A computer virus with unknown origin has started infecting computers around the world, and spreading itself from computer to computer.
This particular computer virus has the ability to completely shut down a very small percentage of computers;
cause other computers to malfunction temporarily; and to keep most computers intact to continue spreading itself.
A person with a substantial criminal history linked to computer viruses convinces the governments of the world that he has a solution. It will cost $20 per computer, and the governments agree to pay this criminal to provide a patch for every computer on the planet.
There is very little testing to show that this new software update will actually work, or to prove that it will be safe to operate this software for a long period of time. But everyone is desperate, so the governments decide not to wait and they pull the trigger.
When the patch is ready, people around the world start downloading it to their computers. It’s a relatively small section of code, but this patch supposedly works with any operating system or computer.
As more computers are installed with the new patch, it becomes obvious that the computer virus can still infect these patched computers and these computers can still transmit the computer virus to patched and non-patched computer systems.
With this obvious defect, the governments tell people not to worry because the patch lowers the probability that their computer will malfunction if it does become infected. Most people accept this as a reasonable explanation and more people download the new software patch.
It also becomes apparent that a great deal of computers either malfunction or are completely inactivated within a short period of time after receiving the new patch, even though there are no measurable signs that the computer has been infected with the computer virus.
Because the governments have chosen not to take these patch-induced adverse computer events seriously, the general populace starts warning others about the risks of downloading the software patch. The governments begin a campaign to silence these people.
Even with a large % of the computers possessing the software patch, the virus continues spreading rapidly, and computers continue to malfunction or inactivate. It’s argued that this outcome is much better than the outcome if the software patch had not been deployed.
The criminal who designed the software patch is now wealthier than ever, and they continue pushing the governments of the world to peddle the software patch.
Other computer scientists from around the world have found several other relatively easy and obvious technology solutions to fix the problem, and have generated sufficient data to demonstrate that their solution is safer and more effective.
These technologists are systematically silenced and censored by mainstream media, social media, and the government. Many lose their reputations or jobs, but they continue to speak out because they know it is more important for the world to have access to an effective solution
It’s found that the initial installation of the software patch wanes in effectiveness over several months. Rather than launch a new more effective approach, the governments institute a periodic re-installation program with the original faulty, risky software patch.
New versions of the computer virus begin to spawn off at an accelerated rate. It’s found that the computer virus has a code built into it that imparts it with the ability to circumvent any efforts to stop its spread.
The observed changes in the code are not random, as they are directed specifically at circumventing the code introduced by the patch.
The software patch becomes less and less effective against these new computer virus variants that have circumvented the patch’s defenses. Eventually, a computer virus emerges that is completely resistant to the patch.
This new patch-resistant computer virus begins spreading around the world at a rapid pace as it blows through the patch.
This particular computer virus has the ability to completely shut down a very small percentage of computers;
cause other computers to malfunction temporarily; and to keep most computers intact to continue spreading itself.
A person with a substantial criminal history linked to computer viruses convinces the governments of the world that he has a solution. It will cost $20 per computer, and the governments agree to pay this criminal to provide a patch for every computer on the planet.
There is very little testing to show that this new software update will actually work, or to prove that it will be safe to operate this software for a long period of time. But everyone is desperate, so the governments decide not to wait and they pull the trigger.
When the patch is ready, people around the world start downloading it to their computers. It’s a relatively small section of code, but this patch supposedly works with any operating system or computer.
As more computers are installed with the new patch, it becomes obvious that the computer virus can still infect these patched computers and these computers can still transmit the computer virus to patched and non-patched computer systems.
With this obvious defect, the governments tell people not to worry because the patch lowers the probability that their computer will malfunction if it does become infected. Most people accept this as a reasonable explanation and more people download the new software patch.
It also becomes apparent that a great deal of computers either malfunction or are completely inactivated within a short period of time after receiving the new patch, even though there are no measurable signs that the computer has been infected with the computer virus.
Because the governments have chosen not to take these patch-induced adverse computer events seriously, the general populace starts warning others about the risks of downloading the software patch. The governments begin a campaign to silence these people.
Even with a large % of the computers possessing the software patch, the virus continues spreading rapidly, and computers continue to malfunction or inactivate. It’s argued that this outcome is much better than the outcome if the software patch had not been deployed.
The criminal who designed the software patch is now wealthier than ever, and they continue pushing the governments of the world to peddle the software patch.
Other computer scientists from around the world have found several other relatively easy and obvious technology solutions to fix the problem, and have generated sufficient data to demonstrate that their solution is safer and more effective.
These technologists are systematically silenced and censored by mainstream media, social media, and the government. Many lose their reputations or jobs, but they continue to speak out because they know it is more important for the world to have access to an effective solution
It’s found that the initial installation of the software patch wanes in effectiveness over several months. Rather than launch a new more effective approach, the governments institute a periodic re-installation program with the original faulty, risky software patch.
New versions of the computer virus begin to spawn off at an accelerated rate. It’s found that the computer virus has a code built into it that imparts it with the ability to circumvent any efforts to stop its spread.
The observed changes in the code are not random, as they are directed specifically at circumventing the code introduced by the patch.
The software patch becomes less and less effective against these new computer virus variants that have circumvented the patch’s defenses. Eventually, a computer virus emerges that is completely resistant to the patch.
This new patch-resistant computer virus begins spreading around the world at a rapid pace as it blows through the patch.
The people who chose not to download the patch to their computer are blamed.
Meanwhile, the governments are coercing people to upload the same ineffective, unsafe software patch, and to do so every several months. They are threatening people with loss of their job, or the ability to move freely in society.
When other more reasonable people warn that uploading the patch is risky and increasingly ineffective, the governments double down on their efforts to coerce people into downloading the patch every few months.
Meanwhile, the criminal software guru continues to increase in wealth at an obscene rate as computers around the world continue to malfunction or inactivate in response to the patch.
Meanwhile, the governments are coercing people to upload the same ineffective, unsafe software patch, and to do so every several months. They are threatening people with loss of their job, or the ability to move freely in society.
When other more reasonable people warn that uploading the patch is risky and increasingly ineffective, the governments double down on their efforts to coerce people into downloading the patch every few months.
Meanwhile, the criminal software guru continues to increase in wealth at an obscene rate as computers around the world continue to malfunction or inactivate in response to the patch.
Protocol for prevention and early treatment —-> https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/FLCCC-Alliance-I-MASKplus-Protocol-ENGLISH.pdf
Hospital treatment protocol —-> https://covid19criticalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/FLCCC-Alliance-MATHplus-Protocol-ENGLISH.pdf
This paper in nature posits a viable theory of why children are mostly unaffected by COVID. Immune memory generated by other beta coronaviruses (which cause the common cold) is cross reactive with certain portions of the spike protein that are similar between the current coronavirus (SARS-COV-2) and other endemic coronaviruses. The similar portions are shown in red.
.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-021-01094-x.pdf
.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-021-01094-x.pdf
Based on this data, our policy should be to accelerate the spread of the relatively benign omicron such that it rapidly displaces delta and other more virulent variants.
https://www.ahri.org/omicron-infection-enhances-neutralising-immunity-against-delta/
https://www.ahri.org/omicron-infection-enhances-neutralising-immunity-against-delta/
90 days post jab, you are more likely to be infected with omicron than if you had not been jabbed. The v. effectiveness rapidly declines and then becomes negative.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.20.21267966v3.full-text
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.20.21267966v3.full-text
This report from Robert Koch Institute report released today states that 95.58% of the #Omicron cases in Germany are fully vaccinated (28% of those had a "booster"), 4.42% are unvaccinated. I don’t read German, but others who do claim that is what this report says. It’s the first pdf link at the top. If anyone reads German and can verify, please comment.
https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Situationsberichte/Wochenbericht/Wochenbericht_2021-12-30.html
https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Situationsberichte/Wochenbericht/Wochenbericht_2021-12-30.html
www.rki.de
RKI - Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 - Wochenbericht vom 30.12.2021 (korrigiert am 5.1.2022)
Wochenbericht des Robert Koch-Instituts vom 30.12.2021 zu COVID-19
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
From the Canadian COVID Care Alliance. Why the vaccines are doing more harm than good. This is a video presentation based on their report. The link for the pdf report is here —-> https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf
Everyone should read this report and share it with others. From the Canadian COVID Care Alliance. Why the vaccines are doing more harm than good. I posted the video in a separate post above. The link for the pdf report is here —-> https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf
New research in Nature that shows one of the reasons why Vitamin D levels are extremely important.
