“We have to be open to this evidence and understand its implications regarding the modes of transmission .”

The lockdown ideology is destroying our societal health, selling the lie of saving lives. There is no reason for believing that a proportional and balanced response would risk lives. The key to responsible policy-making is not bureaucracy but accountability and independence from interest groups.

The explanation could only be that these agents don’t come or go anywhere… they are always here

Dr Tom Jefferson Oxford University

It is as though mankind had divided itself between those who believe in human omnipotence (who think that everything is possible if one knows how to organize masses for it) and those for whom powerlessness has become the major experience of their lives.” –Hannah Arendt

In science the solution to bad information is more information not less information -Dr Michael Greger

Table of Contents

    Nationwide (USA), studies have shown a 15% decrease in the risk of heart disease deaths with every PM2.5 decrease of 10 micrograms per cubic meter of air (µg/m3). Particle pollution has also been associated with lung cancer and adverse birth outcomes, such as low birth weight and preterm birth (CDC, 2013; Shah et al., 2011; UDOH, 2014a). – Coronavirus is airborne Mounting evidence suggests coronavirus is airborne — but health advice has not caught up.

    Since the 1930s, public-health researchers and officials have generally discounted the
    importance of aerosols — droplets less than 5 micrometres in diameter — in respiratory diseases such as influenza. Instead, the dominant view is that respiratory viruses are transmitted by the larger droplets, or through contact with droplets that fall on surfaces or are transferred by people’s hands.

    The researchers are frustrated that key agencies, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), haven’t been heeding their advice in their public messages.

    In response to the commentary, the WHO softened its position. At a 7 July press conference, Benedetta Allegranzi, technical leader of the WHO task force on infection control said: “We have to be open to this evidence and understand its implications regarding the modes of transmission, and also regarding the precautions that need to be taken.”

    Increased aerosol transmission for B.1.1.7 (alpha variant) over lineage A variant of SARS-CoV-2

    Airborne transmission, a term combining both large droplet and aerosol transmission, is thought to be the main transmission route of SARS-CoV-2.

    Here we investigated the relative efficiency of aerosol transmission of two variants of SARS-CoV-2, B.1.1.7 (alpha) and lineage A, in the Syrian hamster. A novel transmission caging setup was designed and validated, which allowed the assessment of transmission efficiency at various distances.

    At 2 meters distance, only particles <5 µm traversed between cages. In this setup, aerosol transmission was confirmed in 8 out of 8 (N = 4 for each variant) sentinels after 24 hours of exposure as demonstrated by respiratory shedding and seroconversion.

    Successful transmission occurred even when exposure time was limited to one hour, highlighting the efficiency of this transmission route. Interestingly, the B.1.1.7 variant outcompeted the lineage A variant in an airborne transmission chain after mixed infection of donors.

    Viruses — lots of them — are falling from the sky

    An astonishing number of viruses are circulating around the Earth’s atmosphere — and falling from it.

    The study marks the first time scientists have quantified the viruses being swept up from the Earth’s surface into the free troposphere, that layer of atmosphere beyond Earth’s weather systems but below the stratosphere where jet airplanes fly. The viruses can be carried thousands of kilometres there before being deposited back onto the Earth’s surface.

    “Every day, more than 800 million viruses are deposited per square metre above the planetary boundary layer — that’s 25 viruses for each person in Canada,” said University of British Columbia virologist Curtis Suttle, one of the senior authors of a paper in the International Society for Microbial Ecology Journal that outlines the findings.

    Origin of new emergent Coronavirus and Candida fungal diseases—Terrestrial or cosmic?

    2020 Jul 14. doi: 10.1016/bs.adgen.2020.04.002

    The origins and global spread of two recent, yet quite different, pandemic diseases is discussed and reviewed in depth: Candida auris, a eukaryotic fungal disease, and COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2), a positive strand RNA viral respiratory disease. Both these diseases display highly distinctive patterns of sudden emergence and global spread, which are not easy to understand by conventional epidemiological analysis based on simple infection-driven human- to-human spread of an infectious disease (assumed to jump suddenly and thus genetically, from an animal reservoir). Both these enigmatic diseases make sense however under a Panspermia in-fall model and the evidence consistent with such a model is critically reviewed.

