Why COVID Vaccine Testing Is a Farce

The flaws of vaccine trials in general are really highlighted by current COVID-19 vaccine studies, one of the most egregious ones being the fact that vaccine makers rarely use inert placebos (such as a saline shot), which is the gold standard for drug trials.

As noted in a January 25, 2021, article in The Defender,1 vaccine developers typically assess the safety of a new vaccine against another vaccine, and by so doing, they effectively hide side effects as most vaccines have side effects and risks.

As just one example, the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine is being tested against a meningitis vaccine,2 which just so happens to share many of the side effects reported from COVID-19 vaccines. As reported by the National Vaccine Information Center:3

“According to the CDC, at least 50% of individuals receiving meningococcal vaccines targeting meningococcal serogroups A, C, Y, and W-135 (Menactra or Menveo) experience mild side effects …

Adverse events reported by Sanofi Pasteur in the Menactra vaccine product insert include … headache; fatigue … joint pain; chills; anaphylaxis; wheezing; upper airway swelling; difficulty breathing; hypotension … lymph node swelling; Guillain-Barre syndrome; convulsions; dizziness; facial palsy; vasovagal syncope; paresthesia; transverse myelitis; acute disseminated encephalomyelitis …

Adverse events reported by Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics (GlaxoSmithKline) in the pre-licensing clinical trials of Menveo vaccine include … headache; joint and muscle pain; malaise; nausea; chills … acute disseminated encephalomyelitis … pneumonia … suicidal depression and suicide attempts.”

Long-Term Safety Analysis Tossed by the Wayside

Now, Pfizer and Moderna have started offering placebo recipients in their trials the real mRNA gene therapy, which means it will be even more difficult to tease out which side effects are actually caused by the shot and which ones aren’t, over the long term. As reported by NPR, February 17, 2021:4

“Tens of thousands of people who volunteered to participate in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine studies are still participating in follow-up research, though that’s somewhat hampered because many people who had been given a placebo shot opted to take the vaccine instead.”

In fact, according to Dr. Carlos Fierro, who runs the clinical trial for the Moderna vaccine in Lenexa, Kansas, virtually all of the 650 volunteers who initially received the placebo have now opted to get the real vaccine, which means he had “essentially no comparison group left for the ongoing study,” which was slated to run for two full years.

As Dr. Steven Goodman at Stanford University told NPR,5 getting rid of the initial control groups makes it far more difficult to assess the safety and effectiveness of the COVID vaccines since they won’t have anything to compare the vaccine recipients against.

Justification for Elimination of Controls Is Flimsy at Best

Ironically, both the use of an active placebo and the elimination of control groups are being justified on “moral grounds” by pro-vaccine advocates who say it’s unethical to not provide volunteers with something of value, such as another vaccine in the case of active placebos, or a vaccine they know is effective in the case of giving placebo recipients the real McCoy.

Both of these arguments are beyond questionable. As mentioned, no vaccine is 100% safe, so getting an active vaccine placebo comes with risk, not merely benefit, and when it comes to the novel mRNA technology used in COVID-19 vaccines, historical data are troubling to say the least, and the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is rapidly filling up with COVID-19 vaccine-related injury reports and deaths.

As reported in “COVID-19 Vaccine To Be Tested on 6-Year-Olds,” as of February 4, 2021, VAERS had received 12,697 injury reports and 653 deaths following COVID-19 vaccination.6 Even more telling, between January 2020 and January 2021, COVID-19 vaccines accounted for 70% of the annual vaccine deaths, even though these vaccines had only been available for less than two months!

What’s more, previous research7 by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services found fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are ever reported to VAERS, so in reality, we may be looking at more than 1 million COVID-19 vaccine injuries within the first two months of their release.

In my view, the data are far from assuring overall, which makes the elimination of long-term control groups — flawed as they may be due to active placebo use — all the more troubling.

All Previous Coronavirus Vaccines Failed Upon Challenge 


Historically, previous attempts to create a coronavirus vaccine have all failed miserably, as they ended up creating devastating immune enhancement. This is why any and all short-cuts taken in the COVID-19 vaccine development is so troubling.

In my May 2020 interview above with Robert Kennedy Jr., he summarized the history of coronavirus vaccine development, which began in 2002, following three consecutive SARS outbreaks. By 2012, Chinese, American and European scientists were working on SARS vaccine development, and had about 30 promising candidates.

Of those, the four best vaccine candidates were then given to ferrets, which are the closest analogue to human lung infections. In the video above, which is a select outtake from my full interview, Kennedy explains what happened next.

While the ferrets displayed robust antibody response, which is the metric used for vaccine licensing, once they were challenged with the wild virus, they were overtaken by a cytokine storm response, known as paradoxical immune enhancement, became severely ill and died.

The same thing happened when they tried to develop a respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine in the 1960s. RSV is an upper respiratory illness that is very similar to that caused by coronaviruses.

At that time, they had decided to skip animal trials and go directly to human trials. The RSV vaccine was tested on about 35 children, with identical results. Initially, they developed a robust antibody response, but when challenged with the wild virus, all became ill and two died. The vaccine was abandoned.

Yes, We Really Do Need Placebo Arms

Despite such dire failures, some still argue that placebo arms aren’t needed in COVID-19 vaccine trials. In an opinion piece in STAT News,8 Kent Peacock, a professor of philosophy, and John Vokey, a professor of psychology, both from the University of Lethbridge, compare the use of placebo control groups with giving out dummy parachutes during wartime.

“Giving the real treatment to 100% of the volunteers removes one of the major ethical barriers to challenge trials: the high probability of harmful side effects or death to members of a control group,” they say, completely ignoring the fact that volunteers in the vaccine arm may be put at grave unknown risks, not just in the short term but in the long term as well.

This entire argument hinges on the idea that the vaccine being tested is KNOWN to be safe, which it absolutely is not at this point, and won’t be for many years. They even argue that “not using a placebo … would be less ethically questionable to test the vaccine on older participants.”

Well, they published that article in early September 2020, and now we can more or less conclusively state that they are wrong on this point, as older vaccine recipients have been dropping like flies.

‘We’re Dealing With Homicide,’ German Attorney Says

As reported by Brian Shilhavy, editor of Health Impact News, February 19, 2021:9

“Earlier this week we published10 the English translation of a video in German that attorney Reiner Fuellmich published with a whistleblower who works in a nursing home where several residents were injected with the experimental COVID mRNA shots against their will, and where many of them died a short time later.

Since that interview was published, other whistleblowers in Germany who work in nursing homes have also stepped forward, some with video footage showing residents being held down and vaccinated against their wish …

Fuellmich … stated: ‘We are getting more and more calls from other whistleblowers form other nursing homes in this country, plus we’re getting information from other countries, Sweden for example, Norway … Gibraltar … here are also incidents in England and in the United States that match these descriptions …

It means that people are dying because of the vaccines. What we are seeing in this video clip is worse than anything we ever expected. If this is representative for what’s going on in other nursing homes, and in other countries, then we have a very serious problem.

And so do the people who make the vaccines, so do the people who administer the vaccines. It looks more and more as though we’re dealing with homicide, and maybe even murder.'”

Novel mRNA Gene Therapy Is Not Harmless

It’s important to realize what mRNA and DNA COVID-19 vaccine actually are. They are not traditional vaccines made with live or attenuated viruses. They’re actually gene therapies. They don’t even meet the medical or legal definition of a vaccine, as detailed in “COVID-19 mRNA Shots Are Legally Not Vaccines.” This novel, never before used therapy has a long list of potential problems, including the following:

The messenger RNA (mRNA) used in many COVID-19 vaccines are synthetic. Your body sees these synthetic particles as non-self, which can cause autoantibodies to attack your own tissues. Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., explained this in her interview, featured in “How COVID-19 Vaccines May Destroy the Lives of Millions.”

Your body also views free mRNA as a warning signal to your immune system, as they drive inflammatory diseases. This is why making synthetic mRNA thermostable, meaning it doesn’t break down as easily as it normally would by encasing the mRNA in lipid nanoparticles is likely to be problematic.

COVID-19 vaccines use PEGylated lipid nanoparticles, and PEG is known to cause anaphylaxis.11

Previous attempts to develop an mRNA-based drug using lipid nanoparticles failed because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic.12

The synthetic RNA influences, in part, the gene syncytin. According to Mikovits, when syncytin is aberrantly expressed in the brain, you can develop multiple sclerosis. Expression of the syncytin gene also inflames and dysregulates communication between the brain microglia, which are critical for clearing toxins and pathogens in the brain. It also dysregulates your immune system and your endocannabinoid system, which is the dimmer switch on inflammation.

The synthetic mRNA also has an HIV envelope expressed in it, which can cause immune dysregulation.

Symptoms of COVID-19 Vaccine Damage

Commonly reported side effects among recipients of the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines include:

Persistent malaise13,14 and extreme exhaustion15

Persistent headache and migraine onset16

Severe allergic, including anaphylactic reactions17,18,19

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome20

Seizures and convulsions21,22

Paralysis,23 including Bell’s Palsy24

Swollen lymph nodes25

Sudden death within hours or days26,27,28,29,30

Many of these symptoms are suggestive of neurological damage. According to Mikovits, this is precisely what you’d expect, as these conditions are caused by neuroinflammation, a dysregulated innate immune response and/or disrupted endocannabinoid system.

Long term, Mikovits predicts we’ll see a significant uptick in migraines, tics, Parkinson’s disease, microvascular disorders, cancers, severe pain syndromes like fibromyalgia and rheumatoid arthritis, bladder problems, kidney disease, psychosis, neurodegenerative diseases such as Lou Gehrig’s disease (ALS) and sleep disorders.

What to Do if You Got the Vaccine and Are Having Problems

If you got the vaccine and now regret it, you may be able to address your symptoms using the same strategies you’d use to treat actual SARS-CoV-2 infection.

I’ve written many articles over the past year detailing simple strategies to improve your immune system, and with a healthy immune system, you’ll get through COVID-19 without incident. Below, I’ll summarize some of the strategies you can use both to prevent COVID-19 and address any side effects you may encounter from the vaccine.

Eat a “clean,” ideally organic diet. Avoid processed foods of all kinds, especially vegetable oils, as they are loaded with damaging omega-6 linoleic acid that wrecks your mitochondrial function. Linoleic acid has been shown to increase mortality from COVID-19.

Consider nutritional ketosis and time-restricted eating, both of which will help you optimize your metabolic machinery and mitochondrial function.

Implement a detoxification program to get rid of heavy metals and glyphosate. This is important as these toxins contribute to inflammation. To improve detoxification, I recommend activating your natural glutathione production with molecular hydrogen tablets.

A simple way to block glyphosate uptake is to take glycine. Approximately 3 grams, about half a teaspoon, a few times a day should be sufficient, along with an organic diet, so that you’re not adding more glyphosate with each meal.

Maintain a neutral pH to improve the resiliency of your immune system. You want your pH to be right around 7, which you can measure with an inexpensive urine strip. The lower your pH, the more acidic you are. A simple way to raise your pH if it’s too acidic (and most people are) is to take one-fourth teaspoon of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) or potassium bicarbonate in water a few times a day.

Nutritional supplementation can also be helpful. Among the most important are:

Vitamin D Vitamin D supplements are readily available and one of the least expensive supplements on the market. All things considered, vitamin D optimization is likely the easiest and most beneficial strategy that anyone can do to minimize their risk of COVID-19 and other infections, and can strengthen your immune system in a matter of a few weeks.

N-acetylcysteine (NAC) NAC is a precursor to reduced glutathione, which appears to play a crucial role in COVID-19. According to one literature analysis,31 glutathione deficiency may actually be associated with COVID-19 severity, leading the author to conclude that NAC may be useful both for its prevention and treatment.

Zinc Zinc plays a very important role in your immune system’s ability to ward off viral infections. Like vitamin D, zinc helps regulate your immune function32 — and a combination of zinc with a zinc ionophore, like hydroxychloroquine or quercetin, was in 2010 shown to inhibit SARS coronavirus in vitro. In cell culture, it also blocked viral replication within minutes.33 Importantly, zinc deficiency has been shown to impair immune function.34

Melatonin Boosts immune function in a variety of ways and helps quell inflammation. Melatonin may also prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection by recharging glutathione35 and enhancing vitamin D synthesis, among other things.

Vitamin C A number of studies have shown vitamin C can be very helpful in the treatment of viral illnesses, sepsis and ARDS,36 all of which are applicable to COVID-19. Its basic properties include anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, antioxidant, antithrombotic and antiviral activities. At high doses, it actually acts as an antiviral drug, actively inactivating viruses. Vitamin C also works synergistically with quercetin.37

Quercetin A powerful immune booster and broad-spectrum antiviral, quercetin was initially found to provide broad-spectrum protection against SARS coronavirus in the aftermath of the 2003 SARS epidemic,38,39,40 and evidence suggests it may be useful for the prevention and treatment of SARS-CoV-2 as well.

B vitamins B vitamins can also influence several COVID-19-specific disease processes, including41 viral replication and invasion, cytokine storm induction, adaptive immunity and hypercoagulability.

Type 1 interferon — Type 1 interferon prevents viral replication and helps degrade the RNA. It’s available in spray form that you can spray directly into your throat, your nose. Mikovits recommends taking a couple of sprays per day prophylactically, and more if you have a cough, fever or headache.

Report All COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects

Last but not least, if you or someone you love have received a COVID-19 gene therapy “vaccine” and are experiencing side effects, help raise public awareness of these problems by reporting it. The Children’s Health Defense is calling on all who have suffered a side effect from a COVID-19 vaccine to do three things:42

  1. If you live in the U.S., file a report on VAERS
  2. Report the injury on VaxxTracker.com, which is a nongovernmental adverse event tracker (you can file anonymously if you like)
  3. Report the injury on the CHD website

The Modelling-Paper Mafiosi

John Edmunds is on top of the world. He’s one of the modelling-paper mafiosi. The London, U.K., professor is a key government advisor on COVID-19-related policies. Edmunds also was a co-author of one of the primary modelling papers1 that have been used to convince the masses that vigilance against new variant B.1.1.7 should be their top priority.

And Edmunds co-wrote an influential January 21, 2021 report2 that concluded, “There is a realistic possibility that VOC B.1.1.7 is associated with an increased risk of death compared to non-VOC viruses.”

In addition, he speaks often to reporters about the deadliness3 of the new variant.4 Edmunds tells them, for example, that a “disaster”5 would ensue if lockdowns are eased too soon, because what first must be done is to “vaccinate much, much, much more widely than the elderly.”6

Follow the Funds

Edmunds happens to be the spouse of someone who, at least until April 2020, was an employee of GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and held shares in the company. (Edmunds doesn’t disclose this in any of his media interviews that I’ve read and watched. He also doesn’t disclose his own stock holdings.)

According to an April 2020 Daily Telegraph7 article,8 Edmunds’s wife is Jeanne Pimenta and she works for GSK. The Daily Telegraph article states Edmunds asserted his partner had recently resigned from GSK. So it’s unclear whether Pimenta currently works there or not.

I did a little digging and found that the only Jeanne Pimenta LinkedIn profile9 indicates she’s currently director of epidemiology at GSK, while Jeanne Pimenta’s ResearchGate profile10 says she’s an epidemiologist at BioMarin Pharmaceutical. (More about Edmunds being married to a present or former Glaxo employee in the next section of this article.)

In any case, GSK’s financial success is skyrocketing. On February 311 the company announced it’s collaborating with mRNA-vaccine company CureVac to spend 150 million euros — approximately $180 million — to make vaccines for the new variants.

That effectively gives them first-entrant advantage in vaccines for the new variants. And that same February 3 news release12 touts the new-variant vaccines as also able to serve as “booster” shots after the initial rounds of vaccination. In addition, GSK joined forces with CureVac to pump out, later this year, 100 million doses of CureVac’s “first-generation” COVID-19 vaccine called “CvnCoV.”13

Not only that: this fall14 GSK together with another international pharmaceutical firm, Sanofi, are scheduled to start producing what could turn out to be up to 1 billion doses of their COVID-19 vaccine annually.15 GSK’s understated February 3 announcement16 of its Q4 2020 financial results said it will “continue to expect meaningful improvement in revenues and margins” because they are “building a high-value biopharma pipeline.”

Note that GSK and other pharma companies17 like Moderna and Pfizer18 are not responsible for damage and compensation payments to people seriously injured and killed by COVID-19 vaccines. Governments19 will pay instead — that is, if those injured and killed and their loved ones are able to beat the long odds20 and get any compensation at all.

And a remarkable February 8, 2021,21 investigative report in the German news outlet Welt Am Sonntag (which translates to World on Sunday) reveals another impetus for the wildly inaccurate modelling governments use to keep populations in a state of fear and control.

The German article shows that in March 2020 government officials enlisted “leading scientists from several research institutes and universities. Together, they were to produce a [mathematical-modelling] paper that would serve as legitimization for further tough political measures.”

These scientists obediently wrote a modelling paper tailored to the government’s instructions. The then-secret paper asserted that if lockdown measures were lifted immediately, up to 1 million Germans would die from COVID-19, some “agonizingly at home, gasping for breath,” after being turned away from overflowing hospitals.

Edmunds Is Deeply Invested in the Vaccine World

There’s still more to the web of money and influence surrounding Edmunds and other modelling-paper mafiosi, including Neil Ferguson.

The first new-variant modelling paper Edmunds co-wrote, which was posted on December 23, 202022 was co-authored with his fellow members of the Centre for Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM). People in the center’s COVID-19 Working Group also contributed.

The modelling paper was posted on the e-journal medr?iv, which publishes only non-peer-reviewed papers. The journal is the creation of an organization led by Facebook head Mark Zuckerberg and his wife.23 I discuss medr?iv and the Zuckerberg connection in my February 3 article24 on the baselessness for the modelling papers that claim the new variants are very dangerous.

Edmunds also is dean of the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health. I contacted the institution’s media-relations department to request an interview with one of the December 23, 2020, modelling paper’s authors. I didn’t receive a response.

In a February 2017 video interview,25 Edmunds enthused that the LSHTM specializes in every aspect of vaccine development, from basic science to large-scale clinical trials.

In the video he also touts using mathematical modelling as a good way to show that vaccines protect individuals and society. (And among other things he describes his group’s efforts in giving children flu vaccines and — in conjunction with Public Health England — promoting human papillomavirus [HPV] vaccines for girls and boys.)

In addition, Edmunds is a key member of the UK Vaccine Network26 (which until recently was known as the UK Vaccines Network — the URL for the organization has “UK Vaccines Network”27 in it).

And he’s a member of the U.K. government’s Science Advisory Group for Emergencies28 (SAGE), which provides COVID-measure advice — much of it related to the unprecedentedly forceful push for mass vaccination — to U.K. prime minister Boris Johnson and his cabinet.

On top of that, Edmunds is a member of the U.K. government’s New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG).29 It works hand in hand with SAGE, and it also heavily promotes vaccination.

And as mentioned earlier, Edmunds is married to a current or former GSK employee. A 2015 article that Edmunds co-authored states under “Competing interests” for Edmunds that “My partner works for GSK.”30 Similarly, on the NERVTAG website’s conflict-disclosure pages — which for some reason haven’t been updated since October 201731 — it reveals that Edmunds’s spouse works for GSK.

As a quick other note, the “Author Contributions and Acknowledgements” section of the PDF of the December 23 modelling analysis32 of B.1.1.7 (pages 15 and 16) shows that almost all of the paper’s authors and members of the modelling center’s COVID-19 Working Group receive funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and/or Wellcome Trust. (By the way, a search for Wellcome Trust yields the Wellcome website.33)

And there’s more to the Edmunds story. Among other of my finds: he’s also on the Scientific Advisory Board34 for the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).35 CEPI was created primarily by the BMGF, the World Economic Forum and the major pharma company Wellcome.

CEPI’s website states36 it was “launched in Davos [at the meeting of the World Economic Forum in January] 2017 to develop vaccines to stop future epidemics. Our mission is to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.”

Investigative journalist Vanessa Beeley last year wrote a must-read two-part37 analysis of the ties between the key individuals, institutions, companies and funders of the UK’s COVID-19 response. She mentioned that GSK is working with CEPI to develop COVID-19 vaccines. This alliance is still going strong38 today.

Note also that the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health, which Edmunds heads, is primarily funded by the BMGF and the Gavi alliance. (Gavi promotes mass vaccination of people around the world — including by quarterbacking the COVAX program.

Gavi’s biggest funders include the BMGF. Doctors Without Borders has criticized Gavi39 for being “aimed more at supporting drug-industry desires to promote new products than at finding the most efficient and sustainable means for fighting the diseases of poverty.”)

BMGF funding for the LSHTM’s Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health is growing very fast. For example, BMGF’s new grants to the faculty rose from $4.9 million in 2013-2014 (see page 14 [p. 9 in the PDF] of the LSHTM’s 2014 annual report40) to $13.19 million in 2015-2016 (see page 14 [p. 9 in the PDF] of the LSHTM’s 2016 annual report41) (top new research grants to each faculty at the LSHTM stopped being reported in the annual reports after 2017).

Funding from the BMGF to the LSHTM as a whole was 30.2 million pounds ($40.2 million) in 2017-2018 (see page 9 [p. 6 in the PDF] in the school’s 2018 annual report42). By the way, the LSHTM also has a Vaccines Manufacturing Innovation Centre.43 It develops, tests and commercializes vaccines. (I couldn’t find any information on where the vaccines center’s funding comes from.)

The vaccines center also performs affiliated activities like combating “vaccine hesitancy.” The latter includes the Vaccine Confidence Project.44 The project’s stated purpose is,45 among other things, “to provide analysis and guidance for early response and engagement with the public to ensure sustained confidence in vaccines and immunisation.”

The Vaccine Confidence Project’s director is LSHTM professor Heidi Larson.46 For more than a decade she’s been researching how to combat vaccine hesitancy. LSHTM47 underpins the project, which also is a member of the WHO’s Vaccine Safety Net.48

More Modelling Mafiosi

Here’s information about two other members of this club:

Public Health England (PHE) issued its first detailed report on the new variant in late December 202049 and continues to provide updates.50 None of their reports are peer-reviewed. One of the highest-profile co-authors of the PHE reports is PHE director Susan Hopkins.51 She’s also a professor of infectious diseases at Imperial College London.52 The college receives tens of millions of dollars a year from the BMGF.

See for example this grant,53 this one,54 this one55 and this one.56 (I emailed PHE media relations to request an interview about PHE’s new-variants reports. PHE communications person Zahra Vindhani responded, “Dr. Hopkins won’t have the capacity for this in the upcoming weeks, and we aren’t able to confirm anyone else for this either.”)

PHE is guided in its approach to vaccination by PHE’s “Strategic Priority 1” for combating infectious diseases in 2020 to 2025. It is to “Optimise vaccine provision and reduce vaccine preventable diseases in England” (see p. 9 of PHE’s Infectious Disease Strategy 2020-202557).

Neil Ferguson is a co-author of the PHE reports and also of a widely quoted December 31 modelling paper58 on the dangerousness of B.1.1.7. He’s acting director of the Imperial College London-based Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium.59

Ferguson’s modelling has been extremely faulty again over the years. This has been thoroughly documented. For example, as investigative journalist Beeley wrote in Part One60 of a two-part investigative report in April-May 2020, Ferguson’s modelling over-estimated by about 3 million-fold the death toll from the bird flu, also known as H5N1.

As a result, a lot of money was made by bird-flu-vaccine manufacturers, ranging from Roche (for its now-infamous, ineffective Tamiflu61) to Sanofi,62 and they were used widely.63

Ferguson also grossly overestimated the effects of swine flu, or H1N1. As a result, millions of people were needlessly given GSK’s Pandemrix.64 It caused brain damage, primarily narcolepsy65 and cataplexy, in hundreds if not thousands of vaccine recipients, mostly children. The pharma giant was granted no fault in any damage claims.66

Therefore the British government paid more than 60 million pounds (approximately $80 million at 2017 conversion rates) to victims.67 (And as mentioned earlier in this article, GSK and other pharma companies68 are similarly protected from having to pay damages to people injured or killed by their COVID-19 vaccines.)

Ferguson also is a member, together with Edmunds and others, of SAGE.69

Another group he’s a member of is the highly influential NERVTAG.70 It’s the group that issued the January 21, 202171 warning, mentioned earlier in this article, that B.1.1.7 is deadly.

Ferguson is a NERVTAG member even though he was reported to have resigned last spring72 after being caught visiting with his married lover when everyone in England was supposed to only be having contact with members of their own households (based in large part on Ferguson’s modelling and his urging the government to lock the country down).

Ferguson also is a member73 of the UK Vaccines Network,74 along with Edmunds and others such as the Network chair Chris Whitty, who’s also the U.K. government’s top COVID-19 adviser.

The network’s focus, according to its website, “to support the [U.K.] government to identify and shortlist targeted investment opportunities for the most promising vaccines and vaccine technologies that will help combat infectious diseases with epidemic potential, and to address structural issues related to the UK’s broader vaccine infrastructure.”

These ties bind Edmunds, Ferguson and Hopkins — along with the rest of the modelling-paper mafiosi — to the bidding of governments, Big Pharma, Bill Gates and other powerful players. They present an image of being fully devoted to the public good, while in fact actively helping to destroy it.

Editor’s Note: This is a reprint of an article by Rosemary Frei. She has a master of science in molecular biology from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary and was a freelance medical journalist for 22 years. She is now an independent investigative journalist in Canada.

Officials Reach New Low, Say Moist Masks Are Good for You

A number of medical professionals and occupational respirator experts, including Chris Schaefer, featured in the video above, have warned that wearing of face masks may have adverse health effects and that people really should not be forced to wear them on a regular basis.

Aside from that, there’s a glaring lack of evidence proving they actually prevent viral illness. On the contrary, the evidence overwhelmingly shows they have little to no impact on viral spread.

Research1 also shows asymptomatic individuals pose virtually no risk, as they rarely ever spread live virus, thereby undermining the idea that everyone must be masked simply because you don’t know who’s infectious and who’s not.

Despite all of that, government officials insist that universal mask wearing is an essential strategy to combat COVID-19, now even recommending wearing two,2 three3,4 or even four5 layers of face masks. And, according to Dr. Anthony Fauci, Americans may have to wear masks all the way through 2022.6

Is Wearing a Wet Mask Good for You?

Just when you thought mainstream propaganda could not propose a greater irrational perversion of the truth, a new study7 from the National Institutes of Health claims wearing a moist mask — which is a breeding ground for harmful bacteria — is actually good for you because inhaling through the wet mask hydrates your lungs and boosts your immune system. As reported by Healthing.ca, February 16, 2021:8

“The study, published in the Biophysical Journal, tested an N95 mask, a three-ply disposable surgical mask, a two-ply cotton-polyester mask and a heavy cotton mask, measuring the level of humidity by having a volunteer breathe into a sealed steel box.

When the person did not wear a mask, the water vapor of the exhaled breath filled the box, leading to a rapid increase in humidity inside the box. When the person wore a mask, the buildup of humidity inside the box greatly decreased as most of the water vapor remained in the mask, became condensed, and was re-inhaled. The researchers conducted the tests at three different temperatures ranging from 7 to 36 degrees Celsius.

‘We found that face masks strongly increase the humidity in inhaled air and propose that the resulting hydration of the respiratory tract could be responsible for the documented finding that links lower COVID-19 disease severity to wearing a mask,’ said Adriaan Bax, Ph.D., a NIH Distinguished Investigator and the study’s lead author.

‘High levels of humidity have been shown to mitigate severity of the flu, and it may be applicable to severity of COVID-19 through a similar mechanism.’”

However, it’s important to realize that the humidity inside the mask will allow pathogenic bacteria to rapidly grow and multiply — a documented fact not addressed by the NIH — and since the mask makes it more difficult to breathe, you’re likely to breathe heavier, thereby risking inhaling the microbes deep inside your lungs. As you’ll see below, this can have significant health risks that vastly outweigh any benefit you might get from breathing more humid air.

Occupational Respirator Testing Expert Speaks Out

In June 2020, Schaefer wrote an open letter9 addressed to the chief medical officer in Alberta, Canada, Dr. Deena Hinshaw, pointing out the errors of recommending universal wearing of N95 masks, surgical masks or nonmedical masks as protection against SARS-CoV-2. In it, he writes:10

“I have been teaching and conducting respirator fit testing for over 20 years and now currently for my company SafeCom Training Services Inc. My clients include many government departments, our military, healthcare providers with Alberta Health Services, educational institutions and private industry. I am a published author and a recognized authority on this subject.

Filter respirator masks, especially N95, surgical and non-medical masks, provide negligible COVID-19 protection for the following reasons:

1. Viruses in the fluid envelopes that surround them can be very small, so small in fact that you would need an electron microscope to see them. N95 masks filter 95% of particles with a diameter of 0.3 microns or larger. COVID-19 particles are .08 – .12 microns.

2. Viruses don’t just enter us through our mouth and nose, but can also enter through our eyes and even the pores of our skin. The only effective barrier one can wear to protect against virus exposure would be a fully encapsulated hazmat suit with cuffs by ankles taped to boots and cuffs by wrists taped to gloves, while receiving breathing air from a self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA).

This barrier is standard gear to protect against a biohazard (viruses) and would have to be worn in a possible virus hazard environment 24/7 and you wouldn’t be able to remove any part of it even to have a sip of water, eat or use the washroom while in the virus environment. If you did, you would become exposed and would negate all the prior precautions you had taken.”

Face Masks Pose Several Health Hazards

In his letter, and in the video above, Schaefer also stresses that these kinds of face masks pose “very real risks and possible serious threats to a wearer’s health” for a number of reasons, including the following:

1. Wearing a face mask increases breathing resistance, and since it makes both inhaling and exhaling more difficult, individuals with pre-existing medical conditions need to be screened by a medical professional to make sure they won’t be at risk of a medical emergency if wearing a face mask.

This includes those with shortness of breath, lung disease, panic attacks, breathing difficulties, chest pain on exertion, cardiovascular disease, fainting spells, claustrophobia, chronic bronchitis, heart problems, asthma, allergies, diabetes, seizures, high blood pressure and those with pacemakers. The impact of wearing a face mask during pregnancy is also wholly unknown.

2. Face masks can reduce oxygen intake, leading to potentially hazardous oxygen deficiency (hypoxia).

3. They also cause rapid accumulation of harmful carbon dioxide, which can have significant cognitive and physical impacts. That said, there is some evidence to support that this may be one of the few benefits of mask wearing, as slightly elevated CO2 levels can also contribute to health benefits as per my interview with Patrick McKeown. (We’re not talking about dangerously high levels, however.)

4. Wearing a face mask increases your body temperature and physical stress, which could result in an elevated temperature reading that is not related to infection.

5. All face masks can cause bacterial and fungal infections in the user as warm, moist air accumulates inside the mask. This is the perfect breeding ground for pathogens. “That is why N95 and other disposable masks were only designed to be short duration, specific task use and then immediately discarded,” Schaefer notes.

Medical doctors have warned that bacterial pneumonia, facial rashes, fungal infections on the face,11mask mouth” (symptoms of which include bad breath, tooth decay and gum inflammation) and candida mouth infections12 are all on the rise.

What’s worse, a study13,14 published in the February 2021 issue of the journal Cancer Discovery found that the presence of microbes in your lungs can worsen lung cancer pathogenesis and can contribute to advanced stage lung cancer. As reported by Global Research:15

“While analyzing lung microbes of 83 untreated adults with lung cancer, the research team discovered that colonies of Veillonella, Prevotella, and Streptococcus bacteria, which may be cultivated through prolonged mask wearing, are all found in larger quantities in patients with advanced stage lung cancer than in earlier stages.

The presence of these bacterial cultures is also associated with a lower chance of survival and increased tumor growth regardless of the stage.”

6. With extended use, medical masks will begin to break down and release chemicals that are then inhaled. Tiny microfibers are also released, which can cause health problems when inhaled. This hazard was highlighted in a performance study16 being published in the June 2021 issue of Journal of Hazardous Materials.

Schaefer also points out that to provide any benefit whatsoever, users must be fitted with the right type and size of respirator, and must undergo fit testing by a trained professional. However, N95 respirators, even when fitted properly, will not protect against viral exposures but can adequately protect against larger particles.

Surgical masks, which do not seal to your face, “do not filter anything,” Schaefer notes. These types of masks are designed to prevent bacteria from the mouth, nose and face from entering the patient during surgical procedures, and researchers have warned that contaminated surgical masks actually pose an infection risk.17 After just two hours, a significant increase in bacterial load on the mask was observed.

Nonmedical cloth masks are not only ineffective but also particularly dangerous as they’re not engineered for “easy inhalation and effective purging of exhaled carbon dioxide,” making them wholly unsuitable for use.

In the video, Schaefer demonstrates the only type of mask that is actually safe to wear — the gas mask kind of respirator you’d use to protect yourself against painting fumes, organic vapors, smoke and dust.

Real respirators are built to filter the air you breathe in, and get rid of the carbon dioxide and humidity from the air you breathe out, thereby ensuring there’s no dangerous buildup of carbon dioxide or reduction in oxygen inside the mask.

Cochrane Review Gives Masks Thumbs Down


I’ve written many articles detailing the evidence showing that face masks do not prevent viral illnesses. To these we can now add an updated Cochrane review,18 which summarizes randomized trial evidence from studies that looked at face masks, hand-washing and/or physical distancing as prevention against respiratory infections.

There are many limitations to the included studies, including the facts that none was specific to COVID-19 and most had questionable adherence. They did not include the one COVID-19 specific trial that also included adherence parameters. With regard to medical and surgical masks, they found that:

“Compared with wearing no mask, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness (9 studies; 3507 people); and probably makes no difference in how many people have flu confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 3005 people).”

Four health care studies and one small community study looked at the use of N95/P2 respirators. Here they found that:

“Compared with wearing medical or surgical masks, wearing N95/P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (5 studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (5 studies; 8407 people) or respiratory illness (3 studies; 7799 people).”

COVID-19 Specific Mask Trial Failed to Prove Benefit

Cochrane’s review certainly would have been more complete had they included the only COVID-19-related study to date. Unfortunately, they only included studies published before April 1, 2020. The trial in question, which was done in Denmark, was published November 18, 2020.

This COVID-19-specific randomized controlled surgical mask trial19,20 confirmed and strengthened previous findings, showing that mask wearing may either reduce your risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by as much as 46%, or increase your risk by 23%. Either way, the vast majority — 97.9% of those who didn’t wear masks, and 98.2% of those who did — remained infection free.

The study included 3,030 individuals assigned to wear a surgical face mask and 2,994 unmasked controls. Of them, 80.7% completed the study. Based on the adherence scores reported, 46% of participants always wore the mask as recommended, 47% predominantly as recommended and 7% failed to follow recommendations.

Among mask wearers, 1.8% ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% among controls. When they removed those who did not adhere to the recommendations for use, the results remained the same — 1.8%, which suggests adherence makes no difference.

Among those who reported wearing their face mask “exactly as instructed,” 2% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared to 2.1% of the controls. So, essentially, we’re destroying economies and lives around the world to protect a tiny minority from getting a positive PCR test result which, as detailed in “Asymptomatic ‘Casedemic’ Is a Perpetuation of Needless Fear,” means little to nothing.

CDC Relies on Anecdotal Data to Promote Mask Use

Considering the dearth of evidence for universal mask use, just what is the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention relying on to back up its recommendation?21 Believe it or not, their primary “evidence” is an anecdotal story about two symptomatic hair stylists who interacted with 139 clients during eight days.

Sixty-seven of the clients agreed to be interviewed and tested. None tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The fact that the stylists and all clients “universally wore masks in the salon” is therefore seen as evidence that the masks prevented the spread of infection. The Danish study reviewed above didn’t make it onto the CDC’s list of studies either.

The CDC’s own data22,23,24 also show 70.6% of COVID-19 patients reported “always” wearing a cloth mask or face covering in the 14 days preceding their illness; 14.4% reported having worn a mask “often.” So, a total of 85% of people who came down with COVID-19 had “often” or “always” worn a mask.

This too contradicts the idea that mask wearing will protect against the infection, and is probably a slightly more reliable indicator of effectiveness than the anecdotal hairdresser story.

Another recent investigation25 revealed the same trend, showing that states with mask mandates had an average of 27 positive SARS-CoV-2 “cases” per 100,000 people, whereas states with no mask mandates had just 17 cases per 100,000. I reviewed these and other findings in my December 31, 2020, article, “Mask Mandates Are Absolutely Useless.”

The CDC’s scientific backing for double-masking is equally flimsy. Using rubber dummy heads for their experiments, they claim wearing two tightly fitted masks could reduce exposure to aerosols by about 95%.26,27

However, there are several reasons to take these results with a grain of salt, starting with the fact that mannequins don’t breathe. The CDC even admits as much in its report, when they note that “double masking might impede breathing or obstruct peripheral vision for some wearers.”

In the final analysis, it seems clear that the most effective ways to prevent the spread of viral illnesses, SARS-CoV-2 included, is frequent handwashing with mild soap and water, and staying home if you have symptoms of a respiratory infection. As for masking up when you’re healthy, let alone double, triple or quadruple masking, there’s simply no scientific consensus for that strategy.

