Сокрытие COVID: 19 вопросов, на которые мы должны ответить Фотография Тайлера Дердена тайлер Дерден

 Автор Джастин Харт через подстек "Рациональная основа",

Итак, вот в чем дело: помните, когда "эксперты" продолжали говорить нам, что делать во время COVID?

Оказывается, они все поняли неправильно. Типа, эффектно неправильно.

Мы говорим о 19 основных вещах, которые они полностью испортили: от того, как распространяется вирус, до того, работают ли маски на самом деле (предупреждение о спойлерах: эти тканевые маски по сути были модными аксессуарами).

Доктор. Фаучи является покровителем УЖАСНОЙ политики в отношении COVID.

Он ошибался ВО МНОГИХ МОМЕНТАХ. Пришло время внести ясность...

Он что-то правильно понял?

1. Происхождение болезни—wrong

2. Передача—неправильная

3. Бессимптомное распространение—wrong

4. ПЦР-тестирование—wrong

5. Уровень смертности—wrong

6. Локдауны—wrong

7. Триггеры сообщества—wrong

8. Закрытие бизнеса—wrong

9. Закрытие школ—wrong

10. Карантин здорового—неправильный

11. Влияние на молодежь—wrong

12. Больничная перегрузка—wrong

13. Плексигласовые барьеры—wrong

14. Социальное дистанцирование—неправильно

15. Наружный разворот—wrong

16. Маски—неправильно

17. Вариант воздействия—wrong

18. Естественный иммунитет—wrong

19. Эффективность вакцины—неправильная

20. Вакцина травма—неправильная

Last year the Norfolk Group just dropped a bomb of a document laying out all these failures. And it's not just Monday morning quarterbacking - they've got the receipts. Real studies showing how natural immunity was actually legit (while Fauci pretended it didn't exist), data proving schools could've stayed open (looking at you, Sweden), and evidence that maybe, just maybe, locking healthy people in their homes wasn't the brilliant strategy they claimed.

Listen, I'm not here to say "I told you so" (okay, maybe a little), but we need to talk about this. Because if we don't learn from how badly our "experts" messed up, we're just asking for a repeat performance next time around. And honestly? I don't think any of us can handle another round of plexiglass theater and double masking.

Let's break down exactly how they got it wrong, and more importantly, why they kept doubling down even when the evidence said otherwise. Buckle up - this is gonna be a wild ride through the greatest public health face-plant in modern history.

These are the questions WE want answered!

TRANSMISSION

1. Why did officials insist on surface transmission protocols when evidence showed primarily respiratory spread?

2. Why weren't hospitals evaluating transmission patterns early to inform policy?

3. Why did the CDC not conduct studies on actual transmission patterns in schools and workplaces?

4. Why was outdoor transmission overemphasized despite minimal evidence?

5. Why weren't transmission studies prioritized to guide evidence-based policies?

ASYMPTOMATIC SPREAD

1. What evidence supported the claim that asymptomatic spread was a major driver?

2. Why did health officials emphasize asymptomatic spread without solid data?

3. Why were resources wasted testing asymptomatic people when they could have focused on symptomatic cases?

4. How did the emphasis on asymptomatic spread affect public trust when evidence didn't support it?

5. What data actually existed on true asymptomatic (vs presymptomatic) transmission rates?

PCR TESTING

1. Why did the CDC insist on developing its own test rather than using WHO's?

2. Why weren't cycle threshold values standardized or reported?

3. Why did labs use cycle thresholds up to 40 when this led to false positives?

4. Why wasn't PCR testing prioritized for high-risk populations early on?

5. How did high cycle thresholds affect case counts and policy decisions?

FATALITY RATE

1. Why were infection fatality rates not properly stratified by age from the beginning?

2. Why were deaths "with COVID" vs "from COVID" not distinguished?

3. How did inflated fatality rates affect public perception and policy?

4. Why weren't accurate age-stratified fatality rates clearly communicated?

5. How did misrepresenting fatality rates affect public trust?

LOCKDOWNS

1. Why were lockdowns implemented without cost-benefit analysis?

2. Why were lockdown harms (mental health, delayed medical care, etc.) ignored?

3. What evidence supported the effectiveness of lockdowns?

4. Why weren't less restrictive focused protection measures tried first?

5. How many excess deaths were caused by lockdown policies?

6. Why weren't regional/seasonal factors considered in lockdown decisions?

COMMUNITY TRIGGERS

1. Why were arbitrary case numbers used to trigger restrictions?

2. Why weren't hospital capacity metrics prioritized over case counts?

3. How were community trigger thresholds determined?

4. Why weren't triggers adjusted based on actual risk levels?

5. Why weren't clear exit criteria established for restrictions?

BUSINESS CLOSURES

1. What evidence supported closing small businesses while keeping large retailers open?

2. Why weren't occupancy limits tried before full closures?

3. How many businesses were unnecessarily destroyed?

4. Why weren't economic impacts weighed against minimal health benefits?

5. What data supported effectiveness of business closures?

SCHOOL CLOSURES

1. Why were schools closed despite early evidence of low risk to children?

2. Why did the US ignore data from European schools that stayed open?

3. Why weren't the developmental/educational harms to children considered?

4. How did school closures affect mental health and suicide rates in youth?

5. Why weren't teachers unions' influence on closure decisions examined?

6. What evidence supported claims that schools were major transmission vectors?

QUARANTINING THE HEALTHY

1. Why was mass quarantine implemented without precedent or evidence?

2. Why weren't focused protection measures tried instead?

3. What was the cost-benefit analysis of quarantining low-risk groups?

4. How did mass quarantine affect mental health?

5. Why weren't vulnerable populations prioritized instead?

IMPACT ON YOUTH

1. Why weren't developmental impacts on children considered?

2. How did isolation affect mental health and suicide rates?

3. What were the educational losses from remote learning?

4. Why weren't sports/activities preserved for youth wellbeing?

5. How did masks/distancing affect social development?

6. What were the impacts on college students' mental health and development?

HOSPITAL OVERLOAD

1. Why weren't early treatment protocols developed to prevent hospitalizations?

2. Why were field hospitals built but never used?

3. How did "flattening the curve" messaging affect hospital preparations?

4. Why weren't at-risk populations protected to prevent hospitalizations?

5. What was the actual vs projected hospital capacity usage?

PLEXIGLASS BARRIERS

1. What evidence supported effectiveness of barriers?

2. Why weren't airflow patterns considered?

3. How did barriers affect ventilation?

4. What was the cost-benefit of barrier installation?

5. Why weren't barrier recommendations updated when shown ineffective?

SOCIAL DISTANCING

1. What evidence supported 6-foot distancing?

2. Why wasn't distancing adjusted based on ventilation/masks/context?

3. How did arbitrary distance rules affect businesses/schools?

4. Why wasn't 3-foot distancing considered adequate earlier?

5. What research supported outdoor distancing requirements?

OUTDOOR SPREAD

1. Why were outdoor gatherings restricted despite minimal transmission risk?

2. Why were beaches/parks closed?

3. Why weren't outdoor activities encouraged as safer alternatives?

4. How did outdoor restrictions affect mental/physical health?

5. What evidence supported masks outdoors?

MASKS

1. Why were mask mandates implemented without RCT evidence?

2. Why weren't potential harms of masking children considered?

3. Why were cloth masks promoted despite ineffectiveness?

4. How did masks affect learning/development in children?

5. Why weren't mask policies updated when studies showed limited benefit?

6. Why was natural immunity discounted in mask policies?

VARIANT IMPACT

1. Почему варианты использовались для оправдания продолжающихся ограничений?

2. Как опасения по поводу вариантов повлияли на доверие к вакцинам?

3. Почему политика не была скорректирована на более мягкие варианты?

4. Как варианты обмена сообщениями повлияли на общественное доверие?

5. Почему сезонные закономерности не учитывались в вариантах прогнозов?

ЕСТЕСТВЕННЫЙ ИММУНИТЕТ

1. Почему естественный иммунитет игнорировался при принятии политических решений?

2. Почему выздоровевших обязали делать прививки?

3. Почему естественный иммунитет не был изучен более тщательно?

4. Как отказ от естественного иммунитета повлиял на общественное доверие?

5. Почему исследования естественного иммунитета из других стран были проигнорированы?

ЭФФЕКТИВНОСТЬ ВАКЦИНЫ

1. Почему первоначальные заявления об эффективности не были должным образом квалифицированы?

2. Почему об ослаблении эффективности не сообщалось раньше?

3. Как эффективность перепродажи повлияла на общественное доверие?

4. Почему прорывные дела не отслеживались должным образом?

5. Почему бустеры продвигались без четких доказательств пользы?

ВАКЦИНАЛЬНОЕ ПОВРЕЖДЕНИЕ

1. Почему нежелательные явления не были должным образом отслежены/расследованы?

2. Почему вакцинальные травмы преуменьшались или отвергались?

3. Как интерпретация данных VAERS повлияла на общественное доверие?

4. Почему не был проведен возрастной стратифицированный анализ риска и пользы?

5. Почему сигналы раннего предупреждения не исследовались более тщательно?

6. Как увольнение травм повлияло на доверие к вакцинам?

Нам предстоит много работы, и, К СЧАСТЬЮ, у нас могут быть ответственные люди, которые готовы задавать эти вопросы!

* * *

"Рациональная основа" Джастина Харта - издание, поддерживаемое читателями. Чтобы получать новые посты и поддерживать мою работу, подумайте о том, чтобы ст