Jump to content

Coronavirus Mega-Thread.


numnuts
 Share

Message added by Grumpy Owl,

This topic is for all general discussion regarding the current COVID-19 pandemic. There are of course numerous other related topics for discussing specific aspects of this pandemic in more detail. And there are other parts of this forum for more 'off-topic' discussions.

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, massivedone said:

I can swear I've heard of that lady before, Fiona Barnett.

 

Searching youtube real quick I think I have seen one or two of her videos years ago when I first was waking up to "Pizzagate" before I had even heard the word pizzagate. Like 2015 I think I found one of her videos after I had found Ted Gunderson and then Johnny Gosch and the Conspiracy of Silence doc.

 

As I have said earlier in this thread, I fully believe that this whole corona bs was fabricated to counter the rapid awakening to the adrenochrome & child trafficking abuse situation.

 

Thanks for posting that link Massivedone.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, zarkov said:

 

The only thing people appear to be sick of, is this sick narrative!

 

 

 

 

 

Thousands of protesters have clashed with riot police in the Serbian capital Belgrade after the country's president announced the reintroduction of a lockdown.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-riots-in-the-serbian-capital-after-government-reimposes-lockdown-12023505

 

  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Velma said:

Thousands of protesters have clashed with riot police in the Serbian capital Belgrade after the country's president announced the reintroduction of a lockdown.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-riots-in-the-serbian-capital-after-government-reimposes-lockdown-12023505

 

 

Thats good; this needs to happen everywhere.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So today, the UK's national academy of science has stated that everyone should wear masks "whenever you are in crowded public spaces".


If this recommendation is followed, and introduced as government guidance, it will mean that to a very great extent I won't be able to go out any more, except to take my dog for a walk in the woods, as I very fortunately live in the countryside and can just walk out of my front door straight into the woods. Although half the time when I encounter someone, on my own in the open air, they're backing away in terror.


There is a pub down the road from me, probably I will be able to walk down there, be served by someone wearing a mask, and have a quiet pint and some lunch. Beyond that, I won't be able to go anywhere else. My life will be limited to my house, taking my dog for a walk, and going to the one pub within walking distance, although that's not a certainty. And I'll be better off than a lot of people!


Because I won't wear a mask in public. I won't do things that don't make sense. Unless you put a gun to my head and make me do them. If I have no choice legally, then at some point I would have to wear a mask, but if I can swerve it then I will. Even if this isn't enacted legally, it's likely that you will be increasingly ostracised if you don't wear one publicly. 


This is being recommended despite the fact that Deputy chief medical officer Dr Jenny Harries stated that there is “probably a very, very small potential beneficial effect” of wearing masks, and that “the evidence is really very, very difficult to tease out”. And that was in relation to "some enclosed environments"; ie. not public spaces that are outdoors! Harries also stated that "the fact that there is a lot of debate means that the evidence either isn’t clear or is weak", and that "for the average member of the public, and it may be for example if you’re walking out in an open space, you’re practising good social distancing measures, you are neither going to be a risk to anybody else or to yourself".


Downing Street chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance noted that evidence for face masks is "variable, quite weak and difficult to know", and Peter Horby, chairman of the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG), having investigated the benefits of face masks, described the data as “weak”. Horby himself stated that he does not wear a mask outside, and went on to explain the following:


"The data are difficult and the reason that you’re seeing different policies is because the data are weak. [In field conditions], their effectiveness is much, much lower. There’s also the problem of wearing the mask properly, they’re very difficult to wear properly for a long time, and so for prolonged exposures their effectiveness is really quite low".


Dr April Baller, a public health specialist for the WHO, previously stated that "masks should only be used by healthcare workers, caregivers or by people who are sick with symptoms of fever and cough", and in the government's own report entitled: "Keeping workers and customers safe during COVID-19 in restaurants, pubs, bars and takeaway services", the following is stated on page 35:

 

"When managing the risk of COVID-19, additional PPE beyond what you usually wear is not beneficial. This is because COVID-19 is a different type of risk to the risks you normally face in a workplace, and needs to be managed through social distancing, hygiene and fixed teams or partnering, not through the use of PPE.
It is important to know that the evidence of the benefit of using a face covering to protect others is weak and the effect is likely to be small, therefore face coverings are not a replacement for the other ways of managing risk, including minimizing time spent in contact, using fixed teams and partnering for close-up work, and increasing hand and surface washing.


These other measures remain the best ways of managing risk in the workplace and government would therefore not expect to see employers relying on face coverings as risk management for the purpose of their health and safety assessments".