Do You Know the 14 Signs of Vitamin D Deficiency?

Vitamin D regulates the expression of hundreds of genes and is integral to biological functions that affect every bodily system. As you’ll see in this short video, vitamin D insufficiency or deficiency can trigger several generalized symptoms that you may have associated with other health conditions.

It is also called the sunshine vitamin since your skin makes vitamin D when exposed to ultraviolet light from the sun.1 Vitamin D performs many functions within the body, including maintaining adequate levels of calcium and phosphate, essential for normal bone mineralization.2

It helps reduce inflammation, which is necessary for the modulation of cell growth and immune function. Vitamin D also affects genes that help regulate cell differentiation and apoptosis.

The main indicator of your vitamin D level is 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD). Data collected from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in 2005-2006 showed a deficiency prevalence of 41.6% in the U.S. population.3 However, as I discuss later in this article, as many as 80% of people may be deficient in vitamin D.

It’s important to note that how the measurement of insufficiency and deficiency is defined depends on the serum concentrations used. Some researchers use a level of 20 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) or 50 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L); the ng/mL is used most frequently in the U.S. and nmol/L is the standard in Europe.

However, GrassrootsHealth Nutrient Research Institute recommends vitamin D serum concentration levels from 40 ng/mL to 60 ng/mL or 100 nmol/L to 150 nmol/L.4 At this level, the number of people who are likely deficient in vitamin D would be significantly higher.

14 Signs You Might Have a Vitamin D Deficiency

During cold and flu season, and the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to maintain healthy levels of vitamin D to help reduce your risk of viral and bacterial illness.5,6 A blood test is the best way to determine your vitamin D levels, but here are some symptoms that may indicate your levels are low.

1. Aching muscles — Nearly half of all adults are affected by muscle pain.7 Researchers believe most of those are deficient in vitamin D. Some studies have suggested that nerves have vitamin D receptors that affect the perception of pain. In one animal model, research demonstrated a vitamin D-deficient diet can induce deep muscle hypersensitivity that was not connected to low levels of calcium.8

2. Painful bones — Vitamin D regulates the level of calcium in your body, necessary to protect bone health.9 Vitamin D deficiency can cause your bones to soften, called osteomalacia. This may be a precursor to osteoporosis.

3. Fatigue — This is a common symptom of a variety of different health conditions, including sleep deprivation. Researchers have found that supplementing cancer patients suffering from fatigue can improve their symptoms.10

In one study11 using 174 adults with fatigue and stable medical conditions, the researchers found 77.2% were deficient in vitamin D. After normalizing their level, the fatigue symptoms improved significantly.

4. Reduced muscle performance — Vitamin D deficiency is as common in athletes as in others. Vitamin D is crucial for muscle development, strength and performance. Older adults taking a vitamin D supplement have a reduced risk of falls and improved muscle performance.12

Correction through oral supplementation or sensible sun exposure may reduce symptoms of stress fractures, musculoskeletal pain and frequent illness. Vitamin D also has a direct effect on muscle performance. In one paper from the Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the author wrote:13

“Higher serum levels of vitamin D are associated with reduced injury rates and improved sports performance. In a subset of the population, vitamin D appears to play a role in muscle strength, injury prevention, and sports performance.”

5. Brain health — Vitamin D is also essential for your brain health. Symptoms of deficiency can include dementia caused by an increase of soluble and insoluble beta-amyloid, a factor in Alzheimer’s disease.14 Research has also found an association with depression15 that may be associated with the function of vitamin D buffering higher levels of calcium in the brain.16

Vitamin D deficiency in pregnant women can increase the risk of autism and schizophrenic-like disorders in the baby.17 One study of people with fibromyalgia found a vitamin D deficiency was more common in those who had anxiety and depression.18 Another looked at vitamin D deficiency in obese subjects and found a relationship between low levels of vitamin D and depression.19

6. Poor sleep — The mechanism linking vitamin D and poor sleep quality has not been identified. But research has found people with low levels of vitamin D have poor quality sleep and a higher risk of sleep disorders.20

7. Sweaty head — Excessive sweating, especially on your head, or a change in your pattern of sweating, can indicate a vitamin D deficiency.21

8. Hair loss — Vitamin D is crucial to the proliferation of keratinocytes and plays an important role in your hair cycle. The vitamin D receptor appears to play a role in the anagen phase of hair growth, leading researchers to conclude, “Treatments that upregulate the vitamin D receptor may be successful in treating hair disorders and are a potential area of further study.”22

9. Slow-healing wounds — Chronic wounds are a major public health challenge.23 In the U.S. 2% of the population is affected by chronic wounds and it is estimated to account for 5.5% of the cost of health care in the U.K. NHS. Vitamin D promotes wound healing and the creation of cathelicidin, a peptide that fights wound infections.24

10. Dizziness — Evidence from animal models suggests that vitamin D is critical in the development of the inner ear,25 which affects balance and coordination. Analysis of people with vestibular neuritis, characterized by vertigo, showed lower serum vitamin D levels than in people without vestibular neuritis.26

11. Heart problems — Clinical studies have shown that vitamin D3 improves circulation and can help improve high blood pressure.27 In one study28 researchers discovered that vitamin D3 also has a significant effect on the endothelial cells that line your cardiovascular system. They found that it helped balance concentrations of nitric oxide and peroxynitrite, which improved endothelial function. 

12. Excess weight — How vitamin D affects obesity has not been identified. However, data do show there is a high probability of deficiency in people who are obese.29

13. Recurring infections — There have been multiple epidemiological studies that show vitamin D deficiency can increase the risk of infection and raise the severity, particularly in respiratory tract infections.30 Multiple studies have demonstrated that vitamin D deficiency increases the potential risk for severe disease and mortality, especially in those who are critically ill.31

14. Reduced cognitive function — Data show that vitamin D deficiency increases your risk of dementia twofold32 and raises your risk of impaired cognitive function.33

80% of People With COVID-19 Are Deficient in Vitamin D

Vitamin D plays an important role in the development and severity of many diseases. This is why, from the very beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, I suspected that optimizing vitamin D levels would significantly lower the incidence of infection and death in the general population.

Since then, mounting evidence has revealed this is indeed the case as researchers have repeatedly found that higher levels of vitamin D reduce the rate of positive tests, hospitalizations and mortality related to this infection.

One study,34 released in late 2020, assessed the serum 25OHD levels of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 to evaluate the influence it might have on the severity of the disease. The researchers found 82.2% of those with COVID-19 were vitamin D deficient (levels lower than 20 ng/mL).

Interestingly, they also found those who were deficient had a greater prevalence of cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, high iron levels and longer hospital stays. A second study35 found similar results for people who only tested positive for COVID-19. 

In other words, these patients were tested for the illness using the PCR test, which gives notoriously high false-positive results, and did not necessarily have symptoms of the illness. Yet, those who were “likely deficient” in vitamin D also had an increased risk of testing positive.

Recently, data showed people who received supplemental vitamin D3 while hospitalized with COVID-19 had reduced admissions to the ICU by 82% and reduced mortality by 64%.36 Editor’s note: This preprint study has since been pulled due to “concerns about the description of the research in this paper,”37 but an archived version is still available.

You can read more about the study, from information published before being pulled, at “Vitamin D Supplementation Reduces COVID-19 Deaths by 64%.”

Before the paper was removed, this information triggered British MP David Davis to call for a reevaluation of the official recommendations for vitamin D. He tweeted, “The findings of this large and well-conducted study should result in this therapy being administered to every COVID patient in every hospital in the temperate latitudes.”38

He added that the demonstration of the “clear relationship between vitamin D and COVID mortality is causal,” and his government should raise the availability of free vitamin D supplements to vulnerable populations. Other experts also called for official vitamin D recommendations.39

It’s important to remember the data showing people who are deficient in vitamin D have a higher risk of severe disease has been available long before the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, information that may suggest the other side of the same coin — namely supplementing with vitamin D — may have a positive effect on disease severity, can come under attack.

It isn’t a big leap to understand that if simple and inexpensive solutions, such a vitamin D, hydroxychloroquine and zinc, may reduce the potential risk of severe disease and death, the billions of dollars the pharmaceutical companies stand to make by vaccinating the world would be lost.

Unlike the painful reports of vaccine adverse events received by the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), supplementing with vitamin D, magnesium and vitamin K2 have been studied for years and found to be “well tolerated.”40,41

Added to which, the studies on vitamin D have demonstrated insufficiency and deficiency are associated with a number of health conditions, which you can find more information about in “Are You Ready for the Darkest Day of the Year?” and “Health Conditions in Which Vitamin D Plays an Important Role.”

Magnesium and Vitamin K2 Optimize Your Vitamin D3 Supplement

In the past, I’ve written about the importance of taking vitamin K2 MK-7 and magnesium with your vitamin D3 supplement. Both play an important role in your overall health and in the bioavailability and application of vitamin D in your body. If you’re not using magnesium and vitamin K2, you could need nearly 2.5 times more vitamin D, which GrassrootsHealth discovered in its D*action project.42

Over 10,000 individuals provided information about supplement use and overall health status to GrassrootsHealth since they began conducting large-scale population-based nutrient research in 2007.43

That information has led to the recommendation that vitamin D blood levels between 40 ng/ml and 60 ng/ml (100 nmol/L to 150 nmol/L) are safe, effective and lower overall disease incidence and health care costs. As reported by GrassrootsHealth from their data:44

“… 244% more supplemental vitamin D was needed for 50% of the population to achieve 40 ng/ml (100 nmol/L) for those not taking supplemental magnesium or vitamin K2 compared to those who usually took both supplemental magnesium and vitamin K2.”

In practical terms, this means when you take vitamin K2 and magnesium with vitamin D, you need far less vitamin D to achieve a healthy level. You’ll find more about the relationship between these supplements, how they can improve cognitive function and the impact on mortality at “Magnesium and K2 Optimize Your Vitamin D Supplementation.”

Weekly Health Quiz: Lockdowns, Vaccine Passports and More

1 Recent research found surges in daily positive tests during the fall of 2020 in 18 European countries linearly correlate with:

  • Longitude
  • Humidity
  • Latitude

    Recent research found surges in daily positive tests during the fall of 2020 in 18 European countries linearly correlate with latitude and, hence, sun exposure and vitamin D levels. Learn more.

  • Temperature

2 COVID-19 gene therapy “vaccines” are designed to:

  • Impart lasting immunity against SARS-CoV-2 infection
  • Inhibit transmissibility of the infection
  • Lessen symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection

    COVID-19 “vaccines” do not impart immunity or inhibit transmissibility of the disease. In other words, they are not designed to keep you from getting sick with SARS-CoV-2; they only are supposed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you get infected. As such, these products do not meet the medical definition of a vaccine. Learn more.

  • All of the above

3 Vaccine passports are ushering in an ever-increasing surveillance state, which many people are welcoming because they’ve been led to believe they’re:

  • A more efficient way to travel
  • An easy way to store medical information
  • A social status symbol
  • Necessary for public health

    This blatant move toward an ever-increasing surveillance state is being welcomed by many who have been led to believe the passports are necessary to protect public health and safety. Learn more.

4 Cost-benefit analyses reveal the cost of lockdowns, in terms of Quality Adjusted Life Years and Wellbeing Years, in the U.S. and Canada are:

  • 5.2 and 10 times higher than the benefit respectively

    The cost for lockdowns in Canada is at least 10 times greater than the benefit. In Australia, the minimum cost is 6.6 times higher, and in the U.S., the cost is estimated to be at least 5.2 times higher than the benefit of lockdowns. Learn more.

  • About 50% lower than the benefit, on average
  • 25% and 30% lower than the benefit, respectively
  • 100 times higher than the benefit

5 According to the World Health Organization’s investigative commission, tasked with identifying the origin of SARS-CoV-2, the virus most likely originated from which of the following?

  • Fresh bat soup served in the Wuhan market
  • Frozen animal food from areas of China where coronavirus-carrying bats are known to reside, or another country

    According to the WHO’s investigative team, SARS-CoV-2 may have piggybacked its way into the Wuhan market in shipments of frozen food from other areas of China where coronavirus-carrying bats are known to reside, or another country. China was allowed to hand-pick the members of the WHO’s team, which includes Peter Daszak, Ph.D., who has close professional ties to the WIV and has gone on record dismissing the lab-origin theory offhand. Learn more.

  • The Wuhan Institute of Virology, which studies bat coronaviruses
  • A researcher infected during a bat guano collection trip

6 Which of the following has long-held ties to and deep influence over corporate media in the U.S. and elsewhere?

  • The FBI
  • The President of the United States
  • The CIA

    The corporate media are indistinguishable from the CIA when it comes to matters of domestic and foreign matters. The CIA has also played an important role in furthering the technocrats’ agenda of global domination since its inception. Learn more.

  • The Queen of England

7 Red and near-infrared light therapy activates genes involved in which of the following?

  • Your behavior
  • Fat deposits and weight
  • Predisposition to cancer
  • Cellular repair, regeneration and growth

    Red and near-infrared light therapy activates genes involved in cell repair, cell regeneration and cellular growth, depending on the tissue. For example, in your brain, it activates brain derived neurotrophic factor; in your skin, it increases expression of fibroblasts that synthesize collagen; in your muscles, it locally increases expression of IGF1 and factors involved in muscle protein synthesis. Learn more.

The Benefits of Red and Near-Infrared Light Therapy

In this interview, Ari Whitten, author of “The Ultimate Guide to Red Light Therapy,” reviews the mechanics and basic benefits of red light and infrared light. Whitten, who has a degree in kinesiology, exercise science and movement science, has studied natural health, fitness and nutrition for over 20 years. He’s been a personal trainer, health coach and nutritionist for many years, and went on to do a Ph.D. program in clinical psychology.

Light as Nutrition

Red and near-infrared light are, of course, a subset of natural sunlight, which actually acts and has value as a nutrient. Red light and near-infrared light therapies are ways to get some of those benefits. It may be particularly valuable and beneficial for people who aren’t getting enough natural sunlight exposure, and that’s a majority of people. As noted by Whitten:

“There’s a mountain of literature showing that regular sun exposure is one of the most powerful and important things you can do for your health and to prevent disease. Simultaneously, we have a general public that is afraid of sunlight.

Even the subject of melanoma is rife with misunderstanding because there is research showing, mechanistically, that if you expose cells in a Petri dish to lots of UV light, you can absolutely induce DNA damage and induce cancer formation.

You can take rats and expose them to tons of isolated UV light and induce cancer. You can even find an association between sun burns and increased melanoma risk.

Despite all of those things, it is also the case that when you compare people with regular sun exposure to people with much less sun exposure, they do not have higher rates of melanoma.

In fact, there’s a bunch of studies comparing outdoor workers to indoor workers, showing that outdoor workers have lower rates of melanoma despite three to nine times more sun exposure.”

One of the reasons for this is because indoor workers are exposed to fluorescent lighting, which is loaded with dirty electricity or high voltage transients that cause biological harm. So, not only do they not get sunlight exposure, but they also get harmful EMF exposure.

But the biggest factor has to do with the frequency of exposure. Intermittent exposure – occasional exposure followed by many days or weeks of little to no exposure – tends to be more problematic than regular, frequent sun exposure, as you’re more likely to burn and cause DNA damage in your skin.

Regular exposure, on the other hand, ameliorates this risk, as it engages innate adaptive systems in your skin, your melanin in particular, that are explicitly designed to prevent DNA damage from UV light exposure.

“So, we have this system built into our bodies that’s designed to allow us to get all these benefits of sunlight without the DNA damage and the increased skin cancer risk,” Whitten says.“Framing light as a nutrient is the best way of understanding this.

Just as we require adequate nutrients from the food we eat, just as our bodies require physical movement to express normal cell function, we also require adequate light exposure to express normal cell function. The absence of that exposure to sunlight creates abnormal cell function. And there are myriad mechanisms through which this occurs.

Vitamin D is obviously the most well-known one that regulates over 2,000 genes related to immune health, musculoskeletal health and many other things. But there are many other mechanisms [as well].”

Bioactive Wavelengths

As explained by Whitten, there are specific bioactive wavelengths, and they work through different mechanisms. One mechanism is through your eyes, which is why you’re typically better off not wearing sunglasses on a regular basis. When you’re outdoors on a sunny day, without sunglasses, blue and green wavelengths enter your eyeballs and feed through nerves into the circadian clock in your brain.

Your circadian clock, in turn, regulates a variety of bodily systems, from neurotransmitters involved in mood regulation to hormones involved in immune function. A dysregulated circadian rhythm has been linked to dozens of diseases, including cancer, cardiovascular disease and neurological diseases.

“I consider disrupted circadian rhythm and poor sleep to be probably the single most common cause of low energy levels and fatigue,” Whitten says. Fatigue is the key focus of his Energy Blueprint brand, and in the interview, he reviews some of the other root causes for poor energy and fatigue, aside from light exposure.

In summary, your body’s resilience, i.e., your ability to tolerate environmental stressors, is directly dependent on the robustness, both in terms of quantity and quality, of your mitochondria. When your resilience threshold is exceeded, disease processes are activated, and fatigue can be viewed as the initial universal symptom prior to overt disease. For more information about this side topic, be sure to listen to the interview or read through the transcript.

Red Light Therapy

Modern day red light and near-infrared light therapy is an extension of the original Helio therapy or sun-based therapy, which has a long and rich history of use for a number of diseases, including tuberculosis.

Over the past few decades, more than 5,000 studies have been published about red and near-infrared light therapy, a.k.a, photobiomodulation, for a wide range of ailments, from combating wrinkles and cellulite to hair regrowth, sports performance, accelerated injury recovery, increased strength and much more.

“You get improvements in strength adaptations, improvements in muscle protein synthesis and the amount of muscle that’s gained, amplified fat loss, increased insulin sensitivity — all when combined with exercise, compared with exercise alone,” Whitten says.

“There’s also research on people with Hashimoto’s hypothyroidism showing profound reductions in thyroid antibodies, as well as thyroid hormone levels. There are also hundreds of studies on random niche things like helping people with diabetic ulcers … combating arthritis pain and chronic pain, joint health, tissue and bone healing …

There are at least dozens, if not hundreds, of studies on using red light therapy in the context of people undergoing chemotherapy to combat oral mucositis, which is inflammation of the oral mucosa that happens as a side effect of some chemotherapy drugs. One of the most, if not the most, effective treatment for that is red light therapy.”

There are also studies showing benefits for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s patients. The difficulty is getting the light to sufficiently penetrate the skull. According to Whitten, near-infrared at 800 to 900 nanometers will penetrate about 20% to 30% deeper than red wavelengths in the range of 600 to 700 nanometers.

“So, if you’re trying to treat the brain, you need a pretty powerful device to be able to emit a strong enough beam of light to penetrate through the skull bone to actually deliver some of that light — which is a relatively small portion, probably less than 20% or something of the overall light being emitted — into the brain,” he says.

More Is Not Necessarily Better

A common fallacy is that if something is beneficial, then the more the better. But this can be a hazardous assumption. As explained by Whitten, there is a bi-phasic dose response to red and near-infrared light therapy. Basically, you need to do enough of it to experience its effects, but if you overdo it, you can cause negative effects. So, it’s all about finding the sweet spot.

That said, as a general rule, your risk of exceeding the beneficial dose with light therapy is lower than it is with something like exercise. Meaning, it’s much easier to overdo exercise and end up with tissue damage from that than it is to overdo red and near-infrared light therapy.

“I interviewed Dr. Michael Hamblin, who’s widely recognized as the world’s top researcher on red and near-infrared light therapy, and I asked him explicitly about this biphasic dose response. I was actually pretty shocked by his response.

He kind of blew off the whole thing as not really significant, [saying] ‘It’s really hard to overdo it, and I’m not worried about really negative side effects from overdoing it.’ Having said that, he is a researcher and he’s doing things in a lab.

And what I’ve seen in my group of about 10,000 people that have gone through my program, many people with severe chronic fatigue or debilitating chronic fatigue syndrome, is there seems to be a small subset of people, I’m guessing somewhere between 1% and 5% of people, that have a really negative reaction to it, even at really, really small doses, let’s say two minutes of red light therapy …

So, there seems to be this small subset of people that is really hypersensitive and prone to negative effects. Generally, in my experience, those people are usually in very poor health overall.”

One potential reason for this is because, like exercise and fasting, light therapy is a type of hormetic stress, which works in part by transiently increasing free radicals or reactive oxygen species.

People with extremely poor mitochondrial health will have a very low resilience threshold, so their capacity to tolerate that burst of reactive oxygen species will be low. At that point, they’re simply creating damage, and their bodies don’t have the resilience to effectively recover from it.

Mechanisms of Action

As noted by Whitten, there are several accepted mechanisms of action, and then there are more speculative mechanisms. One of the most well-known mechanism is cytochrome c oxidase, a photo receptor on your mitochondria that literally captures photons of red and near-infrared light.

The most effective wavelengths that activate this system are in the 600 to 700 nanometer range, and the 800 to 1,000 nanometers range. In response to those light photons, your mitochondria will produce energy more efficiently. “In general, cells — whether it’s skin cells, your thyroid gland, your muscle cells — they work better if mitochondria are producing more energy,” Whitten explains.

This is one general principle of how light therapy can help heal such a diverse range of tissues and conditions. Another mechanism is related to the benefits of hormesis and the transient spike in reactive oxygen species. That burst of reactive oxygen species creates a cascade of signaling effects that stimulate the NRF2 pathway and heat shock proteins, for example.

As a result, your intracellular antioxidant response system is strengthened and your mitochondria are stimulated to grow bigger and stronger. It also stimulates mitochondrial biogenesis, the creation of new mitochondria. Ultimately, all of this increases your resistance to a broad range of environmental stressors.

“If hormesis is dosed properly, it should not create lasting harm. It should stress the system temporarily and stimulate adaptive mechanisms that ultimately make the whole system more resistant to any kind of harm,” Whitten says. “But you shouldn’t be doing hormesis at a dose that is actually creating damage.”

Light Therapy Modulates Gene Expression

A third mechanism of action involves retrograde signaling and the modulation of gene expression. Your mitochondria play a key role here as well. As explained by Whitten:

“Mitochondria are not just mindless energy generators, but they are also environmental sensors that pick up on what’s going on in the environment. Are there toxins present, is there a pathogen present? Is there increased inflammatory cells present?

They’re picking up on these signals. They’re also picking up on light signals … and reactive oxygen species from hormetic stress. And they’re relaying these signals back to the mitochondria in a way that modulates gene expression.”

There’s a specific set of genes that are expressed in response to red and near-infrared light therapy. In summary, it activates genes involved in cell repair, cell regeneration and cellular growth, depending on the tissue.

For example, in your brain, it activates brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), in your skin, it increases expression of fibroblasts that synthesize collagen, in your muscles, it locally increases expression of IGF1 and factors involved in muscle protein synthesis. “So, you’re getting these local effects in those specific tissues that upregulates genes involved in cell healing, growth and repair,” Whitten says.

Exposure to UVA, red light and near-infrared light also increases the release of nitric oxide (NO) which, while being a free radical, also has many metabolic benefits in optimal concentrations. Many of the benefits of sun exposure cannot be explained solely through the production of vitamin D, and the influence of NO may be part of the answer.

There’s also a speculative line of research suggesting that red and near-infrared light interact with chlorophyll metabolites in a way that helps recycle ubiquinol from ubiquinone (the reduced version of CoQ10).

So, those specific wavelengths of light may help recycle reduced CoQ10, which also enhances energy production. “So, there may be this really interesting synergy between your diet and red and near-infrared light therapy were consuming more chlorophyll-rich compounds may enhance this effect,” Whitten says.

Light Structures Water

Yet another mechanism of action has to do with the structuring the water that surrounds your cells. One of the best ways to build this structured water is through exposure to sunlight. Simply drinking structured water is ineffective. Whitten explains:

“The structuring of water is a really fascinating layer of the story. There’s research showing that the water near membranes, and our mitochondria are composed of membranes, can actually change in viscosity in response to red and near-infrared light therapy.

There are a couple things that happen there. One is that reduced viscosity actually helps the physical rotation of the ATPAs, the ATP synthase pump on the mitochondria, which is the last part of the respiratory chain in mitochondria that creates ATP molecules. That’s a physical rotary mechanism.

So, you have this rotary pump that needs to move in water, and there’s some research suggesting that it moves more efficiently with less resistance when the viscosity of that surrounding water is reduced, and that this may, at least partly, be responsible for the enhanced energy production.

But there’s one other layer to the story. I’ve dug really deep into the literature on light and deuterium. It was tough to find any literature on this, but I did find one really interesting study. Basically, what they found is that, when the viscosity of this water around the mitochondrial membranes is reduced, it does two things.

It pushes the deuterium molecules — which is this isotope of hydrogen that tends to damage mitochondria — away from the mitochondria and makes it less likely to go through the mitochondrial ATP synthase pump where it can create damage.

It also enhances the movement of hydrogen ions — normal hydrogen not deuterium — across the membrane, so more hydrogen can move faster and more efficiently through the mitochondria, whereas deuterium moves less efficiently.

So, it doesn’t necessarily deplete deuterium from your body … but it almost mimics deuterium depletion in a way by making the deuterium much less likely to actually get into the mitochondria where it would create damage.”

On Saunas

We cover far more in this 1.5-hour interview than I’ve summarized here, so for more information, be sure to listen to the interview in its entirety. For example, we delve into the benefits of sauna bathing and the hormetic response to heat stress, which helps repair misfolded proteins.

We also discuss the different types of saunas, the problem posed by electromagnetic fields and why most near-infrared saunas really aren’t. As a quick summary review, there are no pure near-infrared saunas, as part of the near-infrared spectrum is non-heating. Incandescent heat lamps, which is what most people are referring to when talking about near-infrared saunas, emit mostly mid- and far-infrared.

Only about 14% of that light is in the near-infrared spectrum. That said, these kinds of incandescent heat lamps could potentially still deliver a therapeutic dose if you use them for about 20 minutes.

“Let’s frame it this way,” Whitten says. “If you have a heat a near-infrared style sauna, a heat lamp style sauna, where you’re sitting in a chamber that is 110 degrees to 120 degrees Fahrenheit, you cannot claim that it has the same benefits of a sauna when the research on sauna uses sauna chambers that are massively hotter than 110 to 120 degrees. They’re using temperatures of 170 to 220 degrees.

So, if it’s 100 degrees less, you can’t just say it has all the benefits of saunas. Maybe it does have the same benefits, or maybe it has some of the benefits, or maybe it even has superior benefits. But all of those are speculative claims that you can’t make until you’ve done the studies …

We know, for example, that in animal studies, heat stress extends lifespan. It stimulates all kinds of mechanisms that are involved in longevity, autophagy, increased resilience via these hormetic pathways. And in general, when it comes to hormesis, I believe you do need to get a bit uncomfortable.

It should be something that pushes you into your edge of discomfort. And my experience with the heat lamp style sauna is that by themselves, these 110-, 120-degree F chambers, don’t really push the edge of discomfort apart from maybe the local area that’s being exposed to the light from the heat lamps.”

One way to get around this and eliminate the EMF problem, is to preheat your far-infrared sauna as high as it’ll go, then turn it off and turn on your near-infrared bulbs. As for benefits, heat stress is known to:

  • Preserve muscle mass and prevent the loss of muscle if you’re unable to exercise for a period of time
  • Lower your risk of infections
  • Improve detoxification
  • Reduce your risk of depression, cardiovascular and neurological disease
  • Reduce all-cause mortality

More Information

To learn more, be sure to pick up a copy of Whitten’s book, “The Ultimate Guide to Red Light Therapy.” On his website, TheEnergyBlueprint.com, you can also access his Energy Blueprint podcast, articles, programs and testimonials.

In his book, Whitten provides specific recommendations for red- and near-infrared therapeutic devices, which can save you a lot of research time if you’re considering this kind of therapy. As noted by Whitten:

“There are a few good brands. It really matters what device you get. I want to put this caution out there because there are a lot of junk devices. There are a lot of devices that are one-fiftieth the power output of the devices that I recommend, and somebody who isn’t savvy to that, isn’t knowledgeable about why the power output of these devices matters, might just go on Amazon and buy some $30 device.

If you get an underpowered device, you’re not doing the same red light therapy, or near-infrared light therapy as [when you’re using] a real high-powered device. So, it is very important to do this the right way, to get the right quality device and to dose it the right way.”

Study Shows How Masks Are Harming Children

A new study shows children have experienced great psychological, behavioral and physical harm from the mandates and lockdowns handed down during the COVID-19 pandemic. This harm affects the next generation of leaders and has dampened the spirits of people around the world. Yet, there is one place that appears to have side-stepped this damage.

Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, there have been events that have changed the world. They include the two World Wars, the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the 9/11 attacks and the COVID-19 pandemic.1

The current pandemic has undoubtedly been the most traumatic period for many people. The devastation that has been wrought on the world is incalculable, including things that aren’t easily measured like mental health, food insecurity and physical abuse.

The harsh reality is that virtually none of it was necessary and the real damage has been the result of decisions made by global health and government officials who appear to have been acting in concert, according to some predetermined plan.

The fallout from this event will be experienced by many for the remainder of their lives. Suicide rates,2 child abuse3 and drug deaths4 have risen dramatically. Prescriptions for anti-anxiety drugs had risen 31% and for antidepressants by up to 22% by mid-2020.5 But children, whose voices are not often heard, may be suffering the most.

Children Show Physical, Behavioral and Psychological Harm

A recent study6 has been published online using data from Germany’s first registry recording the experience children are having wearing masks. Parents, doctors and others can enter their observations; the registry had recorded use by 20,353 people as of October 26, 2020.

Using this data on 25,930 children, the researchers discovered interesting information. The average time children were wearing a mask was 270 minutes each day. There were 24 health issues reported that were associated with wearing masks that fell into the categories of physical, psychological and behavioral issues.7

Of the problems that children were having wearing masks, 68% of them were reported to the registry by parents. The researchers concluded the frequency of registry use and the variety of symptoms being reported indicated the importance of the subject. They recorded symptoms that:8

“… included irritability (60%), headache (53%), difficulty concentrating (50%), less happiness (49%), reluctance to go to school/kindergarten (44%), malaise (42%), impaired learning (38%) and drowsiness or fatigue (37%).”

Added to these concerning symptoms, they also found 29.7% reported feeling short of breath, 26.4% being dizzy and 17.9% were unwilling to move or play.9 Hundreds more experienced “accelerated respiration, tightness in chest, weakness and short-term impairment of consciousness.”

Measurements of anxiety or depressive disorder jumped dramatically for adults between January through June 2019 and January 2021. According to data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,10 the percentage of adults reporting symptoms of anxiety disorder and/or depressive disorder was 11% in the first quarter of 2019 but jumped dramatically to 41.1% across the nation by January 2021.11

Evidence has shown that there is a positive relationship between a child’s behavioral problems and mental health with maternal mental health12 and parental mental health.13 This means that independent of their own stress and physiological harm from mask-wearing and lockdowns, children will also respond negatively to the rising rate of anxiety and depression exhibited by adults.

More Families Seeking Drugs to Manage Remote Learning

In spring 2020 began an unprecedented remote learning experiment for schools around the world. Suddenly, tens of millions of students were at home, plugged into their computer for their education. In one survey, Educators for Excellence14 reported 67% of teachers said their students’ homework or assignments were completed “somewhat worse” or “much worse” than before remote learning was mandatory.

In another survey,15 teachers reported their sense of success dropped from 96.3% when teaching in the classroom to 73.1% teaching remotely. On average, the same teachers reported that only 60% of their students were engaged in learning activities.

Remote learning has been especially challenging for young children and for the 20% of students living in the U.S. who do not have access to the necessary technology.16 According to Education Week, 80% of teachers believe their students are having trouble focusing during the shutdown.17

Each of these factors may contribute to the growing number of parents who are seeking treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for their children. NBC News reports18 specialists are flooded with questions and requests for diagnosis and prescriptions for ADHD.

Dr. Melvin Oatis from the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry believes that the pandemic has “been a tipping point that has pushed some families to get help.”19

However, Dr. Arthur Lavin, who is a pediatrician with service on several national committees of the American Academy of Pediatrics, warns, “Our concern is that pediatricians and families be very careful to not simply list the symptoms of ADHD, but to look at the child’s history and use differential diagnosis to make sure we have the best possible explanation for the symptoms.”20

The fuzziness surrounding a diagnosis of ADHD has also led to some over-identification of these issues. University of Minnesota psychologist Stephanie Carlson finds that students are often misidentified as having deficits in executive functioning skills when the behavior is within normal limits.21

For example, younger students are more likely to be labeled with ADHD than their older peers. Boys are labeled more often than girls, and black and Latino students have a lower probability of being diagnosed or taking medicine.

Schools Are Not Super Spreaders

Early data are now available from a study22 performed by the University of Warwick in the U.K. looking at information on school absences between September 2020 and December 2020. The researchers were interested in students who stayed home from school sick because of COVID-19 infections and how the number who became ill varied across time.

The study evaluated pupils and teachers and how those absences changed during November lockdown and in December when the lockdown was lifted. What they found was that the infection rate in the schools matched the wider community, indicating there was no evidence that schools were a driver in producing more cases of COVID-19.

As in the U.S., students in the U.K. have been offered remote learning options. Dr. Mike Tildesley is one of the researchers and a scientific adviser to the U.K. government. He suggests using a staggered approach as plans for reopening the schools are underway.23

While the rates of infection between the schools and community were the same, the researchers could not comment if the students and teachers who did have COVID-19 caught it in the school or the community.24 As would be expected with what is known about the virus, the rate of infection was lower in primary schools than secondary schools.

When speaking to a BBC reporter, Tildesley had a telling comment about how decisions to reopen schools should be made: “You could potentially think about doing early years first. But this is a political decision.”25

Face Masks Do Not Effectively Reduce COVID-19 Infections

The first randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of surgical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 was published in November 2020 in the Annals of Internal Medicine.26

During the trial, researchers evaluated more than 6,000 individuals and found that masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence of infection of COVID-19. Among the people who wore masks, 1.8% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to 2.1% among the control group.

When the researchers removed those who did not adhere to proper mask-wearing, the results remained the same — 1.8%. This suggests that in this group of 6,000 individuals, wearing a mask made no significant difference as to whether they would acquire COVID-19.

In the group that reportedly wore their masks “exactly as instructed,” 2% tested positive for the virus as compared to 2.1% of the controls. Despite a lack of evidence that mask-wearing in the general public was effective, widespread mask mandates were rolled out.

At the end of December 2020, researchers from Rational Ground revealed results of data analysis evaluating the use of masks from all 50 U.S. states.27 It was completed by data analysts, computer scientists and actuaries, who divided the information into states that had mask mandates and those that did not.

They evaluated data from May 1, 2020, through December 15, 2020, and calculated how many cases per day occurred by population with and without mask mandates. Among states without a mask mandate, 5,781,716 cases were counted over 5,772 days, which worked out to:28

  • No mask mandates — 17 cases per 100,000 people per day
  • Mask mandates — 27 cases per 100,000 people per day

In other words, the evidence does not support the use of masks and school lockdowns. And, there is powerful evidence that masks and school lockdowns are causing significant damage to the physical and psychological health of children. Yet, these mandates and lockdowns have garnered support from schools and parents, likely driven by fear of the virus.

Countrywide Mandates Prove Successful


In fact, fear seems to have been the force used to drive mandates the public would not have otherwise accepted — except, that is, in Sweden. In a 45-minute documentary, Claudia Nye shows how Sweden has approached COVID-19.

Under the guidance of chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, Sweden did not institute a universal lockdown, close small businesses or schools, or enact mandatory mask mandates. Instead, they chose to use enough reasonable strategies to protect their citizens. According to Tegnell, “We don’t want to hurt anyone unnecessarily, but we want to have as good effect as possible.”29

Using this as the basis for their decision-making, only some schools were closed during certain periods of time and only office workers were asked to work from home to minimize crowding on public transportation. Retail shops, gyms and restaurants remained open, a vast difference from what happened in other countries around the world.

Businesses recommended social distancing and masks, but it wasn’t a strict rule. Around the globe, people were told to stay home or face jail time. Yet, in Sweden people were asked to take commonsense precautions based on their individual circumstances.

It was recommended seniors and other high-risk individuals stay home, use social distancing and wear masks. All others were free to live as they normally would. Tegnell noted that in Sweden, “We have chosen a voluntary way and it’s proven to be sustainable and it’s proven also to be effective.”30

According to the Imperial College of London model, Sweden should have experienced a death toll of 80,000 by the end of June 2020 without a lockdown.31 However, the true number September 30, 2020, after no lockdowns, stood at 5,893,32 a vast majority of whom were elderly with comorbidities.

In fact, of those, only 872 were a direct result of COVID-19. The rest had one or more conditions that contributed to the death.33 Nye tells more of this story in her engaging documentary that won the Outstanding Achievement Award in the Los Angeles International Indie Short Fest film festival in January 2021.

I believe without being aware of how your behavior is being influenced, the world will continue to become decidedly different and more difficult. To protect our children, future generations and your finances, I encourage you to share “Public Health Officials Are Destroying Humanity.”

