So when is a conspiracy not a conspiracy? Let us consider the following 3 or 4 points.
A. The actual numbers of fatalities. Statistical experts in the field of epidemiology declare that , covid, statistically, is a little worse than the average influenza, but not worse than a bad flu season.
B. Those affected and at the top of the list of fatalities by a vast majority, are elderly, and are already at the end of life due to age and pre- existing conditions. Same as influenza. In fact, pneumonia, which is prominently the cause of death with covid, had always historically been termed the"old folks friend".
C. Why have the numbers of actual cases been grossly over inflated? The PCR tests magnify the search 3 times higher than was practically intended by the inventor of the test. The cycles currently used... Over 30 and in some places over 40, are magnifying the result 1 trillion times. What is being found are useless and dead remnants that cannot possibly infect anyone. Over 20 cycles scientists cannot even deliberately infect cultures in the lab.
D. Why did hospitals and doctors and government agencies suppress known medicines in trying to treat patients? Instead those showing actual symptoms, were told there was nothing anyone could do, the virus was a mystery, there were no known cures until a vaccine was made, they could only recommend going home until the symptoms became unbearable, then go to hospital to die. This was in direct contradiction to the Hippocratic oath.
E. Why were the alternatives to treatment so globally enforced and logically stupid? Lockdowns. Masks. Social distancing. Why were media networks so determined to agree with governments and term this generally harmless virus for healthy people, a deadly dangerous
Pandemic when it was nothing of the sort?
When is a conspiracy not a conspiracy,,? When there are good sound answers to the above. Other than propaganda, thus far there have been no answers.
Quote...As the current number of cycles performed before declaring a “no” is too large, there is a need to change this parameter in reporting the positive cases. In three sets of testing data that include CTs from Massachusetts, New York, and Nevada, up to 90% of the positive carried hardly any virus.1 The CT used now to decide that a patient is infected must be adjusted. Tests with such a high threshold may detect not only live viruses but also fragments posing no risk. It is claimed that any test with a CT above 35 is too sensitive.
Most of the tests were set to use 40, a few 37. The US CDC suggests that it is extremely difficult to detect any live virus in a sample above a threshold of 33 cycles. A more reasonable cutoff would be even less than 35, at about 30, or even less than 30. If 30, the amount of viral genetic material in the sample would have to be 1,000 times larger than the current standard to produce a “yes”, as every ~3.3 increase in the CT value reflects a 10 times reduction in starting material. Lower CT values are associated with more severe infection. The number of people with positive results that are not infectious is concerning. The viral load of Covid-19 is an important factor in disease severity and the probability of transmission. A test with a CT of up to 40 is approved for use in diagnosing Covid-19 in Melbourne, Australia. This is excessive. Many of those that are now considered infectious are practically not. According to, in the early days of the pandemic in Melbourne, “yes” were detected at a range of CT values from 19.3 to 35.6, on average closer to the lower rather than the upper limit. A CT of 40 for a “yes” is definitively excessive.
What possible justification for a lockdown today in Victoria when the number of cases in a population of 6 million is just over 100? And how many of those 100 are actually infectious, even more importantly, how many are actually sick?
