Since the chinese “communist” (i.e. fascist) party was created and was always puppeted by the western money interests, ( http://thoughtcrimeradio.net/2014/11/corbett-china-and-the-new-world-order/ ) it’s unlikely he came up with this idea himself, he was taking his cue from his western handlers, especially given that china’s bioterror apparatus was nothing compared to the complex controlled by the west, which had already been deployed against the US congress post-9/11 (anthrax, see the site index and reference section). The luciferians absolutely hate the western culture of human rights and relative freedom, and the USA is at the top if their hit list.
Did China’s Plan to Destroy the United States Backfire?
In a secret speech given to high-level Communist Party cadres nearly two decades ago, Chinese Defense Minister Gen. Chi Haotian explained a long-range plan for ensuring a Chinese national renaissance.
He said there were three vital issues that must be grasped. The first was the issue of living space—because China is severely overpopulated and China’s environment is deteriorating. The second issue, therefore, was that the Communist Party must teach the Chinese people to “go out.” By this, Chi meant the conquest of new lands, in which a “second China” could be built by “colonization.” From this, arose the third vital issue: the “issue of America.” ….
A recent study published by the journal Pediatrics found that vitamin D deficiency diagnosis has exponentially increased among children in the UK in recent years.
Although vitamin D has continued to gain recognition for its role in childhood health, there is a lack of research evaluating the trends of vitamin D testing and diagnosis in clinical practice. Therefore, researchers recently conducted a cohort study to investigate whether the rate of vitamin D deficiency diagnosis among children has changed over time.
The researchers gathered the records of 711,788 children between the ages of 0-17 years from the Health Improvement Network database. This database contains large anonymized electronic records from primary care clinics across the UK. The researchers observed the trends in vitamin D deficiency diagnosis among children between 2000-2014.
The researchers found that vitamin D deficiency diagnoses dramatically increased from 3.14 cases per 100,000 children in the year 2000 to 261 cases per 100,000 children in 2014. After adjusting for confounding factors, the researchers observed a 15-fold increase in diagnosis between 2008 and 2014. Children who were nonwhite ethnicity, were of low socioeconomic status and at least 10 years of age were independently associated with an increased frequency of diagnosis. Boys who were less than 5 years and girls at least 10 years of age were more likely to be diagnosed with vitamin D deficiency.
The researchers concluded,
“There has been a marked increase in diagnosis of vitamin D deficiency in children over the past decade.”
It is important to note that this exponential growth in vitamin D deficiency diagnosis does not indicate an increased prevalence of vitamin D deficiency, but a change in diagnostic screening practices. These findings demonstrate increased recognition of the importance of maintaining optimal vitamin D status for supporting the proper growth and development of children among the medical community in the UK.
The researchers continued,
“Future research should explore the drivers for this change in diagnostic behavior and the reasons prompting investigation of vitamin D status in clinical practice.”
The Vitamin D Council recommends parents supplement their children with 1,000 IU vitamin D3 per 25 pounds of body weight (with a max of 5,000 IU/day) during times they are unable to receive safe, sensible full-body sun exposure when their shadow is shorter than they are tall.
The “collectively autocatalytic” nature of mass self-delusion is in evidence here. The authors have clearly never researched the most basic inconvenient truths about vaccines, they simply parrot their preferred authority figures. Lack of insight is everywhere in the “public health” establishment, which has its own dynamic and its own interests, independent of underlying realities. It simply colonizes whatever medium is available to it. That’s how an organic process like corruption functions and grows.
Naturally, much of the same applies to the OTHER side, at least among those who have a healthy distrust of this eugenical regime but don’t have the time to do the research themselves: they rely on a different set of authority figures. The difference is only one of funding and the distributed nature of the newly available medium of peer-to-peer social networking.
It’s always dangerous to trust strangers, but you can at least try to analyze their motivations (which could be based on altruism, profit or job security). On that basis alone, the volume of the message tends to be inversely related to its credibility. This is obviously the case with the MSM: the size and complexity of CNN’s financial entanglements and revenue streams inhibits their willingness to rock the boat. Alex Jones on the other hand, for all his faults, has his own home-cooked business independent of the establishment, which supports his heart-felt and justified sermonizing that this country is in a hell of a lot of trouble because of the likes of CNN. His business is motivated by his sense of altruism, not the other way around.
This is why empathy is so subversive, it bypasses all the skinner boxes which constitute and catalyze the toxic establishment.
Vaccine misinformation and social media
People exposed to vaccine content on social media more likely misinformed than those exposed to it on traditional media
People who rely on social media for information were more likely to be misinformed about vaccines than those who rely on traditional media, according to a study of vaccine knowledge and media use by researchers at the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania.
The study, based on nationally representative surveys of nearly 2,500 U.S. adults, found that up to 20% of respondents were at least somewhat misinformed about vaccines. Such a high level of misinformation is “worrying” because misinformation undermines vaccination rates, and high vaccination rates are required to maintain community immunity, the researchers said.
The study, published in the Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, was conducted in the spring and fall of 2019, when the United States experienced its largest measles outbreak in a quarter century. Between the two survey periods, 19% of the respondents’ levels of vaccine misinformation changed in a substantive way – and within that group, almost two-thirds (64%) were more misinformed in the fall than in the spring.
Media consumption patterns helped to explain the change in misinformation levels, the researchers found. Those respondents who reported increased exposure to information about measles and the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine on social media were more likely to grow more misinformed about vaccines. By contrast, those people who reported an increased exposure to news accounts about those topics in traditional media were more likely to grow less misinformed about vaccines.
“People who received their information from traditional media were less likely to endorse anti-common vaccination claims,” said lead author Dominik Stecula, a postdoctoral fellow in the science of science communication program at the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC). He co-authored the study with Ozan Kuru, another APPC postdoctoral fellow, and APPC Director Kathleen Hall Jamieson.
The result is consistent with research suggesting that social media contain a fair amount of misinformation about vaccination while traditional media are more likely to reflect the scientific consensus on its benefits and safety, according to the Annenberg researchers.
‘Worrying’ levels of vaccine misinformation
The researchers found that:
18% of respondents mistakenly say that it is very or somewhat accurate to state that vaccines cause autism;
15% mistakenly agree that it is very or somewhat accurate to state that vaccines are full of toxins;
20% wrongly report that it is very or somewhat accurate to state that it makes no difference whether parents choose to delay or spread out vaccines instead of relying on the official vaccine schedule from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC);
and 19% incorrectly say it is very or somewhat accurate to state that it is better to develop immunity by getting the disease than by vaccination…..
The researchers said this study suggests that “increasing the sheer amount of pro-vaccination content in media of all types may be of value over the longer term.” They said the findings also underscore the importance of decisions by Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Pinterest to reduce or block access to anti-vaccine misinformation.
Senator Tom Cotton says that China is refusing to hand over evidence concerning the bio-safety level 4 research lab in Wuhan despite a new report from biological scientists at the South China University of Technology saying it may have been the source of the coronavirus outbreak.
During an appearance on Fox News, Cotton told Maria Bartiromo that new evidence confirmed the source of the virus was not the meat market in Wuhan.
“Here is what we do know. This virus did not originate in the Wuhan animal market,” said Cotton. “Epidemiologists who are widely respected from China published a study in the international journal Lancet have demonstrated that several of the original cases did NOT have any contact with that food market. The virus went into that food market before it came out of that food market. So we don’t know where it originated… We also know that only a few miles away from that market is China’s only bio-safety Level Four Super Laboratory that researches human infectious diseases.”
Cotton said that China’s “duplicity and dishonesty” meant that questions needed to be asked about the lab but that “China right now is not giving any evidence on that question at all” and Beijing was being “very secretive” on what happens at the lab.
Cotton also accused China of consistently blocking American scientists from traveling to Wuhan to assist in discovering the origins of the virus.
A new report by scientists at the South China University of Technology in Guangzhou, China concludes that “the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.”
One of the laboratories named in the report which was conducting research on bat coronavirus was located just 280 meters from the site of the Wuhan meat market.
For weeks, the media has demonized anyone who suggested the lab could have been responsible for the coronavirus outbreak as a dangerous conspiracy theorist peddling fake news.
However, now that CNN/NY Times journalist Ezra Cheung tweeted precisely that yesterday, one wonders whether they will begin to change their tune.
#BREAKING: South China University of Technology biologist Xiao Botao exposed that the #COVID19 might have originated from an animal research lab 280m away from the epicentre of the outbreak. The scientists were reportedly bitten by bats used for a test on louse. H/T: @mantaichowpic.twitter.com/uZEXHmvbTU
The World Health Organization (WHO) has held talks with tech giants to stop the spread of coronavirus “misinformation,” despite the fact that some things once labeled “misinformation” have since turned out to be true.
The meeting was organized by the WHO but hosted by Facebook at its Menlo Park campus in California. Attendees included representatives from Amazon, Twilio, Dropbox, Google, Verizon, Salesforce, Twitter, YouTube, Airbnb, Kinsa and Mapbox.
According to the WHO’s Andy Pattison, an “infodemic” of misinformation has accompanied the coronavirus outbreak and big tech giants need to respond by censoring “fake news” content.
Both Facebook and Twitter already announced that they would remove content deemed to be misinformation regarding the virus, a dangerous new lurch to mass censorship given that what is considered “misinformation” is totally subjective and beholden to partisan bias.
Two clear examples of “misinformation” surrounding the coronavirus subsequently turned out to be true.
Once again, the media defamed anyone who even talked about the bio-lab in Wuhan as a fake news conspiracy theorist.
Now biological scientists from the prestigious South China University of Technology have concluded that coronavirus came from a bio-lab in Wuhan.
The first example was claims that China was hiding the true number of coronavirus victims, once labeled a “conspiracy theory” by the media but subsequently proven accurate on Friday when 14,800 new coronavirus cases were reported in a single day.
The second example was suspicions that the virus could have emerged from a bio-safety level 4 research lab in Wuhan.
This contention has been aggressively attacked by the media and big tech giants – Zero Hedge was even banned by Twitter for reporting it – but a new study by scientists at the prestigious South China University of Technology in Guangzhou has confirmed that “the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.”
Chinese dissidents and others have been defamed and in some cases imprisoned by authorities, but the media continues to treat any questioning of the official Chinese Communist Party narrative with disdain.
What does this say about the widespread practice of combining D with calcium in supplements? It says the eugenicists don’t miss a trick.
The dose of vitamin D that some researchers recommend as optimally therapeutic exceeds that officially recognized as safe by a factor of two; it is therefore important to determine the precise mechanism by which excessive doses of vitamin D exert toxicity so that physicians and other health care practitioners may understand how to use optimally therapeutic doses of this vitamin without the risk of adverse effects. Although the toxicity of vitamin D has conventionally been attributed to its induction of hypercalcemia, animal studies show that the toxic endpoints observed in response to hypervitaminosis D such as anorexia, lethargy, growth retardation, bone resorption, soft tissue calcification, and death can be dissociated from the hypercalcemia that usually accompanies them, demanding that an alternative explanation for the mechanism of vitamin D toxicity be developed. The hypothesis presented in this paper proposes the novel understanding that vitamin D exerts toxicity by inducing a deficiency of vitamin K. According to this model, vitamin D increases the expression of proteins whose activation depends on vitamin K-mediated carboxylation; as the demand for carboxylation increases, the pool of vitamin K is depleted. Since vitamin K is essential to the nervous system and plays important roles in protecting against bone loss and calcification of the peripheral soft tissues, its deficiency results in the symptoms associated with hypervitaminosis D. This hypothesis is circumstantially supported by the observation that animals deficient in vitamin K or vitamin K-dependent proteins exhibit remarkable similarities to animals fed toxic doses of vitamin D, and the observation that vitamin D and the vitamin K-inhibitor Warfarin have similar toxicity profiles and exert toxicity synergistically when combined. The hypothesis further proposes that vitamin A protects against the toxicity of vitamin D by decreasing the expression of vitamin K-dependent proteins and thereby exerting a vitamin K-sparing effect. If animal experiments can confirm this hypothesis, the models by which the maximum safe dose is determined would need to be revised. Physicians and other health care practitioners would be able to treat patients with doses of vitamin D that possess greater therapeutic value than those currently being used while avoiding the risk of adverse effects by administering vitamin D together with vitamins A and K.
I have written for years on the effort of European countries to expand their crackdown on free speech globally through restrictions on social media and Internet speech. It appears that Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has relented in what may prove the death knell for free speech in the West. Zuckerberg seems to relent in asking governments for regulations stipulating what speech will be permitted on Facebook and other platforms. It is the ultimate victory of France, Germany, and England in their continuing attack on free expression though hate speech laws and speech regulation.
Zuckerberg told an assembly of Western leaders Saturday at the Munich Security Conference that “There should be more guidance and regulation from the states on basically — take political advertising as an example — what discourse should be allowed?” He did add: “Or, on the balance of free expression and some things that people call harmful expression, where do you draw the line?” The problem is that his comments were received as accepting that government will now dictate the range of free speech. What is missing is the bright line rule long maintained by the free speech community.
As tragically demonstrated in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, speech regulations inevitably expand with time. The desire to silence one’s critics becomes insatiable for both governments and individuals.
Zuckerberg is facing great pressure, including from Democratic leaders in the United States, to regulate political speech and he seems to be moving away from the bright-line position against such regulation as a principle. Instead, he is accepting the fluid concept of “balanced” regulations that has always preceded expanding speech codes and criminalization:
“There are a lot of decisions in these areas that are really just balances between different social values. It’s about coming up with an answer that society feels is legitimate and that they can get behind and understand that you drew the line here on the balance of free expression and safety. It’s not just that there’s one right answer. People need to feel like, ‘OK, enough people weighed in, and that’s why the answer should be this, and we can get behind that.’”
There’s this pleasing mythology out there that the World Health Organization is like some international version of the Center for Disease Control, that it’s staffed by scientists and doctors flying all over the world and racing against the clock to battle infectious diseases and – against all odds – find The Cure.
I mean, that’s an actual subplot of Contagion, where an intrepid W.H.O. scientist tracks down the disease origin in Hong Kong, goes to the remote Chinese village where all of the children are sick (the children!), is taken prisoner, and works heroically (if ultimately unsuccessfully) to get vaccines to the children (the children!).
This is a crock.
The World Health Organization is a political organization, bought and paid for by its sponsor countries (China foremost among them), with a single, dominant mandate: maintain the party line.
The truth is that W.H.O. has done nothing more than parrot the official Chinese Communist Party line since the day the world learned of COVID-19.
The truth is that only now – TWO MONTHS INTO THE EPIDEMIC – is W.H.O. sending a “team” to “start investigating” the virus.
To be sure, W.H.O.’s Director General, Dr. Tedros, has been to China several times since the disease broke out, glad-handing (again, literally) President Xi and all the other CCP mandarins.
So … I’m not going to get into the way China lobbied and pressured the UN to get Dr. Tedros appointed as W.H.O. Director General, succeeding their hand-picked (again, literally) Director General, Margaret Chan, despite credible accusations that Tedros had covered up cholera outbreaks in his home country of Ethiopia. If you want to get into that, you can read this New York Times article: Candidate to Lead the W.H.O. Accused of Covering Up Epidemics.
And … I’m not going to get into the way Dr. Tedros appointed freakin’ Robert Mugabe as a Good-Will Ambassador for the World Health Organization, a toady move that was greeted by healthcare professionals (and anyone with a soul) as “a sick joke”. If you want to get into that, you can read this New York Times article: After Making Mugabe a ‘Good-Will Ambassador,’ W.H.O. Chief Is ‘Rethinking’ It.
No, no … I’m just going to highlight what Dr. Tedros said at the W.H.O. Executive Board meeting in Geneva on February 4, a week after meeting with Xi in Beijing and a few days after senior Chinese diplomats started talking about the “racism” inherent in other countries stopping flights to China and denying visas to people with Chinese passports issued in Hubei province.
Tedros said there was no need for measures that “unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade,” and he specifically said that stopping flights and restricting Chinese travel abroad was “counter-productive” to fighting the global spread of the virus.
This is the Director General of the World Health Organization. On February 4th.
“We call on all countries to implement decisions that are evidence-based and consistent,” said Tedros. Roger that.
There’s just one problem.
The “evidence” here – taken without adjustment or question from the CCP – was a baldfaced lie.
And everyone at W.H.O. knew it.
How do I know that everyone at W.H.O. knew that the official Chinese numbers were a crock on Feb. 4?
Because W.H.O.-sponsored doctors in Hong Kong published independent studies on Jan. 31 showing that the official Chinese numbers were a crock.
In our baseline scenario, we estimated that the basic reproductive number for 2019-nCoV was 2.68 (95% CrI 2.47–2.86) and that 75,815 individuals (95% CrI 37,304–130,330) have been infected in Wuhan as of Jan 25, 2020.
If the transmissibility of 2019-nCoV were similar everywhere domestically and over time, we inferred that epidemics are already growing exponentially in multiple major cities of China with a lag time behind the Wuhan outbreak of about 1–2 weeks.
The tendrils of the pharmaceutical industry are thoroughly entwined with the various disease cultivation and management agencies which are in turn allied with the bioweapons industry. It’s just business.
Michael Bloomberg isn’t making any friends in the agriculture industry, after video of the former NYC Mayor surfaced of him describing farmers as having simple jobs that don’t require much intelligence, according to the Washington Times.
“I could teach anybody, even the people in this room” to be a farmer, said Bloomberg during a 2016 talk at Oxford University in a now-viral clip in which he called agriculture a “process”
“You dig a hole, you put a seed in, you put dirt on top, add water, up comes the corn, he added.
Bloomberg then described metalworkers similarly.
“You put the piece of metal in the lathe, you turn the crank in the direction of the arrow, and you can have a job,” he continued.
Mr. Bloomberg then said working in the information economy is “fundamentally different, because it’s built around replacing people with technology and the skill sets that you have to learn are how to think and analyze. And that is a whole degree level different. You have to have a different skill set, you have to have a lot more gray matter,” he said. –Washington Times
Billionaire Bloomberg claims he “could teach anybody to be a farmer,” even implying that farmers don’t have the same level of “skillset” or “grey matter” as folks in tech jobs.
“Most importantly, we want to get immigrants from around the world to come to America. That’s the single biggest thing that the president could do with Congress, is open up the borders to those that will create jobs here,” Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I-NYC) said on CBS’ “Early Show.”
Actually they move jobs around in the context of a falling wage structure more suitable to a shrinking 3rd world economy perpetually dependent on an authoritarian central government to keep its fractured and chaotic social structure from bursting at the seams. This is just disaster capitalism as domestic (instead of the more traditional foreign) policy.