AVISO: Livestream Session #29: Friday 27. November 2020 - 11h CET: "The Attack on Body and Soul"
UPDATE 23. November 2020: First lawsuit filed by Dr, Fullmich at the High Court in Berlin / Germany - addressing i.a. also the unsuitable PCR tests, designed in addition with a faulty protocol, not validated and not registered, but used to oppress the people worldwide. - see: CORONA-KLAGE: Jetzt Geht Es Los ! (with full document - in German language)
UPDATE 20. November 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 28 - "The Sliding Slope"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 28: Friday, 20.11.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM with experts: Journalist and Historian Anselm Lenz (Publisher of the newspaper Democratic Resistance), police-atrocities victim Karsten Wappler (IT Specialist), Dr. Peer Eifler (persecuted medical doctor and psychological therapist) - as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 13. November 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 27 - "A Sweeping Blow"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 27: Friday, 13.11.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM with experts: Dr. Mike Yeadon (Ex-Vizepräsident and former head of research Pfizer), Dr. Claire Craig (Medical doctor and Pathologist) - as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de (English/German)
UPDATE 06. November 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 26 - "PCR-Test - the Dominoes fall"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 26: Friday, 06.11.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM with experts: Prof. Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer - Biologist, Prof. Stefano Scoglio - Virologist and Science-Journalist - as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation. Plus the actual situation in Italy (PCR law suit) and the Netherlands (new legal cases). | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 30. October 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 25 - "The danger of equalisation of our legal system, police violence and Attacks by private individuals"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 25: Friday, 30.10.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Lawyer Dirk Sattelmeier and deaf-blind victim of police atrocities Mr. Bohla, Attorney Markus Haintz, police victim Friederike Pfeifer and Railway/Federal-Police victim Hans Scharpf (legal counsel) - as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 29. October 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 24 - "The strenght of our Immune-System and the Voices of the Children"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 23: Thursday, 29.10.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Dr. Matthias Burchardt (Anthropologist und Education Philosopher), Dr. med. Claus Köhnlein (Specialist in Internal Medicine) as well as the youth Isabel (17), Anny (14), Noel (15) and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 25. October 2020: John Ioannidis - Modelling by the Imperial College (... and why their predictions are wrong!) "Only by objectively considering a wide variety of models in a statistically principled manner, can one begin to address the effectiveness of NPIs such as lockdown. The approach outlined in this paper provides one such path. = LOCKDOWNS HAVE NO BENEFITS!
UPDATE 23. October 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 23: "Games and Reality"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 23: Friday, 23.10.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Actor Marco Rima and his wife, IT Entrepreneur Roman Roth, Cabaret Artist Arnulf Rating plus a view into the internal affairs of a labour union presented by Colin Meier (labour unionist) as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 22. October 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 22: "The Players: Drosten, Ferguson, Wieler, the Charité and the Role of TIB Molbiol"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 22: Thursday, 22.10.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Artur Aschmoneit (Historian and Journalist), Thorsten Engelbrecht (Journalist), Prof. Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer (Molecular Biologist) as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 20. October 2020: Dr. Reiner Fuellmich about Crimes Against Humanity and Corona Fraud (interview)
UPDATE 20. October 2020: Rushed Covid GMO Vaccines: Legal Action to Cancel EU Regulation 2020/1043
UPDATE 16. October 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 21: "The Power of the Corporations and Corruption"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 21: Friday, 16.10.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Business-Lawyer Dr. Renate Holzeisen (Attorney und Economist from Südtirol, which belongs today to Italy), Journalist Paul Schreyer (Author), Dr. Gunter Frank (.M.D.), Pediatrician Dr. med. Eugen Janzen as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 16. October 2020: Children’s Long-Term Mental Health at Risk From COVID-19-related Stress, Experts Warn
UPDATE 15. October 2020: Money Talks Update 1 English | Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
UPDATE 10. October 2020: THE MOST IMPORTANT Video on Earth Right Now
UPDATE 09. Oktober 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 20: "Finance-System and Hartz IV-Regime"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 20: Friday, 09.10.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Journalist und Author Ernst Wolff, Philosopher Ralph Boes (Hartz-IV-Plaintiff und Humanrights Activist), Childhood Scientist Prof. Dr. Michael Klundt (Human Sciences) as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 06. October 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 19: "Risiks of Medical Treatment / Insights from the Schools"
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 19: Tuesday, 06.10.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Anonymous Teacher, Attorney for Medical Law Dr. Justus. P. Hoffmann (Masks, Attests, Exemptions, Responsibilities of Schools), Dr. med. Claus Köhnlein (Specialist Internal Medicine) as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 06. October 2020: We’re sinking on the ‘global financial Titanic’ that hit iceberg in 2008
UPDATE 04. October 2020: Prof. John Ioannidis - We've lost the sense of what really matters
UPDATE 03. October 2020: Crimes against Humanity & CORONA CLASS ACTION (Must Watch Video) !!! + BOYCOTT YOUTUBE
UPDATE 03. October 2020: Prof John Ioannidis - The medicalization of society is becoming a major threat to humanity & Estimate of 700 Million people infected (by late September) and IFR is ~ 0,15%
UPDATE 02. October 2020: A GLOBAL FRAUD: LAWYER DR. REINER FUELLMICH AND THE GERMAN CORONA INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE SEEK ACCOUNTABILITY FOR FRAUDULENT VIRUS TESTING AND MASSIVE DESTRUCTION OF ECONOMIES AND LIVES. - Whistleblower Podcast
UPDATE 02. October 2020: LIVESTREAM #Session 18: "The Dangers of Corona Measures, Risks due to medical interventions."
Corona Commission of Inquiry Session 18: Friday, 02.10.2020 | 11h CET | via LIVESTREAM (in German) with experts: Law-Chair Prof. Dr. Martin Schwab, Prevention-Medic Martin Hulpke-Wette (Pedriatician), Manuel Döring (Test-Engineer), Dr. Helmut Traindl (Environment-Engineer) as well as Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg as medical-scientific advisor and public participation | https://corona-ausschuss.de
UPDATE 29. September 2020: The Doctor Is In: Scott Atlas and the Efficacy of Lockdowns, Social Distancing, and Closings
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
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
UPDATE 17. September 2020: If the PCR Test Is Unreliable – Why Are Health Officials Demanding the Public Be Tested?
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Lawyers have set up the Corona Committee.
It will examine why federal and state governments have imposed unprecedented restrictions and what impact they have on people.
The committee is chaired by lawyers Antonia Fischer and Viviane Fischer as well as lawyers Dr. Reiner Füllmich and Dr. Justus Hoffmann.
Accompanying experts from science and practice include forensic scientist Prof. Pasquale Mario Bacco, psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Dr. Hans-Joachim Maaz, nursing expert Adelheid von Stösser, experimental immunologist Prof. emeritus Peter Capel, clinical psychologist Prof. Dr. Harald Walach.
Dr Wolfgang Wodarg (former official physician, MdB, pneumologist and health scientist) who is known for his work in the Swine Flu Investigation Committee will support the work of the committee.
The Committee will start its work in Berlin without delay.
At the press conference, the Foundation, the persons acting, the committee's thematic and schedule were presented and questions answered.
SVERIGE GRANSKAS - 20. October 2020
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich about Crimes Against Humanity and Corona Fraud
Please spread the word about this interview with Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, you will understand why when you heard the whole interview.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich about Crimes Against Humanity and Corona Fraud
Links mentioned in the interview and email address to Dr. Reiner Fuellmich
MUST SEE VIDEO
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich - Crimes against humanity
Dr Reiner Fuellmich YouTube Channell
RECHTSANWALTSKANZLEI DR. FUELLMICH
|In Sweden no change in mortality to all the years before|
Watch Censored WORLD DOCTORS ALLIANCE Announce Lawsuit Against COVID-19 Global Lockdown
CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY THE GERMAN CORONA INVESTIGATION
Pharma Death Clock website launched:
How many millions of people Big Pharma has killed since January 1, 2000 ?https://www.naturalnews.com/052613_pharma_death_clock_medication_side_effects_prescription_drug_deaths.html
BIG PHARMA’S CHEMICAL WARFARE ON HUMANITY DWARFS THE NUMBER OF VICTIMS KILLED BY ALL WORLD WARS AND ACTS OF TERRORISM COMBINED…
While drug companies profit billions, people are dying by the millions.
You can read more about and by Ulf Bittner
Further more interviews / conversations in the SWEDEN REVIEW series
Money Talks Update 1 English
•Oct 15, 2020
Crimes against Humanity & CORONA CLASS ACTION
As expected, Youtube - the now biggest internet censor without brains - deleted this video when it had reached 1.5 million views, but we have plenty of backups.
BOYCOTT YOUTUBE !
Eric E. Schmidt and Larry (Lawrence Edward) Page of Alphabet Inc. who own Google and its Youtube will now be sued for the unbelievable havoc they create by forcing their tracker-dogs to take Youtube content down, though these brainless minders have no scientfic qualification whatsoever and only follow the BigPharma narrative.
YouTube is employing a new trick to not make it so obvious that they delete thousands and thousands of videos they banned, because their parent Google and godfather Alphabet are in bed with the medical Mafia. YouTube allocates now the banned URL of the deleted video with first priority to any new upload, so that people, who had embedded the original video in their website, do not see immediately when it has been banned, because there is then no more just no content (and the text that that video had been banned), but some other video. Many viewers will wonder what crap video the website manager offers them out of context, but it is not the webmaster - it is Youtube who creates that havoc.
VERBRECHEN GEGEN DIE MENSCHLICHKEIT (DR. REINER FUELLMICH)
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich and the #coronavirus investigative committee have prepared a class action for fraud and crimes against humanity. https://www.corona-schadensersatzklage.de/
German Lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich says that along with an international panel of attorneys, they are planning to file a class action lawsuit in the USA / or Canada against the perpetrators of the coronavirus scam based on notoriously useless PCR tests.
The German Corona Investigative Committee (SCA) has taken testimony from a large number of international scientists and experts since July 10, 2020.
Their conclusions are the following:
- The corona crisis must be renamed the “Corona Scandal”
- It is:
- The biggest tort case ever
- The greatest crime against humanity ever committed
- Those responsible must be:
- Criminally prosecuted for crimes against humanity
- Sued for civil damages
- There is no excess mortality in any country
- Corona virus mortality equals seasonal flu
- 94% of deaths in Bergamo were caused by transferring sick patients to nursing homes where they infected old people with weak immune systems
- Doctors and hospitals worldwide were paid to declare deceased victims of Covid-19
- Autopsies showed:
- Fatalities almost all caused by serious pre-existing conditions
- Almost all deaths were very old people
- Sweden (no lockdown) and Britain (strict lockdown) have comparable disease and mortality statistics
- US states with and without lockdowns have comparable disease and mortality statistics
- Hospitals remain empty and some face bankruptcy
- Populations have T-cell immunity from previous influenza waves
- Herd immunity needs only 15-25% population infection and is already achieved
- Only when a person has symptoms can an infection be contagious
- Many scientists call this a PCR-test pandemic, not a corona pandemic
- Very healthy and non-infectious people may test positive
- Likelihood of false-positives is 89-94% or near certainty
- Prof. Drosten developed his PCR test from an old SARS virus without ever having seen the real Wuhan virus from China
- The PCR test is not based on scientific facts with respect to infections
- PCR tests are useless for the detection of infections
- A positive PCR test does not mean an infection is present or that an intact virus has been found
- Amplification of samples over 35 cycles is unreliable but WHO recommended 45 cycles
- The German government locked down, imposed social-distancing/ mask-wearing on the basis of a single opinion
- The lockdown was imposed when the virus was already retreating
- The lockdowns were based on non-existent infections
- Former president of the German federal constitutional court doubted the constitutionality of the corona measures
- Former UK supreme court judge Lord Sumption concluded there was no factual basis for panic and no legal basis for corona measures
- German RKI (CDC equivalent) recommended no autopsies be performed
- Corona measures have no sufficient factual or legal basis, are unconstitutional and must be repealed immediately
- No serious scientist gives any validity to the infamous Neil Ferguson’s false computer models warning of millions of deaths
- Mainstream media completely failed to report the true facts of the so-called pandemic
- Democracy is in danger of being replaced by fascist totalitarian models
- Drosten (of PCR test), Tedros of WHO, and others have committed crimes against humanity as defined in the International Criminal Code
- Politicians can avoid going down with the charlatans and criminals by starting the long overdue public scientific discussion
- Politicians and mainstream media deliberately drove populations to panic
- Children were calculatedly made to feel responsible “for the painful tortured death of their parents and grandparents if they do not follow Corona rules”
- The hopeless PCR test is used to create fear and not to diagnose
- There can be no talk of a second wave
- Injury and damage:
- Evidence of gigantic health and economic damage to populations
- Anti-corona measures have:
- Killed innumerable people
- Destroyed countless companies and individuals worldwide
- Children are being taken away from their parents
- Children are traumatized en masse
- Bankruptcies are expected in small- and medium-sized businesses
- A class action lawsuit must be filed in the USA or Canada, with all affected parties worldwide having the opportunity to join
- Companies and self-employed people must be compensated for damage
NO VIRUS ISOLATE IS EXISTNG:
THE MOST IMPORTANT Video on Earth Right Now
•Oct 10, 2020
What if there was a lie so pervasive, so effective, so powerful that almost everyone believed it? What if that lie was destroying people who believed it but mainstream media did nothing to expose it? What if the people who propagated this lie admitted it AFTER major global damage was done? Share this video with everybody you care about.
Architect of the PCR test had no coronavirus ....
The Whistleblower Newsroom
The Whistleblower Newsroom, a platform by whistleblowers, for whistleblowers and about whistleblowers with journalists Celia Farber, Kristina Borjesson and their whistleblowing guests Who stood up for the truth when others wouldn’t.
A GLOBAL FRAUD: LAWYER DR. REINER FUELLMICH AND THE GERMAN CORONA INVESTIGATIVE COMMITTEE SEEK ACCOUNTABILITY FOR FRAUDULENT VIRUS TESTING AND MASSIVE DESTRUCTION OF ECONOMIES AND LIVES.
Dr. Fuellmich talks about how his Committee is seeking to file an international class action suit for crimes perpetrated by those who he says used fraudulent testing to engineer a fraudulent pandemic and how more than 50 other countries so far are following suit.
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.
FREE DOWNLOAD: VIRUS MANIA (Torsten Engelbrecht | Claus Koehnlein)
- if your browser cries a Warning, you can just ignore and override it - the site and download are safe -
On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau - download free pdf
John Ioannidis - Modelling by the Imperial College
•Oct 25, 2020 - LOCKDOWNS HAVE NO BENEFITS! [original source OF VIDEO]
Nober-Prize winner Prof. John Ioannidis is the C.F. Rehnborg Chair in Disease Prevention, Professor of Medicine, of Epidemiology and Population Health, and (by courtesy) of Biomedical Data Science, and of Statistics; co-Director, Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS).
Effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19: A Tale of Three Models
Vincent Chin, John Ioannidis, Martin Tanner, Sally Cripps
In this paper, we compare the inference regarding the effectiveness of the various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) for COVID-19 obtained from three SIR models, all developed by the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team. One model was applied to European countries and published in Nature (model 1), concluding that complete lockdown was by far the most effective measure, responsible for 80% of the reduction in R_t, and 3 million deaths were avoided in the examined countries. The Imperial College team applied a different model to the USA states (model 2), and in response to our original submission, the Imperial team has proposed in a referee report a third model which is a hybrid of the first two models (model 3).
We demonstrate that inference is highly nonrobust to model specification. In particular, inference regarding the relative effectiveness of NPIs changes substantially with the model and decision makers who are unaware of, or ignore, model uncertainty are underestimating the risk attached to any decisions based on that model. Our primary observation is that by applying to European countries the model that the Imperial College team used for the USA states (model 2), complete lockdown has no or little effect, since it was introduced typically at a point when R_t was already very low. Moreover, using several state-of-the-art metrics for Bayesian model comparison, we demonstrate that model 2 (when applied to the European data) is better supported by the data than the model published in Nature. In particular, serious doubt is cast on the conclusions in Flaxman et al., whether we examine the data up to May 5th (as in Flaxman et al.) or beyond the point when NPIs began to be lifted.
Only by objectively considering a wide variety of models in a statistically principled manner, can one begin to address the effectiveness of NPIs such as lockdown. The approach outlined in this paper provides one such path.
Pam Barker | Director of TLB Europe Reloaded Project
We published a Julian Rose article on this topic, of rushing risky GMO-based vaccines to market, back in July titled Towards a Totalitarian Regime? European Commission Adopts GMO Vaccine to Combat Non Existent Covid-19 Virus.
Here we’re reissuing the introduction to that piece as background to the current legal action to stop temporary relaxation of the safety protocols for the clinical trials and manufacture of a GMO-based covid vaccine, permitted under EU regulation 2020/1043. This regulation was adopted in emergency circumstances on July 15, 2020 without either parliamentary debate or scientific consultation:
In a panic to get a covid vaccine out, the European Commission is planning exemptions to established safety rules concerning genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This is the topic of Julian Rose’s article below. The vote in the European Parliament to permit this fast-tracking and exceptional status of vaccine trials and products containing GMOs occurred on July 7, 2020. Here is the press release issued on the same day: Parliament to allow COVID-19 vaccines to be developed more quickly.
We remind readers of the coalition of four EU countries formed – as the Inclusive Vaccines Alliance – to ensure it is European-made vaccines that are are delivered within the EU.
Addressing the issue, this report from Euractiv comes from June 18, 2020 (EU goes easy on GMOs in race for COVID-19 vaccine):
As part of its new vaccine strategy, the European Commission has proposed to temporarily relax the EU’s strict rules on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in order to speed up the search for a COVID-19 vaccine and cure.
Brussels is ready to loosen its stance on GMOs in order to avoid bottlenecks in clinical trials for a coronavirus vaccine involving multiple countries.
Current GMO legislation does not foresee situations of urgency, resulting in very complex and time-consuming procedures, the Commission argues, saying “there is considerable variety across member states in the national requirements and procedures implementing the GMO directives.”
Potential vaccines currently under development by pharmaceutical companies such as Astra Zeneca and Johnson & Johnson contain or consist of GMOs.
The proposed derogation, which still needs to be voted by the European Parliament and the EU Council of Ministers, will last for as long as COVID-19 is regarded as a public health emergency, the Commission said.
The relaxed rules will apply not only for clinical trials on a COVID-19 vaccine but also for treatments, the Commission’s communication reads, although compliance with good manufacturing practices (GMPs) and an environmental risk assessment of the products will still be carried out before their marketing authorisation.
The Commission called on the EU’s co-legislators to adopt the proposal swiftly in order to enable clinical trials to take place in Europe as quickly as possible.
German MEP Peter Liese, European People’s Party (EPP) spokesperson for health, agreed with the Commission’s push on passing the derogation as soon as possible, saying that it needs to be done before the summer break. …
This report from Reuters of June 10, 2020 (Exclusive: Europe to accelerate trials of gene-engineered COVID-19 vaccines – sources) makes it clear that individual nations’ safety protocols concerning vaccines and other medicines are to be superseded:
… The reform is expected to reduce member states’ power to impose extra requirements on drug companies when they conduct clinical trials on medicines and vaccines containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs), according to the sources.
