Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

MSNBC Misinfo: Zeke Emanuel Peddles Fear, Says Unvaxxed Children ‘Likely To Get Serious Case Of Covid’

By Tyler Durden | Zero Hedge | February 5, 2022

Dr Ezekiel Emanuel – former Biden Covid-19 adviser and brother of former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel (and the real ‘Ari Gold’ from Entourage) appeared on MSNBC Wednesday, where he proceeded to peddle the lie that unvaccinated children are ‘likely’ to get a ‘serious’ case of Covid.

“This repeats what we’ve seen in older kids, five and above, where we know the vaccine does protect very well. And there we still have under 50%, I believe, of the children vaccinated, and that’s a serious problem for the country,” Emanuel told host Kristen Welker after she asked about parents’ willingness to vaccinate their children. “Parents have to be more willing – I think they hear some of these rare side effects and think they’re very common.”

With the omicron variant, kids are either going to get the vaccine or they’re likely to get a serious condition of omicronHaving omicron with the vaccine is almost invariably going to be better and safer for children,” Emanuel added. “I am confused about parents’ attitudes. Five and above seems like a no-brainer. Two to five, I understand some hesitancy. Two and under with the small dose, I think probably a very good idea.”

It’s been widely established that Omicron is a relatively mild strain of Covid – from which children face an extremely low risk.

Another recent study cited by economist Emily Oster also reiterated the extremely low risk young children face of severe COVID-19 outcomes. “What we can say is that based on everything we know, the risks to small children from COVID-19 are extremely small,” she wrote. –Fox News

MSNBC faced harsh criticism over Emanuel’s statement.

The network even tweeted (and then deleted) the easily debunked misinformation, receiving a serious ratio of comments to ‘likes.’

Intentional? Or…

Following the backlash, Emanuel issued a Saturday tweet in which he says he “misspoke.”

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 4 Comments

Steve’s fact-based COVID-19 hub

By Steve Kirsch | February 2, 2022

Spotify made a press release about their new platform policies which prohibits any information which in their sole opinion may cause offline harm or poses a direct threat to public health. They refer people to their “fact-based” COVID-19 hub for accurate information.

I think their “fact-based” hub is filled with misinformation, so I decided to write my own simplified version that takes just a couple of minutes to read.

Here it is:

  1. Early treatments using repurposed drugs in a proven protocol are the best way to treat COVID. Treating as soon as symptoms appear is key. Fareed and Tyson have now treated over 10,000 people infected with COVID without any deaths as long as the people arrived early in the disease. The NIH and CDC ignore these treatments. I recommend you choose an early treatment protocol where there have been at least 10,000 COVID patients treated early without a single death (such as the Fareed-Tyson protocol), and start it as soon as you have symptoms.
  2. The evidence is clear that all of the current COVID vaccines available in the US today are both unsafe and ineffective. They are not suitable for anyone because they are more likely to kill you than to save you. If they don’t kill you, they may permanently damage your immune system or leave you permanently disabled. Avoid these at all costs. After 90 days, it appears that the vaccines have negative efficacy against Omicron, making you up to twice as likely to be infected. This is likely why case rates are so high in highly vaccinated countries. See Incriminating Evidence for details.
  3. Cloth and surgical masks do not work. There have been just two randomized trials with masks and COVID (Denmark and Bangladesh) and they proved that surgical and cloth masks have no effect. Similarly, N95 masks do not work in practice either. The FAA rules basically require you to wear these masks on planes, mandating a medical intervention that is much more likely to make you sick and has no chance to protect you. See Incriminating Evidence for details.
  4. If you require PPE that might protect you from COVID, consider a 3M respirator with a P100 filter. Even better is to use a PAPR with your respirator (with a P100 or P3 filter). See this article on masks and respirators for details. These products that protect you do not protect others. The FAA will not allow these devices on a plane.
  5. Social distancing is not the right way to think about risk reduction. Think instead the 4 D’s: draft, distance, density, duration. Putting yourself in an unventilated small room at close distance to a source for a long duration will maximize your exposure. The 6 foot rule for standing in line is nonsensical since as soon as you enter the airspace of the person in front of you, you will be breathing the virus from people who were standing in that spot hours (to days) ago (depending on the ventilation in the area). There is absolutely nothing magical about 6 feet.
  6. Mitigation strategies such as testing, masking, isolation, and vaccination are largely ineffective. See this article for a convincing example.
  7. The best way to treat COVID is to do the opposite of what the CDC and FDA advises. So when they tell you to mask up, get boosted, avoid all repurposed drugs and supplements (including ivermectin, HCQ, fluvoxamine, vitamin D, zinc, aspirin, budesonide, etc), take paxlovid, molnupiravir, and remdesivir, you know what to do.
  8. There is only significant spread if you have symptoms. For example, in a study in China, they looked at 1,174 close contacts of these asymptomatic individuals and could not find ONE CASE of a person getting COVID from the asymptomatic people. Therefore, testing asymptomatic people is unnecessary because it is a lot of effort for near 0 gain.
  9. Omicron is very mild compared to Delta. After you recover from an Omicron infection, data shows you will be protected from Delta as well.
  10. As of December 3, 2021, Omicron had spread to 38 countries, but the WHO couldn’t find anyone who died from Omicron. How is this a national emergency?
  11. People who get the virus and recover are always better off than a vaccinated patient. Unlike vaccinated people, if a naturally infected patient is ever re-infected, they cannot transmit the virus to others (as far as we know so far).
  12. Censorship of COVID advice by social media (in particular the hazards of the vaccines and the effectiveness of early treatment protocols) has cost hundreds of thousands of lives.
  13. None of the health authorities issuing mandates and directives are willing to participate in a recorded scientific discussion with the so-called “misinformation spreaders” such as Robert Malone, Peter McCullough, Robert Kennedy, … Our authorities are afraid of the truth.
  14. The CDC, FDA, and NIH are all corrupt agencies that have looked the other way at safety signals. There are over 1M adverse events in VAERS and these represent over 40M adverse events in the real world. This is unprecedented, yet the CDC isn’t able to find a safety signal other than a “slightly elevated” risk of myocarditis. Attempts to bring the VAERS data to their attention is futile. They won’t even do a proper calculation of the underreporting factor which is required to do a proper risk-benefit analysis. They ignore the DMED data entirely.

