humansarefree--2020-08-08--Big Pharma’s Narrative is Failing

Big Pharma’s Narrative is Failing

And a group of doctors is helping push it over the edge So now we don ’ t have to listen to what those doctors said in front of the US Supreme Court , because it turns out that one of them has some whacky beliefs about sex with demons causing reproductive disorders .
What a relief .
I ’ m not going to pretend that the things Dr. Stella Immanuel has said don ’ t sound just a little crazy to me .
They do .
But I ’ ve been observing this game long enough to have a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Someone says something that contradicts the dominant narrative ( in this case , the narrative about medical science ) , and the machine that supports that narrative goes into overdrive to discredit them , with whatever information they can dig up – as long as it doesn ’ t involve discussing the actual substance of what the person has said .
I understand that for some people , maybe even for a great many , that is the end of the conversation .
So for everyone who is satisfied with the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sex causes fybroids ” narrative – please , stop here .
Your ride is over , and you may go on believing that this group of doctors and other professionals has been thoroughly discredited by these statements .
For everyone else , if you are at all interested in why such a coordinated effort has been launched to silence and discredit this group , why – even before the sex demon stuff was uncovered–videos of the group ’ s press conference were quickly yanked from YouTube , and why their own website was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , SquareSpace , ( their new website can now be found here ) then please keep reading .
WHAT THE AMERICA ’ S FRONTLINE DOCTORS GROUP SAID What follows is a brief summary of the key points made by the group America ’ s Frontline Doctors at their press conference last week .
I will not comment on the validity of their claims , however founder Dr. Simone Gold has provided support for much of what the group said , in a white paper that can be found here .
1 .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Covid-19 .
This is the claim made by several of the speakers , including Dr. Immanuel , based on their own clinical experience , as well as on multiple published studies .
Many of those studies are listed here , and here .
2 .
State licensing boards are using their power to forcibly prevent people from having access to this drug .
According to Dr. Gold , many states have empowered their pharmacists to not honor prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine to be used in treating Covid-19 .
This , she says , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happened that a state has threatened a doctor for prescribing a universally accepted safe generic cheap drug off-label.
” Meanwhile , says Gold , the drug is available over the counter in many other countries , including Iran and Indonesia , where it can be found “ in the vitamin section ” .
3 .
There is a coordinated campaign to discredit and suppressinformation about the drug hydroxychloroquine as a possible treatment for Covid-19 : “ If it seems like there is an orchestrated attack going on against hydroxychloroquine , ” said Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because there is.
” Dr. Todaro is speaking from experience .
He was the co-author of a March 13 white paper arguing for the use of hydroxychloroquine against Covid-19 .
The paper was made public on Google Docs , received a lot of attention , and was then removed – without warning – by Google .
( It has since been put back up . )
4 .
The World Health Organization ( the authority upon which YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki has said she bases her company ’ s policy on “ misinformation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ based on a blatantly fraudulent study that relied on data that it appears never even existed .
The WHO later resumed trials after independent investigators discovered the problems and the study ’ s authors retracted it .
5 .
We should be able to have a free and open discussion about this .
Dr. Dr. Joseph Lapado from UCLA , sums it up : “ We ’ ve been using ( hydroxychloroquine ) for a long time .
But all of a sudden it ’ s been escalated to this area of looking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doesn ’ t make sense… “ At the very least , we can live in a world where there are differences of opinion about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine , but still allow more data to come , still allow physicians who feel they have expertise with it to use that medication , and still , you know , talk and learn and get better at helping people with Covid-19.
” WHY THE ALL-OUT MEDIA ASSAULT ON THE FRONTLINE DOCTORS ?
The influence that the pharmaceutical industry wields over media outlets is no secret @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 70 % of all news advertising in the US came from pharmaceutical companies .
I have written elsewhereabout how “ reporting ” on medical issues can be difficult to distinguish from outright marketing for drug companies .
Social-media platforms are not immune to this influence , whether it comes via advertising dollars ; “ partnerships ” such as that between the CDC Foundation and MailChimp ( which like many other platforms , has an explicit policy of censoring content about vaccines that does not align with the positions of the CDC and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as that of Google ’ s parent company Alphabet ; or indeed at the behest of politicians such as Congressman Adam Schiff , who last year wrote to the CEOs of Amazon , Facebook and Google , requesting that those companies censor information and products that did not conform to the officially sanctioned position on vaccines .
All three complied .
So it should come as small surprise that both Google and YouTube have now taken to removing content supportive of hydroxychloroquine , a drug that is no longer covered by patent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any generic producer , for a fraction of the price that Gilead , for example , might charge for its still-patented Remdesivir .
Twitter and Facebook have likewise removed posts about the drug , most notably – and with no visible sense of irony – removing posts of the video in which the Frontline Doctors speak out about widespread media censorship of the topic .
( You can now see those videos on Bitchute . )
One need not have an opinion on the merits of the drug hydroxychloroquine in order to recognize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Something that doesn ’ t seem to have anything to do with free and open inquiry or honest scientific discourse .
Many argue that the politicization of this drug is founded in a desire to unseat President Trump , that the opposition to it is primarily because it was endorsed by Trump , and if it is deemed to be a failure ( or even better , dangerous to patients ) it will be a powerful strike against the president .
That may well be part of what has motivated this .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do with the desire to push a more expensive medication onto the market , and to push a new vaccine on the world ’ s population .
More broadly , it has to do with the narrative that those in the business of selling drugs demand we believe : that we are all in desperate need of their products ( but only the ones still under patent ) if we are to be healthy–or indeed , if we are to survive at all .
If it turns out that this “ new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hydroxychloroquine or anything else , then the industry ’ s dreams go up in smoke .
If hydroxychloroquine turns out to be a safe and effective way of treating Covid-19 ( as multiple studies and the experience in many other countries outside of the US indicate it may be ) then there is much less reason for anyone to receive a vaccine for it , let alone the entire world ’ s population .
Likewise , there is no pressing need to develop a new , more expensive treatment .
But even more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that hydroxychloroquine is after all a safe and effective treatment for Covid-19 , then this whole episode – the silencing of dissenting voices , the “ fact-checking ” on social media , the campaigns against “ misinformation ” – will be revealed in plain sight , for what it has always been : Nothing more than a well-funded marketing campaign and damage-control effort on behalf of the industry that wants you to believe that you need to use its expensive products in order to go on living .
So when a group of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US Supreme Court and told the world how they were having success using a cheap anti-malarial that had been in use for 65 years to treat the most deadly contagion of our generation , it was a massive blow to the narrative upon which the pharmaceutical purveyors ’ success depends .
And over the next few days , as viewers engaged in a race with the censors , quickly downloading videos before they were removed , to post them on other platforms… it became clear that the censors and the gatekeepers had lost @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only about hydroxychloroquine .
Every time media outlets or social-media platforms engage in outright censorship of content , in a way that happens to benefit pharmaceutical companies , both parties lose just a little more credibility .
The actions we are witnessing now are not the actions of an industry confident in the value of what it provides to the world .
They are the actions of a desperate , threatened creature .
They are the actions of an entity that is not strengthened by the truth , but weakened by it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obvious ) acts of censorship tell us .
What we are witnessing are the pangs of a lumbering , wounded , behemoth .

And a group of doctors is helping push it over the edge
by Bretigne Shaffer
So now we don’t have to listen to what those doctors said in front of the US Supreme Court, because it turns out that one of them has some whacky beliefs about sex with demons causing reproductive disorders. What a relief.
I’m not going to pretend that the things Dr. Stella Immanuel has said don’t sound just a little crazy to me. They do. But I’ve been observing this game long enough to have a pretty good idea of how this works:
Someone says something that contradicts the dominant narrative (in this case, the narrative about medical science), and the machine that supports that narrative goes into overdrive to discredit them, with whatever information they can dig up – as long as it doesn’t involve discussing the actual substance of what the person has said.
I understand that for some people, maybe even for a great many, that is the end of the conversation. So for everyone who is satisfied with the “fringe doctors promoting hydroxychloroquine also believe demon sex causes fybroids” narrative – please, stop here.
Your ride is over, and you may go on believing that this group of doctors and other professionals has been thoroughly discredited by these statements.
For everyone else, if you are at all interested in why such a coordinated effort has been launched to silence and discredit this group, why – even before the sex demon stuff was uncovered–videos of the group’s press conference were quickly yanked from YouTube, and why their own website was taken down without warning by its host, SquareSpace, (their new website can now be found here) then please keep reading.
WHAT THE AMERICA’S FRONTLINE DOCTORS GROUP SAID
What follows is a brief summary of the key points made by the group America’s Frontline Doctors at their press conference last week. I will not comment on the validity of their claims, however founder Dr. Simone Gold has provided support for much of what the group said, in a white paper that can be found here.
1. They believe that hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment for Covid-19.
This is the claim made by several of the speakers, including Dr. Immanuel, based on their own clinical experience, as well as on multiple published studies. Many of those studies are listed here, and here.
2. State licensing boards are using their power to forcibly prevent people from having access to this drug.
According to Dr. Gold, many states have empowered their pharmacists to not honor prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine to be used in treating Covid-19. This, she says, is unprecedented: “It has never happened that a state has threatened a doctor for prescribing a universally accepted safe generic cheap drug off-label.”
Meanwhile, says Gold, the drug is available over the counter in many other countries, including Iran and Indonesia, where it can be found “in the vitamin section”.
3. There is a coordinated campaign to discredit and suppressinformation about the drug hydroxychloroquine as a possible treatment for Covid-19:
“If it seems like there is an orchestrated attack going on against hydroxychloroquine,” said Dr. James Todaro, “it’s because there is.”
Dr. Todaro is speaking from experience. He was the co-author of a March 13 white paper arguing for the use of hydroxychloroquine against Covid-19. The paper was made public on Google Docs, received a lot of attention, and was then removed – without warning – by Google. (It has since been put back up.)
4. The World Health Organization (the authority upon which YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki has said she bases her company’s policy on “misinformation”) halted its trials of hydroxychloroquine based on a blatantly fraudulent study that relied on data that it appears never even existed.
The WHO later resumed trials after independent investigators discovered the problems and the study’s authors retracted it.
5. We should be able to have a free and open discussion about this.
Dr. Dr. Joseph Lapado from UCLA, sums it up:
“We’ve been using (hydroxychloroquine) for a long time. But all of a sudden it’s been escalated to this area of looking like some poisonous drug. That just doesn’t make sense…
“At the very least, we can live in a world where there are differences of opinion about the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, but still allow more data to come, still allow physicians who feel they have expertise with it to use that medication, and still, you know, talk and learn and get better at helping people with Covid-19.”
WHY THE ALL-OUT MEDIA ASSAULT ON THE FRONTLINE DOCTORS?
The influence that the pharmaceutical industry wields over media outlets is no secret. As of 2018, an estimated 70% of all news advertising in the US came from pharmaceutical companies. I have written elsewhereabout how “reporting” on medical issues can be difficult to distinguish from outright marketing for drug companies.
Social-media platforms are not immune to this influence, whether it comes via advertising dollars; “partnerships” such as that between the CDC Foundation and MailChimp (which like many other platforms, has an explicit policy of censoring content about jjabs that does not align with the positions of the CDC and the WHO); direct investment, such as that of Google’s parent company Alphabet; or indeed at the behest of politicians such as Congressman Adam Schiff, who last year wrote to the CEOs of Amazon, Facebook and Google, requesting that those companies censor information and products that did not conform to the officially sanctioned position on jjabs. All three complied.
So it should come as small surprise that both Google and YouTube have now taken to removing content supportive of hydroxychloroquine, a drug that is no longer covered by patent, and can be made and sold by any generic producer, for a fraction of the price that Gilead, for example, might charge for its still-patented Remdesivir.
Twitter and Facebook have likewise removed posts about the drug, most notably – and with no visible sense of irony – removing posts of the video in which the Frontline Doctors speak out about widespread media censorship of the topic. (You can now see those videos on Bitchute.)
One need not have an opinion on the merits of the drug hydroxychloroquine in order to recognize that something very odd is happening here. Something that doesn’t seem to have anything to do with free and open inquiry or honest scientific discourse.
Many argue that the politicization of this drug is founded in a desire to unseat President Trump, that the opposition to it is primarily because it was endorsed by Trump, and if it is deemed to be a failure (or even better, dangerous to patients) it will be a powerful strike against the president.
That may well be part of what has motivated this. But there is another motivation, having to do with the desire to push a more expensive medication onto the market, and to push a new jjab on the world’s population.
More broadly, it has to do with the narrative that those in the business of selling drugs demand we believe: that we are all in desperate need of their products (but only the ones still under patent) if we are to be healthy–or indeed, if we are to survive at all.
If it turns out that this “new” virus is easily treatable, with hydroxychloroquine or anything else, then the industry’s dreams go up in smoke.
If hydroxychloroquine turns out to be a safe and effective way of treating Covid-19 (as multiple studies and the experience in many other countries outside of the US indicate it may be) then there is much less reason for anyone to receive a jjab for it, let alone the entire world’s population. Likewise, there is no pressing need to develop a new, more expensive treatment.
But even more than that: If it turns out that hydroxychloroquine is after all a safe and effective treatment for Covid-19, then this whole episode – the silencing of dissenting voices, the “fact-checking” on social media, the campaigns against “misinformation ” – will be revealed in plain sight, for what it has always been: Nothing more than a well-funded marketing campaign and damage-control effort on behalf of the industry that wants you to believe that you need to use its expensive products in order to go on living.
So when a group of doctors took to the steps of the US Supreme Court and told the world how they were having success using a cheap anti-malarial that had been in use for 65 years to treat the most deadly contagion of our generation, it was a massive blow to the narrative upon which the pharmaceutical purveyors’ success depends.
And over the next few days, as viewers engaged in a race with the censors, quickly downloading videos before they were removed, to post them on other platforms… it became clear that the censors and the gatekeepers had lost control of the conversation.
This is not only about hydroxychloroquine. Every time media outlets or social-media platforms engage in outright censorship of content, in a way that happens to benefit pharmaceutical companies, both parties lose just a little more credibility.
The actions we are witnessing now are not the actions of an industry confident in the value of what it provides to the world. They are the actions of a desperate, threatened creature. They are the actions of an entity that is not strengthened by the truth, but weakened by it. That is what these (increasingly obvious) acts of censorship tell us. What we are witnessing are the pangs of a lumbering, wounded, behemoth.


humansarefree--2020-08-08--Massive Lockdown Protest in Berlin Downplayed and Demonized by MSM

We ’ re at a crossroads at the moment , and most people are choosing to obedience to the emerging new order .
Here in the U.S. , the hysteria and fear is thick , palpable and ugly .
Just as Stanley Milgram demonstrated in his now famous social experiment , most people are turning against their fellow neighbors and countrymen and willfully posing as enforcers of the new normal .
The media in this nation is a cancer , eating away at the social fabric of our society , demanding that we find differences between ourselves and everyone else @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the collective madness .
The American spirit of individualism and personal liberty is being stamped out by peer pressure to conform and obey .
This isn ’ t how it ’ s supposed to be , though .
As a people , Americans have long been admired the world over for our supposed courage in defending liberty , but today we ’ re so fractured and confused that we can ’ t seem to come together in any meaningful numbers .
The police state that has emerged around us has been so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve even given up protesting against the never-ending wars .
We ’ ve become docile , domesticated , distracted , divided , dysfunctional and delusional .
We no longer oppose tyranny .
Time for someone else to carry the torch .
Last week in Germany , a massive crowd of people hit the streets to protest the lockdowns which are killing businesses , destroying families , and causing untold stress , loneliness and depression , all in the name of preventing the spread of a virus .
‘ Masks Make Us Slaves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who came from across the country held up homemade signs with slogans like “ Corona , false alarm , ” “ We are being forced to wear a muzzle , ” “ Natural defense instead of vaccination ” and “ We are the second wave.
” [ Source ] Mainstream media coverage of the event downplayed the size of the crowd .
The Guardian reported , “ Up to 20,000 demonstrated against restrictions , raising fears of a rise in infections , ” diminishing the crowd while also framing the demonstration as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News reported , “ Thousands protest in Berlin against coronavirus restrictions , ” then added , “ Protests against anti-virus restrictions in Germany have drawn a variety of attendees , including conspiracy theorists and right-wing populists.
” This , of course , is an attempt to demonize the event and give the false impression that those who are concerned for their rights are subhuman .
The New York Times wants you to believe that all of these people are a danger to those who follow orders and go along to get along .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and insinuated that they are all somehow allied with Ne0Nazis .
Bollocks .
CNN took a jab as well in their article , “ Thousands gather in Berlin to protest against Covid-19 restrictions.
” Their spin is that all of the people involved are from the far-right .
Say what ?
!
?
“ A large crowd of far-right groups gathered for a “ sit-in ” at Berlin ’ s iconic Brandenburg Gate on Saturday to protest against the German government ’ s coronavirus restrictions .
“ A march earlier Saturday that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rules on social distancing and face masks was halted by organizers.
” [ Source ] Can you read between the lines , people ?
The media is goading you to live in fear not only of a contentious virus , but of your fellow man .
The threat is being expanded to include not only the disease , but anyone who questions the official narrative about the disease .
According to RT , “ 500,000 Germans apply to take part in Stuttgart lockdown protest , but police RESTRICT rally to 5,000 due to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a heck of a lot more people than what other news outlets reported .
The real story is that there were a lot more people at this demonstration than the MSM wants you to believe , and that the crowd was made up of people of all walks of life , not just racist Nazis who deserve to be treated as less-than-human .
Some estimates say that up to 1.3 million people were involved , with people arriving from all over Germany to participate .
“ Now , most media doesn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all , and if they do , they ’ re only referring to these massive numbers of people as conspiracy theorists.
” – Ben Swann Ben Swann destroys the mainstream narrative on this in the following video , diving into who these people were , and why they opposed the lockdown .
Ralph Smart also chimes in , reminding us that millions of people are waking up , and that the mass awakening is the one thing the powers-that-be fear most .
I hope you ’ re paying attention people .
There is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not alone .
This is the global awakening , and it will be impossible to keep the lid on this for much longer .

by Dylan Charles, Waking Times
We’re at a crossroads at the moment, and most people are choosing to obedience to the emerging new order. Here in the U.S., the hysteria and fear is thick, palpable and ugly. Just as Stanley Milgram demonstrated in his now famous social experiment, most people are turning against their fellow neighbors and countrymen and willfully posing as enforcers of the new normal.
The media in this nation is a cancer, eating away at the social fabric of our society, demanding that we find differences between ourselves and everyone else, and demanding that we lose ourselves in the collective madness. The American spirit of individualism and personal liberty is being stamped out by peer pressure to conform and obey. This isn’t how it’s supposed to be, though.
As a people, Americans have long been admired the world over for our supposed courage in defending liberty, but today we’re so fractured and confused that we can’t seem to come together in any meaningful numbers.
The police state that has emerged around us has been so discouraging to real protest movements that we’ve even given up protesting against the never-ending wars. We’ve become docile, domesticated, distracted, divided, dysfunctional and delusional. We no longer oppose tyranny.
Time for someone else to carry the torch.
Last week in Germany, a massive crowd of people hit the streets to protest the lockdowns which are killing businesses, destroying families, and causing untold stress, loneliness and depression, all in the name of preventing the spread of a virus. ‘Masks Make Us Slaves,’ read one banner.
Protesters who came from across the country held up homemade signs with slogans like “Corona, false alarm,” “We are being forced to wear a muzzle,” “Natural defense instead of vaccination” and “We are the second wave.” [Source]
Mainstream media coverage of the event downplayed the size of the crowd. The Guardian reported, “Up to 20,000 demonstrated against restrictions, raising fears of a rise in infections,” diminishing the crowd while also framing the demonstration as a threat to the fear-addled rule-followers.
ABC News reported, “Thousands protest in Berlin against coronavirus restrictions,” then added, “Protests against anti-virus restrictions in Germany have drawn a variety of attendees, including conspiracy theorists and right-wing populists.”
This, of course, is an attempt to demonize the event and give the false impression that those who are concerned for their rights are subhuman.
The New York Times wants you to believe that all of these people are a danger to those who follow orders and go along to get along. They said that 17,000 people marched, and insinuated that they are all somehow allied with Ne0Nazis. Bollocks.
This was the scene in Berlin, where an estimated 17,000 people defied social-distancing and mask requirements to join a protest supported by neo-Nazi groups, conspiracy theorists and others who said they were fed up with the restrictions. Read the latest. https://t.co/QFWyHTTMb0 pic.twitter.com/h9CuxYCERg — The New York Times (@nytimes) August 1, 2020
CNN took a jab as well in their article, “Thousands gather in Berlin to protest against Covid-19 restrictions.” Their spin is that all of the people involved are from the far-right. Say what?!?
“A large crowd of far-right groups gathered for a “sit-in” at Berlin’s iconic Brandenburg Gate on Saturday to protest against the German government’s coronavirus restrictions.
“A march earlier Saturday that was criticized by police for not adhering to rules on social distancing and face masks was halted by organizers.” [Source]
Can you read between the lines, people? The media is goading you to live in fear not only of a contentious virus, but of your fellow man. The threat is being expanded to include not only the disease, but anyone who questions the official narrative about the disease.
According to RT, “500,000 Germans apply to take part in Stuttgart lockdown protest, but police RESTRICT rally to 5,000 due to ‘social distancing,” which is a heck of a lot more people than what other news outlets reported.
The real story is that there were a lot more people at this demonstration than the MSM wants you to believe, and that the crowd was made up of people of all walks of life, not just racist Nazis who deserve to be treated as less-than-human.
Some estimates say that up to 1.3 million people were involved, with people arriving from all over Germany to participate.
“Now, most media doesn’t want to talk about this story at all, and if they do, they’re only referring to these massive numbers of people as conspiracy theorists.” – Ben Swann
Ben Swann destroys the mainstream narrative on this in the following video, diving into who these people were, and why they opposed the lockdown.
Ralph Smart also chimes in, reminding us that millions of people are waking up, and that the mass awakening is the one thing the powers-that-be fear most.
I hope you’re paying attention people. There is an awakening happening, and you are not alone. This is the global awakening, and it will be impossible to keep the lid on this for much longer.


humansarefree--2020-08-09--The Myth That Lockdowns Stop Pandemics

The Myth That Lockdowns Stop Pandemics

From the beginning of time , humans have used mythology to make sense of a chaotic natural world .
Sir G.L .
Gomme dubbed myths “ the science of a pre-scientific age.
” Folklore provided pre-scientific people a comforting sense of control over nature .
To address dry spells , they deployed rain dances .
Sunless stretches hindering crops prompted offerings to Helios .
Then , our ancestors sat back and waited .
The rains always came .
The sun always reappeared , validating their “ wisdom , ” the illusion of control reinforced .
Thanks to science , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same outcomes would have occurred had the tribe taken no action , the tribe leader would still have received credit or blame from his constituents .
Similarly , today ’ s politicians race to take credit – or place blame – for COVID-19 “ results.
” Do politicians really control these outcomes , or are they simply exploiting our ingrained tendencies ?
When China first deployed lockdown in January to “ defeat COVID-19 , ” The Washington Post approvingly quoted a Georgetown University professor as saying , “ The truth is those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never effective… ” In March , Imperial College London ’ s dire projections influenced the White House , but a careful reading of the advice contained in the Imperial College report reveals that its authors knew lockdown alone could not eliminate any infections , only delay them : “ The more successful a strategy is at temporary suppression , ” it stated , “ the larger the later epidemic is predicted to be in the absence of vaccination , due to lesser build-up of herd immunity.
” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as social distancing are ineffective once a disease infects 1 percent of a region ’ s population .
Literature on this subject is unanimous worldwide .
According to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control : There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread .
It is hard to imagine that measures like those within the category of social distancing would not have some positive impact by reducing transmission of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the evidence base supporting each individual measure is often weak .
Decades of evidence corroborates this .
In 1969 , a group of men overwintering in Antarctica experienced a spontaneous respiratory virus outbreak during their 17th week of isolation .
Similarly , COVID-19 appeared on an Argentinian naval ship on the 35th day of its voyage , following a 14-day isolation of captain and crew .
Nature always finds a way .
No respiratory virus ever needed a “ lockdown ” to dissipate .
What it needs is herd immunity , preferably sooner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ young and healthy to minimize mortality .
Politicians know the disease will eventually leave , yet they strive to convince a critical mass that their actions – modern-day versions of the rain dance – brought about that result .
They count on us behaving like renowned psychologist B.F. Skinner ’ s superstitious pigeons .
“ A pigeon is … put into a cage .
A food hopper may be swung into place … so that the pigeon can eat from it … If a clock is [ set ] to present the hopper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the bird ’ s behavior , operant conditioning usually takes place .
“ The bird tends to learn whatever response it is making when the hopper appears .
The experiment might be said to demonstrate a sort of superstition .
The bird behaves as if there were a causal relation between its behavior and the presentation of food , although such a relation is lacking.
” Publicly available data shows no causal relationship between government orders and COVID-19 mortality outcomes .
Sweden ’ s all-cause , per-capita mortality for 2020 is approximately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ average , while lockdown-loving New Jersey ’ s is almost 1,900 per million above the prior five-year average , and Michigan ’ s is over 700 per million .
The mainstream media does not report this .
Instead , its energetic smearing of Sweden , coupled with its pseudo-scientific insistence that lockdowns do anything more than delay the inevitable , helps politicians exploit the human tendency to mythologize .
We are faced with a virus with a 997-out-of-1,000 survival rate .
We have vanquished fiercer adversaries .
We can rid ourselves of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ truth : neither we , nor our politicians , have control over death .

From the beginning of time, humans have used mythology to make sense of a chaotic natural world. Sir G.L. Gomme dubbed myths “the science of a pre-scientific age.”
Folklore provided pre-scientific people a comforting sense of control over nature. To address dry spells, they deployed rain dances. Sunless stretches hindering crops prompted offerings to Helios.
Then, our ancestors sat back and waited. The rains always came. The sun always reappeared, validating their “wisdom,” the illusion of control reinforced.
Thanks to science, we know this was pure superstition. Though the same outcomes would have occurred had the tribe taken no action, the tribe leader would still have received credit or blame from his constituents.
Similarly, today’s politicians race to take credit – or place blame – for COVID-19 “results.” Do politicians really control these outcomes, or are they simply exploiting our ingrained tendencies?
When China first deployed lockdown in January to “defeat COVID-19,” The Washington Post approvingly quoted a Georgetown University professor as saying, “The truth is those kinds of lockdowns are very rare and never effective…”
In March, Imperial College London’s dire projections influenced the White House, but a careful reading of the advice contained in the Imperial College report reveals that its authors knew lockdown alone could not eliminate any infections, only delay them:
“The more successful a strategy is at temporary suppression,” it stated, “the larger the later epidemic is predicted to be in the absence of vaccination, due to lesser build-up of herd immunity.”
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention pandemic planning documents state non-pharmaceutical interventions such as social distancing are ineffective once a disease infects 1 percent of a region’s population. Literature on this subject is unanimous worldwide. According to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control:
There are no historical observations or scientific studies that support the confinement by quarantine of groups of possibly infected people for extended periods in order to slow the spread. It is hard to imagine that measures like those within the category of social distancing would not have some positive impact by reducing transmission of a human respiratory infection. … However, the evidence base supporting each individual measure is often weak.
Decades of evidence corroborates this. In 1969, a group of men overwintering in Antarctica experienced a spontaneous respiratory virus outbreak during their 17th week of isolation. Similarly, COVID-19 appeared on an Argentinian naval ship on the 35th day of its voyage, following a 14-day isolation of captain and crew.
Nature always finds a way. No respiratory virus ever needed a “lockdown” to dissipate. What it needs is herd immunity, preferably sooner than later, preferably developed by the young and healthy to minimize mortality.
Politicians know the disease will eventually leave, yet they strive to convince a critical mass that their actions – modern-day versions of the rain dance – brought about that result. They count on us behaving like renowned psychologist B.F. Skinner’s superstitious pigeons.
“A pigeon is … put into a cage. A food hopper may be swung into place … so that the pigeon can eat from it … If a clock is [set] to present the hopper at regular intervals with no reference whatsoever to the bird’s behavior, operant conditioning usually takes place.
“The bird tends to learn whatever response it is making when the hopper appears. The experiment might be said to demonstrate a sort of superstition. The bird behaves as if there were a causal relation between its behavior and the presentation of food, although such a relation is lacking.”
Publicly available data shows no causal relationship between government orders and COVID-19 mortality outcomes. Sweden’s all-cause, per-capita mortality for 2020 is approximately 290 per million above the prior five-year average, while lockdown-loving New Jersey’s is almost 1,900 per million above the prior five-year average, and Michigan’s is over 700 per million.
(In case you suspect Sweden “naturally” locked down on its own, mobility data reveals it didn’t.)
The mainstream media does not report this. Instead, its energetic smearing of Sweden, coupled with its pseudo-scientific insistence that lockdowns do anything more than delay the inevitable, helps politicians exploit the human tendency to mythologize.
We are faced with a virus with a 997-out-of-1,000 survival rate. We have vanquished fiercer adversaries. We can rid ourselves of this plague less painfully by remembering one simple truth: neither we, nor our politicians, have control over death.
Reprinted with permission from RealClearPolitics.


humansarefree--2020-08-09--Where Do We Draw the Line? At Wearing Masks or Taking Vaccines?

You don ’ t have to be a rocket scientist to see that we are headed to a Chinese Communist-style social credit system based on receiving a COVID vaccination .
We need to reject the mask now .
This is a test .
If we accept masks , they ’ ll know we will accept mandatory vaccines .
We need to start organizations in every state and province to offer moral , legal and financial support to courageous people willing to say , “ the emperor has no clothes.
” This is for real folks .
It ’ s happening @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unless we act .
A friend in Ottawa tells me that gas stations are fined if a customer drives up to the pump not wearing a mask .
That ’ s right , both the customer and the gas station receive a fine , the latter presumably for serving someone without a mask .
This is the future folks , except it is happening now : No participation in society without compliance .
It ’ s time to stop this creeping Communism by defying the bullshit mask law en masse .
The relief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recovery are all designed to stifle dissent .
The bottom line is that this nonsense is the new normal and the sooner we resist it , the better .
“ Eventually , what we ’ ll have to have is certificates of who ’ s a recovered person , who ’ s a vaccinated person , because you don ’ t want people moving around the world , where you have some countries that won ’ t have a control sadly.
” – Bill Gates What he actually has in mind may be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ December that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was funding research at MIT in the development of a “ Tattoo ID “ , to be injected with vaccinations and available for anonymous detection .
In time , the failure to have the appropriate identifying tattoo for any given year , and for any given virus officially declared dangerous , would most certainly be used to control individual freedom of movement .
This should trigger every thinking person ’ s attention , particularly as it is reported that Gates refused to have his own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CDC Director , Robert Redfield , left , predicted a “ double hit ” this fall .
“ I ’ d like to continue to work with you to get the American public to embrace the influenza vaccine so we can try to minimize the impact of influenza because I think those two respiratory pathogens hitting us at the same time do have the potential to stress our health system.
” In Gary Barnett ’ s opinion , “ these are not simply prognostications , but are warnings of things already planned and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indicating with his comments is that he knows that the flu season coming will be much more devastating than normal and that all sickness and death will be blamed on a virus that has never been properly scientifically isolated , identified , or verified .
“ That will matter not , as , after 8 months of mandated isolation and lockdowns , deadly oxygen-stealing mask-wearing , of vitamin deficiencies , lack of exercise , job loss , depression , and extreme stress , the entire population will be at great risk of becoming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this fraud that plotted this outcome from the beginning , will use the purposely created weakness of the masses to advance their agendas of control .
“ This coming flu season will not be like last year when total deaths were close to normal , even with the introduction of a fraudulent virus .
“ This next flu season will see not only the old and infirmed getting sick and dying , but people of all ages will be highly affected due to deliberately introduced lockdown measures implemented by the elite controllers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ soon begin in poverty-stricken parts of Africa for a biometric ID which will also be your payment system and vaccine record .
The biometric digital identity platform that ‘ evolves just as you evolve ’ is backed by none other than the Bill Gates-backed GAVI vaccine alliance , Mastercard , and the AI-powered ‘ identity authentication ’ company , Trust Stamp.
” Am I the only one who watches pre-scamdemic movies with a sense of nostalgia ?
We need to take a stand on mandatory masks .
If we don ’ t , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mandatory vaccines .

The Great Reset: Where Do We Go From Here?
It’s time to step past the 24 hour fear porn news cycle and ask where we are headed. It’s time to Understand The Great Reset.
The Conscious Resistance Network is an independent media organization focused on empowering individuals through education, philosophy, health, and community organizing. We work to create a world where corporate and state power does not rule over the lives of free human beings.
The Great Reset is one of the key pieces of the New World Order, together with Agenda 2030 and the Green New Deal.
Source: https://wp.me/paT9J6-31o


humansarefree--2020-08-09--Authentic Video of the UFOs That Flew Over Washington in 1952

Did you know that UFOs have been filmed/documented for thousands of years ?
There are many examples from our ancient past that show this [ more evidence here and here ] , and many modern day examples in the form of videos , radar trackings etc.. For example , here ’ s one of many documents that can be found within the CIA ’ s electronic reading room that makes it quite clear that authentic footage exists .
Recent footage of UFOs released and confirmed by the Pentagon also makes this quite clear , not to mention millions of pages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ describing encounters with objects that perform maneuvers no known aircraft is capable of doing .
The thing is , we didn ’ t need ‘ them ’ to tell us , and footage , pictures and thousands of interesting cases make one thing quite clear , something is going on .
One example from the past I like to use comes from July of 1952 , when multiple UFOs were filmed flying over Washington D.C .
In fact , during that summer there were a number of sightings reported .
These sightings were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and are quite well known among many ufologists .
During that time , military jets that were sent out to take a closer look at these objects did so to no avail .
The objects instantaneously accelerated at speeds that are still not attainable today by any known man-made craft , similar to the many examples that exist today .
All of the sightings during this time were confirmed by civilians , military , radar operators and pilots .
The same goes for many sightings today , with the Pentagon ’ s recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nathan Twining , author of a September 23 , 1947 memo stated that the “ phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or fictitious ” and that “ the reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb , maneuverability ( particularly in roll ) , and action which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly air-craft and radar , lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually , automatically or remotely.
” The sightings over the White House rocked local consciousness and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ newspaper at the time .
They caused so much of a stir that President Truman held a press conference to answer questions about the event .
During that conference , he admitted that government officials “ discuss ” this topic “ in every meeting ” that the administration has with the military .
He went on to say that “ there ’ s always things like that going on , UFO ’ s and they ’ ve had other things you know.
” “ I counted 9 , the night that I saw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disk type aircraft , spacecraft .
But they were there , they were illuminated , they were quite visible , their configuration was quite conspicuous.
” – Colonel Ross Dedrickson ( source )

Did you know that UFOs have been filmed/documented for thousands of years? There are many examples from our ancient past that show this [more evidence here and here], and many modern day examples in the form of videos, radar trackings etc..
For example, here’s one of many documents that can be found within the CIA’s electronic reading room that makes it quite clear that authentic footage exists.
Recent footage of UFOs released and confirmed by the Pentagon also makes this quite clear, not to mention millions of pages of declassified documents from multiple government agencies describing encounters with objects that perform maneuvers no known aircraft is capable of doing.
The thing is, we didn’t need ‘them’ to tell us, and footage, pictures and thousands of interesting cases make one thing quite clear, something is going on.
One example from the past I like to use comes from July of 1952, when multiple UFOs were filmed flying over Washington D.C.
In fact, during that summer there were a number of sightings reported. These sightings were known as “the Big Flap” and are quite well known among many ufologists. During that time, military jets that were sent out to take a closer look at these objects did so to no avail.
The objects instantaneously accelerated at speeds that are still not attainable today by any known man-made craft, similar to the many examples that exist today.
All of the sightings during this time were confirmed by civilians, military, radar operators and pilots. The same goes for many sightings today, with the Pentagon’s recent release being a prime example.
General Nathan Twining, author of a September 23, 1947 memo stated that the “phenomenon reported is something real and not visionary or fictitious” and that “the reported operating characteristics such as extreme rates of climb, maneuverability (particularly in roll), and action which must be considered evasive when sighted or contacted by friendly air-craft and radar, lend belief to the possibility that some of the objects are controlled either manually, automatically or remotely.”
The sightings over the White House rocked local consciousness and were being reported by every major American newspaper at the time.
They caused so much of a stir that President Truman held a press conference to answer questions about the event. During that conference, he admitted that government officials “discuss” this topic “in every meeting” that the administration has with the military.
He went on to say that “there’s always things like that going on, UFO’s and they’ve had other things you know.”
“I counted 9, the night that I saw them they were round, the typical disk type aircraft, spacecraft. But they were there, they were illuminated, they were quite visible, their configuration was quite conspicuous.” – Colonel Ross Dedrickson (source)
Source: Collective-evolution.com (excerpt)


humansarefree--2020-08-09--Rothschilds Owe Humanity Trillions in Reparations

Reparations to the descendants of black slaves obscure the real debt the Rothschilds owe to humanity .
Destroying the Catholic Church and Christianity – Three trillion Removing God from social consciousness and public discourse – Five trillion Destroying millions of lives through feminism ( marriage and family destruction ) – Three trillion The war on masculinity and feminity which has damaged heterosexuals and robbed the world of masculine virtue and feminine charm .
One trillion .
Mass murders by Bolsheviks and Chinese Communists – Five trillion The Cold War and other wars of the twentieth century – Korea , Vietnam @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Libya – Five trillion The Great Depression , the Credit Crunch and the # scamdeminc of 2020 – Five Trillion The assassination of JFK , MLK , RFK and 9-11 – Two trillion Wars previous to the twentieth century – i.e .
US Civil War , etc .
Two trillion Destruction of the democratic process , journalism , education and the arts – five trillion Damage to national cultures and identities caused by multi-culturalism and illegal migration — One trillion The Rothschilds will finance and distribute ten honest movies about Communist subversion and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ten movies extolling American patriots like Louis McFadden , Charles Coughlin , Charles Lindbergh , and Henry Ford .
Airports and public places named after Illuminati traitors like G.H.W .
Bush will be renamed .
ARE WE CHARGING ENOUGH ?
The Rothschilds may discharge this debt by forgiving all “ debt ” due to money creation and relinquishing ownership of central banks to national governments .
This is letting them off easy , but the return to national sovereignty , personal freedom , and truth is worth the price .

Reparations to the descendants of black slaves obscure the real debt the Rothschilds owe to humanity.
by Henry Makow PhD
A Tentative Invoice
World War Two – Ten trillion (includes Dresden, Hamburg and Jewish holocaust)
World War One – Five Trillion
Destroying the Catholic Church and Christianity – Three trillion
Removing God from social consciousness and public discourse – Five trillion
Destroying millions of lives through feminism (marriage and family destruction) – Three trillion
The war on masculinity and feminity which has damaged heterosexuals and robbed the world of masculine virtue and feminine charm. One trillion.
Mass murders by Bolsheviks and Chinese Communists – Five trillion
General depredations of Communism – One trillion
The Cold War and other wars of the twentieth century – Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria. Libya – Five trillion
The Great Depression, the Credit Crunch and the #scamdeminc of 2020 – Five Trillion
The assassination of JFK, MLK, RFK and 9-11 – Two trillion
Wars previous to the twentieth century – i.e. US Civil War, etc. Two trillion
Attempt to start a race war in America – 300 Billion
Destruction of the democratic process, journalism, education and the arts – five trillion
Damage to national cultures and identities caused by multi-culturalism and illegal migration — One trillion
The Rothschilds will finance and distribute ten honest movies about Communist subversion and espionage in America, as well as ten movies extolling American patriots like Louis McFadden, Charles Coughlin, Charles Lindbergh, and Henry Ford.
Airports and public places named after Illuminati traitors like G.H.W. Bush will be renamed.
YOUR SUGGESTION HERE
TOTAL: ABOUT 50 TRILLION
ARE WE CHARGING ENOUGH?
The Rothschilds may discharge this debt by forgiving all “debt” due to money creation and relinquishing ownership of central banks to national governments.
This is letting them off easy, but the return to national sovereignty, personal freedom, and truth is worth the price.


humansarefree--2020-08-09--Freedom vs. Fear: Stop Forcing People to Wear Masks

Whether masks actually prevent the spread of respiratory infection remains a subject of debate .
As recently as March , the US Surgeon General was saying face coverings could actually increase one ’ s risk of infection .
There ’ s a famous scene in the movie Fight Club where Tyler Durden is on an airplane thumbing through one of those safety manuals in emergency exit rows .
“ An exit door procedure at 30,000 feet , ” says Durden ( Brad Pitt ) .
“ The illusion of safety.
” It ’ s a memorable scene because it touches @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make ourselves feel secure in frightening situations .
Which brings me to America ’ s latest fad : wearing masks in public .
Polls show that more than half of Americans are now choosing to wear masks when they go out , presumably to prevent catching or spreading the COVID-19 virus .
What one chooses to wear is up to them , of course , but the trend is a bit surprising considering government officials spent months telling Americans not to wear protective face coverings .
“ We don ’ t routinely recommend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public to prevent respiratory illness , ” Dr. Nancy Messonnier , director of the Center for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases said on January 31 .
“ And we certainly are not recommending that at this time for this new virus.
” Throughout February and into March , similar statements were made by numerous other top government officials and agencies .
Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said “ the average American does not need a N95 mask .
These are really more for health care providers.
” He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , who told the House Foreign Affairs Committee that there “ is no role for these masks in the community.
” In February , the US Surgeon General chimed in on Twitter , “ STOP BUYING MASKS.
” Despite these warnings , the popularity of masks grew .
“ Maskies ” — selfies of people wearing masks — are the latest trend on Instagram , Fast Company reports .
They ’ ve become a symbol and form of expression , a way to show social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is wearing masks , I feel respected , ” one woman recently told National Geographic .
“ The message is : I ’ m protecting you , you ’ re protecting me , I can feel safe.
” Feel safe .
That ’ s the key word .
Whether masks actually prevent the spread of respiratory infection remains a subject of debate .
An abundance of research shows masks offer little or no protection against infection from respiratory viruses , and some masks can actually increase one ’ s risk of infection .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ surgical masks offered no protection at all .
A 2015 study concluded rates of infection were especially high in cloth masks , finding particle penetration in nearly 97 percent of them .
A 2016 paper that analyzed six clinical studies found that N95 respirator masks fared no better than medical masks in preventing respiratory infection .
As recently as April 7 , a paper analyzing data from 15 randomized trials concluded that “ compared to no masks there was no reduction of influenza-like illness cases for influenza for masks in the general population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lack of hard empirical evidence , however , the study recommended the use of masks based on “ observational evidence from the previous SARS epidemic.
” [ Editor ’ s Note : The authors also found that most clinical trials had “ poor design , ” thus there was insufficient evidence to provide recommendations . ]
Perhaps similar reasoning guided the CDC ’ s about-face in April when it issued guidance recommending the use of cloth face coverings for healthy individuals ( though the World Health Organization still advises against them ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ re now in May , a mere two months after federal authorities were imploring Americans to not wear or buy masks , and many people are finding themselves forced to wear masks to do their shopping or even go for a walk .
This month the megastore Costco began demanding that customers wear masks to do their shopping .
As a private company , Costco has such a right .
But many states in mid April began taking things further , demanding that citizens wear masks to leave their homes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bandwagon is Massachusetts .
The new order requires anyone over the age of two to wear a mask or face covering in public places , even if they are outdoors .
In the span of just two months , we ’ ve gone from urging people to not buy or wear masks ( and warning face coverings could increase the risk of infection ) to threatening to fine and jail those who don ’ t wear them .
Americans , understandably , are confused .
And it ’ s not helping .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ security guard was killed after refusing to allow a woman ’ s daughter into the store because she wasn ’ t wearing a mask .
The guard was enforcing an executive order Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer signed two weeks earlier .
While only those people directly involved in the guard ’ s death are responsible , such confrontations could be avoided if state governors exercised a little humility and acknowledged that CDC recommendations are not gospel and the department ’ s conclusions ( clearly ) are not infallible .
Good ideas generally don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ truth is , based on an abundance of medical research and the federal government ’ s own statements and reports , it ’ s unclear how effective masks are as a preventive measure against COVID-19 transmission .
Public health aside , there ’ s no disputing the psychological impact masks have .
“ The coronavirus is coming , and we feel rather helpless , ” Dr. William Schaffner , Professor of Preventive Medicine at Vanderbilt University , told CNN in March .
“ By getting masks and wearing them , we move the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In a sense , the mask craze is largely about managing our fears .
As my colleague Sean Malone recently observed , when people are afraid they ’ re much more willing to accept anything they believe might make them a little safer .
Even really bad policies and ideas .
The illusion of safety .
It ’ s a powerful thing .
For both humans and governments , it would seem .

Whether masks actually prevent the spread of respiratory infection remains a subject of debate. As recently as March, the US Surgeon General was saying face coverings could actually increase one’s risk of infection.
by Jon Miltimore
There’s a famous scene in the movie Fight Club where Tyler Durden is on an airplane thumbing through one of those safety manuals in emergency exit rows.
“An exit door procedure at 30,000 feet,” says Durden (Brad Pitt). “The illusion of safety.”
It’s a memorable scene because it touches on the strange things humans do to make ourselves feel secure in frightening situations. Which brings me to America’s latest fad: wearing masks in public.
Polls show that more than half of Americans are now choosing to wear masks when they go out, presumably to prevent catching or spreading the COVID-19 virus. What one chooses to wear is up to them, of course, but the trend is a bit surprising considering government officials spent months telling Americans not to wear protective face coverings.
“We don’t routinely recommend the use of face masks by the public to prevent respiratory illness,” Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the Center for the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases said on January 31. “And we certainly are not recommending that at this time for this new virus.”
Throughout February and into March, similar statements were made by numerous other top government officials and agencies.
Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said “the average American does not need a N95 mask. These are really more for health care providers.”
He was echoed by Robert Redfield, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who told the House Foreign Affairs Committee that there “is no role for these masks in the community.” In February, the US Surgeon General chimed in on Twitter, “STOP BUYING MASKS.”
Despite these warnings, the popularity of masks grew. “Maskies” — selfies of people wearing masks — are the latest trend on Instagram, Fast Company reports. They’ve become a symbol and form of expression, a way to show social solidarity and empowerment.
“When everyone is wearing masks, I feel respected,” one woman recently told National Geographic. “The message is: I’m protecting you, you’re protecting me, I can feel safe.”
Feel safe. That’s the key word. Whether masks actually prevent the spread of respiratory infection remains a subject of debate.
There’s a reason public officials made the statements above.
An abundance of research shows masks offer little or no protection against infection from respiratory viruses, and some masks can actually increase one’s risk of infection.
A 2009 randomized clinical trial found that surgical masks offered no protection at all. A 2015 study concluded rates of infection were especially high in cloth masks, finding particle penetration in nearly 97 percent of them.
A 2016 paper that analyzed six clinical studies found that N95 respirator masks fared no better than medical masks in preventing respiratory infection.
As recently as April 7, a paper analyzing data from 15 randomized trials concluded that “compared to no masks there was no reduction of influenza-like illness cases for influenza for masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”
Despite the lack of hard empirical evidence, however, the study recommended the use of masks based on “observational evidence from the previous SARS epidemic.” [Editor’s Note: The authors also found that most clinical trials had “poor design,” thus there was insufficient evidence to provide recommendations.]
Perhaps similar reasoning guided the CDC’s about-face in April when it issued guidance recommending the use of cloth face coverings for healthy individuals (though the World Health Organization still advises against them).
Recommended is the key word here. We’re now in May, a mere two months after federal authorities were imploring Americans to not wear or buy masks, and many people are finding themselves forced to wear masks to do their shopping or even go for a walk.
This month the megastore Costco began demanding that customers wear masks to do their shopping. As a private company, Costco has such a right. But many states in mid April began taking things further, demanding that citizens wear masks to leave their homes.
The latest state to join the bandwagon is Massachusetts. The new order requires anyone over the age of two to wear a mask or face covering in public places, even if they are outdoors.
In the span of just two months, we’ve gone from urging people to not buy or wear masks (and warning face coverings could increase the risk of infection) to threatening to fine and jail those who don’t wear them. Americans, understandably, are confused. And it’s not helping.
This week in Michigan, a Family Dollar security guard was killed after refusing to allow a woman’s daughter into the store because she wasn’t wearing a mask. The guard was enforcing an executive order Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed two weeks earlier.
While only those people directly involved in the guard’s death are responsible, such confrontations could be avoided if state governors exercised a little humility and acknowledged that CDC recommendations are not gospel and the department’s conclusions (clearly) are not infallible.
Good ideas generally don’t require force. And the truth is, based on an abundance of medical research and the federal government’s own statements and reports, it’s unclear how effective masks are as a preventive measure against COVID-19 transmission.
Public health aside, there’s no disputing the psychological impact masks have.
“The coronavirus is coming, and we feel rather helpless,” Dr. William Schaffner, Professor of Preventive Medicine at Vanderbilt University, told CNN in March. “By getting masks and wearing them, we move the locus of control somewhat to ourselves.”
In a sense, the mask craze is largely about managing our fears. As my colleague Sean Malone recently observed, when people are afraid they’re much more willing to accept anything they believe might make them a little safer. Even really bad policies and ideas.
The illusion of safety. It’s a powerful thing. For both humans and governments, it would seem.


humansarefree--2020-08-09--Europe’s Top Health Officials Say Masks Aren’t Helpful in Beating COVID-19

Denmark boasts one of the lowest COVID-19 death rates in the world .
As of August 4 , the Danes have suffered 616 COVID-19 deaths , according to figures from Johns Hopkins University .
That ’ s less than one-third of the number of Danes who die from pneumonia or influenza in a given year .
Despite this success , Danish leaders recently found themselves on the defensive .
The reason is that Danes aren ’ t wearing face masks , and local authorities for the most part aren ’ t even recommending them .
This prompted Berlingske , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complain that Danes had positioned themselves “ to the right of Trump.
” “ The whole world is wearing face masks , even Donald Trump , ” Berlingske pointed out .
This apparently did not sit well with Danish health officials .
They responded by noting there is little conclusive evidence that face masks are an effective way to limit the spread of respiratory viruses .
“ All these countries recommending face masks haven ’ t made their decisions based on new studies , ” said Henning Bundgaard , chief physician at Denmark @ @ @ @ @ @ @ News .
( Denmark has since updated its guidelines to encourage , but not require , the use of masks on public transit where social distancing may not be possible . )
Denmark is not alone .
Despite a global stampede of mask-wearing , data show that 80-90 percent of people in Finland and Holland say they “ never ” wear masks when they go out , a sharp contrast to the 80-90 percent of people in Spain and Italy who say they “ always ” wear masks when they go out .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there is no evidence of a medical effect of wearing face masks , so we decided not to impose a national obligation , ” said Medical Care Minister Tamara van Ark .
Others , echoing statements similar to the US Surgeon General from early March , said masks could make individuals sicker and exacerbate the spread of the virus .
“ Face masks in public places are not necessary , based on all the current evidence , ” said Coen Berends , spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and there may even be negative impact.
” In Sweden , where COVID-19 deaths have slowed to a crawl , public health officials say they see “ no point ” in requiring individuals to wear masks .
“ With numbers diminishing very quickly in Sweden , we see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden , not even on public transport , ” said Anders Tegnell , Sweden ’ s top infectious disease expert .
Very important article : Netherlands Refuses To Mandate Face Masks & Sweden Says They Are ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ With Masks ?
The top immunologists and epidemiologists in the world can ’ t decide if masks are helpful in reducing the spread of COVID-19 .
Indeed , we ’ ve seen organizations like the World Health Organization and the CDC go back and forth in their recommendations .
For the average person , it ’ s confusing and frustrating .
It ’ s also a bit frightening , considering that we ’ ve seen people denounced in public for not wearing a mask while picking up a bag of groceries .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wedge issue , the latest phase of the culture war .
Mask opponents tend to see mask wearers as “ fraidy cats ” or virtue-signalling “ sheeple ” who willfully ignore basic science .
Mask supporters , on the other hand , often see people who refuse to wear masks as selfish Trumpkins … who willfully ignore basic science .
There ’ s not a lot of middle ground to be found and there ’ s no easy way to sit this one out .
We all have to go outside , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to don the mask or not .
It ’ s clear from the data that despite the impression of Americans as selfish rebel cowboys who won ’ t wear a mask to protect others , Americans are wearing masks far more than many people in European countries .
Polls show Americans are wearing masks at record levels , though a political divide remains : 98 percent of Democrats report wearing masks in public compared to 66 percent of Republicans and 85 percent of Independents .
( These numbers , no doubt , are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requirements in cities and states . )
Whether one is pro-mask or anti-mask , the fact of the matter is that face coverings have become politicized to an unhealthy degree , which stands to only further pollute the science .
Last month , for example , researchers at Minnesota ’ s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy responded to demands they remove an article that found mask requirements were “ not based on sound data.
” The school , to its credit , did not remove the article , but instead opted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research had raised .
First , Do No Harm The ethics of medicine go back millennia .
The Hippocratic Oath famously calls on medical practitioners to “ first , do no harm.
” ( Those words didn ’ t actually appear in the original oath ; they developed as a form of shorthand . )
There is a similar principle in the realm of public health : the Principle of Effectiveness .
Public health officials say the idea makes it clear that public health organizations have a responsibility to not harm the people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If a community is at risk , the government may have a duty to recommend interventions , as long as those interventions will cause no harm , or are the least harmful option , ” wrote Claire J. Horwell Professor of Geohealth at Durham University and Fiona McDonald , Co-Director of the Australian Centre for Health Law Research at Queensland University of Technology .
“ If an agency follows the principle of effectiveness , it will only recommend an intervention that they know to be effective.
” The problem with mask mandates is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recommending a precaution that may or may not be effective .
They are using force to make people submit to a state order that could ultimately make individuals or entire populations sicker , according to world-leading public health officials .
That is not just a violation of the Effectiveness Principle .
It ’ s a violation of a basic personal freedom .
Mask advocates might mean well , but they overlook a basic reality : humans spontaneously alter behavior during pandemics .
Scientific evidence shows that American workplaces and consumers changed the patterns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issued .
As I ’ ve previously noted , this should come as no surprise : Humans are intelligent , instinctive , and self-preserving mammals who generally seek to avoid high-risk behavior .
The natural law of spontaneous order shows that people naturally take actions of self-protection by constantly analyzing risk .
Instead of ordering people to “ mask-up ” under penalty of fines or jail time , scientists and public health officials should get back to playing their most important role : developing sound research on which people can freely make informed @ @

Denmark boasts one of the lowest COVID-19 death rates in the world. As of August 4, the Danes have suffered 616 COVID-19 deaths, according to figures from Johns Hopkins University.
That’s less than one-third of the number of Danes who die from pneumonia or influenza in a given year.
Despite this success, Danish leaders recently found themselves on the defensive. The reason is that Danes aren’t wearing face masks, and local authorities for the most part aren’t even recommending them.
This prompted Berlingske, the country’s oldest newspaper, to complain that Danes had positioned themselves “to the right of Trump.”
“The whole world is wearing face masks, even Donald Trump,” Berlingske pointed out.
This apparently did not sit well with Danish health officials. They responded by noting there is little conclusive evidence that face masks are an effective way to limit the spread of respiratory viruses.
“All these countries recommending face masks haven’t made their decisions based on new studies,” said Henning Bundgaard, chief physician at Denmark’s Rigshospitale, according to Bloomberg News. (Denmark has since updated its guidelines to encourage, but not require, the use of masks on public transit where social distancing may not be possible.)
Denmark is not alone.
Despite a global stampede of mask-wearing, data show that 80-90 percent of people in Finland and Holland say they “never” wear masks when they go out, a sharp contrast to the 80-90 percent of people in Spain and Italy who say they “always” wear masks when they go out.
Dutch public health officials recently explained why they’re not recommending masks.
“From a medical point of view, there is no evidence of a medical effect of wearing face masks, so we decided not to impose a national obligation,” said Medical Care Minister Tamara van Ark.
Others, echoing statements similar to the US Surgeon General from early March, said masks could make individuals sicker and exacerbate the spread of the virus.
“Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence,” said Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. “There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.”
In Sweden, where COVID-19 deaths have slowed to a crawl, public health officials say they see “no point” in requiring individuals to wear masks.
“With numbers diminishing very quickly in Sweden, we see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport,” said Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top infectious disease expert.
Very important article: Netherlands Refuses To Mandate Face Masks & Sweden Says They Are ‘Pointless’
What’s Going on With Masks?
The top immunologists and epidemiologists in the world can’t decide if masks are helpful in reducing the spread of COVID-19. Indeed, we’ve seen organizations like the World Health Organization and the CDC go back and forth in their recommendations.
CDC does not currently recommend the use of facemasks to help prevent novel #coronavirus. Take everyday preventive actions, like staying home when you are sick and washing hands with soap and water, to help slow the spread of respiratory illness. #COVID19 https://t.co/uArGZTJhXj pic.twitter.com/yzWTSgt2IV — CDC (@CDCgov) February 27, 2020
For the average person, it’s confusing and frustrating. It’s also a bit frightening, considering that we’ve seen people denounced in public for not wearing a mask while picking up a bag of groceries.
Opening day at Trader Joe’s in North Hollywood, Ca. Karen is mad she was mask shamed… pic.twitter.com/pF3Zgj3w2E — Rex Chapman🏇🏼 (@RexChapman) June 27, 2020
The truth is masks have become the new wedge issue, the latest phase of the culture war. Mask opponents tend to see mask wearers as “fraidy cats” or virtue-signalling “sheeple” who willfully ignore basic science. Mask supporters, on the other hand, often see people who refuse to wear masks as selfish Trumpkins … who willfully ignore basic science.
There’s not a lot of middle ground to be found and there’s no easy way to sit this one out. We all have to go outside, so at some point we all are required to don the mask or not.
It’s clear from the data that despite the impression of Americans as selfish rebel cowboys who won’t wear a mask to protect others, Americans are wearing masks far more than many people in European countries.
Polls show Americans are wearing masks at record levels, though a political divide remains: 98 percent of Democrats report wearing masks in public compared to 66 percent of Republicans and 85 percent of Independents. (These numbers, no doubt, are to some extent the product of mask requirements in cities and states.)
Whether one is pro-mask or anti-mask, the fact of the matter is that face coverings have become politicized to an unhealthy degree, which stands to only further pollute the science.
Last month, for example, researchers at Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy responded to demands they remove an article that found mask requirements were “not based on sound data.”
The school, to its credit, did not remove the article, but instead opted to address the objections critics of their research had raised.
First, Do No Harm
The ethics of medicine go back millennia.
The Hippocratic Oath famously calls on medical practitioners to “first, do no harm.” (Those words didn’t actually appear in the original oath; they developed as a form of shorthand.)
There is a similar principle in the realm of public health: the Principle of Effectiveness.
Public health officials say the idea makes it clear that public health organizations have a responsibility to not harm the people they are assigned to protect.
“If a community is at risk, the government may have a duty to recommend interventions, as long as those interventions will cause no harm, or are the least harmful option,” wrote Claire J. Horwell Professor of Geohealth at Durham University and Fiona McDonald, Co-Director of the Australian Centre for Health Law Research at Queensland University of Technology.
“If an agency follows the principle of effectiveness, it will only recommend an intervention that they know to be effective.”
The problem with mask mandates is that public health officials are not merely recommending a precaution that may or may not be effective.
They are using force to make people submit to a state order that could ultimately make individuals or entire populations sicker, according to world-leading public health officials.
That is not just a violation of the Effectiveness Principle. It’s a violation of a basic personal freedom.
Mask advocates might mean well, but they overlook a basic reality: humans spontaneously alter behavior during pandemics. Scientific evidence shows that American workplaces and consumers changed the patterns of their travel before lockdown orders were issued.
As I’ve previously noted, this should come as no surprise: Humans are intelligent, instinctive, and self-preserving mammals who generally seek to avoid high-risk behavior. The natural law of spontaneous order shows that people naturally take actions of self-protection by constantly analyzing risk.
Instead of ordering people to “mask-up” under penalty of fines or jail time, scientists and public health officials should get back to playing their most important role: developing sound research on which people can freely make informed decisions.
Source: Foundation for Economic Education


humansarefree--2020-08-09--Trump: ‘I Have a Lot of Rich Enemies. You Won’t See Me for Awhile.’

Trump has signed executive orders to “ cut out the middle men ” who rake in hundreds of billions of dollars in Big Pharma profits .
It is these middlemen who keep drug prices insanely high in the USA while the very same drugs are a fraction of the price in Canada or Mexico ( not to mention India , where drug prices are even lower ) .
Two days ago , President Trump spoke directly about the “ rich enemies ” in Big Pharma who are trying to stop him from implementing his efforts to bring down prescription drug @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the price gouging and monopolistic price fixing by pharma distributors .
Trump is going to war with Big Pharma ’ s exploitative price fixing practices , and very powerful people stand to lose billions in easy profits .
Watch this video to see for yourself : “ So I have a lot of enemies out there .
This may be the last time you ’ ll see me for a while .
A lot of very , very rich enemies , but they are not happy with what I ’ m doing… “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do it , and no other President is going to do what I do .
No other President would do a favored nations , a rebate , a buy from other nations at much less cost .
Nobody .
And there are a lot of unhappy people , and they ’ re very rich people , and they ’ re very unhappy… “ They are so wealthy .
They are so wealthy… Nobody has any idea who the hell they are or what they do .
They make more money than the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all fairness , at least the drug companies have to produce a product , and it has to be good product.
” This is why we must also encourage President Trump to end legal immunity for vaccine manufacturers who have become dangerous , fraudulent “ vaccine terrorists ” in their deployment of fake science , fear and financial fraud :

I don’t know who needs to hear this, but there is not one single demographic in this nation that forms an ideological monolith.
Seriously, in a nation where we’re told not to make generalizations about people based on the color of their skin, mainstream pop progressives sure seem to do so an awful lot.
Whether it’s Joe Biden telling black voters they “ain’t black” if they didn’t plan on voting for him or pearl-clutching progressives blaming Trump on white women, these people have some serious blind spots.
However, when a publication that literally teaches children how to engage in sodomy demands white women “answer” for their support of President Donald Trump, you know you’ve reached peak cognitive dissonance.
The magazine in question, Teen Vogue, has been a target of scrutiny here at Elizabeth Johnston Ministries for some time.
In the wake of the 2020 presidential election, the web-only publication ran a scathing and utterly nonsensical rebuke of “white women” who supported President Donald Trump which appears to be written by someone blissfully unaware that a) white women totally don’t all support Trump (seriously, wut?) and b) they are arguing from a place of morally baseless and logically devoid depravity.
“If internalized sexism was to blame for white women’s choice in 2016, how to explain 2020?” the piece, written by Kaylen Ralph, questions.
Discussing her love for collecting her “I voted” stickers, she opines that she’s “never taken my constitutional right to vote for granted, and as a white woman, there’s an inherent privilege in doing so. Depressingly enough, this is a privilege an apparent majority of white women seem to have wielded like a weapon for the second election in a row.”
Of the 2016 election, and with no apparent sense of irony, Ralph explains that:
“In 2016, when given the choice between a woman whose record includes stints as first lady, U.S. senator, and U.S. Secretary of State, versus a man who was accused of sexual misconduct by more than 20 different women prior to the 2016 election, a plurality of white women opted instead for the latter — a reality TV star turned a one-term, impeached president who is the embodiment of white patriarchy, a system in which white women have always been protected at the cost of everyone else.”
“If internalized sexism was to blame for white women’s choice in 2016, how to explain 2020, an election in which voters had the choice between two demographically identical old white men?” she asks.
“As a voting bloc, white women seemingly doubled down in their support of Trump, opting to align themselves against science, reproductive rights, diplomacy, and economic solvency in support of the spoils they (we?) reap as secondary benefactors of white privilege.
“We know that white women tend to vote along policy versus demographic lines, so is it safe to assume that white women don’t care about the rising death toll caused by this pandemic? That the legions of women out of work and the ensuing wage gap and widening achievement gap are not of concern for them?”
It’s appropriate that she’s posing her laughable ignorance as a question because this lady is completely clueless.
She seems earnestly confused as to how other white women would differ from her in terms of policy preferences, wondering how white women could both protest Trump on the day after his inauguration in 2017, post black squares to their Instagram in solidarity with Black Lives Matter, and then turn around and vote for Trump, as if she honestly doesn’t know that these aren’t the same women?!
Meanwhile, she’s working for a magazine that works to normalize abortion, gender confusion, and dangerous sexual practices in the minds of young girls.
The publication for which she writes her incredulous rebuke of white women has been at the forefront of sexualizing children and pushing the kind of anti-American, post-Christian ideology that millions of American women know is so dangerous for our families, communities, and the moral fabric of our nation at large.
This chick is beyond clueless. If she wants white women to answer for voting for Trump, why doesn’t Teen Vogue first answer for pandering smut and destructive ideologies to children?
By Elizabeth Johnston, author of Not on My Watch: How to Win the Fight for Family, Faith and Freedom


