Thursday, April 9, 2020

The World Health Organization's Ultimate Solution to Stopping Transmission of COVID-19

Most of us have paid little attention to the mind-numbingly boring World Health Organization (also known as the Bill Gates Health Organization) but one comment from Dr. Michael Ryan, Executive Director of the World Health Organizations Health Emergency Programme is rather stunning, and yet, it received almost no attention from the world's media.

Here is the March 30, 2020 in its entirety should you happen to be interested in the entire briefing:


Let's go right to the most pertinent part of the press briefing.  When asked the following question by a press representative from Bloomberg (46 minute 30 second mark):

"I wanted to ask, we've seen some different approaches to quarantine in China and in European countries with group quarantine used to good effect in China do you think that home quarantine will be as effective anywhere for people who are positive or would central quarantine be needed in order to have the same success that China had?

...Dr. Ryan answers by noting that WHO tends to use the word "isolation" for someone who has a confirmed case of COVID-19 and the word "quarantine" for someone who is at risk for contracting COVID-19 usually a contact.  WHO recommends that all suspected cases be tested and all suspect cases are isolated in an appropriate medical facility where the capacity exists and notes that "nobody disagrees with that". He notes that how the situation is handled  very much depends on the intensity of the epidemic at any given moment.  In low incidence areas, where there are sporadic cases or clusters we advise that all contacts be quarantined and that ideally, that quarantine should take place that is not inside the affected home but that remedy is not always possible.  He notes that the affected quarantined household needs to be surveilled regularly and provided with medical advice but that, if there are hundreds of thousands of contacts resulting from thousands of cases a day (i.e. intense transmission of the virus), it is difficult to deal with. 

Here's another quote (48 minute 26 second mark): 

"Home quarantine of contacts  is acceptable with appropriate information, education and, more importantly, a very rapid system of getting those people out of their homes if they become sick."

As you will see, home quarantine is not the real aim of the World Health Organization.  Now, let's look at the key comment in this press conference which you will find at the 49 minute and 56 second mark.  If you click here, you will be taken to the key comments by Dr. Ryan:

"...in most parts of the world, due to lockdown, most of the transmission that's actually happening in many countries now is happening in the household, at family level. In some senses, transmission has been taken off the streets and pushed back into family units, now we need to go and look in families and find those people who may be sick and remove them, and isolate them, in a safe and dignified manner.  SO that's what I was saying previously about the transition from movement restrictions and shutdowns and stay at home orders can only be made if we have, in place, the means to be able to detect suspect cases, isolate confirmed cases, track contacts, follow up on the contacts' health at all times and then isolate and... isolate any of those who become sick themselves.".

To me, the suggestion that, in order to stop the transmission of the novel coronavirus, it will require the removal and isolation of sick family members from their family homes, is the most stunning recommendation that the World Health Organization has made since this entire pandemic debacle began.  To think that the health organization that is regarded by governments as the driver behind their responses to the COVID-19 pandemic would recommend that children be removed from their homes and that families be separated as a solution to the "crisis" is nothing less than appalling.  But, on the upside, at least they will be treating us in a "safe and dignified manner" when they tear us from the arms of our loved ones.  

 I feel like I am living in an alternate reality.  Scotty, beam me up, there's no intelligent life here.

8 comments:

  1. "To me, the suggestion that, in order to stop the transmission of the novel coronavirus, it will require the removal and isolation of sick family members from their family homes, is the most stunning recommendation"

    And what do you recommend instead?:

    Leave them there to die?

    Leave them there to infect the other family-members?

    Not isolate them but allow them to infect others?

    ReplyDelete
  2. "look in families and find those people who may be sick and remove them, and isolate them..."

    I suppose anyone MAY be sick, Eric. How do you know that you are definitely not sick? Would you like it if the government has the power to isolate you if you MAY be sick in its judgement?

    ReplyDelete
  3. The reason for this declared “pandemic” is the following- first think back on how many “official” pandemics there were from say 1960-2005. Now how many “declared” pandemics have there been since that time.

    Understand this recent timeline and what has changed.

    In 2005 the WHO, the organization that “decides” what is and what is not a pandemic, changed the way it was funded. It went from a member funded global health agency to one where private interests now contributed the majority of it’s funds. This meant in particular that large pharmaceutical companies and investors connected to them now became the primary donors to the WHO- Public-Private-Partnerships (PPP’s). As a part of this these entities now demanded a seat at the table of the executive committees who are the ones responsible for “officially” declaring that there is a global pandemic.

    In 2007 the WHO changed it’s specific definition as to what qualifies as a global pandemic.

    The old definition was “a pandemic is an infection of global proportions and with a high mortality”- that definition was changed in 2007 to the more general and vague “a pandemic is an infection of global proportions.” This relaxing of the definition allowed for a more liberal interpretation of pandemic. Why this is so vital to understand is that once a pandemic is “officially” declared mechanisms in place and done through the WHO kick into gear designed to deal with this “global pandemic.” And who decides the direction and manner of these mechanisms? The executive committee which is now loaded with various representatives of those large pharmaceutical interests.

    One of THE main outcomes in these PPP’s is that the large amounts of funding that goes to combat these now seasonal “global pandemics” gets funneled directly into the coffers of the big business interests who decide what is a pandemic and how it should be dealt with- meaning funding that goes towards research and development that will now directly benefit those companies who “donate” to the WHO- primarily Big Pharma.

    “When a donor gives money, for example, the pharmaceutical industry, these representatives request to be present on the expert committees of the different [WHO] programs. There is a serious conflict of interest. It happened with the H1N1 epidemic, potential vaccine and drug manufacturers, like Tamiflú, were sitting on the committee that was deciding whether to launch an epidemic or not, obviously [the pharmaceutical companies] pushed for the epidemic to start and give a global alarm because they were going to have an impressive market. ”

    – German Velásquez, the creator of the Health Economics and Drug Financing Unit of the World Health Organization and former Director of its Secretariat for Public Health, Innovation and Intellectual Property

    ReplyDelete
  4. thanks for this information its reall important to updated in this pendamic crisis

    ReplyDelete
  5. As Eric says, "Leave them there to infect the other family-members?"

    Or more morbidly:
    "The family that stays together dies together".

    The Wuhan experience clearly shows that leaving infected people in family units is dangerous. At the moment there are lots of empty rooms in hotels and college residences that can be used for quarantine.

    I am not sure but Taiwan may be doing this--the quarentine that is. So far, they seem to have SARS-CoV-2 under control better than even Singapore or South Korea.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I feel like I am living in an alternate reality.

    I feel like I am living in an alternate reality.

    That is because you are.



    The normal everyday routines and rules of the game that you are used to no longer apply. No you cannot take your children to the park; no you cannot have a street party. Yes you can wait in line outside the grocery store so is not to have too big a crowd.


    You're in a full-blown highly dangerous emergency that requires sometimes extremely drastic changes in behavior it's not clear that anything's going to return to the old reality again.

    I don't really like a war metaphor, but think that you are in the ruins of post World War II Soviet Union or Germany we are having to basically rebuild or create physical and social reality.

    I feel like I am living in an alternate reality.

    That is because you are.



    The normal everyday routines and rules of the game that you are used to no longer apply. No you cannot take your children to the park; no you cannot have a street party. Yes you can wait in line outside the grocery store so is not to have too big a crowd.


    You're in a full-blown highly dangerous emergency that requires sometimes extremely drastic changes in behavior it's not clear that anything's going to return to the old reality again.

    I don't really like a war metaphor, but think that you are in the ruins of post World War II Soviet Union or Germany we are having to basically rebuild or create physical and social reality.



    ReplyDelete
  7. WOW, I am stunned at the complete and total sense of fear and submission that the media has successfully implanted in the minds of people like "jrkrideau" and "Eric Zuesse". I invite them to meet back here in exactly one month (May 11) and we can see just how many excess deaths there actually are, using excellent resources such as https://www.euromomo.eu/index.html. There have indeed been excess deaths during this winter season, exactly as there has been every year since at least 2013. Assuming that by May 11, the excess numbers are going down quickly and the peak was similar to the previous years, all the fearful masses will claim "look, it's obvious that social-distancing worked and we won the war, we’re heroes...!!!". Never once even considering the more likely explanation that another bad flu season was predicted and that in spite of our efforts, the virus simply ran its course. To be extremely clear, it is not possible to prove that people did not die or did not get sick due to social distancing measures. The claims will be made nonetheless and the fearful masses will breathlessly defend their dutiful and patriotic response because they will be unable to face the unthinkable fact they willingly destroyed the economy for nothing more than a bad flu season!

    To punch some more holes in the underlying assumptions driving this mass hysteria.

    1) This is a "novel" virus that no one on earth has any exposure or "immunity" to (gasp!)...I say show me the research and proof. They can't because there is none. It puts full faith in the all knowing system that apparently has a detailed catalog of every single virus on earth, and every single person on earth. (Never mind that huge numbers of people have no symptoms at all.)

    2) Testing testing and more testing....it's the new normal...let’s test every person on earth...multiple times!!! First of all, good luck with that. Second, how many tests have they typically given during past flu seasons? Oh wait, a tiny amount of a couple thousand tests per country...Really, why? Is that because it's a complicated 3 stage genetic sequencing test that is expensive and uses sensitive reagents? Meaning, ALL the data about past yearly "pandemics" is just a bunch of guesswork correlated loosely to a truly tiny number of actual tests. In fact, there are so many problematic areas surrounding the concept of mass testing for viruses that you would need an entire book to discuss it.

    3) They claim it's so much more contagious and fatal than any other virus....Again, I say show me the proof...you know, peer-reviewed studies, etc...oh wait, they cant possibly have done that research or know anything definitive about this particular virus in the current time frame, so again more guesswork being portrayed as facts. Gosh, I wonder what the motive could be...? Could it be fear, leading to unblinking acceptance of removal of our freedoms in the name of "safety".

    4) They say we won't be "safe" again until there's a vaccine....I say, show me the actual effectiveness of current vaccines, (of course using the “estimates” they create using their “models”), because you cant scientifically prove that a person did not get the flu due to using a vaccine. At any rate, the estimated effectiveness is 20-40% in any given year, since viruses constantly mutate and there are many different viruses. So, why would anyone possible stake their heath and well-being on an unproven and lightly tested vaccine that could even be dangerous or might not even be effective once it becomes available. I know, let's ask the illustrious and pious bill gates...Event 201?

    ReplyDelete
  8. At the end of the day, the masses have accepted on the authority of the media that the world is more dangerous than it was before, that other humans are to be feared and avoided, that the outside is also dangerous, because (gasp!) there might be a virus on any surface, anywhere, at any time!!! I ask sincerely to the folks who are accepting this, "When will it ever be safe again, and for that matter, when was it ever safe in the past??" As we enter the new phase of mass denial, with millions of folks afflicted by PTSD like symptoms locked away in the their “safe zones” for years to come, and the true depth of the economic damage becomes apparent, only then can we can properly assess the question of “was it worth it?”

    Many thanks to the author of this site for the excellent research and information presented.

    ReplyDelete