Net als 9/11 deed, verandert COVID-19 het menselijk bewustzijn op een belangrijke manimei 24, 2020
CBD Olie kan helpen bij ADHD. Lees hoe op MHBioShop.com
Huile de CBD peut aider avec TDAH. Visite HuileCBD.be
- The Facts:
A CNN reporter was seen taking off her mask after a White House Press conference, and is being accused of doing so because the camera’s were off.
- Reflect On:
Are masks even necessary? Are we being told it’s for our best health interests, just like we were told quarantine is/was, or is there some other agenda at play here?
The question is, how much do the people telling us to take certain precautions actually believe in what they tell us? A few months ago, models of the new coronavirus were predicting millions of deaths in multiple countries. These models were used and pushed by many federal health regulatory agencies as well as the World Health Organization(WHO). Independent scientists, epidemiologists and doctors all around the world started to publish papers and take to their social media platforms emphasizing that these early models and predictions were absolutely ridiculous, and do nothing but cause unnecessary fear and hysteria.
Special note to our followers: Is 5G safe? Learn the unbiased truth and the steps to implement better solutions in your community at the 5G Health Summit. It’s a free worldwide call to action from the leading independent experts, scientists and doctors in the field. You can sign up here.
What’s worse is that these models were the reasoning behind the quarantine and lockdown that many governments ordered their citizenry into. These lockdown and quarantine measures have also been heavily criticized by those in the field, leading many to believe that the ‘powers that be’ have made and are making the new coronavirus seem much more dangerous than it actually us. This was also complimented by various politicians as well as NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, who recently expressed that governments are using this pandemic to push more authoritarian measures on the citizenry. Information has even surfaced suggesting that the number of deaths attributed to the coronavirus is not accurate, and that people who have died of other causes have been listed as a coronavirus death, thus inflating the numbers.
If you want to read more of our articles diving into the examples given above, you can refer to the list of articles at the bottom of this one.
Government epidemiologist Neil Ferguson was behind the original prediction of millions of deaths as a result of the new coronavirus. Those original models are now coming under fire, the predictions by Ferguson’s models have just been branded the “most devastating software mistake of all time” and many are questioning why the UK government failed to get get a second opinion before accepting the Imperial College’s Covid modelling.
Ferguson co-founded the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis, based at Imperial, in 2008. It is the leading body advising national governments on pathogen outbreaks. It gets tens of millions of dollars in annual funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and works with the UK National Health Service, the US Centres for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC), and is tasked with supplying the World Health Organization with “rapid analysis of urgent infectious disease problems.”
These are the organizations and agencies that control human consciousness. A lot of the time what they put out, recommend and warn of is simply believed and trusted by the masses without questioning. Hopefully the new coronavirus issue will serve as yet another example of why these entities can’t be trusted.
Ferguson was one of many government scientists urging quarantine and lockdown. Yet he was caught not following his own suggestions. This begs the question, did Ferguson really believe the message that he was beaming out to the masses? Do the WHO and other federal health regulatory agencies really believe it? Are certain people being pressured to recommend these measures and put them into place? If it was the right thing to do, why would so any independent scientists question it right away? Why are social media platforms banning all narratives that go against the mainstream media narrative? Why are they banning any content related to the coronavirus that contradicts the WHO? What is going on here? Why are people like Julian Assange in jail? Why are people who expose war crimes punished and those who commit them followed by the masses? Is the coronavirus being used for ulterior motives, just like the “war on terror” has been used to infiltrate other countries under the guise of good will?
As a result of these criticisms and narratives/information that go against the official narrative, a digital authoritarian Orwellian “fact-checker” started to patrol the internet like never before, and still is. What does it say about our world when the leading scientists in this field who have been studying viruses for decades, along with doctors and other world renowned scientists are banned and censored from social media platforms for simply sharing their expert opinions and research just because they go against the official narrative that’s beamed out by the WHO and mainstream media networks? Should people not have the right to examine information, sources, evidence, research, opinions and determine for themselves what is, and what isn’t instead of having a digital “fact-checker” do it for them?
I’m not big on politics, but I am big on exposing the corrupt hand that uses politicians like puppets and powers above government that seem do dictate major government policy and the actions that are taken when it comes to major global geopolitical issues. That being said, I do scroll twitter feeds every now and again just to see what’s up, and in doing so I came across this recent tweet by Donald Trump.
It shows a CNN journalist immediately taking off her mask after the conference is over, obviously thinking that the camera’s were off and the live stream was over. Her name is Kaitlan Collins, and she responded by saying “Nearly 90,000 Americans have been killed by coronavirus, and the president is tweeting about me pulling my mask down for six seconds on Friday.”
Anytime somebody mentions the death toll, I feel it’s important to emphasize that there is a lot of evidence making it clear that the death numbers attributed to the new coronavirus seem to have been inflated, and that it’s probably not nearly that much. You can refer to that evidence in the articles posted below this one, as I go into more detail on that specific subject.
Why would she do this. Is it all for show? Does she really believe that a mask does anything at all to protect people? Are the people who were creating mass fear and hysteria at the beginning of this pandemic still doing so, and do masks play a role in that? Is this really about our health and safety or is it about something else?
Does A Mask Do Anything?
How effective are they? According to Dr. Dan Erickson (former emergency-room physician) and Dr. Artin Massihi (emergency medicine specialist affiliated with multiple hospitals) of Accelerated Urgent Care in California, they’re not helping at all.
When you wear gloves that transfer disease everywhere, those gloves have bacteria all over them. “I’m wearing gloves,” not helping you…Your mask that you’re wearing for days, you touch the outside of it, COVID, and then touch your mouth, this doesn’t make any sense. We wear masks in an acute setting to protect us, we’re not wearing masks (right now). Why is that? Because we understand microbiology, we understand immunology and we want strong immune systems. I don’t want to hide in my home, develop a weak immune system, and then come out and get disease. We’ve both been to the ER through swine flu and through bird flu, did we shut down for those? Were they much less dangerous than COVID? Is the flu less dangerous than COVID? Let’s look at the death rates, no it’s not. They’re similar in prevalence and in death rate. (source)
According to a study published in BMJ Open in 2015,
This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated.
We have provided the first clinical efficacy data of cloth masks, which suggest HCWs should not use cloth masks as protection against respiratory infection. Cloth masks resulted in significantly higher rates of infection than medical masks, and also performed worse than the control arm. The controls were HCWs who observed standard practice, which involved mask use in the majority, albeit with lower compliance than in the intervention arms. The control HCWs also used medical masks more often than cloth masks. When we analysed all mask-wearers including controls, the higher risk of cloth masks was seen for laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection.
According to the study, it was unclear if they help at all, and that they probably need to be worn at all times in acute/dangerous settings within the hospital to be effective at all.
There are also other potential health consequences of wearing not just a cloth mask, but also medical masks. The physiological effects of breathing elevated inhaled CO2 may include changes in visual performance, modified exercise endurance, headaches and dyspnea. The psychological effects include decreased reasoning and alertness, increased irritability, severe dyspnea, headache, dizziness, perspiration, and short-term memory loss. (source)
This study suggests that masks don’t really help, and depending on the material, they can actually make things worse. That being said, there are studies suggesting that medical masks are indeed effective, but the studies are referring to health care workers in acute settings, not the general public.
Below is a quote from a very interesting paper published in 2016, titled “The Surgical Mask Is A Bad Fit For Risk Reduction.”
As represented by our cinema and other media, Western society expects too much of masks. In the public’s mind, the still-legitimate use of masks for source control has gone off-label; masks are thought to prevent infection. From here, another problem arises: because surgical masks are thought to protect against infection in the community setting, people wearing masks for legitimate purposes (those who have a cough in a hospital, say) form part of the larger misperception and act to reinforce it. Even this proper use of surgical masks is incorporated into a larger improper use in the era of pandemic fear, especially in Asia, where such fear is high. The widespread misconception about the use of surgical masks — that wearing a mask protects against the transmission of virus — is a problem of the kind theorized by German sociologist Ulrich Beck.
The birth of the mask came from the realization that surgical wounds need protection from the droplets released in the breath of surgeons. The technology was applied outside the operating room in an effort to control the spread of infectious epidemics. In the 1919 influenza pandemic, masks were available and were dispensed to populations, but they had no impact on the epidemic curve. At the time, it was unknown that the influenza organism is nanoscopic and can theoretically penetrate the surgical mask barrier. As recently as 2010, the US National Academy of Sciences declared that, in the community setting, “face masks are not designed or certified to protect the wearer from exposure to respiratory hazards.” A number of studies have shown the inefficacy of the surgical mask in household settings to prevent transmission of the influenza virus…
Related CE Articles
The 5G debate is going to be one of the biggest social issues of our time in the next year or two. Understanding the basics behind 5G dangers will be very important.
Sign up for the free 5G Summit starting June 1st. Hear from 40 of the world’s leading experts on the subject, all FREE! You can also download our free ebook on the science of 5G once you sign up!