    Overview of the COVID-19 epidemic
    The actual COVID-19 viral disease itself causes respiratory “common cold-like” illness in most people diagnosed with symptoms (but many potential carriers of the disease are asymptomatic). The infection can progress to severe pneumonia in elderly and already medically-compromised patients with other conditions (diabetes, coronary disease, etc.). About 2% of all COVD-19 cases have died due to the pneumonia (Fig. 4). Vaccine and antivirals will not help the latter group, but standard well trusted medical care will—to help patients through the respiratory crisis of the life-threatening pneumonia and dangerous inflammatory bronchitis symptoms. Such care will allow recovery of most patients. The fact that “Recoveries” far exceed “Deaths” (Fig. 4) indicates that timely medical care for this otherwise “common cold” respiratory illness must be the medical priority in the epicenter of the infection in Wuhan and nearby regions in China. We believe this medical care is being implemented throughout China.

    The initial traditional explanation of the new epidemic of COVID-19 is that it jumped from bats (possibly via snakes) to humans and then spread by human-to-human infection contact mutating at a high rate. This explanation is at odds with the data at present. Indeed Jon Cohen the respected Science magazine journalist reports that the head of the Huang et al. (2020) study when interviewed said:

    Bin Cao of Capital Medical University, the corresponding author of The Lancet article and a pulmonary specialist, wrote in an email to ScienceInsider that he and his co-authors “appreciate the criticism” from Lucey (Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease specialist at Georgetown University confirmed the epidemic could not possibly be caused by visits to the Wuham seafood and meat market).

    “Now It seems clear that [the] seafood market is not the only origin of the virus,” he wrote. “But to be honest, we still do not know where the virus came from now.” (our italics)

    Indeed Dr. Bin Cao speaks for all mainstream medical and epidemiological professionals around the world—no formal traditional explanation can be provided for the origins of COVID-19. Thus Andrew Rambaut, Professor of Molecular Evolution at the University of Edinburgh tweeted: “Don’t think any epidemiologist is still thinking that a non-human animal reservoir has had anything to do with the nCoV-2019 epidemic since December.

    Certainly the genome data doesn’t support that.” (Reported in Heidi Han and Kieran Gair, Associated Press, The Australian newspaper January 27, 2020.)

    Thus, when we combine all the available facts we cannot rule out a viral in-fall event targeting the Wuhan province and the wider region around it as an explanation as a first cause of the epidemic. This would fit with the admittedly heterodox view of viral pandemics first proposed by Hoyle and Wickramasinghe as far back as 1978 (Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, 1979Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, 1990Wickramasinghe et al., 2019Wickramasinghe, Wainwright, & Narlikar, 2003).

    Exposure to air pollution and COVID-19 mortality

    Many of the pre-existing conditions that increase the risk of death in those with COVID-19 are the same diseases that are affected by long-term exposure to air pollution. We investigated whether long-term average exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is associated with an increased risk of COVID-19 death in the United States.

    Data sources COVID-19 death counts were collected for more than 3,000 counties in the United States (representing 98% of the population) up to April 22, 2020 from Johns Hopkins University, Center for Systems Science and Engineering Coronavirus Resource Center.

    We found that an increase of only 1 μg/m3 in PM2.5 is associated with an 8% increase in the COVID-19 death rate (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2%, 15%).

    The results were statistically significant and robust to secondary and sensitivity analyses. Conclusions:
    A small increase in long-term exposure to PM2.5 leads to a large increase in the COVID-19 death rate.

    Despite the inherent limitations of the ecological study design, our results underscore the importance of continuing to enforce existing air pollution regulations to protect human health both during and after the COVID-19 crisis.

    COVID19 RNA found on PM in Bergamo

    SARS-Cov-2-RNA found on particulate matter of Bergamo in Northern Italy

    COVID-19 burden seems more severe in areas with high concentrations of PM.
    Particulate matter is already known to have negative effects on human health.
    This is the first evidence that SARS-CoV-2RNA can be found on particulate matter.

