Donald Trump Says The Coronavirus Was “Artificially Induced”

April 8, 2020

In Brief

The Facts:Donald Trump, in a recent press conference, referred to the new coronavirus as "artificially induced."
Reflect On:Why is it so hard to get to the bottom of the coronavirus? Why are so many opinions being
censored and labelled as "false?" Why has freedom of opinion and discussion been shut down so much? Should we not be free to have open discussions?

Special Note To Our Readers: We are concerned that our Facebook Page will be deleted, so we are encouraging all those who want to continue to receive and be able to find our content to sign up for our email list.

You can also join our Telegram account here as we move away from Facebook.

In a recent press conference, Donald Trump stated that the coronavirus was an “artificially induced” virus. You can view a clip of him saying it, here. Obviously, his comments are open to interpretation, and we’ve seen nothing but the ridicule of Donald Trump from mainstream media news sources since he took office. As a result, it’s hard for many people who tune in to these networks and use them as regular sources of information to take anything that he says seriously, at all. But Trump is not alone in his thoughts, that being said, again, it’s hard to really know exactly what he meant. This does not mean that we “support” Trump. In fact, the entire idea that someone who we supposedly elect can make any significant change on this planet is odd. We seem to put our power and faith into one person instead of realizing that we, humanity, ourselves, together, as one are the real solution. Electing and looking to one person for change seems to take the power away from ourselves, and place it into another.

Earlier on in the pandemic, Trump referred to the virus as a “hoax.” I thought when he stated that he meant it was created and released, intelligently, for multiple purposes. The media took his statements as him implying that the virus itself is not real, and that there is no issue. He then explained that he meant that certain people are simply trying to politicize the issue, and use the crises to their advantage. Specifically, the Democrats.

When it comes to the new coronavirus, we are seeing a massive censorship of opinion. Dr. Ron Paul, for example, had his opinion article on the coronavirus flagged as “fake news.” When I saw this, I was curious as to how someone’s opinion can be ‘fake’ at all? In his article, he was encouraging people to ask themselves whether this coronavirus “pandemic” could be a big hoax, with regards to the actual danger of the disease massively exaggerated by those who seek to profit – financially or politically – from the ensuing panic. He emphasized his statements were not to say the disease is harmless. “Without question people will die from coronavirus. Those in vulnerable categories should take precautions to limit their risk of exposure. But we have seen this movie before. Government over-hypes a threat as an excuse to grab more of our freedoms. When the “threat” is over, however, they never give us our freedoms back.”(source)

Another opinion that’s been making its way around the internet has also been flagged as ‘fake news,’ and it comes from Dr. Francis Boyle, a law professor at the University of Illinois College of Law, who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act and serves as counsel to Bosnia and Herzegovina and to the Provisional Government of the Palestinian Authority.

advertisement - learn more

He shared his belief that the coronavirus is an offensive biological warfare weapon that leaked, be it deliberately or not.

Mainstream media quickly picked up on this narrative and also deemed it a conspiracy theory.

But there are some oddities to take note of, for sure. And one seems to be that many in the scientific/medical community are pointing out their confusion with regards to the measures that are being put into place as a result of the new coronavirus.

A paper recently published in The International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents titled “SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data claims “that the problem of SARS-CoV-2 is probably being overestimated.” (source) John P. A. Ioannidis, a professor of medicine and epidemiology at Stanford, recently published an article entitled “A fiasco in the making? As the coronavirus pandemic takes hold, we are making decisions without reliable data” that emphasizes the same, and Dr. Eran Bendavid and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, two professors of medicine at Stanford University recently published an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal titled, “Is the coronavirus as deadly as they say?” Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, a specialist in microbiology and one of the most cited research scientists in German history who refers to the measures being taken governments around the world as “Draconian.” You can read more about that and watch what he has to say about the new coronavirus, here.

Furthermore, the opinion that coronavirus deaths are actually being miscalculated which is inaccurately driving up, and perhaps skyrocketing death rate is also being shared around the internet quite a bit.

For example, take a look at the tweet below from Brit Hume, an American journalist and political commentator currently working for the Fox News Channel.

Another recent tweet from Candace Owens.

Prior to this tweet, she posted stated, “Apparently, doctors and nurses around the world are wondering why no one is dying from heart attacks and strokes anymore. Flu and pneumonia deaths also went off a cliff. Turns out everyone is only dying of #Coronavirus now. Gee. I wonder why” and linked an article from the New York times discussing the fact that deaths from other diseases have suddenly dropped.

But is there any legit evidence of what these people are implying? Professor Walter Ricciardi, an advisor to the Italian Health Ministry, stated that “The way in which we code deaths in our country is very generous in the sense that all the people who die … with the coronavirus are deemed to be dying of the coronavirus,” he has said. “On re-evaluation by the National Institute of Health, only 12 percent of death certificates have shown a direct causality from coronavirus, while 88 percent of patients who have died have at least one pre-morbidity—many had two or three” Pre-morbidity refers to having serious health issues prior to the onset of a disease. (source)

According to another study out of Italy, 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities that were examined specifically for this study were people who suffered from previous medical conditions. More than 75% had high blood pressure, about 35% had diabetes and a third suffered from heart disease. The study provides inside as to why their death rate may be much higher compared to other countries.

An article recently published by the Financial Times points out,

In the UK, about 150,000 people die every year between January and March. To date, the vast majority of those who have died from COVID-19 in Britain have been aged 70 or older or had serious pre-existing health conditions. What is not clear is how many of those deaths would have occurred anyway if the patients had not contracted COVID-19. Speaking at a parliamentary hearing last week, Professor Neil Ferguson, director of the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis at Imperial College London, said it was not yet clear how many “excess deaths” caused by coronavirus there would be in the UK. However, he said the proportion of COVID-19 victims who would have died anyway could be “as many as half or two-thirds”.

I go deeper into that specific discussion in this article article if you’re interested in dividing deep into that narrative: Coronavirus Deaths May Be Miscalculated.

So, as you can see, there may be something here and it should be OK for people and media outlets to have these discussions and share information and opinions without getting censored and flagged as fake news and punished. The idea that ‘fact checkers’ are censoring the opinions and narratives of some in order to protect a dominant narrative in itself raises red flags.

There are many questions and theories going around about what’s going on here, and granted, some of them are indeed conspiracies, but others may not be and are simply being labelled as such.
Treatment is a great example, all we seem to be hearing about is a vaccine when other promising developments seem to be having some success, according to some.

As far as its origin and whether or not it is indeed “artificially induced” for ulterior motives as Trump says, I personally would not be surprised, at all. In fact, this was one of my first thoughts when news broke out about it. It’s sad that it’s gotten to the point where so many people can no longer rely on their governments nor their federal health regulatory agencies for accurate information, but at the same time, it’s quite glorious, because people are waking up.

Templeton Times

Fluoride Information

Thursday, April 9, 2020