principiascientificinternational--2020-09-10--Study: Traffic ‘Not A Key Contributor To Air Pollution’

The significant reduction in vehicle journeys at the start of the Covid-19 lockdown – which saw traffic levels fall by as much as 80 percent – did not reduce the level of toxic ‘ fine ’ particles in Scotland ’ s air , according to experts at the University of Stirling .
A new report published today shows that harmful particulate matter emissions , also known as PM2.5 , remained consistent during the first month of lockdown , despite a 65 percent decline in the number of vehicles on Scotland ’ s roads .
The study concluded that ‘ traffic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ air pollution ’ – and went on to warn that people ‘ may be at greater risk from air pollution in their own homes ’ .
The university study analyzed data from 70 roadside monitoring stations around Scotland from March 24 – the day after the lockdown was introduced in the UK – to April 23 .
The team of experts then compared the data to comparative 31-day periods in 2017 , 2018 , and 2019 .
They found that , across Scotland , the geometric mean concentration of PM2.5 was 6.6 micrograms @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) in the observed period in 2020 – similar to the levels in 2017 ( 6.7 µg/m3 ) and 2018 ( 7.4 µg/m3 ) .
The 2020 figure was substantially lower than the markedly high concentrations observed in 2019 ( 12.8 µg/m3 ) , however , the authors pointed out this was an ‘ outlier ’ likely caused by a meteorological event that caused fine particulate dust from the Saharan desert to impact on UK air quality in April of that year .
Significantly , removing the affected period from the 2019 analysis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ µg/m3 ) .
The team did , however , note a reduction in nitrogen dioxide ( NO2 ) due to the lower traffic levels during the opening month of the pandemic .
Measurements of NO2 emissions , which are specifically associated with vehicle exhaust emissions and closely linked to thousands of premature deaths a year globally – were noticeably lower in 2020 compared to the other three years .
Dr. Ruaraidh Dobson , who led the study , said : ‘ It has been assumed that fewer cars on the road might have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of air pollution outdoors and , in turn , reduce the number of cases of ill health linked to this pollution .
‘ However , our study – contrary to research from places such as Wuhan in China , and Milan – found no evidence of fine particulate air pollution declining in Scotland because of lockdown.
’ While it has widely been believed that vehicles are a major contributor to these types of pollutants being in the air , the University of Stirling claimed otherwise having looked into their results .
Dr. Dobson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggest that vehicles aren ’ t an important cause of this very harmful type of air pollution in Scotland.
’ He said people may be at greater risk of exposure in their own homes , ‘ especially where cooking and smoking is taking place in enclosed and poorly ventilated spaces ’ , he explained .
The university ’ s results have conflicted with other research that has claimed there have been vast improvements in outdoor air quality in some areas as a result of fewer people driving during the lockdown .
Some studies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ positive health effects .
Dr. Dobson and colleague Dr. Sean Semple said that exposure to ‘ potentially harmful air ’ could have actually increased during the lockdown , due to people spending more time at home .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Study: Traffic ‘Not A Key Contributor To Air Pollution’
Written by Rob Hull
The significant reduction in vehicle journeys at the start of the Covid-19 lockdown – which saw traffic levels fall by as much as 80 percent – did not reduce the level of toxic ‘fine’ particles in Scotland’s air, according to experts at the University of Stirling.
A new report published today shows that harmful particulate matter emissions, also known as PM2.5, remained consistent during the first month of lockdown, despite a 65 percent decline in the number of vehicles on Scotland’s roads.
The study concluded that ‘traffic is not a key contributor to outdoor air pollution’ – and went on to warn that people ‘may be at greater risk from air pollution in their own homes’.
The university study analyzed data from 70 roadside monitoring stations around Scotland from March 24 – the day after the lockdown was introduced in the UK – to April 23.
The team of experts then compared the data to comparative 31-day periods in 2017, 2018, and 2019.
They found that, across Scotland, the geometric mean concentration of PM2.5 was 6.6 micrograms per cubic meter of air (µg/m3) in the observed period in 2020 – similar to the levels in 2017 (6.7 µg/m3) and 2018 (7.4 µg/m3).
The 2020 figure was substantially lower than the markedly high concentrations observed in 2019 (12.8 µg/m3), however, the authors pointed out this was an ‘outlier’ likely caused by a meteorological event that caused fine particulate dust from the Saharan desert to impact on UK air quality in April of that year.
Significantly, removing the affected period from the 2019 analysis reduces the mean value to (7.8 µg/m3).
The team did, however, note a reduction in nitrogen dioxide (NO2) due to the lower traffic levels during the opening month of the pandemic.
Measurements of NO2 emissions, which are specifically associated with vehicle exhaust emissions and closely linked to thousands of premature deaths a year globally – were noticeably lower in 2020 compared to the other three years.
Dr. Ruaraidh Dobson, who led the study, said: ‘It has been assumed that fewer cars on the road might have led to a decline in the level of air pollution outdoors and, in turn, reduce the number of cases of ill health linked to this pollution.
‘However, our study – contrary to research from places such as Wuhan in China, and Milan – found no evidence of fine particulate air pollution declining in Scotland because of lockdown.’
While it has widely been believed that vehicles are a major contributor to these types of pollutants being in the air, the University of Stirling claimed otherwise having looked into their results.
Dr. Dobson said the results of his findings ‘suggest that vehicles aren’t an important cause of this very harmful type of air pollution in Scotland.’
He said people may be at greater risk of exposure in their own homes, ‘especially where cooking and smoking is taking place in enclosed and poorly ventilated spaces’, he explained.
The university’s results have conflicted with other research that has claimed there have been vast improvements in outdoor air quality in some areas as a result of fewer people driving during the lockdown.
Some studies have claimed that this may result in positive health effects.
Dr. Dobson and colleague Dr. Sean Semple said that exposure to ‘potentially harmful air’ could have actually increased during the lockdown, due to people spending more time at home.
Read rest at Daily Mail
**
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-10--Boston’s Phony Sea-Level Scare Debunked – Again

Yesterday on Climate Realism , we debunked a fake sea-level scare promoted by Boston ’ s National Public Radio affiliate , WBUR .
WBUR claims global warming has caused 28 trillion tons of ice to disappear since 1994 , which WBUR claims is a worst-case scenario for global sea level , and especially for Boston .
In addition to the scientific evidence we presented yesterday , let ’ s add another piece of scientific evidence today .
Actual sea level data show no acceleration in Boston ’ s sea level since 1994 .
So much for WBUR ’ s Boston @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Boston , reported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration .
Where is the cataclysmic rise in sea level since 1994 ?
It simply isn ’ t there .
The reason it isn ’ t there is that ice has been slowly and steadily melting – and sea level has been slowly and steadily rising – in Boston and throughout much of the world since at least the mid-1800s .
The ice melt since 1994 is nothing unusual or extraordinary .
Utilizing 19th- and 20th-century technologies , humans have adapted to rising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is odd that climate alarmists claim that with all the advantages of 21st-century technologies , humans suddenly won ’ t be able to adapt to modest sea-level rise .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Boston’s Phony Sea-Level Scare Debunked – Again
Written by James Taylor
Yesterday on Climate Realism, we debunked a fake sea-level scare promoted by Boston’s National Public Radio affiliate, WBUR.
WBUR claims global warming has caused 28 trillion tons of ice to disappear since 1994, which WBUR claims is a worst-case scenario for global sea level, and especially for Boston.
In addition to the scientific evidence we presented yesterday, let’s add another piece of scientific evidence today. Actual sea level data show no acceleration in Boston’s sea level since 1994.
So much for WBUR’s Boston sea-level scare.
Above is sea-level data for Boston, reported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Where is the cataclysmic rise in sea level since 1994? It simply isn’t there.
The reason it isn’t there is that ice has been slowly and steadily melting – and sea level has been slowly and steadily rising – in Boston and throughout much of the world since at least the mid-1800s.
The ice melt since 1994 is nothing unusual or extraordinary.
Utilizing 19th- and 20th-century technologies, humans have adapted to rising sea levels without much problem.
It is odd that climate alarmists claim that with all the advantages of 21st-century technologies, humans suddenly won’t be able to adapt to modest sea-level rise.
Boston’s post-1994 ice melt has not created a sea-level emergency.
Read more at Climate Realism
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-11--Swiss Policy Research: The Latest Updates About COVID19

Swiss Policy Research ( SPR ) is maintaining an updated database of information related to the pandemic .
Readers interested in accessing the latest information , or doing research to help expose the glut of fake news on this matter , can access their excellent site at : swprs.org Swiss Policy Research ( SPR ) , founded in 2016 , is an independent , nonpartisan and nonprofit research group investigating geopolitical propaganda in Swiss and international media .
SPR is composed of independent academics and receives no external funding .
Fully referenced facts about Covid-19 , provided by experts in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make a realistic risk assessment .
( Regular updates below ) “ The only means to fight the plague is honesty.
” ( Albert Camus , 1947 ) • According to the latest immunological studies , the overall lethality of Covid-19 ( IFR ) in the general population ranges between 0.1 % and 0.5 % in most countries , which is comparable to the medium influenza pandemics of 1957 and 1968 .
• For people at high risk or high exposure ( including health care workers ) , early or prophylactic treatment is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
• In countries like the UK ( with lockdown ) and Sweden ( without lockdown ) , overall mortality since the beginning of the year is in the range of a strong influenza season ; mortality is higher in the USA ( comparable to 1957/1968 ) , but lower in countries like Germany and Switzerland .
However , antibody values are still low in large parts of previously locked-down Europe .
• In most places , the risk of death for the healthy general population of school and working age is comparable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The risk was initially overestimated because many people with only mild or no symptoms were not taken into account .
• About 80 % of all people develop only mild symptoms or no symptoms .
Even among 70-79 year olds , about 60 % develop only mild symptoms .
About 95 % of all people develop at most moderate symptoms and do not require hospitalization .
• Up to 60 % of all people may already have a partial T-cell immune response against the new coronavirus due to contact with previous coronaviruses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moreover , up to 60 % of children and about 6 % of adults may already have cross-reactive antibodies .
• The median age of Covid deaths in most Western countries is over 80 years – e.g .
84 years in Sweden – and only about 4 % of the deceased had no serious preconditions .
In contrast to flu pandemics , the age and risk profile of deaths thus essentially corresponds to normal mortality .
• In many countries , up to two thirds of all extra deaths occurred in nursing homes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ general lockdown .
Moreover , in many cases it is not clear whether these people really died from Covid-19 or from weeks of extreme stress and isolation .
• Up to 30 % of all additional deaths may have been caused not by Covid-19 , but by the effects of the lockdown , panic and fear .
For example , the treatment of heart attacks and strokes decreased by up to 40 % because many patients no longer dared to go to hospital .
• Many media reports of young and healthy people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ false : many of these young people either did not die from Covid-19 , they had already been seriously ill ( e.g .
from undiagnosed leukaemia ) , or they were in fact 109 instead of 9 years old .
The claimed increase in Kawasaki disease in children also turned out to be exaggerated .
• Most Covid-19 symptoms can also be caused by severe influenza ( including pneumonia , thrombosis and the temporary loss of the sense of taste and smell ) , but with severe Covid-19 these symptoms are indeed much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ About 10 % of symptomatic people develop so-called post-acute ( “ long ” ) Covid and report symptoms that last for several weeks or months .
This may also affect younger and previously healthy people with a strong immune response to the new coronavirus .
• The often shown exponential curves of “ corona cases ” are misleading , as the number of tests also increased exponentially .
In most countries , the ratio of positive tests to tests overall ( i.e .
the positivity rate ) always remained below 20 % .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the spread was already reached well before the lockdown came into effect .
• In most Covid hotspots , including New York City , London , Stockholm and Bergamo , the infection rate dropped as soon as about 20 % of people had developed antibodies against the new coronavirus .
This value is much lower than the inital estimate of 60 to 80 % .
• Countries without lockdown , such as Japan , Belarus and Sweden , have not experienced a more negative course of events than many other countries .
Sweden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now benefits from higher immunity compared to lockdown countries .
75 % of Swedish deaths happened in nursing facilities that weren ’ t protected fast enough .
• The fear of a shortage of ventilators was unjustified .
According to lung specialists , the invasive ventilation ( intubation ) of Covid-19 patients , which is partly done out of fear of spreading the virus , is in fact often counterproductive and damaging to the lungs .
• The main routes of transmission of the virus are direct contact and droplets produced when talking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( small particles floating in the air ) .
Outdoor aerosols and surfaces of objects appear to play only a minor role .
• There is still limited scientific evidence for the effectiveness of cloth face masks in the general population , and most countries with mandatory masks couldn ’ t contain or slow the epidemic .
Some experts warn that face masks may interfere with normal breathing and may become “ germ carriers ” if used repeatedly .
• Many clinics in Europe and the US remained largely underutilized during lockdowns and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home .
Millions of surgeries and therapies were cancelled , including many cancer screenings and organ transplants .
• Several media were caught trying to dramatize the situation in hospitals , sometimes even with manipulative images and videos .
In general , the unprofessional reporting of many media maximized fear and panic in the population .
As a result , according to international surveys , most people dramatically overestimate Covid-19 lethality and mortality .
• The virus test kits used internationally may in some cases produce false positive and false negative results , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ previous infection , or react to other common coronaviruses with a partially similar gene sequence .
• Numerous internationally renowned experts in the fields of virology , immunology and epidemiology consider the measures taken to be counterproductive and recommend rapid natural immunization of the general population and protection of risk groups .
• At no time was there a medical reason for the closure of elementary schools , as the risk of disease and transmission in children is extremely low .
There is also no medical reason for small classes , masks or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schools .
• Several medical experts described express coronavirus vaccines as unnecessary or even dangerous .
Indeed , the vaccine against the so-called swine flu of 2009 , for example , led to cases of severe neurological damage and lawsuits in the millions .
In the testing of new coronavirus vaccines , too , serious complications and failures have already been reported .
• A global respiratory disease pandemic can indeed extend over several seasons , but many studies of a “ second wave ” are based on very unrealistic assumptions , such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ death across all age groups .
• US nurses described an oftentimes fatal medical mismanagement of Covid patients due to questionable financial incentives and inappropriate medical protocols .
However , in many places Covid lethality has dropped significantly due to better treatment options .
• The number of people suffering from unemployment , depression and domestic violence as a result of the measures has reached historic record levels .
Several experts predict that the measures will claim far more lives than the virus itself .
According to the UN 1.6 billion people around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ losing their livelihood .
• NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden warned that the “ corona crisis ” may be used for the permanent expansion of global surveillance .
In several parts of the world , the population is being monitored by drones and facing serious police overreach during lockdowns .
• A 2019 WHO study on measures against pandemic influenza found that from a medical perspective , “ contact tracing ” is “ not recommended in any circumstances ” .
Nevertheless , contact tracing apps have already become partially mandatory in several countries .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ remains unknown , but the best evidence currently points to a Covid-like 2012 pneumonia incident in a Chinese mine , whose viral samples were collected , stored and examined by the Wuhan Institute of Virology ( WIV ) .
• On the treatment of Covid-19 • On the origin of SARS-CoV-2 PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method @

Swiss Policy Research: The Latest Updates About COVID19
Written by SWPRS.org
Swiss Policy Research (SPR) is maintaining an updated database of information related to the pandemic. Readers interested in accessing the latest information, or doing research to help expose the glut of fake news on this matter, can access their excellent site at: swprs.org
Swiss Policy Research (SPR), founded in 2016, is an independent, nonpartisan and nonprofit research group investigating geopolitical propaganda in Swiss and international media. SPR is composed of independent academics and receives no external funding.
Updated: September 2020; Share on: Twitter / Facebook
Languages :
Fully referenced facts about Covid-19, provided by experts in the field, to help our readers make a realistic risk assessment. (Regular updates below)
“The only means to fight the plague is honesty.” (Albert Camus, 1947)
Overview
See also
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-11--Lockdown: ‘biggest mistake made in history of the world’

