COVID-19 and Project Fear - Printable Version
+- RichieAllen.co.uk Forum (https://forums.richieallen.co.uk)
+-- Forum: On Topic (https://forums.richieallen.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Forum: Vaccination (https://forums.richieallen.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: COVID-19 and Project Fear (/showthread.php?tid=1758)
COVID-19 and Project Fear - gmseed - 09-04-2020
Just wanted to make your readers aware of a freely available pdf book I have on my website called "COVID-19 and Project Fear":
Feel free to download a copy, if of interest.
It has a whole section devoted to vaccines.
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - The Apprentice - 09-04-2020
We need our own project to remove the fear and take back our minds eye and media.
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - Firestarter - 09-04-2020
(09-04-2020, 09:35 AM)gmseed Wrote: Just wanted to make your readers aware of a freely available pdf book I have on my website called "COVID-19 and Project Fear":It’s a good collection of information.
The most important goals of the COVID-19 “pandemic” are:
1) Finalising the surveillance state where Big Brother knows everything.
2) Finalising the police state in which nothing can be done against arbitrary detention and censorship.
3) Crashing the economy to wipe out the middle class and make everybody enslaved by huge debts.
4) Vaccinating the world with infertility vaccines.
HPV vaccines are notorious for decreasing fertility in women: https://www.lawfulpath.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1346&p=5193#p5225
Here’s more information on infertility vaccines: https://www.lawfulpath.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=278#p3786
I point out one important piece of information missing in your collection of information on this “pandemic”...
You cite a propaganda letter from the Trump administration that funding to the WHO is ended.
In reality at the same time the amount of money awarded to Gates-linked organisations (GAVI) has been increased by more than the WHO was intended to get.
Gates will simply use his NGOs to funnel the Trump administration cash to the WHO, which will increase his control over the WHO even more: https://www.lawfulpath.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1673&start=50#p69113
Did I forget to mention that it would be (even hypothetically) impossible to successfully vaccinate against a mutating virus (like corona or flu)?
Because at best they could hypothetically make is a vaccine that would prevent infection against last year’s strain of the virus!
As for a “medical” analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic, I advise Jon Rappoport - nomorefakenews.com.
Rappoport has earlier written a good book on “AIDS Inc.”; a hoax not much different from COVID-19: https://forums.richieallen.co.uk/showthread.php?tid=1318&pid=9321#pid9321
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - The Apprentice - 09-04-2020
(09-04-2020, 03:28 PM)Firestarter Wrote:(09-04-2020, 09:35 AM)gmseed Wrote: Just wanted to make your readers aware of a freely available pdf book I have on my website called "COVID-19 and Project Fear":It’s a good collection of information.
After watchin the Interview with Dr. Judy Mikovits, PhD, it brings back memories of the reactions and reports I used to read through night after night in our office, shocking side effects which many of these guys probably died of before they were fifty, there are so many gone from our unit alone.
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - awakened53 - 10-26-2020
The ten worst Covid data failures
Throughout the pandemic, the government and its scientific advisers have made constant predictions, projections and illustrations regarding the behaviour of Covid-19. Their figures are never revisited as the Covid narrative unfolds, which means we are not given an idea of the error margin. A look back at the figures issued shows that the track record, eventually validated against the facts, is abysmal. This is important because major decisions continue to be taken on the strength of such data. There have been several noteworthy failings so far.
1) Overstating of the number of people who are going to die
This starts with the now-infamous Imperial College London (ICL) ‘Report 9’ that modelled 500,000 deaths if no action was taken at all, and 250,000 deaths if restrictions were not tightened. This set the train of lockdown restrictions in motion. Some argue that Imperial’s modelling may have come true had it not been for lockdown. But this does not explain Sweden. Academics there said its assumptions would mean 85,000 deaths if Sweden did not lock down. It did not – and deaths are just under 6,000.
2) LEAKED SAGE PAPERS
Next came a print paper written by SAGE members to support a two-week ‘circuit breaker’, leaked to the press. The reports were striking.
Quote:“‘With no social distancing measures in place from now until January, the virus could potentially spiral out of control and kill 217,000 people, hospitalise 316,000 and infect 20.7 million. But with a strict two-week lockdown the number of deaths could be reduced by 100,000, admissions by 139,000 and infections by 6 million.’Understandably, this made headlines. But when the lead author was interviewed by the BBC, he said that he wished he ‘hadn’t put these numbers in the study’ because it was an extreme scenario only included ‘for illustration’.
3) Miscategorisation of ‘Covid death’
Under the original system, someone run over by a bus would be counted as a ‘Covid death’ if he or she had tested positive for Covid but later recovered. When this anomaly was pointed out by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, it turned out even the Health Secretary was unaware what the Covid death data referred to. He ordered an immediate inquiry. This illustrates how poor-quality data from Public Health England was misleading the government itself. A new system was eventually set up: counting deaths within 28 days of a positive Covid-19 test. This removed 4,149 deaths from the 15 July death count.
4) Overstating the effect of lockdown on reducing virus transmission
On 17 March Patrick Vallance, the Chief Scientific Adviser, stated that keeping the coronavirus death toll in the UK to less than 20,000 would be ‘a good outcome’ – yet on 16 July he had to admit the UK’s coronavirus outcome had ‘not been good’. After lockdown, a range of 7,000 to 20,000 deaths was given by Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London. UK Covid deaths are now approaching 45,000.
5) Exaggerating Covid’s impact on hospitals
A leaked NHS report written in April warned that the UK would need 25,000 hospital beds to treat Covid patients ‘well into July’. However, on 24 July the daily count of confirmed Covid-19 patients in hospital was 928 in England and 1,356 across the UK, or just 5 per cent of the prediction.
6) Exaggerated fears about lifting lockdown
Imperial’s ‘Report 20’ on 4 May, contains a prediction of tens of thousands of deaths in Italy within three weeks of reopening. Yet by 30 June, just 23 daily deaths had been reported (lockdown officially ended on 4 May and internal travel restrictions on 3 June). On 29 May, SAGE advisors stated that ‘Covid-19 was spreading too fast to lift lockdown in England’. The mobility index (based on the request for map indications from the web) in June was around 20 per cent over the norm for the month for the UK, yet cases continued to decline to a low of 624 on 30 June.
[b]7) The Vallance graph[/b]
On 21 September, Sir Patrick Vallance held a press conference where he sought to raise public support for further restrictions. The only graph he showed was one where cases doubled every seven days. This time, at least, the ‘scenario’ could be measured against reality. The Vallance chart showed infections hitting 50,000 cases a day by 13 October without action. His graph did not lead to any change in policy and when this day arrived, the moving average was 16,228.
8) The Excel spreadsheet blunder
This was blamed on a Covid testing glitch that led to 16,000 missed cases and up to 50,000 untraced contacts who should otherwise have been self-isolating. Added to this are grave errors about the overall quality of the data, further undermining confidence in the system.
9) Reluctance to acknowledge uncertainties in evidence
Let’s take the two-metre rule. Sir Patrick Vallance told the Health and Social Care Committee on the 5 May that ‘a minute at two metres contact is about the same risk as six seconds at one metre’. He added: ‘That gives you some idea of why the two metres becomes important. The risk at one metre is about 10 to 30 times higher than the risk at two metres, so the distancing is an important part of this’. On 4 June, SAGE gave a very different estimate: at one metre it could be two to 10 times higher than at two metres they reported. So, who got it right? A one-size-fits-all two metre social distancing rule, however, is inconsistent with the underlying science of exhalations and indoor air. The majority of existing evidence is observational and non-peer-reviewed, depending very much on populations, study settings, sample collection methods and primary outcome. Such studies do not allow a definition of a specific relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 at different distances.
10) Lack of access and transparency in data
The Manchester Evening News asked for trust-by-trust Covid admissions numbers as a proportion of overall capacity in Greater Manchester. Six out of seven relevant trusts did not comply with the request. Wigan, Wrightington and Leigh said that ‘we are unable to provide figures – these will be issued at national level’, while none others replied. We were advised that a Freedom of Information request was required to obtain the data and it would take up to 21 days for a response. At the Oxford University Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, we have also had access to essential healthcare data blocked. But we are aware of important data, used to set lockdown restrictions, that are not in the public domain. This disturbing lack of transparency in what is a global public health and economic crisis hinders our understanding.
All told, the production, dissemination and use of data in the UK paints a disturbing picture. Over the course of this pandemic, we have observed outright errors, misunderstandings of effects, too much certainty being reported by advisors and interpretation lacking the normal context. So are lockdown decisions being taken on a false premise? Without transparency, how can errors be detected?
Poor quality of death data leaves us unable to say for certain who died because of Covid, who died with Covid as a cofactor – and who died of Covid after contracting the infection in hospital. Deaths outside hospitals are not subject to detailed analysis, despite their importance. The use of the word ‘cases’ implies that all cases are the same. They are not. Those who really matter are the contagious and the gravely ill (with the two categories overlapping). This data is not reported presumably because the numbers are not known and are lost in the testing frenzy.
Rather than be cautious in the use of such data, the government’s approach has been publishing worst-case scenarios. These assumptions so far have largely proven to be unreasonable and, all too often, flatly incorrect. However, we have shown that this realisation has had little effect on the approach. This leaves the public – and policymakers – in a hopeless position when it comes to navigating our way out of this mess.
WRITTEN BYTom Jefferson & Carl Heneghan
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - awakened53 - 11-12-2020
Ticketmaster to require negative ‘COVID-19’ test or vaccination to attend concerts – So predictable it’s pathetic and the answer is to boycott any event that uses Ticketmaster which is clearly happy to be used to impose fascist vaccinations on you and your kids
Wallet? Check. Water? Check. COVID-19 test?
The pre-concert checklist for music fans is about to get more complicated, as Ticketmaster is planning to check the coronavirus vaccination status of concert-goers prior to shows once a treatment is approved, Billboard reported Wednesday.
The ticketing giant plans to have customers use their cellphones to verify their inoculation or whether they’ve tested negative for the virus within a 24- to 72-hour window, according to the exclusive report.
The plan, which is still being ironed out, will utilize three separate components, including the California-based company’s digital ticketing app, third-party health information firms like CLEAR Health Pass and testing/vaccination distributors like Labcorp or CVS Minute Clinic.
Ticketmaster will reportedly not store or access medical records under the plan. If approved, fans would need to verify that they’ve either already been vaccinated or have tested negative as recently as 24 hours prior to the show.
Concert-goers would then instruct a lab to send over test results to companies like CLEAR Health Pass or IBM’s Digital Health Pass, which would verify the fan’s status to Ticketmaster. Anyone who tests positive or doesn’t get screened won’t be granted access to the event venue, Billboard reported.
Read more: Ticketmaster to require negative ‘COVID-19’ test or vaccination to attend concerts – So predictable it’s pathetic and the answer is to boycott any event that uses Ticketmaster which is clearly happy to be used to impose fascist vaccinations on you and your kids
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - awakened53 - 05-27-2021
It’s the same wherever you look – cremation and burials in Cornwall in 2020 compared with previous years – where’s the pandemic? (Where’s the ‘virus’ ‘realised from the Wuhan lab’???) THERE IS NO ‘VIRUS’
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - awakened53 - 06-21-2021
‘Come on you jabs! – genetically modify my body and give me consequences for the rest of my life’. A ‘million “Covid vaccines” were booked over the weekend’ in ‘summer sprint’ to get all over-18s modified before the full consequences come to light … thousands queued outside Tottenham Hotspur’s stadium to change their bodies forever and prove that humans can be made to believe anything so long as they concede their right to think
One million jabs were booked over the weekend as officials launched a ‘summer sprint’ to vaccinate all over-18s by July 19.
Thousands queued in the rain for jabs at Tottenham Hotspur’s stadium in north London yesterday after the football club turned into a walk-in vaccine clinic for the day. Most of those getting vaccinated were in their late teens or 20s.
Officials are in a race to vaccinate younger adults in a bid to halt the spread of the Indian variant and stop students bringing Covid-19 back home over the summer holidays, potentially infecting older generations. Cases are currently highest among people in their 20s and infections are five times higher in under-25s than in over-65s, as almost all older adults have received both doses.
Everyone aged 18 and over is being urged to arrange a jab if they have not yet had one, as the health service enters the final push to protect the country against the virus.
Public Health England said there has been a 79 per cent rise in one week in cases of the Delta variant, first identified in India, with the increase being driven by younger age groups.
Similar pop-up centres to the one at Tottenham Hotspur were set up on Saturday at sporting venues in London and giant jab clinics were also opened at the Olympic Stadium, Stamford Bridge, Charlton Athletic FC, Selhurst Park and Crystal Palace Athletics Centre. There were also pop up clinics at universities, such as in York and Canterbury.
The day before, the vaccine programme was thrown open to all over-18s and the NHS revealed that 1,008,472 jab appointments were booked on Friday and Saturday.
Social media firms have signed up to a government plan to encourage younger people to get the Covid jab. Snapchat, Reddit, TikTok and YouTube joined the scheme.
The success of the vaccination rollout is crucial if ‘Freedom Day’ can finally go ahead on July 19.
Read More: Come on you jabs! A MILLION Covid vaccines were booked over the weekend in ‘summer sprint’ to get all over-18s covered
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - awakened53 - 06-23-2021
We’ll be having Covid jabs for the next 10 YEARS says health chief as psychopath Hancock readies plans for autumn booster shot programme to further infuse the lambs to the slaughter masses with synthetic genetic material
Britons may need an annual Covid jab for the next 10 years, a health chief predicted last night.
As Matt Hancock began readying plans for an autumn booster shot programme, Chris Hopson, head of NHS Providers, said he believed vaccine top-ups could be needed for the next decade.
Warning that the country needs to move away from being reactionary to Covid and start planning ahead, he said Covid vaccines were ‘probably’ going to be needed on ‘an annual basis for, I don’t know, at least five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10 years.’
He also called on the Government to give the health service time to plan for potential Covid-19 vaccine booster campaigns to make them ‘business as usual’ instead of ’emergency response’.
‘Flu jabs start in September, so if we’re going to do one jab in one arm, one jab in the other, we really do need to know quite quickly,’ he told Times Radio. His comments came as Matt Hancock yesterday promised to set out plans for Britain’s autumn booster Covid vaccine campaign in the coming weeks.
The Health Secretary said officials were waiting for the results from a Government-funded trial into whether mixing and matching different jabs gives better protection.
When we know the results of that [study], then we will set out the full plans for the booster programme over the autumn,’ Mr Hancock told BBC Breakfast today.
Findings are expected from the £19.3million Cov-Boost trial in the coming weeks, with one of the scientists behind the study saying results may not filter through until the end of August.
But pressure is mounting on No10 to unveil the plans by NHS bosses who say they need as much time as possible to staff the mammoth operation. Hospital trusts will have to juggle the campaign with an annual flu jab programme and the backlog of routine care that has amassed during the pandemic.
Read More: We’ll be having Covid jabs for the next 10 YEARS says health chief as Matt Hancock readies plans for autumn booster shot programme
RE: COVID-19 and Project Fear - awakened53 - 06-25-2021
Is government ever justified in the weaponisation of fear?
The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging” Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour (SPI-B), 22 March 2020
The above quotation is from a Government advice paper and is quoted by Laura Dodsworth in the introduction to her excellent new book, A State of Fear: How the UK government weaponised fear during the Covid-19 pandemic (Pinter & Martin, paperback £9.99). Dodsworth’s book is an analysis of how the Johnson administration deployed fear in service of a lockdown agenda – and of how it continues to do so.
This is where we are: the UK is in a sort of Escher context in which the emergence of lockdown is not distinguishable from the entering of a new phase of it. How did we get here? Dodsworth offers an answer: people, when scared, are willing to embrace all manner of humiliations. And government, knowing this, will pile on the fear. Government is always like a child, attempting to see what it can get away with. Dodsworth explains why, if you like, the public declined to be the adult who pushes back. In March last year we had a chance to set the boundaries. We chose not to.
A State of Fear is part history, part data scrutiny, and part moral warning – that we never go down this route again. It is rigorously argued yet passionate. It interrogates the data while at the same time is sensitive to the fact – often overlooked in the lockdown discussion” – that there are certain rhythms of the human soul that can never be quantified, and which are allergic to the government slide. That is a difficult trick to pull off, but she manages it magnificently. Her prose is measured in a way that emphasises just how angry she is, and which seems to demand to know why so many people do not share in that anger. Her research is impeccable, and real people speak to us from the pages. She intuits a deep scientific truth: that anecdote is tangible evidence and is invariably more accurate than an Imperial College model”.
Dodsworth describes how the UK Government (and others) had, even before 2020, developed mechanisms of control designed to engineer consent” – to nudge” those of us too thick to know what is in our real interests in the direction of the Establishment consensus. To these murky and impenetrable engines of the Deep State, the Covid crisis was an opportunity. The toy was brought out of the box.
Read more: Is government ever justified in the weaponisation of fear?