Coronavirus epidemic news

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
They discuss that many virologists and epidemiologists are agreeing that the lockdowns are ineffective,
These contrarian virologists & epidemiologists are mostly saying that it would be better to let the epidemic run its course, right? That is, to let the exponential growth resume until a natural limit is reached? It's true that all this social distancing is only delaying the inevitable, unless there's some accepted treatment or vaccine.

Word on Twitter is that there might never be a completed double blind trial for HCQ. Because of the highly polarized, sectarian debate in the MSM, nearly everybody now has a strong opinion. Trump fans and Fox News viewers are sure it's effective, while the CNN and MSNBC audience are just as convinced it's a dangerous toxin that's likely to cause heart failure. So it's practically impossible to find volunteers willing to take a random chance on being assigned to the wrong group.

Gov. Cuomo admitted the other day that most of the deaths now are coming from people staying at home, besides the nursing home deaths.
Here's the data:

https://patch.com/new-york/new-york-city/ny-sees-painfully-slow-decline-coronavirus-crisis-cuomo

Of New York's recent COVID-19 hospitalizations, 66 percent came from home, 18 percent came from nursing homes, 4 percent came from assisted living facilities, 2 percent were homeless and less than 1 percent came from jails and prison, the data show.
Leaving, presumably, 9% "essential workers". To judge whether social distancing at home is more or less safe than working or living in a congregate situation, you'd also need to know what percentage of individuals fall into each category.

Nationwide, 1.5 million people live in nursing homes, which would be 0.5%. If New York's percentage of nursing home inhabitants is similar, the rate of hospitalization of nursing home residents is 36 times greater than the rate of the entire population. This makes sense, given that congregate living is likely to be more dangerous, and old age and poor health are also major risk factors.

The incarceration rate in the US is about 0.6%. Again, if New York follows the national pattern, the numbers here would suggest that prison living is about 2x more dangerous than living on the outside. Congregate living would be a contributing factor; old age and poor health, not so much.

There are about 17 million healthcare workers in the US, but most of those would not be especially at risk because they're more likely to be laid off and staying home, rather than working with covid patients. There are 2.7 million grocery workers, or just under 1% of the population. Many other workers fall into the "essential" category, and I'm at a loss how to count them. But it seems reasonable to guess that they would total less than 9% of the population, and that they're getting sick at a higher rate than average.

The raw numbers above seem to indicate that sheltering at home isn't especially safe, either. But we don't know how closely everyone is following the guidelines.

Besides milk thickening the mucous, I am of the school that adult mammals should not regularly consume it, except as a necessary part of some recipe.
Shh... don't tell Gertie the cow...

 

Claude Badley

Registered Guest
Fascist
Quite correct re vitamin D...
Sun exposure on the skin is the primary means of getting D. More exposed skin area times more Time equals more D. Sunlight on the skin also means more nitrous oxide creation, which is good for your blood vessels - given clotting is a problem.

I would consume all that stuff except the milk. Besides milk thickening the mucous, I am of the school that adult mammals should not regularly consume it, except as a necessary part of some recipe. If one likes cereal for breakfast, there is always almond milk or similar.
...as my mother showed when she took supplements, clearing her of a 4-year old leg ulcer from an attack of shingles.

If you are dark-skinned however a walk in the sun on a cold day isn't going to work. That's why Europeans are white-skinned and why all Blacks in northern countries have to take vitamin D supplements.

And you are all also correct about the COVID restrictions being worse than useless - particularly so in Australia where just one case is leading to prolonging the restrictions. This is causing societal collapse even in Australia, forcing people to stay at home without income.

Yours faithfully
Claude
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
These contrarian virologists & epidemiologists are mostly saying that it would be better to let the epidemic run its course, right? That is, to let the exponential growth resume until a natural limit is reached? It's true that all this social distancing is only delaying the inevitable, unless there's some accepted treatment or vaccine.
This is another one you really should watch.

They believe that the only viable course is to let it run its course, and take protective measures for vulnerably situations, and educate people on proper nutrition. And that one can make dramatic changes in their risk factors within 1 to 2 weeks.

For example, I have already started on the 23 hour fast, which I had used the 20 hour fast before to achieve dramatic results in my numbers, before backsliding that is.

But people are dying mostly from blood clotting and bad use / overuse of the ventilators. NAC and blood thinners will likely correct this.
Word on Twitter is that there might never be a completed double blind trial for HCQ. Because of the highly polarized, sectarian debate in the MSM, nearly everybody now has a strong opinion. Trump fans and Fox News viewers are sure it's effective, while the CNN and MSNBC audience are just as convinced it's a dangerous toxin that's likely to cause heart failure. So it's practically impossible to find volunteers willing to take a random chance on being assigned to the wrong group.
Just watched the following. How would not doing the proper HCQ study (w/ zinc and azithromycin and all given early) differ from the CDC failure to perform a typical double blind study on vaccines like the MMR? And how would this entire Trump FauXi virus tableau differ from the MMR vaccine causes autism tableau? The media response is exactly the same. The cost to society is going to be trillions of dollars, which makes it a baby step to the Covid19 situation ... or maybe a trial run?

The common denominator is the revolving doors at the NIH/CDC and Big Pharma.

 
Last edited:

Seeker

Well-Known Member
The raw numbers above seem to indicate that sheltering at home isn't especially safe, either. But we don't know how closely everyone is following the guidelines.
Also, lest anyone think that to stay at home is useless, we are all going to get it anyway, so one might as well go out and party hearty, may I reiterate that this data applies only to New York City, one of the hot spots of the US, the most densely populated city in the country, with the New York metropolitan area one of the most populous in the world , not throughout all 50 states. Governor Cuomo in that article also emphasizes that it is up to the individual:

"Cuomo linked the findings to "personal behavior" and urged New Yorkers to social distance, wear face coverings, wash hands and stay clear of people over the age of 50.
"Much of this comes down to what you do to protect yourself," Cuomo said. "Government has done everything it could, society has done everything it could, now it's down to you."
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Just watched the following.
The existence of this movie fills in some blanks for me. The director is Andy Wakefield, who has been the lightning rod for this controversy since 1998. The producer is Del Bigtree, who lately has been running a talking-head YouTube show, "The Highwire", featuring contrarian covid-19 and anti-vaccination content. Before making Vaxxed, Bigtree was on the production team of a medical talk show, The Doctors, which was a spinoff from Dr. Phil.

As a counterpoint to the film, here's a typically snarky "debunk" by David Gorski.

How would not doing the proper HCQ study (w/ zinc and azithromycin and all given early) differ from the CDC failure to perform a typical double blind study on vaccines like the MMR?
Scanning through the above-linked Gorski article, I noticed the claim that it would be unethical to do a double-blind study that would leave children un-vaccinated. So we're left with studies of populations of kids that were intentionally left unvaccinated. These days, this tends to happen because of conscientious objection by anti-vaxx parents. But until recently, children went unvaccinated because their parents were in poverty, or because they couldn't be vaccinated because of medical problems. So the studies that do exist, are based on far-from-random samples.

Gorski also claims that Wakefield's own conflict of interest (as an expert witness in vaccine court cases) goes unaddressed in the Vaxxed documentary.

I found a forum discussion of the vaccination issue at Martenson's site. It's generally very informative, and presents a balanced view of the pros and cons.

"Much of this comes down to what you do to protect yourself," Cuomo said. "Government has done everything it could, society has done everything it could, now it's down to you."
Self-righteous much, Mr. Cuomo? Actually, the government could hardly have made a more complete botch of the situation.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
In last night's video, Chris Martenson featured this report from NBC News:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/report-says-cellphone-data-suggests-october-shutdown-wuhan-lab-experts-n1202716

WASHINGTON — A private analysis of cellphone location data purports to show that a high-security Wuhan laboratory studying coronaviruses shut down in October, three sources briefed on the matter told NBC News. U.S. spy agencies are reviewing the document, but intelligence analysts examined and couldn't confirm a similar theory previously, two senior officials say.
The report — obtained by the London-based NBC News Verification Unit — says there was no cellphone activity in a high-security portion of the Wuhan Institute of Virology from Oct. 7 through Oct. 24, 2019, and that there may have been a "hazardous event" sometime between Oct. 6 and Oct. 11.
Presumably this information is being released now, at least partly because it backs Trump's narrative that the Chinese were directly responsible. But it also provides some concrete support for the view that the release did happen in Wuhan, rather than earlier at Fort Detrick.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Scanning through the above-linked Gorski article, I noticed the claim that it would be unethical to do a double-blind study that would leave children un-vaccinated. So we're left with studies of populations of kids that were intentionally left unvaccinated. These days, this tends to happen because of conscientious objection by anti-vaxx parents. But until recently, children went unvaccinated because their parents were in poverty, or because they couldn't be vaccinated because of medical problems. So the studies that do exist, are based on far-from-random samples.
Allowing for that it's not 'best practice', how many children that were not vaccinated ended up with the 'genetically caused' autism? I'm betting near zero.

What is the scientific proof that autism is genetic?

These kids are having an intense acute response to the vaccine, very similar to the typical acute response that triggers Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

It's also interesting that Wakefield says he's not anti-vaccine, but rather against such as the MMR multiple virus vaccine being administered at such a young age. And why the curious response of Merck to shut down the single vaccine program that was causing no problems?

Presumably this information is being released now, at least partly because it backs Trump's narrative that the Chinese were directly responsible. But it also provides some concrete support for the view that the release did happen in Wuhan, rather than earlier at Fort Detrick.
Why would this be "concrete evidence" beyond showing timing of when they discovered the virus in the wild and thought it may have come from the lab?
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
JC goes on a rant against the Plandemic video and Mikovits, claiming she is disinfo trying to get us to throw all vaccines out the window. I'm not sure if that is true, as we just mentioned about Wakefield. JC's evidence is that she got caught doing something(s) wrong, but innocent people get caught and convicted all the time, especially when there is a crapload of money at stake. Whistleblowers can end up dead.

Dead? JC did a video recently where he drove his car to the neighborhood where his fellow U Pittsburgh scientist (with immanent big news) got killed. The townhouse environment there made him feel more comfortable that the murder/suicide was legit. I see no reason to use that as evidence one way or the other, or as comforting.

This is the first of his talks while riding to work, so he has to pedal going uphill. The result is that one has to wait for a while before he starts being germane.

 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Why would this be "concrete evidence" beyond showing timing of when they discovered the virus in the wild and thought it may have come from the lab?
I said "support", not necessarily meaning that it rises to the level of "evidence". But, I think that it's part of a circumstantial case that's pretty strong. In the "Good Morning" video, JC opens and closes with the remark that "the odds of generating a pandemic virus in the laboratory when you set out to do it, are pretty close to one… and the probability of nature generating a pandemic virus is somewhere like a million-to-one." And you add to that, the fact that this particular pandemic virus emerged in close proximity to the very same lab where they were pursuing this same research. Now we also add the allegation that the lab experienced a known security breach just before the virus was detected. The "coincidences" are piling up in a way that strongly favors the "lab origins" hypothesis, in terms of Bayesian posterior likelihood.

The situation is very similar with the incidents of kids having an immediate reaction to vaccinations. It's unusual enough that a child would suddenly develop autism after an acute inflammation syndrome. There's no record of such events ever happening before the era of mass vaccination, as far as I know. But the fact that the acute incident happens within hours of a vaccination, definitely favors the hypothesis of a causal relationship. If it happens time and time again, the odds pile up.