Lockdown : ‘ biggest mistake made in history of the world ’ “ Stop panicking – it ’ s over.
” Doctor predicts an IFR ( Infection Fatality Rate ) of somewhere around 0.1 % ( one in a thousand ) , “ about the same as severe flu pandemics we have had in the past.
” ( Don ’ t overlook the point !
Point one percent is ten times less than one percent .
“ I look at your blog every day , good job !
” says reader Leifur Arnason in Iceland .
The importance of understanding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CFR ) vs INFECTION FATALITY RATE ( IFR ) .
I think it is a bombshell .
Here are some quotes from the above referenced article : The best place to estimate where we may finally end up with COVID , is with the country that has tested the most people , per head of population .
This is Iceland .
To quote the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine once more : ‘ In Iceland , where the most testing per capita has occurred , the IFR ( Infection Fatality Rate ) lies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
’ 3 Sitting in the middle of 0.03 % and 0.28 % is 0.16 % .
As you can see , Iceland , having tested more people than anywhere else , has the lowest IFR of all .
This is not a coincidence .
This is an inevitable result of testing more people .
I am going to make a prediction that , in the end , we will end up with an IFR of somewhere around 0.1 % .
Which is about the same as severe flu pandemics we have had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is one in a thousand .
It may surprise you to know that I am not the only person to have made this exact same prediction .
On the 28th February , yes that far back , the New England Journal of Medicine published a report by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , National Institutes of Health , Bethesda , MD ( A.S.F.
, H.C.L . )
; and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , Atlanta .
4 In this paper ‘ Covid-19 — Navigating the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ On the basis of a case definition requiring a diagnosis of pneumonia , the currently reported case fatality rate is approximately 2 % .
In another article in the Journal , Guan et al .
report mortality of 1.4 % among 1099 patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 ; these patients had a wide spectrum of disease severity .
If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases , the fatality rate ( my underline ) may be considerably less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza.
’ A case fatality rate considerably less than 1 % .
Their words , not mine .
As they also added , At this point , you may well be asking .
Why the hell did we lockdown if COVID was believed to be no more serious than influenza ?
Right from the start by the most influential infectious disease organisations in the World .
It is because of the mad mathematical modellers .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others of his ilk .
When they were guessing ( sorry estimating , sorry modelling ) the impact of COVID they used a figure of approximately one per cent as the infection fatality rate .
Not the case fatality rate .
In so doing , they overestimated the likely impact of COVID by , at the very least , ten-fold .
How could this possibly have happened ?
When they put their carefully constructed model together on the 16th of March , if they had been reading the research , they must have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a maximum case fatality rate of just over 1 % in China , right at the start , where the figures are always at their highest .
Which means that , unless COVID was going to turn out nearly 100 % fatal , we could never get anywhere near 1 % , for the infection fatality rate .
Even Ebola only kills 50 % .
But they went with it , they went with 1 % .
Actually , Imperial College reduced it slightly to 0.9 % , for reasons that are opaque @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If the INFECTION fatality rate truly were 0.9 % , and 80 % of the population of the UK became infected , there would have been/could have been , around 500,000 deaths .
However , if the case fatality rate is around 1 % , then the infection fatality rate will be about one tenth of this , maybe less .
So , we would see around 50,000 deaths , about the same as was seen in previous bad flu pandemics .
What Imperial College London did was to use a model @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a factor of ten .
We now know , as the IFR rates of various countries falls and falls , that the Imperial College estimated IFR was completely wrong .
The UK , for example , has seen 42,000 deaths so far , which is 0.074 % of population .
The US has seen about 200,000 deaths 0.053 % .
Sweden , which did not lockdown down , has seen about 6,000 deaths , which is an infection fatality rate of 0.06 % .
All three countries are opening up and opening up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rising and rising , the deaths continue to fall .
They are , to all intents and purposes , flatlining .
In Iceland it is around 0.16 % and falling .
In other words… Whilst everyone is panicking about the ever-increasing number of cases , we should be celebrating them .
They are demonstrating , very clearly , that COVID is far , far , less deadly then was feared .
The Infection Fatality Rate is most likely going to end up around 0.1 % , not 1 % .
So yes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza.
’ Thanks to Leifur Arnason in Iceland for this info and link PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Lockdown: ‘biggest mistake made in history of the world’
Written by www.iceagenow.info
“Stop panicking – it’s over.”
Doctor predicts an IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) of somewhere around 0.1% (one in a thousand), “about the same as severe flu pandemics we have had in the past.”
(Don’t overlook the point! Point one percent is ten times less than one percent.
“I look at your blog every day, good job!” says reader Leifur Arnason in Iceland.
“You also blog about the covid, lockdowns and such. Therefore I would like to point out Dr Malcolm Kendrick’s blog.”
The importance of understanding the difference of CASE FATALITY RATE (CFR) vs INFECTION FATALITY RATE (IFR). I think it is a bombshell.
Dr Kendrick: “ I had not spotted it. He did. All credit is his.” ( he refers to Ronald B. Brown and his report nr 6 on the page) “I am simply drawing your attention to what has simply been – probably the biggest single mistake that has ever been made in the history of the world.”
drmalcolmkendrick.org
Here are some quotes from the above referenced article:
The best place to estimate where we may finally end up with COVID, is with the country that has tested the most people, per head of population. This is Iceland. To quote the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine once more: ‘In Iceland, where the most testing per capita has occurred, the IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) lies somewhere between 0.03% and 0.28%.’ 3 Sitting in the middle of 0.03% and 0.28% is 0.16%. As you can see, Iceland, having tested more people than anywhere else, has the lowest IFR of all. This is not a coincidence. This is an inevitable result of testing more people. I am going to make a prediction that, in the end, we will end up with an IFR of somewhere around 0.1%. Which is about the same as severe flu pandemics we have had in the past. Remember that figure. It is one in a thousand. It may surprise you to know that I am not the only person to have made this exact same prediction. On the 28th February, yes that far back, the New England Journal of Medicine published a report by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD (A.S.F., H.C.L.); and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta. 4
In this paper ‘Covid-19 — Navigating the Uncharted’ they stated the following:
‘On the basis of a case definition requiring a diagnosis of pneumonia, the currently reported case fatality rate is approximately 2%. In another article in the Journal, Guan et al. report mortality of 1.4% among 1099 patients with laboratory-confirmed Covid-19; these patients had a wide spectrum of disease severity. If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate (my underline) may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza.’
A case fatality rate considerably less than 1%. Their words, not mine. As they also added,
‘the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza.’
At this point, you may well be asking. Why the hell did we lockdown if COVID was believed to be no more serious than influenza? Right from the start by the most influential infectious disease organisations in the World.
It is because of the mad mathematical modellers. The academic epidemiologists. Neil Ferguson, and others of his ilk. When they were guessing (sorry estimating, sorry modelling) the impact of COVID they used a figure of approximately one per cent as the infection fatality rate. Not the case fatality rate. In so doing, they overestimated the likely impact of COVID by, at the very least, ten-fold.
How could this possibly have happened?
When they put their carefully constructed model together on the 16th of March, if they had been reading the research, they must have been aware that they were looking at a maximum case fatality rate of just over 1% in China, right at the start, where the figures are always at their highest.
Which means that, unless COVID was going to turn out nearly 100% fatal, we could never get anywhere near 1%, for the infection fatality rate. Even Ebola only kills 50%.
But they went with it, they went with 1%. Actually, Imperial College reduced it slightly to 0.9%, for reasons that are opaque.
From this, all else flowed.
If the INFECTION fatality rate truly were 0.9%, and 80% of the population of the UK became infected, there would have been/could have been, around 500,000 deaths.
0.9% x 80% x 67million = 482,000
LOCKDOWN
However, if the case fatality rate is around 1%, then the infection fatality rate will be about one tenth of this, maybe less. So, we would see around 50,000 deaths, about the same as was seen in previous bad flu pandemics.
DO NOT LOCKDOWN
What Imperial College London did was to use a model that overestimated the infection fatality rate by a factor of ten.
We now know, as the IFR rates of various countries falls and falls, that the Imperial College estimated IFR was completely wrong. The UK, for example, has seen 42,000 deaths so far, which is 0.074% of population. The US has seen about 200,000 deaths 0.053%. Sweden, which did not lockdown down, has seen about 6,000 deaths, which is an infection fatality rate of 0.06%. All three countries are opening up and opening up. Whilst the ‘cases’ are rising and rising, the deaths continue to fall. They are, to all intents and purposes, flatlining.
In Iceland it is around 0.16% and falling. In other words…
Stop panicking – it’s over
Whilst everyone is panicking about the ever-increasing number of cases, we should be celebrating them. They are demonstrating, very clearly, that COVID is far, far, less deadly then was feared. The Infection Fatality Rate is most likely going to end up around 0.1%, not 1%.
So yes, it does seem that ‘the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza.’
Thanks to Leifur Arnason in Iceland for this info and link
Read more at www.iceagenow.info
PSI Editor’s note:
What is the difference between Case Fatality rate (CFR) and Infection Fatality rate(IFR)?
In epidemiology, a case fatality rate (CFR) — sometimes called case fatality risk or case-fatality ratio — is the proportion of deaths from a certain disease compared to the total number of people diagnosed with the disease for a particular period. A CFR can only be considered final when all the cases have been resolved (either died or recovered).
On the other hand, while the term infection fatality rate (IFR) also applies to infectious disease outbreaks, this represents the proportion of deaths among all infected individuals, including all asymptomatic and undiagnosed subjects. Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Case_fatality_rate
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-11--Extinction Rebellion former spokeswoman: Nuclear power ‘only option’

A former Extinction Rebellion ( XR ) spokeswoman left the environmental group to campaign for nuclear power because she says it is the only way to deal with the climate crisis .
Zion Lights , writing in the Daily Mail , also said that she had become unable to defend some of the group ’ s claims .
XR “ peddle messages of doomsday gloom that alienate ” and offer “ little in the way of positive solutions ” , she added.The group calls on governments to take immediate action on climate change .
It describes itself as an international @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and has been involved in a number of high-profile protests since it was formed in 2018 .
Last week it targeted UK newspapers – which it has accused of failing to report on climate change – by blocking printing presses and delaying distribution .
Ms Lights wrote articles for both the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph on Thursday explaining her decision to leave behind XR and support nuclear power .
She told the Mail she initially joined XR because its message was “ listen to the scientists ” and the role of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talk about what I truly felt mattered ” .
However , she says she began to rethink her support for the group after an appearance on the BBC ’ s Andrew Neil Show last October .
She was asked about co-founder Roger Hallam ’ s claim that science predicts six billion people will die this century due to climate change – a claim that he made to BBC ’ s HARDtalk .
Ms Lights said : “ It ’ s a headline-grabbing assertion – but unfortunately , it ’ s also not true @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any evidence .
As was obvious to anyone who knows me – and even to the casual viewer – I was plunged into a PR nightmare .
“ I could not defend the number , but as the official spokesperson nor could I be seen to condemn it .
All I could do , instead , was flounder under the hot glare of the studio lights for what felt like an eternity.
” Ms Lights , who began campaigning about the environment as a student in the early 2000s , said she also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of telling people “ what not to do ” and “ peddling the notion that the solution to the climate crisis was to turn back the clock to a simpler time ” .
Writing in the Telegraph , she said the campaigners who argued that we needed to all live with less – as she once did – had to accept this was not going to happen “ and look to solutions instead ” .
She said that “ many within XR argue in favour of replacing fossil fuels entirely with renewables ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and she favoured “ a pragmatic approach , rather than peer-group tribal pressure to stick to an outdated mainstream green line ” .
Much of the green movement was “ steeped in an anti-nuclear mindset ” , she said , “ when any rational , evidence-based approach shows that a strategy including nuclear energy is the only realistic solution to driving down emissions at the scale and speed required ” .
She denied she was making a U-turn , instead saying it was a “ logical next step ” in looking for solutions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the problem ” .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Extinction Rebellion former spokeswoman: Nuclear power ‘only option’
Written by BBC
A former Extinction Rebellion (XR) spokeswoman left the environmental group to campaign for nuclear power because she says it is the only way to deal with the climate crisis. Zion Lights, writing in the Daily Mail, also said that she had become unable to defend some of the group’s claims.
XR “peddle messages of doomsday gloom that alienate” and offer “little in the way of positive solutions”, she added.The group calls on governments to take immediate action on climate change.
It describes itself as an international “non-violent civil disobedience activist movement” and has been involved in a number of high-profile protests since it was formed in 2018.
Last week it targeted UK newspapers – which it has accused of failing to report on climate change – by blocking printing presses and delaying distribution.
Ms Lights wrote articles for both the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph on Thursday explaining her decision to leave behind XR and support nuclear power.
She told the Mail she initially joined XR because its message was “listen to the scientists” and the role of spokesperson gave her a platform “to talk about what I truly felt mattered”.
However, she says she began to rethink her support for the group after an appearance on the BBC’s Andrew Neil Show last October.
She was asked about co-founder Roger Hallam’s claim that science predicts six billion people will die this century due to climate change – a claim that he made to BBC’s HARDtalk.
Ms Lights said: “It’s a headline-grabbing assertion – but unfortunately, it’s also not true, or certainly not backed up by any evidence. As was obvious to anyone who knows me – and even to the casual viewer – I was plunged into a PR nightmare.
“I could not defend the number, but as the official spokesperson nor could I be seen to condemn it. All I could do, instead, was flounder under the hot glare of the studio lights for what felt like an eternity.”
Image copyright EPA Image caption Extinction Rebellion protesters have been demonstrating outside Parliament this week
Ms Lights, who began campaigning about the environment as a student in the early 2000s, said she also had doubts about XR’s approach of telling people “what not to do” and “peddling the notion that the solution to the climate crisis was to turn back the clock to a simpler time”.
Writing in the Telegraph, she said the campaigners who argued that we needed to all live with less – as she once did – had to accept this was not going to happen “and look to solutions instead”.
She said that “many within XR argue in favour of replacing fossil fuels entirely with renewables” but this was not a realistic option and she favoured “a pragmatic approach, rather than peer-group tribal pressure to stick to an outdated mainstream green line”.
Much of the green movement was “steeped in an anti-nuclear mindset”, she said, “when any rational, evidence-based approach shows that a strategy including nuclear energy is the only realistic solution to driving down emissions at the scale and speed required”.
She denied she was making a U-turn, instead saying it was a “logical next step” in looking for solutions rather than “shouting ever more loudly about the problem”.
Read more at www.bbc.co.uk
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-11--CDC Accidentally Admits Cloth Masks Are Not Effective

For the last several weeks , wildfires have been ravaging the State of California , sending people literally running for their lives .
Fearless leaders across the country who have been calling these fires a result of global warming , however , have forgotten that there are other states in the West with forests that aren ’ t an absolute tinder bin .
While fires are a constant summer event in the West , forest management policies vary from state to state , and therefore , the severity of fires in some states is exponentially worse than others .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in California , the air quality here is less than stellar .
Just today , at my own home in Southern California , everything outside appears brownish-orangish-red as a result of the sun being filtered through the disgusting smoke .
As a result of the horrible air quality , the CDC posted an announcement on their Facebook page regarding the use of cloth masks in the areas most effective by smoke .
Remember that “ science ” that they always like to throw in the face of conservatives ?
Let ’ s take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lens of actual science .
They just told us that smoke particulates are too small to be stopped by a cloth mask .
While N95 masks will protect up to 95 % of particles , down to .1 microns in size .
A quick Google search will tell us that smoke particles and debris are usually .4 to .7 microns in size .
According to the CDC , cloth masks are not effective in stopping materials that size .
Another quick Google search will tell us that the Wuhan Virus is .12 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in size of the smoke and fire debris particulate .
Even if we factor for the “ respiratory droplets ” that are allegedly to blame for the spread of coronavirus , those droplets are as small as .5 microns , or as small or smaller than smoke and fire debris particulate .
These factors and figures aren ’ t hidden in some CDC vault that only their scientists are capable of accessing .
Yet another quick Google search will show these figures within seconds .
The CDC can not , on one hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the prevention of the spread of a disease ( or droplets containing the disease ) and then tell us that those same masks are ineffective in stopping particles that are bigger than the disease we are trying to prevent .
Should you wear a mask while in public places ?
Yes , if anything to keep the maskholes in check .
Are they effective ?
The CDC doesn ’ t seem to think so .

CDC Accidentally Admits Cloth Masks Are Not Effective
Written by Scott Hounsell
For the last several weeks, wildfires have been ravaging the State of California, sending people literally running for their lives. Fearless leaders across the country who have been calling these fires a result of global warming, however, have forgotten that there are other states in the West with forests that aren’t an absolute tinder bin.
While fires are a constant summer event in the West, forest management policies vary from state to state, and therefore, the severity of fires in some states is exponentially worse than others.
As a result of the disastrous fire season in California, the air quality here is less than stellar. Just today, at my own home in Southern California, everything outside appears brownish-orangish-red as a result of the sun being filtered through the disgusting smoke. As a result of the horrible air quality, the CDC posted an announcement on their Facebook page regarding the use of cloth masks in the areas most effective by smoke.
Isn’t that just adorable?
Remember that “science” that they always like to throw in the face of conservatives? Let’s take a quick look at this info through the lens of actual science. They just told us that smoke particulates are too small to be stopped by a cloth mask. While N95 masks will protect up to 95% of particles, down to .1 microns in size. A quick Google search will tell us that smoke particles and debris are usually .4 to .7 microns in size. According to the CDC, cloth masks are not effective in stopping materials that size.
Another quick Google search will tell us that the Wuhan Virus is .12 microns in size, about a quarter in size of the smoke and fire debris particulate. Even if we factor for the “respiratory droplets” that are allegedly to blame for the spread of coronavirus, those droplets are as small as .5 microns, or as small or smaller than smoke and fire debris particulate. These factors and figures aren’t hidden in some CDC vault that only their scientists are capable of accessing. Yet another quick Google search will show these figures within seconds.
The CDC cannot, on one hand, demand we wear masks because of the prevention of the spread of a disease (or droplets containing the disease) and then tell us that those same masks are ineffective in stopping particles that are bigger than the disease we are trying to prevent.
Should you wear a mask while in public places? Yes, if anything to keep the maskholes in check. Are they effective? The CDC doesn’t seem to think so.
Read more at www.redstate.com
****
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-11--COVID Fraud: CDC Adds 5,692 Intentional Injuries & Poisonings to Death Count

At some point there needs to be a serious audit of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention in America .
It ’ s bad enough that they promote their medical fraud on Americans .
It is absolutely sinful that they know there are countries around the world that follow there lead .
America may be able to bounce back from their outrageous and unscientific policies .
But there are hundreds of millions of people in poor countries suffering because of failed CDC policies .
But if you look closely at these numbers there were 5,692 deaths from intentional and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adverse events.
” So why were 5,692 injury and poisoning deaths included on the national coronavirus mortality list ?
And why are 8,034 malignant neoplasm deaths included on the coronavirus list ?
Why are 6,159 Alzheimer deaths included on the coronavirus death list ?
But Americans are supposed to listen to the CDC as they claim masks are saving lives and children are in danger at school when they have a greater chance of drowning than dying from coronavirus .
When will this corrupt organization be audited ?
When will they be held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
What they are getting away with is fraud .
And they list it in their weekly results .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : 27 Old Gloucester Street , London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

COVID Fraud: CDC Adds 5,692 Intentional Injuries & Poisonings to Death Count
Written by Jim Hoft
At some point there needs to be a serious audit of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention in America. It’s bad enough that they promote their medical fraud on Americans. It is absolutely sinful that they know there are countries around the world that follow there lead.
America may be able to bounce back from their outrageous and unscientific policies. But there are hundreds of millions of people in poor countries suffering because of failed CDC policies.
The latest CDC weekly coronavirus numbers lists 174,470 cononavirus deaths this week.
But if you look closely at these numbers there were 5,692 deaths from intentional and unintentional injury, poisoning and “other adverse events.”
So why were 5,692 injury and poisoning deaths included on the national coronavirus mortality list?
And why are 8,034 malignant neoplasm deaths included on the coronavirus list?
Why are 6,159 Alzheimer deaths included on the coronavirus death list?
The CDC doesn’t say.
But Americans are supposed to listen to the CDC as they claim masks are saving lives and children are in danger at school when they have a greater chance of drowning than dying from coronavirus.
When will this corrupt organization be audited? When will they be held to account for their destruction and lies?
What they are getting away with is fraud. And they list it in their weekly results.
Read more at www.thegatewaypundit.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-11--Video: The Science, Logic and Data of the Pandemic Explained

Video : The Science , Logic and Data of the Pandemic Explained In his latest video , Dublin Biochemical expert , Ivor Cummins , crunches the numbers and makes it easier for non-statisticians to comprehend the shenanigans being perpetrated by the ‘ powers that be ‘ during the ongoing scamdemic .
Please watch the video .
Among the key points are the following made during the presentation : At 17:00 we see that masks and handwashing had little effect on spreading .
At 34:00 the author presents a hypothesis that we may have draconianly stopped the safe summer spread ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Check our more on Ivor ’ s Lockdown efficacy analysis papers : https : //www.dropbox.com/sh/zg89tdgzkq… Cummins shows why the lockdown may have been an exercise in governmental Command and Control – a softening-up in preparation for some other campaign they have in mind .
Much of the population appears convinced that they owe their very lives to benevolently proactive government policy .
So when they are told their nation is now effectively bankrupt – due to our unstinting public spending and the stifling of economic activity , they will accept the ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the economic collapse won ’ t be the fault of our ‘ protectors ’ the government ( or the banks ) …now will it ?
About the author : Ivor Cummins BE ( Chem ) CEng MIEI PMP is a technical manager / team leader , biochemical engineer , complex problem solving specialist , with a passion for translating health science into information which can be used to transform your health .
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head Office : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

Video: The Science, Logic and Data of the Pandemic Explained
Written by Ivor Cummins BE(Chem) CEng MIEI PMP
In his latest video, Dublin Biochemical expert, Ivor Cummins, crunches the numbers and makes it easier for non-statisticians to comprehend the shenanigans being perpetrated by the ‘powers that be‘ during the ongoing scamdemic.
Please watch the video. Among the key points are the following made during the presentation:
At 17:00 we see that masks and handwashing had little effect on spreading. At 34:00 the author presents a hypothesis that we may have draconianly stopped the safe summer spread (which would create greater herd immunity).
Check our more on Ivor’s Lockdown efficacy analysis papers: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/zg89tdgzkq…
Hope-Simpson’s stunning book: https://www.dropbox.com/s/4yda40j4hf9…
Cummins shows why the lockdown may have been an exercise in governmental Command and Control – a softening-up in preparation for some other campaign they have in mind. Much of the population appears convinced that they owe their very lives to benevolently proactive government policy. So when they are told their nation is now effectively bankrupt – due to our unstinting public spending and the stifling of economic activity, they will accept the ‘necessary’ economic medicine – after all, the economic collapse won’t be the fault of our ‘protectors’ the government (or the banks) …now will it?
About the author: Ivor Cummins BE(Chem) CEng MIEI PMP is a technical manager / team leader, biochemical engineer, complex problem solving specialist, with a passion for translating health science into information which can be used to transform your health.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-11--New Engineered Coronaviruses Are Under Development

New Engineered Coronaviruses Are Under Development Mounting evidence now suggests SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory creation , whether released by accident or on purpose .
The real conspiracy theory is that SARS-CoV-2 is a naturally occurring virus .
Experimentation with fully infectious SARS-CoV-2 has exploded in recent months .
Such research is now taking place in almost every BSL-3 and 4 facility in the U.S. and overseas .
At least one safety breach involving a modified SARS-CoV-2 virus has already occurred this year , when a lab mouse injected with the virus bit the researcher Information obtained via FOIA requests reveals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working on “ corona-thrax.
” They intend to insert the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein — which allows the virus to gain entry into human cells — into Bacillus anthracis , the causative agent of anthrax .
The National Institutes of Health is demanding answers about coronavirus research that EcoHealth Alliance subcontracted to the Wuhan Institute of Virology , using NIH grants .
Event 201 was a pandemic preparedness simulation hosted in New York City by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security , the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the COVID-19 outbreak first began in Wuhan , China .
This scripted tabletop exercise — select portions of which are featured in the introduction of ‘ Plandemic 2 ’ above — included everything we now see playing out in real time , in the real world , from PPE shortages , lockdowns and removal of civil liberties to mandated vaccination campaigns , riots , economic turmoil and the breakdown of social cohesion .
Many of the discussions revolved around the development of strategies to limit and counter the spread of expected “ misinformation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In addition to censorship of certain views , their plan included the use of celebrities and other social media influencers to “ model ” and promote adherence to pandemic response edicts .
I discussed this in “ The PR Firm Behind WHO ’ s Celeb Endorsements.
” Just as in real life , one of the pieces of “ misinformation ” that would need to be countered was rumors that the virus had been created and released from a bioweapons laboratory .
Mounting evidence now suggests SARS-CoV-2 is indeed a laboratory creation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ purpose .
Increasingly , “ conspiracy theories ” are turning out to be factual conspiracies , and as noted in an August 20 , 2020 , article1 on Wio News .
The article was written by Lawrence Sellin , Ph.D. , a former researcher with the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute , who says the real conspiracy theory here is that SARS-CoV-2 is a naturally occurring virus .
Sellin ’ s article reviews some of the studies that offer significant clues to the virus ’ origin , including the fact that SARS-CoV-2 has:2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thanks to it being more selective for the human ACE2 receptor than SARS-Cov-1 ( responsible for the 2003 SARS pandemic ) • A unique furin cleavage site not found in any closely related bat coronaviruses that allows the virus to fuse to human cells , thereby enhancing its pathogenicity and transmissibility , , , • Certain spike protein structures that are similar to those found in the MERS-CoV virus , which allow the virus to attach using not only the ACE2 receptor but also the DPP4 receptor , like MERS-CoV .
This dual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ability to infect a wide range of human tissues Together , these features make SARS-CoV-2 exceptionally well-adapted for human infection , which is odd , considering it “ came out of nowhere ” and hasn ’ t been found in any other living creature .
Sellin goes on to discuss a theory9 put forth by Jonathan Latham , Ph.D. , and Allison Wilson , Ph.D. , two molecular biologists ( Latham is also a virologist ) .
I interviewed Latham about some of their theories in July 2020 .
His interview is featured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Latham and Wilson ’ s theory can be summarized as follows : A virus similar to SARS-CoV-2 — known as RaTG13 , SARS-CoV-2 ’ s closest relative — infected six Chinese miners in 2012 .
The virus then evolved into its current virulent form once inside the miners , as all were ill for an extended period of time .
Tissue samples from the patients were sent to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for testing , which revealed the infection was caused by a SARS-like coronavirus from horseshoe bats .
This virus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ escaped from the Wuhan lab in 2019 .
Sellin , however , isn ’ t buying it , saying that , while it ’ s a well-documented article,10 it ’ s “ marred by offering an untenable theory of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 based on the serendipitous linking of a series of undocumented assumptions.
” He explains:11 Sellin points out the fact that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was conducting research on RaTG13 in 2017 and 2018 .
Meanwhile , SARS-CoV-2 , obtained from the tissue samples from the miners , was supposedly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Why would they be experimenting with RaTG13 if a more virulent form of the virus was already available ?
What ’ s more , were the miners ’ illness the result of direct bat-to-human transmission , it should have been front page news , yet it wasn ’ t .
In fairness , Latham and Wilson have presented several theories for a laboratory escape — discussed in our interview — so I don ’ t think their starting point is one of trying to prove that the virus is a natural occurrence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ observation that this zoonotic transmission should have been a groundbreaking discovery , though .
In “ Why Was Wuhan Lab Locked Down When Outbreak Began ?
” I review the writings of an anonymous ( possibly Chinese ) scientist who has published13,14 an alternative theory — including raw data — in a blog called Nerd Has Power.15 The unnamed writer suggests RaTG13 is a fabrication and doesn ’ t actually exist .
If it did exist , it would have been groundbreaking news back in 2013 , yet the scientist that is supposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zheng-Li , got her fame from the publication of two other bat coronaviruses that same year instead .
The gene sequence for RaTG13 wasn ’ t published until February 3 , 2020.16 According to that 2020 paper , the sequencing of RaTG13 had not previously been performed .
Why did she wait until people started questioning the origin of SARS-CoV-2 to publish the RaTG13 genetic sequence ?
What ’ s more , according to the anonymous scientist , the genetic sequence of RaTG13 ’ s spike protein “ reveals clear evidence of human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zheng-Li ’ s statement to Scientific American in June 2020 , where she claimed the miners were sickened from a fungal infection17 — not a coronavirus .
Confusing matters further , there ’ s evidence suggesting RaTG13 was previously published in a 2016 paper , but under the name BtCoV/4991 , thereby obscuring its connection to the Mojiang mine where the miners were sickened .
Latham discussed this convoluted story in “ Cover-Up of SARS-CoV-2 Origin ?
” ( see earlier hyperlink ) .
New Engineered Coronaviruses Are Under Development As if there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , uncertainty is piled on top of uncertainty as experimentation with fully infectious SARS-CoV-2 has exploded in recent months .
High-security biosafety labs around the world are clamoring to get in on the action , and according to Richard Ebright , an epidemiologist at Rutgers University , such research is now taking place “ in every , or almost every , BSL-3 facility in the U.S. and overseas.
” 18 In an August 17 , 2020 article,19 Latham reports that at least one safety breach involving a modified SARS-CoV-2 virus has already occurred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ injected with the virus bit the researcher .
The event reportedly occurred at the high-security lab at the University of North Carolina ( UNC ) , Chapel Hill , sometime after April 1 , but was only discovered because Edward Hammond of Prickly Research had filed a FOIA request .
Hammond told Latham:20 Some researchers are even arguing for infectious SARS-CoV-2 research to be permitted in biosafety level 2 laboratories , which Ebright has called “ egregiously irresponsible.
” In another FOIA request , Hammond obtained information showing researchers ( whose names are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are working on what he dubbed “ corona-thrax.
” As reported by Latham,21 they intend to “ put the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 ( which allows the virus to gain entry into human cells ) into Bacillus anthracis which is the causative agent of anthrax.
” Do we really need this kind of research , where already lethal bacteria are equipped with viral components that allow them better entry into human cells and a wider range of human tissues ?
What could go wrong ?
Just about everything !
The argument for “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be prepared should nature throw us a curveball , but the idea that bacteria would naturally evolve to develop a spike protein from a highly infectious virus would have to be infinitesimally small .
As such , this kind of research is nothing short of insanity .
Hundreds of Safety Lapses Have Been Covered Up As reported in a 2014 USA Today article,22 safety lapses at biosafety labs are far more common than anyone might imagine .
Between 2008 and 2012 alone , more than 1,100 lab incidents involving highly infectious germs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the details are shrouded in secrecy .
In all likelihood , the real number is far higher , as the April 2020 incident at UNC does not appear to have been reported to regulators , as required .
According to USA Today:23 I ’ ve also reviewed many other incidents in “ Bioweapon Labs Must Be Shut Down and Scientists Prosecuted , ” “ More Errors Involving Deadly Pathogens Discovered ” and several other articles over the years .
To circle back to where I left off on RaTG13 , August 22 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. National Institutes of Health is now demanding answers about the authenticity of RaTG13 : As I said earlier , conspiracy theories are increasingly looking like conspiracy facts , and even the suspicion that the genomic sequence of RaTG13 might be a fabrication is now being investigated .
The demands for answers are directed to EcoHealth Alliance , the research organization that , between 2014 and 2019 , received a long list of grants from the NIH to study “ the risk of bat coronavirus emergence.
” EcoHealth Alliance then subcontracted that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They ’ ve been working with Zheng-Li for over 15 years .
NIH initially canceled its funding to EcoHealth Alliance in April 2020,25 but has agreed to reinstate the multimillion-dollar grant provided EcoHealth fulfills the seven conditions issued by the NIH .
The scrutiny appears to have put EcoHealth Alliance president , British research scientist Peter Daszak , on edge , calling the demands “ heinous ” and “ politically motivated.
” Zheng-Li echoed Daszak ’ s sentiments , calling the NIH ’ s demands “ outrageous.
” 26 EcoHealth Alliance is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daszak is none too happy about .
In an interview with Nature , published August 21 , 2020 , Daszak said:30 Daszak ’ s dismay at having to show correspondence and information relating to the organization ’ s coronavirus research at Wuhan Institute of Virology suggests what they ’ re doing is likely dangerous .
Why else is he worried that the information will spark conspiracy theories ?
The read the full story at articles.mercola.com PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL , legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes .
Head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ London WC1N 3AX .
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method .

New Engineered Coronaviruses Are Under Development
Written by Dr. Joseph Mercola
Mounting evidence now suggests SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory creation, whether released by accident or on purpose. The real conspiracy theory is that SARS-CoV-2 is a naturally occurring virus.
Experimentation with fully infectious SARS-CoV-2 has exploded in recent months. Such research is now taking place in almost every BSL-3 and 4 facility in the U.S. and overseas.
At least one safety breach involving a modified SARS-CoV-2 virus has already occurred this year, when a lab mouse injected with the virus bit the researcher
Information obtained via FOIA requests reveals researchers at the University of Pittsburgh are working on “corona-thrax.” They intend to insert the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein — which allows the virus to gain entry into human cells — into Bacillus anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax.
The National Institutes of Health is demanding answers about coronavirus research that EcoHealth Alliance subcontracted to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, using NIH grants.
Event 201 was a pandemic preparedness simulation hosted in New York City by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in October 2019 — 10 weeks before the COVID-19 outbreak first began in Wuhan, China.
This scripted tabletop exercise — select portions of which are featured in the introduction of ‘Plandemic 2’ above — included everything we now see playing out in real time, in the real world, from PPE shortages, lockdowns and removal of civil liberties to mandated vaccination campaigns, riots, economic turmoil and the breakdown of social cohesion.
Many of the discussions revolved around the development of strategies to limit and counter the spread of expected “misinformation” about the pandemic and subsequent vaccines.
In addition to censorship of certain views, their plan included the use of celebrities and other social media influencers to “model” and promote adherence to pandemic response edicts. I discussed this in “The PR Firm Behind WHO’s Celeb Endorsements.”
Just as in real life, one of the pieces of “misinformation” that would need to be countered was rumors that the virus had been created and released from a bioweapons laboratory.
Naturally-Occurring SARS-CoV-2 Is the Real Conspiracy Theory
Mounting evidence now suggests SARS-CoV-2 is indeed a laboratory creation, whether released by accident or on purpose. Increasingly, “conspiracy theories” are turning out to be factual conspiracies, and as noted in an August 20, 2020, article1 on Wio News.
The article was written by Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D., a former researcher with the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute, who says the real conspiracy theory here is that SARS-CoV-2 is a naturally occurring virus. Sellin’s article reviews some of the studies that offer significant clues to the virus’ origin, including the fact that SARS-CoV-2 has:2
A very high infection rate, thanks to it being more selective for the human ACE2 receptor than SARS-Cov-1 (responsible for the 2003 SARS pandemic) 3
A unique furin cleavage site not found in any closely related bat coronaviruses that allows the virus to fuse to human cells, thereby enhancing its pathogenicity and transmissibility 4 , 5 , 6 , 7
Certain spike protein structures that are similar to those found in the MERS-CoV virus, which allow the virus to attach using not only the ACE2 receptor but also the DPP4 receptor, like MERS-CoV. This dual receptor strategy might be responsible for its ability to infect a wide range of human tissues 8
Together, these features make SARS-CoV-2 exceptionally well-adapted for human infection, which is odd, considering it “came out of nowhere” and hasn’t been found in any other living creature.
The Mojiang Miners Theory
Sellin goes on to discuss a theory9 put forth by Jonathan Latham, Ph.D., and Allison Wilson, Ph.D., two molecular biologists (Latham is also a virologist). I interviewed Latham about some of their theories in July 2020. His interview is featured in “Cover-Up of SARS-CoV-2 Origin?”
Latham and Wilson’s theory can be summarized as follows: A virus similar to SARS-CoV-2 — known as RaTG13, SARS-CoV-2’s closest relative — infected six Chinese miners in 2012. The virus then evolved into its current virulent form once inside the miners, as all were ill for an extended period of time.
Tissue samples from the patients were sent to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for testing, which revealed the infection was caused by a SARS-like coronavirus from horseshoe bats. This virus, now dubbed SARS-CoV-2, then somehow escaped from the Wuhan lab in 2019.
Sellin, however, isn’t buying it, saying that, while it’s a well-documented article,10 it’s “marred by offering an untenable theory of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 based on the serendipitous linking of a series of undocumented assumptions.” He explains:11
“First of all, the extent of viral evolution in a single patient that would be required to go from RaTG13 to SARS-CoV-2, about 1,200 nucleotides, is unprecedented in the annals of scientific inquiry.
Latham and Wilson attribute the adaptation to the viral load within a large lung surface area and, in particular, a lengthy infection lasting over four months.
Yet, despite the presence of an active infection of a coronavirus highly adapted for human infection, there is no evidence of human-to-human transmission, even though the Chinese clinical study provides no indication of special quarantine efforts and a therapeutic regime resembling that for ordinary respiratory infections, including fungal infections.
Although it seems likely that the miners experienced an initial viral respiratory infection and secondary, probably bacterial infections, tests for viral infections, including SARS-CoV-1, were negative during the course of hospitalization.
It was only afterwards, that the Chinese clinical study mentions a positive test for an unidentified virus, one possibility being henipa-like virus, which was also discovered12 in the same cave along with numerous types of bat coronaviruses.”
Things Simply Don’t Add Up
Sellin points out the fact that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was conducting research on RaTG13 in 2017 and 2018. Meanwhile, SARS-CoV-2, obtained from the tissue samples from the miners, was supposedly still on ice in that same facility.
Why would they be experimenting with RaTG13 if a more virulent form of the virus was already available? What’s more, were the miners’ illness the result of direct bat-to-human transmission, it should have been front page news, yet it wasn’t.
“If the Latham and Wilson theory proves anything, it demonstrates the lengths one must go in evidence-stretching to show that SARS-CoV-2 is naturally-occurring, when one begins by precluding the possibility that it was manufactured in a laboratory,” Sellin writes.
In fairness, Latham and Wilson have presented several theories for a laboratory escape — discussed in our interview — so I don’t think their starting point is one of trying to prove that the virus is a natural occurrence. Sellin is not alone in his observation that this zoonotic transmission should have been a groundbreaking discovery, though.
In “Why Was Wuhan Lab Locked Down When Outbreak Began?” I review the writings of an anonymous (possibly Chinese) scientist who has published13,14 an alternative theory — including raw data — in a blog called Nerd Has Power.15 The unnamed writer suggests RaTG13 is a fabrication and doesn’t actually exist.
If it did exist, it would have been groundbreaking news back in 2013, yet the scientist that is supposed to have made the discovery, Shi Zheng-Li, got her fame from the publication of two other bat coronaviruses that same year instead. The gene sequence for RaTG13 wasn’t published until February 3, 2020.16
According to that 2020 paper, the sequencing of RaTG13 had not previously been performed. Why did she wait until people started questioning the origin of SARS-CoV-2 to publish the RaTG13 genetic sequence?
What’s more, according to the anonymous scientist, the genetic sequence of RaTG13’s spike protein “reveals clear evidence of human manipulation.” And then there’s Zheng-Li’s statement to Scientific American in June 2020, where she claimed the miners were sickened from a fungal infection17 — not a coronavirus.
Confusing matters further, there’s evidence suggesting RaTG13 was previously published in a 2016 paper, but under the name BtCoV/4991, thereby obscuring its connection to the Mojiang mine where the miners were sickened. Latham discussed this convoluted story in “Cover-Up of SARS-CoV-2 Origin?” (see earlier hyperlink).
New Engineered Coronaviruses Are Under Development
As if there aren’t enough unanswered questions already, uncertainty is piled on top of uncertainty as experimentation with fully infectious SARS-CoV-2 has exploded in recent months.
“It is evident that swarms of academic researchers with little prior experience with coronaviruses have leapt into the field in recent months. The biggest risk is the creation and accidental release of a novel form of SARS-CoV-2. Each additional lab that experiments with CoV-2 amplifies the risk.” ~ Edward Hammond
High-security biosafety labs around the world are clamoring to get in on the action, and according to Richard Ebright, an epidemiologist at Rutgers University, such research is now taking place “in every, or almost every, BSL-3 facility in the U.S. and overseas.”18
In an August 17, 2020 article,19 Latham reports that at least one safety breach involving a modified SARS-CoV-2 virus has already occurred this year, when a lab mouse injected with the virus bit the researcher.
The event reportedly occurred at the high-security lab at the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, sometime after April 1, but was only discovered because Edward Hammond of Prickly Research had filed a FOIA request. Hammond told Latham:20
“It is evident that swarms of academic researchers with little prior experience with coronaviruses have leapt into the field in recent months. We need to be clear headed about the risk.
The first SARS virus was a notorious source of laboratory-acquired infections and there is a very real risk that modified forms of SARS-CoV-2 could infect researchers, especially inexperienced researchers, with unpredictable and potentially quite dangerous results.
The biggest risk is the creation and accidental release of a novel form of SARS-CoV-2 … Each additional lab that experiments with CoV-2 amplifies the risk.’”
Some researchers are even arguing for infectious SARS-CoV-2 research to be permitted in biosafety level 2 laboratories, which Ebright has called “egregiously irresponsible.”
Anthrax Equipped With SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein
In another FOIA request, Hammond obtained information showing researchers (whose names are redacted) at the University of Pittsburgh are working on what he dubbed “corona-thrax.” As reported by Latham,21 they intend to “put the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 (which allows the virus to gain entry into human cells) into Bacillus anthracis which is the causative agent of anthrax.”
Do we really need this kind of research, where already lethal bacteria are equipped with viral components that allow them better entry into human cells and a wider range of human tissues? What could go wrong? Just about everything!
The argument for “biodefense” research is that we need to be prepared should nature throw us a curveball, but the idea that bacteria would naturally evolve to develop a spike protein from a highly infectious virus would have to be infinitesimally small. As such, this kind of research is nothing short of insanity.
Hundreds of Safety Lapses Have Been Covered Up
As reported in a 2014 USA Today article,22 safety lapses at biosafety labs are far more common than anyone might imagine. Between 2008 and 2012 alone, more than 1,100 lab incidents involving highly infectious germs were reported to federal regulators, but the details are shrouded in secrecy.
In all likelihood, the real number is far higher, as the April 2020 incident at UNC does not appear to have been reported to regulators, as required. According to USA Today:23
“More than half these incidents were serious enough that lab workers received medical evaluations or treatment, according to the reports. In five incidents, investigations confirmed that laboratory workers had been infected or sickened; all recovered.
In two other incidents, animals were inadvertently infected with contagious diseases that would have posed significant threats to livestock industries if they had spread. One case involved the infection of two animals with hog cholera, a dangerous virus eradicated from the USA in 1978.
In another incident, a cow in a disease-free herd next to a research facility studying the bacteria that cause brucellosis, became infected due to practices that violated federal regulations, resulting in regulators suspending the research and ordering a $425,000 fine, records show.”
I’ve also reviewed many other incidents in “Bioweapon Labs Must Be Shut Down and Scientists Prosecuted,” “More Errors Involving Deadly Pathogens Discovered” and several other articles over the years.
NIH Demands Answers
To circle back to where I left off on RaTG13, August 22, 2020, the Daily Mail reported24 that the U.S. National Institutes of Health is now demanding answers about the authenticity of RaTG13:
“The National Institutes of Health has asked if COVID-19 was linked to the deaths of three miners eight years ago and questioned whether the high-security laboratory in Wuhan possessed samples of the virus prior to the pandemic’s outbreak late last year …
The NIH letter, sent by Michael Lauer, deputy director for extramural research, said there were ‘serious bio-safety concerns’ over research at the Wuhan lab …
Lauer also said the agency needed to know why the Wuhan Institute ‘failed to note that the RaTG13 virus, the bat-derived coronavirus in its collection with greatest similarity to SARS-Cov-2, was actually isolated from an abandoned mine where three men died in 2012 with an illness remarkably similar to COVID-19’ …
The agency also demanded to know more about the ‘apparent disappearance’ of a scientist at the lab rumored to be Patient Zero, and questioned if roadblocks were placed around the Wuhan Institute of Virology between October 14 and 19 last year …
‘It seems NIH experts are not just discarding lab escape scenarios as conspiratorial theories any more,’ said one U.S.-based biomedical expert.”
As I said earlier, conspiracy theories are increasingly looking like conspiracy facts, and even the suspicion that the genomic sequence of RaTG13 might be a fabrication is now being investigated.
The demands for answers are directed to EcoHealth Alliance, the research organization that, between 2014 and 2019, received a long list of grants from the NIH to study “the risk of bat coronavirus emergence.” EcoHealth Alliance then subcontracted that work to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. They’ve been working with Zheng-Li for over 15 years.
NIH initially canceled its funding to EcoHealth Alliance in April 2020,25 but has agreed to reinstate the multimillion-dollar grant provided EcoHealth fulfills the seven conditions issued by the NIH.
The scrutiny appears to have put EcoHealth Alliance president, British research scientist Peter Daszak, on edge, calling the demands “heinous” and “politically motivated.” Zheng-Li echoed Daszak’s sentiments, calling the NIH’s demands “outrageous.”26
EcoHealth Alliance is also the subject of FOIA requests,27,28,29 which Daszak is none too happy about. In an interview with Nature, published August 21, 2020, Daszak said:30
“Conspiracy-theory outlets and politically motivated organizations have made Freedom of Information Act requests on our grants and all of our letters and e-mails to the NIH.
We don’t think it’s fair that we should have to reveal everything we do. When you submit a grant, you put in all your best ideas. We don’t want to hand those over to conspiracy theorists for them to publish and ruin and make a mockery of.”
Daszak’s dismay at having to show correspondence and information relating to the organization’s coronavirus research at Wuhan Institute of Virology suggests what they’re doing is likely dangerous. Why else is he worried that the information will spark conspiracy theories?
The read the full story at articles.mercola.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Share this: Twitter
Facebook
Telegram
Gab
LinkedIn
Reddit
Email
More
Pinterest
Pocket
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Print
Related


principiascientificinternational--2020-09-14--Fauci goes full pseudoscience for mother earth

1/ Hoo boy .
Dr. Anthony Fauci has some advice for us .
“ Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve : rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence , from cities to homes to workplaces… to recreational and gatherings venues.
” 3/ “ In a human-dominated world , in which our human activities represent aggressive , damaging , and unbalanced interactions with nature , we will increasingly provoke new disease emergence.
” Huh .
Sounds like human domination is the real problem here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature.
” Fortunately , Dr. Anthony Fauci can lead the way .
I believe this is known as mission creep .
There are other words for it too .
Dr. Anthony Fauci , the 36 year head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases ( NIAID ) , appears to have embraced something resembling an enviro de-growth movement , arguing in a new “ scientific ” paper that we need to go back to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” in order to avoid future health issues such as pandemics , which have existed since the beginning of the human species .
The bizarre screed , published in Cell Press , reveals one of the nation ’ s longest tenured bureaucrats as someone who is both deeply ideological in his worldview and seemingly completely untethered to reality .
The paper , co authored with Fauci ’ s NIAID colleague , Dr. David Morens , argues that we need to implement extremely necessary but vague policy measures that are “ necessary in controlling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it does not identify particular policy solutions , but offers hazy sentiments on the supposed damage that human beings are doing .
It does , however , include scary graphics such as the one below that offers more insight into the NIAID bureaucrats ’ worldview .
For months now , Fauci has claimed , without evidence , that non pharmaceutical interventions , such as wearing masks and locking down society , is the key to defeating the COVID-19 pandemic .
Yet there is still not a single study or data point that proves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ successful worldwide in stopping the virus .
Still , Fauci insists that human behavior is what will make or break the pandemic .
Now , this latest paper , presumably written while he was recovering from vocal cord surgery ( and taking a short break from his daily routine of endless media appearances ) , takes readers even further down a path of complete speculation and pseudoscience .
“ SARS-CoV-2 ( the virus that causes COVID-19 ) is a deadly addition to the long list of microbial threats to the human species .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and reconsider the nature of our relationship to the natural world , ” the paper states .
“ As human societies grow in size and complexity , we create an endless variety of opportunities for genetically unstable infectious agents to emerge into the unfilled ecologic niches we continue to create .
There is nothing new about this situation , except that we now live in a human-dominated world in which our increasingly extreme alterations of the environment induce increasingly extreme backlashes from nature.
” Fauci and his coauthor appear to be taking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a bad thing , one that is sure to result in future catastrophes .
That could be true when it comes to subjects such as advanced military weaponry ( high powered nuclear bombs ) , but the paper completely ignores the fact that human innovation has allowed for our lifespans to double since the mid 19th century .
Additionally , it ’ s not as if deadly pandemics are only a recent issue .
The Black Death , which took an estimated 75-200 million lives , occurred 400 years before the Industrial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the 21st century have had a significant negative impact on global health .
COVID-19 , which has had the most sophisticated tracking program in pandemic history , has still registered fewer than 1 million reported deaths worldwide .
Human innovation has allowed for a more sanitary lifestyle , and this has undoubtedly reduced the impact that pandemics and climate events may have had on our lives .
Fauci ’ s seeming embrace of the degrowth movement makes no sense , from a human health perspective .
Rolling back human progress and becoming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ humans *more* susceptible to pandemics , not less .
The paper ends by warning of “ a deadly barrage of coming coronavirus and other emergences.
” “ The COVID-19 pandemic is yet another reminder , added to the rapidly growing archive of historical reminders , that in a human-dominated world , in which our human activities represent aggressive , damaging , and unbalanced interactions with nature , we will increasingly provoke new disease emergences , ” it adds .
“ We remain at risk for the foreseeable future .
COVID-19 is among the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ century .
It should force us to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature , even as we plan for nature ’ s inevitable , and always unexpected , surprises.
” So there you have it , Fauci and crew seem to believe that we are living in a permanent pandemic era , which is the fault of human progress , and one that requires immense , but untold , regressive action to combat .
Simply put , they are now blatantly attempting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way we live .

See: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1301933226072698880.html
Former New York Times Reporter Alex Berenson comments:
1/ Hoo boy. Dr. Anthony Fauci has some advice for us.
#Sars-Cov-2 is just the beginning. We’re in a “pandemic era” now, friends. What’s the solution? “Living in greater harmony with nature.” Ooh. I like harmony. I like nature. Tell me more, doc! cell.com/action/showPdf…
2/ “Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve: rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces… to recreational and gatherings venues.”
3/ “In a human-dominated world, in which our human activities represent aggressive, damaging, and unbalanced interactions with nature, we will increasingly provoke new disease emergence.” Huh. Sounds like human domination is the real problem here?
4/ “COVID-19… should force us to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature.” Fortunately, Dr. Anthony Fauci can lead the way. I believe this is known as mission creep. There are other words for it too.
5/ But, see, if #COVID-19 turns out to be a testing-driven lil-bit-worse-than-a-bad-flu year, what then? Maybe we WON’T need to redesign all of human existence because some 79-year-old bureaucrat wants us to? Just spitballing here.
• • •
https://jordanschachtel.substack.com/p/fauci-goes-full-pseudoscience-covid
By Jordan Schachtel
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the 36 year head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), appears to have embraced something resembling an enviro de-growth movement, arguing in a new “scientific” paper that we need to go back to living in “creative harmony with nature” in order to avoid future health issues such as pandemics, which have existed since the beginning of the human species.
The bizarre screed, published in Cell Press, reveals one of the nation’s longest tenured bureaucrats as someone who is both deeply ideological in his worldview and seemingly completely untethered to reality.
The paper, co authored with Fauci’s NIAID colleague, Dr. David Morens, argues that we need to implement extremely necessary but vague policy measures that are “necessary in controlling future devastating disease emergencies.”
Notably, it does not identify particular policy solutions, but offers hazy sentiments on the supposed damage that human beings are doing. It does, however, include scary graphics such as the one below that offers more insight into the NIAID bureaucrats’ worldview.
For months now, Fauci has claimed, without evidence, that non pharmaceutical interventions, such as wearing masks and locking down society, is the key to defeating the COVID-19 pandemic.
Yet there is still not a single study or data point that proves a single non pharmaceutical interventions has been successful worldwide in stopping the virus. Still, Fauci insists that human behavior is what will make or break the pandemic. Now, this latest paper, presumably written while he was recovering from vocal cord surgery (and taking a short break from his daily routine of endless media appearances), takes readers even further down a path of complete speculation and pseudoscience.
“SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) is a deadly addition to the long list of microbial threats to the human species. It forces us to adapt, react, and reconsider the nature of our relationship to the natural world,” the paper states. “As human societies grow in size and complexity, we create an endless variety of opportunities for genetically unstable infectious agents to emerge into the unfilled ecologic niches we continue to create. There is nothing new about this situation, except that we now live in a human-dominated world in which our increasingly extreme alterations of the environment induce increasingly extreme backlashes from nature.”
Fauci and his coauthor appear to be taking the position that human dominance over nature is a bad thing, one that is sure to result in future catastrophes. That could be true when it comes to subjects such as advanced military weaponry (high powered nuclear bombs), but the paper completely ignores the fact that human innovation has allowed for our lifespans to double since the mid 19th century. Additionally, it’s not as if deadly pandemics are only a recent issue. The Black Death, which took an estimated 75-200 million lives, occurred 400 years before the Industrial Revolution, and none of the pandemics of the 21st century have had a significant negative impact on global health. COVID-19, which has had the most sophisticated tracking program in pandemic history, has still registered fewer than 1 million reported deaths worldwide. Human innovation has allowed for a more sanitary lifestyle, and this has undoubtedly reduced the impact that pandemics and climate events may have had on our lives. Fauci’s seeming embrace of the degrowth movement makes no sense, from a human health perspective. Rolling back human progress and becoming “one with nature” would make humans *more* susceptible to pandemics, not less.
The paper ends by warning of “a deadly barrage of coming coronavirus and other emergences.”
“The COVID-19 pandemic is yet another reminder, added to the rapidly growing archive of historical reminders, that in a human-dominated world, in which our human activities represent aggressive, damaging, and unbalanced interactions with nature, we will increasingly provoke new disease emergences,” it adds. “We remain at risk for the foreseeable future. COVID-19 is among the most vivid wake-up calls in over a century. It should force us to begin to think in earnest and collectively about living in more thoughtful and creative harmony with nature, even as we plan for nature’s inevitable, and always unexpected, surprises.”
So there you have it, Fauci and crew seem to believe that we are living in a permanent pandemic era, which is the fault of human progress, and one that requires immense, but untold, regressive action to combat. Simply put, they are now blatantly attempting to leverage the pandemic to permanently change the way we live.