Updated: Mar 28
Poet, essayist, author, teacher, B.W. Lowe, reminds us,
“We become slaves the moment we hand the keys to the definition of reality entirely over to someone else, whether it is a business, an economic theory, a political party, the White House, Newsworld or CNN.”
Of course, there are depths to our enslavement. To offer ourselves to CNN is truly to free fall into vacuity and innuendo incarnate.
Desmet’s “Mass Formation” is about paucity of inner lives, shriveled social bonds, the anxiety kicked loose by these vacuums and the aggression that builds from the concomitant frustration and despair.
And then, here cometh a unifying narrative, someone to compose the confusion, to offer “belonging” (masks, distancing, manic sanitizing and other earnest rituals however divorced from efficacy), and off we go.
We’ve been reminded that outright gibberish, discredited, factually bereft gibberish, repeated often enough, delivered from citadels of “authority”, becomes a collective paradigm, a default setting.
And in fact, it is treated as a truism. And anyone who doubts it (from WMD in Iraq, to the “novel” coronavirus that will kill intemperately anyone breathing air, to the self-evident purity of wars of aggression launched by certain States and the inherent criminality of those launched by others), is suspect and has to be “quarantined.”
Pull all this away then on the other side (hence the death grips on the idiotic masks, where even CEOs of major airlines are petitioning for mask mandates to be dropped while the White House threatens to veto anything passed by Congress to that effect),
and people suddenly don’t feel they have an identity.
And so Florida’s Governor DeSantis recently held a “roundtable” to attempt to offer expert testimony as a rebuttal to this weird, enigmatic hypnotic trance that moved from “curve flattening” to contact tracing for an airborne pathogen (eventually your head starts giving off sparks if you think about that proposition enough), to locking away the healthy, to muzzles/face nappies that are utterly useless given the size of C-19 particles (nano-particles), to being ordered to go bankrupt by shutting our businesses, to being imprisoned in your residence, to awaiting compulsory, unproven, experimental injections when there is a bounty of off-label, easily accessible, cheap remedies available.
Recall, “cases” were proclaimed without symptoms, according to tests (PCR) whose own paperwork confirms they are not diagnostic and explicitly not for asymptomatic testing, and that is how we globally “test”!
Movement was banned, economic transactions verboten, religious worship denied, education dismantled, right of assembly neutered. A bio-security police state was hatched…
and this over a not particularly terrifying pathogen with a 99%+ recovery rate for the bulk of the population.
And when no justification for any of this was forthcoming and the only “results” produced were destructive of society and its overall functioning and wellbeing, the specter of censorship came in to ensure the “heretical” reality would not be heard, broadcast, discussed or debated. Swaggering sanctimony prevailed, and any stray truth was allowed out only with “spin” and a bodyguard of accompanying lies.
I am delighted this happened, kudos for the cause, and to the Governor for assembling a formidable panel. The public health industry overall is now in thrall to financial conglomerates, with pandemics being contrived as political levers and leveraged for financial investment opportunities. So, exposes are welcome.
Dr. Lapado, Florida’s Surgeon General, previously UCLA Associate Professor, practicing physician, who has contributed to NIH research, spoke out about individual choice versus the encroachment of an overarching government. He complained of blatant abuse of data and unethical behavior.
These are interesting charges. I have been writing for literally years now claiming that this has been an outright sham. And the question was, irrespective of other merits, by what right did the powers that be abscond with our civil liberties? By what justification were these indefinitely suspended, simply by government assertion of a never-ending “emergency”? I continue to believe that word has been rendered meaningless taffy. Nothing keeps “emerging” for several years.
The Roundtable coincided with the two-year anniversary of “two weeks to stop the spread.” The credentialed ignorance that has been rolled out since has been head spinning. It came gushing with unsubstantiated certitudes, when no one could have possibly known what two weeks would or would not do.
In fact, since we have evidence of C-19 circulating well before December 2019, then clearly, we could never have “locked it down.” Moreover, as an airborne pathogen, once that became apparent, then this whole approach was rendered completely incoherent, which is where it remains today.
Dr. Robert Malone, physician and scientist, educated at the Salk Institute and UC Davis, is a molecular virologist. In his student years, his contribution to key patents that led to the development of the mRNA methodology, make his comments particularly telling. He has also worked as a bioethicist and in biodefense with the Department of Defense.
Dr. Malone was particularly impassioned, speaking as he said on behalf of the International Alliance of Physicians, claiming there was no justification for mandating “vaccines” for children. The medical ethical premise must be,
“If there is risk, there should be choice.”
This is an irreducible principle of ethics and informed consent. Moreover, this is even more acute as there is clearly no medical emergency today. Ergo, any temporary suspension of rights, if ever justifiable, is certainly not justifiable today.
Physicians who disagreed with the prevailing approach were targeted and scapegoated, early treatment was ignored and aggressively discouraged, no protocols were developed for “treatment”.
There is quite a bit here to unpack. First, children have never been at appreciable risk. Second, there are off-label therapeutics that work. While there are smear campaigns galore relative to Ivermectin and HCQ, desperate ones, they are motivated by the simple fact that all the “vaccines” available in the US are on “Emergency Use Authorization” (EUAs), which are given only if nothing else is available. It all hangs on that thread.
The attacks about incomplete trials of these alternative therapeutics are completely bogus, and rather ironic besides. The only trials done on the “vaccines” are by the manufacturers themselves, were slipshod, had a very limited base, no one actually highly vulnerable population-wise was included, over time the placebo group seemed to outperform the “vaccine” group (it was only in terms of short-term infectiousness the “vaccines” did better by a few people in a very limited sampling, which in relative terms was spun as 95% efficacy). Then, they jabbed the placebo group, so no control group would persist. This is completely in contravention to all medical practice.
We now know these are not “sterilizing” “vaccines” and as per their own EUA applications petitioned as “gene therapies” and never claimed to stop spread or re-infection. By the longstanding definition of “vaccine,” changed recently lest these be excluded (which they still are by common sense and multiple decades of medical norms), these are then essentially “therapeutics.”
Dr. Shankara Chetty, whose “8th Day Protocol” has led to 10,000 patients not needing oxygen, not being admitted to hospital, and all recovering, rightly makes the point that in terms of overall safety all these other “controversial” therapeutics are, even by WHO’s own website many times safer after decades of use and billions of doses versus even the one year stats of adverse effects and deaths of these “vaccines.”
As Dr. Chetty clearly states,
“Once safety is no longer the issue, the only argument left is ‘efficacy.’ And that is between doctor and patient.”
To which I would add, governments by intruding on this are practicing medicine without a license! They are not equipped to discuss efficacy.
In the US almost 20% of all prescriptions are off label. And the argument that the doses needed for these therapeutics to be helpful render them dangerous would then be a different discussion altogether.
And these claims run against the national experience of parts of India, Mexico, Japan, Indonesia, hundreds of thousands of documented cases in the US, and elsewhere, where these generic, off label treatments have been salvific.
Protocols also exist, like Dr. Chetty’s, that use no “controversial” medicines. Dr. Richard Urso has developed such protocols in the US as well.
Drs. Tyson and Fareed, with close to 10,000 patients, none of whom died among those who came in for early treatment, argue very clearly, treat “symptoms” (virus, then inflammation, then thrombosis – all treatable if acted upon at the right time) not a “brand” (COVID).
But there is no “safety” comparison or even “trial” comparison between these off-label, efficacious, cheap treatments, and these exorbitantly priced, untested, adverse effect riddled “experimental treatments.”
The first are evidently safer, have had exceptional global results, and have far more rigorous trials, open to scrutiny. And while we can argue how definitive the results have been, they have been overwhelmingly more encouraging than the murky manufacturer’s trials of these experimental “vaccines” with dubious data from a very limited population.
Ergo, why ever, would children, at nominal to no risk, be exposed to these “vaccines”? How could you say the “nothing else is available” standard is possibly, even plausibly fulfilled?
And where are the “randomized trials” for masking efficacy or lockdowns by the way if we claim such a fetish for evidence?
Professor Harvey Risch of Yale, MD, PhD, Epidemiologist, has railed against systematic misrepresentation of outcomes. Of the 200,000 or so patients treated in the US, by the alternative, field tested, off-label therapeutics, less than two dozen have died – these have been administered by tele-clinics as well as physician alliances dedicated to actually providing treatment. It is a shockingly positive record.
The issue of “no treatment protocol” again is not a minor issue. As Dr. Peter McCullough, COVID treatment activist, author of among the only peer reviewed papers on COVID treatment, possibly the most published cardiologist in the world, has said, never before in medical history has the guidance been, “don’t treat.” Essentially, if they can’t breathe and present themselves at ICU, blue in the face, then do something! And we know, absolutely know, from recoveries, COVID is eminently treatable, particularly if treated early.
HCQ, for example, has an established history as an anti-viral. There was an intentional decision to undermine it, as there was then to smear Ivermectin, to ignore their efficacy as part of treatment cocktails like those of Dr. Barody in Australia, along with Zinc and Doxycycline, or to disdain the clear positive impact of Fluvoxamine.
And on the issue of the government intervening in our rights due to health concerns, if that were true, Professor Risch points out, half a million plus tobacco related deaths per annum in the US would get more attention, as might the impact of sugar and preservatives in fast food. Since that has never been even suggested as a prevailing rationale for abridgement of rights, it is clear that on this go-around too, this is not what is operative here. Given how readily we swat away "health" as a consideration when it suits us, what we have is a clear abuse of constitutional rights.
Jeffrey Tucker rightly reminds us that when polio landed in crippling waves in the 20th century, there was no cure, no vaccine, a long incubation period before symptoms ever revealed themselves, confusion about how it was transmitted, and yet locking down the known world was inconceivable and never entertained. And let's remember, the visceral impact, 1 in 1,000 children aged 5 to 9 were paralyzed.
Mr. Tucker very aptly summarizes that this was successfully addressed by a private and voluntary system of health professionals, innovators, partnering with parents and local leadership.
“Meanwhile, Guys and Dolls and The King and I appeared on Broadway, A Streetcar Named Desire and The African Queen rocked the movie theaters, the steel mills hummed as never before, the oil industry boomed, domestic and international travel continued to roar and become democratized, the civil rights movement was born, and the “golden age of American capitalism” took root, all in the thick of a terrible disease.”
And so it has always been throughout history, until now, when rampant fear and panic mongering cuckolded our character and our drive.
Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Biostatistician, Epidemiologist from Harvard, bemoaned and marveled at the completely absurd questioning and denial of natural immunity. The sheer, shrieking illogic of how we, as a human species, ever managed to evolve with bacteria and viruses over billions of years without such immunity seems to have never crossed the minds of the bloviators.
Therefore, how sanely could we demand vaccine mandates for those who had recovered, and clearly had longer, more robust, more sustained immunity as a result? Dr. Kulldorff likens such prattlings from the CDC Director to be akin to a Director of NASA proclaiming the world is flat.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford, Epidemiologist and Mathematical Modeler, has been deeply immersed in immunology and “vaccine” development. She relays being baffled that we’ve inverted the schedule of uncertainty. We had “solutions” imposed on us that we had never tried (lockdowns, untested gene therapies) with complete certainty and things were claimed to be uncertain (the evolution of the disease) that were fairly well known as we were dealing with a coronavirus not a visitor from Mars.
Also, what were the mitigation strategies seeking to achieve, she questions? Unless blundering down the hoax-filled alley ways of “Zero COVID” you simply had to let this very mild illness become endemic, by letting those not at risk, contract it, and provide us a growing immunological shield.
If we compare this to smallpox, it is quite fascinating. Alex Berenson relays a telling vignette from Dr. D.A. Henderson, the man most acknowledged for having led us to eradicating smallpox.
Dr. Henderson tells us both smallpox and the freeze-dried vaccine had unique characteristics, that, taken together, made it the best candidate for disease elimination.
Along with that, no reservoir in nature, humans only, he says also tops the list. No rodents, monkeys, or other animals could be infected.
Each person infected exhibited a rash that could be identified “even by illiterate villagers.” No lab tests therefore required. And if patients were promptly isolated, they could be prevented from spreading it.
By contrast, TB, polio, hepatitis cause subclinical infections as the disease silently spreads. With smallpox, the patient could only infect others during the two to three weeks of severe illness, and once recovered, was immune for life (with COVID infectivity is about 5-7 days we are told by clinicians, and life-long immunity very likely, at least until outlier variants came calling, and even then, a robust immune response is mobilized).
The freeze-dried vaccine could withstand storage at 98 degrees Fahrenheit (37 degrees Celsius) for a month, making it ideal for tropical areas. The vaccine was truly that, inexpensive, easily administered, and each vaccination provided immunity for at least 10 years.
On those facts, absolutely no “mandating” was ever required!
