Irresponsible Immunocompromised

In our inverted ‘reality’, any of the overwhelming majority of immunocompetent who deviate even slightly from the extreme protocols—such as crossing the 6′ barrier —and thus threaten the small minority of immunocompromised, are considered irresponsible and even hated for causing potential agonizing death to innocent people. Let’s assume that a tiny minority of the tiny minority of the immunocompromised got that way through no responsibility of their own. Let’s leave out the possibility that people who voluntarily submit to pharmaceutical drug use including immune suppressing drugs and toxic vaccines may be responsible for their own immune compromise —though doctors and the medical profession generally, established originally by the Rockefeller family, and such later criminals as the Sackler family who are up to their eyeballs in the opioid epidemic, may be more responsible. And let’s leave out old people, say in excess of 65, since we can hardly blame people for wanting to live as opposed to the alternative —although elders in the past had developed traditions of voluntary euthanasia when they recognized they had become more of a burden on their families and clans than contributors, thus making voluntary euthanasia an act of filial love. We can even leave out children who sometimes become adults whose mothers listened to ‘experts’ and bottle fed children instead of conferring the #1 factor in life-long immune health, natural nursing (C-section birth is another factor, but let’s leave out that too).

We are left with people who through their own irresponsibility contribute to their own immune compromise, threatening the rest of us. They take ‘recreational’ drugs and alcohol that lowers their immune systems. This they do voluntarily. They overeat, especially sugar and carbs, and become obese, lowering immunity and becoming a disease vector to the rest of us. They don’t exercise or get fresh air and sunshine, depressing their immune systems and making themselves transmitters of disease. They eat nutrient-deficient diets, starving their immune cells of vital nutrients they need to function, and so make of themselves incubators of disease they spread to the rest of us. They smoke tobacco, cannabis, crack and who knows what else that tar their lungs and make them particularly susceptible to airborne disease, which their deficient immune systems harbor and spread to the rest of us. They engage in a wide range of behaviors of their own free choice, and avoid other behaviors of their own free will, that make them the Irresponsible Immunocompromised.

And then they comply with the dictates of their ‘champions’ and demand the rest of us, who are making good a faith effort—the sacrifices and disciplines needed to be healthy, make further sacrifices and be even more disciplined in order to protect them! And anyone who relaxes in maintaining the new social distancing rules is shouted at as being irresponsible! Why is no one shouting —with love, mind you —at these Irresponsible Immunocompromised to get their acts together and start supporting their natural immune health and join the rest of us who are trying to be healthy and contribute to real ‘herd immunity’?

We are given an answer to this question by those  ‘champions’ of the immunecompromised mentioned earlier: They are victims. It is irresponsible to blame the victim, they can’t help it, they are the way they are and the rest of us have to adjust. Again. We must show compassion and understanding, and we must monitor ourselves for strict compliance with our sacrifices and disciplines to protect them. They are the most vulnerable after all, and what kind of society would we be if we did not do our utmost to protect the most vulnerable among us?

Well, such a society wouldn’t be ‘progressive’. An enlightened ‘progressive’ would never dream of saying “these people, these Irresponsible Immunocompromised must now make a choice. We’ll help them if they decide to change their ways and start applying the sacrifices and disciplines the rest of us make to be more immune competent. This is their opportunity. They should feel a healthy shame in their lax indulgence, and in the ways it threatens the rest of us. From this healthy shame they can start to join the majority of people doing their best to be disease-resistant and so help keep the whole population healthy. We love them too, but if they won’t…”

What? “We are not going to exert any special effort to protect you. If you won’t make any effort to protect us and yourself, we are not going out of our way for you. This is your dilemma and your motivation, not ours. If you won’t change, you may get sick and die. That is not our fault. We detach with love.”

This is simply a human decision to align with what is at the core of the natural thrust of life. It used to be called eugenics, and while that word has been demonized since World War II, nature doesn’t care. It is still the thrust of nature to continually trend toward producing stronger, faster, better, longer-lived, more virile specimens of Her species. Our confrontation with the challenges of nature does that. Disease does that. Be strong and survive and reproduce, pass along strong traits, or get sick and die having failed to reproduce and pass on deficient traits. It is the most humane, decent, dignified way to respond to the inevitable indignity of pain and death.

However, we have a couple of major problems in our post-modern age. We have largely eliminated all the natural challenges that made the specimens of our species strong. We flick switches, pull levers, turn wheels, push buttons, and our needs are met, our comforts provided. We also have lost the pride in the healthy and strong among us, and have actually been indoctrinated (an interesting word) to glorify and celebrate the weak and deficient. It is now almost shameful to be healthy and strong. Especially men. It is seen as a threat. We expend great resources and attention on the ‘vulnerable’, and neglect and even contempt the capable. We offer benefits to the deficient. Thus we Encourage the sick. I call it Weakism.

How did we reach this state of decline? Here is not the place to explore the culprits in depth, but let it be enough now to say that those same ‘champions’ of the immunocompromised who teach us to do all in our power to protect them at our own great expense, have also brought their influence on our entire society and inverted the natural eugenics to a glorified dysgenics.

Why have we not heard any of the Irresponsible Immunocompromised say “I’m sorry. I know I’m being irresponsible. I know my weak immune system is a threat to the rest of you. I know I’m causing the rest of you enormous hardship just to try and protect unworthy me. And I don’t feel right about that. I’m ashamed of myself. Tell you what: Don’t do anything special to protect me. I won’t blame you if I get sick and die. I know I am to blame. I can’t live with myself knowing I am causing such distress and difficulty for the rest of you. So I’ll risk it. I’m going to keep eating cheetos and drinking pop and sitting on my fat butt watching netflix and smoking, but I don’t want you to do anything special for me. We all die. I know with all the difficulties the extreme ‘measures’ are causing people, some of the immunecompetent are going to die who otherwise wouldn’t yet. I don’t want that on my conscience. Just forget it. Don’t wash your hands or ‘social distance’ or stay home from work or corral your kids or pay any extra taxes or endure inflation on my account. I won’t blame you.”

But we don’t hear this, do we? Why not? The victim mentality is too deeply imposed on our sorry society to trigger it. Even if we did hear it, most of us would say “Oh no don’t say that. We’ll take care of you. We love you and want everyone to survive or none of us.” In fact, our society is now counter-natural, it elevates the deficient at the expense of the sufficient and even gifted (superior? Oh no —).

The ‘champions’ have done this for their own ends. Those ends are not good. They are not natural. They are evil. Anything that is against the laws of nature is counter-life, thus it is death worshiping. Thus it is evil. We have been taught that evil is good and good is evil. We can hardly see reality anymore, so thoroughly has the System and our own disconnect from raw nature indoctrinated us. Our morality is now evil-oriented, and we think it’s good.

I may be immunocompromised. I may have a chronic infection or 3. They are not contagious unless (maybe) I donate blood, which I don’t do. I am responsible. I am doing everything I can to remain healthy and a contributing member of society. I want to do whatever I can to protect my own and other people’s health. Don’t do anything special for me. I’m not going to do anything special for you or the immunocompromised except make all the efforts and expense and sacrifice and discipline I can to have a healthy immune system and keep my infections to myself, or overcome them, as we all should.

Don’t anyone think they can just get a vaccine injection and be fine. That’s a rampant mythology it would take another complete essay to address. Immune health is not that simple, tempting as it is to believe, and vaccination is no substitute for discipline, sacrifice and real applied knowledge. Viruses keep mutating and, in any case, a vaccine for the current plague is a year off.

Then there’s the idea that maybe the immunocompetent should arrange to get certain diseases, in order to gain life-long immunity and a boost in development, greater cancer resistance, fewer diseases later on… If the Irresponsible Immunocompromised can’t attend, that’s their problem. Because we love them too, we want them to face the challenges of being healthy like the rest of us. Let them catch up with us so they can. Or not. It’s not our problem, and we shouldn’t have to stop everything —I mean everything —on their behalf. And they shouldn’t want us to.

It’s what the ‘champions’ want. And it’s not good. Health is good. Life is good. Disease resistance is good. Love is good. And in a special way, since it is the counter-point of life, death can be good. Let the good flourish.

121 replies
  1. Caryl Johnston
    Caryl Johnston says:

    Thank you, Mr. Mackenzie, for your article. Just today on The there is an interview with Dr. Shiva –“Top Doctor Exposes Everything the Deep State is trying to hide…” He discusses immune system at length and how modern pharmaceuticals damage it. May I also recommend the books of Stephen Jenkinson on our death-phobic culture–Die Wise and Come of Age.
    We suffer a deficit of wisdom in this culture. We will change course…or die–as a society.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Thanks. I’ve seen the Shiva interview (a few of them actually). He’s obviously partisan Right–I am neither–and actually seems to believe in the President–I believe him to be so pro-Zionist it is appalling. But his views on health and disease seem mostly good, though he still seems to consider viruses a cause of disease, or at least the reason for auto-immune disease. I am leaning toward understanding viruses to be ‘exosomes’, little sub-cells that emerge from cells to neutralize toxins in the intercellular material.
      Jenkinson sounds intriguing. We used to have Elders to share the wisdom. Where are they?

  2. Tim Folke
    Tim Folke says:

    I wish this article could be read by all our people of good character, as well as those of us seeking a brighter future.

    Unlike modern day Hungary or Russia, the USA and other Western powers have rejected Nature. More and more they opt for a Big-Mac over non-GMO home grown food, city life instead of country life, miscegenation over racial preservation, perversity over diversity, unnatural unions over the one man-one woman marriage, drugs over exercise, and aborted babies over family.

    The solution is not hard – embrace Natural Law. If and when we do that, we need not worry about the culprits (or ‘champions’ as the writer puts it) for such parasites cannot draw nourishment from a potential host that embraces Nature and therefore vibrant health.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Yes, well said. A good summary. We might add clan and extended family vs. isolation to the list. I was just sitting here wondering if so many abortions might become births if the mother (and father?) had an extended family and clan to help with the baby.
      The culprit ‘champions’ obviously have had a deliberate plan to weaken the host for a long time. It seems to be working, though counter-trends are encouraging. The current plan to force vaccinate the world population with who-knows-what (certainly poisons) would be a major set-back. Host resistance means rejecting vaccination.

  3. Barkingmad
    Barkingmad says:

    “Germs” don’t cause disease; disease causes germs. Viruses don’t cause anything. That is pure propaganda. But we have to start somewhere and you’ve done yeoman service, George.
    And it is time someone sent this article to the bozos at, who heap abuse on any commenter who says even 10% of what you have said.

