. In addition they enriched a tiny group of do called elites.
Thank you for keeping on this. Please don't stop. With each day that passes, facts are lost, forgotten, or even erased. Everyone is pretending none of this ever happened.
I cannot forget. Especially because the same thing could happen tomorrow! Nothing has really changed. They're still masked here in Chicago. I have become convinced that they will never, ever stop. It's now been normalized, especially for kids. Younger ones have no memory of Before. They think it's normal to wear or at least see people with useless rags on their faces. It's horrifying. But it doesn't seem to bother anyone here.
While I find your position interesting, I feel like you construct kind of a weak argument and I'd like to bring to light some issues with it so you can choose to strengthen your argument if you'd like.
To begin, your claim is based on the idea that a "pandemic" is an event that requires a large amount of deaths. You go on to say that this is the common understanding of a pandemic by the public; however, a quick google search will show that the definition of pandemic is fairly consistent which only lays out that an infectious disease must spread across multiple regions in multiple countries in a nature that is "widespread" (to be more precise, it would be wise for someone to outline "widespread"). If, as the final paragraphs of that section implies, your issue is with the manipulation and misguidance of "the establishment" (which I would also suggest you define-- is the establishment the government? whose government? is is all branches or only specific branches? all people within a branch or specific "bad actors"? I highly doubt that even if the "American government" misled the public, that this would include people such as my postman -- who is a government employee).
Second, in the section regarding the "creation of the virus" you presuppose that in order for a lab-leaked virus to cause a pandemic, it must be intentionally created to do so. However, this is factually untrue. Take, for example, Viagra, which was originally used for treatment of angina and hypertension. Scientists created a medication for one purpose and ultimately ended up having properties that were had additional outcomes, other than the one intended. This is just one example of human creation resulting in outcomes unforeseen by it's original creator.
Third, your argument that the spread and death rate of the virus seemed to follow "political and administrative lines" supposes that these administrative lines where put in prior to obtaining data about spread which is factually inaccurate. The best example being travel restrictions on China being put in place well after they began locking down citizens in Wuhan in January of 2020. Additionally, in this section the claim that the chance is "small" is not sufficient to indicate that it is not possible, but rather that you as an individual believe that it did not happen in this instance. While that is true, I think it a weak claim to base a larger argument on.
Furthermore, you say that there were "no prior signs of abnormality" before we declared pandemic status. This is factually not true. As someone who followed this pandemic closely since January of 2020 (I can provide proof, if necessary ,of the John Hopkins website when COVID number were below 10,000), there had been lockdowns in Wuhan occurring far before March 2020 when the pandemic began to affect American policy.
I also find the claim that "novel" implied that the virus must be a disease that has "unique characteristics" or a signature, is a stretch when we consider that there are only so many symptoms the human body can display despite there being a large amount of different pathogens that can cause said symptoms. Though this doesn't break your argument, I do think it ignores the nature of human illness being limited by the capacities of the human body (we only have so many organs that can only be impacted in a number of ways, so there is a limitation at how "new" a virus can seem symptomatically). Furthermore you state that the mass instances of symptoms can be, in part, traced to "non-treatment" but, there were attempts to treat the symptoms both over the counter and in hospitals. This proved helpful for some and not for others as each body is different and responds to viruses and medications differently. Viruses are not like bacteria where we have a standard for treatment of the source pathogen-- there is not a standard "antiviral" that mimics an "antibiotic."
The qualm I have with this argument is that it ignores some context of the beginning of the pandemic, which potentially points to why such drastic measures were taken. At the beginning, we had very little knowledge about this virus except what was trackable in other countries. Due to this, we saw a lot of death and despair in places like China, where there were strict lockdowns, and in Italy, where the hospital system was not able to keep up with the rapid rise in illness that required inpatient treatment. Even further into the pandemic in NYC, we saw a rise in hospitalizations and the institutions were not able to keep up with the demand. All of this to say, some of the drastic measures were taken, not because the virus itself was a large danger to the population, but because of the knock off effects of having a highly transmissible virus that had the potential of hospitalization rip through communities. The high hospitalization rates, in many places, surpassed the ability to accommodate that the limited resources that hospitals have to work with. The concern was that, with hospitals having no available beds, other very treatable medical issues like minor heart attacks could take lives due to the lack of staff and resources to treat.
To wrap up my comment, I want to discuss what I agree with you on and the strong points of your argument.
1) I agree that the handling of COVID was abysmal. I agree that there were many politicians that used scare tactics to get the public to "fall in line" and I am not a proponent of lying, manipulating, or overblowing information to get the public to do what you want. (I am a person who believes that the ends never justify the means if the means are unethical if not tied to the ends).
2) I agree that in the current economic system, the continued use of scare tactics to gain funding for private interests guised as "public health and safety", is a real possibility that the public should be aware of. There are many industries that are based in fear mongering for money and this very well could end up being the next one.
3) I appreciate the attempt at a logic based argument as to why the pandemic didn't really occur (though it seems to me that your claim is a mixture of "it didn't happen" and "it wasn't as portrayed").
I think your overarching claim is definitely one that needs to be explored much more by the public, rather than immediately shutting it down similar to how we may a Holocaust denier. I hope my comment finds you well, as a way of trying to strengthen your argument as to have others take your stance more seriously, rather than another attempt just to argue in the comments section (though admittedly, I am arguing in the comments section but tried to do so more along the lines of the construction of an argument rather than just typing in all caps that I think you're wrong).
Hello! I obviously can't answer for the poster, but was just reading your interesting comment, and am guessing that you're not aware that the WHO changed the actual definition of a pandemic by simply crossing off any need for large numbers of death and serious diseases?
IIRC, (and if someone will please correct any errors I make? I'm frequency-sensitive, it takes me ages to write anything now, and I 'glitch' a lot, memory-wise, especially with more new stratospheric spraying program additions) this 'strategic alteration', that a number of us never noticed until later informed online, was made for a previous attempt at a fake pandemic ('Swine Flu', I believe) that the then-CDC head - (the perps having already been caught red-handed up to the elbows in this scam by Wolfgang Wodarg, then part of [think it was called something else prior] the European Medicines Agency) admitted, in a 60 Minutes investigative report interview, that he'd found no confirmed cases, just 3 mentioned in the media, outside of the US.
Oddly enough, the scammed countries were still obliged to pay the cheating pharmafia for useless and damaging vaccines in a bait-and switch in which vaccines that reportedly had been authorised by the US FDA were later quietly replaced by some damaging ones supplied by DARPA. something which appears to be habit-forming.
If you recall the court case brought by a group of scientists and other experts after FOIAs regarding publicly-funded 'COVID-jab study' data to which they had been refused access proved the info to be otherwise unobtainable, and against the release of which, the pharmafia and FDA argued that study data should be kept concealed from the public for a half-century or so - until the US DOD/DARPA apparently stepped into Court to demand it be kept Top Secret for 75 years, only to have the judge (still have some good ones!) order that the study data be released in a legible form and at a specific rate, these tech-platformed gene-jabs were known by the FDA to be toxic, damaging and immediately-to-ultimately-deadly - but still authorised their 'emergency use'.
The 'unethical ends' would appear to be directed toward ending non-Insiders around the world.
The odds of a naturally-occurring 'epidemic/pandemic' - since the general introduction of indoor plumbing, electricity/refrigeration and railway/other transport capable of supplying fresh produce in winter - has been pretty-much nil and was typically found to be due to toxins, including toxins that can be produced by certain bacteria/fungi/molds, which CAN sicken someone and, in the case of bacteria and certain yeasts/fungi, can be isolated and identified as a causal factor.
People said to be 'teeming with viruses', however, despite supposedly spewing these everywhere, they can't seem to produce a single whole virus - at ANY point - which can be isolated, identified, and tested, using standard - or even River's modified version of - scientific methodology to see if postulated normal-type transmission methods using the isolate can actually infect others to produce the same symptoms.
Now, the 'common cold/flu' (which seems most likely to be the body cleansing/need for adequate nutrition to carry out the cleansing properly that's not anymore easy to obtain, in this GMO'd toxic crop-chemical-soaked, sun-dimmed, vit D-deficient world) could qualify as a pandemic, to be used as a perpetual 'Lock-down' in 'LockStep' around the world by order of human-rights-abusing Terrorist Tedros, selected as the first non-doctor to become a Director-General of WHO by Bill Gates, who provides 88% of the WHO's 'discretionary' funding, meaning that the funder can direct what's done with the money, so, essentially using WHO as an asset, in bolstering the pretence that the destructive protocols imposed are pushed through in the name of 'public health'.
But only a psychopath could view an emergency - whether real or faked - as a 'window of opportunity' to prey upon those made vulnerable by it. And we can't let the psychopaths take control over the world...
