- This topic has 127 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Conspiracy theories never die and never get refuted because they are a system of belief rather than a rational way of looking at a problem. But that is not to say that they are totally irrelevant. The way I see it is that there is a continuum between actual proven conspiracy on one end of the scale and very much unproven ‘everything is a conspiracy’ at the other end. Many people regularly reading and commenting on this website have attuned antennae for conspiracies that are generally well founded but we do get some that veer towards extremes, and then we also get the drive past conspiracists who are well armed with facts from conspiracy loonies. This is such a shame because it diverts from seeing the true nature of the conspiracies that are being carried through in front of our eyes.
The current focus should be about the biggest conspiracy which is capitalism, and Craig Murray has written in his last post much that we all agree on about how this has become the most important unifying conspiracy that is the cause of all the apparently disconnected events. The success of this particular conspiracy is that it has simple rules that determine everything also that flows from it. We all need to think deeply about this.
Even watching interviews of well known journalists is an eye opener. Today Sophy Ridge interviewed David Davis and Lord Lister. And what an eye opener! Both made assertions based on inside information that were not challenged, and they would have been so easy to challenge. But, as Emily Maitlis recently highlighted in her criticism of the pseudo-neutrality of the BBC, it is not an enforced system but it is a system of self-censorship, because it is an essential tool to get to the top and to be allowed to continue to probe. I am against those who boycott MSM on the basis that it is propaganda, not because I disagree that it is, but because it quickly becomes apparent what methods are used to deceive.
But Kate, keep up the good work of diverting resources from these good people who continue to refute your endless prepared arguments that keep changing and that contain irrefutable arguments within an hour and three quarters worth of monologues by cardiologists who are now top authorities on Covid and who still advocate the use of chloroquine despite overwhelming evidence that it does not ‘cure’ covid and can be harmful.
SA, I strongly agree:
The Five Real Conspiracies You Need to Know About – Jeremy Lent
I think this is why we see so much more conspiracist thinking from the right of the political spectrum than from the left; due to the triumph of neoliberalism, people on the right don’t understand the complaints about capitalism. They equate capitalism with working for a wage and running a small business, seeing these as part of the natural order of things, and therefore anything the system does wrong must be down to a tiny minority of evil people conspiring in secret to pervert the course of nature.
Thanks Clark. Indeed this expresses my views in a very well structured way and I agree with everything in this article. All five components constitute the main elements of capitalism and its refinement into the current neoliberalism. In fact this form of capitalism is purely a form of legalized organised criminal gangsterism. The media have now been co-opted to carry out the indoctrination.
@Kate
Some statements you have made.
“The medical information is hard to follow unless you have been keeping up with it regularly”
“In fact the ‘all cause’ mortality for the pandemic year was normal.”
“You are right there were death peaks in the “pandemic” year, but the overall death rate for that year was within normal parameters, the pandemic merely advanced deaths of elderly people by a few months and once they had died, the death rate dropped. Thus the overall rate was normal.”
You state the overall “all cause” mortality rate for “the pandemic year, (presumable 2020) was normal” and “overall death rate for that year was within normal parameters.” In light of your statement “The medical information is hard to follow unless you have been keeping up with it” did you bother to check the veracity of such a statement by referring to the “all cause” mortality statistics in the UK? I already know the answer is no, you didn’t bother. This is not medical information per-se but “generally available to anyone” statistical information from the ONS here.
UK deaths from all causes from ONS by year.
2015-2019 5 year average = 532,077
2016-2019+2021 5 year average = 543,413
2019 = 530,841
2020 = 607,922
2021 = 586,3342020
2020 excess deaths compared to 2015-2019 5 year average 75,845 or a 14.25% increase on this 5 year average, this excess deaths figure representing 12.47% of total deaths for 2020.
2020 excess deaths compared to 2016-2019+2021 5 year average 64,507 or an 11.87% increase on this 5 year average, this excess deaths figure representing 10.61% of total deaths for 2020.2021
2021 excess deaths compared to 2015-2019 5 year average 54,257 or a 10.19% increase on this 5 year average, this excess deaths figure representing 9.25% of total deaths for 2021.