    And that site prides itself on supposedly exposing hypocrisy by challenging standard-issue, accepted views on several controversial issues. Over at unz, and other similar sites, the column writers are still plugging along, week after week, with their endless analysis of corona 19 statistics, death predictions, who invented the Corona 19 virus, etc. There’s one small exception allowed – Dr. Ron Paul. He at least is headed in the correct direction. He was saying ages ago that instead of languishing and rotting indoors we need to go outside and get some sunshine (Vit. D – which, it has been proved, is a major anti-sickness factor).

    One or two good comments there, as well. The video version is on youtube. Beatus paschae.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Yes, I’ve been considering the exosome theory. Young Dr. Kaufman presented it well in the half hour video linked to by Icke. Others like Dr. Cowan explain it well too. Another stunner if true, but then, we now know about the cholesterol myth, and it is very similar: cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease, it is a repair substance fixing tears in the artery walls caused by glycation. Could be similar with ‘viruses: they are not the cause of disease, they are exosomes emerging from cells to prevent disease. Like so much else, we have been lied to on a massive scale re: disease.

      This is the second time I’ve heard denunciation of Unz. I’ve found so many good exposes of the JQ and other taboo topics there, I’m interested in considering the critique. Actually, so many who have been doing good work seem to fail with this latest disease scare: Duke, TRS, FTN, Red Ice… I was just watching Ron Paul last night, and feel he is right on. Also Kelly/Atwill on Our Interesting Times, Jon Rappoport, and I like Icke (on this issue).

      We are thinking of displaying a large sign: Another Mind Hex. Better Sane Than Suckered!

    • Mari
      Mari says:

      Unz is just unreadable since about March 6 It’s just the Plague is on us. It’s mostly clip and paste this and that about the China virus. Plus graphs and some very creative math.

      Hundreds died in Los Angeles county last week.
      Well, yeah hundreds died in a county of 10 million people that’s a medical center for the south western states and has a gazillion nursing homes full of sickly 80-100 year olds.

      Used to like UNZ now it’s just endless speculation that China virus will kill us all.

      • Barkingmad
        Barkingmad says:

        @Mari. Great comments. Esp. your comment about L.A. county and it being basically a large, end-of-life nursing home.

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          We’ve had quite a few “COVID-19” deaths in Palm Springs and the Coachella Valley.

          Let’s see…there are a lot of very old people here. Go figure.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Good point. An effective slogan all by itself.
      What are their real problems? The latest poll by Pew of 2018 asked American ‘what are your very serious problems’? #1, as it has been for many years, was drug abuse. This is even more serious because almost no drug abuser would list it, since they are in denial, thus making the number of those listing it far higher than recorded. But what problems cause drug abuse? Down we go along the causation chain. It is probably more like a web.

  4. todd hupp
    todd hupp says:

    The cost of obesity to the USA is enormous. Citizens- of all ages -should be responsible to maintain a normal weight: control their gluttony.”Food addiction” is a huge American problem; predisposing one to manifold health problems – including Corona infection recently.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Even children are now suffering from obesity and diabetes, cancer, etc. Complex factors must cause this problem, and among them is a certain acceptance. Kids used to be shamed for being fat, and a certain fitness and weight moderation was encouraged. No more, it’s all about acceptance and non-judgement and even celebration. Now anyone who disapproves of obesity is judged as wrong and bad.
      That reminds me of the 5 Stages of Cultural Conquest. 1- Tolerance. 2- Equality. 3- Celebration. 4- Participation. 5- Punishment. First deviants are to be tolerated, leave them alone, don’t judge. Then they are considered equal, same as the rest of us. Then they are considered special, gifeds, endowed with something unique to offer. Finally anyone who does not join in the celebration is punished in some way. Cultural conquest complete.
      Jews are masters of this, which is some ways is what Culture of Critique documents.

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      I suspect they put a lot of unhealthy stuff in our food, which increases weight gain. Our lifestyles are more sedentary.

      When I was a kid, we spent our life outdoors running around. Those days are gone. “Chester the Molester” is waiting around every corner.

  5. David Ashton
    David Ashton says:

    As scientist Galton patiently explained to socialist Shaw about a century ago, eugenics is about reducing and preventing not inflicting pain, but about removing sickness from people in future by careful reproduction not removing sick people in the present by physical extermination.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Was that a public debate or dialogue? I know the National Socialists had a policy statement on eugenics, as so many governments and societies did at the time. It was an obvious direction for human societies to develop. Their statement included the idea that such a program of selection would ultimately reduce suffering and hardship for humanity, it was considered to be the most compassionate. And it followed Nature’s Laws.
      Communists of course defied this. Their policy actually removed the fittest and ‘best and brightest’ (as the most likely to resist totalitarian rule) in the most crude and brutal way, and so was counter-natural. It was dysgenics.
      Hitler was quite concerned that warfare also acted in a counter-natural dysgenic way, losing the flower of the youth, the most courageous and loyal and willing to sacrifice, all traits that were better off living and passing on.
      National Socialism did have a careful, thoughtful euthanasia program, removing severe cases of disease and deformity and debility, as would occur in nature, but it was controversial with the clergy, and it was discontinued.

    • Hammerheart
      Hammerheart says:

      @David Ashton

      Yes, my dear sir! And that is exactly the argument the jews make about us (“tikkun olam”) !!!!

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        In my limited understanding, Tikkun Olam is one of the worst justifications for Jewish power and damage in the world. It seems to justify their avid promotion of vaccines, such as by Peter Hotez, who actually used the phrase ‘Science Tikkun’. Hotez is a major vaccine promoter. As are Stanley Plotkin, Walter Orenstein and Paul Offit, all Jews and all major–perhaps the most prominent–vaccine promoters in the country.
        Tikkun Olam is grotesque Jewish Supremacism. it is the concept that only Jews are qualified to fix the world on behalf of the rest of us, of its inherent flaws. No thanks, I’ll take the world as it is, with its self-correcting mechanisms, rather than Jewish righteous supremacist intervention.

  6. Jack D.
    Jack D. says:

    As a physician I applaud your ideas. So many of my patients just wanted a single pill to fix all their medical problems resulting from a lousy diet, sedentary lifestyle, and a plethora of other irresponsible lifestyle choices. 85% of all modern diseases result from poor lifestyle habits. The dollars spent on HIV/AIDS drugs alone run in the tens of thousand dollars (often monthly – and preventable with simple condom use) – which cost the rest of us higher insurance costs

    • AspaDistra
      AspaDistra says:

      Beginning in mid-January Gilead pharma corp sponsored billboards in numerous, mostly black neighborhoods in a rust-belt city encouraging the depicted feminized black male holding a rainbow umbrella to “Love Passionately” and without fear: Gilead had a drug to prevent AIDs, and the US government would pay for him to obtain it.

      The male (term used lightly) version was replaced by a female version in mid-March.

      • ChilledBee
        ChilledBee says:

        The same GILEAD who had a billboard in one of the most prominent positions in West Hollywood, California (gay town) to- and I quote – “F**CK WITHOUT FEAR”
        But…you must take their PrEP bill every day. They also had another ad campaign for their consumers “You Can F**CK RAW”. “PrEP WORKS -NO MORE HIV” Knowing full well that most gay men do not like to use protection. Therefore, go right ahead – this little blue pill will protect you.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      I am interested in holistic health, not the silver bullet pill. I wonder what you thing of vaccines.
      I have not studied it deeply, but I hear various theories about what HIV/AIDS really was/is. Some say it was engineered (always a theory it seems), and others that it was a cover term used to blame a virus, when in fact it was other multiple diseases and conditions. Our esteemed Anthony Fauci who is so prominent an expert on COVID apparently was deeply involved in the big $$ behind AIDS.

      • Barkingmad
        Barkingmad says:

        Then hurry up get yourself a copy of “Aids, Inc.” by Jon Rappoport. I read this 25 yr. ago and not one word of it shocked me at all.

        Also (but I don’t know if it is easy to find anymore): “Why We Will Never Win the War on AIDS” by Peter Duesberg & Brian Ellison. Maybe on ebay. Fauci doesn’t come across as a hero here!

        Duesberg was treated like Kevin MacDonald (i.e., like shit) for saying that the retrovirus known as HIV is harmless and merely a marker for the syndrome seen in the most degenerated of humans.

        • Pierre de Craon
          Pierre de Craon says:

          Actually, the foundational text disclosing the AIDS hoax is Duesberg’s “Inventing the AIDS Virus” (©1996 but published in 1995). In a society that valued truth, the book would have ended Tony Fauci’s medico-political career and made him effectively unemployable.

          Putting that wish-fulfillment fantasy to one side for the moment, however, for TOO denizens the big-picture significance of Duesberg’s book is in its complementarity to the work of Kevin MacDonald and the handful of other visible truth tellers in our Judaized society. While demonstrating that almost everything the government and its media alter ego broadcast about AIDS is unfounded and deceitful, Duesberg reveals, virtually in passing, that the primary interest of the scientific and medical establishment is in propagating lies and that liars occupy its positions of highest honor and prestige. His revelations are all the more telling for being presented in a tone of modest rationality that is devoid of grandiosity and intellectual overreach.

          Once one has read, for instance, Duesberg’s seemingly contrarian explanation of why privately funded research yields far more fruit than publicly funded research or why the peer-review process is a tool in a protectionist racket,* the veils that have been ripped away can never be rehung via any mechanism less invasive than a frontal lobotomy.
          * Duesberg demonstrates in a few sentences that peer review is in effect nothing more than a process by which your competitors get to decide what you can or can’t sell.

      • Achilles Wannabe
        Achilles Wannabe says:

        Go to Virus, click on stuff by Duesberg – the Berkeley discoverer of retro viruses who argued quite cogently that HIV was a harmless fall guy for health threatening
        radical male homosexual promiscuity. Faucchi called him a mad man. He had tenure so they couldn’t get rid of him but they stripped him of all his grants

        • Barkingmad
          Barkingmad says:

          @Achilles. Not only that. Because they could not fire him, he was relegated to planning the annual workplace picnic in lieu of being allowed to do important research work. He said so himself. Could I make this up.

 I think that is David Crowe’s site? He has been doing this for ages, before internet if I remember. What a fabulous writer he is.

          Thanx for replying!

    • Sbaker
      Sbaker says:

      Yes, and as a licensed veterinarian and public health instructor, I agree with what you wrote. I’m surprised George ignored the HIV pandemic which has decimated our healthcare system, and received a ridiculously disproportionate share of funding for an easily preventable, and yes, viral disease. I would be interested to see George Mackensie’s bio, to know why he has little understanding of viruses and enhancement of specific immune function using evidence-based science of the value of vaccines in dozens of species.

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        A major focus of my studies for 4 years almost continuously was vaccines and infectious disease. In that time I did not happen to explore the AIDS topic in depth, so I defer to those here who did. I am not in the least surprised to hear the real health condition called ‘AIDS’ was something else–degenerate lifestyles of gay men and drug users–falsely attributed to a harmless virus. This apparently happens all the time primarily promoted by the Epidemic Intelligence Service recently presented by Jon Rappoport in his essays on COVID.
        Dr. Baker, my bio would not inform you of my knowledge of vaccines, but I am willing to share what I have learned with you. I am not certain of your meaning here: ‘…why he has little understanding of viruses and enhancement of specific immune function using evidence-based science of the value of vaccines in dozens of species.’ If you are asserting that vaccines have been effective at preventing the contraction and transfer of ‘disease’, I refute that on a number of grounds, starting with Immunization Graphs 2009 Raymond Obomsawin, which show steep decline in deaths from infectious disease throughout the 20th century long before vaccines were ever introduced, and even no vaccine ever introduced, such as scarlet fever in the US, and typhoid. Such factors as water treatment, food safety laws, hygiene education and solid waste removal and processing contributed to steep declines in disease, not vaccines. In my final conclusion after years of deep research: The global vaccine programs are the most successful part of a dysgenics population control plan enacted by a cabal of oligarch Zionist banksters. I can support this conclusion.
        If you believe vaccines have been ‘safe and effective’, please state why.

        • Sbaker
          Sbaker says:

          George, hey, I am in full agreement with being responsible for ones personal health. Long ago, I was taught in military academy about the triad of human development; the spiritual, the physical and the intellectual. I remembered these lessons for most of my life, especially once I passed my youth. And being healthy also enhances immunity, but like anything, nothing in life is 100%. It is always a matter of risk versus benefit. And, this is a big one, anecdotal evidence is not evidence-based science. Formulation and testing of hypotheses are evidence-based science. This means a controlled experiment with positive and negative controls and all other conditions being tightly regulated by protocol to avoid bias. I saw nothing in your article that addressed the most basic concept of the dose of infectious agent. This concept was formulated and has been tested thousands of times for the last 500 years. A sufficient infectious dose of a virulent viral pathogen will simply overwhelm the immune system to produce disease. The same concept applies to poisons–the dose of anything makes it either a poison or a remedy. A little on the anti-vax movement and where it originated in the US and please don’t take this personally, but the anti-vax movement has little to do with evidence-based science.
          It used to be that public health and vaccination was a bipartisan non-issue, endorsed by both sides. The modern anti-vax cult arose mainly in the All Gnatural Granola-Crunching Neo-Hippies who were essentially Left-wing Luddites who detested corporations. At the same time, many of them are invested in corporations and all of them buy their products.
          The highest concentration of anti-vax culties arise in places like Marin Co CA, Malibu, West LA, San Fran. and the hippie enclaves to the north.
          The Democrats did, and are doing, a decent job of marginalizing their party-political influence… which is what you do with your fringe… you don’t want to flat-out kick them out, just castrate them so they can’t hurt the party.
          More recently, the anti-vax cult changed tactics and went after the Republicans and conservatives. Here they have had some success with their invoking of “personal rights” and “medical freedom” which are aligned with Republican/conservative views in name only. This tactic has convinced very few Republican lawmakers and quite a few libertarians who have less power.
          I’ve come to know quite a few other pro-vax advocates of all political stripes from far left to far right and none of them are happy that it has come to the point that legislation and the force of law is required to get the luddites to do the obvious and sane thing – which is to vaccinate their kids to prevent us going back to the pre- 1800s with respect to infectious diseases. Every one of them has expressed dismay that it is taking this level of effort to protect the public health.
          The extremely high rate of pathogenic influenza virus replication likely outpaces and overwhelms the developing immune response. RNA viruses have high mutation rates—up to a million times higher than their hosts—and these high rates are correlated with enhanced virulence and survivability, traits considered beneficial for viruses. However, their mutation rates are almost disastrously high, and a small increase in mutation rate can cause RNA viruses to go extinct, at least locally.
          Viruses proliferate in natural environments by infecting cells and hijacking their replication and protein synthesis machinery. After new viral proteins are synthesized and assembled with their nucleic acid core, bursts of viruses are released from the infected (and usually soon to be dead) cells to repeat the process all over again in proximate cells. How many viruses are released from each infected cell? This parameter is referred to as the viral burst size, alluding to the fact that often virus emission either leads to cell lysis (bacteriophage) or cell death (HIV infection of T-cells). The emission of new viruses from an infected cell hence occurs as a burst with characteristic numbers of viruses (100s-1000s) and with time scales lasting from minutes to days depending upon the kind of virus and host. Burst sizes for different viruses have a large range corresponding in turn with the range of different sizes of the host cells.
          As a diagnostician I can’t remember the number of clients expressing dismay when cattle, pigs, sheep, dogs, cats, suddenly got sick and died because they stopped vaccinating. After all, they hadn’t had the disease on the premises for years. Any idea why I was forced to be rabies vaccinated during the 1st two weeks of vet school? This was a no exceptions policy–either you get vaccinated or find another profession. Stay healthy and be safe.

  7. Fenria
    Fenria says:

    This is what a society based on hyper-individualism becomes, though. Americans have spent the last century being told that they are each the warm center of the universe, and every choice they make is an incredible act of bravery. Go ahead, squeeze your 300 lbs of blubber into a bikini. So brave, so progressive. Give in totally to sexual and body dysmorphia, we’ll celebrate it with you. Live for nothing other than consuming retail items and showing them off to your friends. We’ll build a new religion around it. Our late stage capitalist / hyper-consumerist society congratulates everyone on living as if they were the only person on earth and every choice they made was commemorated in solid gold as an example of the pinnacle of human thought. The US is all full of people who are living gods in their own minds. The premise of compromise or choices based on the good of the group and not the good of the individual never enters the average American mind. This is what a steady diet of high pressure consumerism does to the sheeplike masses over the course of a century.

    • Barkingmad
      Barkingmad says:

      Hell of a comment, Fenria! I should like to add that his hyper-consumerism on the part of everyone would never exist without easy credit for all and sundry.

      It used to be that only the aristocracy/nobility/ royalty could live as they did, their comforts and excesses having been enabled by the efforts of peasants, serfs, etc. who lived under the thumb of these increasingly degenerate hereditary rulers. Once democracy plus a dishonest system of banking took hold, the pelf could spread around (“expanding the economy”).

      The idea by some white identitarians ( of the traditionalist variety) that we need a return to a society run by aristocrats is absurd. They think that they, bien sur, will never be the ones living in huts, plowing the fields, cleaning the barns, and hauling their betters’ garbage.

      I don’t think it’s an either/or situation, but that is the way the traditionalists like to present it. I’m not buying it. Also, it’s not just us; those ethnic groups who are not given over to our pathological form of individualism are just as greedy for the life of Riley and all that implies. So, maybe becoming more group-oriented is not the only issue.

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        I’m puzzling over your comment. Traditional white identitarians want a feudal aristocracy system? I thought they wanted a Fascistic benevolent leadership and healthy mass societal participation of all ranks and classes in the thriving ethno-state. You might know something about a sub-faction I don’t, though.
        I am not sure aspects of the feudal system at times was not also beneficient to the serfs/peasants. Certainly there was enough discontent at times to give Communist/Socialist agitators pull with the masses. Then the riots and strikes incited ended up being far worse for the worker/peasants, as they were designed to do. If Communism/Socialism actually succeeded after the ‘Revolution’, then the plight of worker/peasants became worse still. So I’m cautious of critiques of ‘tradition’ and aristocracies.
        Which ethnic groups not given to our pathological forms of individualism who are just as greedy for our opulence are you thinking of? This sounds like what Bush 2 said about the ‘Muslims’ that attacked us on 911. Or do you mean Asians? Hispanics? I was thinking of Amish, and they are definitely not greedy. They may be the best model for a healthy way forward. High birth rates.

        • Barkingmad
          Barkingmad says:

          Hi, George. It is nice that you converse with those commenting on your article. Regarding self-described Traditional white identitarians wantiing to go back to kings and aristocrats running the show because, you see, they are superior beings and everyone else is supposed to look up to them just because of their inherent superiority: I see endless comments to this effect on a dozen different sites. Going back to kings ‘n’ nobles will apparently fix up everything that ails us, especially the problem of uppity women. That we have evolved in various ways and are no longer even biologically quite the same lies outside white traditionalist identitarians’ frame of reference. Or at least that’s the way it looks to me.

          “I am not sure aspects of the feudal system at times was not also beneficient to the serfs/peasants.” Sure, there were benefits. But it was a different time, almost a different species. I recall in Turgenev’s novel Fathers & Sons where the landowner (not an aristocrat, but it comes down to the same thing) had to tend to his childlike servants and serfs, who could be helpless and troublesome, requiring big daddy to always get them out of fixes and do their thinking for them, etc. Do we need to go back to that. How about we put on our big boy pants once and for all.

          You ask: “Which ethnic groups not given to our pathological forms of individualism who are just as greedy for our opulence are you thinking of?” It looks to me as if all nonwhite groups are more acquisitive and grasping than whites (not possessing typical white folks’ morality to sometimes put the brakes on a bit). I am sorry, I should have said “race” not ethnic group.

    • Jett Rucker
      Jett Rucker says:

      I don’t fully agree with you, but I must say, you give as good as you get. Your reply is every bit as vociferous and committed as the article, and that’s saying a lot.
      Let’s hear it for clarity, if not outright extremism (often extremely good).

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        I appreciate the humor. 8D Extremism begets extremism. This is why Fascism required such strength and determination, it was opposing the extremism of Communism. And that is why the article may appear extreme in some sense, it is responding to the run-away extremism of permissiveness and victim mentality and laxity that seems to dominant in our society. But is it really extreme to say people should get their act together and try to be healthy? I feel it’s extreme to say everyone else should take extreme measures to try and (uselessly) protect them.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Excellent summary. We used to have the concepts of thrift and discipline, replaced by credit card debt to buy stuff. These comments are unusually bereft of mention of the Jewish role, so I’ll say that somewhere recently I was reading that Christian and white society, especially in Europe, was mostly modest about promoting business, it was considered crude to go out and advertise, as opposed to quietly providing a good product or service and building customers through integrity and professionalism. It was Jews who began aggressive advertising, consolidation of retail in the Department Store that challenged the small stores and shops, and price gouging to drive out competition. With this kind of challenge, gentiles were forced to compete with advertising, and so the entire market was perverted and polluted with the scourge of mass mind manipulation known as advertising. Now of course it sells other concepts, like hatred and contempt for whites, males, straights…
      A sane and healthy society would regulate this and prevent its people from being exposed and influenced. The People can be thought of as responsible to reject it, but so should the leadership prevent it from being presented. Christian groups organized to prevent filth and soft porn from entering Hollywood movies, and came up with the film rating system to protect children from such garbage. After WW2 this was challenged legally on ‘free speech’ grounds, and the first film to show full frontal nudity was a Holocaust fantasy, merging horror with porn.
      And here we are today.

      • Achilles Wannabe
        Achilles Wannabe says:

        Have you read E Michael Jones’s Barren Metal? Good stuff abut how Jews and Jewish influenced WASP’s destroyed traditional and Germanic notions
        of productivity and trade and turned economies into usuries.
        The science of economics is Jewish science

        • George Mackenzie
          George Mackenzie says:

          I have not read Barren Metal but have heard Jones and others discuss it.
          Perhaps here is a place to insert a quote I took from Nesta Webster’s book World Revolution, The Plot Against Civilisation (1921), which sounds like it might compliment Jones from a different era:
          ‘”The Jews,” as (Werner) Sombart remarks (in The Jews and Modern Capitalism) “embodied modern Capitalism” and he goes on to describe, step by step, the building up by Jewish hands of the system which superceded the Old Regime of amicable trading and peaceful industry; he shows the Jew as the inventor of advertisement, as the employer of cheap labour, as the principal participant in the stock-jobbing or agiotage (speculative buying and selling of stocks) that prevailed at the end of the first French Revolution. But it is above all as the usurer that the Jew achieved power. “Modern Capitalism”, says Sombart, “is the child of money-lending”, and the Jew, as we have seen, is the money-lender par excellence. The great fortune of the Rothschilds was built up on this basis. The principal “loan-floaters” of the world, they were later the first railway kings. The period of 1820 onward became, as Sombart calls it, “the age of the Rothschilds”, so that by the middle of the century it was a common dictum, “There is only one power in Europe, and that is Rothschild.”‘
          pg 172

  8. Eric
    Eric says:

    Life is to be enjoyed. The pleasure we receive is part of nature, too.

    I see a lot of puritanism in this article. One of the unpleasant changes I’ve noticed in America and elsewhere is the growth of the Nanny State: “Put out that cigarette! Don’t you know it’s against the law to smoke here?” a drunk shouts before he leaves the outdoor bar patio (with a breeze blowing) to get into his car to drive home.

    “Don’t smoke!” say the surfer, recreational pilot, bicyclist, recreational driver. (“I can take risks, but you can’t.”)

    “Don’t smoke, you’re polluting my air!” says the city dweller who lives in a cloud of auto exhaust fumes.

    Then there’s “I don’t want to have to pay for your healthcare if you get sick.” Hey, guess what. People have accidents. They get killed in wars. They become victims of crimes. Their own genetic heritage does them in.

    No one lives forever, and it’s during the last weeks or months of your “pristine healthy life” when the medical bills pile up. At least half of your/society’s medical costs happen then.

    All of this has nothing to do with health or undue expense: It’s about cherry picking and minding other people’s business.

    People who don’t take care of their own health shouldn’t act like victims. They are not.

    But to say that they are making US victims is false. It’s playing their fake game of being a fake victim.

    People don’t owe you anything — and that includes looking after their own health.

    Let’s not emulate the Jewish billionaire Michael Bloomberg, who has been on a Nanny State crusade to micromanage everyone’s life right down to the size of the sodas they’re allowed to buy.

    All of that being said, the shut-down that has been imposed on us is nothing less than insane.

    By social distancing, we are not allowing herd immunity to develop, so the virus will come back again, and there will be more quarantines.

    The whole idea of artificial vaccination is absurd when you can get natural vaccination by simply letting the bug run its course.

    This COVID-19 fake crisis is Bill Gates’s attempt to make us more vulnerable to infectious disease by not allowing us to develop our own natural immunity.

    But then, didn’t Bill Gates say — or at least imply — that the solution to “climate change” is a drastic reduction in the human population? Destroying the development of natural immunity in human beings by giving them vaccines is a great way to accomplish that.

    Dr. Fauci, Dr. Birx, WHO, the NIH and NIAID are shills for Bill Gates. So are HEMI and the Imperial College in London. They are the ones who have Trump’s ear. The lockdown should end — yesterday.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      I partly agree with you. Some of the calls for health measures in the article are somewhat facetious. They are responses to the other absurd calls for health measures that are actually being imposed now, like the ridiculous 6′ rule. I was attempting to show that there are far less absurd measures we could take, if we are really panicked about disease–which as you say later on, we should not be. Panic is being used, as always. I don’t really think people should be prohibited from smoking by law, but if the oligarchs are imposing enormously damaging ‘solutions’ to some disease scare to save the whole herd, then smoking restrictions would be a far less damaging solution (though agreeing it would be a loss of freedom. Not as bad as home lockdown!).
      I addressed your thoughts on who we should not pay insurance for in the first paragraph. I’d leave out the people you cite, such as accidents, veterans damaged in war, genetic factors (if they are not in fact epigenetic), and others. These are the ‘responsible immunocompromised’, and we give them an exception.
      It Is about minding other people’s business, but isn’t that exactly what is being done to us on a massive extreme scale right now? My point was somewhat sarcastic–like A Modest Proposal–but I honor your concern, if taken literally it would be a challenge to freedom.

      The ‘virus’ will always come back again, it is called flu season, and it happens every year. This year, even with COVID if it even exists, it is less severe than recent years. No need for hysteria. Agreed, vaccines interrupt the natural life-long immunity and boost in life-long disease resistance that develops from surviving infection. As most do. I will say I am sincere in believing that if some people die of the extra burden a flu imposes on their otherwise weakened immune system, that is sad but not a tragedy and not to be prevented with extreme ineffective measures. That is not the intent of the measures anyway, that is the pretext.
      Gates does seem to have all those agencies and people in his pocket. But who has Gates in their pocket? The top world controllers do not speak from the stage and give interviews. I suspect Gates to be a paid agent of the Rothschild Zionists and other Jewish oligarchs.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        Thanks for your reply.

        Speaking of the Rothschilds, I wish somebody — maybe me — would do some intensive research on them. I’ve tried to determine their wealth, and it’s not easy. Of course, it could all be hidden, but if you go by what’s public, I can’t say that I’m very impressed.

        I’ve looked at the most recent Forbes list of billionaires around the world. Only one Rothschild (who happens to live in the U.S.) is a billionaire, and he is in the lower ranks — somewhere between 1 billion and 2 billion if I remember correctly.

        The Rothschild who owns Waddeston (sp?) Manor in England (Jacob? Evelyn?) is not listed.

        It seems that Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s original plan for the Rothschilds to keep all of their money in the family by marrying cousins might have fallen apart about 100 years ago.

        Looking at a list of Rothschild descendants on Wiki (which, of course, can’t be trusted), I noticed one Rothschild who died fighting for the Allies in one of the world wars, and another who died in a concentration camp in National Socialist Germany.

        By now there could be thousands of descendants of Mayer Amschel not bearing the Rothschild name but having some claim on the family fortune. So most of the money may have dissipated.

        There are still several Rothschild businesses. But they are not anywhere near the stature of such corporations as Apple or such banking houses as Goldman Sachs.

        The possible “impoverishment” (relatively speaking) of the House of Rothschild doesn’t, of course, mean that the world isn’t ruled by a tight-knit oligarchy that is heavily Jewish.

        When you combine Jews having at least a quarter of the world’s wealth (my own estimate) with the thousands of Jewish organizations that promote Jewish interests internationally, you know that we are ruled not by governments, but by a small world elite and their carefully chosen lackeys and front men.

        • George Mackenzie
          George Mackenzie says:

          I don’t trust those ‘richest people in the world’ lists. Cover for the real globalgarchs.
          Here is something about the origins of the Rothschilds I came upon recently from Nesta Webster’s book World Revolution. It is possible the Rothschild dynasty has dispersed, but still dominant in other forms.
          ‘”The Jews,” as (Werner) Sombart remarks (in The Jews and Modern Capitalism) “embodied modern Capitalism” and he goes on to describe, step by step, the building up by Jewish hands of the system which superceded the Old Regime of amicable trading and peaceful industry; he shows the Jew as the inventor of advertisement, as the employer of cheap labour, as the principal participant in the stock-jobbing or agiotage (speculative buying and selling of stocks) that prevailed at the end of the first French Revolution. But it is above all as the usurer that the Jew achieved power. “Modern Capitalism”, says Sombart, “is the child of money-lending”, and the Jew, as we have seen, is the money-lender par excellence. The great fortune of the Rothschilds was built up on this basis. The principal “loan-floaters” of the world, they were later the first railway kings. The period of 1820 onward became, as Sombart calls it, “the age of the Rothschilds”, so that by the middle of the century it was a common dictum, “There is only one power in Europe, and that is Rothschild.”‘
          pg 172

      • Achilles Wannabe
        Achilles Wannabe says:

        Quoting Barkingmad below: “We have to make a distinction between doing a bit of smoking, drinking, junk food consumption, etc. in the context of a mostly healthy way of life – and an existence that appears to be centered on liquor, weed and all ’round stupid behavior of every category.”
        She or he has got it right. You’re tone is too one dimensional. Remember we are hoping to influence young people- particularly males – who need to sow their oats. Also they are victimized by Globo homo and need some sensual compensation. I try to put myself into the mind of a young white guy reading your piece and I think I would find it off putting.

        Your stuff is GOOD but try to lighten up a little?

        • George Mackenzie
          George Mackenzie says:

          Maybe the sarcasm was too subtle. I don’t actually espouse puritanical austerity in diet, lifestyle etc. The point was that the Establishment is now demanding extreme discipline and austerity for the relatively healthy population to protect the tiny minority of ‘immunocompromised’, at least some of whom are not applying much discipline and austerity to protect even themselves.

        • Barkingmad
          Barkingmad says:

          “She or he has got it right”. She. A mouthy woman.

          Speaking of young males needing to sow wild oats: ain’t going to be any of that with the Six Foot Rule in force. If you ask me, this whole damn project is more about stopping reproduction than anything else…It won’t affect foreigners though, with their practice of matchmaking by the parents.

    • Barkingmad
      Barkingmad says:

      Lots of your examples of the Nanny State are indeed accurate but I don’t interpret George Mackenzie’s article as having a puritanical slant. I’d say that a bit of “bad” behavior is actually beneficial for us as individuals and not destructive to our society as a whole. We have to make a distinction between doing a bit of smoking, drinking, junk food consumption, etc. in the context of a mostly healthy way of life – and an existence that appears to be centered on liquor, weed and all ’round stupid behavior of every category.

      “People who don’t take care of their own health shouldn’t act like victims. They are not. But to say that they are making US victims is false. It’s playing their fake game of being a fake victim.”

      True enough. But the reality is that they are acting like victims, so the government uses this to take away everyone’s freedom, including my freedom to not have to be on tenterhooks when I am in the supermarket. It’s not me asking for a 6-foot-wide berth around everyone or mandatory vaccination for the entire populace, it’s your typical cowering, cowardly, obedient citizen (who has no control over his urges) who demands these things. They are plenty moralistic and, I suspect, prone to get on the Snitch Line the moment they see two or more people standing around getting a bit of air. Go have a read of the comment sections in newspapers. It is scary that I have to breathe the same air as these freaks.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        Well said.

        I can only speak for myself. I smoke like a chimney, drink like a fish, and my dietary rule is to eat what tastes good and as much of it as I like. In my late sixties, I’m in excellent health and would never snitch on anyone.

        I don’t believe in modern medicine or doctors. Maybe it’s in my genes — my grandfather was a doctor and smart enough to be skeptical about his own profession.

        Speaking of genes, I think they are what determine your state of health — far more than your lifestyle. So I believe in eugenics.

        Cigarettes may kill a lot of people (last I heard, “experts” claimed a third of all lifelong smokers), but there’s an even larger group they don’t kill. We never hear about them.

        And the claim that occasional exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke outdoors can be deadly to non-smokers is preposterous.

        But their jobs and reputations depend on upholding “the narrative,” so real scientists allow charlatans and cranks to shape their profession.

        It seems that only math will escape the Nanny State. 2 plus 2 still equals 4.

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        Exactly. Thank you. And saying that the ‘irresponsible immunocompromised’ are making the rest of us victims (at least of disease transfer) is not meant to be literal. they are not. It is meant to apply the same absurd ‘logic’ that is being applied in reverse: reasonably healthy people are some kind of threat to susceptible people. They are not either.

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      Amen, Eric. But those entities who “have Trump’s ear” … how *can* he not listen to them? They’re out to destroy him if he doesn’t, and the public will follow along. (Our reverence for modern science, you know.) Even so, Trump is showing great courage in his determined stand to open our economy as soon as possible. He floated Easter. That got shot down … now he’s aiming at May 1st. And forming his commission already to prepare for it. He should be praised.

      BTW, my best take on the pandemic is here: I think this is a missed opportunity so far.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        I agree. Trump is handling this very well, everything considered.

        If he opens things up on May 1, I will be satisfied.

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          Follow up: Trump is allowing governors to continue modified restrictions for another 45 days or longer. So I’m not satisfied. People are going to have to take to the streets.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            Eric – How would it be possible to just jump from zero to 100%? It must be gradual. And there is the Constitution; the US is not a Führerprinzip state.

            It’s good that Trump began this immediately (starts today!) and it’s designed so that it depends on the progress of the state how fast they can move into Phase Three. So some states are already out of phase one, ready for phase two. I’m looking forward to hearing from our Texas governor today (or soon) as to loosening the meetings rule, so that small groups can meet (10 to 50). I think Trump has done as well as he possibly could have. An increase in cases could set us way back. But that’s a public perception due to the media because increased cases does not mean increased deaths. It’s the right strategy (and should have been from the beginning) to quarantine the elderly and leave the rest alone. But that’s hindsight, and only clear now due to a dishonest, agenda-driven media.

            I’ve settled on the extreme position that the world media and the far-left internationalists (including Jews) are using this to destroy Donald Trump and his reelection. So don’t fall into their plan. All you Trump-bashers (including George and many here) are NOT smart, but foolish. Even China’s leader Jinping Xi (Trump’s ‘friend’) wants him out. It’s a very dangerous world.

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            We’ve already been under lockdown way too long thanks to this plan-demic hoax.

            I listened to your Texas governor today. He might as well be a Communist.

            Greg Abbott — Communist Lite.

            A conservative conserving nothing.

            Just one step behind the Democrats (like most Republicans are) (like Trump is).

            Greg: (paraphrase): “We’re going to begin to commence to start beginning to start to commence commencing to start to begin ending the lockdown by following ALL of the recommendations of [the fraud] Fauci.”

            Fauci — who claimed that COVID-19 was ten times as deadly as the flu when he knew that he had no basis for making that claim, and who called the Communist mass-murdering director of WHO a ‘good man’ and respected colleague.

            Fauci — whose NIH and NIAID gave $3.7 million to the Wuhan virological laboratory to do “gain of function” research on viruses. “Gain of function” = turn them into bioweapons. Make them more infectious to humans.

            Fauci, Birx, CDC, NIH, NIAID, WHO — all puppets of Bill Gates. Natural immunity is out, vaccines are in.

            Bill: (Paraphrase) “We need to poison — I mean, vaccinate, hahaha — 7 billion people in order to reduce human-caused global warming — I mean make everyone healthy, hahaha.”

            Bill is a Satanist. I think that’s pretty safe to say. You know he’s one because he’s always suppressing a cackle when he talks about disease and death. And he spills the beans constantly. “We need vaccines for health and population reduction and…” Population reduction? Really, Bill?

            Satanists always have to show their hand. It’s part of their religion. Just start connecting the dots: Spirit Cooking, adrenochrome, Pizza Gate, John Podesta, the Clintons, Orgy Island, pedivores, Jeffrey Epstein, Donald Trump – wait, what? the Donald?

            Gee, thanks Greg. For nothing. And same to you, Trump.

            I don’t care about the media destroying Trump.

            Trump is destroying this country. Right before our very eyes. His supporters won’t call him out. But I will.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            I’m glad you’ve exposed yourself for the nutcase you are, Eric. Describing yourself as a California resident in his late sixties who smokes, drinks and eats anything and everything he feels like (and is perfectly healthy, haha), and calls himself a National Socialist who thinks Patrick Little would make a good president. What a joke.
            You want to dump Trump and our great Governor Abbott — and replace them with what? Why not go after your own governor Newsom? He’s a real communist!

            “His supporters won’t call him [Trump] out. But I will.” Who is I? What influence do you have as “Eric?”

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            Carolyn: You need to start paying attention to the real world instead of your own fantasies.

            I invite anyone here to listen to Abbott’s speech about ending the lockdown restrictions in Texas and contrast it with your fantasy that there have been no significant restrictions at all.

            There is zero meaningful difference between Abbott and Newsom.

            And I am perfectly healthy. I look good for my age, sleep well, have no aches and pains, and I take no pharmaceuticals — which surprised the representative of United Health Care when I signed up for their Medicare Part D program.

            You can believe me or not — I couldn’t care less.

            You said there have been no protests in Texas. There are protests in Austin right now.

            Patrick Little would not be crapping all over our freedoms and rights or listening to pseudo-scientists and psychopaths the way Trump, Abbott and Newsom are doing.

            What influence do I have on Trump? The influence you have when you give a presidential candidate money and he keeps begging for more.

            Dear Carolyn: You need to tighten your own grip on what is going on right in front of your nose before you start calling other people “nutcases.”

            I know you love to get into these little tiffs, and for the time being I’ll indulge you.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            Eric – Thanks for your reply. I do not *love* to get into “little tiffs,” but I do have something of a compulsion to point out the foolish talk of some White Nationalists, especially those who, even in their late sixties like you, seek to remain anonymous.

            Just to dispose of the health thing, I think I can match you in being in exceptionally good health for my age (greater than yours). But unlike you, I have not signed up for Medicare B, and certainly not for Medicare D (prescription drugs)! I’m surprised to hear that you have if you take no presc. drugs, as you say. Why in the world?

            No way, and nowhere, did I say there were “no restrictions at all” in Texas. I said I have not experienced restrictions in my way of life, but I do not work nor do I have children in school. What I said was it was not a ‘lockdown.’ I’m disappointed that Abbott is not opening the schools until Aug-Sept., but there may be meaningful financial reasons for that. Our leaders in Austin are fiscal conservatives, thank God. I also appreciate that in areas with many “people of color,” there would be great difficulty disciplining the children to follow “distancing” guidelines. I’ve been a public school teacher in Texas, and the difference in behavior between white kids and “kids of color” is huge. There are exceptions of course.

            Sez you: “There is zero meaningful difference between Abbott and Newsom.”
            That is what I call a foolish statement since it’s patently untrue. You mention “my fantasies” vs the real world. I would say Californians tend more to live in a fantasy world. How you quoted or paraphrased Abbott’s announcement was totally false – you added many words that were never spoken so who is the fantasist?

            The gathering in Austin did take place right after I wrote there were none, but it wasn’t a protest against Abbott, but a demonstration in favor of opening up Texas sooner rather than later, and a central theme was “Fire Fauci,” not fire Abbott or Trump. I hope the governor takes that to heart, but he can’t fire Fauci nor does he have total freedom to just do anything he pleases. The people who gather for a demonstration do not have the responsibility that a governor does. It always helps to put yourself in his shoes and think about what you would feel okay in doing.

            You can’t seriously believe that Patrick Little has what it takes to be President of the United States. He’s a one-issue person, as are many WN’s like yourself. Just expressing opinions.

            I contributed to Trump 3 times in 2016 – for a total of $300. All campaigns keep asking for more, and the more you give the more they try to get. I haven’t given a dime so far this time and I don’t plan to – they have plenty of money without mine.

            I’m against vaccination and as I’ve said elsewhere, have only had two in my long life – both when a child. I won’t get this new vaccine when it comes out. I’m sure I should not have called you a “nutcase” but your most recent comments have included a lot of nuttiness, imo. Such as: “Bill Gates is a Satanist. The Donald … well, him too. Greg Abbott is communist-lite. Trump is destroying this country right before our very eyes.”
            So you say *I* need to tighten my grip? I don’t think so, Eric.

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        The President could be controlled opposition, signaling to his voter base in an election year (or not), but with no intention to actually follow through. And not because greater powers ‘have his ear’. Greater powers appear to have his ass, such as Wilbur Ross who bailed Trump out of bankruptcy in the 90’s, and most likely Epstein with blackmail. Even before that, Trump’s real estate attorney and bankruptcy lawyer were two Jews he gave Administration positions to. Think they have any dirt on Trump the real estate tycoon?

        Excellent statement on comparing the struggles over the body count today with the war-time Germans at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I agree with a comment there that the media depiction of bodies piling up in NYC and spikes in mass grave deposits is more disease-mongering propaganda with no basis in reality. Fake News as the President likes to say, and in this case–as in so many associated with this ‘plandemic’–I agree.
        CBS News featured a video of a busy hospital ward and indicated it was NYC, when researchers showed the same video had been used in Italy the previous week. CBS news called it a ‘mistake’. One news report showed rows of coffins placed in a airplane hangar, saying it was COVID victims, but another researcher showed it was an out-take from a Hollywood movie. Channel 4 NYC showed a masked health care worker applying a ventilator to a ‘patient’, but analysts showed that a sign on the wall in the background said ‘Do Not Eat or Drink Near Mannequins’. On even cursory inspection, the ‘patient’ on the table was a mannequin. Pathetic.
        Also, when TV news depicts swarms of patients pouring into hospital ERs, ambulances hurrying to and fro, staff rushing and hustling, bodies laid in hallways– Locals go to the hospitals with cell phone cameras and find–crickets. No one there. Ambulances sitting idle. Staff twiddling their thumbs. Overflow tents empty even of staff. pathetic. Zio-media lies. Fake News!

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          George: “The President could be controlled opposition, signaling to his voter base in an election year (or not), but with no intention to actually follow through.”

          I’d more likely consider you to be controlled opposition than the President. Every time someone disagrees with something you’ve written, you pull back and modify it in that direction. Who are you, anyway? I put your name in a search, and found it referred to a famous 17th century Scottish lawyer. Figures.

          In medical training, mannequins are used when demonstrating how to carry out procedures on real patients. It’s supposed to be fake in that sense, but taken very seriously. Thus the sign on the wall.

    • Achilles Wannabe
      Achilles Wannabe says:

      Life is to be enjoyed. The pleasure we receive is part of nature, too.

      You keep beating me to it. There is this Puritanism on the WN right. Some of this essay seems evangelical. Except they like to eat

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        I do worry about puritanism in the WN movement. Freedom should be our highest value.

        Hitler might have abstained from smoking, drinking and eating meat, but he didn’t impose that on the German people, who love to do all of those things.

        In fact, I solidified all of those habits in Germany when I was visiting there as a teenager.

        Teens could buy cigarettes and drink in taverns (this was in 1969), and I remember my German host sending his ten year old daughter to the store to buy a bottle of wine.

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        It is emerging from these thoughtful comments that I should have included a disclaimer in the essay: ‘some of these views are meant to be sarcastic in order to expose the absurdity of the current official pronouncements.’

    • someone
      someone says:

      “‘Don’t smoke, you’re polluting my air!’ says the city dweller who lives in a cloud of auto exhaust fumes.”

      Car exhaust fumes are imperceptible or inoffensive, and cars are a necessary part of society. Cigarette smoke is so bad it prevents breathing, and serves no useful purpose. And besides, this is like arguing that it’s ok to throw your trash on the street because there’s already some trash there.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        “Car exhaust fumes are imperceptible or inoffensive.”

        They’re also toxic. And most of us live in a cloud of those fumes. That cloud becomes noticeable if you are looking at an urban area from a distance. The brown haze you see is not made of cigarette smoke.

        “Cars are a necessary part of society.”

        To some degree, but not entirely. Not all driving that takes place is necessary. So maybe we should ban recreational driving. What do you say to that idea? We’d have fewer toxic fumes in the air.

        “Cigarette smoke is so bad it prevents breathing.” No, it doesn’t. Where did you get that idea?

        “This is like arguing that it’s ok to throw your trash in the street because there’s already some trash there.” If I have to refrain from “throwing trash in the street,” then so do you. That’s only fair.

        “Cigarette smoking serves no useful purpose.” Does everything in life have to serve a useful purpose? I would hate to have to live in a world where everything had to serve a useful purpose as defined by you or anyone else. Anyone who has read George Orwell’s “1984” knows what such a world would be like.

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        Yes, the case against cigarette smoke has rather more weight than Eric (4/12/20, 4:55 pm) seems to think it has. In a sense, more important, however, is the begging of the primary question: what is the appropriate response to an issue related both to health and to a social custom with more than four centuries’ worth of acceptance? Is it to legislate or to persuade?

        The (((special-interest group))) that has splintered the Christian West through immigration did so in no small part to advance its authoritarian agenda, in which persuasion has no native place. Thanks to the resulting societal fragmentation, those who still argue the case for persuasion are widely and successfully portrayed as naïfs or cranks—when not as something very much worse. In this matter as in all too many others, one of the objects seems to have been to paint us, the remnant, into a corner.

        Anyway, good comment, someone. The “contra factum non valet argumentum” subset of TOO commenters hasn’t had any new membership applications in quite a while. Yours would be welcome!

  9. Tim Stadler
    Tim Stadler says:

    One of my sons was a police officer for 15 yrs until he turned to alcohol to try and ease the stress and became an alcoholic and quit the force. That was seven years ago and he hasn’t drank for some time but his health has been compromised and I worry about him and the virus.
    It wasn’t being shot at five times or dealing with numerous hostage situations where as the SWAT sniper peoples lives were in his hands or picking up body parts and having to deal all to often with the dregs of society and so and so on.

    No it was the twenty some infants that suffered SIDS and he had to give them mouth to mouth until the medics arrived even if he knew there was little or no chance. He had a trainee who had seen full action in Iraq that he warned about the trauma of child resuscitation but he was confidant he could handle it, after seeing Eric attempt a resuscitation he quit the next day.

    So Mr. Mckenzie I ask where does this fit in with your thesis about responsibility.
    I am 65 and take good care of myself and yes it annoys me to those that don’t, but ever happened to “Don’t judge criticize or accuse until you have walked in their shoes”. It troubles me that supposedly learned people still believe in the fallacy of free-will. Life is complicated and most people do the best they can with what life has dealt them.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      I am humbled by your comment. I am sorry for the suffering of your son. It sounds grievous.
      In my extensive studies into the vaccine issue, I am convinced that SIDS stands for Sudden Immunization Death Syndrome. Many studies show temporal proximity (babble for soon after) of vaccination with SIDS. Same with ‘shaken baby syndrome’, babies shake themselves to death with seizures induced by vaccine poisoning. So yes, resuscitation with mouth-to-mouth is a heroic attempt, but nothing can prevent death by vaccine poisoning in tiny babies other than preventing vaccines from being injected.
      As for my thesis of responsibility– Dear Sir, my essay was partially an attempt at sarcasm, similar to A Modest Proposal. While I do think the individual has some responsibility to be healthy himself, I do not really think he must do that alone. We are all in some sense also responsible for his health, as we are for our own. This is the same argument our Overlords are using to lock us down and strip us of our freedoms, but I believe they are doing it for their own selfish agenda, and causing more harm than good (also part of the agenda). So I proposed some milder approaches that are likely to be more effective, though assuming it would be understood they are challenges to free will. In counterpoint, I hoped they would show the absurdity of the Overlord approach.
      My brother died at 51 two years ago of heroine abuse. I was devastated and went through the remorse of wondering if there was not something I could have done to help him. Did I contribute to his condition in the course of our lives? Am I my brother’s keeper? Yes, was the answer. Yes we are. Clearly our Big Brother government/media/academia complex is not our keeper, they are trying to sicken and weaken and kill us I am convinced. We must resist. I was subject to the control program myself and did my best, having said something to my brother about this self-destructive behavior at times, but of course that was not enough. What would have been enough? I am convinced he should have been on close supervision, not been allowed to spend his own money, denied access to drugs by restrictions on his travel and movements, and given lots of both tough and tender love. Counselling and coaching and diet and detox… But he was left to run wild and free, and he killed himself. Thankfully he did not kill anyone else in the process, since he was found on the shoulder in his car, unconscious.
      So I understand your point. I guess we are all responsible, including the patient. It is so infuriating that the System is working deliberately to undermine our efforts, and is promoting sickness and addiction and disempowerment. Are we responsible for that too? I suppose we are. We do the best we can. Or should we do what is required? We do the best we can with what life had dealt us, but our entire Judeo-Masonic system has deliberately dealt us hell, and what are we to do about that? The best we can.

    • Sbaker
      Sbaker says:

      Good comment sir. Life is filled with tragedy and suffering. There are few who escape. I recall when my sister at a year and half, fell down in her crib when she was playing with a Venetian blind cord, she somehow managed to reach. She strangled and my dad tried to resuscitate her. He blamed Mom, divorced her, and never was quite right after that. He never touched alcohol or tobacco and lived mostly by himself after that. Such is life. Some find the strength to recover, some don’t. Dad came to hate God after that accident.

      • Barkingmad
        Barkingmad says:

        @Sbaker. What a sad story, so sorry to hear about these events. I was taught years ago to never have Venetian blind cords or anything similar near babies or small children. It is highly likely that the experience in your family was not the only one and that is why later generations learned how to baby- and child-proof a home. You really have to keep your eyes open with them, to look at your surroundings from a child’s viewpoint. Everything is fascinating to them; they want to reach for it and touch it. Constantly and everywhere. That may be one reason (at least) why women never really recover from having children. Some men too, of course.

        • Snaker
          Snaker says:

          1950 was a long time ago. I’ve thought of her my whole life and always pondered what it would have been like to have a sister.

  10. ChilledBee
    ChilledBee says:

    I recently watched an old Black and White movie from 1959 focused on working women in the many offices of New York City. It was actually quite heartbreaking to witness what America once was. What struck me the most after watching this movie was just how the United States has been systematically destroyed from enemies within. Your comment perfectly encapsulates the depths to which she has plunged. One would have to be blind not to see how the willful destruction of America was by design. It should never have come to this.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Yes, obviously by design. Who is obvious as well. Read Culture of Critique as one source of the answer. Today Fauci and Gates and Tedros are front-men for the Judeo-Masonic cult that relentlessly pursues our destruction. It should never have come to this, and the self-defense should have been just are relentless and strong. The UnAmerican Activities Committee was one structure that was trying hard, first commenced in 1938 by Martin Dies. Richard Nixon was a member in 1948, and of course Joe McCarthy in the 50s. It was a lesson to us all how a effective self-defense was undermined and destroyed by the Jew Roy Cohn, a grotesque sexual pervert, and the Zio-media at the time. Perhaps the same could be said of the John Birch Society, and many other institutions and groups conducting self defense, including the American Nazi Party of GL Rockwell, when you look at it right. Rockwell begins both of his books with accounts of grotesque depravity and degeneracy in American pretending to be ‘art’ and ‘culture’, mostly promoted by Jews. I agree. Ron Paul should have been President if not for the power that marginalized and prevented him.
      It is out of control today. What can we do? This medical martial law imposed by our Overlords must be resisted in some way. Clever how they will make that seem a ‘threat to public health’. The lockdown is!

        • Eric
          Eric says:

          If it’s possible to combine a libertarian with a national socialist, that’s what I am.

          In any legitimate political system, you have to balance individual rights and freedoms against the well-being of society as a whole.

          If my ideal society forbids the exploitation of other people within that society and requires everyone who wants to eat to contribute (if they are able) and to be productive, is that an illegitimate assault on people’s rights and freedoms?

          If my ideal society forbids race-mixing and importing alien peoples and cultures, is that an illegitimate assault on people’s rights and freedoms?

          Apart from those limitations — and the usual ones against lying, cheating, stealing and murder — I can’t think of any others that I would impose.

          You could even openly express your disagreement with my regime. It wouldn’t matter to me as long as the limits stayed firmly in place.

          • Carolyn Yeager
            Carolyn Yeager says:

            No, Eric, it’s not possible to combine Libertarianism and National Socialism. I’m glad I noticed this comment, which is dated only 2 days ago.

            You’ve recommended a book by George Lincoln Rockwell in this thread, and also, here or elsewhere, praised Adolf Hitler. They weren’t identical, since Rockwell was an American. That’s why he couldn’t present, or even embody, a true nationalism. “Nation” refers to one’s birth, not to citizenship. That means, where one was born, or in some cases, where one’s recent ancestors were born. That’s why it comes to ‘Blood’, a direct genetic connection. That’s not possible in the US. Originally it was Anglo, but there’s been way too much immigration from all over, so much that no one can make a case for even a European-based America anymore.

            Libertarianism, with it’s prime concern for “individual rights and freedoms,” allows for ‘citizens’ to marry whomever they wish, to travel wherever they wish and return again, to hold whatever political opinions they wish (and they can change over time), and to criticize their government however they wish. What counts is what makes the individual happiest, *not* what makes the nation as a whole strongest and safest.

            Sez you: “You could even openly express your disagreement with my regime. It wouldn’t matter to me as long as the limits stayed firmly in place.” In that case, how would you keep the limits firmly in place? When enough of the *individuals* wanted basic changes to your limits, how would you stop that? They would have the right to express their will even if they were misguided and were damaging your regime thereby (perhaps intentionally).

            The two belief systems will always come into conflict. Only in your imagiation can you put them together in an agreeable way that suits you personally. It’s impossible to make the two work together in real life. I suppose you think you can come up with some examples, but I doubt it.

            In the end, you are an antisemitic libertarian, which is humorous in itself since Jews are the driving force behind Libertarianism.

  11. Hammerheart
    Hammerheart says:

    Should one assume the article author and all commenters would be saying the same if the virus/pathogen pandemic was killing large numbers of mainly babies and children, especially of whites?

    • Eric
      Eric says:

      It isn’t.

      And what do you mean by “large numbers”?

      Herod ordering all male infants to be killed?

      God killing all the first-born of Egypt during Passover?

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      I’d say–and probably most commentators too–that if the ‘virus/pathogen’, if it even existed, was killing mainly white babies and children, that it was most likely engineered by Ultra-Zionists. After all, they are killing white babies and children in a dozen other ways right now, with abortion promotion, LGBT, white guilt, miscegenation promotion, mass 3rd world immigration invasion, climate hoax depop prop, ‘white nationalist’ demonization, inciting non-whites… is that a dozen yet?

  12. Joe
    Joe says:

    Damn… this was a great article. I love it when natural law is evoked in all of its unparalleled power. Thank you.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Glad you liked it. It seems obvious, doesn’t it, that disease will at some point take away the aging, the unfit, the immunocompromised? And leave the fit and the strong to reproduce and improve the stock. Simple, elegant, compassionate, right. The point is, some people hurt their own chances at being healthy. The rest of the population is not responsible. This must be said in the current ‘save the immunocompromised at any cost’ mania.
      Quarantines have Never been imposed on healthy populations. Only the sick. So WTH is going on now? Unprecedented.

  13. Jody Vorhees
    Jody Vorhees says:

    100,000 dead = one in 3,300 American, if my math is correct.

    50,000 dead = one in 6,600 Americans, a more likely scenario.

    The machinations we’re watching appear to be those of the Deep State / the plutocracy / the oligarchy, positioning itself to derail Mr. Trump’s administration by crashing the economy. Nothing else they threw at him worked. This, most likely, will work.

    See ya, America. You were nice while you lasted. Of course, it’s not like they weren’t in the process of murdering you anyway.

  14. Hammerheart
    Hammerheart says:

    @Tim Stadler

    Yes, white Americans especially have been through a ‘mindwarp’ process thanks to Calvinism & Puritanism, etc. “Evangelicals” etc fanatically demand absolute total free will, while Atheists/Skeptics (Ayn Rand Libertarians) also strongly argue for (or against), but proceeding from the same flawed Calvinist, Puritan etc premises (to reduce a horrifically complicated problem millennia-old to a few lines in a comment). I must also add that many of the fanatical free-will absolutists in my experience come from upper- & upper-middle backgrounds, for some reason.

    I’ve seen & had to deal with some awful things & they pushed me close to the brink, too (tho I never turned to substances).
    “Life is complicated & most people do the best they can with what they’ve been dealt,” indeed. Thank you for a dose of reality. “Responsibility”, free will etc are indeed very difficult & very complex issues (all the more reason to not jettison for no good reason 3 or 4 thousand years’ worth of accumulated wisdom on the subjects, whether it’s the Bible or Aristotle). I hope things get better for your son.
    Happy Easter!

  15. Larry
    Larry says:

    It never fails to amaze me that in 15 years of consuming “Jew wise” media, I have only heard the flexner brothers mentioned once. Our entire medical industry was formulated by flexner, funded by Rockefeller. His brother was one of the most prominent Zionist activists. Look it up. Jennifer lake was the one who mentioned him.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Yes, I have heard of Flexner. Wasn’t there some famous document written by him that established the medical school curriculum or something foundational?

      • Achilles Wannabe
        Achilles Wannabe says:

        It was called the “Flexnor Report”
        If memory serves me, It was part of the successful effort to scientize medicine. Flexnor wanted Allopathic approaches which relied on drugs and technology – such as they were then – as opposed to naturalistic approaches He advised all Medical schools to
        vest in biology and chemistry and
        fire the naturopaths who he
        portrayed as charlatans and dummies. He thought science would lead to a type of doctor who cured thru technology and treated the body as if it was a machine whose parts can be adjusted by experts, Needless to say he was one of the grandfathers of our post modern drug pushing and condition conceptualizing medical racket.
        Lately I have wondered who created our statistically driven and hyped epidemiology.. There might be a real story in that for TOQ Of course I am betting it is another Jew. But then I am prejudiced

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      I looked it up. It was called the Flexner Report, and the Jew Flexner visited many of the diverse schools and clinics of all kinds of medicine in 1910. He then declared them ‘unscientific’ and not up to the rigorous standards of European ‘scientific’ medicine. Flexner was funded and guided by the Rockefellers, and with his report Rockefeller created the AMA, which allowed only ‘scientific’ meaning pharmaceutical drug and device medicine. The other approaches–naturopathy, homeopathy, water cures, energy medicine, herbalism–were not funded, and quickly died out in favor of the medical school curriculum Rockefeller installed, based on the Flexner Report.
      Did I mention Flexner was a Jew?

    • Sbaker
      Sbaker says:

      Medical industry funded by Rockefeller and flexner? Is it a bad thing to fund medical advancement? Most hospitals were started by Christians, as was higher education. I don’t see hospitals named after the two guys you mentioned. I do see many named after Christians.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        The Jew Flexner didn’t fund anything.

        And “medical advancement” is not a term that I would apply to his activities.

        Same with the Rockefellers.

        We live longer because of good hygiene and abundant food. Not because of doctors.

        Everyone I know who goes to doctors is sick. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

        • Sbaker
          Sbaker says:

          Apparently, you’ve never suffered severe physical trauma–people do have accidents. It would be interesting to see when you force yourself to go to a doctor, and I bet you will. I’ll assume you were born at home. Good hygiene means chemicals in your water–is that called natural?

          • Eric
            Eric says:

            I respect ER docs and trauma surgeons — for the most part.

            And there are good doctors around — just be careful that you do get a good one.

            I don’t respect quacks who prescribe poison to healthy people on behalf of Big Pharma.

            You’ve defended the fraud Fauci, and that puts you in the category of “quack.”

            Although I understand that you are a veterinarian, not a doctor for humans.

  16. Stuart Rogers
    Stuart Rogers says:

    A brief interview with Knut Witkowski, He worked for 15 years with Klaus Dietz, a leading epidemiologist who coined the term “reproduction number”, on the Epidemiology of HIV before heading for 20 years the Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design at The Rockefeller University, New York..

    This guy is highly credentialed and explains why Fouci is a fraud along with the “shelter in place” 6-ft distancing idiocy. As he states, “I don’t work for the gov’t so I can talk Science.”

    • Pierre de Craon
      Pierre de Craon says:

      I’m glad you cited this interview. A measure of Wittkowski’s insight into the hoax is the rapidity and virulence of the response it has generated from “respectables” of every political stripe.

  17. Jerry cornelius
    Jerry cornelius says:

    Ever broken a leg? never been to the hospital?
    Where do you draw the line (Other than behind yourself)?
    What if you crash your car? Nature decided your reflexes were lacking, so we will not scoop up your mangled body and off to the hospital. What if you were run over, leave him to die, not aware enough.
    What if a gang of blacks kick the shite out of you? not ubermensch enough, let him die.
    Why are we on here whining about immigration? we are not good enough to stop it so we will be overwhelmed. If we exploit 3rd world countries it is because they are weak, if they come here and overrun us it is because they are Parasites.
    It is such a bullshit way of looking at it and as I said you will always find an exception to the rule for your self. And of course, blame someone else. Go look at some of the places that have that way of life-they are shitholes.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      Jerry, I drew the line in the first paragraph, and very generously. It’s also reflected in the title, Irresponsible. None of the cases you list are irresponsible, they are responsible. They are cases of harm and injury through no significant neglect or fault of the victims.
      As for myself, I have been devoted to holistic health for myself since I got lyme disease 27 years ago. No drugs/alcohol, the best nutritious food I can afford, certain supplements, occasional expensive treatments, management protocols, meditation, healthy lifestyle…
      I draw the line with myself. It is my own habits and disciplines and resources that I devote to my health and so try to contribute to the collective health. I want to be an example and an inspiration. Hope this helps.

  18. Larry
    Larry says:

    The key thing to realize about flexner is that he formulated the medical school curriculum and most importantly the training regimen. This regimen is a form of trauma based mind control used by many cults. Sleep and nutrient deprivation with exposure to major trauma and high stress experience. This combined with a highly regimented and regulated rule system is the formula for unquestioning obedience.

  19. HH%
    HH% says:

    Poisoned needles – -funded – -developed – -dispersed and promoted – and about to be –mandated– by USURY.

    ” Driving people off the land – –
    —————— – -piling diverse populations – –
    ————————————– – -idling them in cities – – ?
    ————– – – these are merely the –legal– methods of extermination.

    If extermination is ever to be made humane and apologetic – –
    ————————– – -it –must– be put on a ‘scientific’ [ aka ‘medical’ ] basis. ”
    George Bernard SHAW
    ‘My Fair Lady’ playwright
    USURY mafia ‘radical change agent’


  20. Pierre de Craon
    Pierre de Craon says:

    Let these two quotes stand for the score or more others of the same feather.

    It seems obvious, doesn’t it, that disease will at some point take away the aging, the unfit, the immunocompromised? And leave the fit and the strong to reproduce and improve the stock. Simple, elegant, compassionate, right.

    It is still the thrust of nature to continually trend toward producing stronger, faster, better, longer-lived, more virile specimens of Her species. Our confrontation with the challenges of nature does that. Disease does that. Be strong and survive and reproduce, pass along strong traits, or get sick and die having failed to reproduce and pass on deficient traits.

    Qoheleth wasn’t the only one, perhaps not even the first, to notice that the race isn’t always to the swift or the battle to the strong (though, granted, it is the way to bet). Indeed, it’s a phenomenon so widely observed that it’s not too much to suggest that a man ignores it at his peril, especially when he offers his readers or listeners what purport to be evidence-based reflections on generalities of human conduct and human nature. What I see in Mr. Mackenzie’s article and comments is, instead, a tendency to treat schematic assumptions as effective equivalents for analysis. The tendency seems to be a first resort, almost a reflex. That it is accompanied by a poorly restrained impulse to quip at the drop of a hat scarcely increases its commendability.

    Then there’s this.

    We expend great resources and attention on the “vulnerable” and neglect and even [show] contempt [for] the capable. We offer benefits to the deficient. Thus we Encourage the sick. I call it Weakism.

    … and so on.

    I stopped counting the editorial “we”s in this article when I’d thrice gotten through my allotment of fingers and toes. (Partial reference has already been made to an ingrate Tonto’s “What you mean ‘we,’ white man?” so I shan’t restate the obvious here.) The experience has left me less concerned about Mr. Mackenzie’s Weakism than about his we-ism, which in the present instance is the biochemical precursor of Weak Tea-ism.

    Overall, and to speak as plainly as my own nature permits, whether the fact that I fail to see the same merit in this article and its subsequent comments that many other commenters see is a function of my spleen or their generosity is not for me to decide. Absent a shaft of illumination from above or even below, I shall continue to regard what Mr. Mackenzie has written here as related more to a species of pub grumbling than to composed reflection, and I shall weigh it accordingly.

    • Sbaker
      Sbaker says:

      An elegant and well written comment. My concern is what axe is there to grind, what profit is to be obtained. Shall we return to the time of the Luddites?

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        With respect, given that we are seeing this elite-driven “crisis” used, among many other things, to covertly hasten the imposition of poisonous 5G technology on a doltish and distracted world populace, it seems to me that a perfectly reasonable and healthy response would be to channel one’s inner Wordsworth and proclaim “Ned Ludd! thou shouldst be living at this hour.”

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        We should return to the time of the Amish. They tried to do a comparative study of Amish children and ‘normal’ children in the US, for general and specific aspects of health. The Amish children were significantly healthier in most categories, and overall. Unfortunately, they had to disregard the results, because they were trying to compare unvaccinated vs. vaccinated, which was the case, but so many other factors contributed to the Amish children being healthier they could not solve for X alone.
        So they did the study with home schooled vs. public schooled children, whose livestyles, diet, social factors etc. were much more similar. They found around 300 unvaccinated homeschooled children, and about 700 vaccinated public schooled children. No comparison, the homeschooled children were far healthier in most categories, and somewhat in others, but far healthier overall. It was called the Mawson study, search it out.
        Gates does not want us to know.

    • George Mackenzie
      George Mackenzie says:

      We beg to quip. Such an erudite address requires at least that much..

      We regret that pronoun consistency offends thee.

      Quipping on, as for ‘poorly restrained impulse’, we rather view it as respectful willingness to engage. We note that few authors participate in comments, as though aloof from such phlogistics, and we determine to defy such elitism and join in meritocratic commentary.

      We see no reason to reject basic evolutionary theory for the exceptions. Much of Darwin has been distorted for obvious reasons, but eugenics still stands. The strong survive and breed. The weak die and decline. Except in unusual circumstances, which are of course common today. But today did not produce us.

      If not, then why is this boogey-bug said to lay low the elderly and ‘immune compromised’? Why do most children and healthy adults survive it just fine and contribute to herd immunity? Exceptions prove the rule, except when they are the norm. These are not generalities on human nature, but on nature Herself, or God’s nature if you prefer. Ignore them at our peril.

      We regret that someone of such consummate skill with words fails to know that contempt can be a verb. Overeagerness to correct reveals the error. We will not contempt it however.

      I mean we humans, Tonto. You may have red skin, but we all have red blood. Except perhaps thyself Pierre, whose blood is surely blue.

      If speaking as plainly as your nature permits amounts to not being able to decide, then to speak plainly, your nature is indecisive. But we approve, these are complex matters and too swift a decision can lead to misunderstanding.

      Consider this a shaft from the side, and not of illumination, but of quip. We don’t know what pub you inhabit, but do please bring us more napkin scribbling. We find it humorous.

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        Mr. Mackenzie: In both British and American English, the sole verb associated with the noun “contempt” is “contemn.” The various Oxford dictionaries characterize the verb as archaic, and though neither Webster’s 11 nor the American Heritage Dictionary labels the verb in any way, it is fair to say, I think, that one would be hard put to find an unfacetious use of “contemn” in a 21st-century published source.

        I am unaware of any example of “contempt” used as a verb prior to your own. My ignorance is evidently shared by the staffs of the aforementioned reference books.

        So much for facts. As for the rest, your low estimation of my opinion and your high estimation of your own hardly surprises me.

        • George Mackenzie
          George Mackenzie says:

          I imagine the alternative usage would be ‘condemn’. But we are quippling. Yes, I make up words and I claim poetic license. I find language to be a creative, evolving expression and am not rule-bound, though I try to expand beyond the rules thoughtfully, in a way that makes others think too. Perhaps I’ve succeeded. The word ‘Semitophobia’ comes from this process.
          If it seems I am contempting (verbal) you, it is only out of enjoyment for the witty repartee. My estimation of your opinion is quite high, I admire your above-average linguistic skill, and ability to present your views with wit and sting. I enjoy the challenge and hope others here are enjoying the intellectual fray. It’s stimulating and I welcome it. If we have soared far beyond the rules for classical debate, and entered into personal ad hominem swordplay, it’s all in good fun.
          At some point we might apply our high wit to more urgent matters though.

  21. Barkingmad
    Barkingmad says:


    Greg: (paraphrase): “We’re going to begin to commence to start beginning to start to commence commencing to start to begin ending the lockdown by following ALL of the recommendations of [the fraud] Fauci.”

    LOL. We need some humor around here!

    Me, I’d stick a few “proceeds” into there, too, as in: proceed to begin to commence to start…

    • Carolyn Yeager
      Carolyn Yeager says:

      The fact is, Texas is starting, has already started and is being called “first in the nation to end the lockdown.”
      Fact is, we’ve never been in a lockdown. I’ve had all the freedom to come and go as I please and no one is there to stop me. Two days ago I went to Home Depot and it was functioning normally except the cashiers had a table in front of their register area and you had to put your purchase and payment on the table so you never touched hands or got too close. I took my recycling out to the city dump and that was functioning normally. Some businesses are closed, I guess, but my pest control guy came as scheduled. It may be different in Houston and Dallas, under the instruction of the mayors.

      Abbott was speaking carefully in his televised announcement, particularly at the beginning, but I can assure you we freedom-loving people in Texas are very happy with our governor, and lieutenant governor too, and have no reason to complain. Excluding the dirty dems, of course. You won’t see protests at the capital in Austin like there were in the leftist states of Michigan and Minnesota. And while we love freedom, we also love order and law-enforcement, and constitutional government. I’ve lived here 24 years and now I wouldn’t live anywhere else.

      Your humor is based on a made-up version of Abbott’s announcement. You are contributing to “fake news” in order to have a laugh.

      • Eric
        Eric says:

        There are protests going on in Austin right now.

        Are you allowed to go to restaurants and bars in Texas. And I’m not talking about take-out or drive-thru restaurants, but ones where you can sit down. Can you go to movie theaters and sporting events? Churches?

        Bars and restaurants in Austin have been closed down. Did they reopen?

        Just what do you consider “not being restricted”?

        • Carolyn Yeager
          Carolyn Yeager says:

          I wrote two replies to your two April 17 comments directed to me this morning (April 18) that have not been published, although this one from you has. I said the gathering in Austin was not against Gov. Abbott or Pres. Trump but was in favor of opening up Texas asap. Trump said this afternoon in his CV news conf. that he was supportive of the demonstrators to express their views. He wants things to loosen things. He, more than anyone else, is trying to make it happen asap.

          I don’t go to restaurants or bars, or movie theaters or sporting events, so that doesn’t come under my “experience.” I am not feeling personally restricted, and that’s all I said in spite of what you claim I said, but I worry about the country. I’m sure it’s like everywhere else, restaurants open only for take-out or drive in (there are plenty of those!). I don’t see this as much of a hardship for people. One reason hospitals are without patients is because people are safely at home, not out getting in car and motorcycle accidents, fist-and knife-fights, shooting each other, and other such fun and good times.
          The Texas state parks opened yesterday! That’s a big deal. I don’t think our city park was ever closed. BTW, in my county, there are a total of 4 cases, all at home. No covid cases at all in our very capable hospital!

          The serious problem for the economy is folks not able to go to work. So offices and plants need to open first, but with very careful safety plans. I think many people are still afraid of catching this disease because of the photos we’ve seen of people who are very bad off. Rather terrifying.

      • George Mackenzie
        George Mackenzie says:

        I have heard only about 8 governors are not applying the full lockdown protocols. Texas must be one, though it looks like Mayors can go further. Texas still has some support for freedom, it seems.
        Isn’t that changing? I am told that hispanic immigrants, legal and illegal, are changing the demographics of the state and it will turn blue at some point, like AZ, VA, long-since CA and others. This is by design, and Jews are a big part of it. I have news of citizen militias at the border ‘assisting’ ICE and CBP, but aren’t those agencies shifting toward the NWO Judeo-Masonic agenda for America too? Trump is an actor reality TV show host for the Ultra-Zionists, he is participating in the destruction of white freedom in America. And Texas.

Comments are closed.