There goes another friendship. All because I had the audacity to point out the unambiguous fallacies of statistical and anecdotal logic that clearly illustrate the ulterior motivations of our leaders, health officials and mainstream news publications who continue to make the dishonest proclamation that we are in the midst of some kind of harrowing “Pandemic”. A crisis that they claim poses such a grave threat to all of humanity that we, in turn, better listen to what they say, no questions asked, or we are going to die. They try posturing that anyone who questions this in the slightest is immoral. This entire charade was a meticulously planned and completely fabricated public health threat, designed to facilitate this “Great Economic Reset” they’ve long been planning, while at the same time lending further justification towards the Orwellian, rights-eviscerating, economy-destroying measures that they continue to saddle humanity with in response. Solutions to the very problems that they concocted to begin with. It’s a joke. Not a very funny one. But they certainly think it’s funny. They troll us on the reg an have been bragging about their plans for years now.
- Coronavirus Predictive Programming in 1981 Dean Koontz Novel
- WAY TOO COINCIDENTAL TO BE COINCIDENTAL: 5 THINGS ABOUT COVID-19 THAT SHOULD MAKE YOU GO “HMMM…”
- Agenda 21, Predictive Programming & the Coronavirus
- The Complete UNTOLD Coronavirus Lockdown Story
- THE CORONAVIRUS AND PREDICTIVE PROGRAMMING EP7
- Predictive Programming of a Post-Pandemic World
- Predictive Programming for Notre Dame Fire Is Found in ‘The OA,’ Season 2
- Coronavirus (CoVid-19): The Predictive Programming Abounds!
- KOBE BRYANT SIMPSONS PREDICT CORONA VIRUS
- Proof That The Pandemic Was Planned & With Purpose
How HOLLYWOOD used PREDICTIVE PROGRAMMING for the CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) Global Pandemic (VIDEO)
One of the first things this ex-friend of mine did, before deciding to put in her cancelation order on our friendship, was cite the fact that her mom had gotten very sick recently and was diagnosed with Covid-19(common ploy). So essentially, because of this, I was being labeled as an inconsiderate selfish asshole for not blindly believing and going along with nonsensical bullshit(the lamestream narrative that Covid is some kind of extra special threat worthy of all this nonsense). So because she was told her mom had Covid, I was in turn immoral for merely pointing out the glaring lack of logic in this assinine mainstream narrative. I bet our leaders didn’t even think it was going to be that easy to get the sheeple to instantaneously vilify dissidents like me. My God.
After her mother recovered, the doctors made sure that before parting ways, they left her with a nice side order of unwarranted fear, explaining to her that she was now “especially at-risk” moving forward. Even though she supposedly already had the virus.
Well wouldn’t you know, I had a similar experience with my mother, who was diagnosed with a very particular & specific lung condition well before Covid-19 waltzed into all our lives. She was also inexplicably told that not only had she contracted Covid-19, but was ALSO “especially at risk moving forward” after her recovery. But this diagnosis and accompanying stupifying dire prognosis about her increased risk factors, was not made from any valid or rational medical evaluation or even the result of any ridiculous PCR-test. Oh no. These conclusions were made merely from the doctor observing a “particular set of symptoms” that they associate with the “still-not-isolated-in-the-lab” virus known as “SARS Cov2” aka Covid-19. These oath-breaking doctors simply “observed” her symptoms from her pre-existing condition and then hastily slapped her with a Covid-19 diagnosis. Ensuring they did their part in further padding the statistics, while knowing damn well that the true origin of her symptoms had nothing to do with their phantom viral threat.
On top of these wildly irresponsible and dishonest diagnosis practices, they are also taking the opportunity to classify as many deaths as possible as being from Covid-19. No matter what their true cause. When I say “no matter what“, I mean “NO MATTER WHAT“. Here are some of the examples of deaths that were classified as “Covid-19”.
- Gunshot victims*
- Motorcycle accident*
- Anyone who died WITH “SARS Cov2” in their system, not FROM “SARS Cov2”*
- And of course any fatality that would have normally been attributed to the seasonal flu which we have miraculously ERADICATED since Novid came around with a 98% nose dive.
Has Covid killed off the flu? Experts pose the intriguing question as influenza cases nosedive by 98% across the globe | DAILY.UK
“It includes all people who’ve died with SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) in their body.”Marc Trabsky, La Trobe University, Courtney Hempton, Deakin University
Classifying any death that occurred with an accompanying positive PCR-test as a “Covid death” takes their whole co-morbidity ruse to another level. They’ve even been forced to begrudgingly admit to this practice publicly.
Fake death data from the CDC, coupled with wild guesstimates from experts, and the relentless barrage of fear porn the mainstream media subjects Americans to around the clock, have been getting results
*I don’t want to hear how you don’t consider many of the publications I cited above as credible. These examples have undeniable provenance and just because your libtarded news sources won’t carry these stories does not make them any less credible. In fact, just the opposite is true. So save it. BTW, Snopes is run by a libby BDSM freak and her partner who also happen to work as intel-agency goons under the guise of journalists.
Yet even with their laughable criteria & methodology for coming up with the testing & death statistics they have, its still not the harrowing threat they try making it out to be! How pathetic is that? This is one of the reasons I get so upset at people for falling for this. They aren’t even pulling it[the deception] off. They suck at it. But it hasn’t mattered. The public lap up their rhetoric like a dog lapping up puke mixed with shit off the floor. No questions asked. No wonder they want to exterminate us. I can’t even blame them at this point. We are pathetic mindless zombies who are incapable of thinking for themselves. Even just a little bit. We don’t deserve the freedoms that they are systematically taking away the last remnants of.
PCR tests cannot distinguish between “live” viruses and inactive (noninfectious) viral particles and therefore cannot be used as a diagnostic tool. The false appearance of a lethal pandemic has been manufactured using cycle thresholds (CTs) that are too high
*Above article republished below in case you are not signed-up at Mercola.com which you must be to read the full piece.
Washington Inflates COVID-19 Numbers, Includes Gunshot Victims Among Deaths(VIDEO)
I am going to have to once again reassert my strong belief that if you are one of the sheeple who still supports the notion that Novid-19 is an authentic and honestly represented health threat, then your family needs to start looking into group homes that might agree to take you in. You should not be allowed to participate as an adult in a free society. You need to be locked away before you do anymore damage to our chances at shaking free of this Orwellian control mechanism and the subsequent bona-fide nightmare of a “New Abnormal” it has helped usher in.
And stop turning to the creator of Microsoft Windows & XBOX for medical & epidemiological advice. Since when are out-of-touch Eugenics-motivated, depopulation-aspiring billionaires automatically granted so much implied authority? What is wrong with you all? Do you know how much Billy has made from his vaccine investments since the start of all this?
ITALY: DOCTORS AND SCIENTISTS TEST A KIWI FRUIT USING PCR TEST FOR COVID [2020-12-31] (VIDEO)
Experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Operating System Designed To Program Human DNA, Says Moderna
by j | Wake Up To The Truth | 2021-01-06 15:15
Published: January 5, 2021 Source: great game india. According to pharma giant Moderna, the COVID-19 mRNA based experimental vaccines being approved for emergency use for the first time in history are Operating System designed to program human DNA. Experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Operating System Designed To Program Human DNA, Says Moderna Messenger RNA (mRNA) … Continue reading Experimental COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Are Operating System Designed To Program Human DNA, Says Moderna →
Astonishing COVID-19 Testing Fraud Revealed
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
- January 13, 2021
- PCR tests cannot distinguish between “live” viruses and inactive (noninfectious) viral particles and therefore cannot be used as a diagnostic tool. The false appearance of a lethal pandemic has been manufactured using cycle thresholds (CTs) that are too high
- The higher the CT — i.e., the number of amplification cycles used to detect RNA particles — the greater the chance of a false positive. Research shows that to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at 17 cycles. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically
- The SARS-CoV-2 PCR test was developed based on a genetic sequence published by Chinese scientists, not the viral isolate. Missing genetic code was simply made up
- November 30, 2020, 22 international scientists published a review challenging the scientific paper on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 that was adopted as the standard across the world. The scientists are calling for the so-called Corman-Drosten paper to be retracted due to its numerous errors
- The flaws of PCR testing have been capitalized upon to incite fear in order to benefit the Great Reset agenda developed by a technocratic elite
The COVID-19 pandemic has brought us many harsh lessons. Importantly, it has shown us how easy it is to manufacture panic and control entire populations through deceptive means. Topping the list of deceptive strategies is the use of a test that falsely labels healthy individuals as sick and infectious. This allows mass testing to drive the narrative that we’re in a lethal pandemic.
Of course, I’m talking about the now infamous reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. The fact is, the PCR test is not designed to be used as a diagnostic tool as it cannot distinguish between inactive viruses and “live” or reproductive ones.1
This is a crucial point, since inactive and reproductive viruses are not interchangeable in terms of infectivity. If you have a nonreproductive virus in your body, you will not get sick and you cannot spread it to others. Secondly, many if not most laboratories amplify the RNA collected far too many times, which results in healthy people testing “positive.”
The Crucial Detail That Nullifies Most PCR Test Results
The video above explains how the PCR test works and how we are interpreting results incorrectly. In summary, the PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal cavity. This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA. Due to its tiny size, it must be amplified to become discernible. Each round of amplification is called a cycle, and the number of amplification cycles used by any given test or lab is called a cycle threshold (CT).
The higher the CT, the greater the risk that insignificant sequences of viral DNA end up being magnified to the point that the test reads positive even if your viral load is extremely low or the virus is inactive and poses no threat to you or anyone else.
Many scientists have noted that anything over 35 cycles is scientifically indefensible.2,3,4 A September 28, 2020, study5 in Clinical Infectious Diseases revealed that when you run a PCR test at a CT of 35 or higher, the accuracy drops to 3%, resulting in a 97% false positive rate.
Yet, a test known as the Corman-Drosten paper and tests recommended by the World Health Organization are set to 45 cycles,6,7,8 and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend running PCR tests at a CT of 40.9
The question is why, considering the consensus is that CTs over 35 render the test useless. When labs use these excessive cycle thresholds, you clearly end up with a grossly overestimated number of positive tests, so what we’re really dealing with is a “casedemic”10,11 — an epidemic of false positives.
Many are now questioning whether this was done on purpose to crash the global economy and provide cover for the implementation of what’s known as the Great Reset, which is nothing less than a global totalitarian takeover by unelected technocrats who seek to gobble up all the world’s assets.
Indeed, it seems quite clear we’re not dealing with a lethal pandemic in any real sense. Mortality statistics further prove this is the case, as overall mortality statistics have remained stable in 2020 and in line with previous years.12,13,14
In other words, people are dying from COVID-19, yes, but the illness is not killing an excess number of people. The same number of people would have died anyway, from something. Indeed, CDC data15 released August 26, 2020, showed only 6% of so-called COVID-19 deaths had COVID-19 listed as the sole cause on the death certificate.
“For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death,” the CDC stated, and any one of those comorbidities could have killed those people even if COVID-19 was nonexistent.
For Accuracy, Much Lower CTs Must Be Used
Now, if CTs above 35 are scientifically unjustified, just how low of a CT should be used? Quite a few studies have investigated this, so there’s no shortage of data at this point. The fact that the WHO, FDA and CDC still have not changed their CTs downward in light of all these data tells us they’re not interested in getting an accurate picture of the infection rate.
For example, an April 2020 study16 in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases showed that to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at 17 cycles. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically.
By the time you get to 33 cycles, the accuracy rate is a mere 20%, meaning 80% are false positives. Beyond 34 cycles, your chance of a positive PCR test being a true positive shrinks to zero.
More recently, a December 3, 2020, systematic review17 published in the journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases assessed the findings of 29 different studies — all of which were published in 2020 — comparing evidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection with the CTs used in testing.
Five of the studies included were unable to identify any live viruses in cases where a positive PCR test had used a CT above 24. What’s more, in order to produce live virus culture, a patient whose PCR test used a CT at or above 35 had to be symptomatic.