New research provides evidence of an impaired vitamin D gene signature in CD4+ T cells in patients with severe COVID-19. Mechanistically, it is shown that vitamin D alters the epigenetic landscape of CD4+ T cells, as well as inducing key transcription factors such as STAT3, BACH2 and JUN that reduce levels of IFN-γ and increase IL-10. These changes generate pro-resolving TH1 cells that may be beneficial in resolving or preventing severe COVID-19.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-021-01098-7
New research provides evidence of an impaired vitamin D gene signature in CD4+ T cells in patients with severe COVID-19. Mechanistically, it is shown that vitamin D alters the epigenetic landscape of CD4+ T cells, as well as inducing key transcription factors such as STAT3, BACH2 and JUN that reduce levels of IFN-γ and increase IL-10. These changes generate pro-resolving TH1 cells that may be beneficial in resolving or preventing severe COVID-19.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-021-01098-7
If this paper from Columbia University proves to be true, there is something like 400,000 deaths caused by the COVID vaccine rollout. They perform a robust correlation analysis of public databases cataloguing all-cause mortality, and calculate an average Vaccine Fatality Ratio (VFR) of 0.04%, which means on average, 1 out of every 2,500 people die from the vaccine (the VFR varies significantly with age, so this is the population average). They estimate something like 150,000 deaths occurred by August, 2021. Based on their VFR, they calculate an underreporting factor (UF) of 20 for the VAERS database (which is consistent with other estimates of UF). Currently, VAERS reports 20,000 deaths, so multiplying this by the UF of 20 results in an estimated death toll of 400,000 people as of today. Based on the Infection Fatality Ratio (IFR)of the virus for different age groups, they calculate that the vaccine is causing more deaths than it is saving for children, young adults, and the healthy.
If this is true, then this could mean that the reported 90% Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) is really a false number because it is skewed by “survivorship bias”. What this means is that the vaccine kills people who would have probably suffered an ill fate if exposed to the virus due to some incapacity in their health status, and the people who survive the vaccine are relatively healthy and will survive a COVID infection at a higher ratio than the original population before they were subject to vaccination. This gives the “vaccinated population” an overall “apparent advantage” compared to the average unvaccinated population, and when they calculate VE based on the survivors, it weighs in the vaccine’s favor.
(Note for clarity: the “advantage” I’m talking about is survivorship bias. It’s an “apparent” advantage that shows up when you perform the VE calculations. If you kill off the unhealthy before calculating VE, those who were healthy before the vaccinations skew the VE in favor of the vaccinated. But the VE leaves out all of the people who died before the mathematical filter was applied. But, these vaccinated people who survive the filter still have to deal with the long range health consequences of the vaccine).
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Spiro-Pantazatos/publication/355581860_COVID_vaccination_and_age-stratified_all-cause_mortality_risk/links/619cb61007be5f31b7ad120a/COVID-vaccination-and-age-stratified-all-cause-mortality-risk.pdf
If this is true, then this could mean that the reported 90% Vaccine Effectiveness (VE) is really a false number because it is skewed by “survivorship bias”. What this means is that the vaccine kills people who would have probably suffered an ill fate if exposed to the virus due to some incapacity in their health status, and the people who survive the vaccine are relatively healthy and will survive a COVID infection at a higher ratio than the original population before they were subject to vaccination. This gives the “vaccinated population” an overall “apparent advantage” compared to the average unvaccinated population, and when they calculate VE based on the survivors, it weighs in the vaccine’s favor.
(Note for clarity: the “advantage” I’m talking about is survivorship bias. It’s an “apparent” advantage that shows up when you perform the VE calculations. If you kill off the unhealthy before calculating VE, those who were healthy before the vaccinations skew the VE in favor of the vaccinated. But the VE leaves out all of the people who died before the mathematical filter was applied. But, these vaccinated people who survive the filter still have to deal with the long range health consequences of the vaccine).
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Spiro-Pantazatos/publication/355581860_COVID_vaccination_and_age-stratified_all-cause_mortality_risk/links/619cb61007be5f31b7ad120a/COVID-vaccination-and-age-stratified-all-cause-mortality-risk.pdf
👍1
Meet Flurona, the next panic frenzy. Media is covering this one flurona case like crazy. Prepare for a combined mRNA vaccine that takes care of both flu and COVID.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1543223/covid-news-latest-flurona-israel-coronavirus-and-flu-pandemic-fears/amp
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1543223/covid-news-latest-flurona-israel-coronavirus-and-flu-pandemic-fears/amp
Thermonuclear weapons, climate change, viruses, and asteroid impacts are not humanity’s greatest threat.
Irrational hysteria is.
Irrational hysteria is.
Remember these numbers by Ioannidis (Stanford)? I think it’s safe to say that survivability for omicron is even better.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.08.21260210v1
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.08.21260210v1