Compare my fact-based COVID-19 hub to Spotify’s and let me know which one you like better.

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , | Leave a comment

Vaccinators Won’t Stop Vaccinating

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | February 4, 2022

Many experts have sounded the alarm that the COVID-19 pandemic was all about the shot1 and a larger agenda to impose totalitarian control worldwide.2 Already, one shot has turned into two doses and a third booster. A fourth booster is also being discussed, including by Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel, who said that the efficacy of the third shot is likely to decline over several months, necessitating another shot soon thereafter.3

“I will be surprised when we get that data in the coming weeks that it’s holding nicely over time — I would expect that it’s not going to hold great,” Bancel said in an interview with Goldman Sachs.4 Conveniently, Moderna is working on an Omicron-specific jab that they hope to release as early as March 20225 — and this is only the beginning.

Writing on Substack, contributor Eugyppius explained, “Moderna, just one of multiple pharmaceuticals eager to exploit our new vaccine mania, are expanding their manufacturing capacity to produce as many as 6 billion mRNA vaccine doses per year.”6 The information came straight from the horse’s mouth, at a virtual meeting held the first day of the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Davos Agenda 2022, at a session titled “COVID-19: What’s Next?”7

Along with Bancel, the meeting was attended by Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Richard Hatchett, CEO of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and professor Annelies Wilder-Smith from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, who together detailed their plans for “vaccine mania” to persist indefinitely.

Combined Shots Planned to Avoid ‘Compliance Issues’

During the discussion, Bancel states that Moderna is actively preparing for “what should the vaccine be in the fall of 2022, and what should it contain.” The company is “working with public health experts like Fauci’s team to figure this out. Because soon we’re going to have to decide what goes into the vaccine for fall of 2022,” he said.8

Fauci’s NIAID is part of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH), which, some may be surprised to learn, actually owns half the patent for Moderna’s COVID-19 injection. In fact, the NIH owns thousands of pharmaceutical patents, and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention spends $4.9 billion a year out of its $12 billion budget buying and distributing vaccines.

“Tony Fauci was able to choose, to designate, four of his high-level employees who each get individual patent shares,” according to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in an interview with James Corbett.9 “They will collect $150,000 a year for life if the Moderna vaccine is approved, which it has been.”10

In addition to working closely with Fauci, Moderna is planning to combine multiple shots, such as a COVID-19 shot, a flu shot and a respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) shot, into one injection — coming in 2023 — to help avoid “compliance issues.” He said:11

“The other piece we’re working on is for 2023, is how do we make it possible from a societal standpoint that people want to be vaccinated?

And we’re going to do this by preparing combinations, we’re working on the flu vaccine, we’re working on an RSV vaccine, and our goal is to be able to have a single annual booster, so that we don’t have compliance issues, where people don’t want to get two to three shots a winter, but they get one dose, where they get a booster for corona, and a booster for flu and RSV, to make sure that people get their vaccine.”

When asked how soon this would occur, he continued:12,13

“So the RSV program is now in Phase 3, the flu program is in Phase 2 and soon in Phase 3, I hope as soon as second quarter of this year. So the best case scenario would be the fall of 2023, as a best case scenario, I don’t think it would [be available] in every country, but we believe it’s possible to operate in some countries next year.”

Vaccines for at Least 20 Pathogens in the Works

SARS-Cov-2 isn’t the only virus that Moderna and other pharmaceutical companies, along with health officials, are intent on targeting with more shots. Remember zika virus, which Kennedy described as another pandemic fabricated for the purpose of selling pharmaceuticals and advancing totalitarian control?14 There’s a vaccine on the way.

How about Nipah virus? Nipah virus, a zoonotic pathogen for which no treatments exist, is the inspiration for the film “Contagion.”15 The virus can only be experimented on in BSL-4 laboratories. As an aside, the National Bio and Agro-Defence Facility in Kansas will be the first biocontainment facility16 in the U.S. where research on Nipah (and Ebola) can be conducted on livestock.

In 2019, Nipah Malaysia was also among the deadly virus strains shipped17 from Canada’s National Microbiology Lab to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. If you haven’t heard of Nipah yet, you likely will soon — another vaccine is in the works for it. Bancel said:18,19

“We’re working with Dr. Fauci’s team, we’re working with Richard [Hatchett], to work on many more pathogens … The entire scientific community has known for years that there’s at least around 20-ish pathogens that are a risk for which we need vaccines, you know we have zika vaccine in Phase 2 … we’re working on a Nipah vaccine, those are viruses that not everybody has heard of.

Because we need to have the data. What dose, what construct from a genetic standpoint is required … so that if a new pathogen emerges from that family we can very quickly move into a Phase 3.”

More mRNA Shots Are Coming

Many other vaccines are also under development, including a Phase 3 study looking at combining Pfizer’s COVID-19 injection with their Prevnar 20™ (pneumococcal 20-valent conjugate vaccine) for adults aged 65 and older.20

In a related news release, Kathrin U. Jansen, Ph.D., senior vice president and head of vaccine research and development at Pfizer spoke about the importance of “raising awareness of the importance of adult” vaccinations, echoing Bancel in their desire to create combination shots so adults can get multiple vaccines at one doctor or pharmacy visit.

“As the COVID-19 vaccines and booster doses continue to be administered, we believe that health care providers have an opportunity to talk to their adult patients about other recommended vaccines in line with CDC guidance,” she said.21

An agreement between Pfizer and BioNTech to develop the first mRNA shingles vaccine was also reached in January 2022.22 According to a Pfizer news release, “While there are currently approved vaccines for shingles, there is an opportunity to develop an improved vaccine that potentially shows high efficacy and better tolerability, and is more efficient to produce globally, by utilizing mRNA technology.”23

A Phase 1 study by Moderna for its mRNA Epstein-Barr virus shot is also underway. The first dose of the experimental shot was given to a study subject January 5, 2022,. In a news release, Moderna detailed their intent on rolling out additional mRNA vaccines against a number of additional viruses as well:24

“The start of this Phase 1 study is a significant milestone as we continue to advance mRNA vaccines against latent viruses, which remain in the body for life after infection and can lead to chronic medical conditions. Moderna is committed to developing a portfolio of first-in-class vaccines against latent viruses for which there are no approved vaccines today, including vaccines against CMV [cytomegalovirus], EBV and HIV.

Our research team is working to bring even more vaccines against latent viruses to the clinic. We believe these vaccines could have a profound impact on quality of health for hundreds of millions of people around the world.”

Other mRNA shots also in development include:

  • An mRNA cancer vaccine for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)25
  • mRNA influenza shots, which are under development by several companies, including Pfizer, Moderna, Sanofi and Translate Bio26
  • An mRNA HIV vaccine, one of which is being studied by Moderna in collaboration with the NIH27
  • Various additional mRNA cancer vaccines, including one targeting advanced melanoma — being developed by BioNTech and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals28 — and several being developed by Moderna, targeting melanoma, NSCLC, colorectal cancer and pancreatic cancer29

Ramping Up Production for Billions of Doses

In case there were any doubt that the powers that be intend to use injections as an increasingly integral part of your health care routine and daily life, Bancel described plans for billions of doses of shots to be manufactured in a matter of months. He said during the WEF session:30,31

“The other piece is manufacturing. If you look in 2020, we were able to ship 20 million doses to the U.S. government when the vaccine was authorized. That is not a lot.

But this year we’re going to have 2 to 3 billion doses of capacity in a six-month timeframe, which is what I believe it will take us to get authorization of a vaccine, if all the work has been done before … you could have 1.5 billion doses available in six months, and that’s just from Moderna. And you have other platforms, it could be a much bigger number …”

With censorship now so pervasive, and Big Tech colluding with dictators and pharmaceutical companies to bury the harms occurring through these experimental vaccines — including death — it’s now more important than ever to let your voice be heard in support of medical freedom and opposition of government health officials intimidating, threatening and coercing citizens to violate their conscientiously-held beliefs.

The ethical principal of informed consent to medical risk taking, which includes the legal right to make voluntary decisions about getting experimental injections, must be protected. For now, however, as Eugyppius explained:32

“The vaccinators are a great sword of Damocles over our heads. As I type this, they are scouring the earth for the novel pathogens their products require, and they, together with their bureaucratic and academic allies, will do their level best to call into being new pandemic scares and vaccination campaigns whenever possible — perhaps every flu season.”

Sources and References

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , , | 1 Comment

EU Wants To Keep Vaccine Passports In Place For Another ENTIRE YEAR

By Steve Watson | Summit News | February 4, 2022

The unelected bureaucrat governors of the EU in the European Commission have proposed keeping the bloc’s COVID vaccine passport system in place for another entire year, despite the fact that many member countries are ramping down restrictions.

In a notice on its website, the Commission states “Today the European Commission is proposing to extend the EU Digital COVID Certificate by a year, until 30 June 2023.”

It continues, “The COVID-19 virus continues to be prevalent in Europe and at this stage it is not possible to determine the impact of a possible increase in infections in the second half of 2022 or of the emergence of new variants.”

“Extending the Regulation will ensure that travellers can continue using their EU Digital COVID Certificate when travelling in the EU where Member States maintain certain public health measures,” the statements adds.

It continues, “The Commission is adopting the proposal today to make sure the European Parliament and the Council can conclude the legislative procedure in time before the current Regulation expires.”

The move comes even as several countries, including Denmark, Norway, ItalySwedenFrance, in addition to non-EU countries such as Switzerland and England move to scrap restrictions including the vaccine passes.

The European Commission admits in its statement that it is up to the individual countries whether they carry on using the EU COVID vaccine passport scheme.

“The domestic use of EU Digital COVID Certificates remains a matter for Member States to decide, the statement notes, adding “The EU legislation on the EU Digital COVID Certificate neither prescribes nor prohibits the domestic use of EU Digital COVID Certificate (such as for access to events or restaurants).”

It also notes that “At the same time, where a Member State establishes a system of COVID-19 certificate for domestic purposes, it should continue to ensure that the EU Digital COVID Certificate is also fully accepted for those purposes. Beyond that, the Commission also encourages Member States to align their domestic validity periods with the validity period set at EU level for the purpose of travel.”

As we reported in November, despite vaccine passport schemes and high vaccination rates in many of the countries affected, COVID cases across Europe continued to surge as winter kicked in.

In addition, a recent investigation by experts in Spain concluded that vaccine passports have no significant impact on reducing COVID-19 infection rates.

The findings are similar to evidence found by the UK government that vaccine passports could actually increase Covid rates in the country.

The Spanish study noted that the only positives of such a scheme are that it “warns people that there is still danger from the pandemic and encourages vaccination uptake among the reticent.”

In other words, although vaccine passports have no discernible impact on their stated goal – reducing the spread of COVID-19 – they do succeed in keeping people fearful and compliant.

That conclusion dovetails with a recent admission by French Minister of Health Olivier Véran that the vaccine passports are “a disguised form of vaccination obligation,” but are “more effective.”

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 3 Comments

The ‘Science’ of Manipulation: Researchers Craft Messages of Guilt, Shame to Foster Vaccine Compliance

By Ann Tomoko Rosen | The Defender | February 4, 2022

There’s an entire field of research dedicated to developing messaging designed to persuade “vaccine-hesitant” individuals to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

None of the messaging examined by researchers involves conveying factual evidence that supports the claims — widely disseminated by Big Pharma, Big Media and public health agencies — that the vaccines are “safe” and “effective.”

