lewrockwell--2020-04-21--The Experts Have No Idea How Many COVID-19 Cases There Are

In the early days of the COVID-19 panic—about three weeks ago—it was common to hear both of these phrases often repeated : • “ The fatality rate of this virus is very high !
” • “ There are far more cases of this out there than we know about !
” The strategy of insisting that both these statements are true at the same time has been used by politicians to implement “ lockdowns ” that have forced business to close and millions to lose their jobs .
For instance , on March 12 , Ohio Department of Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100,000 ” people are “ carrying this virus in Ohio today.
” The state began to implement “ stay-at-home ” lockdown orders that day .
At the time , the World Health Organization ( WHO ) , the media , and others were reporting that 2 to 4 percent of people with COVID-19 would die .
Taking the low-end 2 percent number , and allowing for an incubation period , this would mean that two weeks after Acton ’ s announcement—assuming that the lockdown was 100 percent effective and not a single additional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely be dead of COVID-19 .
But as of April 17 , more than a month later , and after a month of the disease spreading through grocery stores and other “ essential ” areas of commerce , about 418 Ohioans have died of COVID-19 .
Fear Itself : The Cause ... Gordon , Ann Best Price : $ 23.69 Buy New $ 16.90 Clearly , something doesn ’ t add up .
At the time , Acton was lampooned by some for presumably inflating the number of infections in the state .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ backpedaled , saying she was only guessing .
As more research comes in , however , it may be that Acton wasn ’ t wildly inaccurate in her “ guesstimate ” after all .
Medical researchers and epidemiologists are increasingly claiming that the COVID-19 virus has spread much more quickly and is much more prevalent than has long been assumed .
And if that is true , then the percentage of people COVID-19 cases that result in death are far lower than is assumed .
If so , Acton was still wrong , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ assumptions about fatality rates than about total cases .
When people say “ death rate ” or “ fatality rate ” they generally mean “ case fatality rate ” ( CFR ) .
This is simply the number of people who die from a disease divided by the number of cases .
If there are 10,000 cases and 100 people die from the disease , the CFR is 1 percent .
( This is not to be confused with “ mortality rate , ” which is the number of deaths divided by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CFR accurately we have to know what the total number of cases is and also know how many people have died from the disease .
If the total number of cases is bigger than we think , then the fatality rate is smaller than we think .
How Death Rates Are Affected by Government Data Collection Methods Counting the number of deaths has been far easier than counting total cases .
Due to “ severity bias , ” people who have presented severe symptoms or have died have been far more likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with few symptoms who never required medical attention .
As one epidemiologist quoted by the New York Times noted : Some deaths of course are missed , especially among those who die at home .
But as the Times article concludes : Deadliest Enemy : Our W ... Olshaker , Mark Best Price : $ 21.15 Buy New $ 19.99 Put another way , the case totals often cited by politicians are nothing more than wild guesses .
Indeed , many researchers and other observers have claimed that total cases numbers were considerably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Vermont could have 16 times more infections than officially reported , ” one March 18 headline reads .
But this estimate doesn ’ t apply just to Vermont .
The headline comes from a nationwide estimate of cases from Stanford epidemiologist Steve Goodman : Similarly , in the Wall Street Journal on March 23 , Stanford researchers Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya suggested the known cases were a tiny fraction of the actual number .
According to a study by Bendavid and Bhattacharya , On Friday , the San Francisco Chronicle reported @ @ @ @ @ @ @ County in California , which suggests that “ cases are being underreported by a factor of 50 to 85 ” : That US case fatality rate of 2 to 4 percent commonly reported by politicians and media outlets is looking less likely every day .
What Does This Mean for Policy ?
If the Santa Clara study or the estimates of Bendavid and Bhattacharya apply to the nation overall , then the current count of 710,000 COVID-19 cases in the US is only a small fraction of the total number of people with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases could number from 35 million to 60 million .
In a nation with such a large number of infected , efforts to forcibly shutter businesses and put millions out of work until there are “ no new cases , no deaths “ —as suggested by federal health bureaucrat Anthony Fauci—are absurd .
This goal is likely unattainable without completely ending interstate travel and destroying the US economy over a period of many months , or possibly years .
The Science of Fear : W ... Gardner , Daniel Best Price : $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some epidemiological models models being used by politicians to justify harsh lockdowns , like the IMHE model , assume fatality rates based only on “ cases reported ” to calculate the CFR .
This highlights the highly questionable practice of basing draconian public policy measures on woefully incomplete government-collected data .
From the very beginning , neither the WHO nor national governments have ever had a handle on how many cases there are , what the case fatality rate is , or by what means—or how quickly—the disease spreads .
One need not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the beginning of the panic that the process of collecting data for government policymakers tends to be a biased and makeshift undertaking .
This is true of all sorts of data , and in this case policymakers have never known how many cases there are ( or were ) but have nonetheless quoted numbers that suited their political purposes .
Meanwhile , government officials have been encouraging doctors and hospital administrators to maximize the number of reported deaths due to COVID-19 .
Worst of all , this make-things-up-as-you-go attitude toward COVID-19 numbers is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ science ” by bureaucrats and elected officials who seek to pander to frightened voters .
But somewhere along the line , the United States became a nation where knowing next to nothing about a disease ’ s true fatality rate or prevalence is sufficient to justify abolishing the Bill of Rights and millions of jobs throughout the nation .
But it ’ s fine , apparently , because this is what the “ experts ” say we should do .
Over the weekend , several new articles have been published noting increased prevalence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ admitted ) .
The AP reports today : In more than ten states , the proportion of tests that are positive is nearly 20 percent or more .
But even this may be too low since tests may return false negatives nearly one-third of the time .
Meanwhile , one new study in Massachusetts found one-third of people randomly tested on the street tested positive for COVID-19 .
Note : The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute .
The Best of Ryan McMaken

In the early days of the COVID-19 panic—about three weeks ago—it was common to hear both of these phrases often repeated:
“The fatality rate of this virus is very high!”
“There are far more cases of this out there than we know about!”
The strategy of insisting that both these statements are true at the same time has been used by politicians to implement “lockdowns” that have forced business to close and millions to lose their jobs. For instance, on March 12, Ohio Department of Health director Amy Acton insisted that “over 100,000” people are “carrying this virus in Ohio today.” The state began to implement “stay-at-home” lockdown orders that day.
At the time, the World Health Organization (WHO), the media, and others were reporting that 2 to 4 percent of people with COVID-19 would die. Taking the low-end 2 percent number, and allowing for an incubation period, this would mean that two weeks after Acton’s announcement—assuming that the lockdown was 100 percent effective and not a single additional person caught the disease—two thousand Ohioans would likely be dead of COVID-19. But as of April 17, more than a month later, and after a month of the disease spreading through grocery stores and other “essential” areas of commerce, about 418 Ohioans have died of COVID-19. Fear Itself: The Cause... Gordon, Ann Best Price: $23.69 Buy New $16.90 (as of 04:13 UTC - Details)
Clearly, something doesn’t add up.
At the time, Acton was lampooned by some for presumably inflating the number of infections in the state. Indeed, the very next day she backpedaled, saying she was only guessing.
As more research comes in, however, it may be that Acton wasn’t wildly inaccurate in her “guesstimate” after all. Medical researchers and epidemiologists are increasingly claiming that the COVID-19 virus has spread much more quickly and is much more prevalent than has long been assumed. And if that is true, then the percentage of people COVID-19 cases that result in death are far lower than is assumed. If so, Acton was still wrong, but she was more wrong in her assumptions about fatality rates than about total cases.
Here’s why:
When people say “death rate” or “fatality rate” they generally mean “case fatality rate” (CFR). This is simply the number of people who die from a disease divided by the number of cases. If there are 10,000 cases and 100 people die from the disease, the CFR is 1 percent. (This is not to be confused with “mortality rate,” which is the number of deaths divided by the entire population.)
To calculate the CFR accurately we have to know what the total number of cases is and also know how many people have died from the disease. If the total number of cases is bigger than we think, then the fatality rate is smaller than we think.
How Death Rates Are Affected by Government Data Collection Methods
Counting the number of deaths has been far easier than counting total cases. Due to “severity bias,” people who have presented severe symptoms or have died have been far more likely to be tested for COVID-19 than have people with few symptoms who never required medical attention. As one epidemiologist quoted by the New York Times noted:
“To know the fatality rate you need to know how many people are infected and how many people died from the disease,” said Ali H. Mokdad, a professor of health metrics sciences at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. “We know how many people are dying, but we don’t know how many people are infected.”
Some deaths of course are missed, especially among those who die at home. But as the Times article concludes:
the missing data on deaths in the deaths-to-infections ratio is still almost certain to be dwarfed by the expected increase in the denominator when the total number of infections is better understood, epidemiologists say. The statistic typically cited by mayors and governors at Covid-19 news conferences relies on a data set that includes mostly people whose symptoms were severe enough to be tested.
Deadliest Enemy: Our W... Olshaker, Mark Best Price: $21.15 Buy New $19.99 (as of 04:58 UTC - Details) Put another way, the case totals often cited by politicians are nothing more than wild guesses.
Indeed, many researchers and other observers have claimed that total cases numbers were considerably higher than was known from testing.
“Vermont could have 16 times more infections than officially reported,” one March 18 headline reads. But this estimate doesn’t apply just to Vermont. The headline comes from a nationwide estimate of cases from Stanford epidemiologist Steve Goodman:
Goodman says the 16 times multiplier is a rough, back-of-the-envelope hypothetical based on current knowledge of how the virus is spreading in other places. It assumes that one in four people who have COVID-19 are symptomatic enough to be tested….Another researcher, Samuel Scarpino, a Northeastern University professor who specializes in infectious disease modeling, told the Globe that the U.S. has identified only between 1 of every 10 cases and 1 in 30 cases.
Similarly, in the Wall Street Journal on March 23, Stanford researchers Eran Bendavid and Jay Bhattacharya suggested the known cases were a tiny fraction of the actual number. According to a study by Bendavid and Bhattacharya,
we get at least 990,000 infections in the U.S. The number of cases reported on March 19 in the U.S. was 13,677, more than 72-fold lower. These numbers imply a fatality rate from Covid-19 orders of magnitude smaller than it appears….If our surmise of six million cases is accurate, that’s a mortality rate of 0.01%, assuming a two week lag between infection and death. This is one-tenth of the flu mortality rate of 0.1%.
On Friday, the San Francisco Chronicle reported on a new study of Santa Clara County in California, which suggests that “cases are being underreported by a factor of 50 to 85”:
If the study’s numbers are accurate, the true mortality and hospitalization rates of COVID-19 are both substantially lower than current estimates, and due to lag between infection and death, researchers project a true mortality rate between .12 and .20.
That US case fatality rate of 2 to 4 percent commonly reported by politicians and media outlets is looking less likely every day.
What Does This Mean for Policy?
If the Santa Clara study or the estimates of Bendavid and Bhattacharya apply to the nation overall, then the current count of 710,000 COVID-19 cases in the US is only a small fraction of the total number of people with the disease. The true number of cases could number from 35 million to 60 million.
In a nation with such a large number of infected, efforts to forcibly shutter businesses and put millions out of work until there are “no new cases, no deaths“—as suggested by federal health bureaucrat Anthony Fauci—are absurd. This goal is likely unattainable without completely ending interstate travel and destroying the US economy over a period of many months, or possibly years. The Science of Fear: W... Gardner, Daniel Best Price: $1.94 Buy New $24.95 (as of 04:58 UTC - Details)
Moreover, some epidemiological models models being used by politicians to justify harsh lockdowns, like the IMHE model, assume fatality rates based only on “cases reported” to calculate the CFR. This highlights the highly questionable practice of basing draconian public policy measures on woefully incomplete government-collected data. From the very beginning, neither the WHO nor national governments have ever had a handle on how many cases there are, what the case fatality rate is, or by what means—or how quickly—the disease spreads.
One need not know anything about viruses to know from the beginning of the panic that the process of collecting data for government policymakers tends to be a biased and makeshift undertaking. This is true of all sorts of data, and in this case policymakers have never known how many cases there are (or were) but have nonetheless quoted numbers that suited their political purposes. Meanwhile, government officials have been encouraging doctors and hospital administrators to maximize the number of reported deaths due to COVID-19.
Worst of all, this make-things-up-as-you-go attitude toward COVID-19 numbers is being draped in the mantle of “science” by bureaucrats and elected officials who seek to pander to frightened voters. But somewhere along the line, the United States became a nation where knowing next to nothing about a disease’s true fatality rate or prevalence is sufficient to justify abolishing the Bill of Rights and millions of jobs throughout the nation. But it’s fine, apparently, because this is what the “experts” say we should do.
UPDATE: April 20
Over the weekend, several new articles have been published noting increased prevalence of COVID-19 than previously known (or admitted). The AP reports today :
A flood of new research suggests that far more people have had the coronavirus without any symptoms, fueling hope that it will turn out to be much less lethal than originally feared. While that’s clearly good news, it also means it’s impossible to know who around you may be contagious. That complicates decisions about returning to work, school and normal life. In the last week, reports of silent infections have come from a homeless shelter in Boston, a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier, pregnant women at a New York hospital, several European countries and California.
In more than ten states, the proportion of tests that are positive is nearly 20 percent or more.
But even this may be too low since tests may return false negatives nearly one-third of the time .
Meanwhile, one new study in Massachusetts found one-third of people randomly tested on the street tested positive for COVID-19.
Note: The views expressed on Mises.org are not necessarily those of the Mises Institute.
The Best of Ryan McMaken


LRC’s Best-Selling Books

2 .
The Miraculous Results Of Extremely High Doses Of The Sunshine Hormone Vitamin D3 My Experiment With Huge Doses Of D3 From 25,000 To 50,000 To 100,000 Iu A Day Over A 1 Year Period – Jeff Bowles 5 .
Jabbed : How the Vaccine Industry , Medical Establishment , and Government Stick It to You and Your Family – Brett Wilcox 6 .
The Natural Law : A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy – Heinrich Rommen 7 .
National Security Cinema : The Shocking New Evidence of Government Control in Hollywood – Mathew Alford 8 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cell Phones : Hidden Harms and How to Protect Yourself – Dr. Joseph Mercola 9 .
Bullyocracy : How the Social Hierarchy Enables Bullies to Rule Schools , Work Places , and Society at Large – Donald Jeffries 10.What You Must Know About Food and Supplements for Optimal Vision Care : Ocular Nutrition Handbook – Jeffrey Anshel 13 .
Be Ready for Anything : How to Survive Tornadoes , Earthquakes , Pandemics , Mass Shootings , Nuclear Disasters , and Other Life-Threatening Events – Daisy Luther 14 .
Left of Bang : How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Can Save Your Life – Patrick van Horne Against the Left : A Ro ... Llewellyn H Rockwell Jr Best Price : $ 13.57 Buy New $ 8.00 The Miraculous Results ... Jeff T Bowles Best Price : $ 4.97 Buy New $ 9.99 The Vitamin D Cure , Re ... Stafford , Diane Best Price : $ 2.05 Buy New $ 2.99 Ideas Have Consequence ... Richard M. Weaver , Rog ... Best Price : $ 6.84 Buy New $ 13.31 Jabbed : How the Vaccin ... Wilcox , Brett Best Price @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Natural Law : A Stu ... Heinrich A. Rommen Best Price : $ 7.00 Buy New $ 8.00 National Security Cine ... Matthew Alford , Tom ` ... Best Price : $ 4.50 Buy New $ 6.98 EMF*D : 5G , Wi-Fi & Cel ... Dr. Joseph Mercola Buy New $ 22.49 Bullyocracy : How the S ... Jeffries , Donald Best Price : $ 15.55 Buy New $ 14.00 What You Must Know Abo ... Anshel OD , Jeffrey Best Price : $ 3.56 Buy New $ 11.75 The Ethics of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : $ 9.63 Buy New $ 19.00 Black & White : Politic ... Deming , David Best Price : $ 4.47 Buy New $ 12.58 Be Ready for Anything : ... Daisy Luther Best Price : $ 10.45 Buy New $ 9.69 Left of Bang : How the ... Patrick Van Horne , Jas ... Best Price : $ 12.13 Buy New $ 14.63 War Is A Racket : Origi ... Butler , Smedley D. Best Price : $ 4.72 Buy New $ 3.75 Amazon.com Gift Card i ... Best Price : null @ @ @ @

1. Against the Left: A Rothbardian Libertarianism – Lew Rockwell
2. The Miraculous Results Of Extremely High Doses Of The Sunshine Hormone Vitamin D3 My Experiment With Huge Doses Of D3 From 25,000 To 50,000 To 100,000 Iu A Day Over A 1 Year Period – Jeff Bowles
3. The Vitamin D Cure, Revised – James Dowd
4. Ideas Have Consequences: Expanded Edition – Richard Weaver
5. Jabbed: How the Vaccine Industry, Medical Establishment, and Government Stick It to You and Your Family – Brett Wilcox
6. The Natural Law: A Study in Legal and Social History and Philosophy – Heinrich Rommen
7. National Security Cinema: The Shocking New Evidence of Government Control in Hollywood – Mathew Alford
8. EMF*D: 5G, Wi-Fi & Cell Phones: Hidden Harms and How to Protect Yourself – Dr. Joseph Mercola
9. Bullyocracy: How the Social Hierarchy Enables Bullies to Rule Schools, Work Places, and Society at Large – Donald Jeffries
10.What You Must Know About Food and Supplements for Optimal Vision Care: Ocular Nutrition Handbook – Jeffrey Anshel
11. The Ethics of Liberty – Murray N. Rothbard
12. Black & White: Politically Incorrect Essays on Politics, Culture, Science, Religion, Energy, and Environment – David Deming
13. Be Ready for Anything: How to Survive Tornadoes, Earthquakes, Pandemics, Mass Shootings, Nuclear Disasters, and Other Life-Threatening Events – Daisy Luther
14. Left of Bang: How the Marine Corps’ Combat Hunter Program Can Save Your Life – Patrick van Horne
15. War Is A Racket: Original Edition – Smedley Butler
Against the Left: A Ro... Rockwell Jr, Llewellyn H Best Price: $2.85 Buy New $8.00 (as of 07:59 UTC - Details) The Miraculous Results... Bowles, Jeff T Best Price: $4.25 Buy New $6.99 (as of 01:50 UTC - Details) The Vitamin D Cure, Re... Stafford, Diane Best Price: $2.05 Buy New $2.99 (as of 11:37 UTC - Details) Ideas Have Consequence... Richard M. Weaver, Rog... Best Price: $6.84 Buy New $13.31 (as of 03:40 UTC - Details) Jabbed: How the Vaccin... Wilcox, Brett Best Price: $13.02 Buy New $13.05 (as of 03:50 UTC - Details) The Natural Law: A Stu... Heinrich A. Rommen Best Price: $7.00 Buy New $8.00 (as of 01:18 UTC - Details) National Security Cine... Matthew Alford, Tom ` ... Best Price: $4.50 Buy New $6.98 (as of 05:55 UTC - Details) EMF*D: 5G, Wi-Fi & Cel... Dr. Joseph Mercola Buy New $22.49 (as of 09:53 UTC - Details) Bullyocracy: How the S... Jeffries, Donald Best Price: $15.55 Buy New $14.00 (as of 11:47 UTC - Details) What You Must Know Abo... Anshel OD, Jeffrey Best Price: $3.56 Buy New $11.75 (as of 10:45 UTC - Details) The Ethics of Liberty Rothbard, Murray N. Best Price: $9.63 Buy New $19.00 (as of 02:25 UTC - Details) Black & White: Politic... Deming, David Best Price: $4.47 Buy New $12.58 (as of 01:22 UTC - Details) Be Ready for Anything:... Daisy Luther Best Price: $10.45 Buy New $9.69 (as of 07:15 UTC - Details) Left of Bang: How the ... Patrick Van Horne, Jas... Best Price: $12.13 Buy New $14.63 (as of 08:15 UTC - Details) War Is A Racket: Origi... Butler, Smedley D. Best Price: $4.72 Buy New $3.75 (as of 08:05 UTC - Details) Amazon.com Gift Card i... Buy New $25.00 (as of 11:14 UTC - Details)


lewrockwell--2020-04-21--There Are No Such Things as Constitutional Rights

“ A man ’ s natural rights are his own , against the whole world ; and any infringement of them is equally a crime , whether committed by one man , or by millions ; whether committed by one man , calling himself a robber , ( or by any other name indicating his true character , ) or by millions , calling themselves a government.
” In the midst of this fraudulent pandemic , there has been a renewed call to look to the Constitution for answers .
This is a smoke and mirrors solution that does not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not exist , and if they did , those so-called rights would be worthless .
Rights can not be written into law or claimed due to a political document because they would have no merit .
The rights of man are natural , and all rights stem from the single factor of life itself , for if man has a right to life , all other natural rights are inherent as well .
A right to life means that one has a right to defend his life .
It means that one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his life .
This means he has a right to property , the highest form of property being self .
It means he has a right to move about freely , to work , to protect others , to speak and congregate in order to protect and defend life .
All individual and natural rights are inherent due to humanity , not to any other men or documents drafted by men .
No Treason : The Consti ... Spooner , Lysander Best Price : $ 16.37 Buy New $ 24.76 This seems simple @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for direction and approval by those that wish to rule over them .
Instead of accepting that a right to life is natural , and can not be bestowed by men , people seek approval by some authoritarian class for clarity concerning the legitimacy of something so obvious .
This in and of itself destroys the very core of common rights , because having to put into contract or law the guidelines for what is natural is the acceptance that rights do not exist unless sanctioned by a higher body .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ constitution to spell out what is inherent weakens any position of strength of the individual .
Some have forgotten , and most have no understanding of the history of the Constitutional Convention .
This was a coup completed by Hamilton and his followers to create a strong central governing system , where most all power was given to a federal or national government instead of to the individual and the states .
Those attending the convention had claimed their task as only to alter and improve the Articles of Confederation , not to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ States .
But there was never any intention of improving upon the current “ law of the land , ” but only to set up a new federal state with unlimited power .
Keep in mind that the Articles of Confederation did not allow for a president , did not allow the federal government any power whatsoever to tax , so it was extremely restrictive of any executive or federal power whatsoever .
So if freedom were desired , why then would a new constitution that gave immense powers to the federal government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by those calling themselves Constitutionalists ?
Why do any that have read Article 1 , Section 8 of the Constitution , the power ’ s clauses , claim that this document was ever meant to protect the rights of man ?
How is an unlimited power to tax , to control all commerce , foreign and domestic , to coin and control all money , to provide for the general welfare , to borrow money on the credit of the United States , to declare and prosecute war , to raise and support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ necessary to enforce all these powers and more ?
The Constitution is a contradiction at every level , as granting these unlimited powers to the federal nationstate , and then at the same time claiming to protect the freedom of the the individual , is not possible .
Every single power “ granted ” in this horrendous document negates any protection of liberty .
The Natural Law : A Stu ... Heinrich A. Rommen Best Price : $ 7.00 Buy New $ 8.00 So why is this document that was long plotted through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accepted behind locked and closed doors in the dark of night , that erased all protections of liberty then in place in the Articles of Confederation , and that was signed by politicians , many of whom gained much more power in government after its implementation , so revered ?
Selling the Constitution in the late 18th century was in effect not much different than selling total tyranny over a fake pandemic today .
If the Constitution was meant to protect individual rights and the freedom of Americans , why are the masses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , loneliness , isolation , quarantine and self-imprisonment ?
Why are medical martial law and martial law being carried out ?
Why have the businesses of Americans been forcibly closed down ?
Why have Americans been forced to avoid contact with all others ?
Why is mass surveillance of everyone the new normal , and constant threats by government of forced vaccination and mandated behavior in place ?
Why does anyone think this is a free country due the the totalitarian powers authorized in the United States Constitution ?
Lysander Spooner explained this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether the Constitution really be one thing , or another , this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had , or has been powerless to prevent it , In either case , it is unfit to exsist.
” The Constitution is used , administered , and defined by government , it is interpreted by the Supreme Court , which is made up of nine judges appointed for life also by government .
In other words , it is simply a political tool of government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state , not to its people .
It was only intended to fool the people into believing that they had freedom and power only due to a piece of paper drafted by politicians .
It is worthless and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the natural rights of man , but in fact is detrimental to liberty because of the assumption that only government can define individual rights through parchment secretly drafted in the dark of night 233 years ago .
Conceived in Liberty , ... Murray N Rothbard Best Price @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are born with rights and we die with rights , whether any piece of paper exists or not .
If rights are claimed to exist because of a constitution , no rights exist at all .
The tyranny we face today is because of the Constitution , not in spite of it .
As to the Constitution : “ It was a bloodless coup d ’ état against an unresisting Confederation Congress….The drive was managed by a corps of brilliant members and representatives of the financial and landed oligarchy .
These wealthy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the urban artisans of the large cities in their drive to create a strong overriding central government – a supreme government with its own absolute power to tax , regulate commerce , and raise armies.
” The Best of Gary D. Barnett

“A man’s natural rights are his own, against the whole world; and any infringement of them is equally a crime, whether committed by one man, or by millions; whether committed by one man, calling himself a robber, (or by any other name indicating his true character,) or by millions, calling themselves a government.”
Lysander Spooner (1867). “No Treason: No. 1-”, p.7
In the midst of this fraudulent pandemic, there has been a renewed call to look to the Constitution for answers. This is a smoke and mirrors solution that does not address the real problem. Constitutional rights do not exist, and if they did, those so-called rights would be worthless. Rights cannot be written into law or claimed due to a political document because they would have no merit.
The rights of man are natural, and all rights stem from the single factor of life itself, for if man has a right to life, all other natural rights are inherent as well. A right to life means that one has a right to defend his life. It means that one has a right to support and sustain his life. This means he has a right to property, the highest form of property being self. It means he has a right to move about freely, to work, to protect others, to speak and congregate in order to protect and defend life. All individual and natural rights are inherent due to humanity, not to any other men or documents drafted by men. No Treason: The Consti... Spooner, Lysander Best Price: $16.37 Buy New $24.76 (as of 05:04 UTC - Details)
This seems simple enough, but Americans seem to clamor for direction and approval by those that wish to rule over them. Instead of accepting that a right to life is natural, and cannot be bestowed by men, people seek approval by some authoritarian class for clarity concerning the legitimacy of something so obvious. This in and of itself destroys the very core of common rights, because having to put into contract or law the guidelines for what is natural is the acceptance that rights do not exist unless sanctioned by a higher body. This is asinine, and the notion of a constitution to spell out what is inherent weakens any position of strength of the individual.
Some have forgotten, and most have no understanding of the history of the Constitutional Convention. This was a coup completed by Hamilton and his followers to create a strong central governing system, where most all power was given to a federal or national government instead of to the individual and the states. Those attending the convention had claimed their task as only to alter and improve the Articles of Confederation, not to scrap the current Constitution of the United States. But there was never any intention of improving upon the current “law of the land,” but only to set up a new federal state with unlimited power. Keep in mind that the Articles of Confederation did not allow for a president, did not allow the federal government any power whatsoever to tax, so it was extremely restrictive of any executive or federal power whatsoever.
So if freedom were desired, why then would a new constitution that gave immense powers to the federal government over states and individuals be so revered by those calling themselves Constitutionalists? Why do any that have read Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, the power’s clauses, claim that this document was ever meant to protect the rights of man? How is an unlimited power to tax, to control all commerce, foreign and domestic, to coin and control all money, to provide for the general welfare, to borrow money on the credit of the United States, to declare and prosecute war, to raise and support militaries, and to make all laws necessary to enforce all these powers and more?
The Constitution is a contradiction at every level, as granting these unlimited powers to the federal nationstate, and then at the same time claiming to protect the freedom of the the individual, is not possible. Every single power “granted” in this horrendous document negates any protection of liberty. The Natural Law: A Stu... Heinrich A. Rommen Best Price: $7.00 Buy New $8.00 (as of 01:18 UTC - Details)
So why is this document that was long plotted through conspiracy, that was secretly written and accepted behind locked and closed doors in the dark of night, that erased all protections of liberty then in place in the Articles of Confederation, and that was signed by politicians, many of whom gained much more power in government after its implementation, so revered? Selling the Constitution in the late 18th century was in effect not much different than selling total tyranny over a fake pandemic today.
If the Constitution was meant to protect individual rights and the freedom of Americans, why are the masses of this population being forced into poverty, loneliness, isolation, quarantine and self-imprisonment? Why are medical martial law and martial law being carried out? Why have the businesses of Americans been forcibly closed down? Why have Americans been forced to avoid contact with all others? Why is mass surveillance of everyone the new normal, and constant threats by government of forced vaccination and mandated behavior in place? Why does anyone think this is a free country due the the totalitarian powers authorized in the United States Constitution?
Lysander Spooner explained this perfectly when he said:
“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it, In either case, it is unfit to exsist.”
Lysander Spooner (1971). “The collected works of Lysander Spooner”
The Constitution is used, administered, and defined by government, it is interpreted by the Supreme Court, which is made up of nine judges appointed for life also by government. In other words, it is simply a political tool of government used and interpreted to give power to the state, not to its people. It was only intended to fool the people into believing that they had freedom and power only due to a piece of paper drafted by politicians. It is worthless and has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the natural rights of man, but in fact is detrimental to liberty because of the assumption that only government can define individual rights through parchment secretly drafted in the dark of night 233 years ago. Conceived in Liberty, ... Murray N Rothbard Best Price: $9.00 Buy New $15.39 (as of 08:05 UTC - Details)
We are born with rights and we die with rights, whether any piece of paper exists or not. If rights are claimed to exist because of a constitution , no rights exist at all. The tyranny we face today is because of the Constitution, not in spite of it.
As to the Constitution:
“It was a bloodless coup d’état against an unresisting Confederation Congress….The drive was managed by a corps of brilliant members and representatives of the financial and landed oligarchy. These wealthy merchants and large landowners were joined by the urban artisans of the large cities in their drive to create a strong overriding central government – a supreme government with its own absolute power to tax, regulate commerce, and raise armies.”
~ Murray N. Rothbard–Conceived in Liberty, Vol. 5, [306]
Reprinted with the author’s permission.
The Best of Gary D. Barnett


lewrockwell--2020-04-21--Covid-19: Neil Ferguson, the Liberal Lyssenko

In the past , European political leaders yielded to the orders of their astrologers .
Today , they refer to them identically to the statisticians of the Imperial College .
In the past , the latter have provided them as much justification as they needed for their liberal hospital policy .
Today , they predict millions of deaths without any scientific rigour .
Thierry Meyssan reveals how these charlatans have taken control of the policies of the European Union , the United Kingdom and certain states of the United States .
In the early days of the Cold War , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make fun of the blindness of the Soviets who believed in the nonsense of Professor Trofim Lyssenko .
The First Secretary of the Party , Joseph Stalin , had banned the teaching of genetics and used Lyssenko as a scientific justification for Marxism , but he drew no practical consequences .
Today the same mental illness has reached the West .
Professor Neil Fergusson assures that statistics can predict the behaviour of living beings .
This is stupid , yet many high-ranking political leaders believe it .
Unfortunately , unlike the Soviets , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countries .
The Creation of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control 9/11 : The Big Lie Thierry Meyssan Best Price : $ 3.97 Buy New $ 76.90 For the past two decades , Western political leaders have been trying to use statistical knowledge of epidemics to determine the right decisions to be made in the event of danger .
Following the SARS outbreak in 2003 , the European Union established the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control ( ECDPC ) in 2005 .
During the second half of 2008 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organised a colloquium to study the advisability of closing schools to combat a flu epidemic and to determine when it should occur and when it should stop .
There was still no talk of widespread containment of the entire population .
The main contribution was made by Professor Neil Ferguson and Simon Cauchemez from Imperial College London .
It compared statistical data on school closures in Hong Kong in 2003 and 2008 , on the impact of the teachers ’ strike in Israel in 2000 , on the impact of zonal holidays in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the closure of schools infected with influenza in France in 1957 , and on the impact of Spanish influenza in some US cities and in Australia in 1918 .
And it pointed out the inequalities and injustices associated with school closures in the UK and the USA .
From that point on , the problem was turned upside down .
Experts had observed that school closures did not have a significant impact on the final number of deaths , but only on the speed of the spread of the disease .
Their task @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closure of hospital beds that were not occupied on a day-to-day basis .
Statistics were no longer at the service of the health of Europeans , but of an ideology , that of the liberal management of the state .
Bernard Kouchner , the French Minister of Foreign Affairs who organized this symposium , was the one who , when he was Minister of Health ( 1992-93 , 1997-99 , 2001-02 ) , began the reorganization of the French hospital system no longer according to medical criteria , but according to a logic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , France has thus been able to make substantial savings by closing 15 % of its hospital beds ; savings that are derisory compared to the current cost of containment .
Professor Trofim Lyssenko claimed that , by applying Marxist dialectics to the natural sciences , he had demonstrated that petty-bourgeois genetic science was wrong .
On this point , he said that just as the Party generated a new man , it was possible to modify the genetics of plants according to the organization of the fields .
His nonsense became the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stalinist period .
Science and ideology are always a bad combination .
Pentagate Thierry Meyssan Best Price : $ 8.99 Buy New $ 29.99 Professor Ferguson is still the European reference for epidemic modelling .
Yet it was he who , in 2001 , convinced Prime Minister Tony Blair to have 6 million cattle slaughtered to stop the foot-and-mouth epidemic ( a decision that cost 10 billion pounds and is now considered an aberration ) .
In 2002 , he calculated that mad cow disease would kill about 50,000 British people and another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were actually 177 .
In 2005 , he predicted that bird flu would kill 65,000 Britons .
There were a total of 457 .
Regardless , he became an adviser to the World Bank and many governments .
It was he who sent a confidential note to French President Emmanuel Macron on March 12 announcing half a million deaths in France .
In panic , the latter took the decision for generalized confinement that same evening .
It was also Professor Ferguson who publicly announced on March 16 that , if nothing was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as 550,000 deaths in the United Kingdom and as many as 1.2 million in the United States , forcing the British government to review its policy .
Simon Cauchemez , who was his right-hand man in 2009 , now heads the modelling unit at the Pasteur Institute .
He is , of course , a member of the Scientific Committee of the Élysée , where he proposed generalized confinement .
This committee was set up by the Director General of Health , Professor Jérôme Salomon , the spiritual son and former technical advisor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s seizure of power was based on an intellectual swindle .
Mathematical biology ” ( sic ) could justify the liberal management of health services .
Unfortunately , while statistics can be used to evaluate the effects of this or that measure after the fact , they can not predict the behaviour of a living organism , a virus .
A virus seeks to spread , not to kill , which it unintentionally does when the species in which it nests does not yet have appropriate antibodies .
No virus will eliminate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if it killed them all , it would disappear with them .
Incidentally , extrapolating influenza measures to the Covid-19 epidemic is absurd : influenza affects many children , not Covid-19 , which in demographic terms only kills elderly people or people with diabetes or high blood pressure .
Children infected with Covid-19 have a very low viral load , it is not even known to this day whether they are contagious .
Professor Ferguson admitted on March 22 that he had carried out his calculations on the Covid-19 epidemic exclusively with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact , one can not help but notice the drift of this guru , who is no longer content to justify liberal policies applied to public health , but has come to advocate depriving entire peoples of their freedom .
To hide the reality of this drift , Professor Fergusson ’ s supporters distract the public ’ s attention by proposing the use of surgical masks , which we have already explained are of no use in the face of the epidemic [ 1 ] .
The Great Influenza : T ... Barry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These explanations shed new light on the polemic that opposed the disciples of Professor Neil Ferguson to those of Professor Didier Raoult [ 2 ] .
Contrary to what has been said , this is not a problem of methodology , but of finality .
Neil Ferguson is a charlatan caught up in his swindle , while Didier Raoult is a clinical doctor .
The followers of the former need dead people to believe in their religion , those of the latter care for their patients .
The problem we are facing is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war of repeated errors against the scientific approach .
It is astounding to hear members of the Scientific Council of the Élysée reproach Professor Raoult for not conducting comparative studies with a control group .
In times of crisis , should a responsible doctor fail to treat some of his patients and deliberately sacrifice them ?
[ 1 ] “ Panic and Political Absurdity in the Face of the Pandemic ” , by Thierry Meyssan , Translation Roger Lagassé , Voltaire Network , 7 April 2020 .
The Best of Thierry Meyssan

In the past, European political leaders yielded to the orders of their astrologers. Today, they refer to them identically to the statisticians of the Imperial College. In the past, the latter have provided them as much justification as they needed for their liberal hospital policy. Today, they predict millions of deaths without any scientific rigour. Thierry Meyssan reveals how these charlatans have taken control of the policies of the European Union, the United Kingdom and certain states of the United States.
In the early days of the Cold War, it was customary in the West to make fun of the blindness of the Soviets who believed in the nonsense of Professor Trofim Lyssenko. The First Secretary of the Party, Joseph Stalin, had banned the teaching of genetics and used Lyssenko as a scientific justification for Marxism, but he drew no practical consequences. Today the same mental illness has reached the West. Professor Neil Fergusson assures that statistics can predict the behaviour of living beings. This is stupid, yet many high-ranking political leaders believe it. Unfortunately, unlike the Soviets, they draw political consequences that ruin their countries.
The Creation of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control
9/11: The Big Lie Thierry Meyssan Best Price: $3.97 Buy New $76.90 (as of 11:40 UTC - Details) For the past two decades, Western political leaders have been trying to use statistical knowledge of epidemics to determine the right decisions to be made in the event of danger. Following the SARS outbreak in 2003, the European Union established the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDPC) in 2005. During the second half of 2008, this centre and the French rotating presidency organised a colloquium to study the advisability of closing schools to combat a flu epidemic and to determine when it should occur and when it should stop. There was still no talk of widespread containment of the entire population.
The main contribution was made by Professor Neil Ferguson and Simon Cauchemez from Imperial College London. It compared statistical data on school closures in Hong Kong in 2003 and 2008, on the impact of the teachers’ strike in Israel in 2000, on the impact of zonal holidays in France from 1984 to 2006, on the closure of schools infected with influenza in France in 1957, and on the impact of Spanish influenza in some US cities and in Australia in 1918. And it pointed out the inequalities and injustices associated with school closures in the UK and the USA.
From that point on, the problem was turned upside down. Experts had observed that school closures did not have a significant impact on the final number of deaths, but only on the speed of the spread of the disease. Their task was to provide a solution to the closure of hospital beds that were not occupied on a day-to-day basis. Statistics were no longer at the service of the health of Europeans, but of an ideology, that of the liberal management of the state.
Bernard Kouchner, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs who organized this symposium, was the one who, when he was Minister of Health (1992-93, 1997-99, 2001-02), began the reorganization of the French hospital system no longer according to medical criteria, but according to a logic of profitability. In about fifteen years, France has thus been able to make substantial savings by closing 15% of its hospital beds; savings that are derisory compared to the current cost of containment.
Professor Trofim Lyssenko claimed that, by applying Marxist dialectics to the natural sciences, he had demonstrated that petty-bourgeois genetic science was wrong. On this point, he said that just as the Party generated a new man, it was possible to modify the genetics of plants according to the organization of the fields. His nonsense became the official truth in the USSR during the Stalinist period. Science and ideology are always a bad combination.
Professor Neil Ferguson’s Charlatanism
Pentagate Thierry Meyssan Best Price: $8.99 Buy New $29.99 (as of 11:40 UTC - Details) Professor Ferguson is still the European reference for epidemic modelling.
Yet it was he who, in 2001, convinced Prime Minister Tony Blair to have 6 million cattle slaughtered to stop the foot-and-mouth epidemic (a decision that cost 10 billion pounds and is now considered an aberration).
In 2002, he calculated that mad cow disease would kill about 50,000 British people and another 150,000 when transmitted to sheep. There were actually 177.
In 2005, he predicted that bird flu would kill 65,000 Britons. There were a total of 457.
Regardless, he became an adviser to the World Bank and many governments. It was he who sent a confidential note to French President Emmanuel Macron on March 12 announcing half a million deaths in France. In panic, the latter took the decision for generalized confinement that same evening. It was also Professor Ferguson who publicly announced on March 16 that, if nothing was done, there would be as many as 550,000 deaths in the United Kingdom and as many as 1.2 million in the United States, forcing the British government to review its policy.
Simon Cauchemez, who was his right-hand man in 2009, now heads the modelling unit at the Pasteur Institute. He is, of course, a member of the Scientific Committee of the Élysée, where he proposed generalized confinement. This committee was set up by the Director General of Health, Professor Jérôme Salomon, the spiritual son and former technical advisor to Bernard Kouchner.
The Ferguson team’s seizure of power was based on an intellectual swindle. Mathematical biology” (sic) could justify the liberal management of health services.
Unfortunately, while statistics can be used to evaluate the effects of this or that measure after the fact, they cannot predict the behaviour of a living organism, a virus. A virus seeks to spread, not to kill, which it unintentionally does when the species in which it nests does not yet have appropriate antibodies. No virus will eliminate any species, including humans, because if it killed them all, it would disappear with them.
Incidentally, extrapolating influenza measures to the Covid-19 epidemic is absurd: influenza affects many children, not Covid-19, which in demographic terms only kills elderly people or people with diabetes or high blood pressure. Children infected with Covid-19 have a very low viral load, it is not even known to this day whether they are contagious.
Professor Ferguson admitted on March 22 that he had carried out his calculations on the Covid-19 epidemic exclusively with a 13-year-old database of influenza epidemics.
In fact, one cannot help but notice the drift of this guru, who is no longer content to justify liberal policies applied to public health, but has come to advocate depriving entire peoples of their freedom. To hide the reality of this drift, Professor Fergusson’s supporters distract the public’s attention by proposing the use of surgical masks, which we have already explained are of no use in the face of the epidemic [1]. The Great Influenza: T... Barry, John M. Buy New $13.99 (as of 02:52 UTC - Details)
The Polemic with Professor Didier Raoult
These explanations shed new light on the polemic that opposed the disciples of Professor Neil Ferguson to those of Professor Didier Raoult [2]. Contrary to what has been said, this is not a problem of methodology, but of finality.
Neil Ferguson is a charlatan caught up in his swindle, while Didier Raoult is a clinical doctor. The followers of the former need dead people to believe in their religion, those of the latter care for their patients.
The problem we are facing is not a scientific debate, but a war of repeated errors against the scientific approach. It is astounding to hear members of the Scientific Council of the Élysée reproach Professor Raoult for not conducting comparative studies with a control group. In times of crisis, should a responsible doctor fail to treat some of his patients and deliberately sacrifice them?
—
[1] “Panic and Political Absurdity in the Face of the Pandemic” , by Thierry Meyssan , Translation Roger Lagassé , Voltaire Network , 7 April 2020.
[2] “Covid-19: propaganda and manipulation” , by Thierry Meyssan , Translation Pete Kimberley , Voltaire Network , 21 March 2020.
The Best of Thierry Meyssan


10th Amendment

Some liberal and conservative commentators have argued that the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does give the States ( and the people ) certain “ powers ” or rights not granted to the Federal Government .
This argument is being used currently to defend the so-called “ rights ” of the States to decide when and whether to allow the resumption of normal business and societal relations in the state .
But is this an accurate reading of the 10th Amendment and of the argument from “ states rights ’ ?
Hardly .
It is true that the 10th @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under the Constitution to the Feds are , in fact , reserved to the States and to the People .
BUT it also says , and this is a huge BUT , these so-called “ powers ” CAN NOT include activities expressly “ prohibited by it ( the Constitution ) to the States.. ” In short , the States can not regulate or prohibit activities that are explicitly protected by the Constitution as “ rights ” , namely activities such as ( Amendment 1 ) “ the free exercise of religion ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” And no State , of course , ( Article 1 , Section 10 ) “ can pass any Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts… ” In short , the States don ’ t have–and have never had–the legitimate power to regulate or prohibit religious freedom or freedom of assembly or “ impair ” the obligation of contracts.
” Yet almost every Governor have done precisely this , i.e.
, they have restricted , regulated and prohibited activities that the Constitution itself says they have no right to restrict , regulate , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal perspective ) they have done so mostly by edict and not by legislation and none to my knowledge have even had to go to court to attempt to provide any “ rational basis ” for their actions .
That , dear reader , is the complete abandonment of the rule of law .
Ideas Have Consequence ... Richard M. Weaver , Rog ... Best Price : $ 6.84 Buy New $ 13.31 The School Revolution : ... Paul , Ron Best Price : $ 1.56 Buy New $ 8.99 The Best of @ @

Some liberal and conservative commentators have argued that the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution does give the States (and the people) certain “powers” or rights not granted to the Federal Government. This argument is being used currently to defend the so-called “rights” of the States to decide when and whether to allow the resumption of normal business and societal relations in the state.
But is this an accurate reading of the 10th Amendment and of the argument from “states rights’? Hardly. It is true that the 10th Amendment does say that powers NOT granted under the Constitution to the Feds are, in fact, reserved to the States and to the People. BUT it also says, and this is a huge BUT, these so-called “powers” CANNOT include activities expressly “prohibited by it (the Constitution) to the States..” In short, the States cannot regulate or prohibit activities that are explicitly protected by the Constitution as “rights”, namely activities such as (Amendment 1) “the free exercise of religion” and the “right of the people…to assemble…” And no State, of course, (Article 1, Section 10) “can pass any Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts…”
In short, the States don’t have–and have never had–the legitimate power to regulate or prohibit religious freedom or freedom of assembly or “impair” the obligation of contracts.” Yet almost every Governor have done precisely this, i.e., they have restricted, regulated and prohibited activities that the Constitution itself says they have no right to restrict, regulate, or prohibit. Even worse (from a legal perspective) they have done so mostly by edict and not by legislation and none to my knowledge have even had to go to court to attempt to provide any “rational basis” for their actions. That, dear reader, is the complete abandonment of the rule of law.
Ideas Have Consequence... Richard M. Weaver, Rog... Best Price: $6.84 Buy New $13.31 (as of 03:40 UTC - Details) The School Revolution:... Paul, Ron Best Price: $1.56 Buy New $8.99 (as of 01:35 UTC - Details)
The Best of Dom Armentano


lewrockwell--2020-04-21--41 Arguments Against the Drug War

41 Arguments Against the Drug War

The popular website Eat This , Not That !
recently ran an article titled “ 41 Ways Alcohol Ruins Your Health.
” Here is the article ’ s brief introduction : If you like to have a drink once in a while , chances are you ’ re having a few more than usual , given the fact that we ’ re all self-isolating .
But the reason why we ’ re self-isolating—to protect against the coronavirus—is all the more reason to drink less .
You need your immune system at full strength to combat COVID-19 .
Read on to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and share this story with someone who needs to read it .
Then follows a list of 41 ways that alcohol ruins your health : • Drinking more than you intended Each item includes a nice graphic and a short paragraph of explanation .
For example , here is what the article says about item number 4 , dehydration : Alcohol is a diuretic , and when consumed in sufficient quantities , it leaches water from all over your body , including your brain .
The result is often a crippling headache @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you just can ’ t seem to quench , no matter how much water or how many sugar- and calorie-packed sports drinks you guzzle down .
None of these 41 things should come as any surprise to anyone who drinks alcohol .
It should be noted that the authors of the article ( the “ Eat This , Not That !
Editors ” ) approach the subject of alcohol from a health standpoint .
They neither promote abstinence from alcohol nor government prohibition of alcoholic beverages .
I am pleased to see the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because it ’ s about alcohol .
I view this article as 41 arguments against the drug war .
If consuming alcohol ruins your health in this many ways and can ultimately lead to premature death , then why would the government spend billions of dollars waging war on drugs and not also wage war on alcohol ?
Every bad thing that could be said regarding drug abuse could also be said of alcohol abuse—and even more so .
Alcohol abuse is a factor in many drownings , home accidents , suicides , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , violent crimes , boating accidents , child abuse cases , sex crimes , and divorces .
The War on Drugs Is a ... Laurence M. Vance Best Price : $ 5.87 Buy New $ 5.95 Alcohol abuse is one of the leading causes of premature deaths in the United States .
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) , short-term health risks include injuries , violence , alcohol poisoning , risky sexual behaviors , and miscarriages and stillbirths , while long-term health risks include high blood pressure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disease , digestive problems , cancer , dementia , depression , anxiety , social problems , family problems , and unemployment .
It seems pretty obvious that the government is fighting against the wrong enemy or should , to be consistent , include alcohol in its war on drugs .
Yet , support for returning to the days of Prohibition is limited to some fundamentalist Christians and members of the Prohibition Party .
Drug warriors are some of the biggest hypocrites on the planet .
The Best of Laurence M. Vance

The popular website Eat This, Not That! recently ran an article titled “41 Ways Alcohol Ruins Your Health.”
Here is the article’s brief introduction:
If you like to have a drink once in a while, chances are you’re having a few more than usual, given the fact that we’re all self-isolating. But the reason why we’re self-isolating—to protect against the coronavirus—is all the more reason to drink less. You need your immune system at full strength to combat COVID-19. Read on to discover the ways alcohol ruins your health, and share this story with someone who needs to read it.
Then follows a list of 41 ways that alcohol ruins your health:
Eating more The Free Society Laurence M. Vance Best Price: $13.55 Buy New $17.54 (as of 04:55 UTC - Details ) Circulatory issues Seizures Dehydration Diabetes Ulcers Belly fat You’ll eat more sugar Cancer Dementia Muscle cramps Lower immune system Decreased fertility Mental decline Pancreatic pain Depression Increased obesity risk Stroke Heavy carb intake Bloating Inherited alcoholism Decreased kidney function Free Trade or Protecti... Laurence M. Vance Buy New $5.95 (as of 04:55 UTC - Details ) Salty food cravings Muscle atrophy Nerve damage Medication complications Reduced sperm count Anemia GERD Gout Anxiety Increased breast cancer risk Insomnia High blood pressure Blood sugar spikes Increased heart attack risk Cirrhosis Drinking more than you intended Leaky gut Less sound sleep Exhaustion War, Empire, and the M... Laurence M. Vance Best Price: $5.24 Buy New $9.79 (as of 09:10 UTC - Details )
Each item includes a nice graphic and a short paragraph of explanation. For example, here is what the article says about item number 4, dehydration:
Alcohol is a diuretic, and when consumed in sufficient quantities, it leaches water from all over your body, including your brain. The result is often a crippling headache, muscle pain, and a thirst you just can’t seem to quench, no matter how much water or how many sugar- and calorie-packed sports drinks you guzzle down.
None of these 41 things should come as any surprise to anyone who drinks alcohol.
It should be noted that the authors of the article (the “Eat This, Not That! Editors”) approach the subject of alcohol from a health standpoint. They neither promote abstinence from alcohol nor government prohibition of alcoholic beverages.
I am pleased to see the publication of this article, but not because it’s about alcohol. I view this article as 41 arguments against the drug war.
If consuming alcohol ruins your health in this many ways and can ultimately lead to premature death, then why would the government spend billions of dollars waging war on drugs and not also wage war on alcohol?
Every bad thing that could be said regarding drug abuse could also be said of alcohol abuse—and even more so.
Alcohol abuse is a factor in many drownings, home accidents, suicides, pedestrian accidents, fires, car accidents, violent crimes, boating accidents, child abuse cases, sex crimes, and divorces. The War on Drugs Is a ... Laurence M. Vance Best Price: $5.87 Buy New $5.95 (as of 09:10 UTC - Details)
Alcohol abuse is one of the leading causes of premature deaths in the United States. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), short-term health risks include injuries, violence, alcohol poisoning, risky sexual behaviors, and miscarriages and stillbirths, while long-term health risks include high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, liver disease, digestive problems, cancer, dementia, depression, anxiety, social problems, family problems, and unemployment.
It seems pretty obvious that the government is fighting against the wrong enemy or should, to be consistent, include alcohol in its war on drugs.
Yet, support for returning to the days of Prohibition is limited to some fundamentalist Christians and members of the Prohibition Party.
Drug warriors are some of the biggest hypocrites on the planet.
The Best of Laurence M. Vance


lewrockwell--2020-04-21--The Good News Is Still There: Death Rate for COVID Falling in New Study

These are tough times .
The mainstream media ( MSM—CNN , Fox , and nearly every other news station ) is reporting 24/7 about COVID-19 .
We hear about every death in real time .
We get daily updates about how many are infected and how many are dying .
Listening to the MSM would have anyone believe that we have a plague on our hands that is not only infecting everyone , it is killing nearly everyone who becomes ill with it .
Folks , this is a perfect example of “ Fake News.
” COVID-19 is neither infecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority who get infected .
I have been writing about his since the start of the crisis .
The best advice I can give you is to turn off the news .
I can ’ t stomach watching it .
I have been treating patients with COVID for the past 6 weeks and finding success in using vitamins ( A , C , D ) and iodine along with IV dosing of hydrogen peroxide , vitamin C and ozone .
Is this a cure for COVID-19 ?
No , I do not claim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I am reporting how our patients are doing on the therapies that we are recommending .
The ultimate cure for COVID-19 is full herd immunity .
That only comes when the majority of us have immunity against the virus .
The Miraculous Results ... Jeff T Bowles Best Price : $ 4.97 Buy New $ 9.99 I know there is good news about COVID-19 out there but you won ’ t see much of that from MSM , as good news does not seem to sell as well as bad news .
Before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state that I understand that COVID-19 is a serious illness .
I have had many patients and friends become ill with it .
Some have suffered tremendously from it .
Thank goodness , none have died .
However , there are many who have died from the virus and , unfortunately , until this is over , there are more who will die from it .
COVID-19 has hit us fast and hard but we will get past this .
Things are already improving as hospitals in COVID-19 hot spots are not as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we will run out of respirators for those stricken with it .
Our country is shuttered right now .
The economy is a mess as we have millions who have filed for unemployment .
Enough about the bad news .
So what is the good news now ?
As I stated above , at my office—The Center for Holistic Medicine–we have seen patient after patient with COVID symptoms improve on our therapies .
We have treated over 100 patients and , so far , we have no hospitalizations and no deaths .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we are all seeing the same positive results .
I have written to you about what we are doing numerous times in my blog posts .
Vital Nutrients - Resv ... Buy New $ 51.90 ( $ 0.86 / Count ) We have seen some patients respond well to oral therapies including high doses of vitamins A , C , D as well as iodine .
Many others , especially those with lung problems , have improved when they started nebulizing hydrogen peroxide and iodine .
Others have needed IV dosing of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to overcome COVID-19 .
I have posted numerous video testimonials detailing our patients ’ stories .
To watch our patient testimonials , take a look at our playlist on my YouTube Channel : Center for Holistic Medicine COVID Program Folks , there are treatments that work .
We have found that following our protocol has helped over 100 patients to date .
It is safe and effective .
Conventional medicine is still searching for its silver bullet in the form of a hydroxychloroquine or Remdesivir .
I hope those therapies pan out .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for COVID-19 .
However , a vaccine probably won ’ t be available for at least six months to a year .
We simply do not have time to wait for that .
COVID-19 will not wait for a vaccine .
It is here now .
The Best of Dr. David Brownstein

These are tough times. The mainstream media (MSM—CNN, Fox, and nearly every other news station) is reporting 24/7 about COVID-19. We hear about every death in real time. We get daily updates about how many are infected and how many are dying. Listening to the MSM would have anyone believe that we have a plague on our hands that is not only infecting everyone, it is killing nearly everyone who becomes ill with it.
Folks, this is a perfect example of “Fake News.” COVID-19 is neither infecting everyone nor is it killing the vast majority who get infected. I have been writing about his since the start of the crisis. The best advice I can give you is to turn off the news. I can’t stomach watching it. I have been treating patients with COVID for the past 6 weeks and finding success in using vitamins (A, C, D) and iodine along with IV dosing of hydrogen peroxide, vitamin C and ozone. Is this a cure for COVID-19? No, I do not claim to have the cure for COVID-19. I am reporting how our patients are doing on the therapies that we are recommending. The ultimate cure for COVID-19 is full herd immunity. That only comes when the majority of us have immunity against the virus. The Miraculous Results... Bowles, Jeff T Best Price: $4.25 Buy New $6.99 (as of 01:50 UTC - Details)
I know there is good news about COVID-19 out there but you won’t see much of that from MSM, as good news does not seem to sell as well as bad news.
Before I go on, let me again state that I understand that COVID-19 is a serious illness. I have had many patients and friends become ill with it. Some have suffered tremendously from it. Thank goodness, none have died. However, there are many who have died from the virus and, unfortunately, until this is over, there are more who will die from it. COVID-19 has hit us fast and hard but we will get past this. Things are already improving as hospitals in COVID-19 hot spots are not as full and now there is little concern that we will run out of respirators for those stricken with it.
Our country is shuttered right now. The economy is a mess as we have millions who have filed for unemployment.
Enough about the bad news.
So what is the good news now? As I stated above, at my office—The Center for Holistic Medicine–we have seen patient after patient with COVID symptoms improve on our therapies. We have treated over 100 patients and, so far, we have no hospitalizations and no deaths. My partners and I continually share notes and we are all seeing the same positive results. I have written to you about what we are doing numerous times in my blog posts. Vital Nutrients - Resv... Buy New $51.90 ($0.86 / Count) (as of 03:55 UTC - Details)
We have seen some patients respond well to oral therapies including high doses of vitamins A, C, D as well as iodine. Many others, especially those with lung problems, have improved when they started nebulizing hydrogen peroxide and iodine. Others have needed IV dosing of vitamin C, hydrogen peroxide and ozone to overcome COVID-19. I have posted numerous video testimonials detailing our patients’ stories. To watch our patient testimonials, take a look at our playlist on my YouTube Channel: Center for Holistic Medicine COVID Program
Folks, there are treatments that work. We have found that following our protocol has helped over 100 patients to date. It is safe and effective. Conventional medicine is still searching for its silver bullet in the form of a hydroxychloroquine or Remdesivir. I hope those therapies pan out. There is much talk about a vaccine for COVID-19. However, a vaccine probably won’t be available for at least six months to a year. We simply do not have time to wait for that. COVID-19 will not wait for a vaccine. It is here now.
Read the Whole Article
Qunol Ultra CoQ10 100m... Buy New $25.35 ($0.21 / Count) (as of 02:39 UTC - Details) Shindn UV Indoor Disin... Buy New $66.00 ($66.00 / Count) (as of 04:25 UTC - Details)
The Best of Dr. David Brownstein


lewrockwell--2020-04-21--SARS 2003: Fraud, and the Credibility of the World Health Organization

If the World Health Organization ( WHO ) deceived the world into fear and panic THEN , in 2003 , why should you believe them NOW re COVID , when both instances involve epidemics ?
As some readers will recall , in 2003 the World Health Organization ( WHO ) put out a travel advisory—don ’ t go to Toronto .
Toronto was “ infected ” with epidemic SARS .
The loss of tourist income was significant .
At the time , I was in touch with a Canadian activist who was trying to assemble a group of Toronto merchants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for a few billion dollars , but it fell apart .
The Canadian Encyclopedia describes the wild scene in the country : “ The outbreak led to the quarantine of thousands…and took an economic toll on Toronto .
It also exposed the country ’ s ill-prepared health-care system…In late April 2003 , the World Health Organization ( WHO ) issued an advisory against all non-essential travel to Toronto .
Government officials and experts criticized the decision as being unnecessary…During the outbreak , thousands of Canadians were quarantined .
Many voluntarily quarantined themselves in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vancouver screened travellers for high fever .
News coverage spiked with each wave of the outbreak in Toronto and right after the WHO travel advisory .
Major Canadian newspapers would each publish up to 25 stories per day on SARS… ” Fauci : The Bernie Mado ... Ortleb , Charles Buy New $ 5.99 You can see how the World Health Organization stimulated a panicked response with its travel advisory .
So SARS must have been a large outbreak , an epidemic of major proportions .
Canadian Encyclopedia : “ In total , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Canada , resulting in 44 deaths.
” What about the total number of SARS cases and deaths , worldwide ?
WHO states : “ An epidemic of SARS affected 26 countries…Other countries/areas in which chains of human-to-human transmission occurred after early importation of cases were Toronto in Canada , Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China , Chinese Taipei , Singapore , and Hanoi in Viet Nam.
” The Chronic Fatigue Sy ... Ortleb , Charles Best Price : $ 16.55 Buy New $ 17.95 The CDC : “ During November 2002 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 8,098 people worldwide became sick with severe acute respiratory syndrome [ SARS ] that was accompanied by either pneumonia or respiratory distress syndrome ( probable cases ) , according to the World Health Organization ( WHO ) .
Of these , 774 died .
By late July 2003 , no new cases were being reported , and WHO declared the global outbreak to be over.
” I see .
Across the entire planet , in this sweeping epidemic—8098 cases and 774 deaths .
Out of 6.3 billion people .
CDC : “ In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were laboratory-confirmed as SARS cases .
There were no SARS-related deaths in the United States.
” Good Intentions : How B ... Nussbaum , Bruce Best Price : $ 42.79 The capper ?
Let ’ s go back to Canada .
As the Canadian Encyclopedia states , a mere week or so after WHO declared the “ epidemic ” was over , “ English rock band The Rolling Stones headlined a benefit concert in Toronto in response to the outbreak ’ s economic toll on the city .
Informally called ‘ SARSStock ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ took place on 30 July 2003 .
Estimated attendance at Downsview Park was 450,000 to 500,000 people.
” Right .
And the residue of this “ deadly virus ” —with half a million people standing cheek to jowl—did… If you want to believe anything the World Health Organization is claiming now , in 2020 , do so at your own peril .
The Best of Jon Rappoport

History matters.
If the World Health Organization (WHO) deceived the world into fear and panic THEN, in 2003, why should you believe them NOW re COVID, when both instances involve epidemics?
As some readers will recall, in 2003 the World Health Organization (WHO) put out a travel advisory—don’t go to Toronto. Toronto was “infected” with epidemic SARS. The loss of tourist income was significant. At the time, I was in touch with a Canadian activist who was trying to assemble a group of Toronto merchants and file a law suit against WHO for a few billion dollars, but it fell apart.
The Canadian Encyclopedia describes the wild scene in the country: “The outbreak led to the quarantine of thousands…and took an economic toll on Toronto. It also exposed the country’s ill-prepared health-care system…In late April 2003, the World Health Organization (WHO) issued an advisory against all non-essential travel to Toronto. Government officials and experts criticized the decision as being unnecessary…During the outbreak, thousands of Canadians were quarantined. Many voluntarily quarantined themselves in their homes. Airports in Toronto and Vancouver screened travellers for high fever. News coverage spiked with each wave of the outbreak in Toronto and right after the WHO travel advisory. Major Canadian newspapers would each publish up to 25 stories per day on SARS…” Fauci: The Bernie Mado... Ortleb, Charles Buy New $5.99 (as of 02:55 UTC - Details)
You can see how the World Health Organization stimulated a panicked response with its travel advisory.
So SARS must have been a large outbreak, an epidemic of major proportions.
Canadian Encyclopedia: “In total, there were 438 probable cases of SARS in Canada, resulting in 44 deaths.”
What??
What about the total number of SARS cases and deaths, worldwide? WHO states: “An epidemic of SARS affected 26 countries…Other countries/areas in which chains of human-to-human transmission occurred after early importation of cases were Toronto in Canada, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China, Chinese Taipei, Singapore, and Hanoi in Viet Nam.” The Chronic Fatigue Sy... Ortleb, Charles Best Price: $16.55 Buy New $17.95 (as of 05:07 UTC - Details)
Sounds quite serious.
The CDC: “During November 2002 through July 2003, a total of 8,098 people worldwide became sick with severe acute respiratory syndrome [SARS] that was accompanied by either pneumonia or respiratory distress syndrome (probable cases), according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Of these, 774 died. By late July 2003, no new cases were being reported, and WHO declared the global outbreak to be over.”
I see. Across the entire planet, in this sweeping epidemic—8098 cases and 774 deaths. Out of 6.3 billion people.
CDC: “In the United States, only eight persons were laboratory-confirmed as SARS cases. There were no SARS-related deaths in the United States.”
Good Intentions: How B... Nussbaum, Bruce Best Price: $42.79 (as of 05:07 UTC - Details) The capper? Let’s go back to Canada. As the Canadian Encyclopedia states, a mere week or so after WHO declared the “epidemic” was over, “English rock band The Rolling Stones headlined a benefit concert in Toronto in response to the outbreak’s economic toll on the city. Informally called ‘SARSStock’ and ‘SARS-a-palooza,’ the concert took place on 30 July 2003. Estimated attendance at Downsview Park was 450,000 to 500,000 people.”
Right. And the residue of this “deadly virus”—with half a million people standing cheek to jowl—did…
Nothing.
History matters.
If you want to believe anything the World Health Organization is claiming now, in 2020, do so at your own peril.
Reprinted with permission from Jon Rappoport’s blog.
The Best of Jon Rappoport


lewrockwell--2020-04-21--New Stanford Study Suggests COVID-19 Has the Same Infection Fatality Rate as Seasonal Influenza

Approximately one month ago , John P.A .
Ioannidis , a professor of medicine and epidemiology at Stanford , published an article entitled “ A fiasco in the making ?
As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold , we are making decisions without reliable data.
“ In the article , he emphasized that there is simply not enough data to make claims about reported case fatality rates , and that the projections that the World Health Organization ( WHO ) were making do nothing but “ cause horror — and are meaningless.
” This has become much easier to see now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ predicting over one million deaths in multiple countries have , as a result of COVID-19 , changed and were clearly way off by a lot .
Those predictions also led to a massive amount of hysteria and panic , and the perception that COVID-19 is more dangerous than it actually is .
Dr. Eran Bendavid and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya , two professors of medicine at Stanford University who published an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal entitled , “ Is the coronavirus as deadly as they say ?
” earlier on during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being put out as as well , among many other scientists arounds the world .
Here ’ s a great example from Germany .
This is not to say COVID-19 isn ’ t dangerous and precautions shouldn ’ t be taken , please keep that in mind , but the measures that are put in place by multiple governments are indeed questionable and always have been .
Permanent Record Snowden , Edward Best Price : $ 8.52 Buy New $ 9.85 Fast forward to today , Ioannidis , Bendavid , Bhattacharya and several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them from the School of Medicine at Stanford University have just published a study titled “ COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in in Santa Clara County , California.
” In the study the authors point out that “ many epidemic projections and policies addressing COVD-19 have been designed without seroprevalence data to inform epidemic parameters.
” The goal of the study was to obtain an accurate estimate of how many people in Santa Clara County , California have actually been infected with the virus , and the way they went about this was to try @ @ @ @ @ @ @ antibodies from COVID-19 .
The study used a sample of residents in Santa Clara country of more than 3000 people , of whom which they evaluated for the presence of COVID-19 antibodies .
Based on what they saw within the sample size , the researchers estimated that between 2.5 and 4.2 percent of the population in Santa Clara county has antibodies “ which is an indication that they had been infected with the virus a while ago.
” The conclusions of the study were expressed by Ioannidis in a recent interview : If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to have been infected , which vary from 48,000 to 81,000 versus the number of documented cases that would correspond to the same time horizon , around April 1st , when we had 956 cases documented in Santa Clara County , we realize that the number of infected people is somewhere between 50 and 85 times more compared to what we thought , compared to what had been documented .
Immediately that means the infection fatality rate , the chance of dying , the probably of dying if you are infected diminishes by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the calculation becomes 50 to 85 fold bigger .
Our data suggests that COVID-19 has an infection fatality rate that is in the same ball park as seasonal influenza .
It suggests that even though this is a very serious problem , we should not fear .
It suggests that we have solid ground to have optimism about the possibility of eventually re-opening our society and gaining back our lives…Sooner rather than later with full control and a data driven approach .
Right now , it ’ s looking like the number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that deaths due to COVID-19 are being miscalculated , and are lower than what the numbers are showing .
The researchers suspect this is the same case , globally , in many countries .
You can read more about miscalculated deaths here .
If this is true , that would drive the case fatality rate even lower than what the researchers predict in their study above .
The Culture Of Fear : W ... Glassner , Barry Best Price : $ 1.92 Buy New $ 25.00 The New York Times states that approximately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that were simply presumed to have COVID19 , without being tested .
( source ) The coronavirus outbreak and the lockdown measures that have resulted from it have raised a lot of questions from the population regarding corruption , false information , and using fear/hysteria to drive the population into the acceptance of inappropriate measures .
Has our fear and hysteria been manufactured ?
Have the measures that governments have taken come as a result of manufacturing our consent ?
Are these measures happening for reasons other than our safety ?
Are they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something else going on here ?
Why are we being forced to comply ?
More ‘ big ’ names are asking these questions and sharing their beliefs .
Edward Snowden recently expressed that the fear and hysteria are simply being used to increase surveillance measures and to heighten the national security state , measures that will remain long after the virus just as they did long after 9/11 .
He suggested that governments should simply make suggestions , present science and evidence as to why they believe social distancing and isolation can help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not enforce them .
What ’ s also suspicious is that opinions about the coronavirus are been flagged as ‘ fake news.
’ One of the latest examples comes from Dr. Ron Paul , who encouraged people to ask themselves whether this coronavirus “ pandemic ” could be a big hoax , with the actual danger of the disease being massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic .
He went on to stat that “ That is not to say the disease is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from coronavirus .
Those in vulnerable categories should take precautions to limit their risk of exposure .
But we have seen this movie before .
Government over-hypes a threat as an excuse to grab more of our freedoms .
When the “ threat ” is over , however , they never give us our freedoms back .
( source ) Is this lockdown necessary ?
Is there something else going on here ?
Events like this coronavirus pandemic only serve the collective as they spark massive amounts of questioning and critical thinking from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collective in the long run , and as a result it empowers the collective to take their lives into their own hands , and not simply allow themselves to be forced into measures by governments that seem to be unscientific and unnecessary .
At the end of the day , I believe humanity will do what is right for each other , and what is right for each other in times like a major pandemic would be obvious .
There is no need for us to constantly rely on governments and pharmaceutical companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isn ’ t , what is right and what is wrong .
It ’ s quite clear that we can think for ourselves and the more events like this happen , the more of us there are that will continue to think for ourselves and ask questions , and challenge the status quo .
The more you drive population by force , the more you awaken that population to corruption within those who use force , because at the end of the day , force should never be necessary .
Hoodwinked : How @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 8.84 Buy New $ 10.83 For me , and obviously many others , it ’ s hard to see how COVID-19 is ultimately any different from already existing coronaviruses , flus and other respiratory illnesses .
For example , did you know that metapneumovirus has been shown to have worldwide circulation with nearly universal infection by age 5 ?
Did you know that outbreaks of metapneumovirus have been well documented every single year , especially in long term care facilities with mortality rates of up to 50 % ?
( source ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results in a large number of hospitalizations of children every single year ?
Did you know it has a substantial morbidity rate , again in the elderly , but also among children as well ?
Did you know that millions of children every single year die of these types of respiratory illnesses because they lead to acute respiratory illness ?
Imagine if the infection rates and death numbers were constantly tracked , and put on an easy to access website mainstream media and on all radio channels .
Imagine if the other coronaviruses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in some cases , and arguably more infectious in some cases were subjected to constant monitoring and beamed out to the population every single minute , could you imagine the hysteria ?
Something to think about .

Approximately one month ago, John P.A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at Stanford, published an article entitled “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data.“ In the article, he emphasized that there is simply not enough data to make claims about reported case fatality rates, and that the projections that the World Health Organization (WHO) were making do nothing but “cause horror — and are meaningless.” This has become much easier to see now, and the earlier models that were predicting over one million deaths in multiple countries have, as a result of COVID-19, changed and were clearly way off by a lot. Those predictions also led to a massive amount of hysteria and panic, and the perception that COVID-19 is more dangerous than it actually is.
Dr. Eran Bendavid and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, two professors of medicine at Stanford University who published an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal entitled, “Is the coronavirus as deadly as they say?” earlier on during the pandemic were also questioning what was being put out as as well, among many other scientists arounds the world. Here’s a great example from Germany.
This is not to say COVID-19 isn’t dangerous and precautions shouldn’t be taken, please keep that in mind, but the measures that are put in place by multiple governments are indeed questionable and always have been. Permanent Record Snowden, Edward Best Price: $8.52 Buy New $9.85 (as of 07:25 UTC - Details)
Fast forward to today, Ioannidis, Bendavid, Bhattacharya and several other academics, together, most of them from the School of Medicine at Stanford University have just published a study titled “COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in in Santa Clara County, California.” In the study the authors point out that “many epidemic projections and policies addressing COVD-19 have been designed without seroprevalence data to inform epidemic parameters.”
The goal of the study was to obtain an accurate estimate of how many people in Santa Clara County, California have actually been infected with the virus, and the way they went about this was to try and see how many people had developed antibodies from COVID-19. The study used a sample of residents in Santa Clara country of more than 3000 people, of whom which they evaluated for the presence of COVID-19 antibodies. Based on what they saw within the sample size, the researchers estimated that between 2.5 and 4.2 percent of the population in Santa Clara county has antibodies “which is an indication that they had been infected with the virus a while ago.”
It seems very likely that the disease is more widespread than people believe, everywhere. – Bhattacharya (source)
The conclusions of the study were expressed by Ioannidis in a recent interview:
If you compare the numbers that we estimate to have been infected, which vary from 48,000 to 81,000 versus the number of documented cases that would correspond to the same time horizon, around April 1st, when we had 956 cases documented in Santa Clara County, we realize that the number of infected people is somewhere between 50 and 85 times more compared to what we thought, compared to what had been documented. Immediately that means the infection fatality rate, the chance of dying, the probably of dying if you are infected diminishes by 50 to 85 fold because the denominator in the calculation becomes 50 to 85 fold bigger. Our data suggests that COVID-19 has an infection fatality rate that is in the same ball park as seasonal influenza. It suggests that even though this is a very serious problem, we should not fear. It suggests that we have solid ground to have optimism about the possibility of eventually re-opening our society and gaining back our lives…Sooner rather than later with full control and a data driven approach.
Right now, it’s looking like the number of infected is higher, and also that deaths due to COVID-19 are being miscalculated, and are lower than what the numbers are showing. The researchers suspect this is the same case, globally, in many countries. You can read more about miscalculated deaths here. If this is true, that would drive the case fatality rate even lower than what the researchers predict in their study above. The Culture Of Fear: W... Glassner, Barry Best Price: $1.92 Buy New $25.00 (as of 04:07 UTC - Details)
The New York Times states that approximately 3,700 were added to the death toll that were simply presumed to have COVID19, without being tested. (source)
Final Thoughts/Takeaway
The coronavirus outbreak and the lockdown measures that have resulted from it have raised a lot of questions from the population regarding corruption, false information, and using fear/hysteria to drive the population into the acceptance of inappropriate measures. Has our fear and hysteria been manufactured? Have the measures that governments have taken come as a result of manufacturing our consent? Are these measures happening for reasons other than our safety? Are they really for our best interests or is something else going on here? Why are we being forced to comply? More ‘big’ names are asking these questions and sharing their beliefs. Edward Snowden recently expressed that the fear and hysteria are simply being used to increase surveillance measures and to heighten the national security state, measures that will remain long after the virus just as they did long after 9/11. He suggested that governments should simply make suggestions, present science and evidence as to why they believe social distancing and isolation can help, and encourage people to follow but not enforce them.
What’s also suspicious is that opinions about the coronavirus are been flagged as ‘fake news.’ One of the latest examples comes from Dr. Ron Paul, who encouraged people to ask themselves whether this coronavirus “pandemic” could be a big hoax, with the actual danger of the disease being massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic. He went on to stat that “That is not to say the disease is harmless. Without question people will die from coronavirus. Those in vulnerable categories should take precautions to limit their risk of exposure. But we have seen this movie before. Government over-hypes a threat as an excuse to grab more of our freedoms. When the “threat” is over, however, they never give us our freedoms back. (source)
Is this lockdown necessary? Is there something else going on here? Events like this coronavirus pandemic only serve the collective as they spark massive amounts of questioning and critical thinking from the citizenry. It simply serves the collective in the long run, and as a result it empowers the collective to take their lives into their own hands, and not simply allow themselves to be forced into measures by governments that seem to be unscientific and unnecessary. At the end of the day, I believe humanity will do what is right for each other, and what is right for each other in times like a major pandemic would be obvious. There is no need for us to constantly rely on governments and pharmaceutical companies to tell us what is, what isn’t, what is right and what is wrong. It’s quite clear that we can think for ourselves and the more events like this happen, the more of us there are that will continue to think for ourselves and ask questions, and challenge the status quo. The more you drive population by force, the more you awaken that population to corruption within those who use force, because at the end of the day, force should never be necessary. Hoodwinked: How Intell... Jack Cashill Best Price: $8.84 Buy New $10.83 (as of 08:25 UTC - Details)
For me, and obviously many others, it’s hard to see how COVID-19 is ultimately any different from already existing coronaviruses, flus and other respiratory illnesses. For example, did you know that metapneumovirus has been shown to have worldwide circulation with nearly universal infection by age 5? Did you know that outbreaks of metapneumovirus have been well documented every single year, especially in long term care facilities with mortality rates of up to 50%? (source) Did you know that human metapneumovirus infection results in a large number of hospitalizations of children every single year? Did you know it has a substantial morbidity rate, again in the elderly, but also among children as well? Did you know that millions of children every single year die of these types of respiratory illnesses because they lead to acute respiratory illness? Imagine if the infection rates and death numbers were constantly tracked, and put on an easy to access website mainstream media and on all radio channels. Imagine if the other coronaviruses and respiratory illnesses that are more severe in some cases, and arguably more infectious in some cases were subjected to constant monitoring and beamed out to the population every single minute, could you imagine the hysteria?
Something to think about.
Reprinted with permission from Collective Evolution.