People move along day to day consumed by their own problems and life issues mostly oblivious to the larger global issues, and even the decisions being made by their own governments that will directly impact their freedoms, and their quality of life.
When presented with actual scientific research and studies that present credible information on important current global issues, or a relevant, critical political debate, most people will pass, electing to watch a video from the Kardashians, or spend time surfing YouTube and TikTok for pet videos.
The unaware are influenced by carefully crafted advertising messages that promote a specific agenda. They connect with censored social media, and occasionally tune in to legacy news sources to absorb biased and narrowly directed sponsored propaganda. Through those narrowly focused sources, they develop superficial uninformed attitudes and opinions that align with biased government narratives and profit-motivated corporate controlled messaging regardless of the truth, even when presented with verifiable data to the contrary.
While the statement, “doing my own research”, has been mocked by many, the sad reality is that as individuals, the whole truth is never really just handed over to you by one source. We must gather and analyze multiple sources of credible information, consider different perspectives, and objectively listen to different sides of a story to develop our own informed beliefs. The key is to assess ‘credible’ sources of information, and not to just take everything that is told to us as the final word. We must consider the source of the information and any potential biases or conflicts of interest, and ask questions when something doesn’t seem to make any sense. But ‘who has the time?’ is often the response. Unfortunately, society as a whole will suffer the consequences of this laissez-faire attitude, while political extremists and activists with specific agendas assume positions of power and decision-making, hoisted into office by a largely ignorant voting public.
The reality is, that doing your own research allows for the gathering of a wide range of information so that you can assess truth compared to any narrative being promoted by governments and complicit media. And when contradictory evidence to the narrative is presented and factual arguments are formed, those promoting the false narrative (corrupted governments, scientists, and academics) absolutely refuse any invitations for open public discussion or debate. Why is that?
Those who have cultivated a loyalty to certain media sources, and have built a level of trust with specific news personalities, are very difficult to persuade, even when presented with solid scientific facts from alternate credible sources. They simply don’t want to hear it if it hasn’t come from their favourite news source.
It is critical to realize that some news sources may be biased as a direct result of significant government and corporate funding, with sponsoring groups limiting what can be said, and enforcing only the promotion of an approved narrative. Including information sources that do not rely on government or corporate sponsors is a key factor in your search for truth.
Government, corporate, and mainstream media interests have taken it upon themselves to select certain individuals and anoint them as ’experts’ to further their own narratives. While renowned scientists, academics, and doctors who present their own contradictory analyses are shut down, unjustly discredited, and largely labeled as conspiracy theorists by governments and biased media. These once respected scientists and doctors are cancelled for not following a narrative presented by governments and elite globalists who offer no scientific evidence or willingness to debate important issues. Those with dissenting opinions have their social media accounts cancelled, and reputations attacked, silencing any opposition to government propaganda and corporate messaging.
Censorship has gone into overdrive as evidenced by Canada’s Bill C-11 and Bill C-18, which aim to control the Internet, what can be freely shared, and forcing tech companies to censor news from their search engines in Canada. The Canadian government now gets to decide what is misinformation, restricting free speech, undermining independent media, and financially supporting only select media groups that willingly promote the government’s approved propaganda.
This has never been more evident than with many of the important issues we are all facing today. Let’s take a closer look at two of these issues and the related misleading narratives that are influencing the general public perception and normalized beliefs.
Climate Change and the Green Agenda
There is no doubt that widespread deforestation of rainforests, and the massive damage being caused by plastics in our oceans are significant and critical environmental issues that must be addressed, but they don’t seem to be getting all the attention. The money isn’t on their side.
1) Has the global temperature been rising?
a) It depends on when your reference of comparative analysis is. Global temperatures have been rising and falling over millions of years, and the earth has been warmer and cooler than it is now.
b) Climate modelling based on historic analysis and our ability to accurately predict future global temperatures is still a developing science, with much debate within the scientific community.
2) Where would electric vehicles charge their batteries from, and will there be enough infrastructure to support large scale proliferation of Electric Vehicles (EVs)?
a) EV charging stations will still need to rely on carbon-based power grids.
b) No real plan for required large-scale EV infrastructure, if it is even possible.
3) If natural gas is far cleaner than coal, why is there now a movement to ban natural gas?
