All-cause mortality during COVID-19: A signature of mass homicide by government
A very interesting paper by D. G. Rancourt of Ontario Civil Liberties Association about the degree of fraud/misattribution in the mortality data and how direct government/MSM actions better account for most of the deaths than does the virus itself. A few excerpts:
These “COVID peak” characteristics, and a review of the epidemiological history, and of relevant knowledge about viral respiratory diseases, lead me to postulate that the “COVID peak” results from an accelerated mass homicide of immune-vulnerable individuals, and individuals made more immune-vulnerable, by government and institutional actions, rather than being an epidemiological signature of a novel virus, irrespective of the degree to which the virus is novel from the perspective of viral speciation.
The paper is organized into the following sections:
? Cause-of-death-attribution data is intrinsically unreliable
? Year-to-year winter-burden mortality in mid-latitude nations is robustly regular
? Why is the winter-burden pattern of mortality so regular and persistent?
? A simple model of viral respiratory disease de facto virulence
? All-cause mortality analysis of COVID-19
? Interpreting the all-cause mortality “COVID peak”
In the face of the persistent and regular pattern of winter-burden mortality, one is tempted to propose that the specific (structural, molecular, and binding) properties of the particular respiratory disease viral pathogen are not as determinative of mortality as virologists suggest. Instead, it is possible that mortality, in a given population exposed to these highly contagious viral pathogens that invade the lungs, is predominantly controlled by the population’s distribution of immune-system capacity and preparedness.
In light of the above background and conceptual tools, we can now examine data for COVID-19, to date. For good reason (as per above), we ignore death-attributed data and model deconvolutions of P&I deaths versus other deaths deemed to be seasonal for reasons unrelated to the seasonal viral pathogens. We concentrate on all-cause mortality, by week.
All-cause mortality is not susceptible to bias, and is currently available for several jurisdictions. We use the raw data without any manipulation, and we do not modify the data to “correct” for changes in total population, or for changes in age structure of a population.
I postulate that the “COVID peak” represents an accelerated mass homicide of immune- vulnerable individuals, and individuals made more immune-vulnerable, by government and institutional actions, rather than being an epidemiological signature of a novel virus, irrespective of the degree to which the virus is novel from the perspective of viral speciation.
Finally, my interpretation of the “COVID peak” as being a signature of mass homicide by government response is supported by several institutional documents, media reports, and scientific articles, such as the following examples.
It could hardly be more obvious that government and MSM fearmongering induces chronic stress in the foolish and NPC populations which shuts down their immune system, causing them to succumb to what would otherwise be a respiratory infection they would be able to handle. So it’s not just bad treatments (ventilators killed absurd numbers of people) and suppression of cures (Vitamin D, HCQ+zinc, CDS, artemisinin…), it’s even moreso the constant fearmongering itself.
And there are still people not paying attention who think the virus is a bigger threat than authoritarian governments…!
It makes no sense at all that government is suppressing your immunity.
…. individuals made more immune-vulnerable, by government and institutional actions, rather than being an epidemiological signature of a novel virus, irrespective of the degree to which the virus is novel from the perspective of viral speciation.
Nobody is stopping you from taking a stroll in the park, or go outdoors. If anybody feels that they need a workout/challenge for their immunity, their restroom has the greatest variety of bacteria – please have a drink. Also, pets & woods have lot of virus and bacteria and please feel to lick them. May be then, we won’t need to work so hard at gain of function research.
How does it not make sense??
Aside from the most obvious, like the lockdowns (people WERE being stopped from “taking a stroll in the park, or go outdoors” — in some places it’s still happening, and many people who don’t do any research (NPCs), or succumb to confirmation bias, are afraid of doing that to this day!), as well as to the idea of washing your hands and disinfecting surfaces all the time… it’s the FEAR-MONGERING which induces chronic cortisol release and activates your sympathetic (fight-or-flight) nervous system and suppresses your parasympathetic nervous system, which shuts down your immune system, because biologically, it’s as if there’s an immediate threat you need to get away from, so functions such as healing, digestion, immunity, are not useful.
BTW, no, your own restroom doesn’t have much bacteria foreign to you and those who live with you. 😛
Yesterday I sent a link to the HCQ YALE study of 1 June to my husband as we are taking HCQ. He said that when he went to the link it is gone….So I checked and it is gone as a 404 page comes up.
So I cached it and got a copy blocked by a banner but one can still read it. I copied the text best I could and here is it as follows.
Hydroxychloroquine and Other Drugs to Fight Pandemic
June 01, 2020
Photo by Dreamstime
Professor Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., is a researcher at the Yale School of Public Health with a specialty in cancer etiology, prevention and early diagnosis, and epidemiologic methods.
