Source: JON RAPPOPORT http://www.nomorefakenews.com http://www.nomorefakenews.com/archives/archivelist.php ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ THE COCKROACH SYNDROME April 8, 2003. Several sources of mine have forcefully pointed out that, when you try to tie human disease to insects, the OP often involves a pesticide. It goes this way. "We've checked out the scene in XYZ poverty-stricken area, and we've found sixteen cases of a new disease called West Nile/SARS Blah Blah. The carrier here is the cockroaches. So, next week, we're bringing in the helicopters and drenching everyone and everything with malathion. No one will be harmed." Oddly enough, Beverly Hills and Park Avenue and Rancho Santa Fe seem to escape such pesticide launches. This is because the rats and cockroaches there are fed beluga and gently boiled green beans, and their coats and shells are shiny. Malathion is a poison. However, to be fair, parts of Pasadena have been drenched in the past to eradicate the medfly (which survives anything at the same low, harmless reproductive rate). And there are some elegant neighborhoods in Pasadena. I understand the mostly elderly occupants of these mansions are approaching, or have already entered into, senility, and therefore don't raise much of a ruckus. Their antidote of choice to malathion is single-malt scotch. So do keep your eyes open for a coming pesticide OP in, perhaps, Hong Kong, to "combat SARS," The resultant lung complications will, naturally, be called SARS. Note well: public health measures in poor neighborhoods rarely involve standard non-toxic sanitation improvements or a few pennies of encouragement for community food gardens or anything that actually improves the health of residents. The pesticides are launched as an attack. Malathion is a close offshoot of Nazi chemical-weapon research. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com ONE MORE TIME ON DISEASE INVENTION April 7, 2003. Because even alternative news sites fall for this on a regular basis, I want to trace a pattern. One, the government or some government health agency announces an outbreak of what looks like a new disease. Two, the government says it has people on the scene looking for the germ that is causing the new disease. At this point, all sorts of people accept One and Two and begin to surmise that the germ may have been designed in a lab. Sure, people do that work in labs, all the time. They tinker with bacteria and viruses and more exotic micro-organisms. BUT. Why accept, on the face of it, that the government has discovered an outbreak of some singular discrete new disease entity in the first place? Why assume that? Why buy that? These government agencies are in the business of welding together people and their symptoms and coming up with authoritative disease names. A cough and a fever in Hong Kong becomes linked to a headache and diarrhea in Miami. They say the folks in Hong Kong and Miami are all suffering from Zabeeweedee, the ONE new disease which is caused by some ONE germ they are presently looking for. Hold it right there. THIS is the place to pause. Are they lying? Did they really track those people on the plane? If so, why are they now saying, for example, in the SARS situation, that "the very first person with SARS in China (itself a fatuous idea)" did NOT give SARS to his immediate family? Before asserting that some new disease was really a planted germ they cooked up in a lab, why not find out if it IS a disease, instead of something more subtle: a linking up of people and their symptoms that don't really fit together. Come ON. You know, people in Hong Kong and Singapore and China and Canada die all the time. Every day. And some of them display, among other things, cough and fever and fatigue and respiratory problems. They call it flu, they call it pneumonia, they call it lung complications. But now they call it SARS. And they have found no convincing virus. They have found no root cause. But that doesn't stop them. They are already working on a vaccine against a germ they don't have. They have admitted, on top of it, that the people in China are dying of pneumonia, but in the US, pneumonia hasn't been seen so far. What's next? Will cervical cancer become the leading US symptom of SARS? Polio? Automobile accidents on lonely roads after midnight? After 20 years of investigating medical scandals, I've learned to stop the merry-go-round just after it starts, and say PROVE IT. PROVE THAT YOU JUST FOUND A NEW DISEASE. PROVE THAT ALL THESE CASES ARE LINKED. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com THE NEXT SARS TRICK IN THE BAG---FILE THIS ONE UNDER: HOW TO INFLATE CASE NUMBERS OF A DISEASE April 7, 2003. WHO is reporting that a number of SARS cases in China seem to be linked to the STD chlamydia. And, pray tell, what does that mean? That people who have chlamydia may be more prone to catching SARS. The two viruses may be working together. Let's see. SARS, which has not been proved to be one unique condition at all, for which they have not found a viral cause, may be working with another virus that causes an STD. Chris Powell, spokesman for WHO, said that these "partner viruses" may vary from nation to nation. So in China it's chlamydia, in England it may be hepatitis, in Norway it may be the common flu, blah blah. Whatever they say it is. Yes, and maybe a new green sun will appear in the sky tomorrow morning. Here is what to look out for: as I predicted, this could be a variation on the numbers-building phase of the disease INVENTION. You see, under the rubric of being very careful and spreading the surveillance net as wide as possible, health agencies may be linking so-called SARS to other disease names so they can create what they call AT-RISK POPULATIONS. "Yes, we have 10,000 cases of chlamydia in area X. So let's say that all these people are at risk for SARS. Then, when we talk about total numbers of SARS cases, we can fudge a little and introduce the category called NUMBERS OF PEOPLE AT RISK FOR SARS. Instead of thirteen people, we can say the number is now 10,013." Get it? Headline: CDC SAYS 600,000 AT RISK FOR SARS GLOBALLY. In fact, in a weird way, they are already hinting in the direction of creating some kind of "sensational at-risk persons." They have invented a completely baseless term, SUPER-SPREADERS. These are supposedly people who have the capacity to give the disease to extraordinary numbers of other people. And they are saying that those with chlamydia may have this super-power. Pure fantasy. They are engineering a delusion in the public mind by covertly and subliminally suggesting that a person with chlamydia, who might have sex with a lot of partners (!?!?), could spread SARS because, well, the chlamydia virus and the SARS virus might be physically joined together like, oh, a hook and eye. They aren't saying it, they're just implying it and letting the imagination and fear do the rest. Sex and fear always work well together. WHO also announced that so-called SARS appears to be diminishing in China, but that's much less interesting to them. In the case of AIDS, they kept adding new diseases and symptoms to the definition until they had about 30 unrelated diseases they said were AIDS INDICATORS. If they decide to take SARS that way, they might say something like, "We have a blood test for SARS. If a person tests positive for the virus, he is infected, although he may not be a full-blown case. But if he tests positive AND has any one of 12 different diseases, such as chlamydia, we will say he is a full-blown case of SARS." Then, because the SARS blood test actually registers positive for 157 different reasons that have nothing to do with pneumonia---such as prior vaccination for polio and alcohol consumed the night before the test and having a cold and having a toxic liver---all sorts of people can be led into the net. So far, I don't see that happening, but keep your eyes peeled. The numbers-building game could occur. They simply widen the net and take in the unwitting. A final note: so far there has been no mention of TITER. That means they have said nothing about how many so-called SARS viruses are actually in the body of any person. After all, sixteen viruses aren't going to do any damage. They need to show there are huge numbers of one kind of virus doing something damaging in the body. And they haven't shown it or even indicated they are trying to measure that. SThat's called a clue. They are getting way out ahead of themselves, based on zero science. Business as usual. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com "FIRST SARS CASE DID NOT SPREAD THE VIRUS TO HIS IMMEDIATE FAMILY" April 5, 2003. Thus spoke Chris Powell, WHO official, from Foshan, China, where WHO officials are studying the origin of SARS. "...this individual apparently infected four people, but did not infect the four grown-up children who live with him," Powell told CNN. Apparently. Not sure. Don't know. Baffled. I offer this clue to WHO. The immune system decides whether a germ does anything or not. I only charge WHO $5,890,567 for the advice. These morons should be, I don't know, QUARANTINED, before they do more harm. Around the world, people are selling surgical masks at the side of the road. That's another stock tip. Mask manufacturers. Meanwhile, in Singapore, WHO scientist David Mansoor said the epidemic there "is almost certainly over." WHAT? The biggest scare since asteroids colliding with Earth, and it's already done? You mean...this thing just burns itself out in a few weeks? With almost no deaths? And the rest of the world is still in complete turmoil about it? Are we still communicating by pony express? Hey, Canada. Take note. Hey, Canadian health officials, take a few valium and play a few hands of pinochle, and when you look up everything will be normal again. In Malaysia, the government is saying they'll give out jail sentences of up to two years, if an airline passenger fails to disclose he has flu-like symptoms. What about a sneeze? Three weeks behind bars? Another clue: if global health police stop declaring that people with irrelevant symptoms have SARS, this whole deal is going to be gone in a month. Unless the EMBARRASSMENT of having pronounced national emergencies push these dopes into self-fulfilling prophecies. Such as: "Dr. Madbrain Slather has just discovered that cervical cancer and TB are symptom of SARS...and in an UNRELATED story, numbers of SARS cases worldwide just jumped from 3000 to 7 million." I do sincerely hope you're grasping this. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com BUSH ISSUES QUARANTINE ORDER ON SARS April 4, 2003. "...executive order Friday allowing the forced quarantine of people suspected of having a mysterious new illness [SARS]...grants authority to Tommy ["I'm not taking the smallpox shot"] Thompson to decide when such a quarantine [of a reluctant citizen with chest congestion] is needed." The MSNBC and wire service story I'm quoting from also states, with a straight face, paraphrasing "government officials," that Bush's executive order "is not meant to escalate fears in the public's mind..." What is it meant to do? Stimulate Internet shopping? The actual executive order directs the "apprehension, detention or conditional release [electronic ankle bracelet?] of individuals [who refuse hospitalization and isolation] to prevent the introduction, transmission or spread of suspected communicable diseases." Yeah. The order specifically mentions SARS. This is the first disease added to the government's quarantine list in 20 years. The supposed trigger for Bush's order was a woman coming back to the US on a plane from somewhere in Asia. She had a cough and a fever. COUGH AND A FEVER. She was told she should go to a hospital and she said no thanks and moved on into the night. The new quarantine command from the lofty clouds above Mt. White House permits cops to bust a person who has been "exposed," has no symptoms, and "may be infected." HAS NO SYMPTOMS. Of course, there is no test for infection, because they have no germ. But wait. They say they do. A member of the coronavirus family. The CDC is going with that. In fact, government work has begun to develop, you guessed it, a vaccine. With animal tests and all, this could take a year or two. The vaccine will "inoculate against" the coronavirus. Of course, as Dr. Anthony ("I'm a big shot, please believe I'm a big shot") Fauci, head of the US Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said, if they later figure out that some other virus causes SARS, then they'll scrap all the research and throw millions of vials of vaccine into the garbage. So far, there are 115 cases of so-called SARS in the US. No deaths. And, as I've been writing, no proof that something called SARS exists. Researchers "have a virus" like a homeless person in NYC has a horse running in the Kentucky Derby. Bush is running neck and neck with Gerald Ford for presidential/medical boob of the last 200 years. But on the quarantine front, he's a leader. You want a stock tip? Invest in a drug-company that sells over the counter cold and flu remedies. Because everybody and his brother is going to be trying to suppress the hell out of those symptoms, to avoid taking a ride to the isolation ward. Maybe kids will be turning in their parents. "My daddy's been inserting Nyquil suppositories all day. He won't leave the garage." JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com HOW TO TARGET A SPECIFIC POPULATION FOR DEATH AND DEBILITATION April 4, 2003. In the wake of my recent SARS articles, I thought I'd spell out how certain medical OPS can work. Clarity in these matters depends on which end of the telescope you're peering through. The public sees the gradual and then accelerating spread of a plague or an epidemic or a wave of contagious illness. It looks like there was an origin point with a fanning out from that spot. It looks like people are catching a germ from one another and getting sick. It looks like the medical troops are moving in to try to save the day. But if it's a planned OP, just the opposite is happening. And here is one version of such an OP. You select the group you want to debilitate. You invent a list of symptoms, and you keep that list vague. You go into the group and you find people who have the symptoms. Some of those people will be dying, usually because the water supply there is dirty and the food situation is bad, or because they are taking some very nasty drugs, or because they are working in an ag area where the pesticides are from hell. Or because they have just been shot up with loads of bad vaccines. (In China, areas went through a massive vaccine program about a year ago.) So you start saying cases that have these vague symptoms actually have QRS, a new disease, and you dispatch med pros to the scene to take blood and look for a new germ. You announce the probable cause, the germ you settle on. You develop a blood test for the germ, and you say if the test is positive and the person has a few of these vague symptoms, he has QRS. You already know that the blood test will read positive for a number a reasons that have nothing to do with this germ. That gives you a nice wide net so you can inflate case numbers and scare everybody and obtain travel bans, and: You can also give all these cases a DRUG that is very toxic, that in fact produces one or two of the vague symptoms of QRS. You shove in a new policy. If a person tests positive for the QRS germ, you give him the drug, even if he has no symptoms. You say this is a very smart preventive action. So now these people who tested positive for the germ but had no symptoms WILL GET SYMPTOMS, because the drug will be causing the symptoms. But you say the symptoms are from the QRS germ. The drug debilitates or kills people. The group you targeted is in a state of hysteria and fear. Of course, you have other people in this group who are dying because of the original reasons they got sick: starvation, dirty water, bad vaccines, other drugs, pesticides, etc. You call all these people QRS fatalities. Those cases that recover without taking the QRS treatment you downplay. You don't give them press coverage. You call them weird miracles. You say they never really had QRS. And if any medical pros stumble across the OP in progress and go public, you discredit them. You take away their funding. You say they are crazy. Suppose a medical pro, a key figure (dupe) who helped establish the existence of QRS to begin with, wakes up and tries to go public and blow the whistle on some part of the scam. You kill him. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com SARS QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS April 3, 2003. I have received much response to my articles on SARS. So I want to provide more information. This does not supplant what I've already written. To access previous articles that are now gone from this page, consult the archive link which has just gone up on the left column. Health officials are busy tracing SARS through Asian patients in a number of countries, explaining this by pointing to China as the origin point. You know, Chinese people got sick in China or Hong Kong or Singapore, they traveled, they spread the disease to others, especially close friends and family who are also Chinese, etc. Sounds reasonable. However, there is a built-in factor here that we need to be aware of. Since SARS has not been proved to be one disease at all, and since the symptoms are vague, searching through ANY SPECIALIZED POPULATION will turn up people who have those generalized symptoms: cough, fatigue, shortness of breath, respiratory problems. It's a piece of sleight-of-hand stage magic. I could invent a disease, call it ABC, offer vague symptoms, say it originated in India, target Indians from London to New York, and begin to investigate Indians and I will DEFINITELY find "cases of ABC." No doubt. None at all. It's a slam dunk. I will find people, Indians, with those symptoms and I will then say they have ABC. Of course, I will neglect to examine OTHER populations where the very same symptoms also exist, and where they are called DEF or GHI or JKL. Or nothing. Or the flu. If you know logic, it's called a tautology. You start with an unproven assumption and you end up confirming your assumption by using it as the yardstick. A=A. You can't lose. It's been pointed out that one or more hospitals have closed in Canada, where the hysteria is very high, and some hospital workers have been quarantined or have voluntarily quarantined themselves. As if this is proof that a contagious plague is spreading. I must point out that hospital closings do not equal proof that one contagious disease with one cause is afoot. Even those doctors who assert that SARS is one disease with one cause readily admit that the death rate is somewhere between 2 and 4 percent. This estimate is based on the falsehood that they have discovered most or all of the cases of SARS. Ridiculous. So if you say that there are thousands more people who have SARS who have not been diagnosed, who have not shown up sick at hospitals, you end up with the conclusion that many of these undiscovered cases are very probably not dying. Which pushes the death rate down much further. Some say that, because the "discoverer" of SARS himself recently died, and because a very few doctors and nurses treating SARS patients have become ill "with SARS," this shows that we are, in fact, dealing with a contagious plague. I refer back to an earlier piece I wrote. When you do not do a real case study of the ill and dead, you obtain only rumors and conjecture. You are swimming in unfathomable waters. You paint a picture from the imagination. I have learned, through extensive investigation of AIDS cases, that when autopsies and other methods were used, people were surprised to find OTHER unrelated and undisclosed prior health conditions that were, in fact, life threatening. You never know unless you look, very carefully. Suppose you do find a nurse who has shortness of breath or respiratory problems. Do you