I will keep pointing out that the Wuhan issue was a complete Red Herring, a false flag, using the seasonal 'flu/respiratory disease caused primarily in Wuhan by the awful industrial pollution, especially in winter.
The appearance of transmission was given by northern Italy were the same problems occur, i.e. temperature inversion with cold air sinking and trapping smog in the Po valley, especially in industrial towns and cities.
There was no pandemic of disease only a pandemic of lies and deceit.
forgive me if I missed it in the article or here in the 84 comments. In the US, the foundational fraud of corona mania was the improperly assayed and overclocked PCR test based on consensus in silico genomes contrived by Christian Drosten. What was used in China to identify cases as COVID-19?
I think this is a great essay but it’s not complete without examining the later lockdown in Shanghai in 2022 which lasted longer and caused far more economic harm, including global supply chain issues. It was only brought to an end by the widespread white paper protests.
The essence of the story questions the absence of similar “outbreaks” in cities around Wuhan or elsewhere in China, suggesting the pandemic might not have been as portrayed.
Notably, Wuhan’s lockdown coincided with a month-long holiday, extending only slightly beyond it, before life quickly resumed normalcy. This rapid return to normalcy, despite the timing with flu season, raises suspicions that the situation could have been a controlled exercise rather than an uncontained outbreak. Wuhan, akin to Chicago with its service and export-based economy, saw restrictions, while major export hubs like Shenzhen, Shanghai, Suzhou, Ningbo, and Guangzhou remained largely unaffected.
This observation leads to skepticism about the reliance on PCR testing and the narrative of selective virus presence. The emphasis should perhaps be on the implausibility of a perfectly engineered pathogen causing widespread devastation while everyday life continues unabated in key economic regions. The discourse around lab leaks and lockdown efficacy, juxtaposed with the notion of a genetically targeted immune response, adds to the complexity, hinting at a broader agenda rather than a straightforward public health crisis.
The author (Thomas Verduyn) quotes the WHO bulletin published on March 11, 2020 “when the WHO “picked up media reports of … a cluster of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan.”
The unedited quote is quite ludicrous: “On 31 December 2019, the WHO China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology (unknown cause) detected in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China. As of 3 January 2020, a total of 44 patients with pneumonia of unknown etiology have been reported to WHO by the national authorities in China. Of the 44 cases reported, 11 are severely ill, while the remaining 33 patients are in stable condition. According to media reports, the concerned market in Wuhan was closed on 1 January 2020 for environmental sanitation and disinfection.” (1)
That’s an excellent place to start my review. The Chinese authorities, the WHO, and Thomas Verduyn were unaware that careful studies published just five years before 2020 found that over 62% of cases of pneumonia diagnosed by radiography were of unknown cause, making this WHO report highly suspect. Why and how were these cases selected, knowing there are several hundred or more cases of pneumonia in a city the size of Wuhan daily?
Moreover, as presented by Thomas Verduyn, analysis of Chinese data cannot be delivered without explaining first that we deal with fiction told by several sources, all Chinese. Strangely, no one, to my knowledge, publicly questioned the integrity of the data presented in the paper on the Chinese “Patient Zero” by Fan Wu et al. (2), accompanied by the paper by Peng Zhou et al. (3).
I’m not sure why a 46-year-old, apparently in good health, was described as Patient Zero. When the two Chinese papers were published in early March 2020 in Nature, it should be evident to any careful observer of the media that the saga of the Diamond Princess cruise ship (4) that just ended was very different from what was feared by virologists. Kentaro Iwata, a renowned Japanese infectious disease specialist who gained access to the cruise ship, predicted that all on board (2,666 passengers and 1,045 crew) would die. Dr. Iwata apparently believed the WHO and the Chinese data were sound (5). To his surprise, no 46-year-old have died on board. Just some 8 elderly passengers died after departing the ship. Was the virus deadly? No, this result should stop immediately all panic driven by the media, but it didn’t.
The whole story gets stranger, as most probably a different Chinese agency started to spread a competing story of how the virus was found by telling the strange story of Dr. Li Wenliang, an eye doctor who didn’t even need metagenomics to find a new, deadly virus. According to these stories, this young and promising doctor paid with his life for his discovery. I’m not joking, please read for yourself on Wikipedia (6) and interesting and probably fake obituaries in Lancet (7) and The Economist (8).
A friend, an EU public health expert stationed in Beijing at the time, wrote me, "I actually find the response by the Chinese government to be extremely interesting. It seems like it’s overblowing the matter on purpose. Considering the low number of cases (compared to China’s population) and low death rates, it feels like the Chinese government is overblowing fears on purpose, with maps filled with dark areas and shutting down everything everywhere (and this is during China’s most important holiday season).
I suspect it’s practicing for when a Really serious disease breaks out, the sort with people dying like flies. So I find all this fuss quite interesting. We’ve been warned about a potential superbug outbreak for years, and now we can see how the response will look like. No doubt the Chinese government is busy taking notes on what it could have done better.
Not to mention, I don’t think most Westerners realize just how big Wuhan is, just how significant Chinese New Year is in terms of people moving around and just how many people go in and out of those wet markets every day. That’s like, tens of thousands of people leaving the wet markets, taking public transport then going home to expose all their visiting relatives, and all those people in turn going to all sorts of crowded areas too. With a high enough contagion rate, we’d easily be at 1 million infected. The fact that we haven’t reached such numbers means that this virus isn’t That bad”.
My guess is that Beijing wanted to send a message: in a nuclear exchange, our civil defense beats yours.
What if the virus began to spread in Wuhan in, say, September 2019 or October? If so, the virus would have certainly spread all around the world. What if the virus, like the authors say, wasn't lethal ... but it did make many people sick? If this was the case, we'd find copious evidence of a spike in Influenza Like illness in China and in countries around the world ... but few deaths from this illness, just like few people die from the flu or other coronaviruses. As it turns out, there was a significant spike in ILI cases in America beginning in November 2019. However, there was no noticeable spike in all-cause deaths, suggesting any contagious respiratory virus was NOT lethal.
I say don't look for Covid deaths or a spike in all-cause deaths. Look for a spike in people who had flu-like symptoms.
... Note four links below that I think support the "early spread" hypothesis - which is the same thing as saying this virus is/was NOT "deadly."
You completely forgot to mention that prior to the "outbreak" 2 000 5G-towers were simultaneously activated in Wuhan and the first "casualties" were perfectly healthy youngsters suddenly grabbing their chests or dropping dead on pavements with a bleeding nose . . . DEFINITELY not symptoms of any flu . . .
Furthermore, the ONLY places that Covid-deaths reportedly were reported, were in first world countries and certain European cities where 5G has been activated prior to the outbreak. 5G microwave frequencies and other EMF has been proven repeatedly in several acclaimed medical/scientific journals to cause oxidative stress, cardiovascular inflammation and several other problems that affect every cell in the body . . . So WHY were 5G towers and structures deployed at the speed of a virus globally when people were forced into lockdowns due to a "flu virus"with a minuscule fatality rate . . . EMF and especially 5G microwave radiation causes exactly the same symptoms that Covid apparently did . . . and since, the entire globe has been covered with 5G structures and "smart" equipment to enable AI-technology in the Fouth Industrial Revolution . . . . An electronic virus?
Great work in showing the timeline of cases and deaths after lock-down.
As expected by updated principles of epidemiology, lock-downs do not "work" as a method to prevent the spread of acute respiratory infections, because other more-important factors -- like one's vitamin D status -- are what it is that ultimately determines how an outbreak or epidemic plays out.
You can even predict ahead of time that lock-downs -- by reducing vitamin D levels -- are essentially guaranteed to worsen matters.
Even if lock-downs could prevent spread, it wouldn't necessarily be a good thing, disease-wise (discounting, for the sake of argument, all societal harms of lock-downs). Exposure to germs creates immunity to the diseases produced by germs. We evolved so that we can live side-by-side with germs.
Air Quality is poor and the population is walking around with high numbers of respiratory disease already.
Notice of a deadly disease would create a deadly 😨fear in the population of a contagion rather than the existing air quality of which they are unaware. I know the area in Queens NY. Long history of industry and pollution.
As others have noted, this article is wonderfully written. Further, it presents hard-hitting scientific analysis, but in a way that should be accessible by the novice. Well done!
Americans, at least, didn't believe U.S. officials' claims about a deadly spreading virus because of what was purportedly happening in China. It was the spectacle of New York (preceded by the spectacle of Northern Italy) that helped sell "We the People" on the idea that a disease emergency necessitating drastic measures was upon us.
I will keep pointing out that the Wuhan issue was a complete Red Herring, a false flag, using the seasonal 'flu/respiratory disease caused primarily in Wuhan by the awful industrial pollution, especially in winter.
The appearance of transmission was given by northern Italy were the same problems occur, i.e. temperature inversion with cold air sinking and trapping smog in the Po valley, especially in industrial towns and cities.
There was no pandemic of disease only a pandemic of lies and deceit.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/wuhan-flu
forgive me if I missed it in the article or here in the 84 comments. In the US, the foundational fraud of corona mania was the improperly assayed and overclocked PCR test based on consensus in silico genomes contrived by Christian Drosten. What was used in China to identify cases as COVID-19?
I think this is a great essay but it’s not complete without examining the later lockdown in Shanghai in 2022 which lasted longer and caused far more economic harm, including global supply chain issues. It was only brought to an end by the widespread white paper protests.
The essence of the story questions the absence of similar “outbreaks” in cities around Wuhan or elsewhere in China, suggesting the pandemic might not have been as portrayed.
Notably, Wuhan’s lockdown coincided with a month-long holiday, extending only slightly beyond it, before life quickly resumed normalcy. This rapid return to normalcy, despite the timing with flu season, raises suspicions that the situation could have been a controlled exercise rather than an uncontained outbreak. Wuhan, akin to Chicago with its service and export-based economy, saw restrictions, while major export hubs like Shenzhen, Shanghai, Suzhou, Ningbo, and Guangzhou remained largely unaffected.
This observation leads to skepticism about the reliance on PCR testing and the narrative of selective virus presence. The emphasis should perhaps be on the implausibility of a perfectly engineered pathogen causing widespread devastation while everyday life continues unabated in key economic regions. The discourse around lab leaks and lockdown efficacy, juxtaposed with the notion of a genetically targeted immune response, adds to the complexity, hinting at a broader agenda rather than a straightforward public health crisis.
Commenting on https://pandauncut.substack.com/p/revisiting-china
The author (Thomas Verduyn) quotes the WHO bulletin published on March 11, 2020 “when the WHO “picked up media reports of … a cluster of cases of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan.”
The unedited quote is quite ludicrous: “On 31 December 2019, the WHO China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology (unknown cause) detected in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China. As of 3 January 2020, a total of 44 patients with pneumonia of unknown etiology have been reported to WHO by the national authorities in China. Of the 44 cases reported, 11 are severely ill, while the remaining 33 patients are in stable condition. According to media reports, the concerned market in Wuhan was closed on 1 January 2020 for environmental sanitation and disinfection.” (1)
That’s an excellent place to start my review. The Chinese authorities, the WHO, and Thomas Verduyn were unaware that careful studies published just five years before 2020 found that over 62% of cases of pneumonia diagnosed by radiography were of unknown cause, making this WHO report highly suspect. Why and how were these cases selected, knowing there are several hundred or more cases of pneumonia in a city the size of Wuhan daily?
Moreover, as presented by Thomas Verduyn, analysis of Chinese data cannot be delivered without explaining first that we deal with fiction told by several sources, all Chinese. Strangely, no one, to my knowledge, publicly questioned the integrity of the data presented in the paper on the Chinese “Patient Zero” by Fan Wu et al. (2), accompanied by the paper by Peng Zhou et al. (3).
I’m not sure why a 46-year-old, apparently in good health, was described as Patient Zero. When the two Chinese papers were published in early March 2020 in Nature, it should be evident to any careful observer of the media that the saga of the Diamond Princess cruise ship (4) that just ended was very different from what was feared by virologists. Kentaro Iwata, a renowned Japanese infectious disease specialist who gained access to the cruise ship, predicted that all on board (2,666 passengers and 1,045 crew) would die. Dr. Iwata apparently believed the WHO and the Chinese data were sound (5). To his surprise, no 46-year-old have died on board. Just some 8 elderly passengers died after departing the ship. Was the virus deadly? No, this result should stop immediately all panic driven by the media, but it didn’t.
The whole story gets stranger, as most probably a different Chinese agency started to spread a competing story of how the virus was found by telling the strange story of Dr. Li Wenliang, an eye doctor who didn’t even need metagenomics to find a new, deadly virus. According to these stories, this young and promising doctor paid with his life for his discovery. I’m not joking, please read for yourself on Wikipedia (6) and interesting and probably fake obituaries in Lancet (7) and The Economist (8).
(1) https://www.who.int/emergencies/disease-outbreak-news/item/2020-DON229
(2) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2008-3
(3) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2012-7
(4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_on_Diamond_Princess
(5) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QizVKEJPeM8&t=25s
(6) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Wenliang
(7) https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30382-2/fulltext
(8) https://www.economist.com/obituary/2020/02/13/li-wenliang-died-on-february-7th
A friend, an EU public health expert stationed in Beijing at the time, wrote me, "I actually find the response by the Chinese government to be extremely interesting. It seems like it’s overblowing the matter on purpose. Considering the low number of cases (compared to China’s population) and low death rates, it feels like the Chinese government is overblowing fears on purpose, with maps filled with dark areas and shutting down everything everywhere (and this is during China’s most important holiday season).
I suspect it’s practicing for when a Really serious disease breaks out, the sort with people dying like flies. So I find all this fuss quite interesting. We’ve been warned about a potential superbug outbreak for years, and now we can see how the response will look like. No doubt the Chinese government is busy taking notes on what it could have done better.
Not to mention, I don’t think most Westerners realize just how big Wuhan is, just how significant Chinese New Year is in terms of people moving around and just how many people go in and out of those wet markets every day. That’s like, tens of thousands of people leaving the wet markets, taking public transport then going home to expose all their visiting relatives, and all those people in turn going to all sorts of crowded areas too. With a high enough contagion rate, we’d easily be at 1 million infected. The fact that we haven’t reached such numbers means that this virus isn’t That bad”.
My guess is that Beijing wanted to send a message: in a nuclear exchange, our civil defense beats yours.
What if the virus began to spread in Wuhan in, say, September 2019 or October? If so, the virus would have certainly spread all around the world. What if the virus, like the authors say, wasn't lethal ... but it did make many people sick? If this was the case, we'd find copious evidence of a spike in Influenza Like illness in China and in countries around the world ... but few deaths from this illness, just like few people die from the flu or other coronaviruses. As it turns out, there was a significant spike in ILI cases in America beginning in November 2019. However, there was no noticeable spike in all-cause deaths, suggesting any contagious respiratory virus was NOT lethal.
I say don't look for Covid deaths or a spike in all-cause deaths. Look for a spike in people who had flu-like symptoms.
... Note four links below that I think support the "early spread" hypothesis - which is the same thing as saying this virus is/was NOT "deadly."
You completely forgot to mention that prior to the "outbreak" 2 000 5G-towers were simultaneously activated in Wuhan and the first "casualties" were perfectly healthy youngsters suddenly grabbing their chests or dropping dead on pavements with a bleeding nose . . . DEFINITELY not symptoms of any flu . . .
Furthermore, the ONLY places that Covid-deaths reportedly were reported, were in first world countries and certain European cities where 5G has been activated prior to the outbreak. 5G microwave frequencies and other EMF has been proven repeatedly in several acclaimed medical/scientific journals to cause oxidative stress, cardiovascular inflammation and several other problems that affect every cell in the body . . . So WHY were 5G towers and structures deployed at the speed of a virus globally when people were forced into lockdowns due to a "flu virus"with a minuscule fatality rate . . . EMF and especially 5G microwave radiation causes exactly the same symptoms that Covid apparently did . . . and since, the entire globe has been covered with 5G structures and "smart" equipment to enable AI-technology in the Fouth Industrial Revolution . . . . An electronic virus?
Great work in showing the timeline of cases and deaths after lock-down.
As expected by updated principles of epidemiology, lock-downs do not "work" as a method to prevent the spread of acute respiratory infections, because other more-important factors -- like one's vitamin D status -- are what it is that ultimately determines how an outbreak or epidemic plays out.
You can even predict ahead of time that lock-downs -- by reducing vitamin D levels -- are essentially guaranteed to worsen matters.
Even if lock-downs could prevent spread, it wouldn't necessarily be a good thing, disease-wise (discounting, for the sake of argument, all societal harms of lock-downs). Exposure to germs creates immunity to the diseases produced by germs. We evolved so that we can live side-by-side with germs.
And World dominance with the WHO.
This is a great article. Excellently written.
funny how closely that 3.8% CFR matches up with what neil ferguson's computer spit out
https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/01/timeline-coronavirus-epidemic/
Three of the most toxic areas were chosen.
Air Quality is poor and the population is walking around with high numbers of respiratory disease already.
Notice of a deadly disease would create a deadly 😨fear in the population of a contagion rather than the existing air quality of which they are unaware. I know the area in Queens NY. Long history of industry and pollution.
Wuhan is most industrial area in China.
As others have noted, this article is wonderfully written. Further, it presents hard-hitting scientific analysis, but in a way that should be accessible by the novice. Well done!
Brilliantly-crafted and well-reasoned article.
Adding on:
While China reported ~3,200 "COVID" deaths over a 3-month period, New York City reported 19,253 such deaths in 11 weeks (underlying cause U07.1- COVID-19 | source: NYC DOHMH 2020 Vital Statistics report). https://substack.com/@woodhouse76/note/c-50549220?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=jjay2
Americans, at least, didn't believe U.S. officials' claims about a deadly spreading virus because of what was purportedly happening in China. It was the spectacle of New York (preceded by the spectacle of Northern Italy) that helped sell "We the People" on the idea that a disease emergency necessitating drastic measures was upon us.