As reported by the authors, “12 studies reported that CT values were significantly lower … in specimens producing live virus culture.” In other words, the higher the CT, the lower the chance of a positive test actually being due to the presence of live (and infectious) virus.
“Two studies reported the odds of live virus culture reduced by approximately 33% for every one unit increase in CT,” the authors noted. Importantly, five of the studies included were unable to identify any live viruses in cases where a positive PCR test had used a CT above 24. What’s more, in order to produce live virus culture, a patient whose PCR test used a CT at or above 35 had to be symptomatic.
So, to summarize, if you have symptoms of COVID-19 and test positive using a PCR test that was run at 35 amplification cycles or higher, then you are likely to be infected and infectious.
However, if you do not have symptoms, yet test positive using a PCR test run at 35 CTs or higher, then it is likely a false positive and you pose no risk to others as you’re unlikely to carry any live virus. In fact, provided you’re asymptomatic, you’re unlikely to be infectious even if you test positive with a test run at 24 CTs or higher.
Fearmongering Success Hinges on Incorrect Use of PCR Test
The video above includes several interviews with experts who have openly criticized the use of PCR testing to diagnose infections such as COVID-19. These include:
|The inventor of the PCR test, the late Kary Mullis (he has spoken about the test for other infections, such as HIV, but died in August 2019, a few months before the COVID-19 pandemic broke out)|
|Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer|
|Professor Carl Heneghan, director of the Oxford University Center for Evidence-Based Medicine|
|Emeritus professor of immunology Beda M. Stadler, former head of the Bern Institute of Immunology|
|Clare Craig, a consultant pathologist|
|Stephen A. Bustin, professor of molecular medicine and a world-renowned expert on the PCR test|
In 1993, Mullis spoke about the use of the PCR test to diagnose HIV. He explained that all the test does is amplify molecules into something you can detect, but it cannot tell you whether those particles actually pose a risk to your health.
He also points out that, using PCR, you can essentially find just about anything in anyone because most of us are walking around with pathogens of all sorts, but the load is either too low to be of concern or the particles are just dead debris that pose no risk.
Bustin points out that when you get a positive result using a CT of 35 or higher, you’re looking at the equivalent of a single copy of viral DNA. The likelihood of that causing a health problem is minuscule. Even Dr. Anthony Fauci has admitted that using a PCR test with a CT above 35 renders it more or less useless because at that point, you’re just detecting dead nucelotides. No live virus can be detected at CTs that high.
Fatal Errors Found in Paper on Which PCR Testing Is Based
November 30, 2020, a team of 22 international scientists published a review18 challenging the scientific paper19 on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 written by Christian Drosten, Ph.D., and Victor Corman. The Corman-Drosten paper was quickly accepted by the WHO and the workflow described therein was adopted as the standard across the world.
According to Reiner Fuellmich,20 founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss,21 or ACU),22,23 Drosten is a key culprit in the COVID-19 pandemic hoax.
The scientists demand the Corman-Drosten paper be retracted due to “fatal errors,”24 one of which is the fact that it was written (and the test itself developed) before any viral isolate was available. All they used was the genetic sequence published online by Chinese scientists in January 2020.
The fact that the paper was published a mere 24 hours after it was submitted also suggests it didn’t even undergo peer review. In an Undercover DC interview, Kevin Corbett, Ph.D., one of the 22 scientists who are now demanding the paper’s retraction, stated:25
“Every scientific rationale for the development of that test has been totally destroyed by this paper. It’s like Hiroshima/Nagasaki to the COVID test.
When Drosten developed the test, China hadn’t given them a viral isolate. They developed the test from a sequence in a gene bank. Do you see? China gave them a genetic sequence with no corresponding viral isolate. They had a code, but no body for the code. No viral morphology.
In the fish market, it’s like giving you a few bones and saying ‘that’s your fish.’ It could be any fish … Listen, the Corman-Drosten paper, there’s nothing from a patient in it. It’s all from gene banks. And the bits of the virus sequence that weren’t there they made up.
They synthetically created them to fill in the blanks. That’s what genetics is; it’s a code. So, its ABBBCCDDD and you’re missing some, what you think is EEE, so you put it in … This is basically a computer virus.
There are 10 fatal errors in this Drosten test paper … But here is the bottom line: There was no viral isolate to validate what they were doing. The PCR products of the amplification didn’t correspond to any viral isolate at that time. I call it ‘donut ring science.’ There is nothing at the center of it. It’s all about code, genetics, nothing to do with reality …
There have since been papers saying they’ve produced viral isolates. But there are no controls for them. The CDC produced a paper in July … where they said: ‘Here’s the viral isolate.’ Do you know what they did? They swabbed one person. One person, who’d been to China and had cold symptoms. One person. And they assumed he had [COVID-19] to begin with. So, it’s all full of holes, the whole thing.“
The conclusion of the review reads, in part:26
“A decision to recognize the errors apparent in the Corman-Drosten paper has the benefit to greatly minimize human cost and suffering going forward. Is it not in the best interest of Eurosurveillance to retract this paper? Our conclusion is clear. In the face of all the tremendous PCR-protocol design flaws and errors described here, we conclude: There is not much of a choice left in the framework of scientific integrity and responsibility.”
The critique against PCR testing is further strengthened by a November 20, 2020, study27 in Nature Communications, which found no viable virus in PCR-positive cases at all. The study evaluated data from 9,865,404 residents of Wuhan, China, who had undergone PCR testing between May 14 and June 1, 2020.
A total of 300 tested positive but had no symptoms. Of the 34,424 people with a history of COVID-19, 107 tested positive a second time. Yet, when they did virus cultures on these 407 individuals who had tested positive (either for the first or second time), no live virus was found in any of them!
Antibody Tests Are Equally Unreliable
Antibody tests are also turning out to have their share of quality problems. If you have antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, that would be evidence that your immune system successfully overcame the virus at some point in the past. However, the COVID-19 antibody test may also turn out positive if you have antibodies against common cold viruses.
June 30, 2020, the CDC admitted that prior exposure to coronaviruses responsible for the common cold can result in a positive COVID-19 antibody test, even if you’ve never been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 specifically.28
The saving grace is that studies29,30,31 suggest antibodies produced following exposure to coronaviruses that cause the common cold also appear to provide some general and long-lasting resistance against SARS-CoV-2.
One such study,32,33 published May 14, 2020, in the journal Cell, found 70% of samples from patients who had recovered from mild cases of COVID-19 had resistance to SARS-CoV-2 on the T-cell level, as did 40% to 60% of people who had not been exposed to SARS-CoV-2.
According to the authors, this suggests there’s “cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.” In other words, if you’ve recovered from a common cold caused by a particular coronavirus, your humoral immune system may activate when you encounter SARS-CoV-2, thus rendering you resistant to COVID-19.
Another study34 discovered SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies are only found in the most severe cases — about 1 in 5. So, a negative antibody test doesn’t necessarily rule out the possibility that you’ve been infected and didn’t get sick. In fact, this finding suggests COVID-19 may actually be five times more prevalent than suspected — and five times less deadly than predicted.
In a letter to the editor35 published in the July 1, 2020, issue of American Family Physician, Drs. Mark Ebell, deputy editor for evidence-based medicine for the journal, and Henry Barry, reviewed some of the available data, noting that:
“When assessing whether patients had a previous infection and may be immune, it is important to avoid false-positives so that patients do not think they are immune when they are not.
Table 1 summarizes the false-positive rates at various population prevalence for the Cellex test and for a hypothetical test that is 90% sensitive and 99% specific. At relatively low population prevalences, which likely reflect current conditions in the United States and elsewhere, we would argue that false-positive rates are unacceptably high with the Cellex test.”
Ebell and Barry pointed out that many of the antibody tests that have provisional approval from the FDA still have not even been evaluated for accuracy. They also recommended that labs report test results “in a way that reflects the local population prevalence based on widespread testing and include the false-positive rate,” as this information “is needed to help family physicians better inform shared decision-making regarding previous infection and return to work or school.”
At present, you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone including that data in their reporting, and the way things are going, I wouldn’t hold my breath in anticipation of such helpful numbers being included in the future either.
