FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Smoking Guns, Big Lies of the Covid-19 SARS-CoV-2 Plandemic

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Major bomb attacks & 'terrorist' events
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2020 10:53 pm    Post subject: Smoking Guns, Big Lies of the Covid-19 SARS-CoV-2 Plandemic Reply with quote

SMOKING GUN #1
FRANCE WITHDREW SARS CURE CHLOROQUINE FROM SALE ON MONDAY 13 JANUARY

Why France is hiding a cheap, tested virus cure
The French government is arguably helping Big Pharma profit from the Covid-19 pandemic
By PEPE ESCOBAR
MARCH 28, 2020
https://asiatimes.com/2020/03/why-france-is-hiding-a-cheap-and-tested- virus-cure/

What’s going on in the fifth largest economy in the world arguably points to a major collusion scandal in which the French government is helping Big Pharma to profit from the expansion of Covid-19. Informed French citizens are absolutely furious about it.

My initial question to a serious, unimpeachable Paris source, jurist Valerie Bugault, was about the liaisons dangereuses between Macronism and Big Pharma and especially about the mysterious “disappearance” – more likely outright theft – of all the stocks of chloroquine in possession of the French government.

Respected Professor Christian Perronne talked about the theft live in one of France’s 24/7 info channels: “The central pharmacy for the hospitals announced today that they were facing a total rupture of stocks, that they were pillaged.”

With input from another, anonymous source, it’s now possible to establish a timeline that puts in much-needed perspective the recent actions of the French government.

Let’s start with Yves Levy, who was the head of INSERM – the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research – from 2014 to 2018, when he was appointed as extraordinary state councilor for the Macron administration. Only 12 people in France have reached this status.



Levy is married to Agnes Buzy, who until recently was minister of health under Macron. Buzy was essentially presented with an “offer you can’t refuse” by Macron’s party to leave the ministry – in the middle of the coronavirus crisis – and run for Mayor of Paris, where she was mercilessly trounced in the first round on March 16.

Levy has a vicious running feud with Professor Didier Raoult – prolific and often-cited Marseille-based specialist in communicable diseases. Levy withheld the INSERM label from the world-renowned IHU (Hospital-University Institute) research center directed by Raoult.

In practice, in October 2019, Levy revoked the status of “foundation” of the different IHUs so he could take over their research.



French professor Didier Raoult, biologist and professor of microbiology, specializes in infectious diseases and director of IHU Mediterranee Infection Institute, poses in his office in Marseille, France. Photo: AFP/Gerard Julien
Raoult was part of a clinical trial that in which hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin healed 90% of Covid-19 cases if they were tested very early. (Early, massive testing is at the heart of the successful South Korean strategy.)

Raoult is opposed to the total lockdown of sane individuals and possible carriers – which he considers “medieval,” in an anachronistic sense. He’s in favor of massive testing (which, besides South Korea, was successful in Singapore, Taiwan and Vietnam) and a fast treatment with hydroxychloroquine. Only contaminated individuals should be confined.


Chloroquine costs one euro for ten pills. And there’s the rub: Big Pharma – which, crucially, finances INSERM, and includes “national champion” Sanofi – would rather go for a way more profitable solution. Sanofi for the moment says it is “actively preparing” to produce chloroquine, but that may take “weeks,” and there’s no mention about pricing.

A minister fleeing a tsunami

Here’s the timeline:

On January 13, Agnes Buzyn, still France’s Health Minister, classifies chloroquine as a “poisonous substance,” from now on only available by prescription. An astonishing move, considering that it has been sold off the shelf in France for half a century.

On March 16, the Macron government orders a partial lockdown. There’s not a peep about chloroquine. Police initially are not required to wear masks; most have been stolen anyway, and there are not enough masks even for health workers. In 2011 France had nearly 1.5 billion masks: 800 million surgical masks and 600 million masks for health professionals generally.


But then, over the years, the strategic stocks were not renewed, to please the EU and to apply the Maastricht criteria, which limited membership in the Growth and Stability Pact to countries whose budget deficits did not exceed 3% of GDP. One of those in charge at the time was Jerome Salomon, now a scientific counselor to the Macron government.

On March 17, Agnes Buzyn says she has learned the spread of Covid-19 will be a major tsunami, for which the French health system has no solution. She also says it had been her understanding that the Paris mayoral election “would not take place” and that it was, ultimately, “a masquerade.”

What she does not say is that she didn’t go public at the time she was running because the whole political focus by the Macron political machine was on winning the “masquerade.” The first round of the election meant nothing, as Covid-19 was advancing. The second round was postponed indefinitely. She had to know about the impending healthcare disaster. But as a candidate of the Macron machine she did not go public in timely fashion.

In quick succession:

The Macron government refuses to apply mass testing, as practiced with success in South Korea and Germany.

Le Monde and the French state health agency characterize Raoult’s research as fake news, before issuing a retraction.

Professor Perrone reveals on the 24/7 LCI news channel that the stock of chloroquine at the French central pharmacy has been stolen.


Thanks to a tweet by Elon Musk, President Trump says chloroquine should be available to all Americans. Sufferers of lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, who already have supply problems with the only drug that offers them relief, set social media afire with their panic.

US doctors and other medical professionals take to hoarding the medicine for the use of themselves and those close to them, faking prescriptions to indicate they are for patients with lupus or rheumatoid arthritis.

Morocco buys the stock of chloroquine from Sanofi in Casablanca.

Pakistan decides to increase its production of chloroquine to be sent to China.

Switzerland discards the total lockdown of its population; goes for mass testing and fast treatment; and accuses France of practicing “spectacle politics.”

Christian Estrosi, the mayor of Nice, having had himself treated with chloroquine, without any government input, directly calls Sanofi so they may deliver chloroquine to Nice hospitals.

Because of Raoult’s research, a large-scale chloroquine test finally starts in France, under the – predictable – direction of INSERM, which wants to “remake the experiments in other independent medical centers.” This will take at least an extra six weeks – as the Elysee Palace’s scientific council now mulls the extension of France’s total lockdown to … six weeks.

If joint use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin proves definitely effective among the most gravely ill, quarantines may be reduced in select clusters.

The only French company that still manufactures chloroquine is under judicial intervention. That puts the chloroquine hoarding and theft into full perspective. It will take time for these stocks to be replenished, thus allowing Big Pharma the leeway to have what it wants: a costly solution.

It appears the perpetrators of the chloroquine theft were very well informed.

Bagged nurses

This chain of events, astonishing for a highly developed G-7 nation proud of its health service, is part of a long, painful process embedded in neoliberal dogma. EU-driven austerity mixed with the profit motive resulted in a very lax attitude towards the health system.

As Bugault told me, “test kits – very few in number – were always available but mostly for a small group connected to the French government [ former officials of the Ministry of Finance, CEOs of large corporations, oligarchs, media and entertainment moguls]. Same for chloroquine, which this government did everything to make inaccessible for the population.

They did not make life easy for Professor Raoult – he received death threats and was intimidated by ‘journalists.’

And they did not protect vital stocks. Still under the Hollande government, there was a conscious liquidation of the stock of masks – which had existed in large quantities in all hospitals. Not to mention that the suppression of hospital beds and hospital means accelerated under Sarkozy.”

This ties in with anguished reports by French citizens of nurses now having to use trash bags due to the lack of proper medical gear.

At the same time, in another astonishing development, the French state refuses to requisition private hospitals and clinics – which are practically empty at this stage – even as the president of their own association, Lamine Garbi, has pleaded for such a public service initiative: “I solemnly demand that we are requisitioned to help public hospitals. Our facilities are prepared. The wave that surprised the east of France must teach us a lesson.”

Bugault reconfirms the health situation in France “is very serious and will become even worse due to these political decisions – absence of masks, political refusal to massively test people, refusal of free access to chloroquine – in a context of supreme distress at the hospitals. This will last and destitution will be the norm.”

Professor vs president

In an explosive development on Tuesday, Raoult said he’s not participating in Macron’s scientific council anymore, even though he’s not quitting it altogether. Raoult once again insists on massive testing on a national scale to detect suspected cases, and then isolate and treat patients who tested positive. In a nutshell: the South Korean model.

That’s exactly what is expected from the IHU in Marseille, where hundreds of residents continue to queue up for testing. And that ties in with the conclusions by a top Chinese expert on Covid-19, Zhang Nanshan, who says that treatment with chloroquine phospate had a “positive impact,” with patients testing negative after around four days.

The key point has been stressed by Raoult: Use chloroquine in very special circumstances, for people tested very early, when the disease is not advanced yet, and only in these cases. He’s not advocating chloroquine for everyone. It’s exactly what the Chinese did, along with their use of Interferon.

For years, Raoult has been pleading for a drastic revision of health economic models, so the treatments, cure and therapies created mostly during the 20th century, are considered a patrimony in the service of all humanity.“That’s not the case”, he says, “because we abandon medicine that is not profitable, even if it’s effective. That’s why almost no antibiotics are manufactured in the West.”

On Tuesday, the French Health Ministry officially prohibited the utilization of treatment based on chloroquine recommended by Raoult. In fact the treatment is only allowed for terminal Covid-19 patients, with no other possibility of healing. This cannot but expose the Macron government to more accusations of at least inefficiency – added to the absence of masks, tests, contact tracing and ventilators.

On Wednesday, commenting on the new government guidelines, Raoult said, “When damage to the lungs is too important, and patients arrive for reanimation, they practically do not harbor viruses in their bodies any more. It’s too late to treat them with chloroquine. Are these the only cases – the very serious cases – that will be treated with chloroquine under the new directive by [French Health Minister] Veran?” If so, he added ironically, “then they will be able to say with scientific certainty that chloroquine does not work.”

Raoult was unavailable for comment on Western news media articles citing Chinese test results that would suggest he is wrong about the efficacy of chloroquine in dealing with mild cases of Covid-19.

Staffers pointed instead to his comments in the IHU bulletin. There Raoult says it’s “insulting” to ask if we can trust the Chinese on the use of chloroquine. “If this was an American disease, and the president of the United States said, ‘We need to treat patients with that,’ nobody would discuss it.”

In China, he adds, there were “enough elements so the Chinese government and all Chinese experts who know coronaviruses took an official position that ‘we must treat with chloroquine.’ Between the moment when we have the first results and an accepted international publication, there is no credible alternative among people who are the most knowledgeable in the world. They took this measure in the interest of public health.”

Crucially: if he had coronavirus, Raoult says he would take chloroquine. Since Raoult is rated by his peers as the number one world expert in communicable diseases, way above Dr. Anthony Fauci in the US, I would say the new reports represent Big Pharma talking.

Raoult has been mercilessly savaged and demonized by French corporate media that are controlled by a few oligarchs closely linked to Macronism. Not by accident the demonization has reached gilets jaunes (yellow vest) levels, especially because of the extremely popular hashtag #IlsSavaient (“They knew”), with which the yellow vests stress that French elites have “managed” the Covid-19 crisis by protecting themselves while leaving the population defenseless against the virus.

That ties in with the controversial analysis by crack philosopher Giorgio Agamben in a column published a month ago, where he was already arguing that Covid-19 clearly shows that the state of exception – similar to a state of emergency but with differences important to philosophers – has become fully normalized in the West.

Agamben was speaking not as a doctor or a virologist but as a master thinker, following in the steps of Foucault, Walter Benjamin and Hannah Arendt. Noting how a latent state of fear has metastasized into a state of collective panic, for which Covid-19 “offers once again the ideal pretext,” he described how, “in a perverse vicious circle, the limitation of freedom imposed by governments is accepted in the name of a desire for security that was induced by the same governments that now intervene to satisfy it.”

There was no state of collective panic in South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Vietnam – to mention four Asian examples outside of China. A dogged combination of mass testing and contact tracing was applied with immense professionalism. It worked. In the Chinese case, with the help of chloroquine. And in all Asian cases, without a murky profit motive to the benefit of Big Pharma.

There hasn’t yet appeared the smoking gun that proves the Macron system not only is incompetent to deal with Covid-19 but also is dragging the process so Big Pharma can come up with a miracle vaccine, fast. But the pattern to discourage chloroquine is more than laid out above – in parallel to the demonization of Raoult.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/


Last edited by TonyGosling on Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:30 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Tue Oct 13, 2020 10:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SMOKING GUN #2
MANDATORY VACCINATION LAWS PASSED ITALY GERMANY CHINA AUTUMN 2019

CHINA MANDATED AUGUST 2019

According to the Law, China is to implement a state immunization program, and residents living within the territory of China are legally obligated to be vaccinated with immunization program vaccines, which are provided by the government free of charge.
China: Vaccine Law Passed
(Aug. 27, 2019) On June 29, 2019, the National People’s Congress Standing Committee of the People’s Republic of China (PRC or China) adopted the PRC Law on Vaccine Administration (Vaccine Law). The official Xinhua news agency states that the Law provides for the “strictest” vaccine management with tough penalties in order to ensure the country’s vaccine safety.
https://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/china-vaccine-law-passed/

GERMANY MANDATED

Germany: Law mandating vaccines in schools takes effect
01 March 2020 - Measles vaccinations in Germany are now required to register in schools. Parents can be fined thousands of euros if they violate the law.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-law-mandating-vaccines-in-schools-takes- effect/a-52596233

The global crackdown on parents who refuse vaccines for their kids is on
Countries like Germany and Australia are tired of measles outbreaks — so they're moving to fine anti-vaccine parents.
https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/8/3/16069204/vaccine-fines -measles-outbreaks-europe-australia
Here’s a quick roundup of the global crackdown on vaccine-refusing parents:
In Germany on Thursday, lawmakers passed a law stating that parents need to prove they’ve vaccinated their kids against measles — or risk fines up to €2,500 (about $2,750). Unvaccinated children also risk losing their places in school.
Italy’s parliament passed a law that makes 10 childhood vaccinations mandatory for kids up to age 16, and requires parents to prove their children are immunized before entering school or else face a €500 (about $560) noncompliance fine. And kids who aren’t vaccinated are being told not to come to school.
In France, the health ministry made 11 vaccines — up from the current three (diphtheria, tetanus, and polio) — mandatory for children, though there’s no talk of a fine yet.
Further afield, New South Wales, Australia, passed “no jab, no play” legislation in September 2017: The law bans unvaccinated kids from preschool and day care and fine the directors of schools that admit un-immunized children $5,500 Australian dollars ($4,400). The law in New South Wales is modeled on similarly stringent laws in other Australian states, and across the country, parents with children who aren’t immunized aren’t eligible for child care benefits.
In the US, New York — where a large measles outbreak raged on for nearly a year — the government threatened parents who don’t vaccinate their children with a fine of up to $1,000.
https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/8/3/16069204/vaccine-fines -measles-outbreaks-europe-australia


What can we learn about lockdowns from the country whose dictator told them to fight Covid by drinking vodka? IAN BIRRELL visits Belarus and finds that the death rate appears lower than ours - despite its leader's deranged ideas
Alexander Lukashenko is last dictator in Europe who ruled Belarus for 26 year
Nation’s professional football league played on through the pandemic’s peak
Death rates from coronavirus do not seem all that different from elsewhere
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8776607/Belarus-death-rate-ap pears-lower-UKs-writes-IAN-BIRRE

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:33 pm    Post subject: Re: Smoking Guns of Covid-19 or SARS-CoV-2 Plandemic Reply with quote

More on smoking gun #1
Fake Lancet report which halted chloroquine Covid-19 trials is retracted

Desai has been named in three medical malpractice suits, unrelated to the Surgisphere database. In an interview with the Scientist, Desai previously described the allegations as “unfounded”.

Surgisphere: governments and WHO changed Covid-19 policy based on suspect data from tiny US company
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-surgisphere-who -world-health-organization-hydroxychloroquine

Surgisphere, whose employees appear to include a sci-fi writer and adult content model, provided database behind Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine hydroxychloroquine studies

Melissa Davey in Melbourne and Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington and Sarah Boseley in London

Wed 3 Jun 2020 19.47 BSTFirst published on Wed 3 Jun 2020 11.54 BST
A tiny US company, Surgisphere, is behind flawed data which led to governments and the world health organisation changing health policy
A tiny US company, Surgisphere, is behind flawed data which led to governments and the world health organisation changing health policy Photograph: Anthony Brown/Alamy Stock Photo
The World Health Organization and a number of national governments have changed their Covid-19 policies and treatments on the basis of flawed data from a little-known US healthcare analytics company, also calling into question the integrity of key studies published in some of the world’s most prestigious medical journals.

A Guardian investigation can reveal the US-based company Surgisphere, whose handful of employees appear to include a science fiction writer and an adult-content model, has provided data for multiple studies on Covid-19 co-authored by its chief executive, but has so far failed to adequately explain its data or methodology.

Data it claims to have legitimately obtained from more than a thousand hospitals worldwide formed the basis of scientific articles that have led to changes in Covid-19 treatment policies in Latin American countries. It was also behind a decision by the WHO and research institutes around the world to halt trials of the controversial drug hydroxychloroquine. On Wednesday, the WHO announced those trials would now resume.

Two of the world’s leading medical journals – the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine – published studies based on Surgisphere data. The studies were co-authored by the firm’s chief executive, Sapan Desai.

Late on Tuesday, after being approached by the Guardian, the Lancet released an “expression of concern” about its published study. The New England Journal of Medicine has also issued a similar notice.

An independent audit of the provenance and validity of the data has now been commissioned by the authors not affiliated with Surgisphere because of “concerns that have been raised about the reliability of the database”.

Questions raised over hydroxychloroquine study which caused WHO to halt trials for Covid-19
Read more
The Guardian’s investigation has found:

A search of publicly available material suggests several of Surgisphere’s employees have little or no data or scientific background. An employee listed as a science editor appears to be a science fiction author and fantasy artist whose professional profile suggests writing is her fulltime job. Another employee listed as a marketing executive is an adult model and events hostess, who also acts in videos for organisations.
The company’s LinkedIn page has fewer than 100 followers and last week listed just six employees. This was changed to three employees as of Wednesday.
While Surgisphere claims to run one of the largest and fastest hospital databases in the world, it has almost no online presence. Its Twitter handle has fewer than 170 followers, with no posts between October 2017 and March 2020.
Until Monday, the “get in touch” link on Surgisphere’s homepage redirected to a WordPress template for a cryptocurrency website, raising questions about how hospitals could easily contact the company to join its database.
Desai has been named in three medical malpractice suits, unrelated to the Surgisphere database. In an interview with the Scientist, Desai previously described the allegations as “unfounded”.


TonyGosling wrote:
SMOKING GUN #1
FRANCE WITHDREW SARS CURE CHLOROQUINE FROM SALE ON MONDAY 13 JANUARY

Why France is hiding a cheap, tested virus cure
The French government is arguably helping Big Pharma profit from the Covid-19 pandemic
By PEPE ESCOBAR
MARCH 28, 2020
https://asiatimes.com/2020/03/why-france-is-hiding-a-cheap-and-tested- virus-cure/

What’s going on in the fifth largest economy in the world arguably points to a major collusion scandal in which the French government is helping Big Pharma to profit from the expansion of Covid-19. Informed French citizens are absolutely furious about it.

My initial question to a serious, unimpeachable Paris source, jurist Valerie Bugault, was about the liaisons dangereuses between Macronism and Big Pharma and especially about the mysterious “disappearance” – more likely outright theft – of all the stocks of chloroquine in possession of the French government.

Respected Professor Christian Perronne talked about the theft live in one of France’s 24/7 info channels: “The central pharmacy for the hospitals announced today that they were facing a total rupture of stocks, that they were pillaged.”

With input from another, anonymous source, it’s now possible to establish a timeline that puts in much-needed perspective the recent actions of the French government.

Let’s start with Yves Levy, who was the head of INSERM – the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research – from 2014 to 2018, when he was appointed as extraordinary state councilor for the Macron administration. Only 12 people in France have reached this status.



Levy is married to Agnes Buzy, who until recently was minister of health under Macron. Buzy was essentially presented with an “offer you can’t refuse” by Macron’s party to leave the ministry – in the middle of the coronavirus crisis – and run for Mayor of Paris, where she was mercilessly trounced in the first round on March 16.

Levy has a vicious running feud with Professor Didier Raoult – prolific and often-cited Marseille-based specialist in communicable diseases. Levy withheld the INSERM label from the world-renowned IHU (Hospital-University Institute) research center directed by Raoult.

In practice, in October 2019, Levy revoked the status of “foundation” of the different IHUs so he could take over their research.



French professor Didier Raoult, biologist and professor of microbiology, specializes in infectious diseases and director of IHU Mediterranee Infection Institute, poses in his office in Marseille, France. Photo: AFP/Gerard Julien
Raoult was part of a clinical trial that in which hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin healed 90% of Covid-19 cases if they were tested very early. (Early, massive testing is at the heart of the successful South Korean strategy.)

Raoult is opposed to the total lockdown of sane individuals and possible carriers – which he considers “medieval,” in an anachronistic sense. He’s in favor of massive testing (which, besides South Korea, was successful in Singapore, Taiwan and Vietnam) and a fast treatment with hydroxychloroquine. Only contaminated individuals should be confined.


Chloroquine costs one euro for ten pills. And there’s the rub: Big Pharma – which, crucially, finances INSERM, and includes “national champion” Sanofi – would rather go for a way more profitable solution. Sanofi for the moment says it is “actively preparing” to produce chloroquine, but that may take “weeks,” and there’s no mention about pricing.

A minister fleeing a tsunami

Here’s the timeline:

On January 13, Agnes Buzyn, still France’s Health Minister, classifies chloroquine as a “poisonous substance,” from now on only available by prescription. An astonishing move, considering that it has been sold off the shelf in France for half a century.

On March 16, the Macron government orders a partial lockdown. There’s not a peep about chloroquine. Police initially are not required to wear masks; most have been stolen anyway, and there are not enough masks even for health workers. In 2011 France had nearly 1.5 billion masks: 800 million surgical masks and 600 million masks for health professionals generally.


But then, over the years, the strategic stocks were not renewed, to please the EU and to apply the Maastricht criteria, which limited membership in the Growth and Stability Pact to countries whose budget deficits did not exceed 3% of GDP. One of those in charge at the time was Jerome Salomon, now a scientific counselor to the Macron government.

On March 17, Agnes Buzyn says she has learned the spread of Covid-19 will be a major tsunami, for which the French health system has no solution. She also says it had been her understanding that the Paris mayoral election “would not take place” and that it was, ultimately, “a masquerade.”

What she does not say is that she didn’t go public at the time she was running because the whole political focus by the Macron political machine was on winning the “masquerade.” The first round of the election meant nothing, as Covid-19 was advancing. The second round was postponed indefinitely. She had to know about the impending healthcare disaster. But as a candidate of the Macron machine she did not go public in timely fashion.

In quick succession:

The Macron government refuses to apply mass testing, as practiced with success in South Korea and Germany.

Le Monde and the French state health agency characterize Raoult’s research as fake news, before issuing a retraction.

Professor Perrone reveals on the 24/7 LCI news channel that the stock of chloroquine at the French central pharmacy has been stolen.


Thanks to a tweet by Elon Musk, President Trump says chloroquine should be available to all Americans. Sufferers of lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, who already have supply problems with the only drug that offers them relief, set social media afire with their panic.

US doctors and other medical professionals take to hoarding the medicine for the use of themselves and those close to them, faking prescriptions to indicate they are for patients with lupus or rheumatoid arthritis.

Morocco buys the stock of chloroquine from Sanofi in Casablanca.

Pakistan decides to increase its production of chloroquine to be sent to China.

Switzerland discards the total lockdown of its population; goes for mass testing and fast treatment; and accuses France of practicing “spectacle politics.”

Christian Estrosi, the mayor of Nice, having had himself treated with chloroquine, without any government input, directly calls Sanofi so they may deliver chloroquine to Nice hospitals.

Because of Raoult’s research, a large-scale chloroquine test finally starts in France, under the – predictable – direction of INSERM, which wants to “remake the experiments in other independent medical centers.” This will take at least an extra six weeks – as the Elysee Palace’s scientific council now mulls the extension of France’s total lockdown to … six weeks.

If joint use of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin proves definitely effective among the most gravely ill, quarantines may be reduced in select clusters.

The only French company that still manufactures chloroquine is under judicial intervention. That puts the chloroquine hoarding and theft into full perspective. It will take time for these stocks to be replenished, thus allowing Big Pharma the leeway to have what it wants: a costly solution.

It appears the perpetrators of the chloroquine theft were very well informed.

Bagged nurses

This chain of events, astonishing for a highly developed G-7 nation proud of its health service, is part of a long, painful process embedded in neoliberal dogma. EU-driven austerity mixed with the profit motive resulted in a very lax attitude towards the health system.

As Bugault told me, “test kits – very few in number – were always available but mostly for a small group connected to the French government [ former officials of the Ministry of Finance, CEOs of large corporations, oligarchs, media and entertainment moguls]. Same for chloroquine, which this government did everything to make inaccessible for the population.

They did not make life easy for Professor Raoult – he received death threats and was intimidated by ‘journalists.’

And they did not protect vital stocks. Still under the Hollande government, there was a conscious liquidation of the stock of masks – which had existed in large quantities in all hospitals. Not to mention that the suppression of hospital beds and hospital means accelerated under Sarkozy.”

This ties in with anguished reports by French citizens of nurses now having to use trash bags due to the lack of proper medical gear.

At the same time, in another astonishing development, the French state refuses to requisition private hospitals and clinics – which are practically empty at this stage – even as the president of their own association, Lamine Garbi, has pleaded for such a public service initiative: “I solemnly demand that we are requisitioned to help public hospitals. Our facilities are prepared. The wave that surprised the east of France must teach us a lesson.”

Bugault reconfirms the health situation in France “is very serious and will become even worse due to these political decisions – absence of masks, political refusal to massively test people, refusal of free access to chloroquine – in a context of supreme distress at the hospitals. This will last and destitution will be the norm.”

Professor vs president

In an explosive development on Tuesday, Raoult said he’s not participating in Macron’s scientific council anymore, even though he’s not quitting it altogether. Raoult once again insists on massive testing on a national scale to detect suspected cases, and then isolate and treat patients who tested positive. In a nutshell: the South Korean model.

That’s exactly what is expected from the IHU in Marseille, where hundreds of residents continue to queue up for testing. And that ties in with the conclusions by a top Chinese expert on Covid-19, Zhang Nanshan, who says that treatment with chloroquine phospate had a “positive impact,” with patients testing negative after around four days.

The key point has been stressed by Raoult: Use chloroquine in very special circumstances, for people tested very early, when the disease is not advanced yet, and only in these cases. He’s not advocating chloroquine for everyone. It’s exactly what the Chinese did, along with their use of Interferon.

For years, Raoult has been pleading for a drastic revision of health economic models, so the treatments, cure and therapies created mostly during the 20th century, are considered a patrimony in the service of all humanity.“That’s not the case”, he says, “because we abandon medicine that is not profitable, even if it’s effective. That’s why almost no antibiotics are manufactured in the West.”

On Tuesday, the French Health Ministry officially prohibited the utilization of treatment based on chloroquine recommended by Raoult. In fact the treatment is only allowed for terminal Covid-19 patients, with no other possibility of healing. This cannot but expose the Macron government to more accusations of at least inefficiency – added to the absence of masks, tests, contact tracing and ventilators.

On Wednesday, commenting on the new government guidelines, Raoult said, “When damage to the lungs is too important, and patients arrive for reanimation, they practically do not harbor viruses in their bodies any more. It’s too late to treat them with chloroquine. Are these the only cases – the very serious cases – that will be treated with chloroquine under the new directive by [French Health Minister] Veran?” If so, he added ironically, “then they will be able to say with scientific certainty that chloroquine does not work.”

Raoult was unavailable for comment on Western news media articles citing Chinese test results that would suggest he is wrong about the efficacy of chloroquine in dealing with mild cases of Covid-19.

Staffers pointed instead to his comments in the IHU bulletin. There Raoult says it’s “insulting” to ask if we can trust the Chinese on the use of chloroquine. “If this was an American disease, and the president of the United States said, ‘We need to treat patients with that,’ nobody would discuss it.”

In China, he adds, there were “enough elements so the Chinese government and all Chinese experts who know coronaviruses took an official position that ‘we must treat with chloroquine.’ Between the moment when we have the first results and an accepted international publication, there is no credible alternative among people who are the most knowledgeable in the world. They took this measure in the interest of public health.”

Crucially: if he had coronavirus, Raoult says he would take chloroquine. Since Raoult is rated by his peers as the number one world expert in communicable diseases, way above Dr. Anthony Fauci in the US, I would say the new reports represent Big Pharma talking.

Raoult has been mercilessly savaged and demonized by French corporate media that are controlled by a few oligarchs closely linked to Macronism. Not by accident the demonization has reached gilets jaunes (yellow vest) levels, especially because of the extremely popular hashtag #IlsSavaient (“They knew”), with which the yellow vests stress that French elites have “managed” the Covid-19 crisis by protecting themselves while leaving the population defenseless against the virus.

That ties in with the controversial analysis by crack philosopher Giorgio Agamben in a column published a month ago, where he was already arguing that Covid-19 clearly shows that the state of exception – similar to a state of emergency but with differences important to philosophers – has become fully normalized in the West.

Agamben was speaking not as a doctor or a virologist but as a master thinker, following in the steps of Foucault, Walter Benjamin and Hannah Arendt. Noting how a latent state of fear has metastasized into a state of collective panic, for which Covid-19 “offers once again the ideal pretext,” he described how, “in a perverse vicious circle, the limitation of freedom imposed by governments is accepted in the name of a desire for security that was induced by the same governments that now intervene to satisfy it.”

There was no state of collective panic in South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Vietnam – to mention four Asian examples outside of China. A dogged combination of mass testing and contact tracing was applied with immense professionalism. It worked. In the Chinese case, with the help of chloroquine. And in all Asian cases, without a murky profit motive to the benefit of Big Pharma.

There hasn’t yet appeared the smoking gun that proves the Macron system not only is incompetent to deal with Covid-19 but also is dragging the process so Big Pharma can come up with a miracle vaccine, fast. But the pattern to discourage chloroquine is more than laid out above – in parallel to the demonization of Raoult.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Whitehall_Bin_Men
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter


Joined: 13 Jan 2007
Posts: 3034
Location: Westminster, LONDON, SW1A 2HB.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 09, 2020 1:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So
USING Plandemic to push mRNA vaccine through
Human Gene Editing vaccine
Under EMERGENCY legislation!
another smoking gun

Transcript Interview with Tony Gosling and Stanley Laham November 2020

How Does New mRNA Pfizer Moderna Vaccine work? Immunologist Dr. Stanley Laham University of Florida.

This YouTube clip opens with an image from National Geographic from July 2020 showing an illustration and the wording: “Moderna’s mRNA vaccine reaches its final phase. Here’s how it works.

It WRONGLY says. “Spike proteins coat the surface of the VIRUS” (implying mRNA vaccine is producing viruses with the spike proteins on, instead of tricking our living cells into producing the spike proteins direct. It should be CORRECTED to read “Spike proteins coat the surface of the CELL”.

NOTES & ABBREVIATIONS:

• Messenger RNA (mRNA) copies portions of genetic code, a process called transcription, and transports these copies to ribosomes, which are the cellular factories that facilitate the production of proteins from this code.  
RNA (Ribonucleic Acid)
DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid)
RT (Reverse Transcriptase)
PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction)
CRISPR (Clusters of Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats) invented by Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier
HCQ (Hydroxychloroquine)
SLE (Systemic Lupus Erythematosus)
SARS (Severe Advanced Respiratory Syndrome)
GBS (Guillain-Barre Syndrome)


Dr Stanley Laham:

My name is Stanley Laham. I am speaking to you from Florida. I attained my Doctorate from the Department of Immunology and Molecular Genetics at the University of Florida, and my doctoral dissertation was the discovery of a previously unknown virus of the Retroviridae family.

Tony Gosling:

And where did you spend most of your career?

SL: Most of my career was a scientific career at the University of Florida and then after that I spent most of my time in private enterprise. I attained my PhD in 1978. My doctoral dissertation was the discovery of a new virus of the Retroviridae family, which is the same as HIV, the double-stranded RNA viruses that have Reverse Transcriptase in them, but of a different sub family. So, you could say, I do have a medical background.

TG: Ok, so how might the vaccines now being released be different to previous types of vaccine?

SL: Now, there are about 4 different vaccines that are being approved for use.

TG: What about types? Are they all the same type?

SL: No, they’re not, and the ones that I am most concerned about are the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines because they are using a novel technique. What they are doing is taking the messenger RNA from the Covid-19, what we call the SARS Corona 2 virus, that codes for the spike protein, which is what attaches to cells and allows the corona virus to penetrate into the cells and they’re injecting it directly into the public. This is basically what their vaccine is. What they’re hoping, what they’re doing and what they’ve had results with, is that our own cells will take that mRNA and make the spike protein. The spike protein will migrate to the membrane of our cells, our immune system will recognize it as a foreign antigen and mount an immune response and make antibodies. B-cells will make antibodies and T-cells will be activated to destroy the cells that are showing this antigen, and that’s the danger with that new technique, because this mRNA will be translated into protein (the process of going from Messenger RNA to protein is called Translation), but it also may be incorporated into our own DNA by the enzyme called Reverse Transcriptase, which can incorporate the RNA that we receive, transform it into DNA, and insert it into our own genomes. This way our cells are not only producing the spike protein from the mRNA piece that will gradually disintegrate, but keep producing it because it has been incorporated into our own cell DNA through Reverse Transcriptase, and what I’m afraid of is that it may cause long-term auto-immune disease. We’ve seen many examples of cases like that such as chronic hepatitis where the virus can no longer be detected, but the viral antigen is still showing up on the membrane of liver cells and we mount an immune response and we effectively destroy our own liver.

There are other vaccines that are coming out which I think would be a much better idea. As far as I’m concerned, I would probably not take the mRNA of either Pfizer or Moderna, because this is the first time such things are being used and the long-term consequences that may way outlast the corona epidemic are not known. Do you see what I mean?

TG: Yes, so can you just give us an idea and take us through again what can go wrong with this kind of vaccine? How is it that your body starts to actually reproduce something that you set out to get rid of, and what effect is that going to have if it happens on someone’s life as they move towards middle and old age?

SL: Well, like I said, the main danger is that it may create some other immune diseases. A lot of our cells that will incorporate this mRNA will become recognized as foreign by our immune system. There is no guarantee that once you get that vaccine which cells and which organs will become that RNA and start producing the viral antigen. So, because of that, it’s a big unknown.

Take the example of polio vaccines. Two polio vaccines were developed: the Salt vaccine and the Sabine vaccine. They were tested for years even though they are very conventional vaccines. One was a dead virus, the Salt vaccine, and the Sabine vaccine was an attenuated vaccine, which was given when we were kids on a piece of sugar and we ingested it.
This is what now , for example, the Russian vaccine, the Sputnik V, has more or less replicated. It has been done by taking the same piece of mRNA that Moderna and Pfizer are proposing to inject into us directly, and instead have used Reverse Transcriptase to incorporate it into a harmless human adenovirus and that becomes the vaccine, so we get infected with that adenovirus which causes extremely mild symptoms. That adenovirus will make its own proteins but also that corona spike protein, because it’s been engineered to do that, and it’s not our own bodies that has to do that spike protein, and I think that’s a safer path to a vaccine for Covid-19.

Another company that’s doing the exact same thing is Johnson & Johnson. They’re using adenovirus 5 to make a vaccine incorporating the corona spike gene into an adenovirus just like the Russians. That would be a safe vaccine. Well, let me put it this way, a safer vaccine.

In Australia there’s a company called Novavax that is producing a vaccine that will be known as NVX-CoV2373. What they’ve done is even simpler. They’ve purified the spike protein of the corona virus, so it’s just the protein, and they’ve attached it to an adjuvant. An adjuvant is an immune stimulator to make the spike protein more antigenic, so that our body reacts even more strongly against it, and that is their vaccine, so we’ll be making antibodies to the receptor sites of the corona virus. The only disadvantage to that one is that it may not produce as strong an immune response as let’s say that of the Russian or the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

TG: Some of the terms you’re using are a bit complicated. I wonder if you could explain them a bit more. This idea of Reverse Transcriptase is one of them and this concept of having the spike, the protein spike, so can you explain a little bit further what you mean by those two terms?

SL: Ok, well Reverse Transcriptase is an enzyme that was discovered by Howard Temin and David Baltimore back in 1976. Well no, they got the Nobel Prize for it back then, but they discovered it in the early 70s. I guess I would have to give you a small course in genetics. You know, our genetic material is DNA and this DNA codes for protein and it codes it to go from DNA to protein and to do this you have to use mRNA and this is elaborated by an enzyme called DNA-dependent/RNA-polymerase and this mRNA goes into the ribosome of our cells and codes for all the different proteins that we make. Reverse Transcriptase does the contrary. It reads RNA and makes the complementary DNA for that RNA. That’s why they call it Reverse Transcriptase because going from DNA to RNA is called Transcription.

There are a lot of viruses that are DNA viruses and there are a lot of viruses that are RNA viruses. Some of the RNA viruses go directly and reproduce RNA to RNA. Others go through DNA replicative stage and they carry their own Reverse Transcriptase. That is the case for HIV. HIV is two strands of RNA and a few enzymes in a capsule. When HIV gets into our cells, the Reverse Transcriptase that it carries transforms into DNA and this DNA has now become part of the cell that it has infected and the cell’s machinery reproduces the virus. Viruses cannot reproduce on their own. They are Obligate Intercellular Parasites because they don’t have a replicative mechanism. What they do is go into a cell and colonize it and use the cell’s machinery to reproduce themselves, until there’s enough in the cell, the cell (inaudible) and it is released into the bloodstream and it effects other cells and it’s a cascading effect.

Now, the Corona virus has its RNA. That RNA codes for its code, the code that it needs to go from cell to cell. In that code, or to be airborne or to infect somebody else, there is a spike and that spike is made out of a protein coded by its RNA. It codes for many other proteins also, but that spike protein is what attaches to cells and allows the virus to penetrate the cells. The mRNA that they’ve isolated from the genome from the RNA of the corona virus is that specific mRNA that codes for that spike protein on the surface of the corona virus, so if you make antibodies to it, you block it’s penetration of cells, you neutralize the virus. Have I made myself more or less clear?

TG: Yeah, I hope so. So, your idea is that you make so many antibodies, that there’s no space on these cells for the Covid spike to get into them.

SL: Correct, you literally put a cap on those spikes, a cap made out of the antibodies that neutralize the virus. They are neutralizing antibodies, the virus can no longer infect the cells, it can no longer penetrate them.

TG: What about the T-cells? Apparently they’re just about as good as antibodies at stopping Covid.

SL: That is correct. You have two kinds of what we used to call humoral immunity, that is antibodies because they are circulating in the blood, and as you know blood used to be called humor, so humoral immunity consists of antibodies and cellular immunity consists of killer T-cells and that’s where there’s a very big danger precisely of having auto-immune diseases later on.

TG: You know, when I was a kid T-cells used to be called white blood cells.

SL: Well, all of them are white blood cells. Whether it’s T-cells, which are lymphocytes. There are two types of lymphocytes: T-cells and B-cells. Leucocytes are also white blood cells as are monocytes. So, yeah, they are a member of the white blood cell population.

TG: It’s a fascinating journey you’re taking us on, Stanley, and I’m sure a lot of our listeners will be enjoying hearing a little bit of this, because there is an idea floating around in the mass media that we mustn’t trouble the listeners and the viewers or the readers of the newspapers too much with the science, but actually the science in all of this of course is absolutely crucial. I wonder could you just take us through the different types. You’ve talked about the mRNA vaccines. Are there other types of vaccines that they’re developing, because many of these vaccines encompass new technology? There are new ideas here. For example, there is the CRISPR technology (I believe one of the inventors of CRISPR is Emmanuelle Charpentier) that can edit our genes. The idea is that they are ‘smart’ vaccines. They’re not like Smallpox and Cowpox where there’s just a simple attenuated version of the dangerous virus, but it’s something that is trying to be clever and smart. It might snip the DNA or RNA of a virus, but it also might go in and start altering our DNA. Can you take us through these new types of vaccines being developed and what you make of them?

SL: Well, as I was telling you, the two main alternatives that are coming out for the Corona virus now are the Russian vaccineand the Johnson & Johnson vaccines where they are precisely using an attenuated adenovirus, a human adenovirus, in which they have incorporated the protein, the part of the genome of the corona virus, so that these adenoviruses when they infect you with a very mild infection you not only get immunized to them, you get immunized to the Corona virus as well. This is the basis of the Russian Sputnik V and the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. They’re both using very mild human adenoviruses as carriers of corona antigen to immunize us, and they will not only elicit an antibody response, but also a T-cell response.

The other one that I was telling you about is from Australia where they are just purifying that protein from the surface of the corona virus, binding it with an immune stimulant, which we call an adjuvant, and that is used as a vaccine. This will produce a lot of antibodies but it will not for sure stimulate T-cell response, but it will give you humoral protection, antibody protection, against the Corona virus.

You previously asked me the difference between T-cell immunity and antibody immunity. Well, antibodies, like I told you, are produced by B-lymphocytes and they provide humoral immunity and even when the antibody count goes down and you don’t have detectable (inaudible) of antibodies, but let’s say you are challenged by that corona virus two years later, you’re going to get what they call a secondary response, because you form what is called Memory B-cells that will immediately start to produce huge quantities of antibodies and you get a secondary response.

Now, as far as T-cell immunity, what the T-cells do is that they actually kill the infected cell that is presenting the viral antigen, and that’s why I told you that there’s a danger with these mRNA viruses because a lot of our cells are going to be producing the viral antigen, the viral spike protein that will be on the cell membrane and our immune system is going to attack them. Yes, it will immunize us against the corona virus, but at the same time a lot of our cells that will be producing that antigen will be attacked and destroyed by our killer T-cells. The danger is that we don’t know how many cells and how many organs will actually be producing that antigen because this mRNA that’s being injected into us will be circulating in our blood and we have no guarantee about which of our own cells are going to pick it up and start producing viral antigens.

TG: Ok, so what is the thinking behind actually getting our own cells to produce the viral antigen?

SL: Well, it’s obviously a much faster track. With the gene manipulation techniques that we have now, it’s very easy to identify that spike protein RNA, cleave it out, put it in what they call a liposome and inject it into the body. You don’t have to try to put it into another virus or you don’t need to attenuate the corona virus itself. It’s a real fast-track way to get the body to produce an immune response against that spike protein.

It’s another way, if I may say so, to have a new patent. As you know, whether its Moderna or Pfizer, their stock prices shot up on the stock exchange. You know Moderna has never produced any pharmaceutical at all. They haven’t produced a vaccine before and they haven’t produced any drug that’s been on the market. Yet, as soon as they announced their mRNA vaccine and that they were on a fast-track to produce that vaccine, their stocks shot up by hundreds of millions of dollars and it seems that some of their high executives, before their vaccine was proven, and I’m talking about three months ago, sold their stocks. So, they cashed in before they had a proven vaccine, but I guess that’s an example of what Naomi Klein calls Disaster Capitalism.

TG: In what way?

SL: In a way that a lot of epidemics, natural disasters and so forth are an opportunity for some companies to make a lot of money. We’ve seen that with the history of the corona virus since the beginning. For example, the criticism of certain anti-viral drugs that were shown in vitro to have antiviral properties to inhibit the corona virus and published as such in scientific articles in Nature and the Lancet were subsequently denounced as fraudulent, as quackery, while Remdesivir was being lauded as an effective drug against corona virus, which it is not; it has not saved lives. The best study they have is that it lessened a patient’s hospital stay by three days. Whereas drugs like Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine have been shown in vitro to seriously inhibit the corona virus both extracellularly and intracellularly, and they are very safe drugs.

To me, I was amazed back in February and March when everybody was warning: What! HCQ is dangerous for the heart, it can cause terrible heart conditions, that it’s unsafe. This is a drug seventy-five years old that hundreds of millions of people have taken, and that has saved tens of millions of lives, that was on the list of the United Nation’s essential drugs for humanity. We never heard about any dangers for the cardiovascular system until it was used for the corona virus outbreak.

The other drug that has proven effective is another anti-parasitic drug, Ivermectin, which has shown in vitro to be effective within 48 hours. If you had infected tissue cultures that you put in the nutrient fluid of these tissue cultures, Ivermectin, and infected them with the Corona 2 Covid-19 virus and a group of controls that did not have Ivermectin that you infected with corona virus, these tissue cultures would be totally destroyed by the corona virus, whereas those with the Ivermectin there would be no effect and no corona virus RNA detectable.

TG: Amazing. It’s incredible isn’t it? How is it that the drug that is actually designed to be used against malaria could be useful for what is effectively a rather suped-up common cold?

SL: Yeah, well, this is what you call serendipity. It just happened that we noticed that. The same for Ivermectin. Ivermectin was developed as an anti-parasitic drug by a Japanese gentleman, who got the Nobel Prize for it by the way. And these two anti-parasitic drugs have proven to be serious anti-viral agents. On top of it, HCQ has one more advantage. Here’s a drug that was developed for malaria. Do you know that now Chloroquine is part of the treatment for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Rheumatoid Arthritis because HCQ was found to be an excellent modulator of the immune system. So, one of the additional ways it helps with the corona infection is that it has antiviral capacities in vitro, but it can also attenuate the Cytokine Storm that the virus sometimes causes. The uncontrolled immune response, where a lot of cytokines and hystomines are released, can actually cause blood clots and respiratory failure. So, how is it that a drug developed for Malaria was found to be effective against a virus? Well, the same way it was found to be a good treatment for SLE or Rheumatoid Arthritis – by accident.

TG: What about SARS? I suppose many people heard on the news in the mid-Noughties about a virus called SARS flying around. When this corona first started, it was actually called SARS Cov2 and I wonder if this is a type of corona virus that is normal, naturally occurring? What is it doing to our body? Obviously, we know that the ordinary corona virus, the common cold, causes a lot of irritation, it makes us sneeze, it makes our nose run, maybe gives us headaches, this kind of thing, but after a while it’s gone, it’s pretty harmless except maybe if you’re very elderly or very sick, but what is SARS actually doing to us because we know that this Covid-19 was originally called SARS Cov2?

SL: It is SARS Cov2. It’s the exact same family as the SARS Corona 1.

TG: Okay, I think it stands for Severe Advanced … Oh Gosh! What is it?

SL: Respiratory Syndrome.

TG: Ah, yes, that’s it. Severe Advanced Respiratory Syndrome. Yeah. But what is it doing to our bodies?

SL: Well, what it does exactly it progresses like a flu. It first infects what we call the ciliated epithelial cells, tracheal ciliated epithelial cells, and then depending on your response, depending on the individual and depending on your immune system, it can progress down to the bronchi, to the lungs, cause a severe immune response which is as devastating as the virus itself, which is what we call the Cytokine Storm, which is why they’ve also discovered steroids, an immune depressant, in the treatment. One would think that it’s counter imaginative to use an immune depressant in a viral infection, but sometimes the immune response is more devastating precisely because you’re recognizing all these infected lung cells as foreign, because they’re producing the viral antigen, and the immune system reacts brutally and you get a Cytokine Storm, and you start destroying your own alveoli and causing a lot of micro blood clots that can eventually lead to death.

TG: Ok, so that’s one way. What’s going on with our blood for example with SARS? Can it progress into the blood stream? I mean I’m just quite amazed that the body would sort of overreact. Surely the idea is to kill off the virus, not to kill off all of our cells as well at the same time?

SL: Yeah, well, this is not new. There are a lot of cases where our bodies, by some mistake of the immune system, recognize our own cells, even without an infection, as foreign. This is what happens in rheumatoid arthritis, in Lupus, it happens in Myasthenia gravis. That’s why they are called autoimmune diseases. Viruses are notorious in acting as detonators of autoimmune responses, because they infect cells, they leave their antigen on cell membranes, and even after the virus itself is no longer active, viruses are notorious in causing immune responses that can very much effect us. I’m sure you’re familiar with Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) and Bell’s Palsy. These are neurological autoimmune diseases that affect us because a virus deposited its antigen and our bodies began to recognize our own cells as foreign to be attacked.

TG: Is that what you’re saying that we might get the same kind of autoimmune response tricking our immune system into attacking our own cells with the mRNA vaccine?

SL: Yes, that’s exactly what I’ve been saying. When, long after the virus has gone, as a matter of fact even when we are not exposed to the virus, we are producing an antigen that is torn that our immune system will recognize as foreign. I would rather be immunized with an adenovirus that is programmed to produce that antigen instead of programming my own cells to produce that antigen.

TG: Why?

SL: Why? Well, because my own cells producing that antigen, my cells then become the virus. My cells become more recognizable as foreign by my immune system.

TG: Ok, so with all these new technologies now on the horizon, would you have one of these new types of vaccines, I wonder, because some people, particularly young people, that I speak to say they don’t want any kind of vaccine to this, preferring to catch the disease and train their own immune system to deal with viruses in a natural way so that when they’re infected, they may be quite ill and sick, but feel that a naturally-trained immune system that can deal with any kind of disease or pathogen as it comes along instead of someone training it in an artificial manner to deal . What do you make of that argument? What we should really be doing, particularly with younger people, is simply catching things, actually even going out of our way to catch things, to train our immune systems to be ready for anything that comes along.

SL: Well, that is a valid argument for a young person and for diseases such as the flu or perhaps a simple corona infection, but that is not true, and they would be under the wrong impression because for things like Poliomyelitis or Smallpox that would not be a very good idea. Thank God for immunization. Thank God for Jenner and Pasteur who started that because there are three things that saved really hundreds of millions of lives and made life expectancy a lot longer.

You have immunization, which we call vaccination, because it got this name from Cowpox, which was first used to immunize against Smallpox, so you have vaccinations, antibiotics and the chemical Chlorine. Chlorine makes unsafe water that carries cholera and many other diseases safe. Even in the fight against malaria Chlorine was useful because the larvae of the anopheles mosquito would die in chlorinated water, so you can imagine the millions and millions and millions of lives that have been saved with vaccinations, with antibiotics and with Chlorine-treated water. But, just like everything else, you can exaggerate things. For example, with antibiotics bacteria are reacting. They have their own natural selection and they’re evolving into all kinds of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, so it’s a constant fight. The same goes for immunization. This is why I myself don’t take the flu vaccine, even if I’m at the age when they say it’s most important to take it, because the flu changes every year and I haven’t seen any correlation between the percentage of people vaccinated with the flu and a decrease in flu cases. 2007 was notorious for that. But, certain vaccines should I think be obligatory, for example the tetanus vaccine. Are you going to let your body get naturally immune to the tetanus toxin? I don’t think that’s a good idea.

As far as the corona is concerned, let’s face it; this is something that has a mortality rate of 1% or less. I don’t think it’s as grave as to warrant such a reaction in shutting down and infringing on people’s liberties, so some young people may have a point there, but to say they’re anti any kind of vaccine is the wrong reaction.

TG: Will you be taking one of these vaccines?

SL: No, I will not be taking an mRNA vaccine for sure, and I will not advise my family members, young family members, to take it either. The adenovirus vaccine may be, if herd immunity doesn’t get rid of this epidemic before they become available.

TG: Ok, so your whole approach to this seems to be very, very well educated. Can you tell us again about your contribution to this, and how come you know quite a bit about the topic?

SL: Well, as I told you, my doctoral dissertation consisted of discovering a new virus. After my doctoral qualifying exams, I was working with tissue cultures that we thought were infected with the Rhabdo virus, this is the rabies virus, but I was seeing formations and pathogenesis that could not be explained with the rabies virus, so I investigated and isolated a new virus of the retroviridae family, retrovirus, which like I told you is the same family as the AIDS virus HIV, of the sub family Spumavirinae, so I spent years working with viruses, tissue cultures, isolating them, proving that they are RNA viruses as opposed to DNA viruses, doing reverse transcriptase assays when Reverse Transcriptase assay was a long and laborious thing in the 70s. Technologically, there have been incredible advances that permit genetic manipulations that were not possible back in the 70s. It’s not so much basic scientific dogma discoveries in biology or genetics, it’s more the incredible techniques that have been developed. For example the tests that they do now for what they call the Rt-PCR test with the swabs. Rt stands for Reverse transcriptase and PCR for Polymerase Chain Reaction. The gentleman (Kary Mullis) who elaborated the Polymerase Chain Reaction technique got the Nobel Prize for it in 1988, the Nobel Prize for Medicine and Physiology, and that permits us to take a small piece of DNA and multiply it a million times. Most of the advances that we are having in genetic engineering are thanks to this PCR technique. Now, this did not exist when I was getting my doctorate in 1978.

TG: Ok, so what about this PCR test, is it reliable, is it being used correctly deployed in the population in the right manner?

SL: Do you want me to give you an honest answer? The honest answer is: I don’t know. Theoretically, it should work, but unfortunately I don’t know what is going wrong. I don’t know whether there’s corruption in as much as labs claiming they’re doing it correctly but are not doing it adequately for, unfortunately, there have been a lot of false positives and false negatives.

TG: It seems that a lot of effort has been put into this particular type of test. Would it not have been better maybe to have used a different test?

SL: Well, I was always advocating for the antibody test, what they call the Immunodiffusion Test. These are very simple tests with results obtained in half an hour where you put the serum of the patient to be tested in a well and you put the antigen in another well and you see if you get an antibody precipitation band. I did quite a few Immunodiffusion Tests with the virus I discovered. When I experimentally infected animals I was working with I could test as I went along and it was almost one hundred percent accurate. But, you know, they say that when you have a new toy, you tend to use it, especially if it’s an expensive one. But, I have to say that PCR is an incredible technique, which I wish we had back in the 70s when I was doing my viral research.

TG: But is it actually being deployed in the right manner across the population? For example they’re using it to try and test everyone in Liverpool.

SL: Let me tell you some of the things that are wrong with it. First of all, in order for you to test positive, when they swab you they have to take enough RNA from your nasal pharynx – this is the first part of the Rt-PCR – then they incubate it with Reverse Transcriptase which turns that RNA into DNA, then they use the PCR which is the DNA Polymerase Chain Reaction to multiply it a million-fold so that it’s detectable. Now, I could get tested let’s suppose at a time I am positive but at that time I have no viral RNA in my throat, so it will get a false negative. It’s possible that one was infected a long time ago, and you still have some remnant of this RNA, it will give you a positive when really you are over it. So, this test should be complemented with a simple antibody test that shouldn’t cost more that $5 to do, an antibody precipitation test, because if you’re PCR test is positive, then within two weeks after that you should be antibody positive, so I think one should be supplemented with the other.

TG: What do you think of this idea of mandating these treatments with the vaccine particularly? There are also conspiracy theories circulating as well about a medical dictatorship that people are using this pandemic in order to make a lot of money by forcing vaccines on people that might otherwise not wish to have. What do you make of this whole idea of mandating?

SL: Mandating for the corona Covid-19 vaccine is unacceptable as far as I’m concerned. It should be completely voluntary. There is this idea that they’re accusing people, saying that if you don’t get vaccinated you’re putting me in danger. That is fallacious reasoning because if you’re vaccinated I’m certainly not putting you in danger. Your vaccine should protect you even though I might be contagious.

TG: I imagine that when you were at university you had some guide in ethics because there seems to be quite a few doctors saying that this is an ethical dilemma here, that we should be taking a different approach rather than going towards mandating. I wonder what you make of the move to saying that people have to have this vaccine for example if they want to travel.

SL: This is the great problem whereby you can be forced to getting vaccinated by restricting your movements if you elect not to be vaccinated. That is an ethical, political and a civil liberties problem.

Like I said, there are some vaccines that I, as an immunologist, ythink are extremely necessary. For example, the DTP vaccine for kids. The Diptheria, Tetanus, Pertussis vaccines are life-savers. But, with this, just like the flu vaccine, the corona epidemic has been used to make billions, even hundreds of billions of dollars by pharmaceutical companies that have up to now given us nothing, and I took the example of Moderna where their stocks went up by billions even before we knew anything was going to be produced and a company that has never ever put a drug out for anything, even a headache. As soon as Dr. Anthony Fauci gave it his blessing, Moderna’s stocks shot up as did Gilead’s Remdesivir as an antiviral drug. Yes, this pandemic has been used to make a lot, a lot of money in a very, very unethical fashion.

TG: And what about the 64-thousand dollar question, Stanley? Could this be a man-made, engineered virus besides the idea that it was released from a Wuhan Lab accidentally or on purpose? What do you think is a possibility that the Covid-19 thing was actually a man-made thing that got released?

SL: Well, I don’t think it was something released on purpose. Could it be a genetically modified corona virus that accidentally got released? Yes, that possibility does exist; it’s a very plausible possibility. Back in the 70s we removed four corona virus serotypes. By the ways, there was a sero positive for one of the corona strains that we knew back then. They’ve been in the laboratory. epidemiological study done in 1974 where they found that 25% of kids between the ages of 7 and 14 years old had antibodies to one of the serotypes of corona virus, and they were totally harmless. It passed.

_________________
--
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com
http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Fri Jan 08, 2021 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Asymptomatic Spread Revisited
Jeffrey A. Tucker
– November 22, 2020Reading Time: 6 minutes
AIER >> Daily Economy >> Healthcare >> Crisis
https://www.aier.org/article/asymptomatic-spread-revisited/

The phrase “fog of war” is attributed to Carl von Clausewitz. It has come to refer to the confusion and uncertainty felt by everyone in the midst of conflict. It is often unclear who is making decisions and why, and what the relationships are between the strategies and the goals. Even the rationale can become elusive as frustration and disorientation displace clarity and rationality.

In 2020, we’ve experienced the fog of disease mitigation.

The initial round of lockdowns was not about suppressing the virus but slowing it for one reason: to preserve hospital capacity. Whether and to what extent the “curve” was actually flattened will probably be debated for years but back then there was no question of extinguishing the virus. The volume of the curves, tall and quick or short and long, was the same either way. People were going to get the bug until the bug burns out (herd immunity).

Gradually, and sometimes almost imperceptibly, the rationale for the lockdowns changed. Curve flattening became an end in itself, apart from hospital capacity. Perhaps this was because the hospital crowding issue was extremely localized in two New York boroughs while hospitals around the country emptied out for patients who didn’t show up: 350 hospitals furloughed workers.

That failure was embarrassing enough, given the overwhelming costs. Schools closed, commercial rights were vanquished, shelter-in-place orders from wartime were imposed, travel nearly stopped, all large events were cancelled, and so on. Clearly there needed to be a good, solid, science-based reason for why the politicians and their advisers had, on their own, decided to take away much of what we once regarded as human rights.

Talk about this began in March but faded. Sometime in summer, the idea of asymptomatic spread started to trend, bit by bit. It finally went to an explosion of interest in the first week of June. It trailed off again until very recently.


Asymptomatic spread was the answer given to the great question: I’m not sick so why should I have to be locked down? Why are we quarantining the healthy? And what possibly could it mean, in any case, to be sick without symptoms? Why are half the PCR-positive tests assigned to people who otherwise seem to be perfectly fine?

All these valid questions came to be answered by this one phrase: asymptomatic spread. You might not feel sick. You might not ever have symptoms from SARS-CoV-2. Still, you could be an even worse super spreader without knowing it, infecting people all around you who will carry it to people who will die from the disease. This was also the moment when, subtly and imperceptibly, we were being asked to think of our fellow citizens not as human beings with dignity and rights but pathogen-carrying disease vectors. We had to be masked, all of us, because we are secretly filthy and unclean: we cannot be allowed to breath near others, so even with a mask we must stay 6 feet away.

(As I type these words, I feel sure that if anyone reads them in ten years, the reader will assume I’m writing fiction or engaged in wild hyperbole. To the future reader: this is all true.)

On June 7, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, told a press conference that from the known research, asymptomatic spread was “very rare.” “From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual.” She added for emphasis: “It’s very rare.”


There was an understandable explosion of fury on all sides. People against lockdowns were screaming all over Twitter that if this is true, the rationale for the lockdowns mostly disappears. We can go back to our normal lives. We can open up everything again!

I wrote at the time:

What this suggests, of course, is that there is nothing mysteriously magical or insidious about this new virus. It behaves like the viruses that scientists have been studying for one hundred years. What we do with a normal virus is be careful around others when we have symptoms. We don’t cough and sneeze on people and generally stay home if we are sick. That’s how it’s always been. You don’t need lockdown to achieve that; you just proceed with life as normal, treating the sick and otherwise not disrupting life.

If that is the case with this one, everything we’ve done over the months – the mask wearing, the grasshopper dance not to be next to people, the canceling of everything, the wild paranoia and premodern confusions – has been a calamitous and destructive waste of time, energy, and money.

On the other side, there was the predictably pro-lockdown mainstream media which decried her heresy. The cry was so loud that the WHO immediately started walking back the claim, mostly with hints and suggestions that didn’t say untrue things but did not repudiate the initial claim either: “There is much to be answered on this. There is much that is unknown. It’s clear that both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals are part of the transmission cycle. The question is what is the relative contribution of each group to the overall number of cases.”

Following that, the question seemed to fade. We went back to assuming that potentially everyone had a disease, enabling fellow citizens to become virtuous enforcers of mask wearing, staying home, and separating, screaming and yelling at others for failing to comply. The science on the question was unsettled, we were told, so let us go back to wrecking life as we once knew it.

The fog of disease mitigation, indeed. But as with most of the “science” throughout this ordeal, it eventually came to be revealed that good sense and rationality would prevail over implausible claims and predictions that led to experiments in social control without any precedent.

In this case, the carrier of rationality is a gigantic study conducted in Wuhan, China, of 10 million people. The article appears in Nature Communications, published November 20, 2020.


The conclusion is not that asymptomatic spread is rare or that the science is uncertain. The study revealed something that hardly ever happens in these kinds of studies. There was not one documented case. Forget rare. Forget even Fauci’s previous suggestion that asymptomatic transmission exists but not does drive the spread. Replace all that with: never. At least not in this study for 10,000,000.

Stringent COVID-19 control measures were imposed in Wuhan between January 23 and April 8, 2020. Estimates of the prevalence of infection following the release of restrictions could inform post-lockdown pandemic management. Here, we describe a city-wide SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening programme between May 14 and June 1, 2020 in Wuhan. All city residents aged six years or older were eligible and 9,899,828 (92.9%) participated. No new symptomatic cases and 300 asymptomatic cases (detection rate 0.303/10,000, 95% CI 0.270–0.339/10,000) were identified. There were no positive tests amongst 1,174 close contacts of asymptomatic cases. 107 of 34,424 previously recovered COVID-19 patients tested positive again (re-positive rate 0.31%, 95% CI 0.423–0.574%). The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Wuhan was therefore very low five to eight weeks after the end of lockdown.

One might suppose that this would be huge news. It would allow us to open up everything immediately. With the whole basis for post-curve-flattening lockdowns crumbled, we could go back to living a normal life. The fear could evaporate. We could take comfort in our normal intuition that healthy people can get out and about with no risk to others. We could take off our masks. We could go to movies and sports events.

From what I can tell, there was only one news story that was posted about this. It was on Russia Today. I’ve not been able to find another one. People not following the right accounts on Twitter wouldn’t even know about it at all.

We keep hearing about how we should follow the science. The claim is tired by now. We know what’s really happening. The lockdown lobby ignores whatever contradicts their narrative, preferring unverified anecdotes over an actual scientific study of 10 million residents in what was the world’s first major hotspot for the disease we are trying to manage. You would expect this study to be massive international news. So far as I can tell, it is being ignored.

With solid evidence that asymptomatic spread is nonsense, we have to ask: who is making decisions and why? Again, this brings me back to the metaphor of fog. We are all experiencing confusion and uncertainty over the precise relationship between the strategies and the goals of panoply of regulations and stringencies all around us. Even the rationale has become elusive – even refuted – as frustration and disorientation have displaced what we vaguely recall as clarity and rationality of daily life.

Print Friendly, PDF & EmailPrintFacebookTwitterLinkedInPinterestEmailShare
READ MORE
Jeffrey A. Tucker

Jeffrey A. Tucker is Editorial Director for the American Institute for Economic Research.

He is the author of many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press and nine books in 5 languages, most recently Liberty or Lockdown. He is also the editor of The Best of Mises. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Mon Jan 11, 2021 11:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Face masks could put wearers at increased risk of coronavirus, top medic warns
PA Mar 12th 2020 10:05AM
https://www.aol.co.uk/living/2020/03/12/face-masks-could-put-wearers-a t-increased-risk-of-coronavirus-t/

People who wear face masks could be putting themselves more at risk of contracting coronavirus, England's deputy chief medical officer has warned.

Dr Jenny Harries said it is "not a good idea" for the average member of the public to put on a face mask unless they have been advised to by a healthcare worker.

Speaking to BBC News on Thursday, she warned the virus could even become trapped in face masks, resulting in the wearer breathing it in.

Slideshow preview image
100 PHOTOS
Coronavirus across the globe
SEE GALLERY
Dr Harries said: "For the average member of the public walking down a street, it is not a good idea.

"What tends to happen is people will have one mask. They won't wear it all the time, they will take it off when they get home, they will put it down on a surface they haven't cleaned.

Salisbury incident
Dr Jenny Harries advised against the general public wearing face masks (Andrew Matthews/PA)
"Or they will be out and they haven't washed their hands, they will have a cup of coffee somewhere, they half hook it off, they wipe something over it.

"In fact, you can actually trap the virus in the mask and start breathing it in."

Asked if people are putting themselves more at risk by wearing masks, Dr Harries said: "Because of these behavioural issues, people can adversely put themselves at more risk than less."

Dr Harries said people should wear masks when they are advised to by healthcare workers, particularly if they have tested positive for Covid-19, as it can "prevent any virus from coming out".

The World Health Organisation (WHO) said healthy individuals only need to wear a mask if they are taking care of a person with a suspected coronavirus infection.

WHO said masks are only effective when used in combination with frequent hand washing, and must be disposed of properly.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Police in England say they won't enforce masks in supermarkets
Senior officers reject Matt Hancock’s support for greater role in overseeing Covid rules
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/11/police-in-england-say-th ey-wont-enforce-masks-in-supermarkets

Vikram Dodd, Jessica Elgot, Sean Ingle, Peter Walker and Jasper Jolly
Mon 11 Jan 2021 20.18 GMTLast modified on Tue 12 Jan 2021 00.34 GMT

The police have set themselves up for a conflict with ministers by insisting that they will not enforce mask-wearing in supermarkets amid growing calls for tougher Covid measures including a crackdown on the number of people in workplaces.

Sources said the government was actively considering telling people to wear masks outdoors as the NHS faces its “most dangerous” point. A further 4,193 people were reported to have gone to hospital with coronavirus on Monday, bringing the current total to 32,294.

A ban on people in England walking or exercising with anyone from outside their household is also on the table, with sources saying it was “under active consideration”.

Ministers have been urged by trade unions to focus on underlining the need for home working as figures show that traffic on the tube in London – often used by commuters – is more than three times higher than in the first lockdown.


The government is keen to intensify efforts to keep contact limited in supermarkets amid concern about infection rates linked to stores. Stores have said they will require help from police if ministers want to increase enforcement of rules such as mask-wearing and social distancing.

On Monday, Morrisons announced that shoppers who refuse to wear a mask without a medical exemption will be told to leave stores. Sainsbury’s followed suit, saying it would be posting trained security guards at shop entrances, rather than shop staff, to challenge any customers not wearing a mask or shopping in groups. The supermarket said it had also significantly reduced the number of customers allowed into stores at any one time.

It is understood that Morrisons is prepared to call in police as a last resort if customers do not comply with requests to wear a mask.

At Monday’s Downing Street briefing, the health secretary, Matt Hancock, cranked up pressure on law enforcement and supermarkets, saying stronger action was needed, and applauded Morrisons. “That’s the right approach, and I want to see all parts of society playing their part in this,” he said.

“Stronger enforcement is necessary, and I’m delighted that the police are stepping up their enforcement. But it isn’t just about the government and the rules we set, or the police and the work that they do. It’s about how everybody behaves.”

You don't have to be a lockdown sceptic to worry about how Covid is being policed | John Harris
Read more
But multiple law enforcement sources said it would be impossible for officers to police supermarkets and insisted forces needed greater clarity about how the rules should be imposed. On Monday Derbyshire police said it had withdrawn controversial £200 fines handed to two women who drove five miles from their home to meet for a walk. Apologising, the force said it had been “working hard to understand the ever-changing guidance and legislation”.

Asked about enforcing rules in supermarkets, one senior police leader said “we won’t be doing that”, adding: “Do people really want the police telling you: ‘that’s not above your nose’? There are no extra officers. Everything else [crime] is still happening. Where is the greater risk: do you put two people in a supermarket not wearing masks before a woman suffering domestic violence?

“You need clearer, consistent messaging, not new rules and more enforcement.”

A chief constable said: “I do not think we need additional powers; I need additional clarity about the exceptions, about how far people can travel.”

Another senior police source added: “The government wants to see more enforcement but that will not regulate behaviour. There is no way the 40,000 officers you can deploy can enforce regulations on 65 million people if they do not want to follow.”

Police are being quicker to issue fines to those they believe will not comply with the rules but are wedded to an approach of trying to encourage people. Police in England and Wales have issued around 30,000 penalty notices, while counterparts in France have issued over 1 million.

A government source insisted there were no imminent changes to the rules planned and said the emphasis was on messaging and enforcement, urging people to stay within existing rules rather than any tighter legal restrictions.

However, it is understood discussions in government took place over the weekend and on Monday about returning to some of the rules of the first lockdown in March, which limited people to one form of outside exercise a day either alone or with people from their household.

Hancock has said he would not remove the right for people to access “support bubbles” where people can form tightly restricted bubbles with one other household if they live alone or if family members provide childcare.

“I can rule out removing the bubbles that we have in place,” he said. “Childcare bubbles and support bubbles are very important, and we’re going to keep them.”

Hancock declined to say what extra rules might be brought in and implored people to “act like you have the virus”. He said: “I know there’s been speculation about more restrictions. We don’t rule out taking more action if it’s needed but it’s your actions now that can make a difference.”

Concerns have been raised by trade unions about home working, with statistics suggesting many more people are in the workplace compared with the March lockdown.

Figures from Transport for London suggested there are four times the number of tube passengers compared with the first lockdown, when there was just 4% of normal demand in mid-April. On Monday, demand on buses was at 29% compared to 18% in mid-April.

Unite’s general secretary, Len McCluskey, said the government must instruct employers to use the furlough scheme to keep employees out of the workplace and enforce the stay at home message, but he said support from the Treasury was lacking.

“Time and again, ministers have been told that unless employers are instructed to use the furlough scheme, too many will demand that workers come to work, therefore undermining an essential public health message,” he said. “And unless the low paid and insecure are paid enough to stay at home then they cannot do so.”

The government has also been urged to emphasise the need for civil servants to stay at home. Lucille Thirlby, assistant general secretary of the FDA, which represents civil servants, said: “The civil service should be leading the example and ensuring that staff do not attend the workplace and work from home, unless their role is of immediate critical delivery or importance.”

The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, said harsher restrictions should be considered within 24 hours and highlighted estate agents and house viewings as one area where rules could be tightened, as well as nurseries.

On Monday, Wales’s health minister, Vaughan Gething, said he believed it would be “easier” not to remove a face covering when moving between essential shops.

A government spokesperson said: “We are incredibly grateful for the work the police are doing to explain and enforce the current coronavirus restrictions.

“As they have throughout the pandemic, the police will support enforcement of the regulations and will attend retail settings as necessary to respond to reports of crime and public order offences.

“We are at a critical point in this pandemic and all of us need to be doing the right thing. People should only be leaving home if it is essential for them to do so and they must follow the rules when they do.”


TonyGosling wrote:
Face masks could put wearers at increased risk of coronavirus, top medic warns
PA Mar 12th 2020 10:05AM
https://www.aol.co.uk/living/2020/03/12/face-masks-could-put-wearers-a t-increased-risk-of-coronavirus-t/

People who wear face masks could be putting themselves more at risk of contracting coronavirus, England's deputy chief medical officer has warned.

Dr Jenny Harries said it is "not a good idea" for the average member of the public to put on a face mask unless they have been advised to by a healthcare worker.

Speaking to BBC News on Thursday, she warned the virus could even become trapped in face masks, resulting in the wearer breathing it in.

Slideshow preview image
100 PHOTOS
Coronavirus across the globe
SEE GALLERY
Dr Harries said: "For the average member of the public walking down a street, it is not a good idea.

"What tends to happen is people will have one mask. They won't wear it all the time, they will take it off when they get home, they will put it down on a surface they haven't cleaned.

Salisbury incident
Dr Jenny Harries advised against the general public wearing face masks (Andrew Matthews/PA)
"Or they will be out and they haven't washed their hands, they will have a cup of coffee somewhere, they half hook it off, they wipe something over it.

"In fact, you can actually trap the virus in the mask and start breathing it in."

Asked if people are putting themselves more at risk by wearing masks, Dr Harries said: "Because of these behavioural issues, people can adversely put themselves at more risk than less."

Dr Harries said people should wear masks when they are advised to by healthcare workers, particularly if they have tested positive for Covid-19, as it can "prevent any virus from coming out".

The World Health Organisation (WHO) said healthy individuals only need to wear a mask if they are taking care of a person with a suspected coronavirus infection.

WHO said masks are only effective when used in combination with frequent hand washing, and must be disposed of properly.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2021 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote


_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sun Jan 31, 2021 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Police Probe Sudden Death of Anti-Vaccine Activist
BY SAMANTHA LOCK ON 12/15/20 AT 10:33 AM EST
https://www.newsweek.com/police-probe-sudden-death-anti-vaccine-activi st-1554784

The sudden death of a prominent anti-vaccination activist has led to a police probe.

Brandy Vaughan

Link

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_HTBhkB-JI

Brandy Vaughan, 45, was found dead on December 7 by her 9-year-old son in the family's California home.

On Monday, the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office announced an investigation into the circumstances surrounding her death.


"The decedent has been positively identified and the death is believe [sic] to be a result of natural causes based on an autopsy exam conducted last week," Santa Barbara County Sheriff Public Information Officer Raquel Zick said in a statement. "The final cause and manner of death determination are pending toxicology screening which normally takes 4-6 weeks."

NEWSWEEK SUBSCRIPTION OFFERS >
Vaughan, a former Merck pharmaceutical representative, was an outspoken critic of mandatory vaccinations and pharmaceutical companies.

She founded non-profit organization Learn The Risk in a bid to educate people "on the dangers of pharmaceutical products, including vaccines and unnecessary medical treatments," according to its website.


A fundraising website set up by close friend Tina Marie describes Vaughan as an "amazing warrior" and "loving mom."

"This past Thanksgiving Brandy, her son, and their dog took a road trip to come spend the holiday with our family," Marie wrote. "We enjoyed an amazing dinner, played games, and laughed together into the wee hours of the night. She told me that this is what she always dreamed of for her son, to be part of a large family enjoying time together... and wanted me to raise him for her, if anything should happen to her (as she had asked multiple times in the past). This last time that she asked was exactly 8 days before her passing."

NEWSWEEK SUBSCRIPTION OFFERS >
The Santa Barbara resident and UC Santa Barbara alum once worked for Merck pharmaceutical as a sales representative for Vioxx, a painkiller eventually taken off the market.

Vaughan "never meant to take on the world's most powerful industry" her website reads, but "felt she had no choice when the industry's agenda to keep us all sick began to spiral out of control."

READ MORE
Could COVID Vaccine Passports Become Mandatory? Here's What the WHO Says
COVID Vaccine Certificates Could be Issued to Inoculated Across Europe
Should the US Pay People to Take COVID-19 Vaccine to Reach Herd Immunity?
Two Weeks After Thanksgiving, Virus Cases Up 20 Percent; Deaths Top 300,000
"From that experience, I realized that just because something is on the market doesn't mean it's safe," Vaughan writes. "Much of what we are told by the healthcare industry just simply isn't the truth."

In a Facebook post dated December 4 of 2019, Vaughan asks: "Ever wonder why I speak out against Big Pharma and suffer the major consequences? Because I will fight for my son and humanity and I will educate people on pharmaceutical product dangers until my last breath!"

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18012
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2021 1:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Johns Hopkins Takes Down Article Showing US Deaths in 2020 No Different than Prior Years – It Doesn’t Fit their ‘We’re All Gonna Die’ Narrative
By Joe Hoft
Published November 28, 2020 at 9:19am
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/johns-hopkins-takes-article-s howing-us-deaths-2020-no-different-prior-years-doesnt-fit-gonna-die-na rrative/

Johns Hopkins University ‘newsletter’ throws work of director under the bus while claiming ‘real’ science from the WHO and CDC is more accurate than the facts.
We reported yesterday how an article in a newsletter published at Johns Hopkins University showed that total deaths in the US have not increased dramatically in 2020 when compared to prior years. This article was taken down. The university could not let it stand:



We were provided more on this unfortunate situation overnight. The university claims the following in regards to taking down the post showing deaths have not increased in 2020 due to the China coronavirus [emphasis ours]:

TRENDING: We Got It! TGP to Release SMOKING GUN Video from TCF Center in Detroit! ...Update: OH BOY! Our Report WILL SHAKE the Political World!

By YANNI GU |

[No doubt Yanni has connections with Mainland China. Just a hunch. We say this in part due to the tight connections between Johns Hopkins and China.]

November 27, 2020 Editor’s Note: After The News-Letter published this article on Nov. 22, it was brought to our attention that our coverage of Genevieve Briand’s presentation “COVID-19 Deaths: A Look at U.S. Data” has been used to support dangerous inaccuracies that minimize the impact of the pandemic.

[Of course no mention of what ‘dangerous inaccuracies’ have occurred – just that they have.]

We decided on Nov. 26 to retract this article to stop the spread of misinformation, as we noted on social media. However, it is our responsibility as journalists to provide a historical record. We have chosen to take down the article from our website, but it is available here as a PDF.

[The university labels its published work as the spread of misinformation and takes it down.]

In accordance with our standards for transparency, we are sharing with our readers how we came to this decision. The News-Letter is an editorially and financially independent, student-run publication. Our articles and content are not endorsed by the University or the School of Medicine, and our decision to retract this article was made independently.

[Does anyone believe that the decision to take down the article was made ‘independently’? This is transparency?]

Briand’s study should not be used exclusively in understanding the impact of COVID-19, but should be taken in context with the countless other data published by Hopkins, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

[Of course the WHO which claimed the mortality rates for the China coronavirus were 3.4% should be trusted! We knew this was a lie in March. Johns Hopkins was silent.]



As assistant director for the Master’s in Applied Economics program at Hopkins, Briand is neither a medical professional nor a disease researcher. At her talk, she herself stated that more research and data are needed to understand the effects of COVID-19 in the U.S.

[Johns Hopkins throws the author and her exceptional and courageous paper under the bus. She doesn’t have the smarts to do a proper study they claim and therefore should not be trusted like the WHO and CDC.]

Briand was quoted in the article as saying, “All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers.” This claim is incorrect and does not take into account the spike in raw death count from all causes compared to previous years. According to the CDC, there have been almost 300,000 excess deaths due to COVID-19. Additionally, Briand presented data of total U.S. deaths in comparison to COVID-19-related deaths as a proportion percentage, which trivializes the repercussions of the pandemic. This evidence does not disprove the severity of COVID-19; an increase in excess deaths is not represented in these proportionalities because they are offered as percentages, not raw numbers.

[Johns Hopkins discounts the results from the study and uses some bizarre chart to support their claims. However, Briand’s report is consistent with the results of studies we published during the summer.]



Briand also claimed in her analysis that deaths due to heart diseases, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia may be incorrectly categorized as COVID-19-related deaths. However, COVID-19 disproportionately affects those with preexisting conditions, so those with those underlying conditions are statistically more likely to be severely affected and die from the virus.

[This point doesn’t address Briand’s claims. The point Briand is making is that many COVID categorized deaths are more properly related to other illnesses. The CDC actually reported that only 6% of all COVID deaths are related to COVID alone. The rest are related to other causes and on average 2-3 other causes. We reported on this previously as well.]



Because of these inaccuracies and our failure to provide additional information about the effects of COVID-19, The News-Letter decided to retract this article. It is our duty as a publication to combat the spread of misinformation and to enhance our fact-checking process. We apologize to our readers.

[We believe Ms. Briand was behind the most honest and courageous report coming out of Johns Hopkins this year. She supports it with data. Her report is substantiated from prior reports and the CDC itself. But instead of giving the young scholar an award, they throw her under the bus because the narrative is not the picture Johns Hopkins and China want.]

You see, the only measurement we can use to really see the impact of COVID is overall deaths. This is because we really have no faith in what deaths are classified as COVID due to issues with the classification process. So by looking at overall deaths we see that overall deaths are not any higher than prior years. This then indicates that the COVID is not as terrible as China and the US medical profession would like us to think. This is why this report at Johns Hopkins had to be taken down. It has nothing to do with the truth and everything to do with the message.

What happened to just studying and reporting the truth?


Submit a Correction
Share on Facebook
Tweet
Share to Gab
P
Share
Email

Joe Hoft
Summary Recent Posts Contact
Joe Hoft is the twin brother of TGP's founder, Jim Hoft. His posts have been retweeted by President Trump and have made the headlines at the Drudge Report. Joe worked as a corporate executive in Hong Kong and traveled the world for his work, which gives him a unique perspective of US and global current events. He has ten degrees or designations and is the author of three books. His new book: 'In God We Trust: Not in Lying Liberal Lunatics' is out now - please take a look and buy a copy.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Major bomb attacks & 'terrorist' events All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group