Here’s why my ‘early spread’ evidence is dismissed
Early spread could probably only be ‘proven’ by the totality of CIRCUMSTANTIAL evidence.
In my quest to prove “early spread” happened, I face several significant hurdles. Many people - including the all-important “experts” and authorities - might even say it’s impossible to prove my “case.”
In today’s article, I’ll briefly list the key pieces of my “evidence” and then show how these pieces of evidence can be discounted as insignificant or irrelevant.
However, I conclude my presentation to my “jury” by simply pointing out I am trying a circumstantial case.
It’s not one “smoking gun” piece of evidence that proves my case; it’s the totality of evidence I think would prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that millions of people had been infected by a non-deadly virus before, say, the lockdown dates.
Summary of Evidence …
The Covid PCR Test …
This assay was created and then approved (at warp speed) by science organizations like the FDA. The PCR test instantly became the accepted “gold standard” of Covid diagnoses. (If you tested positive via this test, Congratulations! You have become an official “case!”)
Regarding my hypothesis, the obstacle I confront is that virtually nobody in the world was getting one of these tests before March 1, 2020.
Like probably every person reading this article, I think the test is largely a fraud (due to testers using 40 or more cycles to detect a “case.”) However, I do think the test - at 25 or 30 cycles - is almost-certainly picking up many authentic cases of Covid.
I also think if, say, 25 percent of the world population had been receiving these tests in January and February of 2020, the world would have had tens of millions of “confirmed cases.”
Alas, the only way I could use PCR tests to prove early spread is invent a time machine and then use my invention to go back in time (with scores of 18-wheelers loaded with tests) and start administering these tests to anyone and everyone who was experiencing Influenza Like Illness (ILI) symptoms.
As things stand, my naysayers simply say I can’t prove anyone had an early case of Covid because none of these people got a Covid test when they might have had the virus. And, as I’ve written ad nauseam, the only way to “confirm” a case (per the CDC protocols) is a positive PCR test.
In my opinion, some kind of maddening “Catch-22” diagnosis protocol was probably intentionally employed to sabotage my case!
(I still think my most-important “early spread” article is this one, where I identified 28 mechanisms I think officials used to conceal evidence of early spread. At the top of this list was the (successful) effort to intentionally delay the roll-out of the PCR test.)
The Covid Antibody Test(s) …
Since I didn’t invent a time machine, the only diagnostic test that might “prove” my early spread hypothesis is the Covid antibody tests. These tests, we’re told, show antigen evidence of “prior infection.”
Alas, very few people who might have had an early case could get a Covid antibody test either.
These tests didn’t become widely-administered until the last week in April 2020. This date is important as - per numerous studies, for many (or some) people - Covid antibodies may fade to undetectable levels in as few as two or three months.
This means if any person was perhaps infected in, say, November or December 2019 and these people got an antibody test in early May 2020, their antibodies might not show up as a “positive” in these test results. (This would be five to seven months after many people experienced Covid symptoms).
But, according to critics of my hypothesis, even a positive result doesn’t “prove” anything about early spread. Per the experts, every single one of these positive results were probably, or almost certainly, “false positives” … probably due to “cross reactivity” with other coronaviruses or ILI bugs.
I’ve identified more than 300 people in at least 17 U.S. states and five countries who I think had or maybe had Covid in the year 2019 based on positive antibody tests. (See some of my “antibody evidence” here and here).
“So what?” respond my naysayers. “You/we can’t trust those positive results.”
In other words, every positive antibody result was bogus and wasn’t really picking up Covid antibodies.
I’d note that many of these positive antibody tests came from CDC or government-approved testing labs. The rest were from private or independent labs, which we’re told were marketing “junk” tests that shouldn’t be trusted.
One question: If we can trust the antibody test results from 2021 as legitimate - i.e, the tests were fine and accurate by this point - why can’t we trust any of the same tests that were given earlier?
Also, did these tests produce only “false positives?” Is it possible that some of the “negative” results could have been false as well? Answer: “No. All the negative results were accurate.”
For what it’s worth, I also think our trusted public health officials intentionally delayed the wide-spread roll-out of antibody tests to conceal even more evidence of early spread.
Furthermore, I think probably every state health agency was receiving reports of “positive antibody results” from people who likely/perhaps had earlier cases and those results have never been released to the public.
Nor were any of these possible early cases ever (or very rarely) “investigated” by our army of public health virus sleuths and “contact tracers.” Our public health bureaucrats only started investigating “cases” once the PCR tests had been widely rolled out (which, significantly, was after the lockdowns).
Evidence of ‘Covid Symptoms’ via ILI Surveillance Reports …
Since I can’t use early PCR tests to prove my hypothesis and all the antibody tests were apparently awful, I made an effort to show that many more people were becoming “sick” from something in the weeks and months before official Covid.
My “ILI” stories (here and here) convinced me that the number of Americans who experienced ILI symptoms (which are almost identical to Covid symptoms) was much larger than the previous 10 “cold and flu” seasons.
I’ve also presented evidence that far more Americans were getting flu tests than in previous years. This prompts my question: Why were more people going to the doctor or emergency room and being given these tests?
To be clear, I’m not saying everyone who was sick between November 2019 and early March 2020 had Covid, but if just 10 to 30 percent of these people did have Covid … that would give us many millions of “early cases.”
(And, if many millions of American or world citizens had “early Covid,” we should have seen a noticeable spike in all-cause deaths before the lockdown dates … something no one observed - thus my conclusion this virus wasn’t “deadly.”)
I also note that most people who get sick don’t even bother going to the doctor so ILI Surveillance Reports (which show significant spikes in ILI) weren’t coming close to capturing all the people who might have had early Covid.
To reiterate, as I tried to illustrate in this recent article, if only 10 million people (less than 3 percent of the U.S. population) had been infected by, say, March 1, 2020, this hypothetical sample size would be plenty large enough to make this conclusion:
This virus is/was not “deadly” because if this many people had already been infected the “all-cause death” numbers would be impossible to miss … if the virus really killed 1 to 4 percent of people who contracted it (which is what we were told in the spring of 2020 by the experts).
As a sidebar avenue of my ILI research, I even spent days (really years) quantifying the huge numbers of schools in America that closed due to rampant respiratory illness in the flu season of 2019-2020.
(The only flu season that might have produced a similar number of school closings was the terrible flu season of 2017-2018, said to be the worst in 40 years. But even that flu season resulted in schools closing primarily in one month, January 2018. In the flu season of 2019-2020, schools were closing from November through February).
Alas, my ILI “evidence” can be easily dismissed by people simply saying, “Ah, Rice, folks get sick every winter. That doesn’t prove anything.” It was just a coincidence so many people got sick right before the Pandemic of the Century.
I also note the CDC quickly revised (significantly downward) its estimates of the number of Americans who were sick from an ILI in 2019-2020 … probably to further conceal evidence of early spread.
The Anecdotal Evidence …
I’m currently working on an extremely-long article that’s going to simply document the vast number of Americans (and global citizens) who think they may have had Covid before official Covid. With this article, I’m just going to publish 400 to 500 Reader Comments I’ve been saving for almost four years.
I’m sure the experts will say these “anecdotes” don’t matter either - these people might think they had early Covid, but they obviously didn’t (because the CDC said this was impossible).
Still, I for one think that if members of society produce enough similar anecdotes (if tens of millions of people happen to believe something), it’s worth giving a little scientific weight to the thoughts of these people.
An apt analogy might be the tens of millions of people who think they’ve suffered adverse health events from the “vaccines” and/or lost loved ones who had been vaccinated.
Question: Are every one of these people … wrong?
Answer from the experts: Yep.
‘The-Dog-That-Didn’t-Bark’ Evidence …
As Sherlock Holmes’ fans know, the world’s most famous fictional detective once solved a case by simply noting something that should have happened … but didn’t. (Basically, a dog that should have barked didn’t bark.)
I actually believe my most compelling “evidence” of early spread comes from all the “early spread investigations” that should have taken place, but never did.
For example, virus sleuths should have commissioned far more antibody studies (instead of just one … where the results weren’t published until a year after the subjects had donated blood).
They should have at least questioned people who had positive antibody tests.
They should have gotten PCR tests out into the public weeks earlier (and antibody tests too).
They should have explored the possibility this virus might have escaped much earlier, and perhaps from a lab besides the WIV.
It should have occurred to at least a couple of employees at the CDC that a big uptick in ILI in the fall and winter of 2019-2020 might be at least partially explained by the spread of this novel virus.
I could write 2,500 words on all the things real virus origin detectives would have done but didn’t do … if they were sincere in investigating Covid origins.
This prompts one red-flag question: Why didn’t officials do any or all of these (common-sense) things?
I’m not sure of this answer, but my Sherlock Holmes’ instincts give me one answer that might “fit.”
Perhaps some officials already knew this virus was spreading widely around the world in the fall and winter of 2019. They just don’t want the public to know this … because if the public did know this, it might be their fannies running from a mob with pitchforks.
From my investigations into myriad unexposed Covid scandals I’m sure of one thing: Our trusted public health officials never investigate anything they don’t want to “confirm.” Per my theory of this case, “Early spread” would probably be the first thing they didn’t want to “confirm.”
I once thought I was going to become a lawyer …
Like all would-be lawyers, I’ve daydreamed about presenting a case in a courtroom where I could bring justice to nefarious criminals.
Even today, I wish I could try my “early spread case” in a courtroom of public opinion.
It might take weeks to present my evidence and show the jury why said evidence was important.
I’d love to cross examine public health officials about all the things they should have done but didn’t do. I’d love to prove to my jury that these officials are serial liars and should NOT be trusted.
But, unless some courageous whistleblowers come forward, this trial would definitely be a circumstantial case. I don’t know if one juror would be swayed by one piece of evidence summarized above.
But I do think if a fair-minded and impartial jury heard all the evidence - and considered it in total - they’d be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that early spread happened … and was covered up by criminals who must have known this happened.
P.S. Any courageous whistleblowers who believe the public should know the real truth about virus origins are welcome to contact me at: wjricejunior@gmail.com
Brownstone recently published a piece asking what did officials know and when did they know it?
For sake of argument, let's say Fauci et al had no clue a contagious virus was circulating in the world before Dec. 31, 2019 (when China officials notified the WHO of this peculiar new virus).
Even if this is true, by, say, January 1, some officials must have wondered if this big spike in ILI in America might be explained by this virus.
They would have ordered as many antibody test as possible as early as possible to see what "community prevalence" might be in America. If they couldn't access Red Cross archived blood for eight months, they could have had an emergency blood drive at the CDC and tested their own employees for antibodies.
By at least the end of January 2020, they would have had a great idea of what percentage of the population had Covid antibodies. If this percentage was over, say, 1 or 2 percent (which equates to millions of previously infected people), they would have called off the lockdowns because they would have known this virus horse had long since escaped the stables.
They would have also known this virus was NOT "deadly."
None of this happened - i.e. "someone" must have known this virus was already spreading and didn't want the world public to know this.
If one views the pandemic response through the lens of crises management cracks begin to show.
From time immemorial the number-one order of business when any crises arises was always to impart a sense of calm.
In every circumstance when human life is being impacted the last thing wanted is panic.
Shouting fire! in a crowded place triggers the reptilian portion of the brain and will have people stampeding for exits in fight or flight mode. Panic always makes a bad situation worse.
Yet, no effort was made by any of our trusted institutions to impart a sense of calming mastery over the pandemic. Instead we were bombarded with inflated case counts. False images on social media flying unchallenged into our collective consciousness. And, a whole lot of baseless conjecture and outright misinformation.
Literally everything they served up added fuel to the fear train. This of course enabled them to tell us anything and most believed it. Why wouldn’t they.
Trash Nuremberg? Sure. Soft house arrest? OK. Mask? Why not! Stand six feet apart? Makes sense. Any dumb ass thing they told us most swallowed hook line and sinker.
They had us simpering to the point they could’ve said hop on one-leg six hours a day and undoubtedly many would’ve tried it and gotten mad at those who wouldn’t.
And, that is the thing that we really need to reflect on because as much as it makes us squirm to admit it, the pandemic was less about germs and more about mind control.
Blind compliance that leads to a paradigm shift in the way the “free” world is governed.