Sweden Refused To Impose New Lockdown Measures, Saying People Have Suffered Enough
Sweden didn’t lockdown or force mask usage, but
fewer deaths than other European Countries with forced masks and lockdowns
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/sweden-refuses-impose-new-lockdown-measures-saying-people-have-suffered-enough
“We cannot only think about infection control,” said Lena Hallengren, Sweden’s health minister,
“we also need to think about public health.”
An important distinction: “focus on Covid to the exclusion of other conditions and you risk lives.”
Hallengren’s 21 page report also uncovered a “decline in mental health” that was
“likely to worsen the longer the recommendations remain in place,”
leading officials to lift lockdown restrictions that previously applied to over-70s.
After deciding to take a “herd immunity” approach to COVID-19 at the start of the pandemic,
Sweden was roundly condemned for not following the harsh lockdowns imposed by virtually every other major European country.
However, as Newsweek acknowledged, Sweden’s COVID-19 death rate is lower than those of Spain, the UK and Italy,
countries which all imposed draconian lockdowns.

Unlike the rest of the continent, Sweden’s economy is also in a far better position to make a swifter recovery.
The country’s senior epidemiologist Anders Tengell has also criticized the
wearing of face masks as “very dangerous” because it gives a false sense of security
but does not effectively stem the spread of the virus.
————————————————————————————
Dr. Scott Atlas, the new head of the Cvirus Task Force, to replace Dr. Fauci,
says no need to wear masks if social distanced.  Wear a mask only if close and if caring for hi risk.
Here is his Tweet, which was Twitter-Banned because not “Politically Correct” which means wrong opinion according to Liberals.

———————————————————————————————
The Covid PCR Test is Fake –  so lots of fake tests give lots of fake “Infections” – no real 2nd Wave
https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-covid-19-numbers-game-the-second-wave-is-based-on-fake-statistics/5725003
Millions of people are now being tested which contributes to increasing the number of socalled “confirmed” Covid positive cases Worldwide.
These statistics are then carefully tabulated.
The governments need those numbers to justify their totalitarian measures.
What’s the Big Lie? What’s the Smoking Gun?
SARS-CoV-2 is NOT A “KILLER VIRUS”.
The fear campaign has no scientific basis. (See analysis below)
The standard RT-PCR test used to “detect” the insidious Virus, “can not identify the Virus”.
SARS-2 (which causes Covid-19) is not a killer virus. In fact quite the opposite.
But neither the governments nor the media have reassured public opinion.
The fear campaign not only prevails, it is gaining momentum.
———————————————————-
COVID19 PCR Tests Are Scientifically Meaningless – it’s a Religion now
https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid19-pcr-tests-scientifically-meaningless/5717253
Lockdowns and hygienic measures around the world are based on numbers of cases and mortality rates created by the so-called SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests
used to identify “positive” patients, whereby “positive” is usually equated with “infected.”
But looking closely at the facts, the conclusion is that
these PCR tests are meaningless as a diagnostic tool to determine an alleged infection by a supposedly new virus called SARS-CoV-2.
Unfounded “Test, Test, Test, …” mantra
At the media briefing on COVID-19 on March 16, 2020, the WHO Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said:

We have a simple message for all countries: test, test, test.”

This indicates that the belief in the validity of the PCR tests is so strong that it equals a religion that tolerates virtually no contradiction.
But it is well known that religions are about faith and not about scientific facts. And as Walter Lippmann, the two-time Pulitzer Prize winner and perhaps the most influential journalist of the 20th centurysaid:
“Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.”
So to start, it is very remarkable that Kary Mullis himself, the inventor of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology, did not think alike.
His invention got him the Nobel prize in chemistry in 1993.
Unfortunately, Mullis passed away last year at the age of 74, but there is no doubt that the biochemist regarded the PCR as inappropriate to detect a viral infection.
The reason is that the intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique, being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and not as a diagnostic tool to detect viruses.
How declaring virus pandemics based on PCR tests can end in disaster was described by Gina Kolata in her 2007 New York Times article Faith in Quick Test Leads to Epidemic That Wasn’t.
Lack of a valid gold standard
Moreover, it is worth mentioning that the PCR tests used to identify so-called COVID-19 patients presumably infected by what is called SARS-CoV-2 do not have a valid gold standard to compare them with.
This is a fundamental point. Tests need to be evaluated to determine their preciseness — strictly speaking their “sensitivity”[1] and “specificity” — by comparison with a “gold standard,” meaning the most accurate method available.
As an example, for a pregnancy test the gold standard would be the pregnancy itself. But as Australian infectious diseases specialist Sanjaya Senanayake, for example, stated in an ABC TV interview in an answer to the question “How accurate is the [COVID-19] testing?”:

If we had a new test for picking up [the bacterium] golden staph in blood, we’ve already got blood cultures, that’s our gold standard we’ve been using for decades, and we could match this new test against that. But for COVID-19 we don’t have a gold standard test.”

Jessica C. Watson from Bristol University confirms this. In her paper “Interpreting a COVID-19 test result”, published recently in The British Medical Journal, she writes that there is a “lack of such a clear-cut ‘gold-standard’ for COVID-19 testing.”
But instead of classifying the tests as unsuitable for SARS-CoV-2 detection and COVID-19 diagnosis, or instead of pointing out that only a virus, proven through isolation and purification, can be a solid gold standard, Watson claims in all seriousness that, “pragmatically” COVID-19 diagnosis itself, remarkably including PCR testing itself, “may be the best available ‘gold standard’.” But this is not scientifically sound.
Apart from the fact that it is downright absurd to take the PCR test itself as part of the gold standard to evaluate the PCR test, there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, as even people such as Thomas Löscher, former head of the Department of Infection and Tropical Medicine at the University of Munich and member of the Federal Association of German Internists, conceded to us[2].
And if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, COVID-19 diagnosis — contrary to Watson’s statement — cannot be suitable for serving as a valid gold standard.
In addition, “experts” such as Watson overlook the fact that only virus isolation, i.e. an unequivocal virus proof, can be the gold standard.
That is why I asked Watson how COVID-19 diagnosis “may be the best available gold standard,” if there are no distinctive specific symptoms for COVID-19, and also whether the virus itself, that is virus isolation, wouldn’t be the best available/possible gold standard. But she hasn’t answered these questions yet – despite multiple requests. And she has not yet responded to our rapid response post on her article in which we address exactly the same points, either, though she wrote us on June 2nd: “I will try to post a reply later this week when I have a chance.”
No proof for the RNA being of viral origin
Now the question is: What is required first for virus isolation/proof? We need to know where the RNA for which the PCR tests are calibrated comes from.
As textbooks (e.g., White/Fenner. Medical Virology, 1986, p. 9) as well as leading virus researchers such as Luc Montagnier or Dominic Dwyer state, particle purification — i.e. the separation of an object from everything else that is not that object, as for instance Nobel laureate Marie Curie purified 100 mg of radium chloride in 1898 by extracting it from tons of pitchblende — is an essential pre-requisite for proving the existence of a virus, and thus to prove that the RNA from the particle in question comes from a new virus.
The reason for this is that PCR is extremely sensitive, which means it can detect even the smallest pieces of DNA or RNA — but it cannot determine where these particles came from. That has to be determined beforehand.
And because the PCR tests are calibrated for gene sequences (in this case RNA sequences because SARS-CoV-2 is believed to be a RNA virus), we have to know that these gene snippets are part of the looked-for virus. And to know that, correct isolation and purification of the presumed virus has to be executed.
Hence, we have asked the science teams of the relevant papers which are referred to in the context of SARS-CoV-2 for proof whether the electron-microscopic shots depicted in their in vitro experiments show purified viruses.
But not a single team could answer that question with “yes” — and NB., nobody said purification was not a necessary step. We only got answers like “No, we did not obtain an electron micrograph showing the degree of purification” (see below).

Video: Vaccines 101 (Vanquishing the “Vaccinati” with Veracity)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUPHbxswFAQ&feature=emb_logo
Simply put: The TRUTH ABOUT VACCINES defeats the DECEPTIONS about Vaccines. TRUTH WINS!!
It’s our hope that this episode enables you put all the pieces together and be able to defend your position on vaccines, based upon TRUTH.
—————————————————–
Watch the Movies: VAXXXED and VAXXED II – https://vaxxedthemovie.com/stream/
——————————————————–
Watch Plandemic Part 2 of the Documentary   https://www.bitchute.com/video/xtE0690IPQaR/