Pages

Subscribe for free email notifications for new articles:

June 21, 2021

The Lies Exposed by the Numbers - Key Takeaways in 34 Charts and Images

This is an abbreviated overview of some of the key takeaways from my recent investigative report, The Lies Exposed by the Numbers: Fear, Misdirection, and Institutional Deaths (An investigative report)Links to all original data sources are found in the original report. Please share it widely!

The fully referenced investigative report provided a guided tour of the pandemic using the government's own official numbers, presented with the context that the government has denied the public during the chaos of the past 15 months. What emerged was a shocking story of scientific misconduct and breach of trust, which revealed the horrifying - and deadly - consequences of stripping data of context and allowing the government to evade transparency. 

This abbreviated version guides you through some of the key takeaways using a series of 34 charts and images. Let it spark your curiosity; the real meat of the scandals will be waiting for you in the full-length report. Or, if you prefer, you can watch a video version on YouTube, Odysee, or Bitchute.

(Full investigative report available here)

My new book is now available on Amazon in paperbacklarge printhardcover, and e-book #Commissions Earned

Key takeaways:

➤ Throughout the pandemic, the government has systematically misrepresented the risk to Canadians by providing out-of-context numbers. For example, on April 19th Dr. Bonnie Henry used the death of an infant in BC to tell Canadians that “it reminds us of the vicious nature of this virus.” 

Yet, this was the first death in anyone in BC under the age of 30. More than a year and two full waves into the pandemic. And it was a child that had such severe pre-existing conditions that it was already a patient seeking out specialized care at the BC Children’s Hospital before catching COVID. And it caught the virus inside the hospital, not out in the community. It should have reminded Canadians just how NOT dangerous this virus is to young people under 30!


By withholding important context, by using extremely fear-inducing language, and by de-emphasizing the most important parts of the story, Dr. Henry succeeded in telling exactly the opposite story told by the facts. She hijacked this infant's tragic death to craft a public message that is simply not supported by the government's own data. A lie created without actually falsifying any data. Magicians call this the art of misdirection: using flashy cues that naturally attract the public's eye in order to distract from that which the magician does not want you to see.

➤ To add additional context to Dr. Henry's propaganda message, in Canada an average of 25 children (aged 0-19) die of influenza and pneumonia every single year. As of May 7th, 15 months into the pandemic, COVID has claimed 11 children’s lives in all of Canada.

➤ The government recently released a report of all 13,789 deaths linked to outbreaks in Canada. An outbreak is defined as occurring any time two or more infections are linked to a single location or event. This outbreak data set starts to put some context to the individual risk that we each face from this virus. 98.6% of all outbreak-linked deaths are from infections caught inside government-controlled or government-regulated institutional settings: long-term care, hospitals, and prisons. These are people who live permanently or temporarily in government-controlled institutions or in privately owned but government-regulated facilities (like nursing homes). They don't go home at night. They only get to mingle with us when the government chooses to let us through the institutional door.

➤ Only 1.4% of outbreak-linked deaths are from infections caught outside of these institutional walls. Thus, even if government were to permanently board up every small business, school, nail salon, gym, and church, the other 98.6% of outbreak-linked deaths happening under the government's watchful care would still continue. Even if every single Canadian living outside of one of these settings was locked up in a quarry and the key was thrown away, 98.6% of outbreak-linked deaths would continue as long as government keeps making the same idiotic mistakes in the way it is managing life behind institutional walls. 13,611 vs 178. Those are the hard numbers illustrating the differences of what is occurring on either side of that institutional divide. The pie chart demonstrates that this is a crisis that almost exclusively affects people living with extremely serious pre-existing health conditions and compromised immune systems. And almost no-one else. 

➤ The outbreak data is even more remarkable when you put numbers to the sizes of the populations living in each of these two settings. Let's focus on the elderly - those who we have been told are the most vulnerable to this virus. There are roughly 292,000 people living inside institutional settings where 98.6% of outbreak-linked deaths occurred (for a total of 13,611 deaths). By contrast, there are at least 9.1 million elderly, including approximately 6.8 million elderly with multiple chronic conditions, living outside of institutional settings, many of whom are every bit as vulnerable as the patients inside nursing homes. Yet at most 178 outbreak-linked deaths occurred among this vast population!

