Tag Archives: UN World Health Organization

Jan 3 2022

Sunday Talks, Fauci Says CDC Quarantine Guidance Will Change Tomorrow After Feedback from Media, Not Science


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 2, 2022 | Sundance | 232 Comments

Before getting to this soundbite, a note for those who travel the deep weeds.  Notice how whenever Fauci is answering questions on COVID subjects that are positive to his worldview, he uses the phrase “we“, including himself in the conduct of health officials.  However, whenever Fauci is answering questions that are critical of health officials, he uses the phrase “they“, to distance his role in the decision-making.  This is a key ¹*tell* in any conversation with leadership and/or teambuilders.

In this soundbite [full interview here and below], Anthony Fauci notes the CDC guidance on quarantine exit is likely to change, specifically because the feedback from media has been critical.  The media have been struggling to support the fear narrative, and the CDC changes are not helping them.  As a result, Fauci says the CDC quarantine guidance will change.  Not very science-y, huh?  WATCH:

Fauci, along with Stephanopoulos, is a big fraud and a narcissistic con artist.  Notice in the full interview (below) Stephanopoulos asks if the media should stop focusing on infection rates now.  Transparently, the media motive is to stop the criticism of the Biden administration.

Going deeper on the introductory point:  Blame-casting is a profoundly negative leadership trait, with horrific consequences.  Stable executives, those with extraordinary skills at leading massive institutions, always look for this blame-casting trait when listening to peers, lower-level executives and teambuilders within the organization.

¹The most effective leaders, people of the most consequential influence, listen 95% of the time and speak only about 5% of the time. And when they do speak, the overwhelming majority of that time is simply to ask more questions.

If you want to become a leader of enormous consequence, listen more, speak less, even if that means silence.  For those of you who are young in your career, consider this advice for a New Year resolution.   It is not easy to listen 90% and talk only 10%.  Those who can do it have extraordinary confidence in who they are, confidence expressed with a rare currency of leadership humility.

People who speak less are considered more measured, stable-minded, more thoughtful, contemplative, analytical and more strategic.  These are tremendous assets in a large organization.  Again, for most people listening is not an easy skill to develop; it takes time, mentorship, a great deal of practice and intense focus at first.  However, once you learn how to listen effectively your influence will skyrocket.

Listening is also a strong negotiation skill in both life and business.  When you encounter a problem with a product or service, you can watch how powerful it is just by staying silent as soon as both parties understand the problem.

Rather than repeating your argument/position in multiple terms, learn to state your position with clarity and focus, including all the reasons why your position on the issue at hand has merit.  THEN SHUT UP, even if you are tempted to speak, even if the reply is nonsense, stay silent.  The other party will almost always start speaking again.

As long as you are silent, the other participant is carrying the monkey of the next move in the negotiation or arbitration.   If you are forced to break the silence, do so only by asking a question about the position of the other party.  Clarify using your words regarding what you just heard, and ask if that is correct. Then, shut up again.

In both large organizations and small teams, those who have either an inherent or learned skill in the art of listening are always the most influential and the most valuable.

For those of you who are employers or already leaders, whenever you hear a person or team-member use “we” when describing positive outcomes and “they” when describing negative ones, do not EVER -regardless of their other skills- consider elevating their leadership in your operation or organization.  If you do, you are setting your organization on the path to failure in the long term.

This little pro-tip on listening and speech has been consistently true.  However, only a select few people are gifted and/or able to do it.

Here’s the full interview with Fauci:

Jan 2 2022

PROOF “VACCINE INJURY’S ARE RARE AND MILD” SHARE THIS EVERYWHERE SERIOUSLY ENOUGH IS ENOUGH


More bad news for parents and Kids

First published on BITCHUTE at 11:38 UTC on November 18th, 2021.

Jan 2 2022

Dr. Robert Malone mRNA Inventor – Kids Will Die from the Vaccines


Armstrong Economics Blog/Vaccine Re-Posted Jan 2, 2022 by Martin Armstrong

Jan 2 2022

Dystopian Scenes in Montreal, Quebec as 10pm COVID Curfew Is Reinstituted


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 1, 2022 | sundance | 113 Comments

Madness, just madness.  Montreal, Quebec has reinstituted a COVID curfew as the Canadian government promotes the fear of Omicron. [Prior Media Report Here] The concept of a curfew is not only arbitrary, but also abject nonsense.  Somehow the Rona is going to be worse at 10:15pm than it was at 9:55pm?

