ORLANDO, Fla. – After FOX 35 News noticed errors in the state’s report on positivity rates, the Florida Department of Health said that some laboratories have not been reporting negative test result data to the state.
Countless labs have reported a 100 percent positivity rate, which means every single person tested was positive. Other labs had very high positivity rates. FOX 35 News found that testing sites like one local Centra Care reported that 83 people were tested and all tested positive. Then, NCF Diagnostics in Alachua reported 88 percent of tests were positive.
How could that be? FOX 35 News investigated these astronomical numbers, contacting every local location mentioned in the report.
The report showed that Orlando Health had a 98 percent positivity rate. However, when FOX 35 News contacted the hospital, they confirmed errors in the report. Orlando Health’s positivity rate is only 9.4 percent, not 98 percent as in the report.
___________________
**Comment**
You can’t make this stuff up. COVID has become a comedy of errors.
(Natural News) A traditional quarantine is intended to isolate a person who has been veritably exposed to an infectious disease and has symptoms of the infection. A properly-conducted quarantine can reduce the spread of a new virus that has multiplied in the cells of a host body and is likely to spread into the immediate environment via the cough and sneeze of the host body’s aerosols. With COVID-19, loose inconsistent “quarantines” are being forced on most of the population, with no verification that COVID-19 is present. Even worse, discriminatory lock down and restrictions to personal liberty remain, even as 90 percent or more sick individuals test negative for COVID-19, and most who do test positive, ultimately recover with newfound immunity. Moreover, the study claiming new coronavirus can be transmitted by people without symptoms turns out to be flawed.
COVID-19 is a real threat but the American response lacks precision and has betrayed the terrain theory of disease, weakening the population long term
When scientists sequenced a new strain of coronavirus, and after preliminary studies from Wuhan, China estimated it had an R naught value between 5 and 6 (very contagious), most government and public health officials came to the consensus that statewide lock downs, the shuttering of select businesses, and stay-at-home orders were the best way to slow the spread of the new virus. In the process, individual liberty was sacrificed and a chain reaction of new problems were realized.
Because one person with COVID-19 symptoms can potentially transmit the coronavirus to 5 or 6 people in close proximity, health officials assumed that everyone would rapidly become infected and require hospitalization, causing overcrowded health systems and a lack of medical treatments. Based on data from Wuhan China, states went into lock down mode.
Not only were rights suspended during this time, but the authoritarian approach also lacked precision and consistency. Governors determined some activities to be essential – like getting alcohol, eating fast food, and crowding Wal-Mart, while other activities were deemed non-essential – such as spreading out at state parks, buying seeds, playing on park playgrounds, or getting sun at the beach (even though vitamin D deficiency is linked to worse outcomes).
The discriminatory shutdown approach lacked precision and did not accurately determine infection or exposure to infection to conduct evidence-based quarantines of people with COVID-19. Now, many people are beginning to wonder whether this inconsistent and controlling lock down approach was worth it, especially as businesses, employment, mental health, individual rights, and personal livelihoods hang in the balance. Why do we allow a hypothetical chain of infection to occur at “essential” places, but small businesses, gyms, playgrounds, beaches, and state parks remain shuttered and controlled?
As a society, have we taken the wrong approach to facing and overcoming infectious disease and will we succumb to government tyranny, which is far more dangerous?
Even though nothing was said or done to help the population mount a healthy immune response to the new virus, everyone was assumed to be infected and assumed to require hospitalization. This assumption was shortsighted, as many people who test positive might be false positive, do not exhibit symptoms at all, and may only experience mild illness. As a matter of fact, in most every state, over 90 percent of people who take the PCR test, test negative for COVID-19 and positive for other respiratory illnesses.
Still, there are some people with underlying chronic conditions, immune-deficiencies, etc. who are at greater risk of complications and death from COVID-19, or any respiratory viral infection. Most complications in NYC came from obese patients. Erroneously, restricting the movement, assembly, economic activity, and leisure of all people became the “cure” for sick individuals with underlying conditions and immune-deficiencies.
During the panic, severe cases of illness were not differentiated from mild ones, and the range of symptoms to determine COVID-19 became so broad and undefined, that healthcare professionals started listing “assumed” or “suspected” cases of COVID-19 as the provisional cause of death for many patients who had co-infections, comorbidity, or underlying health conditions that were the cause of hospitalization in the first place. The World Health Organization and National Vital Statistics officially advised health care professionals to “assume” COVID-19 cases, without confirmation. New York City’s COVID-19 death tally soared by more than 3,700 when it included the deaths of people who were suspected of having COVID-19 but were never tested. Although there is financial incentive for placing patients on ventilators, many NYC doctors report that patients are suffering from further lung damage on the machines, and they observe an 80 percent fatality rate once these devices are used. This is compounded by the fact that ventilator-associated pneumonia affects upwards of 300,000 Americans each year and could be a determining factor in mortality.
