Numerous scientific papers offer contrary indications to the mainstream media’s narrative, which promotes the theory of asymptomatic transmission as being a driving cause of the spread of COVID-19.
August 2, 2021 – In the investigative report “The Lies Exposed by the Numbers”, I documented the worst of the lies, half-truths, and misdirection used by our public health officials to manipulate public perceptions throughout the pandemic. The public messaging surrounding the COVID vaccination campaign has been just as crooked. So, I thought I would do what the government has refused to do: calculate your Vegas odds of death from the virus so you can weigh those odds against the risks of getting the jab. – Kathy Dopp
“It creates an impression that all these people are going into hospital with Covid, and that simply is not the case. People are worried and scared and not really understanding the true picture – that is what I find despicable,” one NHS data expert told the Telegraph.
I wonder how many U.S. COVID-19 hospitalizations were only diagnosed post-admission, keeping in mind of course that U.S. hospitals are paid more for COVID patients under the CARES Act.
- July 23, 2021. An interview on Ingraham Angle of Peter McCullough, MD, MPH, entitled “Treatment and Natural Immunity Will See Us Through Delta Outbreak.”
- May 22, 2021. “How did a disease with no symptoms take over the world?” A biologist discusses that “a viral infection does not necessarily result in a disease. … the only reasonable conclusion we can draw about the creation of an asymptomatic disease is that it wasn’t done by a biologist but instead by individuals (probably on the Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviors (SPI-B)) whose agenda is not to convey accurate information to the public but something different: fear and uncertainty.”
UK: Delta variant vs hospitalizations.
Sources: Public Health England Technical Briefing 16. June 18, 2021. and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtOu7jx3snQ
Green Line is Hospitalizations. Shaded Purple is Delta infections.
The following table is a summary analysis of groups who were together for long periods without any ability to distance and shared the same kitchen and ventilation systems. Thus, the prevalence of COVID-19 in these groups can give us an idea of the share of the population prone to getting COVID symptoms. Overall, it seems that slightly less than 8% of the population were susceptible to symptomatic COVID-19. However the rate is closer to 60% for nursing home facility residents.
- December 2020. “Video: W.H.O. Says Covid-19 Asymptomatic Transmission Is ‘Very Rare’.”
- December 2020. “Has the Evidence of Asymptomatic Spread of COVID-19 been Significantly Overstated?” Written by Dr Clare Craig FRC Path and Jonathan Engler MBChB LLB. The study found: “Evidence of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from patients who remain asymptomatic (as opposed to pre-symptomatic) is found in a body of numerous meta-analyses. Evidence of asymptomatic transmission has been based on only a handful of instances which themselves are questionable. The existence of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from asymptomatic individuals has become an accepted truth but the evidence for this phenomenon being anything other than mistaken interpretation of false positive test results is weak. Examination of the underlying data from the most frequently-cited such meta-analyses reveals that the conclusions are based on a surprisingly small number of cases (six in total globally) and, moreover, the possibility that they are all coincidental contacts with false positive results cannot be ruled out. Transmission which is pre-symptomatic is rare and represents a negligible risk to the population. It is questionable therefore whether any of the extensive testing, tracing, isolation and lockdown policies have delivered any worthwhile benefit over and above strategies which seek to advise symptomatic individuals to self-isolate.
It seems that Dr. Anthony Fauci’s role in the NIH’s funding of so-called “gain-of-function” research may be catching up with him.
In the last couple of days, both U.S. Senator Rand Paul and Fox’s Tucker Carlson (See Below) have laid into Fauci for his alleged promotion of this dangerous research which develops bat-based coronaviruses into more potent variants, capable of infecting humans.
Dr. Fauci denied funding this research.
But, Senator Paul noted that a resident virologist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Dr. Shi Zheng-li and Dr. Ralph Baric, an American virologist funded by Fauci’s department in the NIH, “collaborated on gain-of-function research where they enhanced the SARS virus to infect human airway cells and they did it by merging a new spy protein on it. That is gain-of-function. That was joint research between the Wuhan Institute and Dr. Baric. You [Dr. Fauci] can’t deny it.”
And, later, Fox News host Tucker Carlson picked up on the discrepancy, noting Fauci’s involvement in the creation and promotion of public health directives on account of COVID-19 while also being allegedly tied to the origin of the virus and its spread throughout the world.
So, the evidence, both in testimony and in the court of public opinion, continues to mount.
When concerned scientists warned the US government of the great danger of creating super-viruses in the lab, one man publicly defended the risky experiments: that man was the influential head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), none other than “Mr. Science” himself: Dr. Anthony Fauci.
In 2014, the same year the US government called for a moratorium on this insanely dangerous research, Dr. Fauci’s NIAID began funding a program to study the transmission of bat coronaviruses to humans.
Not only did his funding go to develop the technology for making bat coronaviruses spread more easily to humans, but much of it went to the lab located in the exact location where the Covid pandemic eventually emerged: Wuhan, China.
Like every person, Dr. Fauci deserves to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
But the evidence is so overwhelming that Fauci gambled with a supervirus and lost (the whole world lost), that, at a minimum, he needs to be fired from his position of public trust and must be investigated for possible violations of US law which mandated a moratorium on this extremely dangerous practice of creating super-viruses in the lab.
However, Dr. Fauci, far from being held responsible for his dangerous gamble, has been promoted to the point where, currently, he is the highest paid employee in the US Government.
Just like the Wall Street moguls, whose financial negligence precipitated the financial crisis of 2008, received massive bailout bonuses, Dr. Anthony Fauci recklessly pushed for the research that probably caused the deadly pandemic. And now, he, too, has been rewarded with money and power.
As has been carefully and meticulously documented by Steve Hilton of Fox News, the probable origins of the coronavirus point to Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Dr. Fauci was one of the greatest proponents of developing super-viruses in labs.
Dr. Fauci was responsible for the funding of much of the research through the NIAID.
And, it appears that Dr. Fauci funneled taxpayer funds through an intermediary to allow the research to continue in the unsafe Wuhan Institute of Virology, even after the US government banned the funding of this dangerous research.
Until a thorough investigation into his role of the origins of the current pandemic has taken place, Dr. Fauci should not be in a position of public trust.
P.S. It should be noted that Dr. Fauci not only has proven to be catastrophic for public health with his advocacy of dangerous research, but he has also been a disastrous public health advisor, advocating measures that have negatively impacted every aspect of our lives, from the economy to our most fundamental liberties.
P.P.S. Dr. Anthony Fauci recently stated that he is delighted to be pushing Joe Biden’s return to US taxpayer funding of abortions abroad. So, evidently, not only does Dr. Fauci have problems with public health, public safety, and economics, but also with basic human rights and embryology.
- July 2020. “COVID-19 in primary schools: no significant transmission among children or from students to teachers.”
- July 2020. “How CNN deceives about asymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2,” by Jeremy R. Hammond. On August 20, 2020 US media reported that [all] children are “silent spreaders of COVID ,” citing a study of 49 “Children ages 0-22 years with suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection presenting to urgent care clinics or being hospitalized for confirmed/suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection.” 61.7% of these sickest Massachusetts’ children are over the age of 10 and most have prior medical conditions. These are not normal healthy asymptomatic children. These children’s viral levels were compared to some of the sickest, many intubated, adult patients whose cytokine storms had eliminated the virus from their bodies and were deeply ill.
- October 2020. “Schools aren’t super-spreaders. Fears from the summer appear to have been overblown. By Emily Oster, an economist at Brown University.
- Epidemiologist: “Social Distancing’ does not stop spread of COVID-19, only vulnerable should shelter.”
Compilation By Kathy Dopp