Understanding Coronavirus

[Sena]

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/coronavirus-projections-falling-trump-strategy-working-dr-nan-hayworth

"Projections for the eventual U.S. death toll from COVID-19 have fallen sharply, a testament to the success of a combination of aggressive measures, most notably stringent social distancing, that have been undertaken throughout the country.

This wonderful news is a reminder that Americans can make miracles happen — thanks to their own determination, and to the tireless leadership of a president with remarkable foresight who's assembled a team of the world's best experts to guide and facilitate our response to the pandemic.

The first major blow against the disease was struck by President Trump in January when he imposed restrictions on travel from China. This decisive step has been credited with sparing millions of Americans from exposure to the virus, buying crucial time we needed to delay the wave of severe illness now familiarly known as the "curve."

It's been estimated that without any mitigation efforts by either state or federal governments, up to 2.2 million Americans would have died from COVID-19. President Trump's travel restrictions on China were joined subsequently by bans on travel from Europe, the United Kingdom and Ireland, further limiting the introduction of the novel coronavirus from abroad.

Based on the best evidence and analysis to date, in mid-March, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) warned that COVID-19 could kill up to 1.7 million people in the U.S. A model developed around the same time by the Council on Foreign Relations and Resolve to Save Lives predicted that between 163,500 and 1.6 million Americans could die from the pandemic, on the assumption that about 50 percent of our population would contract the disease.

To maximize the nation's precautions against reaching such a peak on the coronavirus curve, President Trump and his team announced: "15 days to slow the spread."

By April 1, the aggressive multifaceted attack against COVID-19 at the federal and state levels had moved the worst-case predictions downward: the White House announced that the U.S. could expect between 100,000 and 240,000 coronavirus-related deaths by the end of the outbreak. Wisely, the president extended social distancing guidelines for another 30 days.

Further progress was evinced on April 7, when projected mortality fell significantly in a widely respected model from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), to between 49,431 and 136,401 American coronavirus deaths, with a median of just over 80,000. A day later the IHME's median was adjusted downward again, to about 60,000.

The first couple of weeks of April have also demonstrated how rapidly our health care providers have adapted both outpatient and inpatient care according to clinical experience with COVID-19. Recent reports show coronavirus hospitalizations across the U.S. to be far lower than expected, with a notable days-long fall in new hospitalizations in New York, where the pandemic has struck hardest. The state now projects a need for roughly 20,000 to 30,000 beds, compared with the 110,000 that Gov. Andrew Cuomo had previously said would be needed.

As President Trump has rightly noted, the death toll from COVID-19 is a figure that no one could ever be happy about. It is also true that every life spared as we "crush the curve" is a miracle worth celebrating — as is the extraordinary partnership among government, enterprise and our citizens to fight a crisis of unprecedented magnitude and speed, an effort the president has led ever since news of the virus first emerged on the world scene."

[Deb]

Thanks for this Sena, the op-ed sounds positive and I hope it's right.

It's really difficult to know what the right thing to do is as this virus is unique. There's no way to predict what will happen until we know more about it. Then the "right" thing to do will be hindsight, with loads of criticism for those who chose the "wrong" thing to do. Our countries' leaders are not omniscient gods, they can't know everything about everything and have to rely on specialized advisors and world organizations that are hopefully on the up-and-up.

The Chinese government has been no help: secretive and untruthful in reporting on the virus from day one. Doctors who reported the virus early on have been disappeared. Offers from other countries to help with research were refused. China has cracked down even more on virus information, scrutinizing and preventing research from being published, evicting foreign reporters from China, and lying about stats.

The article you put up the other day from the Boston Globe makes a lot of sense to me, herd immunity, in that trying to mitigate the damages by social distancing, wearing masks and gloves may just be delaying the inevitable. How do we know? Who wants to take that chance? Countries are trying different ways to deal with the virus, so their results will give us an idea of what's the better option. At least at this point we have several drugs that appear to have potential. A friend brought up a good point (I thought) today, in that in the not-too-distant-future we will have a vaccine. Everyone will be tested for antibodies by then. Those who do not have antibodies will have access to the vaccine.

I saw an article the other day suggesting the virus started earlier than reported. In California, as early as December, but doctors were attributing sickesses to an unusually bad flu season. But those that were sick are testing positive to antibodies for the virus. I have a good friend who was very sick around Christmas. She had visited an aunt in California, came down with the flu afterwards, and it turned into pneumonia. But she recovered at home. Now I'm wondering if she had corona. In California they are now testing for antibodies from blood donated back in Nov and Dec.

There are of course stories of people testing positive for the antibodies who never had symptoms. I think (and this is an uneducated guess) that the majority of people have strong enough immune systems that they can be exposed and their body overcomes the virus naturally. As Seth says, you cannot [completely] eradicate a virus.

[Sena]

The article you put up the other day from the Boston Globe makes a lot of sense to me, herd immunity, in that trying to mitigate the damages by social distancing, wearing masks and gloves may just be delaying the inevitable.

Deb, I agree that social distancing is necessary for a limited period of time to prevent the health services becoimng overwhelmed. But if the lockup is continued for too lond, that will be bad for peoples' mental, physical and economic health.

In the US, for example, twice as many men have been dying from the virus as women. Similarly, 69% of all coronavirus deaths across Western Europe have been male. Similar patterns have been seen in China and elsewhere.

Yes, that is the likely scenario. Hope the vaccine will not have bad side-effects like causing brain damage.

[Sena]

This article in the National Review explains the reasoning behind Trump's decision to stop funding W.H.O.:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/coronavirus-pandemic-world-health-organization-failed/

"The World Health Organization (WHO)  has been credited with the eradication of smallpox and the near eradication of other devastating illnesses, including leprosy and river blindness.
This record of success makes the current corruption of the organization all the more shameful.
On December 30, Chinese doctor Li Wenliang warned colleagues about the outbreak of an illness resembling severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which sparked a pandemic in 2003. Public-health officials rely on the acuity of doctors like Li, whose early warnings prevent the spread of deadly diseases. But Chinese authorities didn't reward Li; they summoned him to the Public Security Bureau in Wuhan on accusations that he had made false statements and disrupted the public order.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) followed up with numerous other arrests, and publicly warned that it would punish anyone spreading "rumors" on social media. By mid January, Chinese doctors knew that COVID-19 was spreading between humans, but on January 14, the WHO stated that there was "no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus." Two weeks later, WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus flew to Beijing for a meeting with Chinese president Xi Jinping, who so impressed Tedros that he lauded Chinese authorities for "setting a new standard for outbreak control," praising their "openness for sharing information."
Dr. Li might have disagreed with that sentiment. Alas, he was never able to voice his objections: He died after contracting COVID-19.

When the WHO emergency committee discussed whether to declare COVID-19 a public-health emergency on January 23, international observers had definitively discredited Chinese health data. Yet Tedros relied on those data in arguing against declaring an emergency — over the objections of other committee members. That decision delayed the mobilization of public-health resources around the world. John Mackenzie, a committee member, attributed the delay to "very poor reporting" and "very poor communication" from the CCP. After finally declaring an emergency on January 30, Tedros continued to lavish praise on China. As late as February 20, he argued that Chinese actions were "slowing the spread [of coronavirus] to the rest of the world."
When President Trump limited travel from China to the U.S. on January 31 — a decision that bought the U.S. precious time — Tedros said it would "have the effect of increasing fear and stigma, with little public health benefit."
The record is clear: The WHO has lent its imprimatur to Chinese disinformation and blessed China's slow response to its domestic outbreak, which likely caused a 20-fold increase in cases, according to a University of Southampton study.
The Chinese government must believe they have invested very wisely. They backed Tedros's bid to run the WHO in 2017, seeking to plant an ally in the U.N. leadership. Who was better suited for the role than a leftist political operative with a history of covering up health emergencies? As one of his first actions at the helm, Tedros assured the Chinese that he would adhere to the "One China" policy, barring Taiwanese participation. The Trump administration opposed Tedros's campaign to lead the organization but couldn't surmount China's sway.
China's influence over the WHO comes at a bargain price: Beijing only contributes half as much as the U.S. does to the WHO's budget."

[LarryH]

Regarding the first post in this thread: At least two of us have had our wrists slapped when we posted comments that were critical of Trump. I took that as meaning that there should be NO political discussion here, and I accepted that. But apparently, I was wrong: posts that praise Trump are allowed, just not posts that are critical of him? If we want to avoid political controversy, then any posts of a political nature should not be allowed. Deb, I would appreciate clarification on this.

[Deb]

Thanks Larry, I was waiting to see what happened because Sena posted a non-inflammatory article and made no comment himself. This one is not an easy call, because I felt it was border-line political based solely on the title of the topic, which I don't feel is accurate anyway. I responded to it as a topic on the handling of the coronavirus in America.

Members, if you feel this topic is politically argumentative and/or inflammatory, let me know and I will retire the topic or remove the first post and/or change the title of the topic. I feel there's enough stress right now and want to keep the forum as neutral as possible.

[jbseth]

Hi Deb, Hi All,

Actually I don't know that there is any way to handle this situation "fairly" and that's always a problem when dealing with people and their opinions, on any subject.

In my own personal life, the two major subjects that seem to create the biggest controversy between most people are politics and religion/philosophy. And here we are, a forum that talks about Seth. 

I definitely understand your desire to limit major "blow-ups" between people in this forum and I do agree very much with you on this.

I've been in a forum where the forum admin just about allowed everything under the sun in a "freedom of speech" guise. The amount of bullying, hatred and down-right nastiness that took place in that forum was very ugly. It was so bad, that I only went to it a few times and then from then on avoided it as it was just so ugly that it wasn't a fun place to be. Generally, I try to keep my psyche up, and positive, as much as possible, but unfortunately, I don't always do as good of a job at it as I'd like to. In regards to this particular forum, the ugliness was too bad, because the forum itself had some very interesting topics, UFO's, psychic's, etc.

On the other hand, I've also been in another similar forum where the admin absolutely wouldn't allow any comments or thoughts that didn't line up with her very specific and unique viewpoint on things. This limiting of speech amounted to this forum just being a bunch of yes-men that only said what she allowed them to say. After awhile, this forum got extremely boring, as no creativity of ideas were allowed or expressed.

Deb, by far, you are the fairest admin that I've ever come across on the internet and I really want to make sure that you hear this from me.

Now, when I first saw the topic for this subject, I was tempted to make a post about how President Trump was absolutely the last person, who's advice I would ever seek in regards to something so important as the coronavirus. But I opted not to post anything about this, as I thought that it may cause some controversy.

Unfortunately, I don't have an answer here for you Deb.

If you let just about everything be said, then you run the risk of ending up like the first forum, I mentioned above. On the other hand, if you limit almost every subject, you run the risk of ending up like the other forum I mentioned.

Something that I think other people may not see, is just how much time it actually takes to be the forum admin, to keep people from having big "blow ups", how hard that is on you and how much that really isn't fun at all.

Regardless of what you decide to do here, if you come to the conclusion that you'll never be able to make us all happy, all of the time, then I believe you are actually viewing this situation correctly.

I think that its way more important that we have a Seth forum than none at all, and I do understand that one of your options here, is to shut this forum down.

I'll support you, on whatever you decide to do here Deb.

- jbseth

[LarryH]

...Sena posted a non-inflammatory article...

The problem is, the source, Fox News, is well-known for its political bias, and the opinion piece ignores massive evidence that contradicts its claims of Trump's performance. As such, it cannot be considered non-inflammatory by those who are aware of that easily available evidence, which is largely based in fact, not opinion. If you do choose to delete that post, it would make sense for you to delete this one as well.