Researchers last month published the results of a clinical trial involving two survey experiments on how to manufacture consent for COVID vaccines.

The Yale-sponsored study, “Persuasive messaging to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions,” examined how different persuasive messages affected 1) intentions to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, 2) willingness to persuade friends and relatives to get the vaccine, 3) fear of those who have not been vaccinated, and 4) social judgment of people who choose not to vaccinate.

According to the study’s authors:

“Given the considerable amount of skepticism about the safety and efficacy of a COVID-19 vaccine, it has become increasingly important to understand how public health communication can play a role in increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake.”

The paper did not address the underlying reasons someone might have concerns about the safety or efficacy of COVID vaccines but focused instead exclusively on how to persuade them to get the vaccine.

From the paper:

“We conducted two pre-registered experiments to study how different persuasive messages affect intentions to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, willingness to persuade friends and relatives to receive one, and negative judgments of people who choose not to vaccinate.

“In the first experiment, we tested the efficacy of a large number of messages against an untreated control condition … In Experiment 2, we retested the most effective messages from Experiment 1 on a nationally representative sample of American adults.”

The messages tested by the researchers have been woven into mainstream media narratives and public health campaigns throughout the world. But the study completion date for part 1 was July 8, 2020, which means all of these messages were created prior to the release of any science to support them.

The baseline information control message states:

“To end the COVID-19 outbreak, it is important for people to get vaccinated against COVID-19 whenever a vaccine becomes available. Getting the COVID-19 vaccine means you are much less likely to get COVID-19 or spread it to others. Vaccines are safe and widely used to prevent diseases and vaccines are estimated to save millions of lives every year.”

In order to establish which messaging strategies elicited an inclination to get vaccinated, 10 additional messages were added to bring context to the baseline message.

These messages incorporated themes of self-interest, community interest, guilt, embarrassment, anger, bravery, trust in science, personal freedom, economic freedom and community economic benefit.

“We find that persuasive messaging that invokes prosocial vaccination and social image concerns is effective at increasing intended uptake and also the willingness to persuade others and judgments of non-vaccinators,” the researchers wrote.

To study the impacts of guilt, embarrassment and anger, researchers prompted people to think about how they would feel if they did not get vaccinated and then spread the virus to others.

“Emotions are thought to play a role in cooperation, either by motivating an individual to take an action because of a feeling that they experience or restraining them from taking an action because of the emotional response it would provoke in others.”

The “not brave” and “trust in sciences” messages were designed to evoke concerns about reputation and social image. The “not brave” message “reframed the idea that being unafraid of the virus is not a brave action, but instead selfish, and that the way to demonstrate bravery is by getting vaccinated because it shows strength and concern for others.”

The “trust in science” message suggested, “those who do not get vaccinated do not understand science and signal this ignorance to others.”

Personal freedom, economic freedom and community economic benefit messages drew on concerns linked to COVID restrictions.

Overall, it was a message that appealed to community interest, reciprocity and a sense of embarrassment that proved most persuasive, resulting in a 30% increase in intention to vaccinate, a 24% increase in willingness to advise a friend to get vaccinated and a 38% increase in negative opinions of people who decline the vaccines relative to the placebo message.

Community interest messages that incorporate embarrassment were determined to be most effective in getting people to encourage others to get the vaccine, while “not brave” messaging showed the most promise in creating negative judgments of non-vaccinators.

The Yale study findings are consistent with another recent paper, “Vaccination as a Social Contract,” which demonstrated people view vaccination as a social contract and are less willing to cooperate with those who refuse vaccination.

The study stated:

“The experiments consistently showed that especially compliant (i.e., vaccinated) individuals showed less generosity toward nonvaccinated individuals … It is concluded that vaccination is a social contract in which cooperation is the morally right choice.

“Individuals act upon the social contract, and more so the stronger they perceive it as a moral obligation. Emphasizing the social contract could be a promising intervention to increase vaccine uptake, prevent free riding, and, eventually, support the elimination of infectious diseases.”

Forget the facts, appeal to ‘values’

Saad Omer, one of the authors of the Yale study, has an extensive interest in public health messaging.

His efforts to combat vaccine hesitancy earned him a spot on the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Strategic Advisory Group of Experts working Group on COVID-19 Vaccines, the Sabine Vaccine Institute’s Board of Trustees and the WHO’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety.

In 2020, Omer initiated a “Building Vaccine Confidence Through Tailored Messaging Campaigns” project involving randomized trials in five countries using social media messaging to increase COVID and childhood vaccine coverage.

In his keynote address at the first WHO Global Infodemiology Conference in June 2020, Omer referenced “moral foundation theory” and suggested appealing to values could change decision-making behaviors.

Omer provided details about a messaging study for the HPV vaccine and discussed how similar strategies could be applied to create compliance for COVID measures:

“We wanted to test out, can we have a purity-based message? So we showed them pictures of genital warts and described a vignette, a narrative, a story, talking about how someone got genital warts and how disgusting they were and how pure vaccines are that sort of restore the sanctity of the body.

“So we just analyzed these data. This was a randomized control trial with apriori outcomes. We found approximately 20 percentage point effect on people’s likelihood of getting an HPV vaccine in the next 6 months …

“We are trying out liberty-based messages or liberty-mediated messaging around this behavior related to COVID-19 outbreak. That wearing a mask or taking precautions eventually make you free, regain your autonomy. Because if the disease rates are low, your activities can resume.”

The ‘science’ of infodemiology, infoveillance and infodemic

Omer is one of many prominent voices in what is known as the field of “infodemiology,” a term coined in 2002 by Dr. Gunter Eysenbach.

As the first infodemiologist and founder of the Journal of Medical Internet Research, Eysenbach defines infodemiology as ”the science of distribution and determinants of information in an electronic medium, specifically the Internet, or in a population, with the ultimate aim to inform public health and public policy.”

Eysenbach also coined the terms “infoveillance,” defined as “a type of syndromic surveillance that specifically utilizes information found online,” and “infodemic,” which refers to “an overabundance of information” that generally includes deliberate attempts to disseminate wrong information to undermine the public health response and advance alternative agendas of groups or individuals.”

Using just three words, Eysenbach created a scientific niche, identified a problem and proposed at least part of a so-called solution.

The WHO readily embraced this language during the pandemic. An editorial in the August 2020 issue of The Lancet began with a quote from WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus: “We’re not just fighting a pandemic; we’re fighting an infodemic.”

The WHO hosted several infodemiology conferences throughout the pandemic. Asserting that “misinformation costs lives,” the WHO, the United Nations and other groups created the perfect justification for social media surveillance and the suppression of dissent.

In 2020, the WHO created a resolution asking member states to take measures to leverage digital technologies to counter “misinformation” and “disinformation” and worked with more than 50 digital companies and social media platforms, including TikTok and even Tinder, to support these efforts.

The efforts to eliminate “misinformation” resulted in unprecedented censorship of virtually anything that steps outside of state-sanctioned consensus and the creation of a captive audience primed to accept a singular narrative.

A National Defense Authorization Act amendment in 2012 that legalized the use of propaganda on the American public makes it easier for governments to create self-serving narratives.

And thanks to a multi-billion dollar budget from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), we are under the influence of the best messages money can buy — whether or not those messages are true.

This is likely why the CDC, public health departments and mainstream media can make broad assertions like this: “COVID-19 vaccines were developed quickly while maintaining the highest safety standard possible,” and this: “Hydroxychloroquine shouldn’t be used to treat COVID-19,” and claim they are “fact.”

Articles and posts that challenge those assertions are regularly removed if they’re even permitted to be published in the first place.

Public health compliance: A cottage industry

Yale is not the only university researching the science of compliance. Academic institutions and government agencies throughout the world are immersed in this emerging behavioral science.

In February 2021, the University of Pennsylvania newsletter, Penn Today, published, “When the Message Matters, Use Science to Craft It,” covering behavioral scientist Jessica Fishman’s Message Effects Lab (MEL) initiative and research related to “what sways decision-making,” particularly with regard to COVID vaccination and testing.

MEL currently has partnerships and ongoing projects with the World Bank, the National Institutes of Health, the CDC, Penn Medicine, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Independence Blue Cross/Blue Shield and the Government of Canada to address health-related behaviors.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, a branch of HHS, also sponsored research to explore influences on COVID vaccine decision-making. The study, “Attitudes Toward a Potential SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine: A Survey of U.S. Adults,” concluded:

“We found that a substantial proportion (42.2%) of participants in a national survey conducted during the coronavirus pandemic would be hesitant to accept vaccination against COVID-19. Black race was one of the strongest independent predictors of not accepting vaccination; this is especially alarming, given the outsized impact of COVID-19 among African-Americans.

“Our findings suggest that many of the individuals who responded ‘not sure’ may accept vaccination if given credible information that the vaccine is safe and effective. As vaccine development proceeds at an unprecedented pace, parallel efforts to proactively develop messages to foster vaccine acceptance are needed to achieve control of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Behavioral scientist Dr. Rupali Limaye took the messaging a step further. She teaches a free online training course, offered by Johns Hopkins University, that “prepares parents of school-age children, PTAs, community members and school staff to be Vaccine Ambassadors and promote vaccine acceptance in their communities.”

Limaye will be a panelist for an interactive webinar “Making COVID-19 vaccines APPEALing: Pilot message testing in India,” later this month.

Changing messages, same goals

While government agencies and the scientific community cling to unsupported beliefs about vaccine safety and efficacy, they appear to recognize the importance of constantly revisiting their understanding of the impacts of messaging.

UPenn’s updated research found intentions around vaccination have changed. The university’s Annenberg School for Communication reported:

“The researchers found that trust in scientific institutions and health authorities was central to individuals’ intentions to be vaccinated, especially in the early part of the pandemic. However, as the pandemic continued, other factors related to trust emerged …

“The evidence, the researchers wrote, ‘documents the need for the public health community to redouble its efforts to preemptively and persistently communicate not only about how vaccines in general work but also about their benefits, safety, and effectiveness.’”

Research from Civics Analytics, a technology company that creates data-driven audience campaigns, seconds the notion that effective messaging must evolve.

With funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the company explored COVID concerns among different demographics and determined that a “one-size-fits-all” message would not work. The company said:

“In the spring of 2021, before the Delta variant emerged in the U.S. and when vaccine mandates had not yet been implemented, we found that messages highlighting experiences that are off-limits to unvaccinated individuals (such as concerts or international travel) or emphasizing personal choice were most persuasive…

“As you’ll see in this research, the most persuasive messages have changed.”

According to Civics Analytics, FOMO (fear of missing out) and “personal decision” messages were the most impactful. But more current data indicates the “protecting children” message has become more effective at persuading people to get vaccinated.

From the study:

“For general messaging targeting all unvaccinated people, focus on protecting children from COVID-19 and on the financial ramifications of contracting the virus.”

The company found “vaccine safety,” “scary COVID statistics” and “personal story” messages were inclined to backfire and could decrease the likelihood of vaccinating.

Perhaps some good scientists will advance the learning curve and study what happens when the public discovers that “proven messages” lack supporting scientific data.

©2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | , , , , | 2 Comments

Eli Yale Surveillance State

By Stephen Lendman | February 5, 2022

Since seasonal flu was renamed covid over two years ago, medical tyranny became the new abnormal on thousands of US college and university campuses nationwide.

Rights guaranteed by international and US constitutional law no longer apply.

Health and freedom-destroying mandates replaced them.

The higher education experience I enjoyed long ago is gone since medical tyranny took over.

Yalies are enduring some of the worst of what no one should tolerate under virtual surveillance state standards.

A university hotline was established to make “confidential (snitching) reports.”

It largely relates to assuring “compliance with (draconian flu/covid) health and safety standards” that harm and don’t protect.

According to your.yale.edu, it’s to enforce compliance with all things flu/covid to include:

Destruction of normal campus interactions by mandated social distancing.

The same goes for masking.

What Yale calls “personal protective equipment (sic)” risks potentially serious respiratory harm while providing nothing beneficial.

So-called “cleaning and disinfecting standards” are best achieved by old-fashioned soap, water and other good personal hygiene practices.

Yale’s hotline for snitching on non-compliers to any of the above and whatever else relates to flu/covid operates “24 hours a day, seven days a week, every day of the year.”

The Washington Free Beacon (WFB) discussed one example of how Yale’s surveillance state operates.

On a Saturday night at 9:30 PM, a student in what appeared to be a deserted campus library went maskless to relax.

Alone with no one around, there was no reason to wear what’s required by university rules when others are nearby.

Somebody spotted, filmed and reported him.

In response, he got the following Office of the Dean notice, saying:

“The Compact Review Committee (CRC) is reviewing a report that your conduct failed to meet the commitments you agreed to in the Yale Community Compact.”

“The CRC has received the enclosed report from Melanie Boyd, Dean of Student Affairs, Yale College (flu/covid) Health and Safety Leader…”

“You have until (24 hours from this notice to) provide the CRC with any relevant information you would like the Committee to consider in its evaluation.”

“(F)ailure to do so could lead to disciplinary action with the Yale College Executive Committee.”

“The CRC will review the matter and decide whether your conduct poses a risk to the health and safety of yourself or other community members.”

Days after receiving the above notice, he received the following reply:

The so-called CRC “determined that your conduct posed a risk to the health and safety of yourself or other community members (sic).”

“Should you continue to engage in behavior that violates the Yale Community Compact, you will be placed on Public Health Warning and may face more serious outcomes, including the removal of permission to be on campus.”

On the same evening that the reprimanded student went maskless with no one around him in a near-deserted campus library, “1,000 maskless students gathered for Yale’s annual holiday dinner,” the WFB reported.

A video of the event showed the maskless attendees.

Apparently unsnitched on or for whatever other reason(s), no disciplinary actions were reported.

According to what students told the WFB, “rules increasingly feel like overkill.”

Enforcing them is “spotty.”

So far, there’s been no “organized opposition.”

Mass surveillance state Yale discourages it.

What one unnamed student called “a silenced majority (reflects fear of) administrative consequences” for openly addressing what harms health and denies students the full academic experience they deserve.

Other colleges and universities instituted their own surveillance state practices.

Northwestern University with campuses in Evanston, IL and Chicago is one.

Harvard is another. “Speak up,” it urged!

“Simple. Anonymous. 24/7.”

“Keep Harvard a safe place to live, learn and work (sic)” — by making it unsafe and unfit for students, faculty and staff.

By imposing draconian health and freedom-destroying mandates.

At Yale, no official guidelines were published to explain what alleged offenses merit what punitive actions.

The same is likely true on other campuses with draconian rules in place.

Most important is that kill shots and all else flu/covid have nothing to do with protecting and preserving health.

They aim to destroy public health and what remains of fundamental freedoms.

We’ve been lied to and mass deceived for over two years.

For students, academic life as it should be is gone.

For working-age individuals required to be jabbed and masked et al, destroying health and freedom is a condition of employment where these draconian standards were implemented.

The same applies to where free access to other public places are restricted or otherwise impeded.

I mentioned the following once before in an earlier article:

What’s going on reminds me of a comic routine performed on television long ago by famed entertainer/tightwad-impersonating Jack Benny (1894 – 1974).

Approached by a thug impersonator and told “Your money or your life,” Benny responded:

“I’m thinking it over.”

There’s nothing to think over about draconian flu/covid mandates.

It’s crucial to shun what’s designed to destroy health and freedom — on the phony pretext of providing protection not gotten.

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , | 2 Comments

Canadian trucker Freedom Convoy embraces GiveSendGo after GoFundMe censorship

By Tom Parker | Reclaim The Net | February 4, 2022

After having their fundraising efforts shut down by GoFundMe, the leaders of the Canadian trucker Freedom Convoy have switched to alternative platforms to fundraise and communicate with their supporters.

The Freedom Convoy, which has been traveling across Canada to protest vaccine mandates, has gained huge traction online and had raised over $10 million on GoFundMe. However, GoFundMe withheld the convoy’s funds twice and said that it’s “collaborating with local law enforcement” before permanently shutting down the campaign and refusing to pass on the millions of dollars that had been raised.

The shutdown of the campaign came days after a Canadian city council member had requested a lawsuit to seize GoFundMe funds raised by the Freedom Convoy.

Following these issues with GoFundMe, the Freedom Convoy launched a campaign on the alternative crowdfunding site GiveSendGo and has already raised tens of thousands of dollars. We have confirmed that this is the official campaign created by Tamara Lich who created the original campaign on GoFundMe.

While GoFundMe has removed multiple fundraisers from its platform, GiveSendGo has championed freedom of speech and platformed many fundraising campaigns that have been restricted by GoFundMe including those raising money for Kyle Rittenhouse and election investigations.

In addition to embracing GoFundMe, the organizers of the Freedom Convoy have also partnered with CloutHub to create a group for communicating with their supporters and set up a campaign page that contains quick links to the group and fundraising page.

“There is no more important movement for freedom across the American continent right now than the Freedom Convoy 2022,” CloutHub CEO Jeff Brain said. “We are proud to support the Canadian truckers and will help support the other trucker movements popping up around the world to fight against unlawful mandates. CloutHub is where the world connects and organizes to take on the issues they care about, including defending liberty and freedom.”

CloutHub, which had direct experience of Big Tech censorship when it was deplatformed by IBM in 2020, offers users an alternative platform that focuses on bringing people together and empowering them to connect and solve issues that they care about. It has also encouraged lawmakers to pursue laws that limit the power of Big Tech.

The GiveSendGo campaign can be found here. The page may be slow as it deals with heavy demand.


 

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Solidarity and Activism | , , | 5 Comments

More Focus On The Impossible Costs Of A Fully Wind/Solar/Battery Energy System

By Francis Menton | Manhattan Contrarian | February 1, 2022

It should be glaringly obvious that, if we are shortly going to try to convert to a “net zero” carbon emissions energy system based entirely on wind, sun and batteries, then there needs to be serious focus on the feasibility and costs of such a system. The particular part of such a prospective system that needs the most focus is the method of energy storage, its cost and, indeed, feasibility. That part needs focus because, as wind and solar increase their share of generation over 50% of the total, storage becomes far and away the dominant driver of the total costs. Moreover, there is no clear way to identify some fixed amount of storage that will be sufficient to make such a system reliable enough to power a modern economy without full backup from dispatchable sources. This also should be glaringly obvious to anyone who thinks about the problem for any amount of time.

And yet, as recently as a couple of weeks ago, it seemed like the entire Western world was racing forward to “net zero” based on wind and sun without anyone anywhere giving real thought to the problem of the amount of storage needed, let alone its cost, and let alone whether any fixed amount of storage could ever fully assure complete reliability. A retired, independent guy named Roger Andrews had done some calculations back in 2018 for test cases of California and Germany, which had showed that at least 30 days’ of storage would be needed to back up a fully wind/solar system. Andrews’s work showed that storage costs just to be sufficient to match actual wind/solar intermittency patterns for 2017 would likely cause a multiplication of the cost of electricity by something in the range of a factor of 14 to 22. But Andrews did not even get to the point of considering how much storage might be needed in worst case scenarios of lengthy winter wind or sun droughts.

And then Andrews died suddenly in early 2019, and nobody immediately took up where he left off.

But then a few weeks ago I discovered at Watts Up With That some new work from someone named Ken Gregory (again, a retired, independent guy — funny, isn’t it?), who produced a spreadsheet for the entire United States again showing that about 30 days’ storage would be needed to back up a fully wind/solar system. (Cost for the storage, assuming all energy use gets electrified: about $400 trillion.)

And now, some others are getting into the act. And none too soon. A guy named Roger Caiazza has a blog called Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York. Caiazza, as you might by now have guessed, is another independent retired guy. In the past few months, he has turned his attention principally to the energy transition supposedly getting underway here in New York State, as a result of something called the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act of 2019 (the Climate Act). The Climate Act created a gaggle of bureaucracies, and the end of 2021 saw those bureaucracies utter something they call the “Scoping Plan,” laying out how New York is going to go from its current energy system to the nirvana of electrification of everything together with “net zero” emissions by no later than 2050.

The Scoping Plan is a massive document (some 330 pages plus another 500+ pages of appendices) of breathtaking incompetence. The basic approach, summarized by me in this post of December 29, 2021, is that designated “expert” bureaucrats working for the State, themselves having no actual idea how to achieve “net zero” from an engineering perspective, will get around that problem by simply ordering the people to achieve the “net zero” goal by a date certain. Then, presumably some engineers will magically emerge to work out the details. The thousands of people who put this thing together apparently do not regard proof of cost or feasibility as any part of their job. As to the key problem of energy storage to achieve “net zero” goals, the Scoping Plan, in nearly 1000 pages of heft, never even gets to the point of recognizing that the MWH (as opposed to MW) is the key unit that must be considered to assess issues of cost and feasibility.

For the past many weeks, Caiazza has been putting out one post after another ripping the Climate Act and the “Scoping Plan” apart, piece by piece. But for today, I want to focus on one post from January 24 titled “Scoping Plan Reliability Feasibility – Renewable Variability.” This post considers the implications of dependence only on wind and solar power, particularly as to how much storage would be needed with such a system, and without remaining fossil fuel backup, to achieve necessary system reliability.

Rather than creating a spreadsheet for annual wind and solar generation, in the manner of Andrews or Gregory, Caiazza takes a different approach, which is simply to consider a worst-case scenario. (For this purpose Caiazza draws on a January 20 piece from a guy named David Wojick at PA Pundits International.). The beauty of considering the worst-case scenario is that the math becomes so simple you can do it in your head.

So here is the scenario considered by Caiazza. Your mission as the State is to deliver 1000 MW of power continuously with complete reliability, but with only the wind and sun to provide the generation. How much generation capacity do you need, and how much storage do you need? And how much will it cost? (New York’s average current usage is about 18,000 MW, and by the time everything is electrified that will be at least 60,000 MW, so we can multiply everything by 60 at the end to see what the cost implications are for the State of New York.)

First what is the hypothesized worst case? To make the math simple, Caiazza hypothesizes a solar/storage only system, and a five day winter period of overcast, followed by two sunny days to recharge before the next such worst-case 5-day sun drought.

The required battery capacity is simple. Five days at 24 hours a day is 120 hours. To supply a steady 1,000 MW that is a whopping 120,000 MWh of storage. We already have the overnight storage capacity for 16 hours so we now need an additional 104 hours, which means 104,000 MWh of additional storage.

But the 120,000 MWH of storage assumes that you charge the batteries up to 100% and discharge them down to 0%. Real world batteries are supposed to only range between about 20% and 80% charge for best performance.

The standard practice is to operate between 80% and 20%. In that case the available storage is just 60% of the nameplate capacity. This turns the dark days 120,000 MWh into a requirement for 200,000 MWh.

I might throw in that solar panels don’t produce at full capacity for anything close to 8 hours on even the sunniest winter day, but who’s quibbling?

Now suppose that in this worst-case scenario we only had two days to charge up since the last 5 day drought:

Two days gives us 16 hours of charging time for the needed 120,000 MWh, which requires a large 7,500 MW of generating capacity. We already have 3,000 MW of generating capacity but that is in use providing round the clock sunny day power. It is not available to help recharge the dark days batteries. Turns out we need a whopping 10,500 MW of solar generating capacity.

That’s right, it’s not just that you need 200,000 MWH of storage, but you also need more than ten times the “capacity” of solar panels as the mere 1000 MW that you are trying to deliver on a firm basis, just to deal with this worst case scenario to deliver 1000 MW firm through one bad month in the winter.

For cost of storage, Caiazza takes what he calls a standard EIA figure of $250/MWH for the batteries. At this price, 200,000 MWH would cost $50 billion. Then there is the cost of the solar panels. Here, Caiazza has a standard EIA figure of $1.3 million per MW. For the 10,500 MW capacity case, that would mean $13.7 billion. Add the $50 billion plus the $13.7 billion and you get $63.7 billion.

And that’s for the 1000 MW firm power case. Remember, fully-electrified New York State is going to need 60,000 MW firm. So multiply the $63.7 billion by 60, and you get $3.822 trillion. For comparison, the annual GDP of New York State is approximately $1.75 trillion.

Caiazza points out that the state’s Scoping Plan gives necessary storage costs for the new wind/solar/battery system in the range of $288.6 to $310.5 billion. These figures are about 10 times lower than we just calculated. But Caiazza attempts to find in the Scoping Plan the assumptions on which these numbers were calculated, and he can’t find it. Neither can I. Maybe some reader can take a crack.

The reader may find that Caiazza’s $3.8 trillion figure for New York State seems remarkably small relative to the number calculated by Gregory. Gregory got about $400 trillion for the U.S. as a whole. New York representing about 7% of the U.S. economy, that would mean that the cost of the storage piece for New York would be closer to $30 trillion than $4 trillion. The difference is that Caiazza is calculating the cost of just getting through one “worst case” week in the winter, while Gregory considers the cost of trying to get through a whole year where energy needs to be stored up from the summer to get through the whole winter.

One final point. Suppose that, based on even a few decades of meteorological data, you determine that this five day winter sun drought is the true worst case scenario, and you put together a system on that basis. OK, what now happens when one year you get a six day drought? By hypothesis your fossil fuel backup has been dismantled and is no longer available. Does all power then just go out on that sixth day? Remember, this is the dead of winter. People are going to freeze to death. So are you going to keep the fossil fuel backup around just for this one day that might occur only once every few decades? If so, how much of the fossil fuel backup capacity do you need to keep? Think about that for a second. The answer is, all of it. In the 60,000 MW firm power requirement scenario for New York State, you will need 60,000 MW of available fossil fuel capacity to cover that one day when the batteries run out. Dozens of major power plants, fully maintained, and with fuel at the ready, capable of being turned on for this one emergency day perhaps once every twenty years.

Or you can try to avoid that by building yet more solar panels and more batteries so that you can get through a six day sun drought. But what happens when you get a drought of seven days?

It’s almost impossible to contemplate the lack of critical thinking that is going into this so-called green energy transition.

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Economics, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

Around 70 more Joe Rogan episodes have disappeared from Spotify

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | February 4, 2022

Around 70 episodes of the Joe Rogan Experience have today disappeared, according to JREMissing, a tool that uses the Spotify API to detect episode deletions.

Reclaim The Net has confirmed that the episodes have indeed been deleted at the time of writing.

The missing episodes include interviews with Gad Saad, Michael Malice, Theo Von, Aubrey Marcus, Russell Peters, Tim Ferriss, and more.

The deleted episodes are separate from the batch of episodes that Spotify deleted when Rogan first joined the platform on an exclusive basis.

Spotify has yet to confirm if the deletions are intentional and has put out no statement on the matter.

Joe Rogan has been a target of outrage in recent weeks, with demands for censorship coming from Twitter all the way to the White House. The legacy media accuses Rogan of promoting “misinformation” about the Covid-19 vaccines for interviewing doctors who disagree with mandates and promote early treatments for Covid-19.

Spotify has been contacted for comment and this story will be updated when more information is available.


See also:

TUCKER HAS A MESSAGE FOR POLITICIANS TRYING TO CENSOR BROADCASTERS

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Video | , | 2 Comments

Whistleblower: Gunshot Wounds, Baby Deliveries, Car Accidents All Being Coded as “COVID” in Hospitals to Keep Federal Funding Flowing

By Brian Shilhavy | Health Impact News | February 4, 2022

More evidence is surfacing showing that hospitals today are still collecting federal funds as an incentive to diagnose patients with “COVID” via a PCR Test, even if the patient was brought to the hospital with gunshot wounds, or to have a child, or from a car accident.

Project Veritas released a video yesterday of a whistleblower, Jeanne Stagg, who was working as a Senior Administrative Nurse at United Healthcare in Louisiana.

She came forward to expose the fraudulent practices still going on in hospitals today where people who have no symptoms of COVID come into the hospital, such as from gunshot wounds, or to have a baby, or because they were in a car accident, and are then tested positive for COVID and coded as a “COVID patient” when they are admitted to the hospital.

This releases federal funding that financially benefits the hospitals, but can literally kill the patient because they get the wrong treatment.

And to demonstrate how this is happening, a man has just come forward to give his testimony in public about how he was in a car accident, where EMS ambulance services arrived on the scene and sedated him against his will, air lifted him to a hospital allegedly in Tucson, Arizona, and he woke up 8 hours later on a ventilator because he was diagnosed as a “COVID” patient.

He was all alone in his room when he woke up, so he took himself off of the ventilator, removed the IV and catheter, and demanded to be released from the hospital.

He considers himself lucky to be alive today.

This is on our Bitchute channel, and also on our Telegram channel.

February 5, 2022 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , | Leave a comment