The real science behind this states that banning home-heating with natural gas will likely produce more carbon emissions based on the fossil fuels it will take to create the electricity for homes to be heated.
4) Could solar and wind power an entire city?
a) Not even close.
b) Cities will still need to rely on fossil fuels and nuclear.
5) The carbon footprint of building, erecting, and operating one wind turbine is greater than the equivalent power produced by carbon-based alternatives.
Wind turbine construction and maintenance require a lot more oil than supporters like to admit. “Just installing the foundation of one off-shore wind turbine can consume more than 18,000 barrels of marine fuel for construction.” ... in addition, there is a significant amount of fossil fuels needed to manufacture the carbon-based components of the turbines, and there is an ongoing need for large amounts of oil to lubricate the turbine’s mechanisms. And oh yeah, the environmental impacts of common oil leaks from turbines is also a significant concern.
Ref5: https://www.laiier.io/use-cases/wind-turbine-oil-leaks
6) The atrocities of mining cobalt and producing lithium for batteries are significant.
a) Human rights abuses within cobalt mining.
b) Child labour in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where 60% of the world’s cobalt is mined, exposing children as young as seven to the health damaging toxic dust within unregulated mines.
c) Environmental damage caused by cobalt mining and lithium battery production.
Ref6: https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/renewable/the-environmental-impact-of-lithium-batteries/
7) The disposal of old batteries will pose a significant environmental problem if EVs become mass produced.
“As the world looks to electrify vehicles and store renewable power, one giant challenge looms: what will happen to all the old lithium batteries?”
8) Can alternative energy sources like wind and solar operate without fossil fuels?
a) The manufacturing and operation of wind and solar require the support from fossil fuels for hardware production, maintenance, and intermittent supply and demand.
Ref2: https://cornwallalliance.org/2021/01/clean-renewable-there-is-no-wind-energy-without-fossil-fuels/
b) It is commonly understood that wind and solar require fossil fuels as a backup system.
9) Green energy companies are pursuing government green subsidies regardless of the fact that they are destroying sensitive environmental areas to make room for inefficient solar and wind farms.
a) Government subsidies and corporate profits are more important than actual environmental protection:
b) Increased waste and pollution:
c) Damage to wildlife:
d) Significant harm to biospheres:
e) What are the Pros and Cons?:
10) Solar farms and wind farms only last a few decades, not justifying the immense carbon footprint it required to produce and maintain them when compared to the actual intermittent energy they produced.
Many wind turbines are reaching end-of-life much sooner than expected. Originally planned to last 30 years, replacement and repowering efforts are now required as soon as 14 years putting into question the environmental benefit of these complex machines as a replacement for fossil fuels.
a) Limited life span:
b) Production of waste and disposal issues:
11) Biomass fuel as a green alternative solution is more destructive to environmental health and sustainability. But it continues to be promoted by profit-oriented corporations, and corrupt governments with subsidies and handouts.
a) Cutting down large areas of trees, that need and consume CO2, and then burning those trees producing more CO2, when their goal is to reduce CO2 levels just doesn’t make any sense.
b) Governments are funding destructive Biomass operations.
c) Biased media are irresponsibly not researching or reporting the facts before they blindly promote non-science-based government and corporate propaganda.
d) The corrupted EU provided a loophole for Biomass burning.
“UN scientists suggested that biomass emissions should be calculated where the trees are cut down, not where the wood pellets are burned. The UN adopted this methodology in its Renewable Energy Directive, allowing energy companies to burn biomass produced in the United States without having to report the emissions.”
“Following the EU loophole, 164 acres of North Carolina's state's forests are cut down by the biomass industry every day.”
Ref4: https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Biofuels/Biomass-The-EUs-Great-Clean-Energy-Fraud.html
e) It took 30 years for the public outcry to finally shut down Detroit’s toxic garbage burning plant that was a financial and ecological disaster for the city.
f) The biomass distribution on earth. (Research article)
12) One of the best defenses against elevated CO2 levels are the world’s tropical rainforests which consume CO2, and they are being destroyed at an incredible rate by governments and big corporations.
“Last year, Brazil was the country with by far the highest rate of tree loss. Democratic Republic of Congo and Bolivia trailed a distant second and third. But deforestation remains a big problem globally.”
“In 2022, tree cover loss in tropical primary forests rose 10% on last year to 4.1 million hectares. That's the equivalent of 11 soccer fields of forest per minute, according data from the University of Maryland used in the GFW report.” (DW.com, 2023)
“... cutting or clearing forests for energy, either to burn trees or to plant energy crops, releases carbon into the atmosphere that would have been sequestered had the trees remained untouched, and the regrowing and thus recapture of carbon can take decades or even a century. Moreover, carbon is emitted in the combustion process, resulting in a net increase of CO2.” (State of the Planet, 2016)
Why isn’t this devastating impact on the climate more of a focus for real environmental governments who say they have a green plan?
13) Ireland plans on slaughtering 200,000 cows over 3 years to meet climate targets. Apparently, the cows produce too many bodily gases that contribute methane to the atmosphere. What?!
Does that mean the once mass herds of bison in North America that numbered in the millions (estimated at about 30 million) before they were almost wiped out by humans (today there are about 31,000 wild bison in North America) were a definite threat to climate back then? I don’t think so. This is insane.
Ref4: https://humanevents.com/2023/06/03/ireland-moves-to-slaughter-200000-cows-over-climate-concerns
14) The takeover of the environmental movement by self-interested capitalists and global billionaires has corrupted the science, misrepresented the truth, and is destroying the planet and our quality of life as they pursue profits for personal and shareholder gain.
“Most political news is nothing but court gossip: who’s in, who’s out, who said what to whom. It studiously avoids what lies beneath: the dark money, the corruption, the shift of power away from the democratic sphere, the gathering environmental collapse that makes a nonsense of its obsessions.”
(The Guardian.com, 2021)
15) The 2022 Noble Prize-winning scientist in the field of physics, Dr. John Clauser, one the world’s leading authorities on quantum mechanics, blasted “climate emergency” claims as a “dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people.”
A number of renowned scientists have challenged the climate emergency narrative with the “World Climate Declaration” being signed by around 300 climate professors, declaring that there is “No Climate Emergency”.
“According to Clauser, climate pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated issues. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, government agencies, and environmentalists.”
Clauser is not alone. Other influential climate scientists are also sounding the alarm. Like Judith A. Curry, an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, warning the public that claims of a “crisis” related to so-called “global warming” are “manufactured.”
As of August 2023, over 1,600 scientists have signed a declaration stating ... “There is no climate emergency” and that carbon dioxide is “essential” to all life on earth and is “favorable” for nature.
16) Top climate scientists have blown the whistle to reveal that they were “ordered” to “cover up” the truth about the alleged “global warming” on Earth.
“For the past six years, the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been diligently compiling an authoritative report on the full extent of man-made global warming.
And according to a leak, it apparently shows that global temperatures haven’t increased in 15 years.
"The hundreds of esteemed scientists who worked on the report confirmed that 1998 is still the hottest year on record. Ever since that time, temperatures have either generally remained the same or declined, blowing major holes in the government’s global warming narrative.”
In August 2023, the Fraser Institute published an article claiming that the ‘climate alarmists’ have absolutely no scientific evidence to support their positions on ‘global boiling’.
17) Highly informative documentary from a passionate environmentalist, Jeff Gibbs:
PLANET of the HUMANS (Full Documentary – Jeff Gibbs & Michael Moore)
YouTube (if it hasn’t been blocked or cancelled): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyQ3fy8eeIc
Scenes / Trailer:
Covid-19 and Vaccines
The following claims were made throughout the Covid-19 pandemic by various corrupted healthcare leaders, co-opted legacy media, tyrannical governments, biased academics, and so-called scientists, that many individuals still believe to be true, but are simply NOT true:
1) “Covid came from a wet market in Wuhan, China.” (FALSE)
China destroyed all records from the Wuhan Lab, and the lab scientists were among the first to contract the virus. The doctor who treated the lab patients was silenced by the Chinese government, and the scientist that tried to report the outbreak was silenced and conveniently died from Covid. Also, a Chinese scientist from a military lab filed for a patent for a Covid vaccine before the pandemic. And if that isn’t enough, a Chinese scientist that worked on the covid vaccine before the pandemic died under mysterious circumstances, from a rooftop.
“February 1, 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci convened a conference call with nearly a dozen scientists. Their scientific consensus was that SARS-CoV-2 appeared to be genetically engineered and that the pandemic was likely the result of a lab escape.”
2) “Fauci and NIH didn’t fund gain-of-function research in Wuhan.” (FALSE)
It is now a well-known fact that Fauci and the NIH did actually fund the Wuhan lab, specifically for gain-of-function.
Ref7: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/fauci-rand-paul-shouting-match-wuhan-lab-research/story?id=78946568
3) “Vaccines are safe and effective.” (FALSE)
This narrative is an ongoing mantra by pharma and governments even in the face of many documented adverse events and clearly documented vaccine damage. Efforts to conceal adverse event data and statistics continues to be identified.
Ref4: https://flybynews.wordpress.com/2021/12/31/pfizer-whistleblower-exposes-vaccine-data-cover-up/
Ref8: https://rumble.com/v2qeytw-covid-19-vaccine-injury-compilation-compiled-by-henry-benedict.html
July 5, 2023, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, Dr. Roger Hodkinson, an expert clinical pathologist, and colleagues published a systematic review of autopsy findings in people who died after receiving a COVID shot on The Lancet journal’s preprint server.
The autopsy review found that 62.5% to 73.9% of post-jab deaths were likely caused by the injection.
The Lancet pulled the study in less than 24 hours. You need to ask yourself, why is that?
4) “We (the government) didn’t force anyone to take the vaccine.” (FALSE)
If you’re unvaccinated you will lose your job, and also be ineligible for Employment Insurance benefits, so you won’t be able to support your family. Also, you will be unable to travel, continue your education, or receive life-saving medical procedures. But it’s your choice.
Activist Fiona Hine from the UK speaking at the launch of the Trust and Freedom initiative at the European Parliament, Brussels.
5) “If you get the vaccine, you won’t get Covid.” (FALSE)
Many government leaders falsely claimed the high efficacy of the Covid vaccines would prevent Covid infection to encourage more people to get the shot. They had no scientific data to back up their claims, (which turned out to be false), yet they continued to chant, “follow the science”. Many of those spreading this blatant misinformation contracted Covid, even after multiple shots, including CDC Director Walensky, President Biden, PM Trudeau, Pfizer CEO Bourla, NIAID Director Anthony Fauci, and a number of other misinformation spreaders.
6) “Vaccines will end Covid-19.” (FALSE)
It is a widely held belief by renowned scientists, that it is a bad idea to vaccinate during a pandemic, as the vaccines will force mutation of the virus, and create multiple strains that are vaccine resistant. Thus, vaccines will extend the spread of various viruses and will NOT end Covid.
Ref4: Ref4: https://drpanda.substack.com/p/is-geerts-deadly-prediction-about?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
7) “You can’t spread Covid if you have the vaccine.” (FALSE)
Pfizer openly admitted that they never tested the vaccine against transmission, yet the claim was made by many government leaders and the media in an attempt to encourage vaccination. In fact, it has been proven that vaccinated people can still contract, carry, and spread the virus. So, what was the point of the campaign against the unvaccinated, and the fear-mongering about putting others at risk if you don’t get vaccinated?
8) “Vaccinated people stop the virus.” (FALSE)
This false claim was repeated by government officials as well as well-known media personalities like Rachael Maddow. And yet, her blatant misinformation is still up on YouTube, while other proven scientific truths have been banned from YouTube. Why is that?
Ref1 (YouTube): https://youtu.be/DcHmQKKH2F8
Again, Pfizer openly confessed that they did not test the vaccine against transmission. And sadly, we all know now that the vaccine does NOT prevent transmission of the virus. So, the vilification of the unvaccinated was totally unjustified.
Ref4: https://www.brightworkresearch.com/how-the-covid-vaccines-do-nothing-to-limit-the-spread-of-covid/
9) “Masks will stop the spread.” (FALSE)
Many studies have shown that masking did absolutely nothing to stop the spread of the virus. If you were symptomatic and were coughing and sneezing, then a mask seemed appropriate to stop vaporized spread. But symptomatic people shouldn’t be out in public anyway. Stay home! Non-symptomatic people had no need for masking. Previous studies also linked long-term masking with bacterial pneumonia, breathing problems, and developmental issues for children.
In fact, the CDC knows that masks don’t even work against the spread of the Flu or COVID. The CDC published a study in 2020 that found ...
“Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza. We similarly found limited evidence on the effectiveness of improved hygiene and environmental cleaning.”
10) “PCR tests are an accurate method of detecting Covid.” (FALSE)
The widely used PCR test that was the benchmark for detecting Covid-19 infections was never made for that purpose. In fact, it is a grossly inaccurate measure of actual Covid infection. The inventor of the PCR process, Dr. Kary Mullis, also claimed that the test was never meant for the purpose for which it was being used, to detect and diagnose Covid-19 infection. The Covid infection rates were vastly over-stated based on the significant increase in PCR testing that occurred using false infection rate detections.
11) “Lockdowns are necessary to stop the spread.” (FALSE)
Many experts agree that the lockdowns did more harm than good, and were actually totally ineffective in curbing the spread of the virus. Economies were damaged, businesses were lost, child development was stunted, and families were torn apart based on nothing but a government’s desire for control, without any scientific data to support lockdown decisions.
12) “Children are at risk and should be vaccinated.” (FALSE)
Absolutely false, as healthy children are extremely more at risk from the shot than from Covid. Children who have suffered effects directly from Covid already had life-threatening co-morbidities. There is no real scientific evidence that supports the need for young children to get vaccinated. But the government went as far as supporting Covid shots for children without parental consent, putting children potentially at risk without the parent’s knowledge. What is even more upsetting, is that many of those pushing for child vaccination were receiving large sums of money from Pfizer. As was the case for Alberta’s Dr. Jim Kellner, a pediatrician at the University of Calgary who had received nearly $2 million in funding from Pfizer while advocating for child vaccinations. Can you say “conflict of intertest?”
13) “Get boosted to improve your protection.” (FALSE)
The Cleveland Clinic published a peer-reviewed paper that concluded ... “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19.”
As well, a paper published by MDPI Journals found that “... repeated mRNA vaccination with high antigen concentrations may also cause autoimmune diseases, and promote cancer growth and autoimmune myocarditis in susceptible individuals.”
In fact, recent CDC data suggests that boosted vaccinated people are at greater risk of autoimmune diseases through damage to their innate immune systems.
14) “Natural immunity isn’t good enough.” (FALSE)
Actually, multiple studies and historic data supports the fact that natural immunity is the best defense against further infection, and vaccinating those who already have immune antibodies is useless. Rand Paul (US senator, Texas), cites actual science in defense of natural immunity as he admonishes the HHS Secretary, Xavier Becerra, for promoting vaccination without scientific knowledge, and for insulting the unvaccinated.
The Canadian Covid Care Alliance (CCCA) has published a comprehensive study on the superiority of natural immunity compared to the mRNA shot.
The Israeli study that reported the clear benefits of natural immunity, referenced by Rand Paul.
Demand is actually soaring for non-vaccinated blood donors.
15) “Covid vaccines don’t cause heart problems.” (FALSE)
“According to the Public Health Agency (PHAC), there have been 1,376 reported cases of myocarditis, most often in 27-year-old males (after taking the Moderna vaccine)”.
The FDA has actually been caught under-reporting the number of heart attacks related to Covid shots.
Ref7: https://expose-news.com/2021/12/08/278-percent-increase-in-heart-attack-deaths-among-soccer-players/
The US military also confirmed in July that there was a significant increase in myocarditis in the troops after the vaccine rollout.
Young athletes are experiencing a dramatic increase in cardio related events after vaccination.
Ref16 (Sports related incidents documented by month): https://rumble.com/v1dvc6n-1000-athletes-collapsing-dying-heart-problems-blood-clots-march-2021-to-jun.html
16) “Vaccines don’t affect the menstrual health of women.” (FALSE)
Numerous studies have identified a link between Covid vaccinations and changes to women’s menstrual cycles.
Ref4: https://www.news-medical.net/news/20220411/COVID-19-vaccines-and-reports-of-menstrual-disorders.aspx
17) “It’s a pandemic of the unvaccinated.” (FALSE)
At the height of the pandemic, the unvaccinated were unjustly targeted, with continued hate speech from government officials, media, and celebrities, without any science-based evidence. It is now widely known that vaccinated people can catch, carry, and spread the virus, and that the criticism of the unvaccinated was grossly inappropriate.
18) “It’s safe for pregnant women to take the vaccine.” (Don’t really know)
The vaccine companies admittedly did not do any initial trials with respect to the safety of the vaccines for pregnant women before the CDC approved it ‘safe’ for pregnant women. The truth is they don’t know if it is safe, but they said it anyway. Pfizer then started a small randomized trial for pregnant women in February of 2021, but then stopped the trial, citing that since it was already approved by the CDC there was no need for the trial. What?! What is even worse, two years later, Pfizer still has not released the data from the small trial they did complete. Well, I guess time will tell if the shot is safe for pregnant women.
Ref3: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/07/11/why-pfizer-stopped-covid-vax-pregnancy-trial.aspx?ui=8bb1a02dc276b6f7725271ec0f6cab25a306f781638605d5d9a3ecf2c2f206a5&sd=20230323&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20230711_HL2&mid=DM1431440&rid=1852758074
19) “Ivermectin is for horses and not an effective treatment for Covid.” (FALSE)
Called ‘horse-medicine’ by mainstream media, Ivermectin is actually a noble prize-winning medicine for people, and has been proven to be an effective treatment for many Covid patients. Some doctors who prescribed Ivermectin for their patients were reprimanded, and some even lost their medical license. All for doing what they determined was the best course of action for their patients, by prescribing a proven award-winning drug.
“There are now 100 studies that show that Ivermectin had profound benefits. Generally speaking, a 70 percent to 85 percent reduction in hospitalizations and deaths.”
Sept 3, 2023: New Study Shows – Ivermectin Reduces Excess Deaths by 74%.
20) “Vitamin D does not assist in protecting against Covid.” (FALSE)
Many studies actually supported the early use of Vitamin D to protect against severe Covid, but media conveniently decided not to make the public aware. I guess their sponsors didn’t support the information. “Not brought to you by Pfizer”.
Ref3: https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/high-vitamin-d-levels-reduce-covid-infection-nims-study/article34684271.ece
21) “Hydroxychloroquine is not an effective Covid treatment”. (False)
The controversy around Hydroxychloroquine is complex. First let’s look at the drug. Hydroxychloroquine is a component in anti-malarial medications, and has proven quite effective, and is on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines.
We need to remember that the emergency use declaration (EUA) of the Covid vaccines could only be approved if no adequate, approved, and available alternatives existed.
This factor put both promising Covid treatments, Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, in jeopardy. Because, if they were considered potential effective treatments for Covid-19, the EUA for the vaccines could not have been approved. As a result, both drugs were maligned by big-pharma, governments, big tech, and mainstream media. Why were two previously approved and well-respected drugs, suddenly banned from being prescribed by doctors? And those doctors that tried, were reprimanded and some even lost their license to practice medicine.
These are some of the events impacting Hydroxychloroquine surrounding emergency use approval.
a) December 15, 2017: Well-known pharma-company owner of Apotex, Barry Sherman and his wife are murdered in their home. The murders are still unsolved. It was later revealed that Apotex was planning on the development of an inexpensive Hydroxychloroquine-based treatment for SARS-type infections.
b) May 10, 2020: Two facilities (Madison, Illinois and Sierra Madre, Mexico) that manufactured magnesium stearate, an ingredient in the production of Hydroxychloroquine, experienced massive explosions and fire.
Ref8: https://pal29501.wordpress.com/2020/05/10/large-fire-at-magnesium-factory-in-madison-illinois/
c) June 15, 2020: Early into the pandemic, the FDA revokes permission to treat Covid with Hydroxychloroquine.
d) December 20, 2020: The world’s second largest manufacturing facility that supported the production of Hydroxychloroquine in Taiwan, explodes and is destroyed without explanation.
e) November 2021: Scientists are ‘mystified’ about the low rate of Covid infection in Africa. They refuse to recognize the fact that African’s sun exposure maximizes the body’s vitamin ‘D’ production, and Hydroxychloroquine is a commonly used medical application for malaria in Africa. All this combined with Africa’s very low vaccination rates. Why are they mystified?
22) “Remdesivir is an effective treatment for severe Covid cases.” (False)
While other well-known effective drugs were being banned, Remdesivir was being approved for Covid treatment by the NIH and the FDA.
It was soon discovered that Remdesivir was doing more harm than good and actually contributing to Covid patient complications.
The FDA ignored a major study in October 2020, that found Remdesivir to be ineffective against Covid-19 infection... and the FDA went ahead and approved it anyway.
Despite another study that showed renal failure risk for Remdesivir, the FDA ignored that study as well.
July 2023: The FDA again approves another drug, “Veklury” (Remdesivir), for COVID-19 treatment despite data showing complications and renal failure.
“Remdesivir should never have been approved in the first place,” Dr. Paul Marik, critical care physician and author of more than 500 peer-reviewed journal articles told The Epoch Times. “Gilead had to cook the data to be approved. The World Health Organization’s (WHO) own data shows it increases the risk of kidney failure twentyfold, so why you would approve it for someone with renal dysfunction is obscene.” (Epoch Times, July 18, 2023)
23) “Severe Covid patients should be put on ventilators.” (False)
Hospitals reported unusually high death rates for Covid patients who were put on ventilators. Further research had many doctors moving away from ventilator use for Covid infections.
24) “The number of recorded Covid deaths were not inflated.” (FALSE)
Individuals dying ‘with’ Covid and not ‘from’ Covid were counted as Covid deaths. It was also interesting that the CDC even reported that the majority of Covid deaths were people who already had an average of four co-morbidities. Also, the death stats for seasonal flu were dramatically lower during the pandemic. Coincidence?
The New York Times has recently admitted that the number of Covid deaths were ‘over-counted’ by at least 30%. Ask yourself ... "Why would they do that?"
Ref8: https://www.bignewsnetwork.com/news/273903805/us-covid-19-deaths-overcounted-by-nearly-a-third-nyt
Ref9: https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2023/07/truth-bomb-30-of-covid-deaths-werent-from-covid/
The CDC has just quietly published new data that reveals a staggering 99% of reported “Covid deaths” were not actually caused by the virus, showing that most recorded fatalities that were blanket-blamed on Covid were actually caused by something else.
25) “The hospitals are being over-run because of Covid cases, and you need to get vaccinated to stop the surge.” (False)
If hospitals being over-run with Covid cases was the real concern, why did so many nurses and doctors lose their jobs when they were needed most?
Ref1: https://tnc.news/2021/12/16/provinces-sacked-almost-10000-health-care-workers-over-vaccine-mandates/
To help the healthcare system, why didn’t Trudeau and the Liberals pump that $400 billion into hospitals instead of lockdowns and the disastrous CERB payments?
The CERB payments contributed to businesses going under because people didn’t want to go back to work, and many were afraid to leave their homes because of government misinformation.
Ref4: https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/employer-frustrated-at-canadians-who-just-don-t-want-to-work-1.1623217
A large number of hospitalizations during the pandemic were not because of Covid, but due to other health issues or accidents.
Ref7: https://tnc.news/2022/02/03/bc-admits-that-half-of-covid-hospitalizations-arent-because-of-covid/
Many people around the world died during unnecessary lockdowns waiting for critical life-saving medical procedures.
Ref10: https://fee.org/articles/report-thousands-of-canadians-died-due-to-delayed-care-during-covid-19/
While heart disease because of smoking, and diabetes because of obesity, are still some of the main causes for ongoing hospitalizations, along with various types of cancers, during the pandemic there were calls for the unvaccinated to pay extra for healthcare. But smokers and obese people weren’t mentioned in the call for extra healthcare premiums. There was absolutely no scientific evidence that the unvaccinated were a problem.
Ref13: https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/why-do-vaccinated-people-represent-most-covid-19-deaths-right-now/
In fact, CDC data shows that the vaccinated were also as likely to be hospitalized, and more recent data indicates that the vaccinated may be more likely to be hospitalized after a booster.
Ref16: https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/why-do-vaccinated-people-represent-most-covid-19-deaths-right-now/
Canada’s Healthcare system is even worse now after Covid than before. Thanks Trudeau.
So, if you don’t agree, that’s OK. Then do your own research. And if you still claim you “don’t have the time”, and refuse to listen to others who have done the research, then just maybe, you are part of the problem.