[Sena]

Deb, sorry if I have caused problems. If you wish to delete the thread, I shall understand. In my defence, I would say that the coronavirus is one of the really big "mass events" of the 20th and 21st centuries, up there with the two world wars. We know that Seth and Jane Roberts wrote a whole book on mass events, so it is clearly a Sethian topic. If the political aspects of the coronavirus are deemed to be taboo on this forum, I think that will put us at a disadvantage in trying to understand the application of Seth's ideas to what is happening to the human race at present.

[Sena]

Now, when I first saw the topic for this subject, I was tempted to make a post about how President Trump was absolutely the last person, who's advice I would ever seek in regards to something so important as the coronavirus.

jbseth, I see Trump as a significant character in this drama. While I want to make it absolutely clear that I am not comparing Trump to Churchill, I would like to draw your attention to the idea that Churchill was a reincarnation of the ancient Greek statesman Pericles. There is said to have been a facial resemblancs between Churchill and Pericles:

https://tinyurl.com/churchill-pericles

[Deb]

The problem is, the source, Fox News, is well-known for its political bias, and the opinion piece ignores massive evidence that contradicts its claims of Trump's performance. As such, it cannot be considered non-inflammatory by those who are aware of that easily available evidence, which is largely based in fact, not opinion.

So you're saying that it's only because it's from Fox News that it should be considered inflammatory? So do you think I should ban all quotes or links from Fox? If that's the case, would you say there are any news sources that are NOT politically biased on one side or another? If none, do I just tell people they can only quote from the Seth materials? I can understand your issue with an op-ed because it's an opinion and authors generally do not substantiate what they say. And everyone has an opinion.

For me, "inflammatory" comes from content, words intended to incite anger and hatred towards others. Like this: "A form of speech that is used with the intent to stir up emotions, elicit anger, or invoke a physical reaction. Name calling is one form, but the use is generally wider in scope, in the sense that it is used to attack, oppress, or denigrate groups of people, or focus hate or anger on a public figure."

If you let just about everything be said, then you run the risk of ending up like the first forum, I mentioned above. On the other hand, if you limit almost every subject, you run the risk of ending up like the other forum I mentioned.

Damned if I do, damned if I don't, right? Seems like the Devil would be the only winner here. Thanks for your thoughtful input jbseth. Yes there are times when I feel like maybe I'm just not cut out for this "job" and consider that the forum has outlived it's purpose. "If it's not fun, stop doing it." It's fun most of the time. And I think about the people here that get along and I don't want to deprive the majority of an outlet (myself included) because of the bumps in the road.

When I started this forum I had no idea that I'd be trying to put out fires. I thought, we all have Seth in common, we would be on the same wavelength, what could possibly go wrong?

Deb, sorry if I have caused problems. If you wish to delete the thread, I shall understand. In my defence, I would say that the coronavirus is one of the really big "mass events" of the 20th and 21st centuries, up there with the two world wars. We know that Seth and Jane Roberts wrote a whole book on mass events, so it is clearly a Sethian topic. If the political aspects of the coronavirus are deemed to be taboo on this forum, I think that will put us at a disadvantage in trying to understand the application of Seth's ideas to what is happening to the human race at present.

It's a tough call for me, because Sena does have a good point: the virus is a big deal and we are all (us and everyone else on the planet) trying to figure this thing out, what the right decisions are to make to keep damages as low as possible. Every country is winging it, with no prior experience with this particular virus. I think it is possible for us to share information on what's going on in various places in the world, who is trying or doing what, and what the results are, without making it political (meaning, without denigrating or name calling of any political figures, dangerous grounds these days). Such as with the first post in this topic, if someone sees something quoted that is obviously inaccurate and you know it, and it means enough to you, is it possible to just point that out, tactfully and without anger, with a link or quote? 

[LarryH]

So you're saying that it's only because it's from Fox News that it should be considered inflammatory? So do you think I should ban all quotes or links from Fox?

No, the fact that it is from Fox does not in itself make it inflammatory. The content (or lack of relevant opposing facts) makes it highly misleading, though.

Such as with the first post in this topic, if someone sees something quoted that is obviously inaccurate and you know it, and it means enough to you, is it possible to just point that out, tactfully and without anger, with a link or quote?

I considered posting a link, the content consisting exclusively of a video of Trump saying stuff and when he said it, that completely contradicts the conclusions of the opinion piece. But I decided not to do that, because his own words denigrate him, and I might be blamed for denigrating him. It's a slippery slope. Someone gets offended.

[yphen]

If the political aspects of the coronavirus are deemed to be taboo on this forum, I think that will put us at a disadvantage in trying to understand the application of Seth's ideas to what is happening to the human race at present.

I'm the noob there so have limited standing with the group but I'd like to give my 2 cents.

I'm with Sena on this one, and in my personal opinion, free speech trumps everything. Bickering and name calling as I've seen on other forums I suspect has something to do with the ego getting in the way and not taking a moment to stop and reflect and how to steer the conversation. If civility can't be maintained then by all means bring on the ban hammer... or maybe just give a time-out to those involved.

Deb, I appreciate this forum, I have found gobs of material in the short time I've been here, and have spent hours reading through old posts which has resulted in more reading I have to do...ugh.

[LarryH]

My brother and I have had a lively email discussion for a week now discussing the pandemic. He loves Trump (I hear). We have no problem discussing everything about the pandemic without touching on politics.

By the way, today I found out that my last manager (before I retired 3 years ago) was laid off last month and now has the virus at age 60. I presume he no longer has health insurance.

[Deb]

Look, in all honesty I didn't feel Sena put that first article up to make a political statement or to make Trump look good. From little comments of his in the past, I'm pretty sure he doesn't even like Trump. I think Sena is looking for information on the virus just like the rest of us and thought the opinion covered things that have been done here in the US over the past few months. But I'll leave that to him.

Since the op-ed was not written by Trump, I thought the title of this topic was a bit misleading so I would like to change it, I just don't know at this point to what. Understanding Coronavirus...? Unless someone else can come up with a title that is more fitting. We'll be seeing the title of this topic repeated over and over if this topic becomes popular, it would probably be better if it were broad and more neutral.

In the US, for example, twice as many men have been dying from the virus as women. Similarly, 69% of all coronavirus deaths across Western Europe have been male. Similar patterns have been seen in China and elsewhere.

Sena, that's the first I'd heard of that. I did some searching and came up with quite a few articles, this is just one that caught my eye. I don't know this news source, but it seems most of the articles start off the same way so they are mostly repeating whatever the original was, which is typical.

https://www.vox.com/2020/4/9/21215063/coronavirus-covid-19-deaths-men-women-sex-dying-why

"One key piece of context for these questions is that there are, in general, a variety of key biological differences in the way men and women fight off infections. Women, for example, tend to mount a stronger immune response. Researchers think this is in part because most women have two X chromosomes, and the X chromosome happens to contain most of the genes related to the immune system (and those with two X chromosomes instead of one also have a wider diversity of immune responses). This extra immune functioning, however, also seems to put women more at risk for autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease."

I considered posting a link, the content consisting exclusively of a video of Trump saying stuff and when he said it, that completely contradicts the conclusions of the opinion piece. But I decided not to do that, because his own words denigrate him, and I might be blamed for denigrating him. It's a slippery slope. Someone gets offended.

I appreciate your restraint, I was thinking more along the lines of simply providing accurate data if something presented is inaccurate. I think most people prefer and appreciate accuracy.

I'm with Sena on this one, and in my personal opinion, free speech trumps everything. Bickering and name calling as I've seen on other forums I suspect has something to do with the ego getting in the way and not taking a moment to stop and reflect and how to steer the conversation. If civility can't be maintained then by all means bring on the ban hammer... or maybe just give a time-out to those involved.

Thanks, for the input yphen. I think this was just a misunderstanding and I feel we can move beyond that and continue our quest for figuring out what the hell is going on with this pandemic.

My brother and I have had a lively email discussion for a week now discussing the pandemic. He loves Trump (I hear). We have no problem discussing everything about the pandemic without touching on politics.

So it is possible. Glad to know that.

By the way, today I found out that my last manager (before I retired 3 years ago) was laid off last month and now has the virus at age 60. I presume he no longer has health insurance.

Oh no! Hopefully he retained his insurance with COBRA. It seems people have very different experiences with virus symptoms, I hope he will be one of those who has lesser symptoms. My friend that we (she and I) think she had the virus over Christmas was absolutely miserable for a couple of weeks, but only contacted her doctor at the end when she was having some tightness in her chest. She recovered at home and is fine now. She's 64, is a teacher so gets flu shots every year (if you saw narvik2's post today, it seems flu shots increase corona risk).

[LarryH]

...it seems flu shots increase corona risk...

Yes, that's interesting and contradicts expert advice that I heard last night (but the experts are still learning, too). It brings up the question of pneumonia vaccines, because I understand that most of the C-19 deaths are because pneumonia sets in.

[Sena]

"One key piece of context for these questions is that there are, in general, a variety of key biological differences in the way men and women fight off infections. Women, for example, tend to mount a stronger immune response. Researchers think this is in part because most women have two X chromosomes, and the X chromosome happens to contain most of the genes related to the immune system (and those with two X chromosomes instead of one also have a wider diversity of immune responses). This extra immune functioning, however, also seems to put women more at risk for autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease."

Deb, this is quite interesting. My wife and her sister suffer from rheumatoid arthritis. We know of course that Jane Roberts had a severe form of the disease. I remember as a child going to visit a great-aunt of mine who was bed-ridden with arthritis (in those days treatment was not very effective). So women have "stronger" immune systems which help them to fight off the virus.

[LarryH]

This links to an opinion piece written by two epidemiologists. In part:

"On March 16, the White House issued initial social distancing guidelines, including closing schools and avoiding groups of more than 10. But an estimated 90 percent of the cumulative deaths in the United States from Covid-19, at least from the first wave of the epidemic, might have been prevented by putting social distancing policies into effect two weeks earlier, on March 2, when there were only 11 deaths in the entire country. The effect would have been substantial had the policies been imposed even one week earlier, on March 9, resulting in approximately a 60 percent reduction in deaths."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/opinion/covid-social-distancing.html

I do not recall if various states had implemented the guidelines before the White House issued them, but they likely had access to the same information, including what other countries had done to minimize deaths. So governors may share the blame.

[LarryH]

https://sethcenter.com/ is hosting a Free Webinar series entitled Empower Yourself During COVID-19 with Seth and the Law of Attraction. The first of four webinars has already occurred, but if you sign up, you can access the recorded webinar. I have not listened yet.

[Sena]

But an estimated 90 percent of the cumulative deaths in the United States from Covid-19, at least from the first wave of the epidemic, might have been prevented by putting social distancing policies into effect two weeks earlier, on March 2, when there were only 11 deaths in the entire country.

Larry, it is true that some deaths could have been prevented, but at the cost of having less immune people, so more deaths in the second wave when the restrictions are eventually lifted.

[Deb]

I was listening to YouTube this morning while sewing some masks (!) and accidentally came across this one "Questioning Conventional Wisdom in the COVID-19 Crisis" with Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. It has a lot of information in it and I listened to it twice. I'd never heard of him before, but see he's been in the news a few times over the past few months. I've also never heard of the interviewer before, YouTube just auto played this for me. Dr. B is a professor of medicine at Stanford University and is also well versed in Economics (you can see more about his qualifications if you click through to watch this on YouTube). Very well spoken, very clear and easy to listen to (very likable), he understands the medical as well as economic effects of the virus. He brought up a lot of great points. The interview mentions his March 24 article in the Wall Street Journal, but WSJ is a paid-subscriber site so I could only read the first few sentences. Here's the link if anyone here has a membership: https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-the-coronavirus-as-deadly-as-they-say-11585088464 If someone does, if they could copy & paste it on the forum I'd really appreciate it.

Dr. B also talks about why it's been so difficult to accurately calculate the number of infections and mortality rates and therefore make decisions based on the numbers. Towards the end talks about the antibody tests that were just about to start in California when this interview took place at the end of March.

Then, son of a gun, this preliminary report was in the news this afternoon, from various news sources: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.14.20062463v1  :

"These prevalence estimates represent a range between 48,000 and 81,000 people infected in Santa Clara County by early April, 50-85-fold more than the number of confirmed cases. Conclusions: The population prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in Santa Clara County implies that the infection is much more widespread than indicated by the number of confirmed cases. Population prevalence estimates can now be used to calibrate epidemic and mortality projections."

If that many people have the antibodies (50-85x that of confirmed cases), that would surely bring down the death rate percentage figure as well as the number of people who had symptoms and show a different perspective.

I have to say, when I compare the scientific progress the world has made regarding this virus vs. how long it's taken to figure out AIDS, it makes me feel we've made progress in some areas at least.

[Deb]

Larry, it is true that some deaths could have been prevented, but at the cost of having less immune people, so more deaths in the second wave when the restrictions are eventually lifted.

As the saying goes, hindsight is 20/20. Why at 11 deaths? Why not one? How many states would be in line with with restrictions at those points? NYC seems to have held out much longer.

Very good point Sena. Thank you.

[T.M.]

Hi All,

I've been researching cv19. I'm coming to the conclusion this is a massive propaganda campaign. I won't speculate to what end.
There is a growing number of Dr's coming out with the same conclusion. Unfortunately they don't get the traction the main stream media does.
The CDC is telling Dr's to list all deaths as cv19. There are Dr's coming out with this. They are also doing this worldwide.
They are hyper inflating the numbers.
What is actually out there, and what it actually is, is 2 completely different things.

All flus and colds are of the Covid family. That's partially how they can say so many will be infected, and get test results to reflect that. Everyone has had a flu and or cold.

One of the first Dr's to come out is Dr Andrew Kaufman. He has some impressive credentials to back up that he knows what he's talking about. I'm very impressed with him. I've listened to a good amount of his interviews.
What he says backs up what Seth has been saying about viruses very nicely, in my opinion.

I'm listing an interview for those interested below . It's a good overview of how the medical system works, and the basis for understanding viruses- called germ theory. I'm very hopeful that with the knowledge he brings it will start a new era in medicine, on how we look at and deal with diseases in general.

Relevant part starts at 21:50 in the podcast.

[Sena]

One of the first Dr's to come out is Dr Andrew Kaufman. He has some impressive credentials to back up that he knows what he's talking about. I'm very impressed with him. I've listened to a good amount of his interviews.
What he says backs up what Seth has been saying about viruses very nicely, in my opinion.

T.M., thanks for your interesting post. Andrew Kaufman's views are summarized on this webpage:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread1262342/pg1

"1. There is no gold standard test, therefore no scientifically reliable evidence for the existence of a novel virus.

2. The current official test looks for genetic (RNA) material also found in exosomes - toxin-combatting mechanisms that are produced naturally in all of our bodies in response to a lot of different stimuli, including illness, injury, and stress - including - wait for it... stress induced by fear.

3. The test likely has approximately an 80% false positive rate.

Yes, this means that both the numerator and denominator are very, very wrong.

4. The death stats (for this yet to be officially proven) virus are manipulated and artificially biased upwards to the extent of being declared a pandemic and to the extent that anyone expiring from any lung-related condition is being counted as having died from the effect of the "novel virus".

5. A vaccine for the respiratory illness allegedly caused by the virus - that has no scientific basis for its existence - is being proposed."

I don't have enough knowledge to decide on the truth or otherwise of points 1 to 3, but if it is the case that a false positive test for the virus could be produced by FEAR, that is very interesting. That would be very Sethian. So it is even possible that some of the deaths supposed to be due to the virus are actually caused by fear.

As regards point 4 (4. The death stats for this virus are manipulated and artificially biased upwards to the extent of being declared a pandemic and to the extent that anyone expiring from any lung-related condition is being counted as having died from the effect of the "novel virus".), I am in complete agreement. The current situation in the UK is that daily statistics are given for "the number of people dying who have tested positive for coronavirus". There is absolutely no proof that the death was caused by coronavirus. It is acknowledged that 91% of those dying had serious "underlying conditions", and death could be due to those conditions. Once the Covid19 test comes back positive that induces FEAR in the hospital staff, and that fear is communicated to the patient.

Is the coronavirus a case of mass hysteria?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_hysteria_cases

https://www.worth.com/how-mass-hysteria-is-making-coronavirus-worse-than-it-actually-is/

[LarryH]

Larry, it is true that some deaths could have been prevented, but at the cost of having less immune people, so more deaths in the second wave when the restrictions are eventually lifted.

By acting earlier, we would have avoided hospitals and healthcare professionals being overwhelmed with the huge spike in illnesses and deaths. We would have had more time to adequately supply the workers with basic protections and hospital equipment and to come up with effective treatments. And we might have kept the rate of infection so low that the disruption to the economy could have been very short. Instead, it was allowed to get out of control before anything was done. It is true that there will likely be a second wave, but if it is dealt with in the same proactive manner as was suggested, it would be less damaging because we would be better prepared.

[T.M.]

Hi All,

Hi Sena,

I listen mostly to his interviews. I can't shortly re paraphrase all I've learned from them. I wish I could.
This is another interview, where he tells you how they work in the lab, goes to your point 2.

Towards the end it will be discussed, some researchers are coming to the conclusion that:
Viruses overlay in a parasitic electro magnetic way on an otherwise healthy cell. That's what causes the cell to become ill.
What is electro magnetic??   My answer - Thoughts!  Just like Seth said!! @ 34:27 in the clip.

This interview also goes over his credentials. I'm glad I listened just for the understanding it gave me about how they work in the lab. He also says in this interview that regular colds and flus are simply the body's way of burning out and eliminating toxins built up throughout the year. I'm with him on that too!




Here's another Dr coming out about the over hype being reported in main stream vs. what's actually going on.


Hospitals are now just accepting cv19 patients only. They are actually laying off nurses due to inactivity. Not to mention losing tons of money. The only way they are getting money is playing along with what the .gov tells them to do. Which is report everything as cv19. People who are dying at home cause they can't go to the hospital, are being listed as cv19 deaths.

[T.M.]

Hi All,

This is another physician specifically addressing the Cdc telling other physicians how to list cv19.

[LarryH]

This is another physician specifically addressing the Cdc telling other physicians to list all deaths as cv19

I listened to this, and she never said that. What she said is that if someone is tested with CV19 or has CV19 symptoms and then dies  from, for instance, a heart attack, it may be presumed that CV19 was a contributing factor. It's up to the doctor to declare whether that person died from the heart attack or CV19. But it is not "all deaths". I doubt that traffic fatalities, shootings and opioid overdoses are being declared as CV19 fatalities. One could say that if the CV19 deaths are overblown, then so are flu deaths. If someone with the flu gets pneumonia and dies, did they die from the flu or from pneumonia? It's unlikely they would have gotten pneumonia without having gotten the flu, and the same could be said for many of these CV19-related deaths.

[T.M.]

Hi All,


Hi Larry.

I changed the title to reflect how the Cdc is telling Dr's how to list cv19. I did originally title it all deaths.
However, the vid above it,  Corona Virus cv19, does include a Dr exposing a death, unrelated to cv19 as being listed as cv19.
His example is one of many I've come across.

I just don't want to spam this sight with the numerous vids I've come across that report on this.
I did mix the title of the vid with other vids I've seen.
As an interesting aside though, more people are dying of the flu, yearly and traditionally, than the amount of actually confirmed cv19.

[Sena]

Hospitals are now just accepting cv19 patients only. They are actually laying off nurses due to inactivity. Not to mention losing tons of money. The only way they are getting money is playing along with what the .gov tells them to do. Which is report everything as cv19. People who are dying at home cause they can't go to the hospital, are being listed as cv19 deaths.

T.M., this is very interesting. The following is from David Icke's Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/davidicke/photos/a.164527493841/10157513163148842/?type=3&theater

People are just avoiding going to hospital. Does that mean people with heart attacks are dying at home? We don't know. According to Sethian principles, it could be that somebody who has chosen to die at this time chooses to die of coronavirus rather than of a heart attack.

[Sena]

Hi All,

This is another physician specifically addressing the Cdc telling other physicians how to list cv19.

T.M., thanks for sharing this video clip. At one point Dr. Bukacek says, "If the patient has arteriosclerotic heart disease and is also positive for Covid 19, what is the cause of death? Who knows? Only God in heaven knows."
"A death can be certified as due to Covid 19 even if the test for Covid 19 has not been done."

[T.M.]

Hi Sena,

This is what I was trying to get at. Hospitals are only taking in cv19. If you die in a hospital or at home, they finagle and list it as cv19. The Dr's are being heavily pressured to list as cv19,  the cdc then uses "presumptive" as their legal jargon.

I have no doubt many are believing this and exiting at this time, cause they're scared beyond measure.

We've never as a world faced something like this. The past pandemics didn't include instantaneous world wide communications.
They also didn't include a world wide shutdown, with enormous economic implications, talked about non stop from all angles.
Medical technology was in its infancy.  I imagine people unfamiliar Seth's concepts of beliefs and working with them are having a really rough go of it now.

[Sena]

The past pandemics didn't include instantaneous world wide communications.
They also didn't include a world wide shutdown, with enormous economic implications, talked about non stop from all angles.
Medical technology was in its infancy.  I imagine people unfamiliar Seth's concepts of beliefs and working with them are having a really rough go of it now.

T.M., U.K. media are reporting that 91% of people support the government's decision to extend the lockdown for a further 3 weeks. This probably means that 91% are suffering from mass hysteria, even scientisits.

This article in Time magazine is rather worrying:

https://time.com/5820556/ventilators-covid-19/

It is saying that if you are put on a ventilator in hospital, you have an 80% risk of dying. The decision to be put on a ventilator is not always for the benefit of the patient. It may be because hospital staff feel that a patient on a ventilator is less likely to infect them (the staff). Maybe because a patient on a ventilator stops coughing.

Another one from David Icke:

https://www.facebook.com/davidicke/photos/a.164527493841/10157512561833842/?type=3&theater

[T.M.]

Hi Sena,

I came across a vid from the Dr in the time article about a week ago.

[LarryH]

As an interesting aside though, more people are dying of the flu, yearly and traditionally, than the amount of actually confirmed cv19.

From 2010-11 thru 2016-17, the U.S. death rate from flu has averaged 36,000 per year. The U.S. death rate from CV19 is today nearly 38,000 and rising rapidly. A huge difference between the two is that CV19 is overwhelming many hospitals, which simply does not happen with the flu unless there is a flu pandemic such as the Spanish flu.

Hospitals are only taking in cv19.

I doubt that. If someone has a heart attack at home and an ambulance is called, I'm sure they are not blocked at the hospital door. Also, as of yesterday, hospitals in some areas are allowing elective surgeries again.

[Sena]

Hi Sena,

I came across a vid from the Dr in the time article about a week ago.

T.M., thanks for the video clip.
"In the next few weeks, 100,000 American citizens may be put on ventilators."
"With regard to Covid 19, we are operating under a medical paradigm that is untrue."
"I fear that this misguided treatment will mean a great deal of harm to a large number of people."

If I have a fever and cough, I would completely avoid going into hospital.

[LarryH]

It is saying that if you are put on a ventilator in hospital, you have an 80% risk of dying.

That makes it sound like ventilators are killing 80% of the patients. The fact is, most patients are put on ventilators because they can no longer breathe on their own, and they would die without the vents. They are the sickest patients. The doctor in the video may have a point about people who don't yet need to be ventilated, but he continues on to say that many of the patients do need it.

[T.M.]

Hi All,

Hi Larry,

Using who's numbers? From my research, it's clear to me .gov numbers are highly misleading. Which was a very shocking revelation to me. I didn't, almost couldn't believe things could be that far off. Till I started looking into this a little deeper.
Honestly I'm still in a state of shock over what I've learned.

As for hospitals, if someone comes in regardless of the original cause, it turns into cv19.
I have an elective operation/surgery I'm getting set for. The hospital is using Tele conferencing for all appointments but the procedure itself.

I wouldn't be surprised if some hospitals are trying to reopen. They are losing the bulk of their income in all of this.

Hi Sena,

It's amazing the Dr's that are coming forward and saying Hey, something really isn't right here.

[Deb]

In case anyone watched the interview of Dr Jay Bhattacharya that I put up yesterday, looks like he was just interviewed again as the report came out on the antibody testing they were doing in Santa Clara County, which he talked about in the previous video.

I really like this guy, he comes across as being very dedicated and knowledgeable. I felt there were a couple of times the interviewer tried to get him to speculate on things beyond his scope of reporting and he did not fall for it. He's focused.

Just a couple of comments about the conversation here today: as far as I know, hospitals are not turning away patients that are having serious medical issues. They are keeping the CV patients separate of course, and I've been hearing radio announcements telling people if you suspect you may have the virus, please don't just show up at the hospital or walk-in care. Call a doctor or medical institution and ask them how to proceed. Of course elective surgeries were put in hold. That was done to preserve medical resources such as masks, gowns, etc., plus free up medical staff so they can focus on people whose lives are in danger. And who wants to take the change of getting exposed if it can be avoided?

What I'd read about the doctors reporting coronavirus deaths is that the CDC sent out a letter and PDF to doctors regarding cause of death reporting (see page 2) on how to determine a CV death, which is what I think started the uproar, "probable" or "presumed." I don't suppose it's easy to figure out if a person died from an underlying condition complicated by the flu, respiratory virus, or CV, unless they've been tested and diagnosed as positive for something. As testing becomes more accurate and people showing symptoms are tested, the determination should become easier.

"When determining whether COVID–19 played a role in the
cause of death, follow the CDC clinical criteria for evaluating a
person under investigation for COVID–19 and, where possible,
conduct appropriate laboratory testing using guidance provided
by CDC or local health authorities. "

"In cases where a definite diagnosis of COVID–19 cannot
be made, but it is suspected or likely (e.g., the circumstances
are compelling within a reasonable degree of certainty), it
is acceptable to report COVID–19 on a death certificate as
"probable" or "presumed." In these instances, certifiers should
use their best clinical judgement in determining if a COVID–19
infection was likely. However, please note that testing for
COVID–19 should be conducted whenever possible."

The video from the NYC doctor was distressing. It's dated March 31, I wonder if they've learned more about what's happening in the lungs? A week or two ago I'd heard that when the virus invades the lung tissue, it sets off a massive immune response, which ends up causing more damage to the lungs, as the lung tissue itself becomes injured. Both would cause a lot of inflammation, I would think. All of that would effect oxygenation (my guess, I have no medical training obviously). Some doctors are suggesting holding off using ventilators until sat scores are lower than what they've considered unacceptable in the past. But since then I haven't heard more about it. I did find an article from another news source I'd not heard of before: https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-04-15/are-ventilators-helping-or-harming-covid-19-patients It does make sense to me, though, that if someone can't breathe on their own, they are close to dying and a ventilator would prolong life for a while at least.

[LarryH]

Using who's numbers?

Not sure what you are referring to here.

[T.M.]

Hi All,

Hi Deb,

Thanks for the vid of Dr Jay, I listened to the other one you posted and found him interesting too.

Hi Larry,

"From 2010-11 thru 2016-17, the U.S. death rate from flu has averaged 36,000 per year. The U.S. death rate from CV19 is today nearly 38,000 and rising rapidly. "

I'm curious where the 38,000 death rate figure is coming from.

[LarryH]

I'm curious where the 38,000 death rate figure is coming from.

Hi T.M., I can't find the source again, but it had the official death rates for each of those timeframes. I added the total and divided by 7. Another source that I just found simply states that: "Overall, the CDC estimates that 12,000 and 61,000 deaths annually since 2010 can be blamed on the flu." So 38,000 per year average seems to be in line with that. We hear "60,000 deaths" all the time, but it is usually preceded by "as high as", which we tend to drop in favor of a nice round impressive number.

[T.M.]

Hi All,

Hi Larry,

Thank you!

[Deb]

I took a break from listening to Psychic Politics today on my walk, and instead listened to two podcasts from the Weston Price Organization. Warning: The foundation questions vaccinations, processed foods, the relationship between the decline in the human diet and an uptick of allergies and chronic illness over the past 100 years or so, nased on research done by Dr. Weston Price and his resulting book. While the foundation tries to educate the public about things we never hear about regarding food processing, vaccine and pharma studies, side effects, they also do not tell people to not vaccinate. Their goal is to educate people by by sharing data that we'd never see on our own, so people can make their own decisions.

The podcasts are about 45 minutes each, can be listened with the Podcast App, or on the page links below, or can be downloaded from the pages as mp3s. The first one here really makes me question what the heck has really been going on, and is definitely the one to listen to if you only want to listen to one. Leslie seems very level headed and credible.

238: Behind the Coronavirus with Leslie Manookian April 20, 2020
https://www.westonaprice.org/podcast/238-behind-the-coronavirus/

Projection errors, models, lockdowns, misinformation, Fauci/Gates/others being against herd immunity, the Gates money-bags connection to vaccinations, the WHO, the Wuhan Lab. Developing (2) methods to track who is vaccinated and who is not. A complete list of what's covered is on the linked page. Links to articles referenced also are on the page.

242: Are Germs The Enemy? with Dr. Andy Kaufman May 18, 2020
https://www.westonaprice.org/podcast/242-are-germs-the-enemy/

Dr. Kaufman is a molecular biologist and psychiatrist. He's been mentioned here a few times, videos, etc. He's controversial but also sounds very credible. He explains the difference between Germ Theory and Terrain Theory, which really fits in with the Seth materials. Topics covered: lack of studies on germ theory and Koch's Postulates, how bacteria is naturally occurring in our bodies and not a foreign invader. More listed on the page. I have to admit he lost me in the end when he was talking about Masaru Emoto's work, which is a little too far out there for me, but overall he sounds very credible and knowledgeable to me.

[T.M.]

Hi All,

Hi Deb,

Thank you for the podcasts. I like Kaufman, and his approach to this.
Imo, this whole thing along with the players is dirty from top to bottom.
I'm not interested in their vaccines or tests!

[Sena]

Dr. Kaufman is a molecular biologist and psychiatrist.

Deb, thanks for the link. I also found this:

https://londonreal.tv/unmasking-the-lies-around-covid-19-facts-vs-fiction-of-the-coronavirus-pandemic/

"Speaking counter to the mainstream media, Dr. Kaufman has stated that a virus is not causing a new disease, there is no evidence of increased mortality and modern medicine is the leading cause of death."

The excessive use of invasive ventlators together with opiate tranquillizers appears to be causing death.

[Deb]

Thanks Sena for the link to londonreal.tv. Boy they sure make it difficult to listen to any part of the interview! The link to the clips has expired and I'll have to subscribe to watch the video. Ah well, I guess I'll be signing up then.

Update: I just found it as a podcast. 2 hours long!

Lynda just put this quote up on Facebook yesterday, I thought the timing was great:

"The viruses and infections were of course present. They always are. They are themselves fragments, struggling small fragments without intention of harm.

"You have general immunity, believe it or not, to all such viruses and infections. Ideally, you can inhabit a plane with them without fear. It is only when you give tacit agreement that harm is inflicted upon you by these fragments."

The Early Sessions, Book 1, Session 17

[Marianna]

Ideally, you can inhabit a plane with them without fear. It is only when you give tacit agreement that harm is inflicted upon you by these fragments."

Deb,
Thanks for a great quote! How true.
Yet, of how much fear robs you. Here is what I came across in The Economist of April 11, 2020 - in the article about house sharers and Covid "Please Shower on Entry"

"There are also rules for domestic chores <...> which require 5 people to do shopping: two to buy goods (they wear two layers of clothing, taking off the outer layer after leaving the store); two to disinfect purchases outside the house; one to clean the fruit and vegetables. It takes hours."

And I have all the compassion for those who are afraid and don't know about how things really are.

But at least I can improve the general situation by being a good Seth student and a happy me

[Deb]

The Economist of April 11, 2020 - in the article about house sharers and Covid "Please Shower on Entry"

Ugh! That's incredible! Thanks Marianna. It's stuff like that that really makes me think there's more to this than meets the eye. I've been noticing lately that people in stores seem afraid of each other. It wasn't like that a few weeks ago. I think all the constant repetition in the news, signs everywhere "Safer at Home" and seeing masks on people is wearing people down.

So I did listen to the entire Dr. Kaufman podcast this morning and it was a great one. More ideas from him as to what's really going on, and science to back up what he says. From what he's been saying, all the health organizations, experts, scientists have this all wrong. I've been skeptical about this, but he seems so knowledgeable and straight forward. So either the experts are ignorant, or there's something going on.

Then today I found out about the latest iPhone update and what's included. This gave me a weird feeling. I'll turn off auto-update, but if I ever want to update my phone in the future (there are always improvements and bug fixes), then I'll be forced to accept the new app to support "COVID-19 contact tracing apps from pubic health authorities." Unfortunately you can't choose what part of the iOS that gets updated, it comes as a package. To me, there's something wrong with that. Forced compliance. It has an on/off switch. For now.

On a brighter note, I made some new friends while I was fishing this morning. Three months ago this would never have happened. The elk were within 15 feet of me, they silently snuck up. I'm also adding a photo from a couple of weeks ago from when I was up in Georgetown. Big horn sheep grazing on people's lawns. Again, something I've never seen before.

[Marianna]

I've been noticing lately that people in stores seem afraid of each other. It wasn't like that a few weeks ago. I think all the constant repetition in the news, signs everywhere "Safer at Home" and seeing masks on people is wearing people down.

Yes, Deb, there is some of this - there are still kind faces here and there, and even in a grocery store (nearly the only place where I meet people now, except from "seven o'clock howl" where I wave to people on other balconies).

Yet, when someone actually 'barks' at me for coming close to get a broccoli, I am unpleasantly surprised though I understand that barking is not actually at me, but general fear and 'venting'.

The whole situation starts wearing us down. Though we have access to nature and parks. Btw, Memorial Day getting away was cancelled. It was a place in Cape Cod from Stay Away site.

What you said about the phone, the situation can go the way you say (optional for now, forced in future), but only if we expect it to. What Federation of Life mentioned - about "forces of light" prevailing - this gives me assurance and hope. Even if we are further inconvenienced in some way - it Will be temporary. Again - a learning challenge for us all.