This is a big one.
How do experts tell the story of the origin of the China epidemic?
The story is always important. The medical professionals need to make it sound credible.
If it has major flaws, it's as if a stage magician screws up a trick in
full view of the audience. As he's sawing a woman in a box in half,
everyone sees her sneaking out of the back of the box. Busted.
That's what's happening in the case of the so-called China epidemic.
According to Chinese and international public health agencies, the
epidemic started in Wuhan, in a hospital, with a single patient who had
pneumonia. The doctors could find no cause. Soon, researchers
discovered the never-before-seen coronavirus in the patient.
Really? Let's break this down. The doctors couldn't
find a cause for the patient's pneumonia. That means they didn't locate
the usual bacteria or viruses said to be responsible for pneumonia.
They were puzzled.
BUT as I've pointed out in past articles, the city of Wuhan is famous
for clouds of foul pollution. The unprecedented combination of toxic
compounds in the air constitutes a clear and present danger. Last
summer, there was a large protest in the city focusing
on this very issue. When lots of people take to the streets in China,
you know the issue is serious---because the brutal government doesn't
take kindly to public expressions of dissatisfaction.
SO...who cares if doctors in a Wuhan hospital couldn't find familiar
bacteria or viruses in a PNEUMONIA patient? LOOK AT THE AIR POLLUTION.
You want a cause for lung problems? THERE IT IS. In other words, why
would this patient be a mystery in the first
place? Why would researchers look for a virus no one had ever seen
before?
This whole origin-story is absurd. It vibrates with ripples of FAKE.
It's as if emergency workers bring a person into a hospital after a car
accident...and the doctors are puzzled because they can't find a
bacterial explanation for the person's injuries.
There is more. Much more.
The medical professionals had to deal with the possibility that this
"new" coronavirus wasn't new at all. Suppose it had been in the world
for decades or centuries, obviously causing people no harm? If so, that
would sink their ship. They couldn't have that.
They couldn't admit---"Oops, sorry, everyone, we made a mistake.
Finding this coronavirus in people all over the world means NOTHING
because, you see, it's been around for a long, long time, and it's never
caused problems. So when we said we've found people
who have been 'infected', we really mean they have this harmless virus
in them." No, no, that would never do.
Instead, the pros would have to claim the coronavirus JUST EMERGED in
humans for the very first time. A FEW MONTHS AGO, it crossed over from
animals (bats, snakes) to humans.
And that's exactly what they are saying.
Here is a statement from StatNews ("DNA sleuths read the coronavirus genome, tracing its origins and looking for dangerous mutations," January 24, 2020). It's a bit complicated, but read it over, and then I'll comment:
"Given what's known about the pace at which viral genomes mutate, if
nCoV [the coronavirus] had been circulating in humans since
significantly before the first case was reported on Dec. 8, the 24
genomes [from, presumably, 24 different samples of the virus
in 24 people] would differ more. Applying ballpark rates of viral
evolution, Rambaut [one of the "experts"] estimates that the Adam (or
Eve) virus from which all others are descended first appeared no earlier
than Oct. 30, 2019, and no later than Nov. 29."
My, my. That's quite a precise peg: the coronavirus jumped from animals
to humans, for the very first time, between October 30 and November 29,
2019. The experts can assure us that it never existed in humans until
that one-month period. Absurd. No one can
perform such an exact analysis. Therefore, their whole story about the
human origin of the coronavirus wobbles out of the range of
credibility. By miles. Whether they're just winging it, or fabricating
it, or making gross errors in bolstering their tale...there
is no reason to believe anything they say about when the coronavirus
surfaced in humans.
The coronavirus could have existed for a long time in humans---causing no damage or harm whatsoever.
The entire "origin story" of the "coronavirus epidemic" is riddled with exaggerations and fabrications.
Finding traces of the virus in humans and then calling these people
"infected" and "carriers" and "spreaders" and "epidemic cases" is
ridiculous.
Claiming the virus has spread out from Wuhan across the world is typical
nonsense. The virus could have ALREADY been present in MANY different
places. It didn't spread. It was THERE.
To cite a precedent, several years ago the Zika virus was called an
ominous germ that was spreading around the world, causing women to give
birth to babies with smaller heads and brain damage (microcephaly). I
then reported that, according to mainstream medical
sources, ANY injury to a pregnant woman could cause microcephaly. No
virus necessary. And it emerged that the Zika virus had actually been
discovered in...1947. It had never been known to cause harm.
In yet another fake epidemic story---this one, also a coronavirus---the
SARS "epidemic" of 2003 turned out to be a dud. The official death
toll, when all was said and done? 800 people out of a population of 7
billion. And in Canada, a World Health Organization
microbiologist, Frank Plummer, confessed to the press that the number
of SARS patients who actually had the coronavirus in their bodies was
approaching ZERO. In other words, these patients, who had nothing more
than typical flu symptoms, couldn't have SARS,
because they didn't have the virus that was supposed to be causing
SARS.
"Excuse me, waiter, I ordered dinner and you brought me a bowl of stale soggy cereal."
"No, sir. You must be mistaken. Can't you see the dinner on the table
in front of you? We're the experts. Leave the facts to us."
Sorry. No sale.
Some people, reading what I've laid out in this article, will say, "But
what about all the people who are sick in this epidemic?" Take a step
back. A so-called confirmed case of the coronavirus doesn't necessarily
refer to a person who is sick. If "tests
show" a person "has the virus," he is counted as "a case." He may have
no symptoms at all. Or he may have very mild symptoms. Most so-called
cases ARE mild---and, as I've explained in other articles, the
diagnostic tests for the coronavirus do not prove
a patient's symptoms are CAUSED by the virus. The causes can easily
come from other sources. This fact applies to anyone with any degree of
illness who is called "a case of the epidemic."
Finally, keep in mind that people all over the planet have the symptoms
that are now being labeled, "China epidemic": ordinary flu
symptoms---fever, weakness, cough, headache, and lung problems. These
symptoms can and do come about from a whole catalog of
various reasons, none of which need "the story of the coronavirus."
It's as easy as pie to claim, without evidence, that someone who has
these symptoms, and "tests positive for the virus," is a "confirmed
epidemic case."
This is exactly how some of the fake epidemics ARE synthetically put
together and fabricated. Form a hypothetical "cluster" of people in
different locales who all have
typical flu-like symptoms. Claim they are all suffering from
the direct effects of a single virus. Deploy diagnostic tests for the
presence of the virus that---if they work at all---merely establish that
the virus is in some of these people's bodies.
The tests say NOTHING about whether the virus is causing harm. But
gloss over that vital fact. Skip ahead and say: WE HAVE A SPREADING
GLOBAL EPIDEMIC ON OUR HANDS. QUARANTINES ARE NECESSARY. WHEN WE
DELIVER A VACCINE, EVERYONE MUST TAKE IT.
No.
Case unproven and therefore dismissed.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment