International Criminal Grand Jury Investigation: ‘Psychopathic’ Globalists Used COVID To Commit ‘Crimes Against Humanity’

By Jamie White,

An international coalition of lawyers and judges convened a hearing to prosecute the “crimes against humanity” perpetrated by governments who used the COVID-19 pandemic as the pretext.

international criminal grand jury investigation ‘psychopathic’ globalists used covid to commit ‘crimes against humanity’

The group, called the Peoples’ Court of Public Opinion, gathered in Germany on Saturday to detail the many human rights violations inflicted by politicians around the world during the COVID pandemic under the directive of the World Economic Forum (WEF).

“This case, involving the most heinous crimes against humanity committed under the guise of a corona pandemic, looks complicated only at first glance,” said German attorney Dr. Reiner Fuellmich in his opening statement.

Fuellmich elaborated in great detail how the COVID pandemic was engineered by the establishment to usher humanity into a technocratic system under their control.

“One, there is no corona pandemic, but only a PCR test ‘plandemic’ fueled by an elaborate psychological operation designed to create a constant state of panic among the world’s population,” Fuellmich explained. “This agenda has been long-planned.”

“Its ultimately unsuccessful precursor was the swine flu some 12 years ago, and it was cooked up by a group of super rich psychopathic and sociopathic people who hate and fear people at the same time, have no empathy, and are driven by the desire to gain full control over all of us, the people of the world,” he continued, adding that they’re using “governments and the mainstream media” to spread “panic propaganda 24/7.”

Fuellmich noted that the coronavirus can be treated with Vitamin C and D, Zinc, ivermectin, and hydroxychloroquine — all substances dismissed and demonized by the mainstream media and medical establishment since the pandemic’s outset to see through their “ultimate goal” of getting everyone on the planet to take the “lethal experimental injections.”

Fuellmich then pointed out how the WEF has captured world governments through it’s “Young Global Leaders” program to carry out its Great Reset agenda.

“Our governments are not our governments anymore, rather they have been taken over by the other side through their main platform, the World Economic Forum, which had started to create their own global leaders through their ‘Young Global Leaders’ program as early as 1992,” Fuellmich said, citing Bill Gates and former German Chancellor Angela Merkel as its first graduates.

The final pieces of the COVID puzzle involve “population control” and the dissolution of national sovereignty with the replacement of a One World Government and single currency, Fuellmich argued.

“This involves population control which, in their view, requires both a massive reduction of the population and manipulating the DNA of the remaining population with the help – for example – of mRNA experimental injections,” Fuellmich said.

“But it also requires the deliberate destruction of democracy, of the rule of law, and of our constitutions through chaos so that ultimately, we will agree to losing our national and cultural identities and instead will accept a One World Government under the UN – which is now under the full control of them and their World Economic Forum – a digital passport through which each and every move is monitored and controlled, and one digital currency which we will only be able to receive from one World bank — theirs, of course,” he added.

Watch Reiner Fuellmich’s opening statement on

Fuellmich then recommended indictments for six major figures:

The Peoples’ Court of Public Opinion states that their investigation will “serve as a model legal proceeding to present to a jury (consisting of the citizens of the world) all available evidence of COVID-19 Crimes Against Humanity to date against ‘leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices’ who aided, abetted or actively participated in the formulation and execution of a common plan for a pandemic.”

From the PCPO website:

The People’s Court of Public Opinion’s investigation’s purpose is twofold: On the one hand it is to serve as a model proceeding and get indictments against some of the criminally and civilly responsible figure heads of these Crimes against Humanity.

And on the other hand it is – through showing a complete picture of what we are facing, including the geopolitical and historical backdrop – to create awareness about the factual collapse of the current, hijacked system and its institutions, and, as a consequence the necessity for the people themselves retaking their sovereignty, and the necessity to first stop this plandemic’s measures by refusing to comply, and the necessity to jump-start their own new system of health care, education, economics and judiciary, so that democracy and the rule of law on the basis of our constitutions will be reestablished.

Watch the full hearing:

Top 10 BIGGEST LIES About Covid-19

Covid is a group of symptoms, not a disease, according to one of the world’s leading virus experts, Dr. Judy Mikovitz. When you test “positive” for Covid, you’re really just testing positive for common colds, flu viruses and pathogens from previous vaccines.

top 10 biggest lies about covid 19

When most people run a high fever, their body is actually fighting off bacteria from the Covid masks they wear all day and the pathogens that were injected with the Covid inoculations.

The entire pandemic is based on false pretenses and fabricated statistics, so we must look at the biggest lies that were concocted, like a synthetic virus in a lab, and then spread around with propaganda, like a TV “breaking news” pandemic update.

Anyone wearing a mask who got a flu shot this summer is literally growing the pandemic because they will be sick and test “positive” for Covid, and also be convinced they had Covid.

Then when they quarantine, social distance and continue to mask up, they will be weakening themselves while exacerbating whatever cold or flu they have even more so.

Therefore, the vaccines start the wave of sickness, the PCR tests show almost everyone positive for vaccine-induced sickness, and the masks and lockdowns fuel the viruses and bacteria even more.

It’s a vicious cycle and everyone thinks we’re in the middle of a worldwide pandemic caused by a virus, when it’s really caused by the Covid vaccines and promoted by false-positive PCR testing.

Which Of These TEN Most Popular Covid Lies Do You Still Believe?

LIE #1. Covid is still contagious when you’re asymptomatic.

LIE #2. PCR tests tell you whether or not you have or had Covid-19 (or Delta).

LIE #3. Vaccines usually prevent you from catching Covid, or make it a mild case if you do.

LIE #4. Covid-19 vaccines help with immunity against variants, like Delta and Lambda.

LIE #5. A lab can test for Covid-19 and prove in court if you had it (like forensic DNA).

LIE #6. Covid vaccines are safe, even for pregnant women.

LIE #7. Vaccine immunity is stronger than natural immunity.

LIE #8. Without vaccines, you’re at high risk of catching and dying from Covid.

LIE #9. Vaccines provide better immunity for Covid than vitamin D, zinc and Ivermectin.

LIE #10. Masks, social distancing and lockdowns have helped “flatten the curve.”

The 160 Million Americans Who Got Covid Vaccinated Have A New Inflammatory Disease Driving Their “Pre-Existing” Inflammatory Diseases

Most Americans who got the Covid jabs already are the ones who are terrified of the virus because they already have compromised immune systems, whether from obesity, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, COPD or just chronic inflammation from poor eating and toxic medicine, including vaccines.

The spike-protein injections (Covid shots) are creating trillions of miniscule clogs in the blood, causing the heart to become inflamed and overworked, driving other diseases to the tipping point (needed hospitalization or death). Healthy people can fix this “pandemic” by NOT getting any vaccines and NOT wearing a mask, as Dr. Mikovitz has explained.

Scholars, doctors, scientists and immunologists are stepping up and blowing the whistle on the “plandemic” and exposing the fake shots, the fake tests that almost always read positive, and the fake “safety protocols” that are being shoved down our throats by big and small government alike, plus by corporations, school systems and most of all, the medical industrial complex.


How Asymptomatic COVID Spread Used To Lockdown The World Was Based On A Lie

Paul Elias Alexander, PhD, Former COVID Pandemic consultant/advisor to WHO-PAHO and former COVID pandemic advisor to Health and Human Services (HHS), United States; Parvez Dara, MD, MBA; Howard Tenenbaum, DDS, PhD.

asymptomatic spread lie

We will start this discussion on the corruption of ‘asymptomatic spread’ by stating emphatically, that there should be no vaccination of our children with these COVID vaccines. Zero. These vaccines have no long-term safety assessments, and they are working not alike the classical vaccines.

We are talking about vaccinating millions of healthy infants, children, and adolescents, and we know the risk is not substantial in terms of acquiring the infection and going on to become severely ill or dying.

The risk of severe outcome in infants, young children, and young persons is very low and essentially statistical zero (risk of survival persons 0-19 is 99.997%). Yet the potential risks of these vaccines to children can be catastrophic. Thus the basic question is, why would we subject our child to a vaccine that provides them with no benefit?

This is illogical, irrational, absurd, and very reckless and dangerous. The threshold for safety must be set at the highest.

Of course, high-risk young persons should be considered on a case-by-case basis based on an ethical informed assessment of the balance of the risk versus benefits. We say at this time, no, stop, put an immediate pause on this.

We are very concerned with the potential harms to children if this is not done properly. Get the proper safety data collected and assessed first.

We are not against vaccines and in no way anti-vaxxers, rather, we support vaccines once developed properly.

Vaccines have harmed our children in the past when not developed properly. We are pro-vaccine but are against these vaccines as the harms are potentially catastrophic.

Children could be set up for a life time of disability and possible death. We cannot just rush into mass vaccinating healthy persons and importantly, our children, until we properly assess the risks.

How can we be told that vaccines take 10 to 12 to 15 years to develop, yet these were developed in 3 months and they are safe? How? When we bypassed the proper animal studies and the safety assessment.

We need to assess if there are potentially unsafe blood clots and bleeding connected to the vaccines. These are a pressing concern now as they have emerged. We have to assess the myocarditis and pericarditis risks and this is now a real unfolding catastrophe.

We knew very early on that COVID is amenable to risk stratification and that your baseline risk was prognostic on mortality.

Why not the same approach for these vaccines? Why are members of the public not allowed to have open public discussion if they think they have been vaccine injured?

They must also be given care urgently and are dealt with optimally. Their adverse outcome information must be collected for us to make an accurate assessment of the risk subsequent to vaccination.

Moreover, when we opine scientifically, we are talking to the US, Canada, Britain, France, Australia, Italy, all of Europe, the Caribbean, African nations, all of the globe.

Every single person on this earth is important and all our lives matter, especially our minority children who often bear the worst from any illness. We are trying to help save ‘all’ lives. Now, on to the core thesis surrounding asymptomatic spread.

There was no credibility to ‘asymptomatic spread’ or transmission in COVID-19 as a key driver of the pandemic nor even as a driver of minimal infection.

This is not only our hypothesis, we feel strongly that asymptomatic spread was bogus from the start and was used to underpin the lockdowns and had and has still today, no basis.

This was part of pandemic corruption. We have looked at the evidence gathered across the last 16 months and can safely say this was a false narrative along with masking, lockdowns, social distancing, and school closure polices that visited crushing harms on the society and hurt the US and the world immensely.

That the US Pandemic Task Force and these illogical, irrational, unscientific medical experts could use this falsehood and shutter the society and cost so much destruction of life, wealth and property is a scandal, shameful, and unforgiveable.

This was all about corruption, this pandemic response, and there certainly were ingredients other than science at play throughout.

There are members of the US Task Force that some of us here got the pleasure of working with and some of them are incredibly smart, good people. Decent god-fearing people. But they were and are flat wrong! Have been on everything COVID.

Every policy was based on their input and guidance and they created disaster. Many thousands of people died due to them! Their policies! Never has a President been as ill-served as by these Task Force members.

They misled and undercut President Trump at each turn and one continues to mislead the current administration.

Who knows, maybe the combination caused a chaotic frenetic collaboration, so maybe the combination doomed them from the start.

But on a day-to-day basis, we were watching a clown car in the daily briefings! Their hypothesis cannot be borne out on asymptomatic spread, and we have decided once and for all, to lay out the evidence on asymptomatic spread and give our view. This should have never been about supposition, speculation, assumptions or even whimsy by them.

This is not evidence-based research, that is not science. Speculation and assumption is not science. They failed catastrophically and must not be allowed to re-write their history.

As we lay out our op-ed and the evidence that underpins our reasoning, we ask any of the scientists to put forth their data, their science, their proof of its credibility and once shown and proven, we will gladly adjust our position and conclude otherwise.

We also apologize for our writing is blunt on this matter, for we are angered at the catastrophic failures of the Task Forces and these unsound irrational experts who have caused so much damage.

This was such a significant aspect of the pandemic policy decisions, the issue of ‘asymptomatic spread’, that it could not be based on ‘possibility’ or assumptions. We are afraid however, that it was, and this had catastrophic consequences.

They, these absurd and unscientific medical experts, made ‘asymptomatic spread’ the cornerstone of the societal lockdowns and they did this with no credible basis.

There was no strong data or any evidence to underpin this and even if this was assumed for several weeks, and even if we took a more cautious approach initially and this was reasonable, we used and kept this false narrative in place far too long to keep draconian and punitive lockdown restrictions in place that had no basis.

Lives were lost as a result! For us to buy this, we need to see the evidence and data and there is/was none!

We operate in a world of evidence-based medicine and research whereby policies must be underpinned by credible evidence and even if it were ‘anecdotal’ ‘real-world evidence’, it must have some basis. This had none. The reality is that there is no verifiable evidence still today as we write, that persons have developed COVID-19 based on asymptomatic spread, evidence that is credible. You must torture the data or infections to find one and still, it is plagued with the very questionable RT-PCR results.

You just cannot discuss this asymptomatic issue without factoring in the very flawed RT-PCR test with its 97% to 100% false positives at cycle counts (Ct) of 34 to 35 and above (optimal Ct of 24 to 25 denotes real infectiousness and predictive of serious outcomes). This RT-PCR disastrous test cannot be omitted for it was part of the ‘asymptomatic’ deception. I cannot be generous in my language anymore. This was not a falsehood; it was meant to deceive!

This duplicitous ‘asymptomatic’ assertion hobbled and basically doomed the pandemic response from the start, for all the societal shutdowns and school closures revolved around the premise of asymptomatic spread. Dr. Anthony Fauci can be credited with perhaps the greatest falsehood to the American population and the then President Trump. He continues to advance this misleading and duplicitous narrative into the current President Biden’s administration.

They did not try to and failed to protect public health and our elderly in nursing homes, all these crazy lockdown insane lunatics! That’s what they are, lunatics! We have searched for a better descriptive. These bureaucrats and technocrats, this ruling elite, these television medical experts. Flat wrong on everything COVID, yet run around extolling each other patting each other on the back. For what? The destruction they caused?

We begged them to secure the elderly and high-risk strongly but they did not and did not stop the lockdowns. Had we protected the elderly properly from the start, we would have not lost the lives we did. Had we allowed early outpatient treatment using a multi-drug approach (hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, corticosteroids, anti-blood clotting drugs etc. under clinician supervision), we would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives. We could minimize or stop symptoms and thus spread with multi-drug early treatment, which would reduce hospitalization and death. Early treatment can be much more effective than vaccine is stopping transmission.

They, these lunatic lockdown advocates, these medical experts, pretended there were no harms to their lockdowns. It was deliberate, a perverse cruelty on populations. Just look at the declining health due to the isolation from the lockdowns (the mental health costs, the dementia), the inactivity, the loss of education due to school closures, lost medical care, loss of jobs/employment, and income.

Some of these costs, sadly, remain ahead of us, including deaths from delays in cancer screening and treatment, rising opioid overdose, and harms to the life expectancy of today’s children due to lost schooling” (Collateral Global). Alarmingly, we see how COVID wreaks havoc differentially due to baseline risks that are often exaggerated in the underprivileged, but also in the underprivileged in terms of the harms and effects of the lockdowns.

For example, “while breast cancer screening in Washington state fell by 50% for women overall, the drop was even more precipitous among minorities”. Look at how we have suffered our elderly in nursing homes, how our aged populations have died lonely, in fright, isolated, confused, in the last days, weeks of their lives. Look at what we have done! What a scandal!

Before we lay bare this ‘asymptomatic’ fraud, let us show just how duplicitous and incompetent these public health agencies can be and how much lies they (and their leaders) spew in an attempt to deceive and confuse the public. In this case to drive fear now in parents so as to push them to vaccinate their children. They, as public health leaders at the CDC and NIH must rise above the politics and work to inform the public based on truth, evidence, and a quest to help and inform. Not mislead and confuse!

So to help make our case on asymptomatic spread untruths, on Friday, the CDC put out a statement (based on their June 11th 2021 MMWR report) that there is a troubling rise in teens being hospitalized for COVID-19. The first fact that jumps out at us is that there were 0 (zero) deaths. CDC stated that adolescent hospitalization rates increased during March and April 2021 after decreases in January and February 2021.

This message went viral in the media 24/7. This misinformation and lie by the CDC and clear effort to lie to the public was couched as a ‘troubling rise’. But the lie was that there was a rise in March and April but then a decrease in May back to the level it was at the close of February 2021. What garbage, what drivel the CDC has stated here!

The CDC and its Director Walensky had clear knowledge that the hospitalization rate had decreased but they cherry picked a portion of the graph and data (the upside of the graph) and presented that without the downside portion that shows the decline.

What hubris and deceit by Walensky! Did she not read the data? Did someone or staff set her up to look substandard in the media for this once again, shows a badly mis-informed or prepared CDC director. And we have no reason to think she is incapable, in fact, her credentials are stellar.

We have no reason to think she is that inept. We think something other than science is at play here. Persons in her agency must be feeding her the garbage to undermine her, and doing it repeatedly, and we ask her to please read and study the junk they are giving you before you make a public statement.

It is not only your reputation Dr. Walensky, but that of this marque agency, the CDC. It, CDC, must not be dragged through the mud this way, and set for ridicule.

The public is very informed and understand much more than public health officials think they do, and thus the preparation and public statements by the CDC must be open, transparent, explicit, and above all, accurate.

No lies, no spin, no half-baked tripe. Pure evidence and truth, balanced information so that the public is informed for their decision-making. Do not mislead the public!

For she, Dr. Walensky, knew that this was a cherry-picking of the data to drive an erroneous misleading message, because across all age-groups, hospitalizations had declined during the prior 6 to 8 weeks. She knew this. “Allen saysthe latest data from May showed that hospitalization rates declined to 0.6 on May 29”. The real atrocity in this reporting by the CDC is that they did not include the data from May 2021.

This was pure efforts to mislead the public because the same data used in the report showed a significant decline in the month following the slight increase”. So, the CDC took data that showed an increase in April 2021 and now reports it in June as if the May data of the clear decline does not exist. Just the April data and also, why is it now being reported? How incredibly duplicitous and such arrogance to think the American people are that stupid that they cannot see the decline in May?

She, Dr. Walensky, was actually mis-reporting (seemingly deliberately given the data was right there for her to see) CDC’s own data. Why? Is this the first time a CDC MMWR report was basically junk pseudo-science? Based on falsehoods? This MMWR report was based on a population-based surveillance system of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19–associated hospitalizations in 99 counties across 14 states, covering approximately 10% of the U.S. population.

Horowitz of the Blazemedia was beside himself as he discussed this duplicity by the CDC and rightly so. Dr. Walensky stated she was para ‘deeply concerned by the rise’. Yet she knew she was being deceitful, in plain view, understanding that the media cartel would gobble the erroneous tripe up and the public would be too lazy to do the reading just a bit further down in the MMWR to understand the mis-information. “It turns out they picked arbitrary start and end points-an old trick they’ve used with mask studies”.

Or is it that Dr. Walensky cannot read the science or understand the data or graphs? Or those reporting to her? They (Dr. Walensky) also made this type of deceitful error and omission when they reported and misled on the risk of outdoors transmission (< 1% but claiming it is more like 10%), among many others. Same issues with the summer camp rules and spread after vaccination, with flips and flops between Walensky and Fauci. Someone was or is lying, who? And importantly, why? They are routinely false and this is very bad science.

Makary of Johns Hopkins stated para “that the CDC did not report the key issues in that report. No child died, and the CDC should have said this. This is the great news! The hospitalization rate was lower for COVID than it was for influenza”. The CDC should have said this also as the headline. What about the heart swelling complications on teens due to the vaccine…one of the failures of the CDC is their ignoring of natural immunity and this insane rush to mass vaccinate people already immune… we are seeing another set of talking points on the Delta variant scare”.

Hirschhorn writes eloquently about this refusal to recognize natural immunity as a major player in COVID. “The reason is simple.  The more that natural immunity is accepted, the more reason there is to reject getting one of the experimental COVID vaccines.  Half the US population from kids to adults likely have natural immunity, even though most never suffered any serious ill effects from being infected”.

CDC knew the number was coming down for months but misled in their report when they knew it was 20 hospitalizations per day of about 25 million teens, so a rate of approximately 0.00008%. This was to drive panic about a troubling rise in teen hospitalizations and the very small number was going down, and not up. They the CDC knew the % was very, very low. They duplicitously picked only one piece of data and this was terrible so as to exploit the fears of parents.

This was to drive vaccinations, despite learning of the increasing myocarditis among teenagers who are vaccinated for COVID-19. The CDC’s very own VAERS database has near 6,000 deaths linked to the vaccine. The CDC pretends this does not exist, yet the deaths thus far from COVID vaccines are more than all deaths from all vaccines across the last 30 years. Do you understand this? This is not our data, this is CDC’s data.

How about the study out of Israel involving over 6 million participants that uncovered natural immunity from SARS-CoV-2 infection was equivalent or even better to vaccination immunity in reducing risk of COVID infection. “Our results question the need to vaccinate previously-infected individuals”.

How about the results from the Cleveland Clinic studythat looked at 52,238 employees (Employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System working in Ohio), whereby 1359 (53%) of 2579 previously infected subjects remained unvaccinated, compared with 22,777 (41%) of 49,659 not previously infected. Any subject who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at least 42 days earlier was considered previously infected. One was considered vaccinated 14 days after receipt of the second dose of a SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine.

Not one of the 1359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated had a SARS-CoV-2 infection over the duration of the study” leading researchers to conclude that persons who have had SARS-CoV-2 infection would be unlikely to benefit from COVID-19 vaccination. But CDC and the media medical cartel are pretending these studies and great news do not exist.

Dr. Walensky apparently does not get these research reports and prefers to rather mislead the nation and parents with inaccurate and half-presented data. How low has the CDC fallen and how come they have absolutely no common sense! Why is this incessant drive by the CDC day in, day out to mislead the public and how long has this been going on? Why are they working to undermine President Biden and his administration for this can only damage his administration’s credibility?

What about the CDC’s HEROES-RECOVER study? Look at that duplicity by the CDC. They stated in their protocol that “one of the study’s primary objectives was to, “Examine post-vaccine immunologic response in those previously infected.” Yet, despite the fact that there were prior infected persons in the study, they were excluded from the study results.

“Among 5,077 participants, those with laboratory documentation of SARS-CoV-2 infection before enrollment starting in July 2020 (608) or identified as part of longitudinal surveillance up until the first day of vaccine administration (240) were excluded.” Why would CDC do this when this was a group that was part of the study and a key group in terms of the primary purpose? Where did these people vanish to?

What about the misleading statements (see New York Post) by the CDC and Walensky recently about outdoor transmission risk (grossly over-stating it and seeking to drive fear), having to come back and retract and clarify.

What about the director trying to blame the journal they took the data from? Do they at the CDC not read what they are publishing or read whatever, for accuracy or validity? This is shocking. Why must the CDC try each time to mislead the public? Why would the director do this given her prominent role?

We set the table for this op-ed with the falsehoods by the CDC on rising teen hospitalizations and omission of COVID-19 recovered persons in the HEROES-RECOVER study, in the quest by CDC to vaccinate. This is how the last 16 months has been with CDC’s actions and reporting. Late and false! Always one year behind the science. Always misleading. Politicized.

We will begin our op-ed on the lies of ‘asymptomatic spread’ by using the exact words of Dr. Anthony Fauci of the NIAID. Dr. Fauci, previously stated the following as he advocated and moved to shut the society down: “historically people need to realize that even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all history of respiratory viruses of any typeasymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person. Even if there is a rare asymptomatic person that might transmit, an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers”. Soon and without scientific evidence, he and his fellow Task Force people changed the narrative to the contrary.

But what did we know? That he knew yet sought to lie to the nation. In asymptomatic individuals, the viral load is typically very low and the infectious period is also short in duration. They, asymptomatic positive persons (assuming they are ‘actually’ positive and not based on an incorrect test), may still exhale virus particles, which another person may encounter.

However, the overall likelihood of transmitting the disease to others is negligible. Vanishingly small. Exceedingly small. Thus, asymptomatic cases are not the major drivers of epidemics.

Dr. Fauci and his staff along with the help of the media repeatedly came to the podium and misled the nation for they repeatedly told us that due to asymptomatic spread, we would have to wear masks, and socially distance, and close schools, and shut everything down.

Dr. Fauci’s recent e-mails exposing the issue of asymptomatic spread being a non-issue underscores the misinformation he broadcasted to the public. Recent e-mails uncovered show that Fauci stated that “most transmissions” of virus “occur from someone who is symptomatic” and “not asymptomatic”. His comments that were reiterated scores of times on national and international media were the cause of many a loss of life, property, liberty and wealth of an entire generation.

Equally misleading was the premise that all infections equated to severe illness and potential death. This was not only an untruth but has led to scores of teenagers and 20+ year-olds fearful for their lives. They cower below their beds thinking they, in all their health, are at the same risk as their 85 year-old grandmother who has three grave medical conditions.

This not only devastated their outlook to the future but hobbled them into a state of depression which translated to an increase in suicides in that cohort. We as a nation (and world) were fed mistruths, lies, and half-truths by what we can only describe as ‘fallen’ nonsensical, illogical, irrational, and specious medical experts on television, on the stage with their government bureaucratic leaders, and academics.

We knew very early on that COVID was amenable to risk stratification and that your baseline risk was most prognostic for mortality, age and obesity being the principle ones along with renal disease and diabetes as well as heart disease. We realized early on that a more focused ‘targeted’ approach was needed and not a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach that would be devastating.

Like how we know that the FDA is misleading the public with its guidance that “If you have not been vaccinated: Be aware that a positive result from an antibody test does not mean you have a specific amount of immunity or protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection.” What utter nonsense by the FDA and they know it, they know there is empirical evidence to refute this fully. Johns Hopkins Makary has stated “There’s ample scientific evidence that natural immunity is effective and durable, and public-health leaders should pay it heed.”

A huge number of Americans have natural immunity because though “Only around 10% of Americans have had confirmed positive Covid tests, but four to six times as many have likely had the infection…the effect of natural immunity is all around us. The plummeting case numbers in late April and May weren’t the result of vaccination alone, and they came amid a loosening of both restrictions and behavior”.

Turner et al. published in journal Nature recently that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces long-lived bone marrow plasma cells in humans (a source of protective antibodies). The authors concluded that “prior Covid infection induces a ‘robust’ and ‘long-lived humoral immune response,’ leading some scientists to suggest that natural immunity is probably lifelong”.

Additional US research (Lancet) that tracked population-based SARS-CoV-2 antibody seropositivity duration using observational data from a national clinical laboratory registry of patients tested by nucleic acid amplification (NAAT) and serologic assays, showed an encouraging timeline for the development and sustainability of antibodies up to ten months from natural infection.

A similar type study (Nature) showed that SARS-CoV-2 infection induces a robust antigen-specific, long-lived humoral immune response in humans. Moreover, a pre-print paper shows that without vaccination, the antibodies in the infected person is roughly stable for 6 to 12 months. Combined to the Israeli data and the Cleveland data, the case has been built and is indeed compelling.

Like how we know that the job of the media cartel and the inept medical experts on television now is to scare us and parents into vaccination, leading Makary to also weigh in with “Some health officials warn of possible variants resistant to natural immunity. But none of the hundreds of variants observed so far have evaded either natural or vaccinated immunity with the three vaccines authorized in the U.S”.

They are trying in the media and the illogical and incompetent academically sloppy medical experts to drive fear, claiming children can die of COVID-19. We say not so, show us the evidence. Stop the lies! Makary even weighed in on this stating “In reviewing the medical literature and news reports, and in talking to pediatricians across the country, I am not aware of a single healthy child in the U.S. who has died of COVID-19 to date…

We found that 100% of pediatric COVID-19 deaths were in children with a pre-existing condition”. Makary further stated “CDC’s own data show that MIS-C overwhelmingly targets black and Latino children, “likely due to the disproportionate rates of childhood obesity and chronic conditions in these populations.” While three dozen have died, the weekly rate of COVID-associated MIS-C is now at zero”.

It’s a lie, all a lie we say, all part of the bogusness to drive needless fear in parents. That could harm their children with potentially dangerous vaccines. Children must never be vaccinated with these vaccines, these ‘untested to exclude harms’ vaccines. We are not saying a child could die from this, but we are arguing that such a child (tragically) would likely be very ill absent of COVID and COVID did what it has done and done well, it exploits risks.

There were so many falsehoods thrown at the American people by persons in authority and with many credentials behind their names and these are the very people who have sucked at the teats of the tax-payers Treasury purse for decades. You would think at least our tax-payer research grant money would be well spent on these lunatics who could at least tell us the truth and not mislead us!

Take the issue of re-infections to drive fears so you rush to vaccinate. We have looked at the published evidence and can conclude based on the existing body of evidence, that reinfections are very rare, if at all, and based on typically one or two instances with questionable confirmation of an actual case of re-infection e.g. often easily explained by flawed PCR testing etc. (references 123456789101112131415161718192021222324). A very recent study in Qatar (Lancet) found that “natural infection appears to elicit strong protection against reinfection with an efficacy ~95% for at least seven months”.

Dr. Marty Makary of Johns Hopkins wrote “reinfection is extremely rare and even when it does happen, the symptoms are very rare or [those individuals] are asymptomatic”. Importantly, the World Health Organization (WHO) has recently (May 10th 2021 Scientific brief, WHO/2019-nCoV/Sci_Brief/Natural_immunity/2021.1) alluded to what has been clear for many months (one year now), which is that people are very rarely re-infected. The WHO was very late but better late than never.