2021 excess deaths compared to 2016-2019+2021 5 year average 42,921 or an 7.89% increase on this 5 year average, this excess deaths figure representing 7.32% of total deaths for 2021.The first and second leading cause of death in UK since 2017 have been Alzheimers and dementia at approx 11% of all deaths and Ischaemic Heart Disease at approx 10%. In 2020 there was an 11.87‒14.25% increase in overall all cause mortality figures depending on what 5 year average you use. That is more than the deaths caused by the previous leading cause of death. And you state that “‘all cause’ mortality for the pandemic year was normal.” There is a similar picture in 2021. Vaccines were first deployed in December 2020 and could not have affected statistics at that point.
Before you make such a foolish and demonstrably incorrect statement in the future, perhaps you should “do your own research” first by checking basic, freely available and incontestable information.-
This reply was modified 2 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 2 months ago by
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 2 months ago by
.
“You are right there were death peaks in the “pandemic” year, but the overall death rate for that year was within normal parameters, the pandemic merely advanced deaths of elderly people by a few months and once they had died, the death rate dropped. Thus the overall rate was normal.”
It seems that if we all die sooner, that that would really not affect the mortality rate because we are all going to die anyway, so dying sooner does not affect the statistics.
@Kate You might also like to take a look at the euromomo site for a more readable view of what is happening in the UK and Europe re excess deaths. The odd thing about 2020 is the huge spike that hit England about week 15. Strangely it seems to have largely avoided Scotland Wales and NI and was all over by week 22. Plenty of room there to speculate about what caused that. Notice also the big increase at the end of the year about the time of the rollout.
As regards the current situation, Have a look at this facebook post by Aussie MP Stephen Andrew. Something is very wrong, the experimental cures have not performed as promised and as I have said before (but was censored) people are starting to ask awkward questions and no one in authority seem willing to answer.
Stephen Andrew MP for Mirani
“DIED SUDDENLY”…
According to the latest official data, ‘excess deaths’ are skyrocketing worldwide.
Whether its New Zealand, Australia, Germany, Netherlands, Scotland or United Kingdom, “excess deaths” in 2022 are between 10 to 20 percent and heading northwards.
Australia boasts one of the worst “excess deaths” rate in the world at 16.6 percent above the national average.
Just for context, actuaries allow 2 to 3 percent variation for deaths in any given year, so an increase of 16.6 percent is staggering.
The UK’s Office of National Statistics recently showed there were 12,333 deaths for the week ending 26 August 2022 – an increase of 15.4 percent.
That’s 1,646 “excess deaths” in one week.
Alberta, Canada, reports the leading cause of death for 2022 in Alberta, is not cancer or dementia, but “unknown causes”.
In 2019, there were 500 deaths “from unknown causes” in Alberta. Two years later, its 3,500.
Eurostat figures for the EU show similar trends.
European countries with the worst ‘excess death’ rates include Germany (14 percent), Estonia (15 percent), Spain (16.7 percent) and Portugal (23.9 percent).
Professor Carl Heneghan, Director of the Centre for Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford University compared the excess death rate from April to August 2022, with the seven-year average revealing a substantial increase in ‘excess deaths’ everywhere.
His figures also show an astounding 28 percent increase in the number of people dying “at home” in England and Wales.
The Professor is calling for a thorough investigation to be carried out on all these deaths:
“The signals in the data suggest something is not right” he said.
“Sustained rises in deaths should trigger an investigation”. This should involve “accessing the raw data on death certificates, medical notes and analysing autopsy reports”.
“I feel there is a lack of clear thinking at the moment but, when it comes to people’s health and well-being, you can’t wait – it’s unacceptable”.
Mainstream educator, Dr John Campbell, has strongly criticised the publicly available deaths-data, describing it as “simply not acceptable”.
“We really have to get to the bottom of this” he said.
“It’s an international scandal. There are very high death rates around the world and people need to know what’s going on. At the moment we’re not getting the full information we need.”
It doesn’t matter where you look or which expert you listen to, one thing is certain – a lot more people than normal are dying.
It’s an undeniable fact.
And here’s the thing. It’s across every age group.
People in the prime of their lives are dying at unprecedented rates.
Most shocking of all, however, is that nobody in government or the mainstream media seems the least bit interested in finding out why.Yeah Corkie – long covid.
