Where does this pandemic threat come from?

And the answer is : ”they are doing their best to create it”.

By JEFFREY A. TUCKER for The Epoch Times

For years, we have heard about the growing threat posed by pandemics. It's like a civic doctrine that everyone knows.

This year, the theme of the entire World Economic Forum (WEF) conference was “Disease X,” which everyone is waiting for in one way or another. The idea is that we should all live in fear and be consumed by relentless paranoia about infections because the next wave of disease is likely upon us.

Bill Gates has been preaching this doctrine for many years. It is the foundation of an industry worth more than a billion dollars around the world and mobilizes all the major international institutions.

The next pandemic is coming, they say, governments and big pharma will save us.

At the start of the Covid lockdowns, I watched several TED talks by Gates, who says pandemics are multiply. He announces it as if it were a word of gospel and an indisputable fact. Nowhere does he give any explanation for this apparent evidence. He just constantly reaffirms that our travel, our trade, our hyper-industrialization and our widespread global chaos are sure to unleash something horrible from an angry Mother Nature.

By the way, watching these videos, it became clear to me that Gates knows absolutely nothing about viruses and how they work, much less epidemiology. It is obvious that he has never read a guide for dummies , let alone a first year medical text. Everything he thinks he knows comes from his experience with computer viruses, so to speak. For him, a vaccine works like Norton Antivirus.

Without exaggeration.

Regardless, what about this statement suggests that pandemics are increasing and can only become more and more dangerous? A team of researchers dared to ask the unthinkable question: “And how do we know?” » They are associated with the University of Leeds, UK, and assisted by the Brownstone Institute. They call themselves REPPARE and emphasize hard data to verify claims made by the pandemic planning industry.

What they found was fascinating. Detailed statistical examination of 100 years of pandemic threats shows that the pandemic risk is significantly decreasing and not increasing. This has been true for a very long time. Data that shows otherwise is attributable to better surveillance of pathogens, but the total number of deaths from pandemics indicates that they are becoming more and more discreet with each passing year.

The only exception is Ebola, but even then "this is a localized disease and normally quickly contained."

What about Covid-19? According to the usual claims, he confirmed Gates' concerns. And yet:

“Covid-19 of course intervened – for the first time since 1969, it caused higher mortality than the annual seasonal flu. This mortality was concentrated on sick elderly people, whose median age exceeded 75 years in high-income countries where mortality was highest, and on people with significant comorbidities, which contrasts with deaths caused by malaria, which mainly affect children, and with deaths of young and middle-aged adults caused by tuberculosis. Excess mortality has increased compared to the baseline situation, but it is difficult to estimate the real burden of morbidity if we distinguish mortality attributable to Covid-19 disease from mortality resulting from 'containment' measures, which have reduced disease screening and management in high-income countries and promoted poverty-related diseases in low-income countries. »

That's exactly what it is. In fact, we do not know, even at this late date, the total mortality burden due to Covid, the virus, compared to that resulting from prevention and control measures. The authors don't point it out, but today more people than ever before are living to age 75 and beyond, which would have been unthinkable in the past. The vulnerable population is therefore larger than ever. That said, when you add to that the uncertainty of PCR testing and the financial incentive to misclassify deaths, a fog settles over the entire experience.

In any case, there is no doubt that the experience seems comparable to a year of severe flu, but the mortality mainly affects people at the edge of the average lifespan, which turns out to be tragic without having an impact on the entire population. However, lockdowns affect everyone, for no apparent reason. It seems that the elites in charge expected a disastrous pandemic on the entire population that never materialized. However, they have not yet admitted this.

In fact, it turns out that for several decades, pandemics have been decreasing in severity and prevalence, as our authors show. This is a rather inconvenient reality for the pandemic planning industry.

Why have pandemics become less and less of a problem? The reasons are: 1) stronger immune systems due to wide exposure, 2) better sanitation, and 3) better hygiene. These factors are broadly associated with increasing global material prosperity, which improves living conditions overall. The pandemic planning industry has not played a decisive role in this regard. Rather, it is the aforementioned factors that are behind this development.

This single article undermines the entire global effort to prepare for something horrible. Meanwhile, we are largely neglecting the real problem of chronic disease, that is, heart disease associated with obesity and drug addiction. The global population in general is not in good health, but this is not due to the random appearance of viruses that annoy us, but rather to our own choices and behaviors.

Thinking differently is a real game-changer. Indeed, there is little pharmaceutical companies can do to remedy the situation. We know that their last attempt, in the face of the Covid-19 problem, was a resounding failure. These injections failed to provide sterilizing immunity to this rapidly mutating virus that has roots in the animal kingdom. It was always intended to infect most of the planet and for the vast majority of those infected it did not result in significant medical problems.

If you've read this far, you've already asked yourself the following question. Granted this is true for viruses of natural origin, but what about viruses made in the laboratory as a result of gain-of-function research and lab leaks? If these mad scientists continue to conduct these frightening biological warfare experiments in cooperation with totalitarian governments like China, how can we be sure that we are not all in grave danger?

Here's the problem. Even viruses created in the laboratory cannot escape the fundamental laws and dynamics of viral infections. This is a trade-off between severity and prevalence. If the virus kills the host, it does not spread, which is why very dangerous infections like Ebola tend to be self-limiting. The opposite is also true: a virus with a high transmission rate is by definition not very deadly.

There is one exception to this rule and it concerns what is called latency: the length of time the virus can live in your body and be transmitted before you experience symptoms. It is this condition that determines the mortality rate of many viruses. The latency time for Covid-19, despite the wild claims that were made early on, is about the same as that of the average flu. This aspect therefore turned out to be unimportant.

Is it possible to produce a dangerous virus with a very long latency period, like we see in the movies, in the laboratory? So far, we haven't seen any yet. Obviously we cannot exclude it. But this brings us back to the basics: if there is a growing risk of a pandemic, it is not found in nature. It will come from a laboratory.

This is why gain-of-function research should be banned worldwide. At the very least, governments must stop funding it!

Here we are. The concerns about “Disease X” are not about nature, but about the next madness that government scientists will invent. Aside from that, the risk of pandemics in general has declined significantly over many decades.

In short, the answer to the question “where does this pandemic threat come from” is: they are doing their best to create it.