Coronavirus epidemic news

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
There are a lot of elements to agree with, but we yet have some important unknowns. In any case, the whole thing has been used to further divide an already divided polity, as did the odd circumstances and timing of George Floyd's murder.
 

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Very well spoken, Jerry, my only comment would be is that I hope "the coming civil war" is not inevitable.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
None of the mal-actions today, with either the man-made pandemic or the police brutality and murders were 'necessary', and yet like all the 'unnecessary' major historical events of the previous century, they are dynamically leading us to a particular climax.

Whether fact or fiction, Genesis 47 describes a deliberate plan placed in motion to enslave the masses, the Collapse of the Late Bronze Age happened and one elite faction survived. The same general playbooks (OT and NT) are being followed, including debt and wage slavery. The Bible explicitely states 200 times what the global game is about, and there is too much at stake for the elites running the play for this not to be inevitable, sad to say. The masses are yet too focused on various divide and conquer aspects of Right versus Left to see the manipulations from above.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
This touches on a long running debate here, about whether the future is entirely predestined and perfectly predictable, or whether it is subject to quantum randomness and/or conscious free will actions of human beings. I don't see any reason to expect to be able to settle this puzzle now, as the flow of events seemingly becomes more chaotic.

I agree that the Biblical playbooks are influencing the course of modern human events. This could be because the logic of the Biblical stories arose under the same basic human condition that still pertains today. Or, it could be because the bible is so widely revered and studied, that its memes have become a part of human nature. Or it could be because the elite institutions and/or families that arose in the ancient past, are still in existence today and are well aware of their ancient heritage. Or, some combination of all three.

Events are also influenced by modern conditions, and innovations that could not be dreamed of in ancient times. So some sort of struggle between ancient Biblical ethics vs. modern rationalism may indeed be inevitable. But I don't see that the course of events can be predicted successfully with any particularity, whether or not the outcome is predetermined.

With my comment "The new "new normal" is that we're arming ourselves to the teeth for the coming civil war" I was mainly meaning this as an observation. An article at "The Federalist" confirms my statement:

May 2020 marked the third consecutive month of record-high firearm sales, bringing the total to an estimated 6 million guns sold since the coronavirus outbreak began in March. According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a large portion of the sales records were driven by first-time gun owners.
“Our recent survey of firearm retailers shows us that 40 percent of these gun buyers are buying a firearm for the first time,” Mark Oliva, a spokesman for the group, said in a statement. “Of those first-time gun owners, 40 percent are women and these buyers are overwhelmingly purchasing handguns for personal protection.”
Also at the Federalist, I noticed this article headlined "Americans Should Never Again Comply With Pandemic Lockdown Orders". I feel that this argument is transparently obvious to nearly everyone, and that nobody henceforth is going to refrain from doing anything they want to do on a voluntary basis because of coronavirus. Future lockdown orders are only going to be respected to the extent that they're backed by police actions and marshal law, and I guess that's a prediction? Anyhow, from the Federalist:

We’re told a second wave of coronavirus infections is coming. As businesses open back up and states relax lockdown orders, the number of new cases is ticking up in a handful of states. We’ve heard warnings in recent days from the Centers for Disease Control and various public health experts and elected officials that a new series of lockdowns might be necessary.
What these experts and officials don’t seem to realize is that Americans will never comply with their lockdown orders again. They have burned their credibility to the ground, and they no longer have the moral authority to tell us what to do.
Simply put, the people in charge have shown themselves to be rank hypocrites who care more about politics than science. For months, we were told that large gatherings were deadly because of the coronavirus, but when protests broke out in late May, large gatherings were suddenly okay.

As an epidemiological matter, large outdoor gatherings might be much safer than large indoor gatherings, because of the effects of sunshine and breezes. But that is beside the point, because, as the Federalist pointed out in another article: the mass media complained incessantly about Trump's campaign rally held indoors in Tulsa, but not at all about George Floyd's funeral, also held indoors.

If Trump is holding massive indoor campaign rallies, are the Democrats going to handicap themselves by abstaining from doing the same? If George Floyd gets a funeral, why shouldn't anyone's grandpa or grandma have the same respect? Restrictions are being lifted at breakneck pace anyhow.

So let's face it. Except for individual acts of voluntary social distancing, the lockdown phase is over. We are moving into the mass pandemic death phase, with no treatment (HCQ + AZT + Zinc disdained by the MSM and their audience), no known vaccine, and with the economy in shambles and not coming back.

And with unprecedented animosity between the "red" and "blue" teams. And there's a virtually unlimited stockpile of guns and ammo ready to be deployed.
 
Last edited:

Seeker

Well-Known Member
Perhaps the "new normal" was after 9/11/2001, and now the new "new normal" is 2020. At least we are being given plenty of time to get used to feeling "normal".
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
"Beau of the Fifth Column" appears to be a good 'ol boy, speaking with a pronounced Southern drawl from his down-home workshop. But with the reference to the "Fifth Column" in his channel name, we are on notice that he might not be as he appears. So what is he really trying to do? For a clue, let's look at this video entitled "Let's talk about why people believe certain theories..."


Beau explains that he's talking about theories that "may seem less than rational, at times". He spits these words out with an exasperated tone, making it clear that he's holding himself back here. Obviously no one would believe such a theory because of some factual basis. The narration goes on to describe the following reasons:

1) A sense of comfort, knowing that there's an explanation for apparently chaotic events.

2) A boost to one's sense of self-esteem and uniqueness.

3) Projection: individuals with Machiavellian or authoritarian personalities, see these traits embodied in powerful individuals.

Of course, as the narrative continues through these points, one realizes that Beau is talking about "conspiracy theories", and also that there's absolutely nothing original about what Beau is saying. There's an extensive literature of psychoanalytic discussion of conspiracy theorists and their deeply flawed personalities, all of which is based on the mainstream media, government & CIA position regarding events such as the assassinations of JFK, RFK and MLK, and 9/11. That is, that the description of these events given in mainstream media is the absolute truth, which only an insane person would question.

A typical example of this type of psycho-babble is this piece by Dr. Thomas Swan. This lists not just 3 reasons why crazy people believe conspiracy theories, but a full 10 reasons. The piece mentions "a number of studies and analyses" without actually naming or citing any. It certainly doesn't cite any significant clinical work to justify the conclusion that conspiracy theorists are characterized by traits including "dispositions for suspicion, anxiety, feeling out of control, paranoia, self-worth based insecurities, self-aggrandizement, jealousy, self-victimization, sensitivity to fearful events, disillusionment with authority or care-givers, living a relatively independent lifestyle, gossiping, derogating critics, forming highly agreeable groups, not accepting blame, and not feeling genuine empathy towards other victims."

Who knew that, say, doubting that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone to kill JKF, could be a diagnostic indicator for such an alarming syndrome.

Beau distances himself to some extent from this dire analysis. He mentions that people believe these theories because they see patterns, which makes them different from normal, but not necessarily stupid. He also allows that such theories "induce a healthy skepticism of government." What really bothers him, he says, is that certain authoritarian politicians try to appeal to the "theorists" and bring them into their base. He mentions a German guy, an Italian guy, and a Russian guy who did this; which, as one of those "theorists" myself, I discerned the pattern that he might have been talking about Hitler, Moussolini and Stalin (or maybe Putin). "Just a thought", he concludes.

The reason I'm posting this here in the Coronavirus thread, is that in this highly abstract discussion about "theories" in general, there is only one such theory raised with any specificity. And that is the theory in a certain "documentary that is not really a documentary" which was debunked by Ashely Alker, MD. Of course this is the recent "Plandemic" video. Searching for Ashely Alker, I found her Twitter critique unrolled at this link at threadreaderapp:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1258854151649464321.html

Basically it repeats the usual ad hominem attack on Judy Mikovits: "She is an #antivaccine conspiracy theorist, with disproven retracted research, who was fired then arrested for charges of stealing from her lab. She also has a book coming out she would like you to buy." Umm, not exactly: she is not anti-vaccine in general, but only opposed to poorly tested, dangerous vaccines; her research was retracted but not necessarily disproven; she says she was fired because she wouldn't cooperate with her unethical employer; she was arrested on charges of theft of intellectual property, but never convicted. And indeed, she has a book for sale -- as if that's a crime too.

The "debunk" then goes on to nit-pick some errors. COPD doesn't look the same as covid-19 or pneumonia; there have been a couple of successful vaccines against RNA viruses; Italians use a 3-strain version of a flu vaccine; and so forth. None of this addresses the major points made in the video in any meaningful way.
 
Last edited:

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Below, Kim Iverson makes a great case that the vast bulk of Covid19 infections and deaths have occurred among demographic populations that live in more crowded conditions. So besides nursing homes and systemically marginalized populations, this includes immigrant populations ... in a large number of countries, even with otherwise good records (e.g. Sweden, Singapore, etc.).

As Kim discusses, the hyper-politicization of the pandemic is leading people to focus on blaming aspects that aren't holding up as the culprits.

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
The following is an interesting Al Jazeera discussion over the Chinese versus American media propaganda war over Covid-19. In light of our thesis that this pandemic has been yet another managed cluster-f..k, this time of true global scale, I should note that I have not heard any mention of the fact that the Wuhan lab and the Bat Lady were under US taxpayer paid contract to engage in "gain-of-function" virus research that was being simultaneously engaged in in a number of other countries, including the Netherlands and at Fort Detrick, Maryland.

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
As part of JC's new Sunset live streaming episodes he ponders on how much Covid-19's laundery list of secondary symptoms have been over-hyped, on top of whether or not the virus came out of some lab or was truly naturally 'zoonotic' (not likely) in origin. It more likely was 'iterated' in intermediate species animals, as with selectively breeding plants or domestic animals.

JC discusses papers from some years ago that discuss that common influenzas can elicit many of the secondary symptoms that are being constantly paraded before us today.

And, as JC says, then all of this should make us ask whether or not this is a huge global psyop, and if so, to what end? Is this 'merely' a profit boondoggle for Big Pharma, and/or is there a mondo-political aspect?

 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
In this episode of JC's, he discusses an amazing find that Fauci and friends put out an amazingly prescient document in 9/2019. And Fauci is quoted as saying that most people die from such viral bronchial events as a result of secondary bacterial infections. This is the reason, of course, that azithromycin was included in the HCQ protocols (which also needed zinc for the HCQ), the antibiotic not being directly related to the HCQ functionality - as with the zinc.

Note: I have just discovered (hiding in plain sight) how to start a video at the time referred to in my first sentence, and so I have done so.


And here is today's episode below, where we see some discuss of epidemilogical data manipulation and further discussion of lockdown versus no lockdown in regards to herd immunity.

 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
... JC... ponders on how much Covid-19's laundery list of secondary symptoms have been over-hyped...
This is an excellent question. The reports in the press about very alarming secondary problems (such as needing a double lung transplant) are entirely anecdotal. With 14 million cases now worldwide, it's entirely expected that some weird and unusual things would happen from time to time. With the Democratic wing of the MSM determined to sensationalize the pandemic, they can be counted on to ferret out each and every such case. But nobody is collecting any statistics about how the survivors are doing. So, it's also impossible to rule out that these secondary problems might be much more common that they are with other flu bugs. It's a mystery, like so many others.

Also in this episode, JC expresses his skepticism about masks. But, he encourages wearing them anyhow, to create feelings of solidarity and comfort with the believers. I find it very plausible that masks could inhibit droplet transmission, and thus create some actual benefit.

And, he mentions that recent studies show that saliva samples are as effective as nasopharyngial samples for PCR testing. He suspects that swabbing deep around in the sinuses could possibly spread virus closer to the brain.

David Boulware's long-awaited study of early HCQ in outpatients has finally been released.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-4207

Results:
Of 491 patients randomly assigned to a group, 423 contributed primary end point data. Of these, 341 (81%) had laboratory-confirmed infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or epidemiologically linked exposure to a person with laboratory-confirmed infection; 56% (236 of 423) were enrolled within 1 day of symptoms starting. Change in symptom severity over 14 days did not differ between the hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (difference in symptom severity: relative, 12%; absolute, −0.27 points [95% CI, −0.61 to 0.07 points]; P = 0.117). At 14 days, 24% (49 of 201) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine had ongoing symptoms compared with 30% (59 of 194) receiving placebo (P = 0.21). Medication adverse effects occurred in 43% (92 of 212) of participants receiving hydroxychloroquine versus 22% (46 of 211) receiving placebo (P < 0.001). With placebo, 10 hospitalizations occurred (2 non–COVID-19–related), including 1 hospitalized death. With hydroxychloroquine, 4 hospitalizations occurred plus 1 nonhospitalized death (P = 0.29).
Disappointing.

Just like Boulware's post exposure prophylactic study, the most surprising thing is the low, low rate of problems in the placebo group. Only one death and 10 hospitalizations out of 211 patients. The patients were young (interquartile range 32 to 50) and mostly healthy. Symptoms cleared faster and there were half the number of hospitalizations in the HCQ group, but the study was too small for this to be a statistically significant result.

The study participants were asked about whether they were taking zinc or vitamin C. There was no difference in the results based on this aspect.
Boulware also used folic acid as placebo in this study, as in his other one. HCQ and folic acid, both covid-19 wonder drugs? I suppose it's possible.

The earlier study showed that most subjects exposed to covid-19 didn't catch the disease, and this one is showing that hospitalization rates and fatality rates among those that do get sick are also very low.

So what's been going on in hot spots where the disease is causing such high fatality rates, and reportedly overwhelming hospital systems? Something isn't adding up here.
 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
We've talked a lot about Vitamin D here. But I've been meaning to post this article from Damien Downing of the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service, which covers several studies showing benefits with covid-19.

https://orthomolecular.activehosted.com/index.php?action=social&chash=b73ce398c39f506af761d2277d853a92.164&s=fefd45c21bc3a55252a9c7a67da2b16e

If you caught the COVID19 virus right now, having a good vitamin D status (from already having taken a supplement) would
  • Reduce your risk of the disease becoming severe by 90%
    • Reduce your risk of dying by 96%
This is not "proven" or "evidence-based" until we have done controlled trials comparing it to placebo. Any volunteers for that? But the data, already strong, has been pouring in since the start of the pandemic. Here's the data for the two statements above.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
JC (aka JJ) presents his up-to-date, overview hypothesis of the pandemic tableau. He has recently discussed evidence that although it appears that Covid-19 has been amped up by the gain-of-function research, there are still strong natural limiting factors for human immune systems that place an upper bound on death rates, especially regarding coronaviruses. It has been revealed that the antibody PCR testing being done is non-specific for all SARS coronaviruses, and thus it is likely that positive results are indicating for prior SARS1 (which likely went endemic after becoming mostly harmless) from the prior decade, and I would guess that the SARS1 infection rates varied from country to country.

Unfortunately, for the USA, we comparatively have very unhealthy lifestyles on average, and we have the crappiest health system in the advanced world. And, with fake populist Trump versus the neolibs, we have (purposely) bungled the medical response at almost nearly every step.

And with all that, JJ discusses why this is all about the money, and the platform to make more draconian changes to the society. Is it a coincidence that Trump and Barr are testing making arrests (against protesters using the 1st Amendment) using anonymous vans as if this were Pinochet's Chile? JC also discusses Fauci's announcement to fast track vaccine development, yet another financial boondoggle and further health nightmare for all the human guinea pigs. All part of a huge global psy-op.

I have primed the time to 43 minutes in for you:

 
Last edited:

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
it is likely that positive results are indicating for prior SARS1 (which likely went endemic after becoming mostly harmless) from the prior decade, and I would guess that the SARS1 infection rates varied from country to country.
This claim from JC makes no sense at all to me. For one thing, the SARS 1 virus was said to have an extraordinarily high case fatality rate, and yet there was no problem with asymptomatic transmission. So it was easy to contain with basic public health measures, at least according to the official narrative. Any "descendant" that became endemic, would be so different in its manifestations that it could hardly be considered the same virus.

The PCR test has been used very successfully as part of public health programs to contain the virus in many countries. As part of those efforts, broad population swathes were tested and often showed very low prevalence of the infection. This would not be possible if there was a pre-existing, endemic virus that could trigger positive PCR results.

Aside from SARS 1, there are several other similar coronaviruses that are endemic to the human population, and that cause relatively minor colds or flu-like symptoms. There was a recent paper indicating that perhaps as much as 60% to 80% of the population might have some pre-existing natural immunity to SARS-COV2 because of prior infection by those other coronaviruses. (See my post #303 above.) And, some of the early serum antibody tests have also had problems with cross-sensitivity to those common coronaviruses. This might be the issue that inspired JC's remarks.

As far as JC's broader context, that shadowy elites are exploiting the crisis for political purposes, especially in the USA: he's exactly right.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Good points. But at this point, there is so much confusion and corruption its hard to know exactly what is happening.

This claim from JC makes no sense at all to me. For one thing, the SARS 1 virus was said to have an extraordinarily high case fatality rate, and yet there was no problem with asymptomatic transmission. So it was easy to contain with basic public health measures, at least according to the official narrative. Any "descendant" that became endemic, would be so different in its manifestations that it could hardly be considered the same virus.
But the descendants would still have the same ORF frames that the test looks for.

Ah yes, I should have said PCR test, not antibody. The latter of which appears to be a problem as well. If I understand correctly now, the antibodies don't last very long, while the longer term immune memory is in the T cells.
 
Top