➤ Just as remarkable is the fact that over 14.5 million people travelled into Canada since the pandemic began, including the millions of Canadians crammed together inside border controls in March of 2020 when the government asked Canadians to all come home from abroad at once. 

Yet those 14.5 million travellers didn’t even warrant their own category as an outbreak setting. Yet the tiny population of 292,000 institutionalized citizens under the government's watchful care managed to produce 98.6% of the outbreak-linked deaths. Context is everything. This is a major red flag that the fearful beliefs encouraged by our health officials about the behaviour of the virus are entirely out of sync with the story told by the government's own data. 

➤ The difference in risk between those who live in institutional settings vs those who do not is simply mindbogglingly enormous. One-size-fits-all policymaking is ridiculous when different demographics have such different levels of risk, particularly since those who are most vulnerable are already living with such severe pre-existing conditions that they are easy to identify and protect behind shuttered doors by providing focused protection. 

➤ Let’s include the rest of Canadian deaths not related to outbreaks to see how much the picture changes. Using public data released by the Government of Canada, we see that at least 75% of the 24,402 deaths in Canada (as of May 7th, 2021) were from infections caught behind institutional walls (long-term care, hospitals, and prisons). 75% of ALL Canadian deaths are in the tiny population of approximately 292,000 that you are already familiar with. Meanwhile, although there are 38 million Canadians living outside institutional walls, including more than 6.8 million elderly with pre-existing health conditions, only 25% of all deaths in Canada occurred in this vast population. The chart below puts this into perspective. Clearly COVID is dangerous to those who have severe pre-existing health conditions, but that danger is magnified many times if their front door is controlled by the government. For the rest of us, including the vulnerable with pre-existing conditions who guard their own front doors, not so much. 


➤ This summary from the WHO's 2019 pandemic planning guidelines shows which health measures are recommended depending on the severity of a pandemic, and which measures should never be recommended under any circumstances. Study this list carefully, it is of great importance to the scandals that come next.


➤ You will notice that many of the public health measures were clearly a violation of long-established pandemic planning guidelines. They should never have been used. Others were measures that only appropriate to extremely severe pandemics - the highest levels on the scale. Are 24,402 deaths a lot? Were these measures warranted? You be the judge. 

Here is a chart from Statistics Canada showing the total annual deaths (all causes) in a year-over-year comparison (the blue column covers the full first year of the pandemic). COVID does not stand out above the trend of previous bad flu seasons:


➤ Here is another chart produced with data from Statistics Canada: a comparison of 5 years of death in Canada, organized by cause of death. It is rather clear that unless COVID cures cancer and heart attacks, a lot of COVID deaths were misattributed or occurred among people in the last few weeks or months of their life:

➤ This inflation of COVID numbers caused by counting all deaths with a positive PCR test, regardless of whether the patient actually died with or from COVID, is well known and even acknowledged by public health officials despite keeping our eyeballs fixated on "cases, cases, cases". The next image shows Toronto Public Health acknowledging the issue. The distorted reality you have been given on the news is not an accident - they know the numbers are inflated! And they keep doing it anyway.


➤ This next chart uses data from Statistics Canada to show deaths, week by weak, from all causes over the past 11 years. The normal seasonal variations in death caused by flu seasons are clearly visible. So are both COVID waves #1 and #2. The first wave (winter of 2019/2020) was equivalent to a bad flu season, similar to the 2017/18 season. The second wave (winter 2020/21) was barely equivalent to a moderate flu season. There is nothing here to suggest we are living through a once-in-a-generation pandemic.

➤ The seasonality of coronaviruses is well documented, including by our own government. COVID follows the exact same seasonal variation as the other 4 coronaviruses that have long-since been part of the regular concoction of viruses that cause colds and flus in Canada every winter. Yet as spring weather returns, health officials have tried to give credit to their lockdowns for the falling cases. Here is a chart complied by the Government of Ontario showing coronavirus seasonality during previous years - those are the grey, orange, and navy-blue lines on the chart. As you can see, COVID is following the exact same trajectory as other coronaviruses do. The black curve shows Covid arriving midway through the 2019/20 Winter flu season. The dark blue line ending at week 46 shows the beginning of the 2020/21 winter flu season up to when govt data runs out. And it's important to remember that it is the government that put the COVID data on this chart, not me. They know COVID is seasonal. Yet they still try to give lockdowns credit for the drop in cases that happens in the spring.

