Coronavirus Pandemic: Apocalypse Now! Or exaggerated scare story?

[PopHistorian]

The incidence of cancers has increased exponentially worldwide since the universal COVID-19 vaccination program began at the end of 2020.

Maybe this should go in the Our Orwellian World forum.

Study Suggests COVID MRNA Vaccines Help Fight Cancer Too

The COVID-19 mRNA-based vaccines that saved 2.5 million lives globally during the pandemic could help spark the immune system to fight cancer.

www.sciencealert.com

 

[Gaby]

The latest batch is involving some small visceral arteries like thrombosis in the splenic artery, mesenteric artery, etc. and none of the affected had a particularly bad head cold. All of them tested positive for COVID-19 prior to the event.

The person with the splenic artery thrombosis survived. Initially, he was discharged instead of the "stay-on-the-safe-side 24-48 hour observation" for a person with a spleen infarct. What happened next was that his spleen ruptured in his abdominal cavity at home, and he went into a shock. He was reanimated at the hospital, and eventually his spleen was removed. He was discharged shortly afterward with instructions to get vaccinated for all the bacterial agents that your spleen is supposed to fight against, including the pneumococcal vaccine. Which, thanks to the Catalonians, we now know better:

BREAKING: 2.23 Million-Person Study Finds Pneumococcal Vaccines Increase Risk of Pneumonia and Death

The vaccines given to nearly every U.S. child and senior were linked to higher pneumonia and death rates in one of the largest real-world studies ever conducted.

www.thefocalpoints.com

Adjusted Risk (Hazard Ratios):​

After controlling for age, sex, influenza vaccination, and major comorbidities:

• PCV13 [13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine]
  
  • 1.83× higher risk of pneumococcal pneumonia (95% CI 1.49–2.24).
  • 1.55× higher risk of all-cause pneumonia (95% CI 1.42–1.70).
  • 1.91× higher risk of death from all-cause pneumonia (95% CI 1.45–2.52).
• PPSV23 [23-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine]
• • 1.21× higher risk of pneumococcal pneumonia (95% CI 1.10–1.36).
  • 1.24× higher risk of all-cause pneumonia (95% CI 1.18–1.31).
  • No reduction in mortality.

In other words:

So even for pneumococcal bacterial vaccines, no reassurance at all. A few days prior to the publication of this study, a woman came to see me because "I have this cough since I got the pneumococcal vaccine one month before".

The patient decided not to get vaccinated after I explain the latest data, but I would not be surprised if a well intended bureaucrat convinces him of the contrary.

 

[dredger]

Don't know where to post this information, but it's important to share, and was maybe already discussed somewhere else on the forum.
It's a US nurse who warns about the fact that now, some hospitals set a policiy to vaccinate anyone who come into their establishment and visibly, they seems not to inform well about, they act as "bordeline" with a paper to sign for people needing a surgery, but better to listen to what she explains :

https://twitter.com/x/status/1983233512611426660

Is it possible that some hospitals would dare to do this without clear patient's consent in the US ? When you look how much they could be charged in front of a tribunal, I have hard to think they would dare to do it. This remains good to know or at least keep an eye opened about when you have to go to an hospital.

 

[SOTTREADER]

Don't know where to post this information, but it's important to share, and was maybe already discussed somewhere else on the forum.
It's a US nurse who warns about the fact that now, some hospitals set a policiy to vaccinate anyone who come into their establishment and visibly, they seems not to inform well about, they act as "bordeline" with a paper to sign for people needing a surgery, but better to listen to what she explains :

https://twitter.com/x/status/1983233512611426660

Is it possible that some hospitals would dare to do this without clear patient's consent in the US ? When you look how much they could be charged in front of a tribunal, I have hard to think they would dare to do it. This remains good to know or at least keep an eye opened about when you have to go to an hospital.

Immediate thoughts is they can't give you any kind of medicine without informing you what you are being given and getting your consent in non-emergency situations.

Obviously in an emergency they'll treat you based on the judgement of those attending to you but I think the intervention will only be related to resolving the emergency in question.

In situations like the above where we are getting sensationalist claims via X, I'd verify it by reference to actual legislation and / or the view of an informed hospital administrator.

Something that comes to mind on the above clip - how would they even know what vaccines you had / did not have. My understanding is there is no one single integrated IT system all hospitals use to talk to each other and cross-share patient information.

 

[Nathan]

One thing that has started to catch my attention lately is the increasing but noticeable bleeding through of alternative topics such as COVID, vaccines, and lockdowns into more mainstream areas of YouTube. One area I’m seeing this a lot is in the productivity “hustle to earn your million” space. While these podcasters are often neutral politically (or presented that way, at least), you’ll see people like Jordan Peterson and behavioral experts who aren’t well-liked by leftist crowds.

One highlight video that has been doing the rounds in the last few days (so much so that even my mother sent it to me) is actually from a year-old interview with biologist Dr. Bret Weinstein, who spends a portion of it talking about COVID and the vaccine. I don’t watch this channel myself (Diary of a CEO), but the podcaster is popular with younger audiences who have a productivity or entrepreneurial focus. At the time of writing, he has over 13 million subscribers. It seems like he chases the hot and often sensationalist topics, whatever they might be. But I think it’s interesting that this increasingly includes more fringe alternative topics such as the COVID vaccine and lockdowns, presumably because the podcasters are seeing these topics pull larger audiences in their video statistics.

Facebook reel video (16 mins):
132K views · 2.2K reactions | The BANNED Professor's BRUTALLY Honest Opinion On COVID-19 & Dr Fauci... | Dr Bret Weinstein | The Diary CEO

Full YouTube video (plays on the topic):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cFu-b5lTMU&t=6768s

While Weinstein’s account of COVID’s origins, like most in the alternative space, might not match the Cs’ answers on the topic, I find it very intriguing that such blasphemous perspectives are slipping deeper and deeper into more general channels. In the case above, I suspect the podcaster is looking for any topic that will be good for his business, which might be why he decided to share the COVID clip recently. But I think that in itself really tells us something.

P.S. He even interviewed Kamala Harris recently. Unsurprisingly, the comments section is more entertaining than the interview itself.

 

[Natus Videre]

One thing that has started to catch my attention lately is the increasing but noticeable bleeding through of alternative topics such as COVID, vaccines, and lockdowns into more mainstream areas of YouTube.

Yeah, there is also "super mainstream" mind programming going on. Look at this video, it's horrifying. If you want to uncover the hidden agenda, just imagine that these animals are humans!

I Saved 1,000 Animals From Dying

In the beginning of the video, MrBeast, a prominent YouTuber with 448 mllion subscribers, microchips a rhino and vaccinates giraffes by shooting them with flying needles from a helicopter. A wildlife "expert" tells him that these giraffes have no chance of survival if they catch "one of these diseases," so MrBeast concludes that he is saving their lives by forcefully vaccinating them. Brilliant Covidian logic.

And the video wouldn't be complete without a not-so-Freudian slip:

[4:49] MrBeast: We're on a kill streak! Although we're not killing them, we're saving their lives!

In the eyes of the "elites," we are so stupid that they can play with us and inject us with whatever they want. They view themselves as "saviors" or "gods," and so does MrBeast, in some way, by expressing an "otherwordly generosity." The comets will set things straight, but, until then, buckle up!

 

[dredger]

Just received this on a private TG channel, it's about a study of 2020 on the SARS-COV-2 and it's interresting

Here's a translation of the message of the TG post :

According to the study linked at the end of this post, SARS-COV-2 is a ‘virus’ designed to affect certain populations more than others.​

​

On this scale of impact, European Jews are less likely to be infected and fall ill than European Catholics.​

​

The susceptibility of different populations to SARS-CoV-2 infection remains poorly understood.​

​

In this study, researchers combined the analysis of ACE2-coding variants in different populations and performed computational chemistry calculations to study their effects on the SARS-CoV-2/ACE2 interaction.​

​

The ACE2-K26R variant, which is most common among Ashkenazi Jews, decreases the electrostatic attraction between SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2.​

​

Conversely, the ACE2-I468V, R219C, K341R, D206G and G211R variants increase this attraction, ranked in ascending order of affinity.​

These variants are – respectively – most common in East Asian, South Asian, African and African-American populations, Europe, Europe and South Asia.​

​

The study does not answer the question of WHO created the SARS-COV-2 ‘virus’, but it does provide some clues that help us look in the right direction.​

Here's the link to the study :

ACE2 coding variants in different populations and their potential impact on SARS-CoV-2 binding affinity - PMC

The susceptibility of different populations to SARS-CoV-2 infection is not yet understood. Here, we combined ACE2 coding variants' analysis in different populations and computational chemistry calculations to probe the effects on SARS-CoV-2/ACE2 ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

And a graph from it which sums all :

Uh ! ... but not surprising

 

[seiw83]

Virus attack is a great chance to retailiate of those of strong will. They play dangerous play as COVID was a failure

 

[Gaby]

We already knew, still, studies are coming out:

BREAKING: 86% of PCR-Positive “COVID Cases” Were Not Real Infections

New study finds that during the early pandemic period, only 14% of PCR “COVID cases” were real — proving that lockdowns and vaccine mandates were built on a fraudulent testing illusion.

www.thefocalpoints.com

New study finds that during the early pandemic period, only 14% of PCR “COVID cases” were real — proving that lockdowns and vaccine mandates were built on a fraudulent testing illusion.

A bombshell peer-reviewed study out of Germany just dismantled the scientific foundation used to justify lockdowns, social distancing, and vaccine mandates.

Researchers analyzed data from the Akkreditierte Labore in der Medizin (ALM) — a nationwide consortium of authority-accredited medical laboratories that performed roughly 90% of all SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests in Germany between 2020 and 2023.

When researchers compared the ALM’s week-by-week PCR positivity rates with the same labs’ IgG antibody testing data — essentially measuring who truly developed infection-induced immunity — they discovered something staggering:

Only about 14% of those who tested PCR-positive during the early pandemic period (2020–mid-2021) actually developed antibodies — meaning most early “cases” were never real infections.

• Mass PCR testing grossly inflated case numbers worldwide. Every nation that used similar CT thresholds likely overcounted “infections” by an order of magnitude.
• Lockdowns and mandates were built on a false metric. The German “7-day incidence” used to trigger restrictions was statistically meaningless — and identical logic applied in the U.S., U.K., and elsewhere. In America, the entire “15 Days to Slow the Spread” campaign was predicated on the same inflated PCR scam.
• Authorities suppressed representative serology data. Germany’s RKI and Ministry of Health had access to these ALM antibody results but never disclosed them — despite their policy relevance.
• Rewriting pandemic history. If only 10–14% of reported PCR “cases” during the first year reflected true infections, then the infection-fatality rate, transmission models, and emergency declarations were all built on sand. By the end of 2020—months before vaccination began—roughly one-quarter of Germany’s population already carried natural antibodies. In other words, while authorities were declaring an uncontrolled crisis, herd-level immunity was already taking shape. By late 2021, nearly the entire population was IgG-positive. The evidence shows that pandemic policy was driven not by infection reality, but by a diagnostic illusion.

 

[Gaby]

This summarizes my experience with the COVID-19 pandemic. And to the degree that I have managed, rationally, to discourage the most authoritarian patients from getting their 4th-5th-6th vaccine, they have finally stop consulting because of an upper respiratory illness. When they come, it's already because of a developed autoimmune disease or cancer. It has strained the health care system enormously in at a time when primary health care has become the least available for the population at large. Not to mention the streptococcus A infection from 2022-2023 in children, with a 20% mortality rate in the region of Occitanie, France. The catch was that there didn't seem to be a high rate of vaccinations against COVID-19 in children. It's not even a secret that maternity wards are closing up because there are simply not enough children being born.

BREAKING: 51 Million-Person Study Finds COVID-19 “Vaccines” Increase Risk of Respiratory Infections by up to 559%

Landmark study of the entire South Korean population uncovers a VAIDS signal — a dose-dependent rise in the common cold, upper-respiratory infections, pneumonia, and tuberculosis among the vaccinated.

www.thefocalpoints.com

An enormous landmark study published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, covering every single resident in South Korea — all 51.6 million people — has delivered a striking population-level signal suggestive of vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS).

This massive dataset shows a consistent dose-dependent pattern: the more COVID-19 “vaccines” a person received, the higher their risk of developing the common cold and upper-respiratory infections. Increases in pneumonia and tuberculosis were identified in stratified analyses by age and infection status. Children ages 0-19 suffered the most.

Children (ages 0–19) showed the strongest dose-response pattern:

• After the second dose, risk increased by 299 % (aHR 3.99 [3.78–4.21]).
• After the third dose, risk increased by 391 % (aHR 4.91 [4.62–5.22]).
• After the fourth dose or more, risk increased by 559 % (aHR 6.59 [6.00–7.23]).

Older adults (≥ 65 years) followed the same trend:

• Second dose → +9 % (aHR 1.09 [1.06–1.12]).
• Third dose → +33 % (aHR 1.33 [1.29–1.37]).
• Fourth or more doses → +58 % (aHR 1.58 [1.53–1.64]).

Among COVID-positive participants, the same pattern held:

• Second dose → +5 % (aHR 1.05 [1.03–1.06]);
• Third dose → +12 % (aHR 1.12 [1.10–1.14]);
• Fourth or more doses → +36 % (aHR 1.36 [1.34–1.39]).

Even in the pooled population-wide model, common cold incidence rose sharply with each additional dose (aHR 1.23 [1.21–1.25] after the third dose and 1.65 [1.56–1.75] after the fourth or more), confirming the trend across the entire cohort.

Interpretation: Across every analytic layer—pooled, pediatric, geriatric, and COVID-positive—common-cold incidence climbed steadily from dose 2 through dose 4+, showing a clear, monotonic relationship between cumulative vaccination and ordinary viral infection risk.

Upper-Respiratory Tract Infections​

Children (0–19 yrs):

• Second dose → +62 % (aHR 1.62 [1.58–1.66]).
• Third dose → +67 % (aHR 1.67 [1.62–1.71]).
• Fourth or more doses → +83 % (aHR 1.83 [1.75–1.92]).

Older adults (≥ 65 yrs):

• Second dose → +7 % (aHR 1.07 [1.06–1.09]).
• Third dose → +32 % (aHR 1.32 [1.30–1.34]).
• Fourth or more doses → +57 % (aHR 1.57 [1.54–1.59]).

COVID-positive subgroup:

• Second dose → +2 % (aHR 1.02 [1.01–1.03]);
• Third dose → +12 % (aHR 1.12 [1.11–1.13]);
• Fourth or more doses → +32 % (aHR 1.32 [1.30–1.34]).

The pooled model also showed a consistent upward trend—aHR 1.14 after the second dose and 1.48 after the third—indicating that the dose-dependent rise in upper-respiratory infection risk persists even without stratification.

Interpretation: the rise was consistent across all groups and persisted even after adjustment for age, sex, income level, comorbidities, prior infection severity, infection phase, and time since last vaccination.

Tuberculosis​

• General population: overall aHRs hovered near 1.0 (no significant change) across all dose groups.
• COVID-positive subset: clear upward trend with dose number:
  
  • Second dose → aHR 1.24 (1.01–1.52) (+24 % risk).
  • Fourth or more doses → aHR 1.35 (1.02–1.77) (+35 % risk).

Interpretation: a measurable increase in post-infection or reactivation tuberculosis among those previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 who went on to receive multiple boosters.

---

Pneumonia​

Among COVID-negative participants, pneumonia incidence rose consistently with additional vaccine doses:

• Second dose → +34 % (aHR 1.34 [1.31–1.38])
• Fourth or more doses → +91 % (aHR 1.91 [1.84–1.99])

Interpretation: This clear dose-response pattern suggests impaired respiratory defense or susceptibility to secondary bacterial infection following repeated mRNA exposure.

Influenza-Like Illness (ILI) and Pertussis — the “Protective” Mirage​

Regression models appeared to show lower adjusted hazard ratios for these two conditions—approximately 0.55 for ILI and 0.06 for pertussis after the fourth or later dose—which would suggest a protective effect.

In context, however, these apparent reductions are almost certainly statistical artifacts driven by healthy-user bias, diagnostic-coding overlap, and case misclassification. Many mild respiratory infections that might have been coded as influenza-like illness or pertussis before 2020 were likely recorded as “COVID-19” during the post-vaccine era, artificially deflating their apparent incidence in vaccinated groups.

Crucially, the study’s national ARIMAX time-series revealed a 46-fold surge in confirmed pertussis cases across Korea during 2023, directly contradicting any notion of real-world protection.

 

[Cristal]

Not to mention the streptococcus A infection from 2022-2023 in children, with a 20% mortality rate in the region of Occitanie, France. The catch was that there didn't seem to be a high rate of vaccinations against COVID-19 in children

Did those children or their parents receive the flu vaccine? Besides the parents getting the COVID shots. There's a push to vaccinate small children against the flu in Spain(has been since the Pandemic).I don't know about France. When I took my 8 year old son to pediatrician for a check up,she was trying very hard to push for it.(She told me that it's recommended for the 6months- 8 year old children). Unfortunately,many of my son's coleagues were vaccinated against it in the past years.