humansarefree--2020-08-10--The Free Individual vs. the Deep State

The Free Individual vs. the Deep State

The people who run society are engaged in bringing systems and structures into interlocking alignment , in order to create larger and larger machines of control .
I keep returning to this territory , because the whole thrust of modern civilization is making the individual extinct .
Powerless , badly educated , adrift in technology , viewed as a unit tied to a massive collective — this is the picture of the individual .
Let ’ s go back to square one .
The individual is fundamentally at odds with the State .
The State wants control .
The State @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conformists .
The individual wants freedom , if he has any inkling of his own power .
The basic makeup of the State is promoted as a We .
We want this .
We need this .
We deserve this .
We all agree on this .
The ubiquitous We is floated on purpose .
The aim is to eradicate the I .
The individual .
The State wants all arguments to center on what We should get .
Should We be given this or that ?
Should We have A or B @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is where all the trouble starts .
The State is not going to solve that trouble because it is creating it .
On the other hand , the individual who is free knows what he wants .
Or can discover it .
Sooner or later , he realizes that most of the people around him aren ’ t free .
Those people have embedded themselves so deeply in We that they can ’ t see outside it .
The very idea of being free is meaningless to them .
So be it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are in , when all the chips are laid down on the table , the State ’ s game is all about We .
That ’ s how the game is rigged .
The individual is ruled out .
The roulette wheel spins , but it doesn ’ t matter which slot the ball falls into .
No slot is labeled “ individual.
” And I ’ m not just talking about the State .
Any large organization works in the same way .
So the free individual has to take his future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he has to conceive that he does have a future apart from We .
Then he has to imagine what that future could look like .
He has to invent the future he wants .
What ’ s called “ the spiritual ” is not independent from what I ’ m talking about here .
How the free individual imagines his future and then goes after inventing it is very much a spiritual exploration .
Because the individual is more than a bio-machine .
Knowing that , he conceives of a future which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In my collection , Exit From The Matrix , I include dozens of imagination exercises and techniques I developed , based on a study of ancient Tibet , and my work with hypnotherapist Jack True .
The whole purpose of those exercises is : the individual returns to himself and his power .
Not the We .
The I .
The entire planet is turning into a cult , which I call : “ What Already Exists.
” As opposed to the individual inventing what he most profoundly wants to exist .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
To the degree a person feels his life should be lived inside a structure , he is going to refrain from imagining the future he truly wants .
In fact , the whole notion of “ truly wants ” is going to shrink and vanish from his mind .
But that notion is the key .
The key to his freedom and creative power .

The people who run society are engaged in bringing systems and structures into interlocking alignment, in order to create larger and larger machines of control.
I keep returning to this territory, because the whole thrust of modern civilization is making the individual extinct.
Powerless, badly educated, adrift in technology, viewed as a unit tied to a massive collective — this is the picture of the individual.
Let’s go back to square one. The individual is fundamentally at odds with the State. The State wants control. The State wants loyalists, adherents, joiners, conformists. The individual wants freedom, if he has any inkling of his own power.
The basic makeup of the State is promoted as a We. We want this. We need this. We deserve this. We all agree on this. The ubiquitous We is floated on purpose. The aim is to eradicate the I. The individual.
The State wants all arguments to center on what We should get. Should We be given this or that? Should We have A or B? What is best for We?
This is where all the trouble starts.
The State is not going to solve that trouble because it is creating it.
On the other hand, the individual who is free knows what he wants. Or can discover it. Sooner or later, he realizes that most of the people around him aren’t free.
Those people have embedded themselves so deeply in We that they can’t see outside it. The very idea of being free is meaningless to them.
So be it.
Ultimately, when all the bets are in, when all the chips are laid down on the table, the State’s game is all about We. That’s how the game is rigged.
The individual is ruled out.
The roulette wheel spins, but it doesn’t matter which slot the ball falls into. No slot is labeled “individual.”
And I’m not just talking about the State. Any large organization works in the same way.
So the free individual has to take his future in his own hands.
First, he has to conceive that he does have a future apart from We.
Then he has to imagine what that future could look like. He has to invent the future he wants.
What’s called “the spiritual” is not independent from what I’m talking about here. How the free individual imagines his future and then goes after inventing it is very much a spiritual exploration.
Why?
Because the individual is more than a bio-machine. Knowing that, he conceives of a future which is more than lowest-common-denominator physical needs.
In my collection, Exit From The Matrix, I include dozens of imagination exercises and techniques I developed, based on a study of ancient Tibet, and my work with hypnotherapist Jack True.
The whole purpose of those exercises is: the individual returns to himself and his power.
Not the We. The I.
The entire planet is turning into a cult, which I call: “What Already Exists.” As opposed to the individual inventing what he most profoundly wants to exist.
What Already Exists is mostly structures and systems. To the degree a person feels his life should be lived inside a structure, he is going to refrain from imagining the future he truly wants.
In fact, the whole notion of “truly wants” is going to shrink and vanish from his mind.
But that notion is the key.
The key to his freedom and creative power.
By Jon Rappoport, Guest writer


humansarefree--2020-08-10--Australian Professor: Ivermectin ‘Amazingly Successful’ in Killing Coronavirus

An Australian drug known as Ivermectin , which is already in use throughout the world to treat parasitic conditions , is showing great results in killing coronavirus in studies involving patients , according to Sky News .
“ Because I ’ m involved in developing these in the U.S. where all the patients are , there are a number of studies that are amazingly successful .
We ’ re talking close to 100 % .
“ In fact , we haven ’ t seen a result yet under 100 % .
It looks like corona is very simple to kill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ director of Australia ’ s Center for Digestive Disease .
“ It ’ s available as a prescription medication .
You wouldn ’ t use it alone … but you add two other things to it such as doxycycline and zinc.
” Ivermectin is already approved by the FDA and is on the World Health Organization ’ s list of model list of essential medicines .
“ We had a 14-hospital trial in Bangladesh .
We got [ cured ] 100 out of 100 .
In China , they tried to reproduce it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cured … “ So I am behind the Ivermectin , doxycycline , zinc treatment because it has very few side effects and is a real killer of coronavirus , ” Borody said .
Borody said the Ivermectin tablet could cost as little as $ 2 , which is likely why drugmakers haven ’ t promoted the drug ’ s usage .
He also suggested that have a cure for the disease easily would do away with the need for people to be hospitalized , which would make doctors less money .
“ There @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it to spend millions of dollars and put people in places to treat , ” Borody said .

An Australian drug known as Ivermectin, which is already in use throughout the world to treat parasitic conditions, is showing great results in killing coronavirus in studies involving patients, according to Sky News.
“Because I’m involved in developing these in the U.S. where all the patients are, there are a number of studies that are amazingly successful. We’re talking close to 100%.
“In fact, we haven’t seen a result yet under 100%. It looks like corona is very simple to kill,” Professor Thomas Borody, medical director of Australia’s Center for Digestive Disease.
“It’s available as a prescription medication. You wouldn’t use it alone … but you add two other things to it such as doxycycline and zinc.”
Ivermectin is already approved by the FDA and is on the World Health Organization’s list of model list of essential medicines.
“We had a 14-hospital trial in Bangladesh. We got [cured] 100 out of 100. In China, they tried to reproduce it. They got 60 out of 60 cured …
“So I am behind the Ivermectin, doxycycline, zinc treatment because it has very few side effects and is a real killer of coronavirus,” Borody said.
Borody said the Ivermectin tablet could cost as little as $2, which is likely why drugmakers haven’t promoted the drug’s usage.
He also suggested that have a cure for the disease easily would do away with the need for people to be hospitalized, which would make doctors less money.
“There’s no huge pharmaceutical company behind it to spend millions of dollars and put people in places to treat,” Borody said.
Source: © 2020 Newsmax. All rights reserved.