Horowitz: The very concerning data from Scotland



“The vaccines are incredibly safe. They protect us against Omicron; they protect us against Delta; they protect us against COVID." Those were the words of fully vaccinated CDC Director Rochelle Walensky while testifying before the Senate Health Committee with two masks on her face on Jan. 11.

Scottish data shows that the COVID-19 age-standardized case rate is highest among the two-dose vaccinated and lowest among unvaccinated! It further shows this trend of negative efficacy for the double-vaccinated persisting for hospitalizations and deaths. Something is very wrong here, and together with other data points, it raises concerning questions about the negative effect of waning antibodies, constant boosting, and the consequences of a leaky vaccine with narrow-spectrum suboptimal antibodies against an ever-evolving virus.

Every Wednesday, Public Health Scotland (PHS) has been publishing a weekly report on COVID data juxtaposed to vaccination rates. Table 14 of this week’s “Public Health Scotland COVID-19 & Winter Statistical Report” lays bare in plain English (and math) a rate of negative efficacy for the vaccine:

As you can see, while the overall Omicron wave seems to be receding in Scotland, age-standardized case rates per 100,000 people were the lowest in the unvaccinated cohort every week for the past four weeks. Thus, it’s not just the fact that the unvaccinated accounted for only 11.5% of cases the past two weeks, but even adjusted for age-stratified vaccination rates (PHS already does the math for you) the unvaccinated had the lowest infection rate out of the four cohorts – especially during the peak of Omicron. Furthermore, we see that even the triple-vaccinated clearly have no efficacy against infection, although they have some degree less negative efficacy than the double-vaccinated.

Here is a linear presentation of the depth of the Omicron wave by vaccination status, where you can see that the unvaccinated had the shallowest wave:

This also coincides with the latest data from the U.K. Health Security Agency of the entire United Kingdom. This data now shows higher rates of infection among the triple-vaccinated in all but the youngest people.

Triple-Jabbed Over-30s Have Higher Infection Rates Than the Unvaccinated, UKHSA Data Show https://dailysceptic.org/2022/01/20/triple-jabbed-over-30s-have-higher-infection-rates-than-the-unvaccinated-ukhsa-data-show/\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/z5TnXT0sA7
— Andrew Bostom, MD, MS (@Andrew Bostom, MD, MS) 1642700314

Full stop right here. Any public policy measure – from vaccine passports to discrimination – cannot be justified under the science, even if one’s conscience is OK with apartheid. In fact, clearly this shows that, especially with Omicron, the vaccinated are the super-spreaders. Before we get to hospitalizations and deaths, the notion that the unvaccinated are somehow responsible for the continued spread of this virus is completely contradicted by the data. Some might suggest without evidence that the unvaccinated possibly have a higher rate of prior infection; however, Omicron seems to attack even those who already had previous versions of SARS-CoV-2.

Now onto hospitalizations and deaths. While the vaccines clearly provided some degree of protection for some people for several months against severe illness (while possibly causing even more spread), the Scottish data paints a concerning picture of the long-term consequences of the mass vaccination. People like Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche have been warning that if you mass-vaccinate with a leaky, narrow-spectrum (only recognizes spike protein) vaccine in middle of a raging pandemic, the virus would get more virulent over time.

This concern manifests itself at two time periods when the antibodies are “sub-optimal.” There is a period of a few weeks after the jab when the antibodies are strong enough to bind but not strong enough to neutralize, and then at the back end (estimated at four to six months for the original shot, but likely much shorter for the booster), a period when they wane. The media and public health tyrants like to focus your attention on a snapshot of time, but ignore the totality of circumstances that the shots are creating negative efficacy before and after, while using accounting gimmicks to mask the problem.

Remember how the lockdowns were hailed as a success for a number of countries that initially did well, while Sweden now has the lowest rate of excess mortality in Europe in 2021?

\u201cSweden now has a lower death rate than countries that went down the full lockdown route, including the UK, France, Spain and Italy\u2026 Economic recovery has been brisk\u2026 Sweden has not caused damage to the life chances of its children.\u201dhttps://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jan/02/a-wounded-pm-and-ailing-economy-forces-england-to-go-swedish-on-covid?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other\u00a0\u2026
— Prof. Freedom (@Prof. Freedom) 1641237709

Just as with lockdowns, the mass vaccination needs to be judged after all nine innings of the ballgame.

With that said, let’s take a look at tables 15 and 16 – the acute COVID hospitalization and death rates, respectively:

What is clearly evident both from the hospitalizations and deaths is that the double-vaccinated are now worse off per capita even against critical illness, and that pattern appears to be accelerating. Again, this evidently shows a pattern of negative efficacy even against critical illness over time as the shots wear off, increasingly quickly with Omicron. Why is there no desire to study the source of this negative efficacy and whether the fact that the vaccine is non-sterilizing, wanes quickly with sub-optimal antibodies, is narrow-spectrum, and is increasingly out of synch with the changing virus is going to make the pandemic worse in the long run?

Some will look at the chart and conclude that the boosters are amazing. But first it’s important to recognize that even the boosters don’t stop transmission at all even in the short run, and then, based on the latest hospitalization data, appear to wane just like the original shots. Relatedly, you will notice a pattern: the unvaccinated and two-dose cohorts always appear worse and the one-shot and three-shot cohorts always appear better. This is where the most important part of the data set comes into play.

You see, all cases during the first 21 days after the first shot are counted in the “unvaccinated” cohort, while the first 14 days after one receives the 3rd shot is counted among the two-dose cohort. See the definitions from Appendix 6 of the report.

We know from numerous studies (see here and here) that people are actually the most vulnerable to COVID during the first few weeks on the upswing of the antibodies, when T cells are likely suppressed. This is why the health departments smartly count them in the unvaccinated pile. Hence, for all these months, all the cases and deaths from those made more vulnerable from the first shot – which is caused by the mass vaccination, not the unvaccinated – are counted against the unvaccinated. Over time, as the shots waned on the back end, the truth became evident. Now they are starting the cycle all over again by making the two-dose group look even worse than they are by dumping all of the cases caused by the initial take-up from the third dose into the cohort of double-vaccinated.

It’s the ultimate pandemic Ponzi scheme. Just wait another two months and see what the fourth-shot group looks like relative to the triple-dosers, as the immediate vaccination causes an even greater spike in cases. In other words, you have to look in totality where we are headed rather than manipulating a snapshot of time.

What this report shows is that just 18.5% of the hospitalizations in Scotland were unvaccinated, but even that number includes numerous people within 21 days of the first shot, which is clearly a very vulnerable time. It’s akin to telling someone in a foxhole to run across the field of fire to get to a bunker that might be safer, but he runs an even higher risk of getting cut down before reaching the bunker. Then, after a few hours, the bunker will get overrun by the enemy and you have to run through a new field of fire to get to the next bunker.

Likewise, when a therapeutic lowers symptom severity through immune suppression, it’s a flash in the pan. Eventually, that mechanism of action will come back to bite you in the proverbial arm. And this is even before we get to the long-term concern that multiple shots will create permanent immune suppression by creating original antigenic sin, a position now articulated by the European Medicines Agency and top Israeli immunologists.

Just how prominent is the infection rate within the first 14-21 days of getting the shot, thereby completely distorting the epidemiological data and ultimate perception of efficacy of the shots? Although we don’t have data from the U.K. or U.S. on the timing of infection relative to vaccination period, Alberta, Canada evidently publishes some of that data. According to U.K. researcher Joel Smalley, who screenshotted the chart from the Alberta government’s website before it was taken down, roughly 40% of cases, 47.6% of hospitalizations, and 56% of deaths among the vaccinated occurred within 14 days of vaccination! Here is the graphical presentation that was on the website, according to Smalley. The top chart represents cases, the middle is hospitalizations, and the bottom is deaths:

Alberta, like many governments, counts the first 14 days as unvaccinated. In Scotland, they are counting the first 21 days after the first dose as unvaccinated and 14 days following subsequent doses in the cohort of the previous numbered dose. Obviously, we can’t mix the Alberta time-based data with the overall Scottish data, but common sense dictates that a bunch of cases from the immune suppression period of the initial vaccination are being blamed on the unvaccinated, and the perception of the booster shots is also likely being ameliorated at the expense of the double-jabbed cohort. For example, in Alberta, it appears that roughly 60% of the hospitalizations in the vaxxed cohort got COVID within 21 days of the shot, which in Scotland, would all be counted as unvaccinated cases. Thus, they deliberately chose the cutoff date for designation of vax status after the inflection point where they see the most COVID cases post-vax!