    The first test showed positive results for gene E in 15 out of 16 samples, simultaneously displaying positivity also for RdRP gene in 4 samples. The second blind test got 5 additional positive results for at least one of the three marker genes. Overall, we tested 34 RNA extractions for the E, N and RdRP genes, reporting 20 positive results for at least one of the three marker genes, with positivity separately confirmed for all the three markers. Control tests to exclude false positivities were successfully accomplished.

    Dr Tom Jefferson – COVID19 waiting for environment conditions

    Dr Tom Jefferson, of Oxford University’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM), says Covid-19 was waiting for favourable environmental conditions to finally emerge.

    VIRAL ORIGINS Coronavirus was dormant across the world for YEARS and didn’t come from China, Oxford uni Prof claims

    Traces of Covid-19 have been found in sewage samples from Spain, Italy and Brazil which pre-date its discovery in China.

    Speaking to the Daily Telegraph, Dr Jefferson called for an investigation into how and why the virus seems to thrive in environments such as food factories and meatpacking plants.

    Along with CEBM director Professor Carl Heneghan, Dr Jefferson believes this could potentially uncover new transmission routes, such as through the sewerage system or shared lavatory facilities.

    He told the paper: “Strange things like this happened with Spanish Flu. In 1918, around 30 per cent of the population of Western Samoa died of Spanish Flu and they hadn’t had any communication with the outside world.

    The role of Particulate Matter in the Spreading of COVID-19

    The Potential role of Particulate Matter in the Spreading of COVID-19 in Northern Italy: First Evidence-based Research Hypotheses

    PM10 daily limit value exceedances appear to be a significant predictor (p < .001) of infection in univariate analyses.

    Less polluted Provinces had a median of 0.03 infection cases over 1000 residents, while most polluted Provinces had a median of 0.26 cases over 1000 residents. Thirty-nine out of 41 Northern Italian Provinces resulted in the category with highest PM10 levels, while 62 out of 66 Southern Provinces presented low PM10 concentrations (p< 0.001). In Milan, the average growth rate before the lockdown was significantly higher than Rome (0.34 vs. 0.27 per day, with a doubling time of 2.0 days vs. 2.6), suggesting a basic reproductive number R0>6.0, comparable with the highest values estimated for China.

    The available literature on the role of airborne transmission, and this first preliminary observation of consistent association between the number of COVID-19 infected people and PM10 peaks, points out the opportunity of a further computational and experimental research on this route of transmission, and the potential role of PM on viral spread and infectivity (in addition to the possibility of regarding PM levels as an “indicator” of the expected impact of COVID-19 in most polluted areas).

    Zach Bush MD Statement on Coronavirus

    Dr Zach Bush interview on planet

    We need to treat a hypoxic injury similar to cyanide poisoning. And so we need to start to put in the pieces to change the shape of the haemoglobin, which we can do. We know how to treat cyanide poisoning. Cyanide poisoning happens to present exactly like Covid syndrome which is non-febrile, blue patient with signs of liver failure and hypoxemic injury to the organs developing later into respiratory death. And so we have a very well established treatment plan for cyanide poisoning and it’s three quick injections of a cyanide kit, and you’re using things like sodium nitrate in there to change the shape of haemoglobin so that it can bind through methemoglobin the oxygen again.

    Zach Bush on

    Our COVID-19 assumptions are wrong: Why social distancing and vaccines will make the pandemic worse.

    Bureau of Epidemiology – Air Pollution and Public Health in Utah

    Particulate matter (also called PM or particle pollution), one of the EPA criteria pollutants, is a complex airborne mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets. Though PM ranges widely in size, it has been divided into two categories based on diameter.

