The Time to Speak

Author: Verity

  • Most COVID patients were not given any tools to lessen the virus, they were told to “come to the hospital when it gets bad.”

    My mother’s 93 years old. And she lives in Massachusetts. And I talked to her doctor, and said, “What is the plan if she gets COVID?” Because my whole family, of course, is terrified that she’s going to get it. And he said, “Well, if she gets it, the chances are that she’ll be okay, but if she starts to have depleted oxygen levels or has trouble breathing, then we’ll bring her to the hospital.” And I said, “So, there’s no intervention to prevent her disease from progressing to that point?” And he said, “No.” And these are some of the best doctors in the world, and this is in August. Aren’t you kind of astonished by that kind of response from the medical community?

    I mean, ’cause at that point it was pretty clear that if you went to the hospital with this disease that your chances of coming out, if you’re that age, are very, very low. And it seems astonishing to me that that’s her personal doctor who loves my mother, that that’s the best he would have come up with. And why isn’t this sort of occurring to individual doctors?

    RFK Jr., Source

    The word that’s been used, it’s a sharp word, but it’s called therapeutic nihilism, this idea that nothing can be done for patients. And it is the oddest observation that with all the skill and talent that we have in America that not a single major academic institution got out there and fought the virus. Where’s the Harvard protocol to prevent hospitalization, or how about the Mayo Clinic or Johns Hopkins, or Penn, or any of these terrific institutions? Not a single one actually even had a COVID clinic. Not a single one actually tried to prevent a single hospitalization. It was almost as if we were gripped in fear, and that fear overtook everything. And the only thing anybody could think of was playing defense. “Oh, let’s just wait until the oxygen goes down, and we’ll put patients in the hospitalization.” That’s kind of the innocent explanation for this is that it was just gripping fear. For everything else we have amazing protocols. Harvard’s got protocols and clinical trials for treating heart attacks and gallstones. And we have the University of Michigan criterion for cancers. We seem to be great for every other disease except for COVID. And then when COVID hit, our academic institutions just went blank.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    There’s been suppression of science. I think some doctors honestly are afraid to engage. They’re afraid maybe there’s professional repercussions. Maybe, there’ll be views of their practicing community that are negative upon them. It’s hard to imagine, me as a doctor, that there’s a doctor who wouldn’t want to care for a sick patient, that’s the Hippocratic oath. And when I ask doctors sometimes, “Do you treat COVID?” And some say, “No, there’s no treatment. I don’t treat COVID.” And I said, “Well, when a patient calls and you tell them that, do you call them back in a couple days and check on them?” And, usually, there’s silence. And what my concern is through all the fear and isolation and loneliness and division we’ve had, my fear is actually compassion has been lost, and the Hippocratic oath now is being abrogated. I really believe that, because if doctors really cared, they would be calling. They’d be doing everything, get oxygen, get a pulse oximeter, do something. But this idea of, “I don’t treat COVID and hang up the phone,” that’s what Americans are facing right now. And they are outraged. The public is absolutely outraged on the lack of medical response for early treatment.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    And what really became incredible is when we had the Emergency Use Authorization approval for antibiotics both the Lilly and the Regeneron products. So, this is the high-tech research that everybody wanted to see happen, and high-tech products. These antibodies got out there. No word of them. There was no FAQs, no doctor reminders. When patients got their COVID test, there was no hotline of how you get an antibody infusion. No update on TV. People would go on TV, and they’d give their testimonials about how their loved ones would die. And no one would think, “Wow, could my loved one been treated with an antibody infusion or drugs?” We had Elizabeth Warren on the other night talking about her brother passed away. No mention of, “Could he have been treated?” On the TV Dallas News last night there was a wonderful lady whose husband died, they talked about, but no mention of early treatment. So the public, the media, the doctors, I even say even the whole biotech industry, they just drew a blank on early treatment. Everybody went blank on a fatal medical problem right in front of us. The group think and the blind spot and the collective oblivion is beyond belief.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    Well, I testified in the Senate on November 19th. I said that half of the deaths could have been avoided. And the data have come in suggesting, again, hindsight being 2020, that number is probably closer to 85%. But what I would have done from the very beginning is I would have been much more balanced on what we call the four pillars of pandemic response. The first pillar is contagion control trying to reduce the spread. And we really had a major focus on this with masks and distancing, et cetera. The second pillar is early treatment, that was basically the missed opportunity. The third pillar is hospitalized treatment. I think we were pretty solid there. There was efforts there, but it became clear the hospital doesn’t save everyone. In fact, the majority of deaths, when they do occur, occur in the hospital. And then the last pillar has been vaccination. Well, what happened is, the mistake was, that we didn’t off the bat start into multi-drug treatment. We should have looked at this, and said, “You know what? This is a complicated virus. We’re not going to go single drug. Let’s get into multidrug cocktails. Let’s test them in randomized controlled trials. Let’s look for signals of benefit. Let’s not look for overwhelming mortality reductions with a single drug.” It’s unrealistic. Let’s look for signals of benefit, just like we do in cancer or complicated infections, and start to put together these protocols, test them one after another. And get everybody into research. Let’s have a national hotline for NIH research, and let’s get going. What happened is the National Institutes of Health actually had one multi-drug study. It was just hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin. And around the time it became known that the virus was going to be amenable to a vaccine that study was dropped. In fact, it was supposed to collect 2000 patients. They did 20, and they said, “We give up.” And then all efforts were focused on the vaccine. So, we made a gamble. And I published a op-ed in “The Hill” in the summer, and the title of the op-ed was “The Great Gamble of COVID-19 Vaccine Development”. Which basically said, “We’re gambling everything on the vaccine and we’re putting nothing on treatment now that’s going to help sick patients right in front of us.” And it really posed the question, is it gonna be worth it? Is the ends gonna justify the means? And I can tell you at about 550,000 deaths I honestly don’t think that the ends justify the means. We missed the opportunity to treat the sick patient right in front of us.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    We organized our findings and submitted it to “The American Journal of Medicine” in July 1st. And at that time there were 55,000 papers in the peer-reviewed literature, not a single one taught doctors how to treat COVID-19 to avoid hospitalization and death. And so, when that paper was published in the August 7th issue of “The American Journal of Medicine”, it was far and away the most widely quoted, cited, downloaded paper. It still is the most widely downloaded paper. And we filled the void because the National Institutes of Health didn’t have guidelines yet. The Infectious Diseases Society of America didn’t address how to treat outpatients. And the World Health Organization was missing that piece.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    Well, I think the first step would have been to recognize there’s two bad outcomes: hospitalization and death. The next step would have been a courageous statement. And the courageous statement would have had to come from a leader, let’s say a president, or a senator, or a governor. And that statement would be as follows: “COVID-19 is a terrible problem. These hospitalizations and deaths must be stopped. I’m going to put together a panel of expert doctors who are learning and have experience in treating COVID patients. And we’re going to get the best and brightest together. And we’re going to stop these hospitalizations and death.” And, Mr. Kennedy, what I can tell you is not a single leader had the courage anywhere in the world. And it may be courage. It may be insight, it may be intellect. It may be perception. Whatever it was, they didn’t have the stuff to say that courageous statement. I said that statement professionally in April/May.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    But when it comes to advice for the country, there’s been an approach of giving no hope, no window for treatment, no advice on treatment, nothing. It’s almost as if there’s a promotion of as much suffering, despair, anxiety, hospitalization, and death as possible in preparation for mass vaccination.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    This page is incomplete and will be added to.

  • There are COVID treatments that work to keep people out of the hospital.

    In December 2020, fifty-seven brave doctors published a study about treating SARS CoV-2 with a multi-drug approach. The title of that study is: Multifaceted highly targeted sequential multidrug treatment of early ambulatory high-risk SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19)

    In that study, they said:

    Prompt early initiation of sequenced multidrug therapy (SMDT) is a widely and currently available solution to stem the tide of hospitalizations and death. A multipronged therapeutic approach includes 1) adjuvant nutraceuticals, 2) combination intracellular anti-infective therapy, 3) inhaled/oral corticosteroids, 4) antiplatelet agents/anticoagulants, 5) supportive care including supplemental oxygen, monitoring, and telemedicine. 

    Source

    One single medication will not pull a patient out of advanced infection. The key is early treatment, and with multiple medications at once. Dr. McCullough said:

    We had two studies, one from Vladimir Zelenko, who I give tremendous credit for, in New York, addressing the Orthodox Jewish community in the spring, and then one from Brian Procter, which is now fully accepted in a peer-reviewed journal from McKinney, Texas. Both studies show that multi-drug, early outpatient treatment for COVID-19 reduces hospitalization and death by 85%.

    Source

    That study was titled: COVID-19 outpatients: early risk-stratified treatment with zinc plus low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin: a retrospective case series study. Again, multiple drugs were used. There was not a single “miracle” drug or a “cure,” but Dr. Zelenko and the two other physicians had a lot of success with a combination of drugs. Specifically, they used: hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and zinc.

