Is COVID Simply A Rebranding Of The Flu?
I'm still worried about taking logical shortcuts 4 years later.
As the COVID operation kicked into high gear during March of 2020, Americans saw flu cases immediately plummet and stay incredibly low all the way through the following season. For those who were skeptical about this (and I believe people should be) it was easy to blame propaganda and intentional misdiagnoses.
Of course there did seem to be a financial incentive to slightly exaggerate the number of COVID cases—to what degree that happened we may never know. And sure, the fear of what people believed was a “novel pathogen” might have made clinicians speculate incorrectly when observing a bad flu case. However, it was testing that dramatically changed the recorded number of flu cases starting in 2020.
I know many skeptics out there will have an immediate knee-jerk reaction to the idea of testing. Some will say they simply don’t work. I think the important thing to note is that they do something. That something is not detecting a virus that has never been isolated, purified and then proven to be contagious and pathogenic. Heck, they can’t even get fluids from a sick person to infect those who are well via what would be considered normal transmission routes.
Nevertheless, positive flu tests consistently dropped to below 1%. This is regardless of seasonality and shouldn’t be impacted greatly by the number of tests taken.
But what does this actually mean?
The article this graph was pulled from operates under the unproven germ theory paradigm, so of course it points to masking and other implemented pandemic protocols as the reason flu cases dropped. I find this claim odd (even for people who believe in contagious pathogens) since the same correlation didn’t exist for COVID cases. Another popular theory is that the COVID virus was more dominant than the flu virus. Besides the fact that neither of these alleged pathogens have even been purified, I find this theory ridiculous because one would have to assume that a huge percentage of people who were exposed to the flu virus were also simultaneously exposed to the COVID virus while many millions of people weren’t diagnosed with either during that time period. Far-fetched, no?
A PCR test is often used when attempting to diagnose both flu and COVID. I think it’s safe to say that either the tests, the protocols of those adminstering the tests, or what exactly it was the tests were measuring changed significantly at that time. I have no evidence that the tests or the protocols changed in any meaninful way, so that leads me to believe the answer lies in patient samples. Since PCR allegedly detects molecular weight, it seems as if these tests are just taking a good guess as to whether or not a person is expressing a certain type of disease. Obviously, every person—well, sick or somewhere in between—is significantly different than the next, which means there will always be a lot of gray area when using these tests.
So, when people say COVID outcompeted the flu, maybe they are actually right to a certain degree. When people say COVID is just the flu rebranded, maybe they, too, are right to a certain degree. From what I have experienced, the severity, duration and number of symptoms for people who had what was labeled “COVID” was unlike anything they had ever experienced in their whole life. These observations matter and, in NYC, many of them came before the propaganda ramped all the way up. Something changed.
When putting the unproven virus narrative aside, we are able to look at COVID and the flu not as one-pathogen, one-disease expressions; but rather potentially linked multifactorial diseases. While they may have a common factor—possibly EMF radiation, possibly something else—it appears that the molecular weight most often associated with a collection of symptoms and experiences commonly labeled “COVID” overshadows that of a typical flu.
When investigating what happened back in 2020, it’s not enough to say a psychological operation made everyone believe the flu was something else. As I have been exploring for some time now, the COVID operation was planned over multiple decades. It would be foolish to think that there wasn’t prior knowledge to this curious wave of respiratory illness and even more foolish to think that the subsequent authoritarian actions were completely improvised by opportunists on the fly.
Something happened. Understanding that particular something might solve most of the COVID puzzle, including the main motive for a global immunization campaign. As always, drop your thoughts in the comments.
IMO one very important underlying condition is hypochondria. Plus the individual medical record. The convid appeared almost synchronized with the disappearance of the flu and therefore probably timely close after the annual flu shot initiative in the northern hemisphere. That, among other multiple influencial factors (!!!!) could explain the apparent severity of convid. As Fauci once said, the uptake of flu shots is disappointingly lower each year, but there are still some 20% of fearful and vulnerable flu shot takers that may be much more susceptible to fear mongering. The media's first reportings on convid started around mid january of 2020, the "tests" were "developed" around new year 2020, the WHO publicly announced some first "cases of concern" in Wuhan in the first half of january 2020. If fearful people hear "cases of concern ", then are a little bit sick like always, but are afraid of the supposedly novel dangerous disease, they may prepare and take some more medication than usual when sick plus a flu shot plus other "prophylactic treatments" which worsen the conditions in general. And that could turn out to a experience "unlike any other previous infection".
I can't remember any reportings of death spikes among homeless people. The average homeless has no TV.