Physicians Declaration II

Updated
Global Covid Summit

International Alliance of Physicians and Medical Scientists

October 29, 2021

WE, THE PHYSICIANS OF THE WORLD, united and loyal to the Hippocratic Oath, recognizing the imminent threat to humanity brought forth by current Covid-19 policies, are compelled to declare the following:

WHEREAS, after 20 months of research, millions of patients treated, hundreds of clinical trials performed and scientific data shared, we have demonstrated and documented our success and understanding in combating COVID-19;

WHEREAS, in considering the risks vs. benefits of major policy decisions, thousands of physicians and medical scientists worldwide have reached consensus on three foundational principles;

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS:

RESOLVED, THAT HEALTHY CHILDREN SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO FORCED VACCINATION (view supporting evidence)

• Negligible clinical risks from SARS-CoV-2 infection exist for healthy children under eighteen.
• Long term safety of the current COVID vaccines in children cannot be determined prior to instituting such policies. Without high-powered, reproducible, long term safety data, risks to the long-term health status of children remain too high to support use in healthy children.
• Children risk severe, adverse events from receiving the vaccine. Permanent physical damage to the brain, heart, immune and reproductive system associated with SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-based genetic vaccines has been demonstrated in children.
• Healthy, unvaccinated children are critical to achieving herd immunity. Natural immunity is proven to tolerate infection, benefiting community protection while there is insufficient data to assess whether Covid vaccines assist herd immunity.

RESOLVED, THAT NATURALLY IMMUNE PERSONS RECOVERED FROM SARS-CoV-2 SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY RESTRICTIONS OR VACCINE MANDATES (view supporting evidence)

• Natural immunity is the most protective, and longest-lasting solution against the development of COVID-19 disease and its more serious outcomes.
• Naturally immune persons are at the lowest risk of transmission, thus should not be subject to travel, professional, medical or social restrictions.
• Natural immunity provides the best source of herd immunity, a condition necessary for eradicating the Covid virus.

RESOLVED, THAT ALL HEALTH AGENCIES AND INSTITUTIONS SHALL CEASE INTERFERING WITH PHYSICIANS TREATING INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS (view supporting evidence)

• Early intervention with numerous, available agents has proven to be safe and effective, and has saved hundreds of thousands of lives.
• No medicine already given regulatory approval shall be restricted from “off-label” use, particularly during this global humanitarian crisis caused by a rapidly mutating virus, which requires quick to adopt treatment strategies.
• Health agencies shall be prohibited from interfering with physicians prescribing evidence-based treatments they deem necessary, and insurance companies must cease blocking payments for life-saving medicine prescribed by doctors.

RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE OR EXECUTIVE ACTION:

We believe that violating any of these three principles unnecessarily and directly risks death to our citizens. We hereby recommend the leaders of states, provinces and nations legislate or take executive action to prohibit the three practices described above.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed this Declaration.

Source: https://doctorsandscientistsdeclaration.org/

Related.

The Physicians Declaration I

The Criminality of the COVID Vaccines: Crimes Against Humanity

The Criminality of the COVID Vaccines: The Nuremberg Codes

Biden’s “Winter of Death”

The Physicians Declaration I

James F. Gauss

January 3, 2022

Physicians handcuffed and prevented from administering proper COVID care.

During a three-day period, September 12-14, 2021, a group of international physicians and medical scientists gathered in Rome for a Global COVID Summit in order to speak “truth to power about COVID pandemic research and treatment.” As of December 1, over 15,000 doctors and medical scientists had signed the Declaration, even while experiencing “career threats, character assassination, censorship of research papers, clinical trials and patient observations, their professional history and accomplishments altered or omitted in academic and mainstream media because of them providing life-saving treatments for COVID patients” as reported here.

Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of the Liberty Counsel stated, “These medical professionals have been censored and threatened for simply upholding the Hippocratic Oath to ‘do no harm.’ Throughout history, many breakthrough discoveries that have now become accepted science were initially censored. It’s past time to end medical censorship and allow doctors and scientific experts the freedom they rightfully deserve.”

The Physicians Declaration

“We the physicians of the world, united and loyal to the Hippocratic Oath, recognizing the profession of medicine as we know it is at a crossroad, are compelled to declare the following; 

WHEREAS, it is our utmost responsibility and duty to uphold and restore the dignity, integrity, art and science of medicine; 

WHEREAS, there is an unprecedented assault on our ability to care for our patients; 

WHEREAS, public policy makers have chosen to force a “one size fits all” treatment strategy, resulting in needless illness and death, rather than upholding fundamental concepts of the individualized, personalized approach to patient care which is proven to be safe and more effective; 

WHEREAS, physicians and other health care providers working on the front lines, utilizing their knowledge of epidemiology, pathophysiology and pharmacology, are often first to identify new, potentially life saving treatments; 

WHEREAS, physicians are increasingly being discouraged from engaging in open professional discourse and the exchange of ideas about new and emerging diseases, not only endangering the essence of the medical profession, but more importantly, more tragically, the lives of our patients; 

WHEREAS, thousands of physicians are being prevented from providing treatment to their patients, as a result of barriers put up by pharmacies, hospitals, and public health agencies, rendering the vast majority of healthcare providers helpless to protect their patients in the face of disease.  Physicians are now advising their patients to simply go home (allowing the virus to replicate) and return when their disease worsens, resulting in hundreds of thousands of unnecessary patient deaths, due to failure-to-treat; 

WHEREAS, this is not medicine. This is not care. These policies may actually constitute crimes against humanity. 

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS: 

RESOLVED, that the physician-patient relationship must be restored. The very heart of medicine is this relationship, which allows physicians to best understand their patients and their illnesses, to formulate treatments that give the best chance for success, while the patient is an active participant in their care. 

RESOLVED, that the political intrusion into the practice of medicine and the physician/patient relationship must end. Physicians, and all health care providers, must be free to practice the art and science of medicine without fear of retribution, censorship, slander, or disciplinary action, including possible loss of licensure and hospital privileges, loss of insurance contracts and interference from government entities and organizations – which further prevent us from caring for patients in need. More than ever, the right and ability to exchange objective scientific findings, which further our understanding of disease, must be protected. 

RESOLVED, that physicians must defend their right to prescribe treatment, observing the tenet FIRST, DO NO HARM. Physicians shall not be restricted from prescribing safe and effective treatments. These restrictions continue to cause unnecessary sickness and death. The rights of patients, after being fully informed about the risks and benefits of each option, must be restored to receive those treatments. 

RESOLVED, that we invite physicians of the world and all health care providers to join us in this noble cause as we endeavor to restore trust, integrity and professionalism to the practice of medicine. 

RESOLVED, that we invite the scientists of the world, who are skilled in biomedical research and uphold the highest ethical and moral standards, to insist on their ability to conduct and publish objective, empirical research without fear of reprisal upon their careers, reputations and livelihoods. 

RESOLVED, that we invite patients, who believe in the importance of the physician-patient relationship and the ability to be active participants in their care, to demand access to science-based medical care.” 

Related.

Non-vaccine COVID Recovery Protocol

The Criminality of the COVID Vaccines: Crimes Against Humanity

The Criminality of the COVID Vaccines: The Nuremberg Codes

Biden’s “Winter of Death”

Physicians Declaration II

Biden’s “Winter of Death”

James F. Gauss

December 22, 2021

Calling all Prayer Warriors: Step Up!

On December 16, President Biden sent a chilling message to the American people.  He was widely quoted in the media across the United States and abroad.

“I want to send a direct message to the American people: Due to the steps we’ve taken, Omicron has not yet spread as fast as it would have otherwise done,” he noted.

“But it’s here now, and it’s spreading and it’s going to increase,” Biden continued. “For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm.

“But there’s good news: If you’re vaccinated and you had your booster shot, you’re protected from severe illness and death,” he added.

Such a careless and totally unwarranted and unproven proclamation put a curse on America and its residents.  Words idly spoken are dangerous and have consequences.  On the surface, Biden’s pronouncements are unscientific, unproven and fallacious.  In the reality of the spiritual realm, Mr. Biden put a curse of “severe illness and death” upon America’s citizens.  To make matters even worse, he prophesied this grim future for a very specific group of people—most of whom hold strong Christian beliefs—the “unvaccinated.”  He not only condemned them, but also their families.  That is what hate mongers do to those they detest and are in opposition to their beliefs.

In an effort to reaffirm this wicked curse, the Biden administration, on the same day, sent forth the White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator, Jeffrey Zients, to reiterate the Biden curse. 

“For the unvaccinated, you’re looking at a winter of severe illness and death for yourselves, your families, and the hospitals you may soon overwhelm,” Zients declared.

On Tuesday, December 21, pseudo scientist, Bill Gates, claimed the United States “could be entering the worst part of the pandemic.”

I have stated this before: fear is a powerful motivator.  If you can instill fear in someone or a society, you will have complete control over them if they believe you have the answer to their safety and security.  If you tell people lies often enough and back them up with false “science” and data, the undiscerning ears will believe most anything.  One just has to look at the history of socialism, Marxism, communism and the horrendous deception and lies the Jews and others swallowed at the beginning and during the purge of the Third Reich in Germany.  It has been said, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.  Well, here we are, and we are in the throes of repeating it on steroids.

However, for those who cling to faith in Christ, we know, “God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind” (2 Timothy 1:7).  Believers need to do their homework on this “pandemic” and discern the truth and trust in God.  Deceptions, lies and condemnation of fellow Americans have been running rampant in the last two years and most of it from a government that is charged with protecting and doing what is right for the populace.

The truth?

For the past two years I have written extensively on this blog about the repeated lies and deceptions put forth by Dr. Fauci, WHO, the FDA, CDC, President Biden and a host of other scientists and pseudo scientists on the pandemic and the COVID-19 infection.

First, the unvaccinated AND the vaccinated are coming down with COVID-19, the Delta and the Omicron variant.  In South Africa, where the Omicron variant was first detected, the latest study revealed that those infected are 80 percent less likely to be hospitalized than with COVID-19.

Second, the coronavirus PCR test most used to detect the viruses is practically worthless.  The inventor of the test has stated that it will produce too many false positives to be relied on for COVID-19 and other virus diagnoses.  Dr. Fauci, early into the pandemic, clearly proclaimed that the PCR test also detects “dead nucleotides.”  That means if you had a cold or the flu ten years or thirty years ago, you are likely to have a positive COVID test.

Third, the three vaccines, along with booster shots have resulted in serious and sometimes deadly side effects and results.  According to the CDC’s VAERS report through December 10, there have been almost 966,000 adverse reactions to the COVID vaccines and 20,000+ deaths.  Adverse reactions included 22,952 life threatening events, 106,000+ hospitalizations and 33,675 permanent disabilities.  As shocking as those numbers are, it is most likely they are grossly under reported by medical centers and the CDC. 

Fourth, despite all the hype by Presidents Trump and Biden, the NIH (National Institutes of Health), FDA, CDC, Dr. Fauci, the vaccine makers and many others, the vaccines have mostly resulted in only partially and brief protection from the virus and even the “fully” vaccinated will need to get “booster” shots and/or take a variety of “new” oral or injected “cures.”

Fifth, while masking continues to be mandatory in many states and cities, numerous studies and scientific data have proven that the majority of masks being used by the public are worthless for virus protection or spreading.

Sixth, while they say that the Omicron variant is spreading rapidly, the medical science has reported that the symptoms are much less severe than COVID-19 or the Delta variant.  Severe health issues and related deaths are far lower than the pandemic versions.  To date, the data for Omicron does not warrant masking, lockdowns, isolation, school and business closings and a host of other health and societal damaging measures.

Calling ALL Prayer Warriors.

Fortunately, those of strong Christian faith know where they stand; Who stands with them and how to combat such word curses.  The faithful in Christ must rebuke them in the name of Jesus Christ and forbid them to perform or have any effect on one’s family and the people of the United States.  We must stand in the gap. 

“So I sought for a man [or woman] among them who would make a wall, and stand in the gap before Me on behalf of the land,” God said, “that I should not destroy it; but I found no one” (Ezekiel 22:30).  Let not the faithful be found wanting, but instead be bold and courageous and persevering in prayer.

“Have I not commanded you?” God reminded Joshua. “Be strong and of good courage; do not be afraid, nor be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go” (Joshua 1:9).  Joshua’s reminder is every believer’s reminder.

After all, “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’)” (Galatians 3:13).  God, through the wise King Solomon said, “Like a fluttering sparrow or a darting swallow, an undeserved curse does not come to rest’ (Proverbs 26:2).

When King Balak asked the prophet Balaam to curse Israel, God gave Balaam these words for the king.  “How can I curse those whom God has not cursed?  How can I denounce those whom the Lord has not denounced?” (Numbers 23:8).  The same words apply to every follower of Jesus Christ.  God has not cursed those who call upon the name of Jesus Christ and have accepted Him as Lord and Savior of their lives.  As Apostle Paul proclaimed, Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross has redeemed us from the curse of the law and any such proclamation by government officials or others—who do so knowingly or unknowingly—is of no effect.

As believers, we need to confess and proclaim, “‘No weapon formed against [me/us] shall prosper, and every tongue which rises against [me/us] in judgment [I/we] shall condemn.  This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is from Me,’ says the Lord” (Isaiah 54:17).

Remember, “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery” (Galatians 5:1).  “For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear,” Paul asserted, “but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, ‘Abba, Father’” (Romans 8:15).

“You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them [the evil antichrist spirits], because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world” (1 John 4:4).

Our responsibility as believers in dealing with curses does not end with these beliefs and proclamations.  We are to pray for those who curse us.  “Let them curse, but You bless; when they arise, let them be ashamed, but let Your servant rejoice” (Psalm 109:28).  Jesus also told His followers, “bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you” (Luke 6:28).

No matter what we endure or outcome, we must proclaim loud and clear, “Oh, give thanks to the Lord, for He is good! For His mercy endures forever.  Let the redeemed of the Lord say so, whom He has redeemed from the hand of the enemy,” (Psalm 107:1-2).

As a reminder, put on the whole armor of God (see Ephesians 6:10-18).

Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.

(Italian proverb)

A Final Note.  Biden and his ilk are devoid of real solutions and encouragement, and high on scare tactics to enhance the fear among the populace—clear signs of weak, yet debased leadership.  If they really believed in following the science, they would follow the science of centuries on abortion, on gender (male & Female, that’s it), LGBTQ+ (the only sex is between a male and female in a God-ordained union), and, dare I say, climate change.  Following the science for the political left is not following the science at all.  It is just a scam among many to gain control over the people and their freedom of thought and action.

Get the author’s book, Revelation 18 and the Fate of America (2021 Edition) on Amazon or save $3.45 by ordering direct from the author here.

Related.

Non-vaccine COVID Recovery Protocol

The Criminality of the COVID Vaccines: Crimes Against Humanity

James F. Gauss, Ph.D.

October 16, 2021

Crimes against humanity are certain acts that are purposefully committed as part of a widespread or systematic policy, directed against civilians, in times of war or peace.

[Author disclosure. Both my wife and I contracted COVID, but readily recovered after taking Dexamethasone and Ivermectin tablets from our local pharmacy. They were prescribed by a brave nurse practitioner, not a M.D.]

There is no way to get around it. Everyone who has submitted to taking the COVID “vaccine”, no matter the source, are nothing more than “lab rats” for Big Pharma. NONE of the so-called vaccines are approved by the FDA (Federal Drug Administration), nor do any of them fit the true medical definition of a vaccine. The medical definition of a true vaccine: a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.

None of the three main COVID-19 “vaccines” (Moderna, Pfizer or Johnson & Johnson) contain the causative agent, the COVID-19 virus, to stimulate the production of antibodies within you to fight off the infection. So, what do these “vaccines” do? That is the $64,000 question (old quiz show for you young-ins). Big Pharma and Dr. Fauci; the politicians and media that are feverishly promoting them, have no clue. Or, if they do, they are not disclosing it. See my April 8, 2021 post, Thinking of Getting Vaxxed?

Emergency Use Authorization. An Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is a mechanism to facilitate the availability and use of medical countermeasures, including vaccines, during public health emergencies, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives. Taking into consideration input from the FDA, manufacturers decide whether and when to submit an EUA request to FDA.

Once submitted, FDA will evaluate an EUA request and determine whether the relevant statutory criteria are met, taking into account the totality of the scientific evidence about the vaccine that is available to FDA.

Key statement: Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.

The bottom line? An EUA for a medical product allows Big Pharma, or anyone else, to foist upon the unsuspecting American public, an unproven, minimally tested, with no understanding of long term effects, injection of a foreign substance into the human body, while hoping for the best. This, of course, is done with the recipient’s “Informed Consent.” Did you read yours? Also, under the EUA, all those involved in the production, sale, advising and administering of the “vaccine” are absolved from liability and lawsuits.

Informed Consent. Informed Consent is the consent to medical treatment by a patient or to participation in a medical experiment by a subject after achieving an understanding of what is involved and esp[ecially] of the risks (dict.).

Virtually all states have recognized, either by legislation or by common law, the right to receive information about one’s medical condition, treatment choices, risks associated with the treatments, and prognosis. The information must be in plain language that you can easily understand and must be comprehensive enough to allow you to make an “informed” decision about his or her healthcare. If you have received this information, any consent to treatment that is given will be presumed to be an “informed consent.”

The informed consent process isn’t only an ethical obligation for doctors — it is also a legal one. State laws often take a patient-centered approach. Generally, the doctor (or one of his or her representatives) is required to discuss your diagnosis, the nature of the recommended treatment, any risks associated with the treatment, alternative forms of treatment, the risks associated with those alternatives, and the consequences of taking no action at all. Many hospitals, doctor’s offices, and treatment centers require their patients to sign informed consent forms so that consent will be in writing. (https://www.findlaw.com/injury/medical-malpractice/unauthorized-treatment-and-lack-of-informed-consent.html)

Readability of COVID-19 Vaccine Informed Consent Forms. Although the CDC has posted Informed Consent forms for three of the “vaccines” on its website that are 6-8 pages long, my educated (and likely accurate) guess is, 99.99% of those who have received “the shot(s)” have not received an IC, nor have they read one, if it was presented to them. Even if you received the appropriate IC and actually read it while waiting in the vax motorcade, it is unlikely that you fully understood it. After all, it’s written in legalese.

According to an article published online, June 3, 2021, by the National Center for Biotechnology Information (National Institutes of Health), the Informed Consent forms used to inform COVID-19 “vaccine” recipients are “unreadable.”

During the informed consent process, United States law requires volunteer study subjects to be informed and educated about the risks, benefits, and alternatives of the experimental medical intervention and procedures.² For informed consent to be valid, the patient or study volunteer must adequately understand the risks of participating in the clinical trial and voluntarily provide consent.³ In fact, any intervention without clear patient consent could be considered assault.⁴ Several factors may impede informed consent, including the subject’s education level, inadequate or complicated consent information, or ineffective communication between subjects and research professionals. Because study information packets and consent forms are the primary method by which study information and procedures are communicated regarding the clinical trial, the readability and comprehension of these materials are critical. If a study volunteer is unable to read and comprehend the information provided in the consent form, the provision of consent is misguided and invalid. Thus, informed consent documents must be written in a manner that accommodates trial participants in regard to their reading ability and comprehension.

The conclusion of the NCBI: Owing to low readability and several format factors, this study determined that none of the consent forms or informational documents from the recent phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials conducted in the United States met readability standards at the recommended 7th grade readability level for the average vaccine research volunteer in any readability category. The average English-speaking vaccine trial volunteer would have great difficulty comprehending the information provided in the consent forms and informational documents.

NONE! None of the Informed Consent forms used by the CDC provided clear and understandable disclosure for those receiving an experimental and potentially injurious and deadly injection. This is criminal malfeasance at the very least, and on many levels. Unfortunately, even doctors and nurses should be held accountable for their lack of due diligence in recommending and administering this “vaccine” as the ONLY cure for the virus (more on the liability to follow).

Crimes Against Humanity. What are “Crimes Against Humanity”? According to trialinternational.org, they include ten areas of inhumane treatment: murder, extermination, enslavement, imprisonment, torture, sexual violence, persecution against an identifiable group, enforced disappearance of persons, apartheid or other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

We usually associate such atrocities with people like Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong or Idi Amin, all of whom slaughtered millions of their own people and others.

So, where does the COVID-19 pandemic fit into the definition of Crimes Against Humanity? I would argue that it fits possibly 5-6 criteria: murder, extermination, imprisonment, torture, persecution against an identifiable group, other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.

Murder. Almost since the beginning of the pandemic, Dr. Fauci, Big Pharma (the vaccine producers), and even former President Donald J. Trump (sorry Trump fans, of which I WAS one), have known that there was a readily available and inexpensive treatment protocol for COVID-19. Doctors around the world were treating their patients with hydroxychloroquine (a malarial drug) and Ivermectin (a drug used to kill parasites in animals and humans). These two drugs alone were demonstrated as having significant efficacy in preventing or reversing the COVID viral infection, thus saving hundreds of thousands of lives. Please note, unlike the COVID “vaccines”, both hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin are FDA-approved drugs, just not for COVID-19 treatment. Check out this one example of the tremendous effectiveness of Ivermectin in India in preventing COVID-19 infections.

On October 2, 2020, when President Trump tested positive for COVID-19, no COVID “vaccine” was available. Instead, he was given a “cocktail” of Dexamethasone (a steroid to prevent inflammation and improve oxygen intake), Remdesivir (helps block coronavirus reproduction), Rengeneron monoclonal antibody, zinc (helps immune system fight viral infections), vitamin D, Famotidine (Pepcid), Melatonin and aspirin. Of these eight, our emergency room doctor (yes, we were rushed to the ER because our cases were severe) prescribed zinc, vitamin D, Melatonin and aspirin (81mg). While these four were likely beneficial, it was the Dexamethasone and Ivermectin prescribed by a nurse practitioner that resulted in quick recovery.

Here’s the clincher: While the CDC disparages ivermectin use and recommends against its use, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) list ivermectin as one of three approved COVID-19 preventive treatments.* Both the CDC and NIH are part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Remdesivir, also recommended by the NIH, and most commonly used in hospitals for COVID-19, has severe side-effect potential, such as renal and liver failure. Ivermectin, according to the NIH, has minimal side-effects. Cost differential: Remdesivir costs $2,340/five day treatment; generic ivermectin costs $50.

Ivermectin Works. Do you want proof that ivermectin works for COVID? Our dosage of 25 tablets for five days cost $41 (with our GoodRx card). Big Pharma, Merck & Co. in New Jersey, is the manufacturer of ivermectin and has given away billions of doses since 1987, but not for COVID-19 patients. You would think that Merck would be thrilled that ivermectin was being used to ward off the source of the worldwide pandemic. However, on February 4, 2021, Merck released a statement claiming there was no reliable data for the efficacy of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID patients and strongly advised against its use for such treatment.

However, on October 1, 2021, Merck announced that it had applied for an EUA from the Feds for their new COVID-cure drug, molnupiravir. The Biden Administration has already contracted for $1.2 billion of this new drug which Merck is selling for $712/10 pill dosage (not free like ivermectin or $41 like our dosage). Merck claims this “new” wonder drug reduces COVID hospitalizations and death by 47 percent. But, studies show that ivermectin reduces hospitalizations and death due to COVID by 88 percent.

Despite these readily available and inexpensive remedies for preventing or treating COVID-19 patients, ten of thousands of Americans were allowed to suffer and die because Big Pharma, the Federal Government, President Trump, Dr. Fauci, the media and many others were touting the unproven, experimental, big profit (hundreds of billions) as the only solution and cure for the ravages of the pandemic. Although hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin were readily available at every pharmacy in our county, and presumably throughout the U.S., doctors were either threatened or forbidden to prescribe them as a COVID-19 preventative or cure. However, it did not stop the Biden Administration from requiring all Afghanistan refugees from receiving Ivermectin before entering the United States.

Preventing Americans from getting proper medical care that could have prevented them from getting or curing them of a deadly disease and allowing them to die, is murder. Nothing less than what Hitler, Pol Pot, Idi Amin or Mao got away with years ago. It is criminal behavior of the highest order and Americans should be outraged and demand justice for everyone who knowingly promoted and condoned it.

Extermination. Perhaps this is a stretch, but think of all the elderly that unnecessarily suffered and died (95% of COVID deaths were among those 50+ years old). Looks like a “targeted” group to me.

Imprisonment. Maybe another stretch, but think about the millions of Americans that Dr. Fauci and the federal and state governments put under “house arrest” through fear mongering. Telling people to stay home and not go to work or go out in public or gather with family and friends. Children were banned from going to playgrounds and parks. Stores would not let people in unless they wore masks and kept the six-foot “social distance” rule. Both of which were proven to be scientifically useless. All of which was de facto “imprisonment.”

Torture. This may be debatable too. However, the way Americans have been ramrodded, pressured, demeaned, deprived, harassed and had their everyday freedoms restricted or suspended by their local, state and federal government just might qualify as “torture.”

Persecution Against an Identifiable Group. Since the COVID “vaccines” became available Americans have prodded, harassed, ridiculed, demeaned, coerced, threatened, etc. by their own government, the media, their doctors, neighbors, friends, co-workers, family and others to get vaxxed. Not satisfied with this daily assault on those who chose not to get the “vaccine” the Feds and state governors and their mouth pieces started blaming the unvaccinated, Trump followers or conservative Christians for the continued spread of the virus, even claiming they were responsible for killing their friends, neighbors and family members. This was and is not only despicable, but outright persecution of “identifiable groups.”

Other Inhumane Acts. Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health. If you or a loved one has ever had a severe case of pneumonia, you know how debilitating and scary that can be as one fights for every breath. Severe COVID-19 patients are usually admitted to the hospital because of the pneumonia that is associated with the disease. Not long after admission, if there is no improvement, many patients are intubated or put on a ventilator to assist in getting oxygen to the lungs. Yet, a CDC study (March 18, 2020 to April 28, 2021) of select hospitals discovered that the majority (54-75%, depending on the data week) that received intubation or ventilation, died in the hospital. Not a very encouraging statistic. Many COVID survivors, whether in- or out-patients, suffer from (what has been diagnosed as) “long COVID” or weeks, even months of fatigue, headaches, shortness of breath, weakness and other unusual symptoms.

Through October 9, 2021, the CDC reported 714,174 U.S. residents had died from COVID-19, of which 51 percent involved the complication of pneumonia.

*Then there is the numerous adverse reactions and death from the COVID-19 “vaccines.” As of September 17 CDC VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) data, there had been 726,965 adverse reactions (not shot recipients) to the COVID “vaccines” and 15,386 “vaccine” recipients that had died as a result of getting one or two doses of one of the “vaccines.” As reported before by this blogger, this is exceptional adverse results for a vaccine we are told is the cure for what ails us.

One must ask: How much pain and suffering from COVID could have been avoided and how many thousands of Americans would be alive today if doctors were allowed to prescribe what was best for their patients and was readily available at a low cost? Would the U.S. economy be in shambles; millions of jobs lost; families torn apart and our children’s education been torn to shreds? Was this government benevolence in the midst of a national crisis, or was it the purest example of an inhumane act to cause maximum pain and suffering for political purposes? One must ask.

Big Pharma Not Liable for COVID Vax Injury or Death. Did you know that the manufacturers of the COVID-19 “vaccines” or any vaccine are not liable if you are injured, maimed or die from their drug?

42 U.S. Code § 300aa–22, No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death associated with the administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988, if the injury or death resulted from side effects that were unavoidable even though the vaccine was properly prepared and was accompanied by proper directions and warnings.

However, individuals can file a petition with the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) administered by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to receive compensation if they are found to have been injured by one of the vaccines covered by VICP. According to the Health Resources and Services Administration under HHS, “even in cases in which such a finding is not made, petitioners may receive compensation through a settlement.”

But, VICP “does not cover any COVID-19 vaccines.” Is anyone surprised?

Next Post: The Criminality of COVID Vaccines: The Nuremberg Codes

*UPDATE: As of November 19, 2021, there have been 913,266 reported adverse reactions and 19,249 deaths due to the vaccines. However, a growing number of adverse reactions and deaths are going unreported.

*Since this post, the NIH has quietly removed Ivermectin from their approved treatment protocol for COVID, but still approve the deadly Remdesivir.

Related Posts:

CDC “Green Zones”

Chloroquine . . .

Collateral Damage of Face Masks

COVID Tests are Unreliable

Here’s the Science

Masks are Dangerous

The Great Barrington Declaration

Thinking of Getting Vaxxed?

Non-vaccine COVID Recovery Protocol

For more on the demise of America and its future, get the author’s book, Revelation 18 and the Fate of America (2021 Edition).

CDC “Green Zones”

If you think the anti-mask/anti-vaxxers are conspiracy nuts, it’s time to reprogram your thinking. Read the Juy 26, 2020 CDC document summary here and the full document here.

Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings

Updated July 26, 2020

This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings.^1,2  This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available. Please check the CDC website periodically for updates.

What is the Shielding Approach¹?

The shielding approach aims to reduce the number of severe COVID-19 cases by limiting contact between individuals at higher risk of developing severe disease (“high-risk”) and the general population (“low-risk”). High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or “green zones” established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting.^1,2 They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.

Current evidence indicates that older adults and people of any age who have serious underlying medical conditions are at higher risk for severe illness from COVID-19.³ In most humanitarian settings, older population groups make up a small percentage of the total population.^4,5  For this reason, the shielding approach suggests physically separating high-risk individuals from the general population to prioritize the use of the limited available resources and avoid implementing long-term containment measures among the general population.

In theory, shielding may serve its objective to protect high-risk populations from disease and death. However, implementation of the approach necessitates strict adherence^1,6,7, to protocol. Inadvertent introduction of the virus into a green zone may result in rapid transmission among the most vulnerable populations the approach is trying to protect.

A summary of the shielding approach described by Favas is shown in Table 1. See Guidance for the prevention of COVID-19 infections among high-risk individuals in low-resource, displaced and camp and camp-like settings ^1,2 for full details.

QUESTION: Who will the CDC consider among the “high risk” populations? They I.D. the elderly and those with co-morbidity issues, but there has been a lot of clamor from the CDC, the Biden Administration, Democrats and the leftist media, stating unequivocally that the unvaccinated and Christians are responsible for the spread of COVID.

To understand fully where America is heading, read Revelation 18 and the Fate of America (2021 Edition), available Author-Direct at a 25% discount here.

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

Here it is folks. From the Virology Journal, Vol. 2, Article 69 (August 22, 2005). Medical science has known for 15+ years that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine exhibited both prophylactic and curative properties for SARS-CoV-2 (i.e. coronaviruses). Yet, the “Powers to Be,” such as Dr. Fauci and other medical “authorities,” along with the bogus media, politicians and a host of other players, have made Americans and the world suffer relentlessly from a “manufactured” disease that could have been and is easily controlled in its early stages with these drugs.

READ THIS AND WEEP! Due to the 23-page length, I am only posting the abstract summary and background. However, the link to the article is provided here, if you care to review the entire article and research.

Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread

• Martin J Vincent, 
• Eric Bergeron, 
• Suzanne Benjannet, 
• Bobbie R Erickson, 
• Pierre E Rollin, 
• Thomas G Ksiazek, 
• Nabil G Seidah & 
• Stuart T Nichol 

Virology Journal volume 2, Article number: 69 (2005) Cite this article

• 1.01m Accesses
• 903 Citations
• 34101 Altmetric

• Metricsdetails

Abstract

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is caused by a newly discovered coronavirus (SARS-CoV). No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available.

Results

We report, however, that chloroquine has strong antiviral effects on SARS-CoV infection of primate cells. These inhibitory effects are observed when the cells are treated with the drug either before or after exposure to the virus, suggesting both prophylactic and therapeutic advantage. In addition to the well-known functions of chloroquine such as elevations of endosomal pH, the drug appears to interfere with terminal glycosylation of the cellular receptor, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2. This may negatively influence the virus-receptor binding and abrogate the infection, with further ramifications by the elevation of vesicular pH, resulting in the inhibition of infection and spread of SARS CoV at clinically admissible concentrations.

Conclusion

Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection. In addition, the indirect immunofluorescence assay described herein represents a simple and rapid method for screening SARS-CoV antiviral compounds.

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is an emerging disease that was first reported in Guangdong Province, China, in late 2002. The disease rapidly spread to at least 30 countries within months of its first appearance, and concerted worldwide efforts led to the identification of the etiological agent as SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV), a novel member of the family Coronaviridae [1]. Complete genome sequencing of SARS-CoV [2, 3] confirmed that this pathogen is not closely related to any of the previously established coronavirus groups. Budding of the SARS-CoV occurs in the Golgi apparatus [4] and results in the incorporation of the envelope spike glycoprotein into the virion. The spike glycoprotein is a type I membrane protein that facilitates viral attachment to the cellular receptor and initiation of infection, and angiotensin-converting enzyme-2 (ACE2) has been identified as a functional cellular receptor of SARS-CoV [5]. We have recently shown that the processing of the spike protein was effected by furin-like convertases and that inhibition of this cleavage by a specific inhibitor abrogated cytopathicity and significantly reduced the virus titer of SARS-CoV [6].

Due to the severity of SARS-CoV infection, the potential for rapid spread of the disease, and the absence of proven effective and safe in vivo inhibitors of the virus, it is important to identify drugs that can effectively be used to treat or prevent potential SARS-CoV infections. Many novel therapeutic approaches have been evaluated in laboratory studies of SARS-CoV: notable among these approaches are those using siRNA [7], passive antibody transfer [8], DNA vaccination [9], vaccinia or parainfluenza virus expressing the spike protein [10, 11], interferons [12, 13], and monoclonal antibody to the S1-subunit of the spike glycoprotein that blocks receptor binding [14]. In this report, we describe the identification of chloroquine as an effective pre- and post-infection antiviral agent for SARS-CoV. Chloroquine, a 9-aminoquinoline that was identified in 1934, is a weak base that increases the pH of acidic vesicles. When added extracellularly, the non-protonated portion of chloroquine enters the cell, where it becomes protonated and concentrated in acidic, low-pH organelles, such as endosomes, Golgi vesicles, and lysosomes. Chloroquine can affect virus infection in many ways, and the antiviral effect depends in part on the extent to which the virus utilizes endosomes for entry. Chloroquine has been widely used to treat human diseases, such as malaria, amoebiosis, HIV, and autoimmune diseases, without significant detrimental side effects [15]. Together with data presented here, showing virus inhibition in cell culture by chloroquine doses compatible with patient treatment, these features suggest that further evaluation of chloroquine in animal models of SARS-CoV infection would be warranted as we progress toward finding effective antivirals for prevention or treatment of the disease.

P.S. In my book, Revelation 18 and the Fate of America (2021 Edition), I devote an entire chapter to COVID and its planned use.

The Great Barrington Declaration

The Great Barrington Declaration

October 4, 2020

[NOTE: as of August 10, 2021, over 850,000 doctors and public health scientists worldwide have signed this declaration.]

The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection. 

Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice. 

Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.

Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. 

As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e.  the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity. 

The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection. 

Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals. 

Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.

On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:

Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.

Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.

Masks are Dangerous

Along the line of, “I told you so” on March 31, 2020. Masks are dangerous, not just for children, but also adults.

Yuck! Parents send kids’ masks to lab for analysis

Contaminated with dangerous bacteria, parasites, fungi after day of school

By Art Moore
Published June 16, 2021 

WorldNetDaily

A group of Florida parents concerned about the potential harm of wearing masks during the school day sent their children’s face coverings to a lab for analysis.

“We need to know what we are putting on the faces of our children each day. Masks provide a warm, moist environment for bacteria to grow,” said a parent who participated in the analysis, Amanda Donoho.

Of the six masks that were examined, five were contaminated with bacteria, parasites and fungi, noted Scott Morefield of Townhall.com. Three of the masks had dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria.

No viruses were detected on the masks, although the test is capable of detecting them.

The analysis by the University of Florida’s Mass Spectrometry Research and Education Center found the following dangerous pathogens:

• Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumonia)
• Mycobacterium tuberculosis (tuberculosis)
• Neisseria meningitidis (meningitis, sepsis)
• Acanthamoeba polyphaga (keratitis and granulomatous amebic encephalitis)
• Acinetobacter baumanni (pneumonia, blood stream infections, meningitis, UTIs— resistant to antibiotics)
• Escherichia coli (food poisoning)
• Borrelia burgdorferi (causes Lyme disease)
• Corynebacterium diphtheriae (diphtheria)
• Legionella pneumophila (Legionnaires’ disease)
• Staphylococcus pyogenes serotype M3 (severe infections—high morbidity rates)
• Staphylococcus aureus (meningitis, sepsis)

Less dangerous pathogens also were identified, including those that can cause fever, ulcers, acne, yeast infections, strep throat, periodontal disease and Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever.

The masks studied were new or freshly laundered before they were worn for five to eight hours by children aged 6 through 11. One was worn by an adult.

A T-shirt worn by one of the children at school and unworn masks were tested as controls. No pathogens were found on the controls.

Study: Mask mandates don’t slow spread

A recent study by the University of Louisville found that state mask mandates did not help slow the spread of COVID-19.

The researchers found that “masks may promote social cohesion as rallying symbols during a pandemic, but risk compensation can also occur.”

Among the risks:

• Prolonged mask use, more than four hours a day,
  “promotes facial alkalinization and inadvertently encourages dehydration, which in turn can enhance barrier breakdown and bacterial infection risk.”
• British clinicians have reported masks to increase headaches and sweating and decrease cognitive precision.
• By obscuring nonverbal communication, masks interfere with social learning in children.
• Likewise, masks can distort verbal speech and remove visual cues to the detriment of individuals with hearing loss.

Current guidance from the CDC states that masks “are a simple barrier to help prevent your respiratory droplets from reaching others” and “studies show that masks reduce the spray of droplets when worn over the nose and mouth.”

Recently, the CDC updated its guidance to allow for fully vaccinated individuals to ditch their masks, a revision that has led to several states and companies updating their mask mandates to allow the same.

The first large, randomized controlled trial of its kind showed no statistically significant difference in COVID-19 cases between people who wore masks and those who did not.

A study by the Centers for Disease Control in October indicated that Americans were adhering to mask mandates, but the requirements didn’t appear to have slowed or stopped the spread of the coronavirus. And further, it found, mask-wearing has negative effects.

The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons has compiled a page of “Mask Facts” showing that the consensus prior to the coronavirus pandemic was that the effectiveness of mask-wearing by the general public in slowing the spread of a virus is unproven, and there’s evidence it does more harm than good.

The most recent CDC guidelines still recommend mask use for anyone 2 years or older in public settings and when around people who don’t live in their household.​ However, in March 2020, the CDC said masks “are usually not recommended” in “non-health care settings.”

The same month, the World Health Organization recommended people not wear face masks unless they are sick with COVID-19 or caring for someone who is sick.

“There is no specific evidence to suggest that the wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential benefit. In fact, there’s some evidence to suggest the opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or fitting it properly,” said Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO health emergencies program in March 2020.

Related: Collateral Damage of Face Masks | James F. Gauss’ Blog (wordpress.com)

For more on the pandemic and other threats to America, check out my book, Revelation 18 and the Fate of America on Amazon for $21.95 or on the author’s website for $16.50 plus free shipping.

The Plague, Part 3

Revelation 18 and the fate of America (2021 Edition) is now available on Amazon or by author-direct at: https://www.jamesgaussbooks.com

Below is the 3rd excerpt from the chapter, The Plague.

The Negative is the Positive.  The bellwether for determining the presence of the COVID-19 virus has been the PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) test.  The late Dr. Kary Mullis developed the test and won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993 for his contribution.  He made it clear that it was not to be used as a diagnostic tool.  In fact, he stated, “with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody.”

On December 14, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a memo warning that using high cycle thresholds during the PCR test, “will result in false positives.”

WHO further warned, to use a high cycle threshold (CT) value would result in detecting nothing of value and will only produce false-positives for Sars-Cov-2.  The WHO release further stated:

            Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result.

            . . .The design principle of RT-PCR means that for patients with high levels of circulating virus (viral load), relatively few cycles will be needed to detect virus and so the Ct value will be low. Conversely, when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain.

Commenting on cycle thresholds, Dr. Mullis said, “If you have to go more than 40 cycles to amplify a single-copy gene, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.”

Dr. Fauci has also stated publicly, a cycle threshold over 35 will only detect “dead nucleotides” and not a living virus.

Yet, in America and around the world, testing laboratories have been using the PCR test with CT values over 35 and into the low forties.

In late August, 2020, The New York Times, which was keeping track of the number of COVID-19 cases, reported, “In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus . . .”

Masks: Duped into Submission.  In a July 26, 2020 blog post, this author stated:

First (and you can argue all you want), face masks (no matter what type) have been proven time and again, through multiple tests, research, epidemiologists and the medical profession, DO NOT prevent COVID-19 or the spread of any other virus. Virus organisms are much smaller than the smallest pores of any mask. To create a mask that would prevent the spread or inhalation of a virus, would also prevent oxygen intake. Get it! The smallest pore (opening) on the most “effective” mask is 3 microns (micron = one millionth  of  a  meter).  A bacterial organism is 3 microns in size, the COVID-19 virus is 1/10^th of a micron. The N-95 mask is rated to filter 95% of particles that are 3/10ths of a micron or larger. In other words, they do not screen out COVID-19 virus. It is like using 6” x 6” construction wire on your screen door to keep out mosquitos.

I concluded the post with this warning:

Folks, THIS IS NOT about public health and the mask. This is behavioral and social engineering for the next step  in  mastering  the  public  to  comply  with  the  socialist agenda. If you do not think so, you are not paying attention. Remember the mantra since day one of the pandemic. We are never going back to “normal.” There is no going back to pre-COVID America. COVID is never going away.

In the early outbreak of the virus, Dr. Fauci, infectious disease expert, was interviewed on the widely viewed CBS 60 Minutes on March 8, 2020.  He was asked about the advisability of people wearing masks in public.  Dr. Fauci stated that if you are sick, then wearing a mask makes sense so you do not infect others. However, he added, “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask” if you are healthy.   He was asked if he was sure about that because a lot of people were depending on his opinion.  He reiterated that he was sure about it: Healthy people should not wear masks. 

At this juncture, common sense and medical science would support his position.

Six months later, he waffled on his position.

“Very early on in the pandemic,” he noted, “… there was a shortage of PPE [personal protection equipment] and masks for health care providers who needed them desperately since they were putting their lives and their safety on the line every day. So the feeling was that people who were wanting to have masks in the community, namely just people out in the street, might be hoarding masks and making the shortage of masks even greater. In that context, we said that we did not recommend masks.”

Then, on NBC Today (January 25, 2021), when asked about the CDC possibly recommending the wearing of two masks, Fauci responded, “It makes common sense.”

A few days later, he back tracked on his position.  “There are many people who feel, you know,  if you really wanna have an extra little bit of protection ‘maybe I should put two masks on.’ There’s nothing wrong with that, but there’s no data that indicates that that is going to make a difference and that’s the reason why the CDC has not changed their recommendations.”

The truth is, there is no scientific study that has demonstrated that masks of any type are effective in the prevention of the spread or infection of the COVID-19 virus or any virus.  The only purpose is to make people feel better and to stroke their fear factor to a manageable level.  In reality, it just keeps the artificial and unwarranted panic alive.  Numerous medical professionals have stated clearly, masks are useless  in  defending  one  against a virus  or  in preventing one from spreading it.  What masks do, however, is result in the wearer re-breathing their bacteria-laden exhale back into their lungs, possibly causing a very dangerous and life-threatening bacterial lung infection.

In the October 16, 2020 issue of American Institute for Economic Research, Dr. Roger W. Koops, a chemistry professor at the University of California, Riverside, wrote: “A ‘mask,’ and that term usually refers to either a surgical mask or N95 mask, has no benefit in the general population and is only useful in controlled clinical settings. Further, it has been considered a greater transmission risk than a benefit in the general population. … In the open environment, no one should be wearing face coverings.”

Again, Dr. Paul E. Alexander, a Canadian epidemiologist, wrote in the February 11, 2021 issue of American Institute for Economic Research, “Surgical and cloth masks, used as they currently are, have absolutely no impact on controlling the transmission of Covid-19 virus, and current evidence implies that face masks can be actually harmful.”

In May 21, 2020 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine, five professionals (four with medical expertise) wrote:

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with           symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30     minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many    cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.

During Thanksgiving week, 2020, the FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration), again released their recommendations for wearing face masks.

To help expand the availability of face masks (including cloth face coverings), surgical masks, and respirators, the FDA is providing certain regulatory flexibility for the duration of the COVID-19 public health emergency . . . has issued emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for face masks, surgical masks, and respirators that meet certain criteria. . . .

A mask, with or without a face shield, that covers the user’s nose and mouth and may or may not meet fluid barrier or filtration efficiency levels. Face masks that are not intended for a medical purpose are not considered medical devices. Face masks may be used by the general public and health care personnel as source control in accordance with CDC recommendations. . . .

While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, they do not provide complete protection from germs and other contaminants because of the loose fit between the surface of the mask and your face. Surgical masks are not respiratory protective devices such as respirators. . . .

Masks may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others. The CDC recommends people wear face masks in public settings, especially when other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain. Wearing a face mask may limit exposure to respiratory droplets and large particles and may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus. . . .

Source control refers to use of cloth face coverings or face masks to cover a person’s mouth and nose when they are talking, sneezing, or coughing to reduce the likelihood of transmission of infection by preventing the spread of respiratory secretions. COVID-19 may be spread by individuals who may or may not have symptoms of COVID-19 (author’s emphasis).

The FDA release continued by stating that face masks that are intended for medical uses “are subject to FDA regulation.”  However, because of the urgency of need under COVID-19 they issued a EUA (Emergency Use Authorization).  What does that mean?  The EUA allows for medical products, devices and medications (such as vaccines) to be used without the approval of the FDA or any proof that they actually work in preventing the disease or its spread.

Translation and bottom line:  Masks are useless to prevent the spreading of a virus and do not protect one from getting the virus.  There has been no scientific research identified by WHO, the CDC or the FDA that verifies the efficacy of masks of any type in the preventing the spread or ingestion of viral particles.

One interesting revelation, however, came from YouGov.com in a COVID-19 tracking project by economist Brian Westbury, in which he overlaid the incidence of mask wearing with the levels of virus cases from March 20, 2020 to March 3, 2021.  YouGov survey data showed that mask wearing compliance stayed in the 80 percent range from August, 2020 to March, 2021.  However, the incidence of COVID cases ebbed and flowed dramatically during the same period (see the graph below).

Early in 2021, Dr. Scott Atlas, one of President Trump’s COVID advisors, stated in an interview, the use of masks by the public was ineffective in the prevention of the spread of the virus.

“In October,” Art Moore wrote for WorldNetDaily, “an analysis of a dozen graphs charting the number of COVID-19 cases in countries and U.S. states confirmed the conclusions of recent studies that mask mandates had no effect on the spread of the disease.”

The CDC, Moore noted, found that mask-wearing actually had negative impact on a person’s health.

The consensus of members of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons prior to the COVID pandemic “was that the effectiveness of mask-wearing by the general public in slowing the spread of a virus is unproven, and there’s evidence it does more harm than good,” Moore wrote.

Even the World Health Organization, in an April 6, 2020 release, stated, “wide use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not supported by current evidence and carries uncertainties and critical risks.”

Nevertheless, two months later, WHO reversed its position as the pandemic raged on, but provided no evidence for the policy shift. . . .

Order author-direct copy of the book and get a 25% discount and FREE shipping to the continental 48 states, go here or to: https://www.jamesgaussbooks.com/

Related links:

The Plague | James F. Gauss’ Blog (wordpress.com)

Thinking of Getting VAXXED? | James F. Gauss’ Blog (wordpress.com)

The Plague, Part 2

Revelation 18 and the fate of America (2021 Edition) is now available on Amazon or by author-direct at: https://www.jamesgaussbooks.com

Below is an excerpt from the chapter, The Plague.

The Plague of 2020-2021.  Was the coronavirus, aka, COVID-19, an accidental release upon an unsuspecting world?  That is the question any thinking human being should be asking and expecting a truthful answer.  The truth?  It was no accident, but a well- orchestrated release and fanned to a roaring blaze of shear panic by complicit globalist leaders and Marxist media elites.  For the United States and the Democratic Party it was perfect timing to aid in the destruction of the re-election hopes of the enormously popular Donald Trump, a person the Democrats had no realistic chance of defeating.  However, that was not the primary purpose of its release, it was just an added benefit for the corrupt Democratic Party. 

First, let us look at the 54-page document of The Rockefeller Foundation released on May 13, 2010, titled: Scenerios for the Future of Technology and International Development.  On pages 18 and 19 it postulates a future scenario of how a pandemic could reshape the dynamics of the world, providing greater control over the populations through the use of mandatory face masks and “biometric IDs.”

            Scenario Narratives. LOCK STEP: A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback.

            In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain—originating from wild geese—was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.

            The pandemic blanketed the planet—though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge. The United States’s [sic] initial policy of “strongly discouraging” citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the  spread  of  the  virus  not  just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did fare better—China in particular. The Chinese government’s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery.

            China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.

            At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty—and their privacy—to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth.

            Across the developing world, however, the story was different—and much more variable. Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens’ overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed high-emitting vehicles. In Ghana, the introduction of ambitious government programs to improve basic infrastructure and ensure the availability of clean water for all her people led to a sharp decline in water-borne diseases. But more authoritarian leadership worked less well—and in some cases tragically—in countries run by irresponsible elites who used their increased power to pursue their own interests at the expense of their citizens.

If we had not the perspective and reality of COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the foregoing would seem like the script for the next horror movie.  The certainty, however, is that it was and is the script we are all now living, with the prospect of being totally controlled by an evil and corrupt, anti-freedom Marxist elite.  The “script” has been followed almost to the “T” when one realized how COVID-19 has played out and how easy it was for governing authorities and play-along media to whip the unsuspecting public into a turbulent foam of fear and death threats. Now the plan can proceed to the next level of total fear-induced control that will track and dictate the movement of every person. 

Never Waste a Good Crisis. Rahm Emanuel, the former Chief of Staff (2009-2010) under President Obama, and the Democratic Mayor of Chicago, was credited with this proclamation: Never waste a good crisis.  However, it had its roots in a Winston Churchill quote toward the end of World War II: “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” The Democrats have become experts at either creating a crisis or seizing upon an unexpected crisis to introduce or move forward their otherwise unpopular agenda.  COVID-19 was no exception and they used every bit of it to their advantage to lie to, deceive and turn the voting public against each other and President Trump.

Again, this was not the main purpose of the pandemic, it was just the cherry on top of the sundae.  It was a crisis begging to be used for the sordid purposes of the Democratic Party.  Yet, it was not likely the only reason Donald Trump was not re-elected (see Chapter 18).    

If the Truth be Told.  The primary method of the evil one’s attack, is through lies and deceptions. Satan has been deceiving mankind ever since he deceived Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.  COVID-19 has to be one of his greatest successes of the modern era.

The amount of data and the number of medical and scientific people trying to warn the public about the truth of the COVID pandemic worldwide is mind boggling. However, the data and testimonies are being suppressed or scrubbed and the voices of reason have been silenced, or at the very least, been ridiculed and defamed and called purveyors of misinformation.

Some alert and thinking people were on to Dr. Fauci and other’s tactics right from the beginning.  First, they did not buy the mask ruse, realizing it was totally ineffective and counter-productive in providing protection from a virus, and it often created other unnecessary health issues for the vulnerable and the healthy alike.

A second revealing clue, for those who were paying attention, was that the “esteemed” Dr. Anthony Fauci—the one commissioned to be the talking head for President Trump, President Biden and the media—too often contradicted himself or sounded like he had no clue what he was talking about week after week.

Early in the pandemic, one tell-tale sign came from New York.  As COVID deaths rose, the number of deaths from heart attacks and cancer plummeted by over 80 percent.  How was that possible?  Was COVID a cure for heart failure and cancer?  Of course not.  Throughout the U.S., all types of deaths, even murder, were being “coded” as COVID deaths—largely for political and financial reasons.

By April 7, 2021, the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) reported 539,723 deaths as COVID-19 or COVID-19 related deaths (January 4, 2020 to April 3, 2021).  That number represented 13 percent of the 4,161,167 deaths during that period in the U.S. 

However, only 9,037 of the deaths were attributed to influenza alone.  This was a bit odd, since the flu was responsible for an estimated 22,000 deaths during the 2019-2020 flu season; 34,000 in 2018-2019 and 61,000 in 2017-2018.  Influenza often leads to pneumonia,  then  death.  During  the  period  of  2017-2019,  flu and pneumonia deaths averaged 54,858 per year (season).  The 9,037 deaths listed previously, however, included all flu deaths, including those associated with pneumonia or COVID-19.

Of the total “confirmed or presumed” COVID deaths reported by the CDC, 95.6 percent occurred with individuals age 50 or older; 80.5 percent for those 65 and older.  Only 0.046 percent (251 deaths) occurred in those younger than age 18.  This is surprising to medical people, because the flu usually has a much higher death rate among children.   This lower rate might be due to the fact that most schools and daycares were closed during much of the pandemic peak.

The key word in the CDC report is “presumed.”  There is likely a wide range between “confirmed” and “presumed” COVID-related deaths.

For example, back in early September, 2020, the CDC announced that they could only confirm that six percent of the deaths attributed to COVID-19, were actually from COVID-19 alone.  If that is true, and we carry that statistic through to the current death total, then 32,383 were strictly from COVID, or over 16 times less than reported.  This does not mean that COVID was not a contributing factor in the other deaths, just not the main morbidity contributor.

The worst influenza season in decades was 2017-2018, that took the lives of an estimated 61,000 Americans.  The influenza pandemic of 1957-1958 was responsible for an estimated 116,000 deaths.  The Spanish flu pandemic of 1918 reportedly took the lives of 675,000 young and old in America. . . .

Order author-direct and get a 25% discount and FREE shipping to the continental 48 states by clicking here or go to:

https://www.jamesgaussbooks.com/

Related links:

The Plague | James F. Gauss’ Blog (wordpress.com)

Thinking of Getting VAXXED? | James F. Gauss’ Blog (wordpress.com)