Similarly, it was evident that the RT-PCR tests had large numbers of false positive results when certain criteria of using high Thermal Cycle Thresholds of greater than 30 were utilized leading to erroneous quarantines and closures when a positive test emerged.

In fact, Dimitri Mouliou states, “New technologies have loss of standardization as the countless PCR kits vary in methods and cutoff values, thus, test results are paralleled in unassociated weights, and a realistic comparison between cases is trammeled. Thus, by preserving the existence of misleading COVID-19 cases in such way, scientific community is being prevented from clear-sighted advances. Since PCR assay cannot distinguish between active and residual RNA.”

We knew that what mattered most was the number of hospitalizations, ICU bed use, and deaths, not the infections. An infection did not mean one was a ‘case’ of disease. And likely a false positive. We became aware early on that a cycle threshold (Ct) of 24 was the limit in RT-PCR testing and everything above limit was likely false positive, picking up viral dust, fragments, old coronavirus, old recovered infection etc.

We knew the CDC had set the Ct at 40 which contributed to the hundreds of thousands and millions of positive cases that were not positive leading to wrongful policy mandates of school closures and unnecessary quarantine. We were aware and made known that children were at near zero risk of acquiring the infection, spreading it, or getting ill from it, yet the experts and the media continued their narrative on frightening parents. The CDC, the teachers’ unions, and the television medical experts have spent the last 15 to 16 months lying and scaring parents needlessly and have been lying openly on risk to children.

Like how we know but are pretending, that the vaccines were approved for emergency use based on exceptionally and grossly inadequate studies to evaluate safety and effectiveness. Like how we know that the vaccine roll out during a pandemic is driving the mutant variants. Like how we know that vaccinating now is fruitless given the original spike is no longer dominant and that this will be a boon for the vaccine developers who will have to manufacture new versions of the vaccines routinely, with yearly booster shots etc.

We know all of this, especially save for the very high-risk with compromising conditions, we had all that we needed societally to handle COVID, and that a vaccine was not needed and definitely not for low-risk populations and children.

We have stated previously and continue to reiterate that those individuals who have been infected with the SARSCoV2 need not be vaccinated since they have a durable and long-lasting immunity to the virus, as compared to the Vaccine that confers antibodies directed against the Spike Protein only. Perhaps such immunity against a selected and limited part of the virus is limited and we feel might also drive the viral variants due to selection pressure.

There was this pure falsehood and lie about no prior immunity. But we had also commented that the T-cell immunity was out there and represented a large portion of persons who were not candidates for vaccine and were already strongly immune to COVID e.g. had prior infection with other coronaviruses and common cold coronaviruses that confer ‘cross-protection’ cellular immunity via T-cell immunity etc. (Weiskopf GrifoniLe BertMateusTavukcuogluCassanitiDykemaEcheverríaBonifacius, Nelde, Ansari, Ma, Lineburg, Borena) (references 1234567891011121314). The reader can draw their own conclusions.

We have also advocated that early outpatient treatment (references 1234) was very successful in reducing the risk of hospitalization and death (McCullough, Risch, Zelenko, Tenenbaum, Kory, Smith, Bernstein, Fareed, Ladapo etc.). Unfortunately, the expert scientific community was misguided in it’s vitriol against the early treatment More evidence continues to emerge from well-designed studies that are proving the previous narrative wrong. We have been advocating for thorough testing of the vaccines prior to mass vaccinations for fear of Serious Adverse Events that might accrue over time from such a policy mandate.

It appears our fears are well-founded and  we are now seeing (CDC’s very own VAERS database). Given the risks and harm exposed on the CDC VAERS site, we have advocated that children must not be vaccinated with mRNA vaccines for fear of short-term and longer-term harm. The short-term harms are being revealed in the media news daily while the longer-term harm may unfold over time.

There must be no EUA for children and only high-risk children should be considered and based only on ethical consenting between the parents, doctor, and child after considering the balance between the benefits of vaccine versus the harms.

Certain political and scientific experts have maintained a ‘ZERO COVID’ view which is ill-thought and ludicrous because it is impossible to attain. There is no way we could eliminate every infection/case as COVID is now endemic and all around us.

ZERO was never possible as the Nature survey of scientists states,

“It’s a beautiful dream but most scientists think it’s improbable. In January, Nature journal asked more than 100 immunologists, infectious-disease researchers and virologists working on the coronavirus whether it could be eradicated. Almost 90% of respondents think that the coronavirus will become endemic — meaning that it will continue to circulate in pockets of the global population for years to come.”

We knew this while they forced their absurd intention to destroy the society by enforcing lockdowns to attain ZERO. Enforcing Lockdowns forces the pathogen to mutate more infectiously. Dr. Christopher Martin stated, “most experts believe the answer is no and predict that the virus will continue to circulate indefinitely, transitioning from the current pandemic to a steady, but much lower, endemic rate of infection.”

We have always advocated that simple enhanced handwashing and isolation of only the symptomatic ill/sick persons are the best societal measures in controlling the viral infection. We have stated previously that the SARS-CoV-2 will eventually become endemic, less virulent and circulate through the population mutating as it does, mostly to find harmony with its human hosts. Thusly, any suggestions of “ZERO COVID” must be considered as entertainment for those that have taken leave of all science and reason and wish to impose undue harm on the populace.

We have advocated against the masks previously and current data bears it out that cloth face masks are ineffective and dangerous, specifically to the children as used, with no clear benefit. impacting their social, emotional, and health and well-being. It is also confirmed that the social distance rule of 6 feet was made up, not based on credible science. Same as the 3 feet in school, courtesy of the CDC experts. Made up.

In showing the gross efforts to mislead on asymptomatic spread, we have to also lightly treat issues around lockdowns, school closures, masking, and mask mandates. What did we know about lockdowns and school closures and masks? What evidence accumulated and very early?

We recommend that you judge for yourself. We link the various catastrophic harms (consequences) and failures of lockdowns (references 1, 2345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758) and school closures (references 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142, 4344454647484950515253545556).

The basis for the societal lockdowns was that 40% to 50% of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 could potentially spread it due to being asymptomatic.

“But fears that the virus may be spread to a significant degree by asymptomatic carriers soon led government leaders to issue broad and lengthy stay-at-home orders and mask mandates out of concerns that anyone could be a silent spreader”. However, the evidence in support of common asymptomatic spread remains largely non-existent and we argue, was overstated, and potentially was made with no basis.

We were aware of the catastrophic harms due to mask use: (references 123456789101112131415161718192021222324).

And of the ineffectiveness of masks(references 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627, 2829303132333435) and the failure of mask mandates (references 123456,78).

During the past 16 months the “experts” and their willing accomplices have amassed great fortunes while the lockdowns and school closures have placed an astronomical burden on the poorer in society. The COVID pandemic created billionaires among the pharmaceutical industry while shoring up the fortunes of the wealthy and small business operators languished or outright lost all their life’s earnings. The nation has lost a brace of productive and innovative citizens from the sheer

academic sloppiness and overt politicization of a pandemic. These experts and their acolytes have exhibited a depth of cognitive dissonance to anything that disagreed with their absurdities that they spewed at the public, who yearned just honesty and the facts for their informed decision-making.

We also suggest the complete cessation of testing asymptomatic individuals for the virus, both because of false positive results (which drives fear) and because it serves no purpose since contact tracing in a full-blown pandemic is worthless from any scientific point of view in controlling it.

We remain confident enough based on the existing literature to also agree that ‘it is a dangerous assumption to believe that there is persuasive, scientific evidence of asymptomatic transmission’. We feel that only symptomatic individua’s should be tested for the SARSCoV2 virus, period. “Searching for people who are asymptomatic yet infectious is like searching for needles that appear and reappear transiently in haystacks, particularly when rates are falling”.

Further Scientific Evidence against Asymptomatic Spread:

A high-quality review study by Madewell published in JAMA sought to estimate the secondary attack rate of SARS-CoV-2 in households and determine factors that modify this parameter. In addition, researchers sought to estimate the proportion of households with index cases that had any secondary transmission, and compared the SARS-CoV-2 household secondary attack rate with that of other severe viruses and with that to close contacts for studies that reported the secondary attack rate for both close and household contacts.

The study was a meta-analysis of 54 studies with 77 758 participants. Secondary attack rates represented the spread to additional persons and researchers found a 25-fold increased risk within households between symptomatic positive infected index persons versus asymptomatic infected index persons.

“Household secondary attack rates were increased from symptomatic index cases (18.0%; 95% CI, 14.2%-22.1%) than from asymptomatic index cases (0.7%; 95% CI, 0%-4.9%)”. This study showed just how rare asymptomatic spread was within a confined household environment. “The real impact of asymptomatic transmission is likely to be even smaller than this figure because the study combines asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic individuals”.

A study published in Nature found no instances of asymptomatic spread from positive asymptomatic cases among all 1,174 close contacts of the cases, based on a base sample of 10 million persons. AIER’s Zucker responded this way “The conclusion is not that asymptomatic spread is rare or that the science is uncertain. The study revealed something that hardly ever happens in these kinds of studies. There was not one documented case. Forget rare. Forget even Fauci’s previous suggestion that asymptomatic transmission exists but not does drive the spread. Replace all that with: never. At least not in this study for 10,000,000”.

One study in May 2020 examined the 455 contacts of one asymptomatic person. Researchers found that “all CT images showed no sign of COVID-19 infection. No severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections was detected in 455 contacts by nucleic acid test”.

The World Health Organization (WHO) also made this claim that asymptomatic spread/transmission is rare. This issue of asymptomatic spread is the key issue being used to force vaccination in children. The science, however, remains contrary to this proposed policy mandate.

Additionally, a high-quality robust study in the French Alps examined the spread of Covid-19 virus via a cluster of Covid-19. They followed one infected child who visited three different schools and interacted with other children, teachers, and various adults. They reported no instance of secondary transmission despite close interactions. These data have been available to the CDC and other health experts for over a year, and while one must tease out the concept of no asymptomatic spread though we argue it is an easy argument to make, it clearly shows that children do not spread the virus.

