1 Note: The Plandemic claims have been debunked.
7 methods journalists used to dismantle the ‘Plandemic’ video
Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process
Court dismisses lawsuit by XMRV-chronic fatigue syndrome researcher
A California court has dismissed virologist Judy Mikovits’s lawsuit against fourteen people and two Nevada corporations, in part because she failed to submit necessary documents on time.
Mikovits is the author on a now-retracted Science paper suggesting a link between a virus known as XMRV and chronic fatigue syndrome, which has no known cause. She alleged that she was fired from the Whittemore-Peterson Institute for blowing the whistle on her former colleague’s activities, and that the defendants then colluded to imprison and defame her.
The court dismissed her case last Wednesday. According to the court minutes,
perhaps because of the convoluted nature of the alleged conspiracy, Plaintiff has failed to articulate a short and plain statement of her claim, establish jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants, or comply with the Court’s orders despite several opportunities to do so.
Further, Mikovits submitted her opposition to the defendants’ motion to dismiss too late:
In her untimely opposition, Plaintiff essentially concedes that there is no present basis for personal jurisdiction over the remaining defendants and requests that the Court forestall the present motions to allow discovery…
The court documents make for a good read — for instance, in one of the defendants’ documents, they argue:
Mikovits has failed to heed this Court’s warnings about how to go about prosecuting this case. Her complaints and her opposition papers continue to read like novels, replete with unsubstantiated factual and legal theories.
As baseball’s spring training approaches, we are again reminded that “three strikes and you’re out.” Mikovits has tried three times to plead around obvious problems like the statute of limitations and personal jurisdiction. And this time she has added insult to injury by failing to timely oppose the pending motions. Enough is enough.
2 The claim that 500 German doctors said that the pandemic is fake is untrue.
Fact-checked by: VoxCheck
2020/06/12 | Ukraine, Germany
MISLEADING: German doctors called the pandemic fake.
Explanation: The author refers to the personal opinion of one of the German officials, not to the results of the study.READ THE FULL ARTICLE (VOXCHECK)
Checking fakes in partnership with Facebook.
The network is spreading false news about a report by German doctors, which reveals “global falsifications” and proves that the coronavirus pandemic is a fake. Allegedly, at the request of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Germany, doctors prepared a report, but it hit the public domain and led to a scandal.
In fact, the document in question was not “merged” with the German Ministry, nor was it prepared or ordered by any of the German Interior Ministry units. The document expressed the personal opinion of one of the ministry’s employees and several independent scientists, who distributed it on the department’s letterhead without permission. This was immediately announced by the German Interior Ministry, and a few days later in parliament, Chancellor Angela Merkel further clarified that the Government does not agree with the conclusions set out in the document. An employee of the ministry was fired .
The author of the document was Stefan Cohn. According to him, he cooperated with ten experts. However, there were no virologists or epidemiologists among them .
The report provides a number of unsubstantiated theses, refuting the main ones.
“People who die from coronavirus are essentially those who will statistically die this year because they have reached the end of their lives and their weakened bodies can no longer cope with any occasional daily stress, including about 150 viruses. currently in circulation “
The exact death rate will be determined only after the end of the pandemic, but as of June 18, more than 440,000 people with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 have already died in the world .
Elderly people and people of any age with chronic diseases (diabetes, heart disease, lung disease, cancer, etc.) are indeed at greater risk of suffering from severe COVID-19. However, this does not mean that young and healthy people do not die from a new coronavirus infection .
“Worldwide, just over 250,000 deaths from Covid-19 were reported in 3 months, compared to 1.5 million deaths [25,100 in Germany] during the 2017/18 flu wave in the same period.”
We have already written about why the coronavirus is more dangerous than the common flu . According to statistics, according to the WHO, the annual seasonal flu causes 290-650 thousand deaths worldwide. That is, it is not one and a half million in 3 months.
“The danger of Covid-19 was overestimated: at no time did the danger posed by the new virus go beyond the normal level” <…> “The danger is obviously no greater than that of many other viruses”
The danger of the new coronavirus is that there is currently no vaccine or effective drug against COVID-19. And without vaccination and effective treatment and prevention, the virus can spread en masse and uncontrollably, causing large numbers of casualties. We wrote more about it here and here .
As for the overestimated danger, it is difficult to determine what is a “normal level” for the author. However, on March 11, the WHO declared a pandemic precisely because COVID-19 had spread worldwide, with more than 118,000 confirmed infections and more than 4,000 deaths.
“More people die from state-imposed quarantine measures than they die from the virus”
Despite the possible negative effects – such as rising unemployment or domestic violence, a study of 129 countries shows that restrictive measures have been shown to be highly effective in curbing the spread of coronavirus and reducing deaths. The effect of quarantine restrictions has been greater in countries where they have been introduced more quickly.
For example, early and severe restrictive measures in New Zealand (restrictions on public events and public gatherings, the operation of schools and businesses, going out without urgency), which were introduced when there were only a few cases in the country, reduced the potential mortality rate. about 90%. In other words, in New Zealand, mortality rates from COVID-19 could be 10 times higher without strict restrictive measures.