sanctus Posted August 18, 2020 Report Posted August 18, 2020 Wrt to "live in fear". There is fear and fear.1) Be scared of any social interaction, never leave house and die lonely in anxiety.2) Be scared of infecting someone else and become a killer of them or their grandparents just like the anti-vaxxers.You here talking about fear of type 1), which I do agree is bad for all reasons you linked.Type 2) -fear (I guess you can call it "fear"), means just to be a caring human being. It does not limit me in anyway other than I want to. I mean aren't you vaccinating yourself for same reason? Quote
Thoth101 Posted August 20, 2020 Author Report Posted August 20, 2020 (edited) Argument here is a bit far fetched, because there might be a pop-growth of 9 million. But Covid kills people with other conditions, but also mainly older people. Of these 9 millions some are immigrants, rest are kids... And THOTH101 By now it should be clear even to deniers that this is bullshit. Flu, according to WHO (but just find your own source) kills between 290k and 650k people per year. They actually say flu-related causes, so just like covid, it kills mainly older people or with other causes. Covid already killed 100k more and the year is not even over... "To receive the full force of this hoax, you need to understand that so-called epidemics are very big business. Vaccine business. Pharma business. Government business. When those governments announce an epidemic, the public believes. The belief is on the order of religious faith. It is also scientific faith. Once announced, there is no going back. These 'epidemics' are like major banks, too big to fail."Jon Rappoport CDC Admits Hospital Incentives Drove Up COVID-19 Deaths Story at-a-glance -In April 2020, Minnesota state senator and family physician Scott Jensen came out with a strong critique against the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s guidance for how doctors were to certify COVID-19 fatalities on the death certificateIn July, Jensen came under investigation by the state medical board and faced disciplinary action and loss of his medical license after an anonymous complaint was filed against him, alleging he had been spreading misinformation about how death certificates are categorized during the pandemicJuly 28, 2020, Jensen announced the Minnesota Medical Board had dismissed the allegations against himCDC director Robert Redfield recently admitted that financial policies likely have resulted in artificially elevated hospitalization rates and death toll statistics. Brett Giroir with the U.S. Health and Human Services Department also told lawmakers the COVID-19 death statistics the HHS has been receiving from states “are over-inflated”Perhaps the most egregious misrepresentation of reality is the media’s conflating a positive test result with the actual disease, COVID-19. “COVID-19” refers to a clinical diagnosis of someone who exhibits severe respiratory illness characterized by fever, coughing and shortness of breath. If you test positive but are asymptomatic, you do not “have COVID-19” and should not be counted as a “COVID-19 case”String of ‘Errors’ Have Permanently Muddled Statistics As reported in “Consistent Inaccuracies in COVID-19 Testing and Reporting” and “Common Cold May Trigger Positive COVID-19 Antibody Test,” the only consistent pattern in COVID-19 statistics is their inconsistency. Faulty or contaminated tests have been used, labs have sporadically reported only positive test results,15,16,17 and reporting guidelines for infected cases (positive tests), hospitalizations and deaths have been changed so many times, it’s now virtually impossible to determine the accuracy of these statistics. Positive Test Result Is Not a COVID-19 Case Perhaps the most egregious misrepresentation of reality, though, is the media’s conflating a positive test result with the actual disease, COVID-19. These tests only test for the virus directly (PCR tests) or antibodies to the virus. The fact that a person tests positive does NOT equate to actually having the disease. https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/20/hospital-incentives-drove-up-covid-19-deaths.aspx Edited August 20, 2020 by Thoth101 OceanBreeze 1 Quote
OceanBreeze Posted August 21, 2020 Report Posted August 21, 2020 Positive Test Result Is Not a COVID-19 Case Perhaps the most egregious misrepresentation of reality, though, is the media’s conflating a positive test result with the actual disease, COVID-19. These tests only test for the virus directly (PCR tests) or antibodies to the virus. The fact that a person tests positive does NOT equate to actually having the disease. This is absolutely true. In fact, the more positive test results, the better for achieving herd immunity. Flummoxed and Thoth101 2 Quote
GAHD Posted August 21, 2020 Report Posted August 21, 2020 Herd Immunity requires about 50 to 60% infection rate Ha Ha. approx 50% of US Population 331,000,000/2= 165,000,000 ish at 1 % fatality late in a healthy population = 1,650,000 deaths. From the current level of infection in the US there will be 200,000 dead in about another 4 weeks. Weird how the % fatality rate went down from 3.5% to 2.75% to now 1% in only 7 months WITHOUT ANY TREATMENT CHANGES. Almost like it's actual overall fatality is around 0.006 or less and was/is artificially spiked by high visibility sample sizes being burned out early on... But heay, that's just statistics. Math is silly. Guess we'll find out if/when the burn-through finishes happening. Then again Flu season is coming up, I wonder if people will drop dead of the regular seasonal flu but still be counted as -19? Some of those that are likely to die might like to slow the infection rate, and wait for a vaccine. NB Once infected a person does not become immune to a second third infection. In what way can herd immunity work, if all you are getting is a slight resistance to being reinfected.NB= Not Bad? No Bueno? Hint: If recovery from a FIRST infection doesn't protect you from a second, then a vaccine would not work either. That is how vaccination works; you get infected a first time with a neutered version to protect from nth other infections. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00502-w <-animal study showing functional vaccination vs -19. This would seem to indicate that antibodies DO work vs second infections. What makes you think that somehow t-cells lose their training? You misreading the antibody study that just reconfirms studies from the past 30 years showing how antibodies decrease quickly when nolonger needed? That's an evolutionary mechanism exactly the same as muscle mass decreasing when no longer needed. The body doesn't like to waste energy on stuff it doesn't use. That ties in directly with neuroplasticity studies, the myostatin/Follistatin studies, and lots of others. Energy/resource waste is not something evolution has left very open. Unused antibodies are that kind of waste and of course get cycled out of plasma once the infection is gone, it's the ability to rapidly produce them AGAIN later that matters. you need to learn how reliable sources actually work... Edit There is more than wan dum fuk on this forumTrue. Ironic. Amusing. As long as they follow the rules about posting sources for claims and being factual that's fine though. One of the goals is to liberate the ignorant from their mental chains. Thoth101 and OceanBreeze 2 Quote
Thoth101 Posted August 22, 2020 Author Report Posted August 22, 2020 This is interesting: A PhD macromolecular biologist-researcher from Stanford wrote to me that testing is not specific. It tells you if there is An Infection present but not which exact one. It requires someone of her specialization, in crystallography, which sees inside the cells, to positively identify the exact virus,, she wrote to me. Her exact words in one of her messages could not fit here, I will post below, please see. "For a test of a virus, you need to: isolate it, purify, concentrate and detect 100% that ONE TYPE of virus, a 30kilobase long genetic string. After you isolate it, you can only IDENTIFY it with electron microscopy or crystallography (which was my area of expertise). Every single PCR based test, looking for pieces of genetic code of the virus, will get exactly what's in it, only the pieces of some genes. Once the presence of these genes is confirmed, computer algorithms put it together, and especially there, we get errors. On top of it, nobody discloses which genes are being used for the tests actually, because it is proprietary, Pharma is making big money on every single 'test'! Remember old SARS and MERS are ~86% and ~75% GENETICALLY IDENTICAL to the current covid-19, which has ~15 different proteins on it, the surface spike protein alone has ~1300 amino acids. So if you had a flu in recent years with a loss of smell and taste, or you were vaccinated with SYNTHETIC genes derived from those old viruses, you have a very high chance of 'testing' positive now. In particular when you are wearing mask, which helps to incubate and multiply these viruses even more. It is physically IMPOSSIBLE to make a 'cheap' test which will 100% detect a 'virus'. Mullis, who won the Nobel prize for his PCR invention said: this method is NOT suitable for detection of infectious agents, like viruses, which consist of many different biological entities, proteins+DNA/RNA all in the same TIME! Single proteins, yes, that's what I did in the past, every day, BUT NOT FOR AN OBJECT which has 15 different proteins in it AND specific RNA! Not only the method, but the testing media are equally highly questionable. I see patents for nanomaterials used in the testing swabs for 'collecting' the covid-19 viruses. Not sure if all do have them, but one is certain, every nanomaterial is toxic, can cross the blood brain barrier and accumulates in the human body.Source:mirandola Quote
Thoth101 Posted August 22, 2020 Author Report Posted August 22, 2020 (edited) Herd Immunity requires about 50 to 60% infection rate Ha Ha. approx 50% of US Population 331,000,000/2= 165,000,000 ish at 1 % fatality late in a healthy population = 1,650,000 deaths. From the current level of infection in the US there will be 200,000 dead in about another 4 weeks. Some of those that are likely to die might like to slow the infection rate, and wait for a vaccine. NB Once infected a person does not become immune to a second third infection. In what way can herd immunity work, if all you are getting is a slight resistance to being reinfected. Edit There is more than wan dum fuk on this forumIf the tests are not accurate and the cases being counted inaccurately, none of these numbers mean anything or add up. Do you really believe everything the mainstream media tells you still? Still after all the lies and cover ups they have been caught in and an all out censorship of doctors that don't fit the technocrats and mainstream medias narrative? You have to be an utter lunatic to be still falling for this. “Fear is far deadlier and a more contagious disease than COVID-19." “Isn’t it time we stopped living our lives and dictating what we can and cannot do based on fear of every new danger? Instead, shouldn’t we let each individual decide what risks he is willing to take?Dr. Jeffrey Barke Edited August 22, 2020 by Thoth101 Quote
Thoth101 Posted September 3, 2020 Author Report Posted September 3, 2020 2. Masks Don’t Really Work Outside of Healthcare Systems. A meta-analysis on masks concluded that masks should work in the healthcare setting, but the three studies that focused on the utility of masks to protect the wearer outside of the healthcare system? Two of three studies say “no effect” – and the one that is significant is only marginally significant, and oh, also (like all of the other studies) only focused on the ability of masks to protect the wearer. And, for good measure, N95 does NOT mean they stop 95% of droplets, as incorrectly reported by “Ask Ethan” on Forbes – it means they can block viruses no smaller than 5 microns. SARS-CoV-2 is 30 times smaller than N95. In a BSL3 laboratory, workers must wear much more effective equipment that an N95 mask, or a handkerchief, or a shirt collar, to block viruses the size of coronaviruses. Clearly we are being socially conditioned to submit to pressure to conform to an agenda to accept the spate of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines as the living Savior of society. Oh, if only that could even be theoretically true. Unfortuantely, CDC, Fauci and apparently FDA also forgot that There is a good reason why a huge number of scientists are calling upon Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences for retraction of a bullshit study that claimed to show that masks are critical for reducing community transmission. There is actually a ton of science that shows that they do not. “Objective The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of cloth masks to medical masks in hospital healthcare workers (HCWs). The null hypothesis is that there is no difference between medical masks and cloth masks. Setting 14 secondary-level/tertiary-level hospitals in Hanoi, Vietnam. Participants 1607 hospital HCWs aged ≥18 years working full-time in selected high-risk wards. Intervention Hospital wards were randomised to: medical masks, cloth masks or a control group (usual practice, which included mask wearing). Participants used the mask on every shift for 4 consecutive weeks. Main outcome measure Clinical respiratory illness (CRI), influenza-like illness (ILI) and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infection. Results The rates of all infection outcomes were highest in the cloth mask arm, with the rate of ILI statistically significantly higher in the cloth mask arm (relative risk (RR)=13.00, 95% CI 1.69 to 100.07) compared with the medical mask arm. Cloth masks also had significantly higher rates of ILI compared with the control arm. An analysis by mask use showed ILI (RR=6.64, 95% CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.94) were significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group. Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. Conclusions This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated. Trial registration number Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12610000887077.” From Ref #2 “Summary: Respiratory infection is much higher among healthcare workers wearing cloth masks compared to medical masks, research shows. Cloth masks should not be used by workers in any healthcare setting, authors of the new study say.” C. R. MacIntyre, H. Seale, T. C. Dung, N. T. Hien, P. T. Nga, A. A. Chughtai, B. Rahman, D. E. Dwyer, Q. Wang. A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open, 2015; 5 (4): e006577 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006577https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150422121724.htmEven Medpage today published an article that concluded that some politicians are pushing masks for fear mongers, not toward evidence-based medical purposes.(See Medpage Today: Mask Hysteria: Are We Going Too Far? — Kevin Campbell believes media and politicians use masking as a way to fear monger )https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2020/07/14/covid19-three-bits-of-science-that-cdc-fauci-and-fda-forgot-and-one-they-would-like-to-forget/ Quote
Thoth101 Posted September 3, 2020 Author Report Posted September 3, 2020 (edited) CDC’s Policies on Masking Actually Increase COVID19 Risk. Why Do You Still Trust Them? CDC has a history of getting it wrong with personal protective equipment right when we need them to get it right. Remember Ebola? CDC published the wrong PPE protocol on their website, leading to infection of two nurses from Texas. Now, AMERICA IS WAKING UP to the fact that they either were lied to, or are being lied to about masks-for-all. Which is it? Perhaps both.CDC’s initial position on whether the public should wear masks was a resounding “No”. In March, U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams explains why the CDC and WHO do not recommend the general public wear masks and how doing so could increase your virus risk. (see video from Fox News here).Marketwatch covered this reporting that “people shouldn’t wear face masks to prevent the spread of the infectious illness, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. surgeon general”“STOP BUYING MASKS”US Surgeon General Jerome Adams tweeted these words in February –<img data- The mercurial Dr. Anthony Fauci, who seems to have changed his position on every detail about COVID19, including the utility of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (which even he says may not be the answer), said that said that masks only made people feel better but were pretty much pointless. Fast forward to now, and Fauci says changed his tune: From Town Hall: “We were concerned the public health community, and many people were saying this, were concerned that it was at a time when personal protective equipment, including the N95 masks and the surgical masks, were in very short supply,” Fauci told The Street. But – and this is a huge BUT – the public health community (and the medical community) do not wear cloth masks. They wear surgical masks, or, in some cases, N95 masks – for 15-20 minutes at a time. From something like COVID19, they wear LAYERS of masks and faceshield.CDC recommends cloth masks, not surgical masks, not N95. Cloth masks. Actually, Cloth “face coverings“. Fauci, CDC, and HHS in general have offered nothing but a whirlwind of vague, imprecise and unclear positions. It makes one wonder… What is very clear (#ScienceSays) that cloth masks do not prevent transmission of viruses. In fact, they may increase transmission. The new excuse? They are supposed to prevent droplet transmission. Fine. But what about the narrative that Coronavirus is airborne? Here, hundreds of scientists say that coronavirus is airborne (Reuters). It’s almost as if Fauci does not really care what the reality is, or that he is content to allow social strife, mutual distrust to foment among the public until he and Moderna fly in with the vaccine and save the world.The Risks of Mask-WearingCloth masks can increase, not decrease, the risk of infection (including from the Coronavirus). In this study, researchers found that people have 3x the risk of developing a respiratory illness if they wear a mask. In the first randomized clinical trial on the effects of cloth masks, scientists reported that “the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection” Additionally, Dr. Jenny Harries, UK’s Deputy Chief Medical Officer has warned that it was not a good idea for the public to wear facemasks as the virus can get trapped in the material and causes infection when the wearer breathes in.Wearing masks increases your CO2 blood oxygen level to unsafe levels.In a live online demonstration, Del Bigtree of the Highwire measured his son’s CO2 levels while wearing different types of masks. In the video, you can see the CO2 levels in this young man shoot past 5,000 ppm. Click here to watch the video or read the details here on The FedUp Democrat.Here, the Guardian reviews the risks of high carbon dioxide levels. https://bit.ly/GuardianRisksOfHighC02In 2018, California public health official Peter Beilenson released a statement advising people to not wear N95 masks because they carry the risk of forcing people to “rebreathe” their own CO2.As the temperatures increase, overheating while wearing a mask is a real risk. See this article.Here, an OSHA trainer and PPE expert explains the risks and ineffectiveness of long-term mask wearing.https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2020/07/ Edited September 3, 2020 by Thoth101 Quote
OceanBreeze Posted September 3, 2020 Report Posted September 3, 2020 Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy Dr. Russell Blaylock warns that not only do face masks fail to protect the healthy from getting sick, but they also create serious health risks to the wearer. The bottom line is that if you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask. How is Coronavirus Getting Into the Brain? "In most instances it enters the brain by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves), which connect directly with the area of the brain dealing with recent memory and memory consolidation. By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain" Maybe this would be the safest mask to wear? Thoth101 1 Quote
Thoth101 Posted September 4, 2020 Author Report Posted September 4, 2020 Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy Dr. Russell Blaylock warns that not only do face masks fail to protect the healthy from getting sick, but they also create serious health risks to the wearer. The bottom line is that if you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask. How is Coronavirus Getting Into the Brain? "In most instances it enters the brain by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves), which connect directly with the area of the brain dealing with recent memory and memory consolidation. By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain" Maybe this would be the safest mask to wear? I have no clue why people are failing to understand this. Well....I guess I do have a clue. They are heavily under mind control and propaganda and few see through it. So congratulate yourself for seeing through this scam and thanks for more information. I always enjoy what Dr. Blaylock has to say. It is quite interesting what he has to say on viruses themselves. Quote
GAHD Posted September 4, 2020 Report Posted September 4, 2020 I have no clue why people are failing to understand this.There's a saying from one of my modern heroes, Lawrence Krauss. I think It applies equally here as it does when I see people misinterpreting other things like gravity or electricity or magnetism from the incomplete 5th-grade science similes they remember."The human brain evolved to avoid predators on the savanna, not to intuitively understand the laws of the universe" There are a lot of studies, both scientific and social, that try to determine why people make silly decisions or hold silly beliefs. The best reasoning I've come across is closely related to that above observation. The same "natural" neural hardware that kept our ancestors alive through short-term dangers really screws with the ability to tell truth from fiction and make long-term judgements that contradict short-term panic decisions. In the past that shadow-movement out of the corner of the eye could have been a predator about to pounce, so the ones who got frightened and knee-jerk ready to run or combat survived more often. There's very little downside to a false-positive in that scenario, but today that same wiring is probably what leads to ghosthunters and the rabbithole of other "seen but not really recordable" phenomena. Similarly the intuitive grasp of size & distance in the human brain can be boiled down to "bigger than me, needs two hands, needs one hand, smaller" and "in arms reach, within 10 seconds of sprint, farther." It takes training to be able to grasp sizes & distances outside of those categories. Most people who don't actively use dimensions in real-world applications cannot at a glance get anywhere close to the right measurements. Ask an average person how big their bedroom is they'll go "oh...kinda small" or "big enough for object, object and object." Someone in construction or some in real-estate will ballpark "around ten by twelve" or "100 to 150 square feet" (with the occasional few using meters). Dimensions take training to be understood. Dimensions that need optical assistance like microns or nano-meters compound this intuitive grasp problem many fold. "I can't see the holes" is the same as "there are no holes" to the savanna-brain, do not ask it to understand filtration, VOC, etc... on an intuitive level. It's just not going to happen. Thoth101 1 Quote
Thoth101 Posted September 5, 2020 Author Report Posted September 5, 2020 (edited) There's a saying from one of my modern heroes, Lawrence Krauss. I think It applies equally here as it does when I see people misinterpreting other things like gravity or electricity or magnetism from the incomplete 5th-grade science similes they remember."The human brain evolved to avoid predators on the savanna, not to intuitively understand the laws of the universe" There are a lot of studies, both scientific and social, that try to determine why people make silly decisions or hold silly beliefs. The best reasoning I've come across is closely related to that above observation. The same "natural" neural hardware that kept our ancestors alive through short-term dangers really screws with the ability to tell truth from fiction and make long-term judgements that contradict short-term panic decisions. In the past that shadow-movement out of the corner of the eye could have been a predator about to pounce, so the ones who got frightened and knee-jerk ready to run or combat survived more often. There's very little downside to a false-positive in that scenario, but today that same wiring is probably what leads to ghosthunters and the rabbithole of other "seen but not really recordable" phenomena. Similarly the intuitive grasp of size & distance in the human brain can be boiled down to "bigger than me, needs two hands, needs one hand, smaller" and "in arms reach, within 10 seconds of sprint, farther." It takes training to be able to grasp sizes & distances outside of those categories. Most people who don't actively use dimensions in real-world applications cannot at a glance get anywhere close to the right measurements. Ask an average person how big their bedroom is they'll go "oh...kinda small" or "big enough for object, object and object." Someone in construction or some in real-estate will ballpark "around ten by twelve" or "100 to 150 square feet" (with the occasional few using meters). Dimensions take training to be understood. Dimensions that need optical assistance like microns or nano-meters compound this intuitive grasp problem many fold. "I can't see the holes" is the same as "there are no holes" to the savanna-brain, do not ask it to understand filtration, VOC, etc... on an intuitive level. It's just not going to happen.Those are very great points and I have heard this explained this way before and makes a lot of sense. I would further add that these predators are also unseen predators. The controllers have got more clever with their manipulation of the human race. After all they are masters of how the human mind works and the reptilian part of the brain in fight or flight. Before there was a terrorist around every corner and now we have an unseen virus. I do find it interesting how we don't hear about terrorist anymore. Sure their are riots now but you mostly don't hear the mainstream labeling them as terrorist anymore. I guess they figured that program was not controlling as well anymore. It has to be admitted how manipulation using a virus has worked very well and can control the whole world in a short amount of time before people can even ask questions. If this was all planned out in advance as I contend as you can see that in watching Event 201. And reading many documents from the Rockefeller Foundation. A insidious genus way to do what they call the The Great Reset . Edited September 5, 2020 by Thoth101 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.