Ludvigsson published a seminal paper in the New England Journal of Medicine on Covid-19 among children 1 to 16 years of age and their teachers in Sweden. From the nearly 2 million children that were followed in school in Sweden, it was reported that with no mask mandates, there were zero deaths from Covid and a few instances of transmission and minimal hospitalization.

We include this study for it is seminal in showing that masks were never needed and children do not spread the virus or get sick or die from it. But importantly, if asymptomatic spread was so vast, and there were 2 million children, would there not be much more elevated numbers of infection reported?

A recent June 10th 2021 op-ed sheds more confirmatory light that asymptomatic spread was more a myth that a reality. Ballan and Tindall wrote “People presenting with symptoms of Covid-19 are almost exclusively responsible for transmitting SARS-CoV-2… serious infection usually results from frequent exposure to high doses of SARS-CoV-2, such as health care workers caring for sick Covid-19 patients in hospitals or nursing homes and people living in the same household.

A person showing no symptoms of Covid-19 may test positive for SARS-CoV-2 on a PCR test, which doesn’t necessarily mean that they are infectious. They explain further that the myth was driven by a single case report of an asymptomatic woman from China who had spread the virus to approximately 16 contacts in Germany. “Later reports showed that, at the time of contact, this woman was taking medication for flu-like symptoms, invalidating the evidence provided for the theory of asymptomatic transmission”.

Ballan and Tindall further explain that “a person showing no symptoms of Covid-19 may test positive for SARS-CoV-2 on a PCR test, which doesn’t necessarily mean that they are infectious. There are four ways in which this can happen: i) the test may give a false positive result due to several faults in the testing process or in the test itself (the person is not infected), ii) the person may have recovered from Covid-19 in the last three months (the person is not currently infected but dead debris of the virus are being picked up by the test), the person may be pre-symptomatic, i.e, the person is infected but still in the early stages of the disease and has not yet developed symptoms, and iv) the person may be asymptomatic, i.e. the person is infected but has pre-existing immunity and will never develop symptoms”.

Dr Clare Craig, a pathologist, and her colleague Dr Jonathan Engler have examined the research evidence behind the claim that Covid-19 can be transmitted by asymptomatic individuals. They wrote “harmful lockdown policies and mass testing have been justified on the assumption that asymptomatic transmission is a genuine risk. Given the harmful collateral effects of such policies, the precautionary principle should result in a very high evidential bar for asymptomatic transmission being set.

However, the only word which can be used to describe the quality of evidence for this is woeful. A handful of questionable instances of spread have been massively amplified in the medical literature by repeatedly including them in meta-analyses that continue to be published, recycling the same evidence base.

It is important to carefully distinguish purely asymptomatic (individuals who never develop any symptoms) from pre-symptomatic transmission (where individuals do eventually develop symptoms). To the extent that the latter phenomenon, which has in fact happened only very rarely, is deemed worthy of public health action, appropriate strategies to manage it (in the absence of significant asymptomatic transmission) would be entirely different and much less disruptive than those adopted.

We state emphatically that the concept of ‘asymptomatic spread’ of COVID virus was devised to frighten the population into compliance and that it was not central to this pandemic as we were told. Evidence to support its existence remains lacking and absent. We close by offering our continued beliefs and thus opinion on how this pandemic should have been handled from the start. We would have as a basic, the strong double and triple down protection of the elderly high-risk populations. If this is not done properly and first, then there will be no success.

We should have fostered improved hand-washing hygiene and isolation of only the ill/sick/symptomatic persons. No asymptomatic person is/was to be quarantined and there is only to be testing of symptomatic persons or when there is strong clinical suspicion. We would promote education in improving support for the immune system such as public service messages about vitamin D supplements (especially in societies with limited sunlight) and allow the rest of the low-risk society to live largely unfettered daily lives, taking sensible reasonable safety precautions.

This would allow them to mingle and be exposed to each other harmlessly and naturally, so that this would drive population level immunity. At the same time, we would offer early outpatient treatment to high-risk positive persons (in nursing homes or their private homes). This includes the elderly, younger persons with underlying medical conditions, and obese persons.

We feel that had this approach been enacted from the very beginning, the devastating losses incurred by businesses and the economy, as well as the deaths of despair to the business owners, employees, and our school children would have been avoided.

There were crushing harms to our societies and especially our children due tor he lockdowns and school closures, and this is unforgivable for the data was always available and we have been screaming loudly from March 2020 on the pending tragedy if our governments continued in that manner. The narrative and falsehood of ‘asymptomatic spread’ helped severely hobble and damage the pandemic response as it caused devastating personal and economic loses to accrue needlessly, and especially for our children. Especially for the poorer among us who could least afford!

I close by asking CDC, NIH, FDA and all of these alphabet agencies that have been failing us for so long, show me, show us the evidence! Stop spewing nonsense without the evidence. Stop lying to the nation about their immune systems’ incapability that is way more robust than you give it credit for! You are denying basic immunology and virology and acting a fool. “Natural immunity and vaccinated immunity are equally effective and “probably life-long”.

Stop lying to the public and we call on the public that until you the CDC and NIH get your credibility and honesty ‘house’ in order, that the nation must turn you off, tune you out, for you spew inaccurate misleading nonsense 24/7 that defies common sense! Focus now on rebuilding your credibility that is so destroyed, now deeply buried, courtesy of you the CDC and NIH!

Hopefully the FDA can unshackle itself from you and return to a non-political regulatory role it must hold, for the safety of the nation. You talk about ‘following the science’, well show us. Begin by following it. Shame on all of you so called experts!

Note that views expressed in this opinion article are the writer’s personal views.


Over 200 doctors call for global vitamin D distribution because it inexpensively reduces covid infections, hospitalizations and deaths

Over two hundred doctors and scientists have come together in support of worldwide distribution of vitamin D to help treat covid infections and reduce hospitalizations, ICU admissions and deaths. The doctors are calling on all governments and healthcare systems around the world to immediately recommend and distribute vitamin D to adult populations. Long before covid-19, most of the world’s population was physically primed to suffer from infections. This is because 70 percent of the world’s population is deficient in vitamin D and have subpar immune function. All current medical research shows that vitamin D deficiency is the common denominator behind covid hospitalization, ICU admission, severe illness and death. Vitamin D is both inexpensive and nontoxic. It could have already been delivered worldwide to people throughout the pandemic, but public health authorities from the NIH to the CDC shamefully took the opposite approach, leading to needless suffering and death.

Addressing vitamin D deficiency should be top priority for governments around the world

Vitamin D deficiency is medically defined as less than 20ng/ml (50nmol/L) and affects over 33 percent of the population. Vitamin D insufficiency is defined as less than 30ng/ml (75nmol/L) and affects over 50 percent of the population. In order to get circulating vitamin D to a minimally sufficient level (30ng/ml), most people are recommended to consume 6,200 international units (IU) of vitamin D each day. Vitamin D deficiency is more common in people with dark skin, due to their high melanin content, which blocks sunlight absorption. Deficiency is also common for people who are overweight or obese. Vitamin D is fat soluble; therefore, circulating vitamin D levels are higher in people who have a healthy weight. People who live in the Northern Hemisphere are commonly deficient, especially in the winter, when they are indoors and away from the sunlight. The elderly population is also deficient, especially if they are stuck in nursing homes that cordon them off from sunlight. The doctors .have analyzed over 188 scientific papers on vitamin D and concur:

• Higher vitamin D blood levels are associated with lower rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection. • Many papers indicate that vitamin D affects COVID-19 more strongly than most other health conditions, with increased risk at levels less than 30ng/ml (75nmol/L) and severely greater risk at levels less than 20ng/ml (50nmol/L). • Higher D levels are associated with lower risk of a severe case (hospitalization, ICU or death). • Intervention studies and randomized controlled trials indicate that vitamin D can be a very effective treatment. • Many papers reveal several biological mechanisms by which vitamin D influences COVID-19. • Causal inference modelling, Hill’s criteria, the intervention studies & the biological mechanisms indicate that vitamin D’s influence on COVID-19 is very likely causal, not just correlation. • COVID-19 pandemic sustains itself in large part through infection of those with low vitamin D, and that deaths are concentrated largely in those with deficiency.

Addressing underlying immune deficiency is the most important health responsibility

The doctors and scientists agree that all adults should take 10,000 IU of vitamin D3 every day for at least two weeks to get circulating vitamin D levels to a sufficient level in their blood. They also recommend that every adult take 4,000 IU of vitamin D3 every day afterward to maintain a healthy level. They recommend that high risk groups (dark skin, excess weight) should take double that amount. Patients who are hospitalized with covid-19 should be administered a higher dose, which was instrumental in helping patients recover in two important 2020 studies. Patients who received 60,000 IU vitamin D daily for 7 days were more likely to recover without complications or death. The doctors also recommend vitamin C intake at 500 mg, twice daily. Since vitamin C is water soluble, it’s best to ingest it intermittently throughout the day. Whole food sources include citrus fruits, camu camu, and amalaki berry. Most people are also deficient in the mineral selenium. These doctors suggest 200 micrograms of selenium per day. Zinc is equally important for stopping viral replication and can be consumed in doses of 30 mg per day. Quercetin, a natural plant pigment and antioxidant, can help zinc assimilate in the cells. The doctors recommend 250 mg, twice daily. Because severe covid illness shows signs of blood coagulation and thrombosis, the doctors recommend aspirin (325 mg/day) while symptoms lasts. Nitric oxide is also important for keeping oxygen levels up in the blood. The doctors recommend whole food B-complex vitamins, which are highly concentrated in foods like beet root and spirulina. For further treatment, the doctors recommend a prescription of ivermectin, a proven antiviral. For more on conquering infection, check out VitaminD.NewsSources

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: Why The COVID-19 Vaccine Should Be FORBIDDEN And Avoided At All Cost

I would like to draw your attention urgently to important issues related to the next Covid-19 vaccination.

by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

For the first time in the history of vaccination, the so-called last generation mRNA vaccines intervene directly in the genetic material of the patient and therefore alter the individual genetic material, which represents the genetic manipulation, something that was already forbidden and until then considered criminal.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

This intervention can be compared to genetically manipulated food, which is also highly controversial.

