Revolver Exclusive Study: COVID-19 Lockdowns Over 10 Times More Deadly Than Pandemic Itself

Revolver 

A groundbreaking new study commissioned by Revolver News concludes that COVID-19 lockdowns are ten times more deadly than the actual COVID-19 virus in terms of years of life lost by American citizens.

Up until this point there had been no simple, rigorous analysis that accurately and definitively conveys the true costs of the COVID-19 lockdowns. Accordingly, Revolver News set out to commission a study to do precisely that: to finally quantify the net damage of the lockdowns in terms of a metric known as “life-years.” Simply put, we have drawn upon existing economic studies on the health effects of unemployment to calculate an estimate of how many years of life will have been lost due to the lockdowns in the United States, and have weighed this against an estimate of how many years of life will have been saved by the lockdowns. The results are nothing short of staggering, and suggest that the lockdowns will end up costing Americans over 10 times as many years of life as they will save from the virus itself.

The COVID-19 lockdown measures that Americans have had to endure for the greater part of 2020 represent one of the most dramatic, consequential, and damaging policy measures undertaken in this nation’s history. For the first time in its history, America has experienced a situation so crippling and perilous that long term financial and social stability have been legitimately threatened.

As with everything in 2020 America, these lockdown measures have become deeply politicized. President Trump opposes further devastating lockdowns. In his recent Republican National Convention speech, President Trump raised the point that lockdowns have had very real and very devastating effects on the lives of many Americans.

President Trump: “The cost of the Biden shutdown would be measured in increased drug overdoses, depression, alcohol addiction, suicides, heart attacks, economic devastation, job loss and much more.  Joe Biden’s plan is not a solution to the virus, but, rather, it’s a surrender to the virus.” [Politico]

Democrat Presidential candidate Joe Biden, by contrast, has suggested that he is willing to impose further lockdowns if “scientists” tell him to do so. It is unclear which scientists Joe Biden would be listening to, as there is no consensus among scientists and experts as to whether or not lockdowns are worth the staggering costs they impose on the common man.

Revolver News is very proud to present a rigorous study on such an important topic and we hope that this will be spread far and wide both within government and without to assist policymakers. This exclusive study is a collaborative guest contribution to Revolver News. Due to the unfortunately politicized nature of the COVID-19 lockdowns, and the associated plausibility of professional repercussions, the authors have chosen for the time being to represent themselves pseudonymously.

Abel Sumner is a Ph.D. candidate in a social sciences field with both private and public sector experience as a policymaker. He is extensively trained in statistics, econometrics, and quantitatively informed public policy.

Jeremiah Jackson holds a Ph.D. in economics and has experience both in the public sector as a policy maker and in the private sector as an analyst.

Jacob Cage holds a Ph.D. in a social sciences field and has extensive experience both in the public and private sectors in policy analysis and strategic communications.

—————————–

CHEAT SHEETBack-of-the-Envelope Calculations Show COVID-19 “Cure” Is Worse Than Disease

  • Standard approaches to evaluating epidemic policy responses, involving the Value of a Statistical Life, have conceptual problems and are biased towards the elderly and rich.
  • Using a life-years criterion as an alternative shows that the lockdowns cost an order of magnitude more life-years than they saved.
  • Most of the publicized cost-benefit analyses of COVID-19 lockdowns have used coarse measures like lives as units rather than life-years, which misleads politicians and the general public. COVID-19 deaths disproportionately impact the oldest members of the population, whereas the economic impacts of lockdowns disproportionately harm the youngest of the working population, who have far greater life expectancies at the time of impact.
  • Using prior research on workforce entrants and recent graduates entering into a market marred by an economic recession, empirical estimates of life-years lost can be determined. Extensive research on job displacement can be used to estimate the economic impact in life-years of starkly increased unemployment for mid-to-late career workers.
  • Combining these analyses, we found that an estimated 18.7 million life-years will be lost in the United States due to the COVID-19 lockdowns. Comparative data analysis between nations shows that the lockdowns in the United States likely had a minimal effect in saving life-years. Using two different comparison groups, we estimate that the COVID-19 lockdowns in the U.S. saved between a quarter to three quarters of a million life-years.
  • Every broad age category lost life-years from the lockdowns including those 55 and older.
  • The media and state and local governments contributed to the panic by selectively presenting evidence on COVID-19 and shutdowns of dubious benefit.
  • Public health researchers and health economists gave poor policy advice and made selective use of the prior research literature. They will likely be rewarded, not punished, by academia for their failure because of academia’s biases.
  • Public health in general is so biased and vulnerable to motivated cognition that it is not “not yet ready for policy analysis.”

———————————

Back-of-the-Envelope Calculations Show COVID-19 “Cure” Is Worse Than Disease

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization officially classified COVID-19 as a global pandemic. In the following weeks, the countries of the world began implementing previously unthinkable measures to prevent the spread of the virus. In the United States, some states quickly locked down nearly all physical businesses, venues, and public areas. As a short quarantine rapidly grew into an indefinite lockdown, some lawmakers and economists began asking if the lockdowns would cause more damage than the virus itself. Using empirical research, first-pass estimates can be made about the impact of the unprecedented lockdown in life-years lost. This can then be compared to the number to the estimated life-years lost to COVID-19 in the United States.

Why life-years? It is well-known that socioeconomic status (SES) appears to be linked to life expectancy and some of that association is causal, with higher SESes causing longer life expectancies through a number of channels. Most government policy analysts make decisions using the Value of a Statistical Life (VSLs) — which is about $10 million. If a regulation can save 1 life and costs $9 million, for instance, then it’s worth imposing to save a life. If it costs $11 million, then it’s not worth imposing to save a life. A problem with this approach is how coarse it is. Because SES is linked to life expectancies, actions by the government that do not result in direct loss of life are liable to being simply unaccounted for in this approach. For example, why not set the VSL at $100 million? Or $1? If you set the VSL too low, you will fail to impose many very cheap lifesaving regulations. Something perhaps more subtle is that if you set the VSL too high, then regulations you impose will reduce income so much by retarding economic activity that you will wind up reducing life expectancies through the SES-life expectancy channel. There are actually more fundamental issues with the use of a single VSL for all citizens (see Sunstein’s Valuing Life for a good overview), but many find the general equilibrium problems with it very intuitive.

Surprisingly, the COVID-19 conversation among public health analysts, bio-statisticians, economists, and policymakers who are otherwise sensitive to the problems with VSL has been dominated by the standard “coarse” VSL calculation above. We have seen no full policy analyses utilizing life-year approaches, although various studies have tried to estimate the average life-year losses per COVID-19 death. Controversy over estimating the correct value of a statistical life, problems with actually applying it in analysis as described above, and perhaps a certain odiousness associated with the rendering of human lives in dollar terms have pushed some health economists and public health analysts toward use of a life-years approach. This approach is simple, and in principle, involves no explicit conversion of human lives into money terms — although such a trade-off is implicit in any policy analysis. From the life-years’ perspective, a policymaker can compute the life-years lost and gained if they take a specific action. For instance, a new airline safety regulation may make users of airlines so safe that they save an average of 0.1 life-years per traveler, but the higher cost of air travel may induce potential passengers to switch to less safe car travel, costing the switchers an average of 0.3 life-years. If enough people switch to car travel, then the airline safety regulation will actually reduce the total life-years lived from the perspective of the transportation system as a whole.

A life-year maximizer would say that the regulation should not be adopted. An advantage of the life-year approach is that it values all people’s life-years equally in principle. The life-year of an 80 year old is of equal value to that of a 20 year old. The life-year of a poor person is worth the same as the life-year of a rich person. The VSL method, by incorrectly estimating the amount that heterogenous consumers and workers are willing to pay for safety, may privilege the wealthy (who place a higher premium on safety) and the elderly (who will not have to face the “general equilibrium” costs of more safety regulations) over the poor and the young, who might prefer less safe but much cheaper goods and services or higher paying, but unsafe jobs over lower paying, but safe jobs. With life-years now established as our operational metric, we shall proceed with our analysis of the life-year impacts of Covid lockdown policies.

The COVID-19 lockdowns have resulted in a massive global recession, which has spared almost no country, firm, or economic sector. Job displacement in America has occurred at a scale nearly rivaling that of the Great Depression in the 1930s, with unemployment as high as 14.7% in April of 2020. Using a back-of-the envelope calculation, we can lower-bound the medium-term increase in unemployment, which can reasonably be estimated at around 8.5%. It is important to note that even medium-term unemployment will result in permanent job separations, as employees who are unemployed for over a year are unlikely to return to their previous position.

Figure 1

Previous research on job displacement and mortality has found that displaced workers face a significant increase in mortality rates, from which lost years of life can be estimated.[1] Job losses and permanent job separations have been shown to correlate directly with increases in heart disease, drug overdoses, lung cancer, and liver disease, among other factors of increased mortality risk. Sullivan and Von Watcher’s paper on job displacement and mortality estimated that job separation results in about 1.5 lost life-years per individual.

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates that U.S. unemployment in 2021 will range between 8.5% in a single-wave scenario and 11.5% in a double-wave scenario.[2] Assuming that a single-wave scenario occurs, U.S. unemployment next year will increase by about 5 percentage points over pre-COVID-19 2020 levels. Based on pre-COVID-19 payrolls, total job displacements in 2021 will likely be around 8.2 million. Increases in 2020 unemployment by age group between February and July can be used to estimate the distribution of additional unemployment for each age group. Taking the 8.2 million job displacements and multiplying them by Sullivan and Von Watcher’s lost life-year coefficients for each age group provides a total estimate of over 8,000,000 life-years lost due to job displacement.

Beyond direct job displacements, additional research has shown that labor market recessions have significant but lagged effects on the future mortality rates of those entering the labor market.[3] Based on Hannes Schwandt and Till von Wachter’s linear model of increased mortality due to entering the job market during a recession, a figure of 0.629 life-years are lost per individual in this classification.[4] This number can be multiplied by 13 million workers in the 16-24 age group in 2020 and then multiplied separately by the 3.9 million college graduates of 2020.[5] This methodology is also used by Till von Wachter in his working paper on the long-term effects of the Covid-19 crisis on workers.[6] By these estimates, long-term life-years lost due to the COVID-19 recession in the U.S. total around 18.7 million.

Table 1 contains a breakdown of total life-years lost as a result of economic conditions created by the lockdowns by all estimation methods.

Table 1

Group Estimated life-years lost
2020 Displaced Workers 8,071,000
New Workforce Entrants 8,180,000
Recent Graduates 2,453,000
Total 18,704,000

 

Having established the amount of  life-years lost due to COVID-19 lockdown policies, it remains to consider how many lives these may have saved.

With over 170,000 confirmed COVID-19 deaths at the time of writing, the virus has proven to be a clear public health threat in America. Table 2 (below) contains CDC data for COVID-19 deaths by age group in the United States, and life expectancies of those age groups.

Multiplying the expected years of life remaining by the number of deaths in each age group provides a number for life-years lost by age group. The total calculated life-years lost from COVID-19 in the United States adds up to 1.88 million. It is important to note that this is a high-end estimate. This calculation assumes that those dying from coronavirus have an average life expectancy and would have otherwise likely lived out the remaining years, had they not contracted the virus. Recent medical research has shown that coronavirus deaths are more likely to occur in patients with underlying health conditions. This implies that an estimate of life-years lost due to COVID-19 may be slightly inflated.

Table 2

Age Group US COVID-19 Deaths Expectation of Life Estimated Life-Years Lost
Under 1 year 15 78.61 1,179
1-4 years 10 78.61 786
5-14 years 20 74.14 1,483
15-24 years 225 64.23 14,452
25-34 years 1,074 54.66 58,705
35-44 years 2,728 45.32 123,639
45-54 years 7,298 36.11 263,558
55-64 years 17,583 27.36 480,997
65-74 years 29,869 19.40 579,539
75-84 years 37,494 12.26 459,549
85 years and over 45,842 6.58 301,848
Total 142,158 2,285,735

 

To better contextualize the effect of the lockdown, it is important to estimate COVID-19 deaths in the United States in a scenario where a lockdown was not enacted. While much is still unknown about the virus, data from other countries illustrates the effect of varying degrees of lockdowns.

Sweden faced controversy for not enacting lockdown measures, unlike most other nations. Data from Johns Hopkins University shows that Sweden had a COVID-19 fatality rate of 56.62 per 100,000 people.[7] The United States, with full lockdown measures, had a COVID-19 fatality rate of 50 per 100,000 people [note all data valid up to the time of writing]. The United Kingdom provides yet another perspective, as it initially took an approach closer to Sweden and then changed course during the pandemic, resulting in a COVID-19 death rate of 70 per 100,000 people. An estimate of U.S. COVID-19 deaths had the lockdowns not been enacted can be estimated by using either Sweden’s per-capita death rate or the United Kingdom’s rate as counterfactual estimates of the “least economically costly-possible policy.” For simplicity, we hold the distribution of age at death constant. Figure 2 and Table 3 show these estimates by age group. Table 4 shows differences between counterfactual and actual COVID-19 deaths. For simplicity, we assume that the “age structure of death” in the United States for COVID-19 would have continued to apply and apply a simple multiplier (based on the ratio of per capita deaths in the U.S. and UK/Sweden) to construct our counterfactual estimates.

Figure 2

 

Table 3

Age Group COVID-19 Deaths Estimated Life-years lost
56/100k 70/100k 56/100k 70/100k
Under 1 year 17 21 1,336 1,653
1-4 years 11 14 865 1,102
5-14 years 23 28 1,614 1,968
15-24 years 255 315 15,393 19,042
25-34 years 1,216 1,506 61,912 76,664
35-44 years 3,089 3,825 128,574 159,194
45-54 years 8,264 10,232 265,366 328,554
55-64 years 19,910 24,651 480,005 594,314
65-74 years 33,500 41,876 551,204 689,027
75-84 years 42,458 52,567 417,063 516,360
85 years and over 51,911 64,270 207,233 256,573
Total 160,654 199,306 2,130,565 2,644,450

 

Table 4

Age Group Excess COVID-19 Deaths Excess Life-Years Lost
56/100k 70/100k 56/100k 70/100k
Under 1 year 2 6 157 474
1-4 years 1 4 865 311
5-14 years 3 8 211 564
15-24 years 30 90 1,811 5,460
25-34 years 142 432 7,230 21,982
35-44 years 361 1,097 15,026 45,646
45-54 years 966 2,934 31,019 94,207
55-64 years 2,327 7,068 56,101 170,410
65-74 years 3,631 12,007 59,744 197,567
75-84 years 4,964 15,073 48,761 148,057
85 years and over 6,069 18,428 24,228 73,568
Total 18,496 57,148 245,153 758,247

 

Based on the estimations in Table 4 (directly above), the U.S. lockdowns may have saved anywhere between a quarter of a million to three quarters of a million life-years. This estimate range is staggeringly low compared to the life-years that will be lost as a result of the lockdown.

Figure 3 (below) shows the breakdown with the Swedish and U.K. models. In the Figure, the blue bars represent life-years saved from the lockdown, which are estimated by comparing the U.S.’s performance with Sweden and the U.K. The red bars represent life-years lost from the lockdown, which are estimated using the estimated reductions in life expectancy from unemployment and separations using U.S. data described above.

 

An intuition policymakers should develop is that that the death of someone aged 20 to 25 will “cost” a little over 50 life-years. Similarly, a permanent employment separation today will “cost” between 0.5 and 1.5 lost life-years, as a small fraction of permanent separations will yield permanently unemployed workers, who have shorter life expectancies in general (think stress-induced increases in cancer, heart attacks, homicide, and deaths of despair [alcohol, suicide, pills]). On the other hand, a typical COVID-19 death will cost between 7 and 17 years — simply because of the age and comorbidity structure of those typically dying already tilts them towards an early death.

A second key assumption, more debatable, is that absent the lockdowns unemployment would not have dramatically increased. Krugman and other economists make the case that the consumption cuts driving unemployment would have happened without the stay-at-home orders based on the experience of contiguous countries e.g. Sweden and Denmark both suffered similar GDP losses. This logic ignores the fact that huge fractions of the Nordics’ collective GDP are linked through trade and so a straightforward difference-in-difference exercise ignores the negative externalities Finnish, Danish, and Norwegian lockdowns imposed on their neighbors. Even if it was not lockdowns causing the consumption cutbacks, mainstream media did little to push back on catastrophe narratives and, through selective coverage, actively misled citizens’ about the actual (small) risks of COVID-19.

The fact of the matter is that once COVID-19 hit, there were going to be economic and life-year losses compared to the world where COVID-19 did not hit. However, the ultimate size of those income and life-year losses, and the geographic and age-allocation of those life-year losses, amount to a policy choice.

Some pedants may quibble that we have constructed our unemployment counterfactual using a time series analysis of U.S. data while we constructed our “no lockdown” COVID-19 life-year losses counterfactual using foreign country experience, effectively mixing two different designs.

We encourage the fair reader to consult the title of this piece. The correct counterfactual is impossible to know. Real results from a country like Sweden or the UK are better than results from an epidemiological model with extremely limited out of sample validity and fundamentally unidentifiable parameters. The point of this quantitative thought experiment is mostly qualitative and aimed at making the single point to citizens and policymakers: small permanent or cohort-level increases in unemployment induced by the lockdowns easily wipe out the small documented benefits of lockdowns.[8] The actual increases in unemployment in the United States are massive — exceeding the scale of the Great Recession. The long-run increase in unemployment cannot easily be constructed from contemporaneous cross-country data for the simple reason that those countries long-run employment evolutions haven’t happened yet, but it is reasonable to assume that COVID-19 has run its course in say, New York or Sweden — which now has around 1-2 COVID-19 deaths per day. Revolver.news would be honored if someone stole these insights for Lancet, which has a quick turnaround (recall their Hydroxychloroquine debacle), the CDC’s in-house journals, or the NBER working paper series on epidemics/COVID-19.

The economic devastation of the lockdowns will last for decades after the virus is brought under control, and it may lead to far worse ripple effects down the road. For the first time in its history, America has experienced what could be almost likened to a sudden stop in an emerging nation — a situation so crippling and perilous that long term financial and social stability have been legitimately threatened.

How did this happen? It is worth reflecting for a moment on the institutional incentives in academia that led to the pandemic pandemonium and the U.S.’s almost assured future fiscal collapse. Our calculations imply that — from a lost life-years’ perspective — the COVID-19 lockdowns in the U.S. objectively caused far more harm than good to every age category. The life year losses are so large that it is difficult to see any kind of refinement justifying the current American policy combination. Indeed, one would need to argue that — without elite panic — a disease only about two to four times as virulent as the flu would have induced a depression, which itself would indict the macrofinancial policymaking community.

Why have the policy trade-offs of COVID-19 never been presented to politicians, the media, or the public in terms of life-years? Why did economists and the public health field as a whole, which popularized linkages between socioeconomic status and life expectancy, suddenly fail to consider these linkages when it came to COVID-19? Why did trade economists ignore the trade spillover impacts of lockdowns when considering COVID-19 policy?

American politicians who enacted these lockdowns were driven by a combination of fear and political incentives. What drove tenured professionals to exaggerate the potential harms of the virus and minimize the costs of lockdowns? Citizens give huge amounts of both money and time to academics with the promise that knowledge can help lead to more rational policymaking. Indeed, a few economists were vocal in warning of the damage of potential lockdowns, but most were either silent or fomented panic. Some economists at the FED and MIT Sloan rushed research to print that actively misled policymakers making life or death decisions

Ridiculously, public health experts encouraged “Black Lives Matter” protests and riots and claimed that they actually reduced COVID-19 infections. Indeed, in the hyper-politicized atmosphere of academia, it is difficult to imagine any “academic” retaining their position who condemned the protests and riots on common-sense public health grounds. On the basis of this asymmetry (and similar asymmetries in the treatment of race and mortality, pollution, sexual minorities, and the role of economic analysis in public health), public health must be condemned as “not yet useful for policy analysis”.

COVID-19 shows that the promise of rational social research is a lie. Politicians and citizens would have been better off following common-sense approaches pursued in past plagues: shutting down borders within the United States and between the United States and other countries, isolating the elderly, and simply wearing a mask.

[1] http://www.econ.ucla.edu/tvwachter/papers/sullivan_vonwachter_qje.pdf

[2] https://data.oecd.org/unemp/unemployment-rate-forecast.htm

[3] http://www.econ.ucla.edu/tvwachter/papers/Unlucky_Midlife_Schwandt_vonWachter.pdf

[4] Ibid.

[5] https://educationdata.org/number-of-college-graduates/#:~:text=To%20illustrate%2C%20the%20estimates%20for,the%202015%2D2016%20academic%20year.

[6] http://www.econ.ucla.edu/tvwachter/covid19/LT_effects_STC_memo_vonWachter.pdf

[7] https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

[8] Because the employment losses primarily affect downscale workers, making less than $50,000/year, remote-working social and policy elites’ do not intuit or feel these downscale workers’ pain, unless enterprising journalists can derive some racial oppression narrative from the employment losses.

 

Please follow and like us:

67 thoughts on “Revolver Exclusive Study: COVID-19 Lockdowns Over 10 Times More Deadly Than Pandemic Itself”

  1. Posted Sep 7, 2020 by Martin Armstrong:

    Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko said last month via Belarusian Telegraph Agency, BelTA., that World Bank and IMF offered him a bribe of $940 million USD in the form of “Covid Relief Aid.” In exchange for $940 million USD, the World Bank and IMF demanded that the President of Belarus:

    • imposed “extreme lockdown on his people”
    • force them to wear face masks
    • impose very strict curfews
    • impose a police state
    • crash the economy

    Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko REFUSED the offer and stated that he could not accept such an offer and would put his people above the needs of the IMF and World Bank. This is NOT a conspiracy. You may research this yourself. He actually said this!

    Now IMF and World Bank are bailing out failing airlines with billions of dollars, and in exchange, they are FORCING airline CEOs to implement VERY STRICT POLICIES such as FORCED face masks covers on EVERYONE, including SMALL CHILDREN, whose health will suffer as a result of these policies.

    And if it is true for Belarus, then it is true for the rest of the world! The IMF and World Bank want to crash every major economy with the intent of buying over every nation’s infrastructure at cents on the dollar!

    There it is.
    The bankers are behind Covid19.
    All Roads Lead to the City of London

    https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/corruption/belarusian-president-claims-imf-world-bank-offered-him-a-bribe-to-impose-covid-restrictions/

    moderated
    1. This is part of what’s discussed in that interview between Rose and Dr. Martin that I posted earlier. The pockets are bottomless and most, if not all of the money is from taxpayers.

      moderated
  2. THIS is the interview that blows this corona plandemic WIDE OPEN. The facts are irrefutable. This WILL bring it down. We the People will have the last laugh. Some of what has been discovered will go against even the alternative explanation. it’s live now, but when it goes to a replay, I’ll post it. Best I can tell this was an attempt at genocide that failed miserably. The CDC and the Rat Fauci are two of the players behind it. David Martin’s opinion is that this is a result of the trade war between the US and China. They needed something on which to BLAME THE TRANSITION THAT IS COMING. This was an act of war from the industrial complex against the world. And from all he said, it does not seem like Trump was in on it. DO NOT MISS THIS UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES if you want to hear what is really behind it all. “Keep everyone in their home and make sure they have to go on line to buy anything”. Could not possibly be a place like Amazon, could it? Someone is writing the check for the governors and mayors to shut down local business. Someone is PAYING THEM TO DO IT!! “It was not the MIC it was the “technology industrial complex”. Google, Amazon, You Tube…..guilty as charged. Dis-ban them all and charge the sobs with treason.

    https://freedomplatform.tv/david-e-martin-exposing-moderna-the-star-of-plandemic-indoctrination-reveals-the-truth/#popup1

    moderated
      1. At 25:00 minutes or so, it is clearly stated that Fauci and his comrades engaged in an act of domestic terrorism according to the Patriot Act which did not expire until March, long after Fauci started on this road. So, it’s understandable why we saw the Rat vacillating on mask wearing and lockdowns…he was attempting to cover his arse! Do not miss that above video.

        moderated
      2. Unfortunately, Martin’s efforts went nowhere. It looks like the corruption is far deeper (is that at all feasible) than he or any of us thought. My conclusion is that Trump is under very bad council and as a germaphobe, may be in a state of grabbing at straws. At least the doctor tried and with todays interview with rose has not given up. BUT, the documents he presented are still viable and one can download them and send them to the appropriate parties. For myself, I prefer to try than sit back and complain. This coming weekend, i will again confront Paneras and now Bulk Nation with documents for them to sign which I will use on my way to composing letters to their corporate attorneys. I would rather go down fighting than on my knees.

        From Dr. Martin subsequent to the above video:

        On April 22, 2020, I provided the evidence that our current “SARS coronavirus pandemic” and the set of symptoms branded “COVID-19” were the direct consequence of illegal actions coordinated through the United States Department of Health and Human Services and their primary conspiring entities – the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (“NIAID” headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). My evidence and complaint was submitted to the Office of the Inspector General on April 23, 2020 and to the U.S. Department of Justice COVID legal team identified by U.S. Attorney General William Barr coordinated by U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan Matthew Schneider and Assistant Attorney for the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division Eric Dreiband. None of the aforementioned and none of the myriad of attorneys with whom I’ve spoken about the heinous abuse of public trust have had the courage to stand up for We The People.

        Having indicated that this death knell to the U.S. economic engine driven by small businesses was the result of a criminal conspiracy then, it was with inevitable resolve that I awaited Daniel O’Day’s final act – his justification for charging $2,340 per patient for the Department of Health and Human Services’ collusive priced remdesivir. He delivered the blow with brutal honesty. He didn’t lie about the cost of R&D (paid for by the U.S. taxpayer). He didn’t lie about the laborious clinical trials (done with COMPLETE exemption from liability courtesy of the U.S. FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization provided in February for SARS CoV-2 interventions). He simply stated that, in collusion with the compound’s inventors (the Department of Health and Human Services) the company established a price that was considerably less than the 4-5 days of hospitalization that their drug might, in certain random instances, reduce. His letter on June 29, 2020 is the coup de grâce in the chain of evidence that began in 2003 and ended with the Pandemic Depression of 2020. And for your edification, the letter is referenced here: https://www.gilead.com/news-and-press/press-room/press-releases/2020/6/an-open-letter-from-daniel-oday-chairman–ceo-gilead-sciences.

        Gilead Sciences – a donor to California Governor Gavin Newsom; California domiciled biotech; darling of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s NIAID; accused patent thief; and so much more – has finally succeeded in doing what Dr. Fauci and the SARS coronavirus co-conspirators never could have pulled off without the national meltdown by State of Emergency. Under the orchestration of the dishonorable lawyer, turned lobbyist, turned Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex M Azar II, with President Trump’s reckless confidence in Dr. Anthony Fauci to willfully lie to and terrorize the U.S. population, and with Governor Gavin Newsom insisting that the largest economy in the country and 5th largest economy in the world should be sacrificed on the altar of the industrial pharmaceutical industry’s macabre obsession with fear and blood-thirsty greed, Gilead now reaps the spoils of what was the Great American Experiment.

        As the rest of the world watches Johns Hopkins University data race with ever more positive bullshit tests peddled by none other than the co-conspiring CDC (and their patented restriction on RT-PCR that did not restrain the rest of the world but made independence impossible in the United States), whole countries fail to match in the entire “pandemic” one day of testing in the lands of Newsom, Northam, Wolf, and Cuomo. Why? Well, as I showed in April, when you control the means of establishing the narrative, when you report that this virus doesn’t instill sufficient fear to justify financial aspirations for pharmaceutical intervention, and when you restrict independent testing data that demonstrates that SARS CoV-2 like strains have probably been circulating long before December 2019, you get to maintain control of the narrative. And PROFIT from it.

        Never mind the fact that in over half of the patients subjected to Dr. Fauci’s wonder drug generously offered to the world, serious adverse events cast a shadow on whether the few days of decreased hospitalization were worth the risk.

        Prof Simon Maxwell, Professor of Clinical Pharmacology and Prescribing, University of Edinburgh, said:
        “The research is interesting but doesn’t prove anything at this point: the data are from a small and uncontrolled study. Remdesivir is currently being assessed in large scale clinical studies, which will be critical in determining whether it is a safe and effective treatment for COVID-19. This is not least because there were some adverse events (60%) reported in the current study, some of them serious (23%), including multiple organ failure, septic shock, acute kidney injury, and hypotension.”

        But never mind this. The lobbying industry that put Alex Azar into his role in Trump’s administration of criminal co-conspirators has its win. And it only cost us our country.

        Oh, and as of the date of this publication, NO attorney, NO Department of Justice official, and NO judge has had the moral or ethical spine to take this matter on. So, if you’re holding your breath for Q, a Kennedy, or a savior, don’t. Breathlessness is a symptom of COVID-19 and you’ll just add to the body count.

        moderated
    1. Having missed the first 15 minutes of the Rose/Martin interview., I went back to the replay and this is what was stated…(paraphrased)….. .If on March 28th, 2019, Moderna had written into its patent application that because of a concern for the re-emergence or DELIBERATE release of the sars corona virus, vaccine development was initiated.
      Just let that sink in!! Absolute fact…that was Moderna’s words. Absolutely STARTLING!!

      moderated
      1. This is part of what’s discussed in that interview between Rose and Dr. Martin that I posted earlier. The pockets are bottomless and most, if not all of the money is from taxpayers.

        moderated
    2. OK, here’s a video just issued by Dr.Martin after he did the interview yesterday with Rose. it covers some of the material, but certainly not all from a two hour interview. I am still waiting for the Rose interview to come up on another media. If anyone here finds it before I do, please post it. For some reason, many folks are hesitant to subscribe to London Real. I am not sure why. It’s free and you may opt out of any emails.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6-WM-gj_FM&feature=youtu.be&t=244

      moderated
  3. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-03/coronavirus-lockdown-protest-facebook-arrest/12624318
    I watched this woman arrested on Infwars. When the blacklivesmatter protested it was not pounced on like this woman. Like the article says, there are double standards. They have made it illegal to protest because they use the spread of the virus as an excuse. I saw the ex primeminister of england’s brother arrested for protesting. ALso because we are all locked up we mainly communicate over phone or video, which they monitor. The other day I comolained to the ABC Aus, about them saying George Soros was a nazi collaborator was a conspiracy theory, when he had admitted it on USA 60 minutes, they never replied, and my computer has been playing up until today.

    moderated
    1. BillAu…Australia has gone crazy…full Commie. They arrested a pregnant woman for some post on Facecrap and then allowed a 10,000 participant march in Sydney for BLM…absolutely off the wall insane.

      moderated
      1. I first visited Australia 38 years ago. It was like the US was 100+ years ago ….it was a fun place and not one homeless person did I see. Lots of rules and the people were mostly happy to follow them. Now, in 2020 there are even more rules, plus the addition of lefty leaders and many new Asian migrants.

        In Melbourne I wore a tiny US flag pin and they allowed me to ride the trams for free. A US citizen went to the front of any lines. The store greeters often said, “this man is a US citizen, out of the way”.

        moderated
        1. I find your comments condescending and to knowledge, not true. I am 65 yo and have never seen americans given special treatment at all. And we are not 100 years behind so called progress. I have grown up watching your media and your society and ours seem the same, except a lot of the BLM etc has not had the same effect here. When we had an american live in our house. He was a nice guy. I think he got into some trouble with the law, I am not sure where he went afterwards. I worked with contact to millionaire Texan on the Westgate Bridge in 1978, he never got any special treatment , in fact I think they used him to his disadvantage.

          moderated
          1. Hey BillAu… condescending? Really? I was treated mostly very kindly in Au. I tried three times to give my coins to the Tram money taker but he adamantly refused. He was carrying one of those huge leather sacks that they carry….maybe still do. One time a train driver I talked directions with gave me a free ride in his cab for a couple miles. There was a large seat behind the driver’s wheel where he told me to sit. All I had to say was 2 or 3 words and the Aussies instantly knew I was foreign. Many had never met an American. One bus driver went off his route and took me to my exact address. Nice people overall. I was in Au for 8 weeks so a lot happened.

            The photo shows me at the Opera House.

            Attachment

        2. I have worked with men who were american red indian descent, they were both great guys. The first was in1973, we pulled nails out of used wood by hand held pliers. The second when we made the precast concrete sections for the Westagte Freeway in 1985., his nickname was Shecky. Shecy’s car broke dow one day on a main road, a bastard truck rammed his his car and pushed it out of the was way, I have never heard if that sort of thing, and it certainly was not like being “pushed to the front of the queue.

          moderated
        3. My stepfather was in the military, army and airforce. He was an instructor in the airforce. He told me there was a big punchup between the yanks and the ausies, I seem to remember it was over women. Not all yanks were treated with your concepts.

          moderated
          1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Brisbane
            Battle of Brisbane
            From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
            Jump to navigationJump to search
            This article is about the riot. For other uses, see Battle of Brisbane (disambiguation).
            Battle of Brisbane
            Date 26–27 November 1942
            Location Brisbane, Australia
            Methods Rioting, protests, looting, attacks
            Parties to the civil conflict
            United States Army
            Australian Army
            Australia Australian citizens
            Casualties and losses
            None killed
            1 killed (Gnr Edward S. Webster)
            Hundreds wounded on both sides
            The Battle of Brisbane was a riot between United States military personnel on one side and Australian servicemen and civilians on the other, in Brisbane, Queensland’s capital city, on 26 and 27 November 1942, during which time the two nations were allies. By the time the violence had been quelled, one Australian soldier was dead and hundreds of Australians and U.S. servicemen had been injured.[1] News reports of these incidents were suppressed overseas, with the causes of the riot not made evident in the few newspaper reports of the event that were published within Australia.

        4. As I said you are wrong. If some people were good to you, fine. But if you are American in Australia you do not go to the front of the queue etc. That is not usual. We are not 100 years behind at all. To say that is condescending. I used to try and guess accents. Many times I have mistaken a Canadian accent for American, and it was taken as an insult.

          moderated
        1. BillAu…Something is going on in Australia that seems to be worse than any other country…..or are all these vids fake and psyops done to put fear in the average Aussie? What is happening is beyond explanation. All this for 678 dead (which is likely from other causes). What is going on? Where are the protests as in the UK and Berlin? Please watch this vid and give me your take. And I will tell you flat out, this will not happen in the US…never…no way.

          http://153news.net/watch_video.php?v=U89AUYG721ON

          moderated
          1. When I could ring Jim, before he stopped it, I used to brag how we didn’t have to wear masks etc. Now we have to. I currently wear a tea towel. Lots of people I meet agree it is some type of psyop but we don’t want to get fined or locked up. You may be right, it might be part of the psyop to scare us.
            The media reports seem to be real. But there may the aspect of trying to scare us with hoaxes too. I am not sure. We should be like Sweden and have the freedom to choose. It is all done with the pretence of them protecting us.
            Anyhow they didn’t go to the moon, they blew up the towers on 911 etc they are always lying to us, why would they stop now. They are still crapping on about the NZ mosque and having fake trials etc.

          2. As I said recently I have complained and asked questions at ABC EFC usually no reply, just my computer seems to be attacked since, trouble moving the mouse, jerky. They control the media, so anything they let through must somehow be to their advantage, eg divide and conquer.

  4. Now that the fear of the virus is gone (because people have figured out that no one dies from it), it has become clear that the Covid -19 hoax is simply the tool of a hard edge dictatorship whose ultimate goal is universal vaccination ——- which will perfect the enslavement of the population.

    And Trump has endorsed the vaccine.

    moderated
    1. My conjecture is that this is a campaign ploy and not a serious commitment on his part. He knows the dangers of vaccines, but overcoming the public’s belief in them prior to 3 November 2020 would be a practical impossibility. I believe he is temporizing and will oppose mandating vaccinations. My guess.

      1. I concur. He has said it’s going to be amazing how this covid disappears after the election…paraphrased. Trump may not have been a politician to start with, but he learned quickly. He likely remembers what happened to JFK and is being cautious.,

        moderated
    2. Operation Covid-19 It’s a fraud like AIDS, except a lot worse.

      And Trump has been suckered into it.

      Perhaps Trump was only fooled in the beginning and he is now trying to distance himself. But note that if this is the case, Trump’s reversal is far from energetic. In fact, Trump is still going along with it.

      Of course, true believers in Trump will claim Trump is playing dumb and that this is a ruse Trump is using to fool his opposition and get reelected Trump is just being his usual clever self. When the time is right, he will spring the trap and fix everything. The ship will be righted and the criminals jailed. But we haven’t seen much evidence of that so far, have we? In particular, we haven’t seen that with the Clintons.

      Or, perhaps Trump, after being reelected, and because he is weak of character, may have a change of heart and decide the best thing for him and his family is to go along with operation Covid. After all, Trump has a lot to lose. And most of it is encumbered by Jew bankers. And no trap will be sprung.

      Do you trust Trump to do the right thing based on his record? Or is it just wishful thinking?

      https://www.spreaker.com/user/11385457/powers-principalities-episode-166

      moderated
  5. Pingback: Revolver Exclusive Study: COVID-19 Lockdowns Over 10 Times More Deadly Than Pandemic Itself – Stateless Nation
  6. Trump is our only “choice”. True enough.

    But that does not make him competent—— or one of “Us”.

    Former builder; master of bankruptcy. Reality TV star. Owned completely by rich American Jews, the Israeli lobby and international Jew bankers. Weak as a popcorn fart, Trump’s record is nothing to be proud of.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9L50mdD6G0Y

    moderated
    1. Could anyone as “weak as a popcorn fart” (that’s an interesting metaphor…never heard that one_) have endured the last 4 years? I doubt it. “One of us” is not a quality I would expect from a leader. That’s why they’re called “leaders”. Most of us know do not know our way around the political world. Trump’s an exceptional businessman and that’s what it takes when you understand the US is a corporation as are 99% of all other countries.

      You did not say”incompetent”, but I think it was inferred. These are his accomplishments through November 2019 before they sprung the covid hoax on him:

      — Brad Parscale (@parscale) November 4, 2019

      Almost 4 million jobs created since election.
      More Americans are now employed than ever recorded before in our history.
      We have created more than 400,000 manufacturing jobs since my election.
      Manufacturing jobs growing at the fastest rate in more than THREE DECADES.
      Economic growth last quarter hit 4.2 percent.
      New unemployment claims recently hit a 49-year low.
      Median household income has hit highest level ever recorded.
      African-American unemployment has recently achieved the lowest rate ever recorded.
      Hispanic-American unemployment is at the lowest rate ever recorded.
      Asian-American unemployment recently achieved the lowest rate ever recorded.
      Women’s unemployment recently reached the lowest rate in 65 years.
      Youth unemployment has recently hit the lowest rate in nearly half a century.
      Lowest unemployment rate ever recorded for Americans without a high school diploma.
      Under my Administration, veterans’ unemployment recently reached its lowest rate in nearly 20 years.
      Almost 3.9 million Americans have been lifted off food stamps since the election.
      The Pledge to America’s Workers has resulted in employers committing to train more than 4 million Americans. We are committed to VOCATIONAL education.
      95 percent of U.S. manufacturers are optimistic about the future—the highest ever.
      Retail sales surged last month, up another 6 percent over last year.
      Signed the biggest package of tax cuts and reforms in history. After tax cuts, over $300 billion poured back in to the U.S. in the first quarter alone.
      As a result of our tax bill, small businesses will have the lowest top marginal tax rate in more than 80 years.
      Helped win U.S. bid for the 2028 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles.
      Helped win U.S.-Mexico-Canada’s united bid for 2026 World Cup.
      Opened ANWR and approved Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines.
      Record number of regulations eliminated.
      Enacted regulatory relief for community banks and credit unions.
      Obamacare individual mandate penalty GONE.
      My Administration is providing more affordable healthcare options for Americans through association health plans and short-term duration plans.
      Last month, the FDA approved more affordable generic drugs than ever before in history. And thanks to our efforts, many drug companies are freezing or reversing planned price increases.
      We reformed the Medicare program to stop hospitals from overcharging low-income seniors on their drugs—saving seniors hundreds of millions of dollars this year alone.
      Signed Right-To-Try legislation.
      Secured $6 billion in NEW funding to fight the opioid epidemic.
      We have reduced high-dose opioid prescriptions by 16 percent during my first year in office.
      Signed VA Choice Act and VA Accountability Act, expanded VA telehealth services, walk-in-clinics, and same-day urgent primary and mental health care.
      Increased our coal exports by 60 percent; U.S. oil production recently reached all-time high.
      United States is a net natural gas exporter for the first time since 1957.
      Withdrew the United States from the job-killing Paris Climate Accord.
      Cancelled the illegal, anti-coal, so-called Clean Power Plan.
      Secured record $700 billion in military funding; $716 billion next year.
      NATO allies are spending $69 billion more on defense since 2016.
      Process has begun to make the Space Force the 6th branch of the Armed Forces.
      Confirmed more circuit court judges than any other new administration.
      Confirmed Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
      Withdrew from the horrible, one-sided Iran Deal.
      Moved U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.
      Protecting Americans from terrorists with the Travel Ban, upheld by Supreme Court.
      Issued Executive Order to keep open Guantanamo Bay.
      Concluded a historic U.S.-Mexico Trade Deal to replace NAFTA. And negotiations with Canada are underway as we speak.
      Reached a breakthrough agreement with the E.U. to increase U.S. exports.
      Imposed tariffs on foreign steel and aluminum to protect our national security.
      Imposed tariffs on China in response to China’s forced technology transfer, intellectual property theft, and their chronically abusive trade practices.
      Net exports are on track to increase by $59 billion this year.
      Improved vetting and screening for refugees, and switched focus to overseas resettlement.
      We have begun BUILDING THE WALL. Republicans want STRONG BORDERS and NO CRIME. Democrats want OPEN BORDERS which equals MASSIVE CRIME.

      NOT BAD CONSIDERING THE WAR AGAINST HIS ADMINISTRATION.

      moderated
      1. I love these two from the list:
        “Secured record $700 billion in military funding; $716 billion next year.”
        “New unemployment claims recently hit a 49-year low.”

        But they don’t even come close the the absolute best:
        “Moved U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.” !!!!

        I take back everything bad I ever said about Trump. He’s the best!

        moderated
    1. I have decided. And that decision is to vote for Trump with all his faults than for a party that endorses impeachment of a sitting president with no valid evidence, endorses rioting and looting in America, takes a knee to BLM and has as their nominee, a man who is cognitively challenged to say the least.

      moderated
        1. But, I fear those mail in ballots are going to be a deciding factor. Somehow each one has to be verified. Here in Suwannee County Florida, if you have not voted before and are mailing in a vote, a valid form of ID must accompany that ballot. I see no reason that should not be the case nationwide.

          moderated
          1. From Jim Stone’s site..a Trump tweet:

            TRUMP HAS FIGURED OUT HOW TO MAKE MAIL IN VOTING AN ELECTION SECURITY FEATURE
            From his Twitter. Ha ha, this is GOOD:

            “Based on the massive number of Unsolicited & Solicited Ballots that will be sent to potential Voters for the upcoming 2020 Election, & in order for you to MAKE SURE YOUR VOTE COUNTS & IS COUNTED, SIGN & MAIL IN your Ballot as EARLY as possible. On Election Day, or Early Voting, go to your Polling Place to see whether or not your Mail In Vote has been Tabulated (Counted). If it has you will not be able to Vote & the Mail In System worked properly. If it has not been Counted, VOTE (which is a citizen’s right to do). If your Mail In Ballot arrives after you Vote, which it should not, that Ballot will not be used or counted in that your vote has already been cast & tabulated. YOU ARE NOW ASSURED THAT YOUR PRECIOUS VOTE HAS BEEN COUNTED, it hasn’t been “lost, thrown out, or in any way destroyed”. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!

            Me…Vote early in person. Why not?

        2. I am voting for Trump, even though I believe his knowledge is a mile wide and an inch deep. His endorsement of the death penalty for the remaining Boston Marathon boy is ugly. He did nothing but carry a backpack and be photographed by Federal Agents.

          But of course once you’re involved with hoaxes, your life is not worth two cents. The mom said that her older son had been talking with the FBI for over a year. This was the planing stage for Boston.

          The photo shows a naked Tamerlan in Police custody at night on Marathon Day. The next photo shows him in a Boston hospital morgue, his bloody body covered with deep cuts and bruises.

          Attachment

          moderated
  7. Maybe someone can help me. The recent figures from the CDC have said that covid death rates are 90% off. That would mean, rounding it off, that only 10,000 have died in the US from this fake virus. IF my math is correct, in a population of 330 million, that would mean 3 millionths of the population have supposedly died. Would that be right?

    10,000 divided by 330,000,000.

    moderated
    1. OK, I am correcting my own calculation. 10,000 divided by 330,000,000 is actually .00003, so I believe that is pronounced three hundred thousandths.
      So, if there are only 10,000 death in the US from the supposed covid, that represents three hundred thousandths of the population. Please correct me if I am wrong.

      moderated
  8. Although I continue to defend Trump’s policy from the start of this lockdown, knowing damn well he realizes this is all a hoax, I cannot fathom how he or anyone else can possibly compensate for the loss of life, treasure and simple human dignity. The toll is and will be will be staggering.
    This from State of the Nation:

    THE GREAT SCAMDEMIC OF 2020 IS COLLAPSING
    …Faster Than Building #7 on September 11th, 2001

    As hard scientific evidence mounts,
    doctors tell the medical truth,
    patients share their experiences,
    and governors are investigated by
    the U.S. Department of Justice,
    THE GREAT SCAMDEMIC
    inexorably undergoes a
    slow-motion free-fall collapse
    that only accelerates by the day.

    http://stateofthenation.co/?p=26660

    Attachment

    moderated

Leave a Reply