Bear in mind that again deals with enclosed spaces, not open-air environments.


And I heard a BBC Radio 5Live report on when masks were first required on public transport, during which a government medical advisor (who advocated in favour of face masks) conceded that the benefit of them is "extremely marginal". And after he'd said this, the reporter from 5Live stated that he had spoken to government representatives, they had equally stated that any benefits are extremely marginal, and that the policy was only being implemented to provide "psychological comfort" to people, so that they will be willing to use public transport again.


So we already have a situation where it's legally required to wear masks, and it's admitted that this actually has virtually no medical benefit, that the policy isn't being implemented for any medical benefit anyway, and this is only in relation to enclosed spaces, where viruses are far more likely to be transmitted.


This last point is blindingly obvious anyway. Quite clearly, any virus is more likely to be passed on from one person to another indoors than outdoors. But a study in April already concluded that "the odds that a primary case transmitted COVID-19 in a closed environment was 18.7 times greater compared to an open-air environment".


That's just my little bit of research that I carried out while writing this post, which took about 5-10 minutes. It's all mainstream sources, it's not in any way contentious or controversial.


Yet already the president of the UK's Royal Society, Venki Ramakrishnan, has not only called for everyone to wear face coverings in public spaces, but has also stated that "it used to be quite normal to have quite a few drinks and drive home, and it also used to be normal to drive without seatbelts. Today both of those would be considered antisocial, and not wearing face coverings in public should be regarded in the same way". 


So we're comparing drink-driving, in relation to which alcohol is known to impede reaction time, impair your reflexes, and effectively make you a worse driver, while driving is already dangerous anyway, with not wearing a mask in public, which is known to be ineffective even in enclosed spaces, which will have bordering on zero impact in outdoor environments, where there is little evidence that the virus can be passed on outdoors anyway and studies have shown that this hardly ever happens statistically, which is a response to a virus that 95% of people in the UK have yet to contract, and which it is now admitted that many will never contract, which only really kills old people, according to the government's own figures, which has killed very few people proportionately who don't have underlying health conditions, for which most deaths haven't been proven to be related to the virus, and for which 45% of even those deaths linked with Covid-19 have occurred in care homes (20,000 of 44,000 deaths).


I don't really think it's quite the same, do you? But I'm sure the government will roll over and force everyone to wear face masks in due course. As an example, you're already required to wear face masks on beaches in Spain. 


If we're now asked to wear masks in public, or even if people start doing this voluntarily en masse, it's a complete joke. There's just no evidence that this is necessary, or even beneficial. If this became law, it could then go on for months, or even years. If it does become law, congratulations TPTB, you will have confined me to the immediate vicinity of my home. Because there's no way I'm playing ball with this, it's fucking stupid.

Edited by wake_up_bomb
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

I've had to upload my post for this thread on face masks and Covid as images of a word processor document, as I received a blocked message when I tried to post it. I had provided loads of links, but obviously you can't click on those now, but you could look everything up if you could be bothered! I've also enclosed a screenshot so you can see what occurred when I tried to post it.

yeah i think you have to paste as plain text,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Walking around feeling angry today ... I realised that I'm just walking around.  People have shown me images that make me mad, but nothing is really happening.  I am just walking one foot and the other.

 

Degeneration of people involves convincing people to live in fear and distrust ... which reduces people to stimulus response machines with nothing inside, always on emergency mode.

 

This is the same no matter which side of the spectrum you are on, whether you are a BLM protestor or a Truther or whatever.  Continuing in this ever-growing-fear ... is not going to work.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wake_up_bomb said:

So today, the UK's national academy of science has stated that everyone should wear masks "whenever you are in crowded public spaces".


If this recommendation is followed, and introduced as government guidance, it will mean that to a very great extent I won't be able to go out any more, except to take my dog for a walk in the woods, as I very fortunately live in the countryside and can just walk out of my front door straight into the woods. Although half the time when I encounter someone, on my own in the open air, they're backing away in terror.


There is a pub down the road from me, probably I will be able to walk down there, be served by someone wearing a mask, and have a quiet pint and some lunch. Beyond that, I won't be able to go anywhere else. My life will be limited to my house, taking my dog for a walk, and going to the one pub within walking distance, although that's not a certainty. And I'll be better off than a lot of people!


Because I won't wear a mask in public. I won't do things that don't make sense. Unless you put a gun to my head and make me do them. If I have no choice legally, then at some point I would have to wear a mask, but if I can swerve it then I will. Even if this isn't enacted legally, it's likely that you will be increasingly ostracised if you don't wear one publicly. 


This is being recommended despite the fact that Deputy chief medical officer Dr Jenny Harries stated that there is “probably a very, very small potential beneficial effect” of wearing masks, and that “the evidence is really very, very difficult to tease out”. And that was in relation to "some enclosed environments"; ie. not public spaces that are outdoors! Harries also stated that "the fact that there is a lot of debate means that the evidence either isn’t clear or is weak", and that "for the average member of the public, and it may be for example if you’re walking out in an open space, you’re practising good social distancing measures, you are neither going to be a risk to anybody else or to yourself".


Downing Street chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance noted that evidence for face masks is "variable, quite weak and difficult to know", and Peter Horby, chairman of the New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG), having investigated the benefits of face masks, described the data as “weak”. Horby himself stated that he does not wear a mask outside, and went on to explain the following:


"The data are difficult and the reason that you’re seeing different policies is because the data are weak. [In field conditions], their effectiveness is much, much lower. There’s also the problem of wearing the mask properly, they’re very difficult to wear properly for a long time, and so for prolonged exposures their effectiveness is really quite low".


Dr April Baller, a public health specialist for the WHO, previously stated that "masks should only be used by healthcare workers, caregivers or by people who are sick with symptoms of fever and cough", and in the government's own report entitled: "Keeping workers and customers safe during COVID-19 in restaurants, pubs, bars and takeaway services", the following is stated on page 35:

 

"When managing the risk of COVID-19, additional PPE beyond what you usually wear is not beneficial. This is because COVID-19 is a different type of risk to the risks you normally face in a workplace, and needs to be managed through social distancing, hygiene and fixed teams or partnering, not through the use of PPE.
It is important to know that the evidence of the benefit of using a face covering to protect others is weak and the effect is likely to be small, therefore face coverings are not a replacement for the other ways of managing risk, including minimizing time spent in contact, using fixed teams and partnering for close-up work, and increasing hand and surface washing.


These other measures remain the best ways of managing risk in the workplace and government would therefore not expect to see employers relying on face coverings as risk management for the purpose of their health and safety assessments".


Bear in mind that again deals with enclosed spaces, not open-air environments.


And I heard a BBC Radio 5Live report on when masks were first required on public transport, during which a government medical advisor (who advocated in favour of face masks) conceded that the benefit of them is "extremely marginal". And after he'd said this, the reporter from 5Live stated that he had spoken to government representatives, they had equally stated that any benefits are extremely marginal, and that the policy was only being implemented to provide "psychological comfort" to people, so that they will be willing to use public transport again.


So we already have a situation where it's legally required to wear masks, and it's admitted that this actually has virtually no medical benefit, that the policy isn't being implemented for any medical benefit anyway, and this is only in relation to enclosed spaces, where viruses are far more likely to be transmitted.


This last point is blindingly obvious anyway. Quite clearly, any virus is more likely to be passed on from one person to another indoors than outdoors. But a study in April already concluded that "the odds that a primary case transmitted COVID-19 in a closed environment was 18.7 times greater compared to an open-air environment".


That's just my little bit of research that I carried out while writing this post, which took about 5-10 minutes. It's all mainstream sources, it's not in any way contentious or controversial.


Yet already the president of the UK's Royal Society, Venki Ramakrishnan, has not only called for everyone to wear face coverings in public spaces, but has also stated that "it used to be quite normal to have quite a few drinks and drive home, and it also used to be normal to drive without seatbelts. Today both of those would be considered antisocial, and not wearing face coverings in public should be regarded in the same way". 


So we're comparing drink-driving, in relation to which alcohol is known to impede reaction time, impair your reflexes, and effectively make you a worse driver, while driving is already dangerous anyway, with not wearing a mask in public, which is known to be ineffective even in enclosed spaces, which will have bordering on zero impact in outdoor environments, where there is little evidence that the virus can be passed on outdoors anyway and studies have shown that this hardly ever happens statistically, which is a response to a virus that 95% of people in the UK have yet to contract, and which it is now admitted that many will never contract, which only really kills old people, according to the government's own figures, which has killed very few people proportionately who don't have underlying health conditions, for which most deaths haven't been proven to be related to the virus, and for which 45% of even those deaths linked with Covid-19 have occurred in care homes (20,000 of 44,000 deaths).


I don't really think it's quite the same, do you? But I'm sure the government will roll over and force everyone to wear face masks in due course. As an example, you're already required to wear face masks on beaches in Spain. 