Even if the media and politicians currently trivialize the problem and even stupidly call for a new type of vaccine to return to normality, this vaccination is problematic in terms of health, morality and ethics, and also in terms of genetic damage that, unlike the damage caused by previous vaccines, will be irreversible and irreparable.

Dear patients, after an unprecedented mRNA vaccine, you will no longer be able to treat the vaccine symptoms in a complementary way.

They will have to live with the consequences, because they can no longer be cured simply by removing toxins from the human body, just as a person with a genetic defect like Down syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome, genetic cardiac arrest, hemophilia, cystic fibrosis, Rett syndrome, etc.), because the genetic defect is forever!

This means clearly: if a vaccination symptom develops after an mRNA vaccination, neither I nor any other therapist can help you, because the damage caused by the vaccination will be genetically irreversible.

In my opinion, these new vaccines represent a crime against humanity that has never been committed in such a big way in history.

As Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, an experienced doctor, said: “In fact, this ‘promising vaccine’ for the vast majority of people should be FORBIDDEN, because it is genetic manipulation!”

The vaccine, developed and endorsed by Anthony Fauci and funded by Bill Gates, uses experimental mRNA technology. Three of the 15 human guinea pigs (20%) experienced a “serious adverse event”.

Note: messenger RNA or mRNA is the ribonucleic acid that transfers the genetic code of the DNA of the cell nucleus to a ribosome in the cytoplasm, that is, the one that determines the order in which the amino acids of a protein bind and act as a mold or pattern for the synthesis of that protein.

Resource: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.





Yes, like many other viruses.


Yes, if you use the proper medicines and do not leave your health in the hands of corrupt and mercantile health systems.


Yes and many, some are acting discreetly giving appropriate treatments, others have been bolder and there are many videos in the networks talking about these treatments, and many have been threatened, disqualified or silenced.


Yes, and there is a world union calling for more doctors and scientists called Doctors and Scientists for Truth, to expose the falsity of the treatment they have given to the bug issue.


No. The WHO changed the term that referred to the pandemic, before the bug was launched in order to end the pandemic.


Yes, like all flu.


No. If you have symptoms, just take the appropriate medicine from the first day (strengthen the immune system, take anti-inflammatory and anti-influenza) and cure yourself at home.


Yes, being as clean as you should be, and maintaining a high immune system. And you also have: Ozone Therapy, Chlorine Dioxide with the preventive protocol.


No. In the USA it was discovered that any data, would be in fact 10% of that number, because the causes of deaths were other diseases, and the tests are not reliable, they give false positives.


The human being has many microorganisms and viruses in the body and this does not mean that you are a sick or infected person, or that you have the virus, however, the viruses that are supposedly “so aggressive” present some symptoms in the patients because the body releases alarms from an intruder (fever, headache, vomiting, etc.) and according to Koch’s theory the answer is NO.


Yes, in a laboratory.


To be the excuse to restrict freedoms, to change the current economic system to a more oppressive / enslaving, scary, blind flock obedience.




Yes. And all those who contributed to the deaths and the plan will fall, and they will pay for what they did.


No. Fear diminishes your immune system and makes you mentally controllable.


Yes. The owners of the media are accomplices. This is called mind control.


You protect yourself, and if you get sick you already know how to heal yourself at home, or with your trusted doctor who will not commit to the abandonment protocol.


No. If you get healthy, vaccines bring chemicals, heavy metals and a series of “bugs” that will only affect your health more in the medium and long term, both physically and mentally.

It’s your body, and it’s your right to decide about it, and about your physical and mental health. Would you trust a vaccine after a virus has been created to exterminate humanity?


Yes! And we will be victorious! We need to stay together and wake other people up, giving a lot of information.

“Forced to wear a mask, but not to shut up.”

9 Covid Facts: A Pandemic Of Fearmongering And Ignorance

Ever since the alleged pandemic erupted this past March the mainstream media has spewed a non-stop stream of misinformation that appears to be laser focused on generating maximum fear among the citizenry.

But the facts and the science simply don’t support the grave picture painted of a deadly virus sweeping the land.

Yes we do have a pandemic, but it’s a pandemic of ginned up pseudo-science masquerading as unbiased fact.

9 Covid Facts A Pandemic Of Fearmongering And Ignorance

Here are nine facts backed up with data, in many cases from the CDC itself that paints a very different picture from the fear and dread being relentlessly drummed into the brains of unsuspecting citizens.

1) The PCR Test Is Practically Useless

According to an article in the New York Times August 29th 2020 testing for the Covid-19 virus using the popular PCR method results in up to 90% of those tested showing positive results that are grossly misleading.

Officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada compiled testing data that revealed the PCR test can NOT determine the amount of virus in a sample (viral load).

The amount of virus in up to 90% of positive results turned out to be so miniscule that the patient was asymptomatic and posed no threat to others.

So the positive Covid-19 tests are virtually meaningless.

2) A Positive Test Is NOT A CASE

For some reason every positive Covid-19 test is immediately designated a CASE. As we saw in #1 above up to 90% of positive Covid-19 tests result in miniscule amounts of virus that do not sicken the subject.

Historically only patients who demonstrated actual symptoms of an illness were considered a case.

Publishing positive test results as “CASES” is grossly misleading and needlessly alarming.

3) The Centers For Disease Control Dramatically Lowered The Covid-19 Death Count

On August 30th the CDC released new data that showed only 6% of the deaths previously attributed to Covid-19 were due exclusively to the virus.

The vast majority, 94%, may have had exposure to Covid-19 but also had preexisting illnesses like heart disease, obesity, hypertension, cancer and various respiratory illnesses.

While they died with Covid-19 they did NOT die exclusively from Covid-19.

4) CDC Reports Covid-19 Survival Rate Over 99%

The CDC updated their “Current Best Estimate” for Covid-19 survival on September 10th showing that over 99% of people exposed to the virus survived.

[According to the CDC, Covid-19 poses virtually no death risk for people under the age of 50].

Another way to say this is that less than 1% of the exposures are potentially life threatening. According to the CDC the vast majority of deaths attributed to Covid-19 were concentrated in the population over age 70, close to normal life expectancy.

5) CDC Reveals 85% Of Positive Covid Cases Wore Face Masks Always Or Often

In September of 2020 the CDC released the results of a study conducted in July where they discovered that 85% of the positive Covid test subjects reported wearing a cloth face mask always or often for two weeks prior to testing positive.

The majority, 71% of the test subjects reported always wearing a cloth face mask and 14% reported often wearing a cloth face mask.

The only rational conclusion from this study is that cloth face masks offer little if any protection from Covid-19 infection.

[According to top health expertswearing a mask can cause serious brain damage].

6) There Are Inexpensive, Proven Therapies For Covid-19

Harvey Risch, MD, PhD heads the Yale University School of Epidemiology. He authored “The Key to Defeating Covid-19 Already Exists. We Need to Start Using It” which was published in Newsweek Magazine July 23rd, 2020.

Dr. Risch documents the proven effectiveness of treating patients diagnosed with Covid-19 using a combination of Hydroxychloroquine, an antibiotic like azithromycin and the nutritional supplement zinc.

Medical Doctors across the globe have reported very positive results [i.e. 100% cure rate] using this protocol particularly for early stage Covid patients.

7) The US Death Rate Is NOT Spiking

If Covid-19 was the lethal killer it’s made out to be one would reasonably expect to see a significant spike in the number of deaths reported. But that hasn’t happened.

According to the CDC as of early May 2020 the total number of deaths in the US was 944,251 from January 1 – April 30th.

This is actually slightly lower than the number of deaths during the same period in 2017 when 946,067 total deaths were reported.

[Actually, the same thing is happening in Europe as well. Though the number of cases keeps rising due to an increase in testing, the mortality rate remained the same.

Even more proof that Covid-19 is not a real pandemic, but a lie propagated by unscientific testing and MSM scare tactics, according to data from the state authority of statistics in Sweden (SCB), September 2020 was the least deadly month per capita ever recorded in Swedish history.

This is extremely important because Sweden didn’t impose any kind of draconian coronavirus lockdowns and never mandated the use of face masks. As a matter of fact, life in Sweden continued pretty much unhindered, and now they have one of the lowest case fatality rates in Europe].

8) Most Covid-19 Deaths Occur At The End Of A Normal Lifespan

According to the CDC as of 2017 US males can expect a normal lifespan of 76.1 years and females 81.1 years.

A little over 80% of the suspected Covid-19 deaths have occurred in people over age 65.

According to a June 28th New York Post article almost half of all Covid suspected deaths have occurred in Nursing Homes which predominately house people with preexisting health conditions and close to or past their normal life expectancy.

9) CDC Data Shows Minimal Covid Risk To Children And Young Adults

The CDC reported in their September 10th update that it’s estimated Infection Mortality Rate (IFR) for children age 0-19 was so low that 99.97% of those infected with the virus survived.

For 20-49 year-olds the survival rate was almost as good at 99.98%.

Even those 70 years-old and older had a survival rate of 94.6%.

To put this in perspective the CDC data suggest that a child or young adult up to age 19 has a greater chance of death from some type of accident than they do from Covid-19.

Taken together it should be obvious that Covid-19 is pretty similar to typical flu viruses [a fact that was accidentally confirmed by the WHO in a recent conference] that sicken some people annually.

The vast majority are able to successfully fight off the virus with their body’s natural immune system.

Common sense precautions should be taken, particularly by those over age 65 that suffer from preexisting medical conditions.

The gross over reaction by government leaders to this illness is causing much more distress, physical, emotional and financial, than the virus ever could on its own.

The bottom line is there is NO pandemic, just a typical flu season that has been wildly blown out of proportion by 24/7 media propaganda and enabled by the masses paralyzed by irrational fear.