Gorski answers this by claiming that in at least one incident, the doctor's notes don't agree with the parents' recollection. But that doesn't answer all the many such incidents, it only addresses that one. And even in that one case, there's no guarantee that the doctor's records weren't faulty.

JC's evidence is that she got caught doing something(s) wrong, but innocent people get caught and convicted all the time, especially when there is a crapload of money at stake.
Yes, JC says that "Mikobitch" was caught fraudulently altering her results. He says "everybody in biology" knows this. But Mikovits never admitted that her results were even wrong, much less fraudulent. And there's a big difference between making a mistake, and committing fraud. The latter requires proof of an intent to deceive.

Also, Mikovits was arrested for stealing lab notebooks and a computer. It was actually an intellectual property dispute: her research had been shut down and she was trying to take it to a new lab. Criminal charges were dropped, and the matter was pursued in civil court. Mikovits lost and the research was terminated with prejudice.

A similar situation applies to Wakefield. "Everybody knows" that he committed research fraud. Wakefield's many admirers aren't buying that for a minute.

Considering the importance of the context here, I'm planning to find time to watch the Vaxxed video, and to buy Mikovits' new book "Plague of Corruption".

I found a forum discussion of the vaccination issue at Martenson's site. It's generally very informative, and presents a balanced view of the pros and cons.
I forgot to include the link. Here it is: https://www.peakprosperity.com/forum-topic/vaccines/
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
A person named Rick "Bright" is warning that America is facing its "Darkest Winter" because of its ongoing failure to properly deal with the coronavirus pandemic. This "Darkest Winter" meme is being plastered all over the MSM since yesterday.

James Corbett and James Evan Pilato produced a video this morning, pointing out that there was a "Dead Zone" TV episode called "The Plague" from 2003 in which "chloraquin" is (or maybe isn't) a cure for the mysterious coronavirus that has arrived from China. This was season 2, episode 14, air date 7/13/2003. At that time, research on chloroquine as an antiviral was very controversial and cutting edge, and papers showing effectiveness in vitro against coronaviruses didn't come out until 2004.


And furthermore, there was an "Operation Dark Winter" simulation in June 2001, in which the US (fails to) respond to a bioweapon attack. I notice in this video clip, that somebody named Larry "Brilliant" is discussing the consequences, including civil war between Oklahoma and Texas.


Whitney Webb says that this "Operation Dark Winter" also foreshadowed the 2001 anthrax letter episode, and more.

Hmm... where else have I heard this "Winter" before??...


Corbett and Pilato agree that this is a huge dog whistle for anyone paying attention. They worry that maybe the existing coronavirus plague is just a hint of a more deadly follow-up bioweapon to come.


Permanent link in case Corbett gets de-platformed: https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1545-new-world-next-week-with-james-evan-pilato/
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I said "support", not necessarily meaning that it rises to the level of "evidence". But, I think that it's part of a circumstantial case that's pretty strong. In the "Good Morning" video, JC opens and closes with the remark that "the odds of generating a pandemic virus in the laboratory when you set out to do it, are pretty close to one… and the probability of nature generating a pandemic virus is somewhere like a million-to-one." And you add to that, the fact that this particular pandemic virus emerged in close proximity to the very same lab where they were pursuing this same research. Now we also add the allegation that the lab experienced a known security breach just before the virus was detected. The "coincidences" are piling up in a way that strongly favors the "lab origins" hypothesis, in terms of Bayesian posterior likelihood.
My question was how does this prove that it came from "the lab", meaning that particular Wuhan lab versus another lab anywhere else in the world?

You're sure watching a lot of videos. How am I supposed to watch my videos if I'm watching your videos?
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
My question was how does this prove that it came from "the lab", meaning that particular Wuhan lab versus another lab anywhere else in the world?
It doesn't prove anything. It just provides a plausible explanation. Or, plausible deniability for all those other labs. Or from the Bayesian perspective, the data can be explained equally well either by the Wuhan lab hypothesis, or the hypothesis that Fort Detrick has been using the Wuhan lab as a cover story.

You're sure watching a lot of videos.
The first three videos add up to seven minutes. The Corbett video, the segment on "Dark Winter" is only the first nine minutes. You can get back to watching Lil Pump in no time.

 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
How am I supposed to watch my videos if I'm watching your videos?
J.C. on a bike posted another Morning Ride just minutes ago. Would this be your video, or my video? Anyhow, it's pretty interesting. JC says that because of the lockdown, there are huge numbers of unemployed post-docs who can't go into the lab anymore. Microbiologists, immunologists, epidemiologists, & so forth. With nothing better to do, they're on a caffein and nicotine fueled quest to analyze the genome of the SARS-cov2 virus in comparison to the assorted bat viruses and pangolin viruses that are being put forth as its zoonotic predecessors. Their evolving research is all being posted in real time on Twitter, he says.

Today he thinks that maybe the "smoking gun" to end all possible debate has emerged. He says that there's a codon sequence that expresses as a human specific "hypoptosis" or "cell death" protein. He says that "there is no monte carlo biological bat casino in the universe that could generate that by chance." Jay C seems more than a little uncertain about this, probably because he's waiting to see if a Twitter consensus emerges, or if the analysis is going off some other direction.

You know where to find the video. JC's twitter is: https://twitter.com/jjcouey
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The following discuss some interesting timing regarding the trade deal and the pandemic. At the bottom I provide a link to another thread regarding the wider context of Trump's relationship to China. Is this what Bannon would call kicking their ass?

...
"Such "force majeure" language, while common in commercial contracts, is rare in trade agreements, particularly between two countries with economies so large that they are essentially immune to localized floods and droughts," notes Huffington Post.
"In late November word had already gotten out that there was a virus in Wuhan," she said. "Six weeks later on January 15, the U.S. trade deal was signed with an out-clause that the Chinese made sure was in there. That said if there was any act of God, a pandemic, then they didn't have to make good on what they'd committed to buy from the U.S."
"Within days they'd announced the first coronavirus (case)," she added.
Phase one of the US-China trade deal
US President Trump and China's chief negotiator, Vice-Premier Liu He, signed the phase one trade deal at the White House on 15 January 2020. As part of the deal, China agreed to buy an additional $200 billion of American goods and services over the following two years in exchange for a cut in some US tariffs on imported Chinese goods.
Although Chinese officials initially maintained that they would "definitely" honour its commitments, they later conceded that the coronavirus pandemic may mean China would have to invoke the force majeure clause with regard to its promised purchases, according to the South China Morning Post. ...
Here below is the interview with DiMartino-Booth that the above article references. The pertinent comment is featured in the intro, other it is made near the end of the interview.


See this link for more on Trump's relationship with China: https://postflaviana.org/community/index.php?threads/just-saying-whos-trumping-der-fuhrer.1548/post-15801
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
A person named Rick "Bright" is warning that America is facing its "Darkest Winter" because of its ongoing failure to properly deal with the coronavirus pandemic. This "Darkest Winter" meme is being plastered all over the MSM since yesterday.

James Corbett and James Evan Pilato produced a video this morning, pointing out that there was a "Dead Zone" TV episode called "The Plague" from 2003 in which "chloraquin" is (or maybe isn't) a cure for the mysterious coronavirus that has arrived from China. This was season 2, episode 14, air date 7/13/2003. At that time, research on chloroquine as an antiviral was very controversial and cutting edge, and papers showing effectiveness in vitro against coronaviruses didn't come out until 2004.
Jerry, what are the singular and combined odds of these and things like the Trump episode of the 1950's Tracker TV series where a scam artist named Trump tries to convince a Western town that they must build a wall to prevent an impending disaster?

Interestingly, as well, Bright is in conflict with Trump over the use of resources regarding HCQ, of which there has been some good possible news, possible dark shade for Bright and good light on Trump the Stable Genius:

 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Another (short) interview with Judy Mikovits. She shows documents proving that she really was arrested without any charges, and that police searched her home with a "warrant" that was never signed by a judge. She says that she never stole notebooks. And, states that the reason she was fired from her job at Whittemore is because she refused to misappropriate federal funds.

Might as well not bother with the YouTube link, I'm sure it won't last long. At LBRY: https://lbry.tv/@humankind:b/judy-mikovits-ben-swann:8
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Hmm... where else have I heard this "Winter" before??...
"Now is the WINTER of our DISCONTENT Made glorious summer (more solstice sacrifices?) by this sun (CORONA) of (NEW)York ", "Richard III" (this virus originated in the third year of "Rich" President Trump), by William ShakesVERE (a real player).
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The following interview with Whitney Webb discusses the American government plans to leverage the pandemic to achieve its dystopian goals which predated the pandemic. This also puts the lie to the claim that Trump et al. is not an integral part of the Deep State, as well as demonstrating that such as his problems with Jeff Bezos are part of the deception, another contrived drama.



I'm not sure exactly which article Whitney is referencing on her site as she has a number of articles and is so prolific. In any case, I have excerpted the beginning of one of them below:

In January, well before the coronavirus (Covid-19) crisis would result in lockdowns, quarantines and economic devastation in the United States and beyond, the U.S. intelligence community and the Pentagon were working with the National Security Council to create still-classified plans to respond to an imminent pandemic. It has since been alleged that the intelligence and military intelligence communities knew about a likely pandemic in the United States as early as last November, and potentially even before then.
Given this foreknowledge and the numerous simulations conducted in the United States last year regarding global viral pandemic outbreaks, at least six of varying scope and size, it has often been asked – Why did the government not act or prepare if an imminent global pandemic and the shortcomings of any response to such an event were known? Though the answer to this question has frequently been written off as mere “incompetence” in mainstream media circles, it is worth entertaining the possibility that a crisis was allowed to unfold.
Why would the intelligence community or another faction of the U.S. government knowingly allow a crisis such as this to occur? The answer is clear if one looks at history, as times of crisis have often been used by the U.S. government to implement policies that would normally be rejected by the American public, ranging from censorship of the press to mass surveillance networks. Though the government response to the September 11 attacks, like the Patriot Act, may be the most accessible example to many Americans, U.S. government efforts to limit the flow of “dangerous” journalism and surveil the population go back to as early as the First World War. Many of these policies, whether the Patriot Act after 9/11 or WWI-era civilian “spy” networks, did little if anything to protect the homeland, but instead led to increased surveillance and control that persisted long after the crisis that spurred them had ended.
Using this history as a lens, it is possible to look at the current coronavirus crisis to see how the long-standing agendas of ever-expanding mass surveillance and media censorship are again getting a dramatic boost thanks to the chaos unleashed by the coronavirus pandemic. Yet, this crisis is unique because it also has given a boost to a newer yet complimentary agenda that — if fulfilled – would render most, if not all, other government efforts at controlling and subduing their populations obsolete. ...
 

Claude Badley

Registered Guest
Fascist
A very interesting point Richard...
This also puts the lie to the claim that Trump et al. is not an integral part of the Deep State, as well as demonstrating that such as his problems with Jeff Bezos are part of the deception, another contrived drama.
...in that implicit in your statement is that the USA is a hydra-headed-monster with many fox-heads (including Fox network) of which Trump is but one of them. By labelling them as 'fox' it implies that they are fully in the know, but it also may be the case that a particular fox-head is only partly in the know, meaning that the Deep State is a general agreement among the elites, but that the specific details - and the participants' knowledge of them - are incomplete due to the recognition that unexpected events could intervene.

What I'm getting at is that one SOME knew of the coronavirus preparations, and yet, that these people could not control the coronavirus outcome with certainty - apart from the release in Wuhan.

Yours faithfully
Claude
 
Top