He recently studied the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (used in conjunction with two other drugs) to treat people infected with COVID-19 and concluded that the approach should be “widely available” in the fight against the current pandemic.
The results of his research are published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.
Describe your findings.
HR: COVID-19 is really two different diseases. In the first few days, it is like a very bad cold. In some people, it then morphs into pneumonia which can be life-threatening. What I found is that treatments for the cold don’t work well for the pneumonia, and vice versa. Most of the published studies have looked at treatments for the cold but used for the pneumonia. I just looked at how well the treatments for the cold worked for the cold. There are five studies done this way, four of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin and one with hydroxychloroquine plus doxycycline, and they all show that treating the cold part of COVID-19—the early part—works very well.
Do you think that these drug combinations should be used for all people with COVID-19, or only certain patients?
HR: Most people less than 60 years old who are of healthy weight and who don’t have other conditions like heart disease or diabetes can get by without medications. But if anyone starts to have shortness of breath while doing normal activities like walking around at home, they should get medical care immediately.
But the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 remains highly controversial. Why is there so much disagreement if it is effective?
HR: I think that there has been confusion about treating the cold versus treating the pneumonia. These medications don’t seem to work so well for treating the pneumonia. As early as possible is crucial, within the first five to six days of symptoms.
Are these drugs safe?
HR: The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin has been used for decades in hundreds of thousands of people with rheumatoid arthritis. There is a concern that these medications do change the heart pacing a little and could cause cardiac arrhythmias. However, these arrhythmias are still very rare in people using these medications. People who already have heart arrhythmias or are predisposed to them or have family histories of them should discuss this with their health care providers and see if using hydroxychloroquine plus doxycycline or some other medications would be a better choice.
Does hydroxychloroquine have the potential to be a “game-changer” in the fight against this pandemic?
HR: Hydroxychloroquine alone is not the whole story. It needs to be combined with azithromycin or doxycycline and probably with zinc to make it most effective. The game changer is to aggressively treat people as soon as possible, before they are hospitalized, to keep them from becoming hospitalized in the first place. Hydroxychloroquine plus the other medications is what we know about now. In a few months we may have data on other medications that also work. We just have to start with something now.
How widely is the drug currently being used to treat people infected with COVID-19? What do you recommend?
HR: Various places around the world have started using these drugs. An international survey of doctors who treat COVID-19 patients recently showed 72 percent of doctors in Spain say that they have been using them. I think that doctors need to be able to use their own clinical judgement about their patients and have objective information about drugs that can work for the early part of the infection, the cold part.
Why did you study this?
HR: This pandemic is undoubtedly the biggest public health crisis of our time. I started seeing reports of treatment benefit in France and New York and couldn’t understand where the controversy was coming from. So, I did an exhaustive search of studies and data on medication use in COVID-19 outpatients and the paper I wrote just describes everything that I found. Every study has details and the details are important.
Submitted by Sayuri Gavaskar on June 01, 2020
Featured in this article
Harvey Risch photo
Harvey Risch, MD, PhD
Professor of Epidemiology (Chronic Diseases)
Read the full report here:
Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk Covid-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis
333 Cedar Street
New Haven, CT 06510
Maps & Directions
Education, Patient Care
you could attend in July 2020
Accessibility at YSM
Library & Reference
© 2020 Yale School of Medicine. Updated 10/24/2019
There that is all I could get.
The fact that it has been pulled is yet another red flag leading people to believe something “deeper” is going on.
Personally I feel that this war of HCQ is political at least and this is 100% genocide.
I am fighting this in the open now under my own name. If anyone wants to help, please PM me. Thanks
Mary Otto-Chang HBA MES PhD (Candidate) 20 years UN experience
You’re right, the link to Yale’s press release about Dr. Harvey Risch’s study is gone (404). But the actual publication can be found here.
The manuscript is accepted by the American Journal of Epidemiology. So everyone download the pdf quickly before he’s forced to “retract” …
I don’t buy it tbp.
Yes, there is fear created by the media, but I find the conclusion that it’s responsible for 143,000 and counting deaths implausible.
Of course it does make a bit of a dent in the SS dilemma.
You find it implausible because…? Because you don’t want to believe it? But it’s a great question isn’t it: what’s the most proximal/influential cause of the deaths? The virus itself, or government/MSM reactions to it and fear-mongering in the form of constant psychological terror (which prevents people’s immune systems from functioning properly because their bodymind is perceiving a present threat) and false information (no good recommendations like vitamin D and suppression of cures like HCQ+zinc)?
And the cascading effects may be EVEN WORSE:
Yes, that’s the UN itself admitting that.