I'm embeding a video that you can listen to without watching. You're probably COVID'd out and don't want to hear about it, but you need to understand what is actually going on. What the actual science is and what these people have in store for you. I want to highlight some text because it's THAT important:
now i want to close this podcast with this
the so-called standard of care right now
is to tell you to sit at home
until and unless you have shortness of
breath basically
take tylenol and relax cool your jets
let your body fight it off folks
as i pointed out very early in this in
in this disease in march
by the time you get to the point that
your oxygen saturation starts to fall
you're in a lot of trouble
not a little trouble a lot of trouble
the average human being has somewhere
between six and ten times
the pulmonary and cardiac capacity that
they require to sit around
and be you know quietly amused recording
a podcast like this or
cooking dinner or laying in bed
or watching television
an athlete may have 20 or more times
that capacity
to tell somebody to allow a virus to
destroy
70 80 90
of your pulmonary capacity before you
attempt to
treat it is criminally insane
especially when we have interventions
that are very low risk
and we know work
The Ghost has been telling people what to do to prevent the bad effects of the infection (anti-inflamatory foods and drinks), The Ghost been told people to take Zinc and Quercetin if you think you've been infected. Heck take Zinc anyway. The Ghost provided you with the proof of how and why HCQ and Quercetin work with Zinc.
So the new mantra is that 95% mask usage in the US would prevent 70k "preventable or unnecessary deaths" presumably through Dec 1. Never mind that many predictions have failed to come to fruition and that we have an example of a country with no mask mandate (though people may use one) that is seeing no such pattern.
But one of the problems I've had with the Wuhan outbreak is how there is so much information out there about it, that everyone and anyone can make proclamations that take root in a lot of peoples minds who are generally speaking numerically illiterate. And so to them seeing 70K seems like a large number.
I remember back in my video production days when a person I was working with discussed something told to them about how people who have never had a million dollars thinks it's a lot of money but to a billionaire a million is not that much at all. That is the larger the sums you're used to seeing, the less impressed you are by smaller sums. A lot of people think that 170k dead means they are going to see ambulances loudly arriving in their neighborhood on a daily basis. It only slowly dawns on them when they see their neighbor day after day after day (maskless no less) that perhaps they have been sold on a lie.
So lets take a look at deaths in America so we can have some perspective.
There are 330 million people in America. 330,000,000.
There are 50 states in America plus the territory of Puerto Rico and Guam that are considered US citizens so we'll include them If we divide 2.8 million (2,800,000) by 52 we get 53,800deaths per state and territory.
Now if we divide the deaths per state+territory by the number of days in a year (365) then we get 147 deaths per day, per state.
Below is the Worldometer CV data for yesterday (8-28) arranged by deaths (highest to lowest) for the top 16.
You'll notice that with the exception of California, the daily deaths from the Wuhan virus is 3% of the expected daily total deaths which is an average. Only California has a death rate that is 2/3 its expected daily death number.
On a side note the differences in recovered between Texas and Florida is quite striking. Texas either has bad numbers or is doing something very different from Florida. I like to look at recovery rates because it tells a lot about treatments. I think some journalist (not the fake news people) should look into the states with high recovery rates and see what they are doing differently or what's different about their population. I think that would be more useful than pushing narratives based on fear and control.
So if we look at the 70k that supposedly would be "saved" by 95% mask usage, we can calculate that it would be, again as an average 1346 per state. If we spread that out over the last 4 months of the year that's 336 people per day. But that's not really possible is it? If each day over the year we lose 147 people, how can we be saving 336? Particularly when current death rates outside of California and Florida only account for 3% of expected daily deaths?
One of the assumptions is that Wuhan deaths are above and beyond the deaths that are expected for a given day. Yet we know that since people are in lock downs that deaths in auto accidents are way down. Perhaps other forms of accidental deaths are down due to people not being out and about. It is entirely plausible that at this point in time that Wuhan deaths are instead of other deaths. Another example is the reported drop in premature births. We know that stressed out pregnant women have more difficulties with pregnancy. With women not at work (or commuting and the stress involved with that), they have less stress and hence better pregnancy outcomes. So I'm not convinced of the "in addition to" argument. perhaps back in March but certainly not now.
So we don't know what's going to happen when the weather changes and influenza season returns. Certainly heightened attention to hygiene will bring down influenza infections (as seen in South America) but if we don't see spikes in NY and Sweden (benchmarks due to early high rates of cases and deaths and divergent policies) then we'll know that herd immunity (or saturation) is indeed possible and policies of hiding from the virus are counter-productive from a public health standpoint but quite economically productive for certain corporations that are making a LOT of money due to the sidelining of their competition and pharmaceutical companies who stand to make large sums off a "vaccine" that no doubt government agents will do everything they can to make mandatory, including extortion (no stick, no pay, no travel).
Understand that if enough governments mandate the "vaccine" even if "free" to the client, that these companies stand to make billions. There are 7 billion people on Earth. If 2 billion come under a "vaccine" mandate" and the price is 1 dollar, that's 2 billion per "vaccination cycle" (since we don't know how long supposed immunity lasts). You don't think these companies will not lobby governments to get 2 billion? What about 10x that with a $10/dose cost? You don't think so?
Sweden had 91,972 deaths last year. It has a population of 10 million. If we divide there deaths by 365 we get 251 per day. As of yesterday (8-28-2020) Sweden had 5 Wuhan deaths.
Again, that 5 represents 2% of their total average daily deaths. No masks. No lockdowns. It is high time the people start demanding these experts explain these numbers and the national panic they have created with their "mandates" and the like.
While various NBA player act a fool in their bubble about how scared they are in America, there are others who have real deal scary situations who would gladly take their places.
Remember when Obama went into Libya for "humanitarian" reasons? Remember how after Ghaddafi was killed that Clinton said: "we came, we saw, he died"? Yeah, so let's watch this documentary and see what our first black US president and the 2016 runner up unleashed on "black lives". Remember that like Ghaddafi or not, he kept a lid on the stuff you're going to see.
Oh yeah, and those European "humanitarians" who are "rescuing" the seafaring migrants? They are human traffickers. Oh yeah, they use high sounding terms and phrases but the video below shows clearly that they are in fact traffickers. Their continued "humanitarian" actions only provide "hope" for those trying to make or who consider making the trip since they know that once the white people show up, they can evade the Libyan authorities.
I"ve posted a lot about how the Wuhan virus is being used to control and manipulate the population. I've shown with data you can read yourself that there are effective treatments (if given early enough). I've shown that lockdowns and mask mandates were absolutely unnecessary to end the pandemic (see Sweden) as long as we understand that yes, people will die. I showed you what co-morbidities are likely to cause Wuhan complications.
But I'm not a doctor. Why should you believe what I write? First, I don't ask any of you to believe what I say. I ask you to follow the links and read the papers for yourself. So in that vein here is a doctor in Spain (which was hard hit) discussing the situation at the hospital where he works and the conditions seen by other Spanish medical professionals are seeing.
So, in my free time I like to leave BBC America on the telly. Often they run nature programs that I find informative. One episode featured a bird that made its nests on sheer face cliffs near the sea. Like other birds the parents would fly out to sea (or wherever) and get food and bring back to feed it's young.
Eventually the parents get tired of doing that and insist that their children learn to fly and get their own food. I'm kidding about the "get tired" part, but I assume it's a part of their nature to determine that at some point the chicks need to step up and learn to be independent.
So the parents stop providing food in hopes the hunger would motivate the chicks to jump out the nest and fly to sea. Some chicks are too shook and eventually the parents push them off.
Now, there are a few deadly dangers facing the chicks. Between the cliffs and the sea are foxes (and perhaps other predators) that are looking to eat chicks who don't make it to sea. Still the chicks MUST leave the nest if they are to survive. Staying on the cliff, in the nest is guaranteed death by starvation.
So off the chicks fly. Most of them make it but a number of them fall short and are eaten by the waiting foxes.
The obvious lesson here being that the nest may be safe from the obvious dangers OUTSIDE the nest, but in the long run the nest is certain death. In contrast learning to fly and going out to live on their own, has some mortal risks that WILL befall some, but the vast majority will make it and survive and live.
What if the parent birds refused to allow their chicks to leave the nest until there was a guarantee that foxes would not endanger their chicks? certain death for the chicks and eventual extinction of the colony.
"Our" reaction to the current SARS outbreak is like the bird that refuses to let the chicks out the nest. We are trapped by people who are emotionally able to deal with the fact that people die, some unfortunately from various diseases. They think that they have the right and obligation to force us to "stay in the nest" with lockdowns and closures of schools because "someone might die".
