COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless

Though the whole world relies on RT-PCR to “diagnose” Sars-Cov-2 infection, the science is clear: they are not fit for purpose

by Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter, OffGuardian
June 27, 2020

Lockdowns and hygienic measures around the world are based on numbers of cases and mortality rates created by the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests used to identify “positive” patients, whereby “positive” is usually equated with “infected.”

But looking closely at the facts, the conclusion is that these PCR tests are meaningless as a diagnostic tool to determine an alleged infection by a supposedly new virus called SARS-CoV-2.

UNFOUNDED “TEST, TEST, TEST,…” MANTRA

At the media briefing on COVID-19 on March 16, 2020, the WHO Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said:

We have a simple message for all countries: test, test, test.”

The message was spread through headlines around the world, for instance by Reuters and the BBC.

Still on the 3 of May, the moderator of the heute journal — one of the most important news magazines on German television— was passing the mantra of the corona dogma on to his audience with the admonishing words:

“Test, test, test—that is the credo at the moment, and it is the only way to really understand how much the coronavirus is spreading.”

This indicates that the belief in the validity of the PCR tests is so strong that it equals a religion that tolerates virtually no contradiction.

But it is well known that religions are about faith and not about scientific facts. And as Walter Lippmann, the two-time Pulitzer Prize winner and perhaps the most influential journalist of the 20th century said: “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.”

So to start, it is very remarkable that Kary Mullis himself, the inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology, did not think alike. His invention got him the Nobel prize in chemistry in 1993.

Unfortunately, Mullis passed away last year at the age of 74, but there is no doubt that the biochemist regarded the PCR as inappropriate to detect a viral infection.

The reason is that the intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique, being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and not as a diagnostic tool to detect viruses.

How declaring virus pandemics based on PCR tests can end in disaster was described by Gina Kolata in her 2007 New York Times article Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.

LACK OF A VALID GOLD STANDARD

Moreover, it is worth mentioning that the PCR tests used to identify so-called COVID-19 patients presumably infected by what is called SARS-CoV-2 do not have a valid gold standard to compare them with.

This is a fundamental point. Tests need to be evaluated to determine their preciseness — strictly speaking their “sensitivity”[1] and “specificity” — by comparison with a “gold standard,” meaning the most accurate method available.

As an example, for a pregnancy test the gold standard would be the pregnancy itself. But as Australian infectious diseases specialist Sanjaya Senanayake, for example, stated in an ABC TV interview in an answer to the question “How accurate is the [COVID-19] testing?”:

If we had a new test for picking up [the bacterium] golden staph in blood, we’ve already got blood cultures, that’s our gold standard we’ve been using for decades, and we could match this new test against that. But for COVID-19 we don’t have a gold standard test.”

Jessica C. Watson from Bristol University confirms this. In her paper “Interpreting a COVID-19 test result”, published recently in The British Medical Journal, she writes that there is a “lack of such a clear-cut ‘gold-standard’ for COVID-19 testing.”

But instead of classifying the tests as unsuitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection and COVID-19 diagnosis, or instead of pointing out that only a virus, proven through isolation and purification, can be a solid gold standard, Watson claims in all seriousness that, “pragmatically” COVID-19 diagnosis itself, remarkably including PCR testing itself, “may be the best available ‘gold standard’.” But this is not scientifically sound.

Apart from the fact that it is downright absurd to take the PCR test itself as part of the gold standard to evaluate the PCR test, there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, as even people such as Thomas Löscher, former head of the Department of Infection and Tropical Medicine at the University of Munich and member of the Federal Association of German Internists, conceded to us[2].

And if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, COVID-19 diagnosis — contrary to Watson’s statement — cannot be suitable for serving as a valid gold standard.

In addition, “experts” such as Watson overlook the fact that only virus isolation, i.e. an unequivocal virus proof, can be the gold standard.

That is why I asked Watson how COVID-19 diagnosis “may be the best available gold standard,” if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, and also whether the virus itself, that is virus isolation, wouldn’t be the best available/possible gold standard. But she hasn’t answered these questions yet – despite multiple requests. And she has not yet responded to our rapid response post on her article in which we address exactly the same points, either, though she wrote us on June 2nd: “I will try to post a reply later this week when I have a chance.”

NO PROOF FOR THE RNA BEING OF VIRAL ORIGIN

Now the question is: What is required first for virus isolation/proof? We need to know where the RNA for which the PCR tests are calibrated comes from.

As textbooks (e.g., White/Fenner. Medical Virology, 1986, p. 9) as well as leading virus researchers such as Luc Montagnier or Dominic Dwyer state, particle purification — i.e. the separation of an object from everything else that is not that object, as for instance Nobel laureate Marie Curie purified 100 mg of radium chloride in 1898 by extracting it from tons of pitchblende — is an essential pre-requisite for proving the existence of a virus, and thus to prove that the RNA from the particle in question comes from a new virus.

The reason for this is that PCR is extremely sensitive, which means it can detect even the smallest pieces of DNA or RNA — but it cannot determine where these particles came from. That has to be determined beforehand.

And because the PCR tests are calibrated for gene sequences (in this case RNA sequences because SARS-CoV-2 is believed to be a RNA virus), we have to know that these gene snippets are part of the looked-for virus. And to know that, correct isolation and purification of the presumed virus has to be executed.

Hence, we have asked the science teams of the relevant papers which are referred to in the context of SARS-CoV-2 for proof whether the electron-microscopic shots depicted in their in vitro experiments show purified viruses.

But not a single team could answer that question with “yes” — and NB., nobody said purification was not a necessary step. We only got answers like “No, we did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification” (see below).

We asked several study authors “Do your electron micrographs show the purified virus?”, they gave the following responses:

Regarding the mentioned papers it is clear that what is shown in the electron micrographs (EMs) is the end result of the experiment, meaning there is no other result that they could have made EMs from.

That is to say, if the authors of these studies concede that their published EMs do not show purified particles, then they definitely do not possess purified particles claimed to be viral. (In this context, it has to be remarked that some researchers use the term “isolation” in their papers, but the procedures described therein do not represent a proper isolation (purification) process. Consequently, in this context the term “isolation” is misused).

Thus, the authors of four of the principal, early 2020 papers claiming discovery of a new coronavirus concede they had no proof that the origin of the virus genome was viral-like particles or cellular debris, pure or impure, or particles of any kind. In other words, the existence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is based on faith, not fact.

We have also contacted Dr Charles Calisher, who is a seasoned virologist. In 2001, Science published an “impassioned plea…to the younger generation” from several veteran virologists, among them Calisher, saying that:

“[modern virus detection methods like] sleek polymerase chain reaction […] tell little or nothing about how a virus multiplies, which animals carry it, [or] how it makes people sick. [It is] like trying to say whether somebody has bad breath by looking at his fingerprint.”[3]

And that’s why we asked Dr Calisher whether he knows one single paper in which SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated and finally really purified. His answer:

“I know of no such a publication. I have kept an eye out for one.”[4]

This actually means that one cannot conclude that the RNA gene sequences, which the scientists took from the tissue samples prepared in the mentioned in vitro trials and for which the PCR tests are finally being “calibrated,” belong to a specific virus — in this case SARS-CoV-2.

In addition, there is no scientific proof that those RNA sequences are the causative agent of what is called COVID-19.

In order to establish a causal connection, one way or the other, i.e. beyond virus isolation and purification, it would have been absolutely necessary to carry out an experiment that satisfies the four Koch’s postulates. But there is no such experiment, as Amory Devereux and Rosemary Frei recently revealed for OffGuardian.

The necessity to fulfill these postulates regarding SARS-CoV-2 is demonstrated not least by the fact that attempts have been made to fulfill them. But even researchers claiming they have done it, in reality, did not succeed.

One example is a study published in Nature on May 7. This trial, besides other procedures which render the study invalid, did not meet any of the postulates.

For instance, the alleged “infected” laboratory mice did not show any relevant clinical symptoms clearly attributable to pneumonia, which according to the third postulate should actually occur if a dangerous and potentially deadly virus was really at work there. And the slight bristles and weight loss, which were observed temporarily in the animals are negligible, not only because they could have been caused by the procedure itself, but also because the weight went back to normal again.

Also, no animal died except those they killed to perform the autopsies. And let’s not forget: These experiments should have been done before developing a test, which is not the case.

Revealingly, none of the leading German representatives of the official theory about SARS-Cov-2/COVID-19 — the Robert Koch-Institute (RKI), Alexander S. Kekulé (University of Halle), Hartmut Hengel and Ralf Bartenschlager (German Society for Virology), the aforementioned Thomas Löscher, Ulrich Dirnagl (Charité Berlin) or Georg Bornkamm (virologist and professor emeritus at the Helmholtz-Zentrum Munich) — could answer the following question I have sent them:

If the particles that are claimed to be to be SARS-CoV-2 have not been purified, how do you want to be sure that the RNA gene sequences of these particles belong to a specific new virus?

Particularly, if there are studies showing that substances such as antibiotics that are added to the test tubes in the in vitro experiments carried out for virus detection can “stress” the cell culture in a way that new gene sequences are being formed that were not previously detectable — an aspect that Nobel laureate Barbara McClintock already drew attention to in her Nobel Lecture back in 1983.

It should not go unmentioned that we finally got the Charité – the employer of Christian Drosten, Germany’s most influential virologist in respect of COVID-19, advisor to the German government and co-developer of the PCR test which was the first to be “accepted” (not validated!) by the WHO worldwide – to answer questions on the topic.

But we didn’t get answers until June 18, 2020, after months of non-response. In the end, we achieved it only with the help of Berlin lawyer Viviane Fischer.

Regarding our question “Has the Charité convinced itself that appropriate particle purification was carried out?,” the Charité concedes that they didn’t use purified particles.

And although they claim “virologists at the Charité are sure that they are testing for the virus,” in their paper (Corman et al.) they state:

“RNA was extracted from clinical samples with the MagNA Pure 96 system (Roche, Penzberg, Germany) and from cell culture supernatants with the viral RNA mini kit (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany),”

Which means they just assumed the RNA was viral.

Incidentally, the Corman et al. paper, published on January 23, 2020 didn’t even go through a proper peer review process, nor were the procedures outlined therein accompanied by controls — although it is only through these two things that scientific work becomes really solid.

IRRATIONAL TEST RESULTS

It is also certain that we cannot know the false positive rate of the PCR tests without widespread testing of people who certainly do not have the virus, proven by a method which is independent of the test (having a solid gold standard).

Therefore, it is hardly surprising that there are several papers illustrating irrational test results.

For example, already in February the health authority in China’s Guangdong province reported that people have fully recovered from illness blamed on COVID-19, started to test “negative,” and then tested “positive” again.

A month later, a paper published in the Journal of Medical Virology showed that 29 out of 610 patients at a hospital in Wuhan had 3 to 6 test results that flipped between “negative”, “positive” and “dubious”.

A third example is a study from Singapore in which tests were carried out almost daily on 18 patients and the majority went from “positive” to “negative” back to “positive” at least once, and up to five times in one patient.

Even Wang Chen, president of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, conceded in February that the PCR tests are “only 30 to 50 per cent accurate”; while Sin Hang Lee from the Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory sent a letter to the WHO’s coronavirus response team and to Anthony S. Fauci on March 22, 2020, saying that:

“It has been widely reported in the social media that the RT-qPCR [Reverse Transcriptase quantitative PCR] test kits used to detect SARSCoV-2 RNA in human specimens are generating many false positive results and are not sensitive enough to detect some real positive cases.”

In other words, even if we theoretically assume that these PCR tests can really detect a viral infection, the tests would be practically worthless, and would only cause an unfounded scare among the “positive” people tested.

This becomes also evident considering the positive predictive value (PPV).

The PPV indicates the probability that a person with a positive test result is truly “positive” (ie. has the supposed virus), and it depends on two factors: the prevalence of the virus in the general population and the specificity of the test, that is the percentage of people without disease in whom the test is correctly “negative” (a test with a specificity of 95% incorrectly gives a positive result in 5 out of 100 non-infected people).

With the same specificity, the higher the prevalence, the higher the PPV.

In this context, on June 12 2020, the journal Deutsches Ärzteblatt published an article in which the PPV has been calculated with three different prevalence scenarios.

The results must, of course, be viewed very critically, first because it is not possible to calculate the specificity without a solid gold standard, as outlined, and second because the calculations in the article are based on the specificity determined in the study by Jessica Watson, which is potentially worthless, as also mentioned.

But if you abstract from it, assuming that the underlying specificity of 95% is correct and that we know the prevalence, even the mainstream medical journal Deutsches Ärzteblatt reports that the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests may have “a shockingly low” PPV.

In one of the three scenarios, figuring with an assumed prevalence of 3%, the PPV was only 30 percent, which means that 70 percent of the people tested “positive” are not “positive” at all. Yet “they are prescribed quarantine,” as even the Ärzteblatt notes critically.

In a second scenario of the journal’s article, a prevalence of rate of 20 percent is assumed. In this case they generate a PPV of 78 percent, meaning that 22 percent of the “positive” tests are false “positives.”

That would mean: If we take the around 9 million people who are currently considered “positive” worldwide — supposing that the true “positives” really have a viral infection — we would get almost 2 million false “positives.”

All this fits with the fact that the CDC and the FDA, for instance, concede in their files that the so-called “SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests” are not suitable for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis.

In the “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel“ file from March 30, 2020, for example, it says:

“Detection of viral RNA may not indicate the presence of infectious virus or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent for clinical symptoms”

And:

“This test cannot rule out diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.”

And the FDA admits that:

“positive results […] do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease.”

Remarkably, in the instruction manuals of PCR tests we can also read that they are not intended as a diagnostic test, as for instance in those by Altona Diagnostics and Creative Diagnostics[5].

To quote another one, in the product announcement of the LightMix Modular Assays produced by TIB Molbiol — which were developed using the Corman et al. protocol — and distributed by Roche we can read:

“These assays are not intended for use as an aid in the diagnosis of coronavirus infection”

And:

“For research use only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.”

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE THAT THE TESTS CAN MEASURE THE “VIRAL LOAD”?

There is also reason to conclude that the PCR test from Roche and others cannot even detect the targeted genes.

Moreover, in the product descriptions of the RT-qPCR tests for SARS-COV-2 it says they are “qualitative” tests, contrary to the fact that the “q” in “qPCR” stands for “quantitative.” And if these tests are not “quantitative” tests, they don’t show how many viral particles are in the body.

That is crucial because, in order to even begin talking about actual illness in the real world not only in a laboratory, the patient would need to have millions and millions of viral particles actively replicating in their body.

That is to say, the CDC, the WHO, the FDA or the RKI may assert that the tests can measure the so-called “viral load,” i.e. how many viral particles are in the body. “But this has never been proven. That is an enormous scandal,” as the journalist Jon Rappoport points out.

This is not only because the term “viral load” is deception. If you put the question “what is viral load?” at a dinner party, people take it to mean viruses circulating in the bloodstream. They’re surprised to learn it’s actually RNA molecules.

Also, to prove beyond any doubt that the PCR can measure how much a person is “burdened” with a disease-causing virus, the following experiment would have had to be carried out (which has not yet happened):

You take, let’s say, a few hundred or even thousand people and remove tissue samples from them. Make sure the people who take the samples do not perform the test.The testers will never know who the patients are and what condition they’re in. The testers run their PCR on the tissue samples. In each case, they say which virus they found and how much of it they found. Then, for example, in patients 29, 86, 199, 272, and 293 they found a great deal of what they claim is a virus. Now we un-blind those patients. They should all be sick, because they have so much virus replicating in their bodies. But are they really sick — or are they fit as a fiddle?

With the help of the aforementioned lawyer Viviane Fischer, I finally got the Charité to also answer the question of whether the test developed by Corman et al. — the so-called “Drosten PCR test” — is a quantitative test.

But the Charité was not willing to answer this question “yes”. Instead, the Charité wrote:

“If real-time RT-PCR is involved, to the knowledge of the Charité in most cases these are […] limited to qualitative detection.”

Furthermore, the “Drosten PCR test” uses the unspecific E-gene assay as preliminary assay, while the Institut Pasteur uses the same assay as confirmatory assay.

According to Corman et al., the E-gene assay is likely to detect all Asian viruses, while the other assays in both tests are supposed to be more specific for sequences labelled “SARS-CoV-2”.

Besides the questionable purpose of having either a preliminary or a confirmatory test that is likely to detect all Asian viruses, at the beginning of April the WHO changed the algorithm, recommending that from then on a test can be regarded as “positive” even if just the E-gene assay (which is likely to detect all Asian viruses!) gives a “positive” result.

This means that a confirmed unspecific test result is officially sold as specific.

That change of algorithm increased the “case” numbers. Tests using the E-gene assay are produced for example by Roche, TIB Molbiol and R-Biopharm.

HIGH CQ VALUES MAKE THE TEST RESULTS EVEN MORE MEANINGLESS

Another essential problem is that many PCR tests have a “cycle quantification” (Cq) value of over 35, and some, including the “Drosten PCR test”, even have a Cq of 45.

The Cq value specifies how many cycles of DNA replication are required to detect a real signal from biological samples.

“Cq values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,” as it says in the MIQE guidelines.

MIQE stands for “Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments”, a set of guidelines that describe the minimum information necessary for evaluating publications on Real-Time PCR, also called quantitative PCR, or qPCR.

The inventor himself, Kary Mullis, agreed, when he stated:

“If you have to go more than 40 cycles to amplify a single-copy gene, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.”

The MIQE guidelines have been developed under the aegis of Stephen A. Bustin, Professor of Molecular Medicine, a world-renowned expert on quantitative PCR and author of the book A-Z of Quantitative PCR which has been called “the bible of qPCR.”

In a recent podcast interview Bustin points out that “the use of such arbitrary Cq cut-offs is not ideal, because they may be either too low (eliminating valid results) or too high (increasing false “positive” results).”



And, according to him, a Cq in the 20s to 30s should be aimed at and there is concern regarding the reliability of the results for any Cq over 35.

If the Cq value gets too high, it becomes difficult to distinguish real signal from background, for example due to reactions of primers and fluorescent probes, and hence there is a higher probability of false positives.

Moreover, among other factors that can alter the result, before starting with the actual PCR, in case you are looking for presumed RNA viruses such as SARS-CoV-2, the RNA must be converted to complementary DNA (cDNA) with the enzyme Reverse Transcriptase—hence the “RT” at the beginning of “PCR” or “qPCR.”

But this transformation process is “widely recognized as inefficient and variable,” as Jessica Schwaber from the Centre for Commercialization of Regenerative Medicine in Toronto and two research colleagues pointed out in a 2019 paper.

Stephen A. Bustin acknowledges problems with PCR in a comparable way.

For example, he pointed to the problem that in the course of the conversion process (RNA to cDNA) the amount of DNA obtained with the same RNA base material can vary widely, even by a factor of 10 (see above interview).

Considering that the DNA sequences get doubled at every cycle, even a slight variation becomes magnified and can thus alter the result, annihilating the test’s reliable informative value.

So how can it be that those who claim the PCR tests are highly meaningful for so-called COVID-19 diagnosis blind out the fundamental inadequacies of these tests—even if they are confronted with questions regarding their validity?

Certainly, the apologists of the novel coronavirus hypothesis should have dealt with these questions before throwing the tests on the market and putting basically the whole world under lockdown, not least because these are questions that come to mind immediately for anyone with even a spark of scientific understanding.

Thus, the thought inevitably emerges that financial and political interests play a decisive role for this ignorance about scientific obligations. NB, the WHO, for example has financial ties with drug companies, as the British Medical Journal showed in 2010.

And experts criticize “that the notorious corruption and conflicts of interest at WHO have continued, even grown“ since then. The CDC as well, to take another big player, is obviously no better off.

Finally, the reasons and possible motives remain speculative, and many involved surely act in good faith; but the science is clear: The numbers generated by these RT-PCR tests do not in the least justify frightening people who have been tested “positive” and imposing lockdown measures that plunge countless people into poverty and despair or even drive them to suicide.

And a “positive” result may have serious consequences for the patients as well, because then all non-viral factors are excluded from the diagnosis and the patients are treated with highly toxic drugs and invasive intubations. Especially for elderly people and patients with pre-existing conditions such a treatment can be fatal, as we have outlined in the article “Fatal Therapie.”

Without doubt eventual excess mortality rates are caused by the therapy and by the lockdown measures, while the “COVID-19” death statistics comprise also patients who died of a variety of diseases, redefined as COVID-19 only because of a “positive” test result whose value could not be more doubtful.

Torsten Engelbrecht is an award-winning journalist and author from Hamburg, Germany. In 2006 he co-authored Virus-Mania with Dr Klaus Kohnlein, and in 2009 he won the German Alternate Media Award. He has also written for Rubikon, Süddeutsche Zeitung, Financial Times Deutschland and many others.

Konstantin Demeter is a freelance photographer and an independent researcher. Together with the journalist Torsten Engelbrecht he has published articles on the “COVID-19” crisis in the online magazine Rubikon, as well as contributions on the monetary system, geopolitics, and the media in Swiss Italian newspapers.

Dr. Tom Cowan: Challenging the COVID-19 Narrative — A Call for Debate About the Myth of Contagious Disease

The Book Born of the Biggest Intellectual Challenge of My Life

compiled works by Dr. Thomas Cowan, drtomcowan.com

Excerpt from Dr. Tom Cowan’s August 12, 2020 newsletter:

We are living in an unprecedented and perilous time in history. Never before that I know of has the full fury and power of “science”, “medicine” and technology been unleashed to control the lives of so many people.

As many of you know, I have somewhat reluctantly been thrust into a role of examining the facts behind the “science” and “medicine” surrounding the COVID-19 crisis. This examination has been the intellectual challenge of my life.

Although I don’t pretend I have all the answers or the full truth, I do believe I have something important to contribute.

It is in that spirit of contribution that some months ago my dear friend and colleague Sally Fallon Morell and I decided to write a book detailing the history of the real science of contagious disease, including COVID-19. It will be published September 15.

What we found might be shocking and even hard to fathom for many, but I can assure you that our findings are based on meticulous research, not the dogma of germ theory. 

We want the information in this book to become part of an open, honest, public debate, an integral part of the serious and scientific dialogue.

To that end, we are asking everyone we know to purchase a copy of our book, The Contagion Myth.

Read it yourself, read it again, send me your feedback, comments and questions. Give a copy to your friends, family members, health-care providers and government officials.

I will continue to speak out, but I need your help.

We are at a turning point in history. Like the mythical Phoenix, we can rise up and create a more beautiful world, one based in trust, compassion, mutual aid and a profound connection to the needs of all life.

But, this more beautiful future will be born only from an intentional and collective effort to see and think clearly and to act with confidence and courage.

Join me, please.

Dr. Thomas Cowan, MD 3/12/2020 at the Health And Human Rights Summit in Tucson, AZ

Video also available at Lbry

[**September 26, 2020 Update: The Contagion Myth has been banned on Amazon. It is available at Barnes & Noble, Books-a-Million & Target]

The official explanation for today’s COVID-19 pandemic is a “dangerous, infectious virus.”

This is the rationale for isolating a large portion of the world’s population in their homes so as to curb its spread.  From face masks to social distancing, from antivirals to vaccines, these measures are predicated on the assumption that tiny viruses can cause serious illness and that such illness is transmissible person-to-person.

It was Louis Pasteur who convinced a skeptical medical community that contagious germs cause disease; his “germ theory” now serves as the official explanation for most illness. However, in his private diaries he states unequivocally that in his entire career he was not once able to transfer disease with a pure culture of bacteria (he obviously wasn’t able to purify viruses at that time). He admitted that the whole effort to prove contagion was a failure, leading to his famous death bed confession that “the germ is nothing, the terrain is everything.”

While the incidence and death statistics for COVID-19 may not be reliable, there is no question that many people have taken sick with a strange new disease—with odd symptoms like gasping for air and “fizzing” feelings—and hundreds of thousands have died. Many suspect that the cause is not viral but a kind of pollution unique to the modern age—electromagnetic pollution.

Today we are surrounded by a jangle of overlapping and jarring frequencies—from power lines to the fridge to the cell phone. It started with the telegraph and progressed to worldwide electricity, then radar, then satellites that disrupt the ionosphere, then ubiquitous Wi-Fi. The most recent addition to this disturbing racket is fifth generation wireless—5G.

In The Contagion Myth: Why Viruses (including Coronavirus) are Not the Cause of Disease, bestselling authors Thomas S. Cowan, MD, and Sally Fallon Morell tackle the true causes of COVID-19.

On September 26, 2019, 5G wireless was turned on in Wuhan, China (and officially launched November 1) with a grid of about ten thousand antennas—more antennas than exist in the whole United States, all concentrated in one city. A spike in cases occurred on February 13, the same week that Wuhan turned on its 5G network for monitoring traffic. Illness has subsequently followed 5G installation in all the major cities in America.

Since the dawn of the human race, medicine men and physicians have wondered about the cause of disease, especially what we call “contagions,” numerous people ill with similar symptoms, all at the same time. Does humankind suffer these outbreaks at the hands of an angry god or evil spirit? A disturbance in the atmosphere, a miasma? Do we catch the illness from others or from some outside influence?

As the restriction of our freedoms continues, more and more people are wondering whether this is true. Could a packet of RNA fragments, which cannot even be defined as a living organism, cause such havoc? Perhaps something else is involved—something that has upset the balance of nature and made us more susceptible to disease? Perhaps there is no “coronavirus” at all; perhaps, as Pasteur said, “the germ is nothing, the terrain is everything.”

Mentioned by Dr. Tom Cowan in the video above:

Electricity has shaped the modern world. But how has it affected our health and environment?

Over the last 220 years, society has evolved a universal belief that electricity is ‘safe’ for humanity and the planet. Scientist and journalist Arthur Firstenberg disrupts this conviction by telling the story of electricity in a way it has never been told before―from an environmental point of view―by detailing the effects that this fundamental societal building block has had on our health and our planet.

In The Invisible Rainbow, Firstenberg traces the history of electricity from the early eighteenth century to the present, making a compelling case that many environmental problems, as well as the major diseases of industrialized civilization―heart disease, diabetes, and cancer―are related to electrical pollution.

[TCTL editor’s note: For understanding the history of medical deceit, see Hippocratic Hypocrisy: A Tale of Two Snakes by Dr. Andrew Kaufman]

Luciferase Chain Reaction to ID2020

by Rosanne Lindsay, ND, Nature of Healing
July 22, 2020

Put down the mask. The mask is a tool of conditioning, a temporary distraction from the new technology.

Biometric bioluminescence.

Bioluminescence is a “cold light” that derives from a chemical reaction within a living organism. Cold light means less than 20% of the light generates thermal radiation, or heat. Most bioluminescent organisms are found in the ocean; fish, bacteria, and jellies. Some bioluminescent organisms, including fireflies and fungi, are found on land. There are almost no bioluminescent organisms native to freshwater habitats.

Until now.

Luciferase Chain Reaction to ID2020

Scientists say humans can utilize bioluminescence through a chemical enzyme called Luciferase. Enzymes catalyze biochemical chain reactions in the body to make things happen. The root word lucifer – means lightbringer. It also happens to be the name of the Vatican’s binocular telescope, LUCIFER, atop Mt. Graham in southeastern Arizona, as well as the name of an infamous fallen angel.

Researchers at MIT created a microneedle platform using fluorescent microparticles called quantum dots (QD), which can deliver vaccines and at the same time invisibly encode vaccination history directly in the skin. Bill Gates calls it the Human Implantable Quantum Dot Microneedle Vaccination Delivery System.

The researchers designed their dye to be delivered by a microneedle patch rather than using a traditional syringe and needle. Such patches are now being developed to deliver vaccines for measles, rubella, and other diseases. The QD are composed of nanocrystals, which also emit near-infrared (NIR) light that can be detected with a specially equipped smartphone using an app. The dots are about 4 nm in diameter, and are encapsulated in biocompatible microparticles that form spheres about 20 µm in diameter. This encapsulation allows the dye to remain in place, under the skin, after being injected.

Forget the HIPAA Privacy rules. The MIT team set out to devise a method for recording vaccination information in a way that doesn’t require a centralized database or other infrastructure, rather it is an “on-patient,” decentralized medical record. No mention of adding or subtracting information, or hacking was disclosed. The team wrote:

Because these phones offer on-board processing power, camera applications, and inexpensive consumer-grade camera modules, they chose to adapt an existing smartphone to enable NIR imaging rather than build a completely new imaging system.

This experiment was conducted in rats in the December 2019 journal Science Translational Medicine which concluded:

intradermal QDs can be used to reliably encode information and can be delivered with a vaccine, which may be particularly valuable in the developing world and open up new avenues for decentralized data storage and biosensing.

Biosensing is a new drop sensing method for faster testing of Covid-19, published June of 2020 in ACS Nano.

Sound Supernatural?

Biometric ID2020 & Cryptos

COVID19 seems to be an acronym for Coronavirus I.D. 2019. This I.D. will be delivered via quantum dot microneedles, as a digital identification mark. Part of this injectable system will include a human implantable device  for buying and selling cryptocurrency. The digital ID will come in the form of something called an Immunity Passport.

In the Information Age, advertisers claim blockchain-enabled digital “immunity passports could help take the strain off increasingly stretched healthcare systems and help reinvigorate shrinking economies.” But what if the Immunity Passport is also your passport to travel by plane, to buy a car, to purchase food, to see a show?

The Plandemic is the vehicle for the government to move from a currency system (a dollar in your pocket) to a crypto system, to allow government to get deeply into your business.

Think Smart Meter in your body.

The Luciferase chain reaction is set up to:  1). inject everyone with a universal shot, 2). create a device for buying and selling currency that’s run on the human body as it’s battery, and 3). attach both those things to a digital identification from ID2020.

Crypto is not a currency. It’s a control system. Your crypto (in a digital system) can arbitrarily be taken away if you don’t behave. That is not your asset. It is a credit at the company store. And they can take it away or change its value. – Catherine Austin Fitts, investment advisor

Unlike the dollar, which is tied to the oil standard as the petrodollar, the crypto will have a human being as its collateral.

Catherine Austin Fitts says:

So you see Bill Gates coming out with ID2020, so every human being has a biometric ID. They’re talking about changing from an oil standard to a human standard. And where I come from, we call that slavery. Where the dollar syndicate wants to go is a Mark of the Beast System, a control system. The end of currencies.”

FUN FACT:  The publication of this Microsoft patent?  #060606

The US government (Navy) is working with a Danish tech firm to come up with an implantable chip that would integrate with a cryptocurrency called Ripple. The technology being rolled out over the next decade, from life extension technology to new energy systems, to building out space, can create incredible wealth, for some. But there is also a reason to believe in the dumbing down of an entire global population.

Slavery.

Spiritual war.

Biowarfare.

The Global Superbrain

The Covid19 solution being called a “vaccine’ is the Human Implantable Quantum Dot Microneedle Vaccination. It is not a vaccine.  It is an implantation to become a part of the Cloud.

According to a research published in the journal Frontiers in Neuroscience, exponential progress in nanotechnology, nanomedicine, artificial intelligence (AI), and computation will lead this century to the development of a “Human Brain/Cloud Interface” (B/CI).

Being connected to the Cloud would mean neural nanorobots would provide direct, real-time monitoring and control of signals to and from brain cells to allow Matrix-style downloading of information.

These devices would navigate the human vasculature, cross the blood-brain barrier, and precisely autoposition themselves among, or even within brain cells. They would then wirelessly transmit encoded information to and from a cloud-based supercomputer network for real-time brain-state monitoring and data extraction. With the advance of neuralnanorobotics, we envisage the future creation of ‘superbrains’ that can harness the thoughts and thinking the power of any number of humans and machines in real time,” – Robert Freitas, senior author of the research, University of California, Berkeley and Institute for Molecular Manufacturing in the US.

“Crytocurrency is not a currency, it’s a crypt.” – Catherine Austin Fitts

Luciferace is not only a ‘near infrared bioluminescence enzyme’, it is a chain reaction to catalyze an ID tracking system.

Put down the mask.

Know what are are consenting to.

Know what you are connecting to.

Know you always have a choice.

Rosanne Lindsay is a Naturopath, writer, earth keeper, health freedom advocate and author of the books The Nature of Healing, Heal the Body, Heal the Planet and  Free Your Voice, Heal Your Thyroid, Reverse Thyroid Disease Naturally.

Rosanne Lindsay is available for consultation through Turtle Island Network.  Subscribe to her blog at natureofhealing.org.

Dr. Stefan Lanka 2020 Article Busts the Virus Misconception

by Makia Freeman, The Freedom Articles
July 21, 2020

The virus misconception is at the heart of Operation Coronavirus, because without the concept of germ theory and without the horror story of the killer virus, most people would not buy the NWO-directed official narrative of COVID propaganda.

In a previous article on the nature of the virus, I have discussed the heroic efforts of German virologist Dr. Stefan Lanka, who won a landmark case in 2017 which went all the way to the German Supreme Court. Lanka proved in the highest court of the land that measles was not caused by a virus, and that there was in fact no such thing as a measles virus.

Lanka is still busy working, and he wrote this article earlier this year (translated into English here) entitled “The Misconception called Virus” in which he explains the history of how mainstream science went horribly wrong with its conclusions (really assumptions) to demonize the humble virus and to falsely ascribe pathogenicity to it when there is none.

The Virus Misconception: The Killer Virus Story vs. Deficiency and Toxicity

Lanka’s main point throughout the article is this: when modern scientists are working with diseased tissue, they think the presence of a virus is causing the disease, instead of realizing that the tissue in question has been cut off and isolated from its host, then doused with antibiotics, and that this separation and poison make it diseased and kill it, rather than any virus. Lanka writes:

“All claims about viruses as pathogens are wrong and are based on easily recognizable, understandable and verifiable misinterpretations … All scientists who think they are working with viruses in laboratories are actually working with typical particles of specific dying tissues or cells which were prepared in a special way. They believe that those tissues and cells are dying because they were infected by a virus. In reality, the infected cells and tissues were dying because they were starved and poisoned as a consequence of the experiments in the lab.”

” … the death of the tissue and cells takes place in the exact same manner when no “infected” genetic material is added at all. The virologists have apparently not noticed this fact. According to … scientific logic and the rules of scientific conduct, control experiments should have been carried out. In order to confirm the newly discovered method of so-called “virus propagation” … scientists would have had to perform additional experiments, called negative control experiments, in which they would add sterile substances … to the cell culture.”

“These control experiment have never been carried out by the official “science” to this day. During the measles virus trial, I commissioned an independent laboratory to perform this control experiment and the result was that the tissues and cells die due to the laboratory conditions in the exact same way as when they come into contact with alleged “infected” material.”

In other words, the studied cells and tissues die with or without the presence of a virus in exactly the same way; therefore, the virus cannot be the cause of the morbidity and mortality. Interestingly, this exactly what many health experts have stated, namely that there are only 2 causes of disease: deficiency and toxicity.

For instance, Charlotte Gerson (who took over running the Gerson Clinic from her brilliant father Max) said this about disease and cancer. Removing cells or tissue from the body and thus cutting them off from their energy/nutrient supply will quickly lead to deficiency; injecting antibiotics into the mixture is toxicity; thus there is no solid proof a virus is causing disease when there is already deficiency and toxicity present. This is the key point of the virus misconception.

How the Virus Misconception Has Roots in 1858 and Became Entrenched in 1954

Lanka traces back the development of the virus misconception to 1858 and to the ‘cell theory’ of Rudolf Virchow, who proposed a theory that all disease and all life originates from a single cell, which is somehow hijacked by a virus that weakens it and propagates itself. Lanka points out 2 problems with this:

“The cell theory was only originated because Rudolf Virchow suppressed crucial discoveries about tissues. The findings and insights with respect to the structure, function and central importance of tissues in the creation of life, which were already known in 1858, comprehensively refute the cell theory and the subsequently derived genetic, immune and cancer therapies.

“The infection theories were only established as a global dogma through the concrete policies and eugenics of the Third Reich. Before 1933, scientists dared to contradict this theory; after 1933, these critical scientists were silenced.”

By “infection theories” Lanka means germ theory, the prevailing theory of modern Western Medicine. Lanka then describes how a paradigm shift in the perception of the virus occurred during 1952-1954:

“Until 1952, a virus was defined as a pathogenic poison in the form of a protein, which as an enzyme caused damage in an unknown manner, which could cause disease and be transmissible. After 1953, the year in which the alleged DNA in the form [of] an alleged alpha helix was publicly announced, the idea of a virus became a malignant genotype wrapped in proteins. Thus, a paradigm shift took place between 1952 and 1954 regarding the image of a virus.”

He talks about how theory become dogma in the Church of Mainstream Science (aka Scientism):

“This completely unscientific approach originated in June 1954, when an unscientific and refutable speculative article was published, according to which the death of tissue in a test tube was considered … possible evidence for the presence of a virus. Six months later, on 10 December 1954, the main author of this opinion was awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine for another equally speculative theory. The speculation from June 1954 was then raised to a scientific fact and became a dogma which has never been challenged to this date. Since June 1954, the death of tissue and cells in a test tube has been regarded as proof for the existence of a virus.”

Returning to Koch’s Postulates: No Isolation, No Purification

As I covered in COVID-19 Umbrella Term to Operate a Fake Pandemic: Not 1 Disease, Not 1 Cause, today’s mainstream scientists are skipping the all important 2nd step of Koch’s postulates: the isolation and purification of the virus. This isn’t something you can just gloss over or forget to do, like accidentally forgetting your umbrella on a rainy day and getting a bit wet. This is the absolutely quintessential part of determining if there is a new virus and if it causing causing disease. It’s the sine qua non. If you can’t isolate it, you have FAILED to prove anything, because the budding offshoot you think is an invading virus could easily be a exosome or particle being produced by the body itself. This is why all the COVID propaganda has conveniently glossed over the fact that there are no electron microscope images of SARS-CoV-2, since the electron microscope is an extremely important tool in the 1st step of Koch’s postulates, the identification. Lanka continues:

“… a virus has never been isolated according to the meaning of the word isolation, and it has never been photographed and biochemically characterised as a whole unique structure. The electron micrographs of the alleged viruses show in reality quite normal cellular particles from dying tissues and cells, and most photos show only a computer model (CGI – computer generated images).”

So What Does All This Have to Do with COVID?

So to bring this back to the current plandemic, all of the same assumptions and lack of evidence are in play when it comes to COVID:

“Individual molecules are extracted from the particles of dead tissue and cells, they are misinterpreted to be parts of a virus and are theoretically put together into a virus model … The consensus-finding process for the measles “virus”, in which the participants debated in order to determine what belonged to the virus and what didn’t, lasted for decades. With the apparently new China Coronavirus 2019 (2019-nCoV, meanwhile renamed), this consensus-finding process lasts only a few mouse clicks.

With only a few mouse clicks as well, a program can create any virus by putting together molecules of short parts of nucleic acids from dead tissue and cells with a determined biochemical composition, thus arranging them as desired into a longer genotype which is then declared to be the complete genome of the new virus … in this process of theoretical construction of the “viral DNA”, those sequences that don’t fit are “smoothed out” and missing ones are added. Thus, a DNA sequence is invented which doesn’t exist in reality and which was never discovered and scientifically demonstrated as a whole.”

So basically, mainstream Chinese scientists who work under the same theory as mainstream Western scientists invented a new theoretical model for SARS-CoV-2, and proclaimed a novel coronavirus, but all without the electron micrographs to actually back it up.

This entire process has extremely interesting parallels with the theme of space fakery, whether it’s propagated by NASA or the space agencies of other nations. We don’t have verifiable images of viruses; we don’t have verifiable whole (non-composite) images of the Earth, or many other space bodies such as moons, planets, etc. Instead we are fed CGIs and told not to question authority. Is this science or is this faith-based Scientism? To what extent are we being manipulated when we are denied real and true photographs of the world around us, both on a micro and macro level? I would argue to a massive extent.

Lanka on the Danger of Vaccines

Our lack of understanding about viruses, disease, the immune system, terrain theory and much more is exploited by Big Pharma to push dangerous medical interventions such as vaccines. Here’s what Lanka has to say about the danger and ineffectiveness of vaccines:

“[A] concoction consisting of dying tissue and cells from monkeys, bovine foetuses and toxic antibiotics … is being used as a “live” vaccine, because it is supposed to consist of so-called “attenuated” viruses … [this] toxic mixture full of foreign proteins, foreign nucleic acids (DNA/RNA), cytotoxic antibiotics, microbes and spores of all types is being labelled a “live vaccine.” It is implanted in children through vaccination mainly into the muscles, in a quantity which if it were injected into the veins would immediately lead to certain death … The verifiable facts demonstrate the danger and negligence of these scientists and politicians, who claim that vaccines are safe, have little or no side-effects, and would protect from a disease. None of these claims is true and scientific, on the contrary: upon precise scientific analysis, one finds that vaccines are useless and the respective literature admits to the lack of any evidence in their favour.”

Final Thoughts

The virus misconception has been with us a long time. As insane as the current fear-based, mask-wearing, social-distancing submission is, there are those people who are using Operation Coronavirus as a chance to wake up. While some go deeper into unconsciousness and look to new protective products (“upgrade your mask for our patent-pending powered air-filtration protective shield (N95)”), others have seen the coronavirus coup for what it truly is: a chance to roll out all kinds of control architecture while people sleepwalk in fear. It is always a good idea to question the base assumptions of any governmental pronouncement, because almost always, it can open up a portal that leads to the truth.

Sources:

*https://thefreedomarticles.com/deep-down-virus-rabbit-hole-question-everything/

*https://davidicke.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Paper-Virus-Lanka-002.pdf

*https://thefreedomarticles.com/covid-19-umbrella-term-fake-pandemic-not-1-disease-cause/

*https://thefreedomarticles.com/toxic-vaccine-adjuvants-the-top-10/

They Want to Kill Six Billion of Us – Here’s How They’ll Do It

by Vernon Coleman
July 17, 2020

https://youtu.be/K66EDRFvEUU

International best-selling author, Dr Vernon Coleman MB ChB DSc FRSA, explains that the people planning to rule the world want to reduce the global population to 500 million. And he then explains how’ll they’ll kill the six billion of us they want to eliminate. For more unbiased information, please visit http://www.vernoncoleman.com

The transcripts of the videos that YouTube banned are also on the website.

In the event that the original video is censored and deleted by the source social media platform,
link here to a mirrored copy on TCTL Bitchute & Lbry channels.

TRANSCRIPT:

There are people around who believe that if we all wear masks, obey the social distancing laws and become true slaves to the system, then everything will be back to normal by Christmas at the latest.

In the last 24 hours I have read, and been dismayed by, three articles by writers who believe that if we all behave properly, and do exactly as we are told to do, the coronavirus will slink off and all will be well with everyone back at work, the economy beginning to boom and the world well on its way to a recovery. There are even some who were shocked at the suggestion that taxes will rise dramatically in the next 12 months or so. Where do these people think the money came from – the money that an ex Goldman Sachs, currently the UK Chancellor, was throwing around with such gay abandon.

Of course, they add as a rider, we won’t be able to forget about social distancing, and we may have to keep on our masks until the vaccine is ready, but everything will be normal apart from that.

I wonder what these people have inside their skulls. Porridge? Those little white polystyrene balls that are used for packaging? Bubble wrap?

They certainly don’t have brains.

The people now planning to rule the world, a group of billionaires and would-be billionaires who I will, for ease, refer to as the enemy, have decided that there are too many people in the world and that the earth would be more comfortable for them if the total were reduced to around 500,000,000.

Since the current population is around 7 billion that means that at least 6 billion of us are surplus to requirements, unnecessary, not wanted on voyage. Since their ambition has a convincingly eugenic flavour they will presumably want to get rid of the weak and the poor and the elderly and the frail.

So how are they going to do that?

Well, the ignorant, scare mongering climate change nutters have done some of their work for those who want us dead. The brainwashed children and idiots who believe in man-made global warming are helping the enemy enormously. Cutting back on our use of oil and gas will kill hundreds of millions who will die of hunger and cold.

And I have no doubt that the enemy will manage another plandemic.

The abominable Gates and his wife have already said that people will pay attention when the next pandemic arrives. And I thought they both smirked very knowingly when Bill made this prediction.

It wouldn’t be difficult.

They could just say that the coronavirus which caused Covid-19 had mutated. Or they could blame a pig virus or a cuckoo virus or maybe a virus from the Gates family – something unpleasant.

It wouldn’t really need to be something too nasty. After all, a really bad virus might kill off some of the billionaires.

I rather suspect that we are going to have more alleged virus health calamities coming up. If it isn’t the coronavirus in a pre-ordained second wave it will be something else. If they can make up one crisis then they can, and will, make up many more.

All it needs is good marketing, and organisations like the BBC will provide all the myths and fake news that the enemy will need.

The BBC, The Guardian and the Daily Mail could turn tapioca into a deadly threat.

Of course, the plan to reduce the global population is already doing well.

The enemy has got everyone social distancing. And that is known to cause illness and to kill people. The CIA reckon that social distancing is one of the most powerful weapons there is for controlling large numbers of people.

They managed to murder huge numbers in the care homes and they have killed vast numbers of the sick by closing down hospitals for absolutely no good reason.

They put everyone under house arrest – and isolation damages the immune system. Prisoners of War have confirmed that isolation does more damage than physical torture. Stress and anxiety affect the immune system too.

The masks will kill quite a few people too. It’s well known that they reduce blood oxygen levels, and those with respiratory and cardiac disorders will die. It’s true that surgeons wear masks but the circumstances are entirely different. Women’s movement enthusiasts used to burn their bras. Perhaps, we should burn our masks – in an environmentally acceptable way, of course.

Even the sanitising gel they insist we use a dozen times a day will kill some people. (If you haven’t seen it, watch my video on hand sanitisers. Or read the script on this website.)

And then there is the cold in the winter months. They are stopping us using gas and there are going to be electricity outages. Many will freeze to death in the winter months.

But I think their biggest weapon is food.

That’s how they are going to bring the population crashing right down.

Food shortages are coming and the cost of food is going to rise even faster than it has been doing. And it isn’t because of global warming or whatever other lies they tell you – it is, however, a side effect of the coronavirus hoax.

All around the world food is in short supply. The price of the world’s most important staple food – rice – has risen by 70%. Food prices in the US have recently seen a historic jump and are, I believe, destined to stay high and go higher. Countries which have good food production are halting their exports. Vietnam, for example, has stopped exporting because they need their food supplies at home. And you cannot blame them. Some authorities condemn it as nationalism but all countries, all villages, all homes would do much the same.

And it is the managed over-reaction to a virus known to be no more dangerous than the flu that is causing the problem – and that will result in millions of deaths to add to the millions who are going to die as a result of the lockdowns.

The global death rate because of the food shortage is going to be measured in hundreds of millions – and eventually in billions. Africa and Asia are going to see the worst levels of starvation ever seen. I fear that those countries which have some grain will flog it to America – despite massive starvation. Black lives matter protestors, who have been manipulated by professionals, would be wise to forget about Cecil Rhodes’s statue, and where they’d like to see it placed, and concentrate instead on helping Africans who are going to be subjected to the worst genocide in history.

So, how is the coronavirus scandal responsible for the food shortages that are coming?

That’s easy to explain.

Processing plants and distribution centres all around the world have been deliberately severely disrupted by the massive over-reaction to this fairly ordinary virus.

Around the world more and more testing is being done. And although the tests are about as trustworthy as Gates, Clinton and Soros – your local purveyors of fear and death – they are treated with undeserved reverence. Curiously, it seems to me that farms and food distribution centres are being tested more than, say, civil servants or tax officials. This is odd because the chances of the virus being carried on food are roughly the same as the chance that the moon is made of cheese.

And so if one worker on a farm or in a warehouse falls ill with flu like symptoms then the authorities will close down that farm or the warehouse. Delivery systems have been massively affected as drivers are sent home for two weeks and all their colleagues sent home for two weeks too.

As a result, huge crops of vegetables and fruit are being ploughed into the ground. Millions of animals are being slaughtered and then buried or burnt because the supply chains have been shut down. America, almost unbelievably, has been importing beef because of the shortages.

The world lockdown, and the mass house arrests that were engineered to keep us all subservient, mean that thousands of farmers cannot get their crops picked. Fruit in particular is likely to rot in the fields, and tankers full of milk are being poured away. Controls on transport have meant that it has been difficult to move food from where there is a glut to where there is a dearth. It would have been easy for governments to insist that furloughed workers should help pick the crops but they didn’t do so. And why would they? The plan is to eradicate the poor and the weak.

And the unsurprising consequence of all this is that there are going to be massive shortages of fruit and vegetables, and prices are going to rocket.

In the UK, the most toxic of the Remainers, the fascist EU loving lunatics, bigoted, soaked in their own prejudices and consumed by ignorance, will blame Brexit for the shortages. But then, if they develop a bald spot or lose their keys they blame Brexit.

In the US, the media will doubtless blame Trump for the food shortages.

Sadly for them all, the shortages will be global.

All around the world there will be a shortage of almost all foods.

This isn’t the sort of fear-porn favoured by irresponsible main stream media giants such as the EU and Gates supported BBC.

This is real.

Other factors are going to ensure that the shortage just gets worse.

If and when the economy is allowed to stutter into action again, the price of oil will doubtless eventually rise because the existing supplies are diminishing rapidly and most oil companies have pretty well given up exploration.

The rising price of oil will mean that farming and transportation costs will rise and that will push up the price of food still further.

I tell you this not to scare you but because when you know something is happening you can do something about it.

You may think it is worthwhile building up your stocks of long-dated food staples such as rice and pasta. Dried and tinned foods which have long dates are good. As you eat your stocks, replace them with more.

Governments tell us not to store stuff but the military don’t buy bullets the day they need them, do they? If you have a garden and can grow your favourite vegetables or fruit that’s probably a good idea but watch that no one climbs over your fence and steals them. I don’t recommend having an allotment – the chances of you being able to harvest your own crops are too remote because they will be stolen. It might also be a good idea to stock up on vitamin and mineral supplements if you usually take them.

I’ve always been a bit of contrarian, though I don’t suppose anyone would notice, and I’m convinced that the time to panic buy is when there is no panic.

I hope the advice here will help you and your family to have a better chance to be strong and healthy. Countries look after themselves and we all need to do so. It isn’t selfish. It’s survival. If you buy food you will eat anyway, and you store it carefully, what have you got to lose? If I’m wrong and there is no enemy and there are no food shortages then you can always eat what you’re stored.

If and when your government finally warns you of this problem it will be far too late.

Remember: you should stockpile food now – don’t wait for the panic

Copyright Vernon Coleman July 2020

Vernon Coleman’s book Coming Apocalypse explains how the hoax developed and what our future will be. Coming Apocalypse is available on Amazon as a paperback and an eBook.

Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary of the Science

by Colleen Huber, NMD, PrimaryDoctor.org
July 6, 2020

Download PDF

At this writing, there is a recent surge in widespread use by the public of facemasks when in public places, including for extended periods of time, in the United States as well as in other countries.   The public has been instructed by media and their governments that one’s use of masks, even if not sick, may prevent others from being infected with SARS-CoV-2, the infectious agent of COVID-19.

A review of the peer-reviewed medical literature examines impacts on human health, both immunological, as well as physiological.  The purpose of this paper is to examine data regarding the effectiveness of facemasks, as well as safety data.  The reason that both are examined in one paper is that for the general public as a whole, as well as for every individual, a risk-benefit analysis is necessary to guide decisions on if and when to wear a mask.

Are masks effective at preventing transmission of respiratory pathogens?

In this meta-analysis, face masks were found to have no detectable effect against transmission of viral infections. (1)  It found: “Compared to no masks, there was no reduction of influenza-like illness cases or influenza for masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”

This 2020 meta-analysis found that evidence from randomized controlled trials of face masks did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility. (2)

Another recent review found that masks had no effect specifically against Covid-19, although facemask use seemed linked to, in 3 of 31 studies, “very slightly reduced” odds of developing influenza-like illness. (3)

This 2019 study of 2862 participants showed that both N95 respirators and surgical masks “resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory confirmed influenza.” (4)

This 2016 meta-analysis found that both randomized controlled trials and observational studies of N95 respirators and surgical masks used by healthcare workers did not show benefit against transmission of acute respiratory infections.  It was also found that acute respiratory infection transmission “may have occurred via contamination of provided respiratory protective equipment during storage and reuse of masks and respirators throughout the workday.” (5)

A 2011 meta-analysis of 17 studies regarding masks and effect on transmission of influenza found that “none of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.” (6)  However, authors speculated that effectiveness of masks may be linked to early, consistent and correct usage.

Face mask use was likewise found to be not protective against the common cold, compared to controls without face masks among healthcare workers. (7)

Airflow around masks

Masks have been assumed to be effective in obstructing forward travel of viral particles.  Considering those positioned next to or behind a mask wearer, there have been farther transmission of virus-laden fluid particles from masked individuals than from unmasked individuals, by means of “several leakage jets, including intense backward and downwards jets that may present major hazards,” and a “potentially dangerous leakage jet of up to several meters.”  (8) All masks were thought to reduce forward airflow by 90% or more over wearing no mask.  However, Schlieren imaging showed that both surgical masks and cloth masks had farther brow jets (unfiltered upward airflow past eyebrows) than not wearing any mask at all, 182 mm and 203 mm respectively, vs none discernible with no mask.  Backward unfiltered airflow was found to be strong with all masks compared to not masking.

For both N95 and surgical masks, it was found that expelled particles from 0.03 to 1 micron were deflected around the edges of each mask, and that there was measurable penetration of particles through the filter of each mask. (9)

Penetration through masks

A study of 44 mask brands found mean 35.6% penetration (+ 34.7%).  Most medical masks had over 20% penetration, while “general masks and handkerchiefs had no protective function in terms of the aerosol filtration efficiency.”  The study found that “Medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs were found to provide little protection against respiratory aerosols.” (10)

It may be helpful to remember that an aerosol is a colloidal suspension of liquid or solid particles in a gas.  In respiration, the relevant aerosol is the suspension of bacterial or viral particles in inhaled or exhaled breath.

In another study, penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. (11)

N95 respirators

Honeywell is a manufacturer of N95 respirators.  These are made with a 0.3 micron filter. (12)  N95 respirators are so named, because 95% of particles having a diameter of 0.3 microns are filtered by the mask forward of the wearer, by use of an electrostatic mechanism. Coronaviruses are approximately 0.125 microns in diameter.

This meta-analysis found that N95 respirators did not provide superior protection to facemasks against viral infections or influenza-like infections. (13)  This study did find superior protection by N95 respirators when they were fit-tested compared to surgical masks. (14)

This study found that 624 out of 714 people wearing N95 masks left visible gaps when putting on their own masks. (15)

Surgical masks

This study found that surgical masks offered no protection at all against influenza. (16) Another study found that surgical masks had about 85% penetration ratio of aerosolized inactivated influenza particles and about 90% of Staphylococcus aureus bacteria, although S aureus particles were about 6x the diameter of influenza particles. (17)

Use of masks in surgery were found to slightly increase incidence of infection over not masking in a study of 3,088 surgeries. (18)  The surgeons’ masks were found to give no protective effect to the patients.

Other studies found no difference in wound infection rates with and without surgical masks. (19) (20)

This study found that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.” (21)

This study found that medical masks have a wide range of filtration efficiency, with most showing a 30% to 50% efficiency. (22)

Specifically, are surgical masks effective in stopping human transmission of coronaviruses?  Both experimental and control groups, masked and unmasked respectively, were found to “not shed detectable virus in respiratory droplets or aerosols.” (23) In that study, they “did not confirm the infectivity of coronavirus” as found in exhaled breath.

A study of aerosol penetration showed that two of the five surgical masks studied had 51% to 89% penetration of polydisperse aerosols.  (24)

In another study, that observed subjects while coughing, “neither surgical nor cotton masks effectively filtered SARS-CoV-2 during coughs by infected patients.”  And more viral particles were found on the outside than on the inside of masks tested. (25)

Cloth masks

Cloth masks were found to have low efficiency for blocking particles of 0.3 microns and smaller.  Aerosol penetration through the various cloth masks examined in this study were between 74 and 90%.  Likewise, the filtration efficiency of fabric materials was 3% to 33% (26)

Healthcare workers wearing cloth masks were found to have 13 times the risk of influenza-like illness than those wearing medical masks. (27)

This 1920 analysis of cloth mask use during the 1918 pandemic examines the failure of masks to impede or stop flu transmission at that time, and concluded that the number of layers of fabric required to prevent pathogen penetration would have required a suffocating number of layers, and could not be used for that reason, as well as the problem of leakage vents around the edges of cloth masks. (28)

Masks against Covid-19

The New England Journal of Medicine editorial on the topic of mask use versus Covid-19 assesses the matter as follows:

“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection.  Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 20 minutes).  The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal.  In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.” (29)

Are masks safe?

During walking or other exercise

Surgical mask wearers had significantly increased dyspnea after a 6-minute walk than non-mask wearers. (30)

Researchers are concerned about possible burden of facemasks during physical activity on pulmonary, circulatory and immune systems, due to oxygen reduction and air trapping reducing substantial carbon dioxide exchange.  As a result of hypercapnia, there may be cardiac overload, renal overload, and a shift to metabolic acidosis. (31)

Risks of N95 respirators

Pregnant healthcare workers were found to have a loss in volume of oxygen consumption by 13.8% compared to controls when wearing N95 respirators.  17.7% less carbon dioxide was exhaled. (32)  Patients with end-stage renal disease were studied during use of N95 respirators.  Their partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) decreased significantly compared to controls and increased respiratory adverse effects. (33)   19% of the patients developed various degrees of hypoxemia while wearing the masks.

Healthcare workers’ N95 respirators were measured by personal bioaerosol samplers to harbor influenza virus. (34)  And 25% of healthcare workers’ facepiece respirators were found to contain influenza in an emergency department during the 2015 flu season. (35)

Risks of surgical masks

Healthcare workers’ surgical masks also were measured by personal bioaerosol samplers to harbor for influenza virus. (36)

Various respiratory pathogens were found on the outer surface of used medical masks, which could result in self-contamination.  The risk was found to be higher with longer duration of mask use. (37)

Surgical masks were also found to be a repository of bacterial contamination.  The source of the bacteria was determined to be the body surface of the surgeons, rather than the operating room environment. (38)  Given that surgeons are gowned from head to foot for surgery, this finding should be especially concerning for laypeople who wear masks.  Without the protective garb of surgeons, laypeople generally have even more exposed body surface to serve as a source for bacteria to collect on their masks.

Risks of cloth masks

Healthcare workers wearing cloth masks had significantly higher rates of influenza-like illness after four weeks of continuous on-the-job use, when compared to controls. (39)

The increased rate of infection in mask-wearers may be due to a weakening of immune function during mask use.  Surgeons have been found to have lower oxygen saturation after surgeries even as short as 30 minutes. (40)  Low oxygen induces hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha (HIF-1). (41)  This in turn down-regulates CD4+ T-cells.  CD4+ T-cells, in turn, are necessary for viral immunity. (42)

​Weighing risks versus benefits of mask use

In the summer of 2020 the United States is experiencing a surge of popular mask use, which is frequently promoted by the media, political leaders and celebrities.  Homemade and store-bought cloth masks and surgical masks or N95 masks are being used by the public especially when entering stores and other publicly accessible buildings.  Sometimes bandanas or scarves are used.  The use of face masks, whether cloth, surgical or N95, creates a poor obstacle to aerosolized pathogens as we can see from the meta-analyses and other studies in this paper, allowing both transmission of aerosolized pathogens to others in various directions, as well as self-contamination.

It must also be considered that masks impede the necessary volume of air intake required for adequate oxygen exchange, which results in observed physiological effects that may be undesirable.  Even 6- minute walks, let alone more strenuous activity, resulted in dyspnea.  The volume of unobstructed oxygen in a typical breath is about 100 ml, used for normal physiological processes.  100 ml O2 greatly exceeds the volume of a pathogen required for transmission.

The foregoing data show that masks serve more as instruments of obstruction of normal breathing, rather than as effective barriers to pathogens. Therefore, masks should not be used by the general public, either by adults or children, and their limitations as prophylaxis against pathogens should also be considered in medical settings.

​Find a Naturopathic doctor near you.

1  T Jefferson, M Jones, et al. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 7.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2

​2  J Xiao, E Shiu, et al. Nonpharmaceutical measures for pandemic influenza in non-healthcare settings – personal protective and environmental measures.  Centers for Disease Control. 26(5); 2020 May.

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

​3  J Brainard, N Jones, et al. Facemasks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID19: A rapid systematic review.  MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 1.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1.full.pdf

​4  L Radonovich M Simberkoff, et al. N95 respirators vs medical masks for preventing influenza among health care personnel: a randomized clinic trial.  JAMA. 2019 Sep 3. 322(9): 824-833.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214

​5  J Smith, C MacDougall. CMAJ. 2016 May 17. 188(8); 567-574.

https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567

​6  F bin-Reza, V Lopez, et al. The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence. 2012 Jul; 6(4): 257-267.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5779801/

​7  J Jacobs, S Ohde, et al.  Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial.  Am J Infect Control. 2009 Jun; 37(5): 417-419.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/

​8  M Viola, B Peterson, et al. Face coverings, aerosol dispersion and mitigation of virus transmission risk.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.10720, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2005/2005.10720.pdf

​9  S Grinshpun, H Haruta, et al. Performance of an N95 filtering facepiece particular respirator and a surgical mask during human breathing: two pathways for particle penetration. J Occup Env Hygiene. 2009; 6(10):593-603.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15459620903120086

​10 H Jung, J Kim, et al. Comparison of filtration efficiency and pressure drop in anti-yellow sand masks, quarantine masks, medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs. Aerosol Air Qual Res. 2013 Jun. 14:991-1002.

https://aaqr.org/articles/aaqr-13-06-oa-0201.pdf

​11  C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers.  BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long

​12  N95 masks explained. https://www.honeywell.com/en-us/newsroom/news/2020/03/n95-masks-explained

​13  V Offeddu, C Yung, et al. Effectiveness of masks and respirators against infections in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.  Clin Inf Dis. 65(11), 2017 Dec 1; 1934-1942.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747

​14  C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x?fbclid=IwAR3kRYVYDKb0aR-su9_me9_vY6a8KVR4HZ17J2A_80f_fXUABRQdhQlc8Wo

​15  M Walker. Study casts doubt on N95 masks for the public. MedPage Today. 2020 May 20.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/86601

​16  C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x?fbclid=IwAR3kRYVYDKb0aR-su9_me9_vY6a8KVR4HZ17J2A_80f_fXUABRQdhQlc8Wo

​17  N Shimasaki, A Okaue, et al. Comparison of the filter efficiency of medical nonwoven fabrics against three different microbe aerosols. Biocontrol Sci.  2018; 23(2). 61-69.

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bio/23/2/23_61/_pdf/-char/en

​18  T Tunevall. Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: A controlled study. World J Surg. 1991 May; 15: 383-387.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01658736

​19  N Orr. Is a mask necessary in the operating theatre? Ann Royal Coll Surg Eng 1981: 63: 390-392.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/pdf/annrcse01509-0009.pdf

​20  N Mitchell, S Hunt. Surgical face masks in modern operating rooms – a costly and unnecessary ritual?  J Hosp Infection. 18(3); 1991 Jul 1. 239-242.

https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/0195-6701(91)90148-2/pdf

​21  C DaZhou, P Sivathondan, et al. Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of facemasks in surgery.  JR Soc Med. 2015 Jun; 108(6): 223-228.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/

​22  L Brosseau, M Sietsema. Commentary: Masks for all for Covid-19 not based on sound data. U Minn Ctr Inf Dis Res Pol. 2020 Apr 1.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

​23  N Leung, D Chu, et al. Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks Nature Research.  2020 Mar 7. 26,676-680 (2020).

https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-16836/v1

​24  S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.

https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744

​25  S Bae, M Kim, et al. Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS-CoV-2: A controlled comparison in 4 patients.  Ann Int Med. 2020 Apr 6.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

​26  S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.

https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744

​27  C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers.  BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long

​28  W Kellogg. An experimental study of the efficacy of gauze face masks. Am J Pub Health. 1920.  34-42.

https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.10.1.34

​29  M Klompas, C Morris, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the Covid-19 era. N Eng J Med. 2020; 382 e63.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

​30  E Person, C Lemercier et al.  Effect of a surgical mask on six minute walking distance.  Rev Mal Respir. 2018 Mar; 35(3):264-268.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29395560/

​31  B Chandrasekaran, S Fernandes.  Exercise with facemask; are we handling a devil’s sword – a physiological hypothesis. Med Hypothese. 2020 Jun 22. 144:110002.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32590322/

​32  P Shuang Ye Tong, A Sugam Kale, et al.  Respiratory consequences of N95-type mask usage in pregnant healthcare workers – A controlled clinical study.  Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2015 Nov 16; 4:48.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26579222/

​33  T Kao, K Huang, et al. The physiological impact of wearing an N95 mask during hemodialysis as a precaution against SARS in patients with end-stage renal disease.  J Formos Med Assoc. 2004 Aug; 103(8):624-628.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15340662/

​34  F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods.  2018 Oct; 260:98-106.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/

​35  A Rule, O Apau, et al. Healthcare personnel exposure in an emergency department during influenza season.  PLoS One. 2018 Aug 31; 13(8): e0203223.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30169507/

​36  F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods.  2018 Oct; 260:98-106.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/

​37  A Chughtai, S Stelzer-Braid, et al.  Contamination by respiratory viruses on our surface of medical masks used by hospital healthcare workers.  BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Jun 3; 19(1): 491.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31159777/

​38  L Zhiqing, C Yongyun, et al. J Orthop Translat. 2018 Jun 27; 14:57-62.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30035033/

​39  C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers.  BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

​40  A Beder, U Buyukkocak, et al. Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery. Neurocirugia. 2008; 19: 121-126.

http://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/neuro/v19n2/3.pdf

​41  D Lukashev, B Klebanov, et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha and its activation-inducible short isoform negatively regulate functions of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. J Immunol. 2006 Oct 15; 177(8) 4962-4965.

https://www.jimmunol.org/content/177/8/4962

​42  A Sant, A McMichael. Revealing the role of CD4+ T-cells in viral immunity.  J Exper Med. 2012 Jun 30; 209(8):1391-1395.

https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/3420330

​© 2020, Colleen Huber, NMD

Special Solari Report: Dr. Sherri Tenpenny on the PERP Act & Injection Fraud

by Catherine Austin Fitts, The Solari Report
June 13, 2020

Connect with the work of Catherine Austin Fitts: The Solari Report – solari.com

Connect with the work of Dr. Sherri Tenpenny: Courses for Mastery – http://courses4mastery.com/

See also: The Injection Fraud — It’s Not a Vaccine by Catherine Austin Fitts

In the event that the original video is censored and deleted by the source social media platform, link here to a mirrored copy on Truth Comes to Light Bitchute channel.

“There Are Fates Worse Than Death” – Catherine Austin Fitts Exposes the Injection Fraud

by Catherine Austin Fitts, Solari Report and James Corbett, The Corbett Report
sourced from The Corbett Report
June 5, 2020

Catherine Austin Fitts: So you need to understand that this is absolutely as satanic, you know, as it gets. And what you’re talking about is will you allow them to do that to your children…

James Corbett: You’re right. I mean there are things worse death and we will experience them if we keep acquiescing to this agenda. And I thought you hit the nail on the head when you say that the machine model that’s been in place for the last few hundred years of industrial productivity is essentially anti-life. And the only way to foist that on the world — which is abundant in and of itself — the only way to foist that model on the world is through control, through manipulation, through deception, and ultimately through death. Destruction. And that is the model that has been in place.

https://youtu.be/xI_JvEbEEHc

Catherine Austin Fitts of solari.com interviews James Corbett about his new documentary, Who Is Bill Gates?

We go beyond the focus on Gates to discuss the syndicate that he is leading, the business model it relies on, and the new form of collateral that will underlie the digital economy: the human body.

Don’t miss this vital conversation that fills in the missing pieces of the puzzle and draws back the curtains on the real purpose of the injection fraud.

SHOW NOTES:

solari.com

Who Is Bill Gates?

The Injection Fraud – It’s Not a Vaccine

Biosecurity and Politics (Giorgio Agamben)

Deep State Tactics 101 with Catherine Austin Fitts (Part 1/6)

See also: Who’s Doing This? | Catherine Austin Fitts: “We Have No Idea What the Governance Structure on Our Planet Is”

In the event that the original video is censored and deleted by YouTube, link here to a mirrored copy on Truth Comes to Light Bitchute channel.

ECUADORIAN PRESIDENT: WORLD LEADERS ADVISED TO TAKE HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE

by Joseph P. Farrell, Giza Death Star
June 1. 2020

I know, I know, we’re all tired of hearing about the story no one wants to talk about. We’re tired of the social engineering of the manipulated memes of “wear a mask” and “social distancing,” and of dirty doctors connected to the Baal and Malicious Gates Foundation trying to set policy for how, when, and under what circumstances churches may open and worship. I have a couple of words for said people: anathema fiat (and I mean that). And while it appears that all this Fauci-Lieber-Wuhan-Baal Gates virus narrative hysteria is running out of steam, and that “they” have cued up a new crisis de jour with the rioting, a little story stole in under the radar. Fortunately, the regular readers of this website who send me articles, spotted it and passed it along. In this case, it was L.G.R. and the article has me wondering all sorts of stuff.

It seems that in addition to President Trump, Ecuador’s President Nayib Bukele has also been taking hydroxychloroquine. It’s why he’s been taking it that has my suspicion meter into the red zone:

President of El Salvador Announces That He is Taking Hydroxychloroquine, Says ‘Most World Leaders’ Doing the Same

Here’s what Senor Bukele has to say about the matter:

President of El Salvador Nayib Bukele has announced that he is taking hydroxychloroquine as a preventative measure against the coronavirus.

Bukele told reporters on Tuesday that “most world leaders” are doing the same and has questioned why world leaders are being advised to use it while the public is not.

“I use it as a prophylaxis, President Trump uses it as a prophylaxis, most of the world’s leaders use it as a prophylaxis,” said Bukele. (Italicized emphasis added)

And then he adds this:

The World Health Organization suspended a trial of the drug on Monday, claiming that they had safety concerns. Following their announcement, Bukele said that El Salvador would no longer promote it as a treatment for the virus, but that people could continue to take it as a preventative measure if they wish.

On Twitter, Bukele questioned why world leaders were being advised to take it, while the general public is not.

“Does it work? I don’t know. But we have been advised to take it. While the rest of the world is being advised not to. Why? That’s a question worth asking. Isn’t it?” Bukele wrote. (Italicized emphasis added)

Now, reading between the lines a bit, the impression is given that world leaders were advised by some meysterious “someone” that they should take the drug as a prophylactic measure, i.e., as a preventative measure. We’ll get back to that in a moment, because as Senor Bukele avers, it raises all sorts of questions. But I want to focus, for a moment, on that “little” revelation about the W.H.O. That would be the same W.H.O. from which the Trump administration has recently suspended all American contributions and financial support, and that South Carolina U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham recently took a break from his box of animal cracker cookies to state that he thought putting Baal Gates in charge of the organization was a wonderful idea, and that if that happened, he’d be all for doubling the U.S. contribution. Thanks Lindsey; you can go back to shining Baal’s shoes now. (See

https://libertysentinel.org/new-ad-destroys-rino-sen-graham

Anyway, what Senor Bukele is implying is that the drug is OK for the “elite”, but not OK for everyone else.

Gee, I wonder why…?

Well, think about it. Baal and Malicious Gates have an agenda, and that’s to force everyone to take their “vaccines”. (I’m still waiting for Baal and Malicious to show everyone their technology is safe by taking it themselves, and revealing their records that they have done so.) The “vaccines” (and I’m qualifying the word because I have serious doubts that they’re “vaccines” in any ordinary sense of the word, and loaded with other “goodies” that will, per the Microsludge business model, require constant “updates” and that will still be as virus prone as the horrible operating system software Baal Gates inflicted on the world. But I digress.) Those “vaccines” will be more expensive, and if Baal gets his way, everyone will be forced to take them. So much for “my body, my choice.”

With that, we come to the central problem implied by Senor Bukele’s revelation: why would anyone want to take a relatively harmless – and inexpensive – drug like hydroxychloroquine, in use for decades and which has been shown during this Fauci-Lieber-Wuhan-Baal Gates plandemic to have curative and preventative properties for COVID-19, when a much more expensive, untried and as yet unavailable “vaccine” is “just around the corner”, notwithstanding we’re still waiting – thank you Dr. Fauci – for an HIV-AIDS vaccine?

Or to put it country simple, simple enough that even a Baal Gates can understand, hydroxychloroquine is the inconvenient fact that shatters the plandemic-“vaccine” narrative. That’s why the W.H.O tried to ramp up the hysteria about the drug’s side effects. Why would anyone want Baal’s “vaccine” with all its potentially-embedded nano-technology, when a drug on the market for decades has already shown its prophylatic and curative properties.

How about it, Baal, are you one of those “world leaders” taking it as a prophylactic too?

I know, I know… you’ll never tell, because like your namesake, you’re all about human sacrifice…

See you on the flip side…

The Injection Fraud – It’s Not a Vaccine

by Catherine Austin Fitts, The Solari Report
May 27, 2020

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” ~ William Shakespeare

I am not a scientist. I am not a doctor. I am not a biotech engineer. I am not an attorney. However, I read, listen, appreciate, and try to understand those who are.

I was an investment banker until politics made it impossible to continue to practice my art. I was trained as a portfolio strategist—so I map my world by watching the financial flows and allocation of resources. I was also trained as a conspiracy generator and foot soldier—conspiracies being the fundamental organizing principle of how things get done in our world. It was not until I left the establishment that I learned that those not in the club had been trained to disparage and avoid conspiracies—a clever trick that sabotages their efforts to gather power.

My response to living at war with agencies of the U.S. government for a time was to answer the questions of people who were sufficiently courageous and curious to solicit my opinion. Over many years, that response transformed into two businesses. One was The Solari Report, which continues to grow as a global intelligence network—we seek to help each other understand and navigate what is happening and contribute to positive outcomes. The other was serving as an investment advisor to individuals and families through Solari Investment Advisory Services. After ten years, I converted that business to doing an ESG screen. What those who use it want—that is not otherwise readily available in the retail market—is a screen that reflects knowledge of financial and political corruption. Tracking the metastasizing corruption is an art, not a science.

When you help a family with their finances, it is imperative to understand all their risk issues. Their financial success depends on successful mitigation of all the risks—whether financial or non-financial—that they encounter in their daily lives. Non-financial risks can have a major impact on the allocation of family resources, including attention, time, assets, and money.

Many of my clients and their children had been devastated and drained by health care failures and corruption—and the most common catalyst for this devastation was vaccine death and injury. After their lengthy and horrendous experiences with the health care establishment, they would invariably ask, “If the corruption is this bad in medicine, food, and health, what is going on in the financial world?” Chilled by the thought, they would search out a financial professional who was schooled in U.S. government and financial corruption. And they would find me.

The result of this flow of bright, educated people blessed with the resources to pay for my time was that, for ten years, I got quite an education about the disabilities and death inflicted on our children by what I now call “the great poisoning.” I had the opportunity to repeatedly price out the human damage to all concerned—not just the affected children but their parents, siblings, and future generations—mapping the financial costs of vaccine injury again and again and again. These cases were not as unusual as you might expect. Studies indicate that 54% of American children have one or more chronic diseases. Doctors who I trust tell me that number is actually much higher, as many children and their families cannot afford the care and testing necessary to properly diagnose what ails them.

One of the mothers featured in VAXXED—a must-watch documentary for any awake citizen, as is its sequel VAXXED II: The People’s Truth—estimated that a heavily autistic child would cost present value $5MM to raise and care for over a lifetime. When my clients who were grandparents insisted that they would not interfere with their children’s vaccine choices because it was “none of their business,” I would say, “Really? Who has the $5MM? You or your kids? When your kids need the $5MM to raise their vaccine-injured child, are you going to refuse them? You are the banker, and it is your money that is at risk here, so it is your business. Do you want to spend that $5MM on growing a strong family through the generations or on managing a disabled child who did not have to be disabled?” Often, that $5MM in expenditures also translates into divorce, depression, and lost opportunities for siblings.

My clients helped me find the best resources—books, documentaries, articles—on vaccines. You will find many of them linked or reviewed at The Solari Report, including in our Library.

Of all the questions that I had, the one that I spent the most time researching and thinking about was why. Why was the medical establishment intentionally poisoning generations of children? Many of the writers who researched and wrote about vaccine injury and death assumed it was an aberration—resulting from the orthodoxy of a medical establishment that could not face or deal with its mistakes and liabilities. That never made sense to me. Writings by Forrest Maready, Jon Rappoport, Dr. Suzanne Humphries and Arthur Firstenberg have helped me understand the role of vaccines in the con man trick of saving money for insurance companies and the legally liable.

Here is one example of how the trick may play out. A toxin creates a disease. The toxin might be pesticides or industrial pollution or wireless technology radiation. The toxin damages millions of people and their communities. Companies or their insurance provider may be liable for civil or criminal violations. Then a virus is blamed. A “cure” is found in a “vaccine.” The pesticide or other toxic exposure is halted just as the vaccine is introduced, and presto, the sickness goes away. The vaccine is declared a success, and the inventor is declared a hero. A potential financial catastrophe has been converted to a profit, including for investors and pension funds. As a portfolio strategist, I admit it has been a brilliant trick and likely has protected the insurance industry from the bankrupting losses it would experience if it had to fairly compensate the people and families destroyed.

Thanks to the work of Robert Kennedy and Mary Holland of Children’s Health Defense, I now understand the enormous profits generated by so-called “vaccines” subsequent to the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and the creation of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program—a federal no-fault mechanism for compensating vaccine-related injuries or deaths by establishing a claim procedure involving the United States Court of Federal Claims and special masters. Call a drug or biotech cocktail a “vaccine,” and pharmaceutical and biotech companies are free from any liabilities—the taxpayer pays. Unfortunately, this system has become an open invitation to make billions from “injectibles,” particularly where government regulations and laws can be used to create a guaranteed market through mandates. As government agencies and legislators as well as the corporate media have developed various schemes to participate in the billions of profits, significant conflicts of interest have resulted.

The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREPA or the PREP Act) became law in 2005, adding to corporate freedoms from liability. The Act “is a controversial tort liability shield intended to protect vaccine manufacturers from financial risk in the event of a declared public health emergency. The act specifically affords to drug makers immunity from potential financial liability for clinical trials of . . . vaccine at the discretion of the Executive branch of government. PREPA strengthens and consolidates the oversight of litigation against pharmaceutical companies under the purview of the secretary of Health and Human Services.” (~ Wikipedia)

Over time, this has evolved to the engineering of epidemics—the medical version of false flags. In theory, these can be “psyops” or events engineered with chemical warfare, biowarfare, or wireless technology. If this sounds strange, dive into all the writings of the “Targeted Individuals.”

I learned about this first-hand when I was litigating with the Department of Justice and was experiencing significant physical harassment. I tried to hire several security firms; they would check my references and then decline the work, saying it was too dangerous. The last one took pity and warned me not to worry about electronic weaponry, letting me know that my main problem would be low-grade biowarfare. This biowarfare expert predicted that the opposing team would drill holes in the wall of my house and inject the “invisible enemy.” Sure enough, that is exactly what happened. I sold my house and left town. That journey began a long process of learning how poisoning and nonlethal weapons are used—whether to move people out of rent-controlled apartments, sicken the elderly to move them to more expensive government-subsidized housing, gangstalk political or business targets, or weaken or kill litigants—and the list goes on. Poisoning turned out to be a much more common tactic in the game of political and economic warfare in America than I had previously understood.

After I finished my litigation, I spent several years detoxing from heavy metal toxicity—including from lead, arsenic, and aluminum. As I drove around America, I realized it was not just me. Americans increasingly looked like a people struggling with high loads of heavy metals toxicity. In the process of significantly decreasing my unusually high levels of heavy metals, I learned what a difference the toxic load had made to my outlook, my energy, and my ability to handle complex information.

This brings me to the question of what exactly a vaccine is and what exactly is in the concoctions being injected into people today as well as the witches’ brews currently under development.

In 2017, Italian researchers reviewed the ingredients of 44 types of so-called “vaccines.” They discovered heavy metal debris and biological contamination in every human vaccine they tested. The researchers stated, “The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us.” They then drew the obvious conclusion, namely, that because the micro- and nanocontaminants were “neither biocompatible nor biodegradable,” they were “biopersistent” and could cause inflammatory effects right away—or later (http://medcraveonline.com/IJVV/IJVV-04-00072.pdf)

Aborted fetal tissue, animal tissue, aluminum, mercury, genetically altered materials—and what else?

Whatever the ingredients of vaccines have been to date, nothing is more bizarre and unsettling than the proposals of what might be included in them in the future. Strategies—already well-funded and well on the way—include brain-machine interface nanotechnology, digital identity tracking devices, and technology with an expiration date that can be managed and turned off remotely. One report indicates that the Danish government and U.S. Navy had been paying a tech company in Denmark to make an injectible chip that would be compatible with one of the leading cryptocurrencies.

I was recently reading Mary Holland’s excellent 2012 review of U.S. vaccine court decisions (“Compulsory vaccination, the Constitution, and the hepatitis B mandate for infants and young children,” Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law, and Ethics) and I froze and thought, “Why are we calling the injectibles that Bill Gates and his colleagues are promoting ‘vaccines’? Are they really vaccines?”

Most people are familiar with how Bill Gates made and kept his fortune. He acquired an operating system that was loaded into your computer. It was widely rumored that the U.S. intelligence agencies had a back door. The simultaneous and sudden explosion of computer viruses then made it necessary to regularly update your operating system, allowing Gates and his associates to regularly add whatever they wanted into your software. One of my more knowledgeable software developers once said to me in the 1990s—when Microsoft really took off—”Microsoft makes really sh***y software.” But of course, the software was not really their business. Their business was accessing and aggregating all of your data. Surveillance capitalism was underway.

The Department of Justice launched an antitrust case against Microsoft in 1998, just as the $21 trillion started to disappear from the U.S. government—no doubt with the help of specially designed software and IT systems. During the settlement negotiations that permitted Gates to keep his fortune, he started the Gates Foundation and his new philanthropy career. I laughed the other day when my tweet of one of Robert Kennedy Jr.’s articles from Children’s Health Defense—describing the gruesome technology Gates is hoping to roll out through “injectibles”—inspired a response: “Well, I guess he is finally fulfilling his side of his antitrust settlement.”

If you look at what is being created and proposed in the way of injectibles, it looks to me like these technological developments are organized around several potential goals.

The first and most important goal is the replacement of the existing U.S. dollar currency system used by the general population with a digital transaction system that can be combined with digital identification and tracking. The goal is to end currencies as we know them and replace them with an embedded credit card system that can be integrated with various forms of control, potentially including mind control. “De-dollarization” is threatening the dollar global reserve system. The M1 and M2 money supply have increased in the double digits over the last year as a result of a new round of quantitative easing by the Fed. The reason we have not entered into hyperinflation is because of the dramatic drop in money velocity occasioned by converting Covid-19 into an engineered shutdown of significant economic activity and the bankrupting of millions of small and medium-sized businesses. The managers of the dollar system are under urgent pressure to use new technology to centralize economic flows and preserve their control of the financial system.

Just as Gates installed an operating system in our computers, now the vision is to install an operating system in our bodies and use “viruses” to mandate an initial installation followed by regular updates.

Now I appreciate why Gates and his colleagues want to call these technologies “vaccines.” If they can persuade the body politic that injectible credit cards or injectible surveillance trackers or injectable brain-machine interface nanotechnologies are “vaccines,” then they can enjoy the protection of a century or more of legal decisions and laws that support their efforts to mandate what they want to do. As well, they can insist that U.S. taxpayers fund, through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, the damages for which they would otherwise be liable as a result of their experiments—and violations of the Nuremberg Code and numerous civil and criminal laws—on the general population. The scheme is quite clever. Get the general population to go along with defining their new injectible high-tech concoctions as “vaccines,” and they can slip them right into the vaccine pipeline. No need to worry about the disease and death that will result from something this unnatural delivered this quickly. The freedom from liability guaranteed by the PREP Act through the declaration of an emergency—and the ability to keep the emergency going through contact tracing—can protect them from liability for thousands if not millions of deaths and disabilities likely to follow such human experimentation. Ideally, they can just blame the deaths on a virus.

A colleague once told me how Webster’s Dictionary came about. Webster said that the way the evildoers would change the Constitution was not by amending it but by changing the definitions—a legal sneak attack.

I believe that Gates and the pharma and biotech industries are literally reaching to create a global control grid by installing digital interface components and hooking us up to Microsoft’s new $10 billion JEDI cloud at the Department of Defense as well as Amazon’s multibillion cloud contract for the CIA that is shared with all U.S. intelligence agencies. Why do you think President Trump has the military organizing to stockpile syringes for vaccines? It is likely because the military is installing the roaming operating system for integration into their cloud. Remember—the winner in the AI superpower race is the AI system with access to the most data. Accessing your body and my body on a 24/7 basis generates a lot of data. If the Chinese do it, the Americans will want to do it, too. In fact, the rollout of human “operating systems” may be one of the reasons why the competition around Huawei and 5G telecommunications has become so fractious. As Frank Clegg, former President of Microsoft Canada has warned us, 5G was developed by the Israelis for crowd control.

In the face of global “de-dollarization,” this is how the dollar syndicate can assert the central control it needs to maintain and extend its global reserve currency financial power. This includes protecting its leadership from the civil and criminal liability related to explosive levels of financial and health care fraud in recent decades.

Which brings me back to you and me. Why are we calling these formulations “vaccines”? If I understand the history of case law, vaccines, in legal terms, are medicine. Intentional heavy metal poisoning is not medicine. Injectible surveillance components are not medicine. Injectible credit cards are not medicine. An injectible brain-machine interface is not a medicine. Legal and financial immunity for insurance companies does not create human immunity from disease.

We need to stop allowing these concoctions to be referred to by a word that the courts and the general population define and treat as medicine and protect from legal and financial liability.

The perpetrators of this fraud are trying a very neat trick—one that will help them go much faster and cancel out a lot of risk—at our expense. I understand why they are doing it.

What I don’t understand is why we are helping them. Why are we acquiescing in calling these bizarre and deeply dangerous concoctions “vaccines”? Whatever they are, they are not medicine.

So, what shall our naming convention be? What name shall we give to the relevant poisons, neurologically damaging metals, and digital shackles?

Whatever we call them, I know one thing. THEY ARE NOT MEDICINE, WHICH MEANS THEY SURE ARE NOT VACCINES.

Solari Report Interviews:
Central Bank Stimulus: Quantitative Easing 5.0 with John Titus
Deep State Tactics 101 Part III

Solari Special Reports:
VAXXED II: The People’s Truth with Polly Tommey
Special Solari Report: Vaccine Mandates with Mary Holland, J.D

Solari Book Reviews:
The Autism Vaccine by Forrest Maready
unvaccinated by Forrest Maready
Crooked: Man-Made Disease Explained by Forrest Maready

Great Articles & Videos:
Childrens Health Defense: COVID-19: The Spearpoint for Rolling Out a “New Era” of High-Risk, Genetically Engineered Vaccines
Compulsory Vaccination, the Constitution, and the Hepatitis B Mandate for Infants and Young Children by Mary Holland
Hero of the Week: March 12, 2020 – Former President Of Microsoft Canada, Frank Clegg
Corbett Report: Bill Gates x 5
Collection Cup: Building a List of Best Sources on Vaccine Risks

Related reading:
Children’s Health Defense
VAXXED
VAXXED II: The People’s Truth
Jon Rappoport at nomorefakenews.com

Corona Masks – Infection Prevention…Or Submission-Signaling?

by RonPaulLibertyReport
May 13, 2020

Ironically, as coronavirus deaths continue to decline in the US and as more states are “opening up,” there appears to be an increase in mask wearing. Are the face masks going to prevent the spread of the virus? Will they protect people from the virus? Or may they actually cause harm to some people? Or…even: are they a new form of “virtue signaling,” a show of submission to the “authorities”? Plenty of prominent MDs – including Fauci not long ago – have condemned the mass masking of America. Are they right?

In the event that the original video is censored and deleted by YouTube, link here to a mirrored copy on Truth Comes to Light Bitchute channel.

Dr. Andrew Kaufman: They Want To Genetically Modify Us With The COVID-19 Vaccine

by Spiro Skouras
May 11, 2020

In this powerful interview Spiro is joined with Doctor Andrew Kaufman.

Spiro and Dr. Kaufman discuss the expanding curtailment of basic civil liberties being normalized under the false pretext of a global health emergency. Doctor Kaufman lays his reputation and his career on the line as he blows the whistle, on what he describes as a manufactured crisis to carry out a preplanned agenda to facilitate global governance and population control.

Doctor Kaufman is a well educated medical professional who convincingly illustrates, using the CDC’s own technical data, how the public has been manipulated on the grandest scale.

Doctor Kaufman’s Website https://www.andrewkaufmanmd.com

Doctor Kaufman’s Youtube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV7v2cvSnrJ9Qyz36cW1Ftw

Provisional Death Counts for Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm

One-Third of All U.S. Coronavirus Deaths Are Nursing Home Residents or Workers https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/05/09/us/coronavirus-cases-nursing-homes-us.html

Army germ lab shut down by CDC in 2019 had several ‘serious’ protocol violations that year https://wjla.com/news/local/cdc-shut-down-army-germ-lab-health-concerns

2 Dead From Unknown Respiratory Virus. What Could It Be? https://www.acsh.org/news/2019/07/11/2-dead-unknown-respiratory-virus-what-could-it-be-14147

Wuhan China Weeks Before Coronavirus Outbreak! https://www.activistpost.com/2020/02/nearly-10k-military-personnel-from-110-nations-in-wuhan-china-weeks-before-coronavirus-outbreak.html

French army returned from Wuhan military games in October with mystery illness https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/french-army-returned-wuhan-military-21988912

Policy for Coronavirus Disease-2019 Tests During the Public Health Emergency (Revised)  V https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/policy-coronavirus-disease-2019-tests-during-public-health-emergency-revised

Cepheid Letter of Authorization https://www.fda.gov/media/136316/download   

  ~~~~~

Connect with Dr. Kaufman:https://www.andrewkaufmanmd.com

In the event that the original video is censored and deleted by YouTube, link here to a mirrored copy on Truth Comes to Light Bitchute channel.

Shutdowns: Pointless, Stupid and Evil

by Larken Rose
May 3, 2020



No, I’m not going to be polite or gentle when so many good people are being tricked into cooperating with widespread, devastatingly destructive “solutions” to a problem that only ever threatened a tiny percentage of the population (which can be protected separately).

Feel free to copy and spread this video, since YouTube is likely to take it down if any of their censors notice it not parroting the idiotic, fear-driven party line.

[TCTL editor’s note: YouTube did take it down after 50,000 views.]

Connect with Larken Rose

Dr. Tenpenny: This is The Biggest Scam Ever Perpetrated on The Human Race…

by Spiro Skouras
May 2, 2020

https://youtu.be/M_9bQ_Ri9p0

In this explosive interview, Spiro Skouras is joined by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny.

The two discuss the latest developments regarding the coronavirus situation which was declared a global health pandemic, by the Gates funded World Health Organization, as more information comes to light questioning the need for a global lockdown.

Dr. Tenpenny and Spiro examine and explore, the motives of the global response by governments, global institutions and private interests, as Dr. Tenpenny exposes perhaps the most alarming aspect of the crisis yet!

No, it is not the virus, it is the blank check issued to the vaccine and drug manufacturers, which not only provides unlimited funding, but also provides blanket immunity to Big Pharma for any harm attributed with the treatments produced during the declared emergency, including all drugs and vaccines.

This blanket immunity is provided by the US government under the PREP Act and provides the drug and vaccine manufacturers the ‘Ultimate Blank Check’ during a declared emergency.

As Dr. Tenpenny points out, the vaccine and drug manufacturers have zero incentive to produce a safe product, as the declared emergency not only rolls back regulatory standards and removes them from any and all liability, but it also ensures the government will purchase their products.

This is an unprecedented level of immunity which raises many questions and safety concerns.

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny Twitter Account https://twitter.com/BusyDrT

Dr Tenpenny Vaxxter Website https://vaxxter.com

Coronavirus Pt 1: How Soon We Forget – Same Playbook, Different Virus

Coronavirus Pt 2: ‘Never Let a Good Crisis Go to Waste’, Replay

See all references for this video.

A mirrored copy is available on Truth Comes to Light’s Bitchute channel should the source video be censored or become otherwise unavailable at YouTube or other platforms.

https://youtu.be/2MGXePjIzXE

In this powerful interview, Spiro is joined by Whitney Webb and Ryan Cristian from The Last American Vagabond, as they discuss the rollout of a new system of control the likes of which the world has never seen. It has been said to never let a good crisis go to waste and it appears the ones pulling the strings are taking full advantage of the current crisis as more and more evidence emerges contradicting the official story that suggests this crisis is no accident. The fact that Bill Gates has teamed up with the Department of Defense and DARPA, which is the special project research and development arm of the pentagon to develop a brand new type of vaccine, which is being rushed into production is alarming to say the least. Especially considering this new kind of DNA / RNA vaccine would normally take 15-20 years to roll out, while this one is being rolled out in a matter of months and is already undergoing human clinical trials. The urgency and rolled back regulations to streamline this new vaccine is of course, justified by the crisis.

The Last American Vagabond Website
https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com

The Last American Vagabond BitChute
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/24yVcta8zEjY/

The Last American Vagabond YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_ClYrAtDNAGy5J0N-AwBNw

Ryan Cristian’s Twitter
https://twitter.com/TLAVagabond

Whitney Webb’s Twitter
https://twitter.com/_whitneywebb

Covid-19 was already ‘silently circulating’ in France before virus arrived from China & Italy – study
https://www.rt.com/news/487294-france-coronavirus-strain-italy-china/

Introductions and early spread of SARS-CoV-2 in France
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.24.059576v1.full.pdf

TECHNO-TYRANNY: HOW THE US NATIONAL SECURITY STATE IS USING CORONAVIRUS TO FULFILL AN ORWELLIAN VISION
https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/top-news/techno-tyranny-how-us-national-security-state-using-coronavirus-fulfill-orwellian-vision/

INOVIO Receives New $5 Million Grant to Accelerate Scale Up of Smart Delivery Device for Its COVID-19 Vaccine
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/inovio-receives-new-5-million-grant-to-accelerate-scale-up-of-smart-delivery-device-for-its-covid-19-vaccine-301022049.html

Inovio COVID-19 Vaccine Uses Electricity to Drive DNA Into Body Cells
https://thevaccinereaction.org/2020/04/inovio-covid-19-vaccine-uses-electricity-to-drive-dna-into-body-cells/

Follow Spiro on BitChute bitchute.com/channel/spiro/
Follow Spiro on Twitter https://twitter.com/o_rips

~~~~~~~~~~

This video is also available on Spiro‘s Bitchute channel, should the YouTube video seen above be censored or become otherwise unavailable.

US Doctor: How can you make a vaccine for something never proven to exist? A must-watch

by Jaymie Icke
April 9, 2020

[Youtube version was taken down. Please view here on Bitchute.]

Jaymie Icke interviews Dr. Andy Kaufman on whether COVID-19 actually exists, what the tests are all about,

DNA vaccines and Transhumanism

by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny
April 2, 2020

Transhumanism is a futuristic concept where man and technology blend, resulting in soulless intelligent machines. It is a movement that favors the evolution of a new species of human through the use of integrative circuitry. Referred to as “human betterment for the post-human era,” transhumanists assume that humanity will only be enhanced by machines. No damage. No degradation. No possibility for coercion or domination. In a post-human world, humanity as we know it will be obsolete.

In 2012, artificial intelligence pioneer Ray Kurzweil became Director of Engineering and Chief Futurist at Google, hired to work on projects to teach machines to learn. Kurzweil predicts that by 2030 (there’s that date again) technological advances will allow tiny nano-bots to be injected into the bloodstream, pass through the blood-brain barrier and integrate into the brain. The human brains can then be connected to “the cloud,” achieving a level of brilliance never thought possible. So, essentially, biological beings will become “non-biological entities.” In his book, The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology, Kurzweil states, “In the future, there will be no distinction between human and machine, or between physical and virtual reality.”

But if our brains can tap UP into the cloud, it only makes sense the what’s in the cloud could be pushed DOWN into our brain…So, the question becomes: Who controls the specific information we’re allowed to tap into? Who determines what is downloaded into us?  The disturbing vision of thousands – or millions – of Manchurian Candidates comes to mind.

The Quest for Control of the Human Brain

In former-president Obama’s 2013 State of the Union Address, he announced his plan to invest in brain mapping technologies. In April of that year, a $100+ million initiative was launched called BRAIN, which stands for Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies. Multiple public-private partnerships were funded, including the Allen Institute for Brain Science, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute,  Salk Institute for Biological Studies, and the Kavli Foundation and Institutes.  Our tax dollars also funded this project; the government allocations included:

• $20 million to the National Science Foundation to study how Big Data could be used to understand the ability of the brain to generate thoughts, emotions, and memories;
• $40 million to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to develop training tools and resources to support the BRAIN initiative; and
• $50 million was given to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to develop tools to capture and process dynamic neural and synaptic activities.

Using those funds – and more – DARPA announced in 2016 it would develop the Neural Engineering System Design (NESD) program. Touted as the next-level brain-computer interface (BCI), the NESD system is designed to turn brain activity into a binary code, allowing humans to engage with machines wirelessly, by simply thinking.

While many amazing medical uses could come from this research, from treating PTSD and traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), to maneuvering brain-activated exoskeletons and prosthetic limbs, it takes very little imagination to see how this research could quickly turn dark.

• What if the post-human world was dominated by strong, mechanical humanoids with enhancements designed to benefit institutions, at the expense of the individual?
• Will the drivers to create bionic humans be economic efficiency, cultural modification, and military dominance?

Post-humans will live longer and be Global Citizens, a future where humankind is melded into a single, apolitical identity ruled by the UN and governed by the global Sustainability Agenda. Bionic humans will have no need to connect, even with creatures of their kind. Advances in animal cloning and embryonic stem cell technologies are bringing human cloning closer to reality, eliminating the need to procreate – satisfying the globalist’s concerns regarding planetary overpopulation. Need more worker bees? Create them at the factory – they need no benefits, no vacations and can work 24/7.

DNA Vaccines: Permanent manipulation of humans and animals

DNA vaccines, a type of genetic engineering, were first tinkered with in the early 1990s. A small snip of DNA, say, from a herpes virus, is inserted into a bacterial “bubble” called a plasmid. When the plasmid-laden vaccine is injected, the cellular immune system gears up to eliminate the foreign protein (plasmid + viral DNA snip) and at the same time, the humoral immune system creates antibodies against the viral DNA. When a herpes virus enters the body, the memory T-cells and B-cells work together to attack the foreign virus, eliminating it and avoiding the infection. 

This process is not without problems.

• The DNA snip can be incorporated into the host’s DNA, leading to chromosome instability. The mutagenic affect can turn on oncogenes and turn off tumor suppressor genes, leading to cancer. 
• Genetic expression is the process where genes create proteins. Genetic over-expression is when the process “goes rogue” and produces massive amounts of foreign protein, destroying human tissues via both acute and chronic inflammation.
• Often the plasmid used is resistant to antibiotics; the same antibiotic resistance can be transferred to the host.
• The plasmid DNA can appear very similar to the vaccine recipient’s DNA. The anti-DNA antibodies can attack human organs with similar DNA sequences. The result is autoimmunity, clearly identified as the cause of nearly  100 different diseases and suspected to be the cause at least 40 more chronic and potentially life-threatening conditions.

A concern that sounds like science fiction is the use of DNA vaccines in food-producing animals. The foreign DNA can be incorporated into an animal’s DNA, getting into the human food supply. The plasmid DNA can disrupt the animal’s microflora, and even potentially transform the environmental microflora as the animals defecate. 

This level of genetic manipulation makes DNA vaccines a dreamy tool of the transhumanists. With a host of companies working on biotic human body parts and DARPA working to build killer robots, designing DNA vaccines to enhance human DNA is only a step away. In fact, Editas Medicine, a US-based company, announced in November 2015 that the trials with the first humans to have their DNA genetically modified were well underway. 

If robots could think, feel and have a conscience, would that make them human? Or, would the lack of genetic material always render it as non-human? Using the combination of artificial intelligence, nanotechnology and DNA vaccines to insert human genes and human characteristics into machines is no longer just for the movies. At what point are humans no longer humans?

As vaccine recommendations become mandates – and 30 states are now pushing for mandatory vaccines, will you retain your right to refuse?

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny is an osteopathic medical doctor, board-certified in three specialties. She is the founder of Tenpenny Integrative Medical Center, a medical clinic located near Cleveland, Ohio. Her company, Courses4Mastery.com provides online education and training regarding all aspects of vaccines and vaccination. 

Dr. Tenpenny has invested nearly 20 years and more than 40,000 hours documenting and exposing the problems associated with vaccines. As an internationally known speaker and author, her many articles have been translated into at least 15 languages. She is a frequent guest on radio and TV to share her knowledge and educate parents on why they should Just.Say.No. to vaccines.

CHLOROQUINE AND THE APRIL FOOLS’ STORY NO ONE IS TALKING ABOUT

by Joseph P. Farrell
April 1, 2020

Happy April Fool’s Day!

I say that because it is perhaps no accident that there’s a familiar “odor” to all this corona virus plandemic stuff.

And no, I’m not talking about all those teams of scientists weighing in on the “cure” of chloroquine. Frankly, it’s a bit mystifying; team A of scientists cite reports from France or South Korea touting the use of the drug to combat and cure the virus, while team B writes articles and gets on TV urging caution and the need for more study and tests and so on. “I’m a scientist; trust me!” and “No, I’m the scientist here, trust me.”

Well, in that spirit, B.G. sent the following article, which pretty well sums up this whole sub-plot:

What’s The Deal With Antimalarials And Coronavirus? Read This Before You Try Anything

According to  this, someone found chloroquine phosphate was an ingredient in their fish food, and tried some, and ended up dead or in the hospital:

An Arizona man died, and his wife was hospitalized, after taking a form of chloroquine, which President Trump has touted as an effective treatment for COVID-19. The couple decided to self-medicate with chloroquine phosphate, which they had on hand to kill parasites in their fish, after hearing the president describe the drug as a “game changer.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of NIH’s National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases, quickly corrected the statement, explaining that Trump’s comments were based on anecdotes and not a controlled clinical trial.

I am a medicinal chemist who specializes in discovery and development of antiviral drugs, and I have been actively working on coronaviruses for seven years.

However, because I am a scientist and I deal in facts and evidence-based medicine, I am concerned about the sweeping statements the president has been making regarding the use of chloroquine or the closely related hydroxychloroquine, both antimalarial drugs, as cures for COVID-19. So let’s examine the facts.

Yes, and while you’re “dealing in facts” here’s a few you forgot to mention:

French researcher posts successful Covid-19 drug trial

There Should Be Zero Distancing From Chloroquine Treatment

Or this, shared by S.C.:

https://asiatimes.com/2020/03/why-france-is-hiding-a-cheap-and-tested-virus-cure/

However, there is a fact mentioned in the article shared by B.G. (thanks B.G.!) that we both found more than a little… well, what? Ironic? Macabrely amusing?

It’s this:

These are both FDA-approved antimalarial drugs that have been in use for many years. Chloroquine was originally developed in 1934 at the pharmaceutical company Bayer and used in World War II to prevent malaria. (Emphasis added)

You’re kidding, right?

Bayer you say?

The Bayer whose one time chairman Carl Duisberg advocated for the use of Belgian slave labor in World War One, helped invent poison gas, and later helped found I.G. Farben in the first place Bayer? The Bayer whose Carl Duisberg became the name for a society that sponsored Mohammad Atta? That Bayer? As in major-component-of-I.G.-Farben-Bayer? As in “oh look we’ve got so much cash on hand we can afford to buy Mon(ster)santo with a cash buyout” Bayer? The Bayer that we here at the Giza Community of Daily High Octane Speculation like to call I.G. Farbensanto Bayer? The Bayer that recently expressed “misgivings” for having bought Mon(ster)santo in the first place in order to become I.G. Farbensanto, because it also bought all those lawsuits pending against Mon(ster)santo, and might have to shell out more – much more – cash because of it Bayer? The Bayer that because of that, might need a quick, fast, and reliable infusion of lots of cash Bayer? Like, infusions of cash during a plandemic whose only cure appears to be a drug patented by Bayer which stands potentially to make lots of cash off the patent and any licensing agreements Bayer?

Well, color me utterly speechless, because you just can’t make this stuff up folks. It’s a much better plot than anything coming out of Hollyweird in the last few years.

Now I’ve got a headache. I need an aspirin…

(Looks at pill).

Hmmph…

… Bayer…

See you on the flip side…