Lies, Damn Lies, Omicron—and What Comes Next

We expect policymakers to lie to us.  There is only one rule in politics and that is to maintain power at all costs.  If lies result in maintaining power, then so be it.  When it comes to politics, I classify mistruths as either “lies” or “damn lies." The former is what I consider to be a lie of ignorance or negligence.  That is, a policymaker simply doesn’t know what s/he is talking about and makes something up, is misinformed, or should have done more research before opening their big fat mouth.

What’s worse is the “damn lie.”  That’s when the policymakers know they are lying.  Most of the time the damn lie is part of political theatre.  The lie is told to smear another politician or for some other feckless purpose. What’s unforgivable is when the damn lie is an attempt to knowingly perpetrate a fraud.  When it results in harm to the public, the damn lie is utterly reprehensible.

The lies emanating from policymakers and the media at the beginning of the Covid-19 fiasco were of the lesser variety.  Politicians simply didn’t know what they were talking about.   Now, however, these have become the most insidious form of damn lies in modern American history.  They have done incalculable harm.

Il Duce, Fauci.

Damn Lie #1: PCR tests are reliable.

In order to determine if a person has Covid-19, one must obviously be tested.  What’s so critical about this damn lie is that it is the primary motivator of fear as well as the statistic that most likely determines mitigation policy.

The problem with PCR tests is that they are extremely sensitive.  If even a tiny amount of virus is present, the amplification process of the PCR test may render a false positive value.  As many as 43 percent of all positive values in those who present as asymptomatic may be false.  A 50 percent positivity rate is no better than random chance, so a test that allegedly has a near-100 percent specificity is actually no better at determining an infection than a coin flip.

Thus, the “pandemic” may not be anything of the kind.  Not only is the case count rendered unreliable, we’ve never been told how many positive cases are asymptomatic.

Damn Lie #2: Death Rates.

The CDC has, until recently, been exceptionally slippery when it came to determining the number of deaths of people with Covid-19 as opposed to those who died from Covid-19.  There is no transparency to this data.  Part of the problem is that, as the CDC has admitted, there is a financial incentive for hospitals to report death from Covid in Medicare patients.

Now CDC director Rochelle Walensky has admitted that some three-quarters of Covid-19 deaths had four or more co-morbidities, which dramatically alters the picture of Covid the government has been pushing for two years:

Dr. Rochelle Walensky, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said 75% of people who died of COVID-19 had at least four comorbidities, sparking an outpouring of commentary from people surprised by her statement and others saying, "I told you so."

The top health official made the comment on ABC's Good Morning America on Friday, days after Dr. Anthony Fauci said on TV that statistics on child hospitalizations are being overblown. Vaccine mandate skeptics have said the COVID-19 death toll was inflated by people who died with COVID-19 as opposed to dying of COVID-19, and some of them claimed they were made into pariahs or punished on social media for making these claims.

Walensky's assertion means the 834,000 deaths in the United States that have been attributed to COVID-19 could be lowered to just over 200,000.

In other words, this "terrible pandemic" that is nowhere near as severe as we've been led to believe.

Who is that masked Walensky?

Damn Lie #3:  The Vaccines Work.

It is true that vaccine efficacy in the Pfizer and Moderna jabs are 95 percent effective at first.  The problem is we now know that such efficacy wanes over time.  Among many studies, this one from Israel demonstrated that protection waned in just a few months, and people then got infected with the Delta variant.  The Israeli data is particularly compelling because the small country’s centralized health care system is so efficient that it managed to get half the population vaccinated in just three months.  The study reported that:

The rate of confirmed infection among persons 60 years of age or older who became fully vaccinated in the second half of January was 1.6 times as high as that among persons in the same age group who became fully vaccinated in March. The data show a similar increase in rate with increasing time since vaccination in the other age groups. The rate of severe Covid-19 cases also increased as a function of time from vaccination.

Damn Lie #4:  Vaccine Mandates Are Necessary.

One lie begets another, so the fact that breakthrough infections occurred (and continue to occur in spades via Omicron) demonstrate that vaccine mandates not only were unnecessary, but they didn’t even work.

Damn Lie #5: Therapeutics Don’t Work.

Over and over again, studies showing that therapeutics such as hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin, and fluvoxamine may help those with Covid-19 were suppressed.  These therapies were not investigated at all, much less with the emergency authorization protocol afforded Big Pharma’s vaccines.  Only now are we finally learning of therapeutics going through the regular FDA approval process. Yet missing from these official and approved studies are the therapeutics listed above. Why not at least give these a fair shake in clinical trials?

Follow the bouncing ball...

Damn Lie #6: Lockdowns worked and were harmless.

The lockdowns did not work as far as preventing the spread of the virus.  Certainly the claim that they were necessary and did no harm is an even more insidious lie.  A University of Arizona study from April to September last year found an increase in hazardous alcohol use from 21 percent in April to 41 percent in September. Dependence rose from 8 percent to 29 percent. Increased use was higher among younger people. The CDC reported that “the proportion of mental health–related visits for children aged 5–11 years and adolescents aged 12–17 years increased approximately 24 percent and 31 percent.”

The National Commission on Covid-19 and Criminal Justice reported higher crime in the 34 American cities it examined, including a 30 percent higher homicide rate, aggravated assault up 6 percent, gun assaults up 8 percent and car theft rose 13 percent. This doesn’t even address the stunting of childhood development and destruction of hundreds of thousands of businesses.

All of these lies damaged America in myriad ways. Further, the global population is now more likely to become infected after receiving booster shots than the unvaccinated.  This may explain the Omicron surge -- and portend something even worse ahead.

Fauci—and the World—Agonistes

What are we doing? Policies that we continue to accept from those we hire to represent us and keep us free:

Yet we show no sign of terminating our acceptance of these policies. People refuse to listen to doctors using successful treatments, instead still listening to Dr. Anthony Fauci, who said in 2012 in answer to a question about the risk of a pandemic resulting from his gain-of-function research,

In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic? Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario – however remote – should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?

Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.

Dr. Monte in the house.

While the risk to him was and remains near-zero, millions around the world paid the ultimate price for a risk he took with their lives without their knowledge or permission. His policies are still killing us.

And still we listen to him as he not only changes his mind daily on the virus but demands vaccinating all of humanity against the very pandemic his use of our tax dollars created, using vaccinations from which his organization may profit, all the while refusing and rejecting proven, safe, FDA-approved drugs doctors are using successfully to treat it all over the world, but are prohibited from using here. Meanwhile...

NIH, on rejecting therapeutics:  "The NIH COVID Treatment Guidelines Panel reviews available information with an emphasis given to adequately-powered, well-conducted, peer-reviewed clinical trials;"

None of which was done for these "vaccines" that have killed thousands, have killed or permanently sidelined professional athletes in top shape here and across Europe, and of which we have zero knowledge of long-term effects.

Among the complaints about therapeutic drugs is that they are “off-label.” Yet, "an estimated 12 percent to 38 percent of prescriptions are written for FDA-approved drugs used "off-label" (including Botox and Viagra)." Viagra, due to its function of dilating blood vessels, recently is credited with saving the life of a dying Covid patient in England. One might ask, why is Viagra off-label okay, but doctors are losing their license for other FDA-approved drugs being prescribed off-label? And, why? One doctor reasonably asks,

If I'm wrong with the treatment I'm giving, people are still going to die. If I'm right, how many lives have we saved? How many can be saved? Why are we erring on the side of death instead of treatment?

In November 2020, nine months into the pandemic, Dr. Fauci co-authored an article in the authoritative Journal of the American Medical Association titled "Therapy for Early COVID-19: A Critical Need," in which he asserted that "interventions that can be administered early during the course of infection to prevent disease progression and longer-term complications are urgently needed." Treatments, he wrote, "must be safe with few adverse effects, easy to administer, and scalable."

Yet the NIAID, FDA, pharmacies and many doctors dismissed the efficacy of a number of drugs used around the globe for the interventions he requested, causing one doctor to note:

We could have prevented this tragedy for $1. Dexamethasone, 5 cents. Ivermectin, 1 cent. Colchicine, 50 cents. Aspirin, 100 pills for four bucks," he said. "If we had given people aspirin, ivermectin, colchicine, and if they get complicated, a little dexamethasone, we could have saved the world with one dollar.

One dollar.

Do the vaccines even work? Alex Berenson notes:

This absolutely brutal preprint from Denmark shows zero vaccine effectiveness against Omicron beginning two months after “peak” protection, and sharply negative protection three months out. In other words, vaccinated people were much MORE likely to get Omicron beginning about 100 days after the second dose.

A study from Canada is similar.

Other studies are showing the Omicron may be a good thing for the less-vulnerable. Its symptoms resemble the common cold and the recovered wind up with immunity to the full range of Covid-19 variants, rather than just the one part of the spike of the “vaccine.”

Our elites have done all this to us for money & power. By August, we had minted nine new billionaires in healthcare. By November it was 44. We have added billions of dollars to the accounts of already-billionaires Gates, Zuckerberg, Dorsey, and Bezos for doing nothing but keeping businesses closed and conversations censored.  (Windfall profits tax, anyone?). We have spent on this pandemic more than we spent to win World War II, a war fought for, rather than against, our liberties, a war costing Americans fewer lives than have resulted from this gain-of-function (virus weaponization) research.

The public enemy.

Even knowing as we do now that natural immunity (get it, treat it, get over it = immunity) is broader and stronger than these "vaccines," we still demand “vaccines” that raise the viral load of the vaxxed and turn them into spreaders and have, without exception spiked infections (the most-vaxxed countries are seeing the highest spikes in infections). Many still also demand masks that have been shown useless (and worse) in study after study, and allow politicians hired to protect our liberties instead to destroy them rather than adapt policies to the body of Covid science that has grown rapidly with the pandemic.

It is unconscionable to allow people to die in hospitals when one hundred percent of those “at death's door” receiving ivermectin on the order of a judge have recovered against the will of hospitals whose reason for existence is treatment. Once the first judge ordered the first hospital to provide ivermectin to a dying patient on whom all other treatments had been tried, and that patient recovered to live another day, all future in-hospital deaths of covid patients are on the hospitals refusing therapeutics - not the virus. One day soon this will be recognized by class-action lawyers and hospitals will find that the Nuremberg Defense won’t work for them, either.

Ask yourself why. Why no therapeutics? Why a mandated vaccine? Obviously, something is in play here, and it isn’t our health.

The Covid Policy Octopus Strangles Everything

Any fan of the James Bond films knows that S.P.E.C.T.R.E. is the nefarious global organization whose symbol was an octopus, because its influence extended everywhere, and it could manipulate world events.  If we didn’t know better, one might think Dr. Anthony Fauci’s gain-of-function research was actually a S.P.E.C.T.R.E. operation, because Covid has become a society-destroying octopus in ways that go far beyond making elderly people sick.

The foolish and unnecessary lockdowns will kill more people and create more suffering than the virus, thanks to both short-term and long-term effects on mental and physical health.

Cancer screening and treatment is one such area where the Covid policy octopus has done, and will do, tremendous damage.  Cancer screening in the U.K. was suspended and routine diagnostic work was postponed following the lockdown beginning in March of 2020; a British study reported sobering findings:

Substantial increases in the number of avoidable cancer deaths in England are to be expected as a result of diagnostic delays due to the Covid-19 pandemic in the UK. Urgent policy interventions are necessary, particularly the need to manage the backlog within routine diagnostic services to mitigate the expected impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on patients with cancer.

A plot worthy of a Bond villain.

Specifically, compared with pre-pandemic figures, the study estimated an 8 to 10 percent increase in the number of deaths due to breast cancer, a 15-17 percent increase for colorectal cancer, 5 percent increase; for lung cancer, and 6 percent increase for esophageal cancer. Translated, the total years of life lost is between 59,000 and 63,000. And that's just the U.K.

One can find incidents of increased cancer rates across the globe.  At the Weill Cornell Medicine Center in New York City, the number of lung cancer patients seen by medical professionals declined by half during the lockdown, and there was a “significant increase in the proportion of patients with Stage IV disease” after re-opening.

In Draconian New Zealand, the backlog for breast cancer screenings stands at 50,000 and there's been a 14 percent increase in skin cancer.  Another paper revealed that “screenings for breast, colon, prostate, and lung cancers were lower by 85 percent, 75 percent, 74 percent, and 56 percent, respectively” in April 2020.  That was just for a 6-week period at the start of this nonsense.

