I called the Covid-19 viral outbreak a scam from the beginning not because it wasn’t a real virus, it has been. But the way that the World Health Organization and the CDC organized their math to communicate their concerns sent alarm bells out from the beginning. For a virus that nobody seemed to have ever seen before, scientists seemed to know a lot about it to construct models which of course manipulated the world into a global shutdown of their economies. A little reading will show that many of these same scientists behind the Covid-19 models are also supporters of the highly political climate change activism that is so prevalent, so there was a reason that they devised their math to tell such a story on something they couldn’t have known enough to do, they manipulated the math to tell a political story about climate change rather than any real danger about dying from a new virus coming out of China. And they figured that by the time people realized how wrong they were that they could point to social distancing to say that they saved the world from a pandemic and that people would then listen to them on other topics once the viral outbreak was over, and behavioral changes across the world had been introduced and accepted as new aspects of culture. What they didn’t want anybody to figure out was that they were powerless to do anything about Covid-19 because there was no vaccine and that the best way to tackle it was to get it and get over it. Once people got sick from it then they’d have some level of immunity and the danger would be averted. However, they wanted to slow the spread of the virus for a whole host of political reasons so they came up with social distancing and conned politicians around the world into following them with unusually high death toll numbers that got everyone’s attention, but ultimately had a goal of changing social behavior by an unelected mass of academics.
The common flu has a fatality rate of around .1% and routinely produces about 60,000 deaths a year through the whole year. Many people have some level of immunity to most flu outbreaks so the R-naught number of 1.3 doesn’t spread so fast, which is why only 60,000 deaths happen. Currently Covid-19 has an R-naught number of 2, which means for every one coronavirus carrier, they give it typically to 2 people. With a normal virus, its 1.3 people. So Covid-19, because it’s a new strain of virus spreads almost twice as rapidly and has a longer incubation period where the carrier is contagious—that is until human immune systems adapt and overcome as they typically are expected to do. The problem starts when scientists built their models to project the total number of the outbreak on stats that were known in January and February of 2020 where there wasn’t much testing around the world for Covid-19 so nobody knew what the actual fatality rate would be. With that in mind scientists used the number 1-3% mortality which is what we knew of cases and those who needed to go to the hospital for assistance with the virus and died—which is how they built their mortality rate number.
However, by the time scientists were building their models many people had already gotten over Covid-19 and were no longer susceptible to the virus. As of this writing there are over a million cases of coronavirus and we know of more than 233,000 who have recovered. Most of those million will recover fully with no real issues, as they would a common virus. A percentage of them will need some help at a hospital due to some statistical anomaly, yet the panic was that our healthcare system wouldn’t be able to deal with the surge because scientists used the unusually high fatality number to calculate their assumptions. I would propose this was done on purpose because the virus was so new they thought nobody would call them out on having the wrong initial fatality number and that everyone would forgive them for an error on the side of caution. But what they were really after was policy changes that helped them with their real passion, saving the planet from man-made climate change. The actual fatality number should have been in the flu range of around .1%, not up there around 1.-2%. That’s why scientists were talking about 1-2 million people dying of the Covid-19 virus instead of what it will likely be globally which is around 100,000—a big difference.
Of course, every life matters and we should try to help everyone, but the method here was to prolong the misery for political gains, not to actually save lives. It could easily be argued that immune system builders like happiness, and good food would have helped more people get coronavirus and get over it faster which would have stopped the outbreak, not prolonged it locking everyone in their homes miserable so that they got sick much easier. They did not have such a panicky governor in South Carolina and their Covid-19 cases were much more under control during the outbreak compared to other states with similar demographics. So this notion of flattening the curve was invented supposedly to accommodate that ridiculously high fatality rate that was used to build the death toll numbers. But to keep the story alive, scientists needed people to test positive for coronavirus so that they could keep building that curve with stats they could show to not have egg on their face from their original projections. That left states desperate to get people tested so they could use those numbers to justify their concern and show a buildup of daily increases of cases on their scoreboard that has been displayed on almost every news station and reported with updates around the world every 15 minutes. If we treated other viral outbreaks in the same way, we would have seen similar growth, but we focused on this one to run cover for the original recommendations of the scientists and their misstated fatality number in the beginning.
Of course with more cases reported, the fatality rate was going down, so hospitals in on the game stopped reporting deaths by pneumonia and other ailments and begin attributing them to the coronavirus hoping nobody would notice and it would give a higher death toll. After all, it would make scientists look stupid to say that a million people were going to die when only 50 or 60,000 actually did. So the need for a daily death count to justify all the bad math became an industry standard and by the time of this so-called “surge week” coronavirus was being blamed on every death that was occurring. It would not surprise me that a person dying from getting hit on the head by a shooting meteor streaming in from outer space would have that death blamed on the coronavirus to help that scoreboard look not so bad.
That is how this scam was portrayed and how scientist used that original fatality number to scare politicians into a massive global policy change when in actuality, they should have left coronavirus to the natural immune system of the human being and left the surge need to the hospitals that would normally handle such viral outbreaks in the way they do every year. It was their interference in that process that brought so much misery with the assumption of a high fatality number that threw off all the models—on purpose—to bring attention to leftist causes such as healthcare reform, climate change, and universal wages along with an expanded police state. And they managed it all with a simple number that was off by a few percentage points. They knew they could always ask for forgiveness by playing things safe. But their intentions were much more malicious than that, and for their activism, we have all suffered. How does that make you feel dear reader?
Sign up for Second Call Defense at the link below. Use my name to get added benefits.