by Dr. Joseph Mercola
January 27, 2021
There is good reason why the Bible warns, "Where
there is no vision, the people perish" (Prov.
In the case of Technocracy's coup d'etat, those who
will not see, cannot see.
Their Technocrat enslavement will be on their own
We have warned from the beginning of the pandemic
panic that the whole scheme was an intentional
There are giant protests around the world demanding
that lockdowns cease and freedom be returned.
Those protestors may not have any understanding of
the big picture, but they understand the pain of
unemployment, social deprivation, wrecked
relationships and hunger.
You're living in a fog of war right now - a fog of COVID
war - according to Jeffrey Tucker, editorial director of
the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER)
description is typically reserved for the
disorientation, chaos and confusion of battle but now
applies disturbingly well to the fog surrounding
COVID-19 disease mitigation
often unclear who is making decisions related to
COVID-19 health policy, and why, and the rationale
behind such decisions is elusive or entirely absent
example is the timeline from January 2020, when mask use
was discouraged for the general public, to December
2020, when masks have become mandatory in many areas
Science suggests asymptomatic spread of COVID-19 is
rare, and masks are ineffective at stopping
transmission, but healthy people continue to be locked
down and told to wear masks
The Fog of
COVID War - Locking Down the Healthy
The "fog of war" is a term used to describe the uncertainty, chaos
and confusion that can occur during battle.
What you thought was
true entering into the battle may be turned upside down, clouding
your judgment as you try to make decisions in a sort of suspended
You're living in a fog of war right now - a fog of COVID war -
according to Jeffrey Tucker, editorial director of the American
Institute for Economic Research (AIER):
"It is often unclear
who is making decisions and why, and what the relationships are
between the strategies and the goals.
Even the rationale can
become elusive as frustration and disorientation displace
clarity and rationality." 1
This description is
typically reserved for the disorientation of battle but now applies
disturbingly well to the fog surrounding COVID-19 disease
If you'd like a concrete example, watch the video
timeline at bottom page, which takes you from January 2020, when mask use was
discouraged, to December 2020, when masks have become mandatory in
many areas. 2
March - Face
Masks Cannot Protect Against the New Coronavirus
In February 2020, Christine Francis, a consultant for
infection prevention and control at the World Health Organization
headquarters, was featured in a video, holding up a disposable face
"Medical masks like
this one cannot protect against the new coronavirus when used
alone... WHO only recommends the use of masks in specific
Those specific cases,
include if you have a cough, fever or difficulty breathing.
words, if you're actively sick and showing symptoms.
"If you do not have
these symptoms, you do not have to wear masks because there is
no evidence that they protect people who are not sick," she
In March 2020, the U.S.
Surgeon General publicly agreed, tweeting a message stating,
"Seriously people - STOP BUYING MASKS!" and going on to say that
they are not effective in preventing the general public from
catching coronavirus. 4
As of March 31, 2020, WHO
was still advising against the use of face masks for people without
symptoms, stating that there is "no evidence" that such mask usage
prevents COVID-19 transmission. 5
June - Public
Should Wear a Face Mask
By June 6, 2020, the rhetoric had changed.
evidence," WHO reversed their recommendation, with
Ghebreyesus, WHO's director general, advising
governments to encourage the general public
to wear masks where there is
widespread transmission and physical distancing is difficult. 6
This encouragement turned into mandates in many areas, with threats
of fines for those who did not comply.
In Humboldt County,
California, for instance, anyone who violated the order to wear
face coverings in public could be fined $50 to $1,000 and/or
face 90 days in jail for each day the offense occurred. 7
In Salem, Massachusetts, you could also be fined for not wearing a
mask in public, including the common areas inside an apartment
What's the evolving
evidence WHO referred to that made them reverse their position on
masks for the healthy general public over a period of just two
This remains unclear, but
an interesting development did occur...
Asymptomatic Transmission 'Very Rare'
During a June 8, 2020, press briefing - just two days after
Ghebreyesus advised healthy people to start wearing masks,
Van Kerkhove, WHO's technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic,
made it very clear that people who have COVID-19 without any
symptoms "rarely" transmit the disease to others. 9
WHO's interim guidance from June 5, 2020, supports Kerkhove's
studies on transmission from asymptomatic individuals are
difficult to conduct, but the available evidence from contact
tracing reported by Member States suggests that
asymptomatically-infected individuals are much less likely to
transmit the virus than those who develop symptoms." 10
If this is the case,
though, the recommendation that healthy, asymptomatic people wear
face masks or be locked down in their homes makes no sense,
highlighting just one instance of the ongoing "COVID fog."
Not to be called out on their blatant contradictions, on June 9,
2020, Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of WHO's emergencies
program, quickly backpedaled Van Kerkhove's statement, saying the
maybe we didn't use the most elegant words to explain that."
Van Kerkhove also stated
that the data she mentioned only came from a, "small subset of
studies," and added: 12
"I wasn't stating a
policy of WHO or anything like that. I was just trying to
articulate what we know.
And in that, I used
the phrase 'very rare,' and I think that that's misunderstanding
to state that asymptomatic transmission globally is very rare."
People, Not One Case of Asymptomatic Transmission
After WHO's asymptomatic spread debacle, talk of this topic died
down considerably. 13
But, quietly, a landmark
study involving 9,899,828 million residents of Wuhan, China, was
published in Nature Communications. 14
The participants were tested
for COVID-19 between May 14, 2020, and June 1, 2020.
No new symptomatic cases, and 300 asymptomatic cases, were
Among the 300 asymptomatic cases, 1,174 close contacts
were identified, and not one of them tested positive for COVID-19.
Additionally, of the 34,424 participants with a history of COVID-19,
107 individuals (0.31%) tested positive again, but, importantly,
none were symptomatic.
As noted by the authors,
"Virus cultures were
negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases,
indicating no 'viable virus' in positive cases detected in this
Tucker explained: 16
"The conclusion is
not that asymptomatic spread is rare or that the science is
The study revealed
something that hardly ever happens in these kinds of studies.
There was not one documented case. Forget rare. Forget even
Fauci's previous suggestion that asymptomatic transmission
exists but does not drive the spread.
Replace all that
At least not in this study for 10,000,000."
A meta-analysis of 21,708
at-risk people, of which 663 were COVID-19 positive and 111 were
asymptomatic, also found that asymptomatic transmission rates may
"lower than those of
many highly-publicized studies." 17
They suggested the
prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases is 1 in 6, and found the
relative risk of asymptomatic transmission was 42% lower than the
risk of symptomatic transmission.
In a preprint version of their study, the researchers noted,
"Our estimates of the
proportion of asymptomatic cases and their transmission rates
suggest that asymptomatic spread is unlikely to be a major
driver of clusters or community transmission of infection..."
As Tucker noted: 19
"We keep hearing
about how we should follow the science.
The claim is tired by
now. We know what's really happening.
The lockdown lobby ignores whatever contradicts their narrative,
preferring unverified anecdotes over an actual scientific study
of 10 million residents in what was the world's first major
hotspot for the disease we are trying to manage.
expect this study to be massive international news.
So far as I can tell,
it is being ignored."
Asymptomatic Spread Is Rare, Why Masks and Lockdowns?
Widespread asymptomatic spreading is the only reason that
mask usage among the healthy make sense.
For months, health
officials have been perpetuating the myth of asymptomatic spreading
to escalate fear.
Now, as people are increasingly eager to return to some sense of
normalcy, a mutated SARS-CoV-2 strain, which is supposedly more
virulent, is said to have emerged and resulted in new, more severe
lockdown restrictions in the U.K. 20
This perpetuation of fear has extended far beyond the initial
purpose of the lockdowns, which was to flatten the curve and avoid
As Tucker pointed out,
however, this has gradually changed such that now we're facing
lockdowns indefinitely: 21
"The initial round of
lockdowns was not about suppressing the virus but slowing it for
one reason: to preserve hospital capacity.
Whether and to what
extent the 'curve' was actually flattened will probably be
debated for years but back then there was no question of
extinguishing the virus.
The volume of the
curves, tall and quick or short and long, was the same either
way. People were going to get the bug until the bug burns out
Gradually, and sometimes almost imperceptibly, the rationale for
the lockdowns changed. Curve flattening became an end in itself,
apart from hospital capacity.
Perhaps this was
because the hospital crowding issue was extremely localized in
two New York boroughs while hospitals around the country emptied
out for patients who didn't show up:
350 hospitals furloughed
Science is what should be
used to dictate policy, but this isn't what's occurring.
Ongoing testing of
asymptomatic people is adding to the problem, as positive reverse
transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests are also
being used as justification for keeping large portions of the world
The problem is a positive PCR test does not mean that an active
infection is present.
The PCR swab collects RNA from your nasal
This RNA is then reverse transcribed into DNA.
However, the genetic
snippets are so small they must be amplified in order to become
What this does is amplify
any, even insignificant sequences of viral
DNA that might be present to the point that the test reads
"positive," even if the viral load is extremely low or the virus is
These "positive" cases
are keeping the pandemic narrative going.
Case in point, between March 22 and April 4, 2020, 215 pregnant
women admitted to a hospital in New York City were screened on
admission for symptoms of COVID-19 and tested for the virus.
Only 1.9% of the women
had fever or other COVID-19 symptoms, and all of those women tested
Of the remaining women who were tested even though they had no
symptoms, 13.7% were positive.
This means that, overall,
87.9% of the women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 had no
symptoms, 22 and the overwhelming research suggests they likely
wouldn't have transmitted the virus to others, either.
What does the science say
about masks for preventing COVID-19
The first randomized
controlled trial of more than 6,000 individuals to assess the
effectiveness of surgical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection
found masks did not statistically significantly reduce the incidence
The "Danmask-19 Trial," published November 18, 2020, in the Annals
of Internal Medicine, 23 found that among mask wearers 1.8% (42
participants) ended up testing positive for SARS-CoV-2, compared to
2.1% (53) among controls.
When they removed the
people who reported not adhering to the recommendations for use, the
results remained the same - 1.8% (40 people), which suggests
adherence makes no significant difference.
Rational Ground also looked at COVID-19 cases from May 1, 2020 to
December 15, 2020, in all 50 U.S. states, with and without mask
Among states with no mask
mandates, 17 cases per 100,000 people per day were counted, compared
to 27 cases per 100,000 people per day in states with mask
mandates 24 - COVID-19 cases were higher in areas with mask mandates
The findings further call into question the effectiveness of
mandated masks for preventing COVID-19, as does a case-control
investigation of people with COVID-19 who visited 11 U.S. health
The U.S. Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention report revealed factors associated
with getting the disease, 25 including the use of cloth face
coverings or masks in the 14 days before becoming ill.
The majority of them - 70.6% - reported that they "always" wore a
mask, but they still got sick.
Among the interview respondents who
became ill, 108, or 70.6%, said they always wore a mask, compared to
six, or 3.9%, who said they "never" did, and six more, or 3.9%, who
said they "rarely" did.
Taken together, this shows that, of the symptomatic adults with
COVID-19, 70.6% always wore a mask and still got sick, compared to
7.8% for those who rarely or never did. 26
An abundance of evidence suggests that locking down the healthy and
mandating mask usage for those without symptoms is irrational, at
best, and dangerous, at worst, considering both masks and lockdowns
are associated with ill effects of their own. 27
According to Tucker:
"With solid evidence
that asymptomatic spread is nonsense, we have to ask:
making decisions and why?
Again, this brings me
back to the metaphor of fog.
We are all
experiencing confusion and uncertainty over the precise
relationship between the strategies and the goals of panoply of
regulations and stringencies all around us.
Even the rationale has become elusive - even refuted - as
frustration and disorientation have displaced what we vaguely
recall as clarity and rationality of daily life."
Living in such a fog can
be intimidating, but the purpose of this article is not to spread
more fear but, rather, to empower you with information.
The fog of war, after
all, is not always an impediment.
It can also be used to
gain advantage, 29 and seeing through the fog is the first step to
winning the war...
1, 13, 16, 19, 21, 28
Institute for Economic Research December 21, 2020
2, 3, 4, 5, 6
January 1, 2021
April 22, 2020
8 - MassLive
April 14, 2020
9 - Twitter,
Ivor Cummins June 9, 2020
10 - WHO
June 5, 2020
June 9, 2020
Communications volume 11, Article number: 5917 (2020)
17 - Journal
of the Association of Medical Microbiology and
Infectious Disease Canada, December 2020, Volume 5,
Issue 4, pp. 223-234
18 - medRxiv
June 4, 2020
20 - The
New York Times December 21, 2020
New England Journal of Medicine April 13, 2020
23 - Annals
of Internal Medicine November 18, 2020 DOI:
24 - The
Blaze December 21, 2020
Weekly September 11, 2020 / 69(36);1258–1264
27 - Meehan
MD November 20, 2020
29 - Strategy
By Design, The Fog of War