Coronavirus Pandemic: Apocalypse Now! Or exaggerated scare story?

[Adobe]

Minnesota RN Chelsea Walls says 56 employees from her hospital were fired. All exceptions denied, regardless of the shortages they are experiencing And, that FEMA employees have been sent to replace the staff and take care of the covid patients.

You only need one minute for the FEMA information (minute 2 to minute 3)

Bitchute

Bitchute is a video service that prioritizes creators and champions users' freedoms and privacy.

www.bitchute.com

 

[flashgordonv]

So you can't detect obvious BS when you see it, but you know my cup is "obviously" full? Sounds like you have a speciality in "full cups".


In many cases, it's obvious. The "Baked Noodles" section is full of such posts.


You didn't specify anything in particular, you just used the phrase 'down under', when referring to an article posted on a website called "Virology Down Under"? If you weren't referring to the article specifically in any conscious sense, then I'll assume you mechanically reused the phrase because it was something you read only seconds before, which further suggests it's not far off the mark to assume something about it bothered you and you simply reacted to it with a blanket denial of all Australian "medical and political" sources.


This is an exact example of what I was talking about. Totally incorrect.

https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/Nucleic_acid_test

PCR testing for Hepatitis C RNA has been commonplace for decades. You'll find abundant references with a simple web search.

Back to my "Realty checks".


So you have "personal experience" with me after one post, and you have time to post disinfo, but no time to explain your points. In fact, you posted your post just after my earlier post in this thread, giving evidence about why such a perspective is disinfomation. So, a critical mind might wonder if, seeing my inital post, you decided to go on a 'fishing expedition' with a separate post, thinking you could "get" me. Well, I hope you now have a better idea of who I am after having two whole posts of "experience".

Mate, I don't disagree with the great majority of what you are saying, but how you are saying it puts my teeth on edge. It comes across as arrogant, condescending and very aggressive. All that does, other than make you feel righteous (perhaps), is to put people off and make them unreceptive to your message. It's almost as if you are channelling Anart (if you remember her).

Might be time to back off, rethink your approach and try a softer, more empathetic tone without that unpleasant flavour that you know everything and the other contributors are idiots.

 

[Hi_Henry]

That the VAERS data system is not catching most adverse reactions to the clot-shot was know from the start. However now it is suspected that VAERS is picking up even less, as the vaxx/booster campaign moves forward.

This is probably happening because the screws are being tightened on the doctors and others to look the other way. I suspect this may be happening in other countries also. After all, this is a Global Theatrical Production.

Wayne Sims 5 hours ago

Good morning @Hafsa Sheikh, I posted this on the board back in Aug.
Our medical professionals are being threatened with license revocation by the FSMB, who represents every medical board across the United States, if they give any credence to vaccine injuries caused by the jab or if they go out of CDC/FDA protocols by recommending/administering non-approved protocols such as Ivermectin/Hydroxychloroquin therapies. They are being silenced before our very eyes. Lest we say complete coercion/blackmail. Believe it! It's True!
...and it has been kindly affirmed below although you won't get many to admit it in the face of this tyranny.
Dr. Karen Slabas| Ob/Gyn & Women's Health
Statement Regarding Dissemination of COVID-19 Misinformation
The American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ABOG) fully supports the statement published by the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) that asserts that providing misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine contradicts physicians' ethical and professional responsibilities, and therefore may subject a physician to disciplinary actions, including suspension or revocation of their medical license. Additionally, ABOG supports a recent American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) statement, which expresses concern regarding the serious public health effects of the persistent spread of misinformation regarding the COVID-19 virus. Patients rely on physicians to practice evidence-based medicine based on facts and scientific data. The FSMB and ABMS statements align with the ABOG standards and policies for certification and maintenance of certification that involve medical professionalism and professional standing. These standards include:
• acting in your patients’ best interests
• behaving professionally with patients, families, and colleagues across health professions
• taking appropriate care of yourself
• representing your Board certification and MOC status in a professional manner
Providing intentional misinformation that may harm patients or public health does not meet these standards and may be grounds for adverse action on OB GYN certification status. In addition, ABOG is alerted if an OB GYN is investigated for practice or professionalism violations by a state medical board. ABOG acts based on its certification policies as described in the current MOC Bulletins and the Revocation of Diploma or Certificate Policy. A recent article highlights the risks posed to pregnant people by COVID-19 and the reports of increasing numbers of unvaccinated pregnant individuals in ICUs in several states with severe infection. The CDC has reported that the deaths in August are the highest number of deaths reported in any month since the start of the pandemic, citing that about 97% of pregnant people treated in the hospital for COVID-19 have been unvaccinated. The ACOG, SMFM, and CDC recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for all people over the age of 12, including pregnant people. ABOG supports these recommendations and has incorporated this information in our Maintenance of Certification (MOC) learning and self-assessment offerings to help diplomates provide evidence-based care to the people and families that we serve.

Found here

How concerned are you about adverse events related to the vaccines?

www.medscape.com

 

[Voyageur]

Circa 9th November 2021, the world's first person has been officially, medically diagnosed as suffering from Climate Change...

Er, the doctor is from Nelson BC, which may explain a lot, at least for people who have been there and interacted with the community. Heck, with a diagnosis like that, his patients might actually get vaccine exemptions granted, religious or otherwise or, they will be willing candidates for Pfizers new AGW-vaccine trail, unless they are already part of it.

Doctor:

If we’re not looking at the underlying cause, and we’re just treating the symptoms, we’re just gonna keep falling further and further behind,” the emergency room doctor told Glacier Media. […] It’s me trying to just… process what I’m seeing.

This doctor will receive a lot of local praise, there is no doubt, and his practice may bloom in growth by people wanting the same diagnosis. Perhaps, too, this will find its way into medial journals, like JAMA has already asked for papers to be submitted.

Nelson is one of the lotus blossoms of the AGW Climate Change movement, and they need good doctors to help fix the problems.

As Kit said:

It’s a staged PR move. A very obvious one, when you think about it.

 

[Lucius Lu]

Ryan may be angry, but that doesn't mean he does not have a point, although I would ask Ryan to try and make his points with less angry language, because doing so makes for the more productive exchanges that he seeks here. On the virus thing, I tend to agree that posts that essentially claim there are no such things are viruses are NOT useful and should be avoided.

Duplicating the mainstream narrative that a virus exists will never allow us to escape this trap. You are using your position as an administrator to forcefully usher in a narrative that is only right.
A real virus would not allow this whole lying operation called a pandemic to take place.
From a psychological standpoint. A real virus would have real victims and real fear, not TV fear. When the time came for the population to gain herd immunity, the people involved in fighting the epidemic would realize the lie. This precludes the use of a real virus.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

 

[Persej]

Don't worry about new variants people, Moderna got you covered.

Inside Moderna: Making boosters and tracking variants | Watch News Videos Online

Watch Inside Moderna: Making boosters and tracking variants Video Online, on GlobalNews.ca

globalnews.ca

And finally, a French company will arrive on the scene (in April 2022). What took them so long?

On October 18, Valneva said its vaccine demonstrated efficacy "at least as good, if not better" than AstraZeneca's shot in a late-stage trial comparing the two, with significantly fewer adverse side effects.

The study also showed that Valneva's vaccine, given in two shots 28 days apart, prompted significantly fewer adverse reactions than the AstraZeneca vaccine, such as arm pain and fever, the company said.

French firm Valneva wins approval from European Commission to supply Covid-19 vaccines

French vaccine company Valneva on Wednesday said it had won approval from the European Commission for a deal to supply up to 60 million doses of its potential Covid-19 vaccine, VLA2001, as the EU speeds…

www.france24.com

 

[Voyageur]

Might be time to back off, rethink your approach and try a softer, more empathetic tone without that unpleasant flavour that you know everything and the other contributors are idiots.

Agree with your response to Ryan.

Ryan, it goes without saying that these are ultra difficult times, and this subject matter can especially bring out ones hypersensate drives against others, others the same as you who are working to also understand. So, perhaps take a step back from this thread if you can, give yourself pause to look at the little 'i' you may discover in your approach to others, and as a mirror to self.

As is the case in this thread and others, if there is cause to rebuttal opinions, science et cetera, okay fair enough, that is expected in this forum.

The fact that others are commenting, and you are being defensive; being right, and maybe you are or maybe not, is a good sign in itself to revaluate what it is you are adding or getting out of it, fwiw.

 

[Joe]

Duplicating the mainstream narrative that a virus exists will never allow us to escape this trap. You are using your position as an administrator to forcefully usher in a narrative that is only right.
A real virus would not allow this whole lying operation called a pandemic to take place.
From a psychological standpoint. A real virus would have real victims and real fear, not TV fear. When the time came for the population to gain herd immunity, the people involved in fighting the epidemic would realize the lie. This precludes the use of a real virus.

You make no sense. As a result, I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Joe]

According to statistic released by UK Official Office for National Statistics re deaths in England alone (first 8 months of 2021):

35,924 people died within 21 days of having either 1 or 2 Covid-19 Vaccines of which 4,609 'involved Covid-19'.

243,106 people died 21 days or more after their first or second dose of which 12,513 'involved Covid-19'.

So a total of 261,908 non covid related deaths among the vaccinated between getting the jab and 21 days or more thereafter.

Of the 432,826 all cause deaths 279,030 were vaccinated equaling 64% of the total all cause deaths.

Not bad for a pandemic of the unvaccinated.

View attachment 51338

Their point in the above is the 40,996 not vaccinated among "deaths involving covid" and the total of the numbers below that number, i.e. 4413, 7605, 196, 4908, or about 17K, of the vaccinated. i.e. You have a 2.5 times increased risk of death if you're not vaccinated. The large numbers you cite are non covid related deaths, which is all normal deaths from all causes. The real question here is whether or not that number is higher than, say, the same period last year, in which case, you could make an argument that vaccines are contributing to an increase in non covid deaths.

 

[msante]

Duplicating the mainstream narrative that a virus exists will never allow us to escape this trap. You are using your position as an administrator to forcefully usher in a narrative that is only right.

That a virus exists is not a mainstream narrative, it is a fact, viruses exist, and the COVID virus certainly seems to be one of them. The real mainstream narrative is that COVID is deadly and that the vaccine is harmless, indispensable and the only salvation. Asserting a lie just to go against the "bad guys" I don't think is going to get us out of any traps. I think that good discernment skills requires navigating with some sobriety through this vast ocean of lies mixed with truths without being seduced by attractive simplistic and lax explanations.

A real virus would not allow this whole lying operation called a pandemic to take place.
From a psychological standpoint. A real virus would have real victims and real fear, not TV fear. When the time came for the population to gain herd immunity, the people involved in fighting the epidemic would realize the lie. This precludes the use of a real virus.

IMO this does not make much sense. A real virus can affect a person without making them a "victim" or causing fear. Behind all this madness clearly might be a real virus and the big lie not to be the virus itself but everything else. Personally I tend to think that this kind of shocking info like "there is no COVID virus" (or worse "there are no viruses") is meant to create confusion, division and essentially could be classified as disinformation.

 

[isparnid]

Where is the pandemic?
The Technical Agency for Information on Hospitalization (in France) has published a summary of hospital care for COVID-19 in 2020 :
It states, in part, that:
- 218,000 patients were hospitalized for management of COVID-191. COVID patients represent 2% of all hospitalized patients during 2020 across all hospital fields,
- In 2020, COVID patients represent 5% of all patients managed in critical care units. In addition, 8% of hospitalization days within these critical care units were dedicated to the management of COVID-19, A quarter of COVID patients hospitalized in critical care services in 2020 died during their hospitalization.

Martin Blachié's intervention on Twitter

https://twitter.com/x/status/1458498059525034005

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

 

[Jones]

Duplicating the mainstream narrative that a virus exists will never allow us to escape this trap. You are using your position as an administrator to forcefully usher in a narrative that is only right.
A real virus would not allow this whole lying operation called a pandemic to take place.
From a psychological standpoint. A real virus would have real victims and real fear, not TV fear. When the time came for the population to gain herd immunity, the people involved in fighting the epidemic would realize the lie. This precludes the use of a real virus.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

A virus exists, it's just not doing what they claim it is. In the same way that CO2 exists but it doesn't cause the problems that they try to convince that it does.

They've taken things that exist and created mountains out of mole hills with them. Basically over dramatising and then enforcing policy based on the created drama.

 

[Michael B-C]

Their point in the above is the 40,996 not vaccinated among "deaths involving covid" and the total of the numbers below that number, i.e. 4413, 7605, 196, 4908, or about 17K, of the vaccinated. i.e. You have a 2.5 times increased risk of death if you're not vaccinated. The large numbers you cite are non covid related deaths, which is all normal deaths from all causes. The real question here is whether or not that number is higher than, say, the same period last year, in which case, you could make an argument that vaccines are contributing to an increase in non covid deaths.

I hear you Joe and Aeneas, duly noted - and yes of course, full context of all cause mortality is completely important and relevant: but we are living through a pandemic of lies, damned lies and statistics and so I was merely suggesting that if indeed we have a pandemic of the unvaccinated (as claimed), and if we have a reduced mortality in all causes thanks to the efficacy of the jabs thereby apparently impacting other conditions (as claimed), then the headline figures, though already obfuscated (e.g unvaccinated deaths can equal anyone vaccinated but who dies within 14 days of getting either shot) don't exactly trumpet this.

But setting the broad stroke, larger numbers aside, I do think 35,924 people dying 0-21 days after having either shot is a significant signal that should be causing alarm bells to ring, especially when the UK Medicine Regulator recently if inadvertently confirmed in a freedom of information request that the number of deaths in 10 months associated with the Covid-19 Vaccines is 330% higher than the number of deaths due to all other Vaccines combined in the last 20 years.

The Expose recently did a deep dive into the issue of sorting signal from noise in UK government all cause mortality figures. It's long and complex so I leave the link here - but their take away is:

All Cause Mortality has not dropped to 58% of the 5 year average. No. It has risen to be around 15% greater than that average. The Age Standardised Mortality Rate produces a work of bureaucratic fiction by a factor of around 2 – so desperate are the government to cover up the true picture for Covid, which is that the vaccinated are presently raising all cause mortality in the UK by 15%. And since they make up 80% of the population, their true age independent death rate will need to be 19% above that of the unvaxxed in order to achieve that.

What this means is that for every person the vaccines are saving from covid, they are killing 1.19 people from side effects.

Last year at this time all cause mortality was also elevated above the 5 year average due to significant numbers of covid deaths from Wuhan alhpa. This year we have just as many cases, but many fewer deaths, thank God. Because delta, although more infectious, is less lethal. So the elevation is not due to delta. It must be due to the vaccines.

 

[Michael B-C]

Er, the doctor is from Nelson BC, which may explain a lot, at least for people who have been there and interacted with the community. Heck, with a diagnosis like that, his patients might actually get vaccine exemptions granted, religious or otherwise or, they will be willing candidates for Pfizers new AGW-vaccine trail, unless they are already part of it.

Doctor:


This doctor will receive a lot of local praise, there is no doubt, and his practice may bloom in growth by people wanting the same diagnosis. Perhaps, too, this will find its way into medial journals, like JAMA has already asked for papers to be submitted.

Nelson is one of the lotus blossoms of the AGW Climate Change movement, and they need good doctors to help fix the problems.

As Kit said:

All laughs aside, I think Kit does a very good job of raising genuinely valid concerns as to where this is heading. As we know climate lock downs were first mooted as a serious option back in 2020 and the ground has been quietly prepared ever since. When he writes the following scenarios:

They are already discussing “climate-related” mental health issues such as stress, anxiety and depression. These could easily become further types of “climate-related diagnoses” too.

Now, allow me to speculate for a few paragraphs…

The practice of “climate-related diagnosis” is likely going to expand. When questions about the science behind this are raised by sceptics, they will naturally be accused of “climate denial”.

Opinion pieces will appear torturing reason to defend the practice of diagnosing “climate illness”. So-called journalists, or mercenary experts in made-up fields like “climate ethics”, will crochet strands of reason into positions so full of holes they barely exist.

We’ll be told that even if the practice is technically inaccurate, it’s serving a greater truth. That people might not literally be sick due to climate change, but we are all figuratively dying of it.

“Covid has shown us people only do what’s right when they’re scared: We need to make them feel climate fear.”

“Climate change diagnoses are on the rise. And that’s a good thing.”

“Healthcare workers take stand on climate with new diagnosis trend.”

“NHS workers saved us from Covid, and now want to take on climate.”

…you don’t have to read the Guardian as much as I have to feel those headlines, or ones very like them, in our future.

Then the deaths can start happening. Covid has demonstrated that you can create a “mass casualty” scare by essentially just adding an extra line on a death certificate. They can do that for climate too. The headlines will carry on…

“Physicians see spike in “climate deaths” as people suddenly feel the consequences of inaction”

I sit up and say 'spoiler alert!'

 

[stellar]

I hesitate to post this here - in fact it could have gone on half a dozen other threads and still made non-sense - and maybe baked noodles is its real home. But sadly this is probably quite serious and lives here because its yet another sign that COVID has taken us into full blown clown world where up is down and down is cuckoo...

Circa 9th November 2021, the world's first person has been officially, medically diagnosed as suffering from Climate Change...

The first “climate change” diagnosis is here. It will not be the last.​

Good grief. It's like listening to one of my grandkids tell a fib about what happened at the park and then making more stuff up to make it more sensational and gripping. All I can do, is laugh, really.