We got the message Fakebook. Truth, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. When you cannot handle seeing someone else’s truth, look deeper. What are you afraid of?
F a l s e E v i d e n c e A p p e a r i n g R e a l
Love you Zuck. Your behavior speaks volumes about how much work you still have to explore the unfulfilling path of being an overpaid slave. Or maybe underpaid. I can imagine no amount of compensation ever being enough.
Maybe I’ll be banned. Maybe I don’t mind. Do I sound arrogant, because I think my own thoughts and am unafraid to share them?
Am I demanding everyone thinks the way I do? Absolutely not. Am I demanding the freedom to express my thoughts? Absolutely, yes!
For without it we are all slaves. This is exactly why I Love you Zuck. Because we each are the catalysts of all these pressures building to rebirth ourselves as one humanity to truly, once and for all, abolish slavery.
Family and friends continue to flood my inbox with a “cure” being used everywhere.
Except – and even when – it’s forbidden. Those who know me understand I don’t do pHARMa if I can help it (and I can) personally, but to each their own. I won’t judge you or anyone. I am more interested in natural remedies I learned from a young age work better for me.
Anyway, Chef du service des maladies infectieuses à l’hôpital de Garches (chief of the infectious diseases division of the hospital of Garches, France) Professor Christian Perronne has written a best seller: Y a-t-il une erreur qu’ils n’ont pas commise ?
(Is there a mistake they didn’t make?)
Perronne : « L’industrie pharmaceutique est la première source de corruption dans le monde »
(The pharmaceutical industry is the premier source of corruption in the world).
I concur. And the agencies who endorse them are shooting themselves in the foot with their desperate times, desperate measures approach. Many who never questioned pHARMa, now are alarmed at their systemic attempts at oppression.
One such article. In French, though Google may still translate. Just to illustrate the mood in different countries.
At a time of censorship where big tech is feverishly scrubbing, censoring and banning even formerly celebrated medical journalists the writing is on the wall. The argument is lost.
Del Bigtree is painted as a “controversial antivax conspiracy theorist” rather than a person who happens to have been raised to live a natural health based lifestyle.
Rather than a person who happens to be fascinated with the miracle of life and of medicine too, when practiced on a consensual basis. Informed consent and vaccine risk aware activist is more accurate. Sounds too appealing perhaps.
The Highwire with Del Bigtree has now been deleted from YouTube and Facebook has sent warnings to do the same, drawing more attention to the party that will ensue today at 11am PST – 2pm EST. This will only lead to more of a resolve to abolish oppression and slavery and preserve the inalienable rights to free speech and bodily autonomy.
Update: How is it possible that The Highwire with Del Bigtree is only welcome now in right leaning platforms? The dualistic nature of politics with only two so called major parties (each with their own flavor of propaganda), is leading to alienation and civil unrest. May the people remember who they are by nature and work through their differences with Love and consideration for each other.
I have stayed quiet for a while in the blogosphere. At this point it is high time to break the silence on observations I share with many who are critical of the eerily manipulated worldview being pushed 24/7.
Taboo topics: mask wearing and anything to do with coronavirus and vaccine narratives. Feeling triggered? You can choose to ignore this post, or allow your natural curiosity to join in on this exploration of what scientists and legal experts around the world actually are sharing.
Masks may protect against certain pollutants, but were they ever designed to block viral particles? Such a mask would have to be a closed system, connected to an oxygen tank.
I know… critical thinking is not in vogue lately. Groupthink and tunnel vision are encouraged when it comes to prolonging coronaphobia. Never mind the fact that the WHO changed the definition of pandemic.
Never mind bureaucrats with their stuffy PhDs are out of touch with the people and the reality medical professionals are dealing with firsthand. And yet, this is the crew who makes up the policies and advises politicians and media, which has sent public health into a nose dive, along with many unsuspecting citizens to their early demise. Not to mention a global economic “reset” shutting down independent small businesses while enriching multinationals.
Have you noticed how everyone in mask mandated territory is being conditioned to become members of a germophobic cult?
Not everyone is falling for it. Many are politely complying, though cheating in terms of giving themselves some breathing room.
Serge Gregoire, PhD (biochemistry):
“Science is very clear: masks are completely useless at preventing infections.
They give a false sense of protection and invulnerability. And have you noticed how many people touch their face all the time…?
Making the masks useless.
Below you will find several articles related to the uselessness of wearing face masks and the science of face masks:
Here are key anchor points to the extensive scientific literature that establishes that wearing surgical masks and respirators (e.g., “N95”) does not reduce the risk of contracting a verified illness: • Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) “Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,” American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 – 419. N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.
• Cowling, B. et al. (2010) “Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,” Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456. DOI:10.1017/S0950268809991658 None of the studies reviewed showed the benefit of wearing a mask in either HCW or community members in households (H). See summary Tables 1 and 2 therein.
• bin-Reza et al. (2012), “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,” Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257-267. “There were 17 eligible studies. […] None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”
• Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis”, CMAJ Mar 2016, cmaj.150835; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.150835 “We identified 6 clinical studies … In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in the associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism.”
• Offeddu, V. et al. (2017) “Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, Pages 1934-1942, https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cix681
• Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019) “N95 Respirators vs. Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial”, JAMA. 2019; 322(9): 824-833. DOI:10.1001/jama.2019.11645 “Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371, completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. … Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs. medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
• Long, Y. et al. (2020) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis”, J Evid Based Med. 2020; 1- 9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jebm.12381
No RCT study with verified outcome shows a benefit for HCW or community members in households to wearing a mask or respirator. There is no such study. There are no exceptions. Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public.
Furthermore, if there were any benefit to wearing a mask, because of the blocking power against droplets and aerosol particles, then there should be more benefit from wearing a respirator (N95) compared to a surgical mask, yet several large meta-analyses, and all the RCT, prove that there is no such relative benefit. Masks and respirators do not work. Many potential harms may arise from broad public policies to wear masks, and the following unanswered questions arise:
• Do used and loaded masks become sources of enhanced transmission, for the wearer and others? • Do masks become collectors and retainers of pathogens that the mask wearer would otherwise avoid when breathing without a mask? • Are large droplets captured by a mask atomized or aerosolized into breathable components? Can virions escape an evaporating droplet stuck to a mask fiber? • What are the dangers of bacterial growth on a used and loaded mask? • How do pathogen-laden droplets interact with environmental dust and aerosols captured on the mask? • What are long-term health effects on HCW, such as headaches, arising from impeded breathing? • Are there negative social consequences to a masked society? • Are there negative psychological consequences of wearing a mask, as a fear-based behavioral modification? • What are the environmental consequences of mask manufacturing and disposal? • Do the masks shed fibers or substances that are harmful when inhaled?”
elxroflife 