UPDATE 18. September 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 17: "The Economy in the Grip of the Pandemic & The Corona Vaccination" STOP THE UNETHICAL VACCINE-TRIALS !
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 17: Friday, 18.09.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts Professor Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi (Microbiologist, Virologist and Infection-Epidemiologist), Law-Chair Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, Oliver Gaebe (Travel-Journalist, Tourism-Expert), Paul Schreyer (Journalist, MultiPolar Magazine), Volker Reusing und Sarah Luzia Hassel-Reusing (Humanrights Advocates) and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung17/
UPDATE 17. September 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 16: The Corona-Counsel: "Help to Self-Help concerning Masks, Tests and Quarantine"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 16: Thursday, 17.09.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts Law-Chair Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab (Quarantine, PCR Tests, Forced Testing,Parental Rights), Attorney Dr. Justus P. Hoffmann (Masks, Exemptions, Medical Attestation), Lawyer Dirk Sattelmaier (Criminal Law, advises organizers of public events), Medical-scientific Advisor Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg (Corona measures concerning mothers while giving birth) and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung16/
UPDATE 12. September 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 15: "Hypnosis, Rituals, and ways out of the corona trauma crisis"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 15: Saturday, 12.09.2020 | 12h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts Prof. Dr. Franz Ruppert (Psychologist, Traumatherapist und Psychotraumalogist), Prof. Dr. Hüther (Neurobiologist), Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung15/
UPDATE 11. September 2020: LIVESTREAM SPECIAL SESSION - "The problems of vaccinations and the demonstration in Berlin"
Corona Commission of Inquiry in speial session with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the protection of children and the criticism concerning vaccines - 19h30 CET - via LIVESTREAM (in English) with public participation
UPDATE 11. September 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 14: "Astroturfing and the Berlin Demonstrations"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 14: Friday, 11.09.2020 | 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts David Claudio Siber (exTheGreens Politician and Postgrauate in Political Sciences), Ralf Ludwig (Demo-Lawyer), Lars Oberndorf (Criminologist, Scientist in Politics und Police Sciences as well as former Police Officer) und Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as scientific advisor - with public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung14/
24.08.2020 - 28.08.2020: We invited: Government Representatives, Administrators, Public Officers, Governmental Experts, Test Manufacturers etc. | Specific dates will be announced after response has been received. RKI refuses to stand. However, the President of the German Medical Association, Professor Dr Frank Ulrich Montgomery, responded positively and will attend to a session.
UPDATE 08. September 2020: AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine trial ON HOLD after adverse reaction of UK participant – report. HUGE SCANDAL - BECAUSE IT WAS PREDICTED!
UPDATE 07. September 2020: Now Everyone in Europe Is Following the ‘Swedish Model’, but It’s Not Politically Opportune to Say So
Update 06. September 2020: The 1% blunder: How a simple but fatal math mistake by US Covid-19 experts caused the world to panic and order lockdowns
UPDATE 06. September 2020: Lungs Damaged by 'Coronavirus' Can Repair Themselves in Three Months
UPDATE 05. Sptember: Oxford University: Coronavirus tests 'may be picking up traces of dead virus'
UPDATE 28. August 2020: Money Talks - Corona Class Actions: Compensation For Damages - INTERNATIONAL CALL TO JOIN
UPDATE 21. August 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 13: "SMEs in crisis, State Debt, Pandemic Sharks"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 13: 21.08.2020, 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Prof. Dr. Christian Kreiß (Economist), Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab (Law professor University of Bielefeld), Prof. Dr. Wolf Stelzner (Economist and Psychologist), as well as the entrepreneurs Karl-Hermann Wagner (1.300 staff) and economic advisor André Reiser with public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung13/
UPDATE 20. August 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 12: "Misincentives of the System - The Role of the Media II" & MONEY TALKS II - The Plan to achieve compensation.
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 12: 20.08.2020, 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts Hermann Ploppa (Political Sciences/Author) and Don Dylan (Health- und Prevention Advisor) and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung12/
UPDATE 18. August 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 11: "Data Protection - 1mio Genomes, Health-ID, Tracking App / Legal System - Basics for measures, Violations of Basic Rights"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 11: 18. August - 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Dr. Thilo Weichert, Lawyer and Datasecurity Expert, Lawyer Gordon Pankalla (AfA), Karl Hilz (former Police Officer), Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung11/
UPDATE 18. August 2020: Mr Draghi: Comparing Europe’s rebuilding from the pandemic to the aftermath of the second world war !!!
UPDATE 14. August 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 10: "The Dangers of the Virus, Treatment of the Disease, Is Vaccination a Solution?"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 10: 14. August - 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with Dr. Gerd Reuther, Clinical Chief-Medical-Officer (ret.) (12h), Dipl.Biol. Clemens Arvay, Health-Ecologist (13h) Prof. Pierre Capel, Immunologist (14h) and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung10/
UPDATE 13. August 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 09: "The Role of the Media"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 09: 13. August - 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with Patrick Plaga (Journalist) as well as Prof. Dr. Michael Meyen (Media Researcher) and Prof. Johannes Ludwig (Communications Scientist) and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung9/
UPDATE 08. August 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 08: USA - the view from inside & Present situation in Schweden, Frankreich, Italien, Ireland etc.
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 08: 07. August - 14:30 CET via LIVESTREAM (in English/German) with Naturopath Pam Popper - USA, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg - Deutschland, Journalist Gaby Weber - Argentinia, Designer Ash Zrl - Nepal, Prof. Dr. Luca Speciani - Italia, Immunologist and Virologist Prof. Dr. Dolores Cahill - Ireland (MUST WATCH: from minute 3:31'00") and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung8/
UPDATE 07. August 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 07: The Masks - Protection or Danger? & Present situation in Schweden, Frankreich, Italien, Netherlands etc. (English/German)
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 07: 06. August - 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with lung specialist Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg (Germany), Journalist Patrick Plaga (Sweden), Lawyer Anthony Brink (South-Africa), Attorney a. L. Jeroen Pols (Netherlands), Attorney a. L. Michael Verstraeten (Belgium), Dr. Hans-Joachim Maaz (Psychologist), Daniela Prousa (Dipl. Psych.) - and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung7/
UPDATE 31. July 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 06: The Situation of the Children (in German)
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 06: 31. July - 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with child psychologists and a parent initiative | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung6/
UPDATE 30. July 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 05: The Situation of the Small Entrepreneurs and the Self-employed |
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 05: 30. July - 11:00 CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with entrepreneur, artist, top economist and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung5/
UPDATE 24. Juli 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 04: The Drosten-Test, Immunity and the second wave.
Corona commission of inquiry Session 04: 24. Juli 2020 - 11h -16h CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with top expert Prof. Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung4/
Addendum: BIG STORY - PLEASE SHARE: 'Virus' test revelations with David Icke and Andrew Kaufman
UPDATE 23. Juli 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 03:
"Bergamo - what happened there?": Corona commission of inquiry 23. Juli 11:00 h with Top Experts from Italy: Dr. Luka Speziani, Dr. Loretta Bolgan, Dr. Fabio Zoffi, Prof. Dr. Antonietta Gatti, Prof. Dr. Pasquale Bacco + team: Many patients died due to wrong medication and wrong medical procedures like forced incubation. Italian authorites refused forensic investigations on the dead, though classical post-mortems already did show a very high number of cases with severe and deadly thrombosis. (In German, English, Italian) The danger of this pathogen is over, but the Italian government doesn't allow the people to return to their normal life. https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung3/
UPDATE 15. Juli 2020: LIVESTREAM Session 2 | 15. Juli. 2020 | 11h to 16h CET - The situation of the elderly in the care homes
Corona commission of inquiry Session 02: 15. Juli 2020 - 11h -16h CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with top expert with Adelheid von Stösser and public participation - https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung2/
Addendum: Fake Tests = Fake Cases = Fake Reasons For Lockdowns - Mass Murder Of The Elderly
UPDATE 14. Juli 2020: LIVESTREAM Sesson 1 | 14.07.2020 | 11h to 16h - Workplan of the commission, focal points of the inquiry.
Corona commission of inquiry Session 01: 14. Juli 2020 - 11h -16h CET via LIVESTREAM (in German) with top expert Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg presenting his experiences on the swine-flu pandemic and public participation - https://corona-ausschuss.de/sitzung1/
UPDATE 10. Juli 2020: International Media-Conference in Berlin LIVESTREAM (video 2h25m in German) - with a good participation of jounalists from all media, except those financed by government. The direct public participation was excellent with over 6,000 multiplicators engaged, whose most important questions could already and directly be answered during the conference. Over 100,000 already watched the livestream. (In German) From the next week on the committee will for 4-6 weeks on three days per week hear the witnesses and experts - likewise livestreamed und with direct public participation. Via the website https://corona-ausschuss.de/ all sessions will be announced, livestreamed with public participation and and the findings published.The network of the committee is expanding to other European and international initiatives.
UPDATE: Start and International Media-Conference on 10. Juli 2020 in Berlin
Corona Committee of Inquiry Seeks the Truth
By SCA - 01. Juli 2020
We want to investigate why the federal and state governments have imposed unprecedented restrictions and what consequences they had for people. We support scientific studies in this field.
In Germany, coronavirus activity is almost at a standstill. A large number of studies have shown that lethality and mortality are similar to influenza. Throughout the entire coronavirus measures, the German health care system was never overwhelmed.
However, the government's coronavirus interventions, which were imposed in a great panic, have caused massive social, psychological, health, cultural and economic collateral damage.
This is becoming increasingly clear and is in particular due to the lockdown. We are seeing millions of additional unemployed and short-time workers, companies in bankruptcy, excess mortality among the isolated elderly, reduced health care services for the general public due to a large number of postponed operations and a lack of doctors visits due to fear, an increase in suicides, a large elevation of child abuse cases, general traumatisation and "new" anxiety-ridden social behaviour.
Many basic rights have been restricted as a result of hastily enforced legal changes. Due to the new legislation, the federal and state governments are authorized to restrict civil rights beyond the end of this pandemic. Furthermore, democratic processes have been shortened and suspended (e.g. postponed elections). Our liberal democratic structures have been changed. Democracy has thus suffered great damage. Many people feel that the measures taken were degrading and discouraging.
Now that the virus panic has abated, it is time for an objective and unsparing analysis of the overall events, including the state crisis management of the German federal and state governments. Among other things, this will allow us to be better prepared for future pandemics, für the purpose of structured pandemic preparedness. This also includes an (interim) assessment of the damage that has occurred, which must be assigned to the virus or the prescribed measures in each case.
Time is of the essence as there is always a chance that a virus event and/or suboptimal crisis management could potentially lead to avoidable damage and victims.
It is nonviable to wait for the establishment of a parliamentary committee of inquiry, since experience has shown this needs a longer lead time. Therefore, the Foundation is now setting up its own Coronavirus Committee of Inquiry. Over a period of four to six weeks starting shortly, this committee will hear experts and witnesses in weekly meetings on a wide range of issues concerning the virus, the crisis management and the consequences. In particular, the collateral damage of the lockdown, which has not yet been evaluated in detail, will be examined in greater detail.
Our committee of inquiry will commence its work shortly. All meetings will be live-streamed.
The sessions will be streamed live and remain available as recordings. Citizens will be invited to participate in the discussion through contributions in the chat and by e-mail. The commission's findings will be presented to the public.
The Executive Board and the Advisory Board are composed exclusively of persons who are committed to the principles of scientific evidence and who are willing to conduct an objective discussion on the various topics without personal, scientific or economic conflicts of interest. Further experts from science and practice support the search for answers.
The Corona committe of inquiry was founded by four lawyers. It carries out impartial and independentinvestigations into the corona crisis. The committee isrepresented by the attorneys at law Viviane Fischer, Antonia Fischer, Dr. Reiner Füllmich und Dr. Justus. P. Hoffmann.
Read more about the work at: https://corona-ausschuss.de and
Please follow on the official YouTube Channel
Doyou have questions for the committee of inquiry? Can you serve as witness to shed light concerning the situation and circumstances on the corona cisis? Can you contribute your knowlege as expert in any of the fields concered?
Anonymous information should be sent via: https://securewhistleblower.com/ [N.B.: This service, hostet on a server in Switzerland is not really secure, encrypts only the transmisstion (just using SSH), not the message or attachments (i.e. server-manager or hacker find the clear text) and it should in any case never be accessed without VPN or TOR. Services that arebsed on a server or its cloud also log and store meta-data of the sender etc. - Read: https://ecoterra.info/index.php/de/about - you can contact us for advise concerning very sensitive material that you need to send to the commission of inquiry.]
Anyone with specific knowledge or insider informationon the topic "Corona and the Role of the Media", please write to
Kindly support our work with a donation. At present we can not yet issue tax-eductible receipts. Bank details: Rechtsanwaltsanderkonto/Treuhandkonto: Rechtsanwalt Tobias Weissenborn Verwendungszweck “Spende Corona-Ausschuss” IBAN: DE14 2604 0030 0602 3832 04 BIC: COBADEFFXXX
Stiftung Corona-Ausschuss - Pressekonferenz
(Based on the great interest and the growing international interest and network the sessions will also be held in English)
•Streamed live 10. Juli 2020 - 12:00 - Start of the conference at minute 35
Rechtsanwältinnen und Rechtsanwälte haben die Stiftung Corona-Ausschuss ins Leben gerufen.
Sie wird untersuchen, warum Bundes- und Landesregierungen beispiellose Beschränkungen verhängt haben und welche Folgen diese für die Menschen haben.
Der Ausschuss wird geleitet von den Rechtsanwältinnen Antonia Fischer und Viviane Fischer sowie den Rechtsanwälten Dr. Reiner Füllmich und Dr. Justus Hoffmann.
Begleitende Experten aus Wissenschaft und Praxis sind u.a. der Forensiker Prof. Pasquale Mario Bacco, der Psychiater und Psychoanalytiker Dr. Hans-Joachim Maaz, die Pflegeexpertin Adelheid von Stösser, der experimentelle Immunologe Prof. emeritus Peter Capel, der klinische Psychologe Prof. Dr. Harald Walach.
Der durch seine Arbeit im Schweinegrippe-Untersuchungsausschuss bekannte Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg (ehemaliger Amtsarzt, MdB, Pneumologe und Gesundheitswissenschaftler) wird die Arbeit des Ausschusses unterstützen.
Der Ausschuss wird unverzüglich seine Arbeit in Berlin aufnehmen.
Auf der Pressekonferenz wurden die Stiftung, die handelnden Personen sowie der Themen- und Zeitplan des Ausschusses vorgestellt und Fragen beantwortet.
MONEY TALKS - Corona Class Actions
•Aug 28, 2020 - Money Talks - www. corona-schadensersatzklage.de
Corona Class Actions: Compensation For Damages: More information concerning the envisaged class actions and options to join --->>> https://www.corona-schadensersatzklage.de/
Lawyer Dr. Fuellmich
● Founding member of the german C-19 Investigative-Committee
•Jul 27, 2020
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, lawyer in Germany since 1993, licensed in California / USA since 1994, consumer protection lawyer, especially against banks, since 1991.
● Lawyers have set up the C. Committee Foundation. It will investigate why federal and state governments have imposed unprecedented restrictions and what the consequences are for people. The foundation also promotes scientific studies in this area. The committee is headed by the lawyers Antonia Fischer and Viviane Fischer and the lawyers Dr. Reiner Füllmich and Dr. Justus Hoffmann. Accompanying experts from science and practice include the forensic scientist Prof. Pasquale Mario Bacco, the psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Dr. Hans Joachim Maaz, the nursing expert Adelheid von Stösser, the experimental immunologist Prof. emeritus Peter Capel, the clinical psychologist Prof. Dr. Harald Walach.
Known for his work in the swine flu investigation committee Wolfgang Wodarg (former medical officer, Member of the Bundestag, pneumologist and health scientist) will support the work of the committee.
If you missed the World Premier of my film (and don't want to use a proprietary platform):— Juan Passarelli (@jlpassarelli) August 29, 2020
Watch "The War on Journalism: The Case of #JulianAssange" here: https://t.co/OkZKhTeFO7#FreeAssange #AssangeCase #SaveJulian
AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine trial ON HOLD after adverse reaction of UK participant – report
By RT - 08 September 2020
A June 24, 2020 file photo of one of the locations for the Oxford/AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine trials, in Sao Paulo, Brazil. © REUTERS/Amanda Perobelli
The Phase 3 trial of the Covid-19 vaccine developed by the University of Oxford and AstraZeneca has been paused, reportedly due to a suspected ‘serious adverse reaction’ by one of the participants in the UK.
AstraZeneca only said that its “standard review process triggered a pause to vaccination to allow review of safety data,” according to a statement by a company spokesperson on Tuesday. It was unclear whether the hold was self-imposed or ordered by a regulator, what the adverse reaction may have been, or when it might have happened.
Anonymous sources told the news site Stat that the participant is “expected to recover,” but the information could not be independently confirmed.
AstraZeneca’s vaccine is the first Covid-19 trial put on hold upon reaching Phase 3, according to Stat. The study on phases one and two, published in July by the medical journal Lancet, noted that about 60 percent of the participants had developed side effects – fever, headaches, muscle pain, and injection site reactions, mainly – that were described as “mild or moderate” and subsided during the course of the trials.
It is unclear what effect the UK pause will have on the plans for Phase 3 testing in the US, which is supposed to enroll some 30,000 participants at 80 locations, according to the National Institutes of Health.
AstraZeneca’s vaccine client, AZD1222, uses an adenovirus that shares a gene with SARS-Cov-2, the coronavirus that causes Covid-19. The adenovirus platform is considered experimental in the West, but has served as the basis for Russia’s own vaccine for the coronavirus, dubbed Sputnik-V, which was rolled out to the public this week.
A peer-reviewed study of the early stages of Sputnik-V testing, published by The Lancet last week, suggested the Russian vaccine was both effective and safe. The journal noted that longer-term trials, including a placebo comparison, would be required to establish its bona fides beyond a reasonable doubt.
The 1% blunder:
How a simple but fatal math mistake by US Covid-19 experts caused the world to panic and order lockdowns
By Malcolm Kendrick - 06 September 2020
FILE PHOTO: Adriana Cardenas, a medical technologist processes test samples for the coronavirus at the AdventHealth Tampa labs on June 25, 2020 in Tampa, Florida. © Getty Images / Octavio Jones
In February, US Covid guru Anthony Fauci predicted the virus was ‘akin to a severe flu’ and would therefore kill around 0.1 percent of people. Then fatality rate predictions were somehow mixed up to make it look ten times WORSE.
When you strip everything else out, the reason for lockdown comes from a single figure: one percent. This was the prediction that Covid, if left unchecked, would kill around one percent of us.
You may not think that percentage is enormous, but one percent of the population of the world is 70 million people – and that’s a lot. It would mean 3.2 million Americans dead, and 670,000 Britons.
But where did this one percent figure come from? You may find this hard to believe, but this figure emerged by mistake. A pretty major thing to make a mistake about, but that’s what happened.
Such things occur. On September 23, 1998, NASA permanently lost contact with the Mars Climate Orbiter. It was supposed to go round and round the planet looking at the weather, but instead it hit Mars at around 5,000 mph, exploding into tiny fragments. It didn’t measure the weather; it became the weather – for a few seconds anyway.
An investigation later found that the disaster happened because engineers had used the wrong units. They didn’t convert pound seconds into Newton seconds when doing their calculations. Imperial, not metric. This, remember, was NASA. An organisation not completely full of numbskulls.
Now you and I probably have no idea of the difference between a pound second and a Newton second (it’s 0.67 – I looked it up). But you would kind-of hope NASA would. In fact, I am sure they do, but they didn’t notice, so the figures came out wrong. The initial mistake was made, and was baked into the figures.
With Covid, a similar mistake happened. One type of fatality rate was substituted for another. The wrong rate was then used to predict the likely death rate – and, as with NASA, no-one picked up the error.
In order to understand what happened, you have to understand the difference between two medical terms that sound the same – but are completely different. Rather like a pound second or a Newton second.
Which fatality rate, did you say?
First, there’s the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR). This is the total number of people who are infected by a disease and the number of them who die. This figure includes those who have no symptoms at all, or only very mild symptoms – those who stayed at home, coughed a bit and watched Outbreak.
Then there’s the Case Fatality Rate (CFR). This is the number of people suffering serious symptoms, who are probably ill enough to be in hospital. Clearly, people who are seriously ill – the “cases” – are going to have a higher mortality rate than those who are infected, many of whom don’t have symptoms. Put simply – all cases are infections, but not all infections are cases.
Which means that the CFR will always be far higher than the IFR. With influenza, the CFR is around ten times as high as the IFR. Covid seems to have a similar proportion.
Now, clearly, you do not want to get these figures mixed up. By doing so you would either wildly overestimate, or wildly underestimate, the impact of Covid. But mix these figures up, they did.
The error started in America, but didn’t end there. In healthcare, the US is very much the dog that wags the tail. The figures they come up with are used globally.
On February 28, 2020, an editorial was released by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Published in the New England Journal of Medicine, the editorial stated: “… the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza.”
They added that influenza has a CFR of approximately 0.1 percent. One person in a thousand who gets it badly, dies.
But that quoted CFR for influenza was ten times too low – they meant to say the IFR, the Infection Fatality Rate, for influenza was 0.1 percent. This was their fatal – quite literally – mistake.
The mistake was compounded. On March 11, the same experts testified to Congress, stating that Covid’s CFR was likely to be about one percent, so one person dying from a hundred who fell seriously ill. Which, as time has passed, has proved to be pretty accurate.
At this meeting, they compared the likely impact of Covid to flu. But they used the wrong CFR for influenza, the one stated in the previous NEJM editorial. 0.1 percent, or one in a thousand. The one that was ten times too low.
Flu toll 1,000 – Covid toll 10,000
If influenza killed 50, Covid was going to kill 500. If influenza killed a million, Covid was going to get 10 million. No wonder Congress, then the world, panicked. Because they were told Covid was going to be ten times worse than influenza. They could see three million deaths in the US alone, and 70 million around the world.
I don’t expect you or I to get this sort of thing right. But I bloody well expect the experts to do so. They didn’t. They got their IFR and CFR mixed up and multiplied the likely impact of Covid by a factor of ten.
Here’s what the paper, “Public health lessons learned from biases in coronavirus mortality overestimation”,says: “On March 11, 2020,... based on the data available at the time, Congress was informed that the estimated mortality rate for the coronavirus was ten-times higher than for seasonal influenza, which helped launch a campaign of social distancing, organizational and business lockdowns, and shelter-in-place orders.”
On February 28 it was estimated that Covid was going to have about the same impact as a bad influenza season – almost certainly correct. Eleven days later, the same group of experts predicted that the mortality rate was going to be ten times as high. This was horribly, catastrophically, running-into-Mars-at-5,000-miles-an-hour wrong.
Enter the Mad Modellers of Lockdown
In the UK, the group I call the Mad Modellers of lockdown, the Imperial College experts, created the same panic. On March 16, they used an estimated IFR of 0.9 percent to predict that, without lockdown, Covid would kill around 500,000 in the UK.
Is this prediction anywhere close?
So far, the UK has had around 40,000 Covid deaths. Significantly less than 0.1 percent, but not that far off. Of course, people will say... “We had lockdown... without it so many more would have died. Most people have not been infected…” etc.
To answer this, we need to know the true IFR. Is it a 0.1 percent, or one percent? If it is one percent, we have more than 400,000 deaths to go. If it is 0.1 percent, this epidemic has run its course. For this year, at least.
With swine flu, remember that the IFR started at around two percent. In the end, it was 0.02 percent, which was five times lower than the lowest estimate during the outbreak. The more you test, the lower the IFR will fall.
So where can we look to get the current figures on the IFR? The best place to look is at the country that has tested more people than anywhere else as a proportion of their population: Iceland.
As of last week, Iceland’s IFR stood at 0.16 per cent. It cannot go up from here. It can only fall. People can’t start dying of a disease they haven’t got.
This means that we’ll probably end up with an IFR of about 0.1 percent, maybe less. Not the 0.02 percent of Swine Flu – somewhere between the two, perhaps. In short, the 0.1 percent prophecy has proved to be pretty much bang on.
Which means that we’ve had all the deaths we were ever going to get. And which also means that lockdown achieved, almost precisely nothing with regard to Covid. No deaths were prevented.
Mangled beyond recognition
Yes, we are testing and testing, and finding more so-called cases. As you will. But the hospitals and ICUs are virtually empty. Almost no-one is dying of Covid anymore, and most of those who do were otherwise very ill.
Instead of celebrating that, we’ve artificially created a whole new thing to scare ourselves with. We now call a positive test a Covid “case.” This is not medicine. A “case” is someone who has symptoms. A case is not someone carrying tiny amounts of virus in their nose.
Now, however, you test positive, and you’re a “case.” Never in history has medical terminology been so badly mangled. Never have statistics been so badly mangled.
When researchers look back at this pandemic, they’ll have absolutely no idea who died because of Covid, or who died –coincidentally– with it. Everything’s been mashed together in a determined effort to make the virus look as deadly as possible.
Lockdown happened because we were told that Coivid could kill one percent. But Covid was never going to kill more than about 0.1 percent – max.
