Sorry, wrong.
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) October 16, 2020
The state-by-state evidence from the United States (which as a single country is going to have far fewer confounders) shows that states with short or no lockdowns performed far better than those with harsh rules IRRESPECTIVE OF THE COURSE OF THE VIRUS... https://t.co/UbVTSRI7Jp
Friday, October 16, 2020
"states with short or no lockdowns performed far better than those with harsh rules IRRESPECTIVE OF THE COURSE OF THE VIRUS"
Danny Roddy & Georgi Dinkov in Q & A Session
You might enjoy this Q & A session with Danny Roddy and Georgi Dinkov, whom I'd never heard of before. Dinkov is extremely knowledgeable. I liked it. I liked a few topics he discussed. One was pyruvate for cancer. A woman took only Pyruvate to cure her Stage 4 cancer. I guess judgment on it is still out.
I liked how QuaxPodcast introduces him,
Georgi Dinkov is a computer scientist with a passion for biochemistry and the ideas of Ray Peat. He has read thousands of studies and opened his own successful online supplement store. No one knows biochemistry and metabolism quite like Georgi. We celebrate our 50th episode with an extra-long, nutrition-packed interview for your pleasure.
In this episode, he shares results from studies that he himself has funded in defiance of the established medical research field.
He talks about cancer, the breakdown of trust in science, dental health, Michael Phelps, Methylene Blue, Testosterone, and more.
Interesting to learn that he has his own supplement store.
I'd never heard of Methylene Blue before. So what exactly is it, and what are its benefits? First, it's a dye. It's first use as a therapeutic was to treat malaria. The benefits are provided by News-Medical.net,
Methylene blue is an electron carrier, which allows it to function against malaria and methemoglobinemia and is highly beneficial in cytotoxic situations in the brain as it encourages cellular oxygen consumption and decreases anaerobic glycolysis.
In effect, it's protective against stroke. I like it.
Thursday, October 15, 2020
"THEY'VE DECLARED AN EMERGENCY DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY HAD NO REASON TO"
What an insidious hoax. Peggy Hall illuminates the crimes of the states,
So they may be misrepresenting the science. They may be misrepresenting the numbers, and they certainly are misrepresenting in California the fact that, because it's very well-defined in California, an emergency can only be declared when the threat of the event potentially overwhelms the resources available--the personnel, and then the infrastructure. The fact that the hospitals are shutting down, the fact that healthcare workers are being laid off, okay, that's not my opinion. And if I were to go into a court of law, I would say, okay, here's the evidence. These hospitals have closed. These healthcare workers have been laid off. We have stockpiles of gowns and PPE, Personal Protective Equipment. That was another element that the governors highlighted to say, "Here's evidence for an emergency that we don't have the resources."
Peggy Hall of The Healthy American interviews Ohio lawyer, Thomas Renz, who is bringing a lawsuit against Ohio's Republican Governor, Mike DeWine. Here is a PDF of the suit, filed on behalf of a citizens group, called Ohio Stands Up!
About Thomas Renz, this was posted at the site, Make Americans Free Again,
Mr. Renz’s experience with the law began with his mentor, Nuremburg Prosecutor and celebrated international lawyer and scholar, Henry T. King, Jr.
A shortlist of other accomplishments include: being the only American to ever serve as clerk for the Honorable Justice Tarun Chatterjee of the Supreme Court of India, winning the national Trailblazer Award for Political Action, assisting in advocating for numerous state and national legislative and regulatory reforms, and many more. – From Renz Law
9:54 1300 public health officials who signed
letters that said racism is a greater public health risk than COVID.
Can’t use a health
emergency to suspend the constitution.
10:37 An emergency doesn’t
expand constitutional rights, nor does it decrease them. The rights remain the same.
This case is about
ensuring that we have those rights.
12:15 “Discovery” is a critical part of this
case.
12:25 We’re going to ask for the data, the real
data, not your translation of the data but the real data, and we’re going to
try and make it as public as possible. With
that, the next guy can file this case, then the next guy and the next guy . . .
. once we get done, you can find out
whether or not if we did it right. If we
win it, we did it right, great. If we
made a mistake, you can find out where.
But you know what, all the data and effort that we put in won’t be for
naught. The data is there, so even if I am
not the greatest attorney in the world and I blow it somewhere, the next guy
can pick up where we left and we left a heck of a foundation for them.
A San Diego law firm has filed a federal lawsuit against Dr. Wilma Wooten over her face covering mandate.
Arete Law A.P.C. filed the lawsuit against San Diego County Public Health Officer Dr. Wilma Wooten, Nick Macchione, and Helen Robbins-Meyer, alleging that the requirement to wear a facial covering when in public violates both U.S and California Constitutional rights.
15:20 All of our data came from the CDC and the ODH, or Ohio Dept. of Health. We didn't make any of it up. We posed a very valid question. If we're right, and we think we are, people's rights are being very much abridged. The process is set by the courts and the attorneys. The judge did indicate that he's interested in seeing this done. That's a good thing. He seems interested in seeing justice served. We have an opportunity to do it and it will set a precedent that can be used in other cases. Tom adds that at the heart of the suit is the question, "When can you declare an emergency?" He points out that "They've declared an emergency despite the fact that they had no reason to."
17:47 It's very clear to anyone in Emergency Management, whether you are an Emergency Room doctor or nurse, whether you have worked for the fire department, the police department, it's called EMT. There are Emergency Management courses you can take. I learned that there's a pre-emergency phase. In California, we're prone to earthquakes, there's Earthquake Management, Emergency Management, and all of that. You can actually become part of an Emergency Management Response Team in your city or county, and you go through training, and they tell you how to prepare for that earthquake, that flood, that disease, that outbreak. Then you've got the actual emergency. When the emergency hits, you go through all of your preassigned structures and roles, and so forth. Then there's something called the Recovery Phase. You're no longer in the emergency phase: the earthquake is over, the floodwaters have subsided, the fires have stopped burning, the chemical spill has been cleaned up. It's called Recovery. And then you have something called Mitigation. Mitigation is where you look to see what went well, how we can improve on, and how we can plan next time. Any 3rd Grader can tell you we are in the Recovery and Mitigation phases because there is no emergency. The reason why they're declaring the emergency is because it is fraud. It is fraud to get money . . . or to have gained when you've misrepresented the information. So they may be misrepresenting the science. They may be misrepresenting the numbers, and they certainly are misrepresenting in California the fact that, because it's very well-defined in California, an emergency can only be declared when the threat of the event potentially overwhelms the resources available--the personnel, and then the infrastructure. The fact that the hospitals are shutting down, the fact that healthcare workers are being laid off, okay, that's not my opinion. And if I were to go into a court of law, I would say, okay, here's the evidence. These hospitals have closed. These healthcare workers have been laid off. We have stockpiles of gowns and PPE, Personal Protective Equipment. That was another element that the governors highlighted to say, "Here's evidence for an emergency that we don't have the resources." We have abundant resources. Therefore, as I say, a third-grader could tell us there's no emergency. The governors themselves have said there's no emergency. Why? Because they all have their reopening guidelines. In California, they call it "Roadmap to Resiliency." The governor's own words are a de facto declaration of an end to the emergency. However, the counties and the cities--the state has kicked the can down the road. In California, the governor has realized that we-the-people are onto him, so he's reissued press releases because they're not official orders, press releases that say, "Oh, we would like it if you would comply. We hope that you'll be a good citizen and do this." These are not orders. So now the counties have issued health orders in terms of distancing and quarantine and all of that, but they also have very loose parameters. Then the cities have issued emergency ordinances that at least in California are completely unlawful because they violate the California Constitution and the U.S. Constitution, and then the can gets kicked down the road all the way to the store and the businesses who've now become, as the phrase goes, the strong arm of the law. The strong arm of the law means they have no legal authority or law enforcement authority to require you to do these [mitigation] measures but they are so oppressive and so belligerent in their outlooks and attitudes, they're so militant, they're so blatantly breaking the law. So I want to talk about this structure, so we get rid of the governor's emergency, what is that going to look like down the line, what other remedies can we take, and then you and I can talk about our plan for the corporate approach.
23:05 The governors know they're breaking the law. They know it's unconstitutional. They know it's nonsense. So they're trying to distribute what they're doing. They're trying to make it a multi-headed animal that no matter where you go you're getting nipped at. One of the things that we challenge in our suit is the declaration of the emergency and the science itself. If it's not justified at the state level, it's certainly not going to be justified at any other level. How do you declare there's an emergency when there's no science or data to back it? And if the CDC doesn't back it, and arguably the states don't back it, what do you have in the city that allows you to do that?
Wednesday, October 14, 2020
"CANCER SCREENING SERVICES HAVE STOPPED, WHICH MEANS WE WILL MISS OUR CHANCE TO CATCH MANY CANCERS WHEN THEY ARE TREATABLE"
The number of deaths due to disruption of services is likely to outweigh the number of deaths due to COVID because of the diversion of resources into COVID, says Richard Sullivan of Kings College, London. The cessation and delay of cancer care will cause considerable avoidable suffering. Cancer screening services have stopped, which means we will miss our chance to catch many cancers when they are treatable and curable, such as cervical, bowel, and breast. When we do restart normal service delivery after the lockdown has lifted the backlog of cases will be a huge challenge to the healthcare system.
We read, October 6, in the Daily Mail coming out of the UK, "Health Secretary, Matt Hancock says, "Cancer patients may only be guaranteed treatment if COVID-19 stays under control."
Almost 2.5 million people missed out on cancer screenings, referrals, or treatment at the height of lockdown even though the NHS was never overwhelmed." They have the honesty in the UK to say that. Experts now fear the number of people dying as a result of the delays triggered by the treatment of Coronavirus patients could end up being responsible for as many deaths as the pandemic itself." Now we won't see that kind of effect right away. But it does mean that people who might have lived 15 to 20 years may live just another 3 or 4.
United Nations reported in April 2020, saying that "Economic hardships generated by the radical interruptions of commerce could result in hundreds of thousands additional child deaths in 2020." UNICEF later increased that number to 1.2 million child deaths. At Oxford University, Professor Sunetra Gupta has reminded us several times of the UN's predictions, that as many as 130 million people could be at risk of starvation because of the lockdown because of the possibility of famine in several dozen places around the globe.
Now, who are the ones who don't care about human life?
And that's not all. In Oakland, California we have Benjamin Miller of the Well Being Trust, as co-author on a study of death and despair, that's drug abuse or alcohol abuse or suicide, that an excess of 75,000 deaths would occur, that is above what would normally occur.
The CDC itself estimates that in the United States alone there will be 93,000 excess, non-COVID deaths this year because of what's going on, including over 42,000 from cardiovascular conditions, over 10,000 from diabetes, and 3,600 from cancer.
A recent UK study found that the risk of death because of C-19 lockdowns increased 53% among seniors with dementia and another 123% among seniors with severe mental illness.
For four decades, Indian Nobel Peace Laureate, Kailash Satyarthi rescued thousands of children from slavery and human trafficking and he fears that that's going to be reversed.
For options on treating cancer, start here.
"SOME OF THE MOST SINFUL, EGREGIOUS EPIC FAILURES IN THE HISTORY OF PUBLIC POLICY"
Dr. Atlas on #Lockdowns:
— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) October 14, 2020
History will record the faces of public health expertise, as some of the most sinful, egregious epic failures in the history of public policy. They have killed people, with their lack of understanding. The policy itself is a crime against humanity. pic.twitter.com/nhmmmVOqNX
UPDATE: FRIDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2020
I received the following email today from Dr. Tom Woods, who summarizes the Ingraham's interview with Dr. Scott Atlas.
Every now and then, something I see on Twitter makes me want to stand up and cheer, as opposed to committing an atrocity.
An example from yesterday:
Someone shared a clip of Dr. Scott Atlas, adviser to the White House on COVID-19, on Laura Ingraham's show.
Oh, was it good.
It began with Ingraham asking if Atlas thought Biden would lock America down again if "cases" began to rise in January.
Atlas replied:
"Anyone who's talking about doing another lockdown has really not been paying attention for the last seven months and is simply out of touch with average Americans.... The prolonged lockdowns are a complete disaster. They're a complete disaster for missed health care; they're a complete disaster for average working families and particularly for people who are working class and lower-income people.
"People have been killed by people who want to have prolonged lockdowns. And when I say 'killed,' I look at the data. And that means, for instance: this week it was shown that forty-six percent of the most common types of cancers were not diagnosed during the lockdown. Those cancers didn't disappear. They're there. People will present with much later, more widespread disease."
Half the people who have chemotherapy appointments didn’t show up: that’s 650,000 Americans. Half the people who had immunizations for children didn’t come in for fear by our so-called public health experts.
Some 650,000 Americans missed important cancer treatment, Atlas added, thanks to "the fear instilled by our so-called public health experts. You could go on and on: 40 percent of people with acute strokes."
When you close schools, schools alone, we had more than 200,000 cases of child abuse not reported during the two months of spring school closures.
After mentioning the statistic that I've shared with you, that an astonishing 25.5 percent of people between 18 and 24 contemplated suicide in the month of June alone, Atlas concluded: "It's just completely off the rails."
"And it's much worse—not for the elites who are sipping lattes working for a tech company where I live, in Silicon Valley—for people who are average, working-class Americans, they are destroyed by prolonged lockdowns."
And then, in direct response to a question about Dr. Fauci:
“History will record the faces of the public health expertise as some of the most sinful, egregious, epic failures in the history of public policy. They have killed people with their lack of understanding and their lack of caring about not just the impact of cases of COVID-19, a virus that the overwhelming majority of people do well in. They never cared to considered the impact of the policy itself, and the policy itself has been a complete epic failure, and honestly some people say a crime against humanity — these people should be held accountable for what they did."
Darn right.
Meanwhile:
This week I went to see a play, at the Garden Theatre in Winter Garden, Florida.
That's right: in the midst of all this, there were people rehearsing a play.
There are still some of us who intend to live.
It would be one thing if the authorities didn't constantly move the goalposts. But we can't get straight answers out of them, and places keep getting locked down because of meaningless "cases."
With people like this, how do we know if we can ever truly live again?
Why would we sit around and wait, when the people in charge have repeatedly shown themselves to be quacks and charlatans -- and deadly ones, to boot?
So yes, some of us are just going to go ahead and do it.
If that sounds appealing to you, you're very much a fit for the Tom Woods Show Elite, where smart dissident voices congregate.
Who knows how many tens or even hundreds of millions of deranged lunatics are out there.
Whatever the number, time to get yourself to a haven away from them:
http://www.SupportingListeners.com
Tom Woods
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)