COVID-19 is a Common Cold

So what does that mean about the mortality rate?

Another day, another upside down media presentation about COVID-19. A Stanford study finds that the actual number of cases is 50-80x more than the official statistics show. The media presents this as more scary information for the public. The Surgeon General of the Navy referred to the fact that 50-60% of people are totally asymptomatic as the “secret power” of the virus. It’s the same old propaganda of reversals…the weakness of the virus is the strength of the virus.

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.

 

In truth? A 50 to 80-fold increase in the case total implies a miniscule overall mortality rate (as I have been saying over and over and over and over), and it places this virus among the many other coronaviruses causing the common cold. Essentially harmless. Not a cause for a public quarantine. IT IS JUST A COLD, PEOPLE!

Case closed.

 

To those out there protesting, I salute you. Like Mark, I am mostly burnt out on this subject. We have had enough, and this farce needs to end.

7 thoughts on “COVID-19 is a Common Cold

  1. Somewhere I read that the frequency of the positive tests is increasing exactly in line with the number of tests. That is predictable if the virus they are searching for reacts to toxins that seem to be fleshed out during cold and flu season. It is probably in all or most of us in some form, so by all means avoid being tested. With HIV testing positive was almost a death sentence, but for this, the bastards will quarantine you.

    Bright note: At Home Depot today, my usual unmasked self, I had to ask a clerk for help, so I chose an unmasked one. We seemed to click, and he tried very hard to help me find something that was out of stock. While we interacted we stood within a couple of feet of each other, and twice he coughed, covering his mouth with his arm. Just like the good old days.

    Like

  2. Another reason for the high correlation between testing and positive tests is the high percentage of false positives. The more tests you administer, the more false positives you get.

    In addition to the fact that the tests are highly flawed, there’s also a statistical issue. I learned about this in a statistics class, using HIV testing as the example.

    This is slightly rough, but gives you the key point:

    If a test is 98% accurate, you’d expect a false positive 2% of the time. If the rate of HIV in a population is 1%, you get a true positive 1% of the time.

    For every 100 tests you administer, you get 3 positives. 1 real positive, and 2 false positives.

    This would mean that 2 out of every 3 positive tests for HIV are actually incorrect…these people are NOT true positives. In this example, even with a 98% accurate test, the MAJORITY of positive results are false positives.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Tests, in addition to the accumulation of statistical data on prevalence, generate huge amounts of personal biological data that’s being added to the psychological, social, economic, criminal and what-all-else that’s part of your individual profile. Could be for your benefit, but much more likely it will be used as extortion to gain obedience, compliance, and “hive-mind” non-thinking for the masses that are not culled. Or, track your ass down if you misbehave?

    https://www.webfx.com/blog/social-media/social-media-credit-score-infographic/
    There’s already a “social score,” which then begs the question: Where does this all end? The internet is like a spider’s web, a trap for unsuspecting prey. Surveillance is multi-layered, multi-dimensional. Why wouldn’t swabs and blood tests be included? ID2020 needs your biologicals to work.

    Like

Comments are closed.