Five years ago, saying anything that contradicted the Left’s COVID narrative was a one-way ticket to social media ostracization. The so-called ‘experts’ who told us to stay home, wear masks, and get vaccinated without question called us ‘conspiracy theorists’ and ‘grandma killers.’
No one did more to try and ruthlessly enforce COVID narratives than Dr. Lena Wen, formerly of Planned Parenthood. She demanded vaccine mandates and passports, saying those who didn’t go along with the jab should become prisoners in their own homes (we suppose we should be grateful she didn’t recommend a camp).
Now that the dust has settled and the Left can no longer intimidate us with fears of the latest variant, they can admit some of the things they called ‘conspiracy theories’ in 2020 are true.
The entire post reads:
‘People were concerned about the impact of the vaccines on their menstrual periods. Well as it turns out, there have been studies that have shown that there may be some changes to the menstrual period in the short term.’
‘It’s also true that … you do get some degree of pretty good immunity after having infection.’
As philosopher and statesman Edmund Burke famously said in 1795: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
All those who did nothing are also responsible for the global human rights violations of the covid era. And of course the covid enthusiasts who acted as snitches, and joyfully targeted friends and neighbors for punishment deserve our ire. Beyond that you have those directly responsible, the media which utterly failed in their duty as the 4th estate resorting instead to publishing Big Pharma and government issues talking points as “news”; the medical community, with few exceptions; the academics; the teachers; I could go on.
The vaccine (and of course mandates — which people lost jobs over) have disappeared from public consciousness. I mean does anyone actually get that thing anymore?
We are still reminded of masks, as any good leftist protesting about anything — from Teslas and DOGE to “freeing Palestine” to protesting in favor of kids taking mutilating, life-altering hormones to “become” the opposite sex — dons one, still. It is the uniform of “good lefties” or what I would call the “unhinged.” Which it always was really.
There has been no denunciation of those that drove lockdowns and distancing and toddler masking. These public health bureaucrats should be run out of their jobs and never be allowed to set any policy (or “make recommendations”) again. Randi Weingarten should not have any job that has any bearing on children’s lives.
Sure Fauci has retired. But people like Barbara Ferrer (LA) and Sara Cody (Santa Clara county) still hold their positions after destroying small businesses and locking kids out of school for a year and a half and putting disrupted schooling in place for another year after that. And, of course, they force masked 2 year olds as well as speech delayed toddlers and hearing impaired adolescents. This was state sanctioned child abuse from the outset. So forgive me, but the modest acknowledgement that maybe we went too far, brings cold comfort.
I do not feel redeemed. I just feel angry, still, when I think about it. I mostly try not to.
So many kids’ lives were altered and harmed forever. So many milestones they can never get back. And if these concerns were raised at the time (remember drive through graduations?) parents were mocked for saying those things mattered. They were Karens and racists and murderers and selfish for thinking any of that mattered and every stupid vilifying name the idiotic covid hysterics could think of was trained on us.
I believe that COVID-19 has been a kind of hydrostatic stress test for each place and each person around the world. Each system’s weakness has been revealed. Countries overburdened with regulations have been punished for their over regulation. Countries that have a penchant for authoritarian and/or incompetent leaders have had those leaders exposed. And countries that have factious, distrustful cultures have paid the price for their factious, distrustful cultures.
This stress test has occurred within our individual lives, as well. Couples that had been burying their problems for years quickly had them exposed. Weak and opportunistic friendships got washed out. Fragile careers were broken. Miserable lifestyles replaced.
But the stress test of hardship doesn’t just expose weakness, it also reinforces strength. Good relationships become better. Important decisions get made. Priorities get straightened out.
NEW: Dr. Deborah Birx admits the COVID shots were pushed on the wrong people, saying the rollout on young people ignored the science.
Now, she tells us.
“The messenger RNA vaccine should have been rolled out for the people that were at risk for severe disease because that’s what the vaccine was developed for,” Birx said.
She also confessed the COVID shot was never “designed” to prevent infection:
“That is not what the COVID vaccine was designed to do. It wasn’t designed against infection.”
People lost their jobs under the lie that no one was safe until everyone was vaccinated.
Now, four years later, they admit young people never really needed it–and it wasn’t even designed to prevent infection.
The incredible — meaning, completely predictable — thing here is that she seems to be blaming other people for what she herself did.