In some countries like Italy and France, for example, treatments must receive authorization from government environment or research departments, as well as from health and drug authorities, under rules that are up to 20 years old and also cover the more publicly sensitive area of GMO crops.
This has long caused bottlenecks in a pharmaceutical industry that increasingly relies on genetic engineering.
Such delays could be particularly problematic now that Europe may quickly need to accelerate trials, an EU Commission official said, warning that some of the most promising COVID-19 shots under development contain GMOs. …
It is also clear from the Reuters’ piece that it is simply corporations fearing loss of market share in Europe in relation to other big pharma competitors, public health be damned:
The European Commission is expected to put forward the plans as early as next week. They are part of a wider EU strategy aimed at securing enough doses of a possible vaccine for the bloc as it fears lagging behind the United States and China.
Finally, this article from early 2018 (Why Does Europe Lag Behind the US and China in the Gene Editing Race?) explains how European biotechs are at a regulatory disadvantage in terms of getting out gene-edited medical products.
Vaccines: action for annulment against European regulation 2020/1043
LE LIBRE PENSEUR
All the rules were relaxed to facilitate vaccine manufacture, while Professor Didier Raoult was required to conduct a billion tests for hydroxychloroquine. Isn’t that wonderful!
The applicants are:
La Coordination nationale médicale sante environnement (CNMSE), European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance (EFVV), Children’s Health Defense Europe, La Ligue Nationale Pour la Liberté des Vaccinations (LNPV), International Association for Independent and Benevolent Scientific Medicine, Terra SOS-Tenible.
This appeal follows the European regulation n°2020/1043 adopted urgently on July 15, 2020, which abolished all procedures for protection, risk analysis, control, monitoring, labeling and public information concerning the use, transport, release into the environment, injection into humans of genetically modified organisms and microorganisms whenever research or clinical trials on a vaccine or a drug against Covid-19 are involved.
Thus, specific measures to control the risk related to genetic modification of living organisms are no longer applied in this area.
The stated objective of this suppression is to gain a few weeks in the eventual development of a vaccine. Risk analyses and control measures are therefore being eliminated for the sole purpose of speeding up the process. Before submitting its project, the Commission did not carry out any scientific consultation to analyze the risk, particularly in relation to new genetic modification techniques.
Parliament voted without debate, without discussion, without questions and without tabling amendments.
However, it is clearly established that genetic modification of living organisms, in particular microorganisms artificially modified to be injected into humans, presents numerous risks, in particular the risk of recombination of potentially more virulent viruses, or the risk of interactions with human DNA causing random and unknown diseases.
This elimination of all risk assessment measures and all biosafety control measures for the environment and for health is contrary to the precautionary principle, a fundamental principle of the European Union’s operating treaty and a constitutional principle of French law. This abolition of the guards is also contrary to the interest and health of citizens. Obtaining a useful and safe vaccine that is not dangerous is incompatible with the urgency and suppression of risk control measures.
The applicants intend to see the precautionary principle respected and denounce an unacceptable regression in terms of public health and the environment.
The associations denounce this arbitrary suppression of risk control measures that constitute an indispensable protection of health and the environment. Public policies cannot be guided by fear, by immediate events of false urgency, but must respect the health of the citizen and provide all guarantees.
The applicant associations have therefore filed an action for annulment with the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in order to obtain the annulment of this European regulation.
This confirms the statements made by Michèle Rivasil in her interview on September 7, where she explained that this decision was taken in secret in the European Parliament.
It is not up to the public under these conditions to become guinea pigs for experimental vaccines and drugs that are presented as “safe” but whose manufacturers do not want to assume the consequences.
The press release is reproduced below:
Six associations call for the cancellation of the EU regulation on GMO covid vaccines 19
On October 10, six associations in Europe filed an action for annulment before the European Court of Justice against a regulation abolishing the risk assessment of GMOs for vaccines against Covid 19.
Regulation 2020/1043, adopted this summer by the Union, allows producers of vaccines and anti-Covid19 treatments containing GMOs to dispense with the need to produce an environmental impact and biosafety study before the start of clinical trials. Published on July 17, the text was adopted by the European Parliament under an emergency procedure, without amendments or debate. This exception to the GMO legislation is contrary to the precautionary principle provided for in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
These GMO vaccines against Covid 19, for which clinical trials have begun, present very real risks. The report by molecular geneticist Cristian Velot du Criigen, reminds us that they could lead to viral recombinations potentially more serious than the viruses that we are trying to fight with the vaccine, impacting animal life and human health. The risks of interaction with human DNA or the introduction of new genetic technologies may have unknown, potentially serious and irreversible consequences. In other words, no specific measures will be applied to control the risk of genetic modification of living beings.
The six requesting associations – CNMSE, Terra SOS Tenible, LNPLV, EFVV, AIMSIB, Children’s Health Defense Europe – denounce this dangerous experimentation, both for the participants in clinical trials and for the human population and the environment, and demand the immediate application of the precautionary principle, in compliance with the rules of law.
“Having had the chance to organize, under the aegis of the Ile-de-France Regional Council, an innovative experiment on personalized vaccination, I discovered highly toxic molecules and pesticides in the composition of vaccines. It therefore seems essential to me that the implementation of any new vaccine against Covid be exemplary and that all the essential steps be particularly respected” explains Dr Dominique Eraud, President of the National Medical Coordination Health Environment (CNMSE).
“The implementation of this regulation must be stopped immediately. EU Regulation 2020/1043 is fundamentally a regulation against life, reason, law, justice and science, since even the Commission, after bypassing all democratic controls, did not have the moral decency to ask for a scientific opinion,” says Josefina Fraile, President of Terra SoS Tenible.
“By publishing this regulation, the European institutions are giving the European Union member states the right to put in place dangerous, even biocidal, legislative measures that should be denounced,” emphasizes Jean-Pierre Eudier, President of the National League for Vaccination Freedom (LNPLV).
For Dr. Kris Gaublomme, President of the European Forum for Vaccine Vigilance (EFFV):
“We denounce the drift of European States towards authoritarianism, control and restriction of fundamental rights, through systematic derogations to the rules of law under the pretext of the Covid-19 epidemic, which we see particularly with the EU2020/1043 regulation. Our recourse to the Court of Justice of the European Union aims at enforcing the rules of law.”
“The European authority is offering a blank cheque to the pharmaceutical industry to bring to market new GM drug and vaccine technologies for which not all the studies demonstrating safety have been carried out. It is the patients in these conditions who serve as guinea pigs and we, as doctors, refuse this state of affairs” insists Philippe Harvault, President of the International Association for Independent and Caring Scientific Medicine (AIMSIB).
