Coronavirus … Panic or Pandemic? Is It Just An Evidence Fiasco?

In the midst of all that’s happening in the world, there is one underlying disease: FEAR. People are panicking … begging the government to protect and save them. But here’s the question few people seem to be asking…………

“Do we have enough data to support the panic?

In a recent article by John P.A. Ioannidis (professor of medicine, of epidemiology and population health, of biomedical data science, and of statistics at Stanford University), he made some good points…

“The current coronavirus disease, Covid-19, has been called a once-in-a-century pandemic. But it may also be a once-in-a-century evidence fiasco. … The data collected so far on how many people are infected and how the epidemic is evolving are utterly unreliable. Given the limited testing to date, some deaths and probably the vast majority of infections due to SARS-CoV-2 are being missed. We don’t know if we are failing to capture infections by a factor of three or 300. Three months after the outbreak emerged, most countries, including the U.S., lack the ability to test a large number of people and no countries have reliable data on the prevalence of the virus in a representative random sample of the general population.”

He continued:

In the absence of data, prepare-for-the-worst reasoning leads to extreme measures of social distancing and lockdowns. … If we decide to jump off the cliff, we need some data to inform us about the rationale of such an action and the chances of landing somewhere safe.”

Regardless of whether we have enough data or not, it seems like the mention of the “V” word is getting more and more frequent. Make no mistake… a coronavirus VACCINE is coming! Will it be “mandatory”?  Will anyone who refuses the vaccine be ostracized from society or be prohibited from traveling?

In a LA Times article from March 18th, they tell the story of Edward Jenner, crediting him with “saving the most lives ever” with the smallpox vaccine. Then they claim that the anti-vaxxers have “forgotten” about how successful the smallpox vaccine was.

According to the article:

This collective amnesia has allowed for the rise of the anti-vaccine movement, whose irresponsible adherents believe vaccines exist to line the pockets of Big Pharma. They ignore the fact that the smallpox vaccine was so overwhelmingly successful at eradicating the disease that it no longer is routinely given.  Are anti-vaxxers ready to start believing in vaccines again?

Please allow me to retort to this wildly inaccurate article…

Vaccinations became mandatory in England in 1853, and by 1857, fines and imprisonment awaited people who refused to be vaccinated against smallpox. And as Dr. Humphries just mentioned, once smallpox vaccination became mandatory in England, massive epidemics began to occur.  According to official figures of the Register General of England, between 1857 and 1859, there were over 14,000 deaths from smallpox. Then, between 1863 and 1865, there were over 20,000 smallpox deaths. A few years later, there were almost 45,000 smallpox deaths between 1870 and 1872.

Let’s just say that based on those death statistics, the smallpox vaccine was far from “overwhelmingly successful” as the article claims. I’d call that an abysmal failure!

According to Dr. Suzanne Humphries (in her book “Dissolving Illusions”) an interesting phenomenon occurred in a city called Leicester in England, which saw a massive outbreak of smallpox in 1871, despite an almost 100% vaccination rate. Over the next 15 years, the smallpox vaccine was mandatory and they continued to have outbreaks. However, on March 23, 1885, what became known as the “Great Demonstration” against mandatory vaccination took place in Leicester. The residents of Leicester were fed up and held a rally with over 80,000 people participating. They protested mandatory vaccines and actually won their freedom of choice. Over the next eight years, the vaccination rate went from approximately 95% to only 5%. During that period, if someone had smallpox, everyone in the “infected” house was placed in strict quarantine and the house thoroughly disinfected. And guess what happened! The death rates drastically decreased and there were no more outbreaks!

So the lessons we can learn from Leicester and smallpox is that the vaccine did NOT work, but actually CAUSEDfurther outbreaks. Whereas quarantine and isolation were successful at mitigating the spread of disease.

And while quarantine and isolation are good ideas, what about FORCED quarantine and isolation?

Could that be considered “Medical Martial Law”?

More on that in a moment…

The Coming Coronavirus Vaccine

There are lots of promising, natural treatments available to help combat the virus, but nearly all global effort and funding has been dedicated to the development of a vaccine. In 2015, a patent was filed by The Pirbright Institute for the live, attenuated coronavirus. The application claims that the new virus could be used to create a vaccine for treating or preventing respiratory viruses. The patent was awarded in 2018.

Now, The Pirbright Institute is funded by the UK Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, the WHO, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. All of these entities have been loud supporters of mandatory vaccinations and more government control based on “health concerns.”

And for several years, Bill Gates has been telling us that a pandemic is coming, and in November of 2019, collaborating with the World Economic Forum, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation hosted “Event 201” where they ran a simulation of a coronavirus pandemic.

But the push for the vaccine has even the staunchest vaccine advocates and scientists worried.

I understand the importance of accelerating timelines for vaccines in general, but from everything I know, this is not the vaccine to be doing it with,” Dr Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, told Reuters.

Hotez worked on development of a vaccine for SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome), the coronavirus behind a major 2003 outbreak, and found that some vaccinated animals developed more severe disease compared with unvaccinated animals when they were exposed to the virus.