The entire world was already facing a mental health crisis prior to the lockdowns.  This was exacerbated by throwing people out of work for months, adding financial stress to already-vulnerable households, particularly low-income and minority households.

The Covid policy tentacles also reached far into the homes of domestic abuse.  A meta-analysis of 37 different studies showed a 7.86 percent increase in domestic violence, revealing that, “the stay-at-home measures have placed those most vulnerable to violence and abuse in close proximity to their potential abuser, and this may lead to a continued increase in the risk factors associated with domestic violence.”

That's using the old noodle.

Ya think?

There are 10 million incidents of domestic violence annually.  As if all this trauma and its mental and physical effects on victims weren’t enough, the lockdowns forced the abused right back into the home with their now-unemployed abuser. The mean increase, according to the meta-study, was another 76,800 incidents of violence, mostly against women.

Fueling this violence, as well as being a separate category of collateral damage, was the rise in hazardous alcohol use.  Another study found hazardous alcohol use increased from 21 percent among April 2020’s cohort to 40.7 percent for the September group. Alcohol dependence exploded from 8 percent to 29 percent.

She's fine, really she is.

We already know that Covid was harshest on the elderly, especially those trapped in nursing homes.  While everyone needs human contact, and the lack of it was unquestionably harmful to most people, the elderly suffered the most.  They are already isolated, often forgotten or disposed of, by our culture.  The lockdowns prevented  family from visiting them.  Grandchildren are a source of joy, optimism, and energy for so many older folks, and they were robbed of that resource.

Yet beyond that, the caregivers in these facilities were so busy caring for those with the virus, that those without it were sometimes neglected.  Inspectors and advocates could not visit and maintain proper working conditions.  This story from the Associated Press goes into sad detail on this travesty.

Hale and happy before the pandemic, the 75-year-old retired Alabama truck driver became so malnourished and dehydrated that he dropped to 98 pounds and looked to his son like he’d been in a concentration camp. Septic shock suggested an untreated urinary infection, E. coli in his body from his own feces hinted at poor hygiene, and aspiration pneumonia indicated Wallace, who needed help with meals, had likely choked on his food.

“He couldn’t even hold his head up straight because he had gotten so weak,” said his son, Kevin Amerson. “They stopped taking care of him. They abandoned him.”

The tentacles yanked children out of school for no reason whatsoever.  Not only are children the least likely to suffer any ill effects, but they have the lowest chance of mortality unless they are severally ill already.  The most vulnerable populations were, again, disproportionately impacted.

Young children not only require education, but a vital part of childhood development is seeing faces, reading cues, and simple social interaction.  They were robbed of all these things.  Worse, they were thrown onto computers to allegedly learn.  As if they weren’t already spending enough time staring at screens, now they were supposed to have long attention spans to absorb lessons.

Now imagine everything you’ve just read, and consider the long-term effects of each of these issues on each demographic as this insanity continues.  Then consider all the other vulnerable populations that weren’t even discussed.

It's not unreasonable to suggest that the government and media are policy terrorists. They struck terror in the minds and souls of Americans, particularly the most vulnerable.  Most of this data was available early in the lockdown, yet no changes were made. And now, in light of Joe Biden's speech today, it’s unconscionable. But it's going to continue unless and until the American people demand a stop to it.

Enemies of the People: Dr. Fauci

Who's Afraid of the CCP Vaccine?

It wasn’t George Orwell’s animals or calendar, or Ray Bradbury’s firemen or Anthony Burgess’ clockwork that ought to have worried us. No; it was Mary Shelley’s doctor.

Some animals always have been – and always will be – more equal than others. Though today’s “equity” totalitarianism denies this, studies of global population IQ are definitive. If the Left really thought we all were equal, they’d not be replacing Equal Opportunity with Equity, itself an acknowledgement of inequality.

A danger exists within “equity.” As Louis Marano notes in his review of Charles Murray’s new book, Facing Reality, a look at disparities between humans:

The disaster materializes if the white majority gets fed up, has had enough, and pushes back. Or, in Murray’s words, “when working-class and middle-class Whites adopt identity politics.”

One might recall what Admiral Yamamoto is supposed to have said after Pearl Harbor – another attack on the American society… "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve." He ought to know, since he planned the attack himself.

Welcome to the brave new world.

Today’s Left may be intrigued by the Brave New World idea of growing fetuses in a bottle and injecting different proteins to create a worker, a drone, a consultant or an elite – but they seem more interested in killing fetuses and babies. They aren’t worried about the constant telescreen – they carry one in their pocket.

Amazon already has perfected burning disliked books: Move the reader to Kindle and then alter or remove the content however and whenever desired without reader awareness. Or stop selling it, having run nearly all local retailers out of business.

We’ve been watching the clockworkian dystopia burn our cities, murder our cops and attack innocents for over a year – no one seems to mind; at least not enough to do anything about it other than increase the dosage in our soma by defunding cops, releasing perps with no bail, no charge, no trial to do it all again.

But Ms. Shelley’s doctor created a technology with which her society was unable to deal. The result was murderous. Our doctors today? Easy: Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey, Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Tony Fauci. The results are worse.

Eeek.

We aren’t talking about a single monster of technology turned loose to terrorize. No, we’re looking at real Frankenstein monsters, monsters of technology we are so far unwilling to control, attacking liberty and freedom and prosperity and the future - globally. We have, to our detriment, fallen in love with our monsters. Try to get a friend off Zuckerberg’s monster, or Dorsey’s. How many of us refuse Bezos’ wares to support local businesses?

Before our wonderful vaccine technology advanced so far that we don’t even need normal trial durations before turning it loose, we dealt differently with diseases.

I was born in the 1950s. I’m not anti-vax. My generation still has the scar on our left shoulder from smallpox vaccine. We ate a sugar cube laced with polio vaccine. But those were (and this is a term of art) “perfect” vaccines. We didn’t have vaccines for mumps (which, if a boy didn’t get it before puberty, might make him sterile) or German measles (which, if a woman got it during pregnancy, her baby stood a good chance of birth defects) or chicken pox (a mild form of herpes as a kid, a serious problem as an adult). What did we do?

Easy – when a kid got the mumps, all the parents sent their sons over to play and spend the night. When a kid got the measles… when a kid got chicken pox. It was, seriously, a party. Hang out with your buds, have some pizza, get sick, get over it, be immune the rest of your life.

But the BigPharma/BigGov response to the good Dr. Fauci’s function-gained bat flu technology has changed all that. Not only did we not have a party, we locked-up those with no chance of a serious illness or death so that we could not gain permanent immunity. And now we have a vaccine that is (another term of art) “leaky.”

The other good doctors of social media then refused any discussion not supportive of their – uneducated – narrative, including all discussion of decades-old medicines that showed positive results by the millions: Ivermectin and HCQ.

The doctor is our friend.

What is a “leaky vaccine?” This is a good piece describing “leaky” and “perfect” vaccines in layperson terminology. (emphasis mine)

The deadliest strains of viruses often take care of themselves — they flare up and then die out. This is because they are so good at destroying cells and causing illness that they ultimately kill their host before they have time to spread.

But a chicken virus that represents one of the deadliest germs in history breaks from this conventional wisdom, thanks to an inadvertent effect from a vaccine. Chickens vaccinated against Marek’s disease rarely get sick. But the vaccine does not prevent them from spreading Marek’s to unvaccinated birds.

“With the hottest strains, every unvaccinated bird dies within 10 days. There is no human virus that is that hot. Ebola, for example, doesn’t kill everything in 10 days.”

And how is the CCP Virus vaccine described? Stop me if you’ve heard this, but, per PBS,

Vaccines don’t always prevent infection,

and, per the CDC,

… people fully vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) are less likely to have asymptomatic infection or to transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others.

"Less likely." Sounds "leaky," right? These not-quite-a-vaccination “leaky” jabs allow the host (you) to continue spreading the virus, allowing it to get “hotter” (more lethal).

Ms. Shelley’s monster now is among us, let-loose by our new Dr. Frankensteins, with millennia-old, successful, practices of virus immunization rejected by the same “experts” who created it and who quash all discussion of alternatives.

Does Anthony Fauci Even Exist?

Dr. Anthony Fauci is likely the most celebrated, or most notorious, public figure currently claiming the lion’s share of national attention. He rose to the heights of prominence as President Trump’s ubiquitous medical advisor, preening for the camera during Trump’s press briefings detailing the progress of the COVID pandemic and the means to combat it. Fauci’s dictates and pronouncements were regarded as gospel and came to be a major determinant of the nation’s COVID preventive policies. He seemed infallible—until now.

Recently a tranche of Fauci’s emails as well as articles and letters were released via the FOIA and through open records requests calling his bona fides into question. We learn there, among other things, that masks are ineffective, that people should wear multiple masks, that the virus has a natural origin, that the virus may have come from a lab leak, that the NIH did not fund gain-of-function research, that the NIH funded through EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak a team of Chinese scientists who may have worked on gain-of-function experiments, and so on. (Chinese virologist Dr. Li Meng-Yan has added further weight to the lab-leak revelations.) 

The bordereau of planned evasions and collusive misdirections—as witness a “spectrum of correspondence” with such influential figures as Scripps Research professor Dr. Kristian Andersen (January 1, 2020), NIH Deputy Director Dr. Hugh Auchincloss (February 1, 2020), and others—is striking. The controversy is assuming epic proportions as Fauci’s presence and calendar of activities and decisions have polarized the country. 

Do I contradict myself?

In my opinion, all the fuss and bother about Anthony Fauci is nothing but a tempest in a beam-splitter. For Anthony Fauci does not exist. Rather, he is a gaseous exhalation of the Swamp, in effect a computer-generated hologram projected onto the public stage to advance the insidious project of the political left and the class of billionaire scavengers seeking to profit from the national malaise while advancing an agenda of oligarchic social control. 

Why this elaborate charade or pneumatic figment should have been created is another question and invites some speculation. Tom Woods asks: “Can it be that for some in the Establishment Fauci has finally worn out his welcome? Some 64 percent of independents say it's time to resume normal life. That's a big, big chunk of people for the Democrats to alienate. So are they pushing back on Fauci?”

Was the Fauci construct, then, a defensive artifice? If things went sideways and Fauci was exposed as a false prophet speaking from both sides of his mouth, he could be made to disappear, alleging fatigue, family responsibilities, or even COVID itself. Perhaps the virus will have taken its toll or the vaccine misfired, thus provoking a trickle of memorial sympathy among his detractors? Perhaps, weary of the fray and having done his duty, the apparition will have retired to the Pitcairn Islands—0 new cases, 0 confirmed cases, 0 deaths—never to be heard of again?

I think his credibility is entirely shot," Stanford professor Jay Bhattacharya told Fox News. “And I think it's really unfortunate that we have this person who just didn't really have the expertise to lead the response, and yet we somehow venerated him.” Bhattacharya cited Fauci for a rookie mistake, conflating “the case mortality rate with the infection mortality rate.” Fauci’s 2 percent fatality number should have been 0.2 percent, an order of magnitude lower. “It wasn't the science changing,” Bhattacharya said; rather, “Something else happened where he just changed.” 

I am large, I contain multitudes.

What might that “something else” have been? For all we know, it may be that the real Fauci, if he existed, was surreptitiously replaced by a chimerical substitute, a creature of light and air. Or, more likely, that the “program” was changed in medias res, once the hologram had inspired public confidence, and so could begin to implement the larger scheme of tactical disinformation. Holograms are easily manipulated and impervious to attack, at least for an interim period.

Commenting on the doctor’s woefully mediocre and indeed pernicious track record, which has resisted scrutiny up to the present, Stephen Kruiser at PJM believes that Fauci has “proven himself to be a petty, small, pathetic man,” but Kruiser seems not to understand that Fauci is not a “man,” as we commonly understand the term, but a kind of wraith, an illusion, a three-dimensional photonic transmission serving to distract attention from the ulterior purposes of the real plotters. Which is why it is irrelevant to fulminate against him. There’s nothing there. 

It is interesting to note that the compromising email dump came at the instigation of collaborating hard-left news organizations, BuzzFeed and The Washington Post. Tom Woods may have had a point. Once “Fauci” begins feeling the heat, he can made to simply vanish, as we have seen, on any of various excuses, including personal resentment at suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous slander. The possibility must be entertained. He was never a material Fauci but the Schwabian emanation of a shadowy cabal of political manipulators conspiring to impose a Great Reset upon an unsuspecting people. 

Very well then, I contradict myself.

As Steve Deace and Todd Erzen write in their definitive Faucian Bargain, Fauci’s “name may be on the marquee, but the truth is he’s not really the main villain. Fauci is not some sinister figure who cynically manipulated… events in order to rise to power… he contradicts himself way too much, and is too easily exposed… Fauci is not the disease but the symptom [of the] federal leviathan,” a mere figurehead. And we have fallen for this meretricious fiction. “Fauci has only sold much of America what it wanted to buy. Our fear has gifted such authority to Fauci.” And not only fear, but our passion for entertainment and the marvels of medical technology.

The cabal knows this. And it knows that should the operation grow counterproductive, it could then insist it had been misled by Fauci’s ostensible credentials and suave persona, proceed to diffuse public indignation, and devise other means to carry out its intentions. Meanwhile, an “exit strategy” would be put in place, the hologram would evaporate and Fauci would just fade away, exempt from interrogation and exposure. No one would really know what happened to him or where he is. Eventually he would be forgotten. After all, the virtue of non-existence is immunity. 

Caveat profluvium.

With Help from the Media, the Bioweapon Worked Perfectly

There’s a remarkable line in the documentary, “Collective,” about Romanian journalists who discover private corruption and government incompetence following the infamous 2015 Bucharest fire at the music club, Collectiv. The lead journalist says, “We have blindly trusted the authorities… When the press bows down to the authorities, the authorities will mistreat the citizens. This happens worldwide and it has happened to us.”

There’s plenty of reason to suspect China intended to use Covid-19 as a bioweapon. Even if it wasn’t the intent, that was its effect.  Yet as bioweapons go, it delivered unimpressive results.  Without minimizing those who have suffered from Covid, the data from across the world shows Covid-19 was exceptionally effective at killing older people who were already very ill. For everyone else, not so much.

The virus was most successful in destroying the American economy, while also creating social chaos and suppressing liberty. The Chinese government must be delighted that their middling bioengineered weapon turned out to be a foreign social re-engineering bonanza.

I’ve summarized the data from the CDC, sources which culled data from it, and applied some math.  Here are the highlights on Covid-19’s US data:

This has all been apparent since the first few weeks of the “pandemic.” Then again, it wasn’t the virus that did the job. It was our own media and “authorities.” Too many Americans trusted them both. Together, they formulated protocols that were utterly ineffective, pointless, and did more harm than good.

Who was that masked man?

Masks don’t work. Not only does this study show no difference in transmission rates for high and low transmission areas, but the infection rate across every state is virtually identical. Nor would masks be expected to work. The vaunted “honest” media never bothered to mention that Covid-19 has a diameter of 12.5 microns.

The only mask that might stop transmission is the N95, which can protect down to 10 microns. Yet that’s not a guarantee, and it would only be effective if used once and fitted properly. Most Americans didn’t have access to N95 masks, and instead wore surgical masks (which permit Covid-sized particles through), or cloth or sponge masks which let just about everything through. So not only do masks not work, but mandating their use on children was utterly foolish, given that children were the least likely to get infected and generally don’t pass it on to others.

The CDC itself says keeping kids home from school was unnecessary, particularly in areas of low to moderate transmission. This again highlights the hyper-localized differences in communities that still resulted in many children being needlessly penalized.

Based on the data available, in-person learning in schools has not been associated with substantial community transmission…Some studies have found that it is possible for communities to reduce incidence of COVID-19 while keeping schools open for in-person instruction.10,20 A study comparing county-level COVID-19 hospitalizations between counties with in-person learning and those without in-person learning found no effect of in-person school reopening on COVID-19 hospitalization rates when baseline hospitalization rates were low or moderate.

When kids are forced to stay home, adults then must find child care or stay home from work themselves, further harming the economy.

This policy will prove to have been catastrophic. Children and teens were kept out of school for over a year, which will negatively impact their educational development. As it is, we have a lousy education system and keeping kids engaged is a challenge. The worst effects will be seen on the youngest, where socialization and schoolroom protocol is critical. There is no substitute for in-person group socialization, or for the confidence that elementary teachers instill in children. Learning facial cues and expressions of others will be stunted. Thanks to the media and governmental authorities, our younger generation’s ability to succeed and develop has been set back.

China must be delighted.

Since the beginning, common sense and science indicated that transmission while outdoors is negligible.  Yet municipalities like the city of Los Angeles shut down outdoor dining, prevented TVs from being turned on lest people gather to watch them, and even instituted a 10 p.m. curfew, presumably because the virus only hunted people at 10:01 p.m.

All of this nonsense destroyed some 200,000 businesses, and put tens of millions of people out of work.  The very people the Left proclaims they protect – minorities – bore the brunt of these policies. Minorities experienced the highest levels of unemployment after reaching historic lows mere weeks before. Minorities experienced the highest levels of food insecurity as well as the highest levels of missed rent. They will soon experience the highest level of evictions when federal and local moratoriums expire.

Crime of the century.

Worst of all, China’s social re-engineering bioweapon leveraged Trump Derangement Syndrome and pried open the political divide in the country to its widest gulf yet. Americans were at each other’s throats over wearing masks. Communities, marriages, and friendships have been torn apart.

The frustration over housing, income, and food insecurity unquestionably contributed to the summer 2020 riots. The violent tyrants known as ANTIFA and the anti-Semitic race-hustling BLM destroyed even more businesses. America descended into chaos.

And the Chinese government was laughing all the way to the CCP banquets. I have to wonder if China knows just how incompetent government is from experience, and knew American government at every level would be catastrophically unprepared for a manufactured contagion.

There’s a horrible parallel to 9/11 here. Those terrorists took advantage of the flaws at every level in our system, from lax private airport security to accessible cockpits and most important, of Americans' natural inclination to trust and obey authority. The Muslim terrorists told passengers to stay seated or they would detonate (fake) bombs. Americans did what they were told. Tragedy ensued.

The one glimmer of hope is that United 93’s passengers took matters into their own hands. Let’s hope that in the next “pandemic,” American conservatives don’t just give in like they did this time.

Regarding the Vaccines: Exercise Extreme Prudence

In a measured presentation on the subject of vaccines delivered this February, Dr. Byram Bridle, a viral immunologist at Guelph University in Canada, expressed skepticism about these presumed vehicles of salvation. “I would probably prefer to have natural immunity,” he said. Confirming Bridle’s skepticism, a recent study from the Washington University School of Medicine finds there to be lifelong immunity after Covid, owing to natural antibody-producing cells rather than synthetic infusions.

 As Global Research explains, a major issue involved in rejecting the vaccines is that they are forms of gene therapy deputizing for vaccines and are potentially hazardous, “exotic creatures… that actively hijack your genes and reprogram them.” In other words, the vaccines are not really vaccines as commonly understood but genomic substances responding to what is likely a digital virus

Moreover, a new study by British professor Angus Dalgleish and Norwegian scientist Dr. Birger Sørensen, soon to be published in the Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics, claims that it is “now beyond a reasonable doubt…that unique fingerprints in SARS-CoV-2 [are] indicative of purposive manipulation," concluding that “SARS-Coronavirus-2 has no credible natural ancestor.” Indeed, after initial denials across the media for over a year, opinion now seems to be shifting toward a laboratory origin for the virus. A synthetic antidote to a manufactured virus would seem to belong in Frankenstein’s lab, not in the natural world.

No, really, I feel fine. Why do you ask?

Dr. Peter McCullough, a prominent cardiologist, believes that with increasing reports of adverse effects, it's too risky for people who have a more than 99 percent survival rate to receive one of the experimental vaccines. “Based on the safety data now, I can no longer recommend it," he said in an interview with journalist and author John Leake, which was predictably scrubbed on YouTube. Too many people die “on days one, two and three after the vaccine.” 

McCullough has been attacked as a right-wing crank by the usual swarm of dubious “factcheckers” populating the Net. McCullough has 600 peer-reviewed publications to his name, many of which have appeared in top-tier journals such as the New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet. He is also the president of the Cardiorenal Society of America, co-editor of Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and associate editor of the American Journal of Cardiology and Cardiorenal Medicine. His credentials are impeccable and he should be taken seriously. Left-wing cranks should not.

Furthermore, the recent controversy surrounding prominent French virologist and Nobel Laureate Luc Montagnier needs to be put in context. He did not say that all who had been vaccinated would die within two years, as was widely reported. What he did say was that the vaccines and viral variants go hand in hand, owing to a condition called antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), a phenomenon in which virus-specific antibodies enhance the entry of the virus and may also cause viral replication. Variants will continue to proliferate as a direct result of the vaccines themselves: in each country, he says, “the curve of vaccination is followed by the curve of deaths.” Because of the vaccines, “the virus is forced to find another solution, or die,” thus creating vaccine-resistant variants. 

Naturally, Montagnier has been mocked, slandered, “factchecked,” refuted and misreported in a veritable Netblitz. Nonetheless, that one lockdown insensibly succeeds another, that new viral variants continue to appear irrespective of counter-measures, and that top-off injections will likely be administered at regular intervals add weight to his argument. (The French video interview between Montagnier and journalist Pierre Barnérias has been rendered exceedingly difficult to find, but the effort is worth it.)

What could possibly go wrong?

Corroborating Montagnier’s analysis, an international team of virologists and microbiologists writing for the quality journal Vaccine has released a study exposing the vaccine fiasco foisted upon a fearful and credulous public. They describe more than 20 possible long-term healing complications, including severe pneumonia from cross reactivity; this means that the vaccine could potentially cause a “covid spike.” Vaccines, they fear, could “exacerbate[e] rather than attenuat[e] viral infections.” The efficacy of the vaccines, they claim, has been vastly overstated...intentionally. The skeptics appear to have been right all along. 

The debate has raged far and wide among those who swear by the necessity of the vaccines and those who remain doubtful or condemnatory. Official sites such as the British MHRA (Medicines & Healthcare Regulatory products Agency) require a considerable amount of data dredging in order to arrive at reliable conclusions. Reconnoitering the terrain of what is nothing less than a species of fractal embedding is an arduous process; one feels a bit like Joshua’s spies sent out to probe the defenses of Jericho. But the results are startling. The number of adverse reactions is enough to cause a pandemic of vaccine hesitancy. 

By May 19 in the U.K. alone, there have been at least 245,276 adverse reports and counting. The alarming incidence of adverse effects such as blindness, impaired vision and other eye disorders, nervous system disorders, brain damage, facial paralysis, strokes, capillary leak syndrome, cardiac issues, blood disorders and gastrointestinal disorders cannot be taken lightly.

Loader Loading...
EAD Logo Taking too long?

Reload Reload document
| Open Open in new tab

The total number of deaths as of May 19 is 1,192 in the U.K. alone. These are government-authorized figures. Of course, statistical taxonomies appear to reduce the significance of adverse results; tell that to the growing number of vaccine recipients who have suffered the consequences. And we must remember that the reporting scheme, which is passive and voluntary, is significantly underused. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) found that less than one percent of side-effects following vaccination are in fact reported. 

It is consoling to remark that, as of April 16, six American states have banned the use of vaccine passports. According to NewsNation, for April 27, the count is even higher: at least 40 states “are advancing legislation to ban COVID-19 vaccine requirements for businesses and schools.” Becker’s Health IT for May 6 reports that several other states are considering legislation to the same effect. Hospital workers in Houston are suing to block mandatory vaccinations. It’s a running total.

It is also comforting to note that now-beleaguered medical guru Anthony Fauci, whom Jon Sanders writing in the American Institute for Economic Research called “that ubiquitous font of fatuous guidance,” admitted that asymptomatic spread of the virus, despite the dire media and official narrative as well as his own whiffling, was extremely rare. In a February 2020 email, Fauci wrote, “Error in my statement to you. I meant to say that “……most transmissions occur from someone who is symptomatic — not asymptomatic.”

"Error in my statement."

Our national governments and affiliated medical institutions will be fighting these developments tooth and nail. The Biden administration, we learn, may be considering the introduction of vaccine passports for international travel, as well as incentivizing employers to require vaccinations. The alliance of government funding and medical ideology is a powerful force for compliance. And for the most part, all we hear from the corporate media are crickets when we should be hearing kettle drums. 

Former Pfizer Vice President and chief scientific researcher Michael Yeadon believes that these vaccines, as they “go from the computer screens… into the arms of millions of people,” may contain “characteristics which could be harmful and could even be lethal.” The scale of the menace we are facing, he says, not from COVID but from the oligarchs, politicians, media types and technocrats who have exploited it and the billionaire companies that manufacture the vaccines, may be unprecedented. Like practically all vaccine skeptics, he will be “factchecked” to death by the usual suspects who have skin in the game.

But the menace is real. The aforementioned Professor Bridle has admitted that “We made a big mistake. We didn’t realize it until now… we never knew the spike protein itself was a toxin and was a pathogenic protein. So by vaccinating people we are inadvertently inoculating them with a toxin.” Bridle reprises a Japanese study showing how the synthetic mRNA spike protein circulates in the bloodstream and accumulates in tissues such as the liver, the adrenal glands, the spleen and the ovaries, likely causing extreme pathogenic reactions.

Similarly, pediatric rheumatologist J. Patrick Whelan has warned that the spike protein may cause microvascular damage to the liver, heart, and brain in “ways that were not assessed in the safety trials.” Whelan worries that hundreds of millions of people might “suffer long-lasting or even permanent damage to their brain or heart microvasculature as a result of failing to appreciate in the short-term an unintended effect of full-length spike protein-based vaccines on other organs.”

The news from Israel is as distressing as it is revelatory. The country launched one of the strictest vaccine programs in the world, creating two classes of citizens: the vaccinated who retained their social privileges, the unvaccinated who were stripped of them. A report just released by two Israeli researchers, Drs. Haim Yativ and Hervé Seligman, relying on tables provided by the Israel Ministry of Health, reveals that most COVID deaths during a five-week-long vaccination period “are for vaccinated people.”

The numbers show that “the vaccines, for the elderly… killed about 40 times more people than the disease itself would have killed, and about 260 times more people than the disease among the younger age class.” Additionally, confirming Luc Montagnier’s predictions, the researchers state that “in a few months we expect to face mid-and long-term adverse effects of the vaccination as ADE (Antibody-dependent Enhancement) and the vaccination-resistant mutants selected by the vaccines.” The Internet archive has, and no doubt will continue to suppress these numbers. There is far too much money, power and reputation involved to admit error.

People need to understand that such warnings are not conspiracy theories. They reflect the knowledge and apprehensions of reputable professionals who are not beholden to government funding and the big pharmaceutical companies. The accelerated quasi-vaccines may well have been the greatest mistake that our political, medical and media orthodoxies have ever committed. It makes good sense to act and think independently, to attend to and examine the official instruments with due diligence, and to exercise prudence when considering taking the jab. As counterintuitive as it may seem in the midst of an orchestrated panic, this is nothing less than a responsibility one owes oneself and one’s family.

Science: the New Opiate of the Elites

This past year should have dispelled all doubts that scientism has replaced Protestantism as the dominant religion of America's elite. Those Americans who, in days of yore, would have flocked to Marble Collegiate Church, in their Harvard ties and Sunday Go to Meeting hats, to hear Norman Vincent Peale preach about the power of positive thinking, now just stay at home and listen to the increasingly dismal (and often contradictory) predictions of Dr. Anthony Fauci.

But what's particularly striking is how they speak about science in the most unscientific way. They say things like "TRUST THE SCIENCE!" as if science were a single, static, even sentient thing. It's not.

This point was rather humorously made recently after Neil deGrasse Tyson, the obnoxious archbishop of this new religion, tweeted that "The good thing about Science is that it’s true, whether or not you believe in it." Several respondents pointed out that this is a sentiment which might more properly be applied to God. He even capitalized the 'S' in science.

But the best response came from (of all places) the Twitter account of frozen meat company Steak-umm, which, after mocking Tyson a bit, explained: 

Spot on, and extra points for the "steak" pun.

To extend that point, one of the definitive marks of true science is that its falsifiable. As Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry once wrote:

Science is not the pursuit of capital-T Truth. It's a form of engineering — of trial by error. Scientific knowledge is not "true" knowledge, since it is knowledge about only specific empirical propositions — which is always, at least in theory, subject to further disproof by further experiment.

But contemporary scientism is completely unfalsifiable. No matter how many times the high priests are wrong (or have lied), the faithful are not shaken. We see this constantly in the realm of climate science, as when it turned out that polar bears were not actually nearing extinction, when Cold War-era climate scientists predicted that "entire nations" would be wiped out by rising sea levels by the year 2000, and more recently, when Canada's Ministry of Environment released a report showing that "Arctic sea ice grew 27 percent" in 2020, contrary to all expert predictions.

Have any of these revelations caused them to repent? Not at all! They remain certain that every outcome -- hot weather, cold weather, extreme weather, mild weather -- is the result of climate change, and the only solutions are so-called renewable energy, carbon taxes, and -- my favorite -- "carbon offsets," whereby the wealthy can pony up some cash and then live a more carbon intensive lifestyle than the peasantry.

This last one is a pretty good analogue to the abuse of indulgences which provoked the Reformation. Will something similar happen to the new established church? Perhaps. 'Fauci fatigue' has begun to spread to the general populace. But for our elite, don't hold your breath. Scientism is just too convenient.

It’s Time to Stop Wearing Masks

I refuse to wear a mask. I believe, as many people do—but not enough to make a wrinkle in the vast bubble of mass delusion—that masks are largely ineffective. But the consequences of holding to this belief and appearing in public without a mask can be quite unpleasant.

My experience in the streets and shops of my city will be familiar to those who feel as I do. The masked give me a wide berth. Others stare balefully from the only exposed part of their faces. On occasion I find myself in confrontation with those who believe I am a “spreader” to be mocked, shamed, condemned and threatened.

COVID Rage is all the rage. And I am always astounded by the level of ignorance wedded to self-righteousness among the unvisaged, the tendency to follow the diktats of their political leaders and government appointed medical officers without question, and to accept implicitly the reports of a suborned media apparatus. The lack of common sense and the unwillingness to conduct independent research are truly staggering, if entirely predictable. Instead of herd immunity, we have herd mentality.

Masks are not only unsightly, even grotesque, but they obscure proper articulation—I rarely understand what these people are trying to say—and eliminate all signs of personality. One feels one is trapped inside a particularly lurid Zombie movie.

Become the lie.

More importantly, masks are generally useless. The weave and filter are not resistant to the miniscule COVID virion. Wearing masks has been compared to setting up a chain-link fence to keep out flies. Former naval surgeon Dr. Lee Merritt has done the research.

Viruses are passed by tiny micron particles, she explains, “that sneak out through the mask and around the mask.” As Merritt points out, the popular meme of “viral load,” which masks are said to reduce, is misleading; it takes only one COVID micron and a compromised immune system to trigger the infection. So much for director of the HIV Clinic at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital Monica Ghandi’s argument that masks significantly reduce ingestion of viral particles, and that masking can make you “less sick.” A mask is not a silver bullet, it is a blank cartridge.

We might note that the more sophisticated N-95 masks, which are used by medical personnel, provide insecure protection. Medical Life Sciences tells us that the diameter of a COVID particle ranges from 60 to 140 nanometers (nm) and that N-95 masks are non-functional under 100 nm, rendering them only 50 percent effective at best. As the founder of American Frontline Doctors .Simone Gold, states “The facts are not in dispute:  (cloth) masks are completely irrelevant in blocking the SARS-CoV-2 virus.” N-95s bring their own problems, as noted below. (Naturally, she has been roundly attacked by “medical cancel culture”). 

Droplets are apparently another matter, being larger than aerosols and thus impeded by masks, whether on the receiving or emitting end. A little common sense tells us that droplets evaporate and the particles hitching a ride on them remain to be breathed in or out. Moreover, a CambridgeCore study concludes that “any mask, no matter how efficient at filtration or how good the seal, will have minimal effect if it is not used in conjunction with other preventative measures, [including] regular hand hygiene.” Since wearers are frequently adjusting their masks, regular hand hygiene is by no means practical or possible. Aerosols or droplets, same difference.

But there is another side to the problem. ScienceDaily, citing a study conducted at the University of New South Wales, indicates that “cloth masks can be dangerous to your health.” This is also true for the much-hyped N-95. Prolonged wearing is likely to cause hypoxia (diminished oxygen supply). The masker breathes in his own CO2, leading in some cases to grogginess and even somnolence—the reason birds in winter conserve energy and warmth and sleep at night by tucking their heads under their wings.

People who drive masked are asking for trouble. People who wear masks for extended periods are at risk. Hypoxia can also lead to a condition of immune cell dysfunction. The immunologic consequences can be critical, causing neurological damage and rendering the individual susceptible to whatever pathogens are lurking in his own system or in the air around him. This alone is a reason not to wear masks—and certainly not for excessive periods. Even the more reliable surgical masks must be changed frequently. (Plastic face shields are no solution since the larger surface area acts a storehouse for the viral molecule.)

Obviously, the pro-and-con controversy over the efficacy of masks is particularly contentious. Political and professional reputations are at stake, especially in journals and institutions with a distinctive leftist bias. Politics will mostly trump science, and the common observer must be scrupulously careful in evaluating evidence.

Thus, it comes as no surprise that trusted data sources like the W.H.O., The New England Journal of Medicine, and The Lancet are profoundly compromised and have been compelled to revise or retract some of their studies and surveys. But it is interesting to note that The Center for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM) finds that “despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks… assuming 20% asymptomatics and a risk reduction of 40% for wearing masks, 200,000 people would need to wear one to prevent one new infection per week.” 

Timothy Taylor at Conversable Economist points to many random controlled trial studies that “do not find a reason to wear a mask.” Wired magazine is also ambivalent regarding data, stating: “the research literature on mask usage doesn’t provide definitive answers. There are no large-scale clinical trials proving that personal use of masks can prevent pandemic spread; and the ones that look at masks and influenza have produced equivocal results.” 

Such a “large scale clinical trial” has, in fact, just been conducted. A major Danish controlled study involving 6000 participants, the only study of its kind, has been predictably rejected by three medical journals. One of the researchers, Thomas Lars Benfield, states that publication will have to wait until “a journal is brave enough to accept the paper.” The Lancet, among others, won’t touch it, as is to be expected.

Reviewing the travesty, Conservative Review editor Daniel Horowitz wonders “how many other scientific and academic studies covering an array of very consequential policy questions rooted in scientific debate are being censored because they don’t fit the narrative of the political elites?” And indeed, why is NIAID Director Anthony Fauci disinclined to pursue a controlled study on the effectiveness of masks? Of course, like CNN journalist Chris Cuomo and Canada’s Minister of Health Patty Hajdu, Fauci was spotted not wearing a mask in public. Do as I say, not as I do.

Masks work. Just ask Dr. Fauci.

By the same token, Bioengineer Yinon Weiss at The Federalist shows via data comparison and representative graphs of seven European countries and three American states that renewed mask compliance has led to an exponential spike in infection rates, in some case by as much as 1500 percent. Weiss cites major international studies, as well as the U.S. surgeon general and the Centers for Disease Control, revealing the ineffectiveness of commercial masks. Masks, lockdowns and quarantine protocols merely delay the development of herd immunity and are practically guaranteed to prolong the epidemic. Nevertheless, fear not only of the disease but also of punitive measures and of being conspicuous dissenters exposed to social opprobrium are operative factors.

Mask hysteria seems primed to continue. Psychiatrist Dr. Mark McDonald calls the standard response to the virus “a pandemic of hysteria… a delusional psychosis…It is killing us physically, mentally, socially, psychologically.” Masks dehumanize us and make us timid and afraid, vulnerable to the designs of our political masters seeking, as Weiss writes, “to twist the pandemic for political and electoral purposes.”

The situation has grown even more perverse. We seem to have reached a point where government propaganda and coercion are no longer necessary. People have become the servants and enablers of the state, having by and large internalized the official compulsion and are now their own stringent monitors and self-appointed mask police—the final ingredient in the time-tested recipe for totalitarian control. Swallow the lie. Become the lie. Enforce the lie.

Enforce the lie.

At best, mask wearing should be discretionary. If you wish to wear a mask no one can legally prevent you from doing so. But some things are clear. Masks should not be mandated by political authority since (1) the requirement to do so is an infringement of the Charter rights of free citizens living in a democratic state; (2) masks are largely, and perhaps in most cases wholly, ineffective; and (3) they can be demonstrably harmful to one’s health and the health of other people.

Ironically, mask wearing is the real risk, not only delaying or preventing the development of immunity while inducing a false sense of comfort, but also acting as a disease incubator, and a conceivable threat to non-maskers. A highly qualified friend who has diligently studied the virus for the last six months writes: “Mask wearers are becoming an additional potential source of environmental contamination, increasing not only their own but the risk to others.”

I do my best to avoid maskers, although it is difficult considering the numbers.