“There is no one place where you could go and find the definition for “variant”, for example. Or “isolate” or “strain”. I looked in several textbooks. In fact, not even my textbook, Principles of Virology, co-authored with four other Virologists. Not even there will you find a definition of these terms.”
Professor Vincent Raccaniello
Professor of Virology, Columbia University
Thankfully when I was young, grooming children was both illegal and frowned upon by society.
This practice is now a part of what was once called “public health” and a risk we must take “to save lives”.
Forcible removal of children from their families, a practice that enlightened social texts until recently recognised as harmful in multiple ways, is “public health” now. Obstructing them from human contact is “helpful”. Teaching them their mere existence is a danger to others is imperative.
We regard any conceivable harm from Covid as presumptively real and worth mitigating, no matter how speculative. Any conceivable harm from our mitigation is presumed illusory and not worth worrying about, no matter how concrete.
Up is down. In is out. High is low. Black is white. War is peace. Mass starvation and poverty are the only way to “save lives”. Humanity is alien.
Nothing in the world makes sense any longer. Until you wonder who is behind this and what motivates them.
The latest video from Kate Wand: Terra Carta and A Green New World shows ideologies behind the pseudoscientific practices that now rule the world to “keep us safe”. It remains a common belief that those leading us now are beneficent, no matter how much evidence there is to the contrary; and those questioning are conspiracists, no matter how much common sense underpins their “conspiracies”.
Here is how a social credit system (vaccine passport) can work. A year ago I didn’t imagine this could be a part of our future. Social Credit System: NBC Report.
New Zealand’s courageous Dr Samantha Bailey continues to explain basic public health in an effort to defend established medical science against the global voodoo tsunami. Covid FAQs with Dr Sam Bailey is eighteen minutes explaining the following: Has the CDC admitted there is a problem with PCR?; What is everyone dying from?; What is the Delta variant?; What about Covid antibodies? Some of her views are (what I would call) wrong. But in all the years I worked in public health, people were allowed to explore alternative ideas.
My memory of working in outbreak control includes meetings during which often quite animated debate would play out amongst a team with varying backgrounds, debating and exploring evidence. Not a single leader instructing the team what to think. Source detection for infectious disease is a very difficult problem to solve even in “easy” diseases such as food poisoning (a single source affecting everyone who falls ill) or Tuberculosis (very few contacts become ill, but those who do have a long period of close, usually household contact with a physically sick person). Today, in cases of a highly transmissible respiratory virus which causes minimal symptoms for most, the source appears to be identified in every case almost immediately. This is one of the clues suggesting public health science is not being represented.
Insistence on one single narrative is the opposite of exploring for truth in complicated issues. Consideration of a range of ideas has always underpinned modern public health practice. Until a year ago when one single belief system, irrespective of evidence, became sacrosanct and questioning became heresy.
The first Epidemiologist, John Snow discovered the cause of a Cholera outbreak in London in 1854 by going against a strongly held mainstream belief that “miasma” was the reason people were getting sick. Society’s reasons for believing in miasma appeared justified at the time, but if they had not been challenged we would still be following the theory today. There is absolutely nothing wrong (and everything right) with listening to other opinions and hearing why people hold them, before coming to our own conclusion based on the weight of evidence. We have reverted to miasmatic times in the name of “safety” and “protection”, which are removing the scientific process, the democratic process, and our freedom.