Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 28, 2021 | Sundance | 184 Comments
National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins appeared on Fox News today to push the panic button around the latest COVID variant, Omicron. Dr. Collins was pushing the vaccine hard as he explained why Americans need to be concerned about the latest variant.
Vaccines, and now double and triple booster shots, are the acceptable scientific approach to combating the arriving Omicron variant, which Collins’ protege Dr. Fauci has warned could lead to a new round of lockdowns, mask mandates and social distancing requirements from federal and state officials.
However, in the face of all the panic promotion, NIH Director Collins was asked to reconcile why Florida, the most open and free state in the nation – that does not have any COVID mandates in place, would also have the lowest infection rate in the country. Dr. Collins refused to answer the question, and instead repeated his rehearsed talking points.
It is very telling -in a weird way- how the NIH Director would not answer the question. In fact, he avoided it completely. WATCH (Prompted):
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 28, 2021 | Sundance | 305 Comments
The fabulously fraudulent fear mongering fiend known as Anthony Fauci was all over television today proclaiming the pending horribleness from Omicron, the latest and greatest of Fauci’s variants.
In this soundbite the vertically challenged little fellas are talking shop about new lockdowns.
More Fauci appearances below, if you can stomach them.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 28, 2021 | Sundance | 128 Comments
Last week NBC and California media reported that cars were responsible for looting and general mayhem in/around the San Francisco shopping districts {SEE HERE}.
…”Just before 9 p.m. dozens of cars pulled up to 1200 Broadway Plaza to block off the street and rush into store.” (link)
…“About 25 cars just blocked the street and rushed into the Walnut Creek Nordstrom making off with goods before getting in cars and speeding away,” Hernandez said on Twitter.
Today, CNN announces that cars have become even more violent: “Waukesha will hold a moment of silence .. one week since a car drove through a city Christmas parade“:
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 28, 2021 | Sundance | 145 Comments
The DC system is predictable in how they weaponize their branches against the electorate. As the primary races of the mid-term election looms, CTH also provides a few tripwires to watch. Keep in mind, when it comes to controlling the electorate, Democrat and Republican leadership, the UniParty writ large are united in that goal.
In this interview the insufferable House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff appears on CNN to discuss the House efforts to weaponize the J6 Committee for maximum political benefit. The key point to take away from this interview can only be found if you ignore the political manipulation, a shell game, around labeling the opposition as domestic extremists. The intent to use the J6 committee as a political narrative engineering effort is obvious; everyone will talk about that aspect.
Instead, listen to how many times Schiff notes the committee will provide the DOJ with information they gather. The DOJ role is where everyone should be paying attention; and by DOJ we mean DOJ and FBI. WATCH Schiff first:
Instead of focusing on the obvious, look around. It is not coincidental the people behind Biden and Lawfare are funneling information into the Lisa Monaco and Merrick Garland DOJ to use against their political opposition. The DOJ/FBI targeting school board protests; the DOJ/FBI targeting James O’Keefe; the DOJ/FBI rounding up J6 attendees etc are the visible tip of the iceberg.
The iceberg itself is built upon the aligned political system, the White House included, feeding the DOJ/FBI targeting information. In/around the spring of 2022, right about the time when the primary challenges to establish the field of contenders for the mid term election are happening, that is when we will see OUTCOMES from the DC system building that below surface iceberg right now.
♦ Tripwire One – The investigative referrals from the J6 committee to the DOJ/FBI in the spring of 2022 will be akin to the Clinton campaign referrals to the DOJ/FBI in the fall of 2016. The appearance of criminal activity will be fabricated to trigger those investigations for the media to cover at length over the course of several months. The media pattern of “according to people familiar with the investigation,” and “according to people with knowledge of the investigation,” will start again.
The corporate printing presses will all be building upon each other, timed to culminate just before the November 2022 election. Much of the political targeting will come from the J6 Committee; however, there’s another part that is being built right now that few are seeing.
♦ Tripwire Two – There will be a very dramatic RICO-esque investigation that will drop in/around the same time in 2022. The targets of the case(s) will be a collective group of people who were at the epicenter of the 2020 audit demand. The entry point for Lisa Monaco and Merrick Garland will be investigations of wire-fraud; and the people targeted will come from the groups who were/are fundraising around the issues of state audits in the aftermath of the 2020 election.
