Thursday, October 22, 2020

Today's Links

 Poke Salad Annie  Foo Fighters and Tony Joe White


"Yet in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposit danger that public policy itself could become the captive of a scientific-technological elite." President Dwight Eisenhower (minute 4)  


"The supine capitulation to a de facto police state in a country long regarded as a cradle of liberty has been one of the most depressing spectacles I’ve ever witnessed." Lionel Shriver

"To the politicians, who believe those corrupt people, these facts are hereby offered as a lifeline, that can help you readjust your course of action and start the long overdue public scientific discussion and not go down with those charlatans and criminals. ~ Dr. Reiner Fuellmich



1--"I think it's all ridiculous. We never should have been in lockdown." you tube

 “I think it’s all ridiculous, we should never have been in lockdown. All the people who were vulnerable should have been helped and kept home safe.

“And all the rest of us, I’m 83, I don’t give a sod.

“I look at it this way, I’ve not got all that many years left of me and I’m not going to be fastened in a house when the Government have got it all wrong.

“We need… how can we get the country on its feet? Money-wise? Where’s all the money?

“By the end of this year there’s going to be millions of people unemployed and you know who’s going to pay for it? All the young ones. Not me because I’m going to be dead.”



2-- Gupta on "Immunity" 


3--Biden's fate is sealed

To that point, in perhaps the most devastating paragraph of the 689-word statement, Bobulinski writes that Hunter Biden also referred to his father as “my chairman and frequently referenced asking him for his sign-off or advice on various potential deals that we were discussing.”

“I’ve seen Vice President Biden saying he never talked to Hunter about his business,” says Bobulinski, who was the CEO of the company being formed. “I’ve seen firsthand that that’s not true, because it wasn’t just Hunter’s business, they said they were putting the Biden family name and its legacy on the line.”

Bobulinski, a former wrestler at Penn State University who spent four years in the Navy, insists he has voluminous evidence to back up his explosive charges, reportedly including documents, e-mails, messages and other proof.

Late Wednesday night, he uploaded many to a file- sharing service.

He also says that he turned over all his evidence to two Senate committees Wednesday that requested it.


 4--Studies Point To Big Drop In COVID-19 Death Rates, NPR


Two new peer-reviewed studies are showing a sharp drop in mortality among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The drop is seen in all groups, including older patients and those with underlying conditions, suggesting that physicians are getting better at helping patients survive their illness.

"We find that the death rate has gone down substantially," says Leora Horwitz, a doctor who studies population health at New York University's Grossman School of Medicine and an author on one of the studies, which looked at thousands of patients from March to August.

Studying changes in death rate is tricky because although the overall U.S. death rate for COVID-19 seems to be dropping, the drop coincides with a change in whom the disease is sickening. 

.. He has conducted his own research of 21,000 hospitalized cases in England, which also found a similarly sharp drop in the death rate. The work, which will soon appear in the journal Critical Care Medicine and was released earlier in preprint, shows an unadjusted drop in death rates among hospitalized patients of around 20 percentage points since the worst days of the pandemic.


5--Million New Yorkers Can't Afford Food As Hunger Crisis Worsens


6--IFR--Who's Right?


Around two weeks ago, Dr. Mike Ryan, the executive director of the WHO’s health emergencies programme, stated the WHO estimated that 750 million people have been infected worldwide:

“An estimated 750 million, or 10 per cent of the world’s population, have been infected by Covid-19, World Health Organisation (WHO) official Dr Mike Ryan has said.”


At the time of his statement, there had been just over one million deaths recorded worldwide (1,034,068 to be fully accurate). Using these two figures, the IFR can be easily calculated. It is 1,034,068/750,000,000 = 0.138%. How accurate is this figure? Well, who knows for certain? It is probably as accurate as most other current estimates.

Yet even using these WHO-endorsed figures is apparently verboten in the eyes of the Facebook ‘fact checkers’. Another site that reported these numbers also found its story flagged as “misinformation” by Facebook, and has subsequently accused the social media giant of “selling falsehoods and re-writing history.”

One wide-ranging piece of work, a review of 61 studies of Covid-19 deaths covering 51 countries, was done recently by John Ioannidis, a professor of epidemiology at Stanford University, and a man described as “a lion of medical science.” The article, peer-reviewed and published by the WHO, concluded that the infection fatality rate currently stands at 0.23%, and suggested it would fall further, warning: “The inferred infection fatality rates tended to be much lower than estimates made earlier in the pandemic.”

Who would one rather believe on this matter? A Harvard-trained infectious disease specialist, author of some of the most cited articles in medical history, and a man who the Atlantic has called “one of the most influential scientists alive”? Or some ‘fact checkers’ who, I’m confidently guessing, don’t have quite such a track record or expertise?

It is true the fatality rates currently differ widely from country to country, influenced by other factors such as age and health. In Singapore, there have been nearly 60,000 ‘cases’ recorded, with 28 deaths. This represents a case fatality rate of 0.02%

Another paper by Prof. Ioannidis looking at the global Infection Fatality Rate came to the conclusion that it stood, as of October 7, at 0.15‐0.20%.

Of course, this figure is for the entire population, including the elderly, and those at higher risk because they have other serious medical conditions. His latest estimate of the IFR in the population aged under 70 is 0.04%. Which is four in 10,000, and this figure includes people with serious underlying medical conditions.

What would it be for healthy people under 70? Almost certainly a lot less, but I have seen no good figures on this.


7--Mercola on WHO 

75% of WHO funding comes from indepenedent donors the biggest of which is Bill Gates--Event 201, oct 18, 2019


8--T-Cell immunity?? 


Potential for cross-reactive immunity
In one study, SARS-CoV-2-reactive CD4+ T cells were also identified in about 40 to 60% of unexposed individuals, suggesting cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘‘common cold’’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2 [18]. Another study also showed cross-reactive memory T cells in patients who had recovered from SARS-CoV 17 years before (n=23), and also in individuals with no history of SARS infection (n=37) [20]. These studies were done in small numbers of patients and need verification.

Potential for long-term immunity
Early research suggests that the antibodies in people infected with SARS-CoV-2 dropped significantly within 2 to 3 months [21,22], causing concern that humoral immunity against the virus may decline rapidly. However, it is a normal part of the immune response that antibody levels fall after an infection has resolved [23].  For example, in seasonal coronavirus infections, antibodies start to decline at about a week after infection and typically only last for about a year [24]. It should also be noted that memory T and B cells are formed after infection [25,26]; these can be reactivated when another infection with the same virus occurs and could provide long-lasting immunity. A preliminary study that has not yet undergone peer review has shown that memory T and B cells were found in patients with mild COVID-19 symptoms who had recovered and that these cells persisted, suggesting the potential for longer-term immunity [27].

SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T cells have also been detected in exposed seronegative healthy individuals (relatives of confirmed cases), which may indicate asymptomatic infection. One study has shown that ~93% of “exposed asymptomatic” individuals had a T cell response to SARS-CoV-2, despite seropositivity in only 60% of cases [28]. Asymptomatic infections may therefore be more common, and antibody testing alone may underestimate the true prevalence of the infection or population immunity. SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were found in most of the convalescent patients in this study, which is a promising sign that infection may give rise to immunity [29]



  • There is some evidence of cross-reactivity with seasonal/endemic coronaviruses
  • Emerging studies suggest that all or a majority of people with COVID-19 develop a strong and broad T cell response, both CD4 and CD8, and some have a memory phenotype, which bodes well for potential longer-term immunity
  • Understanding the roles of different subsets of T cells in protection or pathogenesis is crucial for preventing and treating COVID-19


9--Covid--Plunging the world into poverty

The United Nations predicts that the pandemic recession could plunge as many as 420 million people into extreme poverty, defined as earning less than $2 a day. The disruption will be particularly notable in the poorest countries. The UN has forecast that Africa could have 30 million more people in poverty. A study by the International Growth Centre spoke of “staggering” implications with 9.1% of the population descending into extreme poverty as savings are drained, with two-thirds of this due to lockdown. The loss of remittances has cost developing economies billions more income.

Latin America had seen its poverty rate drop from 45 to 30% over the past two decades, but now nearly 45 million, according to the UN, are being plunged into destitution as a result of the novel coronavirus pandemic. In Mexico alone, COVID-19 has caused at least 16 million more people to fall into extreme poverty, according to a study by the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM).


10--The official government line


Coronavirus is deadly and, unfortunately, it is now spreading exponentially in the UK. It is our responsibility to act to prevent more hospitalisations, more deaths and more economic damage". (We are sorry for your imprisonment but it is for the good of all)

To be clear, our strategy is to suppress the virus, (We aim to stop the tide from coming in)

 I believe that we must take firm and balanced decisions to keep this virus under control. This is the only way to protect lives and livelihoods, and we must act now. Delayed action means more deaths from covid, it means more non-covid deaths, and it means more economic pain later, because the virus comes down slower than it goes up. We should stop it going up in the first place. Unless we suppress the virus, we cannot return to the economy we had; unless we suppress the virus, we cannot keep non-covid NHS services going; and unless we suppress the virus, we cannot keep the elderly and the vulnerable safe and secure. (We know it is impossible to suppress a virus, but it helps to implement our political agenda.)

The way to minimise disruption to other treatments is to deal with this virus as effectively as we can, so that we do not have a huge spike of people with Covid being admitted to hospital. (If we fake the science and sound concerned, we will be able to pull the wool over your eyes for sinister purposes.)


11-- Masks are a sign of compliance?

Anyone who ventures out onto the high street will see long queues of masked and muted figures. They probably cannot breathe but, we are told, breathing is dangerous. So we hold our breath. These flimsy shields have become the marks of subservience to a policy that, no one can deny, is bewilderingly inconsistent. The Government has stated on numerous occasions how ineffective face-coverings are; in one document, published on June 23rd, it stated: “The evidence of the benefit of using a face covering to protect others is weak and the effect is likely to be small.” And yet, after only a few months, this symbol of conformity is now normalised and unquestionable. We have become literally silenced and distanced from one another. Why? Because scepticism spreads through communication and scepticism is contagious


12--Unspeakable Cruelty?


Professor Ramesh Thakur, former United Nations Assistant Secretary-General and Professor at the Crawford School of Public Policy in Australia, has written a cracking piece in Spectator Australia on the real harms and dubious ethics of lockdowns.

We now know the fear-mongers were disastrously wrong, but persist with their heartless cruelty nonetheless. In April, the UN Economic Commission for Africa said “between 300,000 and 3.3 million African people could lose their lives as a direct result of COVID-19”. In February, Bill Gates warned of 10 million corona virus deaths in Africa. On October 15th, the real number was 38,977. Gates is a genius as a tech entrepreneur but his grasp of epidemiology is near the other end of the scale. Mind you, the tech sector is one of the very few to have done well financially from the lockdown.

The unbearable cruelty imposed by health bureaucrats without a distinguished medical research record has sucked the very humanity out of society: delaying interstate visits until too late to see a dying father or save one of the twins in the womb in need of urgent attention. As British MP Charles Walker said in a BBC radio interview on October 12th, for many elderly people, “being told that you’ve got to spend the next six or 12 months without human contact, without seeing the people that you love, without embracing your grandchildren, is a price too high”.

Millions will be pushed into extreme poverty.

Of course, the biggest tragedy will be across the developing world over the next decade, with over 100 million more people pushed into extreme poverty, 10s of millions of additional dead from increased infant and maternal mortality, hunger and starvation with more poverty and disrupted crop production and food distribution networks, sharp cutbacks in immunisation and schooling, and destruction of the informal sectors of the economy in which daily wage earners earn a pitiful living. Most countries will also need to prepare for potential spikes in mental health problems and suicides from the fear generated by exaggerated alarmism as well as the loneliness, isolation, financial ruin and despair caused by the lockdowns.


13-- Coronavirus Fraud Scandal — The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun


Dr. Mike Yeadon, former vice president and scientific director of Pfizer, is also on this list. Yeadon recently went on record stating "there is no science to suggest a second wave should happen," and that false positive results from unreliable PCR tests are being used to "manufacture a 'second wave' based on 'new cases.'"20

"They assumed, and still do assume, that there was no disease that went beyond the gravity of the seasonal flu; that the population had already acquired cross or T-cell immunity against this allegedly new virus; and that there was therefore no reason for any special measures and certainly not for vaccinations," Fuellmich says.

He also quotes21 from a scientific paper published in September 2020 by Yeadon and colleagues, in which they state:

"We're basing our government policy, our economic policy and the policy of restricting fundamental rights presumably on completely wrong data and assumptions about the coronavirus. If it weren't for the test results that are constantly reported in the media, the pandemic would be over, because nothing really happened."

Nowhere was there any excess mortality. Studies carried out by Professor Ioannidis and others have shown that the mortality of corona is equivalent to that of the seasonal flu; even the pictures from Bergamo and New York that were used to demonstrate to the world that panic was in order proved to be deliberately misleading.

Then, the so-called 'panic paper' was leaked which was written by the German Department of the Interior. Its classified content shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that in fact the population was deliberately driven to panic by politicians and mainstream media

Among other things, the panic paper calls for children to be made to feel responsible, and I quote, 'for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow the corona rules.'"

Fuellmich goes on to cite data showing that in Bergamo, Italy, 94% of deaths were not the result of COVID-19 infection spreading wild but, rather, the consequence of the government's decision to transfer sick patients from hospitals to nursing homes, where they spread infection — colds, flu and SARS-CoV-2 — among the old and frail.

This was also done by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo,22 in direct violation of federal guidelines,23 as well as in Minnesota, Ohio,24 Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Michigan and California.25 Fuellmich also points out the routine malpractice that occurred in some New York hospitals, where all suspected COVID-19 patients were placed on mechanical ventilation, which turned out to be a death sentence.

Lockdowns Were and Are Unnecessary

Based on the expert testimony collected so far by Fuellmich and his colleagues, lockdowns were unnecessary, and any claim to the contrary is wrong. The three reasons for this are:

  1. Lockdowns were imposed at a time when the virus was already in retreat and infection rates were starting to decline
  2. Scientific evidence shows a majority of people already have built-in protection against the virus due to cross-reactive T cell immunity from exposure to cold and flu viruses26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35
  3. The PCR test — which is being used as a gauge of infection rates and a justification for restrictive measures — "do not give any indication of an infection with any virus let alone an infection with SARS-CoV-2"
  4. The PCR Test Fraud

    First of all, the PCR test have not been approved for diagnostic purposes. Its inventor, Kary Mullis, has repeatedly yet unsuccessfully stressed that this test should not be used as a diagnostic tool. As noted by Fuellmich:

    "[PCR tests] are simply incapable of diagnosing any disease ... A positive PCR test result does not mean that an infection is present. If someone tests positive, it does not mean that they're infected with anything, let alone with the contagious SARS-CoV-2 virus. Even the United States CDC … agrees with this and I quote directly from page 38 of one of its publications on the coronavirus and the PCR tests dated July 13 2020:36

      "Even Drosten himself declared in an interview with a German business magazine in 2014 … that these PCR tests are so highly sensitive that even very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive," Fuellmich notes.

    In summary, the PCR test simply measures the presence of partial DNA sequences that are present in a virus, but it cannot tell us whether that virus is active or inactive. Chances are, if you have no symptoms, a positive test simply means it has detected inactive viral DNA in your body. This would also mean that you are not contagious. 


As noted by Fuellmich:

"These vaccines proved to be completely unnecessary because the swine flu eventually turned out to be a mild flu and never became the horrific plague that the pharmaceutical industry and its affiliated universities kept announcing it would turn into, with millions of deaths certain to happen, if people didn't get vaccinated.

These vaccines also led to serious health problems: about 700 children in Europe fell incurably ill with narcolepsy and are now forever severely disabled. The vaccines bought with millions of taxpayers' money had to be destroyed, with even more taxpayers' money."


 14--Death rates for hospitalised Covid-19 patients are now almost a QUARTER of what they were during the peak of the pandemic, studies show


15--Whipping Up Panic--The WHO seems to be warning of the rise of a whole industry of public officials, media, and pharmaceuticals that is heavily invested in creating panic


What alarmed the WHO in those days was how public health authorities had taken a dangerous turn away from calming the public into sowing public panic. 

The memo continues:

In both pandemics of fear, the exaggerated claims of a severe public health threat stemmed primarily from disease advocacy by influenza experts. In the highly competitive market of health governance, the struggle for attention, budgets and grants is fierce. The pharmaceutical industry and the media only reacted to this welcome boon. We therefore need fewer, not more “pandemic preparedness” plans or definitions. Vertical influenza planning in the face of speculative catastrophes is a recipe for repeated waste of resources and health scares, induced by influenza experts with vested interests in exaggeration. There is no reason for expecting any upcoming pandemic to be worse than the mild ones of 1957 or 1968, no reason for striking pre-emptively, no reason for believing that a proportional and balanced response would risk lives.

If I’m reading this correctly, the WHO seems to be warning of the rise of a whole industry of public officials, media, and pharmaceuticals that is heavily invested in creating panic whenever the next pathogen arrives, wildly exaggerating the threat in their own industrial interests. That’s a strong charge. It seems to have been back up by the unfolding events of 2020. 


The key to responsible policy-making is not bureaucracy but accountability and independence from interest groups...

What we see in this remarkable memo is identical to the ethos and import of the Great Barrington Declaration, which since its release has been treated like some kind of radical and controversial statement. Actually, the World Health Organization said the same thing in 2011 with much tougher language and more biting analytics, essentially warning that the world is being trolled by interest groups with a vested stake in panic over rational public health measures. 

What was true in 2011 is true today. More so than ever.


16--Ryan spills the beans

On the 5th of October, the WHO’s Dr Michale Ryan claimed “about 10%” of the global population had been infected with Sars-Cov-2. With an alleged death toll of roughly 1 million, that puts the infection-fatality ratio at roughly 0.14%.

Our current best estimates tell us that about ten percent of the global population may have been infected by this virus.

He said it, we reported it. The maths is not disputable. And yet Facebook has flagged it as “misinformation”:

Literally dozens of studies have been done on the IFR of Sars-Cov-2 to this point, many of them published and peer-reviewed in just the last few weeks. The average IFR in these studies has been much lower than 0.68% (usually between 0.1 and 0.2).

The “recent studies” healthfeedback cite are from June at the latest. They also never mention the immunological studies which suggest up to 80% of people may already have mucosal or cellular-based immunity, potentially dropping the IFR even further.


17--Rebranding Tyranny? When lockdowns are no longer called lockdowns

The policies of the spring are now known as “general population restrictions” and to avoid such policies again we must impose not lockdowns but other localized “restrictions.” Thus they conclude:

“The purpose of these restrictions is to effectively suppress SARS-CoV-2 infections to low levels that allow rapid detection of localised outbreaks and rapid response through efficient and comprehensive find, test, trace, isolate, and support systems so life can return to near-normal without the need for generalised restrictions.”


Just two weeks after he penned these words, all of Wales went back into lockdown.

Although branded as a 2-week “circuit breaker” measure to stem Covid spread, the rules of this new lockdown look all too familiar. All nonessential businesses must close. Residents are ordered to shelter-in-place “except for very limited purposes” such as obtaining groceries and medical supplies. People may not visit friends or family outside of their own households. Of course, there will be fines, forcible removal, and criminal prosecution for anyone who defies the mandate.

Next came Ireland, which announced its return to full scale lockdown for the next six weeks. In addition to its shelter-in-place instructions, the Irish measure limits internal travel for essential reasons and exercise to a 5 kilometer radius from home and establishes police checkpoints to enforce the restrictions.

The return to lockdown is all the more mystifying once one considers the fact that the first round of lockdowns starting in March had no discernible effect at mitigating the pandemic, save perhaps to slightly delay the onset of its successive waves..

And yet we’re right back to where we started this whole mess, complete with hollow 2-week timelines attached to the “circuit breaker” approach. Remember “fourteen days to flatten the curve” before it became 1, then 2, then 3 months?

It’s not just Wales either. Starting Saturday, the entire city of London will join other northern and western regions of the UK’s under the new “Tier 2” lockdown system – a category that bans socialization outside of one’s own immediate household, limits group interaction to only 6 people – even if outdoors – and shutters businesses between the hours of 10 pm and 5 am. If Londoners don’t behave in accordance with the undemocratically imposed dictates of the government’s science advisers, they risk being elevated to “Tier 3” – effectively a return to shelter-in-place, similar to Wales

Indeed, round two of government-imposed lockdowns have gone viral on the European continent as well. France reimposed 4 weeks of nighttime curfews on nine different population centers, a 6-person gathering rule, bar and restaurant closures, and even restrictions on regional travel. Madrid similarly reimposed a 15-day lockdown, barring residents from entering or exiting the city for non-emergency reasons. It too has a 6-person limitation on gatherings, as well as severe restrictions and overnight closures of businesses in the service industry. The Netherlands and Belgium each have “partial” lockdown policies restricting outdoor gatherings to groups of only 4 and strongly discouraging people from leaving their homes again. By all indications, these and similar policies are ratcheting up at a rapid pace, much as they did back in the spring.

Of course the pretext for reimposing lockdowns remains the same. Europe has entered the dreaded “second wave” of case spikes, ironically demonstrating the abject failure of lockdowns to stem the virus the first time around.

A quick aside: does anyone remember all those stories from over the summer, up to and including Dr. Anthony Fauci’s congressional testimony in August, in which the lockdowners lavished praise on Europe for supposedly shutting down the “right way” in the spring and successfully beating back the virus..

Unfortunately, lockdowner ideology continues to spread in the United States as well. True to form New York City recently reimposed zip code-based “hot spot” lockdowns last week – and promptly went to work issuing over $150,000 worth of fines to violators, once again targeting poor people and minority groups in the process.

With Ireland and Wales now announcing their returns to full lockdown, and much of Europe trending in the same direction, who exactly is misleading the public again?




a global perspective forces us to reconsider the importance of state interventions in favour of more enlightening factors, like each country’s age profile, underlying state of health and population density. This is consistent with research conducted by Oxford’s Blavatnik School of Government back in May. Following the peak of the first wave in Europe, it found no correlation between the stringency of government measures and deaths from the virus.

.. biochemical engineer Ivor Cummins has highlighted its lower than typical mortality rate throughout 2019 compared to its neighbours. Otherwise an undoubted blessing, this presented a problem as soon as the pandemic struck in 2020. It meant Sweden was home to a larger proportion of seriously frail elderly citizens than Norway and Finland, which, experiencing higher rates of mortality among the vulnerable in 2019, had fewer to lose through Covid. This goes some way to explaining why Sweden trails its neighbours.

Sweden has suffered 584 Coronavirus deaths per million, compared to Britain’s 633, Spain’s 710 and Belgium’s 884. It also managed this relatively low death rate without destroying the economic and social lives of its citizens through despotic lockdowns, as all these other countries did.

Meanwhile, Sweden’s infection rate is stable and its seven-day rolling death average has not climbed higher than three since late August. So while we ponder another lockdown, ostensibly to kill the endless cycle of restrictions and re-openings, Sweden gives every impression of having foreclosed that same vicious cycle by avoiding lockdown in the first place.


19-- CDC Masks? (2:30 min) May 2020


"evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza."  

20--Why are they doing this?? Ivor Cummins




Wednesday, October 21, 2020

Today's links

 1-- Lockdown's lethal toll laid bare: 50,000 children see surgery postponed, treatments for strokes plunge by almost 50%, and one in FIVE people were hit with depression in just one month as devastating effect of coronavirus restrictions are revealed

  • Delays in treatment are set to cause a 20% rise in deaths among newly diagnosed cancer patients in England – 6,270 excess deaths this year
  • Treatment for strokes fell by 45% during lockdown and there were more than 2,000 excess deaths in from heart disease
  • More than 50,000 operations for children were cancelled
  • Organ transplants fell by two thirds, with the number of those who died on the transplant waiting list almost doubling
  • Total waiting lists for routine orthopaedic and eye operations are at record levels
  • Calls to child abuse helplines rocketed
  • As rates of depression and anxiety doubled, thousands of recovering alcoholics have relapsed

David lined up an impressive array of experts to comment on these horrendous figures.

Professor Karol Sikora, a cancer specialist and head of Buckingham Medical School, said the findings of the Mail’s audit were a “stunning demonstration of lockdowns’ harmful effects across society”.

He added: “If lockdown were a drug, you’d need to consider the side effects, and yet we’re not – even though we seem to be diving headlong into another one.

“People sometimes claim it’s a question of health versus the economy, but it’s not – it’s health versus health.” Professor Sikora supports last week’s Great Barrington Declaration, now signed by more than 10,700 scientists and 29,700 doctors worldwide, calling on governments to adopt an approach of ‘focused protection’, shielding the vulnerable while opening up the economy.

Sunetra Gupta, one of the Declaration’s authors and an Oxford University epidemiologist, said: “These papers and data are starting to build the evidence to show that the collateral damage has been immense – and will continue with extreme measures such as lockdowns. The time has surely come to take their full costs measures into account.”


2-- No Sign of a Second Wave” – Prof Carl Heneghan


Prof Carl Heneghan has told the Telegraph that the ONS data for the week ending October 9th – published yesterday – indicate that there are no excess deaths.

“There is no sign of a second wave up to October 9th. In week 41, the number of deaths registered was 1.5% above the five-year average.

“We consider the current data normal variation, and only consider it an excess when it gets to two standard deviations, which is about 1,200 excess deaths compared to the five-year average.”..

Dr Jason Oke, Carl Heneghan’s colleague at the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, thinks that’s what’s happening is that older people who would normally be dying of flu and pneumonia at this time of year are dying of Covid instead.

“Total deaths are tracking at the top but not over,” said Dr Oke. “Is it because we have nearly an identical deficit of flu and pneumonia deaths for this time of year?

“COVID-19 plus influenza/pneumonia deaths are at 1,621 this week, while five-year average flu and pneumonia for this week is 1,600.”



3-- Scott Atlas Talks to Freddie Sayers

Freddie Sayers, the editor of UnHerd, interviewed Scott Atlas yesterday and the member of the White House’s coronavirus task force made a powerful case for “Focused Protection”, as set out in the Great Barrington Declaration (see below).

Among his key quotes were:

What is his policy?

My advice is exactly this. It’s a three-pronged strategy. Number one: aggressive protection of high risk individuals and the vulnerable (typically the elderly and those with co-morbidities). Number two: allocate resources so that we prevent hospital overcrowding, so that people can be treated for this virus and get the other serious medical care that is needed. Number three: open schools, society and businesses because keeping them closed is enormously harmful – in fact it kills people.

Effect of lockdowns

We must open up because we’re killing people. In the US, 46% of the six most common cancers were not diagnosed during the shutdown… These are people who will present to the hospital or their doctor with later stage disease – many of these people will die. 650,000 Americans are on chemotherapy ­– half of them didn’t come in for their chemo because they were afraid. Two-thirds of screenings for cancer were not done; half of childhood immunisations did not get done; 85% of living organ transplants did not get done. And then we see the other harms: 200,000 cases plus of child abuse in the US during the two months of spring school closures were not reported because schools are the number one agency where abuse is noticed; we have one out of four American young adults, college age, who thought of killing themselves in the month of June…

All of these harms are massive for the working class and the lower socioeconomic groups. The people who are upper class, who can work from home, the people who can sip their latte and complain that their children are underfoot or that they have to come up with extra money to hire a tutor privately – these are people who are not impacted by the lockdowns.

This is the topic, this is why you open up. A secondary gain might be population immunity, but this is the reason to open up.

Climate of fear

This is one of the biggest failures of the voices of public health in the United States and in the world – they specifically instilled fear with their proclamations and statements… And the models that were put forward that were worst case scenarios and were just hideously wrong, and the media that has hyped up these rare exceptions like multi-system inflammation in children even though we know the overwhelming evidence is that this disease is absolutely not high risk for children. All the hyperbole, the sensationalising and the failure of public health officials to articulate what we know instead of what we don’t know… The fear is due to what was said by the so-called experts, by the media and by a failure to understand or care that they were instilling hear… I just heard a famous epidemiologist from Harvard the other day say that to have the idea of herd immunity even being discussed is ‘mass murder’ – these kinds of statements are hideously outrageous.

It’s never appropriate to have fear. There is no such thing as a government leader who is competent who instils fear.


4--I’m Not a Conspiracy Theorist, But


5--There’s a financial incentive for councils to lock down

Grants from central government and increased fines could make lockdown more attractive to local leaders.


6--Lockdown Is a Big Mistake: What Top Israeli Doctors Really Think About COVID-19

The country's hospitals are not collapsing, the lockdown does more harm than good and the policy for dealing with COVID is fundamentally wrong. An increasing number of senior physicians are convinced: Israel needs to switch gears in its handling of the pandemic


7-- 'Scarred for life': Sage experts warn of impact of Covid policies on the young

Government accused of failing to protect generation Z from harm caused by pandemic response


8--Bill Gates?


There is a much grander agenda going on. Bill Gates does not want to increase the world population, he was raised to worry about it. Simply put, I find it inconsistent that this guy is really trying to help humanity rather than limit the population when he is also developing chips that remotely control birth. Gates has been focused on India and Africa to reduce population growth.

This is why Republic forms of government are so dangerous. He only has to bribe politicians to create a totalitarian state. Democracy is where the PEOPLE decide these issue on a direct vote. This is why I am against career politicians of any party. They are for sale to the highest bidder.


9--Glenn Greenwald: The Problem Isn’t Biden Family Corruption, It’s the Media’s Cover-Up of It (10.21.20)



Tuesday, October 20, 2020

Today's Links

 1--Do Masks Work?


Surgical masks do not protect against viruses. At best, these cloth or latex barriers may help prevent the spread of germs (via coughs or sneezes) when worn by folks who are ill. A properly fitted N95 respirator mask, on the other hand, is far more likely to protect against a virus, as it can filter particulates as small as 0.3 micron. An N95 mask can filter properly only when it has created an airtight seal around your mouth and nose. Health-care workers who may be exposed to pathogens, for example, are required to go through annual N95 fit testing to ensure they are wearing the masks correctly. If you have N95 masks at home and you’d prefer to wear one in public, doing so won’t hurt.  

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that members of the public use simple cloth face coverings when in a public setting to slow the spread of the virus, since this will help people who may have the virus and do not know it from transmitting it to others. In short, you shouldn’t count on ear loop masks to protect you from COVID-19 — you should wear them mainly as a public service to help protect others from you.  

From the CDC: "In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks."

2-- Global Covid report --Just the facts


3--Secret powers and the presidency--Cockburn


4--Bannon on Biden

Steve Bannon, former chief strategist to President Donald Trump, says emails revealing Hunter Biden’s communication with Ukranian energy company Burisma show “Joe Biden’s a liar, a stone cold liar”. The New York Post this week published news of emails detailing Joe Biden's son's business dealings overseas.

 The emails revealed that Hunter Biden had planned to introduce his father – the then Vice President- to an executive at Ukrainian energy company Burisma, a company where Hunter served on the board of directors. “Joe Biden has lied about this for years, and it’s pretty stunning the information that has come off this hard drive. 

It’s really shocked the United States,” Mr Bannon said. “Joe Biden has said, categorically, my family has nothing to do with, no financial relationship with China and the Chinese communist party.”

 “I think what we have here now, we’ve brought in a number of experts to look at this, we have a massive national security issue with Joe Biden and the people around him. “I don’t think Joe Biden today could get a security clearance, so I don’t know how in 16 days he’s going to stand and run for to be commander in chief of the United States. 

5--The Demon Fauci


6--How many people have pre existing immunity


7--Trump slams Fauci 


8--Longer Lockdowns Associated with Much Worse Economic Outcomes


9--‘The Great Reset’: World leaders to harness COVID and pursue 'sinister' climate agenda

Sky News host Rowan Dean says the next World Economic Forum in Davos has morphed from a “jet-setter climate gabfest” into a sinister “anti-democratic enterprise designed to destroy your job, steal your prosperity and rob your kids of a future”.

 “It's a hardcore leftist eco-horror show replete with quasi fascism,” he said. Mr Dean highlighted what he described as a “disturbing trend among many of the world's left-wing elites to increasingly conflate COVID-19 with climate change. “Many are going so far as to suggest that all the measures applied to the coronavirus, the lockdowns, the destruction of businesses, the suppression of dissent, curfews, strong-arm police tactics, should become the ‘new normal’ for dealing with climate change. Mr Dean said the next World Economic Forum is planning “to convince governments with the help of big businesses and big tech to bring about something deeply sinister called ‘The Great Reset’.”

 “It is a program designed to strip us all of our fundamental democratic rights in favour of a new form of society as dictated by the elites”. Mr Dean said the advertising for ‘The Great Reset’ was “just about as cliched and vomit-inducing as the most inane corporate ad can be”. “This promo is saying that all the very worst things in the world, from the coronavirus to bushfires to riots to pollution to poverty are somehow linked.

 “Then it is claiming they can magically disappear. Literally at the push of a button and just like that, everything in the world is made right and pure again. “The Great Reset. What could be simpler? Mr Dean said ultimately “lunatics including Prince Charles and the United Nations and the IMF want to replicate the global response to COVID and repurpose it for climate change, to enforce zero net emissions”. 

10--WHO-- Flu vanishes. All is Covid

11-- Eisenhower's Warning About Science

Biden will Lockdown


12-- Sweden "a disaster"?? 

13-  Scott Atlas: I'm disgusted and dismayed

we do not support a "survival of the fittest" policy (herd immunity)

1--Protect vulnerable

2--Protect hospital overload

3-- Reopen schools and society 


14-- The Covidian Cult


15--Covid strategy based on false assumptions -Unherd

16-- Crucial Viral Update 15th Oct: Why are the Media Undermining Science and Data?? Ivor Cummins


17-  Oct 20th Shocking Data - Endemic Virus versus Damaging Lockdowns, Ivor Cummins

Monday, October 19, 2020


“In the magical universe there are no coincidences and there are no accidents. nothing happens unless someone wills it to happen”

~ William S. Burroughs


Corrupt politician Joe Biden makes Crooked Hillary look like an amateur!






1--Sweden's rank in global COVID-19 deaths continues to fall as other countries move up the list

Its global rank is half its peak over the summer

long-derided for its purported lax response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Sweden continues to fall in global adjusted coronavirus death rankings, currently sitting more than twice as far from the top of the list as its summer peak. 

The data website Worldometers lists Sweden as 15th among nations in population-adjusted deaths from coronavirus as of Saturday evening. That's down from a peak of 7th place over the summer. 

Sweden's tumble in the global rankings has come about as other nations have continued to post steady and in some cases increasing death rates. The running seven-day average of COVID-19 deaths in Sweden has been around 1-2 since late August.

Countries that have overtaken Sweden, meanwhile—such as Peru and Brazil—have continued to post steady numbers of high deaths. The U.S. has also overtaken Sweden since the summer, though both have still fallen in their respective rankings since then. 

The Nordic country has received sustained criticism for its handling of the pandemic, with public health officials worldwide arguing that leaders there failed to take aggressive measures to keep the virus from spreading and killing Swedish citizens. 

Sweden's government, meanwhile, has countered that it largely followed what was before 2020 widely understood to be an appropriate response to a virus like COVID-19. 

2-- Herd Immunity To COVID Is Not Reckless. It Would Protect The Vulnerable

Freaking out about ‘herd immunity’ looks like a smear campaign designed to prevent Americans, including the president, from hearing the scientific case against the lockdowns.


After enough people get and recover from an infection, the virus loses most of its routes for new infections. Indeed, the main purpose of the annual flu vaccine is to speed up herd immunity by reducing the number of susceptible people. Just as huddling inside in the winter helps spread flu, and thereby pneumonia, so herd immunity helps bring down death rates in the summer.

Second, herd immunity isn’t so much a strategy as a fact of life when dealing with infectious agents like the coronavirus. Even the Time article that lambasted Sweden admits that it’s not quite fair to say the Nordic country pursued a herd immunity “strategy.” Rather, it had an anti-lockdown policy. (Sweden's goal was not to increase infections, but manage spread.)

Still, any strategy that ignores herd immunity is foolish, since that is precisely how infection rates fall in pandemics.

So why the renewed furor over herd immunity? We suspect it’s really aimed at the thousands of scientists and medical practitioners who have signed the Great Barrington Declaration, which invokes the term favorably.

For lockdown partisans in the press and Big Tech, the declaration is a clear and present danger. They’re working hard to suppress it. After all, it refutes the narrative that all scientists agree with the lockdowns. Its three principal authors hail from Stanford, Harvard, and Oxford universities. They have as many scientific chops as any of the lockdown partisans.

So the media have done everything they can, first to ignore, and then to tar, feather, and misrepresent the scientists who organized this effort. The campaign against a supposed “herd immunity strategy,” or what some call the “let people die” approach, is really a proxy war against the declaration.

But the scientists behind the Great Barrington advocate nothing like that. They call for focused protection, a strategy that confers the greatest benefits with the fewest costs. These scientists argue that population-wide lockdowns are all pain and little gain. They also know that we’re going to reach herd immunity at some point whatever our approach. How much damage we cause in the meantime is the question.

Finally, they know that the elderly are about 1,000 times more at risk of death from COVID-19 than the young. Therefore, they argue, we should end the disastrous lockdowns, focus on protecting the most vulnerable, treat those who get sick with all the tools in our arsenal — including those President Trump received — and let immunity build up among those with very little risk.

But the scientists behind the Great Barrington advocate nothing like that. They call for focused protection, a strategy that confers the greatest benefits with the fewest costs. These scientists argue that population-wide lockdowns are all pain and little gain. They also know that we’re going to reach herd immunity at some point whatever our approach. How much damage we cause in the meantime is the question.

Finally, they know that the elderly are about 1,000 times more at risk of death from COVID-19 than the young. Therefore, they argue, we should end the disastrous lockdowns, focus on protecting the most vulnerable, treat those who get sick with all the tools in our arsenal — including those President Trump received — and let immunity build up among those with very little risk.


3--Messiah Complex? Bill Gates on Climate--How does this inform his views on the Coronavirus?


To prevent the worst effects of climate change, we need to get to zero net greenhouse gas emissions in every sector of the economy within 50 years—and as the IPCC recently found, we need to be on a path to doing it in the next 10 years. That means dealing with electricity, and the other 75% too.  

To stop the planet from getting substantially warmer, we need breakthroughs in how we make things, grow food, and move people and goods—not just how we power our homes and cars.

These challenges are only getting more urgent. The world’s middle class has been growing at an unprecedented rate, and as you move up the income ladder, your carbon footprint expands. Instead of walking everywhere, you can afford a bicycle (which doesn’t use gas but is likely made with energy-intensive metal and gets to you via cargo ships and trucks that run on fossil fuels). Eventually you get a motorbike so you can travel farther from home to work a better job and afford to send your kids to school. Your family eats more eggs, meat, and dairy, so they get better nutrition. You’re in the market for a refrigerator, electric lights so your kids can study at night, and a sturdy home built with metal and concrete.

All of that new consumption translates into tangible improvements in people’s lives. It is good for the world overall—but it will be very bad for the climate, unless we find ways to do it without adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. 

Personally, I’m part of a group of investors in a private fund called Breakthrough Energy Ventures (BEV), which is putting more than $1 billion into helping promising companies take great ideas from the lab to market at scale...Because the fund will be privately managed, it can avoid some of the bureaucracy that slows things down and makes it hard to support new companies. We’ll have the resources to make a meaningful difference, and the flexibility to move quickly. That’s a rare combination.


4--Infectious disease expert: Coming weeks will be ‘darkest’ of COVID-1


5--Gallup--Americans' Economic Attitudes and the Election

  • Americans' direct ratings of the economy were negative, on balance, but not as negative as earlier in the pandemic.
  • Few Americans (9%) considered any aspect of the economy to be the nation's top problem.
  • A majority (54%) rated Trump positively for his job performance on the economy.
  • A majority (55%) also considered themselves and their family to be better off than they were four years ago
  • Economy Is Not a Top-of-Mind Problem

    Americans appear even less worried about the economy when asked to name the most important problem facing the country. Altogether, 9% of Americans in Gallup's September poll mentioned at least one of several economic issues as the nation's top problem -- mostly citing the economy in general (5%) or unemployment (2%) in response to this open-ended question. No other reelection year has featured less than 40% of Americans naming economic issues as the nation's most important problem, making 2020 a remarkable year in this regard.


    Americans are more likely to name the government/poor leadership (25%), the coronavirus (25%) or race relations (13%) as the nation's top problem than to name any aspect of the economy.

    Majority Approve of Trump's Handling of Economy

    The economy remained Trump's strong suit last month among several issues on which Gallup asks the public to rate him. As of Sept. 14-28, when Trump's overall job approval rating stood at 46%, 54% of Americans approved of his handling of the economy. Trump's economic approval rating exceeded his ratings on crime (48%), foreign affairs (46%), China (46%), the coronavirus (44%) and race relations (38%).

     The 55% who say they are better off today is also similar to the 53% who rate their personal financial situation as either excellent or good, down only slightly from before the pandemic. Today's "better off" figure is easily the highest Gallup has recorded among comparable points in previous incumbents' presidencies.

    Americans rate the economy as more important to their vote this year than any other issue -- 45% say it will be extremely important and 44% very important. However, about half of those rating it as extremely important are Republicans or Republican leaners, and nearly half are Democrats or Democratic leaners, suggesting the economy will cut both ways for Trump as an election issue. Meanwhile, Americans' persistently low satisfaction with the direction of the country, most recently 13%, is a decidedly negative indicator for Trump's reelection.


    Does the election matter?
  • Bottom Line

    The 2020 election is unique given that, amid the coronavirus pandemic, early voting is already reaching record-high levels. While some election indicators suggest that this year might not be remarkable in terms of turnout, the latest reading on Gallup's 24-year measure tracking voters' view that the election matters more than in the past suggests that turnout in this year's election could be significantly higher than it has been in recent years. In fact, looking at this measure only, turnout would likely surpass the recent high of nearly 62% citizen participation in 2008.


 6--Gallup--Race relations and virus driving the election (Huge disparity between GOP and Dems)


So, what do these figures show?

  1. Women of both major parties who are registered to vote are more likely than their male counterparts to rate race relations as extremely important to their vote, resulting in an 18-percentage-point gender gap among Republican voters (including independents who lean Republican) and a 15-point gap among Democratic voters (including Democratic leaners).

  2. The response to the coronavirus as a voting issue sparks smaller gender differences in both parties: 27% of Republican women versus 19% of Republican men rate the coronavirus response as extremely important to their vote. That eight-point difference compares with a six-point gender gap among Democrats. These findings align with the larger gender patterns on COVID-19 related to women being more concerned about contracting the illness and being more likely to take preventive measures such as social distancing.

  3. Views of the economy's importance show little difference by gender among registered voters.


 7--The World’s Billionaires During the Covid Fraud Are Getting Richer While Everyone Else Is Facing Poverty?


By using this purposely manufactured ‘pandemic,’ the world’s billionaires’ wealth has increased from $8 trillion to $10.2 trillion from April until July this year. That is a 28 percent increase in net worth for the richest on the planet in just four months, while most of humanity has been economically destroyed and locked inside home prisons.

Again, this is no coincidence, and since it is not, it is blatantly obvious that it was the plan all along. While most small and medium sized businesses are in dire condition, devastated by the Covid response, big business has used a crisis brought about and perpetuated by the billionaires’ pawns in government. While children and families around the world are starving, these evildoers are taking advantage of this killer reset to line their pockets with money stolen from the very people now starving.


 8--Admission of Guilt? Hunter Biden's lawyer has come to us both with phone calls and with emails saying, 'hey, I've got to get the hard drive back',' 


Hunter Biden's lawyer has come to us both with phone calls and with emails saying, 'hey, I've got to get the hard drive back',' Bannon said.

'This is not some Russian intelligence operation; they admit it's their hard drive,' he continued in proving the validity of the information found on the laptop. 'We have the emails from the lawyer, if we need to release them, we'll release them.'  

Trump weighed in on Hunter's emails on Twitter Sunday, and gave his Democratic rival a new nickname: '10% Joe.'

'Hunter Biden's laptop is a disaster for the entire Biden family, but especially for his father, Joe. It is now a proven fact, and cannot be denied, that all of that info is the REAL DEAL,' Trump tweeted. 'That makes it impossible for '50%, or 10%' Joe, to ever assume the office of the President!'


9--Sweden:: Tegnell: "Even if you feel like there have been a lot of cases in some big cities, there are still huge pockets of people who have not been affected yet."

Dr Rocklov said that he believed that the resurgence in infections in Stockholm has challenged health authorities belief that herd immunity would work.

He said: "I think they must have been shocked by that, after all these strong claims that we were closing in on immunity in April and May. They must have realised that that's not really the case."

Sweden's state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell said on Thursday that the autumn surge in infections had changed they way they understood the virus.

He said: "I think the obvious conclusion is that the level of immunity in those cities is not at all as high as we have, as maybe some people, have believed," he said.

"I think what we are seeing is very much a consequence of the very heterogeneous spread that this disease has, which means that even if you feel like there have been a lot of cases in some big cities, there are still huge pockets of people who have not been affected yet."

Stockholm University maths professor Tom Britton found that even with 20 per cent of a city's population immune - measures still have to rolled out to stop the virus.

He said: "Immunity is a little bit on our on our side, but there is still a substantial risk for future outbreaks in Sweden.

"If we did not care anything about any restrictions or preventive measures, then I think we would see a big second wave, not as big as in the spring, but still a big one."

Sweden had boasted its strategy had been "vindicated" at the start of September as it saw consistently low cases throughout the summer. 

Sweden’s government aimed to "solve the crisis with as few negative consequences as possible for people’s lives and health".

Rather than carry out a strict lockdown, it issued numerous guidelines to help people through the coronavirus pandemic such as staying home if they were ill, washing hands and social distancing.

But it says that its general guidelines were not binding and only a recommendation.

Meanwhile no businesses were forced to shut down, as Sweden wanted to limit the impact on its economy.


10--Andrew Cockburn--Secret powers and the presidenc


11--Who Elected Donald Trump?

When the Democratic-leaning press began (falsely) reporting on rising hate and racial backlash, and the CEOs of large banks and tech companies began stating publicly that white supremacy is the only problem in need of solving, the havoc that neoliberal policies have wrought quickly disappeared as a topic of polite conversation.


According to the polling organizatiunless one is willing to posit that the 7% of black voters who voted in 2012, but who sat the 2016 election out, were too lazy or disinterested in politics to vote, then not voting is every bit as much an assertion of political will as voting.

Vox tried to frame the down ballot exiling of Democrats during the Obama years— with the loss of over a thousand congressional seats and state and local elected positions, as the natural ebb and flow of American politics


on Gallup, by election eve 2016, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were the two most reviled candidates for President in polling history. Both of the establishment political parties experienced plummeting memberships during periods of profound policy failures. There are plausible reasons why treating the 2016 election in terms of comparative incomes is less than illuminating. In terms of class analysis, blacks, who skew towards working class, and whites— many of whom had twice voted for Barack Obama, but nevertheless voted for Donald Trump in 2016, suggests that class antagonism was central to the outcome of the 2016 election.

Assuming that the Census Bureau data is correct, the percentage of blacks who voted in 2016 fell by 7% from 2012. The identitarian explanation, that blacks voted for ‘one of their own’ with Mr. Obama and then stayed home when his name wasn’t on the ballot, is insightful-lite in that black voters went to the polls to vote for white candidates in prior elections. Whether or not the contention is racist, I leave to readers.

Left unsaid going into the 2016 election was that voters had been abandoning the establishment political parties since George W. Bush’s war with Iraq headed south around 2005. First it was Republicans who bailed on the Republican Party. Then, following the implementation of Barack Obama’s political program, came the Democrats. Party affiliation held steady going into the 2008 election, after which it declined precipitously as Mr. Obama implemented his neoliberal political program. In contrast to the racial ‘backlash’ theory, those leaving the Democratic Party became Independents

From a political marketing perspective, once it was known that people of color partially boycotted the 2016 election, the obvious marketing strategy became to create racial appeals that boosted the Democrat’s ‘brand’ (forgive me) and diminished their competitor’s. In fact, leading Democratic strategists who had spent storied careers crafting cynical dog whistle campaigns, began shouting racist! to shut down any challenge to their campaign. Donald Trump helped their cause with his insipid slanders of mostly powerless people. But the disenchantment expressed by black voters in 2016 illustrates the power of people to make up their own minds regarding political issues.

Graph: between 2012 and 2016, voter disenchantment with the electoral choice by registered voters who didn’t vote rose by 11 percentage points, to 25%. As stated below, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were the two least liked presidential candidates in polling history. To those who might imagine that the Democrats learned something from that fiasco, in 2020 Joe Biden is, according to recent polls, nearly as disliked as Hillary Clinton was in 2016. Astonishingly, given his pandemic response and fealty to his oligarch brethren, or possibly because of this, Donald Trump is less disliked than he was in 2016. Source:

Graph: voters fled the Democratic party during Barack Obama’s first term to become Independents. This was after they elected him, meaning that they had no problem voting for a black man. They could have joined the Republican Party if they objected to either Mr. Obama’s race or his ‘socialist’ agenda, as it was described by Republicans. But they didn’t. It is therefore plausible that they objected to his policies. They voted for him, he betrayed their interests, so they left the Democratic Party in response. Source:

Graph: None of the official explanations of the 2016 election seem to have captured the dynamic at work. White voters didn’t rush to vote for Donald Trump— only a bit over 1% more whites voted in 2016 than in 2012. The story is that black and Hispanic voters stayed away in droves. Voting by blacks fell seven percent from 2012 to 2016. The cheap explanation, that blacks stayed home because ‘one of their own’ wasn’t running, is belied by the steady increase in black voter participation in prior elections. Wholesale disenchantment with the Democrat’s policies and / or candidates fits voter actions. Source:

 In fact, core constituencies for the Democrats either stayed home (blacks) or voted for Donald Trump after twice voting for Barack Obama. Treating these constituencies like they either don’t exist or don’t matter is, in fact, The Problem.

The only reference made to the consequences of four decades of planned deindustrialization was ‘economic anxiety’ as a psychological malady unrelated to economic dispossession.

  Through suppressing the power of capital, a social democratic weltanschauung (worldview) grew deep roots within the political class. This isn’t to overstate the case— there are serious and valid criticisms of official policies during this era. But as for politics as fashion, the party of FDR held substantive control of domestic political economy for a half century.





Sunday, October 18, 2020

Today's links

 1--Covid is the step on the path to the corporatization of the US

2--Trump advisor: Masks don't work

The post in question provided a link to an article from The American Institute for Economic Research which cast doubt on the effectiveness of mask wearing among the general population during influenza outbursts, with a comment from Atlas  reading “Masks work? No.” The radiologist also cited the World Health Organisation in alleging that despite being “widespread”, use of face coverings was “not supported”

It’s not the first time Trump’s coronavirus adviser questioned the science behind mask wearing, occasionally appearing at White House events without donning one. For some, including Republican representative for Arizona’s 5th district Andy Biggs, he however turned out to be a figure who “helped to expose the pseudoscience & politicization behind COVID-19”.


3--Bannon is working with Giuliani??


Bannon, who said he was contacted by Giuliani in late August to help with media strategy for the emails, said he has been holding on to the legal letters and waiting to use them if the Biden camp tried to deny the laptop ­belonged to Hunter.

'We haven't released that yet. We're holding that back to make sure if they walk into the trap, we're just going to drop it on them,' he said.

'My training under Andrew Breitbart was put it out, let them lie and then bang, drop them on the lie, let them lie some more, drop it again. We have the emails from the lawyer, if we need to ­release them, we'll release them.'

The FBI is reportedly conducting an investigation into whether the allegations are part of a Russian disinformation campaign against the Biden campaign, though the agency has refused to speak publicly on the matter.

FBI Director Christopher Wray has warned that Russia is trying to 'denigrate' Biden ahead of the election and damage his chances of unseating Trump.

Bannon was arrested and charged in August with defrauding donors to a private fund-raising effort called We Build the Wall, which was intended to bolster the president's signature initiative along the Mexican border.


4--Worthless chiseler Fauci pushes worthless drug for $$$$$


Dr. Fauci is heavily invested in Remdesivir succeeding. Since 2014, he has dedicated massive taxpayer resources into studying and hyping Gilead’s product through the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which he has led since 1984.  

Fauci’s NIAID both conducted and funded much of the development of Remdesivir. Over $40 million in taxpayer dollars used in the development of Remdesivir can be traced directly to grants delivered by Fauci’s agency. Additionally, the NIAID is currently sponsoring two separate, major clinical trials on the Gilead product.

In April, the Dr. Fauci chief touted Remdesivir as the best available product to combat COVID-19:

“The data shows that Remdesivir has a clear cut significant positive effect in diminishing the time to recovery. This is really quite important. It’s highly significant,” he said in an April press conference. 

“What it has proven is that a drug can block this virus,” Fauci added, describing the drug as the “standard of care” for COVID-19 patients 

5--Yes, The Hunter Biden Emails Are Authentic by Larry C Johnson


6--Viral Issue Crucial Update Sept 8th: the Science, Logic and Data Explained!


7--Dissenting scientists issue Covid-19 herd immunity declaration


8-- The case for a circuit breaker

Professor Karl Friston has modelled the effect of a short lockdown, with surprising results

His models are starting to develop a track record. Back in early July, Friston appeared on Newsnight in a barely-noticed interview, and was asked if there would be a second wave. At the time, cases and deaths were falling and many people were hoping the virus was behind us altogether. “Yes, there will be [a second wave],” he told Kirsty Wark. “It’s not going to be the kind of second wave we saw in the Spanish Flu… this is going to be a much more muted second wave.” He predicted less than 6,800 deaths from it.

According to Professor Friston, the “secondary wave” is unfolding largely as predicted — see the blue line below, taken from his report in June (the 32 months refers to the typical length of time he is assuming immunity lasts). If we proceed as we are, without national lockdowns, the model suggests that daily deaths will soon peak and start coming down. He now thinks the total deaths from this second wave will be closer to 2,500 than 6,800.

epidemiologists call “epidemic equilibrium” — ie when a virus continues to circulate but at a manageable, more consistent level.

He suggests that we are dealing with a far more moderate resurgence, which you could argue does not warrant national interventions of this kind, with all the side effects they entail. As he said to me, “to put things in perspective, the number of lives saved from SARS-CoV-2 [from a national lockdown] is about twice the number of people dying from road traffic accidents in a year — and less than half the number dying from seasonal influenza.”


9-- Giesecke --“I don’t think you can stop it, it’s like a tsunami sweeping across Europe.”


 Disarmingly blunt, uninterested in percentage points, Giesecke brushed aside the coronavirus pandemic with words that electrified sceptics and horrified his detractors. “I don’t think you can stop it,” he said, “it’s like a tsunami sweeping across Europe.” The real death toll, he suggested, will be in the region of a severe influenza season — maybe double that at most — so we should do what we can to slow it so the health service can cope, but let it pass. 

In the ‘Giesecke’ worldview, this would amount not to a victory but to a surrender. The world becomes a place of indefinite anxiety, with the constant threat of curtailment hovering over all that is best and most human in life — family get-togethers, religious worship, children playing, plans for the future, creative projects – it risks becoming a conscribed, smaller, more fearful world. At its most extreme, a long-term ‘suppression state’ really could start to feel like oppressive regimes of history, from the Puritans to the Communists, that misguidedly tried to remake the whole natural order in pursuit of a single definition of virtue. People who recoil from any move in this direction can hardly be dismissed, or called immoral.

le, somewhat ironically given the laser-targeted threat of this disease on the old and vulnerable, the Giesecke approach felt imbued with the more philosophical perspective of later life. He has seen many pandemics; we live in a world full of various threats and dangers, and we can’t stop everything to try to run from one new one. Young people must be allowed to do what young people do, and older people, without the luxury of unlimited years ahead of them, must be allowed to choose to go back to seeing their grandchildren and living a full life even knowing the risks.

Whether you’re more Giesecke or Ferguson, it’s time to stop pretending that our response to this threat is simply a scientific question, or even an easy moral choice between right and wrong. It’s a question of what sort of world we want to live in, and at what cost.


10--Government Was Warned About Looming Cancer Crisis Five Months Ago

Prof Sikora even flagged up the risk that GP referrals of suspected cancer patients would fall dramatically, which Cancer Research UK said yesterday meant that 350,000 people who would normally have been referred to hospital with suspected cancer in the past six months have still not been seen.

The briefing note was produced at the behest of Sir Simon Stevens, the NHS’s Chief Executive, but after submitting it to a civil servant in the DHSC Prof Sikora never heard anything more.

Not only did Prof Sikora identify all the risks that have subsequently materialised, he also suggested a solution: collaboration with the private sector. Here’s his conclusion:

The surge of cancer patients is expected by late summer 2020. The independent sector has huge resources to assist the NHS by working in partnership. Developing a plan centrally and authorising local coordination based on existing NHS cancer centres would provide the most effective structure for implementation. This will significantly mitigate against delay and strict rationing to ensure the best long-term outcomes for our patients.


 11--Manchester--No lockdown needed

The question on everyone’s mind is whether Covid is out of control in Manchester, or has Burnham got it right, and the Government should hold off?

First, let’s look at cases, which don’t seem to be out of control, and are, if anything, declining. They peaked on the September 30th with 596 cases and a seven-day average of 461. As of October 9th, the seven-day average has fallen from the peak by nearly 20% to an average of 374.

Nine out of the 10 Greater Manchester’s boroughs report recent increases in their Covid rates whereas Manchester’s are on the wane. But this further underpins the need to understand the context of what is actually happening.

The sweeping term “cases” hides a diverse typology of reality, apart from false positives. The only critical cases are those with serious symptoms (who may go on and be admitted to hospital) and those who are contagious (who may transmit the disease to others).

Suppose the increase is due to healthy student-age people. In that case the increase is unlikely to be reflected in either admissions or deaths, especially in the student age group, who play no part in national mortality statistics.

Contagious youngsters are unlikely to pass the pathogen on after a week from symptoms onset and if they continue to test positive with few or no symptoms, it’s likely because they are shedding pieces of dead viruses which have little or no public health significance.

Manchester University’s figures can help as the university keeps data on known positive cases among its staff and students. It includes those on and off-campus but does not indicate where someone might have contracted the virus.

These data also do not support further measures: cases peaked on the October 2nd – a spike driven by the return of over 70,000 students to the city – and have fallen significantly since. They are 75% less than what they were at the peak.

Hospital admissions may shed some light on the need for lockdown. Data from NHS England show the current seven-day average for admissions from the community is 12 a day to NHS Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, up from an average of eight a day in the previous week.

But more telling are the data from weekly and monthly mandated Secondary Uses Service (SUS) repository for healthcare data in England.

These data show a dramatic reduction for respiratory condition admissions compared with what we would normally expect at this time of year.


12--The lost children of Covid

According to the Sunday Times, 750,000 children were absent from school last week, giving an 89.9% attendance rate, compared with 95% last autumn. The truly alarming thing, however, is that many of these children will never return to school.

They are the lost children of Covid. Bright teenagers are dropping out of education to turn to crime, sometimes to feed their families. Teachers spend weeks waiting for promising pupils to return, only to realise they are not coming back.

Other children are being removed from school for home education or long stays abroad for fear of the virus.

Sophie, 16, one of four children in a single-parent family, lives in Walker, one of the most deprived parts of Newcastle upon Tyne. The teenager, whose mother was a nurse before having a family, won a scholarship to start this term at the Royal Grammar School, one of the city’s private schools. She is determined to go to university and become a doctor, but some of her friends from local schools are dropping out.

Boys she grew up with, “lads who dabbled in drugs before the pandemic”, are not in school. Some are drug dealers. “Kids my age feel helpless,” Sophie said. “Some of my friends went for the induction day at sixth-form college last month and never returned. The college is trying its hardest to get them back into class, but they are just like, ‘Nah, that’s it.’”

She added: “A lot of people I went to school with have got sucked into drug-dealing. I know of kids who did it slightly before the pandemic; now it’s all they do. So many people have been made redundant… their mums and dads… their least worry is whether their kid finishes a business course at college; they [the parents] are trying to get their own lives back on track.”


13--‘We are in a truly Orwellian culture’: Amazon yanks Covid-19 skeptic’s book for ominously vague ’content violations’ 


14--The Fact-Free COVID Dystopia | Thomas E. Woods. J


15--The medical community’s revolt against lockdown

For a government which insists it is “following the science,” there is a striking reluctance to listen to the scientists 

The government’s approach to Covid-19 is simple: suppress the virus through social restrictions until a vaccine is developed which can achieve mass immunity

The justification thus far for the government’s extraordinarily heavy-handed approach has been that they are simply “following the science.” This, as though “the science” is some fixed and irreproachable prescription for how to live our lives and approach uncertainty. Yet this mantra is being tested, as high-profile figures in the scientific and medical community criticise the current approach to lockdownThe Great Barrington Declaration is a statement advocating for a radically different approach.

The Declaration argues for a concept of “Focused Protection.” The lockdown has widely been presented as a trade-off between the protection of lives versus the wider economy. The government has seemingly taken the approach that the economy should be sacrificed as a precautionary measure

With time, if a sufficiently large proportion of the low-risk population becomes immune, the virus’ ability to spread reduces, and thus the high-risk population are protected as a by-product. Thus, we achieve three goals simultaneously: minimising the number of deaths as a result of Covid-19, allowing the economy to largely function as normal, and working towards a viable endgame of herd immunity which does not place all our eggs in the precarious basket of vaccine development.

The Declaration, originally authored and co-signed by leading academics, medical professionals and scientists across the globe, has since been signed by a further 4,794 medical and public health scientists, 9,035 medical practitioners, and 125,575 members of the general public at the time of writing. It has also started to gain traction with politicians, with the Steve Baker amongst the leading MPs advocating for it.

This attention has provoked rebuttal from ministers who are anxious to quickly shut down challenges to the legitimacy of lockdown. Health Minister Nadine Dorries tweeted:

Isolating older at risk (over 60s) looks good on paper, in reality it is not achievable. Infections are brought into care homes by care workers, into private homes by those who do their shopping or others with whom they live. Into hospitals by staff. No one can live in isolation … Over 60s have to eat, have their broken boiler fixed, see a Dr, talk to others. Loneliness and isolation also kills.

The implication seems to be that it’s a bit too much effort to protect vulnerable citizens with straightforward measures such as, for instance, providing functioning respirators instead of the flimsy and ineffective surgical masks which the government insists we all wear, and that it would really be easier if we just locked everyone down and the public dealt with it. This is not an especially convincing argument.


16--The Great Barrington Declaration has been attacked for countering the medico-political hegemony on Covid-19. As signatures neared two hundred thousand (mostly concerned citizens but also fifteen thousand scientists), Google magically made it disappear. After an outcry it returned, but search results are dominated by scurrilous diatribes against the sponsor and signatories. Anyone relying on Wikipedia would learn from the likes of Scottish government advisor Devi Sridhar (a social anthropologist) that it is not worth any consideration. Reddit banned it from a discussion forum.

mainstream scientists, politicians and media continue to disparage the Great Barrington Declaration, some resorting to puerile jibes about fake signatories, as if someone signing as ‘Doctor Doolittle’ negates the support of half a million including forty thousand medical practitioners and health scientists. Suppression of a rational scientific argument is justified by Big Tech and the medical authorities by the vague notion of harm. Why is this declaration regarded as so dangerous, and who is really endangered?


Political leaders around the world, including Boris Johnson and Democrat presidential challenger Joe Biden, are parroting the slogan ‘Build Back Better’. It’s no secret that this comes from the World Economic Forum, the masters of the universe who fuel eco-revolutionary and Marxist activism to undermine the nation state. In the ‘Great Reset’, democratic systems will be overridden by global decree (the ordinary people are too stupid to know what’s good for them). Health Secretary Matt Hancock recently promoted the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’, another WEF concept.


Absurdly, anyone mentioning the globalists’ design is mocked as a conspiracy theorist. Kevin O’Sullivan, a British TalkRadio station host, said ‘there is no Great Reset…it’s just so ridiculous’.  Yet Klaus Schwab, WEF leader, openly talks of exploiting chaos to create order, described as the ‘New Normal’. Much of what’s happening today was predicted by Event 201, the desktop exercise by the WEF in 2019. We are rapidly heading towards a technocracy run by an unelected elite, controlling access to banking, travel and employment, and reducing us to digital slaves.