Name: The 'science' on mandates suddenly changes dramatically now narrative is collapsing | Dr. Leana Wen
Uploaded: 2022-02-08T19:17:30+00:00
Duration: 2 min 26 s
Description: Dr. Leana Wen lying and misleading through her teeth on Cable Narrative Network: WEN: The pandemic restrictions were always intended to be removed as soon as possible. Now the circumstances have chang

2 years ago

332

#COVID19 #vaccine #VaxInjury #VaxSafety #VaccineMandate #FaceMask #NaturalImmunity #CNN

Dr. Leana Wen lying and misleading through her teeth on Cable Narrative Network:

WEN: The pandemic restrictions were always intended to be removed as soon as possible. Now the circumstances have changed with case counts declining.

INFORMED REALITY: Case counts ARE declining, but are still higher than at any point up to December 28th, 2021.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&facet=none&pickerSort=desc&pickerMetric=new_cases_smoothed_per_million&Metric=Confirmed+cases&Interval=7-day+rolling+average&Relative+to+Population=true&Color+by+test+positivity=false&country=~USA

WEN: The science has changed. The vaccines protect very well against omicron.

INFORMED REALITY: The vaccines have NEGATIVE efficacy against omicron. If people are not very ill, it's because the disease is not severe, not because the jabs protect well. By the way, how has the science changed? The vaccines are effective against omicron but not against previous variants?

WEN: Everyone 5 and older has widespread access to vaccines.

INFORMED REALITY: Healthy lean people below 50 never needed access to vaccines.

WEN: One way masking works well: when YOU wear a mask, YOU are well protected.

INFORMED REALITY: It is now abundantly clear that even N95 masks provide no net medical benefit for the wearer in community settings. Case in point is Austria where N95 masks are even mandated OUTSIDE, and still cases have continued rising.

The only discussion that might have been possible about masks is on source control, i.e. does MY wearing a mask protect YOU? Although little to no scientific studies have attempted to answer this question, there is no reasonable proof that this is the case.

WEN: The responsibility should shift from the government or schools mandating, to individuals.

INFORMED REALITY: Agreed, but why is this different? This should have been the case from day 1. Is it because citizens are fed up with mandates and want freedom, so now the government is 'ordering' them to do what they wanted to all along?

WEN: We should not be looking at case counts at all, especially with a milder variant.

INFORMED REALITY: Agreed. Case counts of a hyper oversensitive test are useless, especially if you're not going to do anything when someone is 'infected'.

👉 It will never be justifiable to test millions who are not sick and not to treat millions who are.

If you test more, you find more 'cases', especially with a hyper oversensitive test with at least 95% clinically false positives.

WEN: Many people have been exposed to omicron and therefore have some protection either through vaccination or natural immunity.

INFORMED REALITY: So in the beginning, naturally acquired immunity was denied and any discussion on it was suppressed. Anybody who had the crazy idea that humans have an immune system that is robust and can adapt and has cross immunity, was called a quack.

Now that the jabs and all others measures of mass destruction have turned out to be complete a fiasco, it turns out that healthy, lean humans have a functioning immune system anyway. Who would've thought!?

NB: Being exposed to omicron does not 'therefore' give you vaccine protection.

WEN: The key number that we should be looking at is hospitalizations.

INFORMED REALITY: We should have looked ONLY at hospitalizations from the beginning. However, when you choose to ONLY select from INEFFECTIVE measures that do more harm than good ― such as lockdowns, social distancing, mask mandates, jab mandates, et cetera ― it doesn't matter what you look at, because whatever you do, it won't help. After all, ineffective measures are, by definition, ineffective. Effective harmless measures should be offered and encouraged regardless of hospitalizations, but the problem with these is they're not profitable and contrary to political and other agendas.

WEN: What's the harm of adults wearing a mask when they go into a grocery story?

INFORMED REALITY: Mask wearers inhale their own exhaust fumes which leads to higher CO2 concentrations, they inhale harmful bacteria and fungi from their mask, the pH of their respiratory microbiome is changed which is detrimental to their immune system, they inhale tiny particles from their masks like asbestos, they're stressed due to constant reminders of 'danger' and lack of human contact which is harmful to wellbeing and health in the widest sense, et cetera.

WEN: We should be intellectually honest and look at the harms of the measures for children.

INFORMED REALITY: We should have been intellectually honest and looking at both the benefits and the harms from the very beginning. If we had done that, we would've chosen a similar strategy as Sweden (i.e. as little ineffective harmful measures as possible), hopefully with vitamin D and early treatment added. However, any discussion of harms was made impossible for at least 18 months. Most countries chose to follow 'experts' who consciously chose to categorically ignore harms.

WEN: The risk-benefit calculation for children and masks has changed.

INFORMED REALITY: No, it hasn't changed one bit. Healthy, lean children have not been at risk for even one second, but masks have always been extremely harmful to them physically and psychologically. It is a disgrace that we ever forced masks on children and vaccinated them with an expired failed experimental toxic gene therapy with unknown but potentially huge long term risks.