The Global Elites Population Cull - Terence Smart (best feel good books TXT) 📗

pathogen and its exclusive relationship with a particular disease.

There’s an urgent need for scientists to step up and do this conclusively with the novel coronavirus and COVID-19. But, strangely, the fire hose of scientific papers on the virus-disease dyad is only a sickly trickle on this tremendously important aspect of it.

A very straightforward and inexpensive experiment is all that’s needed to prove that the first postulate has been met.

Here’s how to do it. Test blood samples from a large number of people for the novel coronavirus using a test that’s been proven by several non-conflicted third parties to be accurate – i.e., to have very low rates of false positives and false negatives.

Then, if all the people who are diagnosed with COVID-19 are the same ones who tested positive for the novel coronavirus, that would prove the virus causes COVID-19. (Note that COVID-19 would have to be diagnosed based on a well-defined and finite set of symptoms. The currently-used and excessively broad diagnostic criteria – such as pneumonia, or the combination of fever and cough – doesn’t cut it, because those are present in many other respiratory conditions.)

But such an experiment has never been done, or if it has been done it hasn’t been made public.

The real kicker, though, is that the third postulate – isolating and sequencing the virus and then showing it causes the disease in other organisms – has not been fulfilled either.

We’ve scoured the internet and found no proof that scientists have done the simple steps required to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 conclusively meets even one – never mind all — of the third postulate’s constituent parts. Those parts are:

• isolation from a human patient’s cells of full-length novel-coronavirus DNA*

• sequencing of the isolated DNA, then determining that the identical sequence is not present in any other virus, and next replicating or cloning the DNA to form a new copy of the virus

• injecting the new copy of the virus into a statistically significant number of living hosts (usually lab animals) and seeing whether those animals develop the discrete diagnostic symptoms associated with COVID-19 rather than developing the diagnostic symptoms of any other infection or disease.

A few scientists have claimed that some or all of the postulates have been fulfilled. Their papers have been given laudatory coverage by the media, public-health officials and politicians.

The problem is that each of these papers falls apart on even cursory examination.

For example, in February 2020 Chinese and Dutch researchers published studies purporting to show they had isolated the virus, which is the first step in fulfilling the third postulate.

But both teams sourced the virus from animals rather than humans. (And on top of that, the Dutch study was done 15 years ago on SARS-CoV, not SARS-CoV-2.)

Another example is a review paper by two Americans published in February 2020 and cinematically titled ‘Return of the Coronavirus: 2019-nCoV.’ Two places in the paper suggest the third postulate has been at least partially fulfilled.

The first is in the section titled ‘Emergence.’ There, the two authors write:

After extensive speculation about a causative agent [of the Wuhan outbreak], the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirmed a report by the Wall Street Journal and announced identification of a novel CoV on 9th January [2]. The novel CoV (2019-nCoV) was isolated from a single patient and subsequently verified in 16 additional patients [3]. While not yet confirmed to induce the viral pneumonia, 2019-nCoV was quickly predicted as the likely causative agent.

Strikingly, though, reference 3 that the authors link to at the end of the second sentence is a World Health Organization press release rather than a published study.

The section’s next two sentences describe several Chinese research groups’ virus-sequencing results. However, these sequencing attempts are shoddy. For example, one group’s paper has many red flags – and indeed, on the web page showing the group’s sequence, commenters point to such problems as ‘sequencing and assembly artifacts.’ That group also didn’t replicate or clone the DNA to form a new copy of the virus, as required by the third postulate. (All subsequent sequencing attempts also have fatal flaws with respect to meeting the postulates.)

Yet the Chinese researchers’ gene sequences are integral to all of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test kits.

The second place in the review paper that refers to the principles is in the fifth section, ‘Achieving Koch Postulates.’ The authors assert that:

Traditional identification of a microbe as the causative agent of disease requires fulfillment of Koch’s postulates, modified by Rivers for viral diseases [37]. At the present time, the 2019-nCoV has been isolated from patients, detected by specific assays in patients, and cultured in host cells (one available sequence is identified as a passage isolate), starting to fulfill these criteria.

What’s missing is even one reference to back up those assertions.

Meanwhile, public-health officials appear oblivious to this gaping hole in the science. They imperiously pronounce that they’re using the best data available, and act as if evidence-based decision-making is the substrate for the draconian measures they’re imposing.

Could it be that they’re in fact using decision-based evidence-making?

Here’s an idea: please email your local, state/provincial AND national/federal governments, asking for solid scientific evidence that:

1. SARS-CoV-2 causes a discrete illness that matches the characteristics of all of the deaths attributed to COVID-19

2. the virus has been isolated, reproduced and then shown to cause this discrete illness.

https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/09/scientists-have-utterly-failed-to-prove-that-the-coronavirus-fulfills-kochs-postulates/ by Rosemary Frei and Patrick Corbett (Rosemary has an MSc in molecular biology from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary)

German Report Denounces Covid-19

German Official Leaks Report Denouncing Corona as ‘A Global False Alarm

Germany’s federal government and mainstream media are engaged in damage control after a report titled ‘Analysis of the Crisis Management’ that challenges the established Corona narrative leaked from the interior ministry.

Some of the report key passages are:

The dangerousness of Covid-19 was overestimated: probably at no point did the danger posed by the new virus go beyond the normal level.

The people who die from Corona are essentially those who would statistically die this year, because they have reached the end of their lives and their weakened bodies can no longer cope with any random everyday stress (including the approximately 150 viruses currently in circulation).

Worldwide, within a quarter of a year, there has been no more than 250,000 deaths from Covid-19, compared to 1.5 million deaths [25,100 in Germany] during the influenza wave 2017/18.

The danger is obviously no greater than that of many other viruses. There is no evidence that this was more than a false alarm.

A reproach could go along these lines: During the Corona crisis the State has proved itself as one of the biggest producers of Fake News.

The report focuses on the “manifold and heavy consequences of the Corona measures” and warns that these are “grave”.

More people are dying because of state-imposed Corona-measures than they are being killed by the virus.

A Corona-focused German healthcare system is postponing life-saving surgery and delaying or reducing treatment for non-Corona patients.

Initially, the government tried to dismiss the report as “the work of one employee”, and its contents as “his own opinion”. But the 93-pages report titled “Analysis of the Crisis Management” has been drafted by a scientific panel appointed by the interior ministry and composed by external medical experts from several German universities. The report was the initiative of a department of the interior ministry called Unit KM4 and in charge with the “Protection of critical infrastructures”. This is also where the German official turned whistleblower, Stephen Kohn, worked, and from where he leaked it to the media.

The authors of the report issued a joint press release already on May 11th, berating the government for ignoring expert advice, and asking for the interior minister to officially comment upon the expert’s joint statement: Therapeutic and preventive measures should never bring more harm than the illness itself. Their aim should be to protect the risk groups, without endangering the availability of medical care and the health of the whole population, as it is unfortunately occurring. We in the scientific and medical praxis are experiencing the secondary damages of the Corona-measures on our patients on a daily basis. We therefore ask the Federal Ministry of the Interior, to comment upon our press release, and we hope for a pertinent discussion regarding the [Corona] measures, one that leads to the best possible solution for the whole population. At the time of writing, the German government had yet to react.

On May 26th Dr Alexander Myasnikov, Russia's head of coronavirus information, gave an interview to former-Presidential candidate Ksenia Sobchak in which he apparently let slip his true feelings.

Believing the interview over, and the camera turned off, Myasnikov said: It’s all bullsh*t.”

“It’s all exaggerated. It’s an acute respiratory disease with minimal mortality,” he told television personality Ksenia Sobchak in the interview for her YouTube project

The science of the coronavirus is not disputed. It is well documented and openly admitted:

Most people won't get the virus.

Most of the people who get it won't display symptoms.

Most of the people who display symptoms will only be mildly sick.

Most of the people with severe symptoms will never be critically ill.

And most of the people who get critically ill will survive.

This is borne out by the numerous serological studies which show, again and again, that the infection fatality ratio is on par with flu.

Covid letter from Belgian Doctors to Belgian Authorities

Open letter from medical doctors and health professionals to all Belgian authorities and all Belgian media.

We, Belgian doctors and health professionals, wish to express our serious concern about the evolution of the situation in the recent months surrounding the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We call on politicians to be independently and critically informed in the decision-making process and in the compulsory implementation of corona-measures. We ask for an open debate, where all experts are represented without any form of censorship. After the initial panic surrounding covid-19, the objective facts now show a completely different picture – there is no medical justification for any emergency policy anymore.

The current crisis management has become totally disproportionate and causes more damage than it does any good.

We call for an end to all measures and ask for an immediate restoration of our normal democratic governance and legal structures and of all our civil liberties.

‘A cure must not be worse than the problem’ is a thesis that is more relevant than ever in the current situation. We note, however, that the collateral damage now being caused to the population will have a greater impact in the short and long term on all sections of the population than the number of people now being safeguarded from corona.

In our opinion, the current corona measures and the strict penalties for non-compliance with them are contrary to the values formulated by the Belgian Supreme Health Council, which, until recently, as the health authority, has always ensured quality medicine in our country: “Science – Expertise – Quality – Impartiality – Independence – Transparency”. 1

We believe that the policy has introduced mandatory measures that are not sufficiently scientifically based, unilaterally directed, and that there is not enough space in the media for an open debate in which different views and opinions are heard. In addition, each municipality and province now has the authorisation to add its own measures, whether well-founded or not.

Moreover, the strict repressive policy on corona strongly contrasts with the government’s minimal policy when it comes to disease prevention, strengthening our own immune system through a healthy lifestyle, optimal care with attention for the individual and investment in care personnel.2

The concept of health

In 1948, the WHO defined health as follows: ‘Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being