‘COVID Chronicles’


The film “COVID Chronicles”.1 gives a concise look at the pandemic, answering some of the questions that make many people scratch their heads because reality and science don’t seem to coincide with what the media is reporting.

Ivor Cummins is a biochemical engineer with experience in medical device engineering and leading teams in solving complex problems. On his website TheFatEmperor.com,2 It offers guidelines on how to decode science to transform your health. He produced “COVID Chronicles” together with Donal O’Neill, director of documentaries in the field of health and human performance.

There were red flags in the pandemic from the beginning. Because the symptoms of COVID-19 overlap with many other diseases, the only way to find out if you have it is to test for it.

The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests used for COVID-19 use a powerful amplification process that makes them so sensitive that they can even detect the remains of a dead virus long after infection, Cummins explains. But even beyond that, any positive test on COVID-19 is considered a “case” – and therein lies the big problem.

A positive test is not the same as a case

Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, an internal medicine doctor and former head of health at the Council of Europe, is among those who have called the COVID-19 pandemic a “test pandemic” because of the PCR test.3

“The WHO accepted that and they said that when the test is positive, we have the COVID-19 case. And so they started counting cases, ”says Wodarg. “What they were calculating was the testing activity. And the more they tested, the more cases they found. ”4 When labs use too high cycle thresholds, you end up with a very overestimated number of positive tests, leading to “cossaemia”5,6 – an epidemic of false positive results.

Wodarg says COVID-19 was a ‘test’ pandemic. It was not a virus pandemic. “7 because PCR tests can give a positive result when coronaviruses that have existed for 20 years are detected.8 In COVID Chronicles, Cummins talks to John Lee, a former clinical professor of pathology at Hull York Medical School and a consultant histopathologist at Rotherham General Hospital, who later became director of cancer services at the Rotherham NHS Foundation Trust.

He echoes Wodarga, noting that during a pandemic, any positive test is considered a case, but “these are two completely different things.”9 Normally, if you have a typical cold, for example, you only become a “case” if you are hospitalized, but that all changed with the pandemic. Lee says:10

“When it comes to coronavirus, we count each individual positive test as a positive case. This is scientifically and medically wrong. You can have a positive coronavirus test and be perfectly fine. You can have a positive coronavirus test and shed minimal amounts of the virus.

Combining positive tests with cases is simply wrong, and yet positive cases have triggered government policy and a number of restrictive measures taken. ”

On January 13, 2021, “WHO has finally questioned the accuracy of PCR testing,” records the film and released an informational notice explaining instructions for interpreting PCR test results, including the fact that “careful interpretation of weak positive results is required”.11 “Reported case rates collapsed in the United States the next day,” COVID Chronicles said.12

The locks didn’t work

Conclusions can be effective if they are implemented when no one has the disease, but when it has already spread in your population, they do not work. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the blockade was carried out too late and did much more harm than good.

The film highlights the outcomes of COVID-19 around the world, including in significantly different regions, such as the densely populated Khayelitsha in South Africa. It was originally assumed that COVID-19 would ravage the area. They were strictly locked together with the rest of South Africa, but due to the dense population, the closure in Khayelitshi only served to keep people pushing each other further.

Because the area has a long history of fighting diseases such as HIV and tuberculosis, it was easy for officials to use data from the area, which quickly showed that those most at risk for COVID-19 were older, weak, or suffering from other conditions like Type 2 diabetes. What surprised many, however, was that Khayelitsha went through the pandemic almost the same as everywhere else in South Africa.

Furthermore, as the second and third waves hit, those in Khayelitshi were much better protected, even as new variants emerged. It was later shown that as many as 68% of the local population had antibodies to COVID-19.13 As stated in the COVID Chronicles:14

“[A]The delta cut across the world and South Africa, here it was bigger than any of the previous waves or variants we’ve seen. But in Khayelitshi, those 68% of antibody levels in the whole community proved to be extremely powerful and very, very protective, even against the new Delta variant.

So while the United Kingdom was in complete disarray, we had an informal settlement here in an economically deprived region with half a million inhabitants surpassing Britain and many First World nations … they did not intend … to expand COVID to the whole community. But in doing so, they have reached a point where, if you will, the immunity of the herd has been achieved. ”

Other communities also enjoyed high levels of antibodies to COVID-19 in the community, including India, the Orthodox Jewish community in London, and the Amish community in the United States. Thus, when this virus was left to behave in a way that would allow it to spread among the healthy, it typically accounted for approximately two-thirds of the population with antibody levels.15

The mask mandates failed

Like isolation, mask mandates are another pandemic control measure that is proclaimed the gospel despite a lack of effectiveness and evidence of harm. “Trial of Danmask-19”, published on November 18, 2020 in the Annals of Internal Medicine,16 found that among those wearing masks, 1.8% (42 participants) were ultimately positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared with 2.1% (53) among controls.

When they removed persons who stated that they did not adhere to the recommendations for use, the results remained the same – 1.8% (40 people), which suggests that adherence does not make a significant difference. Initially, a number of research journals refused to publish the results, calling into question the widespread mandate of the masks.17

If the masks work, the film points out, you should immediately see a dramatic change in the curve, within 14 days. “If you look at about 10 or 12 countries where the masks have made, there was no influence on the curve … no matter what the empirical science of our eyes screams on us: masks and blockades do not actually run a needle much, maybe a little, but no one wants to know. That is the ideology now. It’s a religion, “says Cummins.18

Dr. Reid Sheftall also extensively studied the use of masks and found that mandates for masks did not noticeably change the number of cases or deaths in the way they should if they actually reduce transmission. Countries that used minimum masks were not in a worse position than neighboring countries with a mask mandate.19

“It makes sense,” Cummins says, “because 40 years of science is almost unanimous that surgical masks and blankets are very ineffective for influenza viruses. So that agrees with science. ” Still, the media claims the masks are effective, based on a “rush of paper” that arrived around June 2020 which says the masks could be good. “So a few weeks of work nullified several decades of scientific sense,” he adds.20

Injections do not work

It has now been discovered that the viral load of COVID-19 is similar among people who received the injection and those who did not.21 “What kind of vaccine needs three vaccinations, and maybe a fourth, and more, within a few months?” Cummins asks. “The answer is a vaccine that doesn’t actually work very well at all.”22

The media message that the pandemic is now a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” is also wrong, because data from Israel show that a similar number of people were hospitalized because of COVID-19, regardless of whether they were injected or not.23 Cummins notes:24

“There are a lot of data tricks. Hospitalizations are difficult because you cannot get raw data, and they are very confusing data. In one case… The US gave shocking stories that 99% were unvaccinated. However, they counted on the way back … before vaccines were available.

So at that time the lion’s share was unvaccinated because there was no vaccine yet. So there are a lot of tricks – I would say scams – in the way the data is presented. ”

People who received only one injection of the mRNA series are also called unvaccinated, which further reduces the data to again make it look as if more uninjected people have been hospitalized. Moreover, the film notes: “In 2021, Professor Sir Andrew Pollard, Director of the Oxford Vaccine Group, stated that,‘ … immunity of the herd by vaccination is not possible because [Delta] it still infects vaccinated people. ‘”25

Is this a lifestyle pandemic?

Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a consultant cardiologist and chair of public health co-operation in the UK, was also featured in the COVID Chronicles, talking about the underlying factors that make certain people more vulnerable to COVID-19 – lifestyle-related illnesses caused by poor nutrition.

This aspect of prevention through a long-term healthy lifestyle, which could save lives in future pandemics, is another principle that the dominant story ignores. Malhotra explains:26

“I think what we’ve had is a rapid pandemic, in terms of COVID, that has exacerbated and exploited a slow pandemic, and that’s a pandemic of chronic lifestyle-related diseases that put stress on our health care system. many, many years, and our NHS, certainly before COVID, was already at a tipping point.

But in fact, COVID has broken its back on the NHS, and the main reason for this is that for many years we have failed to tackle prevention, specifically the biggest driver of these chronic diseases: poor nutrition.

Ultraprocessed food, which is the heart of the problem, is now half the calorie consumption in the British diet. This is about 60% of calorie consumption in the United States, and there is already a very clear correlation between countries that had 50% or more of the overweight or obese population, had 90% of deaths from COVID-19. Thus, poor metabolic health means poor immune health.

But other than that, we know that the real drivers of this problem are structural. This refers to the environment and misinformation to which the public is exposed for profit. And the two real culprits for that, in my opinion, are the food industry and the pharmaceutical industry.

And the collusion of academics, medical journals, doctors and politicians for financial gain with these industries is the heart of the problem. That needs to be exposed, and the public needs to understand that the biggest enemies of democracy are the food and pharmaceutical industries. ”

If it weren’t for the media, would you know there is a pandemic?

The film implies that COVID-19 provided an opportunity that multiple entities took advantage of to promote their own plans, while the media served as a tool to overpower science and common sense. It is important to stay grounded and think critically so as not to fall victim to unnecessary panic and stress. Cummins notes:27

“I think the key thing to remember is to turn off the media, no one would know there was an epidemic. Even during the onslaught in Ireland, in both seasons, if you didn’t have access to the media, you would never have known.

No one actually knew anyone who died – outside of someone in a nursing home, someone of advanced age, or with stage 4 cancer – most people didn’t know anyone who died. Law? Isn’t that amazing, in a great pandemic, as we were told? ”


Source link

Leave a Comment