CDC is misleading the public by reporting the per 100,000 rate instead of the actual percentages

CDC is misleading the public by reporting “per 100,000” rather than actual numbers. The chart above makes it look like the Native American population is being ravaged by Covid-19, but is misleading due to small percent of total population.

Per 100,000 is a rate, not an actual number. It is only good for comparing within a fixed population/ group, not between different sized populations/groups. This applies to different racial/ethnic groups, age groups, states, counties.  The smaller the total population, the larger the “per 100,000” appears.  If a population is 10 and only 1 is affected, that is 10,000 per 100,000.  If the population is 1000 and 1 is affected, that is 100 per 100,000. The technique magnifies results in smaller populations and reduces results in larger populations.

Example: January, 2021 data from USAfacts.org reported deaths per 100,000 by ethnic group. Each group has a different size and percent of total population.  Deaths per 100,000 is reported so that Native Americans appear to be the most affected by far because the population is relatively small.  See table below.

Ethnic GroupGroup PopulationGroup as Percent of US Pop.Covid Deaths per 100,000Number of Covid DeathsCovid Deaths as percent of total deaths
Native American6,371,2002285.118,1643.0
Black40,138,56012.6227.191,15415
Hispanic53,836,64016.9185.799,97516.5
White197,507,20062190.8376,84362
Asian16,565,1205.212320,3753.4

By converting the per 100,000 results reported into actual numbers and percentage of the total deaths, the picture is quite different and similar to the percent of US population for each group. The huge disparity has disappeared. Blacks and Native Americans appear to be slightly more affected, while Hispanics and Asian are slightly less affected than their population.

Epidemiology to take seriously: Natural immunity better than COVID vaccines — JunkScience.com

A new epidemiology study reports that natural immunity confers better protection against COVID than current vaccines. I’ve been publishing JunkScience.com for 25+ years and can’t think of a single epidemiology study I’ve seen that was worth anything. 31 more words

Epidemiology to take seriously: Natural immunity better than COVID vaccines — JunkScience.com
Original scientific paper from research team in Israel is attached. 

Israeli Study Conclusive: Natural Immunity Better Than Vaccinations

Candidly Speaking

This Ends The Debate’ – Israeli Study Shows Natural Immunity 13x More Effective Than Vaccines At Stopping Delta

BY TYLER DURDEN- FRIDAY, AUG 27, 2021 – 07:39 AM

Dr. Anthony Fauci and the rest of President Biden’s COVID advisors have been proven wrong about “the science” of COVID vaccines yet again. After telling Americans that vaccines offer better protection than natural infection, a new study out of Israel suggests the opposite is true: natural infection offers a much better shield against the delta variant than vaccines.

The study was described by Bloomberg as “the largest real-world analysis comparing natural immunity – gained from an earlier infection – to the protection provided by one of the most potent vaccines currently in use.” A few days ago, we noted how remarkable it was thatthe mainstream press was finally giving voice to scientiststo criticize President Biden’s push to start doling…

View original post 509 more words

Media Hype about “Long Covid”

Science Matters

Science Norway reports Poor studies on long Covid are sensationalized by the media  Excerpts in italics with my bolds.

Many recent reports in the media have given the impression that people are experiencing major long-term effects after having even mild Covid-19. This impression does not correspond with the knowledge we have accumulated so far.

We must dedramatise the long-term effects of Covid-19, often referred to as long Covid. The media have a responsibility in this regard. They must become more critical of the research methods used in the studies they refer to.

Most infectious diseases with severe symptoms will to some extent be accompanied by long-term effects. Most infectious diseases with mild symptoms will cause few short-term effects.

More and more studies are showing that this is probably also the case for Covid-19. It is vital that more high-quality studies are carried out to examine this problem.

Data…

View original post 379 more words

CDC dropping RT-PCR test for Covid-19

CDC is ending RT-PCR testing in favor of multiplex rapid antigen test to distinguish Covid from Flu. See CDC notice below. What they are not telling us is that the RT-PCR test has very high false positives, inflating the numbers. The rapid antigen test is more accurate and gives results in minutes, so medical care decisions can be made ASAP. Labs will start transitioning before the Dec 31, 2021 cutoff so numbers will start to drop, just in time for 2022 election year. England has been using the rapid antigen test for over a year.


07/21/2021: Lab Alert: Changes to CDC RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 Testing Audience: Individuals Performing COVID-19 TestingLevel: Laboratory AlertAfter December 31, 2021, CDC will withdraw the request to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, the assay first introduced in February 2020 for detection of SARS-CoV-2 only. CDC is providing this advance notice for clinical laboratories to have adequate time to select and implement one of the many FDA-authorized alternatives. Visit the FDA website for a list of authorized COVID-19 diagnostic methods. For a summary of the performance of FDA-authorized molecular methods with an FDA reference panel, visit this page.In preparation for this change, CDC recommends clinical laboratories and testing sites that have been using the CDC 2019-nCoV RT-PCR assay select and begin their transition to another FDA-authorized COVID-19 test. CDC encourages laboratories to consider adoption of a multiplexed method that can facilitate detection and differentiation of SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. Such assays can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season. Laboratories and testing sites should validate and verify their selected assay within their facility before beginning clinical testing.Opt in to receive updates from the CDC Laboratory Outreach Communication System (LOCS).Online resources:• FAQ: CDC Distribution of COVID-19 Assays• Guidance for SARS-CoV-2 Point-of-Care Testing• Interim Guidance for SARS-CoV-2 Antigen Testing• Interim Guidelines for Collecting, Handling, and Testing Clinical Specimens for COVID-19• Frequently Asked Questions about COVID-19 for Laboratories• Information for Laboratories about COVID-19• CDC COVID-19 Website• Clinical Laboratory COVID-19 Response Weekly Calls• CDC Laboratory Outreach Communication System (LOCS)If you have any questions, please contact us at LOCS@cdc.gov.Thank you,The Laboratory Outreach Communication SystemLaboratory Outreach Communication System (LOCS) | Division of Laboratory Systems (DLS)Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services (CSELS)Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)LOCS@cdc.govwww.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locsPage last reviewed: July 19, 2021Content source: Division of Laboratory Systems (DLS)
https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html

Follow The Science

Candidly Speaking

The charts below are from Our World in Data, a global data tracker that combines the CDC, Johns Hopkins, WHO and the IMF world data to create a daily update of cases and deaths.

Since the U.S. media focuses on new cases, which are riddled with all kinds of misleading inconsistencies, including repeat testing (multiple testing per person), new cases also do not indicate level of sickness, only a positive result, and new cases are most likely from a PCR swab known to be 40-50% inaccurate depending on adjusted cycle thresholds which can produce false positives.

Fatalities are the truest measure real-word impacts of COVID-19.

So while the rest of the media is using new cases as a way to instill continued panic, let’s follow the science on the data that actually counts: how many people are dying in each State, on average per day. Below and current daily…

View original post 171 more words

Why Is The CDC Quietly Abandoning The PCR Test For COVID?

Candidly Speaking

(Courtesy Zerohedge.com)

BY TYLER DURDENMONDAY, JUL 26, 2021 – 06:11 AM

We have detailed(most recently hereandhere) thecontroversy surrounding America’s COVID “casedemic” and the misleading results of the PCR test and its amplification procedurein great detail over the past few months.

As a reminder, “cycle thresholds” (Ct) are the level at which widely used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test can detect a sample of the COVID-19 virus. The higher the number of cycles, the lower the amount of viral load in the sample; the lower the cycles, the more prevalent the virus was in the original sample.

Numerous epidemiological experts have argued thatcycle thresholds are animportant metric by which patients, the public, and policymakers can make more informed decisionsabout how infectious and/or sick an individual with a positive COVID-19 testmight be. However,as JustTheNews reports,health departments across the country arefailing to…

View original post 1,459 more words

They Worried Us Sick

Be sure to visit the original site. It has several good cartoons.

Science Matters

cfarmafoto1275521

John Tierney writes at City Journal The Panic Pandemic.  

The first part of the article is a refresher on how it happened that all those who talked reasonably in the face of the panic narrative, were silenced and banished from public discourse.  Included are many recognizable names:  John Ioannidis, Jay Bhattacharya, Thomas Benfield, Stefan Baral, Martin Kulldorff, Sunetra Gupta,  and the most reviled heretic, Scott Atlas.  The excerpts below in italics (with my bolds and images) express Tierney’s conclusions to take away from this sorry mess.

Fearmongering from journalists, scientists, and politicians did more harm than the virus.

The United States suffered through two lethal waves of contagion in the past year and a half. The first was a viral pandemic that killed about one in 500 Americans—typically, a person over 75 suffering from other serious conditions. The second, and far more catastrophic, was a moral panic that…

View original post 1,245 more words

Covid-19 tests have high false positives

The article below from Epoch Times reveals the problem that inflates Covid-19 case numbers. PCR tests are great diagnostic tests for confirming the source of an illness; PCR is a terrible screening test for non-symtomatic people. You may also read the original article using the link at the end.

World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus gives a press conference at Geneva's WHO headquarters on Feb. 24, 2020. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)

World Health Organization (WHO) Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus gives a press conference at Geneva’s WHO headquarters on Feb. 24, 2020. (Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images)PUBLIC HEALTH INFORMATION

WHO Changes CCP Virus Test Criteria in Attempt to Reduce False Positives

BY MEILING LEE January 23, 2021 Updated: January 24, 2021 

The World Health Organization (WHO) has cautioned experts not to rely solely on the results of a PCR test to detect the CCP virus.

In updated guidance published on Jan. 20, the WHO said that lab experts and health care practitioners should also consider the patient’s history and epidemiological risk factors alongside the PCR test in diagnosing the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus.

The new guidance could result in significantly fewer daily cases.

“Most PCR assays are indicated as an aid for diagnosis, therefore, health care providers must consider any result in combination with timing of sampling, specimen type, assay specifics, clinical observations, patient history, confirmed status of any contacts, and epidemiological information,” the guidance says.

It’s unclear why the health agency waited over a year to release the new directive. The WHO didn’t reply to an inquiry from The Epoch Times.

Scientists and physicians have raised concerns for many months of an over-reliance on and a misuse of the PCR test as a diagnostic tool since it can’t differentiate between a live infectious virus from an inactivated virus fragment that is not infectious.

Additionally, the high cycle threshold values of most PCR tests—at 40 cycles or higher—increases the risk of false positives. A higher threshold value indicates less viral load and that the person is less likely to be infectious, while a person with a lower cycle threshold value has a higher viral load, or is more infectious.

The WHO did not specify what the threshold value cutoff should be for a positive diagnosis, but said to only “determine if [a] manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is recommended by the manufacturer.”

Epoch Times Photo
A medical staff member prepares and processes PCR and antibody tests of people who think they may be infected with the CCP virus, at the laboratory of the Karolinska Hospital in Solna near Stockholm, Sweden, on Dec. 7, 2020. (Jonathan Nackstrand/AFP via Getty Images)

However, it clarified that when the prevalence of the CCP virus is low, “the risk of false positive increases” meaning that “the probability that a person who has a positive result (SARS-CoV-2 detected) is truly infected with SARS-CoV-2 decreases as prevalence decreases, irrespective of the claimed specificity [of the PCR test].”

SARS-CoV-2 is the scientific name for the CCP virus that causes the disease COVID-19.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says its PCR tests have a cycle threshold cutoff of 40 cycles. The federal agency finally included information on cycle threshold value in its Frequently Asked Questions about COVID-19 for laboratories on Nov. 12, 2020.

But many medical experts consider a threshold value cutoff of 40 cycles to only return false positives since samples that go through many amplification cycles will pick up negligible RNA sequences regardless if the virus is inactivate or the viral load is exceedingly low to pose any problem.

Prior to the CCP virus pandemic, for individuals to be considered a case, they must test positive and show clinical signs and symptoms. But to be counted as a CCP virus case, only a positive PCR test is required. And no matter how many times an individual is tested, each positive test is counted as a separate case.

The WHO is now advising that a positive PCR test that does “not correspond with the clinical presentation” should be verified by taking “a new specimen” and retesting it.

This advice may also help lower CCP virus cases in hospitals as it more clearly defines who is considered a hospitalized case.

The UK’s National Health Service (NHS) Director of International Relations Dr. Layla McCay confirmed to talkRADIO that a percentage of hospitalized patients officially counted as positive cases were actually being treated for different illnesses not related to COVID-19. They had only tested positive for the disease at the hospital without displaying any symptoms.https://platform.twitter.com/embed/index.html?creatorScreenName=EpochTimes&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1346363750006317056&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theepochtimes.com%2Fwho-changes-ccp-virus-test-criteria-in-attempt-to-reduce-false-positives_3668064.html&siteScreenName=EpochTimes&theme=light&widgetsVersion=ed20a2b%3A1601588405575&width=550px

Dr Layla McCay, NHS Confederation director, confirms to Julia that the hospital figures for “Covid patients” include patients who are not being treated for Covid but have simply tested positive while being treated for something else.@JuliaHB1 | @LaylaMcCay pic.twitter.com/xSud6LW13M

— talkRADIO (@talkRADIO) January 5, 2021

“It is correct that in hospital, people who tested positive for COVID will be the full range of symptoms,” McCay said. “Some will have it as an aside to some other problem for which they’re in the hospital.”

The day after the WHO released its new guidance, Chief Medical Adviser to President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci, said the United States would rejoin the organization.

“As such, I am honored to announce that the United States will remain a member of the World Health Organization,” Fauci said. “Yesterday, President Biden signed letters retracting the previous administration’s announcement to withdraw from the organization, and those letters have been transmitted to the secretary-general of the United Nations and to you Dr. Tedros, my dear friend.”

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is the director-general of the WHO.

“The United States also intends to fulfill its financial obligations to the organizations,” Fauci added.

In July last year, the Trump administration pulled out of the WHO over its alleged role in helping the Chinese communist regime cover up the severity of the CCP virus.

There have been mixed responses from Congress over Biden’s decision to rejoin the WHO.

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) introduced a bill (pdf) on Jan. 21 to “prohibit the availability of United States contributions to the World Health Organization until Congress receives a full report on China and the COVID-19 pandemic, and for other purposes.”

She said in a statement: “The WHO is China-centric and panders to Beijing at every turn. There is no reason U.S. taxpayers should contribute more than $400 million annually to an organization that covered for China and failed to contain the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Prior to former President Donald Trump withdrawing from the WHO, the United States contributed the most money to the health agency, according to State Department statistics.

Covid-19 Vaccines – truth, lies and conspiracies

What can we believe about Covid-19 vaccines?

What is real and what is agenda driven misinformation, disinformation and confusion?  Here are the basic facts in plain language, followed by a few of the lies and conspiracy theories that you may be concerned or confused about.

Vaccines Available

So far, there are three vaccines approved under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the FDA for use in the US, and one approved for England, EU and other countries.  Many companies in several countries entered the race to develop vaccines when President Trump made the funds available and announced Operation Warp Speed to develop vaccines as quickly and safely as possible.  Several other companies are still doing research or trials.  Merck dropped out when it determined that its vaccine was not as effective as the others that were being developed, but partnered with Johnson and Johnson, which lacked capacity, to manufacture their vaccine.  Other independent efforts include Sputnik 5 from Russia and Convidicea from China.

Pfizer and Moderna (US) used gene sequencing techniques to create a short segment of the Covid-19 single stranded mRNA (messenger RNA) molecule that codes for the Covid-19 surface spike protein. To produce immunity, the vaccine mRNA first uses ribosomes inside the host’s cells to build the Covid-19 spike protein. Ribosomes are molecular machines that build proteins by reading the genetic information of mRNA.  When injected, the mRNA enters the host’s cells and uses ribosomes, to read the genetic code and make copies of Covid-19 spike protein. The new copies of the Covid-19 spike protein then can be used by your immune system to evoke an immune response that produces antibodies and other defenses to Covid-19.  Note that, contrary to rumors and scare stories, the small segment of mRNA never enters the nucleus of the cell so it cannot interact with or change the DNA, which is protected inside the nucleus.

AstraZeneca (UK & EU) and Johnson & Johnson (US) developed their vaccines using a more conventional method. Each used a non-replicating, weakened adenovirus combined, through recombinant gene engineering techniques, with laboratory created Covid-19 genes coded for Covid-19 spike proteins.  The Covid-19 spike proteins are expressed on the adenovirus surface, giving them the ability to evoke an immune response in the human body and produce antibodies to Covid-19.  An adenovirus is a double stranded DNA virus that normally causes the common cold. The corona type viruses like Covid-19 are single stranded RNA viruses.

Research and Approvals

The research itself was expedited because the companies already had the information provided by China, WHO and CDC for the virus RNA genetic sequence and the protein structures, including surface and spike proteins.  Each company used well established genetic sequencing techniques to build copies of genes and/or proteins to make their vaccines.  In addition to gene recombinant technology and gene and protein sequencing techniques, Pfizer and Moderna took advantage of a very recent patented breakthrough in stabilizing the Covid-19 spike protein against early immune system attack in order to design their mRNA molecules.  None of this would have been possible just a few years ago.  

Each of the vaccines went through a series of tests and double-blind clinical trials to determine safety and effectiveness. Even for FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), the complete series of trials (in vitro, animals, humans in three phases) double blind clinical trials were completed on tens of thousands of volunteers and thoroughly documented. All possible negative effects were thoroughly documented on the various populations involved.  The trial participants included a wide range of ages, races and backgrounds.  No shortcuts were taken. The only reason they were approved so quickly is that they got priority by the government agencies, and the documentation was expedited, so that they did not wait months or years to get approval of each trial design and permission to run each phase of the trials.

The process was further expedited by running some of the trials concurrently, not in series, which would have required waiting between trials for approval and permission to run each new phase.  After early trials showed promise, bulk manufacturing was begun so that vaccines would be available immediately if and when they were approved. Manufacturing before final approval was a gamble the Warp Speed team was willing to fund in order to get the vaccines out as quickly and safely as reasonably possible.  At the same time, a distribution system was developed to make the vaccines available throughout the country.

Efficacy

The efficacy of all three US approved vaccines is high, compared to flu shots. Fifty percent is considered a good result. Pfizer’s or Moderna’s COVID vaccine was 80% effective in preventing infections. That number jumped to 90% two weeks after the second dose.  Moderna’s vaccine reported 94.1% effectiveness at preventing COVID-19 in people who received both doses. The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was said to be 95% effective.

J&J/Janssen vaccine was 66.3% effective in clinical trials at preventing COVID-19 illness in people who had no evidence of prior infection 2 weeks after receiving the vaccine.  Analyses of secondary endpoints demonstrated vaccine efficacy against central laboratory confirmed and blind-adjudicated severe/critical COVID-19 occurring at least 14 days and at least 28 days after vaccination of 76.7% (54.6, 89.1) and 85.4% (54.2, 96.9), respectively.

Lies, Conspiracy Theories and Confusion

Claim #1. – Aborted Baby Parts – None of the vaccines contain aborted baby parts as claimed by conspiracy theorists. The truth is that before going on to animal and human tests, the vaccines were tested in vitro on a cell line, originally derived from an aborted fetus in 1966, to determine if the vaccine is safe before testing on animals and then humans.   Some of those spreading this lie produced a video and apparently did some study of the AstraZeneca trial documentation, but misunderstood or intentionally distorted the information.  The MRC5 cell line was mistakenly claimed to be part of the vaccine, and the word “recombinant” was misinterpreted as “human recombinant.” It really refers to combining the vaccine adenovirus genes with genes coded for Covid-19 spike protein.  This may be one source of the next conspiracy theory.

Claim #2. – Vaccines will change your DNA – None of the vaccines change human DNA, but ordinary viruses do. Because viruses lack the ability to reproduce on their own, they hijack the host cell’s DNA to make copies of themselves.  Unlike viruses, the vaccines never enter the cell nucleus where DNA is found.  The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were created by gene sequencing techniques to produce short segments of mRNA (messenger RNA) coded for the Covid-19 virus coat spike protein.  The vaccine is designed to enter the cell cytoplasm and use the cell’s ribosomes (outside the nucleus) to make the virus coat protein, which then causes an immune response, forming antibodies. 

The AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines use nonreplicating, weakened adenoviruses whose DNA have been modified to include Covid-19 coat protein instructions. The vaccine adenovirus carries the protein on its surface to produce the immune response. It never needs to enter the cell so it can’t affect the cell’s DNA. Note that “nonreplicating” means it has been “killed” by heat or other means and cannot reproduce by making copies of itself. 

Claim #3. – Experimental Vaccines – The claim is that the vaccines are experimental so they haven’t been tested and can’t be trusted. See above for a brief summary of testing and trials. No steps were skipped or ended early. The only part that is not completed is long term follow up for length of time that the immunity lasts, and any possible rare, chronic or extended reactions to it.

Claim #4. – Vaccines kill people – Some people have died days of weeks after getting the shot. In each case, investigations found no clear cause-and-effect link between the deaths and the vaccine.  The high number (25) reported from Norway were among elderly, frail nursing home residents and could not be linked directly to the vaccine. Other deaths investigated are found to have other causes, but may continue to be associated statistically even weeks after the injection.

There is a US database called VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System, https://vaers.hhs.gov) that documents any adverse reactions to vaccines. In the Covid-19 part of the databases, I chose to study the first two weeks in January, 2021 as a manageable sample. In that time, there were 9676 adverse reactions and 106 deaths reported of 444,753 vaccinations administered. Most of the adverse reactions were either allergic reactions (treated with Benadryl or epi pen) or mild flu-like symptoms or injection site soreness, infection or itch. Adverse reactions were 2.2% of those vaccinated, and deaths were 0.02%. These percentages are higher than those in later periods because of the age and condition of people permitted to get the vaccine at that time. To assure myself that this was representative of the overall pattern, I later checked late March entries and found a similar pattern.

I went through many of the reactions and all of the deaths reported in these time periods to determine any links, if present. All but a few of the deaths were among the elderly with other serious conditions, many in long term care facilities or hospice.  The average age was 74, with a range of 40s to 90s and one 104 for the January set. The one exception was a 25-year-old man that died 20 days after injection; His death is unlikely to be vaccine related because of the elapsed time.  Although there were no details, he may have been chronically ill, judging from the fact that he got the vaccine very early when mostly vulnerable people were getting vaccinated.  Unfortunately, details of factors contributing to death for some were sketchy or missing.  Also company identification was uncertain for the second set.   Some listed one company in that column but stated a different company in the text, so no conclusions could be drawn connecting any one company to deaths or adverse effects. The VAERS reporting system is voluntary and transcribed from entries by healthcare personnel and untrained family members. 

Claim #5. – Vaccines will sterilize people – Not sure where this one came from, but it is pure fantasy. There is no mechanism for it to do this.   There is no secret ingredient added to sterilize people. By the way, this is a common propaganda theme used by population control and anti-vax activists to scare poor people in developing countries from getting much needed vaccines such as polio and measles.

Claim #6. – Vaccines contain specific antibodies that overwhelm and deactivate natural nonspecific antibodies.  This is totally false and is probably just anti-vaccine propaganda to prevent people from getting the protection of vaccines.  Our bodies make and retain in reserve antibodies for hundreds of substances, both specific and nonspecific.  There is no way that antibodies from any vaccine can deactivate any antibodies naturally produced by our bodies. 

Claim #7. – Microchips are inserted with the vaccine – this conspiracy theory gets quite elaborate with Bill Gates, Anthony Fauci and Moderna sometimes woven into the narrative about tracking, monitoring and controlling every person on earth. Every word of it is false, including Gates and Fauci as roommates at Harvard (attended a decade apart), Fauci founding Moderna (not), and Gates, a software guy, inventing RFID microchips. 

An RFID (Radio Frequency Identification Device) chip is a radio receiver and transmitter. It transmits only when it receives a signal from a reader that then reads the transmitted signal. RFID technology has been used to track shipments for over 70 years.  RFID chips are attached to the vaccine containers to track them and make sure they are delivered to the correct facilities. Maybe that’s where this story came from. Microchips that are used in animals are about the size of a grain of rice and need a special applicator to insert under a pet’s skin, not the tiny needle used for vaccinations. 

NOTE:  Tiny RFID chips, called Smart Dust, that are the size of a grain of sand are being developed for the military. These are experimental (read expensive and unavailable) and require other equipment such as external sensors, antennae, communication nodes and networks to operate.  A larger version, ¼ – ½ inch, which contains a tiny computer is called a Mote. It also requires other equipment to operate.

Claim #8. – Nanoparticles are in the vaccine and may contain tiny robots or machines – The “nanoparticles” in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are actually very fine lipid (oil) droplets that protect and help the mRNA segment enter the cell in order to make Covid-19 proteins. Nano is a measure of size and does not imply functionality or complexity. From Wikipedia: “A nanoparticle or ultrafine particle is usually defined as a particle of matter that is between 1 and 100 nanometers in diameter.” A nanometer is 1 billionth of a meter. Although many nanoparticles are solids and may be made of metals, etc., the “particles” in these vaccines are simply very fine oil droplets, similar in size to the colloidal fats in milk, (ranging in size from 1 to 1000 nanometers). Like the colloidal fat in milk, the tiny size of the oil droplets in the vaccines helps keep the oil suspended without separating and settling out.  For comparison, the Covid-19 virus is 120 nanometers in diameter, which is large for a virus.

Claim #9. – Nanoparticles are on the testing swab and are inserted into the blood brain barrier – one version says the swab used to take the sample deep in your nose is used to insert nanoparticles in the “blood brain barrier” there. First of all, sterile swabs are mass produced and readily available from medical supply companies. They are not specific to the test.  The blood brain barrier is not a membrane located in your nose. It consists of membranes covering all of the capillaries of the brain that protect the brain from contaminants. From Wikipedia: “The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a highly selective semipermeable border of endothelial cells that prevents solutes in the circulating blood from non-selectively crossing into the extracellular fluid of the central nervous system where neurons reside.” (“Solutes” refers to solids.)

Claim #10. – 5G cellphone radiation either causes Covid-19 or makes it worse – This is related to anti-technology fears and is totally unfounded.  An earlier claim that cellphone radiation causes cancer has been thoroughly debunked by numerous scientific studies, but is still believed by many.  This new iteration claims that the 5G, which operates at higher radio wave frequencies, is more harmful to health than previous cellphone Generations, e.g. 4G, 3G.  Current 4G networks, operate in the 700 MHz-2500 MHz range, and 5G operates in a higher frequency range in two bands, either less than 6GHz or greater than 24 GHz.  (Hertz means cycles per second, MHz is million and GHz is billion cycles per second). Radio waves are non-ionizing “radiation” and are harmless at frequencies and power levels encountered. The 5G broadens the band width so it can support more users and transfer data faster. Since the higher frequency radio waves don’t travel as far, more cell towers are needed to fill the gaps in the 4G network. 

Another version of this conspiracy theory is that 5G cellphone technology is intended to track people with embedded RFID chips.  If you have a cellphone, you can be and are already “tracked” by GPS; no embedded RFID chip needed.  Although extremely unlikely, this is more likely than the scenario above, and is probably responsible for Hong Kong riots just before China’s 5G system was completed and turned on.  Unlike most free countries, China can require its people to get RFID chips embedded in order to access social services, hospitals, schools or employment. 5G short-range and closer towers could, in this case, locate people more accurately.

Antivaccine Movement

Over many decades, the anti-vaccine movement has done great damage and cost many lives, especially in poor countries. Celebrity activists such as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and his Children’s Health Defense foundation, are either innocent true-believers or sinister liars with an evil agenda.  The antivaxxers join a cadre of antitechnology groups that want to scare people about anything that is not “natural.” Natural doesn’t make it’s safe; arsenic and death cap mushroom are “natural” but deadly. By “not natural,” they mean anything that was not practiced in ancient times. i.e., technology of any kind, including fertilizers, pesticides, hybrid and GMO foods, most modern medicines, electronics, vehicles, and industries. 

Their purpose is to control us by keeping us scared of everything from our food and water to electric lights, pollution and climate change.  Their goal is to cripple modern societies and take us back to simpler times of the past. Secret: the good old days were terrible, with high infant and childhood mortality, short, disease ridden and painful lives, hunger, filth, pollution.  Like all good lies, they are spiced with truths and half-truths as well as so-called “science” and “authority” to make them believable.  Our world is just fine without limiting population and life spans. Overpopulation and limited natural resources are myths, as are most of the climate change claims. Not that it does not exist, but that it is not an emergency, and we can do very little to change it other than adapt to it.

Among many targets of the modern anti-vaccination movement are vaccines of all types. MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine was among early targets, claiming that either the shot overwhelmed the immune system or the preservative thimerisol (containing an organo-mercury preservative) was responsible for autism and autoimmune diseases. This has been thoroughly studied and debunked but it is still claimed, even when the thimerosal was replaced by another preservative.  Every vaccine since then has been targeted by their scare stories and propaganda, and it has caused misery and death worldwide.

It makes no sense for pharmaceutical companies to invest billions of dollars and years of research to produce a product that will kill or maim their customers. Even most of the believers in the overpopulation myth and the zero-growth movement have not gone that far, but they may have spread the antivaxxers scare stories in poor countries to keep children from being protected.  Their usual methods involve providing or requiring abortion and physical sterilization of poor people, while keeping them poor, sick and ignorant by denying them modern development[1].

One thing is certain, once a conspiratorial claim is made, it never dies. Regardless of overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary, some people will continue to believe and spread it.  Behind it is a general distrust of authority and government that has been fostered by these groups and promoted by actual government failures and misinformation.

 

[1] See my book Saving Africa From Lies That Kill: How Myths about the Environment and Overpopulation are Destroying Third World Countries, Kay Kiser, 2018, or my blog www.savingafricafromliesthatkill.com