For example, she says that when we say “we believe in The Science (TM)” we must actually follow the science and not just say that as a public relations tagline.
But she’s the one who pumped out a ton of lies while claiming “we believe in The Science (TM).” She is scolding us — “we” erred, she says — when she was the architect of the scheme of constant, remorseless lies and propaganda about the non-vaccines.
I didn’t lie about the non-vaccines. Why am I part of the “we” that must do better, and must tell the truth about what the science actually is instead of corrupting it into yet another Democrat Party moral blackmail propaganda point?
Note that she has already previously admitted that when Trump would give her an order to change the guidelines for “re-opening” and ending lockdowns, she would deliberately write the guidelines in such a way as to require further lockdowns, while lying to Trump to claim that she had obeyed his orders. She also admitted that she would call state and local authorities on the phone to tell them that no matter what the guidelines said, they should ignore them and continue imposing lockdowns.
FDA’s war on public health is about to end. This includes its aggressive suppression of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals and anything…
All we needed was the HCQ and Ivermectin and the Covid Jab would have never been necessary. Oh, and Covid wouldn’t have been a problem either, or masks, or lockdowns.
It’s odd that a woman wrote this instead of protecting her sex, but the reality discussed here is remarkably accurate.
It kind of makes sense when you read it, but I never put the pattern together until this. Thinking with emotion rather than fact. Short term knee jerk reaction without considering the long term ramifications.
There’s an intriguing argument being made about the COVID-19 pandemic response, and it’s coming from a rather unexpected source—a woman. She suggests, in about one minute, that the entire reaction to the virus was driven by a distinctly female worldview. Honestly, this is the spiciest and best take we’ve ever seen.
Instead of a measured, data-driven approach, we saw a wave of panic wash over the entire globe, pushing us into lockdowns, school closures, and economic chaos—all based on worst-case scenarios and the inability to see beyond the immediate threat. Sadly, this is the very essence of the female reaction: focusing on the here and now without pausing to consider the bigger ramifications. It’s like the entire world was thrown into the arms of a frantic, overly protective helicopter mother who was desperate to shield her children from danger and ended up causing more harm than good.
But, instead of assessing the situation with calm and reason, the response was sheer hysteria. We shut down entire economies, isolated people from their loved ones, and wreaked havoc on children’s social, mental, and physical development—all for what? A fear-driven, knee-jerk reaction that had “hysterical woman” written all over it.
You could argue that the “woman’s worldview” is rooted in a Karen mentality that suffocates and bullies people into submission. It’s that anxious helicopters need to control everyone and everything, no matter the cost or consequences. That’s exactly what we saw unfold with COVID. And the saddest part? The men who should have known better, who should have been stronger stewards of leadership, were steamrolled by this hyper-emotional, controlling mindset, allowing the entire world to spiral into chaos and despair.
Most except the real sheep now know what a farce the lockdown, masks, and the jab were. We have Sweden which didn’t lock down and got over it quickly to compare to. The media won’t tie it to the election, but the evidence remains.
Well, some are waking up, like this:
On March 27th 1913, the population of Columbus, Ohio, started running. Afterwards, nobody was exactly sure why or when. James Thurber, the comic novelist, was a schoolboy in the town and recalled the incident in a famous article some years later. He said that perhaps it was simply someone suddenly remembering an appointment to meet his wife, and then a paperboy in high spirits joined in, and then perhaps a portly man of affairs broke into a trot, and before you knew it, the entire high street, from the union depot to the courthouse, was running. After the run had begun, people began to look for a justification, and the hubbub, the noise, eventually formed into one word: the dam had burst. Nobody stopped to point out that there was zero evidence of it having burst and that, anyway, even if it had, it could not have possibly reached Columbus, Ohio. People ran on for several more miles and then, eventually, sheepishly returned to the town. Here is the point: Thurber said that years passed before anyone dared mention it. Everyone carried on with their business as usual — and woe betide you if you made some jokey remark about the day the dam did not break.
It seems to me that we are in a very similar place with the lockdowns. Then, too, we saw herd instinct at its worst: people joining in one after another without stopping to think. It is an interesting counterfactual to ask what would have happened if the first sign of the pandemic had not been in autocratic China but in a country where lockdowns, the confinement of the entire population, would have been unthinkable — let us say if it had started in the Netherlands or Canada or somewhere. It started in China; then there was the attempt by the Italian Government to stop people moving from north to south; and then, suddenly, lockdowns, which had never been foreseen in any previous planning document, were considered a standard tool of public policy overnight. We were panicked into a response that no one had foreseen prior to those days — by shrieking broadcasters such as Piers Morgan, night after night, saying, “Why aren’t we copying these other countries?”, and all the signs up saying, “Covidiots go home” — and, rather like the people of Columbus, Ohio, we did not stop to think, and we still do not want to go back and ask whether it was justified or proportionate.
I like the part about Covidiots, those were the sheep who lined up like it was 1930 in Germany to do what they were told. Maybe we are finally waking up
This week AstraZeneca recalled its COVID-19 vaccine after admitting that it caused a ‘rare but serious’ clotting.
Then we find that former CNN host Chris Cuomo has been taking Ivermectin, after mocking people for taking ‘dewoming medication,’ leading one to wonder how many dead Americans were dissuaded from taking it during the pandemic.
And in the fullness of time, we’ve learned that vaccine maker Moderna employed a former FBI analyst to secretly police ‘vaccine misinformation,’ while the Biden White House directed virtually every social media platform to censor those questioning vaccinations. Hell, the NY TimessuggestedZeroHedge was spreading misinformation for suggesting, in December of 2020, that vaccine cards would be used to track people and limit their freedom.
And now people like former NY Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) are playing the whole thing off like he wasn’t a complete iron-fisted authoritarian during the pandemic – suggesting that masks were optional.
Or Deborah Birx, who admitted she and Dr. Anthony Fauci pulled all sorts of pandemic-era lockdown protocols out of their asses, and has now remade herself into some sort of vaccine freedom advocate.
🚨Compilation of the insane amount of rewriting & 180s around COVID & COVID vaccines the past week! 👇👇 pic.twitter.com/jM3FdQpuds
I am no longer a professor of medicine at Harvard. The Harvard motto is Veritas, Latin for truth. But, as I discovered, truth can get you fired. This is my story—a story of a Harvard biostatistician and infectious-disease epidemiologist, clinging to the truth as the world lost its way during the Covid pandemic.
On March 10, 2020, before any government prompting, Harvard declared that it would “suspend in-person classes and shift to online learning.” Across the country, universities, schools, and state governments followed Harvard’s lead.
Yet it was clear, from early 2020, that the virus would eventually spread across the globe, and that it would be futile to try to suppress it with lockdowns. It was also clear that lockdowns would inflict enormous collateral damage, not only on education but also on public health, including treatment for cancer, cardiovascular disease, and mental health. We will be dealing with the harm done for decades. Our children, the elderly, the middle class, the working class, and the poor around the world—all will suffer.
Schools closed in many other countries, too, but under heavy international criticism, Sweden kept its schools and daycares open for its 1.8 million children, ages one to 15. Why? While anyone can get infected, we have known since early 2020 that more than a thousandfold difference in Covid mortality risk holds between the young and the old. Children faced minuscule risk from Covid, and interrupting their education would disadvantage them for life, especially those whose families could not afford private schools, pod schools, or tutors, or to homeschool.
What were the results during the spring of 2020? With schools open, Sweden had zero Covid deaths in the one-to-15 age group, while teachers had the same mortality as the average of other professions. Based on those facts, summarized in a July 7, 2020, report by the Swedish Public Health Agency, all U.S. schools should have quickly reopened.
Great, wearing a mask made us even more stupid. The social media Karen’s and Chad’s are struggling for a triple digit IQ as it is. The Covid particle is so small anyway that a mask preventing Covid is as effective as a chain link fence is stopping mosquitos.
It was about controlling the masses anyway
Excerpt:
Findings from the study showed a substantial decline in executive function, which refers to higher-level cognitive skills governing control and coordination. Alongside this, the study’s cohort showed a marked decline in working memory, which is crucial for short-term memory storage and various cognitive processes.
“Significant worsening of executive function and working memory was observed in the first year of the pandemic across the whole cohort, in people with mild cognitive impairment, and in people with a history of COVID-19,” the authors wrote.
The negative impact on cognitive function persisted into the second year, notably concerning executive function across the entire cohort and working memory within specific subgroups.
Cognitive Decline
Key factors for this cognitive decline were identified via regression analyses. Those factors included the fact that, amid lockdowns, people were exercising less and consuming more alcohol across the entire cohort. These factors also contributed to more people experiencing loneliness and depression.
The authors noted that concerns were expressed about the neuropsychological effects of the pandemic social restrictions, with particular respect to the context of potentially increased dementia risk in older adults.
Here are the 10 biggest falsehoods—known for years to be false, not recently learned or proven to be so—promoted by America’s public health leaders, elected and unelected officials, and now-discredited academics:
1. SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has a far higher fatality rate than the flu by several orders of magnitude.
2. Everyone is at significant risk to die from this virus.
3. No one has any immunological protection, because this virus is completely new.
4. Asymptomatic people are major drivers of the spread.
5. Locking down—closing schools and businesses, confining people to their homes, stopping non-COVID medical care, and eliminating travel—will stop or eliminate the virus.
6. Masks will protect everyone and stop the spread.
7. The virus is known to be naturally occurring, and claiming it originated in a lab is a conspiracy theory.
8. Teachers are at especially high risk.
9. COVID vaccines stop the spread of the infection.
What if embedded in all of this is perhaps one more lie?
The greatest lie.
The one lie to rule them all.
This is the one that will come back to haunt us over and over if we do not call it out by name and lay plain its resounding lack of basis in fact.
It’s the lie they have been trying to sell for decades and failing (or at least having only moderate success and thus wreaking only moderate havoc).
It’s the one lie to rule them all. The one lie to rule us all. The truly big lie constituting a forest that has been lost for the trees and perversely therefore winds up being reinforced by the very debate about the little lies. And that lie is this:
Pandemics are dangerous to modern societies.
Because the fact is that they are not.
As was the case with the Spanish flu, perhaps the last truly high excess death global pandemic to bedevil humanity, much of the damage was done by horrible reactions. and the parallels may be more poignant than people realize.
One of the enduring causes of fear during the 1918 flu was the way that it seemed to be killing otherwise young and healthy people (especially soldiers) in a matter of days. They would be a bit, sick then suddenly die of massive organ failure and “wet hemorrhagic lungs.” The progression was incredibly fast, seemingly irreversible, and was stacking people who really ought to have been low risk in mortuaries like cordwood. This made risk, CFR, and IFR look horrifying and fear near universal.
If it could do this to a solider in his prime in a matter of days, every last one of us should be terrified.
But this is simply not a realistic outcome. In a modern society (even pre-antibiotics) it basically doesn’t happen. These are not the pre-sanitation/most people do not get enough calories days of the Black Death.
Diseases that kill at high percentages tend not to spread because killing the host is evolutionarily maladaptive. It’s like trying to conquer the world by burning down your own house and car. Even the really nasty historical killers like smallpox were only infecting ~400k people a year by the late 1800s and excursions above 1 death/year per 1,000 population during outbreaks were very rare not in spite of, but because the fatality rate was so high.
But respiratory diseases are different and tend to spread far more. Fatality rates are low. The claimed Spanish flu CFR was always suspicious in this regard. And there may be a reason:
There is actually quite a lot of convincing evidence that many of the “young, healthy deaths” in Spanish flu were iatrogenic. This is a word that’s going to come up a lot and a topic that’s going to be the big field of debate around covid going forward. It’s probably one of the most important scientific questions in the world right now. So let’s define it:
Loosely put, iatrogenic death is when the doctor kills you. And there is a long and unpleasant history on that one from Benjamin Rush bleeding George Washington to death to killing “witchy” cats to stop a plague carried by the fleas of the very rats they were eating to (and especially) new “wonder drugs” that are poorly understood but that rapidly go into widespread use.
And one of those drugs was aspirin.
Aspirin had just come into widespread availability in 1918 (and Bayer was rushing it to market for the pandemic). It was the new wowie-zowie drug and doctors (and especially militaries) all over the world fell in love with it. They prescribed it widely to those with Spanish flu. In doses ranging from 8 to 31 grams per day. Oopsie.
A typical aspirin today is 325mg and max dosing per day is ~4 grams.
A toxic dose is 200-300mg/kg of weight. That’s about 20g for a 180 pound person.
So 31g is “You’re going to die really, really fast and there is not a damn thing anyone can do to stop it once you take that dose.”