    Some of the medications that have been used:

    Favipiravir Helped COVID Patients in Countries that Used It

    Hydroxychloroquine is Beneficial for COVID When Used Early

    Ivermectin has been Beneficial for COVID Patients

    If a patient does get sick and they’re in the high risk category, treat within the first nine days of symptoms. Why? Because this virus for the first five days, it’s viral load is concentration. It’s amount of virus in the body stays relatively stable. It doesn’t double, it doesn’t increase so much. But on day six or seven it explodes like a wildfire, an inferno. So what happens, my practice, at least patients come on day four or five and they’re sick and they have all the symptoms of coronavirus, which I’ll talk to you about in a minute. And so I’ll do the test. Why not? But it takes three days to get to the results. So I’m going to wait until day eight to treat these patients? When there’s the fires out of control? No, I’m going to give them the medication right away and wait till the results.

    I may stop the medication after three days. I may not. Also because the test is not a hundred percent accurate, I’ll judge how the patient’s doing. But at least I’ll give the patient the chance to treat this early to prevent the development of these catastrophic lung complications.

    Dr. Zelenko, Source

    And my data shows…a 99% reduction in hospitalization and death if you administer these medications within the first five days of symptoms. In other words, this will become less of an issue than influenza virus if you treat it in the right way, at the right time.

    Dr. Zelenko, Source

    This page is incomplete and will be added to.

  • Ivermectin has been Beneficial for COVID Patients

    …right now if you go to Mexico City, it’s ivermectin frontline.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    This page is incomplete and will be added to.

  • Hydroxychloroquine is Beneficial for COVID When Used Early

    Hydroxychloroquine has Been Used Safely For Years

    Look at the hypocrisy that is being done. These drugs have been used for a millions of patients for lupus and rheumatoid arthritis and malaria, malaria prophylaxis. Even to this day, notice that there’s no warnings to these patients that they shouldn’t take the medication. Only if you take this medication for COVID-19 does it kill people?

    Dr. Zelenko, Source

    Hydroxychloroquine has Successfully Been Used to Treat Sars CoV-2

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

    Other Countries Used Hydroxychloroquine

    India early on back in March said, “Hydroxychloroquine. We use it for malaria. We use it for rheumatoid arthritis. It has a mild antiviral activity. Let’s use it for prophylaxis.” India ultimately front-lined hydroxychloroquine as their basic treatment and prevention approach. So did Italy, initially. Italy did this. They reversed their approach midway. Realized their mistake, went back to hydroxychloroquine frontline. Greece had hydroxychloroquine frontline.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    But the unique thing in Africa is there’s widespread use of hydroxychloroquine. They use it for malaria prophylaxis, anyway.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    So the information exists. It exists on multiple, in multiple continents. I can point it out to you. Um, first of all, all of India is using it. I just found out.

    Australia, there’s an Australian billionaire. His name is Clive Palmer. You can look them up. He’s worth four and a half billion dollars. He donated 32 million pills of hydroxychloroquine to the government of Australia and they’ve administered these medications in the hospital setting, but early, not to patients that are on respirators. They have some of the lowest death rates in the world. Look it up. Um, Italy, um, April 6th started using hydroxychloroquine and their death rates went down.

    Turkey had just reported that they used the drugs of chloroquine with great success.

    Iran reported the same exact thing.

    Honduras is reporting the same exact thing.

    The prevent it, health system in Brazil is reporting the same exact thing.

    …in Marseilles, France is reporting the same exact thing.

    Dr. Zelenko, Source

    Hydroxychloroquine is Cheap and Therefore There Was No Financial Incentive to Promote It

    There is a lot of political and financial incentives in this country to make this medication [hydroxychloroquine] unattractive. This is medication costs 23 cents a pill and the president of the United States [President Trump] supports it. So this has been a very orchestrated well organized effort to make this medication seem extremely dangerous, that it’s killing people.

    Dr. Zelenko, Source

    So let me tell you, I spoke to one of the top electric physiologist in the country and I asked him if he’s seen any complications, uh, from ever in his career from using hydroxychloroquine. And his answer was no. And he said something interesting to me that there are, there are around 3000 electrophysiologist. These are hard electricians, you know, uh, they’re the ones that deal with the main supposedly side effect of a drug, which is a QT prolongation, which may lead to supposedly fatal cardiac arrhythmias. So the specialty of medicine that deals with this problem is called electrophysiology heart electrician. So they’re around 3000 of these guys in this country. So he said that they have like a group, uh, I don’t know if it’s WhatsApp or whatever, but they can communicate with each other. And they were asking this question, you know, as anyone seen, uh, any complications and up to this point, no one’s answered yes,

    Dr. Zelenko, Source

    This page is incomplete and will be added to.

  • Other countries used treatments that worked for COVID.

    There are about 30 countries now that have treatment kits where they combine either hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin, plus an intracellular antibiotic, azithromycin, doxycycline, and then steroids, aspirin as a combination. 30 countries, we tabulate those in our December 2020 paper.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    The disappointing thing is that I’m sitting here in Texas. Two hours south of me by plane in South America, they’re handing out treatment kits, but the average person in Texas thinks there’s no treatment for COVID-19. They get handed a test result. They’re given no treatment. They’re given no information, no access to research, no hotline. They’re given no follow-up. They’re told to go home, wait until they can’t breathe, and then go into the hospital, become hospitalized. Many patients never see their loved ones again. This is an absolutely horrifying experience. And two hours south of us, they would get a treatment kit from the government and they’d be eased through the illness.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    Favipiravir Helped COVID Patients in Countries that Used It

    Hydroxychloroquine is Beneficial for COVID When Used Early

    Ivermectin has been Beneficial for COVID Patients

    There’s a tremendous variability in death rate, as we mentioned before, between all these other nations. What’s surprising is one of the incongruities or anomalies that we see is, in our country, it is black populations that are the highest mortality rates. And we can explain that maybe because of chronic vitamin D deficiencies in those populations. But in Africa there’s practically no deaths happening. How do you explain these huge anomalies nation by nation?

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    But the unique thing in Africa is there’s widespread use of hydroxychloroquine. They use it for malaria prophylaxis, anyway.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    The BCG Vaccine Appears to Reduce COVID Cases and Mortality

    When asked “How about Japan? Because Japan has an aging population. How have they done?” by RFK Jr., Dr. McCullough said:

    Japan has taken an interesting approach. Now, they feature favipiravir as the oral antiviral, but they don’t use it at home so they tend to hospitalize. They have tremendous hospital capacity there. So, they start favipiravir very early, but they hospitalize patients and observe them. They may combine them with antibiotics, then later with steroids. But they have managed to keep their case count down and the mortality rate down, but they have very long hospital stays. Favipiravir, like the other antiviral drugs, whether this be an antibody infusion, hydroxychloroquine, or ivermectin, they work by speeding the clearance of the virus from the nasopharyngeal tract and also reducing the density of viral replication. Now, they don’t by any means cure the infection, but in my view, they do play an assistive role.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    About Hydroxychloroquine, Dr. Zelenko said this:

    So the information exists. It exists on multiple, in multiple continents. I can point it out to you. Um, first of all, all of India is using it. I just found out.

    Australia, there’s an Australian billionaire. His name is Clive Palmer. You can look them up. He’s worth four and a half billion dollars. He donated 32 million pills of hydroxychloroquine to the government of Australia and they’ve administered these medications in the hospital setting, but early, not to patients that are on respirators. They have some of the lowest death rates in the world. Look it up. Um, Italy, um, April 6th started using hydroxychloroquine and their death rates went down.

    Turkey had just reported that they used the drugs of chloroquine with great success.

    Iran reported the same exact thing.

    Honduras is reporting the same exact thing.

    The prevent it, health system in Brazil is reporting the same exact thing.

    …in Marseilles, France is reporting the same exact thing.

    Source

    This page is incomplete and will be added to.

  • Favipiravir Helped COVID Patients in Countries that Used It

    I give a lot of credit to countries that just early on did smart things. So, for instance, there is a Japanese drug called favipiravir. It inhibits the RNA-dependent polymerase of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It’s been used for years in Japan for influenza. It has a mechanism similar to that of remdesivir. What did Russia do? What did India, Pakistan, other countries…? They right away onboarded favipiravir. It was like Tamiflu, but except for COVID-19. I give them a lot of credit for doing that.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    Favipiravir, like the other antiviral drugs, whether this be an antibody infusion, hydroxychloroquine, or ivermectin, they work by speeding the clearance of the virus from the nasopharyngeal tract and also reducing the density of viral replication. Now, they don’t by any means cure the infection, but in my view, they do play an assistive role.

    Dr. Peter McCullough, Source

    This page is incomplete and will be added to.

  • The PCR test can be manipulated to inflate or decrease case numbers

    The whole diagnosis of COVID-19 was reliant on one simple tool: The PCR Test. If the PCR tests are not accurate, then we can’t believe anything we’ve been told about this virus.

    Most people bought these statements at truths:

    • If you stick a swab up your nose and turn it in to your local pharmacy or hospital, you will learn, with reasonable accuracy, whether or not you have the virus.
    • If you get positive test results, you have the virus, regardless of whether or not you have symptoms.

    The PCR test is nicknamed “Molecular Photocopying” because

    This post is incomplete and will be added to.

  • COVID-19 most-likely came from a lab

    Wuhan Institute of Virology, CAS Image Source

    Early in the coronavirus pandemic, we were told that the virus didn’t come from a lab. This information was based on these two articles:

    Every time Tony Fauci, the mainstream media or any scientist made a statement about COVID-19 being from natural origin, they were referring to these two articles. Every brave scientist who spoke up about the possibility of a lab-origin was called a “Conspiracy Theorist” based on these two studies alone. The science was “settled” because of these two articles, we were told.

    The articles definitely looked official, like prominent scientists wrote them. The science quoted in the articles looked fishy, though. Other scientists were asking how the certainty of a natural origin was obtained: how did anyone know for certain the virus wasn’t from a laboratory, when we were so early in the pandemic?

    The Lancet Article: Who Wrote and Signed Off on it?

    The Lancet article had a ghost-writer! The writer was a man named Peter Daszak. (Peter Dazak, British bio-weapons expert, getting millions of dollars from the US military and from Tony Fauci)

    Francis Collins was blogging about these articles as if they were truth. Tony Fauci was quoting these articles.

    Tom Cotton, Meryl Nass and others saw through it.

    There was also a letter from Kristian Anderson to Francis Collins, Jeremy Farrar and Tony Fauci thanking them for writing it.

    This post is incomplete and will be added to.

  • How Guns and Semis are Discussed: Is it about our SAFETY?

    Aside from easing “voting restrictions” (insert puke face); much of the speech from the White House recently has been about “Gun Safety.” When Kamala Harris says that she wants to ease “voting restrictions,” she really means that she wants everybody, even illegal aliens and the deceased, to be able to vote. She knows that illegal voting and illegal counting of votes is how she secured her current office, and hopes to win again in 2024, so this is a hot topic for her. Likewise, when Joe Biden speaks of “Gun Safety,” what he really means is that he doesn’t want anybody to have the right to own a gun. These two embarrassing “leaders” are messing with our constitution, in that they want non-citizens (and dead people) to be able to vote and they don’t want American citizens to have the right to protect themselves.

    “Gun Safety”

    Let’s talk about “Gun Safety.” Recent discussion would make one believe that injuries and deaths related to guns are common, and have increased over the recent year. These statistics are difficult to find, and many of the articles discussing this subject contain big, fancy graphics that are definitely skewed. For example, most of these sites lump together suicides, homicides, mass shootings and accidental gun deaths and injuries as if they are all the same.

    For me, it comes down to the intention of the heart. When we look at the sinful human heart, we can know for certain: if a human wants to kill or harm themselves or another, they will find a way, with or without a gun. David killed Goliath with a slingshot (and the power of God). Cain killed Abel with a stone. Men will always find a way to sin if their heart leads to them to do so. We can’t point at guns and say that they are the evil thing, causing deaths and injuries. It is man’s heart.

    Deaths of Unsuspecting/Innocent People is What Matters When We’re Looking at These Facts

    When I can look at an injury or death, as tragic as it is (no matter how it occurred), I can reassure myself that it won’t happen to me or my family if we don’t do XYZ. For example, don’t veer past the ropes or railings on a mountainous hiking trail, and you won’t fall. Keep your guns locked and stored away safely, and your two year old won’t accidentally shoot himself (there have been situations like this, sadly!!). Wear your seatbelt, and you won’t be thrown from your car, no matter how bad an accident is. Put simply: play by the rules, and for the most part, you’ll stay safe. (Knowing that God has our lives in His hand and at any moment He can call us to Him by any way He chooses).

    The deaths and injuries that bother me the most are these types:

    • The family who went to the mall for the afternoon and lost some loved ones to a mass shooter.
    • The student who went to school and died, simply trying to get an education.
    • The little boy who was riding his bike down the street and got shot by someone who didn’t even know him.

    These people weren’t doing anything wrong. Going to the mall, or to school (well–we should probably all be homeschooling, but more on that later!) or riding one’s bike down the street are not reasons to be killed. Most people don’t suspect that taking a trip to the mall will potentially end their life. These are the worst possible scenarios. These are the situations that I want to stop. (Hold on, I know I’m sounding like a liberal–keep reading!) 🙂

    Most People Won’t Be Shot By a Random Stranger

    The good news is, these situations are rare–even now, in 2021. The chances of riding your bike down the street and being shot are extremely rare, as most homicide situations involve non-strangers (people you know). Source, source So, unless you live in a neighborhood with a terribly high crime rate or you’re friends with the Clintons, there is a low chance that a random stranger will kill you (or “suicide” you in the case of the Clintons’ minions).