All I personally know is that the only times I've been 'sick' the past few years, not tending to 'catch' things, it's been with some of the most common symptoms of electro-magnetic frequency poisoning; an initially nasty, gradually diminishing head-ache over a 3 day period, with extreme fatigue, muscle inflammation and weakness, following an odd sequence initially directional and then from above, repeated every night for a number of nights before the issues occurred, although I felt - as did my housemate - more tired every day through out, with a steady tone that bored into the head, followed by a 3 note finish, to begin again, all night every night, for some nights (probably seemed longer than it was, maybe a week and a half?).
No respiratory symptoms or fever in either myself or my house-mate, who was affected before I was, although 'flu-like symptoms' are another common response to 5g and (I suspect) likely other toxic frequencies, as I doubt the tone was produced by 5-G and suspect some HARP-ish version, possibly from satellites.
Despite knowing that the 'tests' were a scam, my housemate rapid-tested for a 'positive' she'd 'caught' from the repeated - and evidently biologically-disruptive - tones.
There was another one with a different tone repeated that was somewhat similar, later, that did not produce the same effects in either of us. And more recently, a lesser version also appearing but not using the same sort of tones or pattern, and mostly just causing fatigue and inflammation.
I do not personally believe in 'COVID', except as symptoms from a killer jab or a damaging frequency response by a disrupted/scrambled bio-electrical system.
I’ll have to look more deeply into some of your claims as they are fact based and I wouldn’t want to deny or affirm belief in them without research.
However, I am curious if you believe that there are other viruses that can make one sick, besides COVID. If so, why would those be legitimate while COVID is not?
Additionally, I am interested in your opinion on why the COVID pandemic would have been invented in the first place. It seems to me, as if the same authorities who put us in lockdown also released these same lockdowns.
Alternatively, if the reason was not to restrict our movement but rather some sort of money grab by big Pharma, why set up an elaborate plan that has had major backlash on the economy if the end goal was money. Or, lastly, maybe you believe that the purpose was something other than control or money, in which I would be very curious to find out what you think.
Thank you for your in depth and thought out response. While I am still not fully convinced, I appreciate being able to have civil discussions like these to widen my perspective on the world and how it may work.
What is 'novel' is the virus produced by the 'leaky' toxic injections. As Geert Vandenbosh warned, the injections caused the actual pandemic! I walked around confident in 2020, knowing the illusion. I saw no one sick with a deadly pathogen. And then I witnessed the uptake of injections. Suddenly, people were sick and dying all around me! And it hasn't stopped.
It was lot easier to spread the testing method than the incidence of illness, simply because asymptomatic carriers will out number those who are symptomatic.
Very interesting article and comments - thanks all.
My only scientific knowledge comes from my husband (B.V.Sc., M.Med.Vet.- Physiology. Pretoria) who died end October 2020 of cardiac disease. At the beginning of 2020 when the Covid-19 manipulation raised it’s ugly head, he warned us and friends who listened NOT to get vaccinated because of the inherent harm in the spike protein mRNA vaccine - from it’s half-baked manufacturing, correct protocols ignored in trials and details of how it would harm our bodies.
Living in BC Canada, where the mandates were perhaps more draconian than anywhere else, including lies, false science, fear mongering through forced mask wearing, punishment for the unvaccinated and dismissal from their jobs as nurses and subsequent persecution of doctors who even questioned the harm they noticed in their patients (Dr. Charles Hoffe is an ongoing case).
These are all things and more, which made me realise that there is no intention of preventing this plandemic. Instead there is an insidious reason for manipulating people to get vaccinated, many of whom had no choice. For simple, hardworking folk, the bank and investment ramifications as mention by some, had little meaning. They regarded the government as omnipotent and it was only after many contracted repeated cases of covid in spite of assurances to the contrary, did they start to realise the fraud.
In BC, masks are still required in all hospitals and medical facilities, vaccines are still required across the country for students to attend high schools or colleges. None of the fired nurses and doctors are being recalled. It is as if the Marxist medical authorities have never heard of the many published evidence by real medical scientists who have refuted the governmental and political lies.
IMO, apart from the money-making scams of the vaccine promoters, I think harming people was always the intention in order to reduce the world populations. It is all tied in with evil Bill Gates, WEF, WHO and their cohorts. They are working on the next plandemic and will not stop until God puts a stop to them.
Pandemic can be a political term or a scientific one..The "or" can be inclusive or exclusive. The COVID pandemic was entirely political, frankly - mostly bureaucratic, with scientific discussion blocked bureaucratically from the start..It is not possible for bureaucrats to identify a scientific pandemic without open scientific discussion and debate. No such discussion was permitted.
I've found that there are three main positions regarding viruses:
1. They exist as we believe, contagious and pathogenic.
2. They do not exist at all.
3. They exist, but not as we believe, are neither contagious (at least not in the way we believe) nor pathogenic (in that they are the root cause of illness).
As you might suspect, I advocate for the third position, having found the second position lacking nuance and exhibiting a strong 'deconstructionist' bias (tear it all down, let others worry about rebuilding).
I think there is validity in the observations made and recorded in virology, but I doubt their conclusions since the lens through which they're made is highly questionable (yet it often goes unquestioned). There is plenty of evidence that challenges the notion of viral contagion, and no direct observation of the causal link between viruses and illness. It seems that viruses are another level of effect rather than a cause themselves. Just like the symptoms that cause our discomfort are also effects of a complex process, it is often tempting to focus on the effects and deal with them directly rather than expend the time and effort required to understand the full chain of cause and effect and deal with the root causes. I hold similar views regarding bacteria and cancer; these things are often portrayed as root causes in and of themselves, but I have come to see them as parts of the intelligent response of a self-sustaining system to some kind of toxic accumulation or exposure.
I think the idea that viruses are harmful to cells comes mainly from the observation of lysis in a petri dish, an unnatural environment in which the cell has no other defense against the toxins present in the dish. We cannot directly observe the behavior of viruses within our bodies, but from what I understand, lysis is not the typical result of viral replication and release; usually, they're produced in small quantities and the rupture in the cell membrane is repaired after release.
We have limited insight into the true nature of what we're observing, and the conclusions we arrive at from these observations depend heavily on the lens through which we view them. If we believe we're looking at a war zone, we'll look for enemies causing damage and think about eliminating them. But if we believe we're looking at a highly complex, intelligent, self-sustaining system, we might ask more questions such as "why are these things causing damage?" with the general assumption that the body knows what it's doing better than we do. To me, the 'warzone' perspective is a dead end that leads to largely ineffective (but lucrative) treatments, whereas the 'intelligent system' perspective leads to deeper understanding and individual empowerment.
I would not, because I am convinced that HIV does not cause AIDS. I have explored other explanations of the origin of AIDS and found them more plausible and better substantiated than the HIV explanation. This goes for other STDs/STIs as well; the commonly held views don't hold much water when you look deeper and study the inconsistencies, and it seems there are always plausible alternative explanations that lead out of fear and into empowerment.
If you were to ask me this question a few years ago, it would have been difficult for me to answer as I was very much in the middle of exploring various perspectives in seeking answers to my questions. However, having used my current perspective for a few years and found my health at its most prolonged best that I can remember, I have more confidence in these conclusions (though I always try to leave room for doubt).
I have also found that fear is generally more troublesome than the goings on of the microcosm. The causes always end up back in our own laps, in the ways we care for (or neglect) our bodies. I have more confidence in the idea that our own ignorance and nescience is used against us on an industrial scale than I do in the idea that our optimal health hinges on the absence of particles so small we must trust experts to tells us whether they exist in our bodies. I also have confidence in the effects of our beliefs on our biology, as studied in epigenetics; in short, simply believing we're in danger puts our bodies in a survival mode that is at odds with optimal health.
They [big bad Pharma] develop drugs that are demonstrated to inhibit HIV in vitro; when taken by humans the humans that have the virus don't develop full blown AIDS. Before this, thousands were dying of it.
I too am going to suggest that never has a virus been proven to exist, nor contagion. Both are the twin towers of Rockefeller lies - for profit selling His petro-"medicines" ("medicines" made from oil) and fear factor (for control - used to full advantage in 2020).
Dr. Yeadon has pointed out before that it is most peculiar that all the COVID vaxes targeted spike protein only, not multiple antigenic sites, where spike protein can cause coagulopathies and other morbidity indistinguishable from SARScovid 2 morbidity. This implies a plan to cause illness from the vax as the real purpose of the vax. More fear porn, more mortality were sure to follow.
I think the end of COVID was the Canadian trucker protest which showed a heavy handed government response was at risk of spreading civil disobedience across the west. This lesson must be recalled for the next ‘big event’. The fact the lockdown mentality stopped with this protest shows it was always political as opposed to the virus was disappearing on its own.
"The WHO estimates that the global excess mortality associated with COVID-19 was 14.91 million in the 24 months between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021, which represents 9.49 million more deaths than those globally reported as directly attributable to COVID-19".
Are there any analyses of the WHO claim?
I think this statement is rapidly becoming the new consensus of the resistance, and as such it is incredibly important.
