By Robyn Chuter
“Psychological operations (PSYOP) are operations to convey selected information and indicators to audiences to influence their emotions, motives, and objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.”
Psychological operations (United States)
I’m far from the first person to point out that the international response to the emergence and spread of SARS-CoV-2 has many elements of a psychological operation (PSYOP).
From the obviously faked videos of people abruptly collapsing in the streets in Wuhan (my personal favourite is the guy at 38 seconds into the compilation; you’d think the people behind this farce would stump up the yuan to pay decent actors, for god’s sake), to the invocation of the 1918-19 “Spanish flu” (which had a death rate over four times as high as SARS-CoV-2 and disproportionately affected young, healthy people with their whole lives ahead of them, resulting in far more years of healthy life lost than our current plague, whose median age of death is higher than average life expectancy), to the hyperbolic claims of overflowing hospitals (helped along by CBS’s creative repurposing of footage from a COVID-19 ward in Bergamo, Italy) while record numbers of health care workers were being furloughed or laid off due to the failure of the promised apocalypse to materialise, to the social media frenzy over a photo of piles of coffins of COVID-19 victims in Italy… which turned out to be from the 2013 sinking of a boat full of African refugees, to the mass media frenzy over mass graves on Hart Island, New York… which turns out to have been the burial place for unclaimed body in that city since 1869… yes folks, it’s been a veritable tutti frutti of PSYOPs of every imaginable flavour.
While most of these flavours had a short shelf-life and hence rapidly disappeared from the COVID-19 ice cream stand, there’s been a few perennial favourites. And among them, “long COVID” deserves a special mention.
Australia’s taxpayer-funded national broadcaster, the ABC, has provided breathless (pun intended) coverage of the bogeyman of persistent post-viral symptoms after recovery from COVID-19 since July 2020. It has relentlessly barraged its hapless audience with horror stories of debilitating fatigue, a brain fog “that’s difficult to quantify”, shortness of breath and chest pain ever since (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
To be clear, post-viral syndrome is nothing new. Over the course of my 25 years in clinical practice, I’ve seen scores of clients who suffered persistent symptoms after recovering from a wide variety of infections, including influenza, glandular fever and Ross River fever. An abnormal immune response to the initial viral infection is believed to be the cause of the fatigue, pain, muscle weakness and cognitive impairment that may linger on for weeks, months and even years.
But the spectre of “long COVID” has, from the start, been invoked to push a particular narrative about SARS-CoV-2: that this virus with an infection fatality rate no worse than a bad flu is actually an existential threat to humanity, whose spread must be stopped in order to save young people from a tsunami of brain damage.
And furthermore, even young people who are at statistically zero risk of dying from SARS-CoV-2 infection must receive experimental injections in order to save them from the threat of long COVID.
(For a while there, the ABC was even peddling the notion that getting jabbed could cure long COVID, even though the lead author of the tiny [44 participants, all of whom had been hospitalised for COVID-19 – that is, they were pretty seriously ill], as-yet-unpublished study hastened to point out that the “small overall improvement in Long Covid symptoms” that participants reported after receiving a jab were just as likely to be attributable to the placebo effect. Desperate much, Aunty?)
Oddly enough, despite the medical experts interviewed by the ABC clearly stating that the risk of long COVID is higher in older people who suffered more severe initial illness (see here and here, and confirmed here), the public broadcaster only seems to manage to find young people, most of whom had mild illness, to feature in its heartstring-tuggers about the travails of COVID long haulers (see here, here and here).
There are just a few teensy weensy widdle pwoblems with this whole long COVID narrative:
But yeah, aside from that, it’s a perfectly sound story.
1. Estimates of the prevalence of long COVID are all over the mapOur beloved Aunty tells us that long COVID “affects between 2.3 per cent to 76 per cent of people who get COVID-19″.
Wait, what? That’s one hell of a range! How can you even begin to think sensibly about whether you’d rather take an experimental jab that is at least 5 times more likely to lead to your premature demise than COVID-19 itself or run the risk of natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 (for which safe and effective early treatments for those at high risk of severe illness are available), when no one knows whether long COVID afflicts one in fifty or three out of four people who get infected… or any random number in between?
To add to the confusion, when the ABC interviewed Professor Gail Matthews, lead investigator of the ADAPT study which found that about 20% of Australian COVID-19 patients had some type of long COVID, they quoted her as asserting – I kid you not – that
“The only things that predict it [the propensity to develop long COVID] are the severity of the initial illness… they tend to be older, to be men and have co-morbidities, and the other factor that predicted whether you were more likely to get long COVID was being female.”
Hang on a minute, Prof Matthews. Did you just say that either being a man or being female predicts one’s likelihood of developing long COVID? That doesn’t leave many people out, does it?
2. Believing you had COVID when you actually didn’t is more likely to lead to long COVID symptoms than actually having had COVIDStrap yourself in, this one’s a doozy.
A study just published in JAMA Internal Medicine asked 26 823 adults from the population-based French CONSTANCES cohort whether they believed they had experienced COVID-19, and whether they had experienced any of the most frequently-reported physical symptoms of long COVID – sleep problems, joint pain, back pain, muscular pain, sore muscles, fatigue, poor attention or concentration, skin problems, sensory symptoms (pins and needles, tingling or burning sensation), hearing impairment, constipation, stomach pain, headache, breathing difficulties, palpitations, dizziness, chest pain, cough, diarrhoea, anosmia (loss of the sense of smell), and “other symptoms” – on a persistent basis since their supposed bout with the rona.
The researchers also used an antibody test to determine whether participants had actually had SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Here’s what they found:
“Persistent physical symptoms 10 to 12 months after the COVID-19 pandemic first wave were associated more with the belief in having experienced COVID-19 infection than with having laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
Association of Self-reported COVID-19 Infection and SARS-CoV-2 Serology Test Results With Persistent Physical Symptoms Among French Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Or, in plain English, people who falsely believed they had experienced COVID-19 were more likely to have “long COVID” than people who actually had COVID-19.
Notice how people who believed they had experienced SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to experience gastrointestinal symptoms, fatigue, impaired attention or concentration, headache, breathing difficulties, palpitations, chest pain and cough, regardless of whether they’d actually had it?
After mutual adjustment for belief and serology, the only persistent symptom that was actually more common in people who had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection was anosmia, which is a well-known feature of actual COVID-19:
Oh, and by the way, 58% of participants (average age 49, so not exactly spring chickens) who had serological evidence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 didn’t think they had been sick in any way. Boy, this rona sure is a fearsome virus.
3. What brain damage?
Although “our ABC” was more than happy to fan the flames of moral panic over “the impacts of COVID on children’s brains”, and brain imaging showed some short-term changes in grey matter in recovered COVID-19 patients, there is simply no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 infection poses any such risk in children; “long COVID” simply doesn’t exist in children or teens despite the constant media squawking to the contrary.
For that matter, when adults who complained of persistent neurocognitive symptoms (impaired attention, memory, and multitasking abilities, word-finding difficulties, and fatigue) as part of “long COVID” were put through a battery of neuropsychological tests and some fancy-schmancy brain imaging, no significant abnormality was found:
“Cognitive testing showed minor impairments only on single-patient level approximately six months after the infection, whereas functional imaging revealed no distinct pathological changes.”
Neuropsychological profiles and cerebral glucose metabolism in neurocognitive Long COVID-syndrome
The authors concluded that fatigue, rather than persistent cortical dysfunction, may be responsible for long COVID.
4. COVID jabs don’t prevent long COVID in breakthrough infectionsPretty much every country that manages to persuade a high proportion of its citizens to get jabbed enters what Alex Berenson has dubbed “the happy vaccine valley” – a transient dip in COVID-19 cases and deaths, followed by a sharp resurgence as the transient, partial protection conferred by these leaky vaccines wears off. It’s happened in the UK, Israel, Denmark and Germany, among others.
So it can reasonably be expected that everyone will eventually get infected with SARS-CoV-2, as the virus transitions from epidemic to endemic.
And that makes this six-month follow-up study of almost 10 000 people who developed breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 infections (i.e. infections after being “fully vaccinated”) worth paying attention to.
Not only did being “fully vaccinated” offer no real protection against serious outcomes of infection in people aged over 60 (you know, the only age group that’s actually at any statistically meaningful risk of severe illness), it also failed to prevent long COVID in any age group.
The study authors also noted that protection against serious outcomes of infection was strongest in the early phase of follow-up. Hello, happy vaccine valley. Be seeing you soon, unhappy vaccine plateau.
Defending yourself against PSYOPsIt’s an unfortunate fact that PSYOPs are part of modern life, and as such, it’s important to have a toolkit to recognise and defend yourself against these “campaigns for your mind”. I highly recommend reading this article in its entirety, but here’s a quick summary:
Final noteI’m not by any means dismissing the idea that long COVID may occur; as mentioned above, I’m very familiar with postviral syndrome.
Dr Bruce Patterson has identified changes in the activity of monocytes (a type of white blood cell) in people experiencing persistent symptoms after SARS-CoV-2 infection, and has developed testing and treatment protocols to address these immune system abnormalities.
No one’s suffering should be dismissed. However, there’s a long and inglorious history of pathologising human suffering for profit, and the reification of “long COVID” is a veritable Swiss Army knife of memetic warfare.
Forewarned is forearmed.
Two of Australia’s biggest sporting codes, the AFL and NRL, have succumbed to medical apartheid.
The AFL has made vaccination compulsory for all of its players.
The NRL has “issued a directive to clubs that left the mandating of vaccinations in their respective hands”.
The Canterbury Bulldogs have informed their players and officials that they expect them to be fully vaccinated. Bulldogs general manager Phil Gould said that “those with the ability to make a difference also have an obligation to do so and at the Bulldogs we take our community responsibility really seriously”.
If they took their responsibility ‘really seriously’, they would do their research properly and see the devastation that the vaccines are causing. They would encourage medical freedom, and they would support freedom of choice. They would stand up to tyranny and inspire children and adults around the country to do the same.
Several brave players have spoken out against vaccine mandates, including Nelson Asofa-Solomona (Storm), Luke Thompson (Bulldogs), John Asiata (Bulldogs), Dylan Walker (Sea Eagles), Api Koroisau (Panthers) and Jason Taumalolo (Cowboys).
Asofa-Solomona posted the following on social media: “Front line nurses speaking out. Ask the question, why are they willing to lose their job to not get the juice? What are they seeing that we don’t see?”
Front line nurses are speaking out because they witness firsthand the significant adverse events presenting in hospitals. Adverse events such as myocarditis, anaphylaxis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, Bell’s Palsy, blood clots, strokes and many other neurological, cardiovascular and immunological conditions. We should be listening to the nurses, not shunning them.
The NRL have even gone as far as to create segregation within clubs. They have reportedly “told clubs to designate separate eating and bathroom areas for players who are yet to receive two jabs”.
“The protocols also restrict players who are unvaccinated or have only had one jab from using indoor gyms, public transport and going to the pub. Additionally, they cannot have visitors at their home or attend other households.”
What sort of world are we living in? When did being healthy pose a danger to society?
The vaccine does not prevent transmission of the virus. This alone should put an end to all vaccine mandates. A vaccinated person is just as likely to transmit the virus as an unvaccinated person.
A preprint study found that there was “no significant difference in cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated, asymptomatic and symptomatic groups infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta”.
“Our study is consistent with other recent reports showing similar viral loads among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in settings with transmission of the Delta variant.”
“A substantial proportion of asymptomatic, fully vaccinated individuals in our study had low Ct-values, indicative of high viral loads.”
Another study in the Lancet showed that “fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts”.
A study in the European Journal of Epidemiology demonstrated that “at the country-level, there appears to be no discernible relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days. In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.”
Different states and territories have issued different sets of rules.
NSW have banned unvaccinated players from training with teammates until December 15 or when the state is 95% vaccinated. However, in QLD, all players can partake in pre-season training while adhering to NRL protocols, but that could change on December 17 when the state opens its borders.
Meanwhile, in the ACT, all players can partake in pre-season training while adhering to the NRL protocols, but in VIC, unvaccinated players cannot partake in any team activities.
This is another sign that vaccine mandates are purely political and not based on health, science or any semblance of logic.
When asked about their club’s vaccination status by Fox Sports, all clubs were willing to share this information except for the Canberra Raiders and New Zealand Warriors. Fox Sports and nearly all of the NRL clubs are obviously unaware that a person’s vaccination status is a private medical record and sharing this information is a breach of privacy and confidentiality.
The Canberra Raiders stated that “we won’t be commenting on player vaccination rates”, whilst the New Zealand Warriors said that player vaccination rates “is not information we will make available”.
At least these two clubs have some understanding of privacy laws.
AFL and NRL players are young, fit and healthy men. They are generally at no risk of developing severe illness, requiring hospitalisation or dying from COVID-19.
According to Stanford University Professor John Ioannidis, the infection fatality rate (IFR) for those aged 20-29 is 0.014%, and for those aged 30-39, it is 0.031%. In other words, players aged 20-29 have a survival rate of 99.986%, whilst those aged 30-39 have a survival rate of 99.969%.
To put this into perspective, all of these players have more chance of dying in a car accident than they do of dying from COVID-19. Should they be banned from driving too?
The NRL and AFL have sold their souls to medical fascism. They are participating in medical apartheid, and for that, they should be truly ashamed.
Players, like everyone else in society, have the right to choose what they put into their bodies, and they, like everyone else, should not lose their jobs, incomes and careers because of that choice.
This is especially true for a product with no long-term safety data, and more reported deaths from this one vaccine than all other vaccines in the past 30 years, as shown by the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in the US.
It’s time to wake up Australia. We are being run by totalitarian governments and organisations that have no regard for an individual’s health or safety.
There are already reports surfacing of athletes suffering from cardiac arrest and death in other countries following vaccination. With myocarditis presenting at alarming rates in younger males, are we going to see our sporting stars suffering from heart issues whilst training or playing?
To the AFL, NRL and other sporting codes, and to all of the players and officials, you have the power to stop this discrimination and segregation. You are role models for many young men and women in this country. They look up to you. Many follow your every move.
It’s not too late. Do the right thing and say no to medical apartheid. Not only for yourselves, but for the entire country.
Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has hinted that those who don’t receive booster shots will not be considered fully vaccinated moving forward.
Mr Andrews suggested that it would be about the “maintenance of your vaccination status” in order to maintain your ‘freedoms’.
“I hope, and we’ll play our part in this, like a month before your six months is up, then you will get a message and your vaccination certificate, the thing that gets you the green tick, you’ll be prompted to go and book a time to go and have your booster shot.”
Does this mean that people will need to receive a booster shot every six months?
And more importantly, where is the evidence to support such a program?
Israel was one of the first countries in the world to roll out booster shots. In order for someone to maintain their vaccine passport, or Green Pass, they are now required to have a booster shot. For the million or more people who haven’t yet had their third dose, they are now restricted from participating normally within society.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky recently announced that the CDC “may need to update our definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ in the future” to only include those who have had three doses of the vaccine.
Deputy Chief Medical Officer Michael Kidd explained that “antibody levels fall over time and there is a risk of breakthrough infections where vaccinated people may become infected and at risk of transmitting COVID-19 to others. So, a booster dose, if you like, turbocharges your immune response and provides additional layers of protection to you and to your loved ones, and to the wider community.”
The current research shows that immunity wanes relatively quickly.
A study conducted in Qatar and published in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that “BNT162b2-induced protection against SARS-COV-2 infection appeared to wane rapidly following its peak after the second dose”.
“Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any SARS-CoV-2 infection was negligible in the first 2 weeks after the first dose. It increased to 36.8%... in the third week after the first dose and reached its peak at 77.5%... in the first month after the second dose.”
“Effectiveness declined gradually thereafter, with the decline accelerating after the fourth month to reach approximately 20% in months 5 through 7 after the second dose. Effectiveness against symptomatic infection was higher than effectiveness against asymptomatic infection but waned similarly. Variant-specific effectiveness waned in the same pattern.”
Another study from Israel, also published in the New England Journal of Medicine, stated that “BNT162b2-induced protection against SARS-COV-2 infection appeared to wane rapidly following its peak after the second dose, but protection against hospitalisation and death persisted at a robust level for 6 months after the second dose”.
The most damning study of all is a preprint study that was just released, which concluded that “these data demonstrate a substantial waning of antibody responses and T cell immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, at 6 months following the second immunisation with the BNT162b2 vaccine. Notably, a significant proportion of vaccinees have neutralising titres below the detection limit.”
After six months, antibodies were no longer detectable.
The booster shot is not different to the initial shot, meaning that protection will mostly wane at a similar rate. Is this why Mr Andrews has suggested a booster shot every six months?
The vaccine was also developed for the wild-type virus, such as the Alpha, Beta and Gamma variants. The Delta variant is now the predominant strain, and the virus may continue to mutate. Will this render the vaccine completely ineffective, regardless of booster shots?
What’s more concerning is that the Federal government has “secured an additional 85 million doses of Pfizer, which brings Australia’s total Pfizer doses to 125 million”. This is enough to vaccinate the entire population five times over, and it doesn’t even include doses of AstraZeneca or Moderna.
What has the government got planned? What are they not telling us?
As we know, the long-term safety of the vaccine is unknown. There has already been an enormous amount of death and disability following the roll out of the vaccine.
In the US, there have been 818,044 adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, including 117,399 serious injuries and 17,128 deaths. There have been more deaths in ten months from this one vaccine than from all other vaccines in the past 30 years.
In Australia, there has been 72,011 adverse events reported to the Therapeutic Goods Administration, including 612 deaths reported shortly after receiving the vaccine. Nine of these deaths have been officially linked to the vaccine.
There has been 312 reports of suspected myocarditis, 836 reports of suspected pericarditis, 156 cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopenia (TTS), 131 reports of Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), and 85 reports of immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). All of these conditions are serious and could have devastating long-term ramifications.
What’s worse is that there is a maniacal push to vaccinate every man, woman and child. Why?
We need to slow down, not speed up. We need to take a step back. We are seeing a rise in cases, which will increase the chance of severe illness and death, in some of the most highly vaccinated countries.
Why is there such a cult-like mentality around vaccination? Why have the government purchased so many doses of the vaccine? And what is the government hiding from its citizens?
Many people were coerced into taking the vaccine in the first place. Will they be coerced into taking booster shots? Will those who choose not to take a booster shot be locked out of society with the unvaccinated?
It’s time to question the motives of those pushing vaccines on the entire population.
Where will it end? And at what cost?
Our articles and rebuttal pieces are written by our writers on our volunteer team