stock here. So I am going to admit that I really get confused when I read about COVID deaths, I think “vaccine deaths” and sometime vice versa. It occurred to me that deep down, my subconscious who has more time to process and less time in the “real world” of our trials and tribulations, knows very well that COVID and the VXX are, if not the exact same thing, then at least 1st Cousins.
For instance, I saw this and thought Wisconsin is inflating their death numbers, how can they have Half of ALL of the Deaths reported by the CDC?
When the sunspots in the southern hemisphere exceed those in the northern hemisphere (of the sun) its time to rock and roll….Earthquakes and Volcanos
Read the caption under the first image. That will explain how the year 536 was the longest duration of south exceeding the north, the integration of the individual deltas. Note in C4 about year 503 there was a higher peak but it was quite isolated.
We have long spoke of how fast moving space rocks cause earthquakes and therefore vulcanism even if they are not large. The speed matters most.
Story below copied and not verified by me, but it is interesting.
In 535/6 AD a piece of comet (possibly from Halley’s Comet) passed over Britain, impacting or exploding over the Norwegian Sea . It would have scorched the land, killed the people and other life in most of Britain except for the valleys in Wales and Scotland. About 450 to 500 years later after the wildlife had recovered, the sparsely populated area (now called England) was resettled (not invaded) by the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, from the area now called Demark and northern Germany.
The Jutes are probably the origin of “Judaeans”, (now called Jews) of the plagiarised Bible stories.
England (Angle land) got its name from the Angle settlers, originally a fishing people (anglers).
Saturday, April 15, 2017
We present results from a three-dimensional Babcock–Leighton dynamo model that is sustained by the explicit emergence and dispersal of bipolar magnetic regions (BMRs). On average, each BMR has a systematic tilt given by Joy’s law. Randomness and nonlinearity in the BMR emergence of our model produce variable magnetic cycle.
Variability in sunspot number (SSN) in STABLE dynamo simulations of the solar cycle image
Variability in sunspot number (SSN) in STABLE dynamo simulations of the solar cycle using the observed random scatter in sunspot pair tilt angle of 15 degrees. (a) 19 magnetic cycles are highlighted with red and blue representing the northern and southern hemispheres respectively. Red shaded areas indicate periods when the SSN in the north exceeds that in the south and blue shaded areas indicate the opposite. (b) Long-term SSN variability in the same simulation, exhibiting extended periods of low and high activity analogous to grand minima and maxima. Black and red indicate northern and southern hemispheres and the dotted line shows the observed SSN for the Sun, averaged over the last 13 cycles, for comparison.
However, when we allow for a random scatter in the tilt angle to mimic the observed departures from Joy’s law, we find more variability in the magnetic cycles. We find that the observed standard deviation in Joy’s law of 15 degrees produces a variability comparable to observed solar cycle variability of ∼ 32%, as quantified by the sunspot number maxima between 1755–2008. We also find that tilt angle scatter can promote grand minima and grand maxima. The time spent in grand minima for a scatter of 15 degrees is somewhat less than that inferred for the Sun from cosmogenic isotopes (about 9% compared to 17%). However, when we double the tile angle scatter to 30 degrees, the simulation statistics are comparable to the Sun (∼18% of the time in grand minima and ∼ 10% in grand maxima). Though the Babcock–Leighton mechanism is the only source of poloidal field, we find that our simulations always maintain magnetic cycles even at large fluctuations in the tilt angle. Furthermore, we find that moderate scatter in the tilts can enhance the efficiency of the dynamo, giving rise to stronger mean fields. We also demonstrate that tilt quenching is a viable and efficient mechanism for dynamo saturation; a suppression of the tilt by only 1-2 degrees is sufficient to limit the dynamo growth. Thus, any potential observational signatures of tilt quenching in the Sun may be subtle.
Submitted to Astrophysical Journal March 8, 2017.
The following are examples of Darkness to Light: What we decide now will determine whether Earth falls into another Dark Age for 13,000 years; (Half of a Galactic Cycle) or, whether we Inherit our destiny, in the Light, with the New Earth and a Bright Connection to The Father of Heaven Space.
Some of you may not understand my words. Some of this information may sound very airy-fairy. Just feel with your Heart and you‘ll be on the Path of Light.
Thinking with the Mind may confuse you? Look at the Planet now.
Does it feel like we are on the path to goodness and love?
Here are some guidepost terms to avoid following the Dark Path:
WOKE = Bad Awakened = Good
Tell-A-Vision = Bad (Global Mind Control) Independent Research = Good (Search with Duck Duck Go)
MSM = Bad Alternative Media = Good
Corporate Social Media = Bad (Twitter, Facebook, YouTube) Open Source Social Media = Good (Telegram, Signal, etc.)