This is why incredible caution should be exercised around large departures from tested and true medical practice and new pharma modalities and products.
Stop me if any of this starts to sound familiar. (study HERE)
The unprecedented overall mortality and the mortality rate among young adults during the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic are incompletely understood. Deaths in the United States peaked with a sudden spike in October 1918. Later, Wade Hampton Frost [2] studied surveys of 8 US cities and found that, for every 1000 persons aged 25–29 years, ∼30% were infected with influenza virus, and 1% died of pneumonia or influenza. This 3% case-fatality rate has been called, “perhaps the most important unsolved mystery of the pandemic” [3, p 1022]
This case fatality rate has never looked even remotely plausible for flu. You simply do not get a respiratory disease like that in a modern (or possibly any) society, especially not in young, healthy people. It’s just not a thing.
But widespread poisoning by well-meaning medical professionals who have no idea how dangerous the products and procedures they are playing with is.
Official recommendations for aspirin were issued on 13 September 1918 by the US Surgeon General [64], who stated aspirin had been used in foreign countries “apparently with much success in the relief of symptoms” (p 13), on 26 September 1918 by the US Navy [29], and on 5 October 1918 by The Journal of the American Medical Association [31]. Recommendations often suggested dose regimens that predispose to toxicity as noted above. At the US Army camp with the highest mortality rate, doctors followed Osler’s treatment recommendations, which included aspirin [48], ordering 100,000 tablets [65]. Aspirin sales more than doubled between 1918 and 1920 [66].Again, anyone starting to pick up a bit of a rhyme in the history here?
The similarities to recent events are more than a little striking. (Bold mine)
Autopsy reports by pathologists of the day describe extremely wet, sometimes hemorrhagic lungs in early deaths. On 23 September 1918 at Camp Devens in Massachusetts, 12,604 soldiers had influenza, and 727 had pneumonia; after examining the lungs of a dead soldier, Colonel Welch concluded, “This must be some new kind of infection or plague” [48, p 190]. What struck E. R. Le Count [49], consulting pathologist to the US Public Health Service, as most unusual was the amount of lung tissue actually “pneumonic” seemed “too little in many cases to explain death by pneumonia.” He saw a thin, watery, bloody liquid in the lung tissue, “like the lungs of the drowned,”
And as ever, bigger hammer theory tends to rise to the fore and the terrible tenet of “it’s not working so do it harder” comes into play.
It has lead to a big change in our lives and possibly affected the outcome of the election, but who knows. I wonder when history is uncovered what the true story really was, if we could ever find out.
Here is a snippet of the story linked to above:
Wuhan and its roughly 11 million residents were abruptly locked down on 23 January after weeks of being told that the virus was controllable, preventable and not contagious. The aim was to limit greater spread of the disease that has since become known as Covid-19, and that has spread around the world and killed almost 2 million people.
In Wuhan, many people are still guarded about what they can and cannot say about what happened a year ago and the lessons they learned.
In April, after 76 days, Wuhan emerged from lockdown. Aided by thousands of local volunteers who delivered and distributed scarce PPE and food supplies and drove ill people to hospitals; by doctors and nurses working until collapse or until the virus overtook them; by workers who built temporary hospitals in a matter of days to relieve inundated facilities, Wuhan made it through.
The memory the Chinese Communist party wants people to keep, though, is of the larger national effort to control the outbreak. The inrush of medical staff and People’s Liberation Army soldiers from provinces across China and the emergency response from the central government after 23 January get key billing.
Wuhan and its roughly 11 million residents were abruptly locked down on 23 January after weeks of being told that the virus was controllable, preventable and not contagious. The aim was to limit greater spread of the disease that has since become known as Covid-19, and that has spread around the world and killed almost 2 million people.
In Wuhan, many people are still guarded about what they can and cannot say about what happened a year ago and the lessons they learned.
The memory the Chinese Communist party wants people to keep, though, is of the larger national effort to control the outbreak. The inrush of medical staff and People’s Liberation Army soldiers from provinces across China and the emergency response from the central government after 23 January get key billing.
A three-month exhibition showcasing China’s coronavirus response, nearing its end in Wuhan, captures all this and more. It paints a China triumphant over the virus, with inconvenient narratives left out.
Delusions of Adequacy 