➤ Giving lockdowns credit for a drop in cases in the spring is like taking credit for the sun rising in the East. It is another lie created by stripping data of its context. Here is Dr. Tam doing just that:

No, Dr. Tam, seasonality did that. You are legitimizing lockdowns using the magician's art of misdirection.

➤ Lockdowns were a fantasy. Here is what lockdowns were meant to do with their promise of flattening the curve:

➤ But the previous charts clearly demonstrate that virus activity is seasonal. You can't "flatten the curve". Seasonality means that lockdowns can merely blunt each peak, thus transferring the nightmare of never-ending COVID to the next winter season, and the next, until enough of the population finally achieves herd immunity to create a protective ring around the vulnerable living in the community. Instead of opting for 6-to-8-weeks of focused protection for the vulnerable, our health officials artificially created the conditions for this 15-month nightmare, and it's not over yet. Thanks to lockdowns which prevented the healthy from achieving herd immunity, the vulnerable are still every bit as much at risk as they were 15 months ago!


 It is a well-known fact that half of all long-term care residents live less than 5 months once they enter long-term care. They are going there because they are on the threshold of dying. They don't have time for a year-long lockdown. So, three separate "crops" of long-term care patients have come and gone since COVID began. And yet there is still no safety to be found inside these institutions because the virus still hasn't been allowed to burn itself out outside in the community. Lockdowns have stretched out the forced confinement for so long that many of these patients have been robbed of the last precious months with family members and were left to face death in isolation, without the dignity and comfort of being surrounded by loved ones during their most difficult last weeks and months. It breaks my heart. Some, like 90-year-old Nancy Russell, chose euthanasia rather than face the isolation of another lockdown.  

➤ The implications of this failed lockdown strategy are huge. Let's revisit the very first chart in this article showing the two waves of dying, created by virus seasonality. If health officials had provided focused protection for the vulnerable during the first wave, as called for by pandemic guidelines, and had allowed the rest of society to acquire natural herd immunity, as it does every winter flu season, a very large portion of deaths in the second wave would have been prevented because herd immunity among the healthy would have caused this virus to burn itself out long before the second wave started. Blatantly ignoring pandemic guidelines, which were written specifically to prevent this kind of DIY rulemaking, is gross criminal negligence. The public didn't know in advance. Every single health official did. It's their job to know. Pandemic guidelines were written specifically to guide their decision-making in the heat of a crisis.

➤ The last bulwark against government overreach, which should have at least prevented health officials from making public health measures mandatory, are our constitutional rights and freedoms. Section 1 of our Charter is an obligation on our government to present evidence and face critics in a court of law before imposing any limits on citizens' rights and freedoms. This never happened. Our Charter was systematically ignored. It is illegal to strip anyone of their rights and freedoms without passing this formal legal test. Lockdowns are thus a human rights violation, and they clearly caused deaths, both among the vulnerable and as a result of collateral damage caused by the lockdowns themselves (suicides, cancelled cancer treatments, a huge surge in overdoses, etc.). So, we have two serious failures here. We have a failure of democracy to use debate and evidence to justify itself in the public square before infringing on rights. And we have a gross failure in our legal system and in our courts to defend our rights, which would have prevented these misbegotten public health measures from being imposed in the first place. Our health officials and politicians, along with many of the judges, systematically prevented legal challenges of the lockdowns, so they can all look forward to a date with a human rights tribunal when the hysteria ends.


➤ It is one thing to be swept up by mass hysteria. It is quite another to knowingly playing chess with the truth and gamble with other people's lives in order to intentionally fuel hysteria to engineer some alleged "greater good". The intentional use of fear to control public behaviour and the willful disdain of evidence and scientific debate, as well as the reckless disregard for established pandemic planning protocols have collectively contributed to many more preventable deaths, on top of the preventable wave-two deaths caused by the lockdown strategy. Many of the deaths during the 1st wave were also preventable if the pandemic planning guidelines had been followed.

The out-of-proportion fear whipped up by health officials and the shortage of personal protective equipment that resulted from that fear led to many entirely preventable deaths among nursing home patients because many frightened health care workers abandoned their patients in nursing homes out of fear for themselves and their own families. This is a phenomenon that happened in many countries. The army had to be called in Quebec because so many care home staff fled their jobs that abandoned residents were quite literally dying in their beds because of neglect. 


➤ Before the pandemic even arrived in Canada, Dr. Tam warned that “the epidemic of fear could be more difficult to control than the epidemic itself". Yet she then drove much of the fear through her own public messaging. One of the worse has been the recommendation to wear face masks. The default attitude when randomized controlled trials don't show any evidence of masks working to stop respiratory viruses is to create policies that err on the side of them not working, not to assume that they do. This excerpt was taken directly from the WHO's 2019 pandemic planning guidelines.


When the virus first arrived, health officials initially correctly explained that masks don't work, while also telling the public that they were needed for health care workers. While that is also true, they did a terrible job of explaining why (to protect health care workers from larger particles, like bacteria, as well as to protect them from splashes of body fluids while working closely with patients - urine, phlegm, etc. - they need them, but not for protection against viruses). The mixed messaging just fueled the public's feeling that they were being lied to and gave them the sense that the virus was actually much more dangerous than officials were admitting. So, the public latched onto masks even harder and many health care workers working in long-term care got caught up in the same panic when mask shortages started cropping up, which contributed to many of them abandoning their patients in nursing homes. 

➤ Instead of fixing the public messaging, the government instead gave in to the public's demands for masks, thus turning over policymaking to the frightened public. They confirmed the public's worst fears by switching to mask recommendations, without producing any evidence to overturn decades of randomized trials showing that they don't work for respiratory viruses. They also fell head-over-heels in love with HEPA filters, despite the fact that hospitals know that HEPA filters are not capable of reliably removing viral particles. Aerosol-producing patients must be isolated in negative pressure rooms to prevent spread. 

But worst of all, the government believed its own bullshit, and created policies to protect the vulnerable in nursing homes using these ineffective tools - face masks and air filtration - instead of ventilation and focused protection. And their sudden unscientific faith in masks and HEPA filters led the government begin transferring COVID-infected patients INTO nursing homes where the most vulnerable are essentially sitting ducks once the virus gets inside. In other words, the government introduced the virus into the living spaces of our most vulnerable citizens, and then expected a placebo - face masks and HEPA filters - to prevent spread through contaminated air spaces and heating ducts. It was a death trap for many of our most vulnerable long-term care residents. That's gross negligence of criminal proportions. In Quebec alone, that decision cost up to 6,700 lives - a quarter of all COVID deaths in Canada.

Thus, thousands of deaths during the 1st wave could have been prevented if government officials had not abandoned the scientific research that was cited in the pandemic planning protocols. Thousands more could have been prevented by stopping all cross-traffic of staff between nursing homes and by sealing staff inside nursing homes with their patients until the wave passed outside their doors. But why worry, they all are wearing face masks, right?

Health officials literally turned their backs on decades of scientific research, while telling us to trust the science. Instead of focusing on their job - to protect the vulnerable - they focused all their efforts on preventing us from eating a meal at a restaurant, intimidating pastors, placing illegal limits on protest attendance, and tormenting our schoolchildren with pointless masks, social distancing, and school closures. Remember that peaceful protest - without attendance limits - is a guaranteed Charter right. It is a tool of last resort in a democracy to give citizens a voice when all other methods of dialogue fail. 

➤ There are two ways to protect the vulnerable. The option that is at the heart of pandemic planning guidelines is provide focused protection for the vulnerable while allowing the healthy members of the community to acquire herd immunity through natural exposure to the virus during the 6-to-8-week pandemic wave. Unless there are lockdowns to slow the spread, after that typical 6-to-8-week wave, enough members of the general public have immunity to create a protective ring of immune people around the pockets of the vulnerable. The virus essentially dries up outside their doors so they can rejoin the rest of society in normal life. 

Instead, health officials used lockdowns and put all their faith in the distant hope of vaccines as their exit strategy. The vulnerable (both inside and outside institutional walls) have therefore been at risk for more than 15 months while society waited for these miracle vaccines to emerge.  The vaccine thus becomes the deadliest vaccine in history, even before the first jab was given, because the vulnerable kept on dying through an entire 2nd wave while society waited for a vaccine. And this vaccine strategy was an extremely reckless gamble because there was never a guarantee that a safe vaccine could be developed. We still do not know if it is safe, despite being in rollout, because the emergency-use authorization means that we don’t have long-term safety data - long-term trials finish in 2024. It took almost a year for the narcolepsy that plagued the 2009 H1N1 vaccine rollout in Europe to emerge. Long term trials matter. We are the experiment.


➤ This obsession about vaccines, to the exclusion of everything else, does not require vaccinating everyone. Once vaccines become available, all those who want it, including every single vulnerable individual, can acquire individual protection through the point of a needle. Once vaccinated, it becomes irrelevant whether their neighbor, their children, or their waitress have it. As I have clearly shown in this report, the vulnerable during this pandemic are old with pre-existing health conditions, not babies too young to be immunized. As long as individual vaccination is available, a ring of immunity created through mass vaccination is not required to protect the vulnerable from COVID. Yet the obsession with vaccines has reached such a frenzy that we are making reopening conditional on vaccination. Coercion is being used to get people to comply with this entirely irrational mass vaccination program. Using coercion to make people get a medical intervention is a violation of our Charter rights and a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code. 

➤ Vaccination is a sort of insurance policy - you take on one risk, however small, like that of vaccination, and use it to offset another risk, like the risk of catching the disease. Every vaccine must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. In a free and democratic society, vaccination is an individual choice that must always be free of coercion. In a free and open democratic society, transparency and open debate is both the key to change minds and is also the way that critics can bring legitimate concerns to the public's attention. If there is coercion, or when that transparency fails, or if the debate is suppressed, informed consent is not possible.

No vaccine is entirely absent of risk - including long-established vaccines like those for measles, tetanus, or polio. The risks of those long-established vaccines are small and clearly known, while the risk of death if you catch one of the deadly diseases is also clearly known and well established. The risk/reward equation is fairly easy to assess. That cannot be said for the COVID vaccines. The fear and absence of context cultivated by the government over the past 15 months means that people do not have the necessary information to understand their personal risk from the virus. Consent given without a clear understanding of your personal risk and in the presence of coercion is not legitimate consent - it is a violation of the Nuremberg Codes.

➤ Informed consent also requires the patient getting vaccinated to fully understand all safety issues related to vaccination. Obsession with vaccines as an exit strategy has become so extreme that health officials are minimizing and deflecting from the fact that long-term trials have not been completed, which makes us all the guinea pigs in an experiment. And the clearly documented injuries, permanent disabilities, and deaths recorded on the US government’s Vaccine Adverse Event Recording System (VAERS), are being downplayed. Critics and concerned doctors who try to engage in public discussion about them are vilified as conspiracy theorists. These deaths are real. People deserve to understand the risks they are taking in order to weigh them against their personal risk from the virus - it’s a necessary ingredient for informed consent. And it's important to bear in mind that not a single vaccine-linked deaths would have happened if health officials had followed the pandemic planning guidelines and not put us in lockdowns. These unnecessary deaths are on top of all the others that they have already caused.


➤ Furthermore, those who have already had the disease do not need vaccination because they have no risk to offset. As I highlighted in the opening section of the Nuremberg Code above, informed consent is not possible for those who get no benefit from the vaccination. Those who have already been exposed to an infection already have immunity. It is illegal, as per the principles of the Nuremberg Code to expose these people to the risks of vaccination, however small they may be, when they get zero personal benefit from the vaccine. Already as early as October of 2020, before the second wave, the WHO estimated that over 750 million people had been infected worldwide. And there are large portions of the population that already have cross-reactive immunity from exposure to other coronavirus (up to 80% of us based on a study from Germany). None of these people need vaccination. It is illegal, as per the principles of the Nuremberg Code, to expose these people to the risks of vaccination because they have absolutely no risk to offset. 

➤ The obsession with this vaccine has reached such a fever that we are even rolling out the vaccine to children and young adults, which I have demonstrated have almost zero statistical risk from this virus. They are being exposed to a vaccine with small but known risks, and risks that we do not yet know because the long-term side effects are not known yet. This is the height of irresponsibility and medical misconduct. Bear in mind that as Dr. Henry's propaganda story showed, as of April 19th, not a single person in British Columbia under the age of 30 without severe pre-existing health conditions had died of COVID. Thus, a single vaccine-linked death in BC of anyone under the age of 30 without pre-existing medical conditions would make the vaccine more dangerous to under-30s than the virus itself!

Health officials are even bypassing the principle of parental consent for children in order to get more “jabs into arms”, to use Doug Ford’s ineloquent phrasing. The principle of parental consent is a fundamental principle in a free and open democratic society, which makes the parent and not the government the guardian of their children and ensures that children have an advocate with their best interests at heart to protect them from their immature impulses, peer pressure, lack of fully matured long-term thinking, and coercive pressure from health authorities and teachers. This principle has been discarded without any public consultation or input through democratic votes. It has been imposed.


➤ And the immunization records of any child that gives their own consent for vaccination will not be shared with the parent or guardian unless the child wants to share it.

➤ Respect for individual liberties is the fundamental building block of a free and open society (liberty is the origin of the word “liberal” in liberal democracy). That respect was completely swept away by lockdowns. And now our government is further jeopardizing our individual autonomy by threatening digital vaccine passports. This would create a two-tier society and would, in effect, lay the foundation for a Chinese-style social credit score system that allows the government to turn on or turn off access to your normal life depending on whether some bureaucrat thinks you are being a good little boy or girl. Under the guise of health and safety, we are in the process of sweeping away all the long-standing principles and checks and balances of a democratic society. This is a threat to democracy itself.

➤ The obsession with vaccines even has reached the point where other promising treatment options, like Ivermectin, are being systematically blocked by government red tape, despite dozens of peer-reviewed trials that show promise of being every bit as effective as vaccines both as a treatment option and for preventative use. Ivermectin, for example, is an out-of-patent repurposed drug, priced around $7/dose, with clearly known short- and long-term side-effects. It is on the WHO’s list of essential medicines, yet it is being withheld for safety reasons while vaccines with no completed long-term trials and many questions about their safety are being rolled out en masse. Unlike the vaccines, there is no uncertainty about Ivermectin's safety. The only question that needs an answer is whether it works.

➤ It raises the question whether the obsession with the vaccine as the exit strategy is forcing health officials to block alternatives because the emergency-use authorization is only allowed if no other alternatives are available. These are not the actions of a government serving the people in a free and open democratic society. Politics and special interests appear to be taking priority over "doing everything we can to keep you safe." 

There are many additional layers of scandal exposed in the full investigative report, but this gives you a taste of the path that I have cleared through the chaos of the last 15 months. Please share it widely with everyone you know. This nightmare world of fabricated lies only ends when communities stand up together and say, "Enough!" 

This adventure in DIY pandemic management must stop, now. This despicable game of deception, fearmongering, and misrepresentation of risk must end. It's never too late to do the right thing. The pandemic planning guidelines tell us in no uncertain terms what needs to be done.

Everything we have witnessed over the past 15 months signals that our scientific institutions and many of those inside them have abandoned all the core principles that make science work.  A functioning democracy is rooted in accountability, transparency, honest debate, and respect for individual rights. That too has been entirely absent during the last 15 months. The behaviour of our politicians, journalists, health officials, many of the scientists advising them has had far more in common with the slander, smears, shaming, and cancel culture tactics of an out-of-control kindergarten than with the distinguished forebearers of their professions upon whose shoulders they stand. 

They have knowingly played chess with the truth and gambled with people's lives in order to intentionally fuel hysteria to engineer some alleged "greater good". It is the height of hubris to be so certain of the righteousness of their cause that even the truth was merely an obstacle in their path. These are not the actions of people with real empathy for their fellow citizens and an honest commitment to objective truth. Their patronizing lies of "good intentions" reveal the extent to which they view us as cattle to be herded into compliance and not as fellow equals in a free and open society. They have become a threat to democracy itself.

The most horrendous crimes are often well hidden in a fog of confusion, disguised from its victims behind a shroud of good intentions and noble ideals. What has happened over the past 15 months is the inevitable consequence of individuals operating in the absence of limits because a permissive society driven into a frenzy of fear has exempted these monsters from transparency, debate, and checks and balances. Science and democracy are those limits. They are the processes that keep our darkest illiberal impulses in check. The past 15 months gave us a window into what a pre-Enlightenment worldview looks like, with modern technology at its fingertips and without the checks and balances imposed by scientific inquiry and liberal democracy. So, it is time to hold these monsters to account, not only in pursuit of justice for those they have hurt and killed through their reckless gross negligence, but also to pull back the curtain to show society the illiberal world that it has been sleepwalking into.

I am going to end this report with the face of Nancy Russell. She chose to end her life through euthanasia rather than endure the forced isolation of a second lockdown. Never forget.


You can read my full investigative report here. I promise, it will be worth every minute of your time. 


If you found this article useful, please consider leaving a little something in my Tip Jar to support my independent writing. 

Julius Ruechel's Tip Jar

And I invite you to subscribe to my free email notifications to receive my latest articles in your inbox. I write about many things, but always with the goal of answering questions essential to science and democracy, and always in the hope of teasing a broader perspective from the mind-numbing noise.

Subscribe for free email notifications for new articles:


COPYRIGHT 2021 JULIUS RUECHEL

12 comments:

  1. Thank you so much for your hard work in exposing the lies. We need 100 more like you to get the truth out.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is a fantastic document. Bravo!

    ReplyDelete
  3. PS: FYI, Bitchute and Odysee are well known as conspiracy-theory websites. Whereas, your reports are well-documented with relevant links...unlike Bitchute and Odysee. Hence, your efforts might get more traction if you diversify into more conventional websites to wake up these folks.
    Another link you might appreciate is the YouTube efforts of Ivor Cummins: https://youtu.be/_DOwDAbibQI

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Given how eager the Big Tech companies are to censor information and debate, I am cross-posting across multiple platforms as an insurance policy against censorship. It's a sad day for freedom of speech when this becomes a necessary strategy because so many seem to prefer censorship to good faith debate.

      I also follow Ivor Cummins work - he has been an extremely important voice throughout this madness!

      Delete
  4. Mr. Ruechel, it looks like my original comment was not published, and that comment was more important than my PS. As best I can remember, it went like this. Thank You for your condensed version, because a shorter version makes it easier to spread the word. The point mentioned in my first post was your reliance on the PCR Covid test. Numerous reliable sources think otherwise. Such as this group of Canadian doctors: https://standupcanada.solutions/canadian-doctors-speak
    And, from Europe:
    Original: https://www.covidtruths.co.uk/2020/12/dr-reiner-fuellmich-is-attacking-the-pcr-test-fraud/
    UPDATE: https://www.covidtruths.co.uk/2021/03/dr-reiner-fuellmich-pcr-lawsuit-update-march-2021/
    Thank You, Tom Banker

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Tom, thanks for the links! I think your original comment was posted on my email newsletter platform, which has its own commenting system separate from the website.

      I fully agree with your concerns about the PCR test; I feel the same way. It is far from reliable as it seems to produce a huge number of false positives, the high cycle threshold produces meaningless results, and the PCR test is not an appropriate way to assign cause of death. The PCR test was not designed to be used as a diagnostic tool; it was designed as a diagnostic aid, to be followed up via laboratory testing, and only for testing symptomatic cases, not for population-wide testing of asymptomatic people.

      All those issues with the PCR testing make the story for the government even worse. However, they are unfortunately all issues were there is a lot of debate, so I focused on simply using publicly available data for my report - the government's own official data - they can't really deny these numbers since they are their own numbers. And even then, without addressing the misuse of the test or all the false positives, the evidence is damning. The year-over-year mortality data, for example, provides an indication of just how useless the PCR test has been at assigning cause of death.

      Cheers, Julius

      Delete
  5. I appreciate the report! It seems your tip jar link is broken, so I am unable to express my appreciation as much as I'd like.
    I would also suggest supporting bitcoin tips. Depending on your geography, something like strike.me or zebedee.io would be the easiest to set up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I fixed the broken link. And thanks for letting me know about the bitcoin tips - I will definitely look into that!

      Delete
  6. You might want to look into the mythology of virology. The history of vaccines is as shady as this current craziness.
    Dr Sam Bailey on YouTube or odysee is a great place to start.

    These days I question why the virus only seemed to affect the first world... And then I saw that the more immunized nations had higher death counts.
    Btw in your mlk article, sorry but the color revolutions were started by nefarious means, such as crooked NGOs etc.

    ReplyDelete
  7. In any real scientific field, if one performed a test like what was done on the Diamond Princess where 80% of those who tested "positive" had no symptoms, the test's usefulness would be put into serious question. Unfortunately for the world, as others have mentioned, virology has been functioning on assumption and faith for so long that it seems to be beyond question. Until that changes, we are stuck on this every darkening path. Good luck to us all, and thank you for collecting this data and putting it into the form you have.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe for free email notifications for new articles: