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.

Actually, the Earth Didn't 'Heal' Itself

Early on in the pandemic, former Greek finance minister (and current lefty activist) Yanis Varoufakis posted the following now-infamous  tweet:

It was a perfect example of what the very online call "saying the quiet part loud," an admirable tendency of Varoufakis. The idea was that the δῆμος (or the plebs for us descendants of western Europe) were responding pretty well to the unprecedented government intrusion into their everyday lives, and that post-Covid we should extend the state of emergency in order to put an end to "climate change."

It was essentially the opening salvo of the Build Back Better/Great Reset discourse, and also anticipated the  "Earth is Healing Itself" trope which emerged shortly thereafter. Since the Earth is doing such much better with us behind closed doors, went this line of thinking, perhaps we should stay there.

Well, unfortunately for Varoufakis and other likeminded leftists, the lockdowns don't seem to have effectively laid the groundwork for their green utopia. Jim Geraghty points out that climatologists are now saying that "carbon dioxide emissions fell by [only] 5.8 percent" due to the Covid-related lockdowns, which "merely amounts to a short-lived 'blip'" on the scale of global CO2 emissions. Geraghty explains the significance of this finding:

The global impact of COVID-19 is difficult to overstate. The earth literally grew quieter for several months, causing human-caused vibrations around the globe to be cut in half. At least 3 million excess deaths in 2020, a global working-hours impact four times worse than the 2008-2009 financial crisis, about $4 trillion in lost productivity, a huge drop in global gross domestic product, school closures for roughly 1.5 billion children around the world. This is about as big and bad as anyone could imagine, short of World War Three or the apocalypse. And if this kind of a halt to all kind of human activity wasn’t enough to have a significant impact on reducing carbon dioxide emissions, then no change in human behavior is going to make a significant reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.

In point of fact, it's hard to conceive of a more illustrative and visceral argument for our side of this debate. "You want to use the power of the government to massively reduce carbon emissions? Well, remember how awful the Covid lockdowns were? You'll have to do a lot more than that."

Great Reset hardest hit.

Lucky for all of us, higher concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere seem to have some real benefits, most especially for plant life and global crop yields. And then there's the fact that technological innovations like the improvements in fracking techniques, have enabled America's transition away from high-carbon coal to low-carbon natural gas, contributing to our leading the world in total emissions decline since 2000.

So maybe true lovers of the planet should consider leaning into the American energy revolution and embracing their ancient enemies, fracking and nuclear power, and stop lobbying for western nations to heavily invest in China's toxic waste generating solar panels, which are, by the way, built using coal-fired power plants.

A man can dream.

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.

Surprise: Models Slip and Fall Yet Again

Near the beginning of the pandemic I wrote a feature about the problem with predictive models, which were at the time being continuously cited to justify unprecedented restrictions on normal life. Time has shown the models that were in operation at the time to have been, in some respects, too gloomy, and in others, too optimistic. Which is really to say that they ended up being just as unreliable as I argued at the time, and should not, therefore, have been the north star we used to navigate through the choppy WuFlu waters.

Well, for a more recent demonstration of this phenomenon, Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight rightly points out that actual Covid case numbers have fallen well below what all twenty-two CDC approved models predicted back in early May. Most (though not all) held that Covid cases would continue to decline in the U.S., pushed down by the combined forces of vaccine reception and warm weather, with the average model suggesting that we'd end up at about 28,000 cases per day. In real life that decline did indeed occur, but we've ended up with roughly half of the projected number of cases, and this with states opening much faster than the CDC was recommending at the time the models were released.

Wrong about Covid, wrong about climate change.

As I discussed in the initial post, the numerous failures of predictive models  are well known to close watchers of the climate debate. We've watched a familiar cycle -- where a new model which anticipates calamity is released, inspires ominous headlines and hand wringing from professional activists and politicians, and is eventually revised when reality fails to conform to it. Of course by then the damage is done, and the headlines are burnt into the brains of regular people who don't have the time or capacity to debunk every bit of misinformation thrown their way.

Dare we hope that the failures of the pandemic are enough to open peoples' eyes? Well, if this Gallup poll is correct that 71 percent of Democrats and more than 40 percent of independents think the case number decline is a mirage, and we should continue to stay home for the foreseeable future, the answer to that is probably 'No.'

What Covid-19 and the 'Son of Sam' Teach About Fear

Never underestimate the power of fear, stoked by the media, to cause some humans to behave like morons (usually Leftists). Netflix is showing a documentary series on the Son of Sam killings, which terrified New York City in 1976 and 1977. The series presents a completely unconvincing case that David Berkowitz was not the sole participant in the killings. Yet in watching the first episode, the parallels between the fear generated by the murderers that swept through New York City and the hysteria over Covid-19 are both astonishing and chillingly instructive.

David Berkowitz carried out a series of random shootings over a 13-month period, primarily in Queens with two in the Bronx. Once it became known that the perp was likely a serial killer, who struck randomly at night, targeting women with long brown hair who were either alone or with boyfriends in vehicles, people's behavior started to change.

Women spoke of how terrified they were, to the point that many would not leave their homes without putting their hair up in a bun in broad daylight – as if the killer might see them during the day and become inspired to target them. This behavior made no sense.  It was known that the killings were opportunistic, and with the aforementioned criteria, long before Berkowitz’s arrest.

The dog made him do it.

Nonetheless, fear ruled, and this fear was entirely whipped up by the media. Sure, women and those who love them were concerned, but this was New York City during one of the worst periods in its history -- decrepit, corrupt, literally falling apart, bankrupt, and with incompetent leadership.  It’s not an exaggeration to say that one was far more likely to be mugged walking down Fifth Avenue in broad daylight than being shot by a serial killer.

Thanks to the New York Post and the local media, however, what the Son of Sam shootings did was put enormous pressure on the New York City Police Department.  The department itself couldn't seem to get out of its own way, was plagued by poor management, and all it did was contribute more to the frenzy.

Here we are 35 years later, and exactly the same thing is happening with the coronavirus.

As we've known from the earliest days of the “pandemic,” those who were most vulnerable were over the age of 65 who had an average of three comorbidities. Since then, we've learned that the overall survival rate for people who catch the virus is north of 99 percent. The requisite behavior would have been to quarantine the elderly and other high-risk individuals, and leave everyone else alone.

Barring that, if one is in a high-risk category, and chooses a situation in which one is likely to contract the coronavirus, that person stands a pretty good chance of dying.  But one must go to great lengths in order to accomplish this.

Analogously, the odds of being targeted by David Berkowitz during the day, and then killed by him, which would also require one to be parked on a dark street after midnight, while sporting long brown hair, were minuscule.  Again, one literally had to be foolish enough to put oneself into that high-risk category in order to end up as a victim.  Yet even then, the odds were astronomical that one would choose a street that Berkowitz had himself randomly selected.

In perhaps the strangest ironic twist, we can thank New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo for analogously putting thousands of young women with long brown hair into parked cars on dark New York City streets after midnight.  He plowed the elderly who were infected with the virus right into nursing homes, and the thousands who have died are direct results of his incompetence.  Yet nobody calls him a serial killer.

Say it ain't so, Fido.

The point is the power of fear historically overwhelms common sense.  The hysteria in both cases was entirely unjustified given the risk.  This is the area where Americans need to become vigilant, because fear controls, and that only serves Leftists.

Back then, the media was only interested in one thing: eyeballs. Anyone with any sense knows Jimmy Breslin was a gift to journalism, but in the Son of Sam case, all he did was sensationalize the story and whip up the panic.

The situation is more insidious today.  Eyeballs are harder to come by, so the media is more relentless and ruthless than ever.  Yet now the media is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party, and is bound and determined to carry out Leftist policy in addition to its self-serving mission. That’s why millions upon millions of Americans believe themselves to be the equivalent of young women with long brown hair who are parked in cars on dark New York City streets after midnight. L.A. County and others like it reached the height of absurdity when it instituted curfews, because the coronavirus – like Berkowitz – apparently only went hunting at night.

There are few real journalists left, and those who do exist can’t be bothered to parse the data the way I and others have, so that a true picture of risk can be provided to the public.  We appear to be spitting in the wind, just as other common sense observers of the Son of Sam killings were in 1976-77.

The serial killer David Berkowitz was found using good old-fashioned police work brought on by a stroke of luck -- his presence at the final crime scene was betrayed by a parking ticket. Berkowitz confessed on the scene, pled guilty, and was sent to prison forever.

The analogy is that the media, government, and hysterical leftists should have actually listened to the real science. Rather than throw the entire country into hysteria over a risk on par with being struck by lightning, it would be nice if rational heads had prevailed.  Just as all of New York City went into a one-size-fits-all solution, so did our entire nation.

There's just one difference. New York City was already in the middle of an economic disaster, the killing spree was just the cherry on top. In 2020, the American economy was booming.  By succumbing to irrational and unscientific fear, millions of lives have been devastated. Collateral damage data will come out eventually.  We will discover that far more lives were lost and or irreparably damaged as a result of lockdowns than the virus itself ended.

When Americans should fear the most, however, is that this will not be the last time that fear engulfs reason and destroys liberty. Having seen the unprecedented upside to shaking the American snow-globe, including the apparent theft of a presidential election and instantaneous demonization of those who opposed the official narrative, expect leftists to continue to rely on media-whipped fear.

Beware the Triumvirate of Fear

Bad news everybody: turns out we’re going to die. Everyone of us. No exceptions. Sorry to have to break it to you this way, but I’m a “rip the bandage off as quickly as possible” kind of guy.

Not sure of the exact dates of demise of course, but despite all of our valiant efforts over the last fifteen months, death has not been eradicated. You survived infection after catching the Covid vaccine? That’s great. You’re still going to die. You want to keep wearing your mask for the rest of your life? Terrific. The important thing to remember is that the phrase “the rest of your life” always ends in a full stop.

It’s ironic, but the healthier a society and the more a society is successful in identifying and minimizing risk, the more risk-averse society becomes.

Happy rest of your lives, snowflakes!

America is now at a point where millions of its citizens are not only willing to sacrifice many of the joys of life in hopes of extending existence by a few years, most of this group firmly believes that everyone else should be morally and legally obligated to share their fearful, neurotic views.

Risk and living – truly living – are intertwined. Attempting to lead a risk-free life is not living, it’s mere existence, reducing what should be an adventure into panic-room level exercise in survival. As a general rule, most Americans have grown ever worse at reasonably assessing and responding to risk issues. Fear among average American citizens seems to grow in inverse proportion to our increasing ability to identify and manage risks.

There is no shortage of self-interested organizations and corporations willing and able to advance narratives that exploit the current climate of fear. Environmental NGOs can’t wait to paint the slightest potential hazard in apocalyptic terms. With few exceptions, politicians of all stripes willingly accept such narratives, sensing the votes that come along with going along. The vast majority of journalists, with little to no personal understanding of foundational technical issues are naturally inclined to support whichever position the left adopts and insists upon.

This trio of special interests are thus able to create “realities” that are detached from reality. In general, the more technically advanced the topic, the more emboldened the triumvirate of fear feels emboldened to push their particular agendas.

Looking for salvation in all the wrong place.

We’ve just undergone fifteen months of risk-avoidance on overdrive. It will be some time before sober, credible sources who do not have an agenda will provide accurate assessments of how well prevention-of-transmittal measures balance out against the societal and economic costs of those policies. I truly do not know how that valuation will come out. However, I am certain that anyone attempting to define that valuation at this point is engaged in speculation, not science.

Were we needlessly and overly cautious? As I said, we can’t be sure at this this point. My speculation: probably, but that’s water under the dam. Time to move on. Moving on means accepting victory, rejecting an eternal state of emergency and emergency powers, and starting to address the risk/reward proposition in rational terms again.

From everything I can discern and based on what the CDC is now saying, if you have either: 1) survived Covid infection, or 2) had one of the vaccines, you’re good to go mask-free in public. Surely certain businesses like restaurants and airlines will continue to require masks for a while and that’s just fine. In a free society, everyone can choose or not choose to wear masks in privately-held venues and suffer the consequences if their preference doesn’t align with venue policy. This is analogous to how we can choose or not choose to wear shirts and shoes while expecting service in a convenience store. The markets will figure it out in the long run.

The point is that the “big-mask” era is drawing to a close and we will finally be able to shout “Free at last! Free at last!” once more. What comes next is up to us.

After Masks and Lockdowns, Here Come the 'Vaccines'

We have been wearing masks for over a year. We have been quarantined in government facilities and in our homes. We have been rigorously locked-down in a futile attempt to control a virus that is clearly unimpressed by our efforts. The latest installment in the Covid frenzy is the love affair with the various vaccines, a mammoth suite of pharmaceutical interventions, that have flooded the market, promising eventual salvation from the ravages of the pandemic. Yet the negative side of these disparate vaccines has gone largely unreported.

While assuring us that pharmaceutical tests have been professionally run on the whole, New York Times reporter Alex Berenson writes in Unreported Truths about COVID-19 that “the companies failed to test the vaccine on the ‘right’ people—the people at high risk of dying from Covid. They failed to prove that it actually reduced deaths, leaving a tragic hole in our medical and scientific knowledge.” Berenson mentions “realistic theories about possible long-run harms from the vaccines, such as the risk that they can lead to a dangerous rebound effect on people who later become infected with COVID.” 

In Berenson’s judgment, “regulators failed at every point in the development of these vaccines—the preclinical work, the major clinical trials, and the approval process”—though he gives them the benefit of the doubt, owing to the pressures they were under and still recommends that people be vaccinated. Nonetheless, all the vaccines accomplished was to “reduce moderate illnesses in people who were at low risk from COVID anyway.”

A little jab'll do ya.

The ramifications of the vaccines are far worse than that. Symptomatic reactogenicity is not uncommon. In just a few months, a spectrum of concerning side-effects have appeared, ranging from blood clots, erythema, cardiovascular ailments and Bell’s Palsy to anaphylactic reactions, swollen lymph nodes, chronic pain and untimely deaths. It should be no surprise that the general population will be constantly assured by a complicit network of authorities and pseudo-authorities that adverse reactions are statistically insignificant and should not be heeded. The incurious will be easily persuaded, especially as countervailing reports will be duly censored.

A typical example of what is really happening comes from British Columbia doctor Charles Hoffe who, in a letter to the Ministry of Health, reports “numerous concerning allergic reactions and neurological side effects from the vaccine,” and observes that “In stark contrast to the deleterious effects of this vaccine in our community, we have not had to give any medical care what-so-ever, to anyone with COVID-19.” He concludes that “this vaccine is quite clearly more dangerous than COVID-19.” 

Equally worrying, mysterious problems of contagion from vaccinated to unvaccinated women have also arisen, causing serious and perhaps lifelong menstrual irregularities and reproductive dysfunctions following Covid vaccines. Dr Christiane Northrup, a leading authority in women’s health, argues that the vaccines do not entail a normal immunization program but create harmful synthetic proteins within the body, whose effects are transmissible. Naturally, she has been accused by the mainstream media of spreading disinformation, but the evidence for this newest pathology is compelling.

The effect on pregnant women is also very much in question. Children’s Health Defense (CHC) refers to Dr. Sherry Tenpenny, “a triple-board certified osteopathic medical doctor and an expert on the potential adverse impact of vaccines on health, who… brings up a most critical point, that we simply have no idea what the potential effects of these warp-speed developed, Emergency Use Authorized, experimental mRNA vaccines might have on a developing fetus.”

What potential effects these injections might have on the population at large is no less moot. The CHC editorial concludes with the rider:

This article contains a growing list of deaths that occurred after the experimental COVID vaccine was administered. The death reports are culled from the media and from social media, as well as from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and reporting systems outside the US.

A Freudian slip by a newscaster reporting on a growing trend of vaccine refusal may have some truth to it. People are unwilling to be “euthanized,” he said, before correcting to “immunized.” The CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) considers the vaccines “safe and effective,” yet reports 2,794 dead, 56,869 injured following experimental Covid injections through April 5, 2021. Even CNN uncharacteristically reports that “5,800 fully vaccinated people have caught Covid anyway in US.”

The results from the U.K. are distressing, as they are from Norway and India. The news from Israel is no less disturbing. The mortality rates recorded in many sites are truly alarming. Other sites and fact-checkers downplay or scoff at these numbers as inflated, remarking instead on an infinitesimal percentage of adverse consequences. Sometimes the statistical accounts are so complex as to be difficult to assess. Obviously, the warnings will be contentious and the numbers disputed.

No thanks, I'll take my chances.

The truth is that reliable vaccines require ten or more years to develop and test, moving from the (1) exploratory to the (2) pre-clinical to the (3) trial and (4) post-licensure stages before they can be approved as safe for public distribution. Otherwise, not only their immediate efficacy but their future impact remains uncharted.

This fact is so glaringly obvious, it boggles the mind that it is rarely mentioned and commented on, or that it remains inadmissible in debate and discussion. A vaccine that arrives in just a few months when a decade or more is needed to create a reliable product cannot be trustworthy. They may, quite plausibly, be hazardous. What is known as “Operation Warp Speed” may pertain to the Starship Enterprise but is contraindicated in vaccine production. Slow and careful are the watchwords.

One can see the problems. We know the vaccines are clinically precarious for an undetermined number of recipients, but we do not know, regardless of what we are told, whether the vaccines are, on the whole and for a majority, actually effective, or merely placebos. Plainly, there are no means for ascertaining their effectiveness in the present moment—one takes it on faith.

Because someone may not or does not contract the disease following receipt of the vaccine is no proof of its potency; one may be already immune or resistant, or may suffer from the virus weeks or months later. And in the absence of longitudinal studies several years in duration, future side effects linger in a region of empty speculation and deferred research. People could find themselves suffering from any number of unexpected maladies—anemia, cognitive decline, clinical depression, or physical disorders as yet unspecified. Vaccines released years too early will likely have unpredictable pathogenic effects. Given their all-too-rapid and kluge-like development, the current rush to COVID-preventive jabs and boosters is a fools’ errand.

This fact has not prevented Big Pharma from scaling up its profit margin. Former Pfizer Vice President and Chief Scientist Dr. Michael Yeadon claims that new, top-off dosages designed to fight viral variants will be released without “clinical safety studies” and that these variants are in any case incapable of “immune escape,” that is, they are so similar to the original virus—“samients,” Yeadon calls them—that they are easily recognizable and controllable by a healthy immune system. Moreover, current “vaccines” consist of “superfluous genetic sequence for which there is absolutely no need or justification” while the ultimate purpose of these superfluous top-offs, Yeadon believes, is to surreptitiously give every person “a unique digital ID” in concert with the plans behind the Great Reset for global hegemony.

You'll take it and you'll like it.

Even Merriam-Webster has joined the quasi-medical cult, newly defining the word “vaccine” as “a preparation of genetic material (such as a strand of synthesized messenger RNA) that is used by the cells of the body to produce an antigenic substance (such as a fragment of virus spike protein).” In reality, this is not a vaccine, which introduces antigens into the system to activate antibodies, but an invasion of one’s genomic substance in order to generate an alien protein.  Adding a layer of vexatiousness to the issue is the question involving the Nuremburg Laws. The informed consent principle was defined as a human right and was intended to prevent forced medical interventions in any form, including vaccines. The first principle in the Nuremberg Code reads in part:

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should…be able to exercise free power of choice, without…any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion, and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.

The code’s application in the current circumstances is debated by many “fact-checking” venues, unconvincingly in my opinion. The fact-checkers need to be checked for their facts; when one considers that accounts critical of the vaccines are regularly suppressed by Big Tech and generally unreported or massaged in “the Marxist Mainstream Media” (the phrase is Dr. Steve Turley’s), one must be skeptical of unrestrained vaccine advocacy. The central fact remains that the efficacy of these drugs comes without proof, as should be obvious considering the conditions under which they have been fabricated: as noted, neither immediate nor long-term confirmation of their outcomes is realistically possible. Ignorance may be bliss, but only temporarily. 

A historic court judgment in Weimar, Germany illuminates the overall dilemma. The vast majority of studies rely on “a purely mathematical estimation or modeling study based on theoretical assumptions without real contact follow-up.” We are proceeding without valid epidemiological knowledge. We do not know the precise extent to which our governments and their salaried health officials and media collaborators are lying to us or are simply incompetent and cowardly. We have no idea what may be coming down the pike. We do not even know if the vaccines work as they are advertised. One does not need statistics, only common sense, to be doubtful and even suspicious of their viability. 

Caveat vaccinator.

Waiting for Genghis Khan

The Guardian has a cheeky post entitled "Why Genghis Khan was good for the planet":

Genghis Khan, in fact, may have been not just the greatest warrior but the greatest eco-warrior of all time, according to a study by the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Energy. It has concluded that the 13th-century Mongol leader's bloody advance, laying waste to vast swaths of territory and wiping out entire civilisations en route, may have scrubbed 700m tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere – roughly the quantity of carbon dioxide generated in a year through global petrol consumption – by allowing previously populated and cultivated land to return to carbon-absorbing forest.

An amusing thought. But it'd have been funnier if we hadn't just sat through a year of pandemic and lockdowns which, at least early on, the green movement were positively giddy about. Remember when anti-human phrases like "The Earth is Healing Itself" trended on Twitter almost daily in the opening months of the pandemic? When we heard over and over again that, because of the pandemic, "carbon emissions are down!," "The air is cleaner!," and (my personal favorite) "The fish are returning to Venice!"? Of course, this crowing died down a bit when the mounting death toll and cratering employment numbers made it just too ghoulish.

Which is to say, the idea that environmentalists might be in favor of a modern day Mongolian warlord thinning out the human population to help us achieve Net-Zero isn't actually that ridiculous. That being so, it is worth noting that when The Guardian jokes that calling for the return of the Great Khan might "not [be] a guaranteed vote-winner for the Green party's next manifesto," they really just mean "let's not give the game away too soon."

The Death of Science, and of Scientific American

The great legacy publication, Scientific American, is dead. It’s still in print, but it is no longer either scientific or American.  In an article described by a friend as, “a hailstorm of impenetrable academic verbiage, dictated by a Ph.D. trying to outpreen the race and climate-change virtue signalers,” the publication has stepped through the woke looking-glass and emerged as self-parody.

How else can one explain “Climate Anxiety Is an Overwhelmingly White Phenomenon”? The nonsensical article’s apparent points are that “climate anxiety [is] just code for white people wishing to hold onto their way of life or get 'back to normal,' to the comforts of their privilege”, and “Climate anxiety can operate like white fragility, sucking up all the oxygen in the room and devoting resources toward appeasing the dominant group.”

It’s easy to write this off as the ravings of the Woke lunatic fringe, but to paraphrase Hannibal Lecter, the pathology on display here is a thousand times more savage and more terrifying, for it is classic Marshall McLuhan insidiously at play in the service of cultural Marxism:

The medium is the message because it is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action. The content or uses of such media are as diverse as they are ineffectual in shaping the form of human association. Indeed, it is only too typical that the “content” of any medium blinds us to the character of the medium.

Alas, the medium is indeed the message, and the message is grim for both science and America. The content isn’t the problem nearly as much as where it has been published.  This is Scientific American, a publication of such heft and import that it has been the poster child, for 175 years, for shaping and controlling the scale and form of human association and action in the realm of objective reality and inquiry.

Science is foundational to human existence.  It explains who we are and our place in the universe.  It adheres to the strictest of laws: physics, mathematics, chemistry.  All are disciplines that have but one specific answer to every question.   There is right and there is wrong. Such things, however, cannot be permitted to exist in Marxist society.

Just ask the Marxists about crackpot science.

Scientific American is the publication that offered accessible, and often essential, insight into fundamental elements of science and impact on society.  This is the publication that tried to answer what people were exposed to in the 9/11 collapse of the WTC, analyzed freezing ions in 1988, and how mammals make milk from blood in 1957.  Peruse the archive back to 1875 and be astonished at what the magazine covered in the even the most obscure realms of real science – and why it mattered to human beings.

Gone now.  Swept away.  The virus of wokism has infiltrated one of the great publications. Here’s how it breaks down.

Readers of this website have been provided actual science by real Americans, demonstrating “climate change” to be a richly-funded, dark money hoax with no basis in science.  Therefore, “climate anxiety” is itself fruit of the poisonous tree, a derivative fiction inculcated in the minds of those predisposed to fear. Thus, climate anxiety as supplanter of racial injustice is a fictional derivative of a fictional derivative of a fiction, a concept rivaled only by Goldman Sachs’ collateralized toxic mortgage obligations.

Think carefully about this.  Scientific American – the longest-running scientific publication in the world -- now publishes Marxist fairy tales.   The medium is indeed terrifying now the message.

The same inverted approach is on display in the publication’s COVID-19 articles. The September 25, 2020 article “How to Distribute a COVID-19 Vaccine Ethically” hand-wrings over countless scenarios that “unfairly prioritize rich countries,” and posit that

… a truly ethical proposal would treat all people equally and help countries get vaccines to people when they lack capacity to do so on their own, rather than accepting inequality in access as an unchangeable fact and bypassing the poor to help the rich, the weak to help the strong.

Yet this article and many like it completely bypass what was already known at the time and continues to prove out.  According to the CDC, in the United States, 81 percent of COVID-19 deaths are in people aged 65 and older.  Some 97 percent of deaths are those aged 45 and older.  Fewer than 600 people under age of 25 have died from COVID-19, which comes to under 0.3 percent of the entire U.S. virus mortality volume.  Kids generally don’t get the virus and even if they do, most don’t die from it.  Finally, 93 percent of virus deaths include an average of three co-morbidities.

The science, and therefore the ethical distribution of vaccine, is clear.  Treat those with the highest risk, because the science shows that much of the general population has very little to worry about.

The September 8, 2020 article entitled, “COVID-19’s Disparate Impacts Are Not a Story About Race: They’re A Story About Racism” makes the serious claim that, “in this pandemic, data are taking a back seat to racial prejudice.”   This is apparently true only in Scientific American and other woke-polluted publications, however, because the article incessantly finger-wags at the alleged impact of racism on COVID infection and treatment without a single example of supporting data.

This time, comrades, we'll get it right.

Cultural Marxists haven't stopped with Scientific AmericanPopular Science as well as Popular Mechanics went woke, as well.  The latter thoroughly and brilliantly debunked 9/11 conspiracy theories, including the deservedly-famous piece on Building 7. Yet articles like “How To Topple A Statue Using Science” and “How to Dodge the Sonic Weapon Used by Police” have now become staples of their editorial mix.

The incessant invasion of cultural Marxism through every institution of Western culture – schools, literature, art, film, sexuality, Judeo-Christian values – successfully penetrated the hallowed grounds of real science.  It continues to spread.  Who would have ever believed that there are 153 genders?  Or that certain die-hard feminists are now demonized as TERFs – “trans-exclusionary radical feminists”?

How long before 2+2 = 5?

Scientific American didn’t just step through the looking-glass. It stepped through fifteen of them and emerged from the rear end of a Christopher Nolan film. And it took science with it.

 

 

 

Slouching Toward the End Times

I recently received a note from a friend commenting on a syndrome he calls “Covid retardation,” which manifests literally as “a general across-the-board slowdown in everything—not merely cognitive, but walking slowly, shoulders slumped, looking at the ground, refusing to make eye contact with people, driving slowly (well under the speed limit) or reacting slowly at green lights, as if the person truly has nowhere to go and nothing to do.” The malady entails “dull conversation and lazy thinking, repetition of clichés and government/media-repeated falsehoods, and on and on. People have a choice. They're not yet in camps. They choose to behave that way.”

I know precisely what he’s getting at and have remarked on this distemper many times. I was observing the stance and posture of a procession of masked ghouls again from my balcony this morning. It's scary as hell and reminds me of The Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Younger people for the most part still enjoy a fund of natal vitality that keeps them reasonably vertical, but middle-aged to older people tend to succumb more readily to a visibly manifest despair. They mumble almost inaudibly through their masks and visors at shop counters or when they stop to chat. They shuffle and stoop, bend their heads and spines as they walk, as if slouching toward the end times. The scapular droop is palpable Bodily comportment is a pretty good sign of general depression and intellectual surrender. This is another consequence of the draconian and utterly misconceived response to the virus, almost never remarked but starkly evident.

Contributing to an atmosphere that does not encourage active coping or even simple curiosity, these people have been gradually but systematically deprived of agency. One wonders if they have not been “cancelled” in their essence. The data about the absurdity and harmfulness of the mask-and-lockdown mandates were always there to be found, even if the Internet is awash with partisan disclaimers and meretricious “fact-checkers”, even if Forbes, in an article plentifully larded with misinformation and false assumptions, has instructed us not to do our own research.

Moreover, the thoughtless rush to vaccines, which are not “vaccines” as we understand them but experimental mRNA strands injected into and systematically altering a person’s genetic code, may severely exacerbate the degree of catalepsy we are seeing. (Interestingly, Italy is presently launching a criminal manslaughter investigation against the BioPharmaceutical Company AstraZeneca, which uses a replicating vector-based vaccine as a delivery system that inserts genetic material into the cells’ nuclei.)

Of course, the slowdown we are witnessing is not only local or age-specific, so to speak, but cultural and national in its sweep. The economy has slowed to the point of near-irrecoverable stagnation. Entrepreneurial activity is sluggish. Small businesses are being decimated. The productive classes are almost paralyzed. Schools are closed. Elderly people are dying in nursing homes and senior residences. Prospects for the future seem positively narcoleptic. “Can do” no longer applies. A general sense of hopelessness has begun to pervade every aspect of common life, every major enterprise and plan for investment in long-term projects. 

Run for your lives!

One sees the signs of demoralization and lethargy everywhere in the little things: the way people avoid each other and isolate in their portable “bubbles”; the way people murmur and mutter behind their face swaddlings; the way some people drive, fully masked, breathing in their own drowsy-making CO2, idling at stoplights, executing unpredictable maneuvers, and oblivious of traffic merges—as I can ruefully attest; and, most emphatically, in the way people walk, especially though not exclusively among the older population, tilting downward, phlegmatic and heavy, like sagging bladders of terminal despondency. This is terrifying to see.

True, there are places that are coming to or have come to their senses. Even The New York Times admits that Florida, for example, an open state with many seniors, outperforms most other regions and jurisdictions in the anti-COVID sweepstakes. Nonetheless, judging from my observations and the reports I receive from other parts of the country, the general impression of something like perithanatic anomie, a kind of corporeal melancholy afflicting a large segment of the population, appears to be valid.

Where is responsibility to be assigned? The arrogance, stupidity and coercive power of the political class on the whole and of the so-called medical “experts” who conform to and abet their masters’ agendas cannot be forgiven. They have been wrong across the board and, along with their Big Tech and media collaborators, have caused vastly more harm than they have prevented, crippling economic and social life as well as generating an “excess” mortality count that is staggering.

A JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) study covering the period from March 1 to May 30, 2020 in the U.S. reveals that “the number of excess all-cause deaths was 28% higher than the official tally of COVID-19–reported deaths during that period,” owing to delayed medical care, economic hardship, substance abuse, emotional distress and “suicides of despair.” In my own country, Statistics Canada has belatedly concluded that “the number of excess deaths has been higher than the number of deaths due to COVID-19, and these deaths are affecting younger populations.” 

With a Great Reset on its way soon.

In fairness, however, it should be acknowledged that the majority of people, young as well as older, have accepted the diktats of government officials and their public CMOHs (chief medical officers of health) as oracles, without questioning the information they dispense or consulting independent, non-governmental-aligned epidemiological authorities, such as The Great Barrington Declaration, the American Institute for Economic Research, JAMA and many others. Public obeisance is at the root of the travesty of voluntary disempowerment, the effects of which are now on popular display. “Those who know the least obey the best,” wrote George Farquhar in The Inconstant

I have seen the identical syndrome my friend mentions at work in the members of my own family, who implicitly believe everything the lying media tell them about masks, lockdowns and vaccines, and treat my warnings as merely conspiratorial. The respect they have, amounting almost to adulation, for health bureaucrats and medical hired guns, who may not “know anything” and who have occasionally violated their own proscriptions, is quite discouraging. My relatives refuse to look up anything for themselves or credit the clear evidence when it is presented to them. The mental disposition of those I care for reproduces the physical deportment they increasingly exhibit, the signs of a profound distress which they cannot disguise. And it seems, despite my best efforts, there is nothing I can do about it.

All one can manage at this point is to bear witness and stay upright. Observing these legions of abulics shambling by, tentatively fumbling with their masks and looking wilted, I find this posture of desuetude truly appalling and ask myself, to adapt a phrase from Henrik Ibsen, whether the dead will ever awaken. For it is an exhaustion of spirit, a reduction of vital energy, a lasting expression of defeat and a morbid depletion of the will that may be among the greatest and most gratuitous harms the Covid panic has produced.

Sometimes, anatomy speaks.