The investigative cases against the groups may be independent in some ways, but the commonality behind them will be their efforts to organize funding for the 2020 election audits (Georgia, Michigan and Arizona as well known examples).
Any entity who did not very carefully and transparently organize their fundraising activity and accounting will be targeted. A reference for the approach the DOJ will take is the 2020 indictment of Steve Bannon and the We Build The Wall organization [Reference Link].
If you take the language of the prior Bannon indictment and overlay the new target, the wording of the investigative narrative will look like this: “As alleged, the defendants defrauded hundreds of thousands of donors, capitalizing on their interest in [funding independent election audits] to raise millions of dollars, under the false pretense that all of that money would be spent on [audits],” the DOJ will say in their statement.
CTH will not go into the details of who exactly will be targeted, you can likely guess the most visible, but this approach is almost guaranteed to happen at roughly the same time as the J6 referrals. Unfortunately, it’s just the way this newly weaponized DOJ/FBI system deploys. I would not be surprised if there were not confidential informants operating in the background of these audit groups right now with an intent to assemble information for transmission to the FBI and DOJ.
The motives are obvious: (1) tamp down any election integrity measures; (2) demoralize the MAGA or spirited America-First base of opposition against Democrats; (3) put the Republican Party on the defensive; (4) take attention away from the economic mess caused by the current administration; and (5) provide political turmoil in the ranks of their opposition.
The DOJ/FBI will be used for maximum political damage, and as you know, the professional Republican Party stands to gain just as much by this effort as the Democrat Party. Similar to how the GOPe supported the targeting of the Tea Party by the DOJ using the IRS, so too will the GOPe support the targeting of the various support networks behind the audit the election groups; what John McCain called, “the whacko birds.”
Put the J6 investigation and Audit investigation together, and you can see the DNC approach for 2022.
Posted originally on the conservative tree house on November 28, 2021 | Sundance | 126 Comments
FULL Analysis Below Video:
Allianz Group chief economic advisor, Mohamed El-Erian, is one of the few financial pundits who understood President Trump’s purposeful economic agenda inside the America First policy {Go Deep and Go Deep}. However, El-Erian also has to maintain his Wall Street credibility and, like most financial pundits, has to pretend not to know things when the emperor’s new clothes -Biden economics- are being discussed.
El-Erian uses the lingo of the club as he walks carefully in the shadow of his Wall Street allies, and he has to avoid the 800lb gorilla in the room and ignore there are other newly surfacing mechanisms available to the government in their approach to inflation. In this interview El-Erian does emphasize that inflation is not transitory, it is only going to get worse as long as the Federal Reserve keeps printing money to keep up with the massive and ongoing Democrat spending programs.
When El-Erian says the Fed needs to take their foot off the accelerator, he’s talking about how the Fed policy right now is purchasing debt (Quantative Easing) and printing money to keep up with legislative spending programs. He knows the Biden administration will not stop this approach, they are committed to the Build Back Better program, and as a consequence El-Erian knows inflation will continue in direct proportion to that ‘demand side‘ activity. But he cannot call it out directly – he can only say inflation will continue.
All of the Wall Street pundits know the Fed cannot hit the brakes (raise interest rates and stop purchasing debt) or else this entire manipulated economy (even on a global scale) will collapse; as El-Erian says “plunge into a recession.” It is a tenuous house of cards the current Wall Street crew is betting to remain in place due to the ideological politics (Green New Deal, Build Back Better, etc ).
In my opinion, the executive suites of Wall Street also know the new COVID variant Omicron is an attempt by the global market manipulators to put an tenuous emergency brake on the demand side in an effort to slow inflation and get people to drop pitchforks.
None of the financial pundits will admit the true intent of the narrative behind the Omicron variant.
We can debate the origin and ideological intent of the COVID virus, vis-a-vis controlling populations via passports etc; however, it is clear at this point that COVID is being exploited as a new tool in the global economic control toolbox. If money -global economic control- was not the motive behind how SARS-CoV-2 is being used, we could not predict the timing, methods and approaches of government to each COVID narrative and evolving variant.
Globally, the various governments and central banks have been pumping out massive amounts of money; spending into oblivion and then buying back their own debt. Currencies around the world are being devalued and this is the root of inflation. The U.S. has spent and pumped more than most, because we benefit from our currency being attached to the global trade system.
Almost all global trade is made in dollars, so our currency is propped up globally. This artificially inflated value allows the U.S. congress to deficit spend like crazy, and the Fed to purchase the debt via bond sales.
This one-sided benefit is why OBL targeted the World Trade Center. This artificial system is also why Biden can claim the U.S. GDP is the only economy growing during the pandemic.
The U.S. dollar is essentially being subsidized by global markets. However, the downside to all of this dollar printing means our rate of inflation (currency devaluation) is higher than other nations. The world is experiencing inflation from their internal monetary policy, but our inflation is higher than average. As a consequence, the people in control of various governments need the tool of Omicron, but our government needs it more than average.
The elites inside the World Bank (WB), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Economic Forum (WEF) are using Omicron as a short term tool to control inflation by trying to use it to control demand. The politicians who receive their instructions from the entities in control of these institutions are all following the program.
It is more important for our government to use Omicron than all other governments because we are the spending center. That is why we are seeing a much bigger emphasis upon it by our government; and that is why the descending levels of variant emphasis all fall in line depending on how closely they are aligned as allies.
♦ When it comes to COVID panic – Canada, the U.K. and Australia are globally akin to New York, New Jersey and California domestically.
♦ What Florida is to COVID panic inside the U.S. – Japan and India are to COVID panic globally.
Panic responses from spending allies are being emphasized. Non-panic responses from lesser spending friends are being ignored.
That is exactly what we are seeing. The vaccines are a shiny thing.
On a geopolitical level – China, Iran and Russia (adversaries on an ideological level) know what is happening, and to the extent they can drive inflation even higher, they will because they know these massive increases in costs hurt the U.S. disproportionately. This is why OPEC is giving Biden the middle finger on his ‘request’ to increase oil production, and that is why China is now triggering shipping quarantines.
GMC Hummer EVs are seen on an assembly line ahead of a tour by the US president of the General Motors Factory ZERO electric vehicle assembly plant in Detroit, Michigan on November 17, 2021.
(Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)
After intense pushback, Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis have partnered with the United Auto Workers (UAW) union to protect workers from vaccine mandates. The United Auto Workers (UAW) union said they will “encourage members to disclose their vaccination status,” but understands that there are “personal reasons that may prevent some members from being vaccinated.” The union, representing over 400,000 members, is among one of the largest entities to block President Biden’s vaccine mandate for private businesses with more than 100 workers. The mandate is stated to go into effect in January 2022, but an increasing number of businesses across America are making it known that they will not comply.
Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite.
Free to Read and Share without paying
In our Toxicology Reports (TR) paper on COVID-19 that examined myriad issues associated with the ongoing mass inoculations (hereafter called the TR paper), we also evaluated the ratio of costs to benefits (relative to deaths) for what we termed a best-case scenario. In response to reader requests, I then performed a brief real-world cost-benefit analysis, and found the ratio of costs to benefits increased substantially compared to the best-case scenario. In this OpEd, I will start from fundamentals to show step-by-step why the ratios of costs to benefits for COVID-19 inoculations are so high in a real-world analysis, relate them to the underlying biological mechanisms that are taking place post-inoculation, and place these results in the larger context of what is being played out on a global scale.
1. WHY ARE THE RATIOS OF COSTS TO BENEFITS SO HIGH FOR COVID-19 INOCULATIONS?
First, some definitions. “Costs” are the deaths induced by the COVID-19 inoculations and “benefits” are the true COVID-19 deaths that only a “vaccine” could have prevented. Since the inoculations were given ostensibly as a preventive measure, the cost:benefit (c:b) ratio should be very low, on the order of a fraction of a percent. Also, in the remainder of this OpEd, I use the term “inoculation” mainly rather than “vaccine”, since the COVID-19 inoculants do not meet the legal definition of a vaccine (as we showed in the TR paper) or even the Patent Office definition (as we also showed in the TR paper).Subscribe to the Trialsitenews “COVID-19” ChannelNo spam – we promise
This analysis focuses on the most vulnerable 65+ demographic. Because of the high COVID-19 death rates in this demographic, the analysis would be expected to show the lowest c:b ratio for any demographic. In June/July, when we did the best-case scenario analysis for the TR paper, there were ~467,000 CDC-reported COVID-19-tagged deaths and ~2,600 VAERS-reported deaths post-inoculation (VAERS is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, and is operated jointly by the CDC and FDA). These official CDC numbers are the starting point for the present analysis.
a) Number of true COVID-19 deaths that required an inoculation for prevention
The first step in developing an actual c:b ratio is to adjust the CDC-reported COVID-19 deaths and VAERS-reported deaths to conform to real-world results.
A1) False Positives
The main diagnostic test with which patients were tagged as having COVID-19 is the real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, hereafter called PCR test. A number of studies have shown that the false positive PCR rate is significant for COVID-19, and increases with increasing values of cycle threshold (Ct). A comprehensive assessment of the data concluded that at Ct of forty, where most of the USA testing occurred (some cases even higher), the false positives ranged from 90% to 97%. Selecting the lower part of the range (90%) reduces the number of true COVID-19 deaths that required a “vaccine” for prevention to 0.1 x 467,000, or ~47,000.
A2) Early Treatment
A number of frontline doctors have testified (and published treatment protocols as well) that ~85->95% of COVID-19-tagged cases could have been saved from hospitalization or death had their protocols been implemented at an early stage, They have testified that, instead, patients were provided treatments known to be ineffective/harmful and denied treatments known to be harmless/safe. Selecting the median of the range (90%) reduces the number of true COVID-19 deaths that required a “vaccine” for prevention to 0.1 x ~47,000, or ~4,700.
A3) Deaths attributable to COVID-19 only
For patients diagnosed with COVID-19, approximately 94% had clinically-defined comorbidities, according to the CDC. In that case, approximately 94 % of the COVID-19 deaths could have been attributed to any of the comorbidities these patients had, and only 6% of the deaths could actually be attributed to COVID-19. If pre-clinical comorbidities had been included, this number of 6% would probably be decreased further. If only 6% of the deaths could be truly attributed to COVID-19 because of absence of comorbidities, the number of true COVID-19 deaths that required a “vaccine” for prevention drops to 0.06 x ~4,700, or ~280.
As a side note, the Italian Higher Institute of Health showed “only 2.9% of the deaths registered since the end of February 2020 would be due to Covid 19”….”of the 130,468 deaths registered by official statistics at the time of preparation of the new report only 3,783 would be due to the power of the virus itself”, which is even stricter than our 6% CDC-based number.
A4) Deaths preventable by inoculation
Many studies have been performed modeling the number of COVID-19 deaths prevented by the inoculations. The most conservative of these studies showed that for Sao Paolo, Brazil “almost 170 thousand deaths…..will occur by the end of 2021 for Sao Paulo…..If in contrast, Sao Paulo…..had enough vaccine supply and so started a vaccination campaign in January with the maximum vaccination rate, compliance and efficacy, they could have averted more than 112 thousand deaths”. This extremely conservative estimate reduces the number of true COVID-19 deaths that required a “vaccine” for prevention to 2/3 x ~280, or ~190!
Thus, the number of true COVID-19 deaths that required a “vaccine” for prevention was about 0.04 percent of the number of COVID-19 deaths reported by the CDC! Except for A4, the first three issues (A1-A3) were known in 2020, well before the rollout of the mass inoculations. In other words, the benefit possible from mass inoculation was exceedingly small, and did not justify mass inoculation of hundreds of millions of people in the USA with an inadequately tested new technology “vaccine”. This small potential benefit almost ensures that any c:b ratio will be relatively large, given even a moderate number of deaths resulting from the inoculation.
b) Number of actual deaths resulting from the mass inoculations
At this point in the analysis, with no scale-up from deaths reported to VAERS, the actual c:b ratio is ~870/190, or ~4.6. However, many studies have shown that the VAERS deaths are under-reported substantially. The Harvard Pilgrim Health Care tracking study showed “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported”, similar to some of our results in the TR paper. Jessica Rose showed that the number of deaths is underreported by a factor of 31, and Steve Kirsch showed that the deaths are underreported by a factor of 41. Using the lowest of these estimates (31), the c:b ratio skyrockets to ~143, while the number of deaths is relatively modest at 870 x 31, or ~27,000. The c:b ratio for this case is about five orders of magnitude above the desired target for a “vaccine” or vaccine-proxy, as was stated at the beginning of this OpEd. Even if some of the selected parameters could be relaxed downwards, it is difficult to see where much more than perhaps an order of magnitude reduction in c:b ratio could be obtained.
While c:b ratios on the order of hundreds have not been shown by previous c:b analyses (especially for the most vulnerable 65+ demographic), and may seem extreme at first glance, they reflect the underlying reality. The only reason they do seem extreme is that the political and biomedical media have framed the narrative that these inoculations are safe and effective, with the implication that their c:b ratios are extremely low. As I have shown above, only a very small cadre of individuals could have benefited potentially from these inoculations. Mass inoculations of hundreds of millions of people in the USA with an unproven technology produced damage that overwhelmed any small potential benefits.
It should be re-emphasized that this conservative analysis was for the most vulnerable 65+ demographic. As we proceed to lower age demographics, we can expect the c:b ratios to go substantially higher, since deaths of COVID-19-tagged individuals decrease drastically with decreasing age. Also, these numbers reflect very-short-term results only, and the hands-on results of Drs. Hoffe, Cole, and others showing alarming values of Early Warning Indicators do not bode well for increased “vaccine-induced” deaths even in the mid-term, with the attendant increase in c:b ratios.
2. WHAT ARE THE BIOLOGICAL MECHANISMS THAT UNDERLIE THESE HIGH COST/BENEFIT RATIOS?
The results of a realistic cost-benefit analysis should reflect the underlying technical performance of the technology being evaluated. What are the features of the inoculant being analyzed that account for its extraordinary high c:b ratios?
First, there are at least three types of toxicities associated with the inoculant. The spike protein resulting from the inoculant is extremely toxic, as shown in detail in the TR paper. The LNP encapsulating shell has some extremely toxic components, such as polyethylene glycol, to which many people are sensitive (also as shown in the TR paper) and cationic lipids. The desired product of the inoculations, anti-spike protein antibodies, can react with tissues and cause myriad types of damage.
Second, it evades the immune system in two ways. It is injected, thereby entering the bloodstream directly and indirectly, and by-passing that part of the innate immune system that inhaled viruses encounter initially. The LNP-encapsulating shell, which provides mRNA stability, was developed initially for drug delivery and similar applications, where the target is to deliver drugs to any tissue or organ in the body. In this case, increased time spent in the circulatory system is the goal. For the present application, long residence time in the circulatory system means that the vascular damage and clotting associated with the spike protein endocytic merging with the endothelial cells can occur throughout the body. This impact is seen in the types of damage listed in VAERS, and in post-inoculation autopsies. Third, while it boosts the antibody titers for a few months, it affects the immune system adversely.
Are there any positive benefits from the inoculations? Obviously, increasing antibody titers against the relevant viral strain will offer some protection before waning immunity commences. For some elderly who are concerned with short-term survival there could be benefits. The inoculation also reduces the severity of symptoms for some people. Because appropriate treatments were withheld from numerous patients, the inoculations saved lives that would have been saved had the proper treatments been administered. But the benefits under the condition that appropriate treatments were administered were small relative to the adverse effects from mass inoculation.
3. HOW DO THESE RESULTS FIT WITHIN THE LARGER PICTURE OF GLOBAL MASS INOCULATIONS AND MANDATES?
The following appears to be the larger picture encompassing the details presented above. In December 2019, a viral outbreak appeared to occur initially in Wuhan, China. There is not consensus on its origins, but it appears the virus was engineered in a lab and released either deliberately or accidentally. It also appears that the outbreak transitioned rapidly into a pandemic. In order for the latter to occur, at least two conditions were required: rapid growth of infections globally, and substantial numbers of deaths from the infection.
A PCR test conducted at high Ct values giving very high numbers of false positives satisfied the rapid growth of infections requirement. COVID-19-tagged patients denied appropriate treatments and given ineffective treatments satisfied the requirement of substantial numbers of deaths from the infection. According to Drs. Zelenko and Ardis, and many others who developed successful treatment protocols for COVID-19-tagged patients, most of the COVID-19-tagged patients could have been saved had the protocols been applied early. Most people who were COVID-19-tagged and died had their deaths attributed to COVID-19. The withholding of appropriate treatments had a double benefit to enforce pandemic measures; it also meant that an EUA could be issued for a “vaccine”, since no alternative treatments were available.
After a few short months of clinical trials, the EUA was granted, and mass inoculations were started in mid-December 2020, about one year after the outbreak occurred. This meant that the inoculants were developed and tested within one year, a process that ordinarily takes 12-15 years. As shown in the TR paper, the clinical trials were questionable, and no long-term testing was done.
The mass inoculations in the USA have been ongoing for about ten months, and almost 200 million people have been fully vaccinated. VAERS reports a fraction of the very-near-term adverse effects, but actual scaled-up numbers are mainly estimated. While the elderly, especially with comorbidities, seem to experience the most deaths, children who previously showed no signs of illness are experiencing large numbers of serious effects such as myocarditis. Early warning indicators, such as high D-dimer and troponin levels after inoculation, are an ominous sign of future problems. Steve Kirsch has summarized many of these demonstrated and future adverse effects in an excellent slide presentation.
Dr. Ryan Cole, CEO of a large independent diagnostics lab in Idaho, states in many videos that he has been seeing a twenty-fold increase in uterine cancer since inoculations began. Dr. Byram Bridle states the following cancer prediction succinctly: “What I have seen way too much of and it does cause me very serious concern is that we are seeing people who had cancers that were in remission or that were being well controlled and their cancers have gone completely out of control after getting the vaccine. We do know that the vaccine causes at least a temporary drop in T-Cell numbers. T-Cells are part of our immune system and they are the critical weapons that our immune system has to fight off cancer cells.” Numerous doctors are starting to report anecdotes of increased cancer, although these effects have not yet been documented in the biomedical literature.
Studies from the UK and Sweden, among many others, seem to indicate that the second mRNA dose confers immunity for about six months, after which a booster is required to maintain immunity. This could mean that boosters would be required every six months (or sooner) indefinitely, and each booster would be accompanied by adverse effects (such as the micro-clotting that Dr. Hoffe has reported in his patients). If these effects are cumulative and irreversible, that would spell disaster for those on the endless treadmill of booster—short-term immunity—waning immunity—possible negative effectiveness—booster…..
Beneficiaries from the lockdowns, restrictions, and mass inoculations appear to be 1) the governments worldwide who increased control over their people and implemented vaccine passports to different degrees; 2) the companies who manufacture the inoculants and drugs that will be needed to address the many adverse health effects resulting from the inoculations and boosters; and 3) the organizations who specialize in online and remote business operations, such as the Big Tech companies. Whether any of these beneficiaries played a major role in the events remains to be seen (and decided in courts of law).
It is unclear why the five major stakeholders (healthcare industry, government at all levels, mainstream media, medical profession, academia) involved in promoting the restrictions and mass inoculations are reading from the same sheet of music. While the government is “captured” by industry and does its bidding, and the other three stakeholders are effectively “captured” by industry (and its proxy the government) because of the funding they receive from industry and government, it is unclear why all these stakeholders would have the same attitude when it comes to harming segments of the American population through e.g., mass inoculation with unproven safety.
In particular, why would the Presidents of Universities and Principals of secondary schools, who have “in loco parentis” responsibilities for the students in their charge, be willing to sacrifice the health of their students just to maintain their research funding or salaries? These “leaders” know full well that their charges are not at risk from COVID-19, but are at substantial risks from the demonstrated adverse effects of the inoculants, and potential future adverse effects. Yet, except for a few isolated instances, there is no action taken to refuse these mandates and protect their charges; rather, action is taken to double-down on the mandates!
The five major stakeholders’ actions to inoculate the full population of the USA in particular have resulted/are resulting/will result in physically, economically, strategically destroying the USA as a sovereign power and world leader. They are producing a populace that is becoming physically addicted to the inoculations and requisite boosters, and is becoming more subservient to a government that mandates these inoculations as a condition to access all that a civilized society has to offer. By the end of 2021, all those who operate the critical USA infrastructure (e.g., police, firefighters, military, healthcare professionals, teachers, pilots, etc.) will have been inoculated by mandate, and the non-compliers will be terminated from their jobs. If our projections of future adverse effects are correct, those who have been inoculated will be at higher risk for damage, and when the symptoms emerge after a lag period, the USA will be functionally paralyzed.
In stark contrast, our research group has been producing monographs and journal papers showing that severe reactions to the viral exposure are the result of a dysfunctional immune system, that this dysfunction is mainly caused by exposure to toxic stimuli and adoption of toxic behaviors, and these severe reactions can be prevented by identifying and removing these toxic contributing factors as broadly, deeply, and rapidly as possible. One bonus of the latter is that many of the comorbidities that accompany COVID-19 serious effects will be eliminated as well.
In summary, the COVID-19 inoculations are not justified from any cost-benefit perspective. The potential benefits are too small to justify mass inoculations with their demonstrated large numbers of very-short-term adverse effects, and potential ADE, autoimmune, neurological, cancer, etc. adverse effects in the mid-and long-terms. The above holds true even for the most vulnerable (elderly with many comorbidities) and is especially true for the least vulnerable from COVID-19, the children who may have to bear the brunt of adverse effects potentially for the rest of their lives.
If those at high/medium risk from COVID-19 want to take the inoculation, that should be a decision between them and their doctor. It should not be mandated, and restrictions should be lifted immediately.
Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views and not necessarily those of TrialSite.
Dr. Ron Brown – Opinion Editorial
November 26, 2021
No one should be surprised that the world is anxiously overreacting to news of the latest coronavirus variant B.1.1.529: WHO meets amid global alarm over new Covid-19 variant. After all, the public has been conditioned to overreact to the discovery of “novel” coronaviruses” during the COVID-19 pandemic by none other than the master disinformation disseminator himself, Dr. Anthony S. Fauci: ‘If it looks like you’re overreacting, you’re probably doing the right thing’. Fauci’s misinformed advice has encouraged hasty, counterproductive, and damaging public health decisions based on surveillance data falling directly into the hands of anxious public health authorities—before being vetted and interpreted by more thorough epidemiological analyses to determine actual virus severity and spread. Consequently, the hysterical public health message implied through the media is that there is no time for all that if we are all dead!
So what is Dr. Fauci’s advice so far on B.1.1.529? What Fauci Said About B.1.1.5…Quality journalism costs money to produce. We will be reinvesting the proceeds of these subscriptions into an increasing volume of high quality, independent, unbiased reporting and expert analysis. Our subscription tiers use the ‘honor system’ – please do not abuse it. All tiers of service provide the same level of access to content. We are grateful for all of you, and we hope you reciprocate.
Note: If you need assistance with your subscription or would like to discuss a corporate subscription for more than 10 employees please contact us or use the chat (bottom right).
On November 25, the Botswanan COVID-19 Task Force reported four new cases of the COVID variant B.1.1.529. All four cases were detected in travelers through routine PCR testing. They noted something interesting about all four cases:
“The preliminary report revealed that all four had been fully vaccinated for COVID-19.”
Yes, all four individuals with detectable cases of B.1.1.529 were fully vaccinated. There have been numerous breakthrough cases of COVID-19 and the Delta variant among the vaccinated. Now, it appears that those who have taken the vaccine may be more susceptible to transmission as this new variant is associated with increased antibody resistance. The report states that they are uncertain if the currently available vaccinations will prevent transmission and suggests “non-pharmaceutical interventions,” such as masks, social distancing, and avoiding unnecessary travel. Governments now have a new reason to reimplement harsh restrictions. The upcoming days and weeks should shine a light on what they plan to do to “stop the spread” since the vaccine is not as “safe and effective” as previously claimed.
The Dow experienced its steepest decline of the year on Friday after it was reported that the COVID-19 virus mutated into a variant called B.1.1.529. Virologists and immunologists are extremely concerned by the number of strains this virus carries, with over 32 detected so far. The National Institute for Communicable Diseases (NICD) has confirmed 22 cases of the virus in South Africa. At the time of this writing, numerous countries such as Italy, France, the UK, and Singapore have banned flights from South Africa and other African nations. Once cases are detected in other countries, we will likely see a further increase in travel bans and restrictions. This news comes weeks after many nations reopened their borders for travel.
Scientists do not understand the variant or strains yet and claim more data is needed. Health agencies are now scrambling to determine the next steps. It is also unknown whether the currently available vaccinations will protect anyone against B.1.1.529, but it has been reported that the strain will spread faster than the Delta variant. The new mutation has increased antibody resistance, which may lead one to believe that the “experts” will push for a new vaccine or booster. If this virus spreads as rapidly as claimed, then we should expect increased government restrictions. They’ve already locked down the world once, destroyed the economy, and they could do it again.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 