State and local governments in particular have ignored the rights of the people and have instituted outrageous attacks on freedom and liberty that was bought and paid for by the blood and sacrifice of our forefathers.

Slowly the people are recognizing the great fraud perpetrated on them by bureaucrats and elected officials who have sworn to uphold rights and freedoms as spelled out in the US Constitution.

The time has come to hold these criminals accountable by utilizing the legal system to bring them to justice.

Either we act now to preserve freedom and liberty for our children and future generations yet unborn, or we meekly submit to tyrants who crave more power and control. I will not comply!

Is a Cure for COVID-19 Already Sold at a Pharmacy Near You? Some Experts Believe So

“You should publish the article as quickly as possible,” I was advised by Dr. Shaul Lev, who heads the general intensive care unit at Hasharon Hospital in Petah Tikva, and chairman of the Israel Society for Clinical Nutrition, at the conclusion of our interview. “Every week of delay in publishing this information can result in thousands of unnecessary infections, some of them serious and even fatal. It can save lives.”

So here it is.

Increasing scientific evidence from around the world indicates that vitamin D, a vitamin that doesn’t have great public relations, can protect against infection by COVID-19, and that it’s possible that for those suffering from the virus, the symptoms might be lessened and the death verdict annulled simply by taking vitamin D. It’s inexpensive and readily available. Is the solution at hand?

The first studies in the world appeared last April. One of them, which examined a large database, was conducted by the research institute of Israel’s Leumit health maintenance organization in association with Bar-Ilan University, and it came up with impressive results.

“Already at the start of the first wave, when I was working in the HMO’s coronavirus directorate and receiving patients who tested positive, I noticed that in many cases they had low levels of vitamin D,” says Yevgeny Marzon, who is director of the Department of Managed Medicine at Leumit and led the study.

“It was very obvious,” Dr. Marzon continues. “In order to verify this intuition, we collected data from more than 7,000 people who were tested for the coronavirus between February and April, and who also been tested for vitamin D in the past year. The results, after taking into account variables such as age, sex, socioeconomic level and underlying illnesses, were unequivocal: People with low levels of vitamin D were at heightened risk of being infected by the coronavirus, and the lower their vitamin D level, the higher the probability that they would be hospitalized – in other words, that they would develop more serious symptoms. It looked as though higher levels [of vitamin D] could protect people from becoming infected.”

Since then, similar articles have been published in a host of countries: the United States, Germany, France, Italy, China, Iran, South Korea, India, Britain, Switzerland and Israel. Time and again, a significant connection was found between the level of vitamin D in the blood and a susceptibility to infection by the coronavirus. Individuals with a vitamin D deficiency are more disposed to be infected by the virus, and in case of infection a low level of vitamin D increases the likelihood of developing complications. The opposite is also true: Patients with high levels of vitamin D tend to suffer less from serious symptoms and to be less likely to die. In general, it can be said that there is a linear connection: The seriousness of the disease correlates completely with one’s level of vitamin D.

“The effectiveness of vitamin D in protecting against infection and in treating patients is already an established fact,” says Marzon, a specialist in family medicine. “As a physician who is in the field and who speaks to dozens of patients every day, I am very disappointed that the authorized medical personnel have not yet issued recommendations [regarding vitamin D]. I have no explanation as to why there is no systematic policy of preventing infection by the virus and of treating mild and intermediate cases in the community with the aid of vitamin D. I suggest to my patients that they take a vitamin D additive and mention that this is a warm personal recommendation.”

The large disparity between the results of the growing number of studies and what’s happening on the ground is infuriating. Yes, one person will have heard a vague recommendation on television, and someone else will have encountered information about vitamin D’s importance elsewhere – but the general feeling is that it’s some sort of rumor. Amid the chaos that characterizes the pandemic’s management, the array of opinions and assessments and the abundant wrangling and vested interests – no clear voice is stating: Here’s a fruit that grows very low – pick it.

Thirty heads and 70 tails

Correlation is not causality, of course. The fact that there is a correlation between two variables – in this case, between vitamin D levels and the rate of coronavirus infection – is not proof of a causal connection between them. As another example, the fact that a clear-cut correlation exists between the consumption of chocolate in various countries and the per capita rate of Nobel Prize winners in them does not prove that eating chocolate improves one’s cognitive ability.

It’s true that Switzerland consumes the largest amount of chocolate per capita and also has the largest number of Nobel laureates, relative to its population, while China, which has the lowest rate of chocolate consumption, is at the bottom of the list of winners (as of 2011). Nevertheless, these are two non-dependent variables with no convincing causal connection between them. It’s likey that the basis for the correlation between the two variables lies in the existence of a third variable, such as the country’s level of affluence. Rich countries invest a great deal of money in scientists, and their citizens can also pamper themselves by eating chocolate.

Sometimes, a correlation is only a correlation, and in order to demonstrate causality between two variables – that is, to prove that one is indeed the cause of the other – a controlled experiment needs to be conducted, in which two similar groups are compared, in only one of which is there intervention involving the element being examined. That, of course, is far more difficult to carry out.

Recently, though, just such an experiment was conducted, which examined directly and under controlled conditions the connection between vitamin D and coronavirus symptoms. The results were dramatic. In Spain, 76 coronavirus patients, who were hospitalized with respiratory difficulties, were divided into two groups immediately upon admission. The patients in the first group received particularly high dosages of vitamin D; those in the second group were treated in the normal way. At the end of the experiment it turned out that only 2 percent of the patients who received vitamin D were subsequently transferred to intensive care – as compared with 50 percent of the patients who did not receive the vitamin (and two of whom died).

The conclusion seems to be clear: Vitamin D wields a dramatic influence on improving the condition of COVID-19 patients. It can reduce the severity of the symptoms, lower the likelihood of needing intensive care and, it follows, also reduce the risk of death.

As a physician who is in the field and who speaks to dozens of patients every day, I am very disappointed that the authorized medical personnel have not yet issued recommendations [regarding vitamin D].

Dr. Yevgeny Marzon
That conclusion could upend all we know about treatment of the disease. But is it correct?

Can we draw such far-reaching conclusions from a single experiment, carried out under the limitations of a surging pandemic and with a small number of participants? After all, it could be solely the hand of chance that fomented those impressive results. There is always the possibility that even though the patients were divided into two groups randomly, according to the order of their arrival in the hospital, it was only by chance that the condition of those who received the vitamin didn’t deteriorate. This is comparable to flipping a coin 100 times, when you expect it to come out 50 times heads and 50 times tails, but perhaps getting landing 30 on heads and 70 times on tails.

“In normal times, it would in fact be better to wait for more research,” says Saar Wilf, an Israeli high-tech entrepreneur who half a year ago dropped most of what he was doing and began devoting his time, on a voluntary basis, to deciphering the coronavirus riddle. “But these are not normal times. There’s a pandemic out there.” Wilf is currently funding a number of clinical trials and initiating projects that are looking for possible solutions.

Several years ago, together with another local tech person, Aviv Cohen, who today is also working on a volunteer basis on behalf of the mission, he founded Rootclaim, a nonprofit that uses models and probabilistic tools to shed light on issues about which there is abundant evidence, often contradictory and sometimes partial, to try to identify the “signal” within the “noise.”

“In light of the plentiful studies about vitamin D and the results of the Spanish experiment, with all its weaknesses, we wanted to estimate the benefit and the risk of adopting vitamin D treatment for coronavirus patients, as compared with the benefit and the risk of the conservative approach, which says we should wait,” Cohen says. “With the help of mathematical models, which try to challenge research results, and based on a rigorous approach, we reached the conclusion that it’s irresponsible to wait for more studies, and that it’s important to start treating patients now with vitamin D. Despite the limitations of the Spanish experiment, it can be concluded with a very high probability, above 80 percent, that a significant effect exists – although perhaps less than that of the results of the experiment – in reducing the severity of the symptoms.”

Everyone knows that you can use statistics to prove just about anything, right?

Wilf: “Our assessment doesn’t take into account only the Spanish study, detached from any context. The Spanish study joins a very large mass of evidence from several disciplines – epidemiological, biological and medical – all of which point to vitamin D as the ‘prime suspect.’ If the Spanish study had found that a five-minute massage of the left leg cures coronavirus, it would be reasonable to assume that a mistake had occurred, even if the results were clear-cut. But in the case of vitamin D, we have a high a priori probability, which is based on the abundance of other evidence that was collected even before this particular experiment. For example, the fact that a new study shows that vitamin D exercises an antiviral effect on the coronavirus in a test tube, raises the a priori probability a great deal.”

An examination of the large number of existing data in the light of the hypothesis about the role of vitamin D in the coronavirus epidemic, suddenly sheds new light on epidemiological observations. Some will say that vitamin D is the “missing piece of the puzzle,” others that it’s like a detective story, in which findings pointing to the murderer were discovered, but it wasn’t clear how, or how they were connected. Until someone suddenly pointed to the factor that connects all the facts, which until now were separate and opaque, and creates a coherent picture. Aha! It was the postman!

The involvement of vitamin D in the disease can explain, for example, why dark-skinned people in the West are more vulnerable than light-skinned people, both to infection with COVID-19 and to severe symptoms. The density of melanin in dark skin inhibits the manufacture of vitamin D, and if so, which could explain why, in the United States, the principal sufferers from vitamin D deficiency are Blacks and Hispanics, and why they are the major sufferers from the coronavirus. In Israel, the population groups most vulnerable to vitamin D deficiency are Arabs and the ultra-Orthodox – two populations that tend to wear long clothing, and they are also the groups that have been most affected by the pandemic. It can also be said, of course, that the high rate of illness in those groups is due to their lower socioeconomic status, and that the vitamin D levels are only an indicator, not a cause. Poor nutrition, obesity, predisposition to diabetes, overcrowding – all these can in and of themselves explain the incidence of the disease.

It’s possible that a new study by the Clalit HMO can shed a little more light on the subject. This research project examined more than half a million people from 200 Israeli locales, and as in earlier studies found an impressive correlation between vitamin D deficiency and the risk of contracting COVID-19. Places that were found to suffer from a deficiency in the vitamin are the “red cities,” the locales where the infection rate is especially high. Because these are all Arab and ultra-Orthodox cities and towns, the phenomenon is usually attributed to a low socioeconomic situation. However, the study also found large differences between Arab men and women. The women tend to fall ill at a far higher rate than the men, and the women’s vitamin D levels are also lower. A possible explanation is that women in Arab society are more covered up than men, and also tend to stay at home more and so are less exposed to sunlight. This difference neutralizes to some degree the socioeconomic factor (as these are men and women from the same population).

‘Causing death by conservatism’

With the help of mathematical models, and based on a rigorous approach, we reached the conclusion that it’s irresponsible to wait for more studies, and that it’s important to start treating patients now with vitamin D.Aviv Cohen

“The vitamin D story did not begin with the impressive epidemiological studies of the past few months,” says Shaul Lev, whose ICU at Petah Tikva’s Sharon Hospital was turned over completely to treatment of COVID-19 patients in the first wave.

“For some years, patients with lung and viral diseases have been treated with vitamin D, because they are known to have a deficiency of that vitamin. So the idea of using it to treat the coronavirus is quite natural,” Dr. Lev continues. “In its mild form, COVID-19 is a simple viral lung disease, with which the regular cells of the immune system cope well. Frequently, no symptoms at all develop. Only 1 percent to 5 percent – the rates are low in the summer – of all those who are infected develop the disease in its serious form. That happens because of a secondary response by the immune system, which sometimes lurches out of control and starts to function in an exaggerated way – it has to do with the hypercytokinemia [severe immune response] that people have been talking about lately. It results in inflammation that causes massive damage to the lungs and afterward multi-systemic damage.”

What is the role of vitamin D in this disease?

Lev: “Vitamin D, or more precisely one of its derivatives, regulates the immune system. It encourages the initial response of the immune system, which occurs immediately at the start [after exposure], and it moderates the secondary response, if it occurs, so that it does not become an overly severe inflammatory response.

“In addition, vitamin D is important for preserving the tight structure of the lung walls, and because it also has an effect on the number of receptors in the walls, through which the virus enters the lungs, it can also influence the disposition to infection. There is no doubt that the central role of vitamin D in the activity of the immune system reinforces the suspicion of its involvement in the coronavirus and justifies the studies conducted about it.”

“Why isn’t vitamin D being administered to the general population and to patients?” Wilf, the high-tech entrepreneur, asks. To provoke and stimulate the discussion, he is betting $100,000 that in another half a year medical experts will be in agreement that treatment of COVID-19 patients with vitamin D is effective in reducing the risk that they will develop severe symptoms.

Wilf: “There is a deluge of findings and evidence that attest to the vitamin’s involvement in the pandemic, but the news spread so slowly. It’s irresponsible. We are trying with all our might to induce the decision makers – physicians, the Health Ministry, the politicians – to break out of the conservative pattern of doing things that characterizes their usual behavior, and to issue a call to the people: ‘Take vitamin D, it can save lives.’ And to the hospitals: ‘Start treating patients with vitamin D.’

“It’s true that most of the studies to date show only correlations and have been published in journals without undergoing peer review (the long process in which scientists with similar competencies scrutinize a scholarly article) because of the urgency of the issue. To date, only one controlled experiment has been conducted, which showed the causal connection between vitamin D and the course of the disease. But even so, this is about saving lives.”

So you want to shake up the system?

Wilf: “Yes. Physicians are educated on the basis of the approach, ‘First, do no harm.’ In other words, it’s better to do nothing than to do something you’re not sure of. That is a welcome approach, of course, in light of the history of rash decisions that caused tremendous damage, such as the thalidomide disaster, where a medication intended to prevent nausea in pregnancy caused the birth of deformed infants. Over the years, important rules of thumb have developed: Don’t rely on a lone study, be suspicious of small samples and beware of any departure from the accepted protocol of the experiment.”

However, Wilf continues, “Our approach is somewhat different. We need to remember that it’s not the rules that are sacred, but the original purpose for which they were laid down: to improve treatment and reduce risk. In a singular situation such as we are now in, with the pandemic raging and the number of dying increasing – a decision needs to be made quickly, one that makes use of the most powerful tools of analysis and deduction that we have, in order to save lives.

If the Health Ministry officially declared the success of treatment with vitamin D too early – people would think that it’s all behind us, that they don’t need face masks and that there’s no point to maintaining social distancing. That is dangerous.

Dr. Shaul Lev
“At the moment the picture is clear,” he says. “The probability that vitamin D is effective is high, its potential benefit is vast and the risk is very low – toxicity as a result of excess [ingestion] of vitamin D is rare, especially if you monitor the patients. Perhaps in another six months more comprehensive studies will be published, showing that the treatment is not effective – in our estimation the likelihood of that is low, but it’s definitely possible – in which case a different decision will be the right one. As of now, every day in which patients are not given vitamin D puts them at risk for no reason. I call it ‘causing death by conservatism.’”

Dr. Lev is also awestruck when he shows me the graphs that display the amazing correlation between vitamin D levels and the rate of infection by the coronavirus. He, too, is convinced that vitamin D should be dispensed in the community, especially to those with a deficiency, as a coronavirus preventive. Indeed, he argues, it is urgent to do this before the coming winter.

At the same time, Lev finds exaggerated, almost missionary-like, the fervor of people who are not physicians, and their demand to start dealing with patients. “As head of the coronavirus ICU in the first wave, I received a great many phone calls from mathematicians, physicists and high-tech people who swore that they had a cure for the coronavirus,” he says.

“You have to understand that the picture is far broader than it appears at first glance. To begin with, as a doctor who is very familiar with the first wave, I can say that the Spanish study, which is considered a supposed game changer in the treatment of the seriously ill, suffered from quite a number of weaknesses, and not only the small number of participants. Second, a distinction needs to be made between giving vitamin D to the healthy population as a food additive in order to prevent infection, and the use of the vitamin as medication for patients. It is impossible to recommend therapeutic intervention without sufficient evidence, and for that more intervention studies need to be conducted, which will show the effect clearly.”

But why wait? If the chance of toxicity is so low, what is there to lose?

Lev: “In principle, you’re right, but in managing an epidemic, it’s important to see the big picture. First, if the Health Ministry’s coronavirus management team were to issue an official declaration about the success of treatment with vitamin D too early – people would think that it’s all behind us, that they don’t need face masks and that there’s no point to maintaining social distancing. That is dangerous. The foundation for getting control over the coronavirus is the public’s behavior. Let’s say the vitamin reduces morbidity by 20 percent – which is a great deal – and at the same time the population feels safe and thinks that anything goes. That whole 20 percent will collapse and be erased.

“Every effect that you create can generate an opposite effect. So it’s best to treat vitamin D as something of great potential, but with caution. We also wouldn’t want people to start drinking bottles of vitamin D and reaching toxic levels. That can heighten the risk of falling and fractures, and it’s especially dangerous for those with kidney or liver problems and for those with high calcium levels.”

President Donald Trump pulls off his protective face mask as he poses atop the Truman Balcony of the White House after returning from being hospitalized at Walter Reed Medical Center, October 5, 2020.Credit: Erin Scott/ REUTERS

If you receive a patient who is seriously ill with COVID-19, will you not give him a large dose of vitamin D?

“At the moment, patients’ vitamin D levels are not being tested, and that is what I am trying to accomplish: to get the hospitals to check those levels, and based on the result to give them or not give them vitamin D. If a patient has a low level of vitamin D, I would definitely give him high vitamin doses while he is hospitalized, in order to bring him to a standard, normal level.”

Everyone I spoke to who is up-to-date on the subject – Dr. Marzon, who conducted one of the first studies, the high-tech people who are urging the vitamin’s use as a medication, and undoubtedly you, too – is taking vitamin D and recommending it to their loved ones. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the White House team’s senior expert on the coronavirus, says he’s taking 6,000 units a day, and President Trump reported from his hospital bed that he was taking vitamin D. Why isn’t the Health Ministry requiring people to be tested and starting to make up the deficiencies?

“I think that much progress has been made in the subject. The Health Ministry’s nutrition department issued a letter to the HMOs recommending that they prescribe vitamin D for people with a deficiency. That doesn’t yet mean that family doctors have taken note of it. From their viewpoint, maybe it’s just another routine message. In addition, it’s one of the expensive tests, and it’s impossible to increase its use all at once. Already today it constitutes 2 percent to 3 percent of all the tests in the hospitals.”

And the recommended dosage?

“In Israel, a totally sun-drenched country, there is paradoxically a tremendous vitamin D deficiency. Only 25 percent of the population has the standard level – possibly because people go outside less than in the rest of the Western world, or maybe because of the high awareness of risk of contracting skin cancer from exposure to the sun. But to recommend a dosage is like a shot in the dark. People live in different places, where there is more sun or less sun. Even people who live in the same area are exposed to the sun to different degrees, depending on the work they do – high-tech or gardening – and how they dress.

“And there are other factors: skin color, percentage of fat (because the adipose [fatty] tissue absorbs the vitamin and prevents it from reaching all parts of the body, obese people suffer more from a deficiency of the vitamin), age and nutrition (milk, liver and fish contain a fine amount of vitamin D). The general recommendation is for 2,000 units a day; 1,000 for young, thin, healthy people; and 4,000 for older people, overweight people and those who have minimal exposure to the sun. Taking that dosage for two to three months can help prevent infection by coronavirus, and in cases where they are infected, it can tilt it toward its mild form. Because winter is approaching, it’s worth thinking about treatment already in these months.”

Is there a large enough supply of vitamin D in Israel?

“Before speaking with you, I checked with the chief pharmacist’s office, and there’s enough for at least four months. There are also manufacturers, so there shouldn’t be a problem.”

Do you not have a word about the lockdown?

“The restriction on going outside reduces the exposure to the sun and thus, paradoxically, heightens the risk of coronavirus infection.”