Excellent, I wholly agree. Indeed in summary, NONE of nine or so government policies worked, all were unnecessary and caused great harm. In addition they enriched a tiny group of do called elites.
Just seen Nick Hudson on Russell Brand's live show and he is gelling with us! Great interview and a must see.
Thank you for keeping on this. Please don't stop. With each day that passes, facts are lost, forgotten, or even erased. Everyone is pretending none of this ever happened.
I cannot forget. Especially because the same thing could happen tomorrow! Nothing has really changed. They're still masked here in Chicago. I have become convinced that they will never, ever stop. It's now been normalized, especially for kids. Younger ones have no memory of Before. They think it's normal to wear or at least see people with useless rags on their faces. It's horrifying. But it doesn't seem to bother anyone here.
I can't live like this. I cannot endure it again.
They want to kill you perhaps - cold there and maske - hot here and not masked yet - the Pandemic Treaty is yet to come!
While I find your position interesting, I feel like you construct kind of a weak argument and I'd like to bring to light some issues with it so you can choose to strengthen your argument if you'd like.
To begin, your claim is based on the idea that a "pandemic" is an event that requires a large amount of deaths. You go on to say that this is the common understanding of a pandemic by the public; however, a quick google search will show that the definition of pandemic is fairly consistent which only lays out that an infectious disease must spread across multiple regions in multiple countries in a nature that is "widespread" (to be more precise, it would be wise for someone to outline "widespread"). If, as the final paragraphs of that section implies, your issue is with the manipulation and misguidance of "the establishment" (which I would also suggest you define-- is the establishment the government? whose government? is is all branches or only specific branches? all people within a branch or specific "bad actors"? I highly doubt that even if the "American government" misled the public, that this would include people such as my postman -- who is a government employee).
Second, in the section regarding the "creation of the virus" you presuppose that in order for a lab-leaked virus to cause a pandemic, it must be intentionally created to do so. However, this is factually untrue. Take, for example, Viagra, which was originally used for treatment of angina and hypertension. Scientists created a medication for one purpose and ultimately ended up having properties that were had additional outcomes, other than the one intended. This is just one example of human creation resulting in outcomes unforeseen by it's original creator.
Third, your argument that the spread and death rate of the virus seemed to follow "political and administrative lines" supposes that these administrative lines where put in prior to obtaining data about spread which is factually inaccurate. The best example being travel restrictions on China being put in place well after they began locking down citizens in Wuhan in January of 2020. Additionally, in this section the claim that the chance is "small" is not sufficient to indicate that it is not possible, but rather that you as an individual believe that it did not happen in this instance. While that is true, I think it a weak claim to base a larger argument on.
Furthermore, you say that there were "no prior signs of abnormality" before we declared pandemic status. This is factually not true. As someone who followed this pandemic closely since January of 2020 (I can provide proof, if necessary ,of the John Hopkins website when COVID number were below 10,000), there had been lockdowns in Wuhan occurring far before March 2020 when the pandemic began to affect American policy.
I also find the claim that "novel" implied that the virus must be a disease that has "unique characteristics" or a signature, is a stretch when we consider that there are only so many symptoms the human body can display despite there being a large amount of different pathogens that can cause said symptoms. Though this doesn't break your argument, I do think it ignores the nature of human illness being limited by the capacities of the human body (we only have so many organs that can only be impacted in a number of ways, so there is a limitation at how "new" a virus can seem symptomatically). Furthermore you state that the mass instances of symptoms can be, in part, traced to "non-treatment" but, there were attempts to treat the symptoms both over the counter and in hospitals. This proved helpful for some and not for others as each body is different and responds to viruses and medications differently. Viruses are not like bacteria where we have a standard for treatment of the source pathogen-- there is not a standard "antiviral" that mimics an "antibiotic."
The qualm I have with this argument is that it ignores some context of the beginning of the pandemic, which potentially points to why such drastic measures were taken. At the beginning, we had very little knowledge about this virus except what was trackable in other countries. Due to this, we saw a lot of death and despair in places like China, where there were strict lockdowns, and in Italy, where the hospital system was not able to keep up with the rapid rise in illness that required inpatient treatment. Even further into the pandemic in NYC, we saw a rise in hospitalizations and the institutions were not able to keep up with the demand. All of this to say, some of the drastic measures were taken, not because the virus itself was a large danger to the population, but because of the knock off effects of having a highly transmissible virus that had the potential of hospitalization rip through communities. The high hospitalization rates, in many places, surpassed the ability to accommodate that the limited resources that hospitals have to work with. The concern was that, with hospitals having no available beds, other very treatable medical issues like minor heart attacks could take lives due to the lack of staff and resources to treat.