It may seem like science fiction, but just one year ago you probably could not have imagined the world as it is today. Unless and until more people understand the direction that leadership is sending the world, it will only continue down the same path.

RFK Jr. Opens ‘CIA Can of Worms’

February 10, 2021, Instagram banned the account of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an attorney, founder of Children’s Health Defense, and co-founder and president of the environmental group, River Alliance. According to Instagram, his account was removed for “sharing debunked claims about the coronavirus or vaccines.”1

This comes as no surprise to anyone who has paid attention over the past year, when privately owned social media companies started censoring users in earnest, often at the request of government officials, thereby qualifying themselves as bona fide instruments of fascism.

As described in “Fascism Definition With Examples,”2 a hallmark of fascism is an economic system in which government controls private corporations and where “a central planning authority directs company leaders to work in the national interest, which actively suppresses those who oppose it.”

The welfare of the population at large is subjugated in such a system in order to achieve “imperative social goals.” This could, for example, be the goal to vaccinate the entire population against COVID-19, which will ensure the vaccine industry can profit rather than go bust. Public health be damned.

Of course, the entire premise of a mass vaccination campaign against COVID-19 is that it will protect people and prevent unnecessary deaths from the virus. But a hidden, underlying agenda is revealed by the fact that injuries and deaths from the vaccine are either suppressed or shrugged off as collateral damage in the name of the greater good.

In other words, dying due to poor health is unacceptable and must be prevented with a vaccine, whereas dying in good health and at a young age due to vaccine injury is a perfectly acceptable price to protect the vulnerable. The end result is the same: People die. The only differences are how and why people die, and whether or not big business, which funds politicians, can profit in the process.

Don’t Trust the Medical or National Security Establishment


In the August 2020 Ron Paul Liberty Report above,3,4 Kennedy talks about evidence suggesting his father, Robert Kennedy, was assassinated by a CIA agent hired as a security guard.

He goes on to review some of the history of the CIA — how it was initially established as an espionage organization tasked solely with intelligence gathering, only to transform into a paramilitary agency engaged with the overthrowing of democracies around the world and other nefarious and antidemocratic activities.

He also touches on the infamous CIA program called MK Ultra, in which individuals are brainwashed to carry out orders, including murders, against their own will.

CIA and Corporate Media Are One and the Same

The CIA’s role in the current flood of censorship may be more significant than most people imagine. In the Off-Guardian article,5 “Opening the CIA’s Can of Worms,” Edward Curtin highlights the close ties between the CIA and corporate mainstream media.

He cites Douglas Valentine’s book, “The CIA as Organized Crime,” in which Valentine states that “The CIA and the media are part of the same criminal conspiracy.” Curtin describes the media as “stenographers for the national security state’s ongoing psychological operations aimed at the American people,” adding that:

“For all practical purposes when it comes to matters that bear on important foreign and domestic matters, the CIA and the corporate mainstream media cannot be distinguished.”

While information warfare and psyops have been par for the course for a long time, it’s only in recent years that more people have started really noticing it, and it’s only become blatantly obvious in the past year or so, thanks to the rapid expansion of individuals, groups and topics being silenced.

In the past year, even licensed medical doctors and award-winning scientists have undergone the modern version of being tarred and feathered online, followed by expulsion from their web-based communities for the crime of asking commonsense questions and speaking truth to power.

Guilt by Headline

The aim and purpose of the kind of information warfare we currently find ourselves embroiled in is to “win the hearts and minds of the American people and pacify them into victims of their own complicity,” Curtin writes. Again, with regard to COVID-19, the purpose is clearly to get everyone to buy into the necessity of getting vaccinated and to reject objections, no matter how logical.

That the CIA-run media, medical establishment and national security apparatus are all working in tandem on this issue, and using classic propaganda tactics, is unmistakable. Curtin writes:6

“Just the other day The New York Times had this headline: ‘Robert Kennedy Jr. Barred From Instagram Over False Virus Claims.’ Notice the lack of the word alleged before ‘false virus claims.’ This is guilt by headline.

It is a perfect piece of propaganda posing as reporting, since it accuses Kennedy, a brilliant and honorable man, of falsity and stupidity, thus justifying Instagram’s ban, and it is an inducement to further censorship of Mr. Kennedy by Facebook, Instagram’s parent company …

This is one example of the censorship underway with much, much more to follow. What was once done under the cover of omission is now done openly and brazenly, cheered on by those who, in an act of bad faith, claim to be upholders of the First Amendment and the importance of free debate in a democracy. We are quickly slipping into an unreal totalitarian social order.”

Curtin disagrees with journalists like Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi and Chris Hedges, who argue that social media companies really don’t want to censor but are pressured into it by hubris-filled, power- and control-hungry corporate media personalities.

There’s more to it than that, Curtin says, pointing out that “These companies and their employees do what they are told, whether explicitly or implicitly, for they know it is in their financial interest to do so.”

He argues that they’re all “part of a large interconnected intelligence apparatus — a system, a complex — whose purpose is power, wealth, and domination for the very few at the expense of the many,” and that, it is this that makes the CIA and media “parts of the same criminal conspiracy.”

Who Pulls the Levers of Control?

“To argue that the Silicon Valley companies do not want to censor but are being pressured by the legacy corporate media does not make sense,” Curtin says, because:

“These companies are deeply connected to U.S. intelligence agencies, as are the NY Times, CNN, NBC, etc. They too are part of what was once called Operation Mockingbird, the CIA’s program to control, use, and infiltrate the media. Only the most naïve would think that such a program does not exist today.”

Indeed, many suspect Facebook is the public-friendly version of DARPA’s Lifelog, a database project aimed at tracking the minutiae of people’s entire existence for national security surveillance purposes.7 The Pentagon pulled the plug on Lifelog February 4, 2004, in response to backlash over privacy concerns.8 Yet that same day, Facebook was launched.9 Coincidence?

Whether by fluke or pre-inception collaboration, there can be no doubt that Facebook now fulfills the Lifelog purpose of surveilling, tracking and data mining its users both on- and offline.

Similarly, Google, Amazon, Twitter and other major tech companies are also tied to the “military-industrial-intelligence-media complex,” to quote Curtin’s term. All provide invaluable surveillance and censorship functions, and without them, the totalitarian control system we now find ourselves caught in wouldn’t be possible.

“The truth is the Internet was a military and intelligence tool from the very beginning and it is not the traditional corporate media that gives [tech companies] its marching orders,” Curtin writes.10

“That being so, it is not the owners of the corporate media or their employees who are the ultimate controllers behind the current vast crackdown on dissent, but the intelligence agencies who control the mainstream media and the Silicon Valley monopolies …

All these media companies are but the outer layer of the onion, the means by which messages are sent and people controlled. But for whom do these intelligence agencies work? Not for themselves.

They work for their overlords, the super wealthy people, the banks, financial institutions, and corporations that own the United States and always have.

In a simple twist of fate, such super wealthy naturally own the media corporations that are essential to their control of the majority of the world’s wealth through the stories they tell. It is a symbiotic relationship.”

Operation Mockingbird: The Great Reset

What Curtin is talking about is the same elite 0.001% of the global population I’ve written about before in articles such as “Oneness Versus the 1%,” “What You Need to Know About the Great Reset,” “The Global Takeover Is Underway,” “The Plan for a Global System of Slavery,” “The Pressing Dangers of Technocracy,” “Technocracy and the Great Reset” and many others.

While the specific identities of the individual string-pullers are difficult to discern, what’s clear is that there is an international “deep state” whose plans are implemented in a coordinated fashion around the world, seemingly at a moment’s notice, as we saw when the COVID-19 pandemic broke out.

Within days, all the world’s leaders sang the same tune. The same message was stated in dozens of languages, often verbatim, as if they were reading the same cue card. Looking at global nongovernmental agencies makes it easier to ascertain who these cue card writers might be, as they form a vast, intertwined web that keep circling back to each other.

We can discern, then, that the core of this technocratic power structure includes entities such as the Trilateral Commission, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the World Economic Forum, the Bilderberg Group, the Club of Rome, the Aspen Institute, the Atlantic Institute, the Brookings Institute and other think-tanks, just to name some of the most obvious.

Members of these exclusive “clubs,” many of which are by invitation only, include leaders from major industries, corporate media, political offices and the military-industrial complex. 

As noted by Curtin, “They are the international overlords who are pushing hard to move the world toward a global dictatorship.” The CIA, as you might suspect by now, has also been part of this “deep state cabal” from the very beginning.

And, if the CIA and corporate media are two sides of the same coin, we can deduce that the global psyop currently underway has the purpose of ensuring the successful implementation of the Great Reset and the Fourth Industrial Revolution — two terms that describe different aspects of the same agenda of enslavement.

While it may seem unrelated to some, the vaccine agenda does play an important part in this scheme, especially long term, which is why anti-vaccine voices are now being slapped down at a furious pace. It’s not the sole reason for their silencing, however.

The Real Threat Kennedy Poses

As Curtin points out in his article, Kennedy is not censored simply because he’s raising questions about vaccines, Bill Gates or the drug industry in general. No, it’s because he’s a direct threat to the highest echelon of this hidden global power structure that seeks to take control:11

“His critiques suggest something far more dangerous is afoot: the demise of democracy and the rise of a totalitarian order that involves total surveillance, control, eugenics, etc. by the wealthy led by their intelligence propagandists.

To call him a super spreader of hoaxes and a conspiracy theorist is aimed at not only silencing him on specific medical issues, but to silence his powerful and articulate voice on all issues.

To give thoughtful consideration to his deeply informed scientific thinking concerning vaccines, the World Health Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, etc., is to open a can of worms that the powerful want shut tight.

This is because RFK, Jr. is also a severe critic of the enormous power of the CIA and its propaganda that goes back so many decades and was used to cover up the national security state’s assassination of both his father and his uncle.

It is why his wonderful recent book, ‘American Values: Lessons I Learned from My Family,’ that contains not one word about vaccines, was shunned by mainstream book reviewers; for the picture he paints fiercely indicts the CIA in multiple ways while also indicting the mass media that have been its mouthpieces.”

According to Kennedy, the CIA murdered his father. The reason they did was because he was a powerful and popular politician who, like Curtin says, “could have … tamed the power of the CIA to control the narrative that has allowed for the plundering of the world and the country for the wealthy overlords.”

In other words, he knew the CIA was the figurative center pole holding up the pole tent, and if you yank that out, the roof caves in. They couldn’t let that happen.

Connecting the Dots

Kennedy discusses many of the same topics covered in the Ron Paul Report in his much longer interview with Patrick Bet-David, above. In both interviews, he reviews his family’s tragic yet heroic history, but he also gets into the topic of vaccine safety and the folly of ignoring published science showing there are significant problems — and the fact that the medical establishment refutes and denies these problems without ever presenting any actual counter-evidence.

Kennedy also discusses data suggesting the COVID-19 lockdowns may have caused more deaths than the virus itself, as well as the civil rights issues involved. Like many other experts, he believes the lockdowns are scientifically indefensible and will kill far more people than COVID-19.

Based on a recent cost-benefit analysis12 of global lockdowns, Kennedy is correct. Data suggest the cost for lockdowns in Canada — in terms of Quality Adjusted Life Years and Wellbeing Years — is at least 10 times greater than the benefit.

In Australia, the minimum cost is 6.6 times higher, and in the U.S., the cost is estimated to be at least 5.2 times higher than the benefit of lockdowns. So, yes, pandemic measures are robbing the public of more life and fruitful years than this virus ever could.

In his interview with Bet-David, Kennedy also delves into known side effects of vaccines that in turn drive a highly profitable chronic illness industry, the lack of safety studies for vaccines, the irresponsible practice of testing vaccines against false placebos such as another vaccine, and the vaccine industry’ indemnity agreement with Congress that further prevents safe vaccines from ever being developed.

He also talks about the aggressive advertising of drugs and vaccines which, as a side effect, allows drug companies to influence media coverage of their products; the questionable integrity of Dr. Anthony Fauci; how mortality data are conflated to falsely inflate influenza deaths as a marketing ploy to sell flu vaccines; the dangers of 5G, modern-day electronic surveillance and social media’s data harvesting; and the detrimental influence of Bill Gates’ so-called philanthropy.

As Curtin notes, Kennedy’s observations, which help people connect the dots, ultimately point people to the core problem of our day, which is a hidden control structure that is seeking to destroy the American Constitution and rob us of our rights and freedoms, if we let them.

At the end of the day, that’s what all of this censorship is about. That hidden power structure does not want us to realize what’s being done to us, because then we might rebel. And, if that happens, the jig is up, since there are far more of us than there are of them.

A Well-Informed Humanity United Is the Answer

This is precisely why we must never stop seeking out and sharing this type of information. Those who buy into the propaganda are quite literally helping their soon-to-be jailers erect the prison bars around them. It’s self-destructive, which is why we need to help those we care about to understand the bigger picture and not get locked into details of differing opinions that don’t matter.

As noted in Kennedy’s October 24, 2020, online speech,13International Message of Hope for Humanity” — which kicked off a day of protest against the coup d’état by the technocratic elite — we must shed our imaginary fears, reject media fearmongering, insist on freedom of speech and engage in the democratic process.

“The only way we can win it is with democracy,” he said. “We need to fight to get our democracy back, to reclaim our democracy from these villains who are stealing it from us. Notice the people who are getting richest from this quarantine are the same people who are censoring criticism of the quarantine.”

Kennedy also stressed another crucial point, namely the need to unify. We must put aside our quibbles over nonessential things like race, religion and political affiliations, and stay laser-focused on the real enemy.

“What the Big Tech villains … want us to do is fight with each other. They want Blacks fighting against whites. They want republicans fighting against democrats. They want everybody polarized. They want everybody fragmented because they know that if we all get together, we’re going to start asking questions and those are questions they can’t answer …

If you’re a republican or democrat, stop talking about that. Stop identifying yourself. The enemy is Big Tech, Big Data, Big Oil, Big Pharma, the medical cartel, the government totalitarian elements that are trying to oppress us, that are trying to rob us of our liberties, of our democracy, of our freedom of thought, of our freedom of expression, of our freedom of assembly and all of the freedoms that give dignity to humanity …

The free-flow of information, the cauldron of debate, is the only thing that allows governments to develop rational policies in which self-governance will actually work and triumph.

You are on the front lines of the most important battle in history — the battle to save democracy, freedom, human liberty and human dignity from this totalitarian cartel that is trying to rob us, simultaneously, in every nation in the world, of the rights that every human being is born with …

And I pledge to you: I will go down dying with my boots on, fighting side-by-side with all of you to make sure that we return these rights and preserve them for our children.”

And, that, right there, is why Kennedy, like his father and uncle before him, is a target for elimination by the technocratic-CIA-media-drug-industrial-political-military complex. The good news is that the more people know and understand who the real enemy is, the lower the risk is for those in the know.

After all, the CIA cannot assassinate an entire country, or the entire world. At a certain point, silencing people becomes moot because too many people know the truth already. I believe this is the case with Kennedy at this point, which is why the worst they can do is try to limit his reach on social media. And with your help, even those efforts will ultimately fail.

Shameless Manipulation of Positive PCR Tests

Hospitalization rates1 associated with COVID have dropped from a high of 132,500 Americans on January 6, 2021, to 71,500 on February 12, 2021. The U.S. had 920,000 staffed hospital beds in 2019,2 of which 14.4% harbored a COVID case in January 2021, and 7.8% do so far in February 2021.

This tremendous drop was predicted. Every hospitalized patient is tested for COVID, often repeatedly, using PCR tests with high false positive rates. False positives are due in considerable part to exorbitant cycle thresholds. This refers to the maximum number of doublings that are allowed during the test.

The problem caused by excessive cycle thresholds was well described in an August 2020 New York Times article,3 but has otherwise been ignored by the mass media. Dr. Sin Hang Lee, director of Connecticut-based Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory, challenged4 the FDA’s reliance on exorbitant cycle thresholds in its acceptance of efficacy claims for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine in early December 2020. He and FDA remain engaged in this debate.

The WHO instructed PCR test users and manufacturers on December 14, 2020,5 and again on January 20, 2021,6 that PCR cycle thresholds needed to come down. The December 14 guidance stated WHO’s concern regarding “an elevated risk for false SARS-CoV-2 results” and pointed to “background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold value result being [incorrectly] interpreted as a positive result.”

The first instruction7 has been superseded by the second, which additionally advises on clinical use of the test:8 If the “test results do not correspond with the clinical presentation, a new specimen should be taken and retested …”

While this implies that the test should only be performed in those with symptoms, and its results should be interpreted with the clinical context in mind, most PCR tests in the U.S. are used very differently: to screen asymptomatics at work, at colleges and universities and to permit border crossings.

No Caution Is Applied to the Results

One single positive test defines someone as a COVID case. Yet, it is well known,9 and was acknowledged in WHO’s January 2021 guidance, that screening in low COVID prevalence situations, such as in the screening of asymptomatics, increases the risk of false positives.

And, the risk increases as the prevalence of disease drops, such that in situations of low disease prevalence, it is common to find that most positives are actually false positives. For example, see this [referenced] BMJ chart and then the real-life example in the comment below it.10

Everyone in the field knew that the PCR test results were bogus. Even Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted11 in July 2020 that cycle thresholds above 35 were not measuring virus, and furthermore that virus could not be cultured from samples that required a high number of cycles to show positivity.

But the drumbeat from the Coronavirus Task Force12 and some academics13 and others14 was “test all, test often” — despite the inordinate numbers of false positives and negatives. Congress repeatedly15 allocated16 many billions of dollars for testing (often free for the person being tested) and so testing quickly mushroomed.

Nearly 2 million COVID tests a day17 were recorded in the U.S. between November 20, 2020, and January 19, 2021. Most of these have been PCR tests that, despite their problems, are still considered the most accurate. Most of the remaining tests performed were rapid antigen tests. These tests too suffer from high false positive rates, as the FDA warned in November 2020.18

While daily deaths have only dropped about 15% since January 12, 2021, there have been dramatic drops during the month in new cases19 (down 60% from 250,000 new cases a day to 100,000) and, as noted, in hospitalizations20 (down 46%). Reports claim more than 486,000 Americans have died from COVID as of February 16, 2021.21

However, none of these numbers is reliable. In addition to inaccurate PCR results, a variety of other measures have skewed the reported number of deaths from COVID. While CDC electronically codes other causes of death, it has chosen to hand code every COVID death,22 and explains:

“It takes extra time to code COVID-19 deaths. While 80% of deaths are electronically processed and coded by NCHS within minutes, most deaths from COVID-19 must be coded by a person, which takes an average of 7 days.”

CDC Treating COVID Deaths Differently

I am waiting for CDC to answer my Freedom of Information Act query, which requested the protocol CDC’s coders use for coding COVID-19 as a cause of death. Why is CDC treating COVID deaths differently from deaths due to other conditions?

CDC changed the way it coded death certificates for a COVID-caused death in March 2020, to include everyone for whom COVID is in any way contributory to the death. By placing different parts of the instructions about coding on different web pages, CDC successfully hid what it was doing.

On one page, the guidance23 states, “If COVID-19 is determined to be a cause of death, it should be reported on the death certificate.” On a different webpage, CDC states: “When COVID-19 is reported as a cause of death on the death certificate, it is coded and counted as a death due to COVID-19.”24

CDC has encouraged providers to be generous with COVID designations.25 And the COVID death definition appears to be a moving target,26 variable across states. CDC attempts to explain27 why its mortality numbers do not add up, and includes this excuse: “Other reporting systems use different definitions or methods for counting deaths.” But it is CDC that chose not to issue uniform guidelines.

COVID Diagnosis Liberally Applied

Anyone with a positive COVID test who dies within 30 days of the test is counted as a death due to COVID, even if COVID is not mentioned on the death certificate in Nevada.28 Colorado coroners are being forced to list gunshot wound deaths as due to COVID29,30 if the victim had a positive recent test. Oregon’s health agency reported in August 2020:31

“We consider COVID-19 deaths to be: Deaths in which a patient hospitalized for any reason within 14 days of a positive COVID-19 test result dies in the hospital or within the 60 days following discharge. Deaths in which COVID-19 is listed as a primary or contributing cause of death on a death certificate.”

CDC guesstimates that many deaths, perhaps half, which list generic pneumonia as the cause of death are actually COVID deaths, and redesignates them as COVID-caused deaths.

CDC created a new statistical category for deaths, titled “Pneumonia, Influenza and COVID-19,” or PIC,32,33 to facilitate this redesignation.

CDC admitted:34

“Weekly mortality surveillance data include a combination of machine coded and manually coded causes of death collected from death certificates. Prior to week 4 (the week ending January 30, 2021), the percentages of deaths due to PIC were higher among manually coded records than more rapidly available machine coded records.

Improvements have been made to the machine coding process that allow for more COVID-19 related deaths to be machine coded, and going forward, the percentage of PIC deaths among machine coded and manually coded data are expected to be more similar.

The data presented are preliminary and expected to change as more data are received and processed, but the amount of change in the percentage of deaths due to PIC should be lower going forward. Weeks for which the largest changes in the percentage of deaths due to PIC may occur are highlighted in gray in the figure below and should be interpreted with caution.”

Percentage of PIC deaths

CDC applies several statistical techniques to deal with anomalous data before publishing its cause of death results. The raw death data are not made available to the public.

If COVID is listed as one contributor to a death on the death certificate, even if the death is caused by cancer or heart attack, CDC relabels it a death caused by COVID.

Because hospitals are paid several times more by Medicare for patients who have been given a COVID diagnosis, and a positive COVID test is not required, it is assumed that the diagnosis of COVID is applied liberally in hospitalized patients.

By changing the methods by which it performs its calculations, CDC has made it impossible to compare prior year statistics with the period since the onset of COVID.

Physician and former Minnesota state legislator Scott Jensen described an audit35 of death certificates attributed to COVID in Minnesota. The death certificates listing COVID as the underlying cause of death totaled 2,715, but the deaths attributed to COVID included an extra 878 deaths, a 32% increase.

The Public Is in the Dark

By accepting excessive cycle thresholds for COVID PCR tests, CDC considerably expanded the numbers of COVID-positive cases, hospitalizations and deaths. By using a variety of idiosyncratic and changing statistical measures, CDC was able to control and further increase the number of deaths attributed to COVID-19.

I do not mean to imply that the PCR tests, whose manufacturers may have recently reduced their cycle thresholds, are now accurate. Over 200 different PCR tests have been “authorized” under emergency rules36 by the FDA, which so far has not standardized or formally approved them.

The public is in the dark as to whether and how each individual test may have changed in response to WHO’s instruction, and we remain uninformed about the accuracy of each test. In fact, it has been established37 by the American College of Pathology that COVID-19 PCR test results are not reproducible.

By hand-coding each death due to COVID, CDC gave itself the power to determine how many COVID deaths would be counted at any particular time. And by creating excessively loose case definitions38 for COVID, several of which did not require a single sign of illness, just a positive test, CDC was able to calibrate the number of COVID-positive cases by the rate at which it rolled out tests to the nation.

Today, the media are telling us to rejoice. Maryland has just gotten its percentage of positive COVID tests below 5%,39 when a month ago the rate was 8.76%. In my state of Maine, a reduction in the percentage of test results that are positive has turned all counties “green,” allowing schools to be open.40 How much of this is due to dialing down the cycle thresholds?

We Are Being Lied Into the Abyss

Things are worse, things are better. Wear no mask41 — no, wear a mask — hey, wear two masks.42 New variants with even more infectivity are coming! But they are no more lethal, and SARS-CoV-2 is quite infectious already, so will the new strains make an appreciable difference?

It seems that despite having recovered from COVID, you can be reinfected with the new viral strains. But how common is that? Does it simply mean you can have a positive PCR test, but be otherwise asymptomatic? I found only a single case report43 of a person becoming severely ill from a new strain after having recovered from original COVID.

  • The point is to keep us begging for the latest vaccine as soon as we have received the last, but no-longer-effective, vaccine.
  • The point is to keep coming up with narratives to justify locking us up and reducing productivity.
  • The point is to keep us frightened and confused and unable to use our wits.
  • The point is to stop us looking deeply and clearly into what is happening, while the media blares COVID hysteria nonstop.

Our families are being torn apart. Our small businesses are going bankrupt. Our countries, and probably we ourselves, are being scooped up by the banks, as borrowing on an unheard-of scale persists at a dizzying pace. Who will pay these debts? What will be the price? Can you see that the looting and crashing of our economies is intentional, buttressed by lie after lie?

We are being lied into the abyss. Our so-called leaders are tossing us and especially our children and grandchildren over a cliff. They threw away our Constitution long ago. Now, they have stolen and sold our future.

Please calm down. Turn off all the “news” and ponder what has been happening. We can fix this mess, once enough of us understand it. Give it the time and focus it deserves. Our leaders won’t save us. Only WE can.