In the end, fearing asymptomatic spread from all healthy human beings may prove to be a futile approach that forces everyone to live in perpetual and irrational paranoia. The longer we fear our environment and ignore what we can do to help our individual immune systems recover, the longer it takes for the population to develop herd immunity. We will never completely control the life cycle of pathogens in a population, no matter how much we shutter people’s lives, oppress them, depress them, and plunge them into economic calamity. We must focus on strengthening the immune response of all, especially the most vulnerable, or we will be consumed by fear and perish as a nation.
Furthermore, when lock downs are lifted, people who have been stagnant in their homes, lost their jobs, stuck drinking alcohol and eating essential fast food, will become even more susceptible to infections in the coming year. Left ignorant of what they can do to overcome infections, trapped on a nutrient-void diet, and slowly dying from immune-suppressant drugs, the modern American’s cellular terrain will present a conducive environment for viruses to take hold and multiply. The terrain theory was completely ignored during this pandemic and as a result, herd immunity will be realized slowly and painfully, as people with weak immune systems continue to suffer, leading to further outbreaks, more complications, and a higher death rate to COVID-19 and a host of other respiratory infections that claim millions of lives each year.
One other very important point – this so called virus has never been purified. The article, Electron microscopy of SARS-CoV-2: A Challenging Task,” states:
“these observed particles in patients with COVID-19 should be best designated as virus-likeparticles because definitive assignment of these structures as SARSCoV-2 virions requires immuno-EM.” Electron_microscopy_of_SARS-CoV-2_a_challenging_ta
These particles have yet to be singularly purified from all else.
The article, Identification of Coronavirus Isolated from a Patient in Korea with COVID-19 also takes impure material, calls it ‘virus’, adds it to a cell culture, and observes cell death. Unfortunately, without purifying a singular pathogenic virus there is no way of knowing what exactly caused the cell death. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7045880/
We randomized 115 children to trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) or placebo. Over the following 9 months, TIV recipients had an increased risk of virologically-confirmed non-influenza infections (relative risk: 4.40; 95% confidence interval: 1.31-14.8). Being protected against influenza, TIV recipients may lack temporary non-specific immunity that protected against other respiratory viruses. (See link for article)
____________________
**Comment**
Important quote:
In the prepandemic period of our study, we did not observe a statistically significant reduction in confirmed seasonal influenza virus infections in the TIV (inactivated influenza vaccine) recipients (Table 3), although serological evidence (Supplementary Appendix) and point estimates of vaccine efficacy based on confirmed infections were consistent with protection of TIV recipients against the seasonal influenza viruses that circulated from January through March 2009 [16]. We identified a statistically significant increased risk of noninfluenza respiratory virus infection among TIV recipients (Table 3), including significant increases in the risk of rhinovirus and coxsackie/echovirus infection, which were most frequently detected in March 2009, immediately after the peak in seasonal influenza activity in February 2009 (Figure 1).
You read that correctly. Not only did the TIV NOT reduce the flu, those that received it simnifically increased their risk of other respiratory virus infections.
..after saying that indeed those who are vaccinated DO get more acute pathogen-creating illness, like CORONAVIRUS, that should make us all wonder if there are any connections here. The acknowledging that patients DO get ill after flu shots from these other viruses (VIRAL INTERFERENCE) is priceless yet disturbing. Basically patients have been made to feel like they were wrong for decades. I am sure deaths too, have been involved but to correctly blame it on the vaccine has been taboo. Mutating bacteria and viruses are possible for sure and vaccines can also be responsible for that.
Here’s a current research article showing the exact same thing:
Receiving influenza vaccination may increase the risk of other respiratory viruses, a phenomenon known as virus interference. … Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus…..
Talk about ignoring the monstrous elephant in the room….
The good news is that according to this immunologist, our body already has some immunity to COVID-19 due to the fact it is not completely novel as we’ve been told: https://madisonarealymesupportgroup.com/2020/07/10/coronavirus-why-everyone-was-wrong/ The very name of it: SARS-COV-2, shows it is closely related to SARS, a virus that has already circulated. This also reveals, clearly, that COVID-19 has yet to be singularly purified, which is why testing is so poor and a vaccine can never be properly made. They don’t even have the singular organism isolated and purified. Big problem and another elephant in the room everyone is side-stepping.
T cell reactivity against SARS-CoV-2 was observed in unexposed people; however, the source and clinical relevance of the reactivity remains unknown. It is speculated that this reflects T cell memory to circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses.
As data start to accumulate on the detection and characterization of SARS-CoV-2 T cell responses in humans, a surprising finding has been reported: lymphocytes from 20–50% of unexposed donors display significant reactivity to SARS-CoV-2 antigen peptide pools1,2,3,4.
In conclusion, it is now established that SARS-CoV-2 pre-existing immune reactivity exists to some degree in the general population. (See link for full article)
“The entire world simply claimed that there was no immunity…..that wasn’t science, but pure speculation based on a gut feeling that was then parroted by everyone.” Beda Stadler
NUTRITIONAL SUPPLEMENTS FOR COVID-19 PROPHYLAXIS AND SYMPTOM DE-ESCALATION
Chris Newton
Research Director CIMMBER (Center for Immuno-Metabolism, Microbiome and Bio-Energetic Research)
A week ago on Friday 3rd July 2020, a call was put out on LinkedIn to biomedical scientists and physicians and all informed individuals to form Consensus-COVID, an initiative to establish a consensus list of non-prescription agents for COVID prophylaxis and symptom de-escalation. The call has so far raised around 1900 views and responses from physicians, biomedical scientists and various other professionals. What follows is a distillation of these suggestions into two lists, one for COVID prophylaxis and the other for immediate use following the onset of symptoms.
Over the past three to four months, numerous articles have been written and posted at the this site and the site of other individuals in the list below, particularly Jeannette Hospers, and Dr Ian Brighthope, concerning what might be considered a ‘trinity mix’ for COVID-19, namely vitamin C, vitamin D and a zinc salt.These three compounds will form the immutable core of both consensus lists. For more information on this combination, I would thoroughly recommend visiting the site of Dr Ian Brighthope and listening to a recent interview.
The lists below are an amalgamation of suggestions made by the following individuals in response to the call:
Dr John H Abeles MD, General Partner at Northlea Partners, West Palm Beach, Florida Area
Dr Alex (Kennerly) Vasquez DO ND DC FACN. Physician, Researcher, Presenter, Academician, Editor, Consultant
Dr Ian Brighthope, Founder and Managing Director at Entoura Pty Ltd, Greater Melbourne Area
David Steenblock, BS, MS, DO. President, CEO, Chief Scientist, Research Physician at Personalized Regenerative Medicine, San Clemente, California
Dr Alan Vinitsky. Physician, Owner at Enlightened Medicine. Owner Enlightened Nutritionals & Illumivites. Washington D.C. Metro Area
Dr William A. Shaver. Founder at Center of Meaning in Health and Disease, Lubbock, Texas Area
Dr. Larry G. Martin. Cellular research related to oxidative stress. Albany, Oregon
Dr Emma Derbyshire. Research, Writing, Media Liasons, Epsom, Surrey, United Kingdom
Dr Jeannette Hospers. Senior Scientist/Clinical Trial Manager, Basel Area, Switzerland
Dr Chris Newton. Director Center for Immuno-Metabolism, Microbiome and Bio-Energetic Research, Yorkshire, UK
It must be stated that the lists below do not constitute medical advice. The clinical science and indeed clinical philosophy behind this consensus is that agents will support immune cells and other somatic cell types by acting as immuno-modulators and not immuno-suppressants. In particular, it is hoped they will prevent the accumulation of oxidants and help tailor a more appropriate immune response to SARS-CoV-2. For an excellent review on optimal nutrition and antiviral immunity see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7230749/
TABLE 1
The list above is relatively extensive and may be onerous for some individuals. A compromise might be made with supplement from companies such as Now Foods. They manufacture a combination of vitamins and minerals with addition of CoQ10 and other substances. The levels in these mixture are too low for vitamins C, and D and some minerals like magnesium, but for some of the B vitamins, they approach or exceed the lower limit in Table 1. By choosing single agent supplements, it will be possible to reach the upper limit of the range in Table 1.
In comparison to the list presented on July 3rd 2020, there are several additions and also one deletion- melatonin. This compound might be considered ‘optional’, to be taken before sleep in late evening at a dose level of 6-12mg. At least in the UK, melatonin is not easy to source and so one might consider natural products such as Feverfew. For an excellent review on natural sources of melatonin see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5409706/ .
Whilst choline is easily available as a supplement, one might also consider natural sources, such as eggs (three eggs a day will reach the dose in Table 1). Also, Brazil nuts are high in selenium and 4-5 whole nuts will provide around 200 microg.
Although it has been suggested that butyrate is appropriate to add as a supplement, for now, it is considered ‘optional’. So, 500-1000mg per day might be appropriate. This substance is produced by bacterial fermentation in the gut and it is known to inhibit inflammatory responses (see post at this site and the work of Dr Larry Martin). The decision not to add butyrate to the list in Table 1 may change following further discussion with Dr Larry Martin and Dr William Shaver.
TABLE 2
Immediately at the onset of symptoms increase ascorbic acid (AA) intake and vitamin D as indicated in Table 2 above. Also increase zinc and quercetin along with NAC. The latter is a thiol antioxidant and a glutathione precursor.
Whilst dropping back to the protocol in Table 1 for vitamins C (0.5-2g four times daily) and D (4000IU/day- but have blood 25OHD measured if possible and maintain D at around 80-90nmolar), after symptoms have abated, all other components in Table 1 should be maintained, if possible, at the higher dose levels for 2 weeks after onset of symptoms. Following this period, the prophylaxis ‘protocol’ of Table 1 should be resumed.
None of the above is ‘set in stone’. They are merely suggestions and a continuing dialogue concerning merits of substances (and amounts) included, and others not included, would be much appreciated.