    PM2.5: Particles with a diameter smaller than 2.5 micrometers (µm, or microns)
    Also called fine particles

    PM10: Particles with a diameter between 2.5 µm and 10 µm
    Also called inhalable coarse particles

    Particles larger than 10 µm (e.g., sand and large dust) are not regulated by EPA (EPA, 2013i)

    Populations sensitive to particulate matter air pollution (EPA, 2013i; UDOH, 2014a)

    People with preexisting heart conditions, including:

    • Heart failure
    • Coronary artery disease (also called coronary heart disease or ischemic heart disease)
    • People with preexisting lung conditions, including:
    • Asthma
    • Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
    • Older adults, who may have undiagnosed heart or lung conditions
    • Children, whose hearts and lungs are still developing
    Symptoms of exposure to particulate matter

    People with heart conditions may experience:

    • Chest pain
    • Irregular heartbeat
    • Shortness of breath
    • Fatigue
    • Heart attacks
    • Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most common heart problem related to long term exposure to PM2.5 (CDC, 2013a)
      • However, CAD is largely linked to risky lifestyle habits like poor diet, smoking, and lack of exercise

    People with lung conditions may experience:

    • Coughing
    • Shortness of breath
    • Decreased ability to breathe deeply or vigorously
    • Increased susceptibility to respiratory infections
    • Aggravation of existing lung conditions like asthma and chronic bronchitis

    Healthy people may experience temporary symptoms like:

    • Eye, nose, and throat irritation
    • Coughing
    • Chest tightness
    • Shortness of breath

    These cardiovascular and respiratory health effects can increase doctor and emergency room visits, hospital stays, absences from school and work, and deaths.

    Nationwide, studies have shown a 15% decrease in the risk of heart disease deaths with every PM2.5 decrease of 10 micrograms per cubic meter of air (µg/m3). Particle pollution has also been associated with lung cancer and adverse birth outcomes, such as low birth weight and preterm birth (CDC, 2013; Shah et al., 2011; UDOH, 2014a).

    Evidence of early circulation of SARS-CoV-2

    Published: 06 February 2021 – Evidence of early circulation of SARS-CoV-2 in France: findings from the population-based “CONSTANCES” cohort

    January 2020 in the East of France and environmental studies suggest that the virus could have been present in December 2019 in Northern Italy.

    A recent investigation of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in 959 adults participating to a trial in Italy with blood samples collected between September 2019 to February 2020 identified 111 (11.6%) samples with a positive receptor-binding protein specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), among which 4 samples collected in October, 1 in November and 1 in February were also positive in a qualitative microneutralization assay.

    This indicates that SARS-CoV-2 could have been present in Italy since the beginning of autumn 2019.

    However, information on antibody responses at the early stage of the SARS-CoV-2 spread in other European countries or worldwide remains scarce.

    A scoping review on bio-Aerosols in healthcare & the dental environment

    A scoping review on bioaerosols in healthcare and the dental environment
    Charifa Zemouri, Hans de Soet Wim Crielaard, Alexa Laheij
    Department of Preventive Dentistry, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam &Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Bio-aerosols are generated via multiple sources such as different interventions, instruments and human activity. Bio-aerosols compositions reported are heterogeneous in their microbiological composition dependent on the setting and methodology. Legionella species were found to be a bio-aerosol dependent hazard to elderly and patients with respiratory complaints. But all aerosols can be can be hazardous to both patients and healthcare workers.

    Ionisation of the air affects influenza virus infectivity

    Ionizing air affects influenza virus infectivity and prevents airborne-transmission.

    By the use of a modified ionizer device we describe effective prevention of airborne transmitted influenza A (strain Panama 99) virus infection between animals and inactivation of virus (>97%). 

    Interview with Ton Rademaker an ionization expert.

    He worked for decades at the research department of Kema Electrotechniek, and in China. The healing effect on the respiratory system comes from air filled with negative ions. For decades, artificial ionization has been used as a means to clean hospitals and other areas from dust, bacteria and viruses.

    In addition to the positive RIVM (Dutch CDC) report on ionization and health from 2010, several scientific studies have been published, including a Swedish study in Science (2013), above. All studies show that ionization kills viruses in addition to bacteria. Rademaker and his colleagues therefore recommend the ionization machine as an effective means against the Corona virus. A simple and inexpensive device that was also successfully used in hospitals in Wuhan.

    This interview is in Dutch but the Youtube subtitle function does a good job translating it into your language.

