- The Facts:
A Bill was proposed in Virginia that aims to make it easier for a woman to get a late-term abortion. Subsequent comments made about it by the Governor of Virginia have some suggesting that this bill pushes infanticide.
- Reflect On:
Can we see how the abortion issue is so polarized these days that there is little room to have the kinds of discussions that bring us together on this matter and try to define who we want to be as a collective?
The proposal of a Bill in Virginia that aims to make it easier for a woman to get a late-term abortion, and subsequent comments made about it by the Governor of Virginia, have set off a firestorm in public discourse, and understandably so.
However, rather than getting into the polarized ‘discussions’ that are taking place both in the political arena and between everyday citizens, let’s take a seat above the fray and try to see what’s going on here at a higher level.
--> Join us on Telegram: Be sure you get our most important and latest content by joining our free Telegram channel. You can also meet and chat with like minds! Click here to join.
If you consume information on this subject from mainstream media, what is inevitably highlighted are the most extreme conclusions coming from the two sides, where the battle of rhetoric between left and right seems to be what is considered newsworthy rather than the issue at hand.
And this is as it was meant to be. For there is an agenda behind how mainstream media reports on the news. As long as it keeps people in a polarized state it actually maintains the system in place and forces people to stay within the control matrix. Those who continue to rigidly identify as a Democrat or as a Republican, as Pro-Choice or Pro-Life, are leaving themselves open to being controlled. The mainstream narrative will continue to think for you, rather than create a space in which you can think for yourself, the latter being one of the main aims of conscious media.
The Facts About The Virginia Bill
Let’s begin with the facts about the Virginia Bill and see if we can navigate through what has happened with a greater degree of emotional neutrality and perspective.
Kathy Tran Introduces The Bill. Kathy Tran is a Democrat who was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates in 2017. She introduced HB 2491 earlier this year, which sought to change the number of physicians required for an abortion to be sanctioned as well as broaden the health circumstances under which an abortion would be allowed. As with many bills, this one was introduced with little fanfare and only really came to public attention in a committee hearing on Monday, where she was questioned about the bill by fellow delegate Todd Gilbert, a Republican.
The Committee Hearing. If you watch the video closely–and I believe it is certainly worthwhile to do so–you will see in Kathy Tran a person who is pushing for significant changes in abortion law, but seems neither well-informed about the bill itself nor a particularly passionate defender of it. Tran often evades questions or gives inappropriate answers, or simply doesn’t have an answer and defends her lack of knowledge by saying “I’m not a physician,” while she and her lawyer rue the fact that “expert witnesses” who are physicians were not present because they were “seeing patients.”
The most significant line of questioning can be illustrated in this exchange in which Gilbert is concerned specifically about the leeway being afforded to allowing abortions right up until birth based on a physician’s assessment of the risk to a woman’s mental health:
Gilbert: “How late in the third trimester could a physician perform an abortion if he indicated it would impair the mental health of the woman?”
Tran: “Through the third trimester. The third trimester goes all the way up to 40 weeks.”
Gilbert: “Where it’s obvious that a woman is about to give birth, would that still be a point at which she could request an abortion if she was so certified? She’s dilating.”
Tran: “My bill would allow that.”
It took a while for Gilbert to make clear to Tran that he was asking about mental health only, and got no answer from either Tran or her lawyer as to what kind of standards or examples of mental health risks would be considered legitimate. However, Tran finally did concede that the bill did not require the physician to have any ‘specialized training in mental health’ in order to certify a third-trimester abortion based on mental health risks.
Governor Northam’s Comments. The Governor of Virginia stepped in with some ill-advised comments during station WTOP’s Ask The Governor radio show two days later. Northam went strong on the stance that what a women does with her body should be her decision in consultations with her physician(s). But he did nothing to distinguish whether a baby that had actually been delivered was no longer a part of the mother’s body. Here are the comments that caused the greatest ruckus:
“If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.”
Now, it must be said that when Northam talks about third-trimester abortions, he created the context that ‘it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities, there may be a fetus that’s non-viable.’ But still, he seems to be going beyond even what Tran was proposing, saying here that a baby that is delivered and is still alive may be subject to a decision between the doctor and the mother as to whether that baby should live or die. There is a bit of vagueness and contradiction in his thought process, so you can follow along in this short clip and judge what he really meant to say.
What Is Really Going On Here?
Does the evidence suggest that the Democratic party should be considered supporters of infanticide, which represents the killing of a child after that child had been delivered? Kathy Tran has since said that she ‘misspoke’ when she said that her bill would allow a woman’s request for an abortion while she was in labor to be executed. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Gov. Northam told Vox his comments were “absolutely not” a reference to infanticide, and that they “focused on the tragic and extremely rare case in which a woman with a nonviable pregnancy or severe fetal abnormalities went into labor.”
But really, this has little to do with Kathy Tran and Ralph Northam. This has much more to do with the long-term social engineering plans of the powerful elite that are behind the Democratic party. While I believe there is some validity in a woman’s right to choose, there appears to be a darker overriding agenda to gradually desensitize human beings to the sanctity of life, which would then allow practices such as pedophilia, child blood sacrifice, and cannibalism to continue in the shadows with increasingly less resistance.
Kathy Tran, by all appearances, is hardly part of this group, and in all likelihood unaware of their sinister agenda. The first-term representative, however, was likely chosen by the party brass to introduce this bill because of the optics, being not only a woman but a mother of 4 who breastfed her daughter on the floor of the Virginia House of Delegates. Who better to introduce a sensitive piece of legislation that further tries to facilitate late-term abortions?
For his part, Governor Northram has been instructed to be a champion of women’s rights, often repeating the mantra that ‘men shouldn’t be deciding what women do with their bodies’ and that ‘we want the government not to be involved in these types of decisions, we want these decisions to be made by the mothers and their [health] providers.’ With Tran’s bill attempting to reduce the number of physicians needed to consent to a late-term abortion down to 1, this would enable pro-abortion doctors to use their authority and knowledge to subtly steer women towards the decision to have an abortion.
Where Planned Parenthood Comes In
And this is where Planned Parenthood enters into the equation. This organization receives $500 million in funding from the government each year, and has disclosed that it contributed $30 million back to the Democratic Party (source), (with actual undisclosed contributions allegedly closer to $65 million (source, post 2674)).
This closed loop reveals one of the fulcrums of this abortion agenda fronted by the Democratic party. As I discussed in my article ‘Illuminati Pedophilia: Attempts To Normalize Sex Between Adults And Children (Part 2),’ there is fairly incontestable evidence that Planned Parenthood sells the body parts of human fetuses for tremendous profits.
Let’s look again at the main three aspects of HB2491:
1) Eliminates the requirement that an abortion in the second trimester of pregnancy and prior to the third trimester be performed in a hospital.
2) Eliminates all the procedures and processes, including the performance of an ultrasound, required to effect a woman’s informed written consent to the performance of an abortion.
3) Eliminates the requirement that two other physicians certify that a third trimester abortion is necessary to prevent the woman’s death or impairment of her mental or physical health, as well as the need to find that any such impairment to the woman’s health would be substantial and irremediable.
All of these aspects point to facilitating abortions that could further erode a societal respect for human life. They make it easier for a single doctor who is aligned with the Planned Parenthood agenda to make a personal assessment without any psychiatric training about the risks of the delivery to the mother’s ‘mental health,’ thereby subtly influencing mothers to consent more to abortions, which then enriches the business end of the Planned Parenthood agenda.
Backlash Against Northam
While the global elite may hope to eventually achieve some conditional acceptance of infanticide, given that they have absolutely no regard for human life, their plan has always unfolded slowly and incrementally, done in the shadows as much as possible. They know full well that at this time they cannot just introduce legislation that would permit allowing a woman to ‘abort’ a baby after it had been delivered, because it would cause outrage and bring attention to their agenda. As it turns out, this is exactly what has happened.
In this regard, Governor Northam unwittingly let the cat out of the bag, and now he is being demonized by the Democratic party with some racist scandal from a photo that appears on Northam’s medical school yearbook page which shows Northam dressed in blackface and another student in a KKK costume, obviously for some kind of costume party. On the basis of this one picture from 35 years ago conveniently surfacing, the Democratic party is trying to hide their own agenda by distancing themselves from Northam and having many party members now echoing the call for him to resign as governor. Too bad Northam couldn’t be as effective as Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo, who recently celebrated the passing of legislation in New York that loosens restrictions on abortions.
It’s Not Just About Democrats
While the abortion agenda has long been the domain of the Democratic party, it should be made clear here that the overall agenda of the global elite has always run through both parties to a large extent. The global elite will advance their agenda in ways that are always disguised to associate with each party’s particular policies. While the Democratic party is used to erode the sanctity of human life, the Republican party may be used more to ensure that a global corporatocracy is strengthened and any signs of sympathy towards socialist doctrines and a minimum standard of living for the poor are effectively quashed.
The fight that rages between Democrats and Republicans has long been to give the illusion of choice to the people, to make us feel that the power of our vote allows us to be masters of our own destiny. In reality, from our seat high above the fray, we see that this has been a false dichotomy which only serves to polarize us, and no matter which party is seen as ‘winning’ or ‘losing’ a particular battle, the outcome is designed to continue to advance the ultimate agenda of the global elite, which is world domination and the enslavement of humanity.
On most issues that are subjected to the violent political tug-of-war between the left and the right, the everyday person feels that they have to identify with one polarity or the other if they want to participate in the discussion. Back when I was younger, and the passing of Roe v. Wade was still in its infancy, the abortion debate was conducted with a bit more openness and curiosity into the nature of what it is to be human, and how we wanted to govern ourselves as a society.
I was always one who supported a woman’s right to choose what to do with her body, and so in a sense I always supported a women’s right to an abortion to the extent that I believed what was being aborted was a part of her body and not a discrete living being. That does not mean I supported the performing of abortions as such; however, I did favor that those women who had good reasons to want or need to abort a fetus should be able to do it in a safe way rather than in an unsanctioned back-room clinic.
That said, two questions remained difficult to answer. The first was, what reasons (aside from the birthing process threatening the life of the mother) could be accepted as justifying getting an abortion? The second was, at what point does the fetus stop being a part of the mother’s anatomy and start being a discrete being on its own? On one extreme, the fetus is considered a separate being from the moment of conception; on the other extreme, the fetus is considered a separate being only after the umbilical cord has been cut. Generally speaking, the debate occurred in between these two extremes, and can only be resolved by reasonable people in an open discussion of the rights and essence of both a mother and a fetus, as well as the essence of who we are as a society. There was a sense of curiosity, and some humility in terms of nobody really knowing the definitive answers to these questions, but being willing to put thoughts and feelings forth in order to arrive at some consensus in terms of legislation on this matter.
Today, the matter is dominated by extremists, and that fits in with the globalist agenda. It is important that those of us who are awakening to the big picture disengage from the polarized discussion, and realize that such discussions about the nature of who we are and who we want to be as people and as a society have to take place in that seat high above the fray of polarity, and in recognition of how this and many other important issues have been co-opted by powerful forces.
Encounters With Star People: An Extraterrestrial, A Spacecraft & An Alaskan Blizzard
- The Facts:
Dr. Ardy Sixkiller Clarke, a Professor Emeritus at Montana State University who is Cherokee/Choctaw has been researching the Star People, and collecting encounters between them and Native Indians for many years. This article shares one of many.
- Reflect On:
Are we alone? If not, what are the implications when the public becomes fully aware of this? How will it change the way we perceive ourselves, the cosmos, spirituality, consciousness, history, science, technology and more?
The topic of UFOs seems to be getting never-ending attention these days by the mainstream media, which is something quite different from a decades long ridicule campaign that’s taken place. Recently, the New York Times covered a story about Eric W. Davis, a renowned astrophysicist who worked with the Pentagon UFO program, stating that he gave a classified briefing to a Defense Department Agency as recently as March about retrievals from “off-world vehicles not made on this Earth.”
Mainstream media coverage of the UFO topic is a deep discussion, and it’s a topic, like everything else, where the ‘powerful interests’, for lack of a better word, will no doubt try and control the narrative and shape our perception of this reality. You can read more about that and dive a little deeper in an article I recently published about mainstream UFO coverage, here.
All in all, at this point we know what has been denied for decades, UFOs are real. The next question now is, what are they and who’s manning them?
Back when UFOs were still considered a “conspiracy theory” there was ample evidence clearly showing that they were indeed real. It’s a shame that something has to be acknowledged by the mainstream for it to be considered real. Just as the evidence was there for the existence of UFOs when they were ridiculed, “there is abundant evidence” that “civilizations have been visiting us for a very long time.” – Dr Brian O’leary, NASA Astronaut, Princeton Physics Professor. That is to say, there is ample evidence, in my opinion, suggesting that some of these UFOs are made by and operated by beings from other planets, civilizations and dimensions.
With this belief, I’ve dived into the lore of extraterrestrial encounters for quite some time. I find it fascinating how thousands of stories can corroborate with each other, and I find encounters with extraterrestrials, although they cannot be verified, to be a critical part for anybody to investigate if they want to have a broader perspective on the UFO phenomenon. Unfortunately, most people don’t actually research the subject and this often leads them to think there is no real evidence, and even report that to be the case.
At the very least, these stories which number in the tens of thousands, if not millions, are very fascinating.
Dr. Ardy Sixkiller Clarke, a Professor Emeritus at Montana State University who is Cherokee/Choctaw has been researching the Star People,and collecting encounters between them and Native Indians for many years. In her book, “Encounters With Star People, Untold Stories of American Indians” she details many of these stories, and explains how her fascination with Star People came from stories told to her by her older relatives, like her grandmother, when she was a child.
I’ve shared stories from her book before in the articles linked below:
The book is filled with many interesting encounters, in one of the chapters, she describes a story told to her by an Alaskan Native, who apparently “came upon an alien in the middle of the road during a blizzard. True to the Alaskan code of honor, he invited the alien to join him in his vehicle for fear he would freeze in the 70 degree below zero night.”
His name was Ross, and he had heard about Clarke and how she collects stories about extraterrestrials and UFOs from Indian people. They met at a restaurant, and Ross told Clarke his story.
Ross operated a snowplow for a living, and on the night of his encounter he was working a 50 mile stretch during a terrible snowstorm where visibility was almost zero, and the temperature with the wind chill hovered at nearly 70 below.
In the book, Clarke outlines a conversation between her and Ross. I left out most of what Clarke asked and focused on key quotes from Ross describing the encounter:
Ross: My partner comes from the south. We drive up and back over that stretch of the highway keeping the roads clear. Sometimes we drive 18-hour shifts. Sometimes more. We usually meet each other around Lucky Gil’s. Clarke: I recognized the place that he was talking about. It was a halfway inn consisting of a bar, restaurant, and gift shop. Ross: About an hour into the shift that night, I got a call from Bill, the other driver, that there was a strange glow up ahead of Lucky Gil’s. He asked if I saw it. Before I had a chance to respond, I came upon a disk sitting in the middle of the highway. It covered the full two lanes. It was round with bright orange lights around the bottom. I stopped within 20 feet of it. I flipped my lights up and down. I tried calling Bill, but my radio was dead.
Suddenly, blinding white lights came on and the craft moved upward and was gone. I watched until it was out of sight, but that was not long because the storm cut the visibility that night to nearly zero. When it was gone, there was darkness all around me…I sat there for a moment, I couldn’t believe what I had just seen. It was at that moment I realized my engine was off. I never turn off the engine for fear it would not turn over again in the extreme temperatures, but it was off. I held my breath when I turned the key in the ignition, and fortunately the engine came to life on the first try. I put in in gear and began to move forward. Just as I got up a little speed, I felt a bump under my right tire as though I had run over something. That freaked me out. I thought it might be something from the space-craft. I stopped the plow and readied myself to go outside. As I tited the string of my parka under my chin, I saw a hand reach upward and pound on the side window. Then a second hand appeared.
It was the scariest damn thing I have ever seen. I swear to you. Those hands only had four digits…I turned on the light inside the cab and suddenly a face appeared and stared at me. Suddenly, it turned and ran across the road to a stand of trees and disappeared.
It ran across the road into the woods. I had no intentions of following it. Leaving a vehicle in a blizzard could have deadly results. I thought that was the end of it, but it wasn’t. Suddenly, the creature re-appeared in the middle of the road ahead of me. Somehow I understood that it was cold and needed a place of shelter. I offered him to come inside my snow plow but he wanted nothing to do with it.
He stood in the middle of the road an told me he was cold and it was my fault. He said the vehicle took off without him. He was outside when I came upon the craft. In their haste to evacuate the scene the other crew members left without him…I invited him inside the snowplow again. I told him I had to clear the roads and I could not leave him outside in the cold. Reluctantly he came inside, but not like you and I would climb inside. He just appeared. One minute he was standing in the middle of the road, the next minute he was inside the cab with me.
I would be lying to you if I said it didn’t scare me. I was nervous and frightened. I just remembered what my grandfather taught me and stayed calm…That was the longest night of my life. I made it to my destination uneventfully; all the time the space traveler was riding shotgun in the passenger’s seat. He paused and then a smile crossed his face. I think we must have made an unusual pair.
Once I made it to the 50 mile point. I turned around and began the journey back again. It was snowing hard. The roads were covered with another four inches of snow. On the return trip, the spacecraft appeared again, in the middle of the road at the exact same spot as I encountered it earlier. The star man suddenly disappeared. Within seconds, I saw him in front of the craft. The pulsating lights outlined his shape and in the dim light I detected a brief and simple salute or a wave, I am not sure, directed toward me and then he was gone. He just disappeared in the night along with the craft.
He told me the craft had malfunctioned. They set down in the middle of the road only momentarily for repairs. He was curious and had gone outside to do some testing of the snow. They didn’t realize it was a highway because of the storm. When I came upon them, my appearance shocked them, and in their confusion they took off without him. They had not expected anyone to appear in the middle of the storm.
To add to his dilemma, they were not allowed to make human contact so he was uneasy about being discovered. So they immediately took off, leaving him behind. In the process they violated several rules of their travel. He said they were a young crew and would likely lose their rights as explorers if their superiors discovered their mistake.
He was fascinated with the snowplow and how it worked. He considered it a rather primitive machine but one that he was curious about. He told me that humans put too much reliance on oil-based machines. He said they should spend their energy on studying the use of magnetic propulsion for travel. He could not understand why our scientists had gone in this direction.
He had never experienced snow before or the extreme cold. He said on his planet, the weather never varied. He had never been so cold in his entire life and hoped never to repeat the experience.
The alien was quiet most of the time. I was lost for words. I didn’t know what to ask a man from the stars, so I was quiet too. After he was gone I thought of a million questions, but when you are there and it is happening to you, it is different.
He was small in stature. He had a human form, but he wasn’t human. He could have passed for maybe a ten year old from a distance. His ability to appear and disappear fascinated me. I asked him about it, but he said that everyone from his world could come and go like that. He said I could do it, too. I just had to learn to use my brain in the right way. I didn’t understand what he meant.”
The day after this happened, a couple of military officers showed up at work and asked if anyone had reported strange lights or UFOs on the night of the storm. Of course, my boss told him there were no reports. I had not reported it either and neither had Ed, the other driver. I thought it was best to keep quiet so I never told them about the star man. When the military showed up, I played dumb too. I didn’t want to lose work because of some government investigation. Besides, the military has too much control in the this state anyway.”
It’s fascinating to contemplate the implication of acknowledging that “we are being visited, and have been visited for many years by people from outer space, from other civilizations.” (Lord Admiral Hill Norton)
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the ET phenomenon truly leaves no aspect of humanity untouched and greatly expands human consciousness and the way we perceive ourselves, the cosmos, and the nature of reality. Just think of all that would change when we consider not only the existence of off-world civilizations but also the technology they use to get here.
I feel human beings have the potential to create a human experience where everybody, including mother Earth, can thrive. I feel as if we are natural born explorers, meant to traverse the universe in search of discovering new worlds and other life. Perhaps this is what some of these beings visiting us are already doing. How do we get to experience this potential world? It seems we have to look at what holds us back. Our ideas, beliefs and worldviews, do they truly hold up to the information that’s out there? Would new worldviews create a new world, a new society? What would happen if humans were more in touch with the essence that is observing the thoughts we individually have, as opposed to just identifying with the thoughts? Is that essence who we truly are?
22 Scientists Publish Paper Claiming The PCR Test Is “Useless” For Detecting COVID-19 Cases
- The Facts:
22 researchers have put out a paper explaining why, according to them, it's quite clear that the PCR test is not effective in identifying COVID-19 cases. As a result we may be seeing a significant amount of false positives.
- Reflect On:
Why are we being discouraged to ask certain questions and share certain information that calls into question the official mainstream narrative about this pandemic?
What Happened: A recent publication titled “Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR” recently published in the Journal Eurosurveillance has come under fire by 22 scientists/independent researchers. The publication claims that the RT-qPCR tests used for detecting COVID-19 is quite robust and a useful tool, but the independent publication presents a number of scientific and methodological “blemishes” that has them confident “that the editorial board of Eurosurveillance has no other choice but to retract the publication.”
According to the researchers,
In light of our re-examination of the test protocol to identify SARS-CoV-2 described in the Corman-Drosten paper we have identified concerning errors and inherent fallacies which render the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test useless.
The conclude by stating,
The decision as to which test protocols are published and made widely available lies squarely in the hands of Eurosurveillance. A decision to recognize the errors apparent in the Corman-Drosten paper has the benefit to greatly minimise human cost and suffering going forward.
They are not specific when they refer to “human cost and suffering, but I believe they are referring to the implications of lockdown measures as a result of COVID cases. 50,000 doctors and scientists have signed a declaration strongly opposing lockdown measures for a number of reasons, more than 100 million people will be pushed to starvation as a result of global lockdowns, and lockdowns in the UK, for example, may have already killed more seniors than COVID itself.
Is it not in the best interest of Eurosurveillance to retract this paper? Our conclusion is clear. In the face of all the tremendous PCR-protocol design flaws and errors described here, we concluded: There is not much of a choice left in the framework of scientific integrity and responsibility.
You can read the entire paper and the evidence behind their reasoning, here. The site where the paper is found was put up by Prof. Dr. Ulrike Kämmerer, specialist in Virology / Immunology / Human Biology / Cell Biology, University Hospital Würzburg, Germany, Dr. Pieter Borger (MSc, PhD), Molecular Genetics, W+W Research Associate, Lörrach, Germany and Rajesh Kumar Malhotra (Artist Alias: Bobby Rajesh Malhotra), Former 3D Artist / Scientific Visualizations at CeMM – Center for Molecular Medicine of the Austrian Academy of Sciences (2019-2020), University for Applied Arts – Department for Digital Arts Vienna, Austria.
To view the credentials and affiliations of the other 19 authors, you can refer to the bottom of the paper.
Other Doubts That’ve Been Expressed About PCR Testing
The Deputy Medical Officer of Ontario, Canada, Dr. Barbara Yaffe recently stated that COVID-19 testing may yield at least 50 percent false positives. This means that people who test positive for COVID may not actually have it.
In July, professor Carl Heneghan, director for the centre of evidence-based medicine at Oxford University and outspoken critic of the current UK response to the pandemic, wrote a piece titled “How many Covid diagnoses are false positives?” He has argued that the proportion of positive tests that are false in the UK could also be as high as 50%.
Former scientific advisor at Pfizer, Dr. Mike Yeadon, also one of the authors of the paper discussed at the beginning of this article, argued that the proportion of positive tests that are false may actually be as high as 90%.
As far back as 2007, Gina Kolata published an article in the New York times about how declaring virus pandemics based on PCR tests can end in a disaster. The article was titled Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.
The Bulgarian Pathology Association claims that PCR tests are “scientific meaningless” to detect COVID-19. They cite an article published in “Off Guardian” that goes into more detail and explanation as to why.
The idea that many COVID-19 cases around the world could be false positives is quite a common theme. British Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab stated that,
The false positive rate is very high, so only seven percent of tests will be successful in identifying those that actually have the virus.
Is Raab implying a 93 percent false positive rate?
A Portuguese court recently determined that the PCR tests used to detect COVID-19 are not able to prove an infection beyond a reasonable doubt. You can read more about that story here.
A number of everyday citizens have also come forward expressing their doubts, including some high profile people like Elon Musk for example. He recently revealed he had four tests completed in one day. Using the same test and the same nurse, he received two positive results and two negative results, causing him to state his belief that “something bogus” is going on here. He then asked his Twitter following
“In your opinion, at what Ct number for the cov2 N1 gene should a PCR test probably be regarded as positive? If I’m asking the wrong question, what is a better question?”
In the Portuguese appeal hearing, Jaafar et al. (2020) was cited, stating that “if someone is testing by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the US), the probability that said person is infected is <3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%.” The court further noted that the cycle threshold used for the PCR tests currently being made in Portugal is unknown.
I just wanted to provide a brief background as to why there is so much controversy out there regarding COVID-19 testing and false positives.
On the other side of the coin,
According to Dr. Matthew Oughton, an infectious diseases specialist at the McGill University Health Centre and the Jewish General Hospital in Montreal:
”The rate of false positives with this particular test is quite low. In other words, if the test comes back saying positive, then believe it, it’s a real positive.”
According to Dr. Robert H. Shmerling, Senior Faculty Editor at Harvard Health Publishing.
False negatives – that is, a test that says you don’t have the virus when you actually do have the virus – may occur. The reported rate of false negatives is as low as 2% and as high as 37%. The false positive rate – that is, how often the test says you have the virus when you actually do not – should be close to zero. Most false-positive results are thought to be due to lab contamination or other problems with how the lab has performed the test, not limitations of the test itself
All of this being said, there is also a scientific consensus that infection cases are much higher and comparable to other respiratory viruses for example that already infect hundreds of millions a year, and that the survival rate for people under 70 is 99.95 percent. But there is a lot of controversy surrounding this as well.
It’s easy to see why so many people are confused and polarized when it comes to this topic. So many doctors, scientists, researchers and even politicians are providing evidence and claiming that these tests are going to have a very high false positive rate. Others, who are just as “renowned” with similar credentials are claiming that these tests are extremely accurate.
There are so many odd ‘things’ happening with this pandemic in terms of information that completely contradicts other information, not only with regards to the testing to detect the virus, but with regards to the severity of the virus as well. Never before have we seen people so polarized in their views, and this in itself is creating a big problem because it creates tension between us.
At the end of the day, we need to try and understand someone who does not share the same perspective as we do, and they should do the same without getting worked up. Our state of being when communicating is of utmost importance.
With so much confusion and lack of appropriate data to justify a lockdown, and with tens and thousands of doctors and scientists explaining how detrimental these measures are, I believe governments and health organizations should simply be presenting data and making recommendations based on science. Those who want to stay inside, wear masks and shut down their businesses for example, should have the option of doing that and those that don’t should have the option of doing that as well. Respiratory viruses kill tens of millions and infect hundreds of millions every single year, it’s not out of the box to treat this virus as we do all others, but that’s just my opinion, what’s yours?
Never before have so many people opposed and not trusted their government, yet we give these entities the power to make decisions and enforce them. Is this right? Especially when such a large majority, or minority, do not agree? Do governments actually execute the will of the people? Why do we continue to allow them to make such big decisions for us? Should it not be put to a vote? Should governments have the authority to shut things down whenever they please? Are they really executing the will of the people? Why do we simply rely on entities that may not have the best interests of humanity at heart?
The trouble we seem to be having is determining how to communicate about COVID, the fears we have around it, and how to come together as a community to ‘draw a line’ as to when we may be taking things too far.
COVID Vaccine Hesitancy Widespread, Even Among Medical Professionals
- The Facts:
Public health groups, including the World Health Organization, are making a concerted effort to reduce COVID vaccine hesitancy, as many medical professionals and minority groups remain doubtful about safety and efficacy.
- Reflect On:
Why is information about vaccines sometimes labeled by the mainstream as an "anti-vax conspiracy theory?" Why are concerns never really addressed properly and constantly ridiculed or unacknowledged?
It’s no secret that vaccine hesitancy is at an all time high, even among many physicians and scientists. This has actually been observed for a while. For example, one study published in the journal EbioMedicine in 2013 outlines this point, stating in the introduction:
Over the past two decades several vaccine controversies have emerged in various countries, including France, inducing worries about severe adverse effects and eroding confidence in health authorities, experts and science. These two dimensions are at the core of vaccine hesitancy (VH) observed in the general population. VH is defined as delay in acceptance of vaccination, or refusal, or even acceptance with doubts about its safety and benefits, with all these behaviours and attitudes varying according to context , vaccine and personal profile, despite the availability of vaccine services VH presents a challenge to physicians who must address their patients’ concerns about vaccines and ensure satisfactory vaccination coverage.
At a 2019 conference on vaccines put on by the World Health Organization this fact was emphasized by Professor Heidi Larson, a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project. She is referenced, as you can see, by the authors in the study above. At the conference, she emphasized that safety concerns among people and health professionals seem to be the biggest issue regarding vaccine hesitancy.
She also stated,
The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers, we have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen… still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider…
We have to ask ourselves the question, why? Vaccines are not a one size fits all product, in the US alone nearly $4 billion has been paid out to families of vaccine injured children, and a number of studies are calling into question their safety. Aluminum, for example, seems to be a concern. You can and read about why here, but that’s just one of multiple examples.
Here’s an example of a vaccine injury I recently wrote about regarding the HPV vaccine.
Below is an article that was recently published Jeremy Loffredo, a reporter for The Defender. It goes into details about vaccine hesitancy among health professionals when it comes to the new COVID vaccines that are about to hit the market.
As details on the latest COVID vaccine contenders flood the news cycle on a daily basis, reports of concerns regarding the safety and efficacy of the vaccine are widespread among many demographics, even including the professional medical community.
As vaccine hesitancy grows agencies, including the World Health Organization (WHO), are stepping up efforts to build vaccine confidence through public relations and communications campaigns.
Surveys reveal vaccine hesitancy
Researchers from the University of California Los Angeles’ Karin Fielding School of Public Health surveyed healthcare personnel working in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. As the Washington Post reported, they found that two thirds (66.5%) of healthcare workers “intend to delay vaccination,” meaning they do not intend to get the COVID vaccine when it becomes available. They plan instead on reviewing the data once it’s widely administered and proven safe.
Seventy-six percent of the vaccine-hesitant healthcare workers cited the “fast-tracked vaccine development” as a primary reason for their concerns. Typically, vaccines take between eight to 10 years to develop, Dr. Emily Erbelding, an infectious disease expert at National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told CNN in an article titled, “The timetable for a coronavirus vaccine is 18 months. Experts say that’s risky.”
The coronavirus vaccine frontrunners — Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca — are expected to make their debut in January. The pharmaceutical giants have exponentially accelerated the average safety and review timeline for vaccine development and production, to get the vaccines to market in under a year. Erbelding admitted that the accelerated pace will involve “not looking at all the data.”
Susan Bailey, president of the American Medical Association, said in a video that the number of physicians expressing hesitancy was “unprecedented” and “posed a real risk” to public confidence in vaccines.
A recent Gallup poll showed that only 58% of Americans plan on getting the COVID vaccine when it’s available. An October poll conducted by Zogby found that nearly 50% of Americans have concerns about the safety of the coming COVID vaccines.
A new collaborative survey project by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and Langer Research found that Black and Latinx Americans are overwhelmingly concerned about the coming COVID vaccine.
The survey, as reported in the Washington post, claims to be “one of the largest and most rigorous conducted on this topic to date.” It found that only 14% of Black Americans trust that a vaccine will be safe, while only 34% of Latinx Americans trust it will be safe.
The survey also found, in the context of COVID, only 19% percent of Black Americans trust drug companies, while less than a third trust the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to “look after their interests.”
According to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, a group of medical experts who advise the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), fears surrounding the painful or harmful side-effects of the COVID vaccine are rooted in reality.
According to CNBC, during a virtual Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ meeting on Nov. 23, Dr. Sandra Fryhofer told fellow CDC officials that patients need to be aware that the side effects from the COVID vaccines “will not be a walk in the park.” Fryhofer acknowledged that side effects from the vaccines have been reported to mimic symptoms of a mild case of COVID, including muscle pain, fever, chills and headache.
Fryhofer, who explained that both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID vaccines require two doses, worries that her patients might not come back for a second dose after experiencing potentially unpleasant side effects after the first shot.
As a participant of the Moderna vaccine trials noted “it was the sickest I’ve ever been.”
Health officials try to combat vaccine hesitancy
Despite this, officials at the forefront of the COVID response plan to combat vaccine safety concerns and hesitancy using, what some are calling, questionable psychological techniques.
For example, the WHO, which named “vaccine hesitancy” as the top global public health threat, has hired the PR firm Hill + Knowlton to identify micro-influencers, macro-influencers and “hidden heroes” on social media who could covertly promote the organization’s image as a COVID authority in order to “ensure WHO’s advice and guidance is followed.”
Cass Sunstein, the chairman of WHO’s Technical Advisory Group on Behavioral Insights, recently wrote an article in Bloomberg in which he promoted the use of popular celebrities, athletes and actors as tools for vaccine persuasion against those who “lack vaccine confidence.”
“Trusted politicians, athletes or actors — thought to be ‘one of us’ rather than ‘one of them’ — might explicitly endorse vaccination and report that they themselves have gotten the vaccine,” Sunstein wrote.
Then there’s the “Guide to COVID-19 Vaccine Communications,” developed by the University of Florida and the United Nations that aims to help governments improve COVID vaccine uptake. The authors of the guide promote the tactic of covertly using trusted community leaders to help with pro-vaccine information.
Citing vaccine hesitancy among the African American community, the guide suggests that barber shops and hair salons in predominantly black neighborhoods might be tapped to help disseminate approved vaccine messaging.
University Mathematician Decodes The Crop Circle With A Binary Code & Extraterrestrial Face
Did you know that crop circles are actually real? How they’re made and who or what is making them is...
Russian Military Colonel Publishes An Article Claiming Human & Animal Telepathy Is 100 Percent Real
Is telepathy real? It’s hard to argue against it; in fact, I would say that it’s not really up for...