That’s what you get with a novel virus. Unexpected results given it is indeed – well – novel.
Sorry if that doesn’t fit well with your paranoid conspiracy theory.
– “The odd thing about 2020 is the huge spike that hit England about week 15. Strangely it seems to have largely avoided Scotland Wales and NI and was all over by week 22. Plenty of room there to speculate about what caused that. Notice also the big increase at the end of the year about the time of the rollout.” (my emphasis)
Those were the deaths from the two first big covid peaks (it’s tempting to append “you idiot” here), so nothing to speculate about either of them (sigh). Yes, the vaccine deployment in the UK began in December 2020, as the second big UK covid peak was ramping up. Obviously, at the start of a deployment, hardly any of the population is vaccinated.
Jeez, sorry Clark I missed that (and over-estimated the sense of Cokie. ). I thought he was one of the conspiracy nuts getting all excited about excess deaths now, and eager to attribute _that_ to vaccines. It didn’t occur that someone was so daft, they were trying to blame vaccines before they were even available – I just looked at his quotes about 2022.
IIRC, Cooky is in denial of the existence of viruses at all ?
About 8% of the population of England and Wales remain completely unvaccinated for covid, so if covid vaccines are the cause of the excess deaths, as corkie (and previously Kate) are desperately trying to insinuate, it will be very easy for epidemiologists to spot.
So that’s where to look, corkie and Kate; in the peer-reviewed epidemiology journals, not “the government and the mainstream media”. OK?
Glenn_nl, the incredible voodoo of mRNA vaccines is that they work backwards through time; they kill you before you get vaccinated. The fact that the gubmint and the mainstream media aren’t saying so proves it.
“The odd thing about 2020 is the huge spike that hit England about week 15. Strangely it seems to have largely avoided Scotland Wales and NI and was all over by week 22”
Again, easily shown to be completely wrong from easily accessible, publicy available information from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) UK here.
Specifically this: “Relative age-standardised mortality rates, persons, all ages, weeks ending 3 January 2020 to 18 June 2021, European countries“
“Relative age-standardised mortality rates (rASMRs) are expressed as the percentage change per week in 2020 or 2021 from the average expected age-standardised mortality rate in 2015 to 2019.”
So, nope. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland did not “largely avoid” the excess deaths similar to most other European countries and neither did it end after week 22 in 2020.
From the same source of publically available data (ONS) I have drawn attention to the ongoing issue of excess deaths in earlier posts here and here and here in the COVID-19 in 2022 thread and yes I agree, it’s weird it’s not being highlighted in any of the media and it needs to be investigated.
Do keep up Corkie.
There is an article in the British Medical Journal from July 5, 2021 by Richard Smith, former editor of the BMJ:
‘Time to assume that all health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise?’
I assume this covers the Covid ‘vaccine’.
Interesting that you altered the title to include “all.” Nonetheless, it is a huge problem and a theme that Ben Goldacre has taken up many moons ago in his books “Bad Science“, “Bad Pharma“, and “I think you’ll find it’s a bit more complicated than that“. (was that an oxford comma?) All three are worth a read.
“We have now reached a point where those doing systematic reviews must start by assuming that a study is fraudulent until they can have some evidence to the contrary.”
By the same token, that would apply to all the systematic reviews or other trials of the use of drugs such as Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, Vit-D, and Azithromycin in treating covid. I think it’s also fair to point out that he wasn’t saying that “all” trials were or are fraudulent but that evidence for authenticity of trials should be examined before inclusion. In that article he gave examples of such evidence of authenticity.
“Some supporting evidence comes from the trial having been registered and having ethics committee approval. Andrew Grey, an associate professor of medicine at the University of Auckland, and others have developed a checklist with around 40 items that can be used as a screening tool for fraud (you can view the checklist here). The REAPPRAISED checklist (Research governance, Ethics, Authorship, Plagiarism, Research conduct, Analyses and methods, Image manipulation, Statistics, Errors, … ”
You ought to check out that checklist.
Again, Ben Goldacre (and many others) has been advocating for years that all trial data be made available for every trial ever. Check out https://www.alltrials.net/ and what they are calling for here. It’s a laudable goal.
Also, just to be pedantic, such scepticism does not apply to the ONS statistics on ‘all cause’ mortality.
Hi ET,
thanks for the correction, it is interesting what the subconscious will get up to.
I can’t speak for the Covid cures such as Ivermectin as I didn’t get Covid. But in light of the concerns of adverse reactions I thought the article relevant. No-one I know has had an adverse reaction to the injection except to keep getting Covid.
What interested me was that the reviewers went in with the idea that the trials and resulting papers were based on professional honesty.
It highlights dishonest behaviour and I wondered if, just perhaps, some less than honest behaviour had been loitering around the various ‘vaccine’ makers and the agencies that approved and promoted it.
Ewan2, hello, good to see you again and thanks for the link, which I regard as very important.
This is why I try to base my arguments on the most reliable facts, such as death from all causes, or the polar icecaps melting away, combined with critical thinking. Things that would be extremely difficult to fake or distort.
I read Goldacre’s Bad Science some years ago, and Bad Pharma shortly afterwards; this is how I knew there was a big problem. I’m yet to read I think you’ll find it’s a bit more complicated than that, but you know, time; lots of commenting, trying to counter the spread of bad (sometimes lethal) information, lots of reading, following links, trying to work out what’s trustworthy and what’s not, and back to commenting again.
We all need the skills taught by Bad Science; Google, YouTube and Facebook tweaking their algorithms to favour “mainstream” sources just makes matters worse, digging the distrust deeper in.
It is in the interests of big (and small) business that we all become stupid, so that we can’t tell treasure from turds and will pay as much for shit as for gems. Don’t let them get away with it. But the corrupting power of business doesn’t turn “alternative” turds into treasure either.
“If you take a barrel of sewage and add a teaspoon of fine wine, you end up with sewage.
If you take a barrel of fine wine and add a teaspoon of sewage, you still end up with sewage”So it’s hard work, and if you’ll join me I’ll welcome you aboard.
Ewan2, what you’ve called the “‘vaccines'” certainly appear to be vaccines, as shown by the deaths from all causes during infection peaks plummeting as the {vaccines or whatever they really are} were deployed. I really don’t see how that could be faked – the national mortality statistics had already been collected for decades before the pandemic, and the national statistics are compiled from regional statistics, compiled from local statistics and individual hospital statistics, country after country, all over the world. The number of conspirators needed to seriously distort such figures would be huge; we’d end up suspecting our friends and neighbours, rather than pharmaceutical companies, Men In Black or shadowy elites.
We now have a problem with excess deaths increasing. I don’t rule out the vaccines being the cause, but it seems highly unlikely for both theoretical and practical reasons:
Theory – a vaccine is a based on a subunit of the virus it vaccinates against, in the case of covid the infamous spike protein. But a spike protein can’t reproduce within the host whereas a whole virus can, and does, passing from organ to organ, potentially damaging each as it goes. So I’d expect a virus to be capable of far more damage than a vaccine. So the excess deaths are most likely being caused by nearly everyone having had covid at some point.
Practical – 6% to 10% of various populations remain entirely unvaccinated, so if the excess deaths don’t apply to them, this will soon be entirely obvious.
Thanks E.T.
I have been contemplating an answer on the same line as you but you did it better.
The problem also applies to climate change when the big energy companies falsified or held back data and evidence. But all of this is traced back to capitalism, the need for increased consumption and economic growth irrespective to consequences and for enrichment of the 1%.HI Clark,
I tend not to think of it as a vaccine as it doesn’t prevent people from getting the disease. This lowering symptoms idea seem BS to me. I don’t expect to have lower symptoms of Tuberculosis or cholera, I expect no symptoms.
As far as ‘conspirators’ there is need. It’s business as usual.
As far as taking a Pfizer vaccine take a look at their criminal and deadly behaviour in the Meningitis outbreak in Nigeria in 1996. And their actions taken to get out of it. They went after state prosecutors and whistleblowers, which is why you don’t need a conspiracy – people know to keep their mouth firmly shut.
All the statistics are fairly meaningless to me and seem to be able to prove almost anything – I look around my community as that is my ‘reality’.
‘Difficult to distort’ – but not impossible. In the 60s John Lilly MD found that it was remarkably easy to programme people with thoughts that were not theirs. It’s in his book ‘ Centre of the Cyclone’.
‘Science in the Public Square: Global Climate Alarmism and Historical Precedents‘ by Richard S. Lindzen, explores ‘scientific renting ‘ in the search for the filthy lucre.
Ewan2:
– “I don’t expect to have lower symptoms of Tuberculosis or cholera, I expect no symptoms.”
Do you apply this thinking to naturally acquired immunity as well?
– ” – people know to keep their mouth firmly shut.”
So how do you know of this?
– “In the 60s John Lilly MD found that it was remarkably easy to programme people with thoughts that were not theirs”
In the context of what you were replying to, are you seriously suggesting that thousands of doctors, nurses and local council officers had been “programmed” to declare living people dead? And what of the living people? Did they just go along with this?
Immunity means one is immune, so no symptoms.
Whistleblowers, who tend to go round in ones, implies that the majority of the workforce either know nothing or are keeping their mouth shut.
Clark, now now, there’s nowhere I suggested that millions of medical personnel ‘declare living people dead’.
Nevertheless I do know one doctor who declared someone dead at a traffic accident – he was struck off.Now, now now, Ewan2. I wrote:
– “This is why I try to base my arguments on the most reliable facts, such as death from all causes… Things that would be extremely difficult to fake or distort”
And you replied:
– “but not impossible. In the 60s John Lilly MD found that it was remarkably easy to programme people with thoughts that were not theirs.”
I think you’d better clarify, as you seem to have contradicted yourself.
– “Immunity means one is immune, so no symptoms.”
This binary distinction is too simplistic (or, “I think you’ll find it’s a bit more complicated than that”). You catch a cold visiting friends and take it into your workplace. It’s unpleasant but not serious enough to stay off work. Your colleagues start coming down with it; they keep working too. You start getting better even though you’re surrounded by infected people; your body has been building immunity. Soon all sorts of people in your town are coming down with it, but your work colleagues are getting better, despite being in an infected town. Eventually everyone recovers, yet two years later the same thing happens again.
We see this with the norovirus vomiting bug, that does the rounds every few years.
Immunity wanes; ask a virologist. Unless you think the virologists make it all up for Pfizer. If you don’t think that, you can’t simply dismiss every claim made by science, on the basis of some corrupted science; you have to apply discernment.
@Clark, I’m sorry to use this thread to turn to you for help.
September 5-9 there was a meeting in Geneva, Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention countries met and Russia reported on US bio labs. I can find nothing on the meeting. If you could help with something to read or watch? There are some statements in our media, I wish I could see the source itself and check if they are reporting true facts.
Thank you!“I tend not to think of it as a vaccine as it doesn’t prevent people from getting the disease. This lowering symptoms idea seem BS to me. I don’t expect to have lower symptoms of Tuberculosis or cholera, I expect no symptoms.”
It is a misconception that all vaccines produce “sterilizing immunity.” The majority of vaccines, including cholera and BCG vaccines that you mentioned do not produce “sterilizing immunity.” Instead, they alter the disease course once you have become infected. Very few vaccines actually act like a coat of armour preventing infection, HPV vaccine being an example of such a vaccine. You might think it’s bullshit but the immunological and vaccinologist community would disagree with you.
If you were hospitalised with for example, a pneumonia, would you refuse antibiotics on the basis that they only modify the disease course this time and don’t prevent you catching it again?
I posted a this link in another thread. You might want to brush up on vaccines and how they work.
A guide to vaccinology: from basic principles to new developments.@Tatyana
I looked here and if you click on the BWC meetings links you’ll find this statement:“The Meeting will be closed and only open to representatives of States Parties and Signatory States. It will be an in-person meeting and will not be publicly broadcast. Summary records will not be prepared.”
Also, in the “digital recordings” if you search for those meetings they have “private” beside them. I suspect you won’t get information on what went on at the actual meetings.
I searched the term ” Article V Consultative Meeting Under the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention” and came up with a number of statements from UK, USA, Russia and others. Needless to say, the USA and UK statements are very dismissive.
-
This reply was modified 2 years, 2 months ago by
- The topic ‘Concerns about the contents of the covid vaccines’ is closed to new replies.