Dr. Mike Yeadon’s – “The Covid Lies”

Content

This video is a brief overview of Doctor Mike Yeadon’s document – The Covid Lies.  The video consists of selected excerpts from the document in order to provide an audio abstract of the entire work.   Listeners are encouraged to download and read the entire document for themselves as it provides and important piece of the Covid 19 pandemic history or mismanagement.

This is a short biography of  Doctor Yeadon taken from the article, The ex-Pfizer scientist who became an anti-vax hero by STEVE STECKLOW and ANDREW MACASKILL in LONDON Filed March 18, 2021.

Michael Yeadon was a scientific researcher and vice president at drugs giant Pfizer Inc.  Michael Yeadon, wasn’t just any scientist. The 60-year-old is a former vice president of Pfizer, where he spent 16 years as an allergy and respiratory researcher. He later co-founded a biotech firm. 

Yeadon (pronounced Yee-don) has emerged as an unlikely hero of the so-called anti-vaxxers, whose adherents question the safety of many vaccines, including for the coronavirus. The anti-vaxxer movement has amplified Yeadon’s skeptical views about COVID-19 vaccines and tests, government-mandated lockdowns and the arc of the pandemic. Yeadon has said he personally doesn’t oppose the use of all vaccines.

Some former colleagues at Pfizer say they no longer recognize the Mike Yeadon they once knew. They described him as a knowledgeable and intelligent man who always insisted on seeing evidence and generally avoided publicity.

The Covid Lies

A Working Draft,   April 10, 2022

By Doctor  Mike Yeadon.

I contend that all the main narrative points about the coronavirus named SARS CoV 2 are lies.

Furthermore, all the measures imposed on the population are also lies.  In what follows, I support these claims scientifically, mostly by reference to peer reviewed journal articles. In 2019, World Health Organization scientists reviewed the evidence for the utility of all non-pharmaceutical interventions, concluding that they are all without effect.

It is no longer possible to view the last two years as well intentioned  errors. Instead, the objectives of the perpetrators are most likely to be totalitarian control over the population by means of mandatory digital IDs and cashless central bank digital currencies.

Testing healthy people should stop. If you’re sick, please stay home. Masks belong in the trash.  Covid-19 gene-based injections are not recommended and must not be coerced or mandated.

It is not the purpose of this document to accuse anyone or to assemble the evidence against them at this time.

The Lies

Number 1 Lie

SARS-CoV-2 has such a high lethality that every measure must be taken to save lives. Essential to claim high lethality in order that unprecedented responses may seem justified.

THE REALITY is that

Early estimates of lethality were very high with, in some reports, an infection fatality

rate (IFR) of 3%. Seasonal influenza is generally considered to have a typical IFR of

0.1%. That means some seasons, IFR for flu may be 0.3% and other times, 0.05% or

lower.

In practise, and this was usual, estimates of IFR for Covid-19 were revised downwards

repeatedly and now are generally recognised as in the range of 0.1 to 0.3%. It cannot now

be argued that it is significantly different from some seasonal influenza epidemics.

Why, then, have we all but destroyed the modern world over it?

Doctor John Ioannidis is one of the world’s most published epidemiologists and he has

been scathing about the inappropriate responses to a novel virus of not particularly

unusual lethality. Like most respiratory viruses, SARS-CoV-2 represents no serious

health threat to those under 60 years of age, certainly not children, and is a serious

threat only to those nearing the end of their lives by virtue of age and multiple

comorbidities.

Lie number 2

Because this is a new virus, there will be no prior immunity in the population.

This remark, made repeatedly early on, aimed to squash any notion that there was a degree of “prior immunity” in the population. Prior immunity and natural immunity are only now, two years in, not considered “misinformation”.

This was a straight lie. It’s pretty much never true that there’s no prior immunity in a

population. This is because viruses are each derived from earlier viruses and some of

the population had already defeated its antecedents, giving them either immunity or a

big head start in defeating the new virus. Either way, a sizeable proportion of the

population never had cause to worry.

Lie number 3

This virus does not discriminate. No one is safe until everyone is safe.

The intention was to minimise the numbers who might reason they’re not “at risk” people.This claim was always absurd. The lethality of this virus, as is common with respiratory viruses, is 1000X less in young, healthy people than in elderly people with multiple comorbidities.

In short, almost no one who wasn’t close to the end of their lives was at risk of severe outcomes and death. In middle-aged individuals, obesity is a risk factor, as it is for a handful of other causes of death.

Lie number 4

People can carry this virus with no signs and infect others:

asymptomatic transmission.

This is the central conceptual deceit. If true, then anyone might infect and kill you. Falsely claimed asymptomatic transmission underscores almost every intrusion: masking, mass testing, lockdowns, border restrictions, school closures, even vaccine passports.

Asymptomatic transmission is epidemiologically irrelevant. It’s not necessary to argue it

never happens; it’s enough to show that if it occurs at all, it is so rare as not to be worth

measuring.

<video>

Lie number 5

The PCR test selectively identifies people with clinical infections.

This is the central operational deceit. If true, we could detect risky people and isolate

them. We could diagnose accurately and also count the number of deaths.

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR), at its best, can confirm the presence of genetic

information in a clean sample and is useful in forensics for that reason. It involves cycle

afer cycle of amplification, copying the starting material at the beginning of each cycle.

The inventor of the PCR test, Kary Mullis, won a Nobel Prize for it and often criticised

Fauci for misusing that test to diagnose AIDS patients, which Mullis insisted was

inappropriate.

In a “dirty” clinical sample, there is more than a possible piece of, or a whole, virus

which might replicate. There are bacteria, fungi, other viruses, human cells, mucus, and

more. It’s not possible unequivocally to know, if a test is judged “positive” after many

cycles, what it was that was amplified to give the signal at the end that we call “positive”.

In mass testing mode, commonly used, no one ever runs so-called “positive controls”

through the chain of custody. That’s diagnostic testing 101. It’s a deception.

You can be genuinely positive, yet not ill. There is no lower limit of true detection below

which you’d be declared to have some copies of the virus, but declared clinically well. It’s

an absurd idea.You can have no virus yet test positive (with or without symptoms). All of these are swept together and called “con”rmed Covid-19 cases”. If you die in the next 28 days,

you’re said to be a “Covid death,” no matter what the cause.

Lie number 6

Masks are effective in preventing the spread of this virus.

This is mostly used to maintain the illusion of danger. You see others’ masks and feel

afraid. Complying is also a measure of whether you do what you’re told, even if the

measure is useless.

We have known for decades that surgical masks worn in medical theatres do not stop

respiratory virus transmission. Masks were tested across a series of operations by

doctors at the Royal College of Surgeons (UK). No difference in post-operative

infection rate was seen by mask use.

Cloth masks definitely don’t stop respiratory virus transmission as shown by several large, randomised trials. If anything, they increase risk of lung infections. The authorities have mostly conceded on cloth masks.

Some people speak of “source control,” catching droplets. Problem is, there is no evidence that transmission takes place via droplets. Equally, there is no evidence it occurs via “ne aerosols. No one finds it on masks, or on air filters in hospital wards of Covid patients, either. Where is the virus?

Many don’t know that blue medical masks aren’t filters. Your inspired and expired air

moves in and out between the mask and your face. They are splashguards, that’s all.

Lie number 7

Lockdowns slow down the spread and reduce the number of cases and deaths.