No someone WILL die. 99% of us will be fine (get sick and recover or simply not be affected).
They would be like a metaphorical bird seeing a chick fail to make it to sea and decided that they'll stay on the cliff, while paying no attention too all their comrades that are living it up on the water.
"They are taking too many risks!!!"
So now a lot of schools are opening and shock of shock, cases are spiking and the emotionally unstable leadership have quickly shut the schools back down. This is the "case-demic. As the Swedish leadership said, once the lockdowns are ended, cases will return. New Zealand is an example of this.
But the important thing is how many are dying. How many are in ICU. Thus far these numbers are NOT up. If the cases are going up but the deaths are NOT going up, then the fact that young people, the least likely group to have serious complications from COVID, are getting infected is not something to be alarmed about.
Be like the bird on the cliff. See the danger. Acknowledge the danger. Modify where necessary. Fly.
I close with two relevant videos which should be of importance to those of you with school age children.
So I have posted a lot about the Wuhan Pack (HCQ+Zinc+antibiotic). Social media companies among others are hell bent on telling the public that these medicines and compounds are parts of "conspiracy theories" and "mis-information". Hospitals are firing doctors who speak out and governments are breaching the doctor patient relationship to dictate what the doctors can and cannot prescribe. So lets throw the gauntlet down and show once and for all that HCQ+Zinc is indeed helpful when used early.
That means, that we can take as much Zinc supplements as we like, and
yet that may never get into the cancer cells at the level required to
disrupt their normal function.
So what can we do, if we want to push more Zinc into the cancer cells and disrupt their function?
So we see that in the case of cancer patients Zinc is desirable to disrupting cancer. When you are sick (in this case with cancer) you want more Zinc in the cells. How do you do it?
Fortunately, there is a group of chemicals that are called Zinc ionophores (Ref.).
Those chemicals have the capability to bind and transport Zinc inside
the cancer cell, even if the Zinc transporters are down regulated in
cancer cells. Once inside the cancer cell at a level high enough, it has
the potential to stop cell functions, regardless of whether we speak
about e.g. prostate cancer, etc. with a low level of zinc or e.g. breast
cancer with a high level of zinc, prior to Zinc treatment. And the good
news is that Zinc ionophores are widely available, used to treat other
human problems, while they are also known for their anti cancer action –
even when not using Zinc supplementation. Yet, Zinc supplementation is
expected to enhance their action.
Say what?
There are things called Zinc Ionophores? Really? We knew this back in 2017 BEFORE the Wuhan virus? I see. And what? They are "widely available" and "used to treat other human problems". You don't say.
Disulfiram is one such Zinc ionophore drug, commonly used as an anti alcohol drug with a long track record of safety in humans (Ref.). As discussed in a previous article (see here) Chloroquine (Ref.)
and Clioquinole, both widely available drugs for oral or topical
admin., are also Zinc ionophores. Ethambutol, a drug used to treat
tuberculosis is also a Zinc ionophore (Ref.1, Ref.2).
I will mainly discuss Disulfiram in the following since its
effectivenss is already proven, but other Zn ionophores can be
considered as well.
Well did I just see Chloroquine?
The Ghost has recommended Quercetinas a substitute for HCQ due to the shameful politicking. Here's a paper on Zinc and Quercetin
Labile zinc, a tiny fraction of total intracellular zinc that is loosely
bound to proteins and easily interchangeable, modulates the activity of
numerous signaling and metabolic pathways. Dietary plant polyphenols
such as the flavonoids quercetin (QCT) and epigallocatechin-gallate act
as antioxidants and as signaling molecules. Remarkably, the activities
of numerous enzymes that are targeted by polyphenols are dependent on
zinc. We have previously shown that these polyphenols chelate zinc
cations and hypothesized that these flavonoids might be also acting as
zinc ionophores, transporting zinc cations through the plasma membrane.
Laymans terms: Quercetin is a Zinc Ionophore. That paper is from 2014. Are these researchers engaged in "conspiracy theories" and "mis-information"?
Back to the original paper:
For more than 50 years, zinc is known to be an essential trace element,
having a regulatory role in the immune system. Deficiency in zinc thus
compromises proper immune function, like it is observed in the elderly
population. Here mild zinc deficiency is a common condition, documented
by a decline of serum or plasma zinc levels with age. This leads to a
dysregulation mainly in the adaptive immunity that can result in an
increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, known as a status
called inflamm-aging. T cell activation as well as polarization of T
helper (Th) cells into their different subpopulations (Th1, Th2, Th17,
regulatory T cells (Treg)) is highly influenced by zinc homeostasis.
So here they are saying that Zinc deficiency compromises immune function. Who's at high risk for COVID? Those with compromised immune function. Who else is at risk for severe COVID? The elderly and the paper explains why. Notice the discussion of T-cells. It is only recently that the role of T-cells has been discussed (The Ghost posted on this already).
So lets review what the literature said back in 2017:Zincis important for immune function. When sick [with cancer] you want MORE Zinc in your cells. In order to get more Zinc in your cells you need a Zinc ionophore. Chloroquine is a Zinc Ionophore and thus is GOOD to get Zinc into the cell. HydroxyChloroquine is less dangerous than Chloroquine so it is a better choice. You can also use Quercetin as a Zinc ionophore.
All the above statements are true and supported by science known back in 2017 and 2014. What changed in March 2020 to negate this?
Ok. You're saying "but this is for cancer". Fair enough. Lets look at Zinc and actual viri.
Increasing the intracellular Zn(2+) concentration with zinc-ionophores
like pyrithione (PT) can efficiently impair the replication of a variety
of RNA viruses, including poliovirus and influenza virus. For some
viruses this effect has been attributed to interference with viral
polyprotein processing.
Say what?"intracellular" means "inside the cell". I'm not trying to be an ass just want to make sure we all understand what we're reading. Now are you ready for the kicker?
In this study we demonstrate that the combination of Zn(2+) and PT at low
concentrations (2 µM Zn(2+) and 2 µM PT) inhibits the replication of
SARS-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and equine arteritis virus (EAV) in cell
culture.
SARS what?
Oh the date on that paper was November 2014.
2014.
So lets recap again:
Those infected with a SARS-coronavirus would benefit from more Zinc in their cells (just like cancer patients). In order to get the Zinc into the cells you need a Zinc ionophore. Chloroquine, it's less dangerous relation, HydroxyChloroquine or Quercetin are Zinc ionophores. So giving a patient HCQ and extra Zinc allows Zinc into the cells where they "inhibit the replication of SARS-coronovirus".
So this is all known by the "authorities". So they know there is a process that can treat (lessen symptoms in those already sick, possibly prevent symptoms from appearing in those newly infected) The Wuhan virus and they are keeping this information from the public. Social media companies (not run by doctors) are actively censoring DOCTORS who know this information and use it to treat their patients. Hospitals actually firing doctors who speak on using this treatment to save the lives of their patients. All waiting for a Bill Gates paid for vaccine.
No, I am not late to this individual. No, Don't care that he is an orthodox Jew. After watching this, if you do not understand that there are people willing to let you die for political power and COVID money, then you are simply too far gone.
Also, since your doctor may be unwilling or unable to prescribe the protocol discussed you should purchase Quercetin (500mg) and Zinc (50mg) and keep at the ready if you have flu like symptoms and definitely if you lose your sense of taste or smell. The Ghost has his own stock so I'm not telling you to do anything I'm not doing.
You should also ask yourself why this guy hasn't been on every media outlet in the US.
It's lengthy but there is good, specific information stated plainly. Let it play on your commute home. Let it run while you cook dinner. It is worth your time.
Yesterday I laid out why the lockdowns needs to end. For months I've laid out what treatments work and when they are effective. I've shown that Wuhan was likely in the US longer than we thought. That it was absolutely the case that we had far more cases than anyone thought prior to the lockdowns.
I showed you the graphs and posted the videos of actual experts in the field showing how the virus actually affects different populations and why. At this point anyone pointing at "cases" is engaging in fear mongering. Children have the absolute lowest mortality rate for COVID. Not that they *cannot* get sick and die, but that the likelihood of that happening is possibly lower than getting a Royal Flush on a Video Poker machine. Ok That's an exaggeration, It's around the chances of a Full House (0.1441%
)
As of April 2, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic
has resulted in >890,000 cases and >45,000 deaths worldwide,
including 239,279 cases and 5,443 deaths in the United States (1,2). In the United States, 22% of the population is made up of infants, children, and adolescents aged <18 years (children) (3).
Data from China suggest that pediatric COVID-19 cases might be less
severe than cases in adults and that children might experience different
symptoms than do adults (4,5); however, disease
characteristics among pediatric patients in the United States have not
been described. Data from 149,760 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases in
the United States occurring during February 12–April 2, 2020 were
analyzed. Among 149,082 (99.6%) reported cases for which age was known,
2,572 (1.7%) were among children aged <18 years. Data were available
for a small proportion of patients on many important variables,
including symptoms (9.4%), underlying conditions (13%), and
hospitalization status (33%). Among those with available information,
73% of pediatric patients had symptoms of fever, cough, or shortness of
breath compared with 93% of adults aged 18–64 years during the same
period; 5.7% of all pediatric patients, or 20% of those for whom
hospitalization status was known, were hospitalized, lower than the
percentages hospitalized among all adults aged 18–64 years (10%) or
those with known hospitalization status (33%). Three deaths were
reported among the pediatric cases included in this analysis.
3 pediatric deaths out of 2,572 cases, is .116%
Point. One. One. Six.
And that's among those who became hospitalized which is always a very small percentage of those infected.
Why would any rational person write an article about the "significantly higher" rates among minority children when the risk to children is POINT ONE ONE SIX% of dying? Do you know that influenza is FAR more risky to children?
Goyal, a pediatric emergency medicine specialist, described the results
as "striking." "Understanding and addressing the root causes of these
disparities are needed to mitigate the spread of infection," the team
wrote.
No, actually we don't need to mitigate the spread. The data is already out there. It's going to spread. Get it over with and get it over with BEFORE the influenza season hits. What is "striking" is that with all the data out there we still have "medical professionals" who are STILL talking about mitigation.
This is racial fear mongering and it's unacceptable.
The team found that the inequities existed even after they adjusted for
age, sex and median family income. Inequalities could be in part due to
limited access to health care and resources, as well as bias and
discrimination, but the researchers said that further research is needed
to understand the cause.
This makes no sense. The Wuhan virus floats in the air and sticks on surfaces. That has nothing to do with "access to health care". Either you breath it in, or you touch an infected surface and then one of your orifices. There is no "bias" in how you get it. It's the "Luck of the draw". But people with racial agendas want you to believe that you got infected because you had "limited health care access".
Total BS.
You know what's bad for certain "minority" children? Being indoors during [peak] daylight hours. Dark skinned people in northern hemispheres are notoriously vitamin D deficient. We need to be outside 3x as long as pale skinned persons to make the same amount of vitamin D. You know what's a leading indicator that you're going to have a rough time with COVID? Vitamin D deficiency.
In an episode of Star Trek: Voyager there is a time ship that has been running around the Delta Quadrant offing planets, comets and entire populations in order to "fix" a "mistake" in history that resulted in the death of the captain's wife. He's been at it for years because no matter who he eliminates from history he cannot get his wife back. It turns out that the first time he used his time ship to eliminate an enemy, a crucial genetic component that gave his people immunity from a disease went missing. This in turn cost him his dear beloved. In the end, the only way to bring back his wife was to eliminate the future him AND his time ship.
One of the few lessons of this episode is that there are almost always unintended consequences of decisions. Sometimes those consequences are worse than the situation we sought to remedy. The other point, relevant here, is that sometimes we ARE the problem and our thinking we can "technologically" get ourselves out of a problem, IS the problem.
As the Last Poets said: The White Man has a God complex.
So lets understand WHY we got into lockdowns in the first place so we understand why we need to get out of it.
The Wuhan virus started in China. The Chinese freaked out. Why? China has a population of 1.4 billion people. China also has a lot of air pollution. Air pollution means that the Chinese people are susceptible to respiratory problems(1,2). Now since the Wuhan virus is a [mainly] respiratory disease that invokes and/or is "attracted" to inflammation, this put the Chinese people at a high risk of severe cases and deaths. In some cases the Wuhan virus had a 10% IFR. If the entire Chinese population got infected and 10% died you're talking 140 million dead people. That's about half the entire US population.
So in the face of a new disease that wasn't understood, China panicked. Due to the internet, this panic went worldwide as people started telling people in other parts of the world. But I'm getting ahead of myself.
Over the weekend I posted a video that mentioned that the Wuhan virus was seen in Brazil back in Nov 2019.
So we know that by the time the March lockdowns occurred, seeding of the rest of the world had been going on for at least four months.
In that time we saw China massively lock down a province. Then we saw Italy go ballistic with massive infections and deaths. What was it about Italy? Well turns out the epicenter in Italy, northern Italy was also an air pollution problem location They also have a massive amount of Chinese residents.
Back in January I knew something was afoot because I noticed a significant lack of Asians in casinos. Chinese love to gamble. Baccarat tables are usually packed with them. Attendance was way down. At that point I decided on an enhanced disinfectant protocol for my visits. I sanitized every station I used and changed visiting times to when there were less people around.
Once the virus became public knowledge I surmised that it had already been in the US for some time, that far more people had and are infected than the authorities knew and that most attempts to stop it would be fruitless. And this was before it was known to be in circulation in November (note: I was sick in Nov and believe I picked up whatever it was IN a casino).
Soon thereafter NY blew up in cases soon followed by NJ. I was completely not surprised by this. NYC alone receives half a million Chinese visitors per year. NYC alone got 13.5 million international visitors in 2018. In other words, the populations of some countries simply visits NYC. And that's ONE city on a CONTINENT.
So every time I see someone chattering about so and so country with a population less than the number of visitors to NYC, having "beat the virus", I know they are full of shit because there is no way to compare the US with any little island country. By the time Feb rolled around there were already hundreds of thousands of cases, the "contain it" ship had long sailed and disappeared over the horizon. They, being those in charge, just didn't realize it.
So cases piled up and people started dying. Indeed there was little information on how to treat those who got severe cases. This induced a panic mentality. Fair enough, it was early and information was limited. We didn't know that ventilators were essentially death machines. We didn't know that simple things like rolling patients onto their stomachs, helped. We didn't quite understand that the triggering issue for most of the severe cases was inflammation which affects ACE-2 and CD-146 expression. The latter being affected by diabetes and obesity the leading co-morbidity. We also did not know that severe vitamin D deficiency was a factor is nearly all severe cases of the Wuhan virus.
We also were in the early phases of learning that HCQ + Zinc-Sulphate + Antibiotic was an effective EARLY intervention, in the proper dosage. We also didn't know yet that certain inhaled steroids were effective as well.
So with a lot of deaths and little knowledge it certainly appeared that we could have a serious capacity problem. So states started locking down. I get that and actually supported that. What was the goal supposed to be?
We were told, and generally agreed to, that we need to "flatten the curve" Why? Because we needed to expand capacity to treat patients. It was NEVER about eliminating the virus or the spread thereof. It was controlling the capacity. Yes I'm repeating myself because you need to understand this. It was NOT about case elimination!!!!! I cannot stress this enough. a flattened curve only spreads out the cases and deaths.
The goal was to literally buy time (ended tax revenue for the time of lockdown) to expand capacity such as the use of the Javits in NYC, the Central Park hospital, etc. Once this capacity was created the lockdowns were supposed to be over. What happened?
Well a couple of things. Firstly, in the US the virus was politicized as a weapon against Trump. Early on Trump banned travel from China and was called racist. His mistake was also not banning flights from Italy and UK. I'm not going to clean that up for him. Then we had Pelosi in California at a Chinese New Year rally saying there was nothing to fear. In NYC they did the same thing. The only thing to fear, they said, was Trump's xenophobia. You won't hear any of THAT nonsense now and they would more than happy for you to forget that.
The second thing was the god complexes that many of the current leadership has. They liked that they could control so much via "emergency" orders. NJ governor Murphy famously said that the Constitution was "above his pay grade" on a national TV program. In other words, damn your rights, WE (the government) control.
In Michigan the governor went so far as to say you couldn't buy seeds.
Many of these people in leadership positions were also subject to guilt tripping. "You want to kill grandma!!" became the phrase of choice to those who wanted to impose all kinds of nonsense. This was closely followed by "you first" for anyone questioning the extended lockdowns. People who are susceptible to guilt tripping are bad leaders. Leadership often entails making very unpopular decisions. If one is constantly trying to be "popular" then clearly making such decisions is nigh impossible.
So the unpopular decision, particularly for the panic crowd was that once the capacity was created was to re-open the society completely. None of this half-assing. Cases would have gone up (as they are anyway) but the difference would have been that we know more now about mortality and treatments than we did back in Jan/Feb. Those who were sick should stay home (heck, let the government pay them to stay home). Anything other than an N95 mask is useless for those not sick and not in regular contact with sick persons. As a matter of fact I'll go out on a limb and say that if you've been in any enclosed space for hours while NOT wearing an N95 mask, you've probably ALREADY been infected and don't or didn't know it. This is particularly true of multi-family dwellings with central air.
Now I'm not saying NOT to wear a mask. I believe in individual liberty and the responsibility of the individual to protect themselves. If you feel that wearing a mask makes you feel safer for whatever reason, please do so. If you feel that hiding out in your house or apartment makes you feel safe, knock yourself out. If you feel that you're not safe in a mall, movie theatre, etc. 100% stay away from those places. Give people the information, not propaganda and let them do a risk assessment for themselves. Instead we have fear mongering. People getting into fights, killing people over mask wearing. We have various states deploying government agents wandering the streets looking to bankrupt citizens for simply walking around breathing the air no one owns into their body that the government has no power over.
Then you have the people that think that this is some kind of movie where in two shakes a vaccine is going to show up, 100% effective. These things rarely go that way. Worse, many of them say that things cannot go back to "normal" until there is a vaccine. Seriously? If this was an Ebola level virus I could understand this. I certainly would make MAJOR changes to my life if this was an Ebola level event. Yo, you do NOT want any parts of Ebola. The Wuhan virus is nowhere near as deadly. Things can go back to normal right now. The Wuhan virus is one with a current 3% global fatality rate. This means on a global scale you have a 97% chance of recovering from a COVID infection. Of the current active cases (per Worldometer) 99% of the current 6 million active cases are mild (sore throat, cough, low grade fever).
1% of current active cases are serious (pneumonia, high fever, blood clotting issues, etc). 1%. In other words, if you get infected right now, you're 99% likely to have no symptoms whatsoever to maybe a low fever. This is not something you shut down peoples lives and livelihoods for. And most certainly you don't wait for a vaccine.
So we have Sweden and New Zealand as two examples at polar ends of the debate (which we shouldn't even be having). New Zealand has claimed eradication. Fine. They also have locked themselves off from the rest of the world. It means that their population only has whatever natural immunity was present prior to the outbreak. So long as they are isolated, they remain susceptible to Wuhan and every and any other Corona viruses that comes out in the future. They may find themselves in the situation of the Star Trek character. Worse, those citizens may be unable to travel anywhere else in the world, lest they get sick. Also they may be subject to rolling lockdowns as sporadic cases arise from those arriving in New Zealand to deliver goods.
On the other end we have Sweden, Sweden did not do lockdowns. They did restrict groupings. Other than that, no mask mandates, no school closures (official), no locking citizens in their homes under penalty of law. They had a relatively large hill of deaths but are now down to zero and 2 deaths a day depending on the day.
And
The very fact that Sweden has achieved this without lockdowns undermines ANY argument in the US for continued lockdowns. The only reasons for lockdowns at this point is politics and power plays.
So again, the lockdowns need to stop. Now. The increased capacity should stay online heading into the fall mostly because we have already wasted over half the summer. What should have happened in May the latest, was a full reopening and go the Sweden route. since 99% of people will have mild symptoms and NOT DIE or have long term complications, let it run through the country during the warm weather months when Influenza is largely dormant. If the Sweden model holds, the cases and deaths would drop to near zero by late August and we could avoid a Influenza +COVID winter of 2020-2021. Right now we are on track for not only Influenza+ COVID but another lockdown come Nov-Dec. Don't say you weren't warned.
Now I'll get into the theorizing. I don't think what's going on is accidental. What do I mean? When 9-11 happened the powers that be saw an opportunity for a power grab and took it. The growth of state power after 9-11 was huge. Surveillance of everything you do on the internet, telephony, etc. No one says that what happened on 9-11 was fake or didn't happen. But there are those who saw those as opportunities to gain power while a panicked public was willing to go along. The Wuhan virus has a very similar profile. Yes the virus is real. Yes the risks of infection are real. But the response to it is unprecedented in opportunities for governments to exert more control and private to profit.
So remember back in May when Australia was considered the safest place [ever] in terms of Wuhan? No? Let me remind you:
"I think many people are surprised in Australia at how well we have done. Really, when you look across all the states and territories, this is the safest place to be in the world, perhaps other than New Zealand," she said...
"Safety has been our fundamental focus and the success of our suppression strategy has meant Australia is in a very similar (place) to New Zealand, which has stated its strategy is aimed at elimination."...
In the remote Northern Territory, where no new cases have been reported for three weeks, residents will be able to use public swimming pools, waterparks, go fishing with friends and play golf starting from Friday. The state has also laid out plans to restart its economy, allowing restaurants, pubs and gyms to reopen on May 15 and lifting the remaining restrictions on June 5.
Melbourne has entered Stage 4 coronavirus restrictions as of 6pm on Sunday night, the strictest level of lockdown yet in Australia.
Further restrictions will also be enforced on regional Victoria, including the Mitchell Shire, which will move to Stage 3 restrictions from Wednesday.
The restrictions will be in force for at least six weeks until 13 September.
Premier Daniel Andrews has also declared a State of Disaster across the state from 6pm tonight.
During these hours, the only reasons to be outside of your home are to give or receive care, or go to and from work.
Outside the curfew, people will only be allowed to leave the house for four reasons: purchase food and and necessary supplies, exercise, give or receive care, or work.
“Going to a mate's place, visiting friends, being out and about for no good reason, all that will do is spread this virus,” Mr Andrews said.
Additionally, residents will no longer be able to travel further than five kilometres from their home, unless the reason is to give or receive care.
Sweden said that the path it took, no hard lockdowns, was because they saw that those places that locked down were merely kicking the can down the road and would get hit again once they opened back up. Thus far their prediction is panning out.
Very informative video. This is the source of my Argentina post. Also of note here is a discussion on why diabetics and obese people are getting the short end of the COVID stick, which further explains the rates in the African-American population.
It's long so I suggest putting the audio up and doing other things while listening.
So I'm watching a video which I'll post later when I'm done but I had to share this part about Argentina. As you know I have hypothesized that everyone gets infected at some point. The vast majority will survive unscathed, a small percent will have serious reactions that will linger and an even smaller percent will die sooner rather than later (as in we all die, it's just a matter of when and how).
Of interest here is whether "lock downs" work. I have been against lock downs because of the huge disruption it causes. I think people should be free to make their own decisions based on their risk tolerance. I do think that the government should have spent the energy and time to acquire and setup extra facilities in case they were needed for patients, but that government lock downs were and are antithetical to a free society. But even further, history shows us that isolation is not a good idea. Recall that much of the eradication of the American native population was due to the fact that they had never been exposed to certain European, well better put, "Old world" diseases. Isolation can be deadly.
Lastly, if the virus was that contagious then going back to my original point, it's only a matter of time since all air circulates and there is no hiding from air. Also, while people can be cautious, eventually you slip up. Infect surface is touched, face is touched, and you're sick. Matter of fact, I had one of those yesterday when I accidentally poked myself in the eye. I suppose I'll know the effects of that in the next few days.
Anyway, so the argument has been that lockdowns prevented infections. Well lets look at Argentina:
Argentina has been under lockdown since March 20, though restrictions were previously relaxed in many parts of the country.
On July 17, Fernandez announced a plan for the country to gradually return to normal life in several stages. Outdoor recreation was permitted and shops, hair salons and some professional services re-opened earlier in Buenos Aires earlier in the month. The capital has one of the highest concentration of new cases, along with the province of Buenos Aires.
Most office buildings and restaurant dining rooms remain closed and public transportation is restricted for those without government permission.
Argentina is in the middle of it's winter. Exactly when respiratory viruses are most active. Now look, they've been on lock since March 20. It's now August 1. That's 4 months.
The South American nation has seen its caseload spike in recent weeks and recorded a record daily tally on Thursday with 6,377 new cases. There are now 185,373 confirmed cases and 3,466 deaths, according to the latest government data.
What a spike. If lock downs somehow "eradicate" the virus then this spike should never have happened. They relaxed some rules after 3 months of lock down and still. As a matter of fact Argentina has as more cases than 46 US states and had more new cases than every US state except Florida.
Sweden by the way (as of this writing), has reported, 80k total cases, no new deaths today and a total death count that is ~2/3 that of Argentina and Sweden had no official lockdown policy although the people did their own thing and did change behavior based on their own risk tolerance, like adults should be allowed to do).
If Sweden can have such a result with no hard lockdown while Argentina can have the result it did WITH a harsh lockdown, it is CLEAR that lockdowns have no effect on the eventual case and death rate other than to prolong and compound the misery.