Finally, according to attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President of Children’s Health Defense Europe,
“The need to consider different types of risks before starting clinical trials of vaccines that will be accelerated and widely distributed cannot be underestimated. Vaccines using genetically modified organisms can have an impact on the environment. Other vaccines being considered for Covid 19, such as mRNA vaccines, use nanoparticles to introduce genetic material into our cells and program their response. Unlike the vaccines we know about, this mechanism is a form of “hacking” into our genetic functioning. It is an entirely new experimental technology about which we know very little. Many people have already experienced serious side effects in clinical trials with Covid vaccines under development. To allow and continue such experiments without any evaluation and without debate about the long-term risk they pose to our health or their ethical aspects is irresponsible and reckless. Urgency should not lead to blind decisions. Our political leaders have a duty to ensure that the precautionary principle is respected, otherwise we will all be in danger.”
Children’s Long-Term Mental Health at Risk From COVID-19-related Stress, Experts Warn
OCTOBER 16, 2020 - In the midst of the sweeping socioeconomic devastation wrought by COVID-19 restrictions, one field, sadly, is booming: mental health. Many mental health professionals are reporting high demand and record caseloads, including more young clients who need help coping with the unprecedented convergence of fear, uncertainty, disruption to routine, physical and social isolation, increased time indoors and parental stress.
Experts and parents are expressing concern that COVID-19 may have damaging long-term repercussions for the young. Many children are already exhibiting signs of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a syndrome typically associated with events such as wars, natural disasters, or physical or sexual abuse. PTSD symptoms include increased negative thoughts and feelings, problems sleeping or concentrating, and “feeling more on guard or unsafe.” Trauma experts are suggesting that the mental health toll of the pandemic may be “far greater than previous mass traumas,” even exceeding the psychological impact of “large-scale traumas like Hurricane Katrina, September 11 or the Hong Kong unrest.” What’s worse, whereas a natural disaster is “limited to a specific time and place,” the coronavirus pandemic is “everywhere, and it doesn’t appear to have an end date.”
Experts are ready to admit that children’s current distress is a serious problem, but few seem willing to discuss the most obvious solution, which is to call an end to the demonstrably unwarranted lockdowns, school closures, edicts and fear-mongering that are proving so damaging to children’s psyches. Instead, a Yale child psychiatrist who acknowledges that there has been “a steady climb in the percentage of parents who worry about their children’s mental health” has only one suggestion — that parents should “spoil” their young children and be tolerant of kids’ “shenanigans” until “after the vaccine” — and then go back to expecting better behavior.
Alarming studies, escalating stress
Mental health researchers began documenting children’s skyrocketing anxiety and depression almost as soon as social isolation, masking and physical distancing measures began to be imposed. In a Wuhan-based study in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), just one month of home confinement doubled Chinese schoolchildren’s anxiety levels (from 9% to 19%), prompting the investigators’ conclusion that “serious infectious diseases may influence the mental health of children as other traumatic experiences do.”
In the U.S., an October study published in Pediatrics indicated that three months of restrictions (March through May) had a similar impact on children as well as their parents. One in four U.S. parents (27%) reported a decline in their own mental health, and about one in seven (14%) perceived a corresponding decline in their children’s behavioral health.
Commenting on the study, a child and adolescent psychiatrist in Virginia speculated that the survey might represent “the tip of the iceberg,” noting that “Every layer of protection for children’s well-being has been weakened or eliminated by the pandemic.” According to this psychiatrist, the most crucial “buffers” are the parents, but in a Canadian study that collected data in early May, seven in 10 pregnant and postpartum moms reported anxiety, and four in ten reported depression. Children have also been cut off from vital community resources that ordinarily form additional “layers of protection” — churches, recreational opportunities and schools. As of April, more than 90% of the world’s enrolled students had been affected by school closures.
Considering North America’s adolescents and young adults, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently reported that during the month of June, three-fourths of 18-24-year-olds reported at least one adverse mental or behavioral health condition, and a dismaying one in four had seriously considered suicide that month. In a Canadian survey, nearly three out of five 15-17-year-olds (57%) rated their mental health as “somewhat worse” or “much worse” than before physical distancing began, while the proportion of 15-24-year-olds rating their mental health as “excellent” or “very good” was 20% lower than in 2018. Additional Canadian research found that 10-17-year-olds “primarily and intensely” report feeling both bored and lonely.
Similarly troubling trends are apparent across the pond, where, just one month into the UK’s lockdown (as reported in July in “The Lancet”), young people aged 16-24 displayed large increases in already high levels of clinically significant mental distress — from 24.5% the year before COVID-19 to 37% by April 2020. Parents of preschool-age children were a second group experiencing a steep rise in mental distress — a trend that does not bode well for small children. Moreover, as the authors of the UK study took pains to mention, their results captured only one month of restrictions:
“As the economic consequences of lockdown develop, when furloughs turn to redundancies [layoffs], mortgage holidays [suspension of payments] expire, and recession takes effect, we believe it is reasonable to expect not only sustained distress and clinically significant deterioration in mental health for some people, but emergence of well described long-term effects of economic recession on mental health including increasing suicide rates and hospital admissions for mental illness.”
Echoing this expectation, a Scottish survey conducted in October for World Mental Health Day found that one-third (32%) of parents perceived their children’s mental health, since COVID-19, as being “the worst it has ever been,” and 37% reported a serious deterioration in their own mental health.
Remote technology tradeoffs
COVID-19 has taken telemedicine into “overdrive,” significantly changing where and how mental health professionals provide services. As community mental health clinics and school and workplace-based resources close their doors or suspend their services, independent and agency psychiatrists and therapists are turning to sessions conducted by phone, videoconferencing, telehealth platforms or eTherapy apps.
A June survey conducted by the American Psychological Association found that since COVID-19, only 3% of psychologists are conducting all of their appointments in person, with another 16% using a mixture of in-person and remote sessions. Setting aside the time-honored face-to-face therapeutic model pioneered by figures like Carl Jung, three-fourths are “solely providing remote services.”
Mental health professionals appear generally enthusiastic about distance therapy’s potential as a “tool for the times,” although some report that “a day of Zoom therapy” can be mentally taxing in a way that in-person therapy is not. With a dearth of studies offering measurable results comparing telehealth to office visits, it is an open question whether the model is appropriate or effective for traumatized children and especially for special-needs children.
Researchers noted years ago that telemedicine can lead to a “breakdown in the relationship between health professional and patient.” Clinicians working in the time of COVID-19 agree not only that patient rapport is “extremely important” but that they are better able to pick up “nuances and subtle signs” in person. Recognizing in-home challenges such as screen exhaustion, distractibility, and technological barriers, one expert working in a high-volume counseling center has stated, “[telehealth] is a great resource when you need it, but it’s just not the same thing as in person.”
Forcing children into yet another tech-mediated interaction also adds to the amount of time they are spending on screens. The COVID-19-triggered remote learning paradigm has already resulted in a nearly 500% increase in children’s time online — about six hours a day, much of it unsupervised — with attendant risks to physical health as well as emotional health and privacy.
With regard to privacy, while advocates celebrate the opportunity for teletherapists to “see patients in their own surroundings,” this also represents an unprecedented digital intrusion into the sacrosanct home environment. Given the fact that domestic and internationalpublic health officials have publicly discussed the possibility of removing people — including children — from their homes for coronavirus quarantine, and given that Child Protective Services has also been known to unnecessarily separate children from their parents, families might want to consider the ramifications of enabling this type of intimate access.
Stop the madness
A May 2020 posting by the World Economic Forum asserted that “COVID-19 is hurting children’s mental health” and cautioned that “high levels of stress and isolation can affect brain development, sometimes with irreparable long-term consequences.” Ironically, the Forum is one of the primary cheerleaders of the global economic “reset” that is causing such hardship to children and their families.
What policy-makers and public health leaders have refused to acknowledge is that “every decision we make in response to the pandemic … reflects a choice and carries with it a set of costs.” At this juncture, few would dispute that the costs to children have been far too high or that the effects are likely to reverberate — whether at the individual, family, community or societal levels — for many years to come.
We’re sinking on the ‘global financial Titanic’ that hit iceberg in 2008 – Max Keiser
By RT - 06. October 2020
The hosts of the Keiser Report discuss the $2.2 trillion coronavirus relief package passed by the US House, which includes a complete ban on eviction and foreclosure filings for 12 months.
There’s a big issue in terms of the properties that will no longer be paying rent, Max Keiser says.
He points out that landlords won’t be able to pay back loans to the banks which, in turn, won’t be able to service their portfolios, meaning that the Central Bank will have to bail them out. However, the central bankers are “already completely constrained with their ability to bail out the system anymore after they’ve been bailing out the system nonstop for 12 years,” he explains.
“This is just another piece of the sinking of the global financial Titanic. They hit the iceberg in 2008,”he concludes, adding, “That’s where we are at now – the beginning of the end.”
Prof. John Ioannidis - We've lost the sense of what really matters
•Oct 4, 2020
Prof John Ioannidis - The medicalization of society is becoming a major threat to humanity
•Oct 3, 2020
“Medicine and the medicalization of society is becoming a major threat to humanity. You know medicine is becoming like a public enemy of health at the moment. And we need to take sides, you know we need to take sides are we with medicine, [or] are we with health? Are we with drugs and interventions? And now I need to add public health measures to the list? Or are we with humans, are we with human lives and with quality of life? It's unfortunate that that it's coming to this. But medicine is becoming an enemy of health and that 50 percent tipping point, the inflection point that you mentioned is probably not very far if you think that for example we had a 33 percent drop in in GDP in the US, you add the 20 percent of GBP that goes to medicine, here's your 50 percent right now in in in some sort of calculation. I don't think that we can sustain that, I think that we need to think of priorities, we need to think of what we are achieving with all these measures. We have lots of extremely effective medical interventions and this is wonderful chapeau bas. Medicine is saving lots of lives we have lots of ineffective interventions and when it comes to COVID-19 in the public health response I am afraid that many of the ineffective interventions are not just applied to one patient at s time which is still detrimental. But they're applied to the whole world at large, so we're not talking about a single patient being mismanaged we're talking about 7.7 billion people being mismanaged and suffering.” — John P.A. Ioannidis (Professor Of Medicine Stanford Prevention Research, of Epidemiology and Population Health and By Courtesy, of Statistics and of Biomedical Data Science) Short BACKUP on Youtube
Estimate of 700 Million people infected (by late September) and IFR is ~ 0,15%
Oct 3, 2020 -
Prof. John Ioannidis is the C.F. Rehnborg Chair in Disease Prevention, Professor of Medicine, of Epidemiology and Population Health, and (by courtesy) of Biomedical Data Science, and of Statistics; co-Director, Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS). Born in New York City in 1965 and raised in Athens, Greece. Valedictorian (1984) at Athens College; National Award of the Greek Mathematical Society (1984); MD (top rank of medical school class) from the National University of Athens in 1990; also received DSc in biopathology from the same institution. Trained at Harvard and Tufts (internal medicine and infectious diseases), then held positions at NIH, Johns Hopkins and Tufts. Chaired the Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, University of Ioannina Medical School in 1999-2010 while also holding adjunct professor positions at Harvard, Tufts, and Imperial College. Senior Advisor on Knowledge Integration at NCI/NIH (2012-6). Served as President, Society for Research Synthesis Methodology, and editorial board member of many leading journals (including PLoS Medicine, Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine, JNCI among others) and as Editor-in-Chief of the European Journal of Clinical Investigation (2010-2019). Delivered ~600 invited and honorary lectures. Recipient of many awards (e.g. European Award for Excellence in Clinical Science , Medal for Distinguished Service, Teachers College, Columbia University , Chanchlani Global Health Award , Epiphany Science Courage Award , Einstein fellow ). Inducted in the Association of American Physicians (2009), European Academy of Cancer Sciences (2010) American Epidemiological Society (2015), European Academy of Sciences and Arts (2015), National Academy of Medicine (2018). Honorary titles from FORTH (2014) and Ioannina (2015), honorary doctorates from Rotterdam (2015), Athens (2017), Tilburg (2019), Edinburgh (2019, ceremony planned for 2020). Multiple honorary lectureships/visiting professorships (Caltech, Oxford, LSHTM, Yale, U Utah, U Conn, UC Davis, U Penn, Wash U St. Louis, NIH among others). The PLoS Medicine paper on “Why most published research findings are false” has been the most-accessed article in the history of Public Library of Science (3 million hits). Author of 7 literary books in Greek, three of which were shortlisted for best book of the year Anagnostis awards. Brave Thinker scientist for 2010 according to Atlantic, “may be one of the most influential scientists alive”. Highly Cited Researcher according to Thomson Reuters in both Clinical Medicine and in Social Sciences. Citation indices: h=199, m=8 per Google Scholar. Current citation rate: more than 4,500 new citations per month (among the 10 scientists worldwide who are currently the most commonly cited, perhaps also the currently most-cited physician). When contrasted against my vast ignorance, these values offer excellent proof that citation metrics can be horribly unreliable. I have no personal social media accounts - I admire people who can outpour their error-free wisdom in them, but I make a lot of errors, I need to revisit my writings multiple times before publishing, and I see no reason to make a fool of myself more frequently than it is sadly unavoidable. I consider myself privileged to have learned and to continue to learn from interactions with students and young scientists (of all ages) from all over the world and I love to be constantly reminded that I know next to nothing.
The Doctor Is In: Scott Atlas and the Efficacy of Lockdowns, Social Distancing, and Closings
•Sep 29, 2020
Recorded on June 18, 2020 and originally published on June 23,2020 - Original post accrued 719K views and 18.5K likes. - Reposted on September 28, 2020 (see note to viewers below)
Dr. Scott Atlas is the Robert Wesson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, an accomplished physician, and a scholar of public health. When this was recorded Dr. Atlas has been making the case in print and in other media that we as a society have overreacted in imposing draconian restrictions on movement, gatherings, schools, sports, and other activities. He believes the virus is a real threat and should be managed as such.
But, as Dr. Atlas argues, there are some age groups and activities that are subject to very low risk. The one-size-fits-all approach is overly authoritarian, inefficient, and not based in science. Dr. Atlas’s prescription includes more protection for people in nursing homes, two weeks of strict self-isolation for those with mild symptoms, and most importantly, the opening of all K–12 schools. Dr. Atlas was also adamant that an economic shutdown, and all of the attendant issues that go along with it, is a terrible solution— a cure that's worse than the disease. Finally, Dr. Atlas revealed some steps he’d taken in his own life to try to get things back to normal.
NOTE TO VIEWERS: On September 11th, 2020 YouTube removed this episode of Uncommon Knowledge with Peter Robinson with Dr. Scott Atlas and notified The Hoover Institution that the video “violates our guidelines." The takedown notice further explained that “YouTube does not allow content that spreads medical misinformation that contradicts the World Health Organization (WHO) or local health authorities’ medical information about COVID-19, including on methods to prevent, treat, or diagnose COVID-19 and means of transmission of COVID-19.” In order to reinstate the interview on their platform, YouTube required the Hoover Institution to add the following disclaimer to two portions of the interview: "Prevailing medical consensus suggests that children can transmit the disease, but at a lower rate than adults." While we disagree with YouTube’s interpretation of what Dr. Atlas said in this video, we have complied with this request to make the video available to viewers.
For further information on Uncommon Knowledge visit: https://www.hoover.org/publications/u...
As evidence mounts that the “gold standard” test for detecting COVID-19 is unreliable, why are health officials around the world calling for more tests?
In the months since the COVID-19 panic began health authorities around the world have told the public to “get tested” to help track the spread of SARS-CoV-2. However, as fear and hysteria subside, the scientific community and public at large are calling into question the efficacy of the test used to determine a patients status. This article is a brief examination of the evidence that the PCR test is unreliable and should not be used as a determinant for the number of COVID-19 cases or as a factor in political decisions.
Houston Health Authority Has Concerns About PCR Test
On August 31, I attended a press conference in Houston to ask the Mayor and Houston Health Authority about reports regarding problems with the Texas Department of State Health Services’ numbers on COVID-19 cases. TLAV has previously reported on these concerns with the COVID-19 case numbers in Texas. I also had a chance to ask Houston Health Authority Dr. David Persse about concerns around the test used to detect COVID-19.
The most common test is a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) lab test. This incredibly sensitive technique was developed by Berkeley scientist Kary Mullis, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1993. The test is designed to detect the presence of a virus by amplifying the virus’ genetic material so it can be detected by scientists. The test is viewed as the gold standard, however, it is not without problems.
The PCR test uses chemicals to amplify the virus’s genetic material and then each sample goes through a number of cycles until a virus is recovered. This “cycle threshold” has become a key component in the debate around the efficacy of the PCR test.
Dr. Persse says that when the labs report numbers of COVID-19 cases to the City of Houston they only offer a binary option of “yes” for positive or “no” for negative. “But, in reality, it comes in what is called cycle-thresholds. It’s an inverse relationship, so the higher the number the less virus there was in the initial sample,” Persse explained. “Some labs will report out to 40 cycle-thresholds, and if they get a positive at 40 – which means there is a tiny, tiny, tiny amount of virus there – that gets reported to us as positive and we don’t know any different.”
Persse noted that the key question is, at what value is someone considered still infectious?
“Because if you test me and I have a tiny amount of virus, does that mean I am contagious? that I am still infectious to someone else? If you are shedding a little bit of virus are you just starting? or are you on the downside?,” Dr. Persse asked in the lobby of Houston City Hall. He believes the answer is for the scientific community to set a national standard for cycle-threshold.
Unfortunately, a national standard would not solve the problems expressed by Dr. Persse and others.
UK Parliament and Scientists Have Concerns About PCR Test
In the first weeks of September a number of important revelations regarding the PCR test have come to light. First, new research from the University of Oxford’s Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and the University of the West of England found that the PCR test poses the potential for false positives when testing for COVID-19. Professor Carl Heneghan, one of the authors of the study, Viral cultures for COVID-19 infectivity assessment – a systematic review, said there was a risk that an increase in testing in the UK will lead to an increase in the risk of “sample contamination” and thus an increase in COVID-19 cases.
The team reviewed evidence from 25 studies where virus specimens had positive PCR tests. The researchers state that the “genetic photocopying” technique scientists use to magnify the sample of genetic material collected is so sensitive it could be picking up fragments of dead virus from previous infections. The researchers reach a similar conclusion as Dr. David Persse, namely that, “A binary Yes/No approach to the interpretation RT-PCR unvalidated against viral culture will result in false positives with segregation of large numbers of people who are no longer infectious and hence not a threat to public health.”
Heneghan, who is also the the editor of BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, told the BBC that the binary approach is a problem and tests should have a cut-off point so small amounts of virus do not lead to a positive result. This is because of the cycle threshold mentioned by Dr. Persse. A person who is shedding an active virus and someone who has leftover infection could both receive the same positive test result. He also stated that the test could be detecting old virus which would explain the rise in cases in the UK. Heneghan also stated that setting a standard for the cycle threshold would eliminate the quarantining and contact tracing of people who are healthy and help the public better understand the true nature of COVID-19.