That’s the figure estimated back in February, by the major players in viral epidemiology. A figure that has turned out to be remarkably accurate. Bright guys… bad mistake.
We’ve killed tens of thousands – for nothing
But because we panicked, we’ve added hugely to the toll. Excess mortality between March and May was around 70,000, not the 40,000 who died of/with Covid. Which means 30,000 may have died directly as a result of the actions we took.
We protected the young, the children, who are at zero risk of Covid. But we threw our elderly and vulnerable under a bus. The very group who should have been shielded. Instead, we caused 20,000 excess deaths in care homes.
It was government policy to clear out hospitals, and stuff care homes with patients carrying Covid, or discharge them back to their own homes, to infect their nearest and dearest. Or any community care staff who visited them.
We threw – to use health secretary Matt Hancock’s ridiculous phrase – a ring of steel around care homes. As it turned out, this was not to protect them, but to trap the residents, as we turned their buildings into Covid incubators. Anyone working in care homes, as I do, knows why we got 20,000 excess deaths. Government policy did this.
That is far from all the damage. On top of care homes, the ONS estimates that 16,000 excess deaths were caused by lockdown. The heart attacks and strokes that were not treated. The empty, echoing hospitals and A&E units. The cancer treatments stopped entirely.
Which means that at least as many people have died as a result of the draconian actions taken to combat Covid, as have been killed by the virus itself. This has been a slow-motion stampede, where the elderly – in particular - were trampled to death.
We locked down in fear. We killed tens of thousands unnecessarily, in fear. We crippled the economy, and left millions in fear of their livelihoods. We have trapped abused women and children at home with their abusers. We have wiped out scores of companies, and crushed entire industries.
We stripped out the NHS, and left millions in prolonged pain and suffering, on ever lengtheningwaiting lists, which have doubled. There have also been tens of thousands of delayed cancer diagnoses – the effects of which are yet to be seen, but the Lancet has estimated at least sixty thousand years of life will be lost.
Lockdown can be seen as a complete and utter disaster. And it was all based on a nonsense, a claim that Covid was going to kill one percent. A claim that can now be seen to be utterly and completely wrong. Sweden, which did not lock down, has had a death rate of 0.0058 percent.
It takes a very big person to admit they have made a horrible, terrible mistake. But a horrible, terrible mistake has been made. Let’s end this ridiculous nonsense now. And vow never to let such monumental stupidity happen ever again.
Malcolm Kendrick, doctor and author who works as a GP in the National Health Service in England. His blog can be read here and his book, 'Doctoring Data – How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense,' is available here.
The Great Hysteria Pandemic
Now Everyone in Europe Is Following the ‘Swedish Model’, but It’s Not PC to Say So
Except for the nonsense with face diapers.
By Sophie Stigfur - 07. September 2020
Editor’s note: The ‘Swedish model’ — aka what we’ve always done before the collective psychosis.
Machine translated from Swedish.
Recommendations instead of mandatory laws, open schools and restaurants along with reminders to wash your hands and keep your distance.
The Swedish model during the pandemic has been called irresponsible and used as an example of horror by several world leaders – not least with reference to Sweden’s high death toll. On several occasions, Sweden has had the highest proportion of deaths per capita in the world.
But international virus experts state that Sweden is now getting a kind of revenge for its unique corona strategy, reports SvD.
– Today, all countries in Europe more or less follow the method from the Swedish model – but no one would admit it. That is not politically correct. Almost everyone has criticized the Swedish strategy and called it inhuman and a failure. You can not turn around now, says Antoine Flahault, professor of epidemiology at the University of Geneva and head of the Institute of Global Health.
While infection is currently declining in Sweden, the numbers are rising in countries that have opened up after strict lockdowns. And when the virus rushes upwards again through Europe , most countries choose not to reintroduce shutdowns.
Instead, in the Swedish way, the population is encouraged to use common sense and follow recommendations on hygiene and physical distance.
– The Swedish model is seen today as sensible or as a unique alternative to lockdown. There, they have managed to make citizens understand and participate in the fight against the virus without mandatory laws and regulations. Countries want to try something more mature, more responsible and inclusive, says Fauhalt.
David Nabarro, WHO envoy for covid-19, also praises Sweden.
– I advocate that this type of trust between authorities and people is used more generally in the world, he says to SvD.
A privileged country
However, all experts highlight Sweden’s accident when it comes to keeping the infection away from nursing homes.
And Marc Van Ranst, head of the Belgian Institute of Public Health, believes that Sweden is privileged with good healthcare and few and well-informed citizens. The Swedish model might not work as well in a densely populated larger country.
Nabarro, from WHO, points out that the results do not yet exist.
– The history books will give us the answers. Then the Swedish strategy can be compared with others, he tells SvD.
Lungs Damaged by Coronavirus Can Repair Themselves in Three Months
(Not so) Breaking news: Human body has the ability to heal itself. Including, shockingly, after coronavirus infections which mammals have been dealing with for millions of years.
First study of its kind has found that nearly half of hospital patients showed no damage at 12 weeks
By Henry Bodkin - 06. September 2020
Editor’s note: When it became clear that COVID-19 had a fatality rate in the ballpark of the common flu the cult changed goalposts and started claiming that if it won’t kill you, it will still drill holes in your lungs for life. So much about that. “Turns out” the human body has the ability to heal itself. Including, shockingly, after coronavirus infections which mammals have been dealing with for millions of years.
Lungs can repair themselves after a serious bout of coronavirus in just three months, a new study has revealed, raising hope patients will not be living with debilitating symptoms for years on end.
Doctors said trials showed nearly half of patients in trials showed no evidence of lung damage at 12 weeks.
Although they confirm longstanding fears that Covid patients can suffer serious effects weeks after recovering from the virus, the results are the first to show that these tend to heal over time.
Eighty-six patients from an outbreak hot-spot in the Tyrolean region of Austriawere hospitalised between April 29 and June 9, then followed up at six, 12 and 24 weeks after discharge. [All participants had been hospitalized, which is to say they had all been the unusual, severe cases.]
At the six-week visit, 88 per cent of patients showed evidence of lung damage, but this dropped to 56 per cent at the 12-week check-up.
The results from the 24-week visits are not yet ready to be published.Meanwhile 65 per cent of the cohort showed general symptoms of lung problems at the six-week visit, with breathlessness the most common symptom – 47 per cent – followed by coughing – 15 per cent.
By 12 weeks, breathlessness had improved and was present in 39 per cent of patients.
The proportion of patients coughing at this stage did not improve as markedly, however, only dropping to 13 per cent.
Dr Sabina Sahanic, who worked on the study at the University Clinic in Innsbruck, said: “The bad news is that people show lung impairment from Covid-19 weeks after discharge; the good news is that the impairment tends to ameliorate over time, which suggests the lungs have a mechanism for repairing themselves.”
The average age of the patients was 61, with 65 per cent male.
Nearly half were former smokers, and more than six in 10 were overweight or obese.
One in five had been admitted to an intensive care unit, and roughly the same proportion placed on a mechanical ventilator. The patients were followed up with lung function tests.
Only 23 per cent performed at 80 per cent less than normal at six weeks, but the proportion did not improve significantly over time.
CT scans showed that the score that defines the severity of overall lung damage decreased from eight points at six weeks to four points at 12 weeksPresented at the European Respiratory Society International Conference on Monday, the results follow months of warnings from medical experts that people who suffered badly with coronavirus can expect long-lasting effects.
In July the NHS announced plans to launch an online Covid rehabilitation service, including virtual access to physiotherapists, in recognition of the long-term needs.
Published alongside the Innsbruck research was another study which found that the sooner patients begin pulmonary rehabilitation after coming off a ventilator, the faster they recovered. Spending days on a ventilator can result in severe muscle loss, particularly in the muscles used for breathing.
Pulmonary rehabilitation, which involves physical exercises and advice on managing symptoms, including shortness of breath and post-traumatic stress disorder, is crucial for helping patients to recover fully, the researchers said.
Yara Al Chikhanie, from Grenoble Alps University, said: “The sooner rehabilitation started and the longer it lasted, the faster and better was the improvement in patients’ walking and breathing capacities and muscle gain.
“Patients who started rehabilitation in the week after coming off their ventilators progressed faster than those who were admitted after two weeks.”
BIG STORY - PLEASE SHARE: 'Virus' test revelations with David Icke and Andrew Kaufman
First published at 11:42 UTC on August 24th, 2020.
Coronavirus tests 'may be picking up traces of dead virus'
Experts from Oxford University's Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine say the widely-used PCR test will result in false positives.
By SN - 05. Sptember 2020
The tests used to find out if someone is COVID positive could be finding traces of the virus that are no longer active, some scientists are saying.
A study by members of the University of Oxford's Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (CEBM) and the University of the West of England found that there was a risk of "false positives" because of the way people are currently tested for coronavirus.
They looked at 25 studies on the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test - the very sensitive test widely used to find out if someone has the virus in their system.
The test gives a positive or negative result, which the scientists say amounts to a simplistic "yes" - someone has the virus, or "no" - they don't have the virus.
But they found the tests were able to detect traces of the virus's genetic material for a much longer period than it remains infectious - meaning a person who tests positive may have the virus in their system, but won't necessarily pass it on.
Other genetic material it detects might be fragments of dead virus - which have already been dealt with by a body's immune system.
One of the study's authors, the CEBM's Professor Carl Heneghan, told The Spectator magazine there were also issues with the way the tests check for the virus and there was a risk that a surge in testing across the UK was increasing the risk of contamination.
He said it may be part of the reason why the number of cases in the UK is rising but the number of deaths from COVID-19 is remaining static.
Prof Heneghan wrote in the magazine: "Evidence is mounting that a good proportion of 'new' mild cases and people re-testing positives after quarantine or discharge from hospital are not infectious, but are simply clearing harmless virus particles which their immune system has efficiently dealt with."
He said an "international effort" was needed to avoid "the dangers of isolating non-infectious people or whole communities".
The authors wrote in their conclusion of the paper, which was published as a pre-print on the Medrxiv online journal and is yet to be peer-reviewed: "Prospective routine testing of reference and culture specimens are necessary for each country involved in the pandemic to establish the usefulness and reliability of (the) PCR (test) for COVID-19 and its relation to patients' factors.
"Infectivity is related to the date of onset of symptoms and cycle threshold level."
PCR tests work by taking a sample from a person and applying a process to increase the amount of DNA or genetic material in that sample, so that it can be examined.
The experts say there is a risk the tests can amplify COVID-19 genetic material which is not a whole virus, or material which is no longer capable of causing a full-blown infection.
Mr Draghi: Comparing Europe’s rebuilding from the pandemic to the aftermath of the second world war !!!
By FT - 18. August 2020
Rebuilding after pandemic will be akin to post-second world war reconstruction, says ex-ECB chief Former European Central Bank president Mario Draghi speaking in Rimini, Italy, on Tuesday
Europe will only fully recover from the economic impact of coronavirus if governments use their vastly increased debts to invest in young people, innovation and research, Mario Draghi has said in his first speech since leaving the European Central Bank last year.
Mr Draghi, who stepped down as ECB president last November, said debt levels would be high for a long time, but they would only be sustainable if “good debt” was “used for productive purposes” instead of “bad debt” being used for unproductive purposes.
“Low interest rates are not in themselves a guarantee of sustainability; the perception of the quality of the debt incurred is just as important,” he said. “The more that perception deteriorates, the more uncertain our framework of references will become, which would jeopardise employment, investment and consumption.”
Comparing Europe’s rebuilding from the pandemic to the aftermath of the second world war, Mr Draghi said the region had to rethink many of its rules while resisting challenges from other countries to its core values of multilateralism, solidarity and the rule of law.
“We should take inspiration from those who were involved in rebuilding the world, Europe and Italy after World War II,” he said in a speech at an event in Rimini, on Italy’s eastern coast.
As ECB president, Mr Draghi repeatedly called for the EU to issue much more common debt and to establish its own budget. He said on Tuesday that the €750bn recovery fund agreed last month by EU leaders to support countries hit hardest by the pandemic “enriches the European policy arsenal”.
The debt created by the pandemic is unprecedented and will have to be repaid mainly by those who are young today Mario Draghi
“Europe can emerge strengthened from this crisis,” he said. “The recognition of the role that a European budget can play in stabilising our economies, and the precedent of issuing common debt, are important and can form the basis of the design of a common Treasury ministry.”
Investors have been concerned about the impact of the pandemic on already elevated debt levels in southern European countries, particularly Italy, where debt is expected to rise above 160 per cent of gross domestic product this year.
Mr Draghi said European governments faced “a moral imperative” to invest in educating young people. “The debt created by the pandemic is unprecedented and will have to be repaid mainly by those who are young today,” he said.
“It is therefore our duty to equip them with the means to service that debt, and to do so while living in improved societies,” he said, adding: “For years, a form of collective selfishness has led governments to divert attention and resources towards initiatives that generated guaranteed and immediate political returns. This is no longer acceptable today.”
Younger workers have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic’s impact on labour markets because many of them have temporary or part-time roles that have been cut, while widespread hiring freezes at companies are hampering the career prospects of graduates.
Since leaving the ECB, where he was widely credited with saving the euro from the region’s sovereign debt crisis in 2012, Mr Draghi has been appointed to a Vatican think-tank advising Pope Francis on social and economic affairs.
Fake Tests = Fake Cases = Fake Reasons For Lockdowns - Mass Murder Of The Elderly - David Icke
First published at 14:06 UTC on August 6th, 2020.
Ernst Wolff - Corona & The Collapse of the System
(Audio in English)
•12 Apr 2020
The total collapse of the financial system as we know it. I have dubbed this fascinating interview with financial expert Ernst Wolff into English so that as many as possible can watch. Interview by Alex Quint March 20 - 2020.
OVALmedia - 13. March 2020
March 13, 2020 - Backup on Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/video/rcvqLu1jCWjk/
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 14 - Astroturfing und die Berliner Demonstrationen
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 13 - Mittelstand in der Krise, Staatsverschuldung, Pandemiegewinnler
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 12 - Fehlanreize im System - Die Rolle der Medien II & MONEY TALKS II
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 11 - Datenschutz - 1 Million Genome, Gesundheits-ID, Tracking-App / Rechtssystem - Grundlagen für die Massnahmen, Grundrechtseingeriffe
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 10 - Gefährlichkeit des Virus, Behandlung der Krankheit, Impfen als Ausweg?
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 9 - Die Rolle der Medien
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 8 - USA - der Blick von innen & Die Lage in anderen Ländern
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 7 - Schützen die Masken oder schaden sie?
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 6 - Die Lage der Kinder - Corona-Ausschuss hört Kinder-Psychologen
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 5 - Die Lage der kleinen Unternehmer und der Selbständigen & Zwischenbilanz & MONEY TALKS I
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 4 - Der Drosten-Test, die Immunität und die zweite Welle
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 3 - Bergamo - was war da los? mit Top-Eperten aus Italien
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 2 - Die Lage der Menschen in den Pflegeheimen
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 1 - Ablaufplan, Themenkreise, Lernen vom Untersuchungsausschuss Schweinegrippe
Corona-Untersuchungsausschuss beginnt die Arbeit - International Media Event