This information is from Our World in Data.

70.6% of the world population has received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.
13.53 billion doses have been administered globally, and 21,130 are now administered each day.
32.8% of people in low-income countries have received at least one dose.

This is a rather morbid subject, understand I'm looking at this from a purely logical standpoint.

Many people believe that the COVID-19 vaccines were designed to reduce the global population as a whole. While that's possible, it's not very probable. How would you know who to kill off?

Is it possible that this is more of a culling? Which is the essential method of action with eugenics. Culling requires removing specific animals from a herd, or people in this case.

Given the strange side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines, the oddest is the frequent and sudden onset of congenital disorders. Diseases that are normally present from the time of birth, or at least have some genetic historical connection to the patient. Perhaps someone else in their family had a particular genetic disorder.

The vast majority of of people "coming down with" genetic disorders are developing autoimmune diseases. Many people are not aware, but infection is listed as the number one cause of "waking up" dormant, or recessive genes that result in autoimmune disorders. This article is rather long, but it consists of a list of various immunity disorders that are linked to infections.

Autoimmune diseases (ADs) are chronic pathologies triggered by the loss of immunological tolerance to self-antigens, which can cause systemic or organ specific damage. ADs are common, with an estimated prevalence of 3,225/100,000. They are also a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality (1,2). Genetic and environmental factors are the main ones involved in the pathogenesis of ADs. Infections and exposure to pathogens or opportunistic organisms are among the environmental factors and may induce the initiation or exacerbation of ADs (3-5). Many types of infection may influence one or more of these diseases, and a single organism may be able to trigger more than one AD (1,6). In this chapter, the evidence indicating a causal role of infections in the development of ADs is reviewed.

Could it be that the vaccines were really a way to "wake up" dormant genes in people who have genetic predispositions to various genetic "defects?" In other words a literal culling. Perhaps to kill off the people who are considered genetically inferior. Like those who have a genetic predisposition to immune disorders.

Then there's the cancer aspect. Cancer is essentially an immune disorder. You might have never heard this before.

Autoimmune disease results from the immune response against self-antigens, while cancer develops when the immune system does not respond to malignant cells. Thus, for years, autoimmunity and cancer have been considered as two separate fields of research that do not have a lot in common. However, the discovery of immune checkpoints and the development of anti-cancer drugs targeting PD-1 (programmed cell death receptor 1) and CTLA-4 (cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4) pathways proved that studying autoimmune diseases can be extremely helpful in the development of novel anti-cancer drugs. Therefore, autoimmunity and cancer seem to be just two sides of the same coin. In the current review, we broadly discuss how various regulatory cell populations, effector molecules, genetic predisposition, and environmental factors contribute to the loss of self-tolerance in autoimmunity or tolerance induction to cancer. With the current paper, we also aim to convince the readers that the pathways involved in cancer and autoimmune disease development consist of similar molecular players working in opposite directions. Therefore, a deep understanding of the two sides of immune tolerance is crucial for the proper designing of novel and selective immunotherapies.

Vaccines are immunotherapies -- just not for cancer. They are functionally the same thing. They both attempt to produce a specific immune response in the host.

With mRNA vaccines nearly all of the potential Adverse Events or (AEs) were known -- long before the vaccines were pushed on the public. This paper was published in April 24, 2019. You might be surprised at the long history of clinical testing as it relates to mRNA vaccines. There is an exhaustive list of reasons that the technology rarely moved past early stage trials. To assume that the underlying issues with mRNA vaccines were fixed and tested just months, before the COVID-19 vaccine rollout are simply not believable. Operation Warp Speed allowed for nearly all of the normal regulatory safety measures to be bypassed.

I'll list a few of the tables from the article, highlighting those adverse events that have now been observed in patients who have received the current COVID-19 vaccines. Keep in mind, all of these adverse events were still and issue as of the above listed article from April 24, 2019.

Summary and conclusion from the 2019 document.

In summary, despite all the excitement over pre-clinical efficacy of mRNA, it should be remembered that in many ways, the mRNA field is recapitulating what occurred with plasmid DNA 20+ years ago, when seemingly almost any disease could be prevented or treated in pre-clinical animal disease models with the administration of an unformulated plasmid encoding a key antigen [1]. Therefore, one must keep in mind that pre-clinical immunogenicity or even protection/therapy, and human immunogenicity are low hurdles and are not predictive of human efficacy. One reason this is so challenging is that, for many of the diseases under evaluation, scientists do not know which immune response or combination of immune responses and which antigen targets are the crucial elements for efficacy; the vaccine technology alone is not the only piece of the puzzle. Table 5 summarizes the main advantages and disadvantages of mRNA vaccines with a comparison to DNA vaccines.

Reported Phase I clinical trial results for mRNA vaccines are encouraging, although only the results of the first rabies mRNA vaccine have been published in the peer reviewed literature. The results for the human Metapneumovirus + Parainfluenza virus 3, and the Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) phase I studies were announced via press release, thus details are not available. The target for the RSV vaccine mRNA was not publicly disclosed at the time the Phase I study was initiated, and to this date, the study appears to not be listed on clinicaltrials.gov. Whether the immune responses are at sufficient levels or have the types of needed immune responses and the necessary duration to result in protective efficacy is unknown and is not necessarily predicted by the Phase I studies.

One should also not ignore the reported toxicities seen with the rabies mRNA vaccine [55] that included limited systemic AEs for the majority of patients (78%) and even grade three AEs in ~10% of patients following doses of 80–400 μg mRNA via different routes, although the conclusions were that the vaccine was generally safe. It is not known whether the pre-clinical hepatic toxicity that proved to be a “no go” result for a particular Crigler-Najjar mRNA candidate is relevant to the mRNA vaccine studies from the same company, because, despite the low doses used, the doses and mRNA formulation for vaccine studies may be different. This is in comparison to DNA vaccine clinical trials where 4 mg doses of DNA i.m. with boosts have been used in a variety of clinical trials with limited systemic symptoms [83,84,85] while generating good immune responses.

Just as DNA vaccines, after more than 25 years since the first publication of preclinical protective efficacy, are still a work in progress in improving potency and finding the right antigens and targets, there remain challenges for mRNA to become clinical products. For both DNA and mRNA vaccines (and monoclonal antibodies and bi-specific antibodies before them), a simple concept may have a challenging path to reality, and the technology may not be totally generic. mRNA may be even more complex than plasmid DNA because of the modifications (modified nucleosides) plus the formulations needed for stability, delivery, and the need to control the innate immunostimulatory activity of the mRNA. However, it also offers advantages in terms of manufacture that avoids the need for any animal or cellular products. The hope is that once the fundamental key challenges are solved for both plasmid DNA and mRNA, the clinical successes will come rapidly, although that has not occurred for moving from the veterinary licensed products for DNA vaccines into humans, demonstrating how much still needs to be understood, not just about the technologies but about the diseases that are being treated or prevented.

I read parts of this article in 2019 on Wikipedia. This was before the entire COVID-19 Pandemic scare. I found it searching for something to do with animals. The dangers related to mRNA tech -- were still listed in the Wikipedia article in 2019. I went to show the Wikipedia article to my wife, in late 2020, and it had changed. I decided to look on the Internet Archive (WayBack Machine) to view an older version, and the history for the "mRNA Vaccine" page for Wikipedia only went back to 2020! We know that research has been going on for more than 25 years per the article I quoted above. Are we really to believe that there wasn't an mRNA Wikipedia article before 2020?

It was at that point that I knew something was definitely not right with the entire COVID-19 situation.

Considering the history of eugenics in the US, it's rather easy to see how this "culling" might be possible.

The Nazis got their inspiration for eugenics from the United States of America?

What is often not appreciated is that Nazi efforts were bolstered by the published works of the American eugenics movement as the intellectual underpinnings for its social policies. One of Hilter's first acts after gaining control of the German government was the passage of the Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring (Gesetz zur Verhütung erbkranken Nachwuchses) in July 1933

Is it possible that through all of the mRNA testing, perhaps some of it that was never published, they found that mRNA could be used to awaken recessive genetic defects? If the goal was to cull the population (removing those with genetic defects, or those who might die from cancer) convincing as many people as possible to get “vaccinated” might be a simple way to accomplish that goal.

When questioning the possibility of a "global culling," it would be wise to consider -- perhaps they never stopping working towards this goal.

US Eugenics Poster Circa 1926:

What do you think?

Please leave a comment, like it or hate it... You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment. Email addresses are NOT used. Just make one up "someone@somehost.com"

Everyone was told that if they just get the vaccine, things will return to normal. I didn't believe it then, and I don't believe it now. Things went way too far -- way too fast, for this not to be a giant permanent power grab.

Let's take a look at what Cathy Hochul is saying in New York.

The updated vaccine, necessary due to waning immunity and mutated variants, was reformulated and developed in recent months following the FDA decision to target a subvariant of Omicron, called XBB.1.5. According to CDC, more than 90% of the COVID viruses circulating are closely related to that strain, with tests showing the updated vaccine effective at increasing immunity to a more recent variant, called BA.2.86.

Isn't that the same language that was used for the first round of shots, and the boosters?

“The vaccine has always been the best way to protect yourself and your community against COVID-19, and this updated vaccine addresses newer strains of the virus that are currently circulating,” Governor Hochul said. “As we enter the Fall season, when respiratory viruses circulate, it is vital that New Yorkers consider getting this updated vaccine to protect themselves from this still dangerous virus.”

We know that the vaccines don't protect other people from infection. They don't "stop the spread." Why are they still parroting this? Even USA Today underhandedly says that this is not true.

Susan Hassig, an epidemiologist at Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, similarly said that vaccines protect vaccinated individuals by greatly reducing their risk of infection, illness and death. That individual vaccination then protects the broader community by making the vaccinated person less likely to become a host.

“This benefit is most evident when the majority of persons in a community are vaccinated,” Hassig said. "The virus, if introduced, has nowhere to go, and dies out. Cannot spread, cannot mutate.”

You have to pay close attention to what is said here. Susan Hassig didn't mention the COVID-19 vaccines, she said, "vaccines" as in traditional vaccines. She said what has been said for the past 80+ years. Besides, we still have variants all over the place, and it is well known that there is no way to eradicate a respiratory virus through vaccination. Not to mention there are multiple animal vectors. Animals that are claimed to get SARS-CoV-2 infections. Are we going to vaccinate every animal that they claim can carry SARS-CoV-2?

The the CDC says, "The risk of animals spreading COVID-19 to people is considered low."

Risk of animals spreading SARS-CoV-2 to people

The risk of animals spreading COVID-19 to people is considered low.

There is no evidence that animals play a significant role in spreading SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, to people. There have been a few reports of infected mammalian animals spreading the virus to people during close contact, but this is rare. These cases include farmed mink in Europe and the United States, white-tailed deer in Canada, pet hamsters in Hong Kong, and a cat in Thailand. In most of these cases, the animals were known to be first infected by a person who had COVID-19.

Animals infected with SARS-CoV-2 have been documented around the world. Most of these animals became infected after contact with people with COVID-19, including owners, caretakers, or others who were in close contact. We don’t yet know all of the animals that can get infected. Animals reported infected worldwide include

Companion animals, including pet cats, dogs, hamsters, and ferrets.

• Animals in zoos and sanctuaries, including several types of big cats (e.g., lions, tigers, snow leopards), otters, non-human primates, a binturong, a coatimundi, a fishing cat, hyenas, hippopotamuses, and manatees.
• Mink on mink farms.
• Wildlife, including white-tailed deer, mule deer, a black-tailed marmoset, a giant anteater, and wild mink near mink farms.

The CDC says, "There is no evidence that animals play a significant role in spreading SARS-CoV-2." Of course their story is that it first infected a human because of a bat. Or was it made in a lab? I'm not sure anymore, and neither are the "experts." Because they keep changing their story -- each time the current story becomes less plausible.

Remember, if you just get the vaccine, things will go back to normal. The lockdowns will stop, we can all take off the masks, stop standing 6-feet apart, and using salad bar sneeze guards at checkout counters. Only that was a lie to get people to take the vaccines. If you remember Fauci was asked multiple times as to what the vaccination level needed to be before things could go back to normal.

Fauci has in the past said that if the U.S. achieves 70% to 85% of the population vaccinated, that would equate to good “herd immunity,” and the country should start to see a return to normality by the fall. That, of course, may depend on individuals’ age, circumstances and underlying conditions.

Also Thursday, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla told CNBC that people will likely require a third vaccine dose after 12 months, and potentially annual vaccinations thereafter. When asked about the prospects for a next-generation vaccine that can fend off emerging variants of the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, Fauci told the hearing that the endgame was a universal vaccine, the business-news channel reported.

At any rate, the goal is to get people to take these mRNA vaccines in perpetuity. If public health were ever the true goal things would not have progressed this way.

What do you think?

Please leave a comment, like it or hate it... You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment. Email addresses are NOT used. Just make one up "someone@somehost.com"

Don't give the globalists what they want. What do they want? They want the Illusion that Biden is in control.

If the Republicans try to impeach Biden, it plays right into the globalist's plans. An impeachment hearing gives the impression that Biden is actually calling the shots -- and that Republicans actually believe this. It gives the impression that by removing Biden, things might change. But most importantly it changes the narrative. It gets people focused on Biden's personal crimes -- not what has been done to the country as a result of his administration's actions.

What the American people have to understand is that Biden, whether you believe he was elected or not, is absolutely incapacitated. Biden hasn't been in charge of anything, he's not mentally capable. Nobody would pick Biden as their Jeopardy partner, much less to run the largest economy on the planet.

Consider Biden's first day in office, what did he do? He signed around a dozen (Executive Orders) EOs undoing a lot of Trump's EOs. Does anyone really believe that Biden has the mental capacity to read those EOs, or to understand the implications of signing them? Of course he doesn't, but the people around him do.

Biden does not represent his administration. Multiple times this year alone, Biden's administration has had to walk back what he's said. Why? Because he doesn't speak for his administration -- they tell him what to say. Biden has admitted that he shouldn't get off topic because he'll, "Get in trouble." Really? The president will get in trouble if he says something other than what his handlers want him to say?

It's like a bad joke, only nobody is laughing. Nobody is laughing in the US, or anywhere else in the world, because the implications of this are worldwide, and they are not good for ordinary people anywhere.

What has become clear is the illusory activities of the current administration/regime. Nobody really knows what they are up to next, because they have zero outward facing visibility, we know that whatever Biden says doesn't matter. We only know that whatever they do, it's not in the best interest of the American people.

What do you think?

Please leave a comment, like it or hate it... You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment. Email addresses are NOT used. Just make one up "someone@somehost.com"

Many people were under the impression that UN Agenda 2030 directive was a "conspiracy theory." It is most definitely not.

Here are screen shots for the associated Samsung Global Goals website. I did this to document what was on the website as of this date. I don't know if these sorts of apps will become more invasive in the future or not.

Keep in mind, EULAs (End User License Agreements) are not getting any shorter. Also keep in mind that Microsoft owns your copy of MS Windows. Not you, you paid for it, but you didn't "buy" it, you paid for the rights to use it. Any Windows machine is basically like a cable TV box. Microsoft can update and change your computer when they want, and you don't have any say in what they do.

United Nations, Agenda 2030, and Samsung.

The app is designed to allow users to watch adds, then the add revenue is stored in the user's donation account. It is later donated to the UN or whatever associated "charity," sometimes automatically.

-

-

-

-

-

-

Here's the info from the Google Play Store about the Samsung Global Goals app.

-

The reviews are rather interesting. There are many of people who like the app, but, few who really know what Agenda 2030 is about. This first person does.

-

-

-

-

-

-

Some people don't like the app.

-

-

-

-

-

Samsung replies with something like, "Agenda 2030, SDGs, and UN directives are important -- because 'we' say they are. Therefore, you will do what we say, and like it. Oh and raising awareness and stuff..." People might want to read those EULAs a little more closely.

-
I'll admit, I have Samsung devices. While I've never run into this application on my devices, I'm going to be looking to other manufacturers from now on when purchasing phones.

What do you think?

Please leave a comment, like it or hate it... You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment. Email addresses are NOT used. Just make one up "someone@somehost.com"

Setting The Stage

It’s now being widely reported that Dengue Fever might become the next global pandemic. Does this really make sense? Why are more people getting it now, than just a few years ago?

Lima is dealing with an outbreak of dengue.

Rosa Gutiérrez, who was forced to resign as health minister on June 16, was widely viewed, both by medical experts and ordinary Peruvians, as out of her depth in handling the outbreak.

//

"But it's not just the health ministry," says Soto. "It's also the education ministry, the housing ministry, infrastructure and regional governments," which are failing. One of the many problems he criticized was the lack of potable water and sanitation services at schools, with pupils often forced to wash their hands in plastic tubs and flush toilets with buckets of water, making the schools dengue hot spots and forcing the Piura regional government to close them for several weeks.

It would seem to me that there are much larger problems in Lima. Lack of sanitation is the absolute number one cause of illness anywhere. Vaccines are not the answer to a place with not running water, improving infrastructure is the start. There is data going back 100+ years that illustrates an increase in public sanitation services, with a dramatic decrease in illness -- far more effective than any vaccine. But that's a topic for another day.

According to some people, this increase might be climate related.

"Dengue is occurring in urban areas where it did not exist before," Dr. Coralith García, associate professor at the school of medicine at Cayetano Heredia University in Lima, Peru, told Fox News Digital.

Experts blame warmer temperatures and increased rainfall, but even in Lima, the second largest desert city in the world, dengue is flourishing because "it’s so crowded that anything can happen," she added.

The "experts" blame high temperatures and increased humidity/rainfall for the rise in cases (dengue is spread by mosquitoes) however, cases are simultaneously increasing in places with hot dry climates?

This is explained away by saying, "it’s so crowded [in Lima] that anything can happen." Really? When was the last malaria outbreak in Lima? Watch out for those pesky -- Desert Mosquitoes. And, Lima didn't become densely populated within the last year, Lima has been densely populated for decades, so why are we seeing this now? You can't have it both ways, but when you're making up stuff, you need it both ways.

I'm not blasting Dr. Coralith García, associate professor at the school of medicine at Cayetano Heredia University in Lima, Peru, but this is not "science." "Anything can happen" is not science, that's a literal admission that they have no answer for what's going on.

How Dangerous is Dengue Fever

Dengue fever is unique in that it requires an ADE (Autoimmune Deficiency Enhancement) response, in part, to make people sick. Most people who are exposed to and catch dengue fever have no symptoms the first time around, however; when they are exposed the second time, they are much more likely to get sick. This is why the vaccine (Dengvaxia) is only supposed to be given to people who have had dengue fever in the past. More on this later.

CDC stats for the Flu -- deaths US only.

CDC estimates that flu has resulted in 9 million – 41 million illnesses, 140,000 – 710,000 hospitalizations and 12,000 – 52,000 deaths annually between 2010 and 2020.

Now let's look at dengue fever -- deaths GLOBALLY.

Each year, up to 400 million people are infected by a dengue virus. Approximately 100 million people get sick from infection, and 40,000 die from severe dengue.

Somehow since COVID-19, and a global mass vaccination campaign, a blood-borne illness spread by mosquitoes has become more virulent -- in the desert?

CDC guidance on at home care for dengue fever.

Jump to The Philippines

There is a vaccine for dengue fever, but it doesn't have the best track record. It's called Dengvaxia, the same one that the CDC recommends if you want to be vaccinated for dengue fever.

A vaccination program run by the Philippine Department of Health (DOH) administered Sanofi Pasteur's Dengvaxia to schoolchildren.[3] The program was stopped when Sanofi Pasteur advised the government that the vaccine could put previously uninfected people at a somewhat higher risk of a severe case of dengue fever through antibody-dependent enhancement.[4] A political controversy erupted over whether the program was run with sufficient care and who should be held responsible for the alleged harm to the vaccinated children.

In late November 2017, the DOH suspended the school-based vaccination program.[5] The DOH subsequently banned the vaccine's use and sale in the Philippines.[6] The scare caused by the controversy has been suggested as a factor in the country's loss of confidence in vaccines and low immunization rates,[7] resulting in an infectious disease crisis in the country in 2019,[8] including a measles outbreak.[9]

The dengue fever vaccine (Dengvaxia) was only supposed to be given to people who were previously infected with dengue fever. There is an antibody test to determine whether or not someone has had dengue fever in the past. As I stated earlier dengue fever works in part by ADE. ADE is basically where you are exposed to something, and your body "gets used to it," no longer attacking that particular pathogen when it enters the body. You get exposed to dengue fever, your body builds an ADE response to it, then when you are infected a second time, you could get very sick, because your immune system ignores the pathogen.

The Wikipedia article states that there was an increase in vaccine hesitancy because of the Philippine government's complete mishandling of the Dengvaxia rollout. But then, the article goes on to claim that there was an infectious disease outbreak due to vaccine hesitancy citing measles as the most prevalent.

In 2019 (the year of the measles outbreak) there was an increase of (463) measles deaths when compared to 2018. For 2014, for which there was no measles outbreak, there was an increase of (390) measles deaths when compared to 2013. The difference between the two increases being (73) deaths. However, in 2020, there were only 51 deaths attributed to measles? Was the measles vaccine uptake higher in 2020 when compared to 2019?

Wikipedia shows that the number of deaths due to the 2019 Philippines Measles Outbreak was (415). I don't know which source is more accurate. Keep in mind the population of the Philippines is 109,033,245.

Due to fear of being exposed to people with Covid-19, Vergeire explained that many parents were reluctant to leave their homes and have their children vaccinated.

Moreover, healthcare workers on the ground were unavailable for the vaccination program because they were re-deployed to attend to [COVID-19] vaccination duties.

"The Philippines is one of the few countries that continued with its efforts for supplemental immunization campaigns in the middle of pandemic. The Sabayang Patak Kontra Polio is a continuation of the 2019 polio campaign in response to the polio outbreak in the country," Vergeire said.

She added that in July 2020, the agency has vaccinated more than 2 million children less than five years old in Central Luzon, Cavite, Laguna, and Rizal.

Meanwhile, the first phase of the vaccination against measles-rubella was conducted October to November 2020 covering Luzon regions and the whole of Mindanao and the second phase was conducted during the first quarter of 2021 including the National Capital Region, Central Luzon, Calabarzon, and the Visayas.

Vergeire stressed the vaccines used in routine immunization have been backed up by decades of research and an established system of delivery and monitoring.

"Vaccines saved millions of children from the debilitating effects of VPDs like polio, measles, mumps, and a lot more," she said. (PNA)

Parents were scared to visit health care facilities, and health care workers were unavailable for routine vaccinations because they were busy with COVID-19 vaccinations. The uptake of all other vaccines, other than COVID-19 vaccines, decreased, yet the numbers indicate that there was no outbreak of any other infectious disease? The same people who were vaccine hesitant in 2019, would still be vaccine hesitant in 2020. Somehow there is a decrease in almost every other disease metric -- even with decreased routine vaccine uptake?

Back to Peru

At least some of the findings make sense for Peru.

We observed that since the first case of COVID‐19 was reported in Peru, there has been a decrease in the number of dengue cases reported in several endemic regions of Peru. This temporal pattern is consistent with findings in Brazil. 15 This could be due to the fact that the epidemiological alert triggered by an increase in the number of COVID‐19 cases in Peru has affected the epidemiological surveillance of dengue, resulting in an underreporting of dengue cases, as has also occurred in recent epidemics, where the excessive prioritization of the prevention and control of emerging diseases has led to the unintentional neglect of endemic diseases. 4 Dengue virus is transported mainly by infected travelers. 1 Therefore, social isolation, quarantine, and other preventive measures that were implemented in Peru to counteract the progression of COVID‐19 could have generated a real decrease in the incidence of dengue. 11 , 15 In contrast, difficulty in access to timely diagnosis together with the population's concern about the risk of being infected with COVID‐19 in healthcare facilities may be another reason for the decrease in the number of dengue cases reported at the beginning of the COVID‐19 pandemic. 16

Similarly, until July 2020, in the West Pacific region, countries such as China, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Australia registered fewer cases of dengue compared with that in the same period in 2019. 17 Moreover, in the Americas, data registered up to epidemiological week 21, 2020, show a reduction by approximately 10% compared with that in 2019. 18 Countries such as Bolivia, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, and Brazil reported a large increase in the number of dengue cases during the first weeks of 2020, 11 , 15 , 19 which abruptly decreased subsequently, coinciding with the exponential increase in the number of COVID 19 cases. 11 , 15

The findings of our study also demonstrate that the number of dengue cases per million inhabitants during the COVID‐19 pandemic has exceeded the number of cases reported in the years before the pandemic. This is in line with findings in other geographical areas such as Brazil, the Southwest Indian Ocean Islands, 16 and Asia. 20 Paradoxically, this could also be explained because of the prevention measures established to prevent COVID‐19 transmission because, during the quarantine, populations have lived in close contact with each other for a long time, which promotes the reproduction of arthropods/mosquitoes in and around the houses. 21

The logic is as follows; there was a decrease in the number of dengue cases reported in Peru. COVID-19 testing can be blamed for the decrease in documented dengue cases. Dengue virus is transported mainly by infected travelers (also requiring mosquitoes). Social isolation, quarantine, and other preventive measures that were implemented in Peru to counteract the progression of COVID‐19 could have generated a real decrease in the incidence of dengue, but not COVID-19?

This is a very long winded way of saying, dengue was underreported because COVID-19 was overreported. It can't be assumed that the majority of people worldwide -- were primarily sick with one illness.

The Disappearing Flu

Here's data from the CDC for Flu in the US. The Flu nearly disappeared during the 2020-2021 reporting period? The Flu is going to appear as if it surging as soon as there is one year of normal reported cases.

But that problem is two-fold. This could mean that the Flu vaccines aren't working? "The science" is in trouble here because there's not a good way to spin this. Of course, they could claim that the Flu vaccines prevent "severe illness and death," but that wouldn't account for the previous years where people were sick enough to go to the hospital anyway. Again, you can't have it both ways.

Those Pesky "Desert Mosquitoes"

There are many things at play here one of which is the scientific community trying to maintain their relevance. Vaccines have been touted for years to work miracles, and COVID-19 has come along and shown a light on a lot of the issues here. The most important is that bad statistical data leads to ill-informed conclusions.

COVID-19 cases were vastly overreported worldwide. It was not an issue in just a few countries. There were decreases in reported cases for every infectious disease on the planet during the pandemic. The reasons for this are less significant than acknowledging that it happened. The overreporting of COVID-19 has caused all data for a few years now to be completely inaccurate. Because of this, none of the comparative data from year to year during the pandemic period can really be used to draw any conclusion -- other than the data is not accurate.

The Final Stage is Set

Nearly all illnesses, other than COVID-19, have been underreported worldwide. This will result in an apparent increase in any number of underreported illnesses. In reality the comparative data is incorrect, but that will never be pointed out in the media. We are going to see story after story of illnesses that were considered "eradicated" resurfacing -- and the cause will be Climate Change, just like the once tropical, now desert disease dengue. Never mind that the data is nonsense.

The go to answer for stopping the spread of infectious disease(s), also happens to be the go to answer to stop Climate Change.

Q: We have a crisis, Climate Change, how do we stop it?

A: Reduce economic activity by increasing the prices on energy to the point where people are required to ration it. Ban/remove existing sources of energy without viable replacements. Limit people's freedom of movement through increased transportation costs.

Q: We have a crisis, COVID-19, how do we stop it.

A: Reduce economic activity though lockdowns, and forced business closures. Limit people’s freedom of movement through coercive measures, self isolate. Limit human interaction, reduce travel.

The proposed solutions to both problems will result in a drastic reduction of economic activity. Isn't it a little strange how the corrective outcomes of such vastly different problems will result in similar results?

The new narrative is going to be that we have to stop climate change, in order to stop having pandemics.

What do you think?

Please leave a comment, like it or hate it... You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment. Email addresses are NOT used. Just make one up "someone@somehost.com"