The UK’s leading health agency, Public Health England, released an update on the testing methods used to detect COVID-19 and appeared to agree with Professor Heneghan regarding the concerns on the cycle threshold. On September 9, PHE released an update which concluded, “all laboratories should determine the threshold for a positive result at the limit of detection.”
This is not the first time Heneghan’s work has directly impacted the UK’s COVID-19 policies. In July, UK health secretary Matt Hancock called for an “urgent review” of the daily COVID-19 death numbers produced by Public Health England after it was revealed the stats included people who died from other causes. The Guardian reported:
“The oddity was revealed in a paper by Yoon K Loke and Carl Heneghan of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University, called “Why no one can ever recover from Covid-19 in England – a statistical anomaly”.
Their analysis suggests PHE cross-checks the latest notifications of deaths against a database of positive test results – so that anyone who has ever tested positive is recorded in the COVID-19 death statistics.
A Department of Health and Social Care source said: ‘You could have been tested positive in February, have no symptoms, then hit by a bus in July and you’d be recorded as a COVID death.’”
Only days after Hancock called for the review of PHE data, the UK government put an immediate halt to its daily update of death numbers from COVID-19.
On September 8, Heneghan tweeted out another study on the limitations of the PCR test. The study, “SARS-CoV-2 Testing: The Limit of Detection Matters”, examines the limit of detection (LoD) for RNA. The researchers note similar problems with the PCR test and the cycle threshold, concluding, “the ultimate lesson from these studies bears repetition: LoD matters and directly impacts efforts to identify, control, and contain outbreaks during this pandemic.”
Heneghan also recently told the BMJ , “one issue in trying to interpret numbers of detected cases is that there is no set definition of a case. At the moment it seems that a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive result is the only criterion required for a case to be recognised.”
“In any other disease we would have a clearly defined specification that would usually involve signs, symptoms, and a test result,” Heneghan explained. “We are moving into a biotech world where the norms of clinical reasoning are going out of the window. A PCR test does not equal covid-19; it should not, but in some definitions it does.”
Heneghan says he is concerned that as soon as there is the appearance of an outbreak there is panic and over-reacting. “This is a huge problem because politicians are operating in a non-evidence-based way when it comes to non-drug interventions,” he stated.
The Evidence For False Positives Is Overwhelming
A recent report from NPR outlines the dangers of false positives with the PCR tests. Andrew Cohen, director of the Center for Research on Aquatic Bioinvasions, was hired by the state of California to study an invasion of non-native mussels. The researchers took water samples and used a PCR test to search for genetic material from the mussels. After the tests came back overwhelmingly positive, Cohen grew suspicious.
“I began to realize that many of these — if not all of these — were false positives, especially when they started being reported in waters that had chemistry that would not allow the mussels to reproduce and establish themselves,” he told NPR. NPR notes that, depending on the lab, there was a 2 to 8 percent false positive rate.
Once COVID-19 was declared a pandemic, Cohen said he began asking if the reports of people with absolutely no symptoms and positive PCR test results could be false positives. “I began wondering whether these asymptomatic carriers weren’t in large part or in whole part the human counterparts of those false-positive results of quagga and zebra mussels in all those water bodies across the West,” he said.
Cohen emphasized the importance of researchers taking potential false positive PCR results seriously. “As near as we can tell, the medical establishment and public health authorities and researchers … appear to be assuming that the false-positive rate in in the PCR based test is zero, or at least so low that we can ignore it.”
Cohen is correct that the scientific authorities need to take false positives seriously, especially when a person can be sent to isolate or quarantine for weeks due to a positive test result. Even the U.S. FDA’s own fact sheet on testing acknowledges the dangers posed by false positives:
“The CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel has been designed to minimize the likelihood of false positive test results. However, in the event of a false positive result, risks to patients could include the following: a recommendation for isolation of the patient, monitoring of household or other close contacts for symptoms, patient isolation that might limit contact with family or friends and may increase contact with other potentially COVID-19 patients, limits in the ability to work, the delayed diagnosis and treatment for the true infection causing the symptoms, unnecessary prescription of a treatment or therapy, or other unintended adverse effects.”
A CDC fact sheet also acknowledges the possibility of false positives with the PCR test.
Professor Heneghan believes the confusion around COVID-19 has come as a result of a shift away from “evidence-based medicine.” In a recent opinion piece published at The Spectator, Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, a senior associate tutor and honorary research fellow at the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford, wrote that patients have become a “prisoner of a system labelling him or her as ‘positive’ when we are not sure what that label means.” The two scientists offer this conclusion and warning:
Governments are producing a series of contradictory and confusing policies which have a brief shelf life as the next crisis emerges. It is increasingly clear the evidence is often ignored. Keeping up to date is a full time occupation, and the advances of the last 30 years have at best been put on hold.
The duties of a good doctor include working in partnership with patients to inform them about what they want or need in a way they can understand, and respecting their rights to reach decisions with you about their treatment and care. Questions need to be asked as to how this will occur if you don’t see your doctor, particularly if all you have to do is queue in at a drive in to get your answer.
And ultimately what is a ‘good test’? We think it’s the test which helps your doctor narrow the uncertainty around the origins and management of your problem.
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. [In case your Browser makes problems click HERE ]
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. [In case your Browser makes problems click HERE ]
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/
SITZUNGEN DES CORONA UNTERSUCHUNGS-AUSSCHUSS DER SCA
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 28 - Der abschüssige Hang
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 27 - Der Rundumschlag
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 26 - PCR-Test - die Dominosteine fallen
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 25 - Die Gefahr der Gleichschaltung unseres Rechtssystems, Polizeigewalt und Übergriffe von Privaten
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 24 - Die Stärke unseres Immunsystems und die Stimmen der Kinder
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 23 - Spiel und Ernst sowie ein Blick ins Innere einer Gewerkschaft
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 22 - Die Player: Drosten, Ferguson, Wieler, die Charité und die Rolle von TIB Molbiol
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 21 - "Die Macht der Konzerne und die Korruption"
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 20 - Finanzsystem und Hartz IV-Regime
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 19 - Risiken durch die Behandlung / Interna aus den Schulen
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 18 - Gefährdung durch die Maßnahmen, Risiken durch die Behandlung
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 17 - Die Volkswirtschaft im Griff der Pandemie & Die Corona Impfung
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 16 - Die Corona-Sprechstunde: Hilfe zur Selbsthilfe bei Masken, Tests, Quarantäne
CORONA UNTERSUCHUNG TAG 15 - Hypnose, Rituale, Angst und Wege raus aus der Traumakrise
Sondersitzung: Gespräch mit Robert F. Kennedy Jr zu den Berliner Demonstrationen und zur Corona-Impfung
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