There is a risk of immune enhancement,” said Hotez. “The way you reduce that risk is first you show it does not occur in laboratory animals.”

But the vaccine won’t be available for at least a year, so in the meantime, we’re hearing some bizarre recommendations … like ….

“GET A FLU SHOT!”

We’re hearing the “doctors” on TV and major newspapers (like the New York Times) recommending that you should get a FLU vaccine to protect against Coronavirus.

But a 2017-2018 study published in the prestigious journal “Vaccine” (a peer-reviewed medical journal) revealed that flu vaccines may increase the risk of infection from other respiratory viruses (including coronavirus), which is a phenomenon known as “virus interference.”

According to the study:

Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus.”

When we look closer at the study, we find this quote:

Examining non-influenza viruses specifically, the odds of both coronavirus and human metapneumovirus in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher when compared to unvaccinated individuals (OR = 1.36 and 1.51, respectively)” 

In other words, the flu shot increases your risk of contracting coronavirus by 36%!

But What About Italy?

A recent article in Bloomberg (titled “99% of Those Who Died From Virus Had Other Illness”) illustrates an overlooked variable in the “corona-panic” equation. And that variable would be the status of the immune system in those who are exposed.

The study found the following:

More than 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities were people who suffered from previous medical conditions, according to a study by the country’s national health authority.”  

Moreover:

The Rome-based institute has examined medical records of about 18% of the country’s coronavirus fatalities, finding that just three victims, or 0.8% of the total, had no previous pathology. Almost half of the victims suffered from at least three prior illnesses and about a fourth had either one or two previous conditions. More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease.”

The Bloomberg article also pointed out that the primary threat is to the elderly (the average age of someone who died was 79.5) and that the fatality rate may have been significantly overblown. Rather than 8%, the fatality rate may, in fact, be closer to the global average of about 2%.

This new report challenges much of the global reporting on the topic which presents a unilateral narrative that simply being exposed (within six feet) to someone who may have tested positive for the virus is life-threatening, independent of one’s health status and other precautions one might take, such as supporting one’s immune system.  Elderly people, already taking multiple prescription drugs for chronic diseases, are highly susceptible to opportunistic infections due to their chronic conditions, the adverse effects of pharmaceuticals, and subsequently weakened immune systems.

Below is a table indicating the COVID-19 fatality rate by age.

As is evident, those who are younger than 60 years old have less than 1% chance of death if exposed.

What About the PCR Test?

According to David Crowe (a Canadian software and telecommunications engineer with a degree in biology who is an expert in global infections such as SARS, Ebola, and flu), the coronavirus panic is an irrational panic, based on an unproven RNA test called “polymerase chain reaction” (PCR).

In his own words:

The coronavirus test is based on PCR, a manufacturing technique. When used as a test it does not produce a positive/negative result, but simply the number of cycles required to detect genetic material. The division between positive and negative is an arbitrary number of cycles chosen by the testers. If positive means infected and negative means uninfected, then there are cases of people going from infected to uninfected and back to infected again in a couple of days.

In layman’s terms, Mr. Crowe suggests that since the PCR test looks for RNA, there is no proof that it detects a virus.  Furthermore, there is no proof that the virus causes disease. He asserts that the data is being interpreted to benefit the viral theory, and there is zero concern for false positive results. He concludes that medical papers are propaganda to increase panic.

He continues:

The world is suffering from a massive delusion based on the belief that a test for RNA is a test for a deadly new virus, a virus that has emerged from wild bats in China, supported by the western assumption that Chinese people will eat anything that moves. If the virus exists, then it should be possible to purify viral particles. From these particles RNA can be extracted and should match the RNA used in this test. Until this is done it is possible that the RNA comes from another source, which could be the cells of the patient, bacteria, fungi etc. There might be an association with elevated levels of RNA and illness, but that is not proof that the RNA is from a virus. Without purification and characterization of virus particles, it cannot be accepted that an RNA test is proof that a virus is present.

Mr. Crowe mentions “false positives” and there is a shocking new Chinese scientific paper that calculated the false positive rate for asymptomatic patients as … (wait for it) … 80%!!

And here’s a scientific study published less than 2 weeks ago which shows just under 50% false positives!

So, is this really a pandemic, or are people panicking based on a test which is producing anywhere from 50% to 80% false positives?

Medical Martial Law?

In times of crisis, it’s not uncommon for citizens to willingly give up their rights in the name of “safety” and “the greater good.” The coronavirus scare is no exception. Around the world, tens of millions of people have been placed under quarantine.

Since the outbreak of the virus a few months ago, government officials have exercised unprecedented authority to monitor and detain citizens. The effort to control media coverage has reached a fevered pitch, and there doesn’t seem to be any sign that the nanny state is going anywhere.

The efforts to quarantine those suspected of carrying the coronavirus seem to have had little effect on its global transmission. Nevertheless, millions of people in China and around the world have been put on lock-down. These people are confined to their homes, ships, or temporary “quarantine zones” with no due process.

And although you may expect this kind of authoritarian response in communist China, the west is facing similar detention efforts.

In New York City, thousands of people are currently under quarantine. Although New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio claims that most of the quarantines are “voluntary,” many of them aren’t. We saw during the measles “epidemic” last year that Mayor de Blasio has no problem with violating the freedom of American citizens when he tried to force unvaccinated families to receive their shots.

Although New York Governor tried to assure reporters that there are no plans to quarantine New York City amid the coronavirus outbreak, Mayor de Blasio said in an interview on CNN that “We’re absolutely considering that. We’re going to look at all other options, but it could get to that for sure for the whole country.”

San Francisco has already implemented such a quarantine. Officials in six San Francisco Bay Area counties issued a sweeping shelter-in-place mandate Monday affecting nearly 7 million people, ordering residents to avoid any unnecessary travel by any method and only leave their homes for food, medicine and exercise.

“BUT IT’S AN EMERGENCY!”

Today the “coronavirus-panic” gives government fuel and cover for its assaults on freedom and poses a question the government does not want to answer: If liberty can be taken away in times of crisis, then is it really liberty; or is it just a license, via a temporary government permission slip, subject to the whims of politicians in power?

The government has no authority to dictate how many people choose to congregate for any peaceful purpose.

Telling people they cannot gather in groups of more than 20 or 30 (or whatever arbitrary number) is a clear violation of the constitutional clause, “no law . . . prohibiting . . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble.”

The coronavirus or any other “emergency” does NOT cancel or negate the Constitution.

We have far more to fear from “Big Government” tyranny than we do from any virus. Moreover, liberty is natural and personal. You can sacrifice yours, but you cannot sacrifice mine.

The Good News!

There are natural ways to fight off viral infections and keep your immune system healthy, one of which is vitamin C, which is currently being used in China against COVID-19 coronavirus and has been officially recommended by the Shanghai government.

The coronavirus can be dramatically slowed, or stopped, with the immediate widespread use of high doses of vitamin C. Physicians have demonstrated the powerful antiviral action of vitamin C for decades. There has been a lack of media coverage of this effective and successful approach against viruses in general, and coronavirus in particular.

Is vitamin C a “cure” for coronavirus? The reality is that there is no “cure” for coronavirus (or any virus for that matter). We are exposed to literally thousands of ‘harmful’ viruses each and every day, but with a functioning immune system and intake of natural antivirals, we shouldn’t have to worry about any of the viruses … including coronavirus!

Taking PuraThrive Liposomal Vitamin C each and every day. Why liposomal? Because it is the only route of administration that’s as “bioavailable” (absorbable) as IV injections, and it’s much cheaper and less invasive.

Want proof that vitamin C may be an answer? Anyone saying that vitamin therapy can stop coronavirus is already being labeled as “promoting false information” and promulgating “fake news.” Even the sharing of verifiable news, and direct quotes from credentialed medical professionals, is being restricted or blocked on social media.

Another supplement we take every day is iodine. Here’s why –> Iodine exhibits activity against bacteria, molds, yeasts, protozoa, and many viruses. Interestingly, of all the antiseptic preparations suitable for direct use on humans and animals and upon tissues, only iodine is capable of killing all classes of pathogens (gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, mycobacteria, fungi, yeasts, viruses and protozoa).

According to Dr. David Brownstein:

Iodine is essential to not only fighting off an infection it is necessary for proper immune system functioning. There is no bacteria, virus, parasite or fungus that is known to be resistant to iodine.”

One of the main problems with coronavirus is that it creates a “cytokine storm,” which is induced by the activation of NLRP3 inflammasomes.  According to a recent article from Italy, melatonin inhibits the NLRP3 inflammasome, so it may be a truly unique molecule to fight against COVID-19. Simply stated, adequate melatonin levels may reduce the infectiousness of coronavirus and may also diminish the chances of developing acute respiratory distress syndrome and acute lung injury.

Also, silver has been utilized as a medicine since ancient times to treat scores of ailments, including the bubonic plague. It works by interfering with the enzymes that allow a virus to utilize oxygen thus, in essence, suffocating it so it cannot do damage in the body. Silver nanoparticles have proven to exert antiviral activity against HIV-1 at non-cytotoxic concentrations, but the mechanism underlying their HIV-inhibitory activity has not been not fully elucidated. In this study, silver nanoparticles are evaluated to elucidate their mode of antiviral action against HIV-1 using a panel of different in vitro assays.

Interestingly, a little over 100 years ago, during the infamous Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-19, it has been estimated that 50 million people died worldwide. In the USA alone, 550,000 people died, which was approximately 10% of the people afflicted with the flu. Homeopathic physicians documented then more than 62,000 patients treated withhomeopathy resulting in a mortality of 0.7%. For people who were sick enough to be hospitalized, conventional medicine had a mortality of 30% while with 27,000 documented hospitalized cases, homeopathy was reporting a mortality of 1.05% (Journal of the American Institute of Homeopathy 1921; 13:1028-43).

Remember … when it comes to the coronavirus (or any other bacteria or virus for that matter) …

Don’t worry … BE HEALTHY!

PLEASE SHARE THIS ARTICLE WITH YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY!