Disappearing White America

Travis says:

Whites are no longer 60% of the US population. Whites have become a minority of our University Students and are a minority of Americans under the age of 19.

The only demographic which matters is the under 40 population, as the older population is no longer fertile and has little impact on our culture and our future. The majority of Americans under the age of 40 benefit from wokism because the majority are part of a minority group.

US demographics under the age of 40
Year- Whites -Non-Whites
1990 – 120 M – 36 M
2020 – 88 M — 78 M

The dramatic collapse of the white population in the United States is accelerating. The Future of America will be fewer and fewer whites. Only about 25% of the US workforce consists of straight White males today. 75% of the workforce are members of a protected minority group with special rights and privileges. White fertility continues to decline. We have already been replaced. White deaths has exceeded white births for the last decade. The decline in the number of Whites is accelerating faster than predicted. By 2040 Whites will be a minority within the US , but for all practical considerations Whites are already a minority within the United States.

Whites are not being culled so much as choosing not to reproduce or mating with non-whites. The European Y chromosomes will remain dominant in the United States , as it remains dominant among Latin Americans and African-Americans today.

The dwindling number of whites in America is due to the low fertility of whites combined with the rise in mixed-raced couples. The majority of mixed raced couples in America today are White-Hispanic pairings followed by White-Asian mating. Both Hispanic Women and Asian females prefer white males, thus the white Y chromosomes will continue to dominate for many years to come.

No culling of whites is required to reduce the number of whites in America. Whites have been choosing careers and education over having children for decades. Whites never had much ethnic solidarity and certainly most whites do not have any allegiance to fellow whites. This is why Whites are vanishing, too many have chosen to remain childless or have just one or two kids and many have chosen non-white mates.

White elites males are more likely to marry Asians, while the white working class men are more likely to marry Hispanic. The future elites will be comprised of Jews, Asians, Whites and mixed-raced (White-Asian). In 50 years the only pure whites left will be the Amish and some hillbillies. But the majority of Americans males will still have the European Y chromosomes.

Cancer: The Forbidden Cures – The Original Big Pharma Playbook Long Before COVID

REVIEW BY DAVID BONELLO – INTERNATIONAL WELLNESS DIRECTORY

Not what it seems. When I popped in the DVD, I went to the chapters to see what they were. I felt, no, not again…the same old stuff.

What a pleasant surprise. I’ve researched and written about these “forbidden” cures for years. What a delight to actually see an interview with Rene Caisse. We even see a party thrown for Rene a year before she died filled with people whom she had helped with their cancers.

Harry Hoxsey shows up, and you get to see scenes from a rare movie that Hoxsey himself made in 1957 called You Don’t Have to Die. It is so rare, you can’t even find a mention of it at the Internet Movie Database.

I loved the research they did on this film. It must have taken years to compile all the archived photos, audio, and films.

They even got Morris Fishbein on film. This is the creep who ran medicine for nearly 50 years. He destroyed many people, many companies, and the damage he did to the health care system of the time killed untold numbers of suffering humans. However, the Hoxsey affair was his downfall. He was forced to resign after libeling Hoxsey and eventually had to admit that Hoxsey was curing cancer.

The section on Max Gerson was interesting, especially the deja vue section: they borrowed scenes from Dying to have Known. The scenes they used were the most powerful, the contraposed scenes of so-called medical experts proclaiming that no one has ever been cured of cancer at the Gerson clinic, juxtaposed with patients telling their story.

Finally, you’ll see some of the latest advances in alternative therapies, including a physician who is curing cancer with baking soda even after he’s lost his license to practice medicine. For you history buffs, this is a must have. For you people looking for options outside of conventional medicine, this could save your life. It is very well done and well worth a watch.

– David Bonello, International Wellness Directory

 

Ivermectin: The Forbidden Treatment

by Nick Corbishley via: Naked Capitalism

So why are journalists not covering it?

Michael Capuzzo, a New York Times best-selling author , has just published an article titled “The Drug That Cracked Covid”. The 15-page article chronicles the gargantuan struggle being waged by frontline doctors on all continents to get ivermectin approved as a Covid-19 treatment, as well as the tireless efforts by reporters, media outlets and social media companies to thwart them.

Because of ivermectin, Capuzzo says, there are “hundreds of thousands, actually millions, of people around the world, from Uttar Pradesh in India to Peru to Brazil, who are living and not dying.” Yet media outlets have done all they can to “debunk” the notion that ivermectin may serve as an effective, easily accessible and affordable treatment for Covid-19. They have parroted the arguments laid out by health regulators around the world that there just isn’t enough evidence to justify its use.

For his part, Capuzzo, as a reporter, “saw with [his] own eyes the other side [of the story]” that has gone unreported, of the many patients in the US whose lives have been saved by ivermectin and of five of the doctors that have led the battle to save lives around the world, Paul Marik, Umberto Meduri, José Iglesias, Pierre Kory and Joe Varon. These are all highly decorated doctors. Through their leadership of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care (FLCCC) Alliance, they have already enhanced our treatment of Covid-19 by discovering and promoting the use of Corticoid steroids against the virus. But their calls for ivermectin to also be used have met with a wall of resistance from healthcare regulators and a wall of silence from media outlets.

“I really wish the world could see both sides,” Capuzzo laments. But unfortunately most reporters are not interested in telling the other side of the story. Even if they were, their publishers would probably refuse to publish it.

That may explain why Capuzzo, a six-time Pulitzer-nominated journalist best known for his New York Times-bestselling nonfiction books Close to Shore and Murder Room, ended up publishing his article on ivermectin in Mountain Home, a monthly local magazine for the of the Pennsylvania mountains and New York Finger Lakes region, of which Capuzzo’s wife is the editor. It’s also the reason why I decided to dedicate today’s post to Capuzzo’s article. Put simply, as many people as possible –particularly journalists — need to read his story.

As Capuzzo himself says, “I don’t know of a bigger story in the world.”

Total News Blackout

On December 8 2020, FLCCC member Dr Pierre Kory gave nine minutes of impassioned testimony to the US Homeland Security Committee Meeting on the potent anti-viral, anti-inflammatory benefits of ivermectin. A total of 9 million people (myself included) saw the video on YouTube before it was taken down by YouTube’s owner, Google. As Capuzzo exhaustively lays out, both traditional and social media have gone to extraordinary lengths to keep people in the dark about ivermectin. So effective has this been that even in some of the countries that have benefited most from its use (such as Mexico and Argentina) many people are completely unaware of its existence. And this is no surprise given how little information is actually seeping out into the public arena.

A news blackout by the world’s leading media came down on Ivermectin like an iron curtain. Reporters who trumpeted the COVID-19 terror in India and Brazil didn’t report that Ivermectin was crushing the P-1 variant in the Brazilian rain forest and killing COVID-19 and all variants in India. That Ivermectin was saving tens of thousands of lives in South America wasn’t news, but mocking the continent’s peasants for taking horse paste was. Journalists denied the world knowledge of the most effective life-saving therapies in the pandemic, Kory said, especially among the elderly, people of color, and the poor, while wringing their hands at the tragedy of their disparate rates of death.

Three days after Kory’s testimony, an Associated Press “fact-check reporter” interviewed Kory “for twenty minutes in which I recounted all of the existing trials evidence (over fifteen randomized and multiple observational trials) all showing dramatic benefits of Ivermectin,” he said. Then she wrote: “AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. There’s no evidence Ivermectin has been proven a safe or effective treatment against COVID-19.” Like many critics, she didn’t explore the Ivermectin data or evidence in any detail, but merely dismissed its “insufficient evidence,” quoting instead the lack of a recommendation by the NIH or WHO. To describe the real evidence in any detail would put the AP and public health agencies in the difficult position of explaining how the lives of thousands of poor people in developing countries don’t count in these matters.

Not just in media but in social media, Ivermectin has inspired a strange new form of Western and pharmaceutical imperialism. On January 12, 2021, the Brazilian Ministry of Health tweeted to its 1.2 million followers not to wait with COVID-19 until it’s too late but “go to a Health Unit and request early treatment,” only to have Twitter take down the official public health pronouncement of the sovereign fifth largest nation in the world for “spreading misleading and potentially harmful information.” (Early treatment is code for Ivermectin.) On January 31, the Slovak Ministry of Health announced its decision on Facebook to allow use of Ivermectin, causing Facebook to take down that post and removed the entire page it was on, the Ivermectin for MDs Team, with 10,200 members from more than 100 countries.

In Argentina, Professor and doctor Hector Carvallo, whose prophylactic studies are renowned by other researchers, says all his scientific documentation for Ivermectin is quickly scrubbed from the Internet. “I am afraid,” he wrote to Marik and his colleagues, “we have affected the most sensitive organ on humans: the wallet…” As Kory’s testimony was climbing toward nine million views, YouTube, owned by Google, erased his official Senate testimony, saying it endangered the community. Kory’s biggest voice was silenced.

“The Most Powerful Entity on Earth”

Malcom X once called the media “the most powerful entity on the earth.” They have, he said, “the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that’s power. Because they control the minds of masses”. Today, that power is now infused with the power of the world’s biggest tech and social media companies. Together social and traditional media have the power to make a medicine that has saved possibly millions of lives during the current pandemic disappear from the conversation. When it is covered, it’s almost always in a negative light. Some media organizations, including the NY Times, have even prefaced mention of the word “ivermectin” — a medicine that has done so much good over its 40-year lifespan that its creators were awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2015 — with the word “controversial.”

Undeterred, many front-line doctors have tried to persuade their respective health regulators of the unparalleled efficacy and safety of ivermectin as a covid treatment. They include Dr. Tess Lawrie, a prominent independent medical researcher who, as Capuzzo reports, evaluates the safety and efficacy of drugs for the WHO and the National Health Service to set international clinical practice guidelines:

“[She] read all twenty-seven of the Ivermectin studies Kory cited. The resulting evidence is consistent and unequivocal,” she announced, and sent a rapid meta-analysis, an epidemiolocal statistical multi-study review considered the highest form of medical evidence, to the director of the NHS, members of parliament, and a video to Prime Minister Boris Johnson with “the good news… that we now have solid evidence of an effective treatment for COVID-19…” and Ivermectin should immediately “be adopted globally and systematically for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.”

Ignored by British leaders and media, Lawrie convened the day-long streaming BIRD conference—British Ivermectin Recommendation Development—with more than sixty researchers and doctors from the U.S., Canada, Mexico, England, Ireland, Belgium, Argentina, South Africa, Botswana, Nigeria, Australia, and Japan. They evaluated the drug using the full “evidence-to-decision framework” that is “the gold standard tool for developing clinical practice guidelines” used by the WHO, and reached the conclusion that Ivermectin should blanket the world.

“Most of all you can trust me because I am also a medical doctor, first and foremost,” Lawrie told the prime minster, “with a moral duty to help people, to do no harm, and to save lives. Please may we start saving lives now.” She heard nothing back.

Ivermectin’s benefits were also corroborated by Dr. Andrew Hill, a renowned University of Liverpool pharmacologist and independent medical researcher, and the senior World Health Organization/UNITAID investigator of potential treatments for COVID-19. Hill’s team of twenty-three researchers in twenty-three countries had reported that, after nine months of looking for a COVID-19 treatment and finding nothing but failures like Remdesivir— “we kissed a lot of frogs”— Ivermectin was the only thing that worked against COVID-19, and its safety and efficacy were astonishing—“blindingly positive,” Hill said, and “transformative.” Ivermectin, the WHO researcher concluded, reduced COVID-19 mortality by 81 percent.

Why All the Foot Dragging?

Yet most health regulators and governments continue to drag their feet. More evidence is needed, they say. All the while, doctors in most countries around the world have no early outpatient medicines to draw upon in their struggle against the worst pandemic in century. Drawing on his own experience, Capuzzo describes the absence of treatments for COVID-19 as a global crisis:

When my daughter Grace, a vice president at a New York advertising agency, came
down with COVID-19 recently, she was quarantined in a “COVID hotel” in Times Square with homeless people and quarantining travelers. The locks on her room door were removed. Nurses prowled the halls to keep her in her room and wake her up every night to check her
vitals—not to treat her, because there is no approved treatment for COVID-19; only, if her oxygen plummeted, to move her to the hospital, where there is only a single eective approved treatment for COVID-19, steroids that may keep the lungs from failing.

There are three possible explanations for health regulators’ refusal to allow the use of a highly promising, well-tolerated off-label medicine such as ivermectin:

  • As a generic, ivermectin is cheap and widely available, which means there would be a lot less money to be made by Big Pharma if it became the go-to early-stage treatment against covid.
  • Other pharmaceutical companies are developing their own novel treatments for Covid-19 which would have to compete directly with ivermectin. They include ivermectin’s original manufacturer, Merck, which has an antiviral compound, molnupiravir, in Phase 3 clinical trials for COVID-19. That might explain the company’s recent statement claiming that there is “no scientific basis whatsoever for a potential therapeutic effect of ivermectin against COVID-19.
  • If approved as a covid-19 treatment, ivermectin could even threaten the emergency use authorisation granted to covid-19 vaccines. One of the basic conditions for the emergency use authorisation granted to the vaccines currently being used against covid is that there are no alternative treatments available for the disease. As such, if ivermectin or some other promising medicine such as fluvoxamine were approved as an effective early treatment for Covid-19, the vaccines could be stripped of authorisation.

[As a lockdown fanatic and virus hysteria booster the Naked Capitalism leaves out another possibility: An effective treatment would threaten the lockdown complex.]

This may explain why affordable, readily available and minimally toxic drugs are not repurposed for use against Covid despite the growing mountains of evidence supporting their efficacy.

Ivermectin has already been approved as a covid-19 treatment in more than 20 countries. They include Mexico where the mayor of Mexico City, Claudia Scheinbaum, recently said that the medicine had reduced hospitalisations by as much as 76%. As of last week, 135,000 of the city’s residents had been treated with the medicine. The government of India — the world’s second most populous country and one of the world’s biggest manufacturers of medicines — has also recommended the use of ivermectin as an early outpatient treatment against covid-19, in direct contravention of WHO’s own advice.

Dr Vikas P. Sukhatme, the dean of Emory School of Medicine, recently wrote in a column for the Times of India that deploying drugs such as ivermectin and fluvoxamine in India is likely to “rapidly reduce the number of COVID-19 patients, reduce the number requiring hospitalization, supplemental oxygen and intensive care and improve outcomes in hospitalized patients.”

Four weeks after the government included ivermectin and budesonide among its early treatment guidelines, the country has recorded its lowest case count in 40 days.

In many of India’s regions the case numbers are plunging in almost vertical fashion. In the capital Delhi, as in Mexico City, hospitalisations have plummeted. In the space of 10 days ICU occupancy fell from 99% to 70%. Deaths are also falling. The test positivity ratio slumped from 35% to 5% in just one month.

One of the outliers of this trend is the state of Tamil Nadu, where cases are still rising steeply. This may have something to do with the fact that the state’s newly elected governor, MK Stalin, decided to exclude ivermectin from the region’s treatment protocol in favor of Remdesivir. The result? Soaring cases. Late last week, Stalin reversed course once again and readopted ivermectin.

For the moment deaths in India remain extremely high. And there are concerns that the numbers are being under-reported. Yet they may also begin to fall in the coming days. In all of the countries that have used ivermectin widely, fatalities are the last thing to fall, after case numbers and hospitalizations. Of course, there’s no way of definitively proving that these rapid falloffs are due to the use of ivermectin. Correlation, even as consistent as this, is not causation. Other factors such as strict lockdowns and travel restrictions no doubt also play a part.

But a clear pattern across nations and territories has formed that strongly supports ivermectin’s purported efficacy. And that efficacy has been amply demonstrated in three meta-analyses.

India’s decision to adopt ivermectin, including as a prophylaxis in some states, is already a potential game-changer. As I wrote three weeks ago, if case numbers, hospitalizations and fatalities fall in India as precipitously as they have in other countries that have adopted ivermectin, it could even become a watershed moment. But for that to happen, the news must reach enough eyes and ears. And for that to happen, reporters must, as Capuzzo says, begin to do their job and report both sides of this vital story.

Why a Yalta II ?

by Thierry Meyssan via Voltairenet.org

The United States is not the hyper-power it dreamed of being. It has endured a terrible military defeat in Syria with a hundred allied states. Even if they continue to delude themselves, the time of reckoning has come. To survive, Washington has no choice but to ally itself with one of its adversaries. Russia or China? That is the question.
PNG - 225.1 kbAt a G7 preparatory meeting on May 3, 2021, U.S. and U.K. foreign ministers Antony Blinken and Dominic Raab suggested that the West would fight both Russia and China. But it is an entirely different scenario that should be implemented.

We cannot live in a society without rules. If they are unjust, we revolt and change them. This is inevitable, because what seems right at one time is not necessarily right at another. In any case, we need an order, otherwise each one becomes the enemy of all. What is true for men is also true for peoples.

In 1945, the Yalta Conference laid the foundations for the division of the world into the zones of influence of the three great victors of the Second World War: the USA, the United Kingdom and above all the Soviet Union. Throughout the Cold War, each side publicly insulted the other, but they always got along under the table. Historical research has shown that, although at any moment the agreement could have turned into a confrontation, the invective was rather intended to weld each side together than to hurt the opponent/partner.

This system was never contested. It lasted until the disappearance of the USSR in 1991. Since then, the United States has claimed to be the only hyper-power capable of organizing the world. They have not succeeded. On many occasions, China and Russia -heir to the USSR- have tried to reshuffle the deck. They have not succeeded either, but they have not stopped making progress. The United Kingdom, which had joined the European Union during the Cold War, left it to compete again (“Global Britain”). Thus, there are no longer three, but four powers that aspire to share the world.

After the confusion of 1991-2021, from “Desert Storm” to the “reshaping of the broader Middle East,” the United States’ ambition broke down in Syria. It took several years for it to admit defeat. The Russian armies now have much more advanced weapons and the Chinese army has much more qualified personnel. Washington urgently needs to take note of reality and accept an agreement otherwise it will lose everything. It is no longer a matter of calculating what is best for it, but of undertaking everything to survive.

The allies of the United States have not perceived the importance of the military disaster in Syria. They persist in lying to themselves and treating this major conflict, involving even more states than the Second World War, as a “civil” war in a small, distant country. It will therefore be particularly difficult for them to comply with Washington’s cascading retreat.

A Yalta II is the last chance for the United Kingdom. The former “Empire on which the sun never sets” no longer has the military means of its ambitions. But it still has an exceptional know-how and an unfailing cynicism (the “Perfidious Albion”). It will take part in any deal as long as it guarantees a payoff. It follows in the footsteps of the US Administration, taking advantage of their common culture and solid networks of influence. The Pilgrim’s Society, which was very present during the first Obama administration, is back in the White House.

Russia is not the USSR, where few leaders were Russian. It does not seek the triumph of an ideology. Its foreign policy is not based on a vague “geopolitical” theory either, but on the projection of its strong personality. It is ready to neglect its interests rather than to deny itself.

China has come a long way without owing anything to anyone, and especially not to those who destroyed it at the beginning of the 20th century. It intends above all to recover its regional influence and trade with the rest of the world. It knows how to wait, but is not ready to make any concessions. Today it is an ally of Russia, but it remembers its role during its colonization and has not given up its territorial claims on Eastern Siberia.

In short, none of the four major powers is acting according to the same logic and pursuing the same objectives. This makes it easier to reach an agreement, but more difficult to keep it.

The Pentagon has appointed a task force to consider possible options for dealing with China (DoD China Task Force), which it fears more than Russia. Indeed, whatever Beijing recovers from its regional zone of influence, it will do so at the expense of Washington’s positions in Asia. For its part, the White House has organized a top-secret working group to consider possible new orders. The first group has issued its report, which has been classified. No one knows whether the second group has completed its work or not.

It is this group that oversees the destiny of the United States. Its composition itself is secret. Its members are obviously more powerful than a senile president. It plays a central decision-making role comparable to that of the National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPD) during the Bush-Cheney Administration.

It is unclear at this point whether this group represents political objectives and/or financial interests. In any case, it is clear that Global Finance influences both NATO and the White House. It does not seek to change alliances, but rather to have the information necessary to adapt behind the scenes to these changes and preserve its social position.

The movements of Washington’s various special envoys suggest that the Biden Administration has already chosen to restore the Cold War duopoly. This is the only way for Washington to avoid a war against a Russian-Chinese alliance that it would probably not survive.

This option implies that Washington commits itself to defend the integrity of Russian Siberia against China and that Moscow reciprocally defends the US bases and possessions located in the Chinese zone of influence.

This option assumes that Washington recognizes Chinese economic pre-eminence in the world. But it leaves it the possibility of politically containing the “Middle Kingdom” so that it never becomes a world power in the full sense.

The only real loser would be China, still deprived of a part of its zone of influence and politically contained. However, it would be appeased, for the time being, by letting it recover Taiwan, which the Pentagon Think Tank has considered for a week as “non-essential” for the USA.

It is important to understand that the main obstacle for the US is mental. Since 2001, Washington has been convinced that instability plays in its favour. This is why it is unabashedly instrumentalizing jihadists around the world, thus implementing the Rumsfeld/Cebrowski strategy. However, the concept of a Yalta-type agreement is, on the contrary, a bet on stability, which is what Moscow has been preaching for two decades.

President Biden has planned to meet with his British partners to strengthen their alliance on the model of the Atlantic Charter; then to bring together his main allies for the G7: and finally to meet with his military and civilian allies in NATO and the European Union. It is only after having assured himself of the loyalty of all that he will meet his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, in Geneva on June 16.

All this is paradoxical; because it amounts to making the Biden Administration do exactly what the Trump Administration was prevented from doing. Four years have been wasted for nothing.

(To be continued…)

Translation
Roger Lagassé

“Half of the Masks Were Contaminated with One or More Strains of Pneumonia-Causing Bacteria”

Scott Morefield via: Townhall

We’ve been told for well over a year that widespread forced public masking should be implemented because, even if only moderately to slightly to negligibly effective at curbing the spread of COVID-19, there are ZERO drawbacks.

“What’s the harm?” they ask.

“It’s only a minor inconvenience,” they bleat.

“If it saves ONE LIFE, it’s worth it!” they implore.

Meanwhile, we on Team Reality have not only continued to point to real-world data that shows masking to be entirely ineffective, we’ve also maintained that forced public masking, especially long-term, has negative societal and even health ramifications that the powers-that-be are all-too-happy to ignore in subservience to their newfound face mask god.

It only stands to reason that one of those health ramifications would be the fact that millions of people, particularly children, have been forced to wear and carry around pieces of cloth they’ve continually breathed through for hours on end. What lurking pathogens might be found on these disgusting contraptions being incessantly handled, stuck in pockets, and mindlessly tossed on books, tables, and desks? Well, one group of Florida parents sent a batch of masks worn by their children to a lab to find out. And yeah, you’ll probably need to make sure you aren’t eating dinner anytime soon before you digest THESE results.

Via press release:

Gainesville, FL (June 16, 2021) – A group of parents in Gainesville, FL, concerned about potential harms from masks, submitted six face masks to a lab for analysis. The resulting report found that five masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria. No viruses were detected on the masks, although the test is capable of detecting viruses.

The analysis detected the following 11 alarmingly dangerous pathogens on the masks:

• Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumonia)

• Mycobacterium tuberculosis (tuberculosis)

• Neisseria meningitidis (meningitis, sepsis)

• Acanthamoeba polyphaga (keratitis and granulomatous amebic encephalitis)

• Acinetobacter baumanni (pneumonia, blood stream infections, meningitis, UTIs— resistant to antibiotics)

• Escherichia coli (food poisoning)

• Borrelia burgdorferi (causes Lyme disease)

• Corynebacterium diphtheriae (diphtheria)

• Legionella pneumophila (Legionnaires’ disease)

• Staphylococcus pyogenes serotype M3 (severe infections—high morbidity rates)

• Staphylococcus aureus (meningitis, sepsis)

Half of the masks were contaminated with one or more strains of pneumonia-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with one or more strains of meningitis-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with dangerous, antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens. In addition, less dangerous pathogens were identified, including pathogens that can cause fever, ulcers, acne, yeast infections, strep throat, periodontal disease, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, and more.

The face masks studied were new or freshly-laundered before wearing and had been worn for 5 to 8 hours, most during in-person schooling by children aged 6 through 11. One was worn by an adult. A t-shirt worn by one of the children at school and unworn masks were tested as controls. No pathogens were found on the controls. Proteins found on the t-shirt, for example, are not pathogenic to humans and are commonly found in hair, skin, and soil.

A parent who participated in the study, Ms. Amanda Donoho, commented that this small sample points to a need for more research: “We need to know what we are putting on the faces of our children each day. Masks provide a warm, moist environment for bacteria to grow.”

These local parents contracted with the lab because they were concerned about the potential of contaminants on masks that their children were forced to wear all day at school, taking them on and off, setting them on various surfaces, wearing them in the bathroom, etc. This prompted them to send the masks to the University of Florida’s Mass Spectrometry Research and Education Center for analysis.

The below chart, put together by the group of parents, shows the potential dangers from each pathogen:

Appetizing, eh? Of course, nothing above, or anything else, will deter the extremists in the masking cult, some of whom now want to see masking in schools forever.

Vaccinated People are Dying of Covid at Over 5x the Rate of the Unvaccinated in UK

via: Investment Watch Blog

www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-of-novel-sars-cov-2-variant-variant-of-concern-20201201

Unvaccinated: 23 / 19,573 = 0.0011750881316099
Fully vaccinated: 12 / 1,785 = 0.0067226890756303
Difference: 0.0067226890756303 / 0.0011750881316099 = 5.721x

The fully vaccinated crowds is about 5.721 times as likely to die, according to this data.

Anybody have any idea what is happening?

The Killer in the Bloodstream: the “Spike Protein”

by MIKE WHITNEY

“From the beginning Covid has been a conspiracy against health and life. Covid is a profit-making agenda and an agenda for increasing arbitrary government power over people. There should be massive law suits and massive arrests of those who block effective Covid cures and impose a deadly vaccine.”

Paul Craig Roberts, Former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Ronald Reagan

The Spike Protein is a “uniquely dangerous” transmembrane fusion protein that is an integral part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. “The S protein plays a crucial role in penetrating host cells and initiating infection.” It also damages the cells in the lining of the blood vessel walls which leads to blood clots, bleeding, massive inflammation and death.

To say that the spike protein is merely “dangerous”, is a vast understatement. It is a potentially-lethal pathogen that has already killed tens of thousands of people.

So, why did the vaccine manufacturers settle on the spike protein as an antigen that would induce an immune response in the body?

That’s the million-dollar question, after all, for all practical purposes, the spike protein is a poison. We know that now due to research that was conducted at the Salk Institute. Here’s a summary of what they found:

“Salk researchers and collaborators show how the protein damages cells, confirming COVID-19 as a primarily vascular disease…. SARS-CoV-2 virus damages and attacks the vascular system (aka–The circulatory system) on a cellular level… scientists studying other coronaviruses have long suspected that the spike protein contributed to damaging vascular endothelial cells, but this is the first time the process has been documented….

the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease. Tissue samples showed inflammation in endothelial cells lining the pulmonary artery walls. The team then replicated this process in the lab, exposing healthy endothelial cells (which line arteries) to the spike protein. They showed that the spike protein damaged the cells by binding ACE2…“If you remove the replicating capabilities of the virus, it still has a major damaging effect on the vascular cells, simply by virtue of its ability to bind to this ACE2 receptor, the S protein receptor, now famous thanks to COVID.” (“COVID-19 Is a Vascular Disease: Coronavirus’ Spike Protein Attacks Vascular System on a Cellular Level”, scitechdaily.com

Remember how everyone laughed at Trump when he said injecting household bleach would cure Covid? How is this any different?

It’s not different, and whatever modest protection the vaccines provide as far as immunity, it pales in comparison to the risks they pose to personal health and survival.

And did you notice what the author said about stripping-out the virus and leaving the spike protein alone?’

He said “it still has a major damaging effect” implying ‘blood clots, bleeding and severe inflammation.’ In other words, the spike protein is deadly even absent the virus. Here’s how Dr. Byram Bridle (who is a viral immunologist and associate professor at University of Guelph, Ontario) summed it up:

“We made a big mistake. We didn’t realize it until now… We thought the spike protein was a great target antigen, we never knew the spike protein itself was a toxin and was a pathogenic protein. So, by vaccinating people we are inadvertently inoculating them with a toxin.” (“Vaccine scientist: ‘We’ve made a big mistake’”, Conservative Woman)

Think about that for a minute. This is a very big deal, in fact, this is the critical piece of the puzzle that has been missing for the last 15 months. Just as the respiratory virus concealed the real killing-agent in Covid, (the spike protein) so too, the relentless hype surrounding mass-vaccination has concealed the glaring problem with the vaccines themselves, which is, they generate a substance that is “capable of causing disease.”

That is the literal definition of pathogenic. The spike protein is a disease-producing toxin that poses a serious and identifiable threat to the health of anyone who chooses to get vaccinated. Could it be any clearer?It’s worth noting, that Bridle is a vaccine researcher who was awarded a $230,000 government grant last year for research on COVID vaccine development. He understands the science and chooses his words carefully. The term “pathogenic” is not meant to whip people into a frenzy, but to accurately describe how vaccine-generated proteins interact in the bloodstream. And the way they interact, is by inflicting serious damage to cells in the lining of the blood vessels which can result in illness or death. Here’s more from the same article:

“As many will know by now, the problem lies within a structure that enables the virus, originally from bats, not only to enter human cells but to deliver a toxin called the spike protein. Most Covid vaccines instruct our body cells to produce the same protein. This is in the hope that antibodies developed against it will prevent the most damaging effects of the actual virus. There is evidence that this is the case for some.

But there’s also a problem, spelled out most recently by Canadian researcher Dr Byram Bridle, who was awarded a $230,000 Ontario government grant last year for research on Covid vaccine development. This is that the spike protein produced by the vaccine does not just act locally, at the site of the jab (the shoulder muscle), but gets into the bloodstream and is carried through the circulation to many other sites in the body.

Previously confidential animal studies using radioactive tracing show it to go just about everywhere, including the adrenal glands, heart, liver, kidneys, lungs, ovaries, pancreas, pituitary gland, prostate, salivary glands, intestines, spinal cord, spleen, stomach, testes, thymus, and uterus.

The quantities are small and usually disappear within days. But the questions arise, is this mechanism involved in the thousands of deaths and injuries reported soon after Covid vaccination, and might it set some people up for the same long-term consequences as in severe cases of the disease itself?” (‘We’ve made a big mistake’“, Conservative Woman)

This is the most important question: What will the long-term impact of these vaccines be on the population at large? Here’s more from the same article:

“Some researchers say the risk from the vaccine may be greater than that from the actual virus in healthy people. This would be especially true for the young, whose immune systems deal with the virus successfully. In contrast, the vaccine has a device that protects the spike protein mechanism against immediate destruction by the body, in order to promote the immune response.”(Conservative Woman)

Repeat: ” the vaccine has a device that protects the spike protein mechanism against immediate destruction by the body, in order to promote the immune response.”

What does that mean? Does it mean that the spike protein created by the vaccine lingers on indefinitely risking a potential flare-up sometime in the future if another virus emerges or if the immune system is compromised? Will the people who have been vaccinated have the Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads until the day they die?

Dr Judy Mikovits thinks so. “Mikovits thinks the COVID-19 vaccine is a bioweapon designed to destroy your innate immunity and set you up for rapid onset of debilitating illness and premature death. She too suspects many will die rather rapidly. “It’s not going to be ‘live and suffer forever,” she says. “It’s going to be suffer five years and die.” (Mercola.com)

Is that possible? Could we see an unprecedented surge in fatalities in the next few years directly linked to these experimental vaccines?

Let’s hope not, but without any long-term safety data, there’s no way to know for sure. It’s all a big guessing game, which is one of the reasons that so many people are refusing to get vaccinated. Here’s more from Bridle:

‘I’m very much pro-vaccine, (said Dr Bridle) but … the story I’m about to tell is a bit of a scary one. This is cutting edge science. There’s a couple of key pieces of scientific information that we’ve been privy to, in the past few days, that has made the final link, so we understand now – myself and some key international collaborators – we understand exactly why these problems [with the vaccine] are happening.’

One of these ‘is that the spike protein, on its own, is almost entirely responsible for the damage to the cardiovascular system, if it gets into circulation. Indeed, if you inject the purified spike protein into the blood of research animals they get all kinds of damage to the cardiovascular system, and it can cross the blood-brain barrier and cause damage to the brain.

‘At first glance that doesn’t seem too concerning because we’re injecting these vaccines into the shoulder muscle. The assumption, up until now, has been that these vaccines behave like all of our traditional vaccines: they don’t go anywhere other than the injection site, so they stay in our shoulder. Some of the protein will go to the local draining lymph node in order to activate the immune system.

‘However – this is where the cutting edge science has come in, and this is where it gets scary – through a request for information from the Japanese regulatory agency, myself and several international collaborators have been able to get access to what’s called the biodistribution study. It’s the first time ever that scientists have been privy to seeing where the messenger RNA vaccines go after vaccination; in other words, is it a safe assumption that it stays in the shoulder muscle? The short answer is, absolutely not. It’s very disconcerting. The spike protein gets into the blood and circulates over several days post-vaccination.’”(Vaccine scientist: ‘We’ve made a big mistake’“, Conservative Woman)

They got the biodistribution study from the Japanese? Are you kidding me? You mean, the FDA waved these experimental “new technology” vaccines into service before they had the slightest inkling of where the substance in the vaccine would end up in the body. If that isn’t criminal negligence, then what is? Do you want proof that our regulators are controlled by the industries they are supposed to monitor? Here it is!

Here’s more from an article at Children’s Health Defense on the same topic:

“… in key studies — called biodistribution studies, which are designed to test where an injected compound travels in the body, and which tissues or organs it accumulates in — Pfizer did not use the commercial vaccine (BNT162b2) but instead relied on a “surrogate” mRNA that produced the luciferase protein….

Regulatory documents also show Pfizer did not follow industry-standard quality management practices during preclinical toxicology studies of its vaccine, as key studies did not meet good laboratory practice (GLP)….

“The implications of these findings are that Pfizer was trying to accelerate the vaccine development timeline based on the pressures of the pandemic,” said TrialSite founder and CEO Daniel O’Connor. “The challenge is that the processes, such as Good Laboratory Practices, are of paramount importance for quality and ultimately for patient safety. If such important steps are skipped, the risk-benefit analysis would need to be compelling.”….(“Pfizer Skipped Critical Testing and Cut Corners on Quality Standards, Documents Reveal“, Children’s Health Defense)

Let’s see if I got this right: The Covid vaccine was approved even though “Pfizer did not follow industry-standard quality management practices” and even though “key studies did not meet good laboratory practice?”

Do you still think these vaccines are safe? And, it gets worse, too. Check it out:

“... documents obtained by scientists through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) revealed pre-clinical studies showing the active part of the vaccine (mRNA-lipid nanoparticles) — which produce the spike protein — did not stay at the injection site and surrounding lymphoid tissue as scientists originally theorized, but spread widely throughout the body and accumulated in various organs, including the ovaries and spleen.” (“Pfizer Skipped Critical Testing and Cut Corners on Quality Standards, Documents Reveal”, Children’s Health Defense)

Like we said earlier, the vaccine was supposed to be “localized”, that is, remain in the area where it was injected. But that theory proved to be wrong, just like the theory that the spike protein would be a good antigen was wrong. There are literally thousands of fatalities and other injuries that attest to the “wrongness” of that theory, and there will be many more before this campaign is terminated. Here’s more:

“Research suggests this could lead to the production of spike protein in unintended places, including the brain, ovaries and spleen, which may cause the immune system to attack organs and tissues resulting in damage, and raises serious questions about genotoxicity and reproductive toxicity risks associated with the vaccine.” (“Pfizer Skipped Critical Testing and Cut Corners on Quality Standards, Documents Reveal“, Children’s Health Defense)

So, it goes everywhere. Wherever blood flows, there too goes the spike proteins. Do young women really want these lethal proteins in their ovaries? Do you think that will improve their prospects for getting pregnant or safely delivering their babies? This is madness on a scale that is, frankly, unimaginable. Here’s more:

“Studies indicate that the protein is able to gain access to cells in the testicles, and may disrupt male reproduction…..

Furthermore, the genetic code the virus carries contains inserts that make it ‘extremely plausible’ that the protein could misfold into a prion (such as held responsible for mad cow disease in the 1980s), causing widespread damage to brain cells and increasing the risk of conditions including Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease….” (“Covid vaccines: Concerns that make more research essential“, The Conservative Woman

We hope that readers are beginning to understand how risky these vaccines really are. It’s literally a matter of life and death. As Bridle opines:

“‘We have known for a long time that the spike protein is pathogenic…. It is a toxin. It can cause damage in our body if it’s in circulation. Now, we have clear-cut evidence that . . . the vaccine itself, plus the protein, gets into blood circulation.’”

Once that happens, the spike protein can combine with receptors on blood platelets and with cells that line our blood vessels. This is why, paradoxically, it can cause both blood clotting and bleeding.‘And of course the heart is involved, as part of the cardiovascular system,’ Bridle said. ‘That’s why we’re seeing heart problems. The protein can also cross the blood-brain barrier and cause neurological damage.

‘In short,… we made a big mistake. We didn’t realize it until now. We didn’t realize that by vaccinating people we are inadvertently inoculating them with a toxin.” (Conservative Woman)

“Mistake?” He calls it a “mistake”? That’s got to be the understatement of the century!

Let’s cut to the chase: These aren’t vaccines; they’re a spike-protein delivery-system. Regrettably, 140 million Americans have already been injected with them which means we can expect a dramatic uptick in debilitating medical conditions including blood clotting, bleeding, autoimmune disease, thrombosis in the brain, stroke and heart attack. The vast human wreckage we are now facing is incalculable.

Has there ever been a greater threat to humanity than the Covid vaccine?

G7 Politics Is The Last Shelter Of The Criminally Retarded

@lienChrist says:.
The criminal and the politician are the same type of people.
If the criminal becomes politically successful they are a great leader.
If the politician cannot succeed in being in power they become a criminal.
Politicians are destructive people, their whole effort is to dominate others.
This desire to dominate others is ugly, it is violence, pure violence and nothing else.
To reduce people to slaves is the greatest violence possible.
And that is the desire of every politician, to dominate, and to dominate absolutely.
All of these psychopaths are hungry for power, they are power-mad.
Their only joy is to dominate.
They talk about great service only to then dominate people.
You can look at the world, you can look at the history, and you will find proofs in abundance.
What they have done to humanity, just watch it, and what they continuously go on doing.
Just look at their games, just look at all their lies.
They are keeping the whole world in stupidity.
And they are not only stupid, they are stupidly cunning.
Remember, only stupid people are cunning.
You may not have thought of it that way.
An intelligent person is never cunning, intelligence is enough, they need not have any cunningness.
The stupid person has to substitute for their lack of intelligence, they have to become cunning.
By the time politician’s reach the highest posts, any intelligence has already withered away.
People who have gone beyond the age of sixty, seventy, eighty, then become prime ministers and presidents.
This is dangerous for the world, because they have so much power and so little intelligence left, if any?
In fact most people choose them to be prime ministers and presidents because they are no longer intelligent.
People don’t like intelligent persons.
Most people like people who look like them, who are retarded like them, then they feel they are not strangers.
Intelligent people will always be strangers.
People only choose dull dead persons to be in power because they can be safe with them.
Countries choose mediocre people to be in power, because they will save their tradition, their conventions, their prejudices.
They will protect their poisons.
Instead of destroying them, they will enhance them and strengthen them.
It is certainly dangerous to have unintelligent people in powerful posts.
And it is becoming more and more dangerous, because they have more and more power and less and less intelligence.
Once a politician is in power, they become a totalitarian, they become dictatorial.
They talk about democracy, but behind the democracy is dictatorship.
It is always so.
When the politician is not in power he is democratic, when he is in power all democracy disappears.
Look at the world, look what these criminal politicians have done to it.
[…]
If the world wants to be at peace, politicians should disappear entirely from this planet.
They are the enemies of humanity.
Humanity has to be freed from their chains and their presence.
A totally new kind of awareness is needed in the world.
A fire in which the whole political game is finished.
A few authentic enlightened people have to bring this fire to every heart.
And with the political game finished, the politician will disappear.
We just need a few authentic intelligent people, not priests, not professionals but people who have experienced consciousness itself.
They will become burning torches in the darkness of the night.
They will not become politicians, but they can destroy the whole political structure of the world, and that’s what is needed.
They will not be interested in politics, but they will certainly be interested in the humanity that the politicians have been exploiting for centuries.
They will not take power in their hands, they will simply destroy these parasites and let the power be with everybody.
[…]

It is a basic truth that only people who are suffering from an inferiority complex go into politics.
It is the inferiority complex that leads them into politics, so that they can prove to themselves, and to the world that they are not inferior, by having power over others.
A person who does not feel inferior would never go into politics.
So it is always the inferior who go to into politics.
And these people have the power of the armies, of chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction, of nuclear weapons.
It is a very strange and dangerous world.
As it is now, idiotic politicians are trying to solve problems which they don’t understand at all.
Problems which they have created, which have now gone beyond their reach and beyond their understanding.
Direct meritocracy is the answer for all our problems.
With direct meritocracy, there is no need for any political party, politicians or political ideology.
People should stand on their own merit.
Merit should be the only decisive point.
We have geniuses in every field, but you don’t find those geniuses becoming prime ministers or presidents.
But they can become presidents and prime ministers if there are no political parties.
Then their sheer merit will be enough, and nobody will even be capable of competing with them.
They will not have to go to beg for votes, they will be chosen unanimously.
We have so many people of great merit, but they should not become part of any political party, they should not degrade themselves.
To become part of a political party and beg for votes while making false promises which cannot be fulfilled, is not the way.
Only the third-class people, very mediocre people, become part of political parties, the best remain out.
Actually only the most capable and intelligent should be the ones who manage the society.
The world will be far better if we are in the hands of intelligent, independent people, creative people who do not want to destroy, whose intelligence won’t allow them to do all the stupid things that politicians go on doing.
Power should always be in the hands of the more alert, more aware, more conscious people.
Otherwise, this power is going to destroy the whole of humanity.
It is time to understand the whole situation.
We have to prevent politicians from going on playing the same criminal games.
Because behind the masks of democracy is a cunning, criminal political system.
These people who call themselves democratic and think that they are protectors of democracy in the world are really imperialistic.
These governments pretend to be democratic, but are not.
We can all now see that this so called democracy is only a mask, and behind it are psychotic politicians controlling fascist governments.
These governments should be exposed to the whole world, because the whole world has been believing that they are in a democracy.
Why should there be a political party?
There is no reason for political parties to exist.
[…]
Politicians have already done enough harm to humanity, it is time to forever show them the door.

Who Brought the Blacks to America?

Alden says in response to this:

“The Kennedys are important because a rational, comparative study of their murders reveals the ugly truth behind the smoke screen of the “Kennedy curse”, and exposes the deep power that has enslaved America ever since.”

Of course the Kennedys didn’t bring slaves to America. By the time Kennedy became President January 1961 segregation was finished. Unless you are a White hating liberal who thinks there should be a black in every residential block.

All three Kennedy’s were anti White. Ted and Robert were just making speeches. But JFK issued an executive order mandating affirmative discrimination in government employment March 1961 less than 2 months after he became president. Think about that. Has any French President ever issues an executive order mandating black Africans be hired for government employment instead of native White French?

You’re not an American, you don’t know our history except the pro Marxist anti American history every European has been taught in school. And like a lot of naive gullible Americans you believe what the worshipful media write about the Kennedy’s from the 1930s on.

Old Joe Kennedy was a master of publicity. He created a public relations campaign on behalf of his family that’s still going on 80 years after he hired Walter Winchell, Drew Pearson, Walter Krock and hundreds of others.

Kennedy was a carefully crafted actor and so was the whole family. Similar to the British royal family and their charities and 15,000 pound wedding dresses and baptisms and happy married couples. Or like the Bill Gates publicity machine that presents him as a philanthropist to disguise whatever he’s doing internationally.

And there’s a lot more people in America other than the 13 percent of black criminals who have destroyed everyone one of our great cities, our state school system and everything they touch.

Like other jumped up prole Europeans, you probably think George Floyd was an innocent angel murdered with malice afore thought by an evil WASP like me with a French name, perhaps a distant relative of yours. Floyd was a career criminal with no employment history, on parole, who died of self ingested illegal drugs after being arrested for passing counterfeit money.

Europeans all love American blacks and feel soo superior to Americans because America has slavery. I’ll say to you what I’ve said to every jumped up prole Brit about American slavery. The English brought Africans to America an English judge legalized slavery for blacks in 1654 and we stopped importing Africans in 1808.

Ever heard of the slave colonies of Haiti, Martinique, Guadalupe, Cayenne, Devils Island, Louisiana French colony and other Caribbean Islands? That’s France you American White hating ignoramus. Do French schools even teach about the French responsibility for populating the American states of Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas and Missouri with African slaves??

I doubt it. Truth about American slavery is that European ignoramuses don’t know is that it was France and England that dumped African slaves on America. 750,000 White men died to free the slaves England and your country France dumped on us.

And don’t call me a WASP, a racial slur invented by Jewish communists. My British DNA came back a bit of Welsh, Irish and Scots but 60 percent Scandinavian. Which makes sense since my father’s surname is common in Yorkshire settled by Vikings.

So get down on your knees and apologize to George Floyd’s criminal generations on welfare useless wasters of Oxygen and space for being responsible as a French man for bringing Africans to six southern states and the Caribbean. Not only is America plagued with our own blacks but Haitians.

And acknowledge your guilt and apologize to every black person resident today in Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas and Missouri for the fact that France imported African slaves to those states.

There’s a few books telling some of the truth about the Kennedys. A good one is The Dark Side Of Camelot by a highly regarded NYTimes reporter. It’s not anti Kennedy at all. Just objective as all presidential biographies should be. Instead of the endless Lives of the Saint Kennedys you’ve been brainwashed with.

I can trade “what about“ history better than you. As you are so ignorant about the French role in American slavery.

Affirmative action, anti White activism, aiding and abetting the blacks to destroy our great cities; that’s what I have against the Kennedys and every American President since Truman.

BTW read some history. The Algerians slave raided, pirated and invaded France for a thousand years before France invaded Algeria and ended the Algerian piracy, slave kidnapping and hit and run raids in France.

Bet you went to college and learned all about the evils of White Europeans and the virtue and sanctity of Arab Muslims who never committed an immoral action since 650AD

You know absolutely nothing about what Algerian Muslims did to Europe for a thousand years before France ended it.

The mind of a liberal is an empty sink. Every once in a while liberal propaganda Central Committee pulls out the plug and drains the sink. Then puts the plug back in, turns on the faucet and fills the empty sink with the current correct thought.

That’s the empty brain if a liberal. Total ignorance until filled with lies.

The NHS Just Changed How They Count Covid “Cases”… Here’s Why

by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian

Licensed from Adobe Stock

The UK’s National Health Service has received new instructions from the government on how it should record Covid19 “cases”, separating those who are actually sick from those who just test positive.

From the beginning of the “pandemic” last spring, the NHS (and other countries all over the world) have defined a “case” as anyone who tests positive for the Sars-Cov-2 virus, regardless of whether or not they have symptoms.

Given that as many as 80% of those who have been infected have no symptoms, and the propensity for the flawed PCR tests to return false-positive results, this lead to likely massively inflated numbers of “cases”.

Now, though, the NHS is going to attempt to differentiate between patients who actually have the alleged disease “Covid19”, and those who are in hospital for other reasons and only “incidentally” tested positive for the virus.

According to a report in the Independent [emphasis added]:

NHS England has instructed hospitals to make the change to the daily flow of data sent by NHS trusts […] Hospitals have been told to change the way they collect data on patients infected with coronavirus to differentiate between those actually sick with symptoms and those who test positive while seeking treatment for something else.

The distinction between “with” and “from” in Covid deaths – and “with” and “for” in hospitalisations – has been one Covid sceptics all over the world have been keen to make for over a year, but this is the first time any institution has really recognised the difference. And, certainly, it’s the first time any healthcare service has endeavoured to actually catalogue them differently.

So what does the NHS expect the impact of this change to be? Again, from the Independent:

One NHS source said the new data would be “more realistic” as not all patients were sick with the virus, adding: “But it will make figures look better as there have always been some, for example stroke [patients], who also had Covid as an incidental finding”.

That’s a frank admission, and an important one.

For the last eighteen months, voices all over the alternate media have been saying the Covid numbers are unrealistic, specifically because they include people who were never actually sick. We have been called “deniers” and “conspiracy theorists” for our trouble.

But now an NHS source has actually said, going forward, the Covid data will be “more realistic” as it will discount all the patients where Covid was only “an incidental finding”. This is a bigger story than the media coverage suggests – only the Indy and Telegraph are covering it right now, and neither with the focus it deserves.

NHS England is, essentially, tucking away a covert admission that a lot of their fear-mongering statistics were never “realistic”.

Why would they do this? And why now?

Well, here’s what they claim [emphasis added]:

[The NHS said] the move was being done to help analyse the effect of the vaccine programme and whether it was successfully reducing Covid-19 sickness.

But it doesn’t really make any sense, when you think about it.

It will “help analyse the effect of the vaccine programme”? How so?

How does changing the definition at this point possibly help “analyse” anything? Doesn’t it confuse the issue?

Won’t it, in fact, effectively reduce the numbers of official “covid cases”? Doesn’t making the numbers “look better”, at this stage, make the “vaccine” appear more effective?

It’s also important to note that the changes in data collection will only apply to new patients, it will not be retroactive. Prof Keith Willett, NHS England’s Covid incident director, was very clear on that in a quote for the Telegraph [emphasis added]:

In lay terms this could be considered as a binary split between those in hospital ‘for Covid-19’ and those in hospital ‘with Covid-19’. We are asking for this binary split for those patients newly admitted to hospital and those newly diagnosed with Covid while in hospital.”

So, the old (and now admitted unrealistic) data, will not be subject to change. The Covid “case” numbers before June 7th are etched in stone – everyone who tested positive was a “case”.

But after June 7th they will be separating Covid cases who are actually hospitalised due to Covid19, from other patients who only have “incidental covid”.

Any good scientist will tell you you can’t change the way you measure or collect your data halfway through an experiment, and you can’t compare data gathered in one way to data gathered in another. That is not “analysing the effect” of anything, it’s altering the experiment conditions.

The difference between “with” and “for” has always existed, but by applying that filter only to new data they will make it appear that it’s a new phenomenon, caused by the vaccination programme.

It is incredibly bad science.

…but it’s also totally in keeping with the trend of altering Covid practices to create the impression the “vaccine” is having a positive impact.

We’ve already reported that WHO changed their Covid diagnosis guidelines, and their PCR test guidelines, in late 2020 and early 2021, right in line with the first vaccination programs being launched. The US CDC has likewise been repeatedly fiddling their definition of“breakthrough infection” in order to make the vaccines appear more effective.

This NHS change is just more of the same – altering the experimental conditions to achieve the desired outcome. A total, complete inversion of the scientific method, by the same people who zealously scream about “following the science”.

It is deliberate manipulation of the data, being done brazenly in the public eye.

But what impact will it actually have? Throughout the pandemic, how many patients were ever sick with only Covid, and how many had cancer, or a stroke or Alzheimers along with “incidental covid”?

Well, official figures on deaths have shown that well over 80% of so-called “Covid deaths” had at least one serious pre-existing condition, and Bernard Marx did a great breakdown of how the cause of death figures are manipulated. But that’s deaths, what about hospital admissions?

Although only anecdotal, we have been sent results of several Freedom of Information Act requests that UK citizens submitted to their local NHS trusts. These FOI requests ask for the number of people currently in hospital being treated for Covid, or numbers who died solely due to Covid or variations on that theme. Here’s 1, 2, 3, 4 them. There are a lot more available.

The numbers are uniformly small. So, it’s entirely possible that, under this new method of “analysis”, the NHS’s list of “Covid cases” will shrink to almost nothing.

Don’t worry though, should that happen we will likely never be told about it, because NHS England has made it quite plain that they might never release this data to the public. Both the Independent and Telegraph say so, with almost word-for-word the exact same sentence:

NHS England has not yet confirmed whether the data will be made public, as it must be checked and verified first.

They need to “check” and “verify” the data before we’re allowed to see it, huh? It’s almost as if they’ve got something to hide.