Thanks for the link. Bill Gates stepped down from Microsoft 1 week before this was published. Supposedly to concentrate on global health concerns. He and Warren Buffet have ‘given’ billions of dollars to vaccine companies, and other tech companies (like the one referenced making the covid test!), and Bill’ Gates is the second largest contributor in the world to WHO (after the US, for now anyway since Trump is supposed to cut US funding to WHO). I saw an article or video within the last month that said even with his ‘philanthropy’ of billions and billions of dollars, his net worth doesn’t decline! I’m thinking he tithes to his church; reaping rewards seven times seven fold. Or not. To paraphrase Forrest Gump: evil is as evil does, and: life is like a box of vaccines, you never know what you’ll get.

“The mass acceptance of a test will be greater than acceptance of a vax
And the vax may be a red herring”

You are probably right. They have been ‘unsuccessful’ in developing a coronavirus vaccine so far, i.e. for SARS. Cannot sue for vaccine damage in the US, and CDC estimates vaccine adverse reaction reporting at 1% of actual reactions occurred. Some countries have stood up to the vaccine cabal though. They’ll continue to work on the other vaccines in the pipeline I’m sure. I think one is to prevent Taco Tuesday.

I think ‘they’ have known for years just how many people ‘they’ ‘need’ to keep around. Eugenics has been around for a long time, so has statistics. After they’ve crashed the economy for ‘us’, ‘they’ will let the ‘people’ decide who stays and who goes (survival of the fittest?)
I wonder how many of the data miners and statisticians will be allowed to continue to serve ‘them’? Poetic justice is that the bobble-heads in gov’t, and the presstitutes won’t be needed. And maybe just a doctor or two.

I was practicing Infection Control during the H1N1 2009 scam. I initially bought the whole deal, but had many many questions during and just after it was over. (And many questions since!!) I did some research in the intervening years, but have really knuckled down since this whole CV hoax has started. I had never heard of Bechamp until this year. Reading “Bechamp or Pasteur?” has answered many questions, connected many dots, just makes sense! Opens up another can of worms; but, worms are good for soil, birds, bait for fishing, etc.

That would show up the authorities.

It should be simple to prove that a virus/exosome is not physically viable outside of a liquid medium, which is its natural habitat.

Even the authorities admit transmission must be by “droplets” which should mean that asymptomatic people, who are not coughing or sneezing, can not be spreaders.

But now they come up with the meme – not peer reviewed science – that we may be exuding “droplets” as we speak. Language is what differentiated us from other creatures but now we afraid to speak – further dehumanisation.

Use of clinical terminologies has a much longer history in medicine. Being able to predict disease outbreak is predicated upon reliable aggregation of statistics on those diseases. Yet, if different communities use different terminologies for the diseases being monitored, then those statistics and hence predictions become unreliable.

As long ago as the early 17th century, the authorities in London drew up a list of ‘ways in which people died’. For example, the term ‘French pox’ was used for the same cause of death in each London parish, and consequently more reliable statistics were gathered. The London Bills of Mortality remained in use for many years and not just in London.

In the late 1880s, the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) was published. This brought the old Bill of Mortality’s terminology up to date and provided mankind with some 200 ways of dying (what conveniently fitted on two sides of paper).

ICD is now in its 10th edition and now has some 13 000 rubrics.

This need for coding is central to the use of terminology in medicine. Originally created for epidemiology purposes, ICD now plays a major role in billing within hospitals. To make this task more complex, several vocabularies have been developed for similar purposes; exactly the problem that the Open Biomedical Ontologies Consortium wishes to avoid

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1847325/