“Self-spreading vaccines—also known as transmissible or self-propagating vaccines—are genetically engineered to move through populations in the same way as communicable diseases, but rather than causing disease, they confer protection. The vision is that a small number of individuals in the target population could be vaccinated, and the vaccine strain would then circulate in the population much like a pathogenic virus. These vaccines could dramatically increase vaccine coverage in human or animal populations without requiring each individual to be inoculated. This technology is currently aimed primarily at animal populations. Because most infectious diseases are zoonotic,40 controlling disease in animal populations would also reduce the risk to humans.”
A review of scientific publications, up to February 2021, about measured and potential harms of face masks imposed on workers, children, and the general population.
“There were 10,652,513 eligible people aged ≥6 years in Wuhan (94.1% of the total population). The nucleic acid screening was completed in 19 days (from May 14, 2020 to Jun 1, 2020), and tested a total of 9,899,828 persons from the 10,652,513 eligible people (participation rate, 92.9%). Of the 9899,828 participants, 9,865,404 had no previous diagnosis of COVID-19, and 34,424 were recovered COVID-19 patients.
The screening of the 9,865,404 participants without a history of COVID-19 found no newly confirmed COVID-19 cases, and identified 300 asymptomatic positive cases with a detection rate of 0.303 (95% CI 0.270–0.339)/10,000. The median age-stratified Ct-values of the asymptomatic cases were shown in Supplementary Table 1. Of the 300 asymptomatic positive cases, two cases came from one family and another two were from another family. There were no previously confirmed COVID-19 patients in these two families. A total of 1174 close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases were traced, and they all tested negative for the COVID-19. There were 34,424 previously recovered COVID-19 cases who participated in the screening. Of the 34,424 participants with a history of COVID-19, 107 tested positive again, giving a repositive rate of 0.310% (95% CI 0.423–0.574%).
Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no “viable virus” in positive cases detected in this study.
All asymptomatic positive cases, repositive cases and their close contacts were isolated for at least 2 weeks until the results of nucleic acid testing were negative. None of detected positive cases or their close contacts became symptomatic or newly confirmed with COVID-19 during the isolation period. In this screening programme, single and mixed testing was performed, respectively, for 76.7% and 23.3% of the collected samples. The asymptomatic positive rates were 0.321 (95% CI 0.282–0.364)/10,000 and 0.243 (95% CI 0.183–0.315)/10,000, respectively.
The 300 asymptomatic positive persons aged from 10 to 89 years, included 132 males (0.256/10,000) and 168 females (0.355/10,000). The asymptomatic positive rate was the lowest in children or adolescents aged 17 and below (0.124/10,000), and the highest among the elderly aged 60 years and above (0.442/10,000) (Table 1). The asymptomatic positive rate in females (0.355/10,000) was higher than that in males (0.256/10,000).”
Here are the facts:
The PCR Coronavirus Test can have 90% False Positives`
“up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus”
RT-PCR tests are “are not fit for purpose”
NO MATTER WHAT SOMEONE DIES OF, IF THEY TEST POSITIVE THEIR DEATH IS MARKED AS A COVID-19 DEATH
COVID-19 HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN TO EXIST
“Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, …”
https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download, PAGE 39, last paragraph.
CDC: 94% of people who died had 2.6 preexisting conditions
“For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes. in addition to COVID-19, on average. there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death”
CDC COVID-19 Survival Rates
Age 0-19 – 99.997%
Age 20-49 – 99.980%
Age 50-69 – 99.500%
Age 70+ – 94.600%
Masks Do Not Work
A Review of Science Relevant to COVID-19 Social Policy
SHUT OFF YOUR TV AND RESEARCH TRUTH, YOU ARE BEING LIED TO! YOUR FREEDOM AND YOUR LIFE, AND YOUR FAMILIES LIFE, DEPEND ON YOU RESEARCHING THE ABOVE TRUTH; IF NOT, YOU’VE EARNED YOUR FUTURE. LIVE FREE. TRUTH AND LOVE ARE FREE.Continue reading “There is NO pandemic”
by Gianluca, November 15, 2020
Bern, 20.07.2020 – The Confederation will continue to draw on independent scientific expertise from academic and research circles during the ‘special situation’ in accordance with the Epidemics Act. The FDHA General Secretariat and the Federal Office of Public Health have accordingly adapted the mandate of the Swiss National COVID-19 Science Task Force (SN-STF), which was set up during the epidemiological ‘extraordinary situation’. From 1 August 2020, the Task Force will have a new chair in Prof. Martin Ackermann, expert in microbiology at the ETH Zurich and Eawag. The present head, Prof. Matthias Egger, will continue to act as an expert for the SN-STF, but in future will be focusing on his work as president of the National Research Council of the Swiss National Science Foundation and as an lecturer in epidemiology at the University of Bern.
Reporting Period: 1 Jan -15 Nov 2020Continue reading “Queensland Weekly Influenza Surveillance Report”
We are an Australian Network of Lawyers who are concerned about how laws are improperly used against Australians
This site was created to share with the public the letter sent to the State and Federal Governments of Australia and accompanying exhibits / references
No part of this site constitutes any specific legal advice for any particular person and their particular circumstances; such persons should seek their own individual personalised and tailored advice concerning their situation from a suitably qualified and experienced lawyer
Letter to Heads of Government
Read our letter dated 6th November 2020
On 27 October 2020 Lord Sumption delivered the 2020 Cambridge Freshfields Lecture entitled “Government by decree – Covid-19 and the Constitution”.
The disputes over Brexit last year saw an attempt to make the executive, not Parliament, the prime source of authority in the Constitution. The coronavirus crisis has provoked another attempt to marginalise Parliament, this time with the willing acquiescence of the House of Commons. Is this to be our future?
Lord Sumption is an author, historian and lawyer of note. He was appointed directly from the practising Bar to the Supreme Court, and served as a Supreme Court Justice from 2012-18. In 2019, he delivered the BBC Reith Lectures, “Law and the Decline of Politics”, and is now a regular commentator in the media. He continues to sit as a Non-Permanent Judge of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal. Alongside his career as a lawyer, he has also produced a substantial and highly-regarded narrative history of the Hundred Years’ War between England and France (with volume V still to come).
“We performed a retrospective analysis spanning ten years of pediatric practice focused on patients with variable vaccination born into a practice, presenting a unique opportunity to study the effects of variable vaccination on outcomes. The average total incidence of billed office visits per outcome related to the outcomes were compared across groups (Relative Incidence of Office Visit (RIOV)). RIOV is shown to be more powerful than odds ratio of diagnoses. Full cohort, cumulative incidence analyses, matched for days of care, and matched for family history analyses were conducted across quantiles of vaccine uptake. Increased office visits related to many diagnoses were robust to days-of-care-matched analyses, family history, gender block, age block, and false discovery risk. Many outcomes had high RIOV odds ratios after matching for days-of-care (e.g., anemia (6.334), asthma (3.496), allergic rhinitis (6.479), and sinusitis (3.529), all significant under the Z-test). Developmental disorders were determined to be difficult to study due to extremely low prevalence in the practice, potentially attributable to high rates of vaccine cessation upon adverse events and family history of autoimmunity. Remarkably, zero of the 561 unvaccinated patients in the study had attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) compared to 0.063% of the (partially and fully) vaccinated. The implications of these results for the net public health effects of whole-population vaccination and with respect for informed consent on human health are compelling. Our results give agency to calls for research conducted by individuals who are independent of any funding sources related to the vaccine industry. While the low rates of developmental disorders prevented sufficiently powered hypothesis testing, it is notable that the overall rate of autism spectrum disorder (0.84%) in the cohort is half that of the US national rate (1.69%). The practice-wide rate of ADHD was roughly half of the national rate. The data indicate that unvaccinated children in the practice are not unhealthier than the vaccinated and indeed the overall results may indicate that the unvaccinated pediatric patients in this practice are healthier overall than the vaccinated.”
Public Health England did not have the information requested.
Andrew Johnson Delivered
Dear Public Health England,
I would like to see:
All records in the possession, custody or control of Public Health England describing the isolation of a SARS-COV-2 virus, directly from a sample taken from a diseased patient, where the patient sample was not first combined with any other source of genetic material (i.e. monkey kidney cells aka vero cells; liver cancer cells).
Please note that I am using “isolation” in the every-day sense of the word: the act of separating a thing(s) from everything else. I am not requesting records where “isolation of SARS-COV-2” refers *instead* to:
• the culturing of something, or
• the performance of an amplification test (i.e. a PCR test), or
• the sequencing of something.
Please also note that my request is not limited to records that were authored by the PHE or that pertain to work done by the PHE. My request includes any sort of record, for example (but not limited to) any published peer-reviewed study that the PHE has downloaded or printed.
Please provide enough information about each record so that I may identify and access each record with certainty (i.e. title, author(s), date, journal, where the public may access it).”
We’ve gone from 1 million to 4.5 million tests per week in the U.S., but we’ll need to redouble our efforts to make it to 30 million tests per week and beyond in order to reopen communities and economies, and keep them open.
Foreword to National Covid-19 Testing & Tracing Action Plan
America faces an impending disaster. The extraordinary scale of the Covid-19 crisis is evident in the growing deaths and economic losses the pandemic has wrought in every state. Devastated minority and low-income families bore the brunt of those costs. As the virus tore across the country, it exposed the structural inequities that have underpinned and undermined our economy for decades. And it will only worsen during fall’s cold and flu season.
This terrifying tragedy was not and is not inevitable. America can function safely, even as we fight Covid-19. Other countries have shown that a better alternative is possible. But as we said in April – when we first released The Rockefeller Foundation’s National Covid-19 Testing Action Plan – testing is the only way out of our present disaster, and it will remain the case until a vaccine or effective therapeutics are widely available.
When we were barely a month into this pandemic, we brought together scientists, industry, technologists, economists, and Republicans and Democrats alike to formulate an action plan to expedite the development of our nation’s widespread testing and tracing system. We called for rapidly expanded diagnostic testing capacity from 1 million tests per week to 3 million tests per week by June, and to 30 million tests per week by October. Today we’re at 4.5 million tests per week, but unfortunately it’s taking far too long to get to 30 million tests per week, and communities that most need them – low-income families, minorities, and highly vulnerable essential workers – find it most difficult to gain access, while elite institutions, companies, and enterprises seem to be able to access them on the private market. We need to urgently fix clinical diagnostic testing and accelerate the introduction of faster, cheaper, point-of-care screening tests to prepare for next flu season. Some say it’s impossible. Some say America has already given up. But we know it can be done, and we present here a renewed national action plan to help get there.
Across the board, federal leadership and genuine public-private partnership will be essential to meeting three key needs identified in this updated plan. First, we need to massively scale up fast, cheap screening tests to identify asymptomatic Americans who are currently infected. Today the country conducts almost zero such tests, and we need at least 25 million per week for schools, health facilities, and essential workers to function safely. Teachers, healthcare workers, grocery store workers: these are the real heroes of this crisis, and they should be able to support our country without the all-consuming fear that they’re jeopardizing their lives or the lives of their loved ones.
Second, we need to dramatically reduce the processing time for diagnostic tests, from the current 5-14 days to a 48-hour standard turnaround time that every state and community should meet. Many businesses that are privately contracting with lab companies already meet this standard. We propose a public-private collaboration between government, lab companies, and scientists in order to alleviate the very basic constraints that are leading to these extraordinary delays.
Third, this reinvestment in testing must be tied to the basics of any pandemic response to really work: clear public health communications from trusted community leaders, and robust contact tracing and support for targeted isolation to reduce the contagion of the disease.
The Rockefeller Foundation will invest an additional $50 million toward realizing the emergency requirements we outline in this updated plan. But make no mistake: this crisis demands immediate federal funding. Congress took a first step by including $25 billion for testing in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. This plan requires another $75 billion as soon as possible, because tests should be free and accessible to all who need them – with extra effort to make sure low-income and minority communities, those who are more financially vulnerable and critical institutions like nursing homes, schools, and community centers are supported, and that we address the sharp racial injustices and inequities that plague our country. This represents the single best investment America could make in averting an even more tragic and pending disaster.
Today Covid-19 cases are spiking, and the trajectory in much of America is rising rapidly. In addition, we will soon enter a new cold and flu season with potentially 100 million cases of flu-like symptoms that stand to overwhelm our current testing capacity. Not only do we need to bend the curve of this epidemic; we need to provide America’s essential workers and children with a way to go about their work and lives more safely, so that critical institutions can survive and function during this period of time. The only alternative is more large-scale lockdowns. The price of that is too high to pay when we don’t have to, if we make smart, strategic, science-based investments now.
