And I can tell you, if you look across the array of White House Task Force members we’ve had, regular media doctors that we’ve had, NIH, CDC, FDA, WHO, we haven’t had a single doctor who has considerable experience in treating outpatient COVID-19, not a one. And Senator Johnson kind of basically exposed this in the November 19th hearing where we had a minority witness, and that minority witness, who’s a media doctor, he’s on TV all the time, he spent about two hours in his rebuttal of our approach. And his rebuttal was largely, “You don’t have enough evidence, and what you’re proposing is not good enough for me.” That was kind of his argument. And it’s an argument we’ll never win, because the idea is we don’t have the resources. I don’t have $45 billion. We’re trying to piece together our approach using the most modest means, and all the resources are for vaccines. And this doctor who’s a big vaccine proponent went on and kept advising no treatment for America, no treatment, no treatment. It was two hours.
And I can tell you, if you look across the array of White House Task Force members we’ve had, regular media doctors that we’ve had, NIH, CDC, FDA, WHO, we haven’t had a single doctor who has considerable experience in treating outpatient COVID-19, not a one.
And, finally, Senator Johnson asked him [Fauci] the loaded question: “Doctor, have you ever treated a patient with COVID-19?” And he says, “No, I haven’t.” And on our panel we had George Fareed, who had treated hundreds upon hundreds. His partner Brian Tyson has treated thousands. I’ve treated over a hundred, and I’ve advised on several hundred more. I mean, we have vast experience that is untapped. And to this day, I’ve never had a call from a formal government agency board to say, “Listen, what’s your opinion?” I’ve had plenty of back calls from officials, staffers, others who get sick. “Oh, what can we do? What can we take?”
Some have said, “We never should have shut down the schools. We should have protected the teachers and professors,” ’cause the kids, if they get COVID-19, they get natural immunity, which is durable and complete.
We were, I think, misled a bit by the PCR testing. And just a word about that. The testing that became the standard of care, the polymerase chain reaction, those tests became more and more sensitive. And so, they could start to pick up fragments of RNA that weren’t even COVID-19. So, if you keep running the cycler over and over again, it’ll start to read some code of something up in the nose. We have all kinds of different viruses and bacteria in the nose, and so we started having the problem of false positive PCRs.
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.
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.
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
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.
One of the unique characteristics of COVID-19, we were told, was the threat of “Asymptomatic Spread.” In fact, “Asymptomatic Spread” was such a concern that the majority of us had to stay home to “flatten the curve” and later, had to wear masks in public spaces. Lets unpack the truth.
54 Studies Showed a .07% Chance of “Asymptomatic Spread”
This is huge, guys. You can find this research in PubMed, the title is: Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. They found that, over 54 studies that had been done in households, only .07% of transmission was from a supposedly “Asymptomatic” family member. Households are typically close environments, with shared kitchens, bathrooms and ventilation. Certainly, the chance of catching the virus from a stranger who is six feet away at the grocery store would be even less than .07%!
NO “Asymptomatic Spread” Among 1,174 People!
Even better than the .07% chance of “Asymptomatic Spread” is NO “Asymptomatic Spread,” which is likely a more accurate assessment:
There were no positive tests amongst 1,174 close contacts of asymptomatic cases.
The CDC website used to say that 30% of the virus spread was from asymptomatic cases. There is no such percentage on the site any longer, nor any study that proves that asymptomatic transmission even exists. Source
Dr. Fauci Said that Asymptomatic People Do Not Spread Viruses or Drive Epidemics
The post above contained this quote: “There is also strong evidence that it can be transmitted by people who are just mildly ill or even presymptomatic” but with no source, no studies proving this to be factual information. There are two, more probable explanations for so many positive PCR tests in people who never showed syptoms:
The Virus is Not as Serious as We Were Told
Have you considered it? If the majority of people were walking around without symptoms (and therefore, without a large enough viral load to spread it), maybe this wasn’t such a terrible virus, afterall?
2. PCR Tests Aren’t Accurate
I believe this is the most likely scenario, and I will be sharing more information about. this soon.
What About All of the Asymptomatic Cases and Deaths?
The WHO stated, in March 2020, that 80% (EIGHTY PERCENT!) of all COVID-19 cases were asymptomatic. Source Keep in mind, this means that 80% of the COVID cases were so mild that they couldn’t have spread it to other people, and that 80% of the COVID cases were probably actually due to faulty tests. (I’ll get into that in another post).
Let’s consider the current stats.
The current numbers say that we have had 34,434,803 cases in the United States. Subtract 80%, and that’s 6,886,960. Divide it by 16 months (because it has been 16 months since the “pandemic” began, at the time of this writing) and then multiply that number by 12 to get a yearly total, that’s 5,165,220 COVID cases in a year in the US. Hmm.
In 2017-18, there were 45,000,000 symptomatic flu cases in the United States (Source)
In 2020-21, there were 5,165,220 symptomatic COVID cases in the United States
Note that the CDC has only ever counted symptomatic flu cases. This was the first time, ever in history, that health officials started looking at “asymptomatic” cases.
Also note that the flu isn’t considered a pandemic at 45,000,000 cases in a year. But only 11% of that number was labeled a pandemic for COVID? That’s crazy talk.
The current total death count is 617,875. Subtract 80%, and that’s 123,569. Divide that by 16 months and then multiply that number by 12 to get a yearly total, and that’s 92,676.
In 2017-18, there were between 46,000 and 95,000 deaths from the flu (in people who were symptomatic).
In 2020-21, there were 92,676 deaths from COVID (in people who were symptomatic).
Also in 2021, only 646 deaths were attributed to the flu. (This is another subject, but WOW. We had a 99.99% reduction in flu cases when COVID hit! Amazing!!! Source)
Let’s look at those top two numbers for deaths. If there were only 46,000 deaths from the flu in 2017-18, at worst, COVID was twice as bad as the flu. (Not 99% worse as the news would have us believing) At 95,000 deaths from the flu, COVID was really on par with the average flu deaths every single year.
If we don’t count “asymptomatic” cases, look what that does to the numbers!
The Concept of “Asymptomatic” Transmission Made the Virus Seem Scarier
This is a super important piece of information that was withheld from us. Without asymptomatic transmission, the truth is that we really didn’t have a pandemic at all. Please share this information far and wide! Here is a graphic to post on social media:
