After 10 months of being told that herd immunity was mis-information and a far right conspiracy theory, the media, and their mindless lemmings are now preaching herd immunity. After silencing and censoring the worlds leading subject matter experts, for almost a full year now, the media has finally turned their sights back to herd immunity.
There is one caveat however. Herd immunity is now only attainable if everyone takes a vaccine. Vaccines must now be mandatory – Geneva Convention, Nuremberg Trials and science be damned.
Apparently, 100 year old science is no longer valid. People like myself are responsible for spreading “mis-information” resulting in our inability to achieve herd immunity and putting peoples lives at risk.
Somehow, people do not know that COVID is less deadly vs the annual flu to those under 50. Somehow, people don’t know that quarantining healthy people, forcing healthy people and forcing children to wear masks has no basis in science, and more closely resembles the authoritarianism represented in Communist China public health policies.
Society as a whole, seems entirely ignorant to history and geo-political events driving our current outcomes and realities.
In todays podcast, I paint a holistic view with respect to our current public health policies, the enormous influence Communist China and their radical ideologies are playing on us, and the associated and related historical references and timelines.
CH1 Podcast Andrew Rouchotas – EP048 – Everything is now Mandatory, except facts
Podcast available on all of your favourite podcast platforms (iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, etc). You can also listen to the podcast in your browser directly from the CH1.ca platform.
The Great Barrington Declaration – https://gbdeclaration.org/
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html – CDC Infection Fatality Rates by Age Demographic
Military Intervention into Ontario Long Term Care – https://globalnews.ca/news/7551057/coronavirus-ontario-health-coalition-military-long-term-care-homes/
New York Times / Dr Michael Mina – Harvard / Juliet Morrison – Virologist – University of California – PCR Testing – https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html
http://www.bccdc.ca/health-info/diseases-conditions/covid-19/testing/antibody-testing – BC CDC Anti-Body Testing Policy
The Great Barrington Declaration – https://gbdeclaration.org
WHO Joins The Great Barrington Declaration emphasizing harm caused by lockdowns – https://reason.com/2020/10/14/who-joins-top-epidemiologists-in-emphasizing-harm-caused-by-lockdowns/
Lack of scientific evidence towards Asymptomatic Spread
- University of Florida – https://rationalground.com/university-of-florida-researchers-find-no-asymptomatic-or-presymptomatic-spread/
https://www.sickkids.ca/en/news/archive/2020/sickkids-releases-recommendations-for-school-reopening/ – Toronto Sick Kids Hospital recommendations for kids to return to normal schooling
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-n-warns-hunger-pandemic-amid-threats-coronavirus-economic-downturn-n1189326 – UN global starvation, COVID lockdowns
Scientific Evidence clearing demonstrating the lack of efficacy with respect to masking in order to prevent contamination
Ritter et al., in 1975, found that “the wearing of a surgical face mask had no effect upon the overall operating room environmental contamination.”
Ha’eri and Wiley, in 1980, applied human albumin microspheres to the interior of surgical masks in 20 operations. At the end of each operation, wound washings were examined under the microscope. “Particle contamination of the wound was demonstrated in all experiments.”
Laslett and Sabin, in 1989, found that caps and masks were not necessary during cardiac catheterization. “No infections were found in any patient, regardless of whether a cap or mask was used,” they wrote. Sjøl and Kelbaek came to the same conclusion in 2002.
In Tunevall’s 1991 study, a general surgical team wore no masks in half of their surgeries for two years. After 1,537 operations performed with masks, the wound infection rate was 4.7%, while after 1,551 operations performed without masks, the wound infection rate was only 3.5%.
A review by Skinner and Sutton in 2001 concluded that “The evidence for discontinuing the use of surgical face masks would appear to be stronger than the evidence available to support their continued use.”
Lahme et al., in 2001, wrote that “surgical face masks worn by patients during regional anaesthesia, did not reduce the concentration of airborne bacteria over the operation field in our study. Thus they are dispensable.”
Figueiredo et al., in 2001, reported that in five years of doing peritoneal dialysis without masks, rates of peritonitis in their unit were no different than rates in hospitals where masks were worn.
Bahli did a systematic literature review in 2009 and found that “no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative wound infection was observed between masks groups and groups operated with no masks.”
Surgeons at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, recognizing the lack of evidence supporting the use of masks, ceased requiring them in 2010 for anesthesiologists and other non-scrubbed personnel in the operating room. “Our decision to no longer require routine surgical masks for personnel not scrubbed for surgery is a departure from common practice. But the evidence to support this practice does not exist,” wrote Dr. Eva Sellden.
Webster et al., in 2010, reported on obstetric, gynecological, general, orthopaedic, breast and urological surgeries performed on 827 patients. All non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries, and none of the non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries. Surgical site infections occurred in 11.5% of the Mask group, and in only 9.0% of the No Mask group.
Lipp and Edwards reviewed the surgical literature in 2014 and found “no statistically significant difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials.”Vincent and Edwards updated this review in 2016 and the conclusion was the same.
Carøe, in a 2014 review based on four studies and 6,006 patients, wrote that “none of the four studies found a difference in the number of post-operative infections whether you used a surgical mask or not.”
Salassa and Swiontkowski, in 2014, investigated the necessity of scrubs, masks and head coverings in the operating room and concluded that “there is no evidence that these measures reduce the prevalence of surgical site infection.”
Da Zhou et al., reviewing the literature in 2015, concluded that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.”
Henning Bundgaard et al, in 2020, specifically with respect to COVID transmission, concluded that “A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results. Although the difference observed was not statistically significant”