    DEEPL auto translated Dutch-English

    1st UV lamp that can safely kill coronavirus

    UV lamps have been widely used as an effective means of sterilization notably in the medical and food-processing industries. But conventional UV rays cannot be used in spaces where there are people as they cause skin cancer and eye problems.

    At this particular wavelength, the firm said, UV rays cannot infiltrate the surface of the skin nor the eyes to bring about cancer-causing genetic defects and other damage.

    A recent third-party study by Hiroshima University confirmed the 222-nanometer UV rays are effective in killing the new coronavirus, Ushio said.

    Dutch articles – Link between Environment and Corona

    Dutch articles – ( does a good job translating the content)

    … and last but not least a little bit of history.

    1919 – Dr Milton Rosenau, attempts to prove the infectious nature of this disease

    But most revealing of all were the various heroic attempts to prove the infectious nature of this disease, using volunteers. All these attempts, made in November and December 1918 and in February and March 1919, failed. One medical team in Boston, working for the United States Public Health Service, tried to infect one hundred healthy volunteers between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five.

    Their efforts were impressive and make entertaining reading:

    “We collected the material and mucous secretions of the mouth and nose and throat and bronchi from cases of the disease and transferred this to our volunteers. We always obtained this material in the same way. The patient with fever, in bed, had a large, shallow, tray-like arrangement before him or her, and we washed out one nostril with some sterile salt solutions, using perhaps 5 c.c., which is allowed to run into the tray; and that nostril is blown vigorously into the tray. This is repeated with the other nostril. The patient then gargles with some of the solution. Next we obtain some bronchial mucus through coughing, and then we swab the mucous surface of each nares and also the mucous surface of the throat… Each one of the volunteers… received 6 c.c. of the mixed stuff that I have described. They received it into each nostril; received it in the throat, and on the eye; and when you think that 6 c.c. in all was used, you will understand that some of it was swallowed. None of them took sick.

    ”In a further experiment with new volunteers and donors, the salt solution was eliminated, and with cotton swabs, the material was transferred directly from nose to nose and from throat to throat, using donors in the first, second, or third day of the disease. “None of these volunteers who received the material thus directly transferred from cases took sick in any way… All of the volunteers received at least two, and some of them three ‘shots’ as they expressed it.”

    In a further experiment 20 c.c. of blood from each of five sick donors were mixed and injected into each volunteer. “None of them took sick in any way.”

    “Then we collected a lot of mucous material from the upper respiratory tract, and filtered it through Mandler filters. This filtrate was injected into ten volunteers, each one receiving 3.5 c.c. subcutaneously, and none of these took sick in any way.”

    Then a further attempt was made to transfer the disease “in the natural way,” using fresh volunteers and donors: “The volunteer was led up to the bedside of the patient; he was introduced. He sat down alongside the bed of the patients. They shook hands, and by instructions, he got as close as he conveniently could, and they talked for five minutes. At the end of the five minutes, the patient breathed out as hard as he could, while the volunteer, muzzle to muzzle (in accordance with his instructions, about 2 inches between the two), received this
    expired breath, and at the same time was breathing in as the patient breathed out… After they had done this for five times, the patient coughed directly into the face of the volunteer, face to face, five different times… [Then] he moved to the next patient whom we had selected, and repeated this, and so on, until this volunteer had had that sort of contact with ten different cases of influenza, in different stages of the disease, mostly fresh cases, none of them more than three days old… None of them took sick in any way.”

    “We entered the outbreak with a notion that we knew the cause of the disease, and were quite sure we knew how it was transmitted from person to person. Perhaps,” concluded Dr. Milton Rosenau, “if we have learned anything, it is that we are not quite sure what we know about the disease.”

    the above text is from the book The INVISIBLE RAINBOW by Arthur Firstenberg
    ISBN 978-1-64502-009-7 (paperback) | 978-1-64502-010-3 (ebook)

    Dishonest efforts will not bring real success. 
    Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason. The saying is recorded from the early 19th century, but a related idea with an ironic twist is found in John Harington’s Epigrams of the early 17th century

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” – Joseph Goebbels Master propagandist of the Nazi regime and dictator.

    “Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.” Hermann Wilhelm Göring
    Nuremberg Diary Paperback – August 22, 1995