To wrap up my comment, I want to discuss what I agree with you on and the strong points of your argument.
1) I agree that the handling of COVID was abysmal. I agree that there were many politicians that used scare tactics to get the public to "fall in line" and I am not a proponent of lying, manipulating, or overblowing information to get the public to do what you want. (I am a person who believes that the ends never justify the means if the means are unethical if not tied to the ends).
2) I agree that in the current economic system, the continued use of scare tactics to gain funding for private interests guised as "public health and safety", is a real possibility that the public should be aware of. There are many industries that are based in fear mongering for money and this very well could end up being the next one.
3) I appreciate the attempt at a logic based argument as to why the pandemic didn't really occur (though it seems to me that your claim is a mixture of "it didn't happen" and "it wasn't as portrayed").
I think your overarching claim is definitely one that needs to be explored much more by the public, rather than immediately shutting it down similar to how we may a Holocaust denier. I hope my comment finds you well, as a way of trying to strengthen your argument as to have others take your stance more seriously, rather than another attempt just to argue in the comments section (though admittedly, I am arguing in the comments section but tried to do so more along the lines of the construction of an argument rather than just typing in all caps that I think you're wrong).
Hello! I obviously can't answer for the poster, but was just reading your interesting comment, and am guessing that you're not aware that the WHO changed the actual definition of a pandemic by simply crossing off any need for large numbers of death and serious diseases?
IIRC, (and if someone will please correct any errors I make? I'm frequency-sensitive, it takes me ages to write anything now, and I 'glitch' a lot, memory-wise, especially with more new stratospheric spraying program additions) this 'strategic alteration', that a number of us never noticed until later informed online, was made for a previous attempt at a fake pandemic ('Swine Flu', I believe) that the then-CDC head - (the perps having already been caught red-handed up to the elbows in this scam by Wolfgang Wodarg, then part of [think it was called something else prior] the European Medicines Agency) admitted, in a 60 Minutes investigative report interview, that he'd found no confirmed cases, just 3 mentioned in the media, outside of the US.
Oddly enough, the scammed countries were still obliged to pay the cheating pharmafia for useless and damaging vaccines in a bait-and switch in which vaccines that reportedly had been authorised by the US FDA were later quietly replaced by some damaging ones supplied by DARPA. something which appears to be habit-forming.
If you recall the court case brought by a group of scientists and other experts after FOIAs regarding publicly-funded 'COVID-jab study' data to which they had been refused access proved the info to be otherwise unobtainable, and against the release of which, the pharmafia and FDA argued that study data should be kept concealed from the public for a half-century or so - until the US DOD/DARPA apparently stepped into Court to demand it be kept Top Secret for 75 years, only to have the judge (still have some good ones!) order that the study data be released in a legible form and at a specific rate, these tech-platformed gene-jabs were known by the FDA to be toxic, damaging and immediately-to-ultimately-deadly - but still authorised their 'emergency use'.
The 'unethical ends' would appear to be directed toward ending non-Insiders around the world.
The odds of a naturally-occurring 'epidemic/pandemic' - since the general introduction of indoor plumbing, electricity/refrigeration and railway/other transport capable of supplying fresh produce in winter - has been pretty-much nil and was typically found to be due to toxins, including toxins that can be produced by certain bacteria/fungi/molds, which CAN sicken someone and, in the case of bacteria and certain yeasts/fungi, can be isolated and identified as a causal factor.
People said to be 'teeming with viruses', however, despite supposedly spewing these everywhere, they can't seem to produce a single whole virus - at ANY point - which can be isolated, identified, and tested, using standard - or even River's modified version of - scientific methodology to see if postulated normal-type transmission methods using the isolate can actually infect others to produce the same symptoms.
Now, the 'common cold/flu' (which seems most likely to be the body cleansing/need for adequate nutrition to carry out the cleansing properly that's not anymore easy to obtain, in this GMO'd toxic crop-chemical-soaked, sun-dimmed, vit D-deficient world) could qualify as a pandemic, to be used as a perpetual 'Lock-down' in 'LockStep' around the world by order of human-rights-abusing Terrorist Tedros, selected as the first non-doctor to become a Director-General of WHO by Bill Gates, who provides 88% of the WHO's 'discretionary' funding, meaning that the funder can direct what's done with the money, so, essentially using WHO as an asset, in bolstering the pretence that the destructive protocols imposed are pushed through in the name of 'public health'.
But only a psychopath could view an emergency - whether real or faked - as a 'window of opportunity' to prey upon those made vulnerable by it. And we can't let the psychopaths take control over the world...
All I personally know is that the only times I've been 'sick' the past few years, not tending to 'catch' things, it's been with some of the most common symptoms of electro-magnetic frequency poisoning; an initially nasty, gradually diminishing head-ache over a 3 day period, with extreme fatigue, muscle inflammation and weakness, following an odd sequence initially directional and then from above, repeated every night for a number of nights before the issues occurred, although I felt - as did my housemate - more tired every day through out, with a steady tone that bored into the head, followed by a 3 note finish, to begin again, all night every night, for some nights (probably seemed longer than it was, maybe a week and a half?).
No respiratory symptoms or fever in either myself or my house-mate, who was affected before I was, although 'flu-like symptoms' are another common response to 5g and (I suspect) likely other toxic frequencies, as I doubt the tone was produced by 5-G and suspect some HARP-ish version, possibly from satellites.
Despite knowing that the 'tests' were a scam, my housemate rapid-tested for a 'positive' she'd 'caught' from the repeated - and evidently biologically-disruptive - tones.
There was another one with a different tone repeated that was somewhat similar, later, that did not produce the same effects in either of us. And more recently, a lesser version also appearing but not using the same sort of tones or pattern, and mostly just causing fatigue and inflammation.
I do not personally believe in 'COVID', except as symptoms from a killer jab or a damaging frequency response by a disrupted/scrambled bio-electrical system.
I’ll have to look more deeply into some of your claims as they are fact based and I wouldn’t want to deny or affirm belief in them without research.
However, I am curious if you believe that there are other viruses that can make one sick, besides COVID. If so, why would those be legitimate while COVID is not?
Additionally, I am interested in your opinion on why the COVID pandemic would have been invented in the first place. It seems to me, as if the same authorities who put us in lockdown also released these same lockdowns.
Alternatively, if the reason was not to restrict our movement but rather some sort of money grab by big Pharma, why set up an elaborate plan that has had major backlash on the economy if the end goal was money. Or, lastly, maybe you believe that the purpose was something other than control or money, in which I would be very curious to find out what you think.
Thank you for your in depth and thought out response. While I am still not fully convinced, I appreciate being able to have civil discussions like these to widen my perspective on the world and how it may work.
Would be great if you could include citations and links to back up each assertion, as a resource for readers who aren't familiar with the key ideas.
What is 'novel' is the virus produced by the 'leaky' toxic injections. As Geert Vandenbosh warned, the injections caused the actual pandemic! I walked around confident in 2020, knowing the illusion. I saw no one sick with a deadly pathogen. And then I witnessed the uptake of injections. Suddenly, people were sick and dying all around me! And it hasn't stopped.
My impression as well.
It was lot easier to spread the testing method than the incidence of illness, simply because asymptomatic carriers will out number those who are symptomatic.
Very interesting article and comments - thanks all.
My only scientific knowledge comes from my husband (B.V.Sc., M.Med.Vet.- Physiology. Pretoria) who died end October 2020 of cardiac disease. At the beginning of 2020 when the Covid-19 manipulation raised it’s ugly head, he warned us and friends who listened NOT to get vaccinated because of the inherent harm in the spike protein mRNA vaccine - from it’s half-baked manufacturing, correct protocols ignored in trials and details of how it would harm our bodies.
Living in BC Canada, where the mandates were perhaps more draconian than anywhere else, including lies, false science, fear mongering through forced mask wearing, punishment for the unvaccinated and dismissal from their jobs as nurses and subsequent persecution of doctors who even questioned the harm they noticed in their patients (Dr. Charles Hoffe is an ongoing case).
These are all things and more, which made me realise that there is no intention of preventing this plandemic. Instead there is an insidious reason for manipulating people to get vaccinated, many of whom had no choice. For simple, hardworking folk, the bank and investment ramifications as mention by some, had little meaning. They regarded the government as omnipotent and it was only after many contracted repeated cases of covid in spite of assurances to the contrary, did they start to realise the fraud.
In BC, masks are still required in all hospitals and medical facilities, vaccines are still required across the country for students to attend high schools or colleges. None of the fired nurses and doctors are being recalled. It is as if the Marxist medical authorities have never heard of the many published evidence by real medical scientists who have refuted the governmental and political lies.
IMO, apart from the money-making scams of the vaccine promoters, I think harming people was always the intention in order to reduce the world populations. It is all tied in with evil Bill Gates, WEF, WHO and their cohorts. They are working on the next plandemic and will not stop until God puts a stop to them.
I will read this when done with work stuff. I'm afraid to read it.
Pandemic can be a political term or a scientific one..The "or" can be inclusive or exclusive. The COVID pandemic was entirely political, frankly - mostly bureaucratic, with scientific discussion blocked bureaucratically from the start..It is not possible for bureaucrats to identify a scientific pandemic without open scientific discussion and debate. No such discussion was permitted.
Very interesting. Thank you.
More photos of viruses: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/6/12/4902
I've found that there are three main positions regarding viruses:
1. They exist as we believe, contagious and pathogenic.
2. They do not exist at all.
3. They exist, but not as we believe, are neither contagious (at least not in the way we believe) nor pathogenic (in that they are the root cause of illness).
As you might suspect, I advocate for the third position, having found the second position lacking nuance and exhibiting a strong 'deconstructionist' bias (tear it all down, let others worry about rebuilding).
What is it that makes you think viruses exist but do not cause illness?
I think there is validity in the observations made and recorded in virology, but I doubt their conclusions since the lens through which they're made is highly questionable (yet it often goes unquestioned). There is plenty of evidence that challenges the notion of viral contagion, and no direct observation of the causal link between viruses and illness. It seems that viruses are another level of effect rather than a cause themselves. Just like the symptoms that cause our discomfort are also effects of a complex process, it is often tempting to focus on the effects and deal with them directly rather than expend the time and effort required to understand the full chain of cause and effect and deal with the root causes. I hold similar views regarding bacteria and cancer; these things are often portrayed as root causes in and of themselves, but I have come to see them as parts of the intelligent response of a self-sustaining system to some kind of toxic accumulation or exposure.
I think the idea that viruses are harmful to cells comes mainly from the observation of lysis in a petri dish, an unnatural environment in which the cell has no other defense against the toxins present in the dish. We cannot directly observe the behavior of viruses within our bodies, but from what I understand, lysis is not the typical result of viral replication and release; usually, they're produced in small quantities and the rupture in the cell membrane is repaired after release.
We have limited insight into the true nature of what we're observing, and the conclusions we arrive at from these observations depend heavily on the lens through which we view them. If we believe we're looking at a war zone, we'll look for enemies causing damage and think about eliminating them. But if we believe we're looking at a highly complex, intelligent, self-sustaining system, we might ask more questions such as "why are these things causing damage?" with the general assumption that the body knows what it's doing better than we do. To me, the 'warzone' perspective is a dead end that leads to largely ineffective (but lucrative) treatments, whereas the 'intelligent system' perspective leads to deeper understanding and individual empowerment.
Can I test your position with a blunt question? I your partner was HIV+ while you were negative, would you take precautions? Why?
I would not, because I am convinced that HIV does not cause AIDS. I have explored other explanations of the origin of AIDS and found them more plausible and better substantiated than the HIV explanation. This goes for other STDs/STIs as well; the commonly held views don't hold much water when you look deeper and study the inconsistencies, and it seems there are always plausible alternative explanations that lead out of fear and into empowerment.
If you were to ask me this question a few years ago, it would have been difficult for me to answer as I was very much in the middle of exploring various perspectives in seeking answers to my questions. However, having used my current perspective for a few years and found my health at its most prolonged best that I can remember, I have more confidence in these conclusions (though I always try to leave room for doubt).
I have also found that fear is generally more troublesome than the goings on of the microcosm. The causes always end up back in our own laps, in the ways we care for (or neglect) our bodies. I have more confidence in the idea that our own ignorance and nescience is used against us on an industrial scale than I do in the idea that our optimal health hinges on the absence of particles so small we must trust experts to tells us whether they exist in our bodies. I also have confidence in the effects of our beliefs on our biology, as studied in epigenetics; in short, simply believing we're in danger puts our bodies in a survival mode that is at odds with optimal health.
OK, but I am more confused now.
They [big bad Pharma] develop drugs that are demonstrated to inhibit HIV in vitro; when taken by humans the humans that have the virus don't develop full blown AIDS. Before this, thousands were dying of it.
That's a very thoughtful response that sets me thinking. Appreciated.
I too am going to suggest that never has a virus been proven to exist, nor contagion. Both are the twin towers of Rockefeller lies - for profit selling His petro-"medicines" ("medicines" made from oil) and fear factor (for control - used to full advantage in 2020).
A Post to Be Viral (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/a-post-to-be-viral
I Am Not Anti-vax; I Am Anti-virus! (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/i-am-not-anti-vax-i-am-anti-virus