Patients in Wuhan, China, are being saved with high-dose vitamin C. In the U.S., you can get your Twitter or Facebook account deleted or your video scrubbed for even talking about it.
The Statistics
Strikingly, the 10 countries with the highest COVID-19 mortality rates are large Western countries, including the US, UK, France, Spain, and Italy. The non-Western country with the highest mortality rate is Ecuador, ranked at #13. Ecuador only has 195 deaths/million, however, compared with the median of around 450 deaths/million in the “top 10”. No Asian countries make the top-20 list despite being close to the epicenter of the epidemic and having high population densities. No African country makes the list despite many having much traffic from China.
Table 1. The 20 countries with the highest COVID-19 mortalities (2020-06-03)
| Country | Cases/M | Deaths/M | Population | |
| 1 | Belgium | 5,065 | 822 | 11,585,802 |
| 2 | Spain | 6,139 | 580 | 46,753,443 |
| 3 | UK | 4,097 | 580 | 67,858,826 |
| 4 | Italy | 3,862 | 555 | 60,468,295 |
| 5 | Sweden | 4,042 | 450 | 10,094,432 |
| 6 | France | 2,319 | 443 | 65,262,729 |
| 7 | Netherlands | 2,728 | 349 | 17,132,042 |
| 8 | Ireland | 5,081 | 336 | 4,933,409 |
| 9 | USA | 5,693 | 327 | 330,854,064 |
| 10 | Channel Islands | 3,223 | 265 | 173,737 |
| 11 | Switzerland | 3,572 | 222 | 8,649,729 |
| 12 | Canada | 2,450 | 196 | 37,716,316 |
| 13 | Ecuador | 2,293 | 195 | 17,621,217 |
| 14 | Luxembourg | 6,431 | 176 | 625,142 |
| 15 | Brazil | 2,628 | 147 | 212,442,762 |
| 16 | Peru | 5,310 | 145 | 32,934,728 |
| 17 | Portugal | 3,261 | 142 | 10,198,850 |
| 18 | Germany | 2,198 | 104 | 83,763,806 |
| 19 | Denmark | 2,033 | 100 | 5,790,665 |
| 20 | Iran | 1,915 | 95 | 83,906,701 |
Worldometers, 06/03/2020, 9:30 am CT
*Eliminated from the comparison are countries with less than 100k population (San Marino, Sint Maarten, Montserrat, Monaco, Bermuda, Isle of Man, and Andorra).
Possible Explanations
The popular hypotheses, such as the use of anti-malarial drugs in some countries and anti-tuberculosis vaccination of children in others, do not explain these differences.
Chloroquine and similar drugs are not widely used for malaria prevention in India and other malaria-affected countries. Travelers do take anti-malarials for prophylaxis, but locals acquire some immunity from exposure to it in childhood. If they do contract malaria, they are treated with chloroquine or artemisinin combo for a few days. India uses less HCQ per million population than the US.
One observational hypothesis posits that full national anti-tuberculosis vaccination (BCG) correlates with lower COVID-19mortality. BCG is typically given to babies at birth, sometimes with boosters in late childhood. This hypothesis suggests that BCG provides some degree of long-term immunity to COVID-19. Even if there is correlation, however, it is not relevant here. The UK had full BCG from 1953–2005. Belgium had it from about 1953–1995 and France from 1950–2007. Ireland started mandatory BCG vaccination in the 1950s and still has it.
Other factors exist. Less developed countries might not detect and report cases and deaths from COVID-19 as completely as more developed countries. They also have lower ratios of older people and have low urbanization.
Amplifying Factors
On the other hand, population density in the cities of non-Western countries is typically higher than in Western ones. Mumbai has 32 thousand persons per km2, while New York City has just 10,000 persons per km2. People in non-Western countries also tend to have less physical distance between them. There are more persons per area at work and home, and multiple generations often live together in the same households. Even in developed Russia and Ukraine, the typical physical distance between persons is about three times less than in the US, which should translate to a much higher transmission speed, and exponentially higher rates of cases and deaths.
Many non-Western countries also have low hygienic standards. Many suffer from bad nutrition, cold weather, lack of UVB sunlight, and other immunity-compromising factors. Less developed countries also have much lower capacities to hospitalize and treat those who are severely ill.
Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.
The top dozen Western countries share another distinguishing factor: information flow dominated by Google, Facebook, Twitter, and their accomplices (here, Masters of the Universe or “MOTUs”). The media are downstream of them, depending on information, clicks, and even cash handouts from them. These companies collaborated with the WHO, spread panic (like Google’s SOS Alert), misled government health agencies and the public about coronavirus mortality (e.g., calling COVID-19 a pandemic was wrong). They have been removing helpful medical advice and even opinions simply because they were not endorsed by the WHO or confused government agencies. Notice that this debate ban prevents scientists and clinicians from communicating helpful information to government agencies, and even communicating among themselves. Many governments censor information, such as the Soviet Union. With all the inferiority of such a model, the Soviet government developed and possessed all the anti-epidemic expertise and capacities it wanted. In the US, most expertise and capacity in this and other fields is with its citizens, from whom the government can receive help and advice when needed. Citizens do provide such help and advice, but the MOTU use their physical control of the communications channels to block and remove information helpful to fight the epidemic. For example, Google blocked access to the scientific paper An Effective Treatment for Coronavirus (COVID-19) by James Todaro and Gregory Rigano, which made a case for CQ and HCQ on March 13–15.
Effects of COVID-19 Misinformation in the US
In the US, most COVID-19 deaths happened in the New York cluster. NYC also spread COVID-19 nationally and internationally. These are some main mistakes made by NYC in handling the epidemic:
- It blocked early HCQ treatment of COVID-19 victims.
- It failed to recommend and, where relevant, implement nutritional and environmental mitigation measures to slow the epidemic.
- It allowed COVID-19 patients to mix with other patients and unprotected healthcare personnel in hospitals.
- It sent young COVID-19 patients to nursing homes.
None of these mistakes was caused by material factors or a lack of knowledge in the public domain. None of these are obvious only in hindsight. All were caused by incorrect assumptions about COVID-19 and/or by panic, both of which were spread by the MOTUs (General incompetence and the politics of NYC have just aggravated these mistakes, I hope).
The resistance to recommending vitamin C, which was caused by misinformation spread by the MOTU directly and through their proxy “fact-checkers,” is an example of how much damage they inflicted.
Vitamin C
Vitamin C has always been recommended as safe and helpful for many health conditions, including the prevention and treatment of respiratory infections. An abundance of evidence and studies supports the use of vitamin C to prevent and alleviate respiratory diseases.
Despite this, in February, the WHO published a Q&A on COVID-19 advising against taking vitamin C, even comparing taking vitamin C to smoking:
“The following measures ARE NOT specifically recommended as 2019-nCoV remedies as they are not effective to protect yourself and can be even harmful:
* Taking vitamin C
* Smoking
* Drinking tradition herbal teas
* Wearing multiple masks to maximize protection
* Taking self-medication such as antibiotics
With all the incompetence and power hunger of the WHO, this is bad copywriting rather than bad judgment. An ordinary person can easily recognize that. However, the MOTU “fact-checkers” interpreted it in the worst conceivable way.
Apparently, it started in the article “These are false cures and fake preventative measures against coronavirus. Help fact-checkers spread the word” (February 13) published by the Poynter Institute (the entity that certifies the fact-checkers used by Google, Facebook, and Microsoft):
Aos Fatos reported that the World Health Organization says on its website that taking vitamin C is not recommended as a way to prevent coronavirus. It is actually dangerous, just like smoking and taking antibiotics without a prescription.
The linked Aos Fatos article did not say that. The Poynter Institute omitted the “not specifically recommended” clause. “Fact-checkers” are in the clickbait business, too. This “advice” went beyond Google and Facebook: the New York Times (NYT) article “Coronavirus Myths” (March 17) said:
You might be tempted to bulk order vitamin C or other supposedly immune-boosting supplements, but their effectiveness is a long-standing fallacy. Even in the cases of colds or flus, vitamin C hasn’t shown a consistent benefit.
Unlike Google, the NYT is supposed to have human editors. Where were they? Its other article with the strange title “Supplements for Coronavirus Probably Won’t Help, and May Harm” (March 23) called vitamin C “a purported immune booster.”USA Today was even worse: “We rate the claim that vitamin C can help cure or prevent the novel coronavirus FALSE because it is not supported by our research”—as if it conducted research.
It seems that Google and Facebook forgot that these fact-checkers were intended as proxies to justify their politically motivated editorializing by pretending it was third-party information. They started using them as authoritative sources. By May 20, it was easier to find “stabilized oxygen” than vitamin C in Google searches including the word COVID-19.
The MOTU financially benefited from their misdeeds. More people were forced to use Facebook, Twitter, Google Docs, YouTube, and Microsoft Skype instead of meeting face-to-face.
Facebook and Twitter Examples
The MOTU have been collaborating and colluding with the WHO to misinform the public and government in the US and other countries since early February. The NYT article “W.H.O. Fights a Pandemic Besides Coronavirus: an ‘Infodemic’” (Feb 6) wrote
Google launched what it calls an “SOS Alert,” which directs people who search for “coronavirus” to news and other information from the W.H.O., including to the organization’s Twitter account . . .
The health agency has worked especially closely with Facebook. The company has used human fact-checkers to flag misinformation, which can come to their attention through computer programs that identify suspicious keywords and trends. Such posts can then be moved down in news feeds, or, in rare cases, removed altogether.
These are some results of this close work. “Coronavirus: World leaders’ posts deleted over fake news” (BBC, 2020-03-31),
Facebook and Twitter have deleted posts from world leaders for spreading misinformation about the coronavirus. Facebook deleted a video from Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro that claimed hydroxychloroquine was totally effective in treating the virus.
Brazil is the sixth-largest country of the world by population. By that time, the use of CQ or HCQ for COVID-19 had been endorsed to some degree by the governments of China, India, and the US. Did Facebook and Twitter executives think they knew better?
Facebook: Combatting COVID-19 Misinformation
We regularly update the claims that we remove based on guidance from the WHO and other health authorities.
Once a post is rated false by a fact-checker, we reduce its distribution so fewer people see it, and we show strong warning labels and notifications to people who still come across it, try to share it or already have.
Facebook: An Update on Our Work
Informing People Who Interacted With Harmful COVID-19 Claims
We’re going to start showing messages in News Feed to people who have liked, reacted or commented on harmful misinformation about COVID-19 that we have since removed. These messages will connect people to COVID-19 myths debunked by the WHO …
Twitter: An update on our continuity strategy during COVID-19
Broadening our definition of harm to address content that goes directly against guidance from authoritative sources of global and local public health information. . . . [W]e will require people to remove tweets that include:
* Denial of global or local health authority recommendations to decrease someone’s likelihood of exposure to COVID-19 . . .
* Description of alleged cures for COVID-19, which are not immediately harmful but are known to be ineffective . . .
* Denial of established scientific facts . . .
* [The list is going on and on]
It is incredible: denial of recommendations … global health authority … alleged cures … denial of established scientific facts. “Require people to remove tweets” means temporary disabling their accounts until they remove the tweets that Twitter dislikes.
The global conversation about COVID-19 and ongoing product improvements are driving up total monetizable DAU (mDAU), with quarter-to-date average total mDAU reaching approximately 164 million, up 23% from 134 million in Q1 2019 . . .
… manufacturing delays in China have compromised the supply chain, resulting in delays in deliveries to our data centers.
Have they de-platformed critics of the Chinese government to avoid “manufacturing delays” or something else?
Most people would think that if Google, Facebook, or Twitter deleted information related to treatment or prevention of the pandemic, they were 100% sure it was false and harmful. Few would believe that they did that on a whim or based on the opinion of entities like Snopes. And they would be branded “conspiracy theorists.”
Remarks
Other Possible Factors
Anti-tuberculosis vaccines and their administration schedules vary by country, and some countries might have COVID-19 protective effects from them.
Another hypothesis is put forward in the following papers:
“Have the malaria eradication measures been behind the COVID-19 pandemic?” Elnady Hassan M., Sohag Medical Journal, opinion article
“Parasites and their protection against COVID-19—Ecology or Immunology?” Ssebambulidde et al., preprint:
One plausible hypothesis for the comparatively low COVID-19 cases/deaths in parasite-endemic areas is immunomodulation induced by parasites.
I consider these hypotheses too exotic to discuss here and just mention them. Many confounding factors remain when comparison among countries is done.
Miscellaneous
- Another commonality among the highest-mortality countries is climate alarmism taking over the scientific community.
- The “fact-checkers” seem to be the original sources of some of the worst hoaxes on the Internet.
- Yes, the MOTUs used artificial intelligence to misinform the public and governments about COVID-19.
- Besides the direct effects of bans, removals, and the deplatforming of information and speakers who knew more about COVID-19 than the WHO, these actions had chilling effects on discussions related to COVID-19.
- Coughing into one’s elbow is outright harmful advice because it makes the sleeve a virus-spreader.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Great write up. Thanks.
Got to laugh when they put vitamin C and herbal teas next to smoking. What were they thinking? Were they thinking?
“The “fact-checkers” seem to be the original sources of some of the worst hoaxes on the Internet.”
We may as well get 4chan to do the fact checking. At least we could all get a laugh out of it.
So I’m gonna bet that none if these “fact checkers” have a medical degree. So if they were deleting posts from doctors calling them false, then would that not constitute giving medical advice without a license? That’s a pretty damn serious crime here.
I back your bet and raise the probability that the “fact checkers” are card-carrying Marxists and in the paid employ of Red China. They are not “honesty brokers”; they are propaganda merchants.
Fact checkers my a$$. Isn’t that what they have at Wikipedia policing the climate “facts”?
The Left lies. They exist on lies. Lying is their thing. It’s the New Speak Syndrome where the truth is hidden and truth-tellers are silenced so the Big Lie can prevail.
Google, Facebook, and Twitter are subversive organizations. Their shared goal is to destroy freedom, cripple the USA, and install “global governance” — their word for international authoritarian control of economies, information, speech, and thought.
“Strikingly, the 10 countries with the highest COVID-19 mortality rates are large Western countries, including the US, UK, France, Spain, and Italy. ”
I wonder if it was a planned attack on the west…
At the very least, China was negligent and deceitful. Perhaps it was a kind of cold war attack. I also wonder about Chinese allies or actors within the Western countries.
“At the very least, China was negligent”
No, this was not negligence, this was deliberate.
I don’t know if they released it to the world in an effort to level the playing field after the infection developed in China, or if they deliberately planned to release a milder version in China and a more lethal version to the Western World, but the bottom line is they deliberately released it to the world.
‘China was negligent’….and ‘deceitful’…..well, so was Dr Fauci, President Trumps key advisor, who appears not to have told his President that he personally authorised funding to the Wuhan lab – for corona virus ‘gain of function’ research, previously banned under Obama. This funding was withdrawn in September 2019 on the advice of US scientists and diplomats in Beijing, who reported poor biosecurity at Wuhan. Ever heard of the disgruntled employee syndrome? Think US anthrax case. But then, why would anyone deliberately infect their own people? More likely to have been an employee who couldn’t care less about protocols – went for lunch at the seafood markets after handling the up-rated bat virus that the Fauci-funded batwoman has engineered. Several science papers now exist showing unusual ‘insertions’ in the bat virus genome – with some senior scientists – eg Luc Montagnier who discovered HIV, maintaining that the inserts could come from HIV genome. China Inc is not the source of all this – it is a global network of nut-jobs, which many of us in the science world have been warning about and Obama listened. Time to talk straight to your President.
It’s my understanding that the suggestion of coughing (or sneezing) into one’s elbow arose as a better alternative to coughing into one’s hand IF you don’t have a tissue.
Here is another study that seems to have been “neglected” by the powers that be, published May 13 2020:
“A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7219423/
The researchers studied the 455 people an asymptomatic carrier came in contact with, and found ZERO infections. This indicates that asymptomatic carriers of CV-19 are a threat to no one. That should put an end to this “you might infect someone even if you don’t know you’re infected!” nonsense.
Good.
“This indicates that asymptomatic carriers of CV-19 are a threat to no one.”
Yes, Dr. Seigel said as much tonight.
“This indicates that asymptomatic carriers of CV-19 are a threat to no one.”
That also means grandparents can now visit with their grandchildren without fear the children will infect them asymptomatically. Just make sure the children are not coughing or sneezing with a symtomatic case of Wuhan virus. And that is much easier to discern.
Another report this morning:
“Asymptomatic spread of coronavirus is ‘very rare,’ WHO says”
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asymptomatic-coronavirus-patients-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html
“From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual,” Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said at a news briefing from the United Nations agency’s Geneva headquarters. “It’s very rare.”
Of course, “very rare” isn’t “never” – but they acknowledge the real risk is elsewhere.
Three observations.
1. Asymptotic spread was proven in Feb by the UK guy from the Singapore conference. Data provided previously: 9:1. How common, dunno. Trust in WHO pronouncements now, zero.
2. Asymptotic surge is NOT evident in the social distancing failure of George Floyd riots—yet. Lets give it another week, since incubation is 3-5 days.
3. The possible therapeutic stuff is off the generic truth scale.
Inferable Mortality
The news here is not good. We have mostly very poor data; both Hubei incidence and mortality were now provably severely under reported. But we do have one piece of usable comparable information. 1300 mortalities and 5000 recoveries amongst those who tested positive from the false negative test kits used until yesterday (the majority of cases have not yet resolved one way of the other). In the end, when the disease has run its course, there are only two outcomes: recovery or death. On the test kit basis, the mortality could be as high as 26%. That is horrible but not impossible since MERS was almost 36%.
My own ‘hunch’ is that Wuhan in the end will come in about 10% mortality; the mechanism is lower respiratory tract viral pneumonia just like 2003 SARS and the 1918 ‘Spanish flu’. There is no reason to think the mortality outcome would differ greatly from a very similar clinical mechanism.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/02/14/wuhan-coronavirus-wuwt-update/
Your hunch is a very high outlier. More likely, the overall case fatality rate will be many times lower, possibly much lower than 1% even.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0320_article
Not my hunch. Rud’s.
Sorry, I expected quotation marks or attribution.
So, Rud’s hunch on 14 Feb appears to be incorrect.
You’re right. To make it clear, I should have noted it was by Rud or put it in quotation marks, rather than rely on my prior reply to clarify authorship.
My first reply, pointing out Rud’s guess at 10% IFR, didn’t take, so no wonder my comment was confusing. I guess it’s permanently lost in cyberspace.
Heh, that hunch didn’t age well.
It’s unclear if attendees at the Singapore conference were infected by a single asympotmatic case. You might be right, but at this time we can’t know for sure, and will probably never know.
Nor if the UK guy were indeed the sole source for subsequent infections. Tracing has its limits, when a virus is already on the loose in a population.
Some people might say they had no symptoms to avoid embarrassment or other negative repercussions.
Anyway, protests and riots have been going on for 13 days now. So far so good about a lack of surges.
Here we are 6 months into a ” pandemic” and we have no approved treatment plan from our health agencies.
Only “anecdotal” thoughts with censorship being applied. One would not expect this in our “modern” society.
I must admit the best source of information has been WUWT. Thank you Anthony.
Turkey is following the treatment protocol of hcq + azithromycin + zinc on all positive tested people regardless of symptom state. Their death rate per reported case is 1/2 that of the US and 1/5 that of UK.
The stats are overwhelming.
The death rates in many states and provinces is 1/2 that of the US, without HCQ , and with antibiotics for secondary infections. Get over it, HCQ is a good treatment for malaria, not CoVid…..
If one can believe their numbers, it does appear that Turkey is relatively far out of the tail past the peak in cases and deaths. But also keep in mind that Turkey also has a relatively young demographic. It would be interesting to compare stats for specific age groups.
“The non-Western country with the highest mortality rate is Ecuador,”
This is the Ecuador that lies between Laos and Thailand, isn’t it?
Not the one in South America, in what is often called “The Western Hemisphere”.
+1000
The concept of western and non western is now irrelevant
East? West? try Southern Hemisphere 😉
Interesting read:
Salicylates and Pandemic Influenza Mortality, 1918–1919 Pharmacology, Pathology, and Historic Evidence
By Karen M. Starko
http://academic.oup.com/cid/article-abstract/49/9/1405/301441
“Lockdowns in Europe saved millions of lives” – it seems the BBC prefers simulated results to real live data.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52968523
“That meant lockdown saved around 3.1 million lives, including 470,000 in the UK”
From the table above we have real data: Sweeden, no lockdown, 450 deaths/M; UK, lockdown, 580 deaths/M. Of course this simulation comes from our old friends at Imperial, who gave us the lockdown in the first place.
“Many non-Western countries also have low hygienic standards. Many suffer from bad nutrition, cold weather, lack of UVB sunlight, and other immunity-compromising factors” What utter rubbish. In fact many of the poorer countries are closer to the equator, and get more sunlight. And you cant for one second suggest the far east is malnourished. Africa has issues, but that is about it.
What you are forgetting is we are obese in the west, and thats a big factor in dying from this virus.
And secondly we have healthcare that keeps weak, fat, ill people around for longer. They are natural targets for this virus. A country where life is by nature harder will have less weak people.
“And secondly we have healthcare that keeps weak, fat, ill people around for longer.”
In which countries?
A health system for the healthy, that is the financiers dream!
Other lives not worthy to live, sorry, too expensive.
Now I wonder where we saw that before?
Here in France we have had for a long time our own Stasi thought police, and our love of “Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité” is but a joke.
One of our most distinguished microbiologists, Prof Didier Raoult, has been vilified as a charlatan by the media for his stance on HCQ , presumably because he doesn’t conform to the “group think” of these blinkered pestilent media types.
Here’s one example of why he’s obviously not the right sort of scientist:
Taken from an interview in the Express newspaper (French not UK ,translated by google)
Professor Raoult is once again being talked about for his very clear positions. This time, the infectious disease specialist questioned the effects of climate change in an interview with L’Express. He justifies his opinion by declaring that the subject ceased to be science and finally became a cult.
“You can accuse me of climate skepticism like all skepticisms, and I agree, because if not, I would stop being a scientist, and I’d become a priest”, explains Didier Raoult. “If you want to challenge certain points, you are a heretic, and if they could burn you, they would do it.”
The infectiologist continued his argument by indicating that the causation of global warming is not known. He admits, however, that there are “climatic variations that we can observe”, but that they have “nothing to do with the drama we have been told”.
………off to the guillotine with you sir
Remember Lavoisier, leading Paris scientist, was the first sent to the guillotine for “wasting state property”. He actually demonstrated diamond burned as carbon.
Still, today’s Robespierre’s, Marat’s, Danton’s should remember their fates.
I like the Raoult argumentation, very reasonable in all points, he knows about what he is talking.
The Asterix of the medical scientists 😀
NYC, formerly New York City, now New York Cluster, is the result of Felix Rohatyn’s Big MAC (the Municipal Assistance Corporation) which threw the Constitution aside to turn over the control of the city’s finances from its elected officials to the private banks, to ensure all debt payments, at the expense of wages, services, or maintenance of the city’s industries. Bloomberg pushed a Global Big MAC.
So we see the direct effect of Felix Rohatyn’s finance.
There is a humorous side: Rohatyn, the Godfather of Mergers and Acquisitions and hedge fund speculation generally, complains that the U.S. image has been tarnished by the fact that “Today, we do not project an image of serious investors, but an image of gamblers enticed by profits. That’s very bad.”
Time to quarantine Wall Street!
Wall street went into quarantine from March to May – they close the floor of the stock exchange to go full electronic trading after some on the floor tested positive – where have you been?
Too much fuss about a problem we see too often: just a handful of sources dominating the information chain. There used to be only 3 TV news networks and a couple of newspapers that controlled virtually every bit of news consumed by Americans. Cable upended that when it introduced new competitors (CNN) that began to reveal the inadequacy and bias of information coming from the networks. Then the internet smashed the TV oligopoly by flooding the world with information we never even imagined. TV reacted by segregating into competing camps that would filter the internet flood on behalf of their viewers’ preferences. It was just a matter of time before the internet “MOTUs” would reorganize to manage the information feed ahead of the news filters. So now we are back where we were in the 1950s and 1960s, except wiser having lived the experience of unlimited information access. As long as we keep the State out of the business of information control (China!), relax: information will strike back and circumvent the MOTUs’ dominance yet again.
I would love to see adds on the tube with a script presenting the case that “you may entitled to compensation” from the MOTUs and their “fact checking” minions if you lost loved ones through the removal or shadow banning of scientific studies by the MOTUs.
Just don’t send fire trucks to a health emergency during a pandemic like the U.S. does.
Take your vitamins D3, K2, and C with a bioavailable Mg. Then take CoQ10, EGCG, and Quercetin. Look them up for yourself.
“By that time, the use of CQ or HCQ for COVID-19 had been endorsed to some degree by the governments of China, India, and the US.”
And Turkey, IIRC.
Sage words from Korean-American virologist and director of the IVI, Jerome Kim:
For Tom Abbott, Samuel Cogar and John Endicott
As the thread ended about my sitting out this election because of “covid” mishandling, I have to respond here. Thank you all three for being gentlemen in your responses. I , yet firm in your beliefs. would hope this would give “Adrian” a lesson in civility that he might be kinder and more thoughtful in his posts so the responses might be intelligent and civil, like yours to me.
So, thank you. I have read your words (and ruminated over them) and though not yet convinced to come back to the President, there may still be time. Unfortunately, in Vermont my vote has not really mattered in the past 25 years here as this state has become extremely one-sided; it may matter, yet.
And, thank you moderator for all the work you do, too.
Regards
AK in VT
Thank you AK. I am out in commiefornia and might as well just not vote (as many of my friends have chosen.) However, I make it a point to read through and vote for the best available outcome for each office, proposition, bond, etc. A friend describes it as griping rights. I voted for the best but was outvoted, therefore I may legitimately complain when the person/thing that won fails. Those that don’t vote, can’t complain.
At present, a pet peeve is looking at bond issues and realizing that at all levels, {city, county, state}, the annual debt service on existing bonds would cover the new bond principal. In other words, we could get everything now without future debt if we would stop going into debt first. Do the Dave Ramsey thing, cut up the credit cards, pay off the debt, and live within our means. Create capital improvement funds and buy things when we have the cash.
As a fellow blue stater, I feel your pain re: having your vote not count