How many are still invested in the pandemic that would so overwhelm New York City hospitals that university dormitories, hotels, the sprawling Jacob Javits Convention Center and the United States Navy hospital vessel Comfort would all be deployed and depended upon? The pandemic that would be the very worst thing since Spanish Flu in 1918, when people who were fine in the morning allegedly dropped dead riding in the saddle of their horse that afternoon?
By ERIC F. COPPOLINOI WONDER HOW MANY believers in the pandemic exist: not the pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of something that is actually happening now, but rather the one we were sold in February and March.
The problem we face today is that political leaders, vaccine makers, the media and a large portion of the population are living in the past, in a time before the crisis was understood and claims about it could be subjected to verification.
Today, eight months after the first lockdown, we know more. It seems we know everything we need to know. At the beginning, I was cautious in my approach, assuming the worst. Now the data is in.
Yet how many people still live in the pandemic where 30% to 70% of the population would become infected, and up to 3% of those would die, resulting in the demise of many millions of otherwise healthy people? (The initial estimate was 2 million dead in the United States.) How many believe in the one where it was when, not if, every person would get sick?
How many still believe we have a novel virus loose — one never before seen, to which nobody is immune?
How many believe in the pandemic where, as a result, we had to flatten the curve, because that was all we could do, since there was no prevention, no cure and no immunity, so we would have to do our small part and make our small sacrifice?
How many still believe in the pandemic with super-spreader events, and little kids killing their grandparents by breathing?
The Unseen Bat from Parts Unknown
Who still believes in the pandemic that started spontaneously when an unseen bat of uncertain species from parts unknown allegedly encountered some other unidentified animal somewhere in a fish market in the heart of a Chinese city, at an unknown time, supposedly facilitating zoonotic transmission conveyed to humans by some means unidentified and undocumented?
Which alone instantly resulted in an outbreak spreading uncontrolled through an entire province of China, across Europe, and to the United States and Canada (but somehow sparing Africa and much of India)?
How many believe in the pandemic we were told took everyone by surprise? The one discussed in detail, during Event 201, held in Manhattan in late 2019. The one that nobody planned for because they could not possibly see such a thing coming. The one that the Rockefeller Foundation has been talking about for a decade. The one that hospitals were not ready for. The one Anthony Fauci said was a sure thing.
How many are still invested in the pandemic that would so overwhelm New York City hospitals that university dormitories, hotels, the sprawling Javits Convention Center and the United States Navy hospital vessel Comfort would all be deployed, depended upon and possibly overrun? The pandemic where sick people might get turned away from hospitals, which is against federal law?
The pandemic that would be the very worst thing since Spanish Flu in 1918, when people who were fine in the morning allegedly dropped dead riding in the saddle of their horse that afternoon.
The one we were told with total certainty was caused by a virus that had been isolated and purified and could be precisely identified by its genetic code, and was found with total certainty in any person who had taken ill. The one we’ve been told passed Koch’s and Rivers’ postulates, the scientific principles of microbiology, proving that the real problem was understood.
Then There’s the Pandemic We Actually Got
The pandemic that actually happened and that we are told is happening strains to infect 3% of the population even in a “hot spot,” most of which are not actually infections. A study of 10 million people in the Wuhan area, published this month by the journal Nature, has found that there is no observable spread from asymptomatic people.
Most people don’t notice if they have “Covid disease.” A few others say it gives them the sniffles like a cold or allergies, and a few say was like a very bad flu or respiratory infection. It has a 99.8% survival rate, except in those over 75. This indicates widespread immunity. Nobody has fallen off their horse in mid-afternoon. (Please see additional infection fatality rate info here.)
It’s true that some people are having a rough recovery. That is true even of influenzas — though we rarely pay attention to that, much less obsess over it.
As with any respiratory illness through history, the vulnerable — those very sick and elderly — can lose their lives to it. The same is true of food poisoning and influenza.
Reported deaths are weighted heavily toward people 65 and over — mostly older. Most are at or above life expectancy, and those who die are overwhelmingly already very sick (both — older and immunocompromised, and medicated for two to three diagnosed life-threatening diseases). One hundred thousand people are said to have died in nursing homes, in the United States alone. That is a very specific population, and pointing to another problem we cannot allow to be covered up by claims of “Covid.”
If hospitals are overwhelmed, which has not been demonstrated, it’s because they are designed without sufficient surge capacity. A system without surge capacity is going to be stressed and tested even during a relatively minor event.
Johns Hopkins Publishes Analysis of CDC Data: No Excess Deaths in 2020
The claim is often repeated that there are unusual excess deaths this year, used as irrefutable proof of a pandemic (even that is not true, but please read on). This weekend, Johns Hopkins University in Maryland — as close to the core medical establishment you can get — reported the contrary: according to their research into data already published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), there are no excess deaths in 2020. This cause such an uproar that the university retracted its own study and restated the official party line of CDC.
Meanwhile, the device that supposedly tests for “Covid” was supposed to be the “Gold Standard” and is still claimed to be. The actual test being used, however, has a false positive rate of anywhere from 50% to 90% according to what are considered reliable published sources — and 100% false positives, based on several past incidents widely reported and carefully documented at the time of a 2006 incident.
If hospitals are overwhelmed, which has not been demonstrated, it’s because they are designed without sufficient surge capacity. A system without surge capacity is going to be stressed and tested even during a relatively minor event. This time of year, it is normal for hospitals in the Northern Hemisphere to experience a sharp increase in people admitted for respiratory cases.
When we go looking for evidence of the virus said to have killed more than 300,000 Americans, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) admits that no purified isolate is available. (Canada and the UK admit the same thing.) I recognize that there are entities claiming to have isolated and purified the virus, though if that is the case, why does CDC say it has none of it? If anyone would have it, they would.
They make this admission in a specific context: a gene-edited sequence is being used to “mimic [a] patient specimen” in the match-up and magnification machine known as the PCR, or polymerase chain reaction. This sequence, falsely said to be unique to a novel virus, does not exist in nature as a specific virus, and yet millions of people are coming up “positive” for it and are being told they have an infection and a disease. What exactly are they testing positive for? What disease could be caused by a virus that exists only as algorithm?
The Radically Inflated False ‘Case’ Count: The Casedemic
What we are told is the “case count” of cases that are not cases, is inflated by up to 90%, and even 100%, due to fraudulent use of the polymerase chain reaction as the “test.” Per its own government authorizations, the PCR cannot test for an infection, cannot detect live virus and cannot diagnose a disease.
The Supreme Court of Portugal ruled that the test is so unreliable it cannot be used to quarantine people.
The device finds what are claimed to be genetic fragments of virus that are based on a cycle threshold: the more cycles meaning the longer it is left on, the more “positives” it gets — and there is no standard used. Any state or jurisdiction can use whatever cycle threshold it wants, without stating the number. When a person tests “positive” they are not told the cycle threshold that got the result.
This device, invented in 1983 as a research tool, not a diagnostic tool, is being pushed past all technical, rational and ethical limits. In testing for “Covid,” it’s usually set to from CT 40 to CT 47, when even Anthony Fauci has admitted that above 35 cycles, “all you get are dead nucleotides.” So why are so many places using up to CT 45?
These are now facts widely reported in the mainstream press after being “conspiracy theories” in the alternative press for six months. But this is not news. Problems with the PCR’s false positive rate have been widely known since at the latest 2007, when false epidemics based on use of the PCR were reported in The New York Times and the issue was part of the national record. If we go back to the 1990s, SPIN magazine did this story many, many times.
If the PCR were turned down to 35 (or a more reasonable 20 or 25), the “pandemic” would vanish, and we would be left with a few sick people who need to be treated, and vulnerable populations who need to be cared for. There would be no lockdowns, distancing, or asymptomatic carrier drama — all of which is justified by false “cases” that are harmless to the person tested and everyone around them.
Assuming there is a pandemic, a concept with a specific definition and that deserves scientific and medical scrutiny, the pandemic we have is not the one we were told was coming.
Yet we are acting under the assumptions and horrific predictions of early March, even with a solid eight months confirmation that, at worst, those assumptions were all wrong — all of them, every last one. That has not stopped those responding to this much-reduced threat demolishing everything in their path. It’s time to ask why.