The COVID-19 Threat
I am a UK Tutor of Critical English for Academic Purposes (CEAP) who teaches every summer at the University of Nottingham in England. I have 23 years experience developing skills in critical thinking.
I believe this article to be the most comprehensive objective analysis of the facts surrounding the COVID-19 threat that are both being reported and not being reported to the public in the media.
I encourage you to investigate the sources cited in this article, and (politely) refute as and when necessary. I am open to change my view based on evidence. Criticality is to have an open mind. I also encourage you to share and republish (link to this article), and I will answer every comment.
I ask you to read all of this article to the very bottom because, as with any evaluative piece, I build a position by exploring all the information as I move along, and the bigger picture only becomes clear once you have completed Addendum II.
Our individual and global reaction to the events unfolding right now could well be the defining moment that determines humanity’s direction for years to come. More than ever, we need a pandemic of critical thinkers. Thank you. Contact
EN | DE
Article Last Updated: 13th May 2020
Research 1/4: General Risk
Research 2/4: Individual Risk
Research 3/4: Irrational Risk
Research 4/4: Global Risk
This article is addressed to all people. Countries have been experiencing this coronavirus differently.
Nevertheless, with the outbreak and spread of COVID-19 (coronavirus strain SARS-CoV-2), worry and fear is spreading globally. The economy is under threat, as is our health, and it seems with it so is everyone’s way of life.
People have emptied the shelves at supermarkets, are locked-down in their homes, and find themselves immersed in a global panic about the overriding uncertainty as the coronavirus pandemic spreads around the world.
The news is giving us live updates of the infected, reporting on the risks of touching objects and going outside, sharing projections of upcoming increased fatalities, publishing photos of people meeting up in groups and requesting we report people, and there is talk of the military policing streets.
It is often argued that we should leave it to the experts to give us the truth. This is in actuality a nonsensical argument when we consider the simple fact that journalists are not experts in this topic, but share the facts we need to know.
As a UK university tutor of Critical English for Academic Purposes (CEAP) with 23 years experience developing skills in criticality, I know full-well the importance of questioning controversial topics.
Accepting what we are told without questioning the information at all is the opposite of criticality. It is blind faith. It is putting our ability to make informed decisions in the hands of someone else.
Everyone can critically think. Criticality is looking at the information we have been given, seeing if it holds up to scrutiny by cross-examining what we’ve been told with opposing sources, and then seeing what the most likely conclusion is once we’ve considered the reliability and validity of all the information.
So I decided to ask the question: how afraid should we actually be?
Or to put it in more academic terms:
To what extent is the threat of coronavirus strain SARS-CoV-2 being exaggerated
(or not) through media fearmongering?
Motivated reasoning is the long established phenomenon studied in cognitive science and social psychology that shows we tend to make decisions based on our emotions rather than decisions that accurately reflect the evidence.
It is also common knowledge that the media we absorb shape our emotions which in turn shapes our perceptions of social problems; thus influencing our beliefs and behaviour.
At the same time, the use of tabloidisation, sensationalism and negativity bias by the media has been shown to have incredibly detrimental effects on public health and is well-documented in scientific research.
Learn more: here
It also well-documented that negative news stories can cause psychological distress, anxiety and irrationality.
Learn more: here
It is because of these facts that I decided to investigate the coronavirus threat and potential fear-mongering for myself.
Research 1/4: General Risk
A newly released Oxford University modelling of the coronavirus suggests that about 68% of the UK population may have already been infected with the virus by 19th March 2020, with the proportion of the population at risk of severe disease being “around 0.1%.”
The same model puts the proportion of the population at risk of severe disease in Italy at around 1%, with approximately 60% to 64% of the population having already been exposed.
If the Oxford study is correct, that means that 0.1 percent of those infected in the UK and 1 percent of those infected in Italy require hospital treatment.
It also means that most people have the virus in their system already, with an overwhelming majority showing very minor symptoms to none at all.
This also makes any type of proposed vaccination completely unnecessary for most people.
The Oxford team are now working with the universities of Cambridge and Kent to test people for antibodies; in other words, to see if people are already fighting the virus themselves.
It should be noted, as the Guardian newspaper points out, “Models based on assumptions in the absence of data can be over-speculative and ‘open to gross over-interpretation.’”
The article also points to the fact that the British government used a flawed 13-year old model from Imperial College to build its strategy for dealing with the virus in the first place.
As a BBC article explains about the Imperial College model, “what is not clear – because the modellers did not map this – is to what extent the deaths would have happened without coronavirus” due to already underlying poor health.
In other words, the argument is that models make assumptions, and therefore models cannot be trusted.
So I investigated further, and I discovered that there is a plethora of evidence that:
The panic being created is not justified by the actually threat, and in actuality making the situation much much worse.
Medical doctors wrote in a March 26th editorial for The New England Journal of Medicine:
If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.
Prof. Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, who headed the Institute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene at Johannes Gutenburg University in Mainz, Germany, for 22 years and is one of the most internationally respected infectiologists and most cited medical researchers in Germany, explains in a German interview that most infected people do not become seriously ill; though older people with pre-existing conditions, especially the lungs and heart, can be seriously at risk.
In a further video, he explains to the German public that this virus, for the vast majority of people, is not serious.
Go to settings, CC and auto-translate to view subtitles in English.
In an open letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel, which he also recorded in the video with English subtitles below, he asserts:
Implementation of the current draconian measures that so extremely restrict fundamental rights can only be justified if there is reason to fear that a truly, exceptionally dangerous virus is threatening us. Do any scientifically sound data exist to support this contention for COVID-19? I assert that the answer is simply: NO.
Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg is a renowned German internist, pulmonologist, and a former member of German Parliament who was involved in the German Enquete-Kommissionen Ethics and Law of Modern Medicine. He was also Deputy Chairman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and Chairman of the Subcommittee on Health.
In the video below (already subtitled in English) he explains that every year there are about 100 different new types of virus because viruses are changing constantly, the coronavirus has always been part of that mix, you will always find 7% – 15% of the population with coronaviruses every time you do a test because the viruses are so common, and up until COVID-19 this was not considered to be of public concern.
He continues that the maximum mortality rate for seasonal flu is 0.1%, and the data so far suggest COVID-19 is much less dangerous than this, concluding that nothing is actually happening out of the ordinary right now, and sharing his opinion on how this unnecessary panic has come about.
A study entitled “SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data” published on March 19th 2020 by Aix Marseille Université and the Institut Hospitalo-universitaire Méditerranée Infection in Marseille, France, has also found that compared to the already existing circulating coronaviruses that infect millions of people each year, and considering the fact that 2.6 million people die of respiratory infections each year, “The problem of SARS-CoV-2 is probably overestimated.”
Professor Peter C. Gøtzsche, a Danish specialist in internal medicine who has worked for two years at a department of infectious diseases, published in the BMJ on March 8th 2020 that “we are victims of mass panic” and expands on this further in a more recent blog post.
There are numerous experts stating that the global reaction is out of proportion to the coronavirus threat, including Dr. John Ioannidis and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford University, Professor Knut Wittkowski, Professor Didier Raoult, Dr. Vernon Coleman, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, Professor Carsten Scheller and Professor Stefan Hockertz.
Meanwhile, articles, posts, commentaries and videos from experts and journalists who have something different to say on this topic than the mainstream narrative are becoming victims of widespread online censorship.
Harald Wiesendanger, a science journalist in Germany for over 35 years, explains that four print media (Frankfurter Rundschau, taz, Der Spiegel and Die Zeit) completely ignored his article about how reporting the coronavirus has become an extended arm of the government with journalists operating as “state servants” with stage campaigns à la “We Against the Virus.”
He names 3 journalists who have been willing to comment on how journalism is obliged to transport the government’s crisis strategy; namely media scientist Otfried Jarren who is professor at the Institute of Communication Science and Media Research at the University of Zurich and President of the Swiss Federal Media Commission in Switzerland, and media journalists Andrej Reisin and Vera Linß.
Collective Evolution, an independent Canadian news media outlet, report on the current measures being taken against journalism, criticality and free speech in an article about Dr. Ron Paul and in the insightful video below.
On 8th April 2020, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg (mentioned above) had his website removed, but a wave of support through online protest to the website hosting service meant the site was reinstated; meanwhile German media outlets such as the Spiegel are targeting “The dangerous false information of Wolfgang Wodarg.”
Dr. Bodo Schiffmann, an otolaryngologist in Germany, has been very outspoken about the unnecessary panic. His videos are also being removed from YouTube, such as this one here (click here for more on online censorship).
In one video (still available), Dr. Schiffmann points to an article in German from Swiss Propaganda Research (SPR), “an independent nonprofit research group investigating geopolitical propaganda in Swiss and international media.”
The article (in German) presents copious amounts of data demonstrating that:
The virus is not anywhere near as dangerous as the media is presenting, and the overreaction to it is creating more unnecessary deaths than the virus itself.
Click on EN to see the English language version. The article is being continually updated, and everything stated in the article is supported with links to the relevant sources. Highlights include:
- Italian immunology professor Sergio Romagnani of the University of Florence concludes in a study of 3000 people that 50 to 75% of those who tested positive with COVID-19 of all ages remain completely symptom-free.
- A new epidemiological study concludes that the fatality of COVID-19 even in the Chinese city of Wuhan was only 0.04% to 0.12% and is therefore rather lower than that of seasonal flu, whose fatality is around 0.1%.
- Based on data from the cruise ship Diamond Princess, Stanford professor John Ioannidis and a Japanese study show lethality of COVID-19 is 0.025% to 0.625%, and 48% remained symptom free despite the high average age.
- Most media incorrectly report that Italy has up to 800 deaths from the corona virus per day. In reality, the President of Italian Civil Protection emphasises that the deaths are “with the coronavirus and not due to the coronavirus.”
- The Italian National Health Institute (ISS) reports that 80% of fatalities had two or more chronic medical conditions; at most 0.8% of the deceased had no chronic previous illnesses.
- According to the latest European monitoring report, all-cause mortality in all countries and in all age groups has so far been in the normal range or below.
- For the healthy general population at school and working age, according to all previous knowledge of COVID-19, a mild to moderate course can be expected.
- A hospital doctor in the Spanish city of Málaga writes that people in her hospital are currently more likely to die of panic and system collapse than of the virus, and that her hospital is overrun by people with colds and flu.
Meanwhile, German media outlet Welt reports that in France, hospitals are so hopelessly overloaded that medics are selecting who should be treated based on their chance of survival, and actively helping the oldest patients to die.
In the USA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has introduced an online chat bot to help people determine the severity of their symptoms because hospitals are overrun with people wondering whether they have the virus or not.
Evidence the pandemic is not serious goes on and on. But what does all this mean? What is the risk? Who is at risk?
Research 2/4: Individual Risk
At this point I did not feel comfortable coming to any conclusion on the actual threat to people’s health before investigating the official data on how contagious COVID-19 is.
We know both COVID-19 and seasonal acute respiratory disease (which includes influenza A and influenza B) are contagious viruses that can cause severe respiratory illness and death.
Clearly these viruses are a high risk to the lives of anyone with a weaker immune system due to chronic illness or age.
Furthermore, the coronavirus seems to be more contagious than seasonal flu.
According to the CDC, the virus is thought to spread mainly from person-to-person, and primarily by those who are most symptomatic (the sickest). As for catching COVID-19 from objects, the CDC continues:
It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes, but this is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads.
The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment expands on this further:
There are currently no cases which have shown any evidence of humans being infected with the new type of coronavirus by another method, such as via the consumption of contaminated food or via contact with contaminated articles. There are also no known reports for other coronaviruses about infections due to food or contact with dry surfaces. Transmission via surfaces which have recently been contaminated with viruses is, nonetheless, possible through smear infections. However, this is only likely to occur during a short period after contamination, due to the relatively low stability of coronaviruses in the environment.
It should also be noted that the average flu deaths worldwide range between 290,000 to 646,000 worldwide. During the 2017-2018 flu season, The Office of National Statistics reported more than 50,000 deaths in England and Wales alone.
In fact, during the UK 2018 flu outbreak, Public Health England (PHE) declared that “while flu was rendering the largest number of people seriously unwell since the winter of 2010/11, it was still not an epidemic.”
Compare these figures to COVID-19 deaths so far: http://worldometers.info/coronavirus.
Australia’s economy and people have been completely shutdown with 100 deaths, New Zealand with 20 deaths, Egypt with 600 deaths, Iceland with 10 deaths, Nepal with 0 deaths, Sri Lanka with 9 deaths, South Africa with 250 deaths, while all of India is shutdown with 3000 deaths.
The evidence reviewed so far collectively states that while the coronavirus is possibly more contagious than seasonal flu, the chances of dying from COVID-19 are lower than dying from flu, most people remain symptom free, and lethality is limited to those who have other chronic illnesses already.
The evidence also suggests that the number of people dying overall is about the same as normal for this time of year; we are just receiving a day by day report of it.
Finally, it suggests it is extremely unlikely that a person will catch the virus from a surface or food; plus many hospitals around the world can’t cope because they are overrun, in part, with panicked people.
How much of the media is focused on this sobering information?
Research 3/4: Irrational Risk
Don’t get me wrong. My own mother is in the very high risk group – she is almost 70, and she has fibromyalgia, a weakened heart and weakened lungs.
So she is doing the most sensible thing she can. She’s staying at home, having food delivered to the house, and (hopefully) getting out in the back garden every day for some fresh air and daylight. (mum!)
The risk is real. But there is still no need for her to panic. Why?
Because, as the UK government website itself now states:
COVID-19 is no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious diseases (HCID) because more information is available about mortality rates (low overall).
At the same time, the race is still on to find a vaccine, and the assessment of safety in animals before human trials is being bypassed to speed up the process which could be severely more harmful to humans.
In other words, the irrational global panic has arguably become more contagious than the virus itself:
“You get corona in your nose and lungs, not shooting out your arse.” ~ Sammy J
It is well documented in the scientific literature (PDF) that stress impairs memory, cognition and learning, causes gastrointestinal complications, AND impairs immune system and cardiovascular system response, and “particularly in older or unhealthy individuals.”
In other words, a narrative of panic and fear only increases the risk of illness, and a narrative of doom and gloom makes us ill. Again, the scientific evidence for this is overwhelming.
Now. It might be argued that this article makes light of the tens of thousands of people who are dying. Not at all.
IT IS A MASSIVE TRAGEDY!
And even more reason to acknowledge how the chosen narrative presented in the media influences our behaviour. So that we do not exacerbate the situation. Because this global panic we’re witnessing is scientifically completely expected when an overactive flight or fight response is activated by ongoing high level stress caused by a narrative of fear, doom and gloom.
In other words – when people are fed only fear, they panic:
Research 4/4: Global Risk
No research on the potential threat of COVID-19 and media fear-mongering would be complete without touching on the more conspiratorial aspect of this controversial topic.
Much more concern for me than the conspiracy theories themselves is the fact that mainstream media will not touch upon any facts that suggest potential conspiracy. From an academic perspective, this causes a serious problem, as certain facts are instantly dismissed that could be crucial to building a full picture about a particular topic.
In psychology, the decision to reject, explain away, or avoid new information because it challenges our worldview is called cognitive dissonance, and it is a major hindrance to criticality. Critical thinking simply cannot take place if certain information is ignored outright.
For example, as the search continues for the cause of the coronavirus, there are scientists and doctors who point to the fact that Wuhan became the first 5G blanketed city in China just prior to the outbreak as evidence.
Mainstream media ignore this fact. CNET, for example, write that 5G didn’t cause the coronavirus pandemic because “Radio waves don’t create viruses” and COVID-19 is spread person-to-person, “not by radio waves.”
British broadcasters face sanctions from the media regulator if they give airtime to, as the Gaurdian claims, “Baseless suggestions that coronavirus is linked to 5G.”
Censorship and non-investigative reporting are exactly what non-criticality is.
Dr. Thomas Cowan is former vice president of the Physicians Association for Anthroposophical Medicine, and a founding board member of the Weston A. Price Foundation.
In the video above he explains the risks of electromagnetic fields (EMF) and the potential relation between 5G and the coronavirus. YouTube removed the talk here, so I have embedded the video myself.
Facebook is also actively deleting any content suggesting 5G could be dangerous.
In a document to the Washington State Department of Health as far back as 2014, Dr. Martin Pall of Washington State University expressed his concerns that “some 20,000 papers on microwave biological effects show that the current international safety standards do not predict biological hazard.”
In a March 2020 document, he explains that “Five downstream effects produced following EMF exposures have important roles in causing coronavirus infections.”
In December 2015, over 240 scientists and doctors from 41 nations appealed to the U.N. calling for urgent action against increasing our exposure to electromagnetic fields generated by electric and wireless devices.
As of April 19th, 2020, 353 scientists and medical doctors have signed a 2017 appeal calling for the EU to halt the roll out of 5G due to clear evidence that 5G can increase cancer risk, cellular stress, harmful free radicals, genetic damage, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and flu-like symptoms in humans, and is also harmful to plants and other animals.
While we are in lockdown, 5G masts are being rolled out globally, and up to 42,000 5G satellites are being sent up into space; masts are being destroyed by the concerned public, and 5G is also used as a weapon. 5G frequencies have the capacity to cause a severe burning sensation and are used by the U.S. Department of Defense in crowd control guns called Active Denial Systems.
Since studies already show 5G can cause cell mutation, flu-like symptoms and affect the properties and activity of bacteria, the hypothesis therefore is that 5G may have caused a biomedical effect that spawned the virus.
Learn more: here
I also discovered that on October 18th 2019, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hosted Event 201, a global high-level pandemic exercise.
Meanwhile, the Chinese government question whether the U.S. Army may have intentionally released the coronavirus in China during the 7th CISM Military World Games, which took place in Wuhan exactly at the same time as Event 21.
It should also be noted that “live, attenuated” coronaviruses have been patented; according to patent US2006257852, these “can be used in the preparation and manufacture of vaccine formulations, diagnostic reagents, kits, etc.”
And on November 15th 2019, the CDC posted job vacancies for Public Health Advisors to operate their Quarantine Program in 37 cities around the country.
All these events took place before the outbreak in Wuhan at the end of December 2019, and that raises valid questions. Is every one of them just a coincidence?
Interesting from a criticality perspective because the infamous global conspiracy theory is that some people at the top of the wealth pyramid know about global events before they happen.
Relevant to the focus of this piece – to what extent has the threat of COVID-19 been exaggerated through media fear-mongering – because the consolidation of media means a few people have huge influence on public perception.
Ben Bagdikian, Pulitzer-prize winning journalist and former Dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at UC Berkeley described the media as a “cartel” that wield enough influence to change political direction and define social values.
Brian Rose founded London Real “as an antidote to the numbing effects of mainstream media.”
In a serious interview with one of the world’s pre-eminent conspiracy theorists, David Icke, the possible purpose of the coronavirus reaction is discussed. Icke concludes that the 1% wish to cause intentional panic and economic collapse, ultimately to bring about a technology-enforced global police state.
Criticality means being willing to consider all arguments and how they hold up to scrutiny.
This leads nicely to the final undiscussed aspect of this evaluation; namely is the shutting down of the world economy through social distancing, self-quarantine and an enforced lockdown justified considering the actual threat of the virus?
This article has evaluated a variety of evidence which, for the most part, is not being presented by the media as part of the mainstream narrative, in order to assess to what extent the threat of COVID-19 (coronavirus strain SARS-CoV-2) is being exaggerated through media fear-mongering. Or in less academic terms, how afraid should we actually be?
The World Health Organisation back in February 2020 released a report that “Most people infected with COVID-19 virus have mild disease and recover.”
At that time, the main concern was that the coronavirus is more contagious than the flu because COVID-19 is a new strain that people had never had before. This meant that the fatality rates could be overestimated or underestimated.
It was therefore the responsibility of the media to keep people calm by conveying balanced information to the public.
Can we say that the media did this?
It is not the goal of mainstream media to keep people calm. Media want viewers and readers, and to ensure they get them, they use tabloidisation, sensationalism and negativity bias to draw people in.
Mainstream media create headlines and content that evoke a visceral response (emotional, not intellectual) because objectivity does not encourage people to share their content.
Alternative and independent media are no less guilty of this practice; it is just that the mainstream media have more responsibility because they reach the homes of the vast population and shape the narrative that most people believe.
If we summarise all sources and data collated for this article, it can be posited based on the facts:
- The coronavirus seems to be no more dangerous than seasonal flu, if not less so.
- The number of deaths for this time of year is no more than usual.
- It is extremely unlikely that a person will catch the virus from a surface or food.
- About half of those infected remain symptom free; the majority have mild to moderate symptoms at worst.
- The vast majority of mortality is people dying with the virus, not because of the virus.
- The virus is no longer considered a high consequence infectious disease due to low mortality rates.
- Many hospitals are overrun with panicked people suffering from colds and flu.
- A narrative of fear focused on doom and gloom creates irrational panic which exacerbates social problems, physical and mental health problems, increasing the risk of infection.
- COVID-19 is possibly more contagious than the seasonal flu.
- People with a weak immune system due to chronic illness or age are high risk, as with any virus.
- The lockdown measures bringing business around the world to a halt may be much more damaging for people’s health and way of life now and in the long run.
A much more rational and objective take on this virus would be:
- to protect the elderly and vulnerable by asking them to stay self-quarantined at home, and provide free healthy organic food to build up the immune system directly to their homes (see WHO recommendations).
- to keep the general public calm with THE FACT that there is only a TINY PERCENTAGE OF RISK for the vast majority, so that people don’t overwhelm themselves, and hospitals, unnecessarily.
- to avoid unnecessary contact, keep a distance, not hang out in groups and stay away from your sick mum (the elderly or people with chronic diseases) just as would be expected with any contagious virus like flu.
- to keep businesses open and instead spend all the money that is currently being spent on keeping people economically afloat on the vulnerable, and on optimising and expanding hospitals and health care services.
- to fine media outlets that induce fear, and have the media instead provide accurate advice on how to improve the immune system through diet and lifestyle (see WHO recommendations).
We need a pandemic of critical thinkers.
I understand the conclusion of this article is controversial. It goes against the mainstream narrative and will be considered by some as irresponsible, but it is an objective conclusion, not an emotional one, based on the facts.
As unbelievable at it seems, the evidence simply suggests that with regard to the risk from this coronavirus strain nothing out of the ordinary is going on.
The evidence strongly suggests only 1% (to as low as 0.025%) of the population are at risk, and the negative consequences on everyone’s physical and mental health from long-term economic shut down, social distancing, self-quarantine and enforced lockdown heavily outweigh the risk to this vulnerable low percentage.
We who are adults need to be exactly that: adults. Not spread panic or rumours.
In a nutshell, those with a weak immune system and/or chronic illness do need to take sensible precautions by staying self-quarantined away from other people for a while, and boost their immune system with health and nutrition.
Those with a healthy immune system and no underlying health conditions have nothing to be afraid of, as the COVID-19 threat is minuscule; though you may wish to focus on the governments’ sudden change of heart instead.
Lest we forget that when the global economy collapsed in 2008, governments helped the world’s banks and let the global masses suffer – through loss of savings, home loss and years of austerity measures.
In times of global crisis, the political view has always been that it is justified to sacrifice the few for the greater good.
I absolutely support transforming this broken economic system into something new that ensures the safety and welfare of all, including the elderly, weak and frail.
However, while the decision to sacrifice the global economy to protect the few seems very admirable, this suggests that governments have suddenly become altruistic. The problem is, I find this very hard to believe.
We have to ask ourselves what the consequences are going to be of closing the global economy. Small businesses will collapse. Debt and poverty will increase. And what measures will be implemented to ensure our safety?
Limiting travel? Making all money digital? Enforcing vaccinations? Increasing mass surveillance for our safety?
We may also wish to remember that after the 9/11 attacks, there were no hidden underground caves or weapons of massive destruction. We have air pollution, water pollution, soil pollution, and secret mass surveillance. Who are the people advising our presidents and prime ministers, and can we trust our governments to make the right decisions?
I think if we get to the part of the curve … when it goes down to essentially no new cases, no new deaths at a period of time, I think it makes sense that you will have to relax social distancing.
If the USA were to only come out of lockdown once there are no new cases or deaths; that would mean never.
What is certain is that this is the first time in any of our lifetimes that we have seen mass panic on a global scale brought about to a significant degree by the way the media is reporting the facts.
Yes the media is fear-mongering. Fear leads to irrational action, also known as panic. When we are in a state of panic, we look outside of ourselves for someone to save us. We need to be the hero ourselves.
It is therefore essential to develop the skills of criticality and wellness. Change the way we engage in our thinking, and we change the way we feel about the world and see things. That way as we see events unfolding before us, we can act rationally and make the most healthful decisions.
Thus, there is a massive positive to this situation.
Without work, and without so many external distractions, millions of people have the opportunity to reassess what is important. We have time to spend with our partner, children and/or with the people we live with.
We have time to take a welcome break, and the time to be alone. To look inside ourselves. To let go of the external story, and to dream again.
What do we want to do? What do we want to feel? What do we want our future world to look like?
The most beneficial thing anyone can do to begin improving health and wellness is to turn off the TV.
This economic shut down and lockdown is giving the environment some time to recover, but we need to recover too.
In these uncertain times, we need to work on emotional balance and become emotionally centred, so we are emotionally prepared for what’s coming next. You will still hear about the big important global events. Trust me.
Continue reading to see the updates, Addendum II Addendum III are more interesting than any TV show or film on Netflix.
Note: My mission is to increase criticality and wellness. Let’s get the message out there that we need to stop handing over our beliefs and perceptions to media that thrive on psychological distress, anxiety and irrational fear, and start thinking critically for ourselves. We can begin by turning off the TV. This article does not substitute medical professional advice. Please share this post with your followers.
Added 5th April 2020
A February 2020 study of more than 44,000 coronavirus patients from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention found that 80.9% of coronavirus cases are mild, the overall case fatality rate was 2.3%, and patients who reported no pre-existing “comorbid” medical conditions had a case fatality rate of 0.9%.
Although the case fatality rate here is higher (2.3% not 1% or less), this data further suggests that COVID-19 itself does not cause fatality; rather it compromises people who already have a greatly-compromised immune system.
This a wake up call for all of us about the health risks associated with poor diet and lifestyle. We already knew that 71% of all deaths globally and 77% of diseases in Europe are because of our own lifestyle choices.
A chronicle of the first 104 deaths in the UK further demonstrates that most people are dying with severe pre-existing underlying health conditions. This information does not refute, but rather reinforces, this articles conclusion.
Added 15th April 2020
On 6th April 2020, the day of broadcast, a second London Real interview with one of the world’s pre-eminent conspiracy theorists, David Icke, was instantly banned by YouTube. The next day Vimeo removed the video.
London Real explain on their website:
In this interview which was reported heavily by the BBC and others and subsequently BANNED, David joined us to talk about the CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC, the worldwide COVID-19 LOCKDOWN, how governments have manipulated their citizens and the wider agenda behind social control and a Surveillance Society.
We go deeper into the global crisis, the looming economic recession and the impact of 5G technology and the violation of our rights and freedom of speech.
While we don’t always agree with everything David says, London Real will defend his right to be able to say it.
Two days later and local television station London Live is being investigated by the UK’s media regulator Ofcom for broadcasting Icke’s prior interview on the coronavirus (discussed previously in this article).
Criticality means being willing to consider all arguments and how they hold up to scrutiny, so it is absolutely necessary to check his sources.
In the first video, Dr. Andrew Kaufman provides evidence that the COVID-19 tests are actually testing for exosomes, which are released from cells to protect them when the body has toxins, stress, cancer, radiation, infection, injury, asthma, and disease.
In other words, anyone who has any of these symptoms (poison, stress, infection) can show up as having COVID-19.
The second video features Dr. Thomas Cowan whose 5G talk found in my article’s Global Risk section was censored. In this video he explains how COVID-19 fails Koch’s postulates, four criteria designed to establish a causative relationship between a microbe and a disease.
The third video shows ER and critical care doctor for New York City, Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell, explaining how we are operating under a narrative that is untrue.
His patients are inexplicably slowly starving of oxygen failure, and this condition is being exacerbated by the use of ventilators. Something reported on in the Geller Report “with 80% of NYC coronavirus ventilator patients dying.”
Video banned by YouTube. Watch here
New York hospitals have instead found success treating patients with high doses of vitamin C taken intravenous and orally, something which is being flagged as fake news by social media when people report on it (see the Collective Evolution video in the General Risk section above), and would mean a vaccination is completely unnecessary.
Doctors are also treating COVID-19 patients with Hydroxychloroquine & Zinc.
Meanwhile, Facebook deleted a video from Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro that claimed hydroxychloroquine treated the virus, and Twitter deleted a homemade treatment tweeted by Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. “Misinformation” according to the BBC.
The video then refers to studies like here and here which show that 5G at 60 GHz is absorbed by oxygen, which could potentially interfere with the uptake of oxygen to hemoglobin. Note that 5G is already used as a military weapon.
Learn more: here
In the next video, retired President Of Microsoft Canada, Frank Clegg, explains that 5G Wireless IS NOT SAFE, and the final video shows a German journalist going to a Berlin hospital that the media say is overrun with COVID-19 patients to find that it is empty.
People are making similar videos of empty hospitals in many countries. Here is one in the USA:
Empty hospital videos banned by YouTube.
On the 7th April 2020, the International Tribunal for Natural Justice (ITNJ) published their 2nd emergency hearing online, in which experts of their fields discuss the degree to which we are being lied to and the necessity to stay objective, observant and to develop our spiritual faculties during this impending unprecedented upheaval.
On the 13th April 2020, the ITNJ launched their 3rd emergency hearing in which experts of their fields discuss horrific updates, including children in Africa being vaccinated right now by Bill Gates’ supposed non-existent COVID-19 vaccination with some children dying days later, and the fact that 17 million cases of human trafficking and sex slavery are being taken to the courts while our focus is on the COVID-19 pandemic.
Video banned by YouTube. Watch here
With regard to the possible initiation of martial law (when the military take control of civilian functions), on 13th March 2020, President Trump initiated an executive order which gives the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) the ability to activate “State Emergency Operations Centers, National Guard costs, law enforcement and other measures necessary to protect public health and safety.”
Why is none of this being reported in the news?
Because the media is scripted. The story is always the same. There is a crisis, the media focus on creating fear and panic, and when the crisis is over, we are presented with further control (for our safety).
At the time of writing this, the media is already talking about increased global surveillance, tracking apps, social media telling us what we should believe, and the criminalisation of anti-vaccine information for our protection.
More than 300 scientists from 26 countries warn in a Joint Statement of “unprecedented surveillance of society” by corona apps violating data protection. Several scientists and universities have already withdrawn from the European contact tracing project PEPP-PT due to a lack of transparency.
Go back to the aforementioned SPR document and read the Political Updates sections to learn more about the police state measures that are being rolled out globally while we are in lockdown:
Quarantine objectors, including lawyers and doctors, are being sent to psychiatric hospitals; Apple and Google are working with governments to track the global population; governments are setting up their own task forces to eliminate all fake news; drones are being deployed to watch the population; countries are implementing compulsory vaccinations and compulsory treatments, including visiting and removing people from their homes; and military and private security services are being deployed in addition to the police to enforce these orders.
German economist Norbert Haering explains in several articles how the “corona crisis” is being used to introduce monitoring instruments that have been planned for some time in the areas of travel, payments, contact tracing and biometrics, in order to create a worldwide “Totalitarian Dystopia.”
Who are these people planning global events and the global narrative? If you continue to explore that, it will take you to the biggest, most disturbing cover up that the mainstream media is involved in again and again and again:
The media deliberately brushed under the carpet the fact that Hillary Clinton’s and her campaign chairman John Podesta’s leaked emails showed internal conversations about sacrificing chickens to Moloch (the God of child sacrifice), mock cannibalistic spirit cooking, and enjoying the extra entertainment of young children.
Hollywood stars like Kevin Spacey, Ralph Fiennes, Alec Baldwin, David Blaine, Jimmy Buffett, Naomi Campbell and Courtney Love; media journalists like Charlie Rose, Mike Wallace and Barbara Walters; world leaders like former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, Tony Blair, industrialist David Koch, Larry Summers, the former Treasury secretary and Harvard president, and Prince Andrew.
Why are our media journalists, world leaders, top Hollywood stars, and Royal Family joining a prolific pedophile on his sex trafficking island? Pedophilia in the British government has also been swept under the carpet.
After finishing Addendum II, my hope is that you have read this article, watched these videos, and are so shaken by the lies and deceit that the media are involved in that you finally break free, and let this web of lies go.
In a COVID-19 article from Collective Evolution, journalist Arjun Walia writes:
I believe events like this coronavirus pandemic, and others like 9/11 for example, are part of humanities natural evolution. I believe they are happening more frequently now in order to ‘wake up’ even more people, because that’s just what they do.
We have to walk away from the web of lies.
Ultimate freedom and happiness comes when we stop listening, and take back control of our minds.
Once the information available to us is completely controlled, we are completely controlled. Once our actions are completely controlled, we are completely controlled. Now is the time to explore what we are not being told, and to start talking with others about what we find.
When we no longer listen to this scripted media narrative and explore with objectivity the difficult but also the incredibly positive facts about reality we are not being told, and when our purpose becomes to make choices that are rational, healthful and solutions-focused, we can can create health and well-being for ourselves and the world around us.
This is to become a superhero. This is to be free, happy and awake.
Added 13th May 2020
In a public speech, Tanzanian President Magufuli explains that he secretly tested motor oil, plants and various animals for COVID-19 and labelled the samples with human names and ages.
There were positive results for the paw paw fruit, the goat, the durian (a smelly fruit), and a bird called Kware.
He explains the absurdity: Should we be putting a paw paw fruit and durian in social isolation?
There must be people who have tested positive who are not suffering from a coronavirus. Or are tests being delivered contaminated in order to produce incorrect results?
What we know for sure is the coronavirus test is completely flawed. It does not identify a particular COVID-19 strand; at best it identifies coronaviruses; at worst it is testing positive for anyone releasing exosomes, which are the bodies natural response when fighting any disease or infection (see Dr. Kaufman’s video in Addendum II above).
Therefore, it is simply a fact that we cannot trust the numbers at all, and the media know this; yet they continue to tell us how many people have caught the virus and censor experts pointing out the pandemic lie.
Get involved. Share this information.
Please share this post. Helping this info reach more people is the most helpful thing you can do to help me get this inspiration out there. These are indeed exciting times!
Subscribe for the latest updates, mind-blowing science and inspiring posts right in your inbox ✨