What They Said About Lockdowns Before 2020 | ZeroHedge

15-01-21 02:32:00,

Authored by Amelia Janaskie via The American Institute For Economic Research,

In 2020, beliefs about how to handle a new virus shifted massively.

Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, mainstream epidemiology and public health entities doubted – or even rejected – the efficacy of lockdowns and mass quarantines because they were considered ineffective.

This all changed in March 2020, when sentiment flipped in support of lockdown measures.

http://www.zerohedge.com/

Still, there is a vast body of evidence explaining their original stance and why these mandates do not work. 

  1. Fauci said that shutting down the country does not work. (January 24, 2020) 

Early into 2020, Fauci spoke to reporters saying, “That’s something that I don’t think we could possibly do in the United States, I can’t imagine shutting down New York or Los Angeles, but the judgement on the part of the Chinese health authorities is that given the fact that it’s spreading throughout the provinces… it’s their judgement that this is something that in fact is going to help in containing it. Whether or not it does or does not is really open to question because historically when you shut things down it doesn’t have a major effect.”

  1. World Health Organization Report discusses NPIs and why quarantine is ineffective. (2019)

In a table, WHO lists their recommendations of NPIs depending on severity level. Quarantine of exposed individuals is categorized as “not recommended in any circumstances.” The report explains that “home quarantine of exposed individuals to reduce transmission is not recommended because there is no obvious rationale for this measure, and there would be considerable difficulties in implementing it.”

  1. WHO acknowledges social-distancing did not stop or dramatically reduce transmission during the 1918 influenza pandemic. (2006)

The WHO authors ultimately conclude that NPIs, including quarantining, require better and more focused methods to make them more effective and less “burdensome.” “Ill persons,” the authors assert, “should remain home when they first become symptomatic, but forced isolation and quarantine are ineffective and impractical.” Summarizing reports from the 1918 influenza pandemic the WHO cites Lomé (British-occupied Togo) and Edmonton (Canada) as places where “isolation and quarantine were instituted;

 » Lees verder

COVID-19: Rethinking the Lockdown Groupthink – Global Research

15-01-21 02:29:00,

Abstract

The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide pandemic in 2020. In response, most countries in the world implemented lockdowns, restricting their population’s movements, work, education, gatherings, and general activities in attempt to ‘flatten the curve’ of COVID-19 cases. The public health goal of lockdowns was to save the population from COVID-19 cases and deaths, and to prevent overwhelming health care systems with COVID-19 patients. In this narrative review I explain why I changed my mind about supporting lockdowns. First, I explain how the initial modeling predictions induced fear and crowd-effects [i.e., groupthink]. Second, I summarize important information that has emerged relevant to the modeling, including about infection fatality rate, high-risk groups, herd immunity thresholds, and exit strategies. Third, I describe how reality started sinking in, with information on significant collateral damage due to the response to the pandemic, and information placing the number of deaths in context and perspective. Fourth, I present a cost-benefit analysis of the response to COVID-19 that finds lockdowns are far more harmful to public health than COVID-19 can be. Controversies and objections about the main points made are considered and addressed. I close with some suggestions for moving forward.

Read full article here.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is by Spiro Skouras

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political,

 » Lees verder

Apple wants to delete Telegram app from people’s iPhones – here’s how to stop it

15-01-21 12:09:00, Image: Apple wants to delete Telegram app from people’s iPhones – here’s how to stop it

(Natural News) Word is circulating that Apple is planning to remotely axe the Telegram app from users’ iPhones now that President Donald Trump and millions of free speech advocates have migrated there.

The social media platform notified its users on Tuesday that the app surpassed 500 million monthly active users during the first week of January, with 25 million new users joining just in the previous 72 hours alone.

Founder Pavel Durov said there was a massive increase in new users compared to the same time last year when roughly 1.5 million new users were signing up daily.

“We’ve had surges of downloads before, throughout our seven-year history of protecting user privacy but this time it is different,” Durov is quoted as saying on his official “Durov’s channel.”

Most of the platform’s new users appear to be out of Asia at 38 percent, along with 27 percent from Europe and 21 percent from Latin America. Eight percent come from the Middle East and North Africa.

“[People] no longer want to be held hostage by tech monopolies that seem to think they can get away with anything as long as their apps have a critical mass of users,” Durov added. “We take this responsibility very seriously, and our users have been and will always be our only priority.”

Unlike Facebook and Twitter, Telegram does not have shareholders or advertisers to report to. It also does not mine data for marketers or deal with government agencies.

“Since the day we launched in August 2013, we haven’t disclosed a single byte of our users’ private data to third parties,” Durov reassured.

To learn more about how the big guys in Big Tech are exploiting and taking advantage of their users, visit Censorship.news.

Don’t let Apple control your digital life

None of this is pleasing to Apple, which thrives on censorship and keeping people in the dark about all things related to truth.

While we cannot yet confirm if Apple has full capacity to remove the Telegram app remotely, we can say that there is a way to prevent that from happening should it turn out to be true.

 » Lees verder

Microsoft, Big Tech Coalition Developing Rockefeller Funded COVID Passports

15-01-21 12:06:00,

A coalition of big tech companies, including Microsoft is developing a COVID passport, with the expectation that a digital document linked to vaccination status will be required to travel and get access to basic services.

The group is calling itself the Vaccination Credential Initiative (VCI), and includes Microsoft, Salesforce and Oracle.

The US health provider Mayo Clinic is also involved in the project, which is being described as “the most significant vaccination effort in the history of the United States.”

The idea is now a familiar one. Anyone who has been vaccinated will receive a QR code that can be stored on their mobile phone in the wallet app. Those without phones will have access to a printed version.

We have previously reported on the development of this so called ‘CommonPass’, which also has backing from the World Economic Forum, and now more details have emerged.

Screenshot: ‘CommonPass’ outline – click to enlarge

“The goal of the Vaccination Credential Initiative is to empower individuals with digital access to their vaccination records,” said Paul Meyer, CEO of non-profit The Commons Project, also involved in the project.

Meyer said that the document will allow people “to safely return to travel, work, school, and life, while protecting their data privacy.”

Meyer said the coalition is working with several governments, and expects standards to be adopted that will see mandatory negative tests or proof of vaccination, in order to re-engage in society.

“Individuals are going to need to have to produce vaccination records for a lot of aspects of getting back to life as normal,” he added. “We live in a globally connected world. We used to anyway — and we hope to again.” 

The Financial Times reports that The Commons Project has received funding for the project from the Rockefeller Foundation, and that it is being implemented by all three major airline alliances.

The Rockefeller Foundation has previously touted its plans for a ‘Covid-19 data and commons digital platform’ as well as a desire to “launch a Covid Community Healthcare Corps for testing and contact tracing.”

“Coordination of such a massive program should be treated as a wartime effort,” the foundation states on its website,

 » Lees verder

Consent-Manufacturing For Patriot Act II Continues

15-01-21 11:19:00,

It’s been obvious for a long time that the best way to stop the rise of right-wing extremism in America that everyone’s so worried about today is not to pass a bunch of authoritarian laws, but to reverse the policies of soul-crushing neoliberalism and domestic austerity which led to Donald Trump. Instead of doing this, the next president is already pushing a Patriot Act sequel and reducing the stimulus checks he’d promised the public before he’s even been sworn in.

President-elect Biden promised unambiguously that if voters gave the Democratic Party control of the Senate by electing Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff in Georgia earlier this month, checks of $2,000 would “go out the door immediately”. Warnock blatantly campaigned on the promise of $2000 checks if elected, literally using pictures of checks with “$2000” written on them to do so. This was not an unclear promise by any stretch of the imagination, yet when Biden unveiled the “American Rescue Plan” on Thursday, the number 1400 was written where the number 2000 should have been.

Boss: Here’s your check.
Employee: This is $1400. You said $2000 for the job.
Boss: Yeah but that’s minus the $600 I paid you for the last job. You’re welcome.

— Caitlin Johnstone ⏳ (@caitoz) January 15, 2021

The argument being pushed out at the moment is that when Democrats were blatantly promising stimulus checks of $2000 what they really meant was that Americans would receive $1400 on top of the $600 checks they’d received earlier, and everyone should have just known this somehow (perhaps via some sort of psychic precognition or sorcery). Which of course makes as much sense as someone hiring you to do a job for a given amount of money and then paying you the amount promised minus the amount you’d made at your last job.

It’s just so emblematic of US austerity policies, which are so normalized they don’t even use that word. Keep people stretched so thin that even a paltry $2000 after months and months of nothing can be spun as an excessively exorbitant indulgence which must be scaled back to keep it reasonable. In reality a grand total of $2600 in the richest nation on earth after all this time would still be a huge slap in the face,

 » Lees verder