The most impactful yet wasteful intervention, accomplishing nothing useful.  Useful to the perpetrators, however, wishing to damage the economy and reduce interpersonal contacts. This measure was surprisingly tolerated in many wealthy countries, because “furlough” schemes were put in place, compensating many people for not working, or requiring them to work from home.

This measure, though among the most repressive acts ever imposed on citizens in a democracy, was intuitively reasonable to many. This is an example of how far off-course uninformed intuition can be.  The core idea was simple. Respiratory viruses are transmitted from person to person.  Reducing the average number of contacts surely reduces transmission? Actually, it

doesn’t, because the transmission concept is wrong. Transmission is from a SYMPTOMATIC person to a susceptible person. Those with symptoms are UNWELL They remain at home in most cases with no action from the government. Transmission occurred mostly in institutions where sick people and susceptible people were forced into contact: hospitals, care homes, and domestic settings.

This is because those involved in the vast bulk of human-to-human contacts are fit and well and such contacts didn’t result in transmission. Essentially, if you’re fooled by the “asymptomatic transmission” lie, then lockdown might make sense. However, since it is epidemiologically irrelevant, lockdowns can never work, and of course, all the voluminous literature confirms this.

Lie number 8

There are unfortunately no treatments for Covid beyond support in hospital.

Reinforced the idea that it was vital to avoid catching the virus. Legally, it was essential for the perpetrators bringing forward novel vaccines that there be no viable treatments. Had there been even one, the regulatory route of Emergency Use Authorisation would not have been available.

In my opinion, while all these measures were destructive and cruel, active deprivation

of access to experimentally applied but otherwise known safe and effective early

treatments led directly to millions of avoidable deaths worldwide. In my mind, this is a policy of mass murder.

Contrasting with the official narrative, the therapeutic value of early treatment was

already understood and demonstrated empirically during spring 2020. Since then, a

sizeable handful of well-understood, out-patent, low-cost and safe oral treatments have

been characterised.

There is no question that senior advisors to a range of governments knew that so-called

“zinc ionophores,” compounds which open channels to allow certain dissolved minerals

to cross cell membranes, were useful in severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in

2003 and should be expected also to be therapeutically useful in SARS-CoV-2 infection.

This is a starting point for all of the clinical trials in Covid-19,&, including especially

ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine (which are zinc ionophores).

Lie number 9

It’s not certain if you can get the virus more than once.

The idea of natural immunity was flatly denied and the absurd idea that you might get

the same virus twice was established. This ramped up the fear, which might otherwise

have passed swiftly.

government, speaking in uncertain terms on this question, were lying. Certainly, in the

Those with even a basic grasp of mammalian immunology knew that senior advisors to

author’s case, it was a pivotal point.

It wouldn’t be possible to get clinically unwell twice in response to the same virus, or close-in variants of it.

Beating off a respiratory virus infection leaves almost everyone with acquired immunity, which is complete, powerful, and durable.

Those infected with SARS in 2003 still had clear evidence of robust, T-cell mediated immunity 17 years later.

Lie number 10

Variants of the virus appear and are of great concern.

I believe the purpose of this fiction was to extend the apparent duration of the pandemic and the fear for as long as the perpetrators wished it. While there is controversy on this point, with some physicians believing reinfection by variants to be a serious problem, I think untrustworthy testing and other viruses entirely is the parsimonious explanation.

I come at it as an immunologist. From that vantage point, there is very strong precedent indicating that recovery a!er infection a#ords immunity extending beyond the sequence of the variant that infected the patient to all variants of SARS-CoV-2. The number of confirmed reinfections is so small that they are not an issue, epidemiologically speaking.

The variants story fails to note “Muller’s Ratchet,” the phenomenon in which variants of a virus, formed in an infected person during viral replication (in which “typographical errors” are made and not corrected) trend to greater transmissibility but lesser lethality.

I do not rule out the possibility that the so-called vaccines are so badly designed that they prevent the establishment of immune memory. If that is true, then the vaccines are worse than failures, and it might be possible to be repeatedly infected. This would be a form of acquired immune deficiency.

Lie number 11

The only way to end the pandemic is universal vaccination.

It’s NEVER been the way prior pandemics have ended, and there was nothing about this one that should have led us to adopt the extreme risks that were taken and which have resulted in hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of wholly avoidable deaths.

The interventions imposed on the population didn’t prevent spread of the virus. Only individual isolation for an open-ended period could do that, and that’s clearly impossible (hospital patients and residents of care homes have to be cared for at very least and additionally, the nation has to be supplied with food and medicines).

All the interventions were useless and hugely burdensome.  Yet we have reached the end of the pandemic, more or less. We would have done so faster and with less suffering and death had we adopted measures along the lines proposed in the Great Barrington Declaration and used pharmaceutical treatments as they were discovered, plus general improvements to public health, such as encouraging vitamin supplements.

It was NEVER appropriate to attempt to “end the pandemic” with a novel technology vaccine. In a public health mass intervention, safety is the top priority, more so even than effectiveness, because so many people will receive it.

It quickly became apparent that natural immunity was stronger than any protection from vaccination, and most people were not at risk of severe outcomes if infected.

Lie number 12

The new vaccines are safe and effective.

I feel particularly strongly about this claim. Both components are lies Separately, the clinical trials were wholly inadequate. They were conducted in people not most in need of protection from safe and effective vaccines.

They were far too short in duration. the endpoints only captured “infection” as measured by an inadequate PCR test and should have been augmented by Sanger sequencing to confirm real infection. Trials were underpowered to detect important endpoints like hospitalisation and death.

These agents were always going to be toxic. The only question was, to what degree? Having selected spike protein to be expressed, a protein which causes blood clotting to be initiated, a risk of thromboembolic adverse events was burned into the design.

Nothing at all limits the amount of spike protein to be made in response to a given dose. Some individuals make a little and only briefly. The other end of a normal range results in synthesis of copious amounts of spike protein for a prolonged period. The locations in which this pathological event occurred, as well as where on the spectrum, in my view played a pivotal role in whether the victim experienced adverse events, including death.

•There are many other pathologies flowing from the design of these agents, including, for the mRNA “vaccines,” that lipid nanoparticle (LNP) formulations leave the injection site and home to the liver and ovaries, among other organs.

Though many people refuse to accept or even look at the evidence, it is clear that the number of adverse events and deaths soon after Covid-19 vaccination is astonishing and far in excess, in 2021 alone, than all adverse effects and deaths reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the previous 30 years.

---

Doctor Yeadon’s full document can be found at Doctors for Covid Ethics by downloading the file.  You are encouraged to read and study the entire document which contains a lot of supporting material for Doctor Yeadon’s points.  Thank you for  taking the time to review this video.

I’m glad you asked – Are the Covid vaccines a protection against serious disease and death?

Are the Covid vaccines a protection against serious disease and death? No they are not!

Here is a quick reference card to provide you with an answer to this question:

may-2-2022-why-the-mrna-vaccine-doesnt-guaranteeDownload

Initially we were told get vaccinated and we will be safe. That turned out to be wrong. The vaccine was supposed to protect us from contracting Coviid. That didn’t happen. You just have too check the real world data for Canada:

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&uniformYAxis=0&pickerSort=asc&pickerMetric=location&Metric=Vaccine+doses%2C+cases%2C+ICU+patients%2C+and+deaths&Interval=7-day+rolling+average&Relative+to+Population=true&Color+by+test+positivity=false&country=~CAN

Today in Ontario, the real world data shows that the highest vaccine protected group (fully vaccinated plus 1 booster dose) is contracting Covid 19 at double the rate of any other group:

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

Common sense tells us that you have to catch Covid 19 before you can get seriously ill or die from it.

Now the politicians and their public health bureaucrats have backed off on telling people that vaccines stop the spread of Covid. Now they are saying that getting vaccinated will keep you from getting seriously ill or dying. That’s not necessarily true. If they were wrong about the vaccines stopping the spread why can’t they be wrong about vaccines keeping you from a severe Covid outcome? Are the Covid vaccines a protection against serious disease and death? Many are learning that vaccination and boosting doesn’t make you safe; they are learning this from the hospital bed or ICU.

So how many fully vaccinated are ending up in the hospital and ICU’s with Covid 19. A lot! Take a look at the Ontario data:

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

Some argue that the unvaccinated have a greater chance of getting sick and dying of Covid than the vaccinated. This is cold comfort to the majority of fully vaccinated patients who are in the hospitals and ICU’s.

What about the chances of dying if you are fully vaccinated? Take a look at the real world data for Ontario;

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data/case-numbers-and-spread

On May 2, 2022 The most vaccine protected group is dying at a rate (0.07 per 100,000) very close to that of the least protected group (0.06 per 100,000). That’s not much of a benefit from the Covid vaccine.

The Government of Canada says that the risk of getting a serious adverse side effect from the Covid vaccine is 0.011%. That translates to 11 in 100,000. Yet the risk of dying should you contract Covid is an order of magnitude lower – not even 1 in 100,000 (anywhere from 0.02 to 0.07 in 100,000). So today in Ontario, citizens are being pushed into taking a vaccine that exposes them to a far higher risk of suffering a severe adverse reaction that could put them in the hospital or kill them than that of dying from Covid 19. That’s is a very poor risk – benefit ratio.

Internationally, out of the pro-vaccine bias of our Canadian mainstream media, there are reports that clearly show that the vaccinated are contracting and dying of Covid at greater rates than the unvaccinated. Material has been tabled in British Columbia citing these studies where the chief public health officer was taken to task for her overreach.

Data published by the UK Health Security Agency on February 22, 2022 shows that the fully vaccinated account for 9 out of every 10 COVID-19 deaths in England …. This data does not support statements made by Dr. Bonnie Henry that the vaccines are reducing the severity of symptoms in infected individuals and in fact disclose a disturbing trend.

https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/AGBC-Expanding-Vaccine-Mandates-2022-03.pdf

The Canadian Covid Care Alliance states

Although health officials claim that the unvaccinated are driving infection rates and threatening
to overload our ICU capacity, and that for this reason vaccine mandates are necessary to
manage hospital capacity, a careful inspection of the actual data does not support those claims. . . .

These studies [regarding the Ontario Data] show that although COVID-19 cases were higher among the unvaccinated from August through to mid-October, by early December it was clear that the majority of cases were among the vaccinated and that this surge in cases resulted in a higher proportion of vaccinated compared to unvaccinated. . . .

https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Scientific-Review-Dispelling-the-Myth-of-a-Pandemic-of-the-Unvaccinated.pdf

Dr. Byram W. Bridle writing on the vaccine failure explains:

 . . . the COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ fail to confer immunity, which is protection against disease and transmission. It is common knowledge that ‘vaccinated’ people get infected and sick at least as much as, if not more than the ‘unvaccinated’. This is why a desperate emphasis has been placed on the debatable possibility that disease severity is merely dampened by ‘vaccination’. A such, a biologically incorrect assumption was made here. . .. What many people were not told is that most of the people in Pfizer’s clinical trial never got COVID-19, which is the disease that can occur in some people who get infected with SARS-CoV-2. In fact, the absolute risk reduction at the population level in the study was a mere 0.84% as a result of ‘vaccination’.

Fiction Disguised as Science to Promote Hatred, Disinformation Must Be Called Out, Dr. Byram W. Bridle ,Apr 26 2022

In another study the author states;

Unreported absolute risk reduction measures of 0.7% and 1.1% for the Pfzier/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, respectively, are very much lower than the reported relative risk reduction measures. Reporting absolute risk reduction measures is essential to prevent outcome reporting bias in evaluation of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy.

Outcome Reporting Bias in COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Clinical Trials, Ronald B Brown, Feb. 26, 2021

The real world efficacy of the Vaccines according to Pfizer’s own data is 0.84% in absolute terms – no wonder vaccinated and boosted people are contracting Covid, getting sick and dying.

The Canadian Covid Care Alliance has an excellent video explaining the difference between absolute and relative risk:

People were never as safe as they thought they were (and were told they were) by being vaccinated.

To conclude, vaccination with the experimental mRNA inoculations hasn’t stopped the spread of Covid 19. Vaccination hasn’t significantly reduced the risk of serious illness or death. Vaccination has caused significant levels of adverse effects in the Canadian population; the risk of which is far higher than the risk of dying from Covid 19.

One thing is for sure!

The past two years of Covid have shown one thing for sure – a virus doesn’t care about a fancy haired Prime Minister, parliament, public health mandates or any other societal affectation that we may take up to stand between us and the stark reality of nature.

Our politicians and their public health bureaucrats may sound off about their official science and the dirt of fake science misinformation but Covid19 doesn’t care. Vaccine mandates brought in to stop the spread and save the fragile neglected hospital systems have done nothing to hinder Covid 19’s sloshing through our population.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&facet=none&uniformYAxis=0&pickerSort=asc&pickerMetric=location&Metric=Confirmed+cases&Interval=7-day+rolling+average&Relative+to+Population=false&Color+by+test+positivity=false&country=~CAN

Re Murphy writing about the disconnect between parliament and reality in regard to invoking the Emergencies Act due to the truckers, observes:

For the past two years the House of Commons has been nothing but a halting-place between vast recesses and the PM’s flight-thick jet romps to international gatherings, back-and-forth flips across the country, and obligatory recuperation air-voyages to the sands and snows of Tofino and Whistler. Trudeau’s carbon-offset bill is probably equal to the entire budget of P.E.I.

Rex Murphy: Please prove me wrong about this farce of an inquiry into the Emergencies Act, Rex Murphy, Apr 29, 2022 

Meanwhile, in Ontario, our politicians and public health bureaucrats has performed equally well with their Covid 19 mandates. A look at the reality of Covid 19 in spite of vaccine mandates, masking, lockdowns is enough to convince any thinking observer that the virus doesn’t care about politics, bureaucrats or their politically correct versions of ‘science;’

April 29, 2022, https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

Clearly, the Ontario data shows that boosting your vaccination status puts you in the highest rate for contracting Covid 19. The virus is ‘laughing’ at mRNA technology – or more accurately, the virus has adapted because that’s what happens in nature.

Society has become increasingly disconnected from nature. Research into this social trend shows;

. . . our connection to nature seems more tenuous than ever today—a time when our children can name more Pokémon characters than wildlife species.

It is widely accepted that we are more disconnected from nature today than we were a century ago, but is that actually true? A recent study we conducted suggests that it is—and that may be bad news not only for our well-being but also for the environment.

How can we explain this shrinking of nature in our collective imagination and cultural conversation? . . .

The trend of urbanization—which swallows up natural areas and cuts people off from natural surroundings—is typically used to explain the weakening human connection to nature, but our findings are not consistent with that account. . . .