Every successful vaccination says Dr. Henderson, resulted in a pustule and then a distinctive scar, “which remained for decades.” For dominant strains (Variola major), 80% of those who recovered had lifelong scars, meaning teams visiting the area could readily determine if smallpox was present, or had occurred in the past, and who had been successfully vaccinated.
So, with almost everything being the opposite, why the fevered aim of lavishing a completely novel, untested technology on something less dangerous for almost all of the population, than a median influenza season?
Dr. Tracy Hoeg, a physician in private practice, MD, PhD, Epidemiologist, referenced mask mandates and a study conducted in Wisconsin by her colleagues. She references 92% compliance from the kids involved (Fall of 2021), minimal spread, 34% lower spread than community. Such “studies” are used to proclaim, “masks work.”
But she points out there was no control group, something quite foundational and fundamental to any real “study.” Otherwise, it’s like saying “kids wore pink socks,” as when something incidental or coincidental provides at best correlation without causation. All one had to do was divert one’s gaze also to Scandinavia, a quick glance to Norway for example, over to Florida, to swathes of Africa. All of these are never referenced or referred to.
Of the two randomized control trials, both showed incidental benefit at best, certainly below 50% (Denmark and Bangladesh). Clear conclusion, cloth masks don’t work (nanoparticle size), surgical masks had at most, nominal value.
Again, it is an inversion of the “precautionary principle.” Masks we know DO interfere with and stifle oxygen flow, impair communication, make listening and hearing difficult, gather bacteria, are unhygienic and more. As Governor DeSantis pointed out, you didn’t even need randomized trials, just seeing the clear comparative results between neighboring counties (which they did to make the same assessment in Florida), if practicing science and not Covidian theology, would have sufficed.
Diving deeper into the completely misrepresented Bangladesh study, the graph for purple cloth masks in that study which showed absolutely no effect whatsoever, was omitted from the published paper. That verges on fraud right there.
And on its fourth booster, and in the midst of yet another surge, what value has “masking” brought to Israel?
Quoting the Israeli Ministry of Health:
“Studies on the subject are of a poor standard and the issue creates inconvenience as there is no strong scientific basis for the new policy. It seems that a mask gives protection, but the numbers are average and do not constitute scientific proof of effectiveness.”
Dr. Christopher D’Adamo, MD and PhD, Epidemiologist, who looks at treating the whole person (dialing in the evident impact of “stress” and “panic” and physical health, all cited by the CDC as towering considerations as comorbidities) says a comprehensive systems level review of outcomes and collateral damage is called for. In any sane society it would be inescapable. We have yet to put our collective sanity to test in this way. We have to continue to agitate for that to be forthcoming.
It is clear that collateral damage globally has far outweighed any benefit. There was an assumption schools would be vectors for the disease. Sweden showed us that wasn’t the case. Many other jurisdictions followed in Scandinavia and then multiple US States.
Less than 5%, says Dr. D’Adamo, more likely closer to 1% spread through schools.
But the physical and mental health impact was devastating. Obesity skyrocketed, diabetes surged, dramatic impact on suicide rates, the crushing imposition of social isolation at such a formative time. Anxiety and stress pummeled and weakened immunity across the board.
Professor Bhattacharya from Stanford, Health Economist, Professor of Medicine, reminds us again of the over 1000 times difference in lethality of COVID 19 between the young and those who are older. And even then, recovery rates above the age of 70 with comorbidities were around 94-95% and, for those receiving those “clandestine” therapeutics, still better.
However, unwilling to review or face data, this was a gross, pathological violation of medical ethics. We crushed our ability to think. And denying any such insights was the pre-set setting, though the sceptics were arguably bringing “good news” of a manageable crisis – good news to all but Big Pharma, larger businesses, politicians funded by various agendas, and their bought off acolytes in medicine and media.
Back to children and schooling, we had screen addiction getting worse, introversion being further fostered when we are an eminently social species (remember the breeding ground for mass formation?). And also, academic results plummeted, from the testimony of parents as well as from overall findings that online “education” was a misnomer by and large. Poor kids had it the worst even in developed countries. No private schools, no tutors, poorer nutrition.
We know the effect from the “lockdowns” via the education impact and social impact is in fact more impoverished, lower quality, shorter, less effective lives. How do you quantify that?
In places like Uganda or India, years of shutdown equate to multiple lives stolen, a generation robbed. These crazy, useless policies (India loses more citizens to daily diarrhea than COVID either pre or post its relatively middling “vaccination” numbers) were tailor made, it almost seems, to harm children.
And for the millions thrown into poverty, little girls sent into premature marriages and boys and girls having to go into child labor to help families stay afloat, how shall we count that cost? Decades of social and educational progress retarded, so some elites could keep their economic arrangements for non-value adding wealth continually afloat.
We had reached the point of wanting to mask toddlers in the US between 2-5 years on no evidence whatsoever. By contrast, the Super Bowl is played and enjoyed with riotous unmasked abandon, world leaders are caught on film socially intimate and unmasked, concerts and VIP events show masked “servers” and everyone else rollicking unfettered. And then, against that backdrop, we have these sad children, socially distanced, masked, being chased with a “jab.” How horrifying and unholy does it have to get?
Moderna in seeking FDA authorization for “vaccinating” up to six-year old’s were able to show trials that “reduced” risk from essentially 0 to 0. And this will go through, because the FDA is now a rubber-stamping arm for political aims.
Moderna claims this “might” reduce the risk of severe COVID in children. However, that is nowhere there in any available data. Little benefit in 6,700 kids, and it actually caused fevers in a number of them, 104 or higher. As there’s no risk to these children from COVID, no risk whatsoever from the “vaccine” therefore can be tolerable.
We do not know of a single healthy child who has died of COVID says Dr. Joseph Fraiman, MD, Cornell graduated, once an avid foe of the Great Barrington Declaration, now saying he has been “converted by the data.”
How can you have “mandates” without risk stratification? That risk stratification is withheld by the CDC having “weaponized health”. The current US Administration has spent over $1 billion in social and legacy media (revealed by the Freedom of Information Act) to spin a narrative and “sell” a tale, rather than explore data and share facts.
The FDA in investigating the “vaccines” only looked at antibodies, which are often temporary, and only one aspect of immunity. They never challenged the mRNA gene therapies in terms of whether they stop spread, or reinfection, or to what extent they help, in terms of suppressing symptoms (said efficacy also wanes after months as we now know).
Not requiring these facts in their initial study and support for the EUAs, shows a cardinal collapse of their duty to provide oversight and reliable guidance. The same by the way can be said of the major European regulators and certainly those in Australia, New Zealand and Canada.
The World Economic Forum announcing their version of a “vaccine passport” seemed thrilled to announce it would work via a blood test, ensuring your “vaccine status” accordingly. This would ensure, they said, “only the uninfected” could cross borders or cross the threshold of a place of entertainment or what have you.
There is so much wrong with this. Not least being that we emphatically know now that the "vaccines” do not stave off reinfection or inhibit spread. So, this utterly medically illiterate claim is the banner headline, again on the theory of repeating nonsense until it infiltrates our consciousness and bypasses any factual “antibodies” we may have.
Particularly telling given the recent UKHSA data about minus 400% efficacy of “vaccines” as death rates between the populations converge. The recent report highlights that the 18-80 range show a 30% rise of “cases” (positive tests) among triple “vaccinated” versus 15% among the “unvaccinated” and those with a “mere” one to two doses.
I mention this not to get a thrill out of the complete collapse of rationale for “vaccination”, even though Omicron and “Stealth Omicron” (even milder) have lain waste to Wuhan and other variants, (properly) vaccinating the planet as even Bill Gates had to confess in terms of Omicron’s impact.
I actually reiterate this to say that complete bosh will be cited as “rationale” for utterly stupid prescriptions, and if we just sway and swoon, we deserve the “collapse via incantation” we’ve been suffering as a society.
It has been a rough road, pseudo-pandemic producing a very real global crisis. The Ukraine conflagration, stoked to a frenzy, until truly martial fever renders sanity or balance, moot.
Whatever is next, requires our capacity to think beyond soundbites and panic porn, the fog of war and the heat of war, to creating the future.
We must beware being “grateful” to have restored the liberties that were never anyone’s to take away, or to freeze, and to now allow to “trickle back.”
There is only collective shame here and we need purposeful, impassioned outrage.
It is not anyone’s job to tell us what to think or feel about war or peace, or what matters or what doesn’t.
We must find our heads again, and our hearts, and we must sally forth, as a community, committed to the value of the human experience, redefining both our humanity and our freedom.