Connect with us

Alternative News

22 Scientists Publish Paper Claiming The PCR Test Is “Useless” For Detecting COVID-19 Cases

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • 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?

Follow me on Instagram here. Make sure you follow Collective Evolution on Telegram as we have no idea how much longer we will be on Facebook.

advertisement - learn more

UPDATED ARTICLE: 22 Scientists Publish Paper Claiming The PCR Test Is “Useless” For Detecting COVID-19 Cases.

-->Free e-Guide - Your Body Electric: An Introduction to Bioenergetics: Dr. Christine Schaffner will help you learn the basic principles of energy, frequency and vibrational healing! Click here to learn more!

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,

advertisement - learn more

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.

The Takeaway

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.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

People Injured By COVID Vaccines In U.S. Will Not Receive Compensation From VICP

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    A new article published in the New England Journal of Medicine outlines why those injured by the COVID-19 vaccine won't be eligible for compensation from the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) while COVID is still an "emergency."

  • Reflect On:

    Is a COVID-19 vaccine requirement for travel, school attendance, employment and other freedoms, unethical? Should freedom of choice always remain? Does the vaccine have the ability to stop transmission and infection?

Many countries have a vaccine injury compensation program. Canada, for example, recently created one just prior to the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine. These programs compensate people who have been and are injured by one or more vaccines, which in some cases have been known to cause hospitalizations due to severe adverse reactions, permanent disabilities and even death. Federal health regulatory agencies claim these are extremely rare events, that approximately one in a million people suffer these kinds of injuries. This may be very true, but no statistics, information or sources are provided, and vaccine injury reporting systems, like the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in the United States, for example, only capture an estimated one percent of vaccine injuries because the majority of them are believed to be unreported. There is information out there that that claims otherwise. For example, an HHS pilot study conducted by the Federal Agency for Health Care Research found that 1 in every 39 vaccines in the United States caused some type of injury, which is a shocking comparison to the 1 in every million claim.

The Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) protects the vaccine manufacturers (pharmaceutical companies) from any liability, and the money comes out of the taxpayers pocket. In the United States, the VICP has paid out more than $4 billion dollars due to vaccine injuries. Since 2015, the program has paid out an average total of $216 million to an average of 615 claimants each year.

When it comes to the COVID-19 vaccine, those who are injured will not be eligible for compensation under the VICP. An article recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine explains,

The United States has developed a robust system for vaccine-injury compensation to alleviate the burdens of adverse medical consequences of vaccines. But this system will be unavailable to people who receive Covid-19 vaccines during the declared public health emergency. All potential vaccine recipients, and especially people in high-risk communities, therefore face a dilemma: should they risk becoming infected or risk having a vaccine injury without sufficient access to compensation?

The declaration of a public health emergency by the Department of Health and Human Services in March 2020, however, resulted in exclusion of Covid-19 vaccine injuries from the VICP. This declaration triggered the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, a federal law that requires that all people injured by vaccines given as countermeasures during a declared emergency bring claims under only the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). The CICP is far less generous and less accessible than the VICP. It compensates people for only the most serious injuries, has a higher burden of proof than the VICP, has a 1-year statute of limitations after the date of vaccination, and limits awards for damages. For example, the CICP limits lost-income recovery to $50,000 for each year out of work and doesn’t include compensation for pain, suffering, or emotional distress.

As a result, people who are vaccinated during the declared public health emergency will be less likely to obtain compensation for injuries associated with Covid-19 vaccines than they would be for injuries from vaccines included in the VICP. Furthermore, the process for pursuing compensation will be lengthier, more difficult, and more expensive because reimbursement for attorneys’ fees is unavailable. People vaccinated during a declared public health emergency can never pursue injury claims under the VICP, even if their symptoms manifest or are linked to the vaccine after the declaration is lifted.

Current projections suggest that the United States will achieve sufficient herd immunity to lift the emergency declaration by the fall of 2021. This development may well allow Covid-19 vaccine-injury claimants who delay vaccination to file under the VICP as long as the CDC has recommended the vaccine for children or pregnant women (the CDC already recommends the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children 16 years of age or older). For lower-income workers, including many “essential workers,” however, delaying vaccination until the end of the declared public health emergency would be especially dangerous. These workers are often at high risk for infection because of their close contact with other people at their workplaces. At the same time, low-income people who most need to be vaccinated are also least able to weather the health and financial outcomes of a serious vaccine injury, especially if the CICP is their only option for compensation.

Only people who can afford to wait for Covid-19 vaccination until the emergency declaration has ended and the CDC acts will be able to file injury claims under the VICP. This group will probably consist largely of people who can continue working remotely and socially isolating until they feel adequately assured of the vaccine’s safety profile.

Vaccine injuries are nothing new and injuries have been reported for various vaccines. For example, according to a MedAlerts search of the  (VAERS) database, as of today, the cumulative raw count of adverse events from measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR) alone is: 83,997 adverse events, 1,809 disabilities, 6,618 hospitalizations, and 428 deaths.

Today I did a search on COVID-19 vaccine injuries in the United States. So far, according to VAERS, there have been 181 deaths and 65 permanent disabilities out of the nearly 8000 adverse events reported as a result of the vaccine. Keep in mind, approximately 20 million have been administered so far. Many people have not reported adverse events, and there are still many more doses to be administered.

I also recently wrote about how Norway has registered a total of 29 deaths among people over the age of 75 who’ve had their first Covid-19 vaccination shot, raising questions over which groups to target in national inoculation programs. You can read more about that here.

Keep in mind the number of doses that have been administered with various vaccines that have resulted in no harmful adverse reactions and events is quite high.

These issues bring up concerns regarding the ethics of mandatory vaccine measures. Many of these measures are already in place in many countries for children who wish to attend public school. The backbone of mandating vaccines is the claim that they help protect the whole by providing herd immunity. This claim has also come under intense scrutiny. When it comes to the MMR vaccine, for example, there are multiple examples of outbreaks in highly vaccinated population that suggest a failing vaccine as opposed to failure to vaccinate. You can see a few documented examples in this article.

In a 2014 analysis in the Oregon Law Review by New York University (NYU) legal scholars Mary Holland and Chase E. Zachary (who also has a Princeton-conferred doctorate in chemistry), the authors claim that 60 years of compulsory vaccine policies “have not attained herd immunity for any childhood disease.” This is one of multiple reasons why so many suggest voluntary choice as opposed to vaccine mandates.

There is also a lot of information out there suggesting that vaccines save lives and do protect the whole, but in my opinion it’s clearly not a black and white issue. Given the fact that it’s not black and white, I believe freedom of choice should always remain. Health authorities and government can always recommend and encourage people to get vaccinated, but ultimately I believe the decision should always lie with the person, or the parents.

Vaccine hesitancy is on the rise among many people, doctors and scientists for a number of reasons. I recently wrote about how 50 percent of healthcare workers in Riverside County, California are refusing to take the COVID vaccine. It’s something that seems to be happening all around the globe, especially in the United States. You can read more about that and find more sources that illustrate how widespread vaccine hesitancy among healthcare professionals has become, here

When it comes to the COVID-19 vaccine, what appears to be in our near future is a lack of access to certain freedoms for people who do not want to receive it. This may include international travel, access into certain institutions,  concerts, shopping malls etc. Some employers may even require their employees to receive the vaccination if they want to keep working for their company. We still have yet to see what’s going to happen, but no doubt many ethical concerns are already being raised.

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

FBI Document Claims US Government Brought Down Extraterrestrial Craft With Bodies Inside

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The most viewed document from the FBI archives touches upon the idea that the US Government was responsible for three UFO crashes in 1950. Each craft had three bodies inside.

  • Reflect On:

    Are we being visited? How long have we been visited? How many different races have visited us? Why? Why the secrecy? Is humanity ready for "contact"? What are the implications? Do "they" avoid mass and open contact?

Follow me on Instagram here. Make sure you follow Collective Evolution on Telegram as we have no idea how much longer we will be on Facebook

Apollo 13 astronaut Dr. Edgar Mitchell once told the world that “Yes there have been crashed craft, and bodies recovered.” He is seen making these statements in this documentary. Eric W. Davis, a renowned astrophysicist who worked with the Pentagon UFO program stated that he gave a classified briefing to a Defense Department Agency, as recently as March 2020 about retrievals from “off-world vehicles not made on this Earth.” Christopher Mellon, a former Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary for Intelligence from 1997 to 2002 has confirmed that he was  present during this testimony. He himself has been quite outspoken about the phenomenon over the past few years.  Dr. David Clarke, an investigative journalist, reader and lecturer at Sheffield Hallam University who was also the curator for The National Archives UFO Project from 2008–2013, came across some interesting documents suggesting that the UK was desperate to capture UFO technology. Paul Hellyer, former Canadian defence minister claimed that the protocol when military jets were scrambled to intercept a UFO was to “shoot first and ask questions after.”

The thought of attempting show aggressive actions against objects that show no aggression themselves is concerning to me. This activity on our part (humans) comes when the behaviour of these objects are not indicative of any type of threat. They often perform evasive maneuvers to avoid our aircraft and the majority of the time, there is no type of retaliation observed. This makes one question our own behaviour and the way our governments have responded to the UFO phenomenon, it’s not something to be proud of in my opinion.

The information above isn’t even the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the topic of crash/UFO retrievals. There are numerous stories suggesting that multiple governments have been successful in bringing down these craft in an attempt to find out more about them and also, perhaps, reverse engineer them. Roswell is not the only case. Here’s an article I’ve wrote about the 1941 Cape Girardeau UFO crash, for example.

Colonel Ross Dedrickson, who had a long stint with the Air Force as well as the US Atomic Energy commision claimed that the detonation of nuclear weapons polluted the magnetic field which some of these craft relied on to operate.

What Happened: A document that made some noise within the mainstream in 2013 due to the fact that’s it’s been viewed more than 1 million times and is, according to the FBI, their most viewed document, reads as follows:

An investigator from the Air Force stated that three so-called flying saucers had been recovered in New Mexico. They were described as being circular in shape with raised centers, approximately 50 feet in diameter. Each one was occupied by three bodies of human shape but only 3 feet tall, dressed in metallic cloth of a very fine texture. Each body was bandaged in a manner similar to the blackout suits used by speed flyers and test pilots.

According to Mr. (redacted) informant, the saucers were found in New Mexico due to the fact that the Government has a very high-powered radar set-up in that area and it is believed the radar interferes with the controlling mechanisms of the saucers.

It was written by Guy Hottel, who was the head of the FBI’s field office in Washington at the time, and addressed to FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. Many believe that the memo is based on a hoax that was carried out by a convicted con man named Silas Newton. Who really knows? At the end of the day one thing is certain, we know that “these objects are here, they’re real” and that “this is happening now.” – Mellon (mentioned at the beginning of the article).

Manuel Kirklin and other veterans have also hinted to the idea that some of these objects have been brought down because of radar. Here’s a brief clip of Kirklin explaining.

The document is from the 1950s, a time when UFOs were quite popular within the mainstream due to the fact that an explosion of sightings were observed and documented after the United States dropped the atomic bomb. There was so much public interest that that President Truman held a press conference during this time and stated that they talk about the subject of UFOs at “every conference that they’ve had with the military.” Going on to state that “there’s always things like that going on, flying saucers and they’ve had other things you know.” This was also around the time (1952) when several unknown objects flew over the White House. Jets were scrambled and as they approached the vicinity of the objects, they (the objects) accelerated at a tremendous pace and vanished.

If all of this was going on 70 years ago, what has been discovered today? To me, crashed craft represents a loss of life. It’s not something to be happy about. In fact, these events in my opinion are quite sad.

Final Thoughts: Mainstream media UFO disclosure is exploding after a decades long campaign of ridicule and secrecy. Many people are concerned about this given the fact that trust in government as well as big media has fallen and continues to do so. This is, in my opinion, because big media outlets are notorious for controlling our perception of various events and issues. This is why they have such strong connections to intelligence agencies, government and big corporations. I believe it’s a big form of mind control.

When it comes to mainstream UFO disclosure, I go much deeper into the conversation in an article I recently published which you can read here.

It’s quite interesting to ponder the idea that we are being visited and have been visited for longer than we know. Based on my research, this topic is somehow, in a way I can’t explain here, connected with human consciousness. I believe it’s a catalyst for us to become aware of aspects of ourselves we are not fully aware of yet, as well as one for questioning why we live on this planet the way we do. I believe it forces us to ask more questions about ourselves and the nature of reality as we know it, and perhaps ponder if there are better ways we can operate here on planet Earth. We are a race with unlimited potential, I have no doubt that we can create an experience where humans can live in harmony with the planet and all life can thrive. I feel we are natural explorers and naturally curious beings, I feel we are meant to traverse the stars and explore even more. I do not feel we are all supposed to go to school, get a job, pay bills and die. There has got to be a way where everybody can have their basic needs met which opens us all up to a new level of freedom. Ask yourself, if money wasn’t a ‘thing’ or an issue, and we all had our needs met, what would we do? Would we crave material desires and sources outside of ourselves for happiness? Or would we start exploring, contemplating, questioning and discovering?

Is humanity ready for contact? Is human consciousness at a proper point? Are we still ruled by greed, ego, the desire for power and control or are we ready to operate from a place within that serves the collective? Can our world operate from a system of cooperation and service to other instead of a competitive, every person for themselves type of mentality?

Photo Credit: An illustration of the incident can be found at the Roswell UFO Museum. (Courtesy of Roswell UFO Museum)

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Media Blackout: Italian Bars & Restaurants Disobey Rules & Open Together In Civil Disobedience

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Thousands of restaurants appear to have opened in Italy in defiance of the country’s strict coronavirus lockdown regulations.

  • Reflect On:

    Are governments doing the right thing? What does the data about lockdowns say? Is it causing more harm than good? Is it having any impact at all on the spread of COVID-19? What are and have been the consequences of lockdown?

Make sure you follow Collective Evolution on Telegram as we have no idea how much longer we will be on Facebook. Follow me on Instagram here.

Article update: Apparently this didn’t last long, it was a 1-2 day event from what I’ve heard from a contact in Italy, but it’s hard to find accurate/up to date information on it. Others have told me it’s been big there and media has not been able to ignore it.

What Happened: Despite no mainstream media coverage, people are starting to become aware of what seems to be a mass civil disobedience campaign in Italy against lockdown measures (#IoApro). An estimated 50,000 bars, restaurants and other businesses are defying government orders and are remaining open to the public, together. We cannot confirm the exact number. UK journalist Damian Wilson writes, “if the number of 50,000 establishments currently on board is to be believed, it’s a movement growing by the day.”

EuroNews is one of the few outlets on the scene providing coverage.

One frustrated restaurateur said the move was as “a polite protest” and another“civil disobedience”, as they invited customers to dine on Friday night despite measures put in place to fight the spread of COVID-19.  Armando Minotti, owner of Loste Ria restaurant in the south of the city, said “we cannot go on this way” – recent losses were making it impossible to provide for his children and he said government financial aid wasn’t enough. “Let’s call this a polite protest. If the guards come in, and they surely will, we will let them in, we will accept the fine but we are going to stay open and we won’t close any more. Because it is impossible to go on like this,” he added. Across the city, pizzas were churned out of the ovens at Fuoco & Farina where owner Max Vietri admitted to seeing the action as “civil disobedience”.

The Express in the UK also did, along with a few others.

People sit at a restaurant as bars and restaurants reopen in ‘yellow zones’ of Italy after the government relaxed some of the coronavirus disease curbs on weekdays following a strict lockdown over the holidays, in Rome, Italy January 7, 2021. © REUTERS/Yara Nardi

A popular hashtag is also providing information from various social media users who are uploading articles and videos. The hashtag is #IoApro. If you view this hashtag on twitter, you can see some pretty large protests. As the #IoApro (I am open) momentum builds, politicians like Vittorio Sgarbi are supporting the restaurants with a message against the rules in which he urges establishments, “Open up and don’t worry, in the end we will make them eat their fines.”

Why This Is Important: Whether you are a world renowned scientist, doctor, academic, journalist, politician, or anybody for that matter who opposes government lockdown measures as a way to combat COVID-19, you’re going to face the consequences. In Ontario, Canda, for example, a member of Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s caucus was fired for speaking out against his own government’s policies and calling for an end to the province-wide pandemic lockdown. “The lockdown isn’t working,” wrote York Centre Progressive Conservative MPP Roman Baber in a letter to Ford.  “It’s causing an avalanche of suicides, overdoses, bankruptcies, divorces and takes an immense toll on our children. Dozens of leading doctors implored you to end the lockdowns.” (source)

Over the last few months, I have seen academic articles and op-eds by professors retracted or labeled “fake news” by social media platforms. Often, no explanation is provided. I am concerned about this heavy-handedness and, at times, outright censorship. – Vinay Prasad, MD, MPH (source)

If you’re a public figure in such a position as Barber was, you face losing your job. If you’re a scientist or a doctor, you risk losing your social media accounts for sharing your opinion, and if you’re an independent media outlet like Collective Evolution, you risk having your life’s work deleted from popular social media platforms.  But that still hasn’t stopped information from spreading.

Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science. – Kamran Abbas, Executive Editor of the British Medical Journal, and the editor of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization. (soure)

Four professors from Stanford School of Medicine have published a paper showing that lockdowns, stay at home orders and business closures are not an effective tool for stopping the spread of COVID. There are many studies claiming the same. You can access that study here and read more about the harms of lockdown, its consequences and its supposed ability to stop the spread of COVID. There are dozens upon dozens of studies providing data that argue against lockdown measures.

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist, Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician and epidemiologist  where the initiators of the The Great Barrington Declaration. The declaration has an impressive list co-signers, and has also now been signed by more than 50,000 doctors and scientists and more than 700,000 concerned citizens, which is pretty impressive given the fact that it’s received no attention from mainstream media. It explains why they oppose lockdown measures. Follow their twitter account here.

The point is, one perspective is dominating the mainstream media and political circles, while the other is being censored, ignored, and ridiculed by these powerful platforms. This alone has been a catalyst for many people to question what exactly is going on here, and that’s always a positive thing.

The Takeaway: Do we really want to live in a world where questioning actions taken by our governments, and whether or not they are in our best interest, can be shut down and discouraged? Is this not the responsibility of all people? Do governments actually represent the will of the people these days? Or do they represent other agendas?  Why are we all so polarized in our beliefs? Can we not see the perspective of another and try to understand why they feel the way they do? Does this mean freedom of choice should always remain, and that governments should simply make recommendations and allow people to do as they please? When measures become unacceptable in the eyes of many, is the only solution mass, peaceful civil disobedience? What else can be done in this situation for all those who are suffering the consequences of lockdown measures? Can the mainstream media make the majority seem like the minority, and the minority seem like the majority?

Dive Deeper

These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.

Amongst 100's of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

Join CETV, engage with these courses and more here!

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Due to censorship, please join us on Telegram

We post important content to Telegram daily so we don't have to rely on Facebook.

You have Successfully Subscribed!