First let’s check the deaths so far, that are officially attributed to COVID-19. I’m using the Worldometer website as source, it gives daily deaths. Comparing the US with the UK, France, Italy and Sweden we express them as deaths per million, or which some may prefer, as percentages. The UK – oddly enough – comes out top:
UK 825 deaths / million => 0.08% of population
Italy 582 “ => 0.06% of population
Sweden 558 “ => 0.06% of population
USA 482 “ => 0.05% of population
France 452. “ => 0.05% of population
So all the convulsions of the USA, practically destroying the very fabric of its civilization, was for the deaths of merely 0.05% of the populace – over a six- month period! The average age of these ‘COVID deaths’ has been generally around eighty.
A ‘PCR test’ is given, from which a yes/no answer will emerge. This test will obtain a strip of your DNA and somehow multiply it – the method discovered in 1984 by Kary Mullis. But, how the presence of an alleged virus is thereby inferred, remains obscure. I’d guess that no reader has read any account of this which makes sense. Whatever it is that is ‘detected’ by this test, you are then ‘positive’. This means (a) you must stay at home for two weeks, and (b) if you’ve just come into a hospital – which is when most of these test are done – then if you die you will be registered as having died of COVID-19. That’s the clever bit. So this hoax plays on the very fear of death itself. No wonder it works so well.
Nearly all COVID ‘deaths’ have been reported as due to very diverse conditions: old age, heart disease, Parkinson’s disease, diabetes, pneumonia etc. There was an insightful report by some Swiss doctors who concluded that a ‘real’ phenomenon was here present, but it comprised about 4% of all the COVID deaths:
‘only about 4% of the deceased had no serious preconditions’.
For the total of American COVID-related deaths, presently 482 per million: if the phenomenon really exists then we should take 4% of that figure, ie 19 deaths per million. That is a fairly ‘real’ value of how this disease has been working in America to-date.
It’s not a lot, one must say.
The Experiment that Cannot be Performed
As a science historian, I’m intrigued by the way Big Pharma is here streamrollering over traditional, normal scientific method. John Rappaport pointed out how the following rudimentary experiment should have been done before any discussion of how real is this disease takes place. Say, we have a hospital ward of people who are ill from COVID-19. We’ve all seen heart-rending images of them on incubators, to keep them breathing. Well OK, take a sample of phlegm from each of them. Then take samples from the same number of healthy people. They are all given to a lab that does the PCR tests, and how well can it differentiate between these two? Now, if real science were going on here we’d all have heard a definite figure here by way of reply. Say, eg 80%. Or, 90%. What figure would you require here, to see it as a reliable method? That is the experiment, that cannot be done.
Ditto for repeatability: we should all have been told a clear figure about how repeatable this PCR test is, applied to the same individual on different days or the same individual with different hospitals doing the testing. Would it be say 60%? Or 90%? Have you ever seen any figures here? Whatever the actual figures are here, they would need to be high enough to reassure us that the test can be relied upon.
I feel this is an important modern concept, of the experiment that cannot be done and here’s one more. All the world seems to be longing for a vaccine to appear. Well fine, if people want to take the vaccine then go ahead. But there is one, simple request we make here: that a similar group of non-vaccinated persons be collected, and the health of the two groups followed over months and years. I’ll wager a large sum of money that some proportion of the former group would suffer far-reaching damage to its health – maybe permanent – as compared to the unvaccinated.
Americans are now probably the most vaccinated people of earth, as growing kids get about seventy different vaccines stuffed into them. Have you ever heard of a control experiment, of comparing a group of them with un-vaccinated kids? I’d wager the latter group would do better at school – if they would be allowed to go there.
Lockdown: The Error
I decided to write a book on the coronavirus topic when it became evident that not one but two surveys had shown that the more a country went into lockdown, the more COVID-19 it experienced. There was a third study showingthat within America, the different states experienced COVID-19 in proportion to how much they locked down (J.P.Morgan, 21 May), then a further study showed that in every case where reliable death-data was available, the increase in mortality in a country started immediately after the lockdown protocols began. In other words, it is the stress, despair and loneliness of the lockdown that produces, especially for old folk, the extra deaths.
Here’s a bar-chart prepared for the ‘UK column’ for one of Vanessa Beeley’s important articles on the subject (click here):
This was the first indication that non-lockdown countries did better. You can see how the USA on the far-right is doing much better than European countries – again using deaths per million. These figures are for mid-April. Japan here is extremely low and its low score remains a bit of a mystery.
Here is a different kind of graph from an Oxford University study, which estimated what they called ‘stringency’ of lockdown’ versus CV-deaths. We see how the best-fit straight line put through the data has a positive gradient. Here is a British expert Iain Davies commenting on this in the Off-Guardian (one of the best UK sites on this topic):
Nor is there any evidence that lockdown regimes have any positive impact upon infection rates. Comparisons between severe lockdown states and those who opted for less draconian measures reveal no advantage to placing your population under house arrest… Oxford University found a direct correlation between infection rates and the relative severity of lockdown regimes. It suggests the more stringent the lockdown, the higher the infection rate. This is not unexpected, as numerous epidemiological studies have shown that infection rates for C19 are higher when people are exposed to it for prolonged periods in confined spaces. Locking people up in their homes is probably the worst thing you could do if you wanted to reduce the infections and the duration of the outbreak.
It’s pretty obvious really: fresh air and sunshine are good for you while staying indoors all day isn’t. Especially in the summertime. It’s how we were designed. Here is a laconic quote from the well-informed Brit Rob Slane which may help to put into perspective the great folly:
The idea of quarantining millions of perfectly healthy people and stopping them from doing normal, healthy things is something that has apparently never occurred to any national leaders in the past.
Americans should re-read papers by the legendary US doctor Donald Henderson, who is remembered as the 20thcentury’s most acclaimed disease eradicator. His sage advice about how epidemics should be handled, and why lockdowns were not the answer, is highly relevant today.
A Second wave?
In the UK, daily COVID death figures had more or less petered out by July, and some new scare was needed. Shops were opening, cafes were opening, even pubs. So on 24/7 (a memorable date) facemasks were declared mandatory. Total weekly deaths from all causes had sunk down to below average, which was to be expected: in the months after the lockdown on the spring equinox, there had been a huge surge in deaths of old people, caused by the Lockdown, so naturally once that stress was off or mitigated, the weekly death figures will drop. Anyhow here are UK daily death figures:
This graph shows deaths of persons who were PCR-test positive. It does not show any basis for scaring the populace with talk of a ‘second wave.’ The graph of total ‘covid cases’ ie positive PCR test does show a slight upturn, but this no doubt reflects an increase in testing. I could not find any source of daily US deaths for comparison.
Planning and Gestation of the Event
In 2000, the Neo-Con Pentagon document ‘Rebuilding America’s Defences’ advocated the policy that:
‘…advanced forms of biological warfare that can ‘target’ specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.’ (p.60)
Two days before the Trump inauguration, his medical advisor Anthony Fauci informed the world that:
There is no question that there will be a challenge to the coming administration in the arena of infectious diseases… But also there will be a surprise outbreak.
‘No question?’ – how did he know that? And how would it be a surprise if he knew it was coming? Fauci, under the Obama administration, had been in charge of the National Institute for Heath and in 2015 it transferred $3.7 million to a Wuhan virus-related laboratory.
The year 2019 featured two planning events which blueprinted what was to come. On August 13th a four-day Operation Crimson Contagion was held in Washington DC which planned for a ‘global influenza pandemic’ featuring school closures, social distancing, medical countermeasures etc. with everyone being told to stay at home: it had a Pandemic Crisis Action Plan. True to ‘real life’ it featured visitors from China who carried the new virus into the USA. That was followed by Event 201 held in October 2019, with its ‘Global Pandemic Exercise’ organized by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation plus the World Economic Forum. Held at the Pierre Hotel in New York City under the auspices of Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Health Security, it simulated a global coronavirus outbreak. Its brochure opened with the firm statement: ‘We need to prepare for the event that becomes a pandemic.’ Flights would be cancelled and everyone had to stay at home.
The synchronies here are important. The death of Kary Mullis is reported on 12th of August, the day before Operation Crimson Contagion begins. He is the one person everyone would have liked to consult about this whole scam: honest, well-informed and fearless, a Nobel-prize winning biochemist. He had to go before the whole thing could happen. Then on 18th October the very day that Event 201 began, US soldiers arrived in Wuhan, China for the Military Olympic Games. They stayed within a hundred yards or so of a seafood market, where the outbreak allegedly began and were there as it began. They performed so badly in the games that Chinese officials concluded they were not trying, and were there for some other purpose…
Infections began in October-November, but the Chinese medical authorities only realised that some new form of flu had broken out on 30th December, and at once reported it to the World Health Organization. It’s not true what Trump is claiming, that they somehow neglected to inform people. As to where it came from, Ron Unz published his big-hit article ‘Our Coronavirus Catastrophe as Biowarfare Blowback?’ and soon found the articles on his immensely popular website being banned from Facebook and Google. Put that title into Google, it will not find the unz.com site. Go to the Russian search engine Yandex, it comes up top.
So the whole thing was blueprinted in America, but the ‘On’ switch to activate the program was in London. A paper appeared on March 17th with thirty authors from Imperial College, London. It predicted two million dead in the USA, half a million dead in the UK. Its been said that no science paper ever had such an effect. Suddenly politicians were talking about ‘exponential’ growth of the illness. Clearly, Lockdown was the answer – with no time for Parliament to discuss it! No British scientist has so consistent a record of being catastrophically wrong as Neil Ferguson, but he’s very good at invoking fear, which politicians seem to need these days. The entire Event 201 program was activated by this paper.
 His classic 2006 study, ‘Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza. ‘How a Free Society Deals with Pandemics, According to Legendary Epidemiologist and Smallpox Eradicator Donald Henderson’ (21 May aeir.org; also jamesfetzer.org).
John P. Costella, Ph.D., has been specifically tracking most of the affected countries since the beginning: http://johncostella.com/covid-19/world-deaths.png This graph shows that only one (tiny) country–San Marino–is over 0.1%: http://johncostella.com/covid-19/top-world-deaths.png All of his graphs at http://johncostella.com/covid-19/
Nicholas Kollerstrom was a founder-member of Britain’s 9/11 Truth group, 2002-2010, which drew him into the arena of ‘conspiracy theory’. Following the 7/7 London subway bombings in 2005, he discovered a glitch in the official story of the trains that the ‘terrorist’ had supposedly caught on that day that invalidated the “official account”. A year later, the Home Secretary had to make an announcement in the Commons adjusting the train times of that day. This may have led him to compose the main if not only book about the London bombings in terms of what happened on that day, Terror on the Tube (3rd ed., 2012). For the last eight years, he has co-managed a monthly ‘9/11 KeepTalking’ group, a non-political current affairs discussion group.
His enquiries into cyanide absorption on the walls of the German labor-camps seventy years ago had him thrown out of University College London in 2008 on the ground that he was ‘denying the Holocaust.’ Subsequently his book, Breaking the Spell (2014), on the topic, brought mathematical, chemical and historical arguments to bear on the subject and became a bestseller, as Revisionist Books go.Earlier, he had worked as a school mathematics teacher and, politically, had managed a successful Green party campaign, while living in Guildford, Surrey. He worked as its Press Secretary, when in 1989 the Greens came in second beating Labour and the social Democrats. His involvement with the Green party lasted about a decade.
He has two degrees in the History of Science, the first at Cambridge followed by his Ph.D. at London, where he became a member of staff in the Science and Technology Studies Department. His research there has focused upon Sir Isaac Newton (see his nine online academically-published articles www.dioi.org/kn/index.htm). He was accepted as a Member of the New York Academy of Sciences in 1999, and invited to contribute to the Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomy (William Hockey, ed., 2007), where he contributed the biography of Sir Isaac Newton. He has been a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society for several decades. He also published extensive research on the discovery of Neptune, including studies on the planet’s co-discoverers, Leverrier and Adams.
Long ago, in the previous century, in his youth, he was interested in hermetic/alchemical matters, which some of the book titles reflect. Since 1980 he has produced a Biodynamic farming lunar-gardening calendar, For years he had a two-floor flat in Belsize Park, Primrose Gardens, but alas lost that following the property crash of 2008, and now lives in Walthamstow, East London. Please support NK by buying his new book, The Great British Coronavirus Hoax(2020),