High Time to End Mass Testing Scam
If the vast majority of people who test positive for COVID-19 infection have no symptoms, don’t feel sick and don’t look sick, is COVID-19 really a “deadly” disease? Or, is it more like HPV — a viral infection that most people have without knowing it, and which 90% are able to eliminate without treatment?
The primary justification for the tyrannical governmental interventions of COVID-19 was to slow the spread of the infection so that hospital resources would not be overwhelmed, causing people to die due to lack of medical care.
These interventions were not about stopping the spread altogether or even reducing the number of people that would eventually get infected. They certainly were never meant to prevent all death. Any rational analysis would rapidly conclude that this simply isn’t possible, under any circumstance.
Short-term stay-at-home orders and business closings were only intended to slow down the spread so that, eventually, naturally-acquired herd immunity — the best kind — would prevent it from reemerging. Yet the goal posts keep shifting as we go along.
Two-week lockdowns turned into months in some areas. Eventually, we were told everything would go back to normal as soon as a vaccine became available. But once the vaccines started rolling out, the narrative changed again, and we were told we’d still need masks, social distancing and lockdowns well into 2021 or even 2022 even with a vaccine. What, exactly, is going on?
The only rational reason for why government interventions continue is because they’re meant to erode our personal freedoms and civil liberties and transfer wealth to unelected technocrats who are controlling the pandemic narrative. It’s all fearmongering based on a combination of wildly manipulated data and flawed tests.
Aside from PCR testing data, there’s no evidence of a lethal pandemic at all. As mentioned, while there is such a thing as COVID-19, and people have and do die from it, there are no excess deaths due to it.36,37,38 The total mortality for 2020 is normal.
So, unless we think we should shut down the world and stop living because people die from heart disease, diabetes, cancer, the flu or anything else, then there’s no reason to shut down the world because some people happen to die from COVID-19.
What You Can Do
The good news is the hoax is starting to be exposed. In November 2020, a Portuguese appeals court ruled39,40 that the PCR test is “not a reliable test for SARS-CoV-2” and that “a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.” Therefore, “any enforced quarantine based on the results is unlawful.”41 The court also noted that forcing healthy people to self-isolate could be a violation of their fundamental right to liberty.
As detailed in “Coronavirus Fraud Scandal — The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun” and “German Lawyers Initiate Class-Action Coronavirus Litigation,” additional legal cases are also to be expected, all of which will help expose the fraud perpetrated. As for what you can do in the meantime, consider:
- Turning off mainstream media news and turning to independent experts — do the research. Read through the science.
- Continue to counter the censorship by asking questions — arm yourself with mortality statistics and the facts on PCR testing, so you can explain how and why this pandemic simply isn’t a pandemic anymore.
- If you are a medical professional, especially if you’re a member of a professional society, write an open letter to your government, urging them to speak to and heed recommendations from independent experts.
- Sign The Great Barrington Declaration,42 which calls for an end to lockdowns.
- Join a group so that you can have support — Examples of groups formed to fight against government overreach include Us for Them, a group campaigning for reopening schools and protecting children’s rights in the U.K., and the Freedom to Breathe Agency, a U.S. team of attorneys, doctors, business owners and parents who are fighting to protect freedom and liberty.
Sources and References
- 1 CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel July 13, 2020 (PDF)
- 2 The Vaccine Reaction September 29, 2020
- 3 Jon Rappaport’s Blog November 6, 2020
- 4 YouTube TWiV 641 July 16, 2020
- 5 Clinical Infectious Diseases September 28, 2020; ciaa1491
- 6 WHO.int Diagnostic detection of Wuhan Coronavirus 2019 by real-time RT-PCR, January 13, 2020 (PDF)
- 7 WHO.int Diagnostic detection of 2019-nCOV by real-time RT-PCR, January 17, 2020 (PDF)
- 8 Eurosurveillance 2020 Jan 23; 25(3): 2000045
- 9 FDA.gov CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel Instructions, July 13, 2020 (PDF) Page 35
- 10 PJ Media October 27, 2020
- 11 AAPS October 7, 2020
- 12, 36 YouTube, SARS-CoV-2 and the rise of medical technocracy, Lee Merritt, MD, aprox 8 minutes in (Lie No. 1: Death Risk)
- 13, 37 Technical Report June 2020 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.24350.77125
- 14, 38 Johns Hopkins Newsletter November 26, 2020 (Archived)
- 15 CDC.gov August 26, 2020
- 16 European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases April 27, 2020; 39: 1059-1061
- 17 Clinical Infectious Diseases December 3, 2020; ciaa1764
- 18, 26 Corman Drosten Review Report
- 19 Eurosurveillance, Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus by real-time RT-PCR
- 20 Fuellmich.com, Dr. Reiner Fuellmich Bio (German)
- 21 Acu2020.org Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss
- 22 Acu2020.org Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee, English
- 23 Algora October 4, 2020
- 24, 25 Undercover DC December 3, 2020
- 27 Nature Communications November 20, 2020; 11 Article number 5917
- 28 CDC Test for Past Infection
- 29 Biorxiv preprint DOI: 10.1101/2020.05.26.115832 (PDF)
- 30 Daily Mail June 12, 2020
- 31 Science Times June 12, 2020
- 32 Cell May 14, 2020 DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.05.015
- 33 Wall Street Journal June 12, 2020 (Archived)
- 34 Off-Guardian June 12, 2020
- 35 American Family Physician July 1, 2020; 102(1): 5-6
- 39 Judgment of the Lisbon Court of Appeal, Portugese Original
- 40 Judgment of the Lisbon Court of Appeal, English Translation
- 41 Geopolitic.org November 21, 2020
- 42 Great Barrington Declaration
No Transparency: Ca Gov. Newsom Under Fire For Keeping COVID-19 Lockdown Info From Public
— 23.01.2021 22:00 Nwo Report
This ensures the state won’t lift lockdown measures until it wants to
Source: Kelen McBreen
Despite touting a transparent relationship with the people of California, Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom is being criticized for holding back information regarding COVID-19.
Since December, the state has used ICU capacity to determine lockdown tiers.
So far, stay-at-home orders have been issued if ICU capacity drops below 15%.
However, the Sacramento area’s stay-at-home order was lifted last week while the local ICU capacity remained at 10%, causing confusion among Californians.
Daily Mail reports, “Suddenly, outdoor dining and worship services were allowed again, hair and nail salons and other businesses could reopen, and retailers could have more shoppers inside. Local officials and businesses were caught off guard. State officials did not describe their reasoning other than to say it was based on a projection for ICU capacity.”
Despite the puzzling decision, Newsom has failed to explain why it was made.
Republican state Assemblyman Kevin Kiley tweeted, “Gov. Newsom is refusing to release the ICU data for his stay-at-home order because it would “confuse” the public, once again throwing in an insult for good measure as he denies our basic rights as citizens.”
San Bernardino County spokesman David Wert said the models being used would benefit local governments.
“If they do exist, the county would find them helpful,” he noted.
Local businesses and even sports coaches are also fed up with the Democrat governor.
Ironically, while the state conceals its COVID tier models, a group of high school football head coaches wrote a letter this week requesting youth sports be exempt from the state’s vague reopening system.
Shattering the idea of shutting down high school football in the name of coronavirus, Serra High School head football coach Patrick Walsh explained, “Only 11 cases of COVID-19 have been traced back to over 1 million workouts over the past month.”
In a survey of about 10% of the football programs in the state, over 1,000 student-athletes are now ineligible thanks to poor grades, while 253 have dropped out altogether.
85 more have joined gangs, 64 were recently incarcerated and 38 became young fathers.
Read the letter below:https://www.scribd.com/embeds/491631540/content
On Tuesday, California’s Wine Country Coalition for Safe Reopening filed a lawsuit Gov. Newsom.
The group of more than 50 wineries and restaurants across Napa and Sonoma counties hope to overturn the state’s ban on in-person dining.
Back in July, Newsom made enemies of the winery community when his order shut down their operations, but his winery stayed open.
According to Kiley, a petition to recall Newsom has reached over 1.2 million of the 1.5 million signatures necessary to reach ballots.
It’s not hard to understand why.