Tonya Harding Syndrome in China-US relations

By Victor Gao Source: Global Times (short version)

ee51f0e5-710d-41e9-9092-f3a59d11867f.jpeg

Photo: GT

Tonya Harding was a promising American figure skater, eager to strike more fame and fortune at the world championships and the Olympics. What undid Tonya’s skating career was her implication in the whacking of the kneecap of Nancy Kerrigan, a graceful skating competitor from Massachusetts, by Tonya’s husband, Gilloly, and his associates. When the dust settled, Tonya Harding was barred from figure skating competition for life.

The Tonya Harding Syndrome is the agony of worrying and panicking about losing out in a competition and resorting to whacking the kneecap of one’s competitor, driven by the desire to ensure one’s championship in a competition rendered unfair and indecent.

In recent years, China-US relations have been pushed into a virtual free-fall. While there are many attempts to describe why the China-US relations have dropped into an abyss, including the Thucydides Trap, an all-out blaming and bashing of anything Chinese, a desperate drive to make America great (as if America were not great to start with) and to keep America first (as if the rest of the world should be relegated to last and least), the complexities of the China-US relations crisis can actually be described as a viral attack of the Tonya Harding Syndrome, by some people in high positions in Washington.

If the goal of whacking the Chinese kneecaps is to prevent China’s steady rise, that is a futile attempt. The complexities of the China-US relations now is that (1) in many ways, China is already ahead of the US (population, market size, economy by PPP, gross export, the number of college graduates every year, etc.); and (2) in many other ways, China may never be ahead of the US (GDP per capita, military superiority, etc.).

The harsh reality is that no one should indulge in a fantasy that Washington can hold Beijing down onto the ground with impunity, either short of war or even in a war. No matter how many Chinese kneecaps Washington dares to whack, China will continue to grow.

This is the irreversible mega-trend in the world today. Further, on a philosophical level, the more Chinese kneecaps Washington whacks, the more the American people may suffer as a whole.

For example, some top official in Washington seems to take delight in levying astronomical tariffs against Chinese exports to the US and claims to the American people that China pays all these tariffs. Anyone with the decency of the mind knows for sure that China doesn’t pay a single penny of these tariffs.

It is the American importers and consumers who pay these tariffs. In a sense, whacking the Chinese kneecaps in a trade war is the equivalent of whacking the kneecaps of the American people.

Washington has been mobilizing its total national resources to whack the kneecap of Huawei, a world-leading firm of the 5G technology. Such brazen political persecution of an outstanding technology company may inadvertently force China to accelerate its drive for self-sufficiency in semi-conductors, which may, in its turn, ring the knell of the American semi-conductor industry. Whacking the kneecap of your largest customer with the largest number of patents in 5G may boomerang in a self-inflicted, suicidal whack of your own semi-conductor industry.

The most important question facing China and the US and mankind as a whole is less when or whether China will eventually outgrow the size of the US, but more how China and the US will get along with each other in about 10 to 15 years when Washington will need to eventually come to terms with a China that is larger and may be more impactful than the US.

While China has become the largest exporter in the world, China does not export ideology, religion, or a political system. The great transformation of China over the past four decades has been achieved by China thriving within the current world order, rather than by its attempt to destroy it.

There are demagogues who have poisoned the China-US relations and are eager to hijack the great people from both sides onto a path of antagonism, hatred, and mutual destruction. They may stop at nothing to fool and agitate the American people in this frenzy.

Both sides will need to find a way to get along with each other.

The author is a current affairs commentator and former interpreter for Deng Xiaoping and chairman of the China Energy Security Institute. The article was first published in CGTN. opinion

What Makes You Think The Stock Market Will Even Exist In 2024?

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

Given the extremes of the stock market’s frauds and even greater extremes of wealth/income inequality it has created, tell me again why the stock market will still exist in 2024?

When I read a financial pundit predicting a bull market in stocks through 2024, blah-blah-blah, I wonder: what makes you think the stock market will even exist in 2024, at least in its current form?

Given the current trajectory of the real economy into the Greatest Depression while the Federal Reserve’s entire raison d’etre is to send stocks soaring to the moon forever and ever, what are the odds that this disconnect leads to a political rebellion against the Fed and its wealth inequality machine, the stock market?

Just as Communism was a god that failed, finance capitalism is also a god that failed, an extreme version of crony-capitalism that is nothing more than a mechanism for concentrating wealth and power at the expense of everyone toiling in the real-world economy.

And if we understand this, then we also understand that with its stock buybacks, high-frequency trading and after-hours manipulation, the stock market is nothing more than finance capitalism’s mechanism for increasing the concentration of wealth.

Should this awareness move from the few who currently understand the depravity and unsustainability of finance capitalism to the general public, why would they allow the skimming machine of the stock market to continue pillaging the nation?

(The appeal of the stock market as a casino game amateurs can easily win is part of its marketing, but like the casinos in Las Vegas, the number of punters who reap consistent gains and hold onto their newfound wealth for five years or longer is near-zero. That’s the plan, of course; win a few bucks today and lose everything over time.)

Once the novelty of toppling symbols of oppression (statues, etc.) wears thin, people might start showing some interest in the actual sources of real-world oppression, which will lead them to the Federal Reserve and finance capitalism’s primary skimming machine, the stock market.

Recall that when a corporation spends $10 billion on stock buybacks, it creates zero jobs, zero productive capacity, zero goods and zero services: all it does is supercharge the wealth of those who already own most of the corporation’s stock.

This is why stock buybacks were illegal until finance capitalism conquered the political machinery of governance.

People who look into this fraud will discover the $10 billion was printed up by the Federal Reserve and made available to an elite of financiers and corporations. You might have noticed that your share of the $6.2 trillion the Fed has printed and given away as free money for financiers since 2008 is, well, zero. This was not an oversight; this asymmetry is the core feature of American central banking and finance: 100% for us, none for you.

High-frequency trading is another massive crony-capitalist fraud in which financiers, hedge funds and other pay-to-play nabobs of finance capitalism skim billions of dollars by manipulating the flow of stock market trade orders. Since they own the regulators and political class (and paid good money for them, too), this fraud is of course entirely legal.

Should the Fed’s baby, the stock market, ever experience a flutter, the Fed’s proxy manipulators goose the market higher in after-hours or pre-market trading, where the low volume is tailor-made for manipulation.

All this fraud and manipulation has given the Fed’s skimming machine a veneer of omnipotence, as if the Fed is eternal. It isn’t. Like the Bastille, the Fed can be torn down once the populace traces their impoverishment and powerlessness to the Fed and its wealth-concentrating skimming mechanisms, starting with the stock market.

While the take-home earnings of the bottom 90% have stagnated for two decades, the wealth and income of the top 0.1% has skyrocketed. The top 5% of speculators, technocrats and insiders have done very well, and the next 5%–the apparatchik/professional class–have been thrown enough crumbs that they labor under the illusion that they’re “sharing the wealth”–a very convenient delusion for the top 0.1%.

Given the extremes of the stock market’s frauds and even greater extremes of wealth/income inequality this skimming operation has created, tell me again why the stock market will still exist in 2024? The aristocrats in France reckoned the Bastille was eternal as well. It wasn’t, and neither is the looting machine known as the stock market.

An assault on our collective brain

An assault on our collective brain (of which we are mere limited cells)

Jeffrey A. Tucker

We’ve lived through the most bizarre experience of human folly in my lifetime, and perhaps in generations.Among the strangest aspects of this has been the near universal failure on the part of regular people, and even the appointed “experts” (the ones the government employs, in any case), to have internalized anything about the basics of viruses that my mother understands, thanks to her mother before who had a solid education in the subject after World War II.

Thus, for example, are all governments ready to impose new lockdowns should the infection data turn in the other direction. Under what theory, precisely, is this supposed to help matters? How does reimposing stay-home orders or mandating gym closures mysteriously manage to intimidate a virus into going away? “Run away and hide” seems to have replaced anything like a sophisticated understanding of viruses and immunities.

So I decided to download Molecular and Cell Biology for Dummies just to check if I’m crazy. I’m pleased to see that it clearly states that there are only two ways to defeat a virus: natural immunity and vaccines.

The book completely left out the option that almost the entire world embraced in March: destroy businesses, force everyone to hide in their homes, and make sure that no one gets close to anyone else. The reason that the text leaves that out is that the idea is essentially ridiculous, so much so that it was initially sold as a strategy to preserve hospital space and only later mutated into a general principle that the way to beat a virus is to avoid people and wear a mini-hazmat suit.

Here is the passage:

For all of recorded history, humans have done a deadly dance with viruses. Measles, smallpox, polio, and influenza viruses changed the course of human history: Measles and smallpox killed hundreds of thousands of Native Americans; polio killed and crippled people, including US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt; and the 1918 influenza epidemic killed more people than were killed during all of World War I.

For most viruses that attack humans, your only defenses are prevention and your own immune systems. Antibiotics don’t kill viruses, and scientists haven’t discovered many effective antiviral drugs.

Vaccines are little pieces of bacteria or viruses injected into the body to give the immune system an education. They work by ramping up your own defensive system so that you’re ready to fight the bacteria or virus upon first contact, without becoming sick first. However, for some viral diseases no vaccines exist, and the only option is to wait uncomfortably for your immune system to win the battle.

A virus is not a miasma, a cootie, or red goo like in the children’s book Cat in the Hat. There is no path toward waging much less winning a national war against a virus. It cares nothing about borders, executive orders, and titles. A virus is a thing to battle one immune system at a time, and our bodies have evolved to be suited to do just that. Vaccines can give advantage to the immune system through a clever hack. Even so, there will always be another virus and another battle, and so it’s been for hundreds of thousands of years.

If you read the above carefully, you now know more than you would know from watching 50 TED talks on viruses by Bill Gates. Though having thrown hundreds of millions of dollars into cobbling together some global plan to combat microbes, his own understanding seems not to have risen above a cooties theory of run away and hide.

There is another level of virus comprehension that came to be observed in the 1950s and then codified in the 70s. For many viruses, not everyone has to catch them to become immune and not everyone needs a vaccine if there is one. Immunity is achieved when a certain percentage of the population has contracted some form of virus, with symptoms or without, and then the virus effectively dies.

This has important implications because it means that vulnerable demographics can isolate for the active days of the virus, and return to normal life once “herd immunity” has been realized with infection within some portion of the non-vulnerable population. This is why every bit of medical advice for ederly people has been to avoid large crowds during the flu season and why getting and recovering for non-vulnerable groups is a good thing.

What you get from this virus advice is not fear but calm management. This wisdom – not ignorance but wisdom – was behind the do-no-harm approach to the polio epidemic of 1949-1952, the Asian flu of 1957-58, and the Hong Kong flu of 1968-69. Donald Henderson summed up this old wisdom beautifully: “Communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted.”

And that’s what we did for the one hundred years following the catastrophic Spanish flu of 1918. We never again attempted widespread closures or lockdown precisely because they had failed so miserably in the few places they were attempted.

The cooties theory attempted a comeback with the Swine flu of 2009 (H1N1) but the world was too busy dealing with a financial crisis so the postwar strategy of virus control and mitigation prevailed once again, thankfully. But then the perfect storm hit in 2020 and a new generation of virus mitigators got their chance to conduct a grand social experiment based on computer modeling and forecasting.

Next thing you know, we had this new vocabulary shoved down our throats and we all had to obey strangely arbitrary exhortations. “Go inside! No, wait don’t go inside!” “Stay healthy but shut the gyms!” “Get away from the virus but don’t travel!” “Don’t wear a mask, wait, do wear a mask!” (Now we can add: “Only gather in groups if you are protesting Trump”)

People started believing crazy things, as if we are medieval peasants, such as that if there is a group of people or if you stand too close to someone, the bad virus will spontaneously appear and you will get infected. Or that you could be a secret superspreader even if you have no symptoms, and also you can get the virus by touching almost anything.

Good grief, the sheer amount of unscientific phony baloney unleashed in these terrible three months boggles the mind. But that’s what happens in any panic. Apparently.

Now, something has truly been bugging me these months as I’ve watched the incredible unravelling of most of the freedoms we’ve long taken for granted. People were locked out of the churches and schools, businesses were shuttered, markets were closed, governors shoved through shelter in place orders meant not for disease control but aerial bomb raids, and masks were mandatory, all while regular people who otherwise seem smart hopped around each other like grasshoppers.

My major shock is discovering how much sheer stupidity exists in the population, particularly among the political class.

Forgive a defense of my use of the term “stupid” but it is technically correct. I take it from Albert Camus and his brilliant book The Plague (1947). “When a war breaks out, people say: ‘It’s too stupid; it can’t last long.’ But though a war may well be ‘too stupid,’ that doesn’t prevent its lasting. Stupidity has a knack of getting its way.”

Indeed it is true.

It was only last February when we seemed smart. We had amazing technology, movies on demand, a smartphone in our pockets to communicate with everyone and reveal all the world’s knowledge. There was peace more or less. There was prosperity. There was progress. Our medical systems worked. It seemed that only a few months ago, we had it all together. We seemed smart. Until suddenly stupid took over, or so it seemed.

Actually we weren’t smart as individuals. Our politicians were as dumb as they ever have been, and massive ignorance pervaded the population, then as always. What was smart last February was society and the processes that made society work in the good old days.

“Please explain.”

I shall.

The lockdowns took a sledgehammer to these practices, processes, and institutions. It replaced them nearly overnight with new bureaucratic and police-state mandates that herded us into our homes and arbitrarily assigned new categories: elective vs non-elective medical procedures, essential vs nonessential business, permissible vs. impermissible forms of association, even to the point of measuring the distance from which we must be separated one from another. And just like that, via executive order, many of the institutions and processes were crushed under the boot of the political class.

What emerged to take its place? It’s sad to say but the answer is widespread ignorance. Despite having access to all the world’s knowledge in our pockets, vast numbers of politicians and regular people defaulted back to a premodern cognition of disease. People did this out of fear, and were suddenly and strangely acquiescent to political commands. I’ve had friends tell me that they were guilty of this back in the day, believing that mass death was imminent so the only thing to do was to shelter in place and comply with the edicts.

The seeming intelligence that we had only in February suddenly seemed to turn to mush. A better way to understand this is all our smartest institutions and practices were crushed, leaving only raw stupidity in its place.

Truth is that we as individuals are probably not much smarter than our ancestors; the reason we’ve made so much progress is due to the wisdom of the institutions we’ve gradually built over decades, centuries, and a millenia.

Take those away and you reveal what we don’t really want to see.

Looking back, I’m very impressed at the knowledge and awareness that the postwar generation had toward disease mitigation. It was taught in the schools, handed down to several generations, and practiced in journalism and public affairs. That was smart. Something happened in the 21st century to cause a kind of breakage in that medical knowledge chain, and thus did societies around the world become vulnerable in the presence of a new virus to rule by charlatans, hucksters, media howlers, and would-be dictators.

With lockdown finally easing, we will see the return of what seems to be smart societies, and the gradual loss of the influence of stupid. But let us not deceive ourselves. It could be that we’ve learned nothing from the fiasco that unfolded before our eyes. If economies come to be restored, eventually, to their former selves, it will not be because we or our leaders somehow beat a virus. The virus outsmarted everyone. What will fix what the political class has broken is the freedom once again to piece back together the institutions and processes that create the extended order that makes us all feel smarter than we really are.

Source: AIER

Flu Like Symptoms are NOT a Disease

Flu like symptoms are not a disease but an inevitable detox that improves health; inevitable for those with lymphatic stagnation. It is like calling sleep a disease.

Full Interview of Dr. Stoian Alexov

Daniel Harris

I cleaned up of the transcript provided. All the bracketed notes were in the original transcription. Looks pretty clean to me, wanted to post it asap.

Interview of Dr. Stoyan Alexov, president of the Bulgarian Pathology Association, by Dr. Stoycho Katsarov, chair of the Centre of protection of citizens’ rights, regarding the European Society of Pathology, May 8, 2020, webinar titled COVID-19: Unprecedented Challenges in Pathology Departments Across Europe

Dr. Katsarov: I’m talking to Dr. Stoian Alexov, who is the president of the Bulgarian Pathology Association. He participated in an international webinar on the topic of the coronavirus infection and the point of view of pathologists from different countries in Europe. Based on that webinar, what are the main conclusions you come up with?

Dr. Alexov: The topic of webinar was to share between the pathologists in European countries what’s happening in their countries, and from the perspective of pathologists what we should do to stop the so-called pandemic. Do we really have accurate information? Are we talking about a pandemic or infection? Is the virus really killing people? If so, how exactly is it killing people and what mechanical type of process is going? How are the different organs and systems in the human body impacted by the coronavirus? The good thing is that the webinar was organized by the European Society of Pathology, and in the webinar were multiple participants from Italy, Spain, Germany, Sweden. Many questions were asked. And the main question was, what is happening with the coronavirus infection not pandemic. I want to accentuate that: it’s an infection, not a pandemic. Because what we hear, many of the facts that are given, the main thing the people are really afraid of is to die, but we the pathologists, we meet with dead people all the time. The main conclusion was that the autopsies that were conducted in Germany, Italy, Spain, France and Sweden do not conclude that the virus is deadly.

Dr. Katsarov: What are the specifics of the clinical picture from the histology of the coronavirus that makes it different from the seasonal flus and other respiratory diseases?

Dr. Alexov: I asked exactly the same question to Professor Moch [Dr. Holger Moch, professor of pathology at the University of Zurich] because he showed us histological pictures or maps of the people they did autopsies on, [as well as] electron microscopy of the lungs of the people who died, the analyses that they did [on those], which cannot be done in Bulgaria. He found the heliome [? heluidic ?] type of tissues in endothelial cells. Based on that, they were considering that the virus creates endotheliitis, and to the lead [?] of the lungs paths [?]. Endotheliitis is a disease which is the infection of the lung palodalim [?]. And also, what’s happening to the first and second level of evelocities[?] [in the lung]? I asked, is there a difference in the autopsy of a person who died from the coronavirus and of another person who died from the seasonal flu? And Dr. Moch answered that to this point from what he has seen in the autopsies there is no difference in the pathology of the person who died from coronavirus and someone who died from seasonal flu. [NOTE: DR. MOCH DIDN’T SAY THAT. HE SIMPLY SAID IT’S A GOOD QUESTION.] But there’s a big difference which is really important to know. The two doctors from Italy asked if there is a specific monoclonal antibody which we can use in our pathology work to prove that the coronavirus [is present]. Is there such an antibody that’s been isolated? [Dr. Moch answered that] such a monoclonal antibody hasn’t been isolated — they don’t know of the existence of such an antibody at the moment. The second question is, is there a different monoclonal antibody that we can use to diagnose a coronavirus infection when we do a biopsy? And for both questions they answered no, there is no such antibody that we can use to prove coronavirus is present in a biopsy or in autopsy tissue. In Bulgaria we’ve done three autopsies [on people whose deaths were attributed by COVID-19], [all conducted] by Dr. Nia Serbianova [spelling?][she’s the head of clinical pathology at Pirogov Hospital]. She asked the same question about this antibody to experts from Italy and Spain. They replied that there’s no such monoclonal antibodies. What all the pathologists said is that there’s no one who has died from the coronavirus. And I will repeat that: no one has died from the coronavirus. Most of the people… You would ask why, because if you were listening to me you’d say I’m crazy. I will explain why I’m not crazy. But I’m explaining this from the perspective of pathology. And as a professional working in pathology, we have certain procedures, protocols, which we apply to necropsy as well as to biopsy. Our protocol should list the first disease, second disease, third disease and reason for the death. When we say that the patient died because of the coronavirus, we mean that the coronavirus led to interstitial pneumonia, afterwards leading to the death of the person, with no other diseases in other organs and in other systems. But such facts haven’t been found; nobody has reported this. And because of that, I’m really concerned with the inadequate behaviour of the World Health Organization. For the first time in my practice I’ve been practising for 30 years as a doctor that the WHO is announcing a pandemic before it has facts to support this. They did not announce an epidemic but instead a pandemic. Pandemic means that people will die from the coronavirus. I don’t know why many governments and country leaders are saying that people are going to die from it. While us pathologists we aren’t scared by that because we meet with that every day — we work with dead bodies.

Dr. Katsarov: Are you saying that the information was presented in a manipulative way

Dr. Alexov: Yes, an absolutely manipulated way. Misrepresented. In many countries, the people who are pathologists and virologists work together in laboratories, so they talk to each other. And that’s why I’m telling you what the other people are saying. I’m not the only person to listen to; we should listen to people from the other countries as well. We need to listen to the people and the colleagues who work together with virologists, with biologists, and [listen to] what they think of that. And the people who died, did they die from the coronavirus, or with the coronavirus? The real term we use is that the people in Italy and France and in Spain are dying with the coronavirus — not from the coronavirus — on the top of their very poor clinical picture from their illness [i.e., they had serious comorbid disease(s)].

Dr. Katsarov: Can we do this comparison: If in Bulgaria we have 200,000-300,000 people who get sick from the seasonal flu every year — and if we know that some of them will die because of different reasons, can we just say they died from the seasonal flu?

Dr. Alexov: No, we can’t do that, because there’s a big difference between the seasonal flu and the coronavirus. No, in many cases the people who die from the seasonal flu also include young people. Which is the big difference. The difference from the coronavirus pandemic is we haven’t yet had young people dying. Which is a big difference. Because [with the seasonal flu] we can find one virus which can cause a young person to die with no other illness present. And it’s different than saying that somebody died from the coronavirus who has a [cardiac] infarct and with [two other diseases]. [One of] the people who died [from COVID] that we did an autopsy on was a 78-year-old with high blood pressure and an infarct from heart attack and he didn’t have a single body system working properly. And then we were saying that coronavirus infections are so difficult to be cured. In other words, the coronavirus infection is an infection that does not lead to death. And the flu can lead to death.

Dr. Katsarov: What I have in mind is if a person has a heart attack and a flu we can either say that he died from a heart attack or we can say he died from the flu; that’s what’s happening now with the coronavirus.

Dr. Alexov: Yes, exactly. At the moment it’s a total resistance of the pathologists in Europe, in China, as well as in Australia and in Canada [because] the pathologists have been pushed and pressured: if the patient has a coronavirus, the reason for the death is to be written that it’s nothing else but the coronavirus. That’s quite stressful for us, and for me in particular, because we have protocols and procedures which we need to use. Because when we do autopsies we take necropsy material from all the body systems, we put it in paraffin blocks, and in 100 years we can take a look at them again. And another pathologist 100 years from now is going to say, Hey, those pathologists didn’t know what they were doing! So we need to be really strict with our diagnoses, because they could be proven [or disprove], and they could be checked again later. In this case, now there is the WHO that doesn’t want us to do autopsies. I’m not clear why the WHO doesn’t want us to do autopsies when we need to prove what is the strength of the virus for this specific [?] of the virus. But I don’t know why the WHO doesn’t really want us to do autopsies; I assume they have the information that the virus is not deadly.

Dr. Katsarov: Is this the reason that in Bulgaria we’re not doing the autopsies?

Dr. Alexov: Yes. We’re required to follow the WHO. And I’m really sad that we need to follow those instructions without even thinking about them. But in Germany, France, Italy and England they’re starting to think that we shouldn’t follow the WHO so strictly, and when we’re writing the reason for death we should have the pathology [results to back that up] and we should follow the protocol. That’s because when we say something we need to be able to prove it. We have information from Spain, Italy and Germany: We didn’t find anybody that died from coronavirus. Did you find in your country? Then we start asking each other internationally, asking, Where is the problem? Who’s making that problem?

Dr. Katsarov: In the media, there’s information that the WHO is giving instructions to all the health organizations, and in this information the instructions are that every person who has a positive PCR test is to be counted [as having the coronavirus]. And if that person dies from something, it’s to be written that they died from the coronavirus. That’s a directive that came from the WHO, which proves what you’re saying. I don’t know if this had some specific goal. But even if the goal had a good rationale, the way it’s been done it’s a source of panic, it’s a source of stress, to the whole world. Because all the people, when they’re pronounced to have died because of the coronavirus, that changes the character of the infection, which is really scary; the people are afraid. And in reality there’s not such a high [death rate from it].

Dr. Alexov: I’d compare it with the flu infection that we had in January and February [2020], when young people died from the flu. It was quite aggressive this year, and we had kids who died from it, as well as people of working age. Versus now with coronavirus, there aren’t as many cases and definitely not as many deaths. My opinion about that, and I will sign under what I’m saying, is that the World Health Organization is creating worldwide chaos, with no real facts behind what they’re saying. In Bulgaria there aren’t many virologists and pathologists, and there isn’t much funding from the government. But [as] a pathologist, which is my personal specialty, I work with proofs — material proofs — and I’m asking the World Health Organization: where are your proofs? We had a problem in the 1990s, [so] there was a Professor Chugdar Gurgev [sp?] who developed a protocol in which if somebody died from AIDS, he did the autopsy and took different samples from different organs, so we could see exactly what was happening in the different systems and organs, and collect that data. We had a similar protocol for tuberculosis, which as you know is quite a dangerous infection. So we developed these protocols for tuberculosis as well. My pathologist colleagues from Italy and Germany, they’re attacking one of the instructions they call it like law from the World Health Organization, that [for the coronavirus] we need to follow a special directions for really dangerous infections. But we [already] have similar directives. And as I said we used that protocol from 1990 when we were collecting data for tuberculosis and collecting data for HIV. Those protocols began to be developed in 1919, after the Spanish flu, when 10-12% of the population died from it, and that was the population in the working age. And it took [decades] to develop those protocols. At the moment, we are talking about 70,000 people [worldwide] who have died [from the coronavirus] who are over the age of 70. And here I’m asking why we didn’t try to do the autopsies of those people to see exactly why they died. And why do we say it’s the coronavirus? Did they die from or did they with the coronavirus? There are also some different sources that were saying that in Italy the coronavirus led to the death of so many people because they were immunized with the H1N1 flu vaccine, which basically suppresses adults’ immune systems. And after that they were getting the coronavirus easily, because [as a result of the vaccine] their immune systems weren’t very strong. This could be cleared up maybe with autopsies, but at the moment it’s not clear.

Dr. Katsarov: So your opinion is that they need to do research and they need to take in[to account] the pathology?

Dr. Alexov: Yes, of course! We’re missing the main points. With the autopsies, we can take a lot of lung material. And we can take some of that material and do research on it, and we can keep about 80% for future research, if future research is needed. The paraffin that we put the material into from autopsies can stay [intact] for up to 300 years. So maybe after 20, 30 years, when we have a different but maybe similar pandemic — or epidemic, because I don’t believe it’s a pandemic — we can maybe compare the lung histological pictures between now and later. Because coronavirus infections, for the people who don’t know, exist in many people, but what we know from our Chinese colleagues, the Chinese pathologists, it’s from 2002, 2007, 2008, 2013, 2017 and 2018. And based on this pathology material we can see what the difference is with this pandemic. And again I won’t talk specifically about a pandemic, because I believe we don’t have the facts necessary to call it a pandemic. I think it’s not reasonable that the World Health Organization is still saying pandemic – it’s an epidemic. I haven’t seen such an advertisement for a virus [before].

Dr. Katsarov: I don’t know whether that is lack of professionalism, or there are different goals, but obviously there’s some controversy about the behaviour and the facts. I want to wrap up with [the observation that] there’s a whole concentration of attention, and a building up of this attention into a panic, which will really impact the people who don’t have the coronavirus but have got different chronic diseases, different people who need medical care, who are like other victims from the whole [healthcare] resources that are focused [instead] on the coronavirus. These people are afraid to go visit the doctor. [And] the health authorities don’t allow visits to GPs. I think this could be as serious a problem later on as the real coronavirus: the number of people who need a doctor’s attention and aren’t getting it could build up and become an even bigger problem. In other words, I think more people possibly will die from their chronic diseases in the near future, because the chronic diseases aren’t being taken of care of compared with the coronavirus.

Dr. Alexov: This is not 100%, his is 200%, you’re right. And I can say that’s for sure, because all of us who are working in oncology, we know that stress significantly suppresses the immune system, so I can really claim 200% that all the chronic diseases will be more severe and more acute per se. Specifically in situ carcinoma, over 50% of these are going to become invasive. So I will say that this epidemic isn’t so much an epidemic of the virus, but it’s an epidemic of giving people a lot of fear and stress. Because the people aren’t like me and other pathologists who understand that the coronavirus is nothing serious. The people are afraid of it.

Dr. Katsarov: How has your work changed because of the coronavirus?}

Dr Alexov: Our work is down by 90%. In some hospitals the work is down 50%, in some hospitals the work for the medical personnel is down to 10-15%.

Dr. Katsarov: I will just tell you now that your job as a pathologist is like the supreme court: you’re giving the cause of death after they die. Specifically for cancer — if it’s cancer or it’s not cancer. Same with biopsies, you’re the supreme court. For all the different tests, the people are waiting for the pathologists to say whether they have cancer or not. Specifically for cancer, same for the in-situ-mass biopsies and Pap tests: what’s the pathology. And if your job is 90% down, this means you’re not getting those tests from the people. This means the people don’t have their proper diagnosis. And this means that this disease is developing without being [diagnosed and treated].

Dr. Alexov: Exactly. Pathology includes cytology, histology, immunochemistry and molecular pathology. For example, when we tell a woman that they have to have a Pap test every three months and they haven’t done it for six months, if that patient had a risk of developing cancer, those six months could be crucial to the development. Which means that instead of spending $5 to test the problem and to start treating it early, the problem is getting worse and we’ll need to treat it later with hundreds of dollars. It’s a similar thing when we’re not doing autopsies for the coronavirus: it’s as if somebody goes to the supreme court and that person was shot ten times, but the supreme court says, Well, maybe out of those 10 times one time he shot himself, so we’ll consider it to be a suicide. I know about similar situations. A really, really interesting situation was a person in the U.S. who was in an accident on the street, he had brain damage and he was put on life support in the hospital for four days. He was positive on the PCR test for the coronavirus, so on his death certificate it said that he died from coronavirus. I don’t think that’s [proper] medicine. After the coronavirus [has subsided] there’ll be a lot of people who will have lost trust in the medical profession. We can’t measure that, but it’ll be a big problem. I want also to add about the pandemic that we need to have people’s trust. Because in my opinion the coronavirus infection isn’t that dangerous, and how are the people going to have trust in me doing cancer pathology, much of which is related to viruses as well? But nobody is talking about that, and nobody is… We have some patients who have lung cancer caused by a papillomavirus infection. And nobody has ever made a big deal about this. And we have many patients like this. [And also,] yearly about a million and a half people die [worldwide] from lung cancer due to smoking. If we compare that to the coronavirus, it would be like a pandemic and everybody [would be told to] stop smoking — let’s say a pandemic of smoking.

Dr. Katsarov: What you’re saying is that the reaction to this infection is disproportionate, and that this amount of panic isn’t necessary. And maybe another risk is that after a year or two there’ll be a really dangerous infection, but the people won’t trust us and won’t believe us if we’re saying that it’s really [dangerous].

Dr. Alexov: I was talking with some friends who are specialists in virology, and [they said that] if we have global warming, perhaps it would cause the spread from frozen areas of viruses that humankind has never seen before. And if those viruses become active/alive, we’d have to combat them, and we wouldn’t know how to do that. And if the people don’t believe us, if a similar type of infection happens [again], what are we going to do then? For example with ebola, which we’ve learned over the last few years is not really an infection that people are used to because it doesn’t infect many humans. We need to see exactly how the law will deal with immunization and that vaccine that we’re all talking about, because I’m certain it’s not possible to create a vaccine against COVID. I’m not sure what exactly Bill Gates is doing with his laboratories; is it really a vaccine he’s producing, or something else? [joking/laughs] But we need to leave this question to the internal agencies, FBI and … Okay, let’s stick to talking about medicine, and the conspiracy theories are conspiracy theories. We don’t know what we’re going to learn.

Dr. Katsarov: I want to say thank you for this conversation.

Dr. Alexov: I want to say again the last sentence, which is that no one has died from the coronavirus. The people are dying with coronavirus, not from [coronavirus]. There is no need for [either the term] pandemic or epidemic. Italy, Spain, France, Germany and Sweden — this is what my colleagues from all those countries said.

“No one has died from the coronavirus”

Important revelations shared by Dr Stoian Alexov, President of the Bulgarian Pathology Association

Rosemary Frei and Patrick Corbett
Via Off-Guardian.com

A high-profile European pathologist is reporting that he and his colleagues across Europe have not found any evidence of any deaths from the novel coronavirus on that continent.

Dr. Stoian Alexov called the World Health Organization (WHO) a “criminal medical organization” for creating worldwide fear and chaos without providing objectively verifiable proof of a pandemic.

Another stunning revelation from Bulgarian Pathology Association (BPA) president Dr. Alexov is that he believes it’s currently “impossible” to create a vaccine against the virus.

He also revealed that European pathologists haven’t identified any antibodies that are specific for SARS-CoV-2.

These stunning statements raise major questions, including about officials’ and scientists’ claims regarding the many vaccines they’re rushing into clinical trials around the world.

They also raise doubt about the veracity of claims of discovery of anti-novel-coronavirus antibodies (which are beginning to be used to treat patients).

Novel-coronavirus-specific antibodies are supposedly the basis for the expensive serology test kits being used in many countries (some of which have been found to be unacceptably inaccurate).

And they’re purportedly key to the immunity certificates coveted by Bill Gates that are about to go into widespread use — in the form of theCOVI-PASS — in 15 countries including the UK, US, and Canada.

Dr. Alexov made his jaw-dropping observations in a video interview summarizing the consensus of participants in a May 8, 2020, European Society of Pathology (ESP) webinar on COVID-19.

The May 13 video interview of Dr. Alexov was conducted by Dr. Stoycho Katsarov, chair of the Center for Protection of Citizens’ Rights in Sofia and a former Bulgarian deputy minister of health. The video is on the BPA’s website, which also highlights some of Dr. Alexov’s main points.

We asked a native Bulgarian speaker with a science background to orally translate the video interview into English. We then transcribed her translation. The video is here and our English transcript is here.

Among the major bombshells Dr. Alexov dropped is that the leaders of the May 8 ESP webinar said no novel-coronavirus-specific antibodies have been found.

The body forms antibodies specific to pathogens it encounters. These specific antibodies are known as monoclonal antibodies and are a key tool in pathology. This is done via immunohistochemistry, which involves tagging antibodies with colours and then coating the biopsy- or autopsy-tissue slides with them. After giving the antibodies time to bind to the pathogens they’re specific for, the pathologists can look at the slides under a microscope and see the specific places where the coloured antibodies — and therefore the pathogens they’re bound to – are located.

Therefore, in the absence of monoclonal antibodies to the novel coronavirus, pathologists cannot verify whether SARS-CoV-2 is present in the body, or whether the diseases and deaths attributed to it indeed were caused by the virus rather than by something else.

It would be easy to dismiss Dr. Alexov as just another crank ‘conspiracy theorist.’ After all many people believe they’re everywhere these days, spreading dangerous misinformation about COVID-19 and other issues.

In addition, little of what Dr. Alexov alleges was the consensus from the May 8 webinar is in the publicly viewable parts of the proceedings.

But keep in mind that whistleblowers often stand alone because the vast majority of people are afraid to speak out publicly.

Also, Dr. Alexov has an unimpugnable record and reputation. He’s been a physician for 30 years. He’s president of the BPA, a member of the ESP’s Advisory Board and head of the histopathology department at the Oncology Hospital in the Bulgarian capital of Sofia.

On top of that, there’s other support for what Dr. Alexov is saying.

For example, the director of the Institute of Forensic Medicine at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf in Germany said in media interviews that there’s a striking dearth of solid evidence for COVID-19’s lethality.

“COVID-19 is a fatal disease only in exceptional cases, but in most cases it is a predominantly harmless viral infection,” Dr. Klaus Püschel told a German paper in April. Adding in another interview:

In quite a few cases, we have also found that the current corona infection has nothing whatsoever to do with the fatal outcome because other causes of death are present, for example, a brain hemorrhage or a heart attack […] [COVID-19 is] not particularly dangerous viral disease […] All speculation about individual deaths that have not been expertly examined only fuel anxiety.”

Also, one of us (Rosemary) and another journalist, Amory Devereux, documented in a June 9 Off-Guardian article that the novel coronavirus has not fulfilled Koch’s postulates.

These postulates are scientific steps used to prove whether a virus exists and has a one-to-one relationship with a specific disease. We showed that to date no one has proven SARS-CoV-2 causes a discrete illness matching the characteristics of all the people who ostensibly died from COVID-19. Nor has the virus has been isolated, reproduced and then shown to cause this discrete illness.

In addition, in a June 27 Off-Guardian article two more journalists, Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter, added to the evidence that “the existence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is based on faith, not fact.”

The pair also confirmed “there is no scientific proof that those RNA sequences [deemed to match that of the novel coronavirus] are the causative agent of what is called COVID-19.”

Dr. Alexov stated in the May 13 interview that:

the main conclusion [of those of us who participated in the May 8 webinar] was that the autopsies that were conducted in Germany, Italy, Spain, France and Sweden do not show that the virus is deadly.”

He added that:

What all of the pathologists said is that there’s no one who has died from the coronavirus. I will repeat that: no one has died from the coronavirus.”

Dr. Alexov also observed there is no proof from autopsies that anyone deemed to have been infected with the novel coronavirus died only from an inflammatory reaction sparked by the virus (presenting as interstitial pneumonia) rather than from other potentially fatal diseases.

Another revelation of his is that:

“We need to see exactly how the law will deal with immunization and that vaccine that we’re all talking about, because I’m certain it’s [currently] not possible to create a vaccine against COVID. I’m not sure what exactly Bill Gates is doing with his laboratories – is it really a vaccine he’s producing, or something else?”

As pointed to above, the inability to identify monoclonal antibodies for the virus suggests there is no basis for the vaccines, serological testing and immunity certificates being rolled out around the globe at unprecedented speed and cost. In fact, there is no solid evidence the virus exists.

Dr. Alexov made still more important points. For example, he noted that, in contrast to the seasonal influenza, SARS-CoV-2 hasn’t been proven to kill youth:

[With the flu] we can find one virus which can cause a young person to die with no other illness present […] In other words, the coronavirus infection is an infection that does not lead to death. And the flu can lead to death.”

(There have been reports of severe maladies such as Kawasaki-like disease and stroke in young people who were deemed to have a novel-coronavirus infection. However, the majority of published papers on these cases are very short and include only one or only a small handful of patients. Moreover, commenters on the papers note it’s impossible to determine the role of the virus because the papers’ authors did not control sufficiently, if at all, for confounding factors. It’s most likely that children’s deaths attributed to COVID-19 in fact are from multiple organ failure resulting from the combination of the drug cocktail and ventilation that these children are subjected to.)

Dr. Alexov therefore asserted that:

the WHO is creating worldwide chaos, with no real facts behind what they’re saying.”

Among the myriad ways the WHO is creating that chaos is by prohibiting almost all autopsies of people deemed to have died from COVID-19. As a result, reported Dr. Alexov, by May 13 only three such autopsies had been conducted in Bulgaria.

Also, the WHO is dictating that everyone said to be infected with the novel coronavirus who subsequently dies must have their deaths attributed to COVID-19.

“That’s quite stressful for us, and for me in particular, because we have protocols and procedures which we need to use,” he told Dr. Katsarov. “…And another pathologist 100 years from now is going to say, ‘Hey, those pathologists didn’t know what they were doing [when they said the cause of death was COVID-19]!’ So we need to be really strict with our diagnoses, because they could be proven [or disproven], and they could be checked again later.”

He disclosed that pathologists in several countries in Europe, as well as in China, Australia and Canada are strongly resisting the pressure on them to attribute deaths to COVID-19 alone:

I’m really sad that we need to follow the [WHO’s] instructions without even thinking about them. But in Germany, France, Italy and England they’re starting to think that we shouldn’t follow the WHO so strictly, and [instead] when we’re writing the cause of death we should have some pathology [results to back that up] and we should follow the protocol. [That’s because] when we say something we need to be able to prove it.”

(He added that autopsies could have helped confirm or disprove the theory that many of the people deemed to have died of COVID-19 in Italy had previously received the H1N1 flu vaccine. Because, as he noted, the vaccine suppresses adults’ immune systems and therefore may have been a significant contributor to their deaths by making them much more susceptible to infection.)

Drs. Alexov and Katsarov agreed that yet another aspect of the WHO-caused chaos and its fatal consequences is many people are likely to die soon from diseases such as cancer because the lockdowns, combined with the emptying of hospitals (ostensibly to make room for COVID-19 patients), halted all but the most pressing procedures and treatments.

They also observed these diseases are being exacerbated by the fear and chaos surrounding COVID-19.

We know that stress significantly suppresses the immune system, so I can really claim 200% that all the chronic diseases will be more severe and more acute per se. Specifically in situ carcinoma – over 50% of these are going to become more invasive […] So I will say that this epidemic isn’t so much an epidemic of the virus, it’s an epidemic of giving people a lot of fear and stress.”

In addition, posited Dr. Alexov, as another direct and dire result of the pandemic panic many people are losing faith in physicians.

Because in my opinion the coronavirus isn’t that dangerous, and how are people going to have trust in me doing cancer pathology, much of which is related to viruses as well? But nobody is talking about that.”

We emailed Dr. Alexov several questions, including asking why he believes it’s impossible to create a vaccine against COVID-19.

He didn’t answer the questions directly. Dr. Alexov instead responded:

We also emailed five of Dr. Alexov’s colleagues in the European Pathology Society asking them to confirm Dr. Alexov’s revelations. We followed up by telephone with two of them. None responded.

Why didn’t Dr. Alexov or his five colleagues answer our questions?

We doubt it’s due to lack of English proficiency.

It’s more likely because of the pressure on pathologists to follow the WHO’s directives and not speak out publicly. (And, on top of that, pathology departments depend on governments for their funding.)

Nonetheless, pathologists like Drs. Alexov and Püschel appear to be willing to step out and say that no one has died from a novel-coronavirus infection.

Perhaps that’s because pathologists’ records and reputations are based on hard physical evidence rather than on subjective interpretation of tests, signs and symptoms. And there is no hard physical evidence that COVID-19 is deadly.

Rosemary Frei has an MSc in molecular biology from the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Calgary, was a freelance medical writer and journalist for 22 years and now is an independent investigative journalist. You can watch her June 15 interview on The Corbett Report, read her otherOff-Guardian articles and follow her on Twitter.
Patrick Corbett is a retired writer, producer, director and editor who’s worked for every major network in Canada and the US except for Fox. His journalistic credits include Dateline NBC, CTV’s W-5 and the CTV documentary unit where he wrote and directed ‘Children’s Hospital’, the first Canadian production to be nominated for an International Emmy. You can follow Patrick on Twitter.