The COVID-As-Pneumonia Hypothesis
The Biowarfare Chronicles, Part 8
Check here for more on the Biowarfare Chronicles. Join the RTE Locals community here where members of the community often sift through information undercovered by either the mainstream or even alternative media.
At some point last year, I was emailing with Drs. Brian Tyson and George Fareed, telling them that it may very well be that most of the [true] COVID-19 deaths were due to pneumonia, and that the most important mechanism behind their protocol might be the antibiotic effects of both hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin/doxycycline. Brian's response suggested that not only did they agree, but that they were ahead of me on that thought. And that's good to see—the doctors who were sane enough to focus on early treatment in 2020 were open-minded and aware of the branching hypotheses over what they saw on a clinical level.
This week I was extremely glad to see Martin Neil, Jessica Hockett, Jonathan Engler, and Norman Fenton—a group in which I have high trust—take on what we might term "The Bacterial-COVID Hypothesis".
From the article (which I recommend reading in full):
Our argument in favour of the hypothesis is:
Conflating pneumonia & covid-19 repeats an official longstanding tactic of conflating the attribution of influenza and pneumonia. The reduction in the public’s perceived threat of flu may have prompted the pharmaceutical industry to attempt a rebranding of the threat along with a new suite of marketable products to respond to that threat.
We investigated the hypothesis that a proportion of covid-19 deaths, those with associated respiratory symptoms (rather than deaths coded as covid-19 because of a positive PCR test, that are absent symptoms), were caused by bacterial pneumonia, and that maybe bacterial pneumonia was the primary, not the secondary, infection.
Does pre-existing exposure to bacterial pneumonia lead to a higher propensity to acquire a viral infection, such as SARS-CoV-2? And we suggest that SARS-Cov-2 infection may mask or be secondary to pneumonia infection and not necessarily the other way around, in whichSARS-CoV-2 is assumed to lead to bacterial pneumonia as a secondary infection.
Given this the actual burden of risk to hospitalized patients may not have been SARS-CoV-2 (or other viruses) at all but bacterial pneumonia.
High rates of ventilator induced pneumonia are confounded by changes in protocols, delays in admission, and overuse of ventilation etc. and estimates of rates of attribution to SARS-CoV-2 cannot therefore be relied upon. Respiratory deaths in hospitals may therefore have beeb caused by bacterial pneumonia but wrongly attributed to SARS-CoV-2.
The pattern of spread of SARS-CoV-2 in spring 2020, and the geographical concentration of the SARS-CoV-2 mortality toll is not what one would expect from a spreading respiratory virus. It is highly localised in specific geographically distant regions and cities. It is a pin-point pandemic.
Under modern sanitary conditions large scale pneumonia outbreaks in highly concentrated areas are unlikely to occur naturally. We must look elsewhere for explanations, including the possibility of human agency.
Given that rates of pneumonia deaths in 2020 were similar to those seen in previous years, changes in ventilation policy and practices coupled with new PCR testing, would be enough to cause the pin-point pandemic effect.
The central question is therefore: Was SARS-CoV-2 a bystander or decoy virus and were bacterial pneumonia deaths mistakenly or intentionally used as proof that SARS-CoV-2 was a deadly respiratory pathogen?
Events are akin to a scene from an Agatha Christie novel where SARS-CoV-2, a bystander used as a decoy, is guilty of the crime, with ventilation as the accomplice, but the actual criminal, who has got off scot-free, is in fact bacterial pneumonia. In other words, SARS-CoV-2 has been framed.
I have kept this hypothesis open, both on my substack and on the RTE podcast (which I hope to reboot in time), and although I disagreed with some of John Cullen's points about pneumonia data, I was glad to have talked with him if for no other reason other than the conversation focused my attention better on pneumonia (and was glad to see Jessica Rose focused on here and here).
James Lyons-Weiler also thinks that pneumonia, combined with inappropriate hospital protocols, was responsible for most of the deaths attributed to COVID-19. I suspect that was certainly true in 2020, and very possibly also since, though the vaccines did change the patient profile a bit.
The self-described 2nd Smartest Guy in the World (actually the 173rd, but the list of unofficial) agrees, and lays out a good Jikky thread tracing the suppression of antibiotics for pneumonia back to 2019! Huh.
There is even discussion of the alternate infection hypothesis closer to mainstream science sources, which is a good sign that not everyone is brain dead.
Now, let's take a look at a counterpoint to the hypothesis from somebody smart:
Walter doesn't exactly say that there was not a lot of pneumonia, but that the ground glass pneumonia is truly different from the typical pneumonia. And he may be right that a subset of the pneumonia cases are caused by the use of herbicides. After the bout of COVID I had earlier this year that involves a completely different effect on my lungs from anything I've ever felt (I nearly went to get x-rays, and suspect that I had ground glass damage), I think Walter is correct to focus on this aspect of COVID, but we are still talking about pneumonia.
Geoff Pain explains it as syncytia:
Some of the pneumonia may very well have been bacterial, though I was toss the infectious clone hypothesis back on the table as it is perfectly consistent with the data—and more likely than a new coronavirus strain to result in novel symptoms. I would also point again to the possibility of cadmium poisoning causing some subset of the damage—there really is no reason why all the cases of COVID have to be the result of the same source.
And honestly, if there is some chance that we are looking at a military operation involving bioweapons, we should remind ourselves of the vastly disproportionate damage done to African and Iranian leadership. This could indicate multiple causes of illness, and is consistent with the release of a low-grade viral/clonal bioweapon that could take the blame and muddy the waters.
Now, recall that the U.S. Navy is the military branch historically associated with the testing of weaponized bacteria against large U.S. (and probably other) populations. They are also the branch that appears to have suffered hushed up earlier COVID outbreaks. At this point, I'd like to point out that
Scientology, a cultic organization that has members around many or all of the most popular presidential candidates, was founded by a man with eugenics goals who worked in Naval intelligence.
Steve Bannon, who was close to president Trump not long before the outset of the plandemonium, then thrust himself into alt-media pandemic coverage, worked under the head of the Office of Naval Intelligence at the Pentagon in the early 80s (oh, you didn't know that?).
Steve Kirsch's mentor, Douglas Engelbart, was a Navy tech genius.
Remember all of these very real and important issues surrounding the plandemonium when you encounter people wagging a finger at you for not focusing narrowly on one thing. Some of those people might be shifting your attention from something larger that we need to understand in order to best move forward in a complex world.
I forgot to point out that Steve Kirsch's mentor, Douglas Engelbart, was a Naval tech genius.
I'm struggling to wrap my head around all the twists and turns. But pneumonia has me intrigued because in the 1918 pandemic it was the major cause of death. A gram negative bacteria called Pfeiffer's bacillus was thought to be the causal of "influenza" at the time. They vaccinated soldiers for pneumonia (and many other things) to try to prevent deaths. Point being they targeted pneumonia, not "Pfeiffer's bacillus". Curiously US soldiers preparing to go to war were worse hit (higher mortality) from "influenza" than those on the battle field, or the citizens.
I'm working on writing some stacks on my findings but other projects have my attention ATM. As far as I can tell "COVID-19" is a repeat of 1918 flu in way too many aspects, and the pathogen is the scapegoat.