Politics has a horrible way of polluting our minds by promoting prejudice and tribalism, which subsequently culminates in a lazy, dismissive, and narrow minded way of seeing the world.
In relation to this current “pandemic,” that’s exactly what I’ve been seeing, but whilst we selfishly politicize these lockdowns like fools, millions of innocent people are being pushed into poverty and starvation around the world.
Millions Are Being Pushed Into Poverty & Starvation
According to UNU World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), lockdown policies are projected to push 8% of the world’s population (400-600 million people) into poverty.
According to the World Food Programme, the disruption from these lockdown measures has caused a hunger crisis of “biblical proportions” that could result in an additional 130 million people being pushed to starvation.
According to UNICEF, these lockdown policies are projected to cause an additional 6.7 million children under the age of 5 to suffer from malnutrition in the form of “wasting”, which is a form of life threatening undernourishment. Quoting an analysis from the Lancet, they also claim that an extra 10,000 child deaths per month are projected to take place.
Why Can’t People See That These Lockdowns Are Dangerous & Deadly?
Throughout this “pandemic,” the establishment media have consistently associated anyone questioning the official narrative surrounding the coronavirus, with incredulous and controversial right-wing figures like Donald Trump, Alex Jones, QAnon, FOX News, “anti-vaxxers,” “science deniers” and even “anti-Semites” — amongst other evocative groups and individuals — which obviously have very strong anti-science conspiracy theory undertones attached to them. These constant associations also closely resemble a manipulative method of “brainwashing” known as classical conditioning.
Naturally, this undermines any sensible scientific discourse, and also promotes polarization and tribalism by aggravating existing political divisions in society. Unsurprisingly, what should be an objective honest scientific discussion degenerates into an irrational “us vs them” political debate.
To fuel this fire even further, there have actually been multiple experts from around the world that have come forward and genuinely questioned a number of different aspects associated with the official narrative, including the inappropriate way that many deaths have officially been recorded; the obvious dangers of fast tracking a vaccine; and, of course, how dangerous and deadly these lockdowns really are, but the media does not give these professional perspectives the same platform, and public attention, that they so consistently give to the more irrational arguments made by characters like Donald Trump and QAnon, amongst other less reputable sources.
Professor Michael Levitt, 2013 Nobel Prize, was recently uninvited to the BioDesign Research Conference for challenging lockdown policies
In fact, not only have the authorities not given these more sensible opposing views the platform that they deserve, but when some of these experts have found a way to share their testimony organically — and without the help of big media — they’ve actually been censored or, once again, inappropriately associated with right wing politics or controversial “conspiracy theories”.
A shamefully underhanded attempt by The Guardian to inappropriately associate a Harvard Professor that is using verifiable evidence to challenge lockdown policies with “Holocaust deniers”
What Does The Objective Science Say?
“These scenarios of 40 million deaths in the world, and 2+ million deaths in the US, by doing nothing, are science fiction at the moment. I cannot describe them in any other terms.”
— Professor John Ioannidis, Perspectives on the Pandemic, Journeyman Pictures, April 17th, 2020
The science supporting these lockdown measures is based almost entirely on theoretical modeling, which is a poor substitute for real world science. In fact, the most influential study in relation to current events — since it has been credited as the motivation behind why both the U.S. and U.K. governments imposed their lockdowns to begin with — which is entitled “Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand” by Imperial College London, was also a theoretical model.
Some of you may have recalled this “study,” which made headlines projecting how up to 40 million people could die without lockdowns being imposed.
Source: Business Insider
What you probably don’t know, however, is that this “study” was never even published in a scientific journal and it was never peer reviewed. Worse still, the lead author, Neil Ferguson, has a history of terrible modeling predictions and financial links to the Big Pharma/Vaccine companies that are set to profit from this pandemic. In fact, Imperial College London currently partners with several Big Pharma/Vaccine companies that are set to make billions of dollars from coronavirus vaccines. All of this is obviously a major conflict of interest.
Screenshot from Imperial College London’s official website with their partnership with GSK.
If that’s not bad enough, other experts have since tried to corroborate Ferguson’s findings, and claim his research is “totally unreliable” and impossible to read. Clearly, this is profoundly unscientific.
By way of comparison, we have decades of real world peer reviewed research — from multiple countries around the world — showing us that lockdown policies can be extremely dangerous and deadly, because they accentuate the risk of things like anxiety, depression, PTSD, suicide — premature death from all causes — and even human trafficking amongst other things.
By Politicizing The Pandemic We Are Putting Hundreds Of Millions Of Lives At Risk
By politicizing the pandemic, and not providing the public with a more authentic and unadulterated view of the reality surrounding current events, we are effectively putting hundreds of millions of people’s lives at risk, which is criminal. End of story.
Unfortunately, the slanted coverage, the unwarranted censorship, the inappropriate associations, and so on and so forth, will almost certainly continue to carry on. Being as such, it is up to us to resist the political trappings setup by these skillful propagandists, and their unwitting cheerleaders, and instead reframe the discussion by focusing on the objective scientific research and the earnest pursuit of Truth. After all, innocent lives are at risk here guys. Look beyond politics and remember your humanity, which transcends the primordial irrationality of tribalism.
With that said, there is much more going on with this “pandemic” than what we have been permitted to perceive through the establishment media’s very narrow and one sided portrayal of events. In an effort to bring some much needed balance to this discussion, that does not rely on sensational “conspiracy theories,” outlandish unprovable claims, or inappropriate political associations, I put together a meticulous 5 hour presentation on the topic — with hundreds of accessible sources and citations — that explores the scientific evidence both for, and against, these lockdown policies; expert testimony questioning current events; major conflicts of interest that we are not being told about; and also a closer look at the disturbing history of corruption within the Big Pharma/Vaccine industry, amongst other relevant topics.
You can view that presentation below (alt link HERE in case of censorship):
Sign up for my email newsletter HERE
- Nordt C, Warnke I, Seifritz E, Kawohl W. Modelling suicide and unemployment: a longitudinal analysis covering 63 countries 2000-2011. Lancet Psychiatry. (2015) 2:239–45. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(14)00118-7
- Barr B, Taylor-Robinson D, Scott-Samuel A, McKee M, Stuckler D. Suicides associated with the 2008-2010 economic recession in England: time trend analysis. Br Med J. (2012) 345:5142. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e5142
- Gerdtham U-G, Johannesson M. A note on the effect of unemployment on mortality. J Health Eco. (2003) 22:505–18. doi: 10.1016/S0167-6296(03)00004-3
- Breuer C. Unemployment and suicide mortality: evidence from regional panel data in europe. Health Eco. (2015) 24:936–50. doi: 10.1002/hec.3073
- Unemployment associated with 50% higher risk of death in heart-failure patients. Cardiovasc J Afr. 2017;28(3):200.
- Gronewold J, Kropp R, Lehmann N on behalf of the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study Investigative Group, et al Association of social relationships with incident cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality Heart 2020;106:1317-1323.
- Dan Brown & Elisabetta De Cao, 2017. “The Impact of Unemployment on Child Maltreatment in the United States,” Working Papers 106, “Carlo F. Dondena” Centre for Research on Social Dynamics (DONDENA), Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi.
- Gillham B, Tanner G, Cheyne B, Freeman I, Rooney M, Lambie A. Unemployment rates, single parent density, and indices of child poverty: their relationship to different categories of child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse Negl. 1998;22(2):79-90. doi:10.1016/s0145-2134(97)00134-8
- Madge, “Unemployment and its effects on children,” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 311–319, 1983.
- Brooks, Sam & Webster, Rebecca & Smith, Louise & Woodland, Lisa & Wessely, Simon & Greenberg, Neil & Rubin, Gideon. (2020). The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet. 395. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8.
- N. Christoffersen, “follow-up study of longterm effects of unemployment on children: loss of self-esteem and self-destructive behavior among adolescents,” Childhood, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 212–220, 1994.
- Moriel Zelikowsky, May Hui, Tomomi Karigo, Andrea Choe, Bin Yang, Mario R. Blanco, Keith Beadle, Viviana Gradinaru, Benjamin E. Deverman, David J. Anderson. The Neuropeptide Tac2 Controls a Distributed Brain State Induced by Chronic Social Isolation Stress. Cell, 2018; 173 (5): 1265 DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.037
- Trafficking in Persons Report 2009, U.S. Department of State publication 11407 Office of the Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs and Bureau of Public Affairs