899 replies to this topic

[Mind]

It was explicit policy by US/UK "health" bureaucrats to foment hatred toward anyone who opposed or questioned in part of the COVID panic policies or the mass injection campaign. It did not matter if there was legitimate science or concern. Anyone who questioned the narrative was villified.

 

Here is another compilation of the hatred. Here is a more humorous take on the anti-science efforts of the US/UK "health" bureaucracy.

 

Thankfully more lawsuits are moving forward - because almost no one seems in the government seems even remotely interested in apologizing or fixing things. (here is an outlier with integrity)

 

(as an aside, it seems not only "health" bureaucrats are interested in silencing opinions and research they don't like - it happens in the US in other areas too)

 

 

 

 

[Hip]

You seem to be contradicting yourself, Mind. 

 

You just earlier praised the Swedish response the pandemic — a response which included having one of the highest vaccination rates in Europe. Undoubtedly that high vaccination rate saved many lives in Sweden.

 

But in your above post, you post links which are critical of the vaccination drive. 

 

 

[Daniel Cooper]

You seem to be contradicting yourself, Mind. 

 

You just earlier praised the Swedish response the pandemic — a response which included having one of the highest vaccination rates in Europe. Undoubtedly that high vaccination rate saved many lives in Sweden.

 

But in your above post, you post links which are critical of the vaccination drive. 

 

Probably would be right to say that Sweden's vaccination rate was in consistent with most of Northern Europe.  242 per 100 in Sweden is not vastly different from 223 per 100 in Norway nor 224 in the UK for that matter.

 

I'd doubt you'd find anyone that would expect a vastly different outcome over that span of vaccination rates.

[Daniel Cooper]

The Swedish are a responsible people, who trust and cooperate with their government. 

 

Thus the Swedes can be individually trusted to do the correct thing, and indeed, Sweden followed a lot voluntary recommendations during the pandemic, rather than imposing mandatory COVID rules, because of their intelligent population.

 

Nevertheless, although the Swedes did not introduce lockdowns, they did introduce: 

• Bans on large gatherings and limited travel
• Advice to those with respiratory symptoms to avoid social contacts, work from home, minimize travel, and adhere to social distancing
• Law banning large gatherings and switch to distance education in educational institutions
• Face masks were not recommended initially but later mandated in public transportation
• Implementation of vaccine passports in July and December 2021

Source: here.  

 

The vaccination uptake in Sweden was also one of the highest in Europe. 

 

So this proves once again that cooperative populations fared better during the pandemic that the rebellious nations and their selfish populations.

 

This emphasis on trust of government and cooperation from you Hip has always sort of puzzled me.  You don't seem to give your or any government high marks when it comes to their response to ME/CFS, yet your trust in other areas is exceedingly high.

 

Why have the health bureaucracies gotten things so wrong on ME/CFS yet so right everywhere else?

 

[Hip]

This emphasis on trust of government and cooperation from you Hip has always sort of puzzled me.  You don't seem to give your or any government high marks when it comes to their response to ME/CFS, yet your trust in other areas is exceedingly high.

 

It's the aggression and societal discord that manifested during the pandemic which I did not like. This anger and animosity that erupted between sections of the populace and their government and health authorities, fighting over pandemic regulations and policy decisions. 

 

I don't think those animosities helped, because the data show that all the calm and intelligently cooperative societies had lower rates of COVID deaths, compared to the societies where frictions and animosities between government and the public manifested. 

 

The UK or US responses to the pandemic were not exemplary, but they were reasonable. Nothing to get angry about.

 

The UK had Boris Johnson as PM, and he does not have a scientific mind (reportedly does not understand graphs), so was not the best person to handle a pandemic. Likewise for Donald Trump.

 

So it's not that I have blind trust in authorities; it more that I think a calm and intelligently cooperative society tends to do better. I have trust in harmony.

 

 

 

Of course we are currently living through an era of populism, where the disenfranchised are sticking their fingers up to the authorities and experts everywhere. And we are also living through an era of identity politics, where people fight from their own individualist corner, only interested in what is good for them and their special interest group, and have little interest in what might be good for wider society. 

 

So this animosity might not have happened if the pandemic had occurred in the 1990s, when if you remember, there was a widespread apathetic lack of interest in politics and the actions of the government (at least in the UK).

 

Do you remember in 1990s that the intelligentsia were worried about the fact that young people (and the public in general) had become apathetic and disinterested in political matters and government policy? 

 

Nowadays it is the very opposite: people have become highly focused on even the most minor government decision or policy, and get very angry when they perceive that policy might not be in their personal interests.

 

And people have become highly polarised, fighting from their corner only, and not seeing the bigger picture on government policies, not really considering what might be good for the overall benefit of society.   

 

So these factors of populism and identity politics might in part explain the animosity that manifested in the pandemic in many countries.

Edited by Hip, 12 March 2024 - 05:16 PM.

[Dorian Grey]

Oh Hip, how can you say: "The UK or US responses to the pandemic were not exemplary, but they were reasonable. Nothing to get angry about."

 

The research had been done after the initial SARS / MERS coronavirus outbreaks in 2002-2004.  Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread PMCID: PMC1232869

 

Doctors working the front lines at ground zero New York tested it out on the new coronavirus and Praise God, the stuff worked!  

 

COVID-19 outpatients: early risk-stratified treatment with zinc plus low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: a retrospective case series study

 

What the heck happened then?  Doctors were forbidden from treating patients the only way HCQ could logically be expected to work (early / outpatient), that's what.  All done to keep the coast clear for the EUAs of Big Pharma's Billion Dollar Babies 

 

A look in the rear view mirror shows those who got treatment lived! Outcomes after early treatment with hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: An analysis of a database of 30,423 COVID-19 patients

 

"Analysis of this large online database showed that HCQ-AZ was consistently associated with the lowest mortality."

 

Millions died or became disabled over 2 years time...  It was the crime of the century!  Don't be a Holocaust denier!  

Edited by Dorian Grey, 12 March 2024 - 09:28 PM.

[Hip]

Millions died or became disabled over 2 years time...  It was the crime of the century!  Don't be a Holocaust denier!  

 

I have already suggested before that the cheap and safe herb Echinacea could have prevented many deaths. Echinacea has been shown in studies to reduce the chances of catching a cold by half (and coronavirus is a cold virus), and Echinacea has been shown in studies to work for SARS-CoV-2.

 

Taking the garlic extract allicin is also demonstrated to reduce the chances of catching a cold by half. Added to Echinacea, you might reduce the chances of catching COVID by a fourfold factor

 

Furthermore, nasal rinsing with saline solution every few hours may again greatly reduce the chances of catching SARS-CoV-2, and might reduce the severity of infection if you do catch it.

 

These were my personal treatments for dealing with the pandemic; and the information about these treatments was freely available.

 

 

But it would be crazy for me to claim that it was the crime of the century that governments did not deploy Echinacea and allicin. 

Edited by Hip, 12 March 2024 - 09:42 PM.

[Dorian Grey]

Well...  My favorite home remedy for sniffles & such is the "Two Hat" cure.  You hang your hat on the bedpost at the foot of the bed, & get into bed with a bottle of brandy.  Drink the brandy until you see "Two Hats" and go to sleep.  You should feel better in the morning.  

 

Then again...  I didn't get nominated for a NOBEL Prize and/or Presidential Medal of Freedom for my little methods, like Dr Zelenko did.  

[joesixpack]

It's the aggression and societal discord that manifested during the pandemic which I did not like. This anger and animosity that erupted between sections of the populace and their government and health authorities, fighting over pandemic regulations and policy decisions. 

 

I don't think those animosities helped, because the data show that all the calm and intelligently cooperative societies had lower rates of COVID deaths, compared to the societies where frictions and animosities between government and the public manifested. 

 

The UK or US responses to the pandemic were not exemplary, but they were reasonable. Nothing to get angry about.

 

The UK had Boris Johnson as PM, and he does not have a scientific mind (reportedly does not understand graphs), so was not the best person to handle a pandemic. Likewise for Donald Trump.

 

So it's not that I have blind trust in authorities; it more that I think a calm and intelligently cooperative society tends to do better. I have trust in harmony.

 

 

 

Of course we are currently living through an era of populism, where the disenfranchised are sticking their fingers up to the authorities and experts everywhere. And we are also living through an era of identity politics, where people fight from their own individualist corner, only interested in what is good for them and their special interest group, and have little interest in what might be good for wider society. 

 

So this animosity might not have happened if the pandemic had occurred in the 1990s, when if you remember, there was a widespread apathetic lack of interest in politics and the actions of the government (at least in the UK).

 

Do you remember in 1990s that the intelligentsia were worried about the fact that young people (and the public in general) had become apathetic and disinterested in political matters and government policy? 

 

Nowadays it is the very opposite: people have become highly focused on even the most minor government decision or policy, and get very angry when they perceive that policy might not be in their personal interests.

 

And people have become highly polarised, fighting from their corner only, and not seeing the bigger picture on government policies, not really considering what might be good for the overall benefit of society.   

 

So these factors of populism and identity politics might in part explain the animosity that manifested in the pandemic in many countries.

Could you reduce your comments to a paragraph or 2? One reason I just delete your pithy responses are - I don't like a wall of a post, on this subject.

 

By the way, here is, I think, an example of a Turbo Cancer. Young happy couple, the wife suddenly has stage 4 lung cancer out of nowhere. I have no  idea what her vax status is, but I can guess. https://www.youtube....h?v=O61vFLsNBqM

 

Please restrain your need to proselytize.

[Hip]

Could you reduce your comments to a paragraph or 2? 

 

My comment is just a paragraph or two. The fact that I have spaced out the text using one line for each sentence just makes it look longer than it really is.

 

If you struggle with reading two paragraphs, no wonder you have no interest in the complexities of serious science, and so instead feed on a diet of easy-to-digest quackery.

 

One of the reasons why some people prefer pseudoscience and quackery over genuine science is because the former is presented as easy-to-digest simple emotional statements, whereas the latter involves a lot of hard-to-digest dry logical complexities. 

Edited by Hip, 13 March 2024 - 06:57 AM.

[joesixpack]

My comment is just a paragraph or two. The fact that I have spaced out the text using one line for each sentence just makes it look longer than it really is.

 

If you struggle with reading two paragraphs, no wonder you have no interest in the complexities of serious science, and so instead feed on a diet of easy-to-digest quackery.

 

One of the reasons why some people prefer pseudoscience and quackery over genuine science is because the former is presented as easy-to-digest simple emotional statements, whereas the latter involves a lot of hard-to-digest dry logical complexities. 

 

Well, Whatever, but thanks for the tip about echinacea. It seems to have eradicated the problem. See how I took care of two subjects in one sentence? Anyway, I understand you have to keep up the good fight, and the moderators should understand we get it, and are willing to go along with it, everyone has something to contribute from time to time.

 

Try to be less nasty when you disagree, you will get more people to read your lengthy messages.

 

All the best.

[Daniel Cooper]

 

Try to be less nasty when you disagree, you will get more people to read your lengthy messages.

 

 

I don't know, what scientific debate can't be enhanced by calling those that disagree with you nincompoops, scumbags, or quacks if you think about it?

[Hip]

Try to be less nasty when you disagree, you will get more people to read your lengthy messages.

 

I think my poor mental health makes me more reactionary than I should be to posts or comments that (to me) seem wrong. 

 

 

If you have robust mental health, then information from the external world that you disagree with do not disturb you much; it is water off a duck's back. This is because we each have mental firewall (to use an Internet router analogy) that protects the inner sanctum of the mind from disagreeable external material. 

 

But if this mental firewall starts to break down due to mental health issues, then external material can enter into your inner mind in an invasive manner. 

 

 

In schizophrenia, it is well known that you get a breakdown of the mental firewall, so that schizophrenics cannot easily separate their inner mind from the external world. 

 

You can actually measure the strength of the mental firewall by an audio test called the P50 sensory gating test.

Edited by Hip, 13 March 2024 - 06:24 PM.

[joesixpack]

I don't know, what scientific debate can't be enhanced by calling those that disagree with you nincompoops, scumbags, or quacks if you think about it?

 

It is hard to concentrate on the science while I am trying to get all this egg off my face. And I have to deal with the illusion of a wall of text, which is apparently caused by the spacing of the sentences, not by a wall of text. 

[Mind]

There are a lot more people awakening to the disastrous fraud that was the COVID panic. Here, someone who was all "on board" with all of the panic policies and pushing the COVID injections, takes a look back and discovers/highlights all of the fraud that occurred during the panic - needless to say - changed his mind about the whole episode. Recall, the fraud began very early with the misleading and fake videos coming out of China.

[Mind]

Here someone highlights all of the "experts" who were wrong during the COVID panic. I am unsure everyone understands the scale of the problem. The vast majority of information that was dispensed by the "experts" and national media outlets in the US was erroneous. The hatred that spilled out toward anyone who proposed commonsense approaches or different medical interventions was unbelievable.

 

Remember, the awful performance of the "experts" arrived early. In early 2020, the WHO assured everyone that the virus was not spread person-to-person, EVEN THOUGH they had evidence from Taiwan that it was. Taiwanese researchers/doctors were telling everyone who would listen.

 

Even though the WHO was catastrophically wrong and it was shown they were ignoring the evidence, everyone kept believing all their stupid advice for the next 3 years. Why? How much can an organization get wrong before you stop believing them?

Edited by Mind, 26 March 2024 - 08:36 PM.

[adamh]

I think people have changed their views and habits in some cases due to the fraud and lies surrounding the covid shot. I have never been keen on that annual flu shot since I never got the flu, well except for when I got covid. And they say it uses up some of your immune memory capacity and the worst thing is that by the time they develop it and get it out, the flu has likely mutated.

 

Some people have started to distrust doctors and the medical system in general. The viscous attacks against anyone trying speak sense shows there was an agenda. Doctors were too scared of losing their lucrative jobs to speak up or even look into the evidence. Given all that, why should we trust the system now, people are saying. The medical profession needs to first of all come clean which they have not done yet. Then they can start to regain trust.

[Mind]

Even though careful reviews of high quality evidence showed that NPI measures (like lockdowns, masking, social distancing) would be insufficient to prevent or slow a pandemic, we got those measures in spades. Even though the COVID panic proved once again that those NPIs failed miserably, some researchers still cling to the false notion that the NPIs were awesome.

 

Several people felt like we were going through an unethical psychological experiment during the COVID panic. Here someone highlights how the COVID policy seemed be a combination of such experiments.

 

In Germany, an FOIA request about the decision to implement harsh NPIs/lockdowns finds that the decision was NOT based upon science reviewed by the German health bureaucracy, but was forced upon the country by unknown outside actors. We don't know who pressured Germany to institute harsh NPIs because they redacted that part of the report. In recent weeks we have seen "health" bureaucracies in the US, UK, and now Germany, redact information about the COVID policies and the injections. Why does anyone still trust anything they say?

[Mind]

I have documented how stress, fear, loneliness, and depression, lead to lower immune function and many other deleterious outcomes for individuals. This is well known - thousands of studies over the course of decades. One would think that "health" bureaucrats would have considered this fact when developing a pandemic policy. They didn't. We now know in Germany that responsible health leaders were overruled by "outside actors" to implement lockdowns. And of course, we all witnessed US/UK "health" bureaucrats and the national media push outlandish fear and panic as much as they could at every turn. When epidemiologists pointed out VERY EARLY on that the mortality rate from COVID was miniscule - they were censored, harassed, fired, belittled, etc... Instead of allowing a robust discussion about the best methods of containing this viral outbreak (very similar to the annual flu season), US/UK "health" bureaucrats pushed a narrative of fear and panic. Not only did the COVID panic measures not work, they were utterly destructive to the lives of people they were meant to help.

 

Some people are blaming the recent dramatic rise of deadly cancer on the COVID injections. This is possible (maybe even likely), but the US/UK COVID panic response could have partly led to this deadly outcome as well. Not only were people NOT getting regular cancer screening, they were also in a constant state of fear, panic, loneliness, depression, and stress - which recent research has found to dramatically worsen cancer incidence and outcomes.

 

Worse yet, no US/UK "health" bureaucrat is yet to be held accountable in any manner whatsoever.

[Hip]

When epidemiologists pointed out VERY EARLY on that the mortality rate from COVID was miniscule - they were censored, harassed, fired, belittled, etc... Instead of allowing a robust discussion about the best methods of containing this viral outbreak (very similar to the annual flu season), US/UK "health" bureaucrats pushed a narrative of fear and panic.

 

It should be possible to get an AI chatbot to automatically fact check Mind's statements.

 

Perhaps someone here with computer skills could set up an automated script which places statements posted here into an AI chatbot, and gets the chatbot to fact check the statements for accuracy.

 

I asked the Perplexity chatbot to fact check Mind's above statement that "the SARS-CoV-2 virus has a death rate similar to annual flu".

 

Perplexity answered: 

 

The claim that "the SARS-CoV-2 virus has a death rate similar to annual flu" is not accurate. The available evidence indicates that the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significantly higher mortality rates compared to typical seasonal influenza.

Edited by Hip, 30 March 2024 - 08:34 PM.

[Florin]

When epidemiologists pointed out VERY EARLY on that the mortality rate from COVID was miniscule - they were censored, harassed, fired, belittled, etc...

 

I'd be surprised if even a single epidemiologist claimed that covid hasn't killed millions of people.

[Dorian Grey]

I'd be surprised if even a single epidemiologist claimed that covid hasn't killed millions of people.

 

I've read 2/3s of those who died were already past their average life expectancy (average age 80?).  Recall Sir William Osler, one of the "Big Four" founding professors of Johns Hopkins Hospital, once said: "Pneumonia was the old man's friend, that helps them escape those “cold gradations of decay” so distressing to himself and to his friends.  

 

No one lives forever, and frequently, there is a little something that happens that bumps you over the edge. Influenza is notorious for this, & old ladies who fall & break their hip usually are dead within a few months, even after prompt treatment.  Now COVID is competing for geriatric patients.  

 

Personally, I kind of think I might not wish to live into my 90s.  Will be procuring a stash of fentanyl and an "exit bag" long before then.   

 

 

 

 

Edited by Dorian Grey, 30 March 2024 - 10:36 PM.

[joesixpack]

It should be possible to get an AI chatbot to automatically fact check Mind's statements.

 

Perhaps someone here with computer skills could set up an automated script which places statements posted here into an AI chatbot, and gets the chatbot to fact check the statements for accuracy.

 

I asked the Perplexity chatbot to fact check Mind's above statement that "the SARS-CoV-2 virus has a death rate similar to annual flu".

 

Perplexity answered: 

 

A chatbot for research? Seriously? Anyone that has used one knows they come with whatever bias the owner put into them. They lie and make things up.

 

For example, Michael Cohen, the disgraced lawyer that had Trump as a client, is still doing time for tax evasion. Did his own legal research on a motion his lawyer was working on using Google's AI. He found a number cases that were directly on point for his motion to end his house arrest early.

 

He passed them on to his lawyer who put them into the brief without checking them out. The Judge did look them up and found that the cases do not exist. The AI could not find anything useful so made up each case citation and description.

 

Cohen's lawyers got in trouble, and Cohen did not do well with the court.

Edited by joesixpack, 31 March 2024 - 03:54 AM.

[Hip]

They lie and make things up.

 

Yes, most AI chatbot are prone to making things up. Known as hallucinations in the AI trade.

 

But not Perplexity, which is why I mainly use that chatbot. It's also the AI company that Jeff Bezos has invested a lot of his money into. 

 

Unlike other chatbots which hallucinate many of their answers and don't supply any references to back up the statements they make, Perplexity does not make stuff up, and always provides links to websites where it obtained the info it presents to you. So you can very easily double check the sources.

 

I would not recommend using chatbots prone to hallucinating. 

[joesixpack]

If Chatbots hallucinate, does that mean they can think? And so to stay on point for the thread, can they get Covid and will the vaccines work on them?

[Mind]

I'd be surprised if even a single epidemiologist claimed that covid hasn't killed millions of people.

 

The IFR from COVID for people under 70 is a tiny fraction of 1 percent. This is established research, peer-reviewed, and no one questions it.

 

The average age of death from COVID is 80 years. This is not disputed. It is from national statistics.

 

It is well-established that fear, stress, depression, panic, and loneliness have significant negative effects on the immune system. No one argues this.

 

It is well documented and not disputed that the elderly were put on ventilators and remdesivir early in the COVID panic - instead of receiving standard pneumonia treatment. These are iatrogenic deaths...not really COVID deaths.

 

My uncle (83) is a good example. He went into palliative care at a health facility. He was given a couple of weeks to live. They say he got COVID while he was there (not sure if there was a test). He died and was considered a COVID death. 

 

Doctors, hospitals, and funeral homes were financially incentivized to label everything as a COVID death. Billions of dollars were paid out in this manner (in the US alone). This is not in dispute. In fact the US government pushed this policy as hard as they could.

 

This is how we get "millions of COVID deaths", that weren't really COVID deaths.

 

A lot of really dumb things were going on during the COVID panic, detailed in video here, and yet there is no "COVID commission" in the US to figure out the true number of COVID deaths or to figure out how to do things better the next time.

 

Most people do not realize bad the situation was. Most scientists asking questions about the true IFR or the COVID panic response was censored, harassed, fired, and even taken into custody under the suspicion they were mentally ill.

 

The COVID policies were unscientific, irrational, useless, and harmful. There is no accountability because the US/UK officials in charge of the COVID panic response do not want anyone to discover had bad they screwed up. They are perfectly fine leaving people to think "there were millions of deaths due to COVID".

[Florin]

The IFR from COVID for people under 70 is a tiny fraction of 1 percent. This is established research, peer-reviewed, and no one questions it.
 
The average age of death from COVID is 80 years. This is not disputed. It is from national statistics.
 
It is well-established that fear, stress, depression, panic, and loneliness have significant negative effects on the immune system. No one argues this.
 
It is well documented and not disputed that the elderly were put on ventilators and remdesivir early in the COVID panic - instead of receiving standard pneumonia treatment. These are iatrogenic deaths...not really COVID deaths.

Do you dispute that there were millions of what are most likely covid-caused deaths worldwide? What caused the excess deaths of millions of people? Ventilators and loneliness?
 

Doctors, hospitals, and funeral homes were financially incentivized to label everything as a COVID death. Billions of dollars were paid out in this manner (in the US alone). This is not in dispute. In fact the US government pushed this policy as hard as they could.
 
This is how we get "millions of COVID deaths", that weren't really COVID deaths.

Most covid deaths were outside of the US, and again, how do you explain the millions of excess deaths inside and outside the US?
 

A lot of really dumb things were going on during the COVID panic, detailed in video here, and yet there is no "COVID commission" in the US to figure out the true number of COVID deaths or to figure out how to do things better the next time.
 
Most people do not realize bad the situation was. Most scientists asking questions about the true IFR or the COVID panic response was censored, harassed, fired, and even taken into custody under the suspicion they were mentally ill.
 
The COVID policies were unscientific, irrational, useless, and harmful. There is no accountability because the US/UK officials in charge of the COVID panic response do not want anyone to discover had bad they screwed up. They are perfectly fine leaving people to think "there were millions of deaths due to COVID".

I agree that there needs to be accountability, and several covid commissions have been established including in the UK. Whether or not covid commissions provide anything of substance remains to be seen.

[Mind]

Do you dispute that there were millions of what are most likely covid-caused deaths worldwide? What caused the excess deaths of millions of people? Ventilators and loneliness?
 

Most covid deaths were outside of the US, and again, how do you explain the millions of excess deaths inside and outside the US?
 

I agree that there needs to be accountability, and several covid commissions have been established including in the UK. Whether or not covid commissions provide anything of substance remains to be seen.

 

"Most likely"  No one assumes that there is an accurate accounting of true COVID deaths. There has been a lot of discussion of those who died from COVID vs. with COVID. It was well known and reported in the media how everything from murders, to suicides, to motorcycle accidents, were being labeled as COVID deaths. Many funeral directors (verified media reports) estimated that anywhere from 20 to 50% of COVID deaths were mislabeled. Thankfully in some countries like Scotland they are at least trying to get to the bottom of this - finding that doctors were labeling most health conditions as COVID - without testing.

 

and yes, I am making the argument that the fear, panic, loneliness, stress, and depression brought on by irresponsible "health" authorities during the COVID panic, caused a lot more death than what would have otherwise occurred. I have posted several studies backing this up - in addition, this is solid research that has been going on for decades. With enough time, one could estimate how many people died due to immune system impairment. Lower immune function also leads to greater cancer incidence in addition to other health problems.

 

It is unfortunate that the fear/panic caused a lot of misinformation to be seared into people's heads.

 

-the virus did not have an IFR of 3.4% (as was widely reported in the media)

-the triage hospitals in the US were barely even used - only one had a small percentage of capacity used.

-the vast majority of deaths were in the frail elderly in nursing homes and among the morbidly obese with multiple comorbities.

 

I could go on and on.

 

Sadly, the media is not correcting all of their erroneous reporting. They keep doubling down on misinformation. This will lead to poor policies continuing into the future.

[Hip]

the media is not correcting all of their erroneous reporting.

 

Did you correct you own recent erroneous statement, where you incorrectly suggested that a video showing e-cigarette smoke passing through an N95 mask proves that viruses can pass through the N95 also?

[Florin]

"Most likely"  No one assumes that there is an accurate accounting of true COVID deaths. There has been a lot of discussion of those who died from COVID vs. with COVID. It was well known and reported in the media how everything from murders, to suicides, to motorcycle accidents, were being labeled as COVID deaths. Many funeral directors (verified media reports) estimated that anywhere from 20 to 50% of COVID deaths were mislabeled. Thankfully in some countries like Scotland they are at least trying to get to the bottom of this - finding that doctors were labeling most health conditions as COVID - without testing.

 

and yes, I am making the argument that the fear, panic, loneliness, stress, and depression brought on by irresponsible "health" authorities during the COVID panic, caused a lot more death than what would have otherwise occurred. I have posted several studies backing this up - in addition, this is solid research that has been going on for decades. With enough time, one could estimate how many people died due to immune system impairment. Lower immune function also leads to greater cancer incidence in addition to other health problems.

 

It is unfortunate that the fear/panic caused a lot of misinformation to be seared into people's heads.

 

-the virus did not have an IFR of 3.4% (as was widely reported in the media)

-the triage hospitals in the US were barely even used - only one had a small percentage of capacity used.

-the vast majority of deaths were in the frail elderly in nursing homes and among the morbidly obese with multiple comorbities.

 

I could go on and on.

 

Sadly, the media is not correcting all of their erroneous reporting. They keep doubling down on misinformation. This will lead to poor policies continuing into the future.

 

Implying that millions of excess deaths was caused by loneliness is ridiculous. Elderly people are used to it, and a few weeks of a tiny bit more isolation would make little difference.