“In their studies they employed a standard influenza model. Namely the ferret. The virus was modified to allow for aerosol transmission to one another. One of the causes of the public misunderstanding was the widespread belief that the virus that was transmitted by aerosol from one ferret to another, actually killed the ferrets. When in fact, that was not the case“.
~ Dr Anthony Fauci, Opening Statement to Congress 2012, On the risk of dual research (gain of function)
It seems clear that some of the strongest public proponents of the COVID-19 lockdowns, know clearly what they are doing. This quote by Dr Fauci seems in line with the MERS quote by Christian Drosten in 2014, describing the faults associated with PCR testing, which he helped establish as a pandemic diagnostic tool across the globe only six years later. In both cases, leading figures in the COVID-19 pandemic describe the ease with which public perception can be influenced by simple but erroneous assumptions. People with scientific knowledge combined with unchecked power may not always use that knowledge for the good of society. Especially not when they have something to gain. Dr Fauci has close associations with Big Pharma which seem a direct conflict of interest for one advising on pandemic response. To unquestioningly accept advice because the person giving it holds a position of authority, has potentially appalling consequences. To attack those asking questions as conspiracy theorists when in fact, asking questions is the basis of scientific inquiry, seems a direct attack on modern civilisation. It’s astounding to see scientists leading the fight for freedom, but easy to understand why they are.
New Study Shows Potential for Serious Harm in Covid-19 Vaccinated. This article describes in detail, why the information in this infographic may be of concern.
It seems a requirement for every conversation about vaccines today, to qualify that asking questions or expressing concerns about one particular vaccine, is not an “anti vax” stance. Interest in the safety and efficacy of vaccines, and the risk profile of those being recommended vaccination, is very basic public health. Mass vaccination of the entire globe without risk-benefit analysis is not a normal approach. Particularly not for a disease with very clear risk stratification. And particularly not with experimental vaccines that remain in trial phase. The history of powerful companies aggressively marketing their products deserves consideration. Is the evidence strong that public health is at the centre of their behaviour?
For example, independent journalist Jordan Schachtel reports on bioMerieux founder and Moderna CEO, Alain Merieux, at this Twitter thread. It includes significantly concerning information which suggests Merieux does not have public health at the forefront of his motivations.
Whilst the pharmaceutical giants control the pandemic response, and public perception of it, scientists galore continue to speak out. There are many, one recent interview being the retired Swiss Professor Emeritus of Immunology Dr Beda Stadler, talking with Irish podcaster Ivor Cummins. Near the end of a prolonged period in an induced coma in hospital recently, Stadler contracted COVID-19. His doctors reported that he experienced one or two days of mild fever and Stadler reports now-disappearing taste alterations. The interview is 1h20m long, but a few of Stadlers’s points are:
- Every virus constantly mutates;
- Every mutation is less dangerous than the original and mutations should be celebrated, not feared;
- SARS-CoV-2 is on track, towards normal cold virus;
- PCR positive cases do not represent sickness and using PCR to diagnose disease is misplaced;
- Vaccinating the already-immune causes stronger side effects without adding value;
- Fear has driven many people into desperation or worse;
- Most people will not experience symptoms following exposure to SARS-CoV-2 virus due to “de facto” immunity;
- There is no evidence to support the idea of disease transmission occurring via people who have no symptoms;
- Protection of the vulnerable as a public health response would have saved the enormous costs of lockdown;
- Every new finding about this virus leads to new panic, instead of recognising that opinions of scientists must be supported with evidence; but the politicisation and corporatisation of science has interfered with the scientific method;
- Many COVID-19 attributed deaths likely died from other causes;
- Even someone like Stadler – elderly with many risk factors – can survive a Covid attack.
I’ve thought long and hard about the phrase “evil triumphs when good men do nothing“. My conclusions are summarised by two collaborating features of human nature: an effective act of evil men throughout history has been to convince the masses that their intent relates to promoting public safety; and good people are often quick to dismiss awkward truths in favour of comfortable lies.