Great Reset = Very Bad (Global Financial and Human Control System) Great Awakening = Good (The New Earth, Nesara/Gesara) Nesara/Gesara = Good (New Freedom Systems, Finance, Health, Transportation, Energy.)
Pharmaceuticals = Death Alternative Natural Medicine = Life
Governments = Slavery to Man We The People = Governed by God
May your Moccasins be Filled with Light as You walk among the Stars!
The promise of a system like this is intoxicating. You can learn new things easier, and get things done faster. Imagine all the time you’d save or how much farther you’d get going after your dreams.
But the reality is that this is dangerous. And it has nothing to do with cracking open your skull and implanting some metallic mesh over the top of your neocortex. Rather, it has everything to do with the amount of energy being pushed from the computer into your brain.
“If you receive any type of COVID-19 vaccine, you are not eligible to donate convalescent plasma with the Red Cross. However, you may be eligible to donate other blood products with the Red Cross including whole blood and platelets if you meet other donation eligibility criteria.
The Red Cross acknowledges that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration did update its guidance regarding convalescent plasma donor eligibility related to those who receive a COVID-19 vaccine. We are evaluating the feasibility and timeline to implement this complex update, alongside the evolving hospital needs for COVID-19 patients. Please know, the Red Cross is committed to building a readily available inventory of convalescent plasma to ensure patients battling COVID-19 have all treatment options available to them.”
THREE IMPORTANT POINTS:
1. It clearly states that the vaccinated are not “eligible to donate convalescent plasma with the Red Cross…”
2. It mentions a complex update by the FDA, referring to the latest FDA Guidance allowing the vaccinated to donate plasma if they had Covid within the six months BEFORE getting the vaccine. But the Red Cross has now stopped accepting all convalescent plasma, which makes NO SENSE in light of point three below.
3. It concludes: “Please know, the Red Cross is committed to building a readily available inventory of convalescent plasma to ensure patients battling COVID-19 have all treatment options available to them.”
So, as of June 12, 2021 (and probably after, but that’s the last Way back snapshot as of today), the Red Cross did not have a readily available inventory of convalescent plasma.
But at some point between June 12, 2021 and today, the Red Cross CHANGED the manual to read:
“The FDA allows people who have received a COVID-19 vaccine to donate dedicated COVID-19 convalescent plasma within six months of their infection of the virus, based on data that antibodies from natural infection can decline after six months however, the Red Cross has discontinued our convalescent plasma collection program.”
1. I find it hard to believe that the Red Cross would just abandon the convalescent plasma program now. How do they know how much plasma the world will need going forward. Are they saying the pandemic is waning?
It seems that the more likely reason they abandoned the convalescent plasma program is that they didn’t think it feasible to implement the complexity of mixing into the inventory, the safe and effective plasma of the unvaccinated, with the plasma of those vaccinated who met the stringent FDA guidelines requiring that the vaccinated plasma must only come from those who had Covid within six months PRIOR TO getting the vaccine, as demanded by the FDA guidelines stated here:
Faced with a choice of continuing to bar the vaccinated from donating convalescent plasma, and trying to implement the complex FDA requirements, they chose to abandon the program, so that now they can muddy the water and contribute to the scam that everyone should be vaccinated. It’s OBVIOUS that the policy of the Red Cross in preventing the vaccinated from donating was EXPOSING the truth about corruption of vaccinated plasma.
2. Note that the Red Cross manual also fails to mention that the FDA requires, for convalescent plasma donations from the vaccinated, that they have been diagnosed with Covid BEFORE getting the vaccine. This is the CRUCIAL POINT that everyone needs to share with their people:
ONCE YOU HAVE BEEN VACCINATED, you are FORBIDDEN by the FDA from donating convalescent plasma if you didn’t get Covid before being vaccinated. And if you get Covid after being vaccinated then recover, your plasma will NOT contain the antibodies necessary to heal other patients sick with Covid. This means that ALL VACCINATED PEOPLE cannot produce the necessary antibodies some time after the vaccine, and those who had Covid before the vaccine will also not be able to produce new nucleocapsid antibodies after receiving the vaccine.
This is why it is now imperative that there be alot of unvaccinated people in the world. If everyone gets vaccinated, then nobody will be able to achieve natural immunity and we will be reliant forever on the vaccine.
Vaccinated people infected with the virus are much less likely to need
to go to the hospital, much less likely to need intubation and much less
likely to die from the illness. There’s no doubt that vaccines provide
And this lie, OK what percent of waning is waning? A handful of Spanish flu still living still have anti-bodies, 100 years later. It is NOT COMMON. And when you are runing man on man defense “Spike S Protein” response team, versus Zone Defense (natural immunity and via infection), you are much more at risk is the “man” changes.
It’s also common for some aspects of viral immunity to naturally wane over time.
And this lie, oh and how convenient that the CDC stopped tracking “breakthrough cases” on purpose, Seriously, they did. But there is still a lot of knowledge. Its a cover, so they can continue their agenda.
Just how common are breakthrough infections? It’s anyone’s guess.
is generally the case that we have to make public health decisions
based on imperfect data,” Frieden said. “But there is just a lot we
And from another Bloomberg Article. 100 “cases” per 100,000 when they are certainly back pumping their PCR at 40 cycles to get lots of false positives. Compare this to 800 DEATHS per 100,000 in the Spanish Flu.
Perhaps the UN wants to hide the Fertility Elephant in the room, until it is beyond obvious.
And my new expected meme, maybe playing out now already, is that Population dropping is normal and healthy.
The States with the highest vaccination rates also showed some of the largest drops in fertility
The December declines were led by states like California, which experienced a19% dropthat month. In the second half of the year, New Mexico, New York, Hawaii and West Virginia also posted substantial decreases, ranging from 8% to 11%.
Oh the mentioned meme has just been found, in the Durango Herald. Ya think they might have more common sense in Durango….but no they want to depopulate to “fight climate change”, on my.
“Unfortunately, the results do not mean that nature will save us from
climate change”, stresses Dr. Gernon. “Today, atmospheric CO2
levels are higher than at any time in the past 3 million years, and
human-driven emissions are about 150 times larger than volcanic CO2
emissions. The continental arcs that appear to have saved the planet in
the deep past are simply not present at the scale needed to help
counteract present-day CO2 emissions”.
It’s Waves of Terror that destabilize the masses, I wonder which wave we are on now?
One thing is clear, for almost 1.5 years now I have been predicting large amounts of deaths if a vaccine was distributed for SARS-2 (aka COVID). As happened with all the attempted vaccines for SARS-1.
It’s called Antibody -Dependent Enhancement
The CDC and NIH and MSM is completely ignoring this, although it was well known and clearly called out in numerous science journals, including this one from April 2020.
Epiphany today: The “Booster Shots” are guaranteed to happen with zeal, and they will make the ADE even worse as we head into flu season. So the timing is “perfect” if death and destabilizing of society is your goal. ADE can happen when challenged with ANY Corona-Virus, and the flu is a corona virus, although lib types like to immediately argue with their limited knowledge and inability to do adequate research that the flu is NOT a corona virus, because it is caused by the influenza virus. Sorry libs, The Influenze Virus is a Corona Virus.
I downloaded the complete available list using Medalert, a superior database processor compared to the VAERS report runner.
I was surprised to see that Pfizer was doing 90% of the deaths. They must be the most trusted, the chosen ones to create the death batches. Pfizer had 158 Batches that killed at least one person, but some batches killed 10 people in just 20 days.
Also noted, “they” are no longer presenting the State of the death. This information is too damning and it proves that this is a giant depop experiment. They are figuring out which bioweapons work best on which demographics.
In August we caught them shipping test “killer batches” all over the States. In August, they stopped reporting the State of the Death. And thus the “bad actor” States can act bad more easy
SOTT Editors: We are publishing below, with permission, an email from a top executive at an American company whose clients include 100 of the Fortune 500 companies. The email was sent in reply to another executive asking for the writer’s thoughts on whether he plans to be vaccinated himself or mandate it for his employees as a requirement for returning to the office. All names and company references have been redacted for privacy reasons.
Unlike most of us who are worried about being on the receiving end of vaccine mandates by employers, this executive also has to worry about pressure from other executives and investors to mandate it on others. Few such business leaders are actively fighting for the rights, dignity, peace, and financial security of their employees. This exec is currently the only voice in his company opposing the madness.
Email to the executive:
Hey [REDACTED] – are you giving any thoughts to getting vaccinated with all this Delta variant stuff going on? We’ve been having management committee discussions here about mandatory vaccinations to be able to come in to the office. We have office support people coming in most days that are not vaccinated and some of those with kids don’t want to come in when they are in the office or invite clients into the office for meetings. Just curious as to how you are approaching it. Thx, [REDACTED]
The executive’s reply:
From: [REDACTED] Date: Fri, Aug 27, 2021 at 9:56 PM Subject: MY POV on Mandating Employee Vaccinations To: [REDACTED]
I appreciate you reaching out. What follows is admittedly lengthy (though I do provide my “summary POV” a couple paragraphs down before I dive into supporting detail). I tried to be succinct, but practically speaking your question for me was akin to “hey, so what’s your take on management?” The analogy here being I’m passionate about both subjects so it was hard to choose between sending back a brief 2-minute POV, or filling this email with enough content fit for a university level course. I didn’t know what you had an appetite for, so I just simply did my best to try and be helpful (and heck, even had some fun while I was at it…).
My framework for this entire POV: in the famous words of W. Edwards Deming, “In God we trust. All others must bring data.” As I hope you’ve come to know me by now, I care more deeply about facts & morals than I do ideology or identity politics (for the latter I just don’t give a shit). If you give me a good reason to do something, I am 100% all over it. But if you give me either faulty reasoning or an unethical ultimatum, I simply cannot get on board out of a moral obligation to do what’s right.
So to answer your questions with that sole framework in mind, here’s my summary POV:
(#1) I still have no plans to get vaccinated anytime in the foreseeable future (unless something radically changes the risk equation), given:
(a) The virus at present poses de minimis risk for me personally (and virtually zero risk to any healthy child (a reference to your initial inquiry)); and
(b) Because these vaccines carry –> confirmed low/moderate short term — inferred moderate medium term — and expected high long-term health risk for what could be [though yet unknown] a majority of individuals who get the jab
(#2) I remain vehemently opposed to vaccine mandates for this specific virus (primarily on the basis of (i) 1b above, (ii) the medical literature, which strongly suggests that these vaccines will prolong this pandemic indefinitely through never-ending variants, and thus/therefore (iii) on moral grounds, as, if (i) and (ii) are true, then any decision to proceed with mandates would be nothing short of a descent by the West towards fascism**, the likes of which hasn’t reared its ugly head since the early 20th century. Finally, at a distant, distant second, I am against these mandates from a logistical perspective*.
*E.g., how will you account for boosters (i.e., will those who were vaccinated too far in the past e.g., January and thus have substantially waning transmission protection also be excluded from the office)? What about those who got a different jab (e.g., AstraZeneca, Sputnik, CoronaVac, etc.), each of which has varying levels of effectiveness (and varying levels of effectiveness reduction over time) against different variants? How will you handle those that already had COVID-19 (and therefore (a) have even higher immunity than the vaccinated, and (b) who face higher health risks if they get vaccinated post- natural infection)? What will you do with the immunocompromised (folks with organ transplants, lung problems or cancer patients) who got the vaccine but have low viable antibodies because they require evermore booster shots? What will you do when future variants require different jabs? I could go on, but I trust you get the point. My real question for you is, will you be responsible for coordinating monthly/quarterly management meetings to update & maintain these ever-changing mandate policies covering ever-growing future use cases?
Last comments before I dive into supporting details
To not lose sight of being pragmatic as it pertains to your inquiry, I want to point out that at this juncture even a discussion about vaccine mandates is mostly moot.
We already know (confirmed) that those who are vaccinated/infected carry as much viral load as the unvaccinated. Which, coupled with waning transmission prevention efficacy means for all practical intents & purposes those vaccinated and those unvaccinated pose similar risks to one another.
And this is notwithstanding even more cutting edge research (not even yet published i.e. currently pre-print in The Lancet), which suggests those vaccinated carry significantly(upwards of 200x) moreviral load than the unvaccinated (which would, if peer-reviewed, flip the risk equation on its head even further in that those vaccinated would pose far greater risk to one another than those unvaccinated). (And it is worth noting that this development would be consistent with what has been found with other vaccines — in this 2017 study, for example, it was assessed that those who were vaccinated for influenza shed 6.3x as much virus as those who are unvaccinated. Crazy stuff.)
All of this is to say, despite the nationwide pushes you’re seeing for private & federal workplace vaccination mandates (which may have made at least some sense much earlier on), such mandates are unfortunately no longer effective models at this stage, unsupported by what we now understand via the latest science. Instead, if you really want to make a difference in improving workplace safety at this juncture, I would suggest implementing either the 1st, or both, of the following policies:
(1) Everyone at the company must perform a daily (pre-commute) self-assessment health survey, whereby all individuals must confirm they are not exhibiting any of the known symptoms of COVID-19 (i.e., if you can’t smell, have fever/chills, shortness of breath, etc., you can’t come in to the office, period), without any pressure from management to respond they are symptom-free.
(2) (Optional) everyone, irrespective of vaccination status, must get tested weekly for COVID-19, such testing to be reimbursed by the company. If you test positive, you aren’t allowed to come in until you test negative.
You asked how we’re handling it, and I can tell you that we’re doing the first one at [my company], and I would recommend utilizing the second one for any in-person company events. That’s it. No mandates. Anything beyond that will lead you into a logistical nightmare (at best), foster a false sense of security as it isn’t effective (worse), and in my humble opinion, is purely unethical (worst of all, which I’d like to think is a decent enough reason not to do something) at this stage.
So anyways, all of the above is the summary of my current POV. What follows below is/are the supporting details for the conclusions I reached in my summary POV 1(a), 1(b), and 2(i) above, if you’re interested in the data.
Always happy to chat/update further as the saga continues ✌
P.S. if you’re going to skip Parts 1 & 2 below*, then no worries… I get it, I probably wrote far more than you were looking for. But if indeed you do skip them, try to make it to the ‘Closing Thoughts’ section way down below — I’ve sourced a nifty chart down there that might give your colleagues pause in their ongoing discussions about mandates before they consider the unvaccinated to be idiots for whom behavioral mandates are the only appropriate solution.
*Though I highly recommend Part 1 (where it says “TWO OTHER THINGS TO CONSIDER” (then scroll to find #2)) as this contains a suggestion for how to naturally protect yourself from COVID-19.
PART 1: RISK OF COVID-19 DEATH —> DE MINIMIS FOR ME
First I’ll address why I do not view COVID-19 as dangerous for me personally: from the CDC’s own data, available here, you can see current the Count of Cases and Count of Deaths by age ->
(Though before I go further, pardon me for abstaining from a lengthy discussion on the reliability of data from an organization that even Dr. Deborah Birx herself — (an individual who received a Meritorious Service Medal from the U.S. Department of Defense in 1991 and a Medal of Excellence from the CDC in 1994) — was quoted as sayingshe didn’t trust a single word from. Hmm, I wonder why she didn’t “trust” the data, could it be because they were —>overinflating “COVID-19 deaths”? <—… I digress.)
Anyways, according to the CDC, being 32, my “risk” stands at 0.14% (purely averages speaking, irrespective of the analysis below); a “starting statistic” you could call it.
The immediate issue with this data, unfortunately, is we’re only able to count cases with confirmed COVID-19 PCR (or other) test results, undercounting materially true case counts to date. As you might imagine, those asymptomatic do not test themselves regularly or out of nowhere. I mean, personally speaking, I am obviously not testing myself on any basis on any cadence — I’d only get tested if I had reason to. Thus is the reason, that the CDC already stated well early on in this pandemic that true case counts were “likely” to be upwards of 10x higher than we have documented (which they concluded based on widespread antibody testing).
Deaths in the U.S., on the other hand, are religiously tested for COVID-19, capturing the vast majority (if not nearly all) deaths, where a COVID-19 infection was present.
Using these two bits of information from the CDC, we can adjust for a “truer” baseline risk. Now, while I could exercise the luxury of taking on more than a 10x spread (because those younger tend to be more asymptomatic), I’ll be conservative just for the sake of it and just use the “10x average” figure. And so, a true starting statistic for me isn’t 0.14%, but a markedly lower 0.014%.
Next, we can use Exhibit B, taken right from the CDC website:
For… 5% of… [COVID-19] deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death.
Again, this is nothing new and has been known since very early in the pandemic, as you can see from this study for example listing the leading comorbidities as measured in NY as early as April 2020:
And herein lies my second issue with folks who preach to me that vaccines are necessary for my survival (the first being my initial lowly baseline risk).
Knock on wood, but I have no non- COVID-19 induced comorbidities — zero. My takeaway is just that: for someone like me, COVID-19 is mostly a virus known to exacerbate serious pre-existing conditions to the point of overwhelming the system definitively.
Put another way, imagine a motorcycle rider trying to assess their risk of death from riding (i.e., catching COVID-19). They see a study which puts the risk of death for those motorcycle riders who were (1) drunk (2) doing a wheelie on the highway (3) during a rainstorm, and (4) while texting with a friend (i.e., analogous to four comorbidities). It would be flawed reasoning for a rider who doesn’t do any of those things to put themselves in the same risk category as those who do. So while no one is saying motorcycles aren’t dangerous — they certainly are — they’re nowhere even in the vicinity as dangerous as riding while doing all the other things. Likewise, neither should a healthy teenager dwell on their COVID-19 risk with the same fervor as a 100 year-old morbidly obese individual with terminal cancer.
Okay, let’s revisit my personal risk again. First, I will ignore the 5% “no comorbidities” statistic above, because out of fairness I want to account for likely COVID-19 induced comorbidities like Respiratory Failure, Sepsis, etc. as well as possible ones like Renal Failure, Cardiac Arrest, and the like. So, let me simply reduce my risk not by 95%, but 57% (conservatively even rounded down further to a clean 50%), which removes just 1 non- COVID-19 induced comorbidity for my age group.