Instead, our findings point to a different explanation for our disconnection from nature: technological change, and in particular the burgeoning of indoor and virtual recreation options. The 1950s saw the rapid rise of television as the most popular medium of entertainment. Video games first appeared in the 1970s and have since been a popular pastime, while the Internet has been claiming more and more leisure time since the late 1990s. It stands to reason that these technologies partially substituted for nature as a source of recreation and entertainment. 

How Modern Life Became Disconnected from Nature,  SELIN KESEBIR, PELIN KESEBIR , SEPTEMBER 20, 2017

Virtual reality is great for shopping, banking and fun, but it sucks when nature comes knocking at your door with a once in 100 year storm or a virus sweeps through your community. Technology fails when the power goes off. Technology fails when those who rely on it forget that nature works by a different set of rules.

Sadly our inept Prime Minster and those who keep him in power don’t seem to understand the mRNA technology isn’t beating Covid 19. Rather the real data shows the opposite. But those in power, as modern WOKE members of a society disconnected from nature, just tighten their virtual reality head sets and double down on their failing policies.

Covid 19 doesn’t care, isn’t affected by social notions about how it should behave and is following its own natural course.

Perhaps we should start listening to those who understand the natural course of pandemics.

What do you think?

More hate from trolls

I published an article, on Facebook, questioning a bit of research on the role of unvaccinated people in the transmission of Covid 19. I found the research to be an over simplification of the epidemiological reality that we find ourselves in and backed up my opinion (as a lay person) with supporting scientific research.

https://scrapbookwithtony.wordpress.com/2022/04/27/another-kick-at-the-unvaccinated/

A couple of trolls thought to add to the discussion (or virtue signal) with the following comments;

I usually ignore such comments but thought a least the second comment might be instructive.

Can people who choose bodily autonomy in medical matters and decide not to be vaccinated be denigrated as selfish people who kill others? Yes they can, this troll just did it.

Is it wise or helpful to denigrate unvaccinated people as selfish and killers? No it isn’t but cowards and intellectually lazy people are happy to virtue signal especially when politicians at the highest levels do so. Bullies like to be backed up – it gives them a nasty kind of false courage.

A person writing to the editor of a newspaper south of our border has a really good perspective on this issue;

The subject of “why unvaccinated people are being ridiculed, threatened and persecuted,” requires further discussion, because such behavior is unacceptable. All citizens in our great country are guaranteed the same protections and rights. As such, everyone is entitled to pursue their beliefs, within the constraints of the law, without being harassed. That includes the right to not agree with the government or one’s neighbors about matters of health.

. . . people who are vaccinated can — and do — get the virus. So some may feel that a hastily approved vaccine is not worth the risk.

. . , many believe there was a great deal of censorship on the topic of COVID-19, and that promotes distrust of the information that is permitted. And, finally, many do not share the confidence in the health officials who are advising us on this pandemic, since the “guidance” has changed frequently.

. . . Maybe the unvaccinated are not “being selfish and self-centered,” but instead are sifting through contradictory and changing information, researching ways to boost their immune systems (the “experts” provided none) and then deciding what is the best course of action for them. And respectfully allowing others to do the same.

Unvaccinated not ‘selfish’ or ‘self-centered’, Citrus County Chronicle, Feb 17, 2022

In Canada, many imitating our Prime Minister’s abusive comments about the unvaccinated don’t seem to reflect on why someone would choose not to take an experimental gene therapy inoculation.

Perhaps a dose of reality might help. What good do these ‘inoculations’ do in terms of stopping the spread of Covid 19? Today in Ontario, a person that is ‘fully vaccinated with a booster dose’ is in a group that is contracting Covid 19 at a rate twice that of a person in the group that is ‘not fully vaccinated!’

And common sense tells us that you have to have Covid 19 to spread it to others. Doesn’t it make sense to not be vaccinated and dosed up given the real world data? Perhaps the ‘fully vaccinated and boosted’ are the selfish ones – trying to allay their fears by engaging in a practice that clearly doesn’t work in order to have freedom of movement and the approval of our political and bureaucratic masters!

What do all you internet trolls out there think about that? Take a look at the real world data for Ontario and tell me that I’m being selfish for questioning the vaccine mandates.

Another kick at the unvaccinated

Mainstream media is again trying to stir up fears about the unvaccinated. And fear leads to hate! Gobal news reports:

Even with high immunization rates, unvaccinated people threaten the safety of people vaccinated against the COVID-19 virus, suggests a new study published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal. . . .

Published April 25, the study uses an infectious disease model based on the province of Ontario to reproduce the interactions between vaccinated and unvaccinated subpopulations in a mostly vaccinated population.

“We use models in a lot of different ways,” said Fisman [the study’s coauthor and professor of epidemiology at the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health]. “They’re just simplified versions of reality.”

Unvaccinated people increase risk of COVID-19 infection among vaccinated: study, By Irelyne Lavery  Global News
Posted April 25, 2022 

Generally SIR models are not all that useful in reflecting reality. Other researchers have measured the efficacy of SIR modeling against real world situations:

In this study, we simulated the epidemic in Isfahan province of Iran for the period from Feb 14th to April 11th and also forecasted the remaining course with three scenarios that differed in terms of the stringency level of social distancing. Despite the prediction of disease course in short-term intervals, the constructed SIR model was unable to forecast the actual spread and pattern of epidemic in the long term. Remarkably, most of the published SIR models developed to predict COVID-19 for other communities, suffered from the same inconformity. The SIR models are based on assumptions that seem not to be true in the case of the COVID-19 epidemic.

Inefficiency of SIR models in forecasting COVID-19 epidemic: a case study of Isfahan, Shiva Moein, Niloofar Nickaeen, Amir Roointan, Niloofar Borhani, Zarifeh Heidary, Shaghayegh Haghjooy Javanmard, Jafar Ghaisari & Yousof Gheisari, Scientific Reports, 25 February 2021

The SIR model used in this ‘study’ is over simplified – pitting the vaccinated against the unvaccinated;

We constructed a simple susceptible–infectious–recovered compartmental model of a respiratory infectious disease with 2 connected subpopulations: people who were vaccinated and those who were unvaccinated.

Impact of population mixing between vaccinated and unvaccinated subpopulations on infectious disease dynamics: implications for SARS-CoV-2 transmission, David N. Fisman, Afia Amoako and Ashleigh R. Tuite, CMAJ April 25, 2022

This ‘simple model’ doesn’t take into account that fact that epidemiologists now recognize that three populations are mixing in reality – the vaccinated, the unvaccinated and the infection acquired immune;

We reviewed studies published in PubMed from inception to Sept 28, 2021, and found well conducted biological studies showing protective immunity after infection (panel). Furthermore, multiple epidemiological and clinical studies, including studies during the recent period of predominantly delta (B.1.617.2) variant transmission, found that the risk of repeat SARS-CoV-2 infection decreased by 80·5–100% among those who had had COVID-19 previously (panel). The reported studies were large and conducted throughout the world.

Protective immunity after recovery from SARS-CoV-2 infection, Noah Kojima Jeffrey D Klausner, The Lancet, November 08, 2021

The ‘not so mainstream media’ is reporting on Ontario’s chief medical officer’s acknowledgement of the infection acquired immune group in the dynamics of Covid 19 infection in our population:

https://lakesuperiornews.com/Public-Safety/Crime/ontario-chief-medical-officer-acknowledges-natural-immunity

Lake Superior News reports:

Responding to a reporter’s question regarding Ontario’s vaccination levels at a press conference Thursday, Moore stated that natural immunity to the virus is an important piece to consider when assessing levels of immunity among the broader population.

“You either get immunity from natural exposure to this virus, or you get immunity through the vaccination process,” stated Moore. “It’s that combination of numbers [which] can tell us how safely we can open up.” 

https://lakesuperiornews.com/Public-Safety/Crime/ontario-chief-medical-officer-acknowledges-natural-immunity

CMOH Moore, finally acknowledges that natural exposure to the virus provides immunity & should be factored in to our re-opening plans!

Then why are countless Ontarians who had Covid or have antibodies losing their jobs? #onpoli @fordnation @MonteMcNaughton pic.twitter.com/LvxVnh99gK

— Roman Baber (@Roman_Baber) October 30, 2021

Clearly, Fishman’s SIR model is too simple minded to reflect the current Covid 19 epidemiological situation. It is deficient science that produces misinformation spread by mainstream media. But it is a useful tool for those who wish to stir up more fear and hate against Canadian citizens who choose to exercise bodily autonomy and freedom of choice in medical matters.

What makes this hate mongering so dangerous for Canada is that it is promoted from the very top political levels of our country. Rex Murphy nails our Prime Minister for his part in spreading hate:

In much of Canada, the unvaccinated may not go where they wish, may not visit family in moments of pain, may not travel or enter public places without their papers. And most significantly, if you resist taking the vaccines, you are that most felonious and vile of human beings; you are Justin Trudeau’s villain of the moment: an anti-vaxxer.

Rex Murphy: Justin Trudeau’s blind hatred of anti-vaxxers, National Post, Rex Murphy, Jan 05, 2022 

And the fear and hate stirred up by deficient science misinformation continues to the detriment of all Canadian citizens.

It has to stop and as a Canadian citizen I’m calling it out!

News flash – Covid convergence has happened in Ontario

What is Covid convergence? I define it as the point where your vaccination status doesn’t matter. At that point the chances of the most vaccine protected (2 + 1 doses) person contracting Covid is equal to or greater than that of the least vaccine protected (none or 1 dose) person contracting Covid. The concet of Covid convergence can also be applied to Covid death rates. The Ontario data shows that we have Covid convergence both in contracting Covid and dying from Covid.

The politically correct would shout – Covid convergence could never happen. If it did that would mean that the public health bureaucrats, doctors and politicians are completely wrong. In December of 2021, the Ontario Science Table and other politically correct doctors said people need 3 doses to immunize against contracting Covid, and if they do contract it they won’t get seriously ill or die if they’ve been boosted.

Any thinking citizen who has been following the Ontario Public Health data would know that in terms of contracting Covid, Ontario is long past Covid convergence. The fully vaccine protected (double vaccinated plus booster) are contracting Covid AT A GREATER RATE (almost double) than the least vaccine protected (unvaccinated or single dose).

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data, Most vaccine protected are contracting Covid 19 at almost DOUBLE the rate of the least vaccine protected!

And in terms of serious illness on April 14, 2022 the most vaccine protected were hospitalized and in the ICU in far greater numbers than the least vaccine protected;

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data, April 14, 2022

If the vaccine inoculations were so effective in preventing serious illness we wouldn’t see these kinds of numbers in the real data!

In terms of death rates from Covid 19, we have now reached Covid convergence – the death rate of the most vaccine protected is equal to the death rate of the least vaccine protected.

The only reason our public health bureaucrats can get away with saying that vaccinations and boosters reduce the risk of contracting Covid and serious illness or death from Covid is because most Ontario citizens trust them. The doctors and bureaucrats are considered trustworthy authorities so few don’t check the data themselves. Also the mainline news media are not fact checking the claims of the public health bureaucrats, politically correct doctors or the politicians. The mainline news media used to be a check and balance in our society. Now this once trusted institution has become a propaganda outlet for politically correct (mis)information.

A word to the wise, check the data for yourself and draw your own conclusions.

Casting of characters in the social drama of Covid 19

https://medium.com/mind-cafe/what-makes-stupid-people-stupid-522028d6569f

After two years of Covid drama the behaviour behind the main characters involved boils down to a simple grid of types. Cipolla’s Theory of Stupidity provides the character profiles. Most if not all the behaviours of the ‘movers and shakers’ of any social drama in general and our Covid 19 nightmare can be categorized in one of these four character types. We can ‘cast’ the characters involved like movie producers do using Cipolla’s scheme.

Intelligent People

According to Carlo Cipolla, intelligent people work for their own good and the good of others. . . . This is also why they aspire to occupy prominent places in society.

Unfortunately, their plans are thwarted by the unpredictable and destructive behavior of the vast majority of other individuals, who instead seem determined to take everyone down with them. Thus, they are supposed to make the greatest contribution to society as a whole, but only from a theoretical point of view.

Helpless People

These are all those people who do good for others while losing or gaining nothing for themselves. They usually have a strong suspicion that not everything is going their way. This is also why they prefer to play socially useful roles.

They contribute to society but are also exploited by it, especially by bandits and criminals. However, these altruists and pacifists people may willingly and consciously accept a place in this category for moral or ethical reasons.

Stupid People

They are by far the most dangerous category of people, more than criminals and bandits. No one benefits from their behavior, neither themselves nor anyone else. Stupid people have no rationality in their actions, which makes them unpredictable and therefore dangerous.

Plus, according to Cipolla the percentage of people behaving irrationally is a constant in any group, regardless of education or environment. And even worse, stupid people do not know they are stupid.

Carlo Cipolla also stated that “the problem with stupid people is when they take up positions of power. And they occupy all positions in society, from top to bottom.”. This is why a stupid person with power is the most threatening.

Bandits

They harm others for personal gain. Even though they are criminals, they may contribute to an improvement in society. This happens when they cause more benefit than harm overall. Cipolla also clarified that they are almost always aware of their behavior, knowing they are outlaws. . . .

Cipolla wrote that “the bandit’s actions follow a pattern of rationality: nasty rationality, if you like, but still rationality”. So, unlike stupid people, bandits fall within the spectrum of rationality, and this what makes them inherently different. This also implies that intelligent individuals can understand them. Consequently, bandits and criminals are less dangerous than stupid people.

What Makes Stupid People Stupid, Antonello Zanini, Jun 30, 2021

Where do our political leaders, Big Pharma and CEO’s of vaccine manufacturing companies, public health bureaucrats, dissenting scientists and citizens as well as the many ordinary people who took the vaccine either because they trusted the authorities or because they were coerced, fit into this grid. Below is my casting of the characters of the Covid drama. The casting doesn’t cover everyone on stage but it is enough to give an overview to understand what has happened to us as a country.

My casting does show my bias. Intelligent people are the dissenting voices in the Covid mandate debates calling for caution and freedom of choice. The intelligent people were the truckers who stood up for basic freedom and the rights of the individual, the doctors and other scientists who have been vilified and silenced because of their dissenting views. What benefit have they provided our society and to themselves – they represent integrity and reason in a world sliding into authoritarianism. They are holding us back from the brink.

The bandits are those who have gained billions in profits from the sale of hastily tested experimental vaccines and their spokespersons. Also those who have openly said that the pandemic is a good time to push their ‘great reset’ agenda. They are so powerful and rich they live in the stratosphere – out of our reach.

The helpless people are the public health bureaucrats who believed what they are told and followed orders but also have provided a human and compassionate face to the public even though their ‘advice’ wasn’t proven effective by their own data. For example – get vaccinated to stop the spread! Also I include the vaccinated who trusted the authorities as well as those who were forced into getting vaccinated to keep their jobs.

Finally the stupid people, those who have done damage to their own reputations/careers (as well as their critics), exposed themselves to allegations of crimes against humanity as well as criminal negligence and exposed others to the risk of serious vaccine side effects without stopping the spread or returning our society to ‘normal’ as promised. They also damaged the mental, physical and social well being of those that trusted them as well as those that could not resist their coercion. I also include every one who promoted the scapegoating of the unvaccinated as well as the mainstream media lackeys who helped spread this hate. After two years of their ‘leadership’ and activism our Canadian social fabric is in tatters and Covid 19 has evaded the vaccines and is rampant. There was no gain to anybody or themselves.

I am aware that someone else could have a totally different view of the drama and casting. But the proof is in the outcome. Did the vaccines work? Is Covid 19 gone? Are we ‘back to normal?’ Are we any safer in the pandemic than we were at the beginning? Are we not a divided nation, deeply in debt with a broken hospital system and unsure as to what the next steps should be in ‘building back better?’

Cipolla observes;

When stupid people are at work, the story is totally different. Stupid people cause losses to other people with no counterpart of gains on their own account. Thus the society as a whole is impoverished. . . .

Whether one considers classical, or medieval, or modern or contemporary times one is impressed by the fact that any country moving uphill has its unavoidable fraction of stupid people. However the country moving uphill also has an unusually high fraction of intelligent people who manage to keep the [stupid people] at bay and at the same time produce enough gains for themselves and the other members of the community to make progress a certainty. . . .

In a country which is moving downhill, the fraction of stupid people is still equal. . . ; however in the remaining population one notices among those in power an alarming proliferation of the bandits with overtones of stupidity. . . and among those not in power an equally alarming growth in the number of helpless individuals . . . . Such change in the composition of the non-stupid population inevitably strengthens the destructive power of the å fraction and makes decline a certainty. And the country goes to Hell.

THE BASIC LAWS OF HUMAN STUPIDITY. by Carlo M. Cipolla

The reader can consider the outcomes of the handling of the Covid 19 pandemic over the last two years and decide for themselves if my casting of the main characters in this drama is on the mark or not.

I think it is.

What do you think?

Covid accountability – it is on route

Content:

The truth about the failed vaccine mandates is coming out, slowly.  More and more people are noticing it and calling out the false narrative of ‘vaccinate and we’ll all be safe.’  It’s been said; “ You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”  For the last two years this has played out in Canada and now accountability is coming. Canadians are resorting to the civil courts to hold public health bureaucrats accountable and find justice.

Paula Tran on April 5, 2022 for Global News reports “Several churches and individuals in Alberta filed a constitutional challenge against the province in December 2020, accusing the government of violating Albertans’ rights by imposing public health orders and restrictions at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The applicants claim the restrictions were unlawful and violated the province’s bill of rights and Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. . . . Lawyer Leighton Grey accused Alberta’s chief medical officer of health Dr. Deena Hinshaw of “controlling the narrative” around COVID-19 in court on Tuesday.

Hinshaw took the stand at a civil trial on Monday, maintaining that public health restrictions were necessary to protect the province’s health-care system during the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Bethany Lindsay  on December 3, 2021 for the CBC News reported;  “B.C. chiropractors voted overwhelmingly this week for their professional regulator to ‘take a stand‘ against a promised COVID-19 shot mandate, bringing a long-running conflict over vaccination back into the spotlight. .  . . Vaccines are expected to be made a requirement for licensing of all regulated health professionals in B.C., but that’s not a decision that was made by the college. Instead, it’s been promised in the form of an order from Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry.”

On April 4 2022 the following article appeared, “BC Lawyer’s Letter Blows Apart Bonnie’s Virus Story“

Bonnie Henry Forced To Back Down on Mandatory Vaccination for Health Professionals By Jack Etkin  For NYCBC,  (Not Your CBC), News

Which featured; “a letter from the Kelowna law firm Doak Shirreff to the Legal Services Branch of the B.C. Government.  The firm was hired by a group of psychologists who had been threatened by Dr. Henry’s order.  The information in this letter is remarkable in that it is so different from what the people of British Columbia and Canada are constantly told by our media and our governments”

The article continues; “Early in 2022, health professionals including doctors, dentists, naturopaths, chiropractors, and Chinese medicine doctors were ordered by Dr. Bonnie Henry and the John Horgan government to be vaccinated by March 24, or stop practicing medicine.  Many of these groups lawyered up, and the government has completely backed down on the threat to force these health professionals to stop working.  The corporate, mainstream media have largely ignored the facts around this story.”

In the letter from the Kelowna law firm Doak Shirreff, “Dr. Bonnie Henry has acknowledged that the COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission of the virus. In preamble  of her November 18, 2021 health order that was concerned primarily with the Delta variant, and which was thought to be less transmissible than the Omicron variant, she admitted that vaccinated people could still be infected with, and transmit the virus. She admits in her most recent February 16, 2022 health order that is primarily concerned with the Omicron variant, that this is still the case.”

In the letter from the Kelowna law firm Doak Shirreff, “Dr. Bonnie Henry has acknowledged that the COVID-19 vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission of the virus. In preamble  of her November 18, 2021 health order that was concerned primarily with the Delta variant, and which was thought to be less transmissible than the Omicron variant, she admitted that vaccinated people could still be infected with, and transmit the virus. She admits in her most recent February 16, 2022 health order that is primarily concerned with the Omicron variant, that this is still the case.”

“Careful inspection of the recent COVID-19 cases counts and vaccination status in recent data from Public Health Ontario also shows higher rates of COVID-19 in the double vaccinated population than the unvaccinated population, even when adjusted per capita.5 Careful inspection of data from COVID-19 Alberta statistics reveals that around half of the people with COVID-19 after double vaccination tend to acquire it within 3 months.”

Let’s take a look at the current Ontario data on the Covid-19 site. They have recently changed their reporting groups to not fully vaccinated, fully vaccinated and vaccinated with booster dose.

We  see that fully vaccinated cases make up the bulk of patients in the ICU.

And in terms of hospitalization the fully vaccinated are by far the majority of those admitted to  the hospital.  Some argue that with the vaccination mandates the larger size of the  vaccinated group compared to the decreasing size of the unvaccinated group means that there will naturally be far more vaccinated people admitted to the hospitals and ICU’s with Covid.  So they dismiss any notion that the vaccines are performing poorly in terms of preventing serious illness that requires hospitalization.  It’s a nice escape hatch to avoid accountability for the failed vaccine mandates.

Yet  the DOAK SHIRREFF LAWYERS letter points out “Data published by the UK Health Security Agency on February 22, 2022 shows that the fully vaccinated account for 9 out of every 10 COVID-19 deaths in England, and 4 of 5 deaths among the triple-vaccinated. This data does not support statements made by Dr. Bonnie Henry that the vaccines are reducing the severity of symptoms in infected individuals and in fact discloses a disturbing trend.”

The current Ontario data does indicate a rise in the Covid-19 case rates.  The vaccinated with booster dose group is supposed to be the most protected yet the data clearly shows that this group is contracting Covid at the highest rate!  The group that is contracting Covid 19 at the lowest rate is the supposedly less protected less vaccinated group, the not fully vaccinated.  This turns the vaccinate and be protected narrative upside down!

To provide detail for April 10, 2022 the vaccinated with booster dose group were contracting Covid at a rate of 26.89 people per one hundred thousand and the not fully vaccinated were contracting Covid at a rate of 14..86 people per hundred thousand.  The supposedly most at risk group reported on was contracting Covid at a little more than one half the rate of the most protected group.  By what Orwellian inversion can it be said that vaccination makes you safer by any terms of reference? 

When we look at Covid death rates, the Ontario data shows that the most protected group according to the official narrative, that is, on that day April 10 2022, the vaccinated with booster dose group is dying at a rate of 0.03 death per hundred thousand, that is close to the rate of 0.06 per hundred thousand for the least protected group, the not fully vaccinated.  Some may say that the least protected group is dying at double the rate of the most protected group which is true but given with out the context of the shear size of the denominators involved and the miniscule risk represented.  A fully protected vaccinated with booster dose has a three in ten million risk of dying from Covid compared to an not fully vaccinated person who has a six in ten million risk of dying from Covid.  The Center for Disease Control says the odds of being struck by lightening in the United States is one in five hundred thousand which translates to twenty in ten million risk – how safe from Covid does a person need to be?

This isn’t new news and should not startle any Canadian citizen that’s paying attention.  As early as December of 2021, Allan Richarz, a privacy lawyer in Toronto published an article  for CBC Opinion, ‘On COVID restrictions, our governments keep firing up the gaslights and shifting the goalposts.’

He stated clearly; “And now, with new case numbers in Ontario essentially split evenly between the unvaccinated and fully vaccinated and questions about waning vaccine efficacy, the goalposts shift again with the rollout of booster shots elsewhere in the country and calls for expanded eligibility. . . . Indeed, officials have shown they are not above apparent falsehoods to further their aims. Last week, Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health Kieran Moore justified the immunization of children between the ages of five and 11 by claiming hospitalization and case counts for that age group were increasing. Yet, according to Ontario’s own data, there had been zero hospitalizations in that age group in the past two weeks at the time of Moore’s statement.”

How will accountability for the failed Covid mandates unfold in Canada and Ontario?  That is a question only time will tell.  However we see certain public health bureaucrats taking notice and acting accordingly!  We haven’t heard from out Ontario chief medical officer of health for quite a while.  The Toronto Star reports; “Where is Dr. Kieran Moore? Ontario’s chief medical officer of health hasn’t been seen in public since St. Patrick’s Day, a week after his final regular pandemic briefing, four days before masks became optional, right around the time the wastewater signal started to really rise, and two-and-a-half weeks before COVID was sloshing around everywhere. An interview request for Moore to the Ministry of Health Monday was politely shuffled into oblivion. The doctor, publicly, is out.”  Will our politicians simply abandon them after they have served their political purpose?

Will our politicians cynically feed them to the lions and sidestep their role in the mishandling of Covid 19?  Only time will tell. Lieutenant Colonel David Redman’s analysis of Canada’s response to Covid 19 is revealing.

His profile is impressive; “David Redman was an officer in the Canadian Army for 27 years, retiring as a Lieutenant Colonel. He was posted 19 times to operations in Germany, Egypt, the Former Republic of Yugoslavia, the USA, and across Canada. In 2000 he became a part of what is now called the Alberta Emergency Management Agency. Following September 11, 2001, he led the development and implementation of the Alberta Crisis Management Counter-Terrorism Plan. He became the Head of EMA in 2004 and led the Provincial response to the devastating floods of June 2005. He also led the development of the 2005 Provincial Pandemic Influenza Plan. He retired from EMA in December 2005, continuing to work as an expert in Emergency Management provincially, nationally and internationally until 2013 when he fully retired.”

He arrived at three deductions regarding our political leadership during the pandemic;

The PM and Premiers have not displayed due diligence in the performance of their responsibilities as leaders of the pandemic response.

The PM has ignored his duties for the defence of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In fact, he has encouraged and at times threatened the withholding of funding to cause contravention of the Charter, with no Oakes Test justification. This is criminal negligence.

The unjustified and continuing use of States of Emergency is a contravention of both provincial and territorial laws. The Premiers are in contravention of law. This is criminal negligence.

https://fcpp.org/wp-content/uploads/FC-PS237_CDADeadlyResponse_JL1621_F2.pdf

There is a lot to be accountable for and sadly there are no politicians willing to accept responsibility.

Covid futures – living with it or a nightmare?

This video was removed from Youtube and I was warned next time it will be a strike against me.

I violated Youtube’s MEDICAL MISINFORMATION POLICY

Content

What’s going to happen as we try to live with Covid?   Our political leaders and their public health care bureaucrats are having a difficult time of turning of the Covid fear in the population that they have worked so hard for two years to nurture and grow.

Now we are being told that we have to learn to live with the Covid virus rather than hiding in fear from it.  Independent and critical  thinkers didn’t buy into the fear narrative.. And they aren’t buying into the ‘learn  to live with it’ narrative either. 

Both narratives are disingenuous.  The fear narrative was promoted by  politicians relying on selected experts in order to promote politically correct solutions and mass vaccinations.  The ‘learn to live with Covid’ is promoted by politicians and the selected experts they relied on  in order to minimize the drastic failure of the vaccine mandates and the social divisiveness they caused.

Jennifer Grant, Martha Fulford and Neil Rau in a Special to the National Post point out that; “Ridiculous censorship has smothered valid criticism, poisoned dialogue and silenced the perspectives of people with valuable insights. . . . These fiercest proponents of “COVID-zero” need to acquiesce that the coronavirus is here to stay, variant upon variant. To be fair to this group, in the early days of the pandemic, they believed wholeheartedly that COVID-19 could be eliminated, as did the WHO and the Public Health Agency of Canada. Unfortunately, this was the only accepted perspective until recently. Those who expressed reservations about the feasibility and societal and economic costs of this approach were silenced on social media, sometimes reported to professional colleges for discipline, and subjected to calumny — both publicly and privately.”

Exploring the charges of ‘misinformation’ so often used to silence opposition they argue; “Misinformation is also a charge used against nuanced interpretations of complex facts countering an overly simplified one-size-fits-all approach (e.g. not every member of the population has the same need for booster doses of vaccine). This is an appropriate response to complexity. Likewise, it is wrong to label as ‘misinformation’ the interpretation of the same facts to arrive at disparate conclusions — this is healthy scientific discourse. True ‘misinformation’ is calculated and self-serving. Purveyors of misinformation know that what they are saying is false, but they forge ahead, often with an ulterior motive. If someone says that school closures caused greater harm to children than benefits, is this ‘misinformation?’ There are certainly data supporting the assertion, and few that counter it. Likewise, does arguing that vaccines do not stop transmission, or that natural immunity is at least as effective as vaccine immunity, make one an “anti-vaxxer” or a ‘revisionist?‘” 

They come to one very chilling conclusion that cannot be over-stressed because our future well-being and public health depends on a full understanding of how Covid evolves.  They declare;  “In the end, ad hominem attacks, unilateral application of standards and the wide misuse of the term “misinformation” have muzzled valid criticism, poisoned dialogue and silenced the perspectives of people with valuable insights. The first major consequence is that valid ideas have been rejected without full consideration. This has resulted in a very skewed understanding of the real risk of COVID-19 and the merits of restrictions and vaccines by the public, mostly along political lines.”

How will Covid evolve as we continue to vaccinate and learn to live with the virus.  Will Covid continue to learn to escape the vaccine and become more and more varied and virulent?

Maija Kappler writing for Healthing, inspiring Canadians to live better reports; “The World Health Organization . . . has released a report detailing what it says is the most likely path forward from this point on in the pandemic, as well several other potential scenarios. There’s a chance the virus will become less severe and a chance it will get much worse — but the most probably outcome is somewhere in the middle. . . . The ‘base case,’ or the scenario that seems the most plausible, is that the virus that causes COVID will continue to evolve, but outbreaks will lessen in severity given the immunity that comes from vaccines. That doesn’t mean the virus will go away, or that it’s something we can ignore. WHO predicts waning immunity will be an issue and could cause ‘periodic spikes in transmission.’ That may necessitate ‘periodic boosting,’ if not for the general population than at least for people who are immunocompromised or otherwise high-risk. In temperate areas, “a seasonal pattern of peaks in transmission” may become the norm.”

Let’s take a moment and examine the claim, ‘Given the immunity that comes from vaccines!’

Current data from Public Health Ontario shows that this claim is false.  There is no immunity that comes from the vaccines.  As a matter of fact, the fully vaccinated with a booster dose in Ontario contract Covid  at the highest rate over the fully vaccinated and not fully vaccinated groups.

This reality is ignored by mainstream media and not mentioned at all by politicians and their public health care bureaucrats.

It has become a dangerous blind spot.

Why?  Because it opens up the possibility of the worst case scenario that Maija Kappler brings up in her discussion of the WHO’s report; “What could still happen, the report warns, is that a variant could emerge that’s highly transmissible and causes more severe illness, against which the vaccine is less effective. If that were to happen, hospitalization and death numbers could continue to mount, especially among people “in the most vulnerable groups.” Older adults, the immunocompromised, and people with chronic illnesses or disabilities are among some of the people most likely to get severely ill or die.”

Much as people don’t want to face a Covid 19 outcome where we have to learn  to die with Covid it is still a chilling possibility.  Even if mainstream media, politicians and their health care bureaucrats avoid any mention of it thinking Canadians need to examine this possibility especially since the vaccinate no matter what mentality has taken hold at all levels of our political leadership.  

Dr. Paul Alexander, an Academic Scientist and Senior Covid Advisor for the WHO, PAHO and Trump administration, is a commited critic of the  unscientific Covid vaccine mandates along with the Drs. Robert Malone, Byran Bridle, Peter McCullough and Mark Trozzi.

His analysis of how vaccine mandates failed to take into account well known scientific principles of virus evolution is very forthright and exposes the blind spot of vaccine mandates . . .

In an interview with Bright Light New he explains that the Covid-19 vaccines were developed for the original Alpha strain and therefore useless against Omicron–are non-sterilizing (do not stop replication) and are driving more infectious variants.

The fully vaccinated are becoming much more infected than the unvaccinated and spreading Covid-19 to the unvaccinated in a very rapid manner.  This is confirmed by data all over the world and our current situation in Ontario.

The continuing the use of “these non-sterilizing, suboptimal vaccines” will only result in the emergence of “variant after variant after variant [and] more infectious variants” and could include the emergence of “a lethal, pathogenic variant,” which “could devastate humanity”

Elsewhere I have pointed out that two years of a mismanaged pandemic has exposed a lot of delusions, much to the loss of ordinary people who trusted government leaders, their health care bureaucrats and mainstream media.

Omicorn is Covid 19’s hard lesson to the willfully blind and their followers. We were told; ‘Get vaccinated and stop the spread.’ Then we were told; ‘Do your duty and get vaccinated so all can get back to normal.’ Then we were told; ‘Get vaccinated or else!’ Finally we were scapegoated. In all the telling there was an army of politicians, their health care bureaucrats and some scientists who cheered it all on. Dissenting and questioning scientists were ostracized, punished and silenced.

Now we know, everybody …vaccinated or unvaccinated…gets omicron. Even the great Dr. Fauci is reported to admit this.

Sadly  scientists and medical experts along with many others who hold politically incorrect yet balanced scientific  views have been silenced and cancelled so the crucial open dialogue so necessary for the effective scientific understanding of the pandemic has been severely hampered and public policy was skewed into a one sided approach that has brought us to this situation. And is now being actively perpetuated by the ‘vaccinate no matter what’ crowd.

This one sided myopic view could end up killing a lot of us.

What do you think?

Would medical ‘science’ ever lead people astray?

Most people will say ‘trust the science,’ ‘listen to the doctors and scientists,’ and ‘the experts know what they’re talking about.’ Sadly far too many people have forgotten history or haven’t been taught history. I remember in my youth going to the doctor, getting a physical and then sitting down in the doctor’s office to discuss my health while we both relaxed with a cigarette. In my youth I completely trusted ‘medical science’ and anybody in a white lab coat with a stethoscope around their neck. I don’t today.

The British Medical Journal confronts Big Pharma’s hold on the medical system and it’s all about money and profits;

 What confidence do we have in a system in which drug companies are permitted to “mark their own homework” rather than having their products tested by independent experts as part of a public regulatory system? Unconcerned governments and captured regulators are unlikely to initiate necessary change to remove research from industry altogether and clean up publishing models that depend on reprint revenue, advertising, and sponsorship revenue.

The illusion of evidence based medicine. BMJ 2022; 376, Published 16 March 2022,  BMJ 2022;376:o702

Dr. John Campbell in his review of this article – ‘The illusion of evidence based medicine’ – points out that; “Medicine is largely dominated by a small number of very large pharmaceutical companies, that compete for market share, but are effectively united in their efforts to expanding that market.”

The illusion of evidence based medicine, Dr. John Campbell

The hold Big Pharma has on doctors and hospitals is no secret. Global News reported:

Concerns around Canadian doctors being wined and dined by pharma companies led the College of Family Physicians Canada announcing last January that its more than 38,000 members can no longer earn educational credits for attending these events. . . .

“You essentially get a taste of the scope and extent of relationships between health professionals and industry,” U of T’s Grundy said.

. . . it’s now known that the over-prescribing of highly addictive painkillers contributed to the opioid crisis. Transparency laws, she said, could have helped officials better track the problem and any inappropriate interactions between drug companies and the health-care sector.

“In the early days of these very powerful drugs, there was extensive, systematic, multifaceted marketing campaigns that not only involved payments to physicians for advisory boards and consulting and more formal arrangements, but lots of those little informal interactions,” she said.

Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, launched an aggressive marketing campaign aimed at promoting the pill, which made the company more than $30 billion in the U.S and Canada, according to lawsuits filed here and in the United States. Health Canada first approved OxyContin in 1996 to relieve moderate to severe pain.

As reports of overdoses exploded across North America in the early 2000s, Purdue began facing questions about the painkiller.

Big pharma paid $151M to doctors, hospitals in 2017-18, but we don’t know who got paid or why, By Andrew Russell & Caryn Lieberman Global News, August 19, 2019

So when doctors, epidemiologists and many other health care bureaucrats tell you that the Covid 19 vaccine is perfectly safe and effective in stopping the pandemic . . .

https://www.askontariodoctors.ca/covidvaccine

Check the data for yourself . . .

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

And think about what they are saying and why their opinion might not be in your best interest.

What do you think?