posted August 06, 2020 06:49 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dhyana:
[b]Sweden COVID-19 Death Rate Lower Than Spain, Italy and U.K., Despite Never Having Lockdown
BY SOO KIM ON 8/3/20 AT 7:16 AM EDT

http://www.newsweek.com/sweden-covid-19-death-rate-lower-spain-it aly-uk-despite-never-having-lockdown-1522306

[/B]

---

posted August 07, 2020 04:24 PM            

quote:

---

Are we just going to ignore the fact that Sweden never issued stay-at-home orders, kept schools open, didn't close businesses and the general public does not wear masks...

...and the entire country is down to LESS THAN 1 DEATH per day from COVID-19.

---

posted August 07, 2020 04:42 PM            

Packed house at #EvangelicalsForTrump prayer & praise event in Las Vegas. NV Governor banned church services but casinos can operate at 50% capacity. So we are praying in a casino.

http://twitter.com/ralphreed/status/1291539005738164224

posted August 09, 2020 06:39 PM            

quote:

---

A new poll finds that the average American thinks 9% of the U.S. population has died from coronavirus.

That's 30 million people.

The actual number is 160k.

Gee, I wonder why everyone is so hysterical?

---

posted August 09, 2020 06:53 PM            

A study suggests there is little evidence the virus is transmitted at school, according to a scientist who backs reopening

quote:

---

One of the largest studies in the world on coronavirus in schools, carried out in 100 institutions in the UK, will confirm that “there is very little evidence that the virus is transmitted” there, according to a leading scientist.

Professor Russell Viner, president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health and a member of the government advisory group Sage, said: “A new study that has been done in UK schools confirms there is very little evidence that the virus is transmitted in schools.

“This is the some of the largest data you will find on schools anywhere. Britain has done very well in terms of thinking of collecting data in schools.”

---

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pupils-pose-no-risk-of-spreading-covid-27q6zfd9l

posted August 10, 2020 05:40 PM            

“Scientists are doing an awful lot of damage to the world in the name of helping it. I don’t mind attacking my own fraternity because I am ashamed of it.” –Kary Mullis, Inventor of Polymerase Chain Reaction [the Covid test]

This is a long, rather technical article, much of it about HIV, that draws a parallel with the current Covid19 virus.

The author interviewed David Crowe, a Canadian researcher, with degrees in biology and mathematics. He is the host of The Infectious Myth podcast, and President of the think-tank Rethinking AIDS. Crowe laid out the problems with the PCR based Corona test, which is discussed at length in this article.

What I think it boils down to is that the Covid test is defective and can be manipulated to render any result desired. Here's just two examples of what stood out to me:

quote:

---

“The Chinese analysis was a mathematical analysis, a standard, the standard analysis that’s been done a million times before. There’s no reason to withdraw the paper for any reason. There’s nothing dramatic about the paper. It’s a really boring analysis. It’s just that they did the standard analysis and said, in some populations, like they estimated 1% of people are actually infected in the population. You could have 80% false positive. Uh, they couldn’t do a real analysis of false positives in terms of determining whether a test is correct or not because that requires a gold standard and the only gold standard is purification of the virus. So, we get back to the fact that the virus is not being purified. If you could purify the virus, then you could take a hundred people who tested positive and you could search for the virus in them. And if you found the virus in 50 out of a hundred and not in the other 50, you could say that the test is only accurate 50% of the time. But we have no way to do that because we haven’t yet purified the virus. And I don’t think we ever will.”

“I don’t think they understand what they’re doing,” he said. “I think it’s out of control. They don’t know how to end this. This is what I think what happened: They have built a pandemic machine over many years and, and as you know, there was a pandemic exercise not long before this whole thing started.”

“I just want to identify who sponsored that simulation conference, 6 weeks before the first news broke out of Wuhan,” I interjected. “It was the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, Johns Hopkins Center For Health Security, and the World Economic Forum. Incidentally, all the stats, projections and modeling you see in the media are coming out of Johns Hopkins.”

In another part of our conversation, he said something unforgettable:

“So, we’ve essentially been taken over by the medical Taliban, if you like.”

I pressed him one last time:

“David, in conclusion, finish this sentence: “The PCR test for Corona is as good as…”

His reply made me laugh. I didn’t know I still could laugh.

“It’s as good as that Scientology test that detects your personality and then tells you need to give all your money to Scientology. “

---

posted August 10, 2020 11:42 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dhyana:
@RalphReed:

Packed house at #EvangelicalsForTrump prayer & praise event in Las Vegas. NV Governor banned church services but casinos can operate at 50% capacity. So we are praying in a casino.

http://twitter.com/ralphreed/status/1291539005738164224

For where two or three gather together in My name, there am I with them. I'm sure Jesus would be fine with this.

---

I love it!

posted August 17, 2020 05:24 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dhyana:
[b]Was the COVID-19 Test Meant to Detect a Virus?

---

here some complementary article written by jon Rapport.

COVID: is the virus real? Aug
10
by Jon Rappoport
by Jon Rappoport

August 10, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

SARS-CoV-2. The woo-woo virus.

People who can think and follow a line of reasoning should have a shot at considering the questions:

Did researchers actually discover the virus?

Did their proof fall short?

DID RESEARCHERS DO ENOUGH TO PROVE THE CORONAVIRUS EXISTS IN THE FIRST PLACE?

If someone says that, during the full moon three weeks ago, the moon suddenly turned gold, and then a strange squadron of giants passed across it, on their way to the ocean, do you think it might be a good idea to find out whether, three weeks ago, there was a full moon? Might that be a basic starting point?

That’s what I’m doing. Checking up to see whether there was a full moon.

A rational researcher, at the CDC, if one actually existed, would say, upon hearing of a possible outbreak in the city of Wuhan: “Let’s see the proof that a new virus is responsible, is the causative agent.”

What kind of proof would he be asking for?

First, he would want to know, “Do researchers there have an actual biological specimen of this new virus? Do they have the real thing?”

And if the answer came back yes, he would reply, “We’re sending in one of our Wuhan people so he can confirm that.”

But how would the confirmation work? You can’t just lay a specimen of a virus on a table and shine a light on it.

There is a traditional method of observation. It’s called an electron microscope photograph (an EM). Certain established procedures exist for obtaining an EM from a patient’s tissue sample. The CDC scientist would want to make sure the Chinese scientists had carried out this process correctly.

Rough sketch: From a patient’s tissue sample, you take a small bit and spin it in a centrifuge. The material settles out in layers. Knowing which layer (by density) you’re looking for, you remove a bit from that layer, look at it under an electron microscope and photograph it. If you’ve found a new virus, you should see many identical particles of it in the photo—and, obviously, it should be something you’ve never seen before.

The rational CDC scientist—if one actually existed—would say, “Let’s have a look at the Chinese EM.” He wants to confirm there are many identical particles of the new virus in the EM.

But there is more. And here is where the rubber meets the road and the failure factor is very high. I need to back up a bit to explain.

When a clinical trial of a new drug is done (and here I’ll make a gigantic leap and assume it’s done correctly), is it carried out on one patient?

Is the result of giving the drug to a single patient then extrapolated to mean everyone will react the way this one person did? Of course not. That would be absurd. In clinical trials, sooner or later, researchers are dealing with a large number of volunteers. A thousand or more.

So, in the case of a new coronavirus, in China, the rational CDC scientist would say: “I want to see electron microscope photographs derived from a thousand patients who have been diagnosed with the new epidemic disease. I want to see those photos side by side. I want to see whether many particles of this same new virus are in all the photos.”

I myself ask, where are these photographs? Where are the completely necessary photographs? Because the Chinese scientist would tell his CDC counterpart, “Oh, we didn’t carry out the EM procedure on a thousand patients. We carried it out on one. Two. Maybe three. I’m not sure.”

At which point, this fantasy rational CDC scientist would blow his stack. He would say, “You’re declaring a new global epidemic based on two or three photographs from two or three patients??”

Consider this potential scenario—which explains why researchers only did the EMs on two or three of the patients. If someone actually performed the electron microscope work on 1000 patients diagnosed with the new disease, he might find a maybe/possible indication, in the photographs, of a new coronavirus in four patients. AND IN NONE OF THE OTHER 997 PATIENTS.

At which point, in Wuhan, they would shrug and say, “Well, wow, that didn’t work out. What a flop. Our hypothesis of a new disease based on a new coronavirus collapsed. We should have been able to see lots of the same new virus in the photos from ALL 1000 patients, or at least the overwhelming percentage of them. And we didn’t. Back to the drawing board. Let’s see. What’s the primary sign of the new disease? Pneumonia? Come to think of it, about 300,000 people in China die of pneumonia every year. How about we look at some studies on the air quality here in Wuhan? I think my colleague down the block has a pile of them. Let’s walk over there. Anybody have a searchlight so we can see the street through the fog of deadly pollution? Let me get my oxygen tank and breathing helmet.”

And that would be the end of that.

Back in Atlanta, the fantasy rational CDC scientist would say to his colleagues, “That Chinese outbreak wasn’t a virus. How about we spend the afternoon going through some of our own studies on vaccines? I know the fraud is rampant. Let’s get it out in the open.”

Sure. Happens every day over at the CDC.

Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe someone has done electron microscope photographs CORRECTLY derived from 1000 patients diagnosed with the new epidemic disease, in ONE LARGE COHERENT HONEST STUDY. LET’S SEE THE PHOTOS. SHOW THEM TO ME. We’ll have a few non-conflicted experts analyze them. Then we’ll demand another complete and honest study of 1000 patients, as confirmation.

Otherwise, don’t talk about science. There is no science going on.

Talk about fakery. And liability. And prison.

I write this piece for those who ordinarily have their heads on straight, when it comes to understanding the basics of HEALTH—but now, because of the “coronavirus epidemic,” are drifting back into the medical model: FIXATION ON GERMS.

A correct reading of suppressed medical history reveals that the hypothesis of “one disease, one germ” is a modern con, moving down a blind alley at midnight. And when you add “one vaccine” to the formula, you get an even greater degree of lunacy.

But you also get a trillion-dollar commercial success.

I don’t care how many contemporary molecular biologists are working in labs, amplifying invisible slivers of who knows what molecules into view, and calling them viruses; it’s a con. They’re all working in the dark, massaging RNA or partial decaying microbes or cellular debris or exosomes or pieces of random genetic sequences or whatever…

The history of human health shows that upgrades in public sanitation, hygiene, and improved nutrition have done more for people than all the laboratory voodoo and “germ-fighting” pharmaceutical interventions ever invented laid end to end.

You want germs? No one knows how many there are. From various estimates, we could be talking about thousands of trillions to the thousandth power. Maybe more. If an infinitesimal fraction of the critters caused serious disease no-matter-what, we’d not only all be dead, we’d be dead on dead on dead.

To begin to understand how overblown all these modern epidemic duds are, let’s go to the animals. Farm animals. Pigs. A headline blares: A MILLION PIGS SLAUGHTERED. African Swine Fever Virus was discovered, and in order to stop the contagion, death was rained down on the pigs. On the farm. On the giant factory farm. So a question arises:

Do you seriously think humans sat down next to each of the million pigs and tested him/her for the Virus? Drew a blood or tissue sample?

Twenty pigs “tested positive” and they killed the rest as matter of course. They always do.

But wait. What are the conditions on this massive million-pig factory farm? Let’s see. Pigs living in their own urine and feces, crowded next to one another, nose to butt, sprayed with toxic chemicals, eating chemical-laced feed—under high stress, never living the kind of existence they were designed for. Think they’re going to get sick? Think some kind of minimally reliable test might find a virus or two living and replicating in their bodies? Do you seriously think those viruses matter, contrasted against the OBVIOUS immunosuppressive ENVIRONMENT?

As the number one germ hunter of all time, Louis Pasteur, was reported to have confessed on his deathbed: it’s not the germ, it’s the terrain—meaning, it’s the body and its strength and vitality and resiliency—THAT should be the central focus of the healing profession. Building up health.

One problem. There’s no money in it. There’s no control over the population in it.

Oops.

posted August 17, 2020 05:31 PM            

The number of positive RT-PCR tests, which diagnose the presence of pieces [fragments] of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, is equated in the press and government reports with the number of new COVID-19 cases. This is not entirely true. This is misleading. It suggests a resurgence of the disease. COVID-19 is the name of the disease.

The RT-PCR test is just a means of detecting SARS-CoV-2, and that test is unreliable. Some people are asymptomatic, or with mild symptoms. Testing positive, which is already subject to interpretation, does not mean “sick”. Other doctors, including virologists, say so and warn of the current danger of this confusion maintained by official bodies.

The tests (screening, diagnosis, immunity) symbolize the blind and total belief in the omnipotence of technical medicine and technology. This illusion is maintained by industry, by some doctors and by the media.

As in the case of vaccination, there is an oversimplification on this subject which is a breeding ground for the manipulation of public opinion.

An example of oversimplification is to summarize human immunity to antibodies or to make people believe that a positive RT-PCR test is synonymous with COVID-19 disease.

RT-PCR

A positive RT-PCR test [1] is not synonymous with COVID-19 disease.

Today, as authorities test more people, there are bound to be more positive RT-PCR tests. This does not mean that COVID-19 is coming back, or that the epidemic is moving in waves. There are more people being tested, that’s all.

Are these tests reliable? [2].

Beware of false positives [3]. This weakness of the PCR test in virus testing has been known for years [4]. For Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR technique which enabled him to win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993, this test was above all qualitative and intended to answer the question: is the element there, yes or no, not at all to be quantified?

Moreover, these tests detect viral particles, genetic sequences, not the whole virus.

In an attempt to quantify the viral load, these sequences are then amplified several times through numerous complex steps that are subject to errors, sterility errors and contamination [5-6].

Positive RT-PCR is not synonymous with COVID-19 disease! PCR specialists make it clear that a test must always be compared with the clinical record of the patient being tested, with the patient’s state of health to confirm its value [reliability] [7].

The media frighten everyone with new positive PCR tests, without any nuance or context, wrongly assimilating this information with a second wave of COVID-19.

Serologies and immunities

Serology is the determination of protein in the blood. In COVID-19, we look for antibodies (immunoglobulins or Ig) specific to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus.

In this case, IgG.

Each test can look for a particular type of antibody. Antibodies are produced after recovery and can be directed against hundreds of virus antigens, which explains the inconsistent results depending on the type of antibody chosen for the test.

The first thing you need to know, in order to know what you are talking about, is the type of antibody that the test is measuring.

The RT-PCR test, a molecular technology based on a sample of cells from the upper respiratory tract, tries to detect the presence of viruses.

Serological tests look to see if the person has developed humoral (antibody-based) immunity (protection) to the virus.

Indirectly, a positive serology would confirm that the person, at some point, has been in contact with the virus.

That’s not entirely true.

The reality is neither so simple nor so obvious!

Many doctors themselves do not know how human antiviral immunity works.

Cross-immunity, non-specific innate immunity and cell specific immunity are not measured by serology. Yet they are essential.

In immunopathology, the notion of field (patient’s condition) conditions the body’s response to COVID-19 [8].

“In this era of astounding progress in the field of lymphocyte molecular and cellular biology, it is easy to forget that our perception of immunology at the systemic level is still at an embryonic stage. Modern immunology has only a very limited understanding of the myriad complex physiological events that, in vivo, constitute the immune response, whether protective or pathological.”

[Fundamentals Immunology, 1600 pages, Louis J Picker & Mark H. Siegelmen, Pathologists, University of Texas.]

Summarizing it all down to SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies alone is a dangerous lure, a dramatic simplification that distorts all reasoning and therefore any future policy blinded by an obsession with a vaccine.

CROSS-IMMUNITY

SARS-CoV-2 is a coronavirus related to other coronaviruses, most of which, in humans, cause only “common” colds. Most of us have developed good immunity to these coronaviruses since childhood. It is this cross-immunity that may have protected most of us from SARS-CoV-2 before any vaccine was developed.

Cross-immunity between cold coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-1 has already been demonstrated. This is cell-based immunity (not antibody-based).

This protection by natural cell-based immunity persists much longer (> 10 years) than antibody-mediated humoral immunity (< 3 years).

Cellular immunity uses a type of cell, T-lymphocytes, the best known of which are called CD4+ and CD8+. This T-cell immune response plays a major role in the defence against infection.

Cross-immunity between common cold coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2 is highly likely, mediated by this T-cell immunity, directed against antigens common to all coronaviruses.

Dosing for antibodies (Ig immunoglobulins) specific to a particular SARS-CoV-2 antigen misses out on this immunity, which is nevertheless very present and very effective.

INNER IMMUNITY

Innate immunity is non-specific, not antibody-mediated.

It is the first response to an infection; it destroys the infectious agent.

It is an important anti-viral barrier that IgG serologies do not detect either. This innate immunity is capable of defending us against a virus without the need for specific immunity, provided we are healthy.

It has probably contributed to the low incidence of COVID-19 disease in young and healthy older individuals. This innate immunity destroys the virus very quickly. It does not need to develop antibodies to manage the infection, at least not enough for a test to detect them. Instead, it activates a cellular response to T-cells. This innate immunity persists throughout life, unlike humoral (memory) specific immunity, which declines with age.

It is possible to be immunized against COVID-19 through our innate immunity and these memory T cells, even in the absence of neutralizing antibodies.

A Swedish study reported that individuals affected by COVID-19 developed a cellular T cell immune response in the absence of detectable antibodies [9]. It is therefore highly likely that this T-cell immune response is sufficient to protect against a new SARS-CoV-2 infection.

However, none of this is demonstrated by current serological tests!

COVID-19 acts as an indicator of our state of health.

Health status is not only related to our standard of living or the quality of our health care services, far from it. Rather, they tend to mask poor health.

Good health is linked to the quality of our diet, our physical activity and, above all, our state of mind.

The importance of good mental health is paramount in our quality of life and in our ability to cope with illness.

Fear, total confinement, social distancing, constant wearing of a mask, all contribute to a serious deterioration of our mental health.

The relationship between psychology and the endocrine (hormones), nervous and immune systems has been proven for a long time [9].

The media, their daily anxiety-provoking announcements, the total confinement and the deadly atmosphere have stressed populations to the point of astonishing and lasting damage to their health.

It is paradoxical to advocate life-saving measures while ignoring the catastrophic consequences of such measures.

The relationship between stress and immunity is well demonstrated [10-11-12].

The field (state of health) is a fundamental notion in immunopathology.

The severity of an infection, of COVID-19 in particular, is determined by the terrain, by the state of health of the patient.

This relationship is not only due to the presence of one or more co-morbidities that weaken the organism.

It involves the decline (with age) of specific acquired immunity (of which humoral antibody immunity is a part).

In unhealthy individuals, the normal protective immune defence is diverted to an inadequate, deleterious overreaction through the production of antibodies that facilitate infection and a Th2 (inflammatory cytokine storm) rather than a protective Th1 (T-cell) response [8].

This is why the sickest people suffer from the most severe forms of the disease, especially if they are older (ageing of specific immunity): because of an inadequate immune response.

Healthy young people and adults are protected because their immune ground is healthy.

This is what people should be told rather than using fear to better prepare them to accept a hastily prepared vaccine.

The innate cellular immunity of most people is competent and sufficient.

In the case of SARS-CoV-2, a coronavirus of the cold virus family, T-cell cross-immunity is effective as well.

That’s all kinds of solid scientific information that will reassure most people.

Why do the media prefer to continue to frighten and misinform?

This information tells us that a large part of the population will be protected from an infection like COVID-19 without having to wait for a vaccine or maintain measures whose deleterious effects eventually outweigh any benefits (such as the continued wearing of a mask).

Instead, authorities and mainstream media continue to perpetuate the psychosis and do not fully inform people.

They incorrectly translate “positive RT-PCR tests” into “new COVID-19 cases”.

They wrongly propagate the dogma that immunity is only antibodies.

They incorrectly suggest that PCR tests and serologies help to separate “infected” and “uninfected”.

They falsely claim that only a vaccine can save us.

The fear is terrible!

Not only does it astound (paralyze) our immune system, it also freezes our analytical and thinking abilities.

In conclusion, keep in mind that human technologies are limited, sometimes sources of error. The precision of words in science, in medicine, is crucial. The RT-PCR technique can give false positives and a positive RT-PCR test is not synonymous with COVID-19 disease. More than the number of positive tests, the actual hospitalization rate remains the indicator of choice for a resurgence of disease.

What matters is the presence or absence of signs, symptoms (cough-fever-respiratory difficulties-impaired taste or smell) that should lead you to stay home, be quarantined, or even see a doctor if these symptoms worsen.

If you have to go out, respect the social distance and wash your hands. Many RT-PCR-positive people will have no symptoms, they must trust their healthy innate and cross immunity.

As for serologies, keep in mind that they only measure a specific neutralizing type of antibody and that the absence of this antibody (negative or low serology) does not mean that you have not been in contact with SARS-CoV-2.

Without even noticing or barely noticing it, you may have been able to eliminate this virus by using your innate immunity, cross-immunity to other cold coronaviruses, and/or T-type cellular immunity, without having to produce antibodies.

Dr. Pascal Sacré, physician specialized in critical care, author and renowned public health analyst based in Charleroi, Belgium. Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

Translation by Maya, Global Research

posted August 17, 2020 05:52 PM            

1. Germany has protested on August 1st in Berlin against corona measures. the Main stream media has lied by saying the some 10,000 people showed up. According to sources in the alternative media, more that 500,000 people where there. They are planning another one 29th of August and I am sure this time will be more than 3 millions... "TAG DER FREIHEIT" i will keep you posted... if you want to see a video of the gathering, here is goes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmUdxS1yWXc#action=share

there is also a civil society initiative "corona fact finding committee" aimed to investigate all the aspects of the measures taken during the crisis... this is advancing and a lot of info has been gathered so far.. will keep you posted in the future.

2. Spain and Germany has already his group of Doctors for the truth "medicos for la verdad" and "ÄRZTE FÜR AUFKLÄRUNG".

https://www.medicosporlaverdad.com/

https://www.xn--rzte-fr-aufklrung-pqbn68b.de/

posted August 22, 2020 11:20 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by nordicsoul:
and.. some news from Europe

1. Germany has protested on August 1st in Berlin against corona measures. the Main stream media has lied by saying the some 10,000 people showed up. According to sources in the alternative media, more that 500,000 people where there. They are planning another one 29th of August and I am sure this time will be more than 3 millions... "TAG DER FREIHEIT" i will keep you posted... if you want to see a video of the gathering, here is goes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmUdxS1yWXc#action=share

there is also a civil society initiative "corona fact finding committee" aimed to investigate all the aspects of the measures taken during the crisis... this is advancing and a lot of info has been gathered so far.. will keep you posted in the future.

2. Spain and Germany has already his group of Doctors for the truth "medicos for la verdad" and "ÄRZTE FÜR AUFKLÄRUNG".

https://www.medicosporlaverdad.com/

https://www.xn--rzte-fr-aufklrung-pqbn68b.de/

---

Thank you for the info. For the youtube video, the correct link is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmUdxS1yWXc

posted August 22, 2020 11:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by teasel:
http://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/briannasacks/covid-long-haulers-who-coronavirus

---

posted August 29, 2020 10:19 PM            

quote:

---

So get this straight – based on the recommendation of doctors Fauci and Birx the US shut down the entire economy based on 9,000 American deaths to the China coronavirus.

---

posted September 01, 2020 08:02 AM            

https://www.bitchute.com/video/set7CVuDQWOo/
Robert Kennedy, Berlin, August 29, 2020

posted September 01, 2020 08:19 AM            

DAVID ICKE'S SPEECH AT THE UNITE FOR FREEDOM RALLY