Honestly, those 190,000 potential victims sound like a gimmick to spread terror among people who were likely to be scared to death by an impressive number and (above all) were likely to ignore what was really happening around them
—were likely to never realize
how curious and singular that statement was.
Should you have any doubts, let's have a closer look at some dates and some numbers. As reported in an article mentioned above and published on
March 11, 2020, the
WHO had praised Italy (a Country with a population of around
60 million people) as an outstanding example of excellence. Yet, by that time,
over 800 people had already died of Covid-19 (a few weeks after the first registered case) according to the official data.
As certainly obvious, in those days of compliments, the
Organization was "encouraged by the aggressive measures adopted by Italy".
Next,
on May 7, 2020, when the
WHO decided to play its
African cards,
about 30,000 people had already died of Covid-19 in Italy, despite its bionic
measures.
Now, don't forget that Africa was a continent with a population of
over 1.3 billion people in 2020! Therefore, if "up to 190 000 people could die of COVID-19 in Africa if not controlled" just "in the first year of the pandemic", that was very sad,
BUT could also be an extraordinary result, since the
WHO had enthusiastically appreciated the "aggressive measures" adopted by a Country of 60 million people, which had already registered
some 30,000 Covid deaths in about three months.
Incidentally, in virtue (?!?) of those amazing "aggressive measures", which had sent the
WHO into raptures,
over 74,000 people lost their lives in Italy because of Covid-19 by the end of 2020. Had Africa suffered a similar fate,
over 1.6 million people would have died of Covid-19 that year
!!!
To be fair, the "new study" had been carried out by observing "slower rate of transmission, lower age of people with severe disease and lower mortality rates compared to what is seen in the most affected countries in the rest of the world". Apparently, this favorable situation was "largely driven by social and environmental factors slowing the transmission". In addition, the population was younger and had "benefitted from the control of communicable diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis to reduce possible vulnerabilities".
However, in spite of this clarification, a
pessimistic estimate of 190,000 deaths caused by an unfortunate
failure of "containment measures" seemed to be
much more encouraging than 1.6 million deaths in an imaginary country with a population of over 1.3 billion people, characterized by unfavorable "social and environmental factors", located "in the rest of the world" and subjected to "
aggressive measures"...
Incidentally, I remember reading a comment by a
corona-pundit, who was quite excited about tests. In order to highlight their importance, he started to observe that no infections would have been registered in the hypothetical case of a country where no tests were being carried out. Then he asked a rhetorical question: "Would it mean that the coronavirus has disappeared?" His reply was pretty obvious: "No! It would spread undisturbed, without our knowledge."
Well, truly speaking, I believe that it would have been really marvelous,
IF the virus had
spread undisturbed, without our knowledge! In fact, in that case, the logical conclusion is that there would have been no hospitalizations and no fatalities caused by Covid-19!
[Alternatively, it must be assumed that hospitals should have been filled with incompetent physicians, who might have been treating dying patients without understanding what was going on!]
This is why I like to refer to cities like Abidjan or Cairo or Johannesburg or Lagos or Luanda or Nairobi, where large-scale Covid deaths were not reported and the number of cases was certainly underestimated for at least two reasons: the (wise!?!) practice of avoiding the waste of money on test kits and the impossibility of enforcing
social distancing in high density areas with large families and (in all likelihood) non-affordable or non-existent
home delivery services—not to mention sanitary and hygienic problems.
Now, if we think back to the countless
Covid-gurus, who insisted on the fatal consequences of failed
caging policies and, hence, of many infections, we ought to concede that the
inevitable high number of deaths would have
NOT gone unnoticed in cities like Abidjan or Cairo or Johannesburg or Lagos or Luanda or Nairobi,
IF a small portion of those claims had been partially true. Therefore, it is plausible that the virus has
spread undisturbed, without our knowledge AND without causing major disruption in many densely populated areas.
Anyway, everybody knows that Africa eventually turned out to be a most successful continent, in spite of over one billion citizens, overpopulated districts and people who needed to move out of home to get their food. In this context, it is hard to deny that
social distancing was just a chimera
—NOT a feasible objective.
In actual fact, even the
WHO appeared to be cautious: "physical distancing" was "not about the confinement of people but rather avoiding unnecessary contacts as people live, work and socialize as a means to interrupt transmission".
It seems that the otherwise commendable "aggressive measures"
did NOT necessarily need to be too aggressive in the case of Africa... and someone might question if "
aggressive measures" were really so exciting, so encouraging and, above all, so
useful "in the rest of the world".
Clearly, the African experience had a favorable outcome and it cannot be assumed that the positive result was a consequence of widespread mass screenings and tough
caging policies!
Therefore, keeping in mind the
WHO "test, test, test" mantra and other strange/funny/disputable episodes, it would
probably not be surprising to learn,
perchance, that,
maybe, someone
might have been induced,
perhaps, to start wondering
WHAT the letter
H stands for...
It is possible that you have some brilliant ideas,
BUT... be careful! This is no kidding.
As you know, you are free to criticize/lambast/censor/castigate
certain people and
certain institutions,
especially in the free world, in the name of freedom of speech
—ONLY certain people and
certain institutions. No mistakes are allowed!
Africa seems to be the right place to start with, in order to say a few words about the substances, which are usually referred to as "vaccines". Personally, however, I prefer terms like
concoctions (my favorite one) or
mystical fluids or
thaumaturgic serums.
Please note that I am
NOT an
anti-vaxxer. For instance, apart from classical anti-flu
vaccines, I did not hesitate to be
vaccinated against typhus or cholera or yellow fever, when I (freely) thought that proper
vaccines might be helpful in certain regions. And when I was
vaccinated, no physician told me that I had to avoid any trip to potentially dangerous countries until a good percentage of the local population had been
vaccinated. No medical practitioner warned me that I could not feel safe in case I met people who were still refusing to get
vaccinated.
In addition, as far as I know, when mass
vaccinations were carried out against measles and poliomyelitis, these diseases practically disappeared, even though undesired effects were probably reported.
Instead, in the case of the substances produced to "protect" from Covid-19, the situation was completely different. After being
vaccinated, everyone had to be careful.
Unvaccinated people had to be avoided like the plague and, to this aim, even a sort of
nazipass was deemed to be necessary, while the performance of the inoculations seemed to rely upon
Divine Providence, as proven by the initial panegyric of the wannabe "full vaccination" and the subsequent propaganda in favor of a first, second, third booster shot. In the meantime, almost everywhere in the world, the so-called
vaccination campaigns had come together with impressive spikes in cases.
Thus, in what follows, I will generically talk of
fluids or
serums, since these terms appear to be much more appropriate and correct.
After this brief digression from the main subject, we can go back to Africa, in 2021, at the end August, when the supply of the famous
fluids was causing quite a headache for the
WHO community. It is true that the injections had recently "tripled", but were "still low".
For instance, the "WHO Director-General" went straight to the point:
it was "unconscionable" that some countries were offering booster shots "while so many people" continued to "remain unprotected".
[
cf.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/8/26/who-covid-19-vaccination-triples-in-africa-but-still-low]
Frankly speaking, it
seemed much more "unconscionable" that some governments were
NOT "offering",
BUT WERE IMPOSING "booster shots" even to young people (for instance to use public transport or enter hotels), while a Country like Egypt had registered less than 17,000 Covid victims by the end of August 2021, even though the so-called "full vaccination rate" was about 3 per cent! Note that we are talking of a Country with a population of over 100 million citizens and a metropolitan area like Greater Cairo with more than 20 million people!
Of course, it can be claimed that some deaths, probably, went uncounted.
YET, it is hard to believe that "the rest of the world" would have been destroyed without
house arrests and mystical
fluids, while the streets of Cairo were not paved with corpses.
Probably, a common popular belief is that Egypt (as well as all African countries) had been saved by "social and environmental factors". However, no one, apparently, has found out (or, maybe, has seriously tried to investigate) which "social and environmental factors", exactly, were so important and why they were extremely aggressive in some regions (
e.g. in the Americas), but extremely mild elsewhere (
e.g. in Africa).
Surely, those who were controlling the mainstream media never gave a hint that, perhaps, a widespread circulation of the coronavirus and, in consequence, of natural antibodies might have
accidentally had some positive effects...
Necessarily, a (
ridiculous?!?) hypothesis of this kind had to lack
scientificity.
Nevertheless, something strange was going on. As a general rule,
negative "social and environmental factors" had waged a war on states, which had enforced strict social distancing and could afford the famous
fluids, while
positive "social and environmental factors" were relentlessly helping other countries
—even countries, which were not part of Africa and did not belong to "the rest of the world" that was being saved by the magical
fluids.
Take the case of Indonesia, where you can find 270 million citizens and a capital like Jakarta, whose population is over 10 million inhabitants and whose density is almost 40,000 people per square mile! By the end of August 2021, the "full vaccination rate" was about 13 per cent and the official number of Covid victims was just over 130,000.
Once again, we can assume that some deaths might have gone uncounted...
YET, it is hard to believe that "the rest of the world" had a desperate need of booster shots for its survival, while the squares of Jakarta were not filled with piles of corpses.
Probably, Indonesia, too, had been really saved by mysterious "social and environmental factors".
INSTEAD, there seemed to be no chance that,
perhaps, many infections and, hence, many natural antibodies might have
accidentally made a positive contribution. As already acknowledged, a (
ridiculous?!?) hypothesis of this kind would lack
scientificity.
It might be wise to remember that the concept of "social and environmental factors" often appears to be associated to the presence of a
younger population (more specifically, a "younger population that has benefitted from the control of communicable diseases" and a "lower age of people with severe disease and lower mortality rates").
Then, it should have been absolutely necessary to offer special protection to elderly people and frail patients.
However, it would have also been worth investigating why Cairo and Jakarta were still there, with a relatively low number of official Covid victims. After all, Egypt and Indonesia are countries whose
life expectancy is well over 50 years (an age for which some Western bureaucrats suddenly had the smart idea of
imposing a booster shot requirement
!!!) and most elderly people were obviously able to cope with Covid-19, from the Mediterranean coast to the Sudanese border, as well as across the Indonesian Archipelago
—while the Western world felt a strong need to inoculate even children!!!
Similarly, it might have been instructive to wonder why the population of
North Korea was not disappearing from the face of the Earth, even though its leadership had
NOT accepted any type of
fluids until June 2022.
INSTEAD, where plenty of money was available, a completely different route was taken in the name of the
diktats of the world-saving scheme. In several countries, basic liberties (freedom to move, freedom to study, freedom to work and even freedom to play tennis) were denied to people of any age. Their fault? They had not accepted an
offer they could not refuse: a certificate (
i.e., the above mentioned
nazipass) to prove that the "booster shot" had been administered or, in the most benevolent countries, that at least two doses of
serum had been injected
!!!
Probably, the main excuse was that the charming
fluids were so magical that they even had the ability to protect the people who had not been injected, as often suggested by the mainstream media and the only articles, which could be easily found in the internet.
[
cf., e.g.,
https://www.afro.who.int/countries/nigeria/news/vaccination-against-covid-19-protects-other-people-survivor]
In this context, undoubtedly, it is of paramount importance to learn that some study results provided "observational evidence that vaccination not only protects individuals who have been vaccinated but also provides cross-protection to unvaccinated individuals in the community".
[
cf.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/high-covid-vaccine-uptake-may-protect-unvaccinated]
However, someone might wish to waste some time to consider a few official numbers and some real, verifiable facts:
- Whenever and wherever a good percentage of people had taken the (often almost compulsory) jabs, there was a spike in infections, from the United Kingdom to Cambodia, from Germany to Vietnam, from Italy to Australia, from Israel to New Zealand. Of course, the mainstream media were ready to let us know that most of the people who were hospitalized in critical condition or died had not been jabbed, BUT...
- ...something odd seemed to happen in practically every country. For instance, take the case of the United States. On January 11, 2022, at a Senate hearing, the top of the top health apparatchiks "said that unvaccinated people are 20 times likelier to die, 17 times likelier to be hospitalized and 10 times likelier to be infected than the vaccinated".
[
cf., e.g.,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/01/12/covid-omicron-variant-live-updates/]
Well, let's have a look at some interesting figures:
1. the number of official Covid victims in the United States a few weeks before, in December 2021: over 41,000 (say 41,391, a number that can be divided by 21)
2. the number of official Covid victims in the United States in December 2020: about 88,000
3. the percentage of people who (according to the official definitions) were "vaccinated" (72 per cent of the population) or "fully vaccinated" (61 per cent) on December 16,
i.e., at the middle of the month
These figures imply that about 1,971 Covid victims in December 2021 were somehow "vaccinated", while 39,420 had not taken any
serum. Now, if we consider the percentage of the so-called "vaccinated" (72 per cent), it turns out that 28 per cent of the population had been hit by 39,420 fatalities. This means that (all other things being equal) over 140,000 people would have died if the entire population had not been jabbed!!! Thus, a comparison with the events of December 2020 does not seem to suggest that the "unvaccinated individuals" had been protected, especially if we remember what happened at the time of the infamous
Spanish flu, which apparently caused at least 25 million fatalities, when there was a world war, hygienic conditions were precarious,
no thaumaturgic serums were available and the world population totaled roughly 1.5 billion people: the world practically started to coexist with the virus some thirty months after the first outbreak.
- Similar remarks can be made by investigating the fate of the "unvaccinated" in many more countries. Indeed, another good example came from Italy, were mortality was much higher among "unvaccinated individuals": for instance, from December 17, 2021 to January 16, 2022, it was 8 times greater, according to official data, if we make a comparison with the so-called "fully vaccinated".
[
cf.
https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2022/02/05/news/covid_iss_i_non_vaccinati_finiscono_in_ospedale_10_volte_di_piu_di_chi_ha_fatto_la_dose_booster-336533984/]
During the same period, there were about 5,900 Covid victims (say 5,895, a number that can be divided by 9), which means that about 5,320 "unvaccinated individuals" died of Covid-19. Note that the percentage of the "fully vaccinated" was about 74 per cent at the end of 2021. In consequence, about 20,000 people should have died if the
jab situation of the year before (
no "full vaccination") had not changed. Instead, from December 17, 2020 to January 16, 2021 about 16,000 people had officially died of Covid-19. Definitely, the protective effect of the powerful
fluids did not seem to be very encouraging for the "unvaccinated"
—maybe owing to some "social and environmental factors"...
- To be honest, it must be admitted that the general picture, in the United States, appeared to be much more encouraging some months before. In fact, in early July 2021, it was even possible to claim that "99.2 per cent of US Covid deaths in June were unvaccinated".
[
cf.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/08/fears-of-new-us-covid-surge-as-delta-spreads-and-many-remain-unvaccinated]
More importantly, roughly 10,000 Covid deaths were registered, about 11,000 less than the year before. Hence, no one can deny that there were good reasons to celebrate a "cross-protection to unvaccinated individuals in the community" on this occasion. In fact, at that time, about 49 per cent of the population did not belong to the fraternity of the "vaccinated". So, the number of Covid deaths would have been about 20,000 in an imaginary, hypothetical nation with no jabs. Instead, in June 2020, when no-one was "vaccinated", roughly 21,000 people died of Covid-19 according to the official data. Beyond any doubt, June 2021 could be hailed as a
successful month, since the situation seemed a little better even for the "unvaccinated"
—yet, I wonder if some boogeyman might make the
unsubstantiated claim that the "unvaccinated individuals" had somehow benefited from natural antibodies against the original virus,
without any major external interference, since the percentage of the "vaccinated" and "fully vaccinated" was still relatively low "in early July 2021"...
- Regardless of what happened in the United States, summer 2021 turned out to be quite rough for many countries in the northern hemisphere. It all happened in the face of the worldwide use of the nazipass, which transformed the "unvaccinated individuals" into a crowd of pariahs—and in the face of the fact that summer, traditionally, is a season in which respiratory diseases tend to become less aggressive. BUT, of course, "social and environmental factors" should never be underestimated...
No matter what you feel, here follow some figures related to geographical areas with a high/very high percentage of "fully vaccinated" people: in France there were about 3,200 Covid deaths from June to September 2020 and about 7,000 from June to August 2021, in Germany about 1,000 and 5,000, in Israel about 1,300 and 1,400, in Italy about 2,350 and 4,700, in Japan about 700 and 4,600, in the United Kingdom about 6,300 and 9,700!!!
Clearly, those 7,000, 5,000, 1,400, 4,700, 4,600 and 9,700 fatalities will look more amazing than ever, if we remember that most of them belonged to a subset of the population of each country: the subset of the "unvaccinated".
The disputable
protective effects of the famous
fluids might have been one of the main reasons behind a widespread skepticism.
When it all started, most of the people were hypnotized by the media hype and mesmerized by the
compulsive desire to get the
miraculous, salvific jab. According to some fairy tales that had come into vogue, the magic
concoctions were so terrific that, apparently, even a single dose could perform the miracle.
[
cf., e.g.,
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/26/health/pfizer-vaccine-covid-19-one-dose-uk-study-wellness/index.html]
Quite soon, it seemed to be clear that the miracle was not so miraculous. Also in the case of a product for which a single dose should have been enough (according to the initial
instructions), a second shot was eventually required...
BUT, do not panic. Allegedly, people who were "fully vaccinated" could sleep well. They could even "drop mask recommendations". And it was not enough. Apparently, the
bewitching double jabs had completely changed the rules of the game:
"Fully vaccinated people can go without masks even if they have an asymptomatic case of COVID-19 because the level of virus is much lower in their nasopharynx, the top part of their throat that lies behind the nose, than it is in someone who is unvaccinated".
It was like living in an earthly paradise:
"When you get vaccinated, you not only protect your own health and that of the family but also you contribute to the community health by preventing the spread of the virus throughout the community".
Isn't it clear enough? Do you need a more thorough explanation? Here it is:
"In other words, you become a dead end to the virus. And when there are a lot of dead ends around, the virus is not going to go anywhere. And that's when you get a point that you have a markedly diminished rate of infection in the community."
[
cf.
https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/553773-fauci-vaccinated-people-become-dead-ends-for-the-coronavirus/]
That was in May 2021, but pretty soon, in July, the time was ripe to pull an implicit warning out of the hat: "Americans who are fully vaccinated do not need booster shots at this time". "
At this time"!!!
[
cf.
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/07/11/politics/fauci-booster-shots-sotu-cnntv/index.html]
In actual fact, a few months later, by the middle of August, the message was quite different: "everybody will likely need a Covid vaccine booster shot eventually".
[
cf.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/12/covid-booster-shot-fauci-says-it-is-likely-everybody-will-eventually-need-a-third-vaccine.html]
As proven by the evidence, the concept of "dead end to the virus" was doomed to become another poor illusion for quite a time in many countries, where the so-called "vaccination rate" was high/relatively high.
Of course, it could be claimed that the fault was of the "unvaccinated", who had not allowed the US (and other countries) to have a sufficient number of "dead ends around". For instance, in July 2021, in someone's opinion, it was "inexplicable" and "very, very frustrating" that a relatively small number of Americans were inclined to take the
life-saving serums.
[
cf.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccines-fauci-data/]
Note that over 45 per cent of the US citizens had already been double jabbed by the end of June...
HOWEVER, looking at what happened (
e.g.) in Egypt, Indonesia and, above all, North Korea, someone might wonder if a higher percentage of "vaccinated" was really crucial to solve the problem in the US... and elsewhere in the world.
Indeed, it might be worth focusing on India, a Country with high population (about 1.4 billion inhabitants) and high density. In July 2021 there was an insignificant percentage of jabbed people and, perhaps more importantly, there were crowded areas all around the nation (
e.g., crowded markets, since no one was willing to die of starvation in the hope of reducing the risk of infections).
[
cf., e.g., a picture on the web page
https://thewire.in/health/international-flights-lockdown-covid-scenario-experts]
I must acknowledge that most of the people in the picture had a piece of fabric on their face,
BUT I also dare to imagine that its (
alleged) contribution was minimal.
Nor did the
caging policy seem to be a
problem solver, when it was implemented (
e.g., in March 2020).
IF the main objective was to maintain
social distancing, we can't forget huge crowds, endless lines and enormous gatherings of desperate people (especially migrant workers), who were mostly unemployed and tried to reach their homes in Spring 2020.
[
cf., e.g.,
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/03/31/822642382/coronavirus-lockdown-sends-migrant-workers-on-a-long-and-risky-trip-home]
Thus, there are reasons to suspect that, in those circumstances, neither the personal (
allegedly) protective equipment, nor the
caging policy succeeded in stopping the infections.
YET, this does not necessarily mean that the outcome was catastrophic, as far as the coronavirus was concerned
—and, perhaps, someone even dares to make the
unsubstantiated claim that huge crowds, endless lines and enormous gatherings might have given an important contribution to the fight against the coronavirus thanks to the spread of
natural antibodies.
Of course, a hypothesis of this kind is likely to be sheer madness. Unquestionably, it seems much more reasonable to suppose that "social and environmental factors" were somehow able to give a hand not only to Africa, Indonesia and North Korea, but also to India...
In fact, if we have a look at the data reported on the
worldometer website, we find that there were about 245,000 victims in India during the worst period (which lasted
three months, from April to June 2021) and less than 112,000 deaths during the next
nine months(
!!!), from July 2021 to March 2022. Clearly, the death rate had remarkably changed, becoming
much lower!
Meanwhile, less that 0.7 per cent of the population belonged to the upper
caste of the so-called "fully vaccinated" at the end of March 2021,
just over 4 per cent at the end of June 2021 (
WHEN THE DEATH RATE CLEARLY STARTED TO DECREASE) and about 60 per cent at the end of March 2022 (
when the death rate had already become almost negliglible).
[
cf., e.g.,
https://ycharts.com/indicators/india_coronavirus_full_vaccination_rate]
What about the US? According to the official data, almost 50,000 people died of Covid-19 during the period April-June 2021 and about 390,000 during the period July 2021-March 2022. Instead, the percentages of the so-called "fully vaccinated" were about 16.8, 46.6 and 65.7 per cent at the end of March 2021, June 2021 and March 2022.
[
cf., e.g.,
https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_coronavirus_full_vaccination_rate]
Without fail, it is possible to insist that many Covid victims in India went uncounted.
NONETHELESS, even if this assumption may be true, there are issues that should not be forgotten and need to be addressed for the sake of fairness:
- In India there are cities like Bangalore (with a population of around 11 million), Chennai (almost 5 million), Delhi (over 32 million), Kolkata (roughly 15 million), and Mumbai (about 21 million), where the potential efficacy of any caging policy seems to be arguable—and if someone feels that the official number of deaths is completely wrong, he also ought to explain how the local authorities were able to hide the enormous number of people who should have died, since social distancing and life-saving fluids were supposed to be absolutely indispensable to prevent a massacre, as claimed by the common narrative
- Even if the actual number of Covid victims in India was underestimated, it can be reasonably assumed that the percentage errors remained basically unchanged over the years. In other words, the impressive decrease in the death rate that occurred after June 2021 (according to the official data) is unlikely to be an irrational fruit of imagination
- Since the new trend in the death rate came together with a very low percentage of so-called "fully vaccinated" and just a few people have died of Covid-19 in India since March 2022, there must have been something different from the life-saving fluids, which was able to create "a lot of dead ends around"!!!
- Meanwhile, in the US, where the so-called "vaccination rate" did not meet the expectations of the health apparatchiks, but (as a consolation prize) the percentage of the so-called "fully vaccinated" was well over 45 per cent at the end of June 2021, about 390,000 people officially died of Covid-19 from July 2021 to March 2022. In consequence, since the United States had a population of around 330 million, at least 1.6 million people should have lost their lives in India during the same time interval (instead of 112,000), IF at least 46.6 per cent of the population had belonged to the caste of the so-called "fully vaccinated" and the immune system of most Indians (jabbed and unjabbed) had been similar to the immune system of most Americans
- Keeping in mind what really happened, many more people should have died of Covid-19 in India from July 2021 to March 2022, IF its citizens had been as unlucky as the unjabbed Americans. In fact, most of the Covid victims in the US had not taken any serum. Hence, the Americans who were most likely to die of Covid-19 were far less than 330 million and their conditions (in terms of life-saving fluids) were exactly the same as the conditions of the large majority of Indians in July 2021
- In view of the figures involved, it would be great if someone could explain why a nightmare future was waiting for 53 per cent of the Americans after June 2021, while the coexistence with the coronavirus was not too bad for 96 per cent of the Indians!!!
In the end, what's the moral of the Indian experience? Far from me the idea of drawing any conclusions.
Perhaps, however, the well-documented floods of people of biblical proportions, the huge communities living in high density areas and the very low percentage of so-called "fully-vaccinated" when it all started to get better and better might suggest a cautious approach. After some careful thinking, maybe someone is inclined to suppose that it is hard to blindly believe in the legend of
caging policies and the myth of
life-saving fluids, which were supposed to bring about "a lot of dead ends" to the coronavirus.
Come what may, the thesis that the puissant
serums could make "you become a dead end to the virus" seemed to be based on a
wishful thinking approach. Without question, it was inconsistent with the cruel reality
—and even with a
CDC web page updated on September 15, 2021, where an interesting, enlightening claim was reported: "Infections with the Delta variant in vaccinated persons potentially have reduced transmissibility than infections in unvaccinated persons, although additional studies are needed".
[
cf.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/fully-vaccinated-people.html]
Hence, apart from the need of "additional studies" and the great news that the magic
fluids were "
potentially" able to provide "reduced transmissibility", it is definitely impossible to deny that there was, at the very least, some sort of "
transmissibility".
Furthermore, it is hard to understand (and, maybe, hard to explain without a
cause-effect relation) why the inoculation campaigns had systematically been followed by a spike in infections,
from the United Kingdom to Cambodia, from Germany to Vietnam, from Italy to Australia, from Israel to New Zealand, as already said above.
Meanwhile, the only
science, which deserved to be called
science according to the
diktats of the world-saving scheme imposed by the
global health tyranny, was evolving and the locution "fully vaccinated" had to be properly interpreted. Of course, it was
NOT a hoax,
BUT it did
NOT absolutely mean "best protected":
"The definition of fully vaccinated does not include a COVID-19 booster. Fully vaccinated, however, is not the same as having the best protection. People are best protected when they stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccinations,
which includes getting a booster when eligible."
[Sentence copied from the web page
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/faq.html, available in June 2023]
Perhaps, you also remember the case of a treatment for which the optimal age range was not very clear for some time and, in spite of the involvement of alleged experts, it was quite natural for several
disbelievers to suggest that the entire process might have been based on the use of the
wheel of fortune—and, for pity's sake, we will not delve into the number of deaths that might have been caused by misjudgment and/or distraction.
Probably, the fate and the efficacy of the mighty
fluids became evident (at least for a good number of skeptics) during the period from August 2022 (when the
terror machine was put to work again) to March 2023.
It was no laughing matter. The alarm bells started to ring under the sign of Leo:
If you aren't up-to-date on Covid vaccines and boosters, you're 'going to get into trouble'.
[
cf.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/03/fauci-not-being-up-to-date-on-covid-vaccines-boosters-means-trouble.html]
Actually, at the beginning of August 2022, a worldwide campaign was launched to brainwash as many people as possible with the aim of establishing the cult of the second booster shot.
Why was the cult of the second booster shot so important? Obviously because the "fully vaccinated" and even those who had taken the first booster shot were NOT "best protected".
Why were so many people poorly protected after the first booster shot? Obviously because the (alleged) beneficial effect of the potent fluids did not last very long.
Fairly speaking, that miraculous effect DID seem to last very little, since a third booster shot came into fashion by the end of 2022. Thus, some believers could end up with an average of one shot every few months, because the people who were eligible for the third booster shot might have begun the jabbing process in summer 2021!!!
Undeniably, it was an epical and epochal event: these devotees were likely to have broken a world record!!!
For some (fortunate!?!) reason, the cult of the second booster shot (to the best of the writer's knowledge) remained optional all around the world and in consequence, as expected, was a failure. INSTEAD, everywhere, the overall situation became better and better—of course, in terms of Covid victims, NOT necessarily in terms of excess mortality and infections.
The long-held axiom many Covid cases imply many Covid deaths seemed to be flawed and the number of infections did not appear to be automatically proportional to the number of Covid victims—as well as it may NOT have been automatically proportional in Africa, India, Indonesia and so on.
To put it straight, the world DID NOT "get into trouble" and succeeded in creating a "dead end to the virus", JUST WHILE a small (perhaps negligible) number of believers were disposed to "stay up to date with COVID-19 vaccinations, which includes getting a booster when eligible"... JUST WHILE the alleged protection provided by the thaumaturgic serums was minimal, IF the message spread by the terror machine about the indispensable second booster shot was reasonably correct and not a consequence of lobbying by special interests.
If the world, positively, DID NOT "get into trouble", what does it mean? Perhaps, it can be humbly insinuated that the second booster shot was not the tool that was needed to save the world.
If the second booster shot was not the tool that was needed to save the world, what can be silently assumed next? Hard to say... but, maybe, the first booster shot, too, had not saved the world.
If someone dares to think that the first booster shot might NOT have saved the world, what is the next heresy?
I don't know... all I can say is that the survival of Egypt (together with all African Countries), India, Indonesia and, above all, North Korea seems to suggest that the Armageddon scenario, which should have followed without the lusty serums, may have been the fruit of disputable assumptions.
Alternatively, a bunch of renegades might be brave enough to hint that the alleged salvific effects of the charming fluids have possibly been the fruit of disputable assumptions. No matter what was claimed by so many health gurus, with the unconditional support of the media hype...
Er... sorry! I made a mistake. Instead of "media hype", I should have said "media bias"! Just think of the war that was waged on politicians and/or physicians, who ventured to express positive opinions about drugs like
Hydroxychloroquine and/or
Ivermectin!
INSTEAD, the mainstream media never blasted a
prime minister, who made the
blatantly false claim that the
nazipass would give "the guarantee to be amongst people who are not contagious"
!!!
[
cf., e.g.,
https://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/topnews/2021/07/22/draghi-green-pass-e-garanzia-di-tranquillita_e7c97abf-b797-4495-b31f-cb5452c2cab1.html]
Or, perhaps, all the
corona-experts who used to work for the mainstream media had been ensnared by the magic of the "dead end" fancy and were absolutely convinced that the
nazipass could really give "the guarantee to be amongst people who are not contagious"...
The
theory or, if you prefer, the
false theory that the
diktats of the world-saving scheme may have been based on
disputable assumptions has probably found further support from recent events in China, as soon as the local
health tyranny gave up its ruinous
dynamic zero Covid-19 strategy.
Western governments
were quick to tackle the inevitable doomsday scenario (no doubt, in the name of the so-called
science) and closed their doors to Chinese tourists.
[
cf., e.g.,
https://time.com/6243967/covid-travel-restrictions-china/]
Many
health pundits were quick to claim that most of the problems were caused by the Chinese
fluids, which were
NOT as miraculous as the more powerful stuff that was produced in the West.
[
cf., e.g.,
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/16/china-should-set-aside-political-issues-on-vaccine-imports-ceo-says.html]
The European Union
was quick to offer "free Covid-19 vaccines to China to help Beijing contain a mass outbreak of the illness". The Chinese leaders declined the generous offer and, as well-known, the
Celestial Empire is still alive and looks perfectly fit.
[
cf., e.g.,
https://www.ft.com/content/db9d8080-472c-419b-858f-07799849c5db]
At this stage, let's go back to the
theory or, if you prefer, the
false theory that the
diktats of the world-saving scheme may have been based on
disputable assumptions.
Surely, there are some facts, which can hardly be denied:
- The dynamic zero Covid-19 strategy in China ended in failure and the problem was essentially solved in a few weeks, when the virus was free to circulate and (possibly?!?!?) gave way to the spread of natural antibodies... BUT such an outcome would have been impossible, IF the diktats of the world-saving scheme (starting with the caging policy) had really been an indispensable resource to save the world
- Many health gurus believed that the Chinese fluids were actually rubbish and only the Western super-serums could save China, while eventually this Country saved itself without external aid... BUT such an outcome would have been impossible, IF the Western super-serums had really been an indispensable resource to save the world
- Countries like Egypt, India, Indonesia and, most notably, North Korea were quite successful in spite of "vaccination rates" which were negligible or even equal to zero, just while the nazipass was becoming a worldwide icon... BUT such an outcome would have been impossible, IF the nazipass (i.e., the mystical fluids) had really been an indispensable resource to save the world
- The number of Covid victims in countries with high/relatively high "vaccination rates" started to significantly decrease when a high percentage of the population had already been infected, including the "vaccinated", sometimes referred to as the immune—even if this term might be a little misleading, because it hints at the idea that the people belonging to the golden elite of the immune cannot be affected by Covid-19...
- It was claimed that even the "vaccinated" would "get into trouble", IF they did not keep "up-to-date on Covid vaccines and boosters"; HOWEVER, eventually, there were NO major troubles after the downfall of the second booster shot
- To be more precise, the failure of the second booster shot signaled the end of the cult of the thaumaturgic serums and the beginning of a pacific coexistence with the coronavirus... BUT such an outcome would have been impossible, IF the mighty serums had really been an indispensable resource to save the world
- The alleged efficacy of the mystical fluids had severe time limits, because a second dose, a first booster shot, a second booster shot, a third booster shot were claimed to be needed... AND, in any case, IT IS QUESTIONABLE WHETHER the first, second, third shot (or first booster shot) had really been an indispensable resource to save the world, SINCE it is undeniable that the fourth shot was (for the believers) and would have been (for the disbelievers) PRACTICALLY useless, as implicitly confirmed even by the WHO, when it was PRACTICALLY forced to declare an end to Covid-19 as a public health emergency last May!!!
- Apart from the already mentioned case of North Korea, the end of the dynamic zero Covid-19 strategy in China had similarities, at least in some sense, with what happened in the United Kingdom after July 2021, when "almost all remaining restrictions" were "lifted, including mask-wearing and social distancing mandates": the UK, too, was NOT transformed into a death camp, in spite of a capital like London, which is not exactly a small village in a deserted area... BUT such an outcome would have been impossible, IF the diktats of the world-saving scheme (starting with the caging policy) had really been an indispensable resource to save the world
Thus, I humbly wonder if someone might be inclined to infer that certain predictive models (perhaps) were not very accurate and that the providential
antibodies induced by a huge number of infections (
NOT the startling properties of some amazing fluids) really had the ability to create "a lot of dead ends around"...
Alas, it frequently happens that predictions turn out to be wrong. For instance, let's have a quick look at some issues related to the Russian economy:
1. According to some estimates, "Russia's economy shrank 2.1% in 2022 under the pressure of Western sanctions, but it was able to sell oil, metals and other natural resources to global markets, in particular to China, India and the Middle East".
In addition, the
International Monetary Fund has recently "raised its forecast for Russian growth in 2023 to 0.7% from 0.3%, but lowered its 2024 forecast to 1.3% from 2.1%".
[
cf.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/russian-billionaires-see-wealth-rise-over-half-trillion-dollars-forbes-2023-04-22/]
2. Of course, the above figures about "Russia's economy" and "Russian growth" may not be correct,
BUT, if they indeed reflect the truth, there clearly was something faulty and misleading in what was proudly stated by the White House press secretary on March 10, 2022: "We have basically crushed the Russian economy".
[
cf.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/white-house-sanctions-crushed-russia-b2033267.html]
In the end, no matter who is right or wrong, there must have been a mistake in the recent estimates and/or last year's assessment of the sanctions' impact.
Unfortunately, it may well happen...
What has been written here (
i.e., a sequence of numbers and facts, which may be considered
ridiculous), is obviously aimed at raising some (unreasonable?!?) doubts about the (surely well-motivated?!?) need to destroy a successful economic system, cause huge social disruption and devastate the lives of millions of families (mainly in developing countries, highly dependent on tourism) under the pretext of (really?!?) protecting the health of humanity.
Personally, however, I unshakably believe that the most intriguing aspect of the whole saga was the unrestrained and uninhibited use of terms like
science,
scientists and
scientific as part of the propaganda machine, with the unhinged support of the mainstream media.
Mind you... I have
nothing against these terms, when they refer to the
science and the
scientific knowledge, which play a fundamental role in the activity of the
scientists who are able to investigate the features of a virus, understand its nature and, maybe, enhance its biological functions through genetic changes.
INSTEAD, I am left extremely puzzled, when the word
science comes together with the strategies adopted to manage the coronavirus. In this context, I am inclined to think that the term
science should be accepted
IF AND ONLY IF it were absolutely clear that this word denotes the
science of the times of Galileo.
As a matter of fact, Galileo was blackmailed and forced to reject the
heliocentric model in the name of a
science, which could not prove the
geocentric theory,
BUT had to be right because it had to be right.
Don't forget that the recent blackmail process did not involve ignorant, illiterate individuals,
BUT medicine doctors (including epidemiologists) and even physicians, who had been considered distinguished
scientists until they started raising doubts about
house arrests and/or more or less magical
fluids. As was the case of Galileo, they were censored and/or intimidated
—forced to shut up or pay the consequences.
Just to make it clearer how things (in my opinion) should work in an unbiased world, I suggest to take the hypothetical case of an academic (
e.g., in the field of mathematics), who suddenly claims that
Pythagoras' theorem is wrong. Come hell or high water, a statement of this kind would certainly be comparable to a verbal attack on
house arrests and/or so-called "vaccines".
HOWEVER, there would be no need to censor or blackmail that imaginary academic. Even a young student would be able to prove that
Pythagoras' theorem holds true and it would be obvious for everyone to boot that bizarre academic out of any university because of
indisputable and scientifically proven evidence.
INSTEAD, the need to blackmail, intimidate, censor reminds of the times of Galileo and
DOES show a complete
LACK of indisputable and scientifically proven evidence.
In actual fact, some truths are emerging. For instance, even though the mainstream media have devoutly ignored the issue, the chief of a well-known social technology company has recently admitted that the "establishment" did not hesitate to ask "for a bunch of things to be censored that, in retrospect, ended up being more debatable or true".
[
cf.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/zuckerberg-says-establishment-asked-facebook-censor-covid-misinfo-ended-true-undermines-trust]
In addition, as euphemistically stated according to the same article, "he believes the requests made to him by the scientific community hurt their credibility with the public"
!!!
Of course, in
Jihad Al-Kuffar, published over ten years ago, there is nothing at all about pandemics and major disease outbreaks. Yet, Chapter 8 focuses on a special fight that was waged in Afghanistan in March 2001, in the Province of Bamiyan. It all happened in an atmosphere characterized by indisputable truths—and animosity was at its peak.
Inspired by his dreams and his faith, the alleged writer (a radical militant) talks about his enthusiastic desire to defend the interests of "true believers", by destroying the Bamiyan statues.
Here follow some of his comments about an unusual plan to guarantee a bright future for the people he is supposed to help:
One of the men in my team was an old friend, Saad, the militant with whom I had shared heady days of conquest in the District of Yakaolang. Again, two months later, faith and devotion had brought us together to fight in the Province of Bamiyan. As everyone else, that mujahid was looking forward to the demolition of the vicious sculptures. He knew we were in the Province of Bamiyan to enhance religious freedom, basic liberties, and inalienable rights of true believers.
Before closing, I would like to say a word about the surname
Mengele and the term
nazipass, which appear in this text
—and, in passing, I can even add that I wouldn't mind if new
Nuremberg trials were held with the aim of investigating the
diktats of the world-saving scheme and their motivations.
No doubt, I am well aware that many institutions and individuals have negative reactions to whatever reminds of the Nazi horrors and does not explicitly refer to the
Holocaust.