(this excerpt is in response to attacks from family around my choice not to be vaccinated, and follows replies to a Faecbook post detailing support for use of alternate drugs against the covid virus - https://rumble.com/embed/vm0vzg/?pub=4 and is partially intended as a placeholder in time, as the walls close in on those refuse the 'jab')
“scientists from all over the world, have colluded on a mission to make sure children die” - now there’s a decent headline. Could it be so?
Colluded, no, turned a blind eye, possibly? There is something about this whole thing which stinks to high levels, of misappropriated resources and misdirected loyalties, of high handed authoritarianism, and of acquiescence to groupthink.
Do I think there is a concentrated effort to harm people, no, but equally the message this guy brings is that more could be done, with what we already have, whether the vaccines are available, or otherwise.
As is obviated with the vid I posted, I am beginning to see holes appearing in the mainstream narrative, which just do not need to be there. Ivermectin being the most obvious. a drug with decades of use in humans and animals, with minimal side effects, formerly lauded by WHO, suddenly being vilified by media, government, and big pharma alike. This drug has been used successfully by the poorer nations which cannot afford to vaccinate their population, so instead treat them with the cheaper, readily available solutions. Best example of this is Uttar Predesh in India, a state with 240 million people, and only a handful of cases per day.
As the pandemic spread, it was my belief that nations such as India will be absolutely decimated by the virus, as their poverty levels, and access to medical care, leave them much more vulnerable than wealthy nations. Yet, as is clearly evident, an off the shelf remedy has seen Uttar Predesh knock back the infection rate to a tiny per capita incidence. Japans ‘miracle’ recovery happened two weeks after Ivermectin was made available to all citizens on Aug 13, and spontaneously the country now has very few cases. There are other possible explanations for Japan, a little more time will tell, yet media probably will not.
Aside from Dr McCallough, there are many other doctors coming out in support of alternate methods of treatment, all of whom seem rational and sincere in their approach. Dr Tess Lawrie, and Dr John Campbell, are two people speaking out, individually, and collaboratively, to discuss the developing landscape of virus symptoms, studies, and treatments. They seem to me to be genuine, caring people, motivated to deliver alternate information to that which is generated by mainstream. I take them at face value, to be honest, and independent. I have no other gauge outside of the way they present themselves, display and share their knowledge, they seem like good people. Question then is, is that enough? Who do we believe if we are to be guided by the way we feel about someone, and in turn, the cause which they represent? One direction will be to enquire, ‘who’ do they represent? And this is where I see a line becoming visible, between self motivated individuals hoping to pitch in for the good of all, verses those with a vested interest, or motivated by external forces. Another question is, who is correct, as we digest this media source, or that? On both sides of the equation, we are merely the uneducated (in these specific areas) dosing up on info from our favourite information source. In this regard, its a battle of search algorithms, yet it seems more to be a battle of belief systems.
Perhaps you are aware of Dr Piere Kory, whose passionate appeal to the US Senate has been significantly overlooked. Again, this guy is not a half-baked shill with a twisted agenda, he wants to help.
There are many US doctors (and NZ also) pleading to have other methods of treatment considered, or at the very least, provide basic care prescriptions which can aid in fighting the virus once contracted. These proposals are shut down, harshly. Why? Why can they not even be considered as part of an exploratory conversation? This is where I roll over from being vaccine hesitant, to vaccine skeptical. Why is so much energy being used to silence anything other than full compliance with the narrative that vaccines are the only cure? This is where my mind goes to the cabal of profit and power. There is a long history of tyranny where big business knowingly distorts the truth in order to maximise profits, e.g. the tobacco industry, petro-chemical industry, sugar, seatbelts, the opioid epidemic, I’m sure there are plenty others, and this is to say nothing of the governments which permit the practices to continue.
Again, do I think it’s a deliberate effort by a collective of ‘scientists’ to create harm, no, but its not the scientists pulling the strings. And, at this point, could be where our belief systems part company. The rot in the system, borne out of the pursuit of profit, is absolute, tho I expect you know this? Founded in the fiat monetary system itself, then extending out into all areas of economy, the pursuit of profit has no rival when it comes to lobbying for change which facilitates its’ greed. Dodgy banking practices, crony politics, and even climate change have been leveraged to create new revenue streams, and this response to the Covid outbreak seems to me, just another way to squeeze financial gain from the bloated corpse of the global financial system. To that end, I see a world of compliant collaborators, not willing to stick their heads above the parapet, doing as their peers seem to accept, and meekly turning away. Its less a matter of science, but a matter of conscience, or the lack of it.
What if, in the panic to bring the pandemic under control, too many shortcuts are being taken to verify the safety of these vaccines? What if, as a way to provide insurance indemnity in the US, drugs must be classified for use on children, and the only pathway there is having it declared safe by the NIH and WHO? What if, the info you are looking at is insufficient, and you are contributing the harm of which your response vilifies me for? What if, the virus mutations can now stay ahead of medical treatment? What if, taking vaccines leaves the immune system vulnerable to future mutations? What if, developing antibodies naturally works for most of the population, and only the vulnerable need medical intervention? What if, info on negative effects of vaccine is being heavily censored, to favour pushing vaccines? What if heart problems are resulting from vaccinations? What if, Ivermectin works for the poorer nations as it runs at about 50 cents per dose, as opposed to big pharma based solutions at $300+ per dose. What if, we are living in a world where profit trumps wellbeing?
There’s a lot of these what ifs, yet discussion is denounced, and thats the point. This is where deliberate collaboration and collusion should be, between all nations, and all pharmaceutical companies. The scientists could be openly sharing ideas, doctors should be openly sharing ideas, evolutionary biologists should be sharing ideas, doctors, scientists and evolutionary biologists should be sharing ideas, and laypeople should be openly sharing their views in praise of the efforts of those learned peeps.
This then, is where I am at, wondering wtf? Wondering why all effort is being made to extinguish cooperation, and to dictate vaccination. Wondering how far the pursuit of profit can distort the field of medical science, in full view of watchful, yet compliant, public. Wondering just how crooked some of the main players are? Hopefully, I am wrong, for if I am not, it has potential for global leadership to crack the shits on a biblical scale.