And just like that, my adjusted risk is downgraded to 0.0069% annually (annually, because it’s only once a year — after which time abetter-than-vaccinationnatural immunitykicks in for that season).
So what really is 0.0069%, you might ask? After all, we humans aren’t terribly good with numbers like that. To help you put it in perspective, consider that according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, your (or my) risk of dying from a freak car accident in any given year, is 1 in 5,407 or 0.018%.
Let that sink in: based on what we know today, I personally am 268% more likely to die in a car accident tomorrow (or any day this year) than COVID-19. But do you really think that in pre-pandemic times, the “1 in 5,407” statistic kept me locked up inside my house? You think even today (in the middle of a pandemic) that figure stops me from taking a leisurely drive to grab ice cream with my nephews? or catching a movie with my brother? or — God forbid!! — hanging out with and actually talking with my friends? No!, and it never could. Because life, my friend, is about dancing in the summer rain, not cowering in fear of getting struck by lightning. But hey, maybe that’s just me…
In any case, I want to come back to your comment about concerns your colleagues have regarding young children. When we look at the statistics available (table above), the results are even more stark: for kids aged 5-11, their odds of a fatal COVID-19 infection are 1 in 137,000 when you factor in asymptomatic cases. And again, we’re talking about a risk inclusive of those with comorbidities. For kids 5-11 who are perfectly healthy, you can consider their risk nil. Okay, well obviously it could never be actually zero, because we both know sometimes kids also fall off a bike and kill themselves — that’s life. But you don’t exactly see people running around freaking out over bicycles all day long, do you? Which is ironic as hell now that we’re on the subject, consideringalmost exactly the number of kids have died from bicyclesas from COVID-19 in the same time frame.
So when I hear about folks taking their kids for a bike ride on the weekend (how awful), or worse!, maniacally driving their kids for ice cream (putting those precious kids at 5,091% (51x) the risk of death as COVID-19), but then trembling at the thought of walking into an office the following Monday because there’s an unvaccinated person there, so they feel the need to demand forcing medical decisions on those people (like getting jabs with vaccines made by companies whose rap sheets (Pfizer, J&J) would satisfy essay requirements at most colleges, approved by an organization that finds safety issues in 1/3 of its drugs post-approval), I come to the simple conclusion that common sense has left the building — it’s mass hysteria.
Alright, enough beating the completely de minimis personal risk dead horse because the point is clear. But let me add two more small things before getting to the dangers of the vaccine:
TWO OTHER THINGS TO CONSIDER
The section above looked at the whole thing purely from a mathematical risk perspective with neither proactive measures in mind, nor accounting for simple and effective (though IMO criminally suppressed) treatment options available to thwart COVID-19 risk even further.
(1) First, on the treatment side. Look, I know there was the whole “orange man (Trump) bad, the FDA disagrees” political BULLSHIT thing going on. Like I said above, I do not give a shit about the political angle of any of this. I require data, and the data could not be more ironclad on the subject matter. I will simply leave these two links here, and avoid another 5 pages in this POV on why IMO this is being criminally suppressed by federal agencies:
First, Ivermectin (links to the studies: (Link A & Link B)). Summary table as follows:
Second, Hydroxychloroquine (link to the studies). Summary table as follows:
By the way, it is worth noting I have a friend right now who has COVID-19. He has felt like shit for the past week. I sent him the studies, and he bought Ivermectin 3 days ago without a prescription from a local store I pointed him to. After a week of feeling like shit, it took him less than a day to get close to symptom free. But hey, I am not a doctor, and “your mileage may vary.” There are a dozen other treatments in addition to the ones above that aren’t getting approved for mass application, either. Go figure.. I could send you the studies if you want, but anyways let’s move on.
(2) As it pertains to the proactive side — okay, sit tight because I’m going to perform a holy miracle here and give you one of several simple things you can do to essentially ensure never needing to worry about COVID-19 again. Not for you, not for the kids, and not even for the neighbor’s dog. Ready? Okay drumroll please… . Did you catch that? If you didn’t, I’ll decipher it for you. It’s your new friend Vitamin D.
The first study is striking all on its own and worth internalizing, but unfortunately it did group an entire category called “normal” into a single bucket. FYI “normal” is what the medical world considers to be ~20ng/mL. But that’s all it is as a level: normal… but far from what we want, which is excellent.
That’s where the second study becomes helpful. It puts the explosive nature of the findings into real perspective: at levels of 25ng/mL in the study, no severe or critical hospitalized outcomes were observed.While at levels of 40ng/mL or greater, there were not even hospitalizations.
Now personally, I regard it as nothing less than a crime against humanity that neither the WHO nor CDC are PUSHING these (and dozens other peer-reviewed studies on the subject) onto the forefront of our collective media screens. But as for the reason, I must digress, because again I could go down a long and nasty rabbit hole about perverted incentives in the system in terms of why you likely haven’t seen them.
In any case, here’s what is just so awesome for me… remember when we concluded I had a higher risk of crashing & dying from my trip to the local ice cream shop than from COVID-19? Well, it just got a WHOLE lot better, because my Vitamin D levels happen to be considerably well above 40ng/mL. Which means we need to be honest with ourselves and admit that I effectively have a ZERO clinically observed risk of death from COVID-19. I mean shit…. at this point really the only way I can die of COVID-19 is by having it and then getting into a car accident. Then sure, I will die “with COVID-19” (and, as you’ll recall from the link above, they would count it!).
So my advice is as follows: get your dang sunshine first thing in the morning. Do not lockdown. In fact, I’d argue it’s what caused so many deaths. People were heavily Vitamin D deficient from sitting at home all day, and it literally increased their risk of death instead of reducing it. And what the CDC did in this regard was at best negligently or at worst intentionally, criminal, and I have nothing but disdain for the way they went about that. Don’t even get me started on the youth suicides it led to, the increases in domestic violence, increases in drug overdoses, infanticide, denial of healthcare, and let’s not dismiss the whammy of the sheer economic devastation to jobs and small businesses the world over, the bleak economic prognosis for the poorest (how convenient), and the future impact of staggering U.S. debt right here at home. All caused by the incompetence or criminality of the CDC and WHO.
Honestly — my personal advice if you want to stop worrying about COVID-19 for the rest of your life (if you still even are), would be to follow the Dan Miller protocol. Each of his bits of advice is like an extra layer of bulletproof glass on top of Kevlar against COVID-19. And remind your colleagues, too, to stop relying on the “American way” of taking a pill to solve all their problems and blaming the unvaccinated. That is not only completely debunked now as I’ve demonstrated throughout, but it is weak morally. It’s high time we all do the hard self-work of making ourselves physically resilient, and stop feebly making outward demands of others to inject into their bodies vaccines that are only now being tested, in vivo, on large numbers of human beings.
Speaking of which… perfect segway.
(VERY BRIEFLY) PART 2: LONG-TERM RISKS OF [SPECIFICALLY] THE COVID-19 VACCINE –> HIGH
As I’m sure you’ll remember, a while back I mentioned I would send you a thorough, synthesized summary outlining the dangers of the COVID-19 vaccines and how the risks they carry far outweigh the risks of the virus itself. Unfortunately, I am not even a fraction of the way through the hundred plus pages of medical literature showing that conclusion — I’m still working through it. I absolutely feel terrible for not having lived up to my promise, though I’m sure you can appreciate the sheer herculean nature of synthesizing 7 months’ of research involving almost a thousand individual pieces of data, and weeks’ worth of video testimonials by researchers, all into something “succinct and digestible”, all the while working on [my company] in the middle of it all.
In any case, it would be disingenuous of me if I didn’t at least provide a sneak peak of a random assortment of links I had handy for why I will not get the vaccine (aside from the fact that COVID-19 poses no risk to me, per the first section):
Short & Sweet: Why non-lethal pressure on the virus is bad (versus natural immunity) -> Part 1 | Part 2
+100 more videos and podcasts on the subject to anyone who asks (unsynthesized, of course)
If you made it this far and checked out even any of the content, kudos. Most folks here in the Northeast stop listening to me once I say “hey, there’s something not right here in this data” or “I’m not too worried about COVID-19 personally”. They think I’m a nut. Now, if you’ve made it this far and checked out most of the content, then I already know you’re starting to wonder if you’re losing your mind, because boy do I have a club pass with your name on it, if you’d like one.
Alas, contrary to popular belief it’s far from a nut club, despite how strong the external pressure is these days to try to make it out to be the case. Rather, It’s a club filled with precisely the very people who we’re supposed to be listening to as a society:
The CDC would have you believing it is just the crazy and uneducated who are most wary of their (and the FDA/WHO’s) conclusions — you know, it’s all the rednecks down south! And they’re right, it is the uneducated (left of the chart). But it is disingenuous for them to try and ignore on the nightly news research like this out of Carnegie Mellon suggesting the biggest group of those most vaccine-hesitant happen to be the smartest folks in the world — the ones I’ve certainly not been ignoring, despite their being shamed, cancelled off of social media, and publicly silenced.
Put another way, I would only posit the simple question of when in the history of the world have you ever had thousands of scientists, doctors, and researchers, some of the brightest minds* in their fields around the world sounding an alarm, and the official response be to label them all as batshit crazy and prevent them from speaking?Hint. Personally, I can’t support it. A free society must allow all open discussion without ridicule well before we dare discuss collectively forcing medical decisions on people using actual threats against their autonomy. We’re too far past that Vietnam-level of government lying bullshit that results in unholy suffering for society for this barbaric nonsense to continue, and it’s time for this country to start acting like we learned something about the importance of asking questions. I simply cannot place any trust in the idea I’m not being lied to until every scientist worth their salt has had an opportunity to speak up freely, and the nature of their concerns investigated transparently. And neither should anyone else.
*Such a fun fact it is that among this ocean of scientist voices being smeared & erased from history are (1) the guy who helped invent mRNA vaccine technology, and (2) the former Chief Scientific Officer (CSO) of Pfizer (who held that role for 16 years and focused on respiratory illnesses), both of whom are saying we have to stop vaccinations at once for those who aren’t at actual high-risk with COVID, because for everyone else they’re not only toxic & dangerous but will be the very cause of this never ending pandemic. Now I don’t know about you, but I neither invented mRNA technology nor worked at Pfizer for 16 years as CSO, but if I did, I’d sure prefer the American people heard my concerns, you know, sans the childish smear tactics part. Until then, I will not — cannot — accept any mandates on moral grounds.
And so there you have it. My opinion on mandatory vaccinations at this stage: if this were the Bubonic Plague, I’d be the first in line to get the shot. Same for Polio, Tetanus, and a whole lotta other great vaccines. But for COVID-19? Let’s just say I wouldn’t even know what to tell Saint Peter at the Pearly Gates to apologize sufficiently if I — knowing what I know now — supported a mandate. Come to think of it, there’s a quote that comes to mind here that I think is a nice way to wrap up this write-up, and commemorate those who continue to protect the rights of society:
‘The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those, who in time of moral crisis, preserve their neutrality.’ ~ unknown
DISCLAIMER –> OBLIGATORY
I obviously have to say this before I sign off.
At the end of the day, I’m not a doctor, I do not have an MD, a Ph.D., or any other useful acronym. All I am is an individual who values truth above hysteria & ideology. I will go wherever the truth points me to without regard for what “side” that puts me on. If it’s a contrarian side, then shit I guess I’m going to have to get in some fights. If I’m on the side of the majority, I guess I’ll rest easy. But wherever it is, I’m willing to go there, and as I said in my opening statement and reiterated to the group — I will always remain open to thoughtful and productive dialogue and my POV on every topic is subject to change through lifelong reflection. All I ask for these days is for those who disagree with me to either have the sincerity to work with me using the scientific method to get the facts on this subject, or if they have no interest in that, to let me do it alone without the constant coercion, which is how I’m sure the folks in your office who are unvaccinated, feel.
Anyways, for the actual disclaimer part: we all have to make our own decisions, do our own research (though I’m always happy to keep sending stuff I come across), and take our own risks. Freak accidents can happen, and just like I wouldn’t want to be responsible for a car accident that happens if you decide to go to a particular ice cream shop I recommend, it is the same for anything I’ve sent above and anything you or anyone you may share any of the information with do as a result of it. Always seek and follow professional, accredited advice! <– the disclaimer part.
Anyone who sees the vaccine as having more benefit than risk, should absolutely take it. I agree 100% with an 85 year-old with five comorbidities getting the jab — shit if that was me, I’d be getting quadruple jabbed walking around with a gas mask. No really, I would. Because for them the virus is actually very dangerous. And I’ve recommended it for some that I know personally would benefit from the vaccine because they are at high risk. But that’s where it ends. And not a single, inch, further.
This is the last post before 10 years of Nukepro was censored from the Web.
You know you are over the target when they attack with force and speed, and no discussion, no review even though I requested a review.
You will need to open the Excel spreadsheet to truly comprehend that there are 100’s of experiments being carried out under the guise of “Vaccines”.
Its a huge file, over 20MB and has all the Data Related to Death in the VAERS system, well the parts that haven’t been scrubbed.
I analyzed by Lot / Batch and by US State. Seems odd to ship a single batch all over the country? Unless of course you wanted to test a bio-Weapon upon different populations to see how they work on that population.
And what if you wanted to make Red States more infertile, more quickly? After results from the first tranche of VXX come in, you would know exactly how to do it most effectively.
These are from a prior article, right click and open for a large view.
First chart, number of deaths is high in States that are swing states.
Second chart, percentage of deaths is high in independent “Trump States”