This deep dive into the data from Scotland should serve as a Rosetta stone for the macro observations we have seen from day one. We are seeing the most vaccinated nations and states being hammered with more cases than ever in a way that defies anything we should expect to see from a safe and effective vaccine. Here are just a few of the many examples:

I mean. When you compare case rates and vax rates for the past 3 weeks you'd think that the line wouldn't look like this. But it does. That trend line should be going in the other direction.pic.twitter.com/85Wdgj9Z2b
— Justin Hart (@Justin Hart) 1641840740
JUST IN - Israel: Over 14,000 IDF personnel are currently infected with COVID. In addition, 9,732 personnel in quarantine (JPost)
— Disclose.tv (@Disclose.tv) 1642598226
Israel , the only quadruple-vaxxed country in the world (also using mask mandates and Covid passports), just broke global record for daily Covid cases pic.twitter.com/G1ZDuVG2Ru
— Dr. Eli David (@Dr. Eli David) 1642537647
With N95 mandates, vaccine passports and 2 months of a lockdown for unvaccinated people, cases in Austria have reached a new high\n\nIt\u2019s amazing how consistently and comprehensively COVID authoritarianism and The Science\u2122 fails & how uninterested media outlets are in covering itpic.twitter.com/O1ABBdOOOO
— IM (@IM) 1642530717
UK HSA data shows infection rate growth correlates with vaccination rate for age cohorts >50. The more highly vaxxed an age cohort is - whether fully vaxxed or boosted - the faster the infection rate growth. Infectn rate growth in the unvaxxed is fairly consistent across cohorts.pic.twitter.com/40l01thdtS
— Don Wolt (@Don Wolt) 1642360856
Quebec, in midst of draconian lockdown, (unlike Ontario) publishes new hospitalization data by age group, vax status https://msss.gouv.qc.ca/professionnels/statistiques/documents/covid19/COVID19_Qc_RapportINSPQ_HospitalisationsSelonStatutVaccinalEtAge.csv\u00a0\u2026 \n\nThese are real counts, neither "normalized" relative to population nor "adjusted" by Ontario Science Table (or CDC). What do you notice?pic.twitter.com/2Q5hPfxam0
— Stephen McIntyre (@Stephen McIntyre) 1642354931
Sigh...pic.twitter.com/zeVA6mtZSi
— Covid19Crusher (@Covid19Crusher) 1641995379
Omicron waves in Israel and South Africa, per capita.\n\nIsrael has given 4x more vaccine shots to its population than South Africa.\n\nYesterday, Israel was exhibiting the higher incidence per capita in the world among large countries.pic.twitter.com/tIryUthm6j
— Covid19Crusher (@Covid19Crusher) 1642778142

Dr. Fauci recently told Bloomberg news that “there are some inherent ‘non-believers’ that no matter what you say, they give you a real problem.” He’s right. It takes a true religious level of adherence – like a believer – to continue supporting his narrative, despite the plain facts before our every eyes.

Horowitz: The danger of the momentum behind N95 respirators



Were the cloth masks just for psychological training purposes to get us to the main course of obsequious servitude to the gods of Fauci?

It took nearly two years, but the “public health experts” are finally admitting what industrial hygienists knew from day one: Masks do not work against airborne viruses. Yet rather than immediately remove these draconian restrictions – including masking 2-year-olds on airplanes and schoolchildren for hours on end in many states – they are seamlessly gliding into the new position of promoting N95 respirators. Following the inveterate patterns of the past two years, they use the failure of their first position to their advantage to further panic people into blindly following their next recommendation ... until that becomes a mandate as well.

On Jan. 2, former FDA administrator Scott Gottlieb, the media’s go-to “expert” on all things pandemic, admitted what we all knew since 2020 but that got us banned from social media for saying so. “Cloth masks aren't going to provide a lot of protection, that's the bottom line,” said Gottlieb on Meet the Press. “This is an airborne illness. We now understand that, and a cloth mask is not going to protect you from a virus that spreads through airborne transmission.”

Well, some of us knew that early on in the pandemic.

Two days later, the New York Times ran an article telling people where to get N95s, states began mailing out N95 variations, and the CDC put out a new message, which between the lines, gives the impression that if you are not wearing an N95, you don’t really have protection. The Biden administration plans to distribute millions of them to local pharmacies. But is there really any evidence that the same people who were wrong about masks are now suddenly connected to God’s word when it comes to respirators? And who says it is safe for people to wear something like that for long periods of time, which until now required rigorous testing, medical exams, and training?

Yes, N95s, unlike masks, actually meet the standard for PPE in hazardous environments. But for which sort of hazard? Not an airborne respiratory virus. Stephen Petty, a certified industrial hygienist and hazardous exposure expert, sent me a copy of an N95 usage label made by 3M that he enlarged into an infographic. It turns out the company's own disclosure blows up the myth of using an N95 for viral protection.

The label confirms what everyone understood prior to the mask mania of COVID: Neither masks nor N95 respirators can stop aerosols, certainly not viral ones, which are much smaller than bacteria. What's truly revealing is that the label recommends against relying on them for source protection even against asbestos particles, which are on average 5 microns – 50 times larger than SARS-CoV-2 virions.

A large randomized controlled trial published just months before the discovery of SARS-CoV-2 — before masking became a political and social control tool — showed no benefit to N95s over surgical masks in terms of protection against the flu. "Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza," concluded the authors of the large trial, published in JAMA on Sept. 3, 2019.

Also, remember, that most people are not wearing sealed N95s. They wear the respirators loosely on their faces as they do surgical masks. Also, many of them are the Chinese version KN95s. Even the CDC admits, “About 60% of KN95 respirators NIOSH evaluated during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021 did not meet the requirements that they intended to meet.”

The same study (Shah et.al.) that found just 10% and 12% reduction in aerosols for cloth and blue surgical masks respectively, actually found that KN95s worn improperly with 3mm gaps between the face and the respirator, as most people wear them, only offer 3.4% filtration efficiency – less than the cloth masks.

And remember, these studies are all conducted in labs, not in the real world, where no study has shown a statistically significant benefit to masks, and the basic epidemiological data has disproven the efficacy for two years.

Take Austria, for example, where they have been mandating N95 respirators in stores. Can you spot the efficacy?

With N95 mandates, vaccine passports and 2 months of a lockdown for unvaccinated people, cases in Austria have reached a new high\n\nIt\u2019s amazing how consistently and comprehensively COVID authoritarianism and The Science\u2122 fails & how uninterested media outlets are in covering itpic.twitter.com/O1ABBdOOOO
— IM (@IM) 1642530717

The notion that children can properly wear a form-fitted N95 that effectively seals is both absurd and dangerous. And anything else will absolutely not work. There’s clearly an inverse relationship between safety and efficacy. The only thing that might possibly work will cause danger, which is why the federal government has long mandated very specific criteria for wearing respirators.

“While some misrepresent N95s as masks, they are actually respirators and will require one to follow the OSHA requirements for respirators under the Respiratory Protection Standard (RPS) 29 CFR 1910.134 (e.g., written program, medical clearance, initial fit testing, annual fit testing, no facial hair, worker training),” said Petty in an interview with TheBlaze. Stephen Petty has served as an expert witness in hundreds of industrial hazardous exposure court cases and now serves as a witness for those bringing lawsuits against irresponsible mask mandates. Here is a list of OSHA requirements, per Petty’s presentation, that would have to be met for usage of N95 respirators:

There’s a good reason why these requirements were put in place by OSHA. To the extent one actually properly seals an N95 respirator to the face (which few will do), it causes significant medical concerns. Here are some findings from an extremely exhaustive qualitative and substantive evaluation of 65 mask studies by German researchers:

In nine of the 11 scientific papers (82%), we found a combined onset of N95 respiratory protection and carbon dioxide rise when wearing a mask. We found a similar result for the decrease in oxygen saturation and respiratory impairment with synchronous evidence in six of the nine relevant studies (67%). N95 masks were associated with headaches in six of the 10 studies (60%). For oxygen deprivation under N95 respiratory protectors, we found a common occurrence in eight of 11 primary studies (72%).

Thus, to the extent anyone could achieve a meaningful degree of efficacy against virus particles with a respirator – something yet to be proven – it will come at a terrible cost. Even with regular masks, before our public health officials lost their minds (and hearts), it was understood that they are not harm-free. Here is a write-up from the Missoula, Montana, city health department recommending against the use of masks during wildfire season in Montana:

Masks are uncomfortable (they are more comfortable when they are leaky – but then they do not provide protection). They increase resistance to airflow. This may make breathing more difficult and lead to physiological stress, such as increased respiratory and heart rates. Masks can also contribute to heat stress. Because of this, mask use by those with cardiac and respiratory diseases can be dangerous, and should only be done under a doctor’s supervision. Even healthy adults may find that the increased effort required for breathing makes it uncomfortable to wear a mask for more than short periods of time. Breathing resistance increases with respirator efficiency.

The Montana Department of Health emphatically writes in bolded letters that N95s that seal are the only things that might help against smoke particles (which are around 1 micron, 10 times larger than most viral virions), but warns of health risks. “Note that respirator masks should be a last resort, as they are difficult to fit correctly, decrease oxygen intake, are hot, and can easily leak when worn improperly.” They go on to add, “People who are not physically fit may experience difficulty going about daily tasks due to reduced oxygen intake. It is more important to have enough oxygen than to have clean air - if you are using a respirator and feel faint, nauseous, or have trouble breathing, take the mask off.”

On the Washington Department of Health’s website guidance for wildfires, it is made clear that “masks are not approved for children” and that “it is harder to breathe through a mask, so take breaks often if you work outside.” The Sacramento County Department of Health Services states, "N95 respirator can make it more difficult for the wearer to breathe due to carbon dioxide buildup, which reduces the intake of oxygen, increased breathing rates, and heart rates."

Just a year ago, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky swatted down the idea of wearing N95s. “They're very hard to breathe in when you wear them properly," Walensky said. "They're very hard to tolerate when you wear them for long periods of time."

Thus, whether we are talking about masks or N95s, it’s quite evident that they are either unsafe or ineffective. They can often be both unsafe and ineffective, but they can never be effective without being unsafe, unless worn by the right person with the right training in limited environments for short periods of time.

And this is just the scope of physical harm. One speech therapist in Palm Beach County is seeing a 364% increase in referrals from pediatricians for babies and toddlers with speech delays. "It's very important that kids do see your face to learn, so they're watching your mouth,” said a clinic director and speech-language pathologist at the Speech and Learning Institute in North Palm Beach.

How our governments can mandate something this immoral and illogical on our bodies indefinitely without due process, evidentiary standards, or a constitutional interest balancing test is astounding. Every state needs a constitutional amendment explicitly banning this from ever happening again. Biden promised 100 days of mask-wearing, but we are now approaching a full year without any end in sight.

Just remember, if a government can criminalize our breathing without due process, what can it not do to us without recourse?

Horowitz: Who are actually the super-spreaders?



“Businesses Now Requiring Positive COVID Test As Proof Of Vaccination.” This was a headline from the Babylon Bee, but increasingly, satire is the new reality.

If a picture is worth 1,000 words, then this data showing negative efficacy of the shots in nearly every age group from my friend Don Wolt is worth 1,000,000 words.

The U.K. has done the world a service by being the only country to put out granular and continuous weekly data breaking down infection rates by vaccination status and by age cohort. For quite some time, the U.K. data has been showing negative efficacy in all but the youngest age group. This means that the infection rates per capita have been higher among the vaccinated. This was true with Delta, but with Omicron, the vaccines have blown the infection rates off the charts.

Yesterday, the U.K. Health Security Agency published its first “COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report” of 2022, which collates infection rate data for the final weeks of 2021 (weeks 49-52). These are not raw numbers, but case rates per 100,000 divided by age group and vaccination status. The results are simply devastating to the cause of the vaccine altogether, much less support for mandating it.

This is from table 13 of the report:

If you factor vaccine efficacy based on the case rates by age group, here is what you get:

As you can see, aside from children, there is clear negative efficacy of the shots in terms of likelihood one will become infected with COVID. For age groups between 18 and 60, the vaccinated are roughly twice as likely to test positive for COVID than the unvaccinated. But what is very telling is the dramatic shift over the past few weeks since Omicron. This is where Don Wolt’s chart is so illustrative.

The beauty of this chart is that it stacks the weekly changes in case rates of each age group and vaccination status next to each other and tracks the progression of the data over the course of five months. As you can see, for a short period of time, the elderly age brackets stopped going negative from the vaccine during November when they got the boosters. It barely registered in positive territory, but it didn’t go negative. Now, Omicron has proven that the boosters don’t help in reversing the vaccine-mediated enhancement, and the seniors are therefore back in negative territory.

Although Omicron, as a mild but very transmissible ailment, caused case spikes among all people, you can see the rate of growth over the past week is exponentially higher among the vaccinated, especially in the younger age groups, who appear to be hit by Omicron more than the seniors. For whatever reason, unvaccinated children seem to have a lot of cases, but that could be a function of testing. Remember, in this same report, the data show that not a single child under 18 died of COVID these past four weeks.

There is simply no way to escape the fact that the vaccines always went negative after a few months, the boosters offered an even shorter degree of partial protection than the original doses, and now with Omicron, there is a clear inverse relationship between case rates and vaccination rates. This point is exemplified in Don’s second chart showing the rate of growth in cases since the previous week’s U.K. report:

With this week's report, infection rates rose in all age cohorts, vaxxed & unvaxxed, except for among Unvaxxed <18. Growth rates from the last UKHSA report (Week 51) are much higher among the fully vaxxed.pic.twitter.com/e8taRwNxG5
— Don Wolt (@Don Wolt) 1641489887

The fact that we are seeing negative efficacy grow the more shots one gets lends credence to a theory that not only are the shots ineffective against Omicron, but they are creating viral immune escape. A recent study from the Statens Serum Institut in Denmark studied secondary attack rates (SAR) inside households during Omicron as compared to Delta. “Surprisingly, we observed no significant difference between the SAR of Omicron versus Delta among unvaccinated individuals,” note the authors. However, when it came to the vaccinated, they found that secondary attack rates were 2.61 times higher for Omicron than Delta, and among booster-vaccinated individuals, it was 3.66 times higher. “This indicates that the increased transmissibility of the Omicron VOC primarily can be ascribed to immune evasion rather than an inherent increase in the basic transmissibility,” concludes the authors.

Thankfully, Omicron is exponentially less deadly than Delta, but it is being used as pretext to force vaccine passports at a time when it is abundantly clear that the vaccines are causing the super-spreading of Omicron. The public health frauds have consistently propagated a narrative that the unvaccinated are driving mutations, but it never made sense that people with zero antibodies could be creating evolutionary pressure on a virus. It’s suboptimal antibodies that do that, and clearly, to the extent one believes these mutations are a problem, it’s the vaccine that is to blame.

The Israeli data harmonizes very well with the theory of shots creating more viral immune escape. If there is any country that “did it right,” it’s Pfizer’s personal laboratory, aka Israel. So many have three shots and they are already onto their fourth, yet cases are have soared past record levels. But over the past few weeks with the rise of Omicron, there is a clear decoupling based on how many vaccines you had.

The vaccinated drive the new infection wave in Israel.\n\nIn particular the boosted.pic.twitter.com/QvCLuGb0Xe
— Covid19Crusher (@Covid19Crusher) 1641487016

At present, the unvaccinated are 29% of the population but compose less than 14% of the new cases.

Israeli data shows a feature now seen in many countries:\n\nvaccination appears to augment the odds of Covid infection.\n\nDoes it increase the risk of other respiratory infections?\n\nDoes it increase the risk of other viral infections?\n\nDoes it increase the risk of other diseases?pic.twitter.com/hn1zZE2Gs1
— Covid19Crusher (@Covid19Crusher) 1641459081

Again, just like in the U.K., while the shots always lost efficacy even during Delta, they actually go negative much quicker with Omicron, including with three shots.

Omikron go BRRRRpic.twitter.com/HX9S4xNETQ
— Jon Snowflake (@Jon Snowflake) 1641472175
Wales has one of the highest booster rates in the world, with 63% of everyone over 12 having had a booster shot already on top of the 90+% vaccination rate\n\nThey also have had a mask mandate since September 2020 and use vaccine passports, so uh\u2026why are cases so out of control?pic.twitter.com/giHLU3drcm
— IM (@IM) 1641496512

Data from Denmark seems to show a similar picture, with cases rising among those with three shots quicker than anyone else, especially in younger and middle-aged adults.

Danish new case incidence data per age group shows a clearly growing problem with booster shots in younger adults...\n\nno vaccination\n 2 shots full effect (no previous infection)\n boosted (no previous infection)\n previously infected\n\nhttps://covid19danmark.dk/#gennembrudsinfektioner\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/3RGCccPl5Q
— Covid19Crusher (@Covid19Crusher) 1641409797

A recent study from Public Health Ontario was equally devastating to the vaccine cause and fits perfectly with the U.K. data. “Receipt of 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccines was not protective against Omicron infection at any point in time, and VE was –38% (95%CI, –61%, –18%) 120-179 days and –42% (95%CI, –69%, –19%) 180-239 days after the second dose,” concluded the Ontario health officials in a preprint study. What about the booster? Out of the gate, it was only 37% effective but then rapidly wanes.

At this point, now that we know the vaccines go negative, and even quicker with Omicron, what is it going to take to ban the shots? After all, if a scientific reality of the unvaccinated getting the virus more often justifies the implementation of vaccine passports, shouldn’t a reverse scientific reality justify getting rid of the shots?

Horowitz: Omicron: Mother Nature’s universal booster



In the ultimate irony, those who get more boosters appear more at risk to get the new variant of coronavirus. At the same time, God appears to be offering natural boosters by making this variant a mild illness that doesn’t cause lung inflammation or blood clotting, and new evidence suggests that it might offer protection against more serious strains of the virus. So why aren’t the public health “experts” taking “yes” for an answer and ending the failed vaccines and panic-induced mandates? Inquiring minds would like to know.

Bizarrely, numerous states were quick to partially suspend the monoclonal antibodies based on a rumor that they no longer worked against Omicron. At the same time, they are doubling down on the ineffective injections that not only fail to work, but actually appear to make people more likely to contract the virus.

In Maryland, for example, one day after the governor contracted COVID (after getting three shots), then treated himself with the monoclonals, the Maryland Department of Health announced that it was pausing federal allocations of the monoclonal antibody treatments because they “may not be effective against the new Omicron variant.” At the same time, they urged people to get the shots that failed the governor. Well, if the antibodies no longer work in the monoclonals, which until now were working better than the vaccines, then the vaccines most certainly don’t work.

Last week, the Indian Express reported that 33 of the 34 people hospitalized for Omicron in Delhi’s Lok Nayak hospital were fully vaccinated. This data is very revealing because India still has a relatively low vaccination rate compared to the U.S. and Europe. Thankfully, none of them needed oxygenation and it was unclear why they were admitted, but to the extent the COVID fascists want to create undue panic over Omicron, it’s not being driven by the unvaccinated.

The U.K’s Office of National Statistics already found in a survey that the vaccinated are exponentially more likely to test positive for Omicron, and now Danish data seems to indicate the same for some age groups.

Not really a scoop anymore:\n\nConfirmed Covid case incidence per 100,000 in Denmark is higher among the vaccinated young adults than the unvaccinated over the last 7 days.pic.twitter.com/kNnm3PQlwN
— Covid19Crusher (@Covid19Crusher) 1640692655

According to the U.K.’s latest Vaccine Surveillance report, which factors in infection rates for all variants together, the vaccine effectiveness is down to negative 75% for 18- to 29-year-olds, negative 98% for 30- to 39-year-olds, and negative 131% for 40- to 49-year-olds. The vaccine effectiveness was in positive territory only for those over 70 years old – but still well under 50% for most – likely because Omicron is infecting mainly the younger people.

Ironically, while the powers that be continue to push the failed vaccines, a lot of local officials are tacitly admitting they don’t work by going back to the original failed mask mandates. Let’s put aside the fact that these masks absolutely do not work ...

Two weeks into the mask mandate, cases in New York City are up an astounding 542%, and 863% since vaccine passports started\n\nHow many more times do experts and politicians need to fail spectacularly before people realize they have absolutely no idea what they\u2019re doing?pic.twitter.com/X6qk2iWIvf
— IM (@IM) 1640631763


Well, it\u2019s official \u2014 San Francisco, one of the most heavily vaccinated areas on earth, with mask mandates & vaccine passports, has set a new high in cases\n\nSo sure, nothing that The Experts\u2122 say to do is working at all, but at least they\u2019re never going to admit they were wrongpic.twitter.com/EwRl8BU1t9
— IM (@IM) 1640544175

However, they are obfuscating the truth from the public that while nothing seems to work against Omicron, the variant itself is very mild and will give people immunity on the cheap.

The decoupling between cases and fatalities from Omicron is unmistakable. South Africa was the original epicenter of the Omicron outbreak, and for the first time since the beginning of the pandemic, the case fatality rate has dropped to near zero.

The 'Cron Effectpic.twitter.com/ZoCR9HxMSh
— Phil Kerpen (@Phil Kerpen) 1640651025

Now look at the decoupling of hospitalizations from cases in Denmark.

Denmark (population: 6 million) ends a month of growing Omicron exposure with 51 hospitalisations 'with'.pic.twitter.com/X2gDNXJ27k
— Covid19Crusher (@Covid19Crusher) 1640620735

And here is a similar presentation from London:

Why London is going to win the epic Omicron battle of England.\n\nhttps://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/HoM7bE36gW
— Covid19Crusher (@Covid19Crusher) 1640555120

Which is why you should be suspicious of any news about hospitals being flooded with patients. It’s true that in some places in the U.S., they are still dealing with the lag effect from the seasonal virulence of Delta’s outbreak and possibly some residual percolation of that much more severe strain. But you will not see large rises in hospitalizations from Omicron because, as a study from the University of Hong Kong suggests, Omicron is fundamentally an upper respiratory infection and rarely replicates in the lungs. A new preprint study from the Soto Lab in Japan also found in hamsters that the spike protein from Omicron has a much weaker fusion to the cells than the one in Delta, thereby making it “less infectious and pathogenic.”

However, because Omicron stays in the nasal pharynx, it spreads as rapidly as a cold. Thus, if we are going to count every last case of the cold with mass testing, can you guess how many people in the hospital at any given time might be incidentally infected? The U.K. Telegraph reports, “Hospitals are reporting high numbers of ‘incidental Covid’ patients who are admitted for unrelated reasons, an NHS chief has said, warning hospitalization data should be treated with caution.” The Miami Herald reports that at Jackson Health, “60% were diagnosed after being admitted for another reason, according to the hospital system’s internal tracking report."

Thus, if anything, to the extent we still have problems in the U.S., it’s precisely because Delta hasn’t been fully flushed out by Omicron yet. Otherwise almost nobody would get seriously ill with coronavirus. For states and cities to have relaxed restrictions during Delta and then use Omicron as pretext to bring them back is scientifically backward. Then again, the imposition of these mandates to begin with was always voodoo for any respiratory virus.

So, is Omicron too good to be true? If it is so mild that even those with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection can get it, then does infection with this variant convey immunity against stronger strains of the virus in the future? Sigallab in South Africa conducted a study and found that those infected with Omicron experienced a 4.4-fold enhancement of neutralization against Delta over a person without any infection. If these results hold, it will mean that the masses of the world could achieve herd immunity with much less pain than from previous variants or possibly future, more virulent variants.

The fact that global and local governments are using the exact wrong variant to promote vaccines and masks – which never worked for more serious, less transmissible strains – against an unstoppable yet mild variant demonstrates that this has been and will always be about social control, not source control.

Horowitz: The vaccines are working ... exactly as they were designed



"Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe them." —George Orwell

There is nowhere to run or hide from the growing observations that the closer we come to universal vaccination rates in many countries, the worse the pandemic has become. We have always known that leaky vaccines have the potential to create viral enhancement, but the recent data is unmistakable. At the same time, the COVID cultists are panicking over an emerging variant that actually might be the mildest of all while mainly affecting the vaccinated — a perfect refutation to the mass vaccination push. All signs point to the need to suspend the shots and focus exclusively on monoclonal antibodies and other early treatment. Or is there an ulterior motive?

At this point, we better pray that Omicron becomes dominant in the U.S. as quickly as possible. The most devastating observation of 2021 is that more people have died from COVID under the mass vaccination regime during the existing variant than before there was a single jab. According to the CDC’s “Data Table for Daily Death Trends,” there have been 127,184 COVID deaths from September 1 through November 30 this year, which is 45% greater than the 87,829 recorded deaths over the same period in 2020. And some of the deaths from this year are still lagging and likely to be updated.

Typically, viruses mutate down and become less virulent. Last year, there was much less built up immunity, we had fewer treatment options, and we had zero vaccines. It is nearly impossible to ignore the fact that the narrow-spectrum leaky vaccine has made the virus much worse.

During the peak of the winter wave in January, there were 19 recorded deaths for 15- to 17-year-olds. In August, when the vaccines began to leak and we likely experienced vaccine-mediated viral enhancement, kids noticeably got sicker. Although deaths were still very rare, there were 63 recorded deaths among that age cohort, and the numbers have generally remained higher.

Something strange happened, after the was available, C19 deaths in 15-17 yos were than any other time of the pandemic\n1/21 - 19\n2/21 - 7\n3/21 - 9\n4/21 - 3\n5/21 - 7\n6/21 - 6\n7/21 - 6\n8/21 - 63\n9/21 - 30\n10/21 - 18 \n11/21 - 10\n\n MIS-C ran w/the curve, C19 deaths didn'tpic.twitter.com/YeK9bqM6wx
— Jean Rees (@Jean Rees) 1639098436

Imagine if we had put all the funds for the leaky shots into the monoclonal antibodies and an outpatient treatment regime built on the latest research of dozens of therapeutics that have shown promise in combatting the virus. Yet rather than focus on alternatives and investigate what went wrong with the injections, our establishment leaders are doubling down, even as the failure is undeniably in plain sight. As such, it’s hard to escape the sinister conclusion that they intended this all along.

Consider the fact that Cornell University has an ironclad vaccine and mask mandate, yet 3.5% of the entire campus tested positive last week alone. The school has now switched to online learning.

NEW: Cornell University goes remote after reporting over 900 COVID cases this week, VP for University Relations Joel Malina says "virtually every" case has been found in fully-vaccinated students, many of whom received the booster shot - CNN
— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) 1639590883

Consider the fact that before the NFL season started, 52 of 53 players on the L.A. Rams’ roster were vaccinated. Now they lead the league with 11 players on the COVID list.

Consider the fact that Newton, Massachusetts, has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world, with 97% of the entire population vaccinated, including 99% of 12- to 15-year-olds and 87% of 5- to 11-year-olds. Yet, despite this and indoor mask mandates, the town has more cases than this time last year and is likely headed toward a record.

Consider the fact that a country like South Korea barely recorded deaths during the entire pandemic, but now has many more cases and deaths, with nearly all adults vaccinated and one of the highest vaccination rates for a country that large (over 50 million).

Consider the fact that England and France, both with very high vaccination rates and large prior COVID waves, have recently set case records.

France has officially set a new high in cases, 4.5 months into vaccine passports, 19 months into mask mandates and with 92% of adults at least partially vaccinated, but at least politicians and experts are still pretending vaccine passports & mask mandates can \u201cslow the spread\u201dpic.twitter.com/9nI0ROjFh0
— IM (@IM) 1639593693

Likewise, Portugal, with the highest double-vaxxed rate in Europe, now has more cases than during the winter peak.

Cases in Portugal are up 554% since they started vaccine passports for major events and nightlife, but I\u2019m sure vaccine passports will work in England after failing literally everywhere else they\u2019ve been triedpic.twitter.com/EYSWtMXi3b
— IM (@IM) 1639595809

Several months ago, a Harvard study published in the European Journal of Epidemiology, the only one to look at thousands of U.S. counties and different countries to study correlation between vaccination rates and case rates, found zero correlation. "In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people,” concluded the author.

The establishment suggests that the shots at least provide some with temporary protection from critical illness. But what good is that if the shots actually make the virus more virulent for everyone and then offer a degree of preventive protection for its consumers while screwing everyone else?

Let’s not forget that Dr. Fauci warned from day one that you need a perfect vaccine because a half-baked one runs the risk of making the virus worse. In an interview with Mark Zuckerberg last March, Fauci said in response to those who wanted rushed vaccines, “If you vaccinate someone, and they make an antibody response, and then they get exposed and infected, does the response that you induce actually enhance the infection and make it worse? The only way you'll know that is if you do an extended study [not on volunteers, but on the public]."

"If you vaccinate someone, and they make an antibody response, and then they get exposed and infected, does the response that you induce enhance the infection and make it worse? The only way you'll know that is if you do an extended study [not on volunteers, but on the public]."pic.twitter.com/OJbXAzGobh
— The Vigilant Fox (@The Vigilant Fox) 1639422119
Dr. Fauci opens up the possibility that the COVID-19 vaccine could be making people more likely to be infected by the virus.\n\n"This would not be the first time, if it happened, that a vaccine that looked good in initial safety actually made people worse."pic.twitter.com/j4DXzMp3Bo
— The Vigilant Fox (@The Vigilant Fox) 1639418795

“This would not be the first time, if it happened, that a vaccine that looked good in initial safety actually made people worse," he continued when the Facebook CEO pressed him on rushing forward with a vaccine.

A month later, Fauci warned at a press conference that “the worst possible thing you could do” is vaccinate someone and create enhancement.

Said it way before the Zuck chat too.. this is April 2020pic.twitter.com/EJUdKqxJvH
— Drew (@Drew) 1639501740

Well, a year and a half later, isn’t that exactly what we are seeing? Remember, the FDA warned during the initial emergency approval period that "risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown.” And that’s at a time when the FDA didn’t know just how badly these shots would wane ... or did it? Is it perhaps the intent to create the need for endless shots to fix the immune suppression and viral enhancement created by the first round – just like a heroin addict who constantly needs more poison to temporarily assuage the latest withdrawal symptoms, until he descends into a death spiral?


It is now universally accepted that the vaccine first suppresses your immune system, possibly for six weeks following the first shot, before it provides any protection for a few months thereafter. To encourage people to vaccinate even more while the numbers are high is the surest way of enabling more people to get the virus. This will create an endless feedback loop, driving a vicious cycle of suppressed immune systems, vaccine-mediated viral enhancement, and excess mortality from both the side effects and from COVID, which in turn generates fear to pressure more boosters in the hardest-hit areas. The German state of North Rhine-Westphalia is making boosters available for people to take every four weeks. Thus, the more the shots fail, the more the makers succeed.

It’s no longer enough to oppose mandates. It’s time to stand athwart history and yell “STOP” to this entire vicious cycle.

Horowitz: The country that ‘succeeded’ against COVID with masks has the highest case rate in the world



Those who believe in the freedom of bodily autonomy are celebrating a slew of recent court rulings enjoining the Biden administration’s injection mandate. However, no GOP state attorney general has bothered to fight the equally immoral, illogical, and inhumane mask mandates that are still in place. Despite nearly two years of evidence that strict mask-wearing has zero effectiveness in stopping the spread, the mandates on 2-year-olds on planes and in many schools still continue. Slovakia is a perfect case study of the mask mendacity.

On May 13, 2020, the Atlantic published an article lauding Slovakia for, at the time, having the lowest per-capita COVID death rate in Europe. The article’s prediction should now be the laughingstock of the world:

When this pandemic ends, and when the reckoning over how the world responded invariably begins, Slovakia will likely be among those highlighted as a success story, whereas the United States—which was supposed to be the country best prepared for such a crisis—will be remembered as among those that suffered the worst. How Slovakia was able to flatten its curve comes down to more than just quick decision making and the widespread adoption of face masks. Perhaps the greatest lesson to be learned from Slovakia is of the value of leading from the front.

Slovakia was so worried about masks that the country even got Taiwan to donate hundreds of thousands of these useless cloths as part of a bilateral trade agreement.

Well, that was before Slovakia’s first winter wave. One can excuse people for mistaking low spread at the time for mask efficacy rather than the fact that the country just didn’t get its turn yet. But for countries to continue this inhumane mandate despite what we now know demonstrates that masks are not a means to public health but an end in themselves of tyranny.

At over 2,000 new cases per million per day, according to Our World in Data, Slovakia now has more cases per capita than any country in the world. To put this in perspective, that is almost three times the level of the winter peak in the U.S., a country that has not exactly performed well in the pandemic!

It’s true that some individual states closer to the size of Slovakia have had more severe waves. However, even the worst counties in the upper Midwest are tracking about 1,200 new cases per million per day.

And here is the epidemiological curve presented by the inimitable Ian Miller, juxtaposed to policy solutions:

Slovakia now leads the world in case rate, which is odd because The Atlantic last year said that \u201cWhen this pandemic ends...Slovakia will likely be among those highlighted as a success story\u201d due to their commitment to masking and lockdowns\n\nWonder if we\u2019ll get any updates!pic.twitter.com/zVjeNjf5S4
— IM (@IM) 1638299206

It’s not just Slovakia. Wherever you turn in Europe, both masks and vaccine mandates have failed miserably, and the spread is now worse than ever. Belgium is now six weeks into the new mask mandate, and it has more cases than ever before, even though the Belgians already suffered one of the deadliest waves in all of Europe. Oh, and 87.4% of adults are vaccinated.

Cases in Belgium are the highest they\u2019ve ever been, over a month into their new mask mandate and with 87.4% of adults fully vaccinated so I\u2019d love to know why the media hasn\u2019t done a story on how Ron DeSantis managed to create his Florida state guard and invade Belgium so quicklypic.twitter.com/z6fkjV2z9k
— IM (@IM) 1638644529

To begin with, the CDC, as late as May 2020, was citing the 10 randomized controlled trials that showed “no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks.” The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford also summarized six international studies that “showed that masks alone have no significant effect in interrupting the spread of ILI or influenza in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”

The only randomized controlled trial studying mask efficacy against COVID published last year was the now famous Danish study that failed to show any meaningful reduction in spread from mask-wearing. Then, several months ago, the media trumpeted a large study done in Bangladesh that seemed to show efficacy. Well, now that the authors have released the actual data, we see that indeed no such claim can be made from the study. It turns out that out of over 340,000 individuals over a span of eight weeks, there were only 20 fewer cases of COVID detected in the mask group over the control group – 1,106 symptomatic individuals confirmed seropositive in the control group and 1,086 such individuals in the treatment group.

Even these results are hard to interpret because of numerous confounding factors. University of California Berkeley professor Ben Recht critiqued the study as follows:

This study was not blinded, as it’s impossible to blind a study on masks. The intervention was highly complex and included a mask promotion campaign and education about other mitigation measures including social distancing. Moreover, individuals were only added to the study if they consented to allow the researchers to visit and survey their households. There was a large differential between the control and treatment groups here, with 95% consenting in the treatment group but only 92% consenting in control. This differential alone could wash away the difference in observed cases. Finally, symptomatic seropositivity is a crude measure of covid as the individuals could have been infected before the trial began.

Given the numerous caveats and confounders, the study still only found a tiny effect size. My takeaway is that a complex intervention including an educational program, free masks, encouraged mask wearing, and surveillance in a poor country with low population immunity and no vaccination showed at best modest reduction in infection.

In other words, you can now add this to a list of 400 studies compiled by the Brownstone Institute that fail to find any correlation between public policy interventions and better pandemic outcomes.

It’s not OK for Republican-controlled states to continue to ignore the facts that masks are inhumane and they simply don’t work. Consider the fact that Head Start has now mandated masks on 2-year-olds, many of whom have special needs. Oregon has moved to make its mask mandate permanent. Why are no red state governments at least suing against the federal mandates, and why are so few red states even banning mask mandates within the states?

The courts are all political. They only responded to the lawsuits against the vaccine mandate when they saw robust political opposition within the political branches of the red states. They see no such opposition regarding the mask mandates. Thus, absent a unified effort from state attorneys general, they are unlikely to respond to a handful of individual lawsuits. The same legal rationale denying the feds the power to force vaccines also denies them the power to cover our breathing holes. But the courts only respond to political momentum.

If nearly two years of masking failing to work anywhere is still not enough to end the most invasive human mandate of all time, then we truly are no longer a free people.

Horowitz: The problematic variant is the CURRENT Pfizer-Delta variant, not Omicron



Consider the fact that more people have died under the current COVID variant with mass vaccination than in 2020 before vaccination, yet the medical and government establishment is worried about a potential new variant predominating that appears to be mild. At the same time, establishment leaders are suggesting the vaccine won’t work for it, yet are demanding we get more of the same vaccine that has already failed for the current, more deadly variant. How’s that for science?

There is simply no evidence that this new variant is worse than the current one, and most initial signals indicate it’s less virulent. According to CNBC, Dr. Angelique Coetzee, the South African physician who first identified the Omicron variant, says patients who’ve been diagnosed with the new strain show only “mild symptoms.” “No one here in South Africa is known to have been hospitalized with the Omicron variant, nor is anyone here believed to have fallen seriously ill with it,” said Coetzee, who is the head of the South African Medical Association.

Sethomo Lelatisitswe, the Botswanan assistant health minister, told Parliament this week that of the 15 known cases in his country – the first one to detect Omicron – just three had mild symptoms, while the rest had none. Eleven of the cases were vaccinated, while those unvaccinated did not show symptoms, and none of them needed oxygen support.

Of the 59 cases identified in Europe, all of them were either asymptomatic or had mild symptoms, just like the case discovered in California. Incidentally, nearly all of the cases seem to be among the vaccinated. Even Japan appears to have eased its travel restrictions after seeing that this variant appears to be mild.

The cruel irony is that the panic over the mildest variant appears to come at a time when there are record hospitalizations among highly vaccinated northern states in the U.S. and much of continental Europe. Why would public health officials focus on a random new variant that would probably portend good news if it predominated Delta, when the current iteration is what is killing so many people?

Clearly, the leaders want to distract from the existing failure of the vaccines against the current variant and sow fear about something new and unknown rather than own up to the fiasco and forge new policies to better treat people for Delta.

In reality, Delta appeared to start more like a bad cold when the U.K. got an earlier wave of it than other countries. Similar to what we are seeing now with Omicron, one would expect more contagious strains to become less virulent, following the laws of micro-evolution and the pathogen’s drive to survive more without incapacitating the host. But something peculiar seemed to happen right around the six-month marker of mass vaccination, when it began to leak. On some level, Delta appeared to get worse. In the U.S. we have had more deaths this year than before the vaccine, and continental Europe appears to be following in that trajectory. Even some Asian countries that barely tasted death from COVID in the previous variant experienced some degree of catastrophe this go-around. What gives?

New research from INSERM — the prestigious national research center of France — as well as Aix Marseille University might shed light on the mystery of Delta, demonstrating why Delta is a much bigger problem than Omicron and why the vaccines are the problem, not the solution. Using molecular modeling, researchers found that there is increased risk for antibody dependent disease enhancement (ADE) from vaccine-generated antibodies with the Delta variant more than with the original one. Typically, there are neutralizing antibodies and enhancing antibodies. The former kill the virus while the latter bind to the virus but sometimes run the risk of a Trojan horse effect, where they serve as a conduit for the virus to more easily flow into the cells and make the virus more aggressive. As it relates to the original Wuhan strain, they found no problem of ADE, but for Delta there was a serious concern.

“As the NTD [N-terminal domain] is also targeted by neutralizing antibodies, our data suggest that the balance between neutralizing and facilitating antibodies in vaccinated individuals is in favor of neutralization for the original Wuhan/D614G strain,” wrote the French researchers in a letter published in the Journal of Infection. “However, in the case of the Delta variant, neutralizing antibodies have a decreased affinity for the spike protein, whereas facilitating antibodies display a strikingly increased affinity. Thus, ADE may be a concern for people receiving vaccines based on the original Wuhan strain spike sequence (either mRNA or viral vectors).”

The authors conclude quite bluntly: “Inasmuch as neutralizing antibodies overwhelm facilitating antibodies, ADE is not a concern. However, the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 variants may tip the scales in favor of infection enhancement. Our structural and modeling data suggest that it might be indeed the case for Delta variants” (emphasis added).

Thus, the outcome, according to the authors, would look something like this:

Six months ago, we could have dismissed this hypothesis as one of the many speculative scientific theories that thousands of scientists are promulgating about the virus on a daily basis. But the reality of the virus being worse in so many universally vaccinated countries than before anyone was ever vaccinated lends a lot of credence to this theory. If this theory is correct, then Delta wouldn’t have been materially worse than other strains if not for the mass vaccination with leaky Trojan horse antibodies.

Remember, on page 52 of the FDA's "Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for an Unapproved Product Review Memorandum," it states that there appears to be no concern of ADE in the short run (during the original strain), but "risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure."

Now consider where we are a year later, with most of the world suffering the worst spread ever – tracking closely with the growth of countries’ vaccination curves.

Netherlands, one of the most vaccinated nations on Earth, has had two covid waves after vaccinating 50% of the population and they are now adding even more restrictions.\n\nClearly, mass vaccination doesn't end the pandemic or buy back your freedom.\n\nhttps://www.travelawaits.com/2713644/amsterdam-netherlands-business-curfew/\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/5en67BeR6Y
— PLC (@PLC) 1638467974
Cases in Vietnam are up 44,739% since \u201cexpert\u201d Gavin Yamey said they had done \u201csuperbly at suppressing viral transmission\u201d with masks & other interventions, and 448,295% since their mask mandate started, so get ready for more mask mandates & gaslighting from experts & politicianspic.twitter.com/yj0HvSFC42
— IM (@IM) 1638393745
Cases in Denmark have reached a new high, 3 weeks into vaccine passports for most businesses & major events & with ~90% of adults fully vaccinated\n\nAdvocating for vaccine passports, as experts, politicians & the media are currently doing, requires a willful disregard for realitypic.twitter.com/dQvjZ0JRm7
— IM (@IM) 1638390163
Hospitalizations in Vermont have reached a new high, with 99% of seniors fully vaccinated and ~65% having had a booster shot, but the important thing to remember is that this is all the fault of college football fans in the Southpic.twitter.com/dumAuL85kO
— IM (@IM) 1638383728
Hospitalizations in Michigan are the highest they\u2019ve ever been despite 93% of seniors having had at least one vaccination dose, well exceeding Fauci\u2019s 50% target, but the good news is that it\u2019s not the Governor\u2019s fault because she isn\u2019t Ron DeSantispic.twitter.com/QI2AxfSomq
— IM (@IM) 1638296008
Germany today announced they\u2019re starting a lockdown for the unvaccinated, which is bizarre because I was told by The Atlantic six weeks ago that all of their mask mandates, vaccine passports and mass testing were helping them \u201cbeat COVID\u201d\n\nWonder why everything stopped working!pic.twitter.com/RNiTH5JbOr
— IM (@IM) 1638470925
It\u2019s incredibly impressive how the media seamlessly moved from blaming unvaccinated Southerners for the big increase in cases over the summer to completely ignoring huge increases in countries like Iceland, with 92% of adults fully vaccinated\n\nAmazing how that works, isn\u2019t it?pic.twitter.com/hcEr5ZvPNX
— IM (@IM) 1638229235

And the rest is history.

The lesson here is that it’s not any one variant that is a problem in a vacuum. The only reason for panic is the concern of the ability of mass vaccination with a leaky, narrow-spectrum, non-sterilizing vaccine to expose any mild variant to evolutionary pressure that will make it stronger. The vaccine is the problem, not the solution. Delta should not have been worse than a previous variant and, in fact, should have been less virulent. But it might have gotten worse because of vaccine-mediated viral enhancement caused by suboptimal evolutionary pressure with a leaky, narrow-spectrum vaccine.

Which brings us to Omicron. We now see that this is clearly starting out as very mild, along the lines of the typical principle that in order for a virus to become more transmissible, it ratchets down its virulence. If that is the case, we should be praying for Omicron to box out Delta. As Dr. Coetzee said, "If, as some evidence suggests, Omicron turns out to be a fast-spreading virus with mostly mild symptoms for the majority of the people who catch it, that would be a useful step on the road to herd immunity."

However, if this variant in the coming weeks takes a sudden turn for the worse, we will know clearly that the vaccine unnaturally made it more virulent. Hopefully, Omicron is less prone to ADE than Delta. But either way, the reality of the past year has shown that fighting the virus with the current vaccines is akin to pouring gasoline instead of water on a fire.

Horowitz: It’s now clear that the leaky shots have made the virus worse than ever




Told you so. Better safe than sorry.\nAfter 20 month we know how effective NPIs are.https://mobile.twitter.com/prof_freedom/status/1424665640745451526\u00a0\u2026
— Prof. Freedom (@Prof. Freedom) 1638055704

So, what have we gotten after injuring countless people all over the world with leaky, ineffective injections? Well, last week, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz bragged that his state is second in the nation in booster shots, has over 80% of all adults with at least one shot, and is sixth in the nation in injecting 5- to 11-year-olds. What he failed to say is that over the past week, Minnesota and Michigan are No. 1 in COVID cases! A leftist like Waltz will never wake up and smell the vaccine-mediated viral enhancement, but will the GOP governors finally call for a suspension of this pandemic-inducing injection?

Over the summer, as people like me and Joe Rogan began popularizing the “leaky chicken vaccine” theory to explain why a non-sterilizing vaccine would make the virus worse, the media dredged up the author of that 2015 study to denounce Joe Rogan’s use of the theory.

In 2015, Penn State biologist Andrew Read published a study explaining how a leaky chicken vaccine essentially exacerbated Marek’s disease in chickens to the point that it was able to defy the laws of microbiology and become both more transmissible and more virulent at the same time. "Our data show that anti-disease vaccines that do not prevent transmission can create conditions that promote the emergence of pathogen strains that cause more severe disease," he concluded in the study, published in Plos Biology.

When we began to see more excess mortality from the virus than ever before in July and August, Rogan pointed out this study as a very logical thesis to explain why a leaky vaccine could make things worse. On Aug. 8, Forbes posted an interview with Read in which he said Rogan was misapplying his work. What Read said in his rebuttal at the time should give you goose bumps, now that we know our own government admits Rogan was right about the vaccine not stopping transmission.

Read responds: “We're talking a very different virus and very different vaccines. The details in biology really matter a lot. The chicken vaccines we worked with, the first-generation vaccine, definitely reduced disease, severity and death.” But unlike the COVID mRNA vaccines, the chicken vaccine “didn't stop transmission at all.” And this is one of the key differences between what was being studied in Read’s paper and our current situation with the global pandemic. “Those [vaccinated] chickens just kept churning out the virus for weeks and weeks and weeks.” Again, this is a key difference. “It’s a very different virus from SARS-2. A key issue here is transmissibility.”

More transmission increases the likelihood of mutation. Thankfully, COVID-19 Vaccines reduce transmission and reduce opportunity for mutation.

“Think about what's happening with evolution,” offers Read. “Mutations can occur anytime the [virus] replicates. So the more replication, the more variants are generated. At the moment, the vast majority of the replication is happening in unvaccinated people. You can tell that because the majority of cases in the hospital are unvaccinated individuals. That is where the evolutionary action is happening at the moment.”

And as they say, the rest is history. Here we are several months later, and nobody disagrees with the fact that the shots appear to spread the virus even more, a clear reality from the best data in the world produced weekly by the U.K. Even the assumption that the shots protect against severe illness is blunted by the establishment’s own demands that everyone get endless boosters. So in many ways, this is now worse than the leaky Marek’s disease vaccine, which Read admits will generate durable variants.

It’s not like we weren’t warned. French virologist Luc Montagnier won the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of HIV, so he has authority on this issue. He warned, “It is clear that the new variants are created by antibody-mediated selection due to the vaccination” and, “The history books will show that because it is the vaccination that is creating the variants.”

And yet, the worse the virus gets, the more governments demand we vaccinate again and again with a leaky vaccine that is so narrow-spectrum, it’s easy for the virus to escape and then become more virulent.

Just look at the excess death data in the U.S. There were 193K excess deaths for the past 13 weeks, which is 112% higher than last year!

Excess Deaths in the US are through the roof!\n\n+112% all-cause excess deaths just the last 13 weeks!\n\nThat is 193 thousand people died more than normal in just 13 weeks! That's besides these widely available vaccines... Something is not right!pic.twitter.com/tqJiVflVUD
— Ben M. (@Ben M.) 1637774986

For weeks 33-45, there were 68.4K more COVID deaths this year than last year and roughly 33.5K non-COVID excess deaths in 2021 over the same period last year. This likely means that not only is the vaccine making the virus worse, but it’s also killing people with sundry ailments created by the spike protein. If one were purposely trying to kill civilization, one could not have done a better job than creating a shot that is leakier than the flu shot but exponentially more dangerous.

Europe is now even worse. With many countries having near-universal vaccination rates among adults, cases are now 20% higher than at any time during the pre-vaccination waves. Ditto for many states in America.

Collectively, cases in Europe are now 20% higher than they were at any point in 2020 or the winter wave in early 2021. \n\nMeanwhile, EU health statistics show 81% of all adults 18+ vaccinated and 77% fully vaccinated.\n\nhttps://vaccinetracker.ecdc.europa.eu/public/extensions/COVID-19/vaccine-tracker.html#uptake-tab\u00a0\u2026
— Kyle Lamb (@Kyle Lamb) 1637797200
Hospitalizations in Vermont are the highest they\u2019ve ever been, despite 99% of seniors being fully vaccinated and 62% having had a booster shot, and yet during his many media appearances today, no one asked Dr. Fauci why he was wrong about 50% vax rates preventing future surgespic.twitter.com/FqdyXosePk
— IM (@IM) 1638124936

Pfizer is responding to fears of the new b.1.1.529 Botswanan variant with a pledge to come out with more leaky vaccines. The company fails to concede that its shot has already completely backfired for the Delta variant and runs the risk of selecting for the most immune-escaped variant to become the dominant one. There is no evidence this “Omicron variant” is more problematic, but we already know that what has been circulating everywhere over the past half-year is more problematic than what we had pre-vaccine.



As Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, one of the greatest vaccinoligists of the generation, has repeatedly warned, a leaky vaccine will help select for the most durable mutations and make them the dominant strains. It doesn’t mean that the shots created these mutations – just that they create natural selection for the worst ones to beat out the other strains. “It’s important to understand the evolutionary capacity that a pathogen has when it is put under widespread immune pressure, that is something you don’t have in clinical studies, for example, the population effect,” Vanden Bossche recently said in an in-depth interview with the HighWire. I’m 200% convinced that it’s going to lead to a catastrophe.” If there ever was a way to create something as bad as Ebola that spreads like a cold, these shots might be the magic and tragic recipe.

It’s no longer true to say the vaccines are not working. They are working quite well for their intended purpose. When all the dust settles, mass vaccination with a leaky injection will likely supplant lockdowns as the worst mistake in the history of human civilization.

Horowitz: The media misses the lesson of Africa and COVID in plain sight



There is nowhere for the priests of Covidstan to run or hide from the failure of their prized injections. Cases in Europe are worse than ever, and America has now racked up more deaths than in 2020, when zero vaccines existed. But reality can hit these people in the face and they will still never admit that all of the human interventions failed.

As Europe battles its fifth wave and even East Asian countries begin to face serious waves of the virus, the AP wrote an article last week claiming that something "mysterious" is going on in much of continental Africa, as these African nations appear to have dodged the pandemic.

But there is something "mysterious" going on in Africa that is puzzling scientists, said Wafaa El-Sadr, chair of global health at Columbia University. "Africa doesn't have the vaccines and the resources to fight COVID-19 that they have in Europe and the U.S., but somehow they seem to be doing better," she said.
Fewer than 6% of people in Africa are vaccinated. For months, the WHO has described Africa as "one of the least affected regions in the world" in its weekly pandemic reports.

No kidding! Contrast that with Europe, where cases are now worse than at any time in the U.S., despite nearly every adult vaccinated in many continental European countries.

2 months into vaccine passports and with ~90% of adults at least partially vaccinated, cases in The Netherlands are up 942% and they\u2019re going back to lockdowns.\n\nIt\u2019s amazing the consistency with which governments will double down on failure to avoid acknowledging realitypic.twitter.com/8XA8cK9vuQ
— IM (@IM) 1637526866

Perhaps the Africans don't have enough money to pay for the rope to hang themselves with leaky vaccines, counterproductive lockdowns, and failed therapeutics like remdesivir. They can't afford to spend $3,000 per dose to have people's kidneys fail and instead are using cheap anti-malaria and anti-parasitic drugs.

Yes, it's true that Africans are younger and the countries' data is less reliable, but that cannot account for the fact that COVID deaths have been nearly nonexistent in many of these countries. Those explanations offered by the AP simply cannot bridge the gap.

Curiously, the AP posits that perhaps "past infection with parasitic diseases" as well as exposure to malaria might make people in these countries more immune to the virus. "On Friday, researchers working in Uganda said they found COVID-19 patients with high rates of exposure to malaria were less likely to suffer severe disease or death than people with little history of the disease."

Gee, why would that be? What about the pathophysiology of those diseases would make people immune to a virus? After all, we have been lectured by those so vociferously against hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin that there can't possibly be cross-relation between the immune response to a parasitic infection and the response to a viral infection.

Could it possibly be the fact that those countries happen to constantly treat themselves with drugs like ... the one that begins with the I and the one that begins with the H?

Since 1987, Merck has been funneling several hundred million doses of ivermectin per year through the Mectizan Donation Program, which includes all of the central African countries. How are the Mectizan countries doing?

And these are the countries @Merck donates Mectizan (=Ivermectin for Human use) to. Do the math.pic.twitter.com/35lAB65tq0
— Mira Moerma (@Mira Moerma) 1630477067

Now, obviously, there are multiple factors involved in the success of these countries, likely including their lack of international travel. However, it is laughable for the media to entertain parasitic infections as a contributing factor without mentioning the two drugs being used to treat COVID that are commonly used in those countries to treat parasitic infections. What is also clear is that the vaccines simply play no role in determining the trajectory of this pandemic — at least not a positive one.

In another part of the world, there is also mounting evidence that ivermectin has helped accelerate a decline in cases. While the Far East has not incurred much death from the virus, those countries have been hit by the recent Delta wave since the summer. Japan was experiencing its sharpest peak of the pandemic, but appears to have enjoyed a steeper and quicker decline since August than any other Asian country.

Tokyo in particular is kicking COVID's ass with IVM - fewest hospitalized since before pandemic. Come on world, wake up wake up wake uppic.twitter.com/nelPEDy9AG
— Pierre Kory, MD MPA (@Pierre Kory, MD MPA) 1637551626

While it's hard to prove causation at this point, it's also hard to overlook the fact that on Aug. 13, Dr. Haruo Ozaki, chairman of the Tokyo Metropolitan Medical Association, spoke favorably of the drug at a press conference.

Tokyo Medical Association Chairman Haruo Ozaki, August 13 2021pic.twitter.com/ANgEbdm1Rn
— Joe (@Joe) 1629731785

"In Africa, if we compare countries distributing ivermectin once a year with countries which do not give ivermectin ... I mean, they don't give ivermectin to prevent COVID, but to prevent parasitic diseases ... but anyway, if we look at COVID numbers in countries that give ivermectin, the number of cases is 134.4 per 100,000, and the number of deaths is 2.2 in 100,000."

"Now, African countries which do not distribute ivermectin: 950.6 cases per 100,000 and 29.3 deaths per 100,000," Ozaki added.

"I believe the difference is clear."

A week later, Ozaki told the Yomiuri Shimbun, which is the largest circulating newspaper in the world, that he had recommended the use of the drug to the Japan Olympic Committee during the Olympics.

Ironically, Japan is the birthplace of ivermectin. In the 1970s, Dr. Satoshi Omura, a Japanese biochemist, discovered the bacteria specimen in the soil that led to the development of ivermectin, along with Dr. William Campbell, a Merck scientist. The two of them won the Nobel Prize for physiology in 2015 for this discovery.

Although ivermectin is not officially recommended by the Japanese government, it is one of the only countries where doctors and citizens have gotten a positive vibe from their government on its use.

Then, of course, there is Uttar Pradesh, the largest state in India, which has crushed its curve to the point that the virus is not just in low circulation, but essentially eradicated since June.

Typically, even when a COVID wave subsides, there is a persisting minimum baseline of cases and deaths, especially after 2-3 months. In Uttar Pradesh, on the other hand, the numbers are remarkable and have held up for a year. Obviously, a lot of the decline was likely due to built-up immunity, but it doesn't account for the fact that the cases didn't just decline to a low level, but essentially flatlined for months. Remember, this is an Indian state with a population of 240 million people. We are seeing similar trends in other Indian states that used ivermectin. The drug is so cheap and available in India that many Americans are buying ivermectin from Indian vendors oversees. (See Juan Chamie's Substack for a compelling district-by-district analysis of Uttar Pradesh's epidemiological curve.)

It is simply unheard of in any other country that experienced a large wave to then go for six straight months with essentially no cases. And again, when cases were eradicated, these Indian states had a very low vaccination rate. Almost nobody was vaccinated in the spring, and even at the end of October, just 15% were fully vaccinated in Uttar Pradesh. A similar trend has played out in Chiapas, Mexico.

No, none of this alone shows empirically that ivermectin itself is a magic pill, but what it does show is that if we are willing to pour billions of dollars and coercion into an ineffective and dangerous injection, why wouldn't we spend a fraction of those funds researching cheap, safe repurposed drugs?

Horowitz: Why masks don’t work in the real world



There is not a single place on earth where masks appear even to have slowed the spread of the virus, which appears hell-bent on cutting through every population until the herd immunity threshold is met. None of this should have surprised us.

How many people do you know who always wear their masks fully clamped to their faces like a respirator? Well, there are very few people who can afford to pass out after hours of oxygen deprivation. That, in a nutshell, is why mask mandates are useless against a virus, even before we examine the fact that the pores in the mask fibers are much larger than the virus itself.

Stephen Petty, one of the most experienced certified industrial hygienists and exposure experts in the country, sent me the following chart based on new research on mask filtration (Drewnick, et al.). It demonstrates that if just 3.2% of the mask space is open, the efficacy of the mask goes down to zero!

As you can see, with just 2% of the mask area open, 80% of the particles under 2.5 microns will escape. Based on that study, Petty extrapolates that masks will be 100% ineffective in blocking any particles that small when the open area reaches 3.2%.

What people forget is that aside from the size of the pores in the fabric, very few people actually wear masks the way they test them in labs or on mannequins. As Petty points out, based on a new study of filtration leakage in masks from 44 different materials, most of the seepage comes out through the sides because the molecules always travel the path of least resistance.

"Measurements with defined leaks showed that already a small fractional leak area of 1–2% can strongly deteriorate total FE," concluded the German study published last October in Aerosol Science and Technology. "This is especially the case for particles smaller than 5 mm diameter, where FE dropped by 50% or even two thirds."

The study goes on to explain that because "surgical masks as well as cloth masks never have a perfect fit on the face," it is "one of the main reasons why in studies investigating filter efficiencies of masks under real life conditions for surgical masks" the efficacy is "significantly lower" than what we see with form-fitted N95s. It's also likely the reason why filtration studies in a lab show some degree of efficacy but not a single randomized controlled trial (RCT) has demonstrated efficacy of these masks against viruses, including 10 RCTs of the flu and mask-wearing, as well as the Danish study of mask use for COVID. Humans are not lab mannequins.

This is what everyone got wrong from day one, or perhaps what Fauci and others originally got right. The COVID conversation should have begun with minimum viable particle size under pressure, which for COVID-size particulates is .06 microns. 90% of exhaled particulates fall within the radically behaving particulate/airborne particulate range.

What that means is that once particles are well under 1 micron (smaller than most bacteria), they easily get through and around the mask, remain suspended in air for a long time, and travel indoors a lot farther than six feet. Once we learned that this virus was airborne and so small, it is simply impossible for masking and six feet to make a difference indoors.

Multiple virions can compose a single particle cluster and still fall well under that threshold. Thus, even if everyone wore masks properly, still enough virions would escape to essentially make mask-wearing nothing but theater, which is why we don't find any real-world evidence of masking helping at all, as cases surge in masked-up Michigan and decline to the lowest levels in a year in Texas and Mississippi.

On 3/5, two experts from Brown University said on the NBC website that Texas & Mississippi lifting their mask manda… https://t.co/FGD6Oqg77i
— IM (@IM)1618854323.0

My friend Emily Burns demonstrates this in a real-life example by exhaling cigarette smoke under a mask that was pretty form-fitted. As she noted on Twitter, cigarette smoke is less than 1 micron, which is the same size or larger than 99% of the virus-carrying aerosols.

1/Masks don’t work to stop COVID, though they work wonders keeping kids out of school & unemployment high But WH… https://t.co/2q5Snzit7B
— Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK (@Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK)1617988292.0

In fact, brand-new research has shown that 90% of the virions of this virus are smaller than 0.3 microns. There are 100 times more aerosols under 1 micron (mostly significantly smaller) than over 1 micron. That is much smaller than the pores on surgical masks, much less cloth masks, not to mention the gaps around the masks.

What's more, the same study shows that at peak contagion around day seven of symptoms, with the inflammation of the alveoli, the number of particles under 0.3 microns increases tenfold, while the larger ones decrease. This likely explains why asymptomatic individuals barely spread and why masks are worthless when people are the most contagious.

8/The going theory is that this change occurs due to inflammation of the alveoli. This might explain why asymptoma… https://t.co/7XmvCgjmWb
— Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK (@Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK)1617988841.0

We have been sold an illogical premise dressed up as science – that somehow masks do not protect you against inhaling someone else's virus, but they do protect others from your exhalation. That is the excuse given to force people who don't like masks to wear them, even though the people concerned about the virus are free to wear them if they think they work. However, while masks fail to work against a virus this small in both directions, if anything, they are even less likely to stop your exhalation of the virus than inhalation. As Emily Burns demonstrated in her video, with a KN95, which makes one feel like he is suffocating when inhaling, exhalation seems to flow easily through the gaps.

10/Let’s look at a non-fit-tested KN-95. I tried to make it a close fit, but as you can see, the smoke still goes… https://t.co/OAEmbELgJO
— Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK (@Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK)1617988925.0
11/While doing this, I found that when I inhaled, due to the negative pressure created, I felt the seal tighten, w… https://t.co/OGzwWQDtPZ
— Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK (@Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK)1617988980.0

This is also why masking might possibly aerosolize the particulates even more than people who are unmasked. Which might explain why nearly every analysis shows more spread in places with mask mandates. As Megan Mansell, a hazardous environs PPE export, explained to me:

Exhalation is the plosive outward release of respiratory gases and mucosal excretions that line the respiratory tract. Exhale pressure fluctuates based on an individual's overall health and level of physical exertion, as well as environmental oxygen saturation. More extreme changes in outward pressure accompany plosive force-generating events (sneeze, scream, cough, blowing, blowing raspberries) which each come with changes in facial characteristics like openness of the mouth and tautness of cheeks that impact outward pressure. The more fitted an apparatus is around the mouth and nose, the greater the release of pressure during general respiration and plosive force-generating events. About 90% of respiratory emissions fall within the radically behaving particulate range, which also encompasses the COVID virion particulate range. The more pressurized the plosive activity, the more force behind the plume.

Thus, masking is a catch-22. Either the virions come straight out of the sides and center or, in the case of tighter masks, plosive force creates greater pressure behind the escape of tiny particles, which are even more prone to travel greater distances and remain suspended for hours. Which is why, although N95s appear to perform well in mechanistic lab-based studies, they don't appear to stop the transmission from someone who is contagious in the real world.

19/Which explains why even N-95s, while again, showing good mechanistic data, do not appear to have an impact on a… https://t.co/0FFmyFFtyj
— Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK (@Emily Burns😊 #SmilesMatter DM’s OK)1617989336.0

Mandating medical-grade masks most certainly has not worked for Germany or Chile:

Two and a half months after Germany mandated medical grade masks for their improved efficacy, the 7-day average of… https://t.co/ljjbpCQjjn
— IM (@IM)1617129045.0
Chile is so devoted to masks that on 12/18 they literally fined the President of the country $3,500 for not wearing… https://t.co/Yr6aRG5Qmy
— IM (@IM)1618861185.0

Stephen Petty sent me a chart from his presentation on mask filtration showing that the overwhelming majority of virions are of the size that have the ability to suspend in air for days.

Remember, the big droplets the politicians and the media speak of tend to fall to the ground immediately and don't travel far. There is no way they can account for this degree of ubiquitous transmission around the globe. It must be the micro-particles, which travel far in unventilated indoor rooms and remain suspended for days, that are causing the rapid spread. No mask has any efficacy against those particulates.

It's important to note that it's the small particulates that are most likely to get into one's deep lungs, not the larger droplets, which are more likely to be trapped in saliva or throat and ingested rather than inhaled. Also, mask-wearing tends to force more people to breathe through their mouths rather than normal shallow nasal breathing, which makes them even more likely to inhale the particles that inevitably get through their masks.

The public has been sold a lie about avoiding the virus by wearing a mask and staying six feet apart indoors. The reality is that we should have focused on dilution and filtration systems for a fraction of the funding we spent destroying the economy. We should also have focused on early and pre-emptive treatment with cheap drugs like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine mixed with supplements of vitamins and zinc. Then again, this was never about science or saving lives. This was about controlling our lives and making us servile puppies to the governing elite. The mask is the ultimate symbol and reminder that we no longer control our own bodies.