A view from the frontlines in New Zealand

A view from the frontlines in New Zealand

The following was made available to me and represents a conversation with a source who is in a position to  confirm what most of us already know.

What I learned is that no-one going onto the MIQ booking site can ever get a booking.

There is not even a waiting list but there are people out there that are block-booking rooms and on-selling at huge profits. 

The government seems to have no objection to this.

This has since been confirmed by TVNZ’s John Campbell. 

The person he interviewed had decided not to profit from his operation.

The layperson’s Population Health view of CV-19

  • Firstly, and foremost – Coronavirus’s are common in the population.
  • Border controls – until confirmation was received that a genuinely highly dangerous and infectious strain of a new coronavirus from which the population did not have any
    pre-existing t-cell immunity was provided, flights into NZ needed to be restricted immediately, and the borders monitored rigorously with tracking and tracing of every person coming into NZ from infectious areas, while the situation overseas continued to unfold as scientific investigations took place of those people with obvious flu-like symptoms.  This is to determine how long someone is typically infectious for, and how long the ‘disease’ lasts. This NZ monitoring did not happen, and tens of thousands of travellers were allowed into the country with no tracing at all – not even basic information provided.
  • The gut feeling was that the decision to not restrict flights and monitor incoming travellers was purely a political decision to keep NZ’s tourism industry operating, and the NZ Govt was asleep at the wheel, and the WHO kept downplaying the risks. However, because of allowing tens of thousands unmonitored into the country, the borders were ultimately fully shut & a L4 lockdown was implemented in late March.  This not only destroyed NZ’s international tourism sector, it also severely damaged the domestic tourism and hospitality sector, and small businesses, which would have been affected less if more stringent border controls had been implemented from the get-go, as many genuine health population specialists had called for at the time i.e., not the theoreticians – epidemiologists.  If a rapid and more stringent border response had of been implemented, NZ would have only needed to go to L2 at worst.
  • Coronavirus – or flu, is a viral detoxification or cleansing, and can’t be “cured”.  When a novel coronavirus enters the population, you must let it run its course and it will unfortunately take those people who are most vulnerable, just like every other respiratory disease in history has.  The population health strategy response is to protect those in the community most at risk – such as people with comorbidities and weakened immune systems.
  • Quarantining healthy people in their homes has no scientific credibility.  It can help spread the infection because coronavirus has a much harder time spreading outdoors. Despite the higher risk of CV-19 spreading indoors, the Govt and media conveniently neglected to disclose that many of the CV-19 positive people in Auckland, although some others in their households also tested positive, many of them DID NOT TEST positive.  In one case, a person who tested positive – they found 2 other household members also then tested positive – another 3 household members were tested and were NEGATIVE.  Yet this was not made public due to ‘privacy’ reasons.  In many cases, people in the household who might have only had a headache, were also listed as CV-19 positive case, even though they were never tested.
  • Masks – again, no scientific credibility – they do not stop transmission. The virus is too small.
  • The WHO definition of ‘close contact’ was at least 15 minutes spent exchanging the same surrounding air with people closer than 1 meter to each other.  The Govt conveniently forgot to emphasise that its only ‘close contacts’ that need to be avoided and those are with an infected person. The introduction of an arbitrary 2 metre social distancing measure (in research – virus particles can circulate inside, much more than 2 metres) and applying this measure to the entire population, has no scientific validity and this contradiction to WHO definition led to widespread confusion.
  • NZ Deaths from CV-19 – it’s well known by the population health experts that several of these deaths listed as caused by the disease CV-19 WERE NOT EVEN tested for the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in their upper nasal cavity prior to death. The diagnosis was done on symptoms.  And almost all the listed deaths had one or more underlying health conditions, again this was kept secret for ‘privacy’ reasons.
  • The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test – well known by the population health experts that this test is an indicator only, of remnants of virus sheaths, that are often dead, and the test being performed higher than 30 cycle rates in NZ provides no indication if the viral load would be large enough to either infect another person or result in disease (illness).  Hence why many people who tested “positive” are not sick or infectious at all.  And why the “recovery” rate is so high (99%+).
  • I specifically asked if the claim made by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg that if we stopped PCR testing, there would no longer be a ‘pandemic’ was correct, my source replied, yes – absolutely – this is a bad flu season, made slightly worse again because of the relatively lower number of all cause deaths in 2018 for the elderly / immune compromised cohort in the population.
  • I specifically asked if the claim made by Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, that by giving out experimental drug therapy in the middle of a pandemic with high infectious pressure, could lead to both immunity escape, and enhanced reactions when the ‘vaccinated’ encounter the actual virus were correct?  My source – who has had the CV-19 shot replied yes – it doesn’t look good for those who have been injected if they are either immune compromised, or enter a highly infectious area where people are sick with the disease.
  • I specifically asked if the claim by Dr. Mike Yeadon, that any “variants” [he calls them “samiants”] would be recognised by the body’s innate immune system before mounting an immune response, therefore booster shots are unnecessary, is correct?  The reply was yes – booster shots are completely unnecessary at this point and could be quite dangerous as they would be impossible to test effectively.
  • I specifically asked if the claims made against the effectiveness of the CV-19 shot are correct (answers in italics); namely:  
    • Injected can still contract CV-19?  Yes – vaccinated will not be exempt from any future social distancing, mask, or lock-down measures
    • Injected can still be infectious if sick?  Yes
    • Injected may still experience severe symptoms?  Yes; for example if you have a pile of blue blocks like Lego, stacked together which represents the entire population, and then on top of that pile you add a smaller pile of red blocks that represents the number of people who actually get symptoms from a SARS-CoV-2 viral infection, and then place on top of that red pile a much smaller number of white blocks representing those who get sick from SARS-2 and go on to have severe symptoms, the impact of the CV-19 injections given to EVERY ONE OF THE BLUE BLOCKS at the base, is to remove only ONE OF THE WHITE BLOCKS from the very top.  [Note – This is the Absolute Risk Reduction of between 0.7% – 1.1% as pointed out by the drug companies themselves]
    •  Injected may still die from CV-19?  Yes
  • The source added, no-one knows how long any “immunity” from SARS-2 conferred by the CV-19 injection (which is not much), will last; it could be 3, 6, 9, or 12 months – anybody’s guess.  I then specifically asked given this, if Dr. Byram Bridle’s claim that if the administering of the injection program to the target population exceeds the duration of immunity conferred by the injection, then we’re back at square one, is correct?  The reply was Yes.
  • I asked, which agency in NZ, will be responsible for compensating those people who have negative effects from the experimental CV-19 injection?  The reply was – unknown which agency is liable.
  • Given all this information, I asked if the Govt’s policy response (lockdowns, masks, social distancing etc) to a bad flu season, and the subsequent CV-19 experimental injection program, was following best practice population health, evidence based scientific principles?  The reply was No – definitely not; the situation is all political.  And every time we hear the epidemiologists coming on the media to spout more doom and gloom based on speculative mathematical models, people have no first-hand or direct experience in the field, we cringe.  The Govt is only listening to the academics, who support its political narrative / agenda.

We know so little about what happens in these quarantine centres. Here is an interview from Dr. Sam Bailey

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Wordpress Social Share Plugin powered by Ultimatelysocial