If we're now asked to wear masks in public, or even if people start doing this voluntarily en masse, it's a complete joke. There's just no evidence that this is necessary, or even beneficial. If this became law, it could then go on for months, or even years. If it does become law, congratulations TPTB, you will have confined me to the immediate vicinity of my home. Because there's no way I'm playing ball with this, it's fucking stupid.

 

Out of likes....Good post.

I too will NEVER wear a mask....EVER.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Japan is one of the country's where mask wearing is common particularly in "flu season" still doesn't stop them getting it en masse. 

 

Exosomes!! We've been lied to for over 100 years. 

 

https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h00386/japan-gripped-by-major-flu-outbreak.html

 

Bingo! 

 

"Studies have found that among many young Japanese, masks have evolved into social firewalls; perfectly healthy teens now wear them, along with audio headsets, to signal a lack of desire to communicate with those around them" .

Edited by Principiis Obsta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The virus is a lie and there is no solid "scientific" evidence behind any of these measures they are putting into place. 

 

They are purely there to control, dehumanise and programme (torture as in social isolation) us for the next phase. 

 

Take for example not being able to sing - a simple experiment yup one of those things great scientists used to do and not a theory or a model shows terrible "science" on their part;

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, chocomel said:

Eat for Britain! :classic_biggrin:

 

with the reduced VAT coming in autumn i think they are quoting 17.5% but might go to 15%

the furlough money

the business grants

the coming mass unemployment (DWP are hiring i believe 30,000 staff)

this food grant

House Stamp Duty removal (my friend just saved £11,000 :o)

 

there comes a rational thought -- who is, how is and when is all this underwritten money being paid back??

 

the general economic model is to get nations in mega debt and then the IMF places demands upon the debtor i.e environmental initiatives

this coming mega debt (which pulls back the UK debt to pre-tory 2010 but without the jobs or affluence of the working people) is the noose

 

the press are bought

the tv is bought

there is no widespread discussion regarding this other than the odd people on youtube/bitchute channels

 

the gov are either toadie gangsters or bought and paid pathetic pieces of shit

 

Small to medium sized businesses are going to the wall.

the local councils will find their business rate tax disappear

 

the wealth of the country is being decimated into paltry interest payments in pathetic attempts to stave off default

 

the Big Corporations are in the wings waiting to pick at the carcass

 

 

 

Edited by zArk
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A fictitious but very real scenario, entitled - l Don't Get lt ;
.
Doctor explaining the pandemic to a six month coma patient who just woke up…
.
Dr: “They shut down the world because of a worldwide pandemic.”

Patient: “OMG! How many people are infected?”

Dr : “About 11 Million.”

Patient: “OMG! 11 million people died?”

Dr: “No, only 500 thousand… Kind of.”

Patient: “What do you mean ‘kind of’?”

Dr: “Well… they keep halving the number of deaths due to double counting, inaccurate tests and mislabeled death certificates. Also, most of the people that die are elderly and dying of other things. There are also people who died because of incorrect ventilator use and other treatments because no-one really understands the virus.”

Patient: “I don’t get it. So how many died from ONLY the virus… like literally dropped dead in the street?”

Dr: “No-one. Only in hospitals and nursing homes”


Patient: “I don’t get it.”

Dr: “Neither do I, it’s a very confusing time.”

Patient: “So they cured the other 11 million people then?”

Dr: “No, most didn’t have any symptoms and in fact they didn’t even know they had it.”

Patient: “I don’t get it.”

Dr: “Neither do I.”


Patient: “It doesn’t sound very deadly. If the other 11 million people didn’t have symptoms then how do they even know they had the virus?”

Dr: “They were tested.”

Patient: “But you just said that the tests are inaccurate.”

Dr: “They are. No-one has isolated the virus so the tests don’t really test for that.”

Patient: “I don’t get it.”

Dr: “Neither do I.”

Patient: “Ok. So when will this pandemic be over?”

Dr: “When they develop a vaccine to stop the virus.”

Patient: “The virus that 1 in 10,000 dies from.”

Dr: “Exactly.”

Patient: “I don’t get it.”

Dr: “Neither do I.."
.
Q : Are you awake yet ?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Basket Case said:

A case against masks.
Dan Dicks on the 'Press for Truth' channel.
The Absolute SCIENCE Behind MASKS And The PROOF THAT THEY DON’T WORK
 

 

 

masks are top for bacterial pathogens.

viral illness is not contagious

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...