@Alligator Ed
If so cui bono?

I have been following this pandemic in China since early January. The one thing that was apparent was China went on a literal war footing immediately once they realized what they were dealing with. Very few countries took it as seriously as China did from the very beginning. Another important factor is that this epidemic was not politicized in China as was done in the Five Eyes countries.

View the following video. This video is typical of the transparency with which the Chinese treated the coronavirus outbreak. The last section discusses how doctors were allowed to use off labeled medicines in an attempt to find a cure. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the link to a video where they were testing chloroquine. I doubt the American CDC would allow this kind of freedom.

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHD_KfBjI8g]

The Chinese also used Chinese Traditional Medicines for mild and moderate cases. These are natural plant based medicines with histories of hundreds of years.

#3.1.2 It has never occurred before in my c99 career to directly quote almost the entirety of a lengthy comment. But here I shall:

You can characterize what they are saying as propaganda.

That does zero to demonstrate that they are factually incorrect in their assertions - which I note you don't even attempt to do.

Adams does not claim to be a doctor. Which doesn't disqualify him from having a reasonably informed opinion - after seeing numerous physicians reporting positive results in using it, reviewing published research, etc. - as to whether it ought to be employed and to draw some conclusions about what the results would look like.

If use of the HCL/Azithromycin/Zinc treatment is so obvious a thing to do then how do you explain the reluctance of Fauci and others to have been so reluctant (more like resistant) to using it?

Think that considerations of power and money don't come into it?

Keep the crisis and sense of panic going and it greatly improves the prospects for enhanced surveillance powers, distracting from matters like the abuses of the Justice Department, from irresponsible monetary policy and corporate behavior.

Mandatory vaccines, corporate bailouts, doing away with cash, the possibilities are breathtaking for authoritarians - AS LONG AS THEY CAN KEEP THE PANIC GOING - and convince people that only the PTB can save them - in exchange for giving them even more power, of course. A cheap, effective cure and ending the lockdowns does not resonate with that agenda. But for the rest of us, it's the rational thing to be pursuing.

Adams is at least proposing a way forward on a course not leading to further impoverishment and enslavement.

You have something better to offer?

The direct attribution of SARS2 can not be firmly established as to origin. Origin in fact could be halfway around the earth from the dissemination point. Plenty of suspicion arises in my mind, after listening to multiple sources, that the virus built on the SARS1 frame, with added accoutrements to unmake the dreaded SARS2. The process bears great resemblance in ways to automotive manufacture: this year's model is using last year's model frame plus a few more pieces of chrome. That's all this new derivation of an older virus denotes.

The technical issues in construction of the new viral accouterments, such as an improved spike protein, are not inconsiderable initially but they will gradually become as streamlined as manufacture of Model T's complexity and slowness has become as slick, computer-modeled, software-controlled robotic machinery as Elon Musk's Tesla.

The shift from Model T to Tesla is only possible because of the rapid advances simultaneously in technology, computational science, biochemistry, bioinformatics, pharmacology and pharmacognosy.

Bioinformatics = the indexing, storage and retrieval of information which may then be analyzed in several ways. One way is to collect studies of particular diseases, whether in depth or just basics. Another way to use bioinformatics is pattern detection. Of course pattern detection combined with statistics is a basic tool in epidemiology.

Pattern detection of objects in nature is somewhat hardwired into our embryonic nervous systems. The need to detect patterns determines survivability. When does that grouping of lines and colors mean a tiger is approaching--or is what is seen merely a bunch or rocks?

But, consider briefly, the following situation: there is a tiger, hiding behind and partially obscured by a bunch of rocks. The search criteria must be rapidly associated.

This is the supreme gift of bioinformatics: the provision for rapid and specific association of data to satisfy pre-selected criteria. But remember the quality of information determines the quality of the output. Garbage in, garbage out.

Pharmacognosy is a medical discipline, left to wither on the vine when manufacture of effective semi-synthetic and wholly synthetic substances was found able to more efficiently cure or allay our ills. This discipline enabled medical practitioners to identify those herbal substances asa they occurred in nature. For instance, during a stroll or a directed search for useful items, this discipline provided for the recognition of beneficial plants. With such knowledge a practitioner could then harvest what plants seemed needed at the time, talk them home (where early healers typically saw their supplicants) and then process them as much as necessary for use.

As Big Pharma emerged, the lack of knowledge of the beneficial properties of naturally occurring substances (mainly plant-based) was suppressed. The reason for the intentional blackout of healing properties of natural substance is because natural substances can not be patented. Thus no huge financial rewards.

The critical geopolitical questions are these, in other words more than one critical question is necessary. The media presents the issue as to who caused this act of bioterrorism (if in fact it is an act of bioterrorism) to occur. Implicit in this framing is the unstated presupposition of only one actor being responsible.

The usual question is what actor (state, faction, religion, ethnicity, etc.) is responsible for this catastrophe (SARS2 plandemic)?
But that questions makes multiple unnamed assumptions:
1. What nation or other actors has the resources to produce SARS2?
2. What is the intended purpose of SARS2?
3. Assuming SARS2 is an effective instrument of terror, by spreading disease and fear of death because of it, then who benefits by deploying it?

There may be other aspects here which I overlook, but one must adopt an analytical, non-ideological mindset in order to satisfactorily account for the several pieces of this immense puzzle. Pattern recognition once again.

I hope the readers of my message understand what is needed for non-ideologically based answers to this plandemic. We must call this a plandemic if we are to insist that one or several actors initiated this event purposerfully. If purposeful, the Plandemic MUST be classed as bioterrorism.

I lack any answers, but I do not lack for questions. If one wishes to solve problems, several issues exist:
1. A goal, whether inspired by biological necessity, intellectual curiosity, problem-solving, or simply greed
2. A body of knowledge, some of which is false, whether through ignorance, fraud, malice.
3. An organizational system in which to place the subsets in the body of knowledge.
4. This cannot be stressed sufficiently: an openness to accept conclusions, no matter how unpleasant, if the solution process is fairly derived.

@Alligator Ed
for a movie, and the guy in front of them is prattling on about Marshall McLuhan, and Alvy (Woody Allen) is getting more and more agitated, and finally he steps out of line and pulls Marshall McLuhan out from nowhere, and McLuhan reams the dude out for talking about stuff that he doesn't understand?

Well ... bioinformatics. 'nuff said.

#3.1.2 It has never occurred before in my c99 career to directly quote almost the entirety of a lengthy comment. But here I shall:

You can characterize what they are saying as propaganda.

That does zero to demonstrate that they are factually incorrect in their assertions - which I note you don't even attempt to do.

Adams does not claim to be a doctor. Which doesn't disqualify him from having a reasonably informed opinion - after seeing numerous physicians reporting positive results in using it, reviewing published research, etc. - as to whether it ought to be employed and to draw some conclusions about what the results would look like.

If use of the HCL/Azithromycin/Zinc treatment is so obvious a thing to do then how do you explain the reluctance of Fauci and others to have been so reluctant (more like resistant) to using it?

Think that considerations of power and money don't come into it?

Keep the crisis and sense of panic going and it greatly improves the prospects for enhanced surveillance powers, distracting from matters like the abuses of the Justice Department, from irresponsible monetary policy and corporate behavior.

Mandatory vaccines, corporate bailouts, doing away with cash, the possibilities are breathtaking for authoritarians - AS LONG AS THEY CAN KEEP THE PANIC GOING - and convince people that only the PTB can save them - in exchange for giving them even more power, of course. A cheap, effective cure and ending the lockdowns does not resonate with that agenda. But for the rest of us, it's the rational thing to be pursuing.

Adams is at least proposing a way forward on a course not leading to further impoverishment and enslavement.

You have something better to offer?

The direct attribution of SARS2 can not be firmly established as to origin. Origin in fact could be halfway around the earth from the dissemination point. Plenty of suspicion arises in my mind, after listening to multiple sources, that the virus built on the SARS1 frame, with added accoutrements to unmake the dreaded SARS2. The process bears great resemblance in ways to automotive manufacture: this year's model is using last year's model frame plus a few more pieces of chrome. That's all this new derivation of an older virus denotes.

The technical issues in construction of the new viral accouterments, such as an improved spike protein, are not inconsiderable initially but they will gradually become as streamlined as manufacture of Model T's complexity and slowness has become as slick, computer-modeled, software-controlled robotic machinery as Elon Musk's Tesla.

The shift from Model T to Tesla is only possible because of the rapid advances simultaneously in technology, computational science, biochemistry, bioinformatics, pharmacology and pharmacognosy.

Bioinformatics = the indexing, storage and retrieval of information which may then be analyzed in several ways. One way is to collect studies of particular diseases, whether in depth or just basics. Another way to use bioinformatics is pattern detection. Of course pattern detection combined with statistics is a basic tool in epidemiology.

Pattern detection of objects in nature is somewhat hardwired into our embryonic nervous systems. The need to detect patterns determines survivability. When does that grouping of lines and colors mean a tiger is approaching--or is what is seen merely a bunch or rocks?

But, consider briefly, the following situation: there is a tiger, hiding behind and partially obscured by a bunch of rocks. The search criteria must be rapidly associated.

This is the supreme gift of bioinformatics: the provision for rapid and specific association of data to satisfy pre-selected criteria. But remember the quality of information determines the quality of the output. Garbage in, garbage out.

Pharmacognosy is a medical discipline, left to wither on the vine when manufacture of effective semi-synthetic and wholly synthetic substances was found able to more efficiently cure or allay our ills. This discipline enabled medical practitioners to identify those herbal substances asa they occurred in nature. For instance, during a stroll or a directed search for useful items, this discipline provided for the recognition of beneficial plants. With such knowledge a practitioner could then harvest what plants seemed needed at the time, talk them home (where early healers typically saw their supplicants) and then process them as much as necessary for use.

As Big Pharma emerged, the lack of knowledge of the beneficial properties of naturally occurring substances (mainly plant-based) was suppressed. The reason for the intentional blackout of healing properties of natural substance is because natural substances can not be patented. Thus no huge financial rewards.

The critical geopolitical questions are these, in other words more than one critical question is necessary. The media presents the issue as to who caused this act of bioterrorism (if in fact it is an act of bioterrorism) to occur. Implicit in this framing is the unstated presupposition of only one actor being responsible.

The usual question is what actor (state, faction, religion, ethnicity, etc.) is responsible for this catastrophe (SARS2 plandemic)?
But that questions makes multiple unnamed assumptions:
1. What nation or other actors has the resources to produce SARS2?
2. What is the intended purpose of SARS2?
3. Assuming SARS2 is an effective instrument of terror, by spreading disease and fear of death because of it, then who benefits by deploying it?

There may be other aspects here which I overlook, but one must adopt an analytical, non-ideological mindset in order to satisfactorily account for the several pieces of this immense puzzle. Pattern recognition once again.

I hope the readers of my message understand what is needed for non-ideologically based answers to this plandemic. We must call this a plandemic if we are to insist that one or several actors initiated this event purposerfully. If purposeful, the Plandemic MUST be classed as bioterrorism.

I lack any answers, but I do not lack for questions. If one wishes to solve problems, several issues exist:
1. A goal, whether inspired by biological necessity, intellectual curiosity, problem-solving, or simply greed
2. A body of knowledge, some of which is false, whether through ignorance, fraud, malice.
3. An organizational system in which to place the subsets in the body of knowledge.
4. This cannot be stressed sufficiently: an openness to accept conclusions, no matter how unpleasant, if the solution process is fairly derived.