Continue reading “The Rockefeller Foundation – National COVID-19 Testing & Tracing Action Plan”
Dr. Rajiv J. Shah
President, The Rockefeller Foundation
Dear Citizens of Eagar,
Over the past several weeks I have been asked repeatedly what the Town of Eagar plans to do about Covid19, masks, visitors, riots, etc. It is somewhat alarming how many expect and almost invite a more drastic infringement on their freedoms. My response from the onset of the Covid19 pandemic has been that we will err on the side of freedom. When riots began to riddle the country and our governor took the drastic measure of a statewide curfew, again, I maintained that we will err on the side of freedom. I have received numerous phone calls from reporters, citizens, visitors, and complete strangers to our area asking why the Town of Eagar has not cancelled upcoming rodeos and our 4th of July parade. Again, my response is that Eagar will err on the side of freedom. What authority does the Town of Eagar, or any other state or local government, have to infringe on the rights of healthy lawabiding citizens?
Posted on: Friday, June 26th 2020 at 11:00 am Written By: Denis G. Rancourt
Originally published on www.ocla.ca
Summary / Abstract
Masks and respirators do not work.
There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.
Furthermore, the relevant known physics and biology, which I review, are such that masks and respirators should not work. It would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective-dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.
The present paper about masks illustrates the degree to which governments, the mainstream media, and institutional propagandists can decide to operate in a science vacuum, or select only incomplete science that serves their interests. Such recklessness is also certainly the case with the current global lockdown of over 1 billion people, an unprecedented experiment in medical and political history.
In this report, claims, assumptions, facts and evidence relating to the alleged COVID-19 Pandemic will be critically analysed and reviewed. The rationale for doing this is to illustrate that current measures are inappropriate – even unlawful – and should be lifted immediately.
In a preliminary clinical study, we observed that the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was effective against SARS-CoV-2 by shortening the duration of viral load in Covid-19 patients. It is of paramount importance to define when a treated patient can be considered as no longer contagious. Correlation between successful isolation of virus in cell culture and Ct value of quantitative RT-PCR targeting E gene suggests that patients with Ct above 33–34 using our RT-PCR system are not contagious and thus can be discharged from hospital care or strict confinement for non-hospitalized patients.
In a stunning disregard for medical and scientific integrity, the WHO posted its new guidelines for determining official deaths from COVID-19 which do not require cases be positively confirmed through virus testing, but only that it is suspected to be a cause of death.
Emergency use ICD codes for COVID-19 disease outbreak
The COVID-19 disease outbreak has been declared a public health emergency of international concern.
- An emergency ICD-10 code of ‘U07.1 COVID-19, virus identified’ is assigned to a disease diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by laboratory testing.
- An emergency ICD-10 code of ‘U07.2 COVID-19, virus not identified’ is assigned to a clinical or epidemiological diagnosis of COVID-19 where laboratory confirmation is inconclusive or not available.
- Both U07.1 and U07.2 may be used for mortality coding as cause of death
- In ICD-11, the code for the confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 is RA01.0 and the code for the clinical diagnosis (suspected or probable) of COVID-19 is RA01.1.
“In 1993, WHO announced a “birth-control vaccine” for “family planning”. Published research shows that by 1976 WHO researchers had conjugated tetanus toxoid (TT) with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) producing a “birth-control” vaccine. Conjugating TT with hCG causes pregnancy hormones to be attacked by the immune system. Expected results are abortions in females already pregnant and/or infertility in recipients not yet impregnated. Repeated inoculations prolong infertility. Currently WHO researchers are working on more potent anti-fertility vaccines using recombinant DNA. WHO publications show a long-range purpose to reduce population growth in unstable “less developed countries”. By November 1993 Catholic publications appeared saying an abortifacient vaccine was being used as a tetanus prophylactic. In November 2014, the Catholic Church asserted that such a program was underway in Kenya. Three independent Nairobi accredited biochemistry laboratories tested samples from vials of the WHO tetanus vaccine being used in March 2014 and found hCG where none should be present. In October 2014, 6 additional vials were obtained by Catholic doctors and were tested in 6 accredited laboratories. Again, hCG was found in half the samples. Subsequently, Nairobi’s AgriQ Quest laboratory, in two sets of analyses, again found hCG in the same vaccine vials that tested positive earlier but found no hCG in 52 samples alleged by the WHO to be vials of the vaccine used in the Kenya campaign 40 with the same identifying batch numbers as the vials that tested positive for hCG. Given that hCG was found in at least half the WHO vaccine samples known by the doctors involved in administering the vaccines to have been used in Kenya, our opinion is that the Kenya “anti-tetanus” campaign was reasonably called into question by the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association as a front for population growth reduction.”Continue reading “HCG Found in WHO Tetanus Vaccine in Kenya Raises Concern in the Developing World”