“In this city-wide ivermectin prophylaxis program, a large, statistically significant decrease in mortality rate was observed after the program began among the entire population of city residents. When comparing subjects that used ivermectin regularly, non-users were two times more likely to die from COVID-19 while ivermectin users were 7% less likely to be infected with SARS-CoV-2 (p = 0.003)

Preprint · January 2022 pdf and link below:

PDF

View online

“Don’t Look Up” stars Meryl Streep as U.S. president, Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet and Jennifer Lawrence.  It is analogous to the current plandemic, especially the media, politics on both sides, and the fear-based mass psychosis in the people.  And then there is the counter reaction equivalent to “Let’s Go Brandon.” 

In “Don’t Look Up,” the crisis is a large comet that astronomers Lawrence and DiCaprio predicted will in six months collide with and devastate earth instead of a virus, or climate change, or a new ice age, or rising seas, or post-apocalyptic blindness, or an alien invasion, yada yada.  It is Hollywood dark humor.  It was probably intended to be an analogy on the so-called climate crisis. 

The government and media (including Hollywood) response to the CDC-CCP virus has been one giant clown show from the very beginning…doing exactly the wrong things, and then doubling and tripling down on the mistakes.  “Don’t Look Up” reflects that clown show.  Instead of mandates for mass vaccination, masking and isolation, the movie offers a billionaire political contributor who is a mad scientist+clairvoyant+inventor composite character of Elon Musk, David Icke, Joe Biden, Richard Branson plus transhuman guru. Of course, when this Frankenstein’s plan fails (to rescue the earth by nuking the comet), the rocketship is waiting for 2000 elites to escape earth to the nearest inhabitable planet. I won’t spoil the ending for you.

Never let a crisis go to waste, it is all about political agendas.  [sarcasm.]

If you and Kafka are sitting around waiting on the bureaucracy, take a look. Let us know. Did you see the movie differently?

The Lancet, once a reputable medical journal, is destroying its credibility.  Shameful.

The purveyor of “The best science for better lives” is pushing a political agenda. 

“Stop treating it [i.e. AGW…human-caused global warming/climate change] as a worthy opponent.  Do not ascribe reasonableness to the other side.  It is not reasonable, not true, not even plausible.” ~ Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). (31 March 2021. Zoom call Clintel Foundation)

Bud Bromley

If you are unable to view this message correctly, click here Code red for a healthy future Dear Colleague, We are pleased to announce the publication of the sixth annual Lancet Countdown on health and climate change report, which is free to read with registration on TheLancet.com. The report tracks 44 indicators of health impacts that are directly linked to climate change and expose an unabated rise in the health impacts of climate change and a delayed and inconsistent response of countries around the world. Climate change and its drivers are creating ideal conditions for infectious disease transmission, and yet many current COVID-19 recovery plans are not compatible with the Paris Agreement. A fossil-fuel driven recovery – which includes large subsidies for oil, gas and coal and limited financial support for clean energy – could potentially meet narrow and near-term economic targets but may then push the world irrevocably off course and make it impossible to meet the maximum 1·5°C of warming as outlined in the Paris Agreement. The Lancet Countdown report shows that many countries are under-prepared for the health effects of climate change. As the linked Editorial in The Lancet notes, while global greenhouse gas emissions dipped by 6·4% in 2020 they have since rebounded. The imperative is clear for accelerated action putting the health of people and the planet above all else. We hope you find the latest Countdown report to be informative and encourage you to explore the additional resources below. Yours sincerely, The Lancet. Special Content – Newsletter & Updates is a communication type sent to you by The Lancet. Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Limited All rights reserved. | Elsevier Privacy Policy Elsevier Limited, The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB UK

“Vaccine immune (VI) escape together with suppression of natural, CoV-nonspecific Abs by vaccinal Abs will make vaccinees highly susceptible to contracting Covid-19 disease.”

“Dominant propagation of more infectious viral variants could be mitigated by mass chemoprophylaxis using a potent antiviral. At the same time, immune pressure on vaccinal S-specific epitopes must be mitigated by calling an immediate halt to mass vaccination campaigns. Furthermore, early treatment of symptomatic subjects can prevent severe disease and provide them with durable protection against a diversified spectrum of more infectious variants and, thereby, also reduce viral transmission. However, this is the last opportunity to limit the disastrous consequences of mass vaccination.”…

“Last but not least, it must be emphasized that those calling themselves ‘experts’ while pretending that this pandemic is ‘a pandemic among the non-vaccinated’ are devoid of any scientific insight in the evolutionary dynamics of Sars-CoV-2 as currently shaped by a combination of high viral infectivity and vaccine coverage rates. Neither the vaccinated (who merely believed the vaccine would protect them from Covid-19 disease) nor the non-vaccinated (who simply believe there is no need for them to take the vaccine in order to stay protected) are to be blamed for the escalation of this pandemic. Mass vaccination is the one and only culprit.”

Geert Vanden Bossche, DVM, PhD.

A copy of his letter has been sent to WHO, NIH, CDC, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI, CEPI, FDA, EMEA and to R&D leaders from Pfizer, Moderna, Astra-Zeneca, J&J, Novavax and GSK

Read his full article wherein he explains what must be done now: https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org/scientific-blog/a-last-word-of-caution-to-all-those-pretending-the-covid-19-pandemic-is-toning-down

Today in the U.S. Supreme Court we heard an example of the problem with PCR kits, which points to the problem with this entire “pandemic.”

Two lawyers who tested positive for COVID-19 delivered their arguments remotely during the hearing where half of U.S. states and many businesses challenged Biden’s mandates, which was held in a building that has been closed to the public for almost two years.

Ohio’s Solicitor General Ben Flowers delivered an argument by telephone, according to the Ohio attorney general’s office:

‘Ben who is vaccinated and boosted, tested positive for COVID-19 after Christmas. His symptoms were exceptionally mild and he has since fully recovered,’ the office said.   

‘The Court required a PCR test yesterday which detected the virus so for that reason he is arguing remotely.’

As I have said since before the PCR test was authorized for non-diagnostic emergency use (EUA) by CDC/FDA:

(1) it is not possible for the test to determine whether or not the person who tested positive has SARS-CoV2 versus the person had corona virus sometime in the past, and

(2) it is not possible for the test to determine whether or not a person who tested positive is infectious to others, and

(3) it is not possible to determine whether or not the person who tested positive will or will not become ill.    

(4) it is not possible for the PCR test to determine if the virus is dead or alive.   

And this is the same test used to validate safety and efficacy in clinical trials for the “vaccines.” And the same test used to determine and report “cases,” hospitalizations, and deaths associated with Covid-19, for which the health care facility collects large bonuses for covid patients.  And the same test which politicians, media, etc. have used to hype fear, control populations, and destroy businesses and income.  The databases and history of this “pandemic” using PCR data are worthless.  The story does not end there.

CO₂ in atmosphere is a cumulative value since volume of a gas is an extensive property of matter.  Area is the correct representation of a cumulative value, not a line.  The blue area is compared to the orange area, the entire orange area.  

The blue area is fossil fuel and cement CO₂ emission (2), which are the largest sources of human CO₂ emission; in the blue area, fossil fuel and cement CO₂ emission which is absorbed in the environment has not been subtracted from fossil fuel and cement CO₂ emission. On the other hand, the orange area is CO₂ emission minus CO₂ absorption, or net emission.  Human-produced CO₂ emission from fossil fuels and cement is too small to be detected. Human CO2 emission = Human CO2 absorption. (3) The blue area and B would not be visible if net fossil fuel and cement CO2 were graphed here. The signal of human-produced CO₂ in net global CO₂ concentration is not detectable by statistical tools used by skilled statistical data analysts (4). Not only is the signal too small to be quantified, it is too small to be detected as a reproducible signal.  The signal of fossil fuels CO₂ and cement CO2 emission is too small to be distinguished from random variations in the 100 times larger CO₂ signal of natural CO₂ concentration.      

CO₂ emitted by humans from all sources is offset continuously by an equivalent amount of CO₂ absorbed by the environment.  The rate of natural CO₂ emission and natural CO₂ absorption are both more than 10 times larger per year than the rate of human CO₂ emission.  The amount of human emission is easily absorbed in the environment. Human CO₂ emission is continuously mixed with CO₂ reservoirs in both atmosphere and ocean surface and each of those reservoirs are about 100 times larger than annual human emission.  The relative percentage of CO₂ in the atmosphere which was emitted by humans is irrelevant; the environment is not selecting one CO₂ molecule versus another CO₂ molecule in any significant amount.  The CO₂ molecule emitted at one point source (for example your exhaled breath) is not the same CO₂ molecule that is absorbed by ocean, land or plants. The partial pressure change is transmitted, not the CO₂ molecule itself. The concentrations of CO₂ in air and in ocean surface are independent of the source of the CO₂.  An amount of CO₂ equal to the amount of CO₂ produced by humans is absorbed by the environment.(3) The source of the CO₂ (whether human, biosphere, ocean) is not a variable in the phase-state equilibrium equation that determines atmospheric CO₂ concentration at a given temperature of ocean surface or land surface.  In other words, humans cannot change the net global average CO₂ concentration nor the rate of change of CO₂ concentration by controlling CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels or cows. 

On the other hand, humans could implement catastrophic planetary climate engineering and eugenics decisions, for example producing artificial clouds or population reduction programs, or taxing carbon footprints and limiting use of fossil fuel energy. Such foolish actions needlessly keep millions of people in poverty and could make earth uninhabitable and uninhabited.

References:

(1) NOAA ESRL GML and Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO). “The carbon dioxide data on Mauna Loa constitute the longest record of direct measurements of CO₂ in the atmosphere. They were started by C. David Keeling of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in March of 1958 at a facility of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [Keeling, 1976]. NOAA started its own CO₂ measurements in May of 1974, and they have run in parallel with those made by Scripps since then [Thoning, 1989].” https://gml.noaa.gov/webdata/ccgg/trends/co2/co2_annmean_mlo.txt File Creation: Mon Dec 6 12:07:43 2021

(2) Friedlingstein, P. et al. 2021. Territorial Emissions. 2021v0.4 https://essd.copernicus.org/preprints/essd-2021-386/ Carbon values in million tonnes per year were multiplied below by 3.664 to yield CO₂ per year.

(3) Salby, Murry L. Physics of the Atmosphere and Climate. 2nd Edition. Date Published: January 2012. isbn: 9780521767187. https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/earth-and-environmental-science/atmospheric-science-and-meteorology/physics-atmosphere-and-climate-2nd-edition?format=HB&isbn=9780521767187    http://www.cambridge.org/9780521767187

“Equally significant are transfers of carbon into and out of the ocean. Of order 100 GtC/yr, they exceed those into and out of land. Together, emission from ocean and land sources (∼150 GtC/yr) is two orders of magnitude greater than CO₂ emission from combustion of fossil fuel. These natural sources are offset by natural sinks, of comparable strength. However, because they are so much stronger, even a minor imbalance between natural sources and sinks can overshadow the anthropogenic component of CO₂ emission.”

“At an absorption rate of 100 GtC/yr, the ocean will absorb the atmospheric store of CO₂ of 1000 GtC in about a decade. That absorption of CO₂, which is concentrated in cold SST [Sea Surface Temperature] at polar latitudes, is nearly offset by emission of CO₂ from warm SST at tropical latitudes. Warming of SST (by any mechanism) will increase the outgassing of CO₂ while reducing its absorption. Owing to the magnitude of transfers with the ocean, even a minor increase of SST can lead to increased emission of CO₂ that rivals other sources.” (3) Salby, p546. 

(4) Munshi, J. “Responsiveness of atmospheric CO₂ to fossil fuel emissions: Updated”. SSRN; 2017. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2997420

#climatechange #globalwarming #CO2 #netzero #Environment

“Abstract: Long-lived bone marrow plasma cells (BMPCs) are a persistent and essential source of protective antibodies^{1,2,3,4,5,6,7}. Individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 have a substantially lower risk of reinfection with SARS-CoV-2^8,9,10    …Consistently, circulating resting memory B cells directed against SARS-CoV-2 S were detected in the convalescent individuals. Overall, our results indicate that mild infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces
robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune memory in humans…”

“Discussion…Overall, our data provide strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans robustly establishes the two arms of humoral immune memory: long-lived BMPCs and memory B cells. These findings provide an immunogenicity benchmark for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and a foundation for assessing the durability of primary humoral immune responses that are induced in humans after viral infections.”

SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans. Turner, J.S., Kim, W., Kalaidina, E. et al. SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans. Nature 595, 421–425 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03647-4

“Conclusions Individuals who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection are unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination, and vaccines can be safely prioritized to those who have not been infected before.”

“Summary Cumulative incidence of COVID-19 was examined among 52238 employees in an American healthcare system. COVID-19 did not occur in anyone over the five months of the study among 2579 individuals previously infected with COVID-19, including 1359 who did not take the vaccine.”

Full text of study https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.01.21258176v3.full-text

Nabin K. Shrestha,¹ Patrick C. Burke,2 Amy S. Nowacki,³ Paul Terpeluk,⁴ Steven M. Gordon ¹
From the Departments of:

1 Infectious Diseases,

2 Infection Prevention,

3 Quantitative Health Sciences, and

4 Occupational Health,

Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio