– by Ted Kuntz –
Our federal and provincial governments and the corporate media persist in describing COVID-19 as a “deadly” condition. For the vast majority of the population, this is simply not true. The coronavirus is far less deadly than most people understand. The risk is restricted mostly to the elderly who have fragile health. According to a report published by the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, “Only 3.3 per cent of Canada’s deaths attributed to COVID-19 have been of people under the age of 60, which is 374 people in a population of 37,5000,000.” This is comparable to an annual influenza season.
The CDC found that the presence of pre-existing medical conditions markedly affects the severity of a CV-19 infection. CDC data reveals only 6% of people who purportedly died from CV-19 were without preexisting medical conditions. The average person had 2.6 pre-existing conditions and was 82 years of age. We also know that the number of deaths attributed to CV-19 is unreliable. The medical system has chosen not to distinguish between deaths caused by a CV-19 infection and deaths caused by other medical conditions unrelated to CV-19 but where the person tested positive. This is unprecedented in mortality reporting. This unusual practice undermines the accuracy and integrity of COVID mortality numbers. According to the WHO, more than 80% of people who develop the infection have mild or no symptoms and recover fully without treatment. It is the elderly with preexisting health conditions and living in extended care facilities who are most at risk of serious complications. During the initial phase 82% of deaths attributed to COVID in Canada occurred in extended care facilities. This means only 18% of deaths occurred in the entire rest of the country. For the vast majority of Canadians, COVID-19 is not a deadly condition.
PCR Tests Not Reliable
Governments use “positive cases” to mandate masks, physical distancing, lockdowns and other restrictive measures. What is implied is that a “positive” test result means someone is “infected”. This is fraudulent. Never before in the history of medicine has the term ‘cases’ been applied so recklessly. The PCR test used to diagnose COVID-19 is not designed to be a diagnostic tool. This is because the PCR test does not distinguish between a live, active infection and remnants of a previous infection. Secondly, the PCR test can be easily manipulated to produce a positive result simply by increasing the number of ‘amplification cycles’.
A study published by Oxford Academic in September showed that when testing at a cycle threshold of 35 or higher, the accuracy of the test drops to 3%. Despite this information, the number of cycles commonly used in PCR testing in Canada and globally is 35 cycles or more. Some governments use more than 47 cycles.
An appeals court in Portugal recently ruled that the PCR test is “not a reliable test for SARS-CoV-2” (COVID-19) and “a single positive PCR test cannot be used as an effective diagnosis of infection.” Therefore, “any enforced quarantine measures based on the results is unlawful.”
Government measures ineffective.
No evidence face coverings work
Canadians are subject to face coverings even though the scientific evidence does not support universal mask wearing. A policy review paper published in Emerging Infectious Diseases found no evidence to support universal mask wearing as a protective measure in reducing respiratory illness. They state: “Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of face masks, evidence from fourteen randomized controlled trials did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
Specifically with regard to the use of face coverings, they conclude “There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure.” A recent meta-analysis and scientific review found that mask wearing in the general population did not reduce influenza or influenza-like illness.
Ontario Civil Liberties researcher Dr. Denis Rancourt, Ph.D. conducted a thorough review of the scientific literature related to the use of face coverings. Dr Rancourt concluded: “No RCT (randomized clinical trial) study with verified outcome shows a benefit for… community members… to wearing a mask. There is no such study. There are no exceptions.”
No country has reported a positive change in the trajectory of COVID-19 diagnosis as a result of countrywide mask mandates. The evidence shows that cases all rise and fall around the same time, no matter how strictly face covering laws are enforced, or the level of compliance of the population.
The ineffectiveness of cloth face coverings becomes self-evident when the size of a coronavirus (0.12 microns) is compared to the filtration capacity of a surgical mask (2-10 microns). The holes in a cloth mask are significantly larger still. Using a cloth fabric to prevent viral transmission has been compared to erecting a chain link fence to keep out sand. There is no scientific evidence with verified outcomes that support the commonly held idea that people wearing a face covering reduces infection rates and save lives.
Masking increases infection
There are known risks with prolonged use of face coverings. A study published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) found the risk of infection with influenza-like illness was 13X higher in hospital workers using cloth masks compared to medical/surgical masks and over 3X higher when compared to not wearing a face covering at all.
The World Health Organization declared that maskscarry increased risk of self-contamination due to the inappropriate use of the mask by the general public. A cursory observation of masked individuals shows repeated touching, adjusting and removing of masks, all of which contributes to increased risk of contagion. A CDC analysis revealed that 85% of patients testing positive for COVID-19 wore masks “often” or “always” in the two weeks preceding a positive test.
Vaccines Not Necessary
Dr. Paul Offit is one of the world’s leading experts on vaccination. Offit warns, “Right now you could probably get everyone in this country to get this (CV) vaccine because they are so scared of this virus. I think we should keep remembering that most people who would be getting this vaccine are very unlikely to be killed by this virus.”
Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Vice President and Chief Scientist for Pfizer rejected the need for any vaccines to bring the COVID-19 pandemic to an end. Dr. Yeadon wrote: “There is absolutely no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic. You do not vaccinate people who aren’t at risk from a disease. You also don’t set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn’t been extensively tested on human subjects.”
What does all this add up to?
An over-hyped COVID pandemic, unsubstantiated by independent scientific evidence, is creating unnecessary panic. This panic is being used by governments and corporations to justify violations of our civil rights. Their actions threaten our financial security, sovereignty and democracy.
These measures are unrealistic, unsustainable and have increased overall morbidity and mortality.
There is abundant valid criticism from recognized experts in Canada and internationally who dispute the government’s response to SARS-2 (COVID-19). These experts concur that the decisions of government state actors are based on assumptions rather than robust clinical evidence.
The imposed interventions and government overstep is far more damaging than the virus itself. Decisions are made based on political and marketing agendas rather than on scientific, evidence-based health practices. Mass deception and fear are the real epidemics we face. It is critical that we start to Question Authority and think for our self in these times of medical disaster marketing.