Another change of heart
14 August 2021 - 9:28 am
So for over a year and a half, thinking people have been asking the question “how many people who ‘test positive’ for COVID-19 are actually ill with COVID-19?”. This question is predicated on the existence of COVID-19 and the “novel coronavirus” that allegedly causes it, but for the purposes of this article, let’s set that aside. We have been asked to believe by the WHO, Governments, Health Services like the NHS and the mainstream media that testing positive for COVID-19 and then dying of anything, some arbitrary and changing amount of time later depending on what aspect or narrative they want to emphasise, equals a COVID death and is dutifully reported as such by the above well connected and conflicted groups.
Sure they do throw in the phrase on occasion “died within 28 days of a positive test”, but this is presented as a COVID death and the scary death figures are what has been used to justify everything since, including lockdowns, withdrawal of care from the NHS, especially to the elderly, insane amounts of spending on furlough schemes, grants and of course what this was all about, the “vaccines”. All of this has been justified by the ridiculous computer model predictions of hundreds of thousands of deaths in the UK alone, and the relatively small but tragic amount of excess deaths they have been able to engineer through the abandonment of the elderly in care homes, plus the misuse of end-of-life pathway policies, wrapped up and packaged as COVID deaths based on the PCR test that we know is not a test and is open to abuse by simply turning up the cycle threshold to amplify a single molecule into something they claim is “the virus”.
Now though they are pushing the “vaccine” like crack dealers, offering freebies and incentives, partnering up with all kinds of private companies, spending millions upon millions on propagandistic advertising campaigns, finding as many ways as possible to increase the fear and implicit threats to freedom and liberties that would restrict people’s abilities to travel, to socialise and even to earn a living at their chosen vocation. The Government are desperate for the “vaccines” to be seen as a success, so they make outlandish, unfalsifiable pseudo-scientific claims based on more nonsense computer models, garbage statistics and so on that the “vaccines” are saving thousands of lives. People are now believing that during a nice warm summer when every single year there is a drop in respiratory illnesses and their general severity that then rises again in the winter months, this year, 2021, it is entirely down to the “vaccines”. Thousands of years of human history, right up to 2020 where people get more respiratory ailments and more people unfortunately die of them in winter than summer appears to have been consigned to the dustbin. This year, any and all drops in those kinds of figures right now is purely down to the humanity-saving “vaccines”.
The Government via it’s Fourth Branch, the media, is doing it’s best to manage the issues surrounding vaccinated people still testing positive and even some dying allegedly of COVID-19 due to the nonsense PCR “test”. They are trying a few angles. The first and most obvious one is that the “vaccine” does not provide immunity, despite that being the sales pitch originally. Now they say it just reduces symptoms and they are seemingly redefining the word “vaccine” to accommodate this. The second obvious way is the “variants” and their “breakthrough” abilities.
It should be clear that neither of those things are scientifically valid or provable. It is not scientifically evidencable (i.e. it is not provable but also not disprovable) that having one of these gene-therapies does anything to reduce symptoms because they also claim most people were/are asymptomatic or have extremely mild symptoms anyway. It is not remotely possible to claim that you would have been one of the tiny minority of “cases” that would have had COVID-19 really badly, or would have died from it but the “vaccine” saved your life, or at the very least stopped you getting seriously ill. The “variants” claim is based on nothing more than matching up fragments of nucleotides found via PCR to a computer model of a “variant” they claim exists, and the whole reason for their existence is to keep this going as long as possible and give stupid or dishonest people some pseudo-science to base their claims that the “unvaccinated” are a “danger to society”.
So how are they going to keep the hype surrounding the “vaccine” and it’s fictional success going as we head towards the winter months where respiratory ailments will impact more people and in more serious ways including a rise in deaths, without it looking like the vaccine is failing? The CDC in the United States has already made moves to address this, as has Public Health England.
The CDC has taken several steps to reduce the likelihood that “vaccinated” people are counted towards COVID “cases”. How? Well back in April/May 2021 the CDC updated their guidelines regarding what are being called “breakthrough” cases. We know that the “pandemic” has been engineered using two main methods…
- A fraudulent use of PCR as a test that generates false-positives.
- An extremely broad definition of what constitutes a “case”, including symptoms of all kinds of things, or even no symptoms at all.
Those two policies that have been used all over the world are how the numbers have been created, and without those two things there would not have been a “pandemic” at all. The updated guidelines from the CDC applied from 1st May 2021 means that those two things apply to a much lesser degree, but only to “vaccinated” people. There was the recommendation surrounding Cycle Threshold values for the PCR “test”, and more notably there was this…
As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance.https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html
Previous data on all vaccine breakthrough cases reported to CDC from January–April 2021 are available.
Deciding to “maximise the quality of the data” is not for that reason at all. This decision is about reducing the overall count of “breakthrough” cases and the CDC’s own Frequently Asked Questions page, updated on the 16th July 2021 under the section titled “Should I be tested for current infection” states clearly:
Fully vaccinated people with no COVID-19 symptoms do not need to be tested following an exposure to someone with COVID-19.https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/faq.html
This will have the obvious effect of reducing the number of so-called cases in the “vaccinated”. Not because they are protected from it but because there is going to be a reduction in testing using the false-positive generating PCR which in turn reduces the number of cases, but only in the “vaccinated”.
The CDC produced a report which covers the 1st January to 30th April 2021 regarding “breakthrough infections”, and acknowledges that the “findings in this report are subject to at least two limitations”, those being:
First, the number of reported COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough cases is likely a substantial undercount of all SARS-CoV-2 infections among fully vaccinated persons. The national surveillance system relies on passive and voluntary reporting, and data might not be complete or representative. Many persons with vaccine breakthrough infections, especially those who are asymptomatic or who experience mild illness, might not seek testing. Second, SARS-CoV-2 sequence data are available for only a small proportion of the reported cases.https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm
Really? Given that this report is supposed to be of clinical significance and when attempting to evaluate a global pandemic and subsequent treatment effectiveness you’d think it would be good to minimise the number of limitations your clinical reporting contains, but the “substantial undercount” is not an accident of the system. The recommendation on the CDC’s FAQ page cited earlier that “Fully vaccinated people with no COVID-19 symptoms do not need to be tested following an exposure to someone with COVID-19” is by design. It is their guidance that is creating this “limitation”.
As if that wasn’t enough blatant manipulation of data through reporting changes and other methods, the CDC has just declared that:
After December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives.https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html
Yes that’s right. At the end of this year the CDC is not going to use the “Emergency Use” authorised PCR test, that was “first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only”. The garbage test that they have used the world over to invent colossal case counts to justify every destructive human-rights trampling policy since February 2020 and push the world’s population into the largest genetic experiment in history is to be abandoned at the end of 2021.
Similar dishonest and manipulative behaviour has been seen in the UK too. As was written about on the 30th April 2021 in an article called “A Sudden Change of Heart”, there has been multiple changes to the way COVID deaths have been counted since the introduction of the “vaccines”. Similar to the motivations of the CDC, the intent is to make the gene-therapy look like it’s “saving lives”. Another change to ensure the “vaccines” are portrayed only as life-saving runaway successes has been highlighted by the Independent in a published article from 10th June 2021 titled “NHS told to identify patients actually sick from Covid-19 separately to those testing positive”, with this line as a sub-title:
Changes to the way hospitals collect data will make the impact of the virus on the NHS look betterhttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-hospitals-nhs-england-data-b1862804.html
Not just the NHS though. This will obviously make the “vaccines” look better too, as the article quotes an NHS source as calling the new data “more realistic”, as not all patients were sick with the virus and that there are some patients, e.g. stroke patients “who also had Covid as an incidental finding”. Not only that, the article quotes NHS England’s COVID Incident Director Professor Keith Willett, from a letter to hospital bosses as saying:
A breakdown of the current stock of Covid patients into those who are in hospital with acute Covid-19 symptoms (and for whom Covid-19 is the primary reason for being in hospital); and those who are primarily in hospital for a reason other than Covid-19 (but for whom the hospital is having to manage and treat the Covid-19 symptoms alongside their primary condition).
Aside from the thoroughly unpleasant language referring to hospital inpatients as “stock”, as if they are sacks of meat in a butcher’s fridge, it is clear they are now pushing for the very thing anyone paying attention from the start has been demanding, that being making the distinction between “with COVID” and “of COVID” when talking about mortality and hospitalised cases. If it still isn’t clear from Willet’s quote above, he helpfully puts it into “lay terms”…
In lay terms this could be considered as a binary split between those in hospital ‘for Covid-19’ and those in hospital ‘with Covid-19’. We are asking for this binary split for those patients newly admitted to hospital and those newly diagnosed with Covid while in hospital.
Yes, just like that, now it is convenient, the distinction between testing positive with a garbage test the CDC is going to abandon when the job it was brought in for is complete, and actually being ill with something remotely resembling the alleged disease the so-called test is diagnosing is super-important. Why? Because it will make the “vaccines” look better.
If it isn’t obvious by now that this whole scam was about getting the public used to the idea of lockdowns, conditioned into a permanent state of fear with pointless mask and social distancing rules and getting people injected with gene-therapies that has the effect in any other setting of instantiating an auto-immune disease, and nothing about an actual deadly virus, I don’t know what to tell you.