Fox Tails

#FlattenTheCurve Is Counterproductive

Those familiar with Event 201, the “high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, in New York, NY” hosted by Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will recall Dr. Caitlin Rivers’ performances, for instance in Event 201 Pandemic Exercise: Segment 4, Communications Discussion and Epilogue Video, wherein panelists discussed ways to ensure continuity of messaging by, for example; enlisting faith-based groups, silencing opposition on social media, and “flooding the zone” with messaging propaganda.

Considering her participation in a scripted event hosted only two months prior to the alleged outbreak of this unprecedented crisis, and which narrative precisely models the present scenario – and more importantly, public officials’ response – I find it intriguing and uncanny that I keep seeing Dr. Rivers performing a function in the media very similar to her performance in the Event 201 exercise.

The most recent example I’ve observed is in this Boston Herald article, which also included reference to this AEI report, co-authored by Dr. Rivers, along with former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, Mark McClellan, Lauren Silvis, and Crystal Watson. The talking points in the article read like they were lifted straight out of the Event 201 exercise; very melodramatic, with precise directives:

Returning to a state of normalcy following the coronavirus pandemic will require a series of delicate stages involving breaking the chain of transmission and maintaining a sustained decrease in new cases, experts from Johns Hopkins University said.

“We haven’t really found the edges of our outbreak yet and we need to continue scaling up,” said Dr. Caitlin Rivers of the Center for Health Security at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

“There’s a lot of time left in this pandemic for things to unfold,” said Rivers in a Thursday afternoon webinar.

“There’s a lot of time left in this pandemic”…? Is Dr. Rivers psychic…? Perhaps. More on that in a moment. In the article, Dr. Rivers further articulates talking points seemingly lifted directly from the Event 201 exercise, including a “four-step plan”:

“We need to be using our time now to plan how we will unfold those interventions when they become available,” said Rivers, referring to the four-step plan.

The first and current phase centers on supporting the health care infrastructure to handle an influx of sick patients and slowing the spread of the contagious virus by maintaining social distancing.

To move on to the second phase, a steady decline in new cases for two weeks will be necessary and hospital capacity to safely treat everyone who needs care must be demonstrated.

In addition, there must be capacity to test everyone who experiences symptoms and perform contact tracing, a “huge undertaking” that depends on a robust and well-staffed public health system, Rivers said.

“Testing capacity is still a major issue in many communities in the United States,” said Rivers.

Under phase two, strict physical distancing measures can be lifted and schools and businesses could reopen. Rivers did not give a timeline as to when that could occur.

Once a vaccine or other therapeutic treatment is made to combat the coronavirus, a third phase of building immunity, lifting all social distancing measures and preventing further infection can be activated.

Knowing when to relax social distancing measures is a tough call for leaders, said Dr. Kelly Henning, who leads the public health program at Bloomberg Philanthropies.

“We really need to let the public health teams in each of the localities, together with leadership, move us forward to understand when it is safe to relax some of the physical distancing that’s occurring,” said Henning.

Rivers added, “It does need to be a very thoughtful and well-considered decision.”

The last phase in getting the country back on track is implementing policies and innovations for protecting the public [read up on the dubious policy of R2P] from the next pandemic, said Rivers.

For now, “we need to focus very energetically on the things that are inside our control,” such as staying at home and practicing good hygiene, said Rivers.
[emphasis added]

That sounds an awful lot like what Bill Gates has been telling everyone, from Trevor Noah, to Chris Anderson, to Reddit, to Chris Wallace, and so on. Our only hope he says, is in “high-volume vaccines” in “billions of dose capacity”. As of this moment, the official holy grail JHU dashboard shows total confirmed cases: 1,612,646. So, why billions of doses…? So, what does Bill Gates think is the ‘ultimate solution’ to this current crisis?

…the ultimate solution, the only thing that really lets us go back completely to normal and feel good about sitting in a stadium with lots of other people is to create a vaccine, and not just take care of our country, but take that vaccine out to the global population…

What luck! He just happens to have an entire vaccine assembly line in his stable, complete with funding, Johns Hopkins “experts” (technocrats), testing, production, and a task master in the WHO, and Marxist terrorist and human rights violator, Tedros Adhanom – the first WHO director-general who is not a medical doctor, incidentally. And may I remind you; Bill Gates is also not a doctor, or an epidemiologist, or even an elected official. So, why is anyone asking him his thoughts on these matters, let alone listening to his answers? Constitutional violations notwithstanding, perhaps we all should acquaint ourselves with the Dunning–Kruger effect to better understand what might be happening here.

Back to the question of Dr. Rivers’ psychic powers. Did you notice the infographic at the top of this post? You can see it here on the UCSF Fresno Facebook page. This infographic was featured during another one of Dr. Rivers’ recent appearances: COVID-19: Johns Hopkins University Experts Discuss Pandemic Response, Social Distancing, and More (Tuesday, March 17, 2020) – YouTube. In the video, at approximately the 19:18 mark, Dr. Rivers discusses the concept of ‘flattening the curve’ with moderator and Johns Hopkins cohort, Dr. Josh Sharfstein. Here’s the unabridged dialogue:

SHARFSTEIN: OK, so people have heard by now probably about this concept of flattening the curve. Can you explain what flattening the curve is?

RIVERS: Flattening the curve is this idea that if we slow transmission, we can extend or change the shape of the curve. And the curve that we’re talking about here is the number of new cases that we see every day. So it may or may not be possible to prevent infections. That is always our number one goal in public health. But even if we are not able to do that, just supposing, it would be better to extend those number of new cases over a longer period of time so that our health care system can accommodate everybody who’s sick. So just as a toy example, if 100 people are going to get sick from this disease, we would rather have that occur over 10 weeks than one week. Because then our hospitals will be able to manage that more easily.
[emphasis added]

So, ‘flattening the curve’ means ‘extending’ – or prolonging it…? Though some contend, as Dr. Rivers suggested this might avoid a potential resource burden – a burden never before seen and which doesn’t exist, mind you – as the infographic clearly illustrates, this will prolong the outbreak. And while it may stand to reason mathematically, we could all agree we’ve never heard anything like this in history, let alone in our lifetimes. The best laid plans in theory don’t always work out in practice. So it turns out Dr. Rivers is correct, and if we follow the approach of ‘flattening the curve’ to ‘slow the spread’ we should indeed expect that “[t]here’s a lot of time left in this pandemic”. But how long until the vast majority of uninfected people start going stir-crazy while on house arrest?

Many experts, including Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, and Professor Knut Wittkowski maintain that ‘flattening the curve’ and ‘slowing the spread’ is precisely the wrong approach. There is overwhelming evidence, including our own experience of never having gone to these measures, to suggest we should end the quarantine immediately – or never have begun it in the first place – and adopt a more sensible approach. For several specific examples of exactly why ‘flattening the curve’ and ‘slowing the spread’ does far more harm than good, listen to Professor Wittkowski explain, for example:

  • 02:45: “…if you flatten the curve, you also prolong, to widen it and it takes more time. And I don’t see a good reason for a respiratory disease to stay in the population longer than necessary…”
  • 29:36: “…the second wave is a direct consequence of social distancing…”

If common sense prevails, then ‘flattening the curve’ to ‘slow the spread’ doesn’t sound good at all. On top of that, Deborah Birx recently reiterated the fact that the numbers of cases and deaths are inflated – or as she put it, “very liberal”. As was recently reported, and as Dr. Birx explained on April 7, the official current position of the WH Coronavirus Task Force is to classify all decedents who died with COVID-19 as having died of COVID-19, a critical distinction, which obviously presents inflated mortality figures, which obviously feeds into the panic.

So, I think in this country we’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality … if someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID death.
[emphasis added]

Deborah Birx, WH Coronavirus Task Force Press Briefing (April 7, 2020)

For those interested, Dr. Annie Bukacek offers a more detailed analysis of exactly how and why this “very liberal approach to mortality” is extremely problematic, and counterproductive. Robert Wenzel puts it this way: If You Get Hit by a Car and Die, You May Be Recorded as a COVID-19 Death.

Here’s where we come to the central point. Many of the same interests now vying to create a global, and some including Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates say possibly seasonal COVID-19 vaccine, are the exact same interests that were represented at the Event 201 exercise, including for instance:

This is at minimum a monumental conflict of interest. Could these organizations and key figures be orchestrating a situation where the outbreak is extended to coincide with the 12-18 month vaccine schedule we’ve been hearing – which also coincides with the Event 201 timeframe, incidentally. Why else would a vast array of multinational organizations gamble $1B+ on a vaccine that even people like Gates and Fauci admit; a) might never arrive, and b) might not even be necessary, were the outbreak to end?

On April 2, Johnson & Johnson Chief Scientific Officer Dr. Paul Stoffels told Fox News’ Bill Hemmer J&J began working on a COVID-19 vaccine on January 15 – only two days after Thailand reported the first international case outside China, and at which point there were; a) fewer than 500 confirmed cases worldwide, and b) zero known cases in the US (first confirmed case: January 20, 2020). Apparently, someone at J&J is psychic too.

Furthermore, on January 23, the same day China News tweeted:

“#Update: 830 confirmed cases have been reported in 29 Chinese provincial regions, including 177 in serious condition and 25 deaths (24 from Hubei and 1 from Hebei) as of 12 pm Jan 23: China’s National Health Commission. #nCoV2019 #pneumonia” the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations

CEPI tweeted:

“CEPI on Twitter: “Given the rapid global spread of the nCoV-2019 virus the world needs to act quickly and in unity to tackle this disease 🌏 We’re funding three programmes to develop vaccines against the novel #coronavirus, nCoV-2019”. It seems this group of folks all have tremendous psychic powers.

Wow, that’s fast! That’s almost as fast as fellow Event 201 Player and CEPI chairman, Jane Halton and colleagues Developing Covid-19 Vaccines at Pandemic Speed. The Event 201 panelists also discussed leveraging the “just-in-time” supply chain. You can’t make this stuff up.

Not to be outdone, Inovio Pharmaceuticals CEO, Joseph Kim got himself and Inovio in hot water, after repeatedly bragging all over mainstream news that Inovio had designed a COVID-19 vaccine candidate – in just three hours. Citron Research called his bluff and filed a class action suit. But Kim, undaunted, doubled down claiming Citron had “demonstrated a lack of understanding of the science behind DNA medicines.”

This story becomes even more bizarre knowing BMGF and CEPI are among those betting on Inovio, despite the facts that; Inovio is historically a dud:

Citron is the latest skeptic to voice concern about the company and its plans to develop a vaccine, pointing to decades of over-promising and under-delivering. Short sellers have pointed out that the drug maker has never successfully developed a medicine and has previously promoted plans to combat pandemic threats like Ebola in 2014 and Zika in 2016.

And Inovio stock was at nearly a 10-year low last October, only to skyrocket as much as 480% this year – in the worst market in US history, no less – including enough high-volume trading to put Martha Stewart in orange jammies. The following lines from this article say it all:

Trading in the Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania-based drug company topped firms like General Electric Co., Apple Inc., Ford Motor Co., and Microsoft Corp. Tuesday through Friday last week with the company being the most-traded stock in the U.S. on a couple of occasions. Well over 100 million shares changed hands on each of the past four sessions, a sign of retail activity given less than 100 million shares are even available for trading.

As of 1:36 p.m. in New York, more than 109 million shares had traded.

Speaking of bosom buddies, Gates and Fauci have both been saying that the only hope for mankind is a vaccine – that everyone must take, and / or certify they have immunity. Understanding her affiliations, it’s no surprise then, to hear the same sort of language from Dr. Rivers, that the only way life on earth can return to normal is by this alliance creating a vaccine? Listen closely, and you’ll hear that language throughout the media, particularly from this consortium. Or should we perhaps call it a cartel?

Incidentally, the fancy new model Birx and Fauci magically adopted from Chris Murray and the IHME, which was published the same day (March 26) Neil Ferguson published his massively downgraded ICL model (which no longer fit the scare narrative) – should rightly be called the Gates model, since the BMGF created the IHME, and appointed Chris Murray as its czar. In fact, Bill Gates even said, “our partner IHME” while talking with Trevor Noah. So, who’s leading the White House Coronavirus Task Force, Bill Gates?

Then there’s all the hydroxychloroquine / chloroquine pushback from every angle. I won’t even get into that here. But speaking of this cartel, and the obscene fortune of a new vaccine hanging in the balance should a mere therapeutic prove successful, could the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator be a limited hangout, intended to lead therapeutic development – right off into a corner to die?

It becomes even more disturbing and alarming when one understands the convergence of other pet projects Bill Gates and the BMGF is developing. For example:

So, in closing, what should we do? Well, it seems most who have any sort of clear picture as to what’s really going on here are sounding the alarm.