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.

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.

Face Masks Make Things Worse And Even Dangerous

He did NOT get tested.

But they said he tested positive.

By Malcolm Kendrick, doctor and author who works as a GP in the National Health Service in England. His blog can be read here and his book, ‘Doctoring Data – How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense,’ is available here.

As a doctor, I occasionally get confronted with difficult, inexplicable things, but this is a mystery I simply can’t solve. What lies behind this unusual rise in deaths in an age group that isn’t vulnerable to Covid-19?

It has been almost impossible to make any sense of the figures of Covid-19 deaths from around the world. They say that the first casualty of war is truth. However, the enemy, in this case, doesn’t much care what anyone says, so there’s no point in lying to it.

All it wants to do is move from one host to another and propagate itself. Why does it wish to do this? We don’t really know – it just does. Covid-19 doesn’t do interviews, but we can guess that its mission is to completely dominate the world.

Faced with the same implacable enemy, you would expect that every country would see similar patterns of infection and death. Or you might expect to see the same figures from countries that carried out the same actions – essentially, whether or not they imposed a nationwide lockdown.

However, if you try to compare lockdown vs no lockdown, the Covid-19 mortality figures appear incomprehensible. Belgium, for example, entered lockdown on March 18, while Belarus didn’t lockdown at all. Belgium has a population of 11.5 million, while Belarus’s is 9.5 million.

As of June 22, Belgium had suffered 9,696 coronavirus-related deaths, while, Belarus, as of the same date, had suffered 346. The death rate in Belgium, per million of population, on that date, was 847. In Belarus, it was 36.

That means the death rate in Belgium was over 23 times higher than in Belarus. Yes, two European countries sitting at approximately the same latitude, both starting with the letter ‘B’, have a vastly different rate of death.

What can we make of such statistics? The simple response would be not to believe the figures from Belarus. Alternatively, we could decide not to believe the figures from Belgium either, because it has the highest death rate from Covid-19, per million, in the entire world. Why? Who knows? However, I’d caution against dismissing figures we don’t like or don’t feel make sense.

After all, there are other countries that didn’t lockdown to any extent, such as Japan, where there’s been a death rate of seven per million, or one fifth that of Belarus. But I think it would take someone very bold to simply dismiss the Japanese figures.

In fact, the death rate in Japan is very nearly the same rate as the rate in New Zealand, which has had only 22 deaths, and has been lauded for its aggressive lockdown policy and low rate of deaths. New Zealand’s death rate is 4.9 per million.

In short, if you look around the world, there are no patterns to be seen, and the death rates between countries vary by more than a hundredfold. However, nowhere in the world have those figures been weirder, or more difficult to interpret, than in England, and – even more curiously – in younger people.

Around 10 days ago, someone pointed out to me an anomaly so strange, so unexpected, that I’ve since spent a considerable amount of time speaking to other doctors, and statisticians, to find an explanation – with no luck so far.

First, to provide some context. The most accurate figures to use, in studying the Covid-19 epidemic, are excess deaths – that is, deaths from all causes, over and above the average from the past few years. If, say, 10,000 people normally die in the first week in April, a figure of 15,000 deaths in the same week this year would represent 5,000 “excess” deaths.

This figure is of crucial importance, mainly because it can be fully relied on. From personal experience, I know that what’s written on a death certificate is often no more than an educated guess. I also know there have been huge differences across countries in the way doctors have been instructed to record Covid-related deaths.

If an elderly person goes downhill rapidly and dies in a care home, and they hadn’t had a test, did they die of Covid, yes or no? Probably, possibly? Doctors in the UK have been advised to record “yes,” while, in other countries, they are more likely to record “no.” On the other hand, there are tales of doctors in the US being coached to write “Covid” on almost all death certificates, because the hospital is paid more money if they do so.

That means relying purely on the statistics for Covid-recorded deaths may be highly misleading. However, you can absolutely rely on the diagnosis of death. It’s a tricky clinical condition to miss.

So, if you want the outcome that’s the most reliable indicator that something truly significant is going on, you need to look at excess-mortality rates. If they stay the same, you can be reassured nothing serious is happening. This is true, however much the diagnosis of a single condition rises.

To provide this data, in as close to real time as possible, the EuroMOMO hub was established to monitor European mortality activity. Currently, it tracks changes in overall mortality in 24 nations. England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are treated as separate countries, and this was to become significant.

EuroMOMO showed absolutely no change in mortality across all 24 countries until week 11 of this year – the second week in March. It then rose rapidly, topping out in week 14. By the end of May, everything had fallen back to normal, which means the Covid-19 mortality spike lasted 10 weeks from start to finish. Overall mortality rates are now lower than normal.

It’s fascinating that some countries showed a sharp rise in mortality, and some showed none. For example, Austria, Denmark, Finland and Germany – nothing. France, Belgium, Spain, the Netherlands, England – major spikes. Half the countries didn’t have a spike; the others did.

Then, and here we get to the really weird part, is the data that was tucked away in a sub-section. A massive rise in mortality that was seen in only one country out of the 24, and nowhere else. And a spike in the age group 15 to 44 – one of the age groups least vulnerable to Covid-19, and in England alone. Not in Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales. It lasted five weeks and then disappeared.

Frustratingly, the figures on causes of death are not available – some types of death can take a long time to be recorded, such as those as the result of an accident or suicide. So, were all the excess deaths from Covid-19? It seems unlikely, as the total number of recorded deaths in this age group has been under 500 since the start of the epidemic, and that wouldn’t have created such a spike.

Might lockdown, in some way, have caused it? Might the loneliness of lockdown have caused a rise in suicides? Or a surge in drug overdoses? Or other reckless behaviour?

I don’t know… but if we are to truly understand what happened during the pandemic, we need to find out.

LARRY ROMANOFF

From the date of the initial outbreak in Wuhan I watched carefully on a daily basis the dispersion and progression of the coronavirus in China and then abroad, collecting as much data as were available on each location. By late May of 2020, China had been infection-free for many weeks, the concern turning to the identification and quarantine of imported cases. At the same time, the US became once again ‘the leader of the world’, this time in virus infections and deaths, producing 20,000 to 30,000 new cases and around 1,000 deaths per day. At the time, American hostility toward China’s success in stopping the virus was palpable, with many nasty media articles and White House accusations about China’s false statistics and blaming China for “spreading the virus” to the US. CNN stated, “Chinese state media has repeatedly touted China’s effective measures in containing the virus as the number of infections and deaths surged abroad, contrasting its success with the failures of Western governments, especially the United States.” Clearly there was much surprise and bitterness at China’s success and America’s failure, this coated in a sticky layer of resentment based partly on a justified suspicion that the Chinese were not overly distressed at the Americans enjoying the fruits of their own labor.

But even then I had a sense of an apparition, a version of Dickens’ ‘ghost of coronavirus past’, accompanied by an uncomfortable feeling the Americans were sufficiently bitter (and vicious) to deny the Chinese their apparently easy victory. My fear was that the Americans would try to reseed China as they did Russia, and it would seem my fears were not unjustified. The new virus that broke out at the Xinfadi market in Beijing was a different strain than any previously existing in China, one that existed only in the US and Europe and could only have been brought in from the outside. And once again at a seafood market with no identifiable patient zero, no clear epidemiology (source and distribution) of a virus that did not exist in China. It almost had to be deliberately seeded, the odds against being infinitesimally small.

In terms of what I am calling COVID-20 (to differentiate it from the initial outbreak), China may have been fortunate to detect and corral this new pathogen before it could spread. The outbreak did expand to three other provinces but in single digits and the medical authorities have taken extreme action to prevent further spread since this variety – which again did not exist in China and had to be seeded from another country, appears to be much more contagious than the original COVID-19. In response, Beijing has locked down everything and sent a group of experts to guide the fight against this new potential epidemic, so far with good success. Nucleic acid testing has been initiated on a massive scale, already many millions of people tested, and all those in contact with the Xinfadi market being in quarantine. Many residential compounds in the city strictly prohibit anyone from entering or leaving, with residents having their temperatures checked and reported on a daily basis, and their food and daily necessities delivered.

Before this new outbreak, Beijing had been virus-free for nearly 60 days, meaning there were no local viruses and that this new pathogen was definitely an import (or an American export). On June 19, China’s CDC experts, after intensive investigations of the Xinfadi market, announced what they termed “a groundbreaking virus tracing discovery”, which was that the strain of the new virus in Beijing was the same as that in much of Europe – but much older than those in Europe, and “had been around for quite some time” – and that can mean only that it came from the US because that was the source of all the original varieties many months ago.

The investigators said they obtained so many positive samples that the entire market was “severely contaminated by the virus”, but also that no one should form the conclusion that the market was the origin merely because the outbreak took place there. More importantly, they also said “Beijing’s outbreak gives us the opportunity to re-examine our previous speculation that the virus originated from wildlife”, because unlike Wuhan, “the possibility of wildlife causing Beijing’s latest outbreak is slim.” Their conclusion was that “an infected individual or object contaminated with the virus entered the wet market, and the market only gave it an environment to multiply”. The authorities have already produced the genome sequence and are now establishing when and how the virus was likely imported into China, and how long was the transmission chain. There is no question this pathogen was brought into China “by people”, the question being the identity of those people and their purpose. And, what better way to “teach those smug Chinese a lesson” and attempt to derail China’s rapid economic recovery.

Russia Re-seeded

There is something equally strange about the virus in Russia. For a long time, Russia had only a few infections, rising steadily by only five or ten per day, then suddenly it exploded, rising by 5,000, then 10,000 and 20,000 per day. Virus outbreaks don’t normally manifest that way. The normal process upon an outbreak is a rapid acceleration in the number of infections until it peaks, as happened with all other countries. But with Russia, the infections were minor for a long time, steady at very low numbers, with all the indications of an unsuccessful epidemic, and the Russian government took strict measures to control the spread. The US government was clearly resentful at the failure of the virus to devastate Russia and the US media bemoaned the fact that Russia’s death rate was so low. I would be very interested to see the genome sequences from the first infections in January and February, and for those happening in April and May. I haven’t any definitive proof, but I am certain Russia, as China, was seeded again with another variety for a second attempt.

Virus Distribution

But to return to our main point, it isn’t necessary for us to determine the physical origin of the virus. We know the virus originated in bats; that much is confirmed, but the more important issue is the epidemiology, particularly the incidence and distribution. First of all, for China and most other nations originally infected, there were so many multiple and simultaneous sources that locating a patient zero was a hopeless task. Virus outbreaks, left to their own natural devices, do not behave in this fashion, but begin with one person in a tightly localised situation and provably spreading from that point. Equally distressing is that we have the truly unprecedented “two waves” of worldwide infections. For this, let’s review my observations from an earlier article and take a quick look at those two waves of infections that circled the globe.

The First Wave simultaneously infected 25 nations within a few days centered on January 25. One month later, the Second Wave simultaneously infected 85 nations within a few days centered on February 25. A natural virus hasn’t the ability to simultaneously (within three days) infect 85 different countries on all continents of the world. More peculiar is that these countries were not all infected with the same variety of the virus, and that most reported simultaneous outbreaks in multiple locations. Considering the above information in light of the basics of virus transmission, the only theory that fits all the known facts is that these waves resulted from many people leaving Fort Detrick on the same day carrying a pail of different live viruses, because those multiple varieties at the time existed only in the US. It could not possibly have resulted from air travel because that timing would have been scattered. When 85 countries experience a virus outbreak on virtually the same day, this can happen only with human assistance. The Americans have steadfastly refused to address this point.

Experts on biological weapons are in unanimous agreement that eruptions in a human population of a new and unusual pathogen in multiple locations simultaneously, with no clear idea of source and cases with no proven links, is virtually prima facie evidence of a pathogen deliberately released, since natural outbreaks can almost always be resolved to one location and one patient zero. But with COVID-19 (or COVID-20), not one country out of 200 has been able to do this.

It should be firmly noted that this new infection in Beijing is not a “second wave” as termed by the Western media. This is an entirely new and different infection by a new virus and totally unrelated to anything prior, a strain of a new and different virus that was deliberately carried to Beijing and flooded in the Xinfadi Market. This infection is not related to COVID-19 but is the seeding of yet another biological pathogen in China, making that now seven different biological attacks on China in two years. And China has suffered others similar. One of the most notable was the H1N1 virus that caused the 1918 flu pandemic – and which was extinct for decades – but which suddenly appeared in 1977 in both China and Russia causing a global pandemic, prompting immediate claims by the Americans that it “escaped from a Chinese lab”. But the only sensible explanation is that the H1N1 virus ‘escaped’ from the Americans because there were persistent reports that the US military had found or saved samples of the original ‘Spanish Flu’ virus and were attempting to re-activate it. There was never a shred of evidence that either China or Russia had anything to do with this, and both were taken entirely by surprise.

It is my view that the world needs to stop pretending that COVID-19 was an accident of nature. Consider China’s recent experience. In addition to SARS – which was indisputably man-made, China has suffered repeated viral pandemics in the past two years. February 15, 2018: H7N4 bird flu. June, 2018: H7N9 bird flu. August, 2018: outbreak of African swine flu. May 24, 2019: massive infestation of armyworms. December, 2019: COVID-19. January, 2020: A “highly pathogenic” strain of bird flu. June, 2020: China is hit with COVID-20. Are we to tell ourselves it was merely a run of bad luck that China was the only nation in the world to be hit repeatedly with so many different biological pathogens in such a short time? And merely more ‘bad luck’ that China became the only country in the world that was domestically virus-free and was suddenly hit again with a foreign strain in another wet market? This assumption is too ridiculous to bother refuting.

It is unfortunate that so much of our information today comes to us in a passive receptance from the mass media because one result is the loss of our ability to examine information critically and use our minds to assess the presentation. As an example, it was very clever for the Americans to use a wet market as a distribution point for a virus and for the media to give this point massive air time, because we instinctively associate such markets with at least a possibility of germs and bacteria and thus passively accept the claims as true without the necessary evidence and thus avoid using our brains as intended. Our assessment of wet markets as unsanitary may be correct, but common germs and bacteria are a very different thing from a coronavirus that makes its home in bats and has no business being in a vegetable market. It isn’t important for our purposes to decide if COVID-19 was created in a lab; the important point is that a coronavirus has no means of transportation from bat caves in Sichuan to a market in Wuhan, nor the ability to mutate itself in such a way as to be energetically contagious to humans, and much less the conscious intelligence to choose China’s largest passenger transportation hub as the distribution point and the Eve of the Chinese New Year as the best time to attack. For these, the coronavirus required a helping ‘black hand’.

The Noose Tightens on the US

There is almost daily an increase in the volume of evidence that COVID-19 was circulating in the US far earlier than admitted, and serving as incriminating proof that the CDC’s deliberate (and threatening) forbidding of testing was to bury this evidence. The most recent example is headlines in the US media on June 21, 2020, stating, “Over 40 mysterious respiratory deaths in California could dramatically rewrite narrative of COVID-19” in the US. The LA Times reported on “a cluster of mysterious respiratory deaths” beginning in December of 2019. The local news website stated this meant that COVID-19 was circulating in California “way earlier than we knew”. And let’s not forget too quickly that Japanese tourists were infected in Hawaii in September of 2019.

And on June 20, 2020, the Italian National Institute of Health (ISS) revealed that they had discovered that COVID-19 was present in water samples dating back to mid-December of 2019. The results were confirmed by two separate labs that used two entirely different testing methods, and also showed that environmental wastewater from Milan, Turin and Bologna returned positive traces of the virus dating back to December if not earlier. Apparently, the RNA from COVID-19 does not readily dissolve or disintegrate in water and polymerase chain reaction testing allows scientists to identify the RNA after many months.

And it wasn’t only Italy. Dutch researchers discovered COVID-19 RNA in a wastewater plant in the Utrecht, Netherlands, city of Amersfoort. French scientists detected “high concentrations” of COVID-19 RNA in samples of sewage water from greater Paris that were obtained before Paris first recorded any deaths. Sputnik News reported in May that a Paris hospital confirmed it had treated Amirouche Hammar, the country’s first COVID-19 patient, on December 27, 2019 – one month before France’s first announcement of infections and four days before the WHO China bureau was informed of a “pneumonia of unknown etiology” on December 31.

The Irish Mirror reported on June 19 that “many countries are beginning to use wastewater sampling to track the spread of the disease”, scientists claiming these detections were “consistent with evidence emerging in other countries” that COVID-19 was circulating around the world long before China reported its first cases, all of which would of necessity have had to have originated in the US and transported around the world. It is now beginning to appear that many countries were seeded at approximately the same time, perhaps in their water distribution systems. Following these discoveries, the ISS told Reuters it intends to launch a new study of the wastewater of Italian tourist resorts. I suspect other nations will follow.

And it would seem the NYT, WSJ, WP, CNN, ABC, NBC, National Post, Globe & Mail, have no knowledge of this. The Chinese and Europeans know, but the Americans and Canadians don’t know because the owners of their major newspapers and TV networks don’t want them to know.

A Brief Update

If you look at the graph (courtesy of CNN), you can see the European infection pattern (in pink) and the American (in green). The Europeans followed China’s protocols in varying degrees, and thus with varying degrees of success. Europe’s infections peaked at around 30,000 per day then descended to around 2,000 near the end of June, while the Americans, led by a man who is living proof that democracy is the worst possible form of government, saw their infections peak at the same level, slightly decrease, then revert to 30,000 infections and around 1,000 deaths per day where they will now remain until the virus surges through the entire population. Twenty-six states are already experiencing dramatic spikes reaching new records each day, so Trump ordered the CDC to “stop testing” because it makes him look bad.

The next graphic is a list of the top ten nations for COVID-19 infections. Missing from this picture is a comparison I want to make about leadership and competence, to say nothing of intelligence. Shanghai is a city only two hours from Wuhan and, when the infections exploded, had no warning and almost no time to prepare, but acted so quickly and decisively that the city had only 26 infections and 7 deaths. Missing from the graphic is Canada, with a population very similar to Shanghai, and who, with months to plan and prepare, had 101,000 infections and 8,400 deaths. Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau is also living proof of democracy’s vast failings.

The Americans elected a pathetic buffoon who lives in outer space, while the Canadians elected a bullied child so painfully unintelligent and indecisive his wife would have to tell him to call the fire department if his house were burning down. I would include here the Brazilians who, with excessive assistance from the Americans, elected an arrogant sociopath who said famously, “It’s not my fault. What do you want me to do about it?”

In all three countries the leaderless pandemic results are the same, with infections and deaths likely increasing until at least the end of the year. China, with a population of more than 1.4 billion people, had about 80,000 infections and little more than 4,000 deaths, and stopped the virus cold in about three months. But according to the NYT, WSJ, WP, and Canada’s terminally-obnoxious National Post, the “free-market capitalist” countries are God’s first choice while “socialist authoritarian” China should incur yet more sanctions for all its mistakes.

Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He can be contacted at: 2186604556@qq.com. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Notes:▲▼

[1] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/15/asia/coronavirus-beijing-outbreak-intl-hnk/index.html

[2] https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1191598.shtml

[3] https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/asia/coronavirus-beijing-outbreak-intl-hnk/index.html

[4] https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192146.shtml

[5]http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202006/15/WS5ee6b33da310834817252ec9.html

[6] COVID-19 – Two Major ‘Waves’ of Global Infection; https://www.moonofshanghai.com/2020/05/covid-19-two-major-waves-of-global.html

[7] https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1192389.shtml

[8] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-sewage-idUSKBN23Q1J9

[9] https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/italy-sewage-study-suggests-covid19-was-there-in-december-2019/news-story/2fd865f7b12a33698f3e9ab2f15a35e3

[10] https://sputniknews.com/europe/202006191079667103-scientists-find-traces-of-sars-cov-2-in-italian-wastewater-predating-2019-wuhan-outbreak/