The scenes from the police patrolling the street, and instructing people over loudspeakers to go home, are dystopian and something you might see or hear in some fictional movie.  The commonsense of government is gone completely.  What did all of those people get double vaccinated and boosted for? WATCH:

https://youtu.be/zwpMZ9a7m38

MONTREAL – […] ” “I know we’re all tired, but it’s my responsibility to protect (Quebecers),” said Legault. “(Experts) agree that, in the coming weeks, there is a risk that the number of hospitalizations will exceed our capacity, which would eventually lead us to no longer being able to treat everyone,” said Premier Francois Legault. 

He made the announcement at a Thursday evening press conference, where he was joined by Health Minister Christian Dube and Public Health Director Dr. Horacio Arruda.  People who violate the curfew are subject to fines ranging from $1,000 to $6,000. (more)

Jan 2 2022

Interesting Shift – Australian Government Now Casually Saying They Will Pay for Adverse Reactions to Vaccine in Booster Phase, Media Calls 79,000 “The Rare Few”


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 1, 2022 | sundance | 238 Comments

A couple of things are a little, well, shall we say, odd about this.   First, is the casual nature of how the Australian media just slip this little stunner into their broadcast as if it’s just an ‘oh, and by the way‘ type of message.

Second, is the evolution of this official government narrative from “it’s just a jab”, perfectly safe and fine, to, well, only a “rare few” will have adverse reactions to the perfectly safe jab… and, oh yeah, boosters now.  By “rare few” we, um, mean around 79,000 people approximately, n’ stuff.  Might be costly, but… whatevs.

According to 7News Australia, “Doctors say that the benefits far outweigh the risks, but as the COVID vaccine rollout ramps-up through the booster phase, there are a rare few who suffer severe side effects. The federal government is now offering compensation for anyone who becomes seriously ill after having their COVID shot.” WATCH: 

Why is the Australian government having to pay this out?  Where’s the vaccine company liability?  Oh wait, yeah.

For scale, the entire population of Australia is essentially the same as the state of Florida.  Imagine if Governor Ron DeSantis mandated the jab, and told all Floridians 80,000 of you will likely suffer severe adverse reactions, but it’s in your best interest… oh, and you don’t have a choice.   Wait… wha, huh?

Jan 2 2022

Dr Robert Malone Discusses How People Are Vulnerable to Mass Formation Psychosis


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 1, 2022 | sundance | 275 Comments

During his interview with Joe Rogan, which was broadcast yesterday, Dr. Robert Malone discussed how government and the medical establishment weaponized the fear of COVID-19 to create “mass formation psychosis.’  Essentially, how a large population can be susceptible to manipulation, because they are destabilized and looking for solutions and explanations.

The full 3-hour interview with Joe Rogan is available on Spotify – LINK HERE.  The part of the interview surrounding ‘mass formation psychosis’ was highlighted today by Dr. Peter McCullough {LINK} and shared on the Twitter {LINK} by several watchers.

The complete video outline of how mass formation psychosis relates to current events was previously published by Dr. Malone [SEE HERE] with a transcript and audio/video segment as below.  WATCH:

https://youtu.be/INHpQL9fgto

While the predicate of the MFP theory is based on destabilization, I would put it a slightly different way and say: The more fear you carry, the more vulnerable you are to people with bad intentions. As I have said often, the need for control is a reaction to fear.

From Dr. Malone Substack: “A brief overview of Mass Formation, which was developed by Dr. Mattias Desmet. He is a psychologist and a statistician. He is at the University of Ghent in Belgium.  I think Dr. Mattias is onto something about what is happening, and he calls this phenomena:

MASS FORMATION PSYCHOSIS

So, when he says “mass” formation, you can think of this as equivalent to “crowd” formation. One can think of this as:

CROWD PSYCHOSIS

The conditions to set up mass formation psychosis include lack of social connectedness and sensemaking as well as large amounts of latent anxiety and passive aggression. When people are inundated with a narrative that presents a plausible “object of anxiety” and strategy for coping with it, then many individuals group together to battle the object with a collective singlemindedness. This allows people to stop focusing on their own problems, avoiding personal mental anguish. Instead, they focus all their thought and energy on this new object.

As mass formation progresses, the group becomes increasingly bonded and connected. Their field of attention is narrowed, and they become unable to consider alternative points of view.  Leaders of the movement are revered, unable to do no wrong.

Left unabated, a society under the spell of mass formation will support a totalitarian governance structure capable of otherwise unthinkable atrocities in order to maintain compliance. A note: mass formation is different from group think. There are easy ways to fix group think by just bringing in dissenting voices and making sure you give them platforms.  It isn’t so easy with mass formation.  Even when the narrative falls apart, cracks in the strategy clearly aren’t solving the issue, the hypnotized crowd can’t break free of the narrative.  This is what appears to be happening now with COVID-19.  The solution for those in control of the narrative is to produce bigger and bigger lies to prop up the solution.  Those being controlled by mass formation no longer are able to use reason to break free of the group narrative.

Of course, the obvious example of mass formation is Germany in the 1930s and 40s. How could the German people who were highly educated, very liberal in the classic sense; western thinking people… how could they go so crazy and do what they did to the Jews? How could this happen?
To a civilized people?  A leader of a mass formation movement will use the platform to continue to pump the group with new information to focus on.  In the case of COVID-19, I like to use the term “fear porn.”  Leaders, through main stream media and government channels continuously  feed the “beast” with more messaging that focus and further hypnotize their adherents.

Studies suggest that mass formation follows a general distribution:

  • 30% are brainwashed, hypnotized, indoctrinated by the group narrative
  • 40% in the middle are persuadable and may follow if no worthy alternative is perceived
  • 30% fight against the narrative.

Those that rebel and fight against the narrative, become the enemy of the brainwashed and a primary target of aggression.

One of the best ways to counter mass formation is for those against the narrative to continue to speak out against it, which serves to help break the hypnosis of some in the brainwashed group as well as persuade the persuadable middle to choose reason over mindlessness.

Dr. Desmet suggests that for something as big as COVID-19, the only way to break the mass formation psychosis is to give the crowd something bigger to focus on.  He believes that totalitarianism may be that bigger issue.  Of course, after COVID-19, global totalitarianism may be the biggest issue of our time. (LINK)

Returning to my own personal theory – The conservative tends to be more faithful – and not necessarily in God, but in the ability of the individual to find great strength in himself (or from his God) to get what he needs and to be successful. Therefore, the conservative has an outlet for his fear and disappointment – trust and faith in something bigger.

The leftist believes the system must be perfected in order to enable success. Therefore, disappointment is channeled as anger and blame at the system. Voids are left to be filled by faith in the govt, which they surely then want to come in and “fix” things.

And therein lies the roots of love and fear respectively. For the conservative, when life presents great struggles, he knows he has the power to surmount them. Happiness stems from internal strength and perseverance. For the modern leftist, when life presents great struggles, the system failed, therefore they were at the mercy of a faulty system, and they believe that only when the system is fixed can their life improve. Happiness is built on systemic contingencies, which they will then seek to control or expect someone else to.

One blames himself. The other blames anyone and everyone but himself. (read more)

Jan 2 2022

Vaccination Rate Compliance Graph


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 1, 2022 | sundance | 198 Comments

Prove me wrong….

Feliz Año Nuevo!

Jan 1 2022

How Dr. Fauci Deliberately Distorts the Truth: “The data needs to be further analyzed”


Posted originally on TrialSite News by Dr-Ron-BrownDecember 31, 20214 Comments

How Dr. Fauci Deliberately Distorts the Truth: “The data needs to be further analyzed”

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

December 31, 2021

The public has been a constant target of Dr. Fauci’s distortion of the truth. Whether misleading U.S. Congress with claims that the coronavirus is ten times more deadly than influenza, Public Health Lessons Learned From Biases in Coronavirus Mortality Overestimation – PubMed (nih.gov), denying that his organization, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was involved in funding gain of function research, or promoting the ridiculously misleading 95% efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines, Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials – PubMed (nih.gov), Dr. Fauci consistently manages to pull the wool over the public’s eyes. Fauci’s distortions often do not appear to be unintentional. Evidence in this editorial will demonstrate one of Dr. Fauci’s methods which he uses to deliberately distort the truth when reporting clinical research findings.

Fauci and AZT Relative Risk Reduction 

Click on the link below first then read the rest of this post

“Fauci’s First Fraud”

The video excerpts from “Fauci’s First Fraud” show a 2020 interview with Dr. Fauci, seated next to Dr. Deborah Birx of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. Fauci is reminiscing about HIV research during the clinical trials of AZT (Retrovir) in the 1980s.

Video – 23:57

Fauci suggests that the researchers at the time had all the clinical trial data necessary to achieve their objective and approve AZT.

Fauci: “Whenever you have clear-cut evidence that a drug works, you have an ethical obligation to immediately let the people who are in the placebo group know so that they can have access…and all of the other trials that are taking place now have a new standard of care. So we would have normally waited several days until the data gets further—dot the i’s and cross the t’s. But the data are not going to change. Some of the numbers may change a little, but the conclusion will not change.” 

Video – 25:14

Fauci: “The mortality rate trended towards being better in the sense of less deaths in the Remdesivir group,…” [Fauci probably meant the Retrovir group,] 

“…8%, versus 11% in the placebo group.”

[These data probably refer to the adverse effects of anorexia, which were 8% in the Retrovir group and 11% in the placebo group. The Retrovir absolute risk reduction was 3%, calculated by subtracting the 8% event rate in the Retrovir group from the 11% event rate in the placebo group]. 

“It has not yet reached statistical significance,…” 

[Fauci appears to imply that the absolute risk reduction of 3% is too small to be a clinically significant outcome].

“…but the data needs to be further analyzed.”

[Fauci implies that the relative risk reduction needs to be calculated by dividing the absolute risk reduction of 3% by the placebo event rate of 11%. The relative risk reduction of the Retrovir group is just over 27%. However, this is the relative risk reduction of anorexia, not mortality, because Fauci appeared to misuse anorexia data in his example].

Dr. Fauci might respond to this editorial by claiming he did nothing wrong by further analyzing the data, because this is the usual method used, but that doesn’t make the distortion of the clinical results any less deceptive. 

Only absolute numbers should be used in clinical trials that measure a causative and controlled experimental effect. Relative numbers should only be used in observational studies that measure relative and uncontrolled associations, not absolute causes. Converting the absolute risk reduction to the relative risk reduction usually makes the risk reduction in the trial appear much larger than it actually is.

Dr-Ron-BrownRonald B. Brown, PhD has authored over a dozen peer-reviewed articles in the U.S. National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health; as well as a chapter on breakthrough knowledge synthesis in Contemporary Natural Philosophy and Philosophies. In addition to his epidemiologic and public health research on infectious disease and vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic, his current areas of research include prevention of cancer, cardiovascular disease, dementia, and other chronic diseases.

Dec 31 2021

A physician describes how the fear of COVID is affecting health and wellbeing


Originally Published on Rumble By The Post Millennial Clips  December 30, 2021 

Rumble — A physician describes how the fear of COVID is affecting health and wellbeing: “I think the fear can be more paralyzing.”

Dec 31 2021

Deadly Ingredient In Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Home Test Kit


Armstrong Economics Blog/Disease Re-Posted Dec 31, 2021 by Martin Armstrong

Even the test kits for the coronavirus could be potentially dangerous. The Abbott BinaxNOW COVID-19 Home Test Kit received emergency use authorization, but the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is warning the kit contains a “solution in the tube contains a hazardous ingredient.”

That deadly ingredient is called sodium azide, and it could be deadly if ingested. A 1990 study studied the component after two college students fell ill following accidental ingestion after a physiology experiment. The student who consumed only a few sips survived, but their classmate died after consuming over 700 ml. “Sodium azide is an uncommon but potent poison which can cause serious illness and death,” the study concluded.

While the COVID test kits likely do not contain a lethal amount of the ingredient, it seems careless to distribute millions of kits across the country with an “uncommon but potent poison.” “If the solution contacts the skin or eye, flush with plenty of water. If irritation persists, seek medical advice,” the kit states.

The at-home test also contains a warning list of “potential risks” that include “possible discomfort during sample collection” and “possible incorrect test results.” Incorrect results! If that is a potential hazard, then why did the US government spend $3 billion in taxpayer funds to purchase 500 million kits? Are they attempting to inflate numbers, provide a false sense of security, or both?