@EVoCeO Yeah well. Stefan is mostly known for his "interesting" claims surrounding IQ and race. 😄 He is often described as a white-nationalist. I would take him and his host with a grain of salt.
Shiva has a lot in common with Judy from the last video. Claimed some controversial stuff about genetically modified food which did not pass the scientific filter and still did tour around states.
Yeah vaccination is a business, but I don't see what is wrong with that. If viruses exist and vaccines are effective then we need to fund research around them and buy them. Maybe I don't understand what are you trying to say by that.
@EVoCeO Yeah I tend to look at the surroundings of a person claiming. I think it is important to understand what is there for him. Both Shavi and Judy do benefit from misinformation of the public. Both have done unjust business with public fear before (which is exactly what they are framing pharmaceutics doing now, which could look like projecting).
Ah I see now. Yeah that would be evil, but I personally don't think that making countries economies fall apart makes anybody rich. Additionally, we are pretty good at identifying lab viruses from those genetically modified and pharmaceutic companies have thousands of researchers. It is really hard to hide something this big. Look how fast we got information from China even though they tried to censor it.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 - this is a paper that "clearly show that Sars-Cov-2 is not a laboratory construct"
https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/70252/how-do-scientists-know-whether-a-virus-is-man-made-or-not Answers here are pretty interesting.
@sda @vnarek Great find. This attests to the spinelessness and lack of confidence in the face of criticism and fear of losing your social capital. Here is the crux of the short article:
In May, in what it admitted was a direct response to the outbreak of swine flu the month before, WHO promulgated a new definition matched to swine flu that simply eliminated severity as a factor. You could now have a pandemic with zero deaths.
"Under fire, the organization is boldly lying about the change, to which anybody with an Internet connection can attest. In a mid-January virtual conference WHO swine flu chief Keiji Fukuda stated: "Did WHO change its definition of a pandemic? The answer is no: WHO did not change its definition." Two weeks later at a PACE conference he insisted: "Having severe deaths has never been part of the WHO definition."
They did it; but why?
In part, it was CYA for the WHO. The agency was losing credibility over the refusal of avian flu H5N1 to go pandemic and kill as many as 150 million people worldwide, as its "flu czar" had predicted in 2005."
@sda @EVoCeO
Thanks for sharing this article, I was not aware of this. My two cents.
They did not predict it well, but it does not mean they did it for big pharma. I would say it is hard to predict something like pandemic and it is better to have some false alarms than be late on calling it. Being late on calling it could cost much more money than a false alarm. We will potentially get better at these prognoses. Hopefully.
I found the changed description (it was not a definition, pandemic is already defined we don't need WHO to tell us what it is, swine flu met criterias on pandemic) on archive.org and traced back to original paper. Yeah it was pretty stupid to have this description on the site, but they don't call it something pandemic based on what is on their sites as description of one.
It would be great if there was more transparency about who makes the decisions in these cases. In the case of coronavirus they did pretty well I would say. (there was still some stupid shit, but at least people are dying 😄)
http://assembly.coe.int/CommitteeDocs/2010/20100125_Hearing_E.pdf this is the statement referred to in the article. there is reasoning behind why they declared swine flu a pandemic.
@vnarek I tend to focus on the message not the messenger and add it to the "realm of possibility" to be mindful of. What I'm saying is, if the vaccine is in support of protecting people from naturally occurring viruses is fine but engineering viruses that mutate in theirs hosts in order to force inoculation repeatedly (netflix for health | viro-capitalism) is just evil and this is the conspiracy. I'm trying to deduce whether or not this is a cash grab or a natural viral evolution.
This Dr. Shiva talks about it in that video, the deployment and "advertising" of the vaccine in order to create the demand then the fear and awareness and lastly the solution or vaccine.
And yes, there is a bunch of drama surrounding him as well. I always try to remember the tactics in sundering your opponent, one of the steps is discredit your opponents reputation. Things I keep in mind.