    Mass shootings are also rare. Biden and the media would have us believe that these random and mass shootings happen on a regular basis, perhaps daily. This is all fear mongering and not based on any facts or data. What has increased is the definition of a “mass shooting.” Take, for example, this list of “mass shootings” that happened in 2021 on Wikipedia. None of these incidents involved random strangers opening fire on a school or a mall (praise God they didn’t). Many were in homes or apartments. The word “nightclub” was used more times than I could count. “Hookah bar” was mentioned several times. “Party” was a word I saw repeated. In almost every situation, the victim knew the shooter somehow. The moral of the story, to me is: avoid unsavory places and untrustworthy people, and you are unlikely to be a victim of a shooting.

    And again, I have to point out: the gun is a thing and the heart is what causes a person to kill or injure another. There are plenty of injuries and even deaths in prisons, where guns are not allowed.

    Google Search: What Happens More, Actual Gun Violence or TALK of Gun Violence?

    I did a random Google search today. Yes, I used Google, not Duck, Duck, Go. I wanted to see what the average person sees in the news. I searched the word “Gun” in News with some random date ranges: today, 6/1-6/5/2021, 3/15-3/18/2021 and 12/24-12/21/2020. I looked at the articles on the first three pages of each of these searches. This is what I found:

    • There were 70 articles talking about gun violence and gun violence injuries
    • There were 0 mass shootings
    • There were 5 instances where someone used a gun to threaten people
    • There were 5 accidental shootings
    • There were 6 intentional shootings, three involved police officers and two were defense situations (so, ONE intentional shooting that was for bad reason)
    • There was 1 BB gun incident
    • 3 articles advertised guns in video games
    • 1 article said that a person carrying a gun saved many people from harm

    This, my friends, is called fear mongering. There were few actual gun-related incidents that killed or injured innocent people in any of the time periods I searched, yet the media (and the president) spoke of such violence at length.

    A Bigger Killer That Nobody’s Talking About: Semi-Trucks

    Recently, I have heard of several deaths or severe injuries that involved a tractor trailer, or semi-truck. Hear me out as I share about this, I realize:

    • Trucks are necessary for our American, consumerist way of life. If semi-trucks weren’t on the road, I wouldn’t be able to go to Walmart whenever I want and find post-it-notes or pens or bandaids or a bicycle.
    • Trucks also move food–without semi-trucks, most of us wouldn’t have bananas, oranges, vanilla, rice, or even oats.
    • Trucking provides jobs for many people in our country.
    • Not all truckers are bad drivers or will cause an accident.

    There, I had to say all of that–before I dive in to this subject. Semi-trucks are on my mind because we have been forced off the road twice within the last two months by trucks that were being driven too fast and one swerved into our lane and another passed us when there was no lane for passing. Our heart rates went up, and we saw our lives flash before our eyes. Praise God, we’re still here, and I can write and tell you all about it!

    But Wait–Certainly There are More Gun Deaths than Semi-Truck Deaths?

    It depends how you look at the statistics.

    In 2019, there were:

    • 14,414 homicides (Again, mostly people who know each other. Angry people who would kill even if they had to use a stone to do it.)
    • 23,941 suicides (Very sad, and again–when people are determined in their heart to sin like this, they will. They will find a way. The gun is not the responsible party, the person is.)
    • 1,352 accidental gun shootings from mishandling of a firearm. These are the awful situations that I can’t stand to read about. 🙁

    Source

    ALL deaths via guns or any other cause are sad. Please do not think that I am minimizing these deaths as I proceed. Consider this: at least 72 million people in this country own guns and there are guns in roughly 40% of American households. Source (I believe these numbers are low. First, they required people to admit that they had guns. Plus, in 2020 alone, 23 million guns were purchased in the U.S. I think more people own guns than readily share that they own guns). For the sake of math (and having a number to work with), let’s assume that 72 million is an accurate number.

    So, out of 72 million gun owners,

    • .02% chose to kill someone in 2019
    • .03% chose to commit suicide
    • .001% misused their weapon and had an accidental shooting
    • In total, .05% of gun owners ever cause death or injury to themselves or others.

    WOW. So 99.95% of gun owners use them safely and never hurt anyone..

    Let’s compare these numbers to semi-truck deaths.

    There are an estimated 3.5 million truck drivers in our country. Source

    In 2019, 4,119 died because of semi-truck accidents. Source

    SO, out of 3.5 million truck drivers:

    • .1% caused death to themselves or others.
    • Also, 11% of all vehicle accidents involved a semi-truck. Source

    So, 99.9% of all semi-truck drivers have not been involved in fatal accidents.

    I know, we’re looking at numbers like .05% and .1%, and it’s hard to tell what that means. If I am doing my math correctly, and I think I am, it boils down to this:

    You are twice as likely to be killed by a semi-truck than you are to be killed or even injured by a gun.

    Let’s look at another number:

    If you are shot with a gun, you have a 50% chance of surviving. In contrast, very few people survive being hit by a semi-truck, and if they do, they are left with debilitating injuries. Source

    Google Search: Do Headlines Confirm That Semis Kill People More Than Guns?

    I performed a Google search for “semi-truck” in the News just like the “gun” search above. I used the exact same date ranges: : today, 6/1-6/5/2021, 3/15-3/18/2021 and 12/24-12/21/2020. I looked at the articles on the first three pages of each of these searches. This is what I found:

    • There were 118 wrecks where people were injured or killed
    • There were 41 major spills, fires, tipped over trucks or trucks hanging off of bridges
    • There was 1 truck that was intentionally used as a weapon by a bad guy
    • There were just 3 news articles mentioning semi-truck safety
    • 1 article said that a trucker saved the day

    SO, let’s look at these statistics a little closer.

    In my random Google search about guns, 77% of the articles were about gun safety, 13% were about guns being used inappropriately, and 7% of the articles were about actual injuries or deaths.

    In contrast, in my random Google search about semi-trucks, 2% of the articles were about semi-truck safety, 72% were about deaths or injuries (mostly deaths), and 25% were about other dangerous situations involving semi-trucks.

    (In addition to trucks hitting other vehicles, sometimes they spill their contents all over the roadway, posing danger to others. I saw articles about a fuel spill, two milk truck spills and logs (think large, HEAVY logs) ending up in the roadway.)

    What is the White House Saying?

    Surely, if semi-truck deaths and injuries are such a big deal, the current administration must be talking about them, right? I wish I could say this was true.

    The fact is that Biden has never addressed the issue of semi-trucks or tractor trailers causing two times as many deaths and injuries as guns.

    May 12, press secretary Jen Psaki said that the Biden administration was going to allow fuel truckers to carry additional weight (Note that additional weight means that trucks will have a more difficult time stopping).

    On Monday and Tuesday and into today, several states have issued emergency declarations that allow truckers to carry additional weight on state roads.

    Now, the White House and DOT have determined that 10 states can use existing federal major disaster declarations that are currently in place to allow those states to issue permits that allow drivers to temporarily carry additional gasoline that would ordinarily exceed existing weight limits on federal highways in their state.

    Source

    On April 8, a reporter asked Jen Psaki a really good question about large truck safety:

    The other question is: Before President Biden took office, he got a letter from advocates — safety advocates who lost loved ones in truck crashes.  Truck crashes are up about 35 percent over the last 10 years.  They asked him to support certain provisions — technology — to reduce crashes.  Those technologies, including automatic braking systems, speed limiters, were recommended on Tuesday by the National Transportation Safety Board.  Is that something the President supports and is going to have people in the agencies look at trying to impose some of those new safety restrictions?

    Source

    Like almost every question Jen is asked, she said she didn’t know and that she’d get back to this reporter. I searched through press briefings since April 8, and haven’t seen her address this topic ever again. I believe that using the phrase “I’ll get back to you” or something like it is really this administration’s method of leaving America uninformed about the issues that matter.

    Is the White House Addressing Gun Safety?

    I did a search for “Gun Violence” on WhiteHouse.gov and found the following:

    • Biden spoke of gun violence 20 times, Harris 3 times
    • Gun violence was addressed in press briefings with Jen Psaki 34 times
    • There were 22 meetings or documents signed that addressed gun safety

    Wow, so the current administration has addressed gun safety 76 times more than semi-truck safety, and semi-trucks kill twice as many people.

    I’m doubting that this administration truly cares about our safety.

    How to Avoid Being Shot vs How to Avoid Being Hit By a Semi

    I mentioned above that to avoid being shot, there are a few things you can do:

    • Avoid sketchy areas
    • Avoid unsavory and untrustworthy people
    • Stay out of night clubs and hookah bars
    • Don’t pretend to hold a gun out the car window, or someone may shoot an actual gun at you

    Do these things, and your chances of being shot and killed by a gun (those evil guns, you know!) are very, very low.

    In contrast, to avoid being hit and killed by a semi-truck, this is what you have to do:

    • Avoid rural areas and cities
    • Avoid highways
    • Don’t drive on the weekends
    • Don’t drive on a Thursday
    • In fact, don’t drive Monday through Friday, either
    • Avoid driving in clear weather
    • Avoid driving in bad weather
    • Don’t drive between noon and 3 pm
    • Wait, don’t drive between 6 am and 6 pm
    • In fact, it’s probably best to only drive between midnight and 3 am
    • Don’t pull in front of a large truck
    • Don’t follow a truck too closely
    • Watch for flying debris from a truck
    • Stay away from truck drivers who are sleepy or who have been drinking or using substances (sadly, there is a high rate of substance abuse among truck drivers, as it is a hard way of life)
    • Stay away from trucks with brake issues
    • Make sure your vehicle has airbags
    • Don’t drive a tiny little sports car or a squished up smart car
    • Drive a bigger vehicle than them (start driving a semi, for safety from the semis, folks!)

    Source, source, source

    Most people won’t be shot and killed by a gun, but almost everyone is at risk of being hit and killed by a semi-truck. While being killed by a semi-truck is rare, if it’s going to happen, there is little we can do to avoid it.

    Money Matters, and Semis Bring in A LOT More than Guns

    Maybe the government cares about dollars more than safety? Trucking is a 255 billion dollar industry, which is huge. That’s roughly 30% of the amount that the pharmaceutical industry brings in and 40% of the banking industry’s profits. Semi-trucks are a big industry, and big industries are important to big government.

    Guns are a 65 billion dollar industry, which is only 9% of the banking industry and 7% of the pharmaceutical industry. Guns are not a tiny industry, but they bring in $190 billion less than the trucking industry every year. Source, source Perhaps nobody is talking about “Semi-Truck Safety” because it’s such a lucrative industry. In contrast, an industry that is 75% less profitable is less important to the government.

    But the Government Cares About Our Safety, Right?!

    Not really. Biden and his puppeteers keep mentioning “Gun Safety” and “Gun Violence” when the actual instances are incredibly low, compared to the amount of gun owners. They refuse to speak about semi-truck safety, even when asked about it, when trucks kill twice as many Americans as guns. (We know people are behind the guns and people are behind the wheel of the trucks, but for the sake of using their language, let’s say “trucks kill” and “guns kill.”). Biden doesn’t truly care about our lives. If he did, he’d get off the “Gun Safety” soapbox and start discussing a real threat: deaths caused by big trucks.

    A Note to the Truckers and Truck-Loving Folks

    As I mentioned above, I recognize that trucks are an important part of how we function as Americans, and that trucking provides jobs and income to many of you. I am not against you! I have read about multiple deaths from semi-truck accidents recently and simply wondered if there are more deaths from semis than guns–and began to research, and write. I believe that important conversations about truck safety (both for the drivers and others on the road) need to happen. The president of the United States should be at least mentioning this–and yes, looking into safer braking systems, to save American lives. If he did this, he’d save more lives than by regulating guns. That’s my point. Not to declare trucks or truckers as evil or as killers on the road. I don’t believe semi-truck drivers want to kill people any more than gun owners want to kill people. And by the way, to all the truckers, thank you for bringing post-it-notes and pens and bananas to our stores. I appreciate your work!

  • British Researchers Want COVID Vaccine Usage Halted and VAERS Data Updated

    I wish more researchers, more doctors, more nurses, more parents, more people would stand up against this wretched experiment. I’m glad some British researchers have been vocal, and that OAN has covered it.

    Share this far and wide, everyone needs to know that COVID-19 “vaccines” are unsafe and unnecessary.

    VAERS Data Updated

    There was a new update to VAERS on July 7, and you can see it all at OpenVAERS. These are the stats:

    • 438,440 Reports
    • 9,048 deaths
    • 26,818 hospitalizations
    • 56,970 urgent care visits
    • 80,269 office visits
    • 2,152 anaphylaxis cases
    • 2,486 bells palsy cases
    • 985 miscarriages
    • 3,324 heart attacks
    • 2,200 myocarditis or pericarditis
    • 7,463 disabled
    • 2,226 thrombocytopenia/low platelet
    • 7,823 life threatening reactions
    • 19,105 severe allergic reaction
    • 5,118 tinnitus

    What these stats don’t make clear is that these are all people. Human beings have been impacted forever because of these shots. The manufacturers of the vaccines won’t ever be held liable, but they should be. Also, Fauci should so be held accountable (he deserves jail), as well as every company that has mandated the shots.

    Will we ever see this happen? I hope so. Please, everyone, share this information with your friends and family who are considering the jab.