• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Corona Virus News & Info

dacrunch

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
5,885
Likes
6,063
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...-finally-admits-much-less-dangerous-children/

There It Is: CDC Equates Coronavirus Hospitalizations to Seasonal Flu and Finally Admits It’s MUCH LESS Dangerous for Children
By Jim Hoft
Published May 2, 2020 at 11:08am

In late February, nearly a month after Presient Trump banned travel from China to the United States in January, the CDC terrorized Americans by claiming the Wuhan coronavirus had a mortality rate of 2.3% at its epicenter.

The CDC compared the coronavirus mortality rate of 2.3% to the seasonal flu mortality rate of 0.1%.



Two weeks later WHO leader, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, sparked a global panic when he claimed the COVID-19 had a 3.4% mortality rate and then compared that number to the annual estimated seasonal flu mortality rate of 0.1%.

These irresponsible and completely inaccurate statements led to the greatest economic crash since the Great Depression.

30 million Americans are currently unemployed due to the crisis and the number is growing each week.

Now this…

On Friday the CDC equated the Wuhan coronavirus to the seasonal flu.

The COVID-19 hospitalization rates are “similar to” those in the 65 and older category during “recent high severity influenza seasons.”

And the COVID-19 hospitalizations for children 17 and under is MUCH LOWER than the seasonal flu hospitalization rates during recent influenza seasons.

The COVID-19 is LESS DANGEROUS to children than a typical influenza!

CDC equates covid19 & flu, 5/1/20: covid19 hospitalization rates are "similar to" those in >65 yo's during “recent high severity influenza seasons” & for children (0-17) "much lower than flu hosp rates during recent influenza seasons” (h/t @ElonBachman) https://t.co/8sAdxRPlK6 pic.twitter.com/G2RGnNCZU6
— Andrew Bostom (@andrewbostom) May 2, 2020
And just think — We destroyed out economy for this!

 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
11,256
Likes
21,699
Remember the excuse was to "flatten the curve" so hospitals would not be overwhelmed.
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
11,256
Likes
21,699
Ya'all ain't gunna believe this shit! Now they will take your kids! What will they do to them? Chip them? Molest them? Vaccinate them? Other...?



If a parent gets Covid-19 the Oregon Child Snatching Division takes your kids away. Allows the state to access federal emergency funds.

http://www.dhs.state.or.us/policy/childwelfare/ar/2020/cw-ar-20-004.pdf

Effective 4/22/20, if in the course of an assessment a caseworker or supervisor makes the determination that a child will enter substitute care because their caregiver is infected with COVID-19, the caseworker or supervisor will need to select a newly created case note value for tracking these specific entries. The category is, “Other Note” and the type of the new value is, “Caregiver with C19,” as displayed in the screenshot below. Again, this value is to be used only when the determination has been made that the child will be entering or has entered substitute care because their caregiver is infected with COVID-19 and is unable to support them. If that determination has been made, it is critical to make this selection for tracking purposes.
 

Voodoo

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
2,199
Likes
2,914
Location
Deep Underground Bunker
This is the best article I've seen yet on this virus business and it makes a lot of sense. There are 2 or 3 variables that all interact in order to see the worst cases that the media wants all to see. And it involves vaccines, completely shocking I know.

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/.../is-the-new-coronavirus-created-in-a-lab.aspx

  • Cellular and molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. believes COVID-19 — the disease — is not caused by SARS-CoV-2 alone, but rather that it’s the result of a combination of SARS-CoV-2 and XMRVs (human gammaretroviruses)
  • SARS-CoV-2 also appears to have been manipulated to include components of HIV that destroys immune function along with XMRVs
  • Those already infected with XMRVs may end up getting serious COVID-19 infection and/or die from the disease. Mikovits’s research suggests more than 30 million Americans carry XMRVs and other gammaretroviruses in their bodies from contaminated vaccines and blood supply
 

ABC123

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,775
Likes
11,034
https://twitter.com/DrJudyAMikovits/status/1256405986874503169

"So glad I am finally in the ears of @realDonaldTrump! Thank you to all of my supporters! "

Article in tweet:
https://truepundit.com/exclusive-trump-drops-the-hammer-on-fauci-after-disturbing-white-house-briefings-on-doctors-past/
1588601651578.png
 

ABC123

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,775
Likes
11,034
"Remdesivir Is Probably Worthless" - A Trauma Surgeon Exposes "Drug Company's Shenanigans"



Markets got very excited (briefly) this week about a study finding a Gilead Sciences drug helped coronavirus patients heal a little more quickly.



But that was all the trial found: remdesivir isn’t the miracle cure that will get us all out of lockdowns tomorrow, unfortunately.



Worse, as Bloomberg's Faye Flam writes, the trial was rushed to get quick FDA approval, without getting helpful information on what kinds of patients it helps or hurts the most; and now that the study is over, we’ve forever lost a chance to help doctors treat virus patients better.



All of which raises a significant number of questions and Acute Care Surgeon (and Asst Professor of Surgery at Wash U.) Mark Hoofnagle warns "I am truly sorry to say, Remdesivir is probably worthless…"



In an excellent Twitter thread, Hoofnagle details what he calls "some fascinating drug company shenanigans."



First, the pre-test probability that an infused, small-molecule inhibitor of a virus would improve mortality in symptomatic patients was already pretty low. Unfortunately, antivirals work poorly in acute disease. This has to do with their mechanism of action, and host response.



Antivirals usually target some aspect of viral replication/assembly/transmission. Remdesivir is a clever pharmacologic prodrug that inhibits a key piece of RNA viruses that mammals don’t have - the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, and inhibits viral replication.



Unfortunately, by the time you are symptomatic with a virus, you are usually already high/peak viral load. So, when you give an antiviral to someone who is already ill, the damage from the virus is largely done.



It’s there in big numbers and in the cells.



Consistent with this, the Lancet paper on the remdesivir trial in China shows no impact on viral load clinically.



https://www.zerohedge.com/health/remdesivir-probably-worthless-trauma-surgeon-exposes-drug-companys-shenanigans
1588602057494.png
 

ABC123

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,775
Likes
11,034
China intentionally hid virus evidence: new intel; Footage from N95 mask factory raises concerns

A video showing a converted Chinese factory producing #N95masks for medical staff is raising concern.

Chinese authorities take issue with a woman’s gift of Bibles and masks to her family in China.

Chinese-listed company on the New York Stock Exchange, GSX Techedu, is facing allegations of fraud.

A new western intelligence dossier states the Chinese regime intentionally hid evidence leading to the pandemic. Find out what’s included in the 15-page document.
 

ABC123

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,775
Likes
11,034
Dr. Erickson Warns that Soros Wants Government to Take Over YouTube and Facebook After his Video Is Removed From YouTube
1588602814838.png

Last weekend two California doctors of Immunology went on with KERO News 23 in California and made a video disputing the official state coronavirus policy in California.

Doctors Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi said their facilities have tested over 5,200 patients for the coronavirus throughout the county, making up for over half of all testing in Kern County. According to their data, the death rate of the coronavirus is similar in prevalence to the flu. And they believe only the sick and elderly should be quarantined and that businesses should open. They also revealed that the state of California is pressuring doctors to pad the COVID-19 numbers.

The KERO videos went viral!

We reported on this story on Saturday.

On Monday night the two California doctors went on The Ingraham Angle with Laura Ingraham to discuss their expertise and challenge the official state narrative on the coronavirus.

Following their appearance on the show their videos were removed from Google-YouTube!
They did not pass official WHO policy.

THESE TECH COMPANIES ARE OUT OF CONTROL!

On Saturday Dr. Erickson went on FOX News to discuss the ongoing coronavirus outbreak and the tech censorship.
Dr. Erickson warned that George Soros wants the government to take over YouTube and Facebook

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/dr-erickson-warns-soros-wants-government-take-youtube-facebook-video-removed-youtube/
 

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
49,705
Likes
87,007
Location
Earth
Dr. Erickson Warns that Soros Wants Government to Take Over YouTube and Facebook After his Video Is Removed From YouTube
View attachment 164078
Last weekend two California doctors of Immunology went on with KERO News 23 in California and made a video disputing the official state coronavirus policy in California.

Doctors Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi said their facilities have tested over 5,200 patients for the coronavirus throughout the county, making up for over half of all testing in Kern County. According to their data, the death rate of the coronavirus is similar in prevalence to the flu. And they believe only the sick and elderly should be quarantined and that businesses should open. They also revealed that the state of California is pressuring doctors to pad the COVID-19 numbers.

The KERO videos went viral!

We reported on this story on Saturday.

On Monday night the two California doctors went on The Ingraham Angle with Laura Ingraham to discuss their expertise and challenge the official state narrative on the coronavirus.

Following their appearance on the show their videos were removed from Google-YouTube!
They did not pass official WHO policy.

THESE TECH COMPANIES ARE OUT OF CONTROL!

On Saturday Dr. Erickson went on FOX News to discuss the ongoing coronavirus outbreak and the tech censorship.
Dr. Erickson warned that George Soros wants the government to take over YouTube and Facebook

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/dr-erickson-warns-soros-wants-government-take-youtube-facebook-video-removed-youtube/
Why should YouTube be allowed to continue? Its ongoing role as an agent provocateur supporting crimes against humanity should be sufficient to take the site down and arrest its executive management!
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
9,620
Likes
18,485
The Pseudo-Science Behind The Mysterious Assault On Hydroxychloroquine
https://www.zerohedge.com/health/pseudo-science-behind-mysterious-assault-hydroxychloroquine
Mon, 05/04/2020

In the comments to the article....
a poster using the handle of The First Rule posted this:​
  • Big Pharma Hates it because it costs less than $1/Pill.
  • LibTards Hate it because Trump is pushing it
  • Vacs people Hate it because it cures at a 99% rate if caught early and applied w/Zinc
Another poster using the handle of devnickle summed it up this way:​
Orange man bad.​
Must defeat Trump.​
Don't know why?​
Brainwashed.​
That is this whole pandemic scenario in a nutshell.
 
Last edited:

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
9,620
Likes
18,485
Coronavirus disease 2019: The harms of exaggerated information and non‐evidence‐based measures
John P. A. Ioannidis
First published:19 March 2020

source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/eci.13222

The evolving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic1 is certainly cause for concern. Proper communication and optimal decision‐making are an ongoing challenge, as data evolve. The challenge is compounded, however, by exaggerated information. This can lead to inappropriate actions. It is important to differentiate promptly the true epidemic from an epidemic of false claims and potentially harmful actions.

1 FAKE NEWS AND WITHDRAWN PAPERS
Based on Altmetric scores, the most discussed and most visible scientific paper across all 20+ million papers published in the last 8 years across all science is a preprint claiming that the new coronavirus' spike protein bears “uncanny similarity” with HIV‐1 proteins.2 The Altmetric score of this work has reached an astronomical level of 13 725 points as of 5 March 2020. The paper was rapidly criticized as highly flawed, and the authors withdrew it within days. Regardless, major harm was already done. The preprint fuelled conspiracy theories of scientists manufacturing dangerous viruses and offered ammunition to vaccine deniers. Refutation will probably not stop dispersion of weird inferences.
The first report documenting transmission by an asymptomatic individual was published in the New England Journal of Medicine on January 30. However, the specific patient did have symptoms, but researchers had not asked.3 Understanding the chances of transmission during the asymptomatic phase has major implications for what protective measures might work.
Lancet published on February 24 an account from two Chinese nurses of their front‐line experience fighting coronavirus. The authors soon retracted the paper admitting it was not a first‐hand account.
These examples show how sensationalism affects even top scientific venues. Moreover, peer review may malfunction when there is little evidence and strong opinions. Opinion‐based peer review may even solidify a literature of spurious statements. As outlined below, for the main features of the epidemic and the response to it, circulating estimates are often exaggerated, even when they come from otherwise excellent scientists.
2 EXAGGERATED PANDEMIC ESTIMATES
An early speculation that 40%‐70% of the global population will be infected went viral.4 Early estimates of the basic reproduction number (how many people get infected by each infected person) have varied widely, from 1.3 to 6.5.5 These estimates translate into manyfold difference in the proportion of the population eventually infected and dramatically different expectations on what containment measures (or even any future vaccine) can achieve. The fact that containment measures do seem to work, means that the basic reproduction number is probably in the lower bound of the 1.3‐6.5 range, and can decrease below 1 with proper measures. The originator of the “40%‐70% of the population” estimate tweeted on March 3 a revised estimate of “20%‐60% of adults,” but this is probably still substantially exaggerated. Even after the 40%‐70% quote was revised downward, it still remained quoted in viral interviews.6
3 EXAGGERATED CASE FATALITY RATE (CFR)
Early reported CFR figures also seem exaggerated. The most widely quoted CFR has been 3.4%, reported by WHO dividing the number of deaths by documented cases in early March.7 This ignores undetected infections and the strong age dependence of CFR. The most complete data come from Diamond Princess passengers, with CFR = 1% observed in an elderly cohort; thus, CFR may be much lower than 1% in the general population, probably higher than seasonal flu (CFR = 0.1%), but not much so.
Observed crude CFR in South Korea and in Germany,8 the countries with most extensive testing, is 0.9% and 0.2%, respectively, as of March 14, and crude CFR in Scandinavian countries is about 0.1%. Some deaths of infected, seriously ill people will occur later, and these deaths have not been counted yet. However, even in these countries many infections probably remain undiagnosed. Therefore, CFR (or, more properly called, infection fatality rate, counting as cases all infected individuals) may be even lower rather than higher than these crude estimates.
4 EXAGGERATED EXPONENTIAL COMMUNITY SPREAD
At face value, the epidemic curve of new cases outside China since late February is compatible with exponential community spread. However, reading this curve is very difficult. Part of the growth of documented cases could reflect rapid increases in numbers of coronavirus tests performed. The number of tests done depends on how many test‐kits are available and how many patients seek testing. Even if bottlenecks in test availability are eventually removed, the epidemic curve may still reflect primarily population sensitization and willingness for testing rather than true epidemic growth. China data are more compatible with close contact rather than wide community spread being the main mode of transmission.
5 EXTREME MEASURES
Under alarming circumstances, extreme measures of unknown effectiveness are adopted. China initially responded sluggishly, but subsequently locked down entire cities.9 School closures, cancellation of social events, air travel curtailment and restrictions, entry control measures and border closure are applied by various countries. Italy adopted country‐level lockdown on March 8, and many countries have been following suite.
Evidence is lacking for the most aggressive measures. A systematic review on measures to prevent the spread of respiratory viruses found insufficient evidence for entry port screening and social distancing in reducing epidemic spreading.10 Plain hygienic measures have the strongest evidence.10, 11 Frequent hand washing and staying at home and avoiding contacts when sick are probably very useful. Their routine endorsement may save many lives. Most lives saved may actually be due to reduced transmission of influenza rather than coronavirus.
Most evidence on protective measures comes from nonrandomized studies prone to bias. A systematic review of personal protective measures in reducing pandemic influenza risk found only two randomized trials, one on hand sanitizer and another on facemasks and hand hygiene in household members of people infected with influenza.11
6 HARMS FROM NONEVIDENCE‐BASED MEASURES
Given the uncertainties, one may opt for abundant caution and implement the most severe containment measures. By this perspective, no opportunity should be missed to gain any benefit, even in the absence of evidence or even with mostly negative evidence.
This reasoning ignores possible harms. Impulsive actions can indeed cause major harm. One clear example is the panic shopping which depleted supplies of face masks, escalation of prices and a shortage for medical personnel. Masks, gloves and gowns are clearly needed for medical personnel, and their lack poses healthcare workers' lives at risk. Conversely, they are meaningless for the uninfected general population. However, a prominent virologist's comment12 that people should stock surgical masks and wear them around the clock to avoid touching their nose went viral.
7 MISALLOCATION OF RESOURCES
Policymakers feel pressure from opponents who lambast inaction. Also, adoption of measures in one institution, jurisdiction or country creates pressure for taking similar measures elsewhere under fear of being accused of negligence. Moreover, many countries pass legislation that allocates major resources and funding to the coronavirus response. This is justified, but the exact allocation priorities can become irrational.
For example, undoubtedly research on coronavirus vaccines and potential treatments must be accelerated. However, if only part of resources mobilized to implement extreme measures for COVID‐19 had been invested towards enhancing influenza vaccination uptake, tens of thousands of influenza deaths might have been averted. Only 1%‐2% of the population in China is vaccinated against influenza. Even in the United States, despite improvements over time, most adults remain unvaccinated every year.
As another example, enhanced detection of infections and lower hospitalization thresholds may increase demands for hospital beds. For patients without severe symptoms, hospitalizations offer no benefit and may only infect health workers causing shortage of much‐needed personnel. Even for severe cases, effectiveness of intensive supportive care is unknown. Excess admissions may strain health care systems and increase mortality from other serious diseases where hospital care is clearly effective.
8 LOCKDOWNS—FOR HOW LONG?
An argument in favour of lockdowns is that postponing the epidemic wave (“flattening the curve”) gains time to develop vaccines and reduces strain on the health system. However, vaccines take many months (or years) to develop and test properly. Maintaining lockdowns for many months may have even worse consequences than an epidemic wave that runs an acute course. Focusing on protecting susceptible individuals may be preferable to maintaining countrywide lockdowns longterm.
9 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DISRUPTION
The potential consequences on the global economy are already tangible. February 22‐28 was the worst week for global markets since 2008, and the worse may lie ahead. Moreover, some political decisions may be confounded with alternative motives. Lockdowns weaponized by suppressive regimes can create a precedent for easy adoption in the future. Closure of borders may serve policies focused on limiting immigration. Regardless, even in the strongest economies, disruption of social life, travel, work and school education may have major adverse consequences.
The eventual cost of such disruption is notoriously difficult to project. A quote of $2.7 trillion13 is totally speculative. Much depends on the duration of the anomaly. The global economy and society is already getting a major blow from an epidemic that otherwise (as of March 14) accounts for 0.01% of all 60 million annual global deaths from all causes and that kills almost exclusively people with relatively low life expectancy.
10 CLAIMS FOR ONCE‐IN‐A‐CENTURY PANDEMIC
Leading figures insist that the current situation is a once‐in‐a‐century pandemic.14 A corollary might be that any reaction to it, no matter how extreme, is justified.
This year's coronavirus outbreak is clearly unprecedented in amount of attention received. Media have capitalized on curiosity, uncertainty and horror. A Google search with “coronavirus” yielded 3 550 000 000 results on March 3 and 9 440 000 000 results on March 14. Conversely, “influenza” attracted 30‐ to 60‐fold less attention although this season it has caused so far more deaths15 globally than coronavirus.
Different coronaviruses actually infect millions of people every year, and they are common especially in the elderly and in hospitalized patients with respiratory illness in the winter. A serological analysis16 of CoV 229E and OC43 in 4 adult populations under surveillance for acute respiratory illness during the winters of 1999‐2003 (healthy young adults, healthy elderly adults, high‐risk adults with underlying cardiopulmonary disease and a hospitalized group) showed annual infection rates ranging from 2.8% to 26% in prospective cohorts, and prevalence of 3.3%‐11.1% in the hospitalized cohort. Case fatality of 8% has been described in outbreaks among nursing home elderly.17 Leaving the well‐known and highly lethal SARS and MERS coronaviruses aside, other coronaviruses probably have infected millions of people and have killed thousands. However, it is only this year that every single case and every single death gets red alert broadcasting in the news.
11 COMPARISONS WITH 1918
Some fear an analogy to the 1918 influenza pandemic that killed 20‐40 million people.18 Retrospective data from that pandemic suggest that early adoption of social distancing measures was associated with lower peak death rates.19 However, these data are sparse, retrospective and pathogen‐specific. Moreover, total deaths were eventually little affected by early social distancing: people just died several weeks later.19 Importantly, this year we are dealing with thousands, not tens of millions deaths.
12 LEARNING FROM COVID‐19
The Box 1 summarizes the problems with inaccurate and exaggerated information in the case of COVID‐19. Even if COVID‐19 is not a 1918‐recap in infection‐related deaths, some coronavirus may match the 1918 pandemic in future seasons. Thus, we should learn and be better prepared. Questions about transmission, duration of immunity, effectiveness of different containment and mitigation methods, the role of children in viral spread, and assessment of the effectiveness of vaccines and drugs are essential to settle timely.
BOX 1. Problems with early estimates and responses to the COVID‐19 epidemic

  • A highly flawed nonpeer‐reviewed preprint claiming similarity with HIV‐1 drew tremendous attention, and it was withdrawn, but conspiracy theories about the new virus became entrenched
  • Even major peer‐reviewed journals have already published wrong, sensationalist items
  • Early estimates of the projected proportion of global population that will be infected seem markedly exaggerated
  • Early estimates of case (infection) fatality rate may be markedly exaggerated
  • The proportion of undetected infections is unknown but probably varies across countries and may be very large overall
  • Reported epidemic curves are largely affected by the change in availability of test kits and the willingness to test for the virus over time
  • Of the multiple measures adopted, a few have strong evidence, and many may have obvious harms
  • Panic shopping of masks and protective gear and excess hospital admissions may be highly detrimental to health systems without offering any concomitant benefit
  • Extreme measures such as lockdowns may have major impact on social life and the economy (and those also lives lost), and estimates of this impact are entirely speculative
  • Comparisons with and extrapolations from the 1918 influenza pandemic are precarious, if not outright misleading and harmful

This research agenda requires carefully collected, unbiased data to avoid unfounded inferences. Larger‐scale diagnostic testing should help get more unbiased estimates of cases, basic reproduction number and infection fatality rate. The research agenda also deserves proper experimental studies. Besides candidate vaccines and drugs, randomized trials should evaluate also the real‐world effectiveness of simple measures (eg face masks in different settings), least disruptive social distancing measures and healthcare management policies for documented cases.
If COVID‐19 is indeed the pandemic of the century, we need the most accurate evidence to handle it. Open data sharing of scientific information is a minimum requirement. This should include data on the number and demographics of tested individuals per day in each country and the demographics and background diseases of patients requiring hospital care and intensive care and those who die. Proper prevalence studies and trials are also indispensable.
If COVID‐19 is not as grave as it is depicted, high evidence standards are equally relevant. Exaggeration and overreaction may seriously damage the reputation of science, public health, media and policymakers. It may foster disbelief that will jeopardize the prospects of an appropriately strong response if and when a more major pandemic strikes in the future.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.

Monopoly + Skulduggery + Censorship = Lockdown, Obedience & Fear, Oh My! (22 min 24 sec):​
Published on May 4, 2020 by Glidden Healthcare​
 
Last edited:

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
49,705
Likes
87,007
Location
Earth
For you math nuts!

1588684415122.png
 

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
49,705
Likes
87,007
Location
Earth
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethb...-attributed-to-the-wuhan-coronavirus-n2568099

Project Veritas recently released a new video that included phone calls with multiple funeral directors in the New York City metro area who say patients are being labeled as "coronavirus deaths" even though the person may have never even tested positive for the virus.

“To be honest with you, all of the death certificates, they're writing COVID on all the death certificate, whether they had a positive test, whether they didn't," Michael Lanza, the funeral director at Colonial Funeral Home in Staten Island, told Project Veritas. "So, I think, you know, again, this is my personal opinion, I think that like the mayor in our city, they're looking for federal funding and, the more they put COVID on the death certificate, the more they can ask for federal funds. So I think it's political."

 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
9,620
Likes
18,485

Bubble Fat

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
38
Likes
49

arminius

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
5,701
Likes
8,309
1588907020260.png
 

SongSungAU

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
9,620
Likes
18,485

Voodoo

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
2,199
Likes
2,914
Location
Deep Underground Bunker

glockngold

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,581
Likes
4,865

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
49,705
Likes
87,007
Location
Earth

AguA

Silver Miner
Seeker
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
532
Likes
536
Fortnight? wth uses that word?
One Fortnight...
Two Weeks is much clearer...and takes up less space
Well, as a matter of fact, fourscore and seven years ago...
 

ABC123

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,775
Likes
11,034
“There Is Nothing from the CDC I Can Trust!” – Dr. Birx Tells Off CDC Director, Claims COVID-19 Mortality Rate Inflated By as Much as 25%!

Earlier this week The Gateway Pundit reported on the faulty models used to shut down the US economy:

** Dr. Tony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx used the Imperial College Model to persuade President Trump to lock down the ENTIRE US ECONOMY.
** The fraudulent model predicted 2.2 million American deaths from the coronavirus pandemic
** The authors of the Imperial College Model shared their findings with the White House Coronavirus task force in early March
** Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx then met with President Trump privately and urged him to shut down the US economy and destroy the record Trump economy based on this model
** A new critique of the Imperial College Model finds the study is “completely unusable for scientific purposes” — The study is a complete sham
** Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx pushed a garbage model on the White House and the American public and destroyed the US economy

We reported earlier today that frontline COVID-19 doctors this week have gone public saying they feel pressured to show COVID-19 as cause-of-death on certificates of patients suspected of having the virus when they also have had underlying medical conditions. Now, even the doctors are challenging the CDC on their rules of reporting.

Earlier this week Dr. Deborah Birx, the White House Coronavirus Task Force response administrator, challenged the CDC Director in a heated conversation. Dr. Birx told Dr. Redfield, “There is nothing from the CDC that I can trust!”

Salon.com reported:

According to a new bombshell report from the Washington Post, the White House Coronavirus Task Force response administrator is doubting the administration’s numbers.

Dr. Deborah Birx reportedly made the comments during a Wednesday meeting.

“During a task force meeting Wednesday, a heated discussion broke out between Deborah Birx, the physician who oversees the administration’s coronavirus response, and Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Birx and others were frustrated with the CDC’s antiquated system for tracking virus data, which they worried was inflating some statistics — such as mortality rate and case count — by as much as 25 percent, according to four people present for the discussion or later briefed on it. Two senior administration officials said the discussion was not heated,” the newspaper reported.

“There is nothing from the CDC that I can trust,” Birx reportedly said, according to two of the people.

“The flare-up came two days after it was reported that an internal government model, based on data from the CDC and other agencies, projected the daily death count would rise to 3,000 by June 1,” the newspaper noted.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/05/nothing-cdc-can-trust-dr-birx-tells-off-cdc-director-claims-covid-19-mortality-rate-inflated-much-25/
 

ABC123

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
5,775
Likes
11,034
Murder of Canadian Pharma Billionaires-Largest Producers of Generic Virus Cure-HCQ

April 6, 2020
Sherman’s company, Apotex, was a leading Canadian manufacturer of generic drugs, and the largest producer of Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate, in their case, the APO-Hydroxyquine 200MG tablet.

Quite simply, the Shermans, who had pledged to donate their fortunes to the Bill Gates – Warren Buffet Giving Pledge program, (per DailyMail-The fund itself does not actually make any donations nor oversee those made by its members. Instead signatories 'pursue their philanthropy independently and give to a wide range of causes') could have just been murdered to take control of their giant supply of Corona Virus killer, Hydroxychloroquine. Lots of presumptions there, including that the virus was man-made, that Bill Gates, who’s emerged as the self-appointed global vaccine czar, would want to limit knowledge of the old Malaria drug as a cure to leave room for the public to be vaccinated once that’s developed."

"The Shermans were sitting side by side, their legs were stretched out in front of them and they were held upright by belts, tied around their necks and tethered to the low poolside railings.Barry's legs were crossed, and his spectacles perched low on his nose. Both he and Honey wore jackets that were pulled down on their shoulders, seemingly holding their arms behind their backs."
It seems like they were positioned like the "human statues" in their basement.


https://quartermaster.news/new-motive-found-in-murder-of-canadian-pharma-billionaires-largest-producers-of-generic-virus-cure/
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
11,256
Likes
21,699
Do we need to start a bill gates death list now?
 

Lancers32

Silver Miner
Joined
May 10, 2020
Messages
701
Likes
847
Location
Down South
So if I get this right the reaction form the world governments is an attempt to usher in a one world digital currency making the sheep totally dependent upon government handouts?
 

chieftain

Silver Miner
Joined
Jan 4, 2020
Messages
1,808
Likes
2,569
So if I get this right the reaction form the world governments is an attempt to usher in a one world digital currency making the sheep totally dependent upon government handouts?
You need to understand, the public facing governments of the world wholeheartedly believe COVID-19 is real and will kill millions if left unchecked. They are being fed very suspect data and highly questionable information by proxies of those that hold the reins. Governments had to believe it for the masses to do the same, otherwise the fear campaign would have fallen apart very early on in the piece. The fact that beer virus has turned into a nothing burger anyway hasn't helped those wishing to direct the narrative in a particular direction.
 

Uglytruth

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Messages
11,256
Likes
21,699
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...-Covid-19-tests-have-been-returned-to-the-CDC
Birx, one of the top officials on the White House's coronavirus task force, said Thursday that part of the $2 trillion economic stimulus measure that was signed into law by President Donald Trump requires that all tests conducted get reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But Birx says she has not received that data yet.
"Well, I'm telling you, I'm still missing 50% of the data from reporting," she said. "I have 660 (thousand) tests reported in. We've done 1.3 million. ... So, we do need to see -- the bill said you need to report. We are still not receiving 100% of the tests."
When pressed about the possibility that 1 in 3 tests had produced false negatives, Birx said, "I haven't seen that kind of anomaly."
Birx added that "the number of positive tests is tracking very closely with a number of cases diagnosed."
The absent data underscores how issues surrounding testing -- including overall volume, public accessibility and timely processing -- have remained a steady component of the federal government's coronavirus response.​
 

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
11,785
Likes
64,058
Location
third cove on the right
This doctor spills the beans on this virus

 
Last edited:

Someone_else

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,139
Likes
4,518
This doctor spills the beans on this virus
What the hell?! "Video unavailable?!"

I normally prefer to read a transcript, but in this case, the doctor had great delivery and I thought the presentation made her message great. She qualified her facts several times, that they were only from her direct experience. She did not attack any other conclusions; she just presented her own evidence. And I think her evidence is very strong.

I have studied psychopathy for well over a decade, and I believe that she was sincere and her message was accurate.
 

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
11,785
Likes
64,058
Location
third cove on the right
What the hell?! "Video unavailable?!"

I normally prefer to read a transcript, but in this case, the doctor had great delivery and I thought the presentation made her message great. She qualified her facts several times, that they were only from her direct experience. She did not attack any other conclusions; she just presented her own evidence. And I think her evidence is very strong.

I have studied psychopathy for well over a decade, and I believe that she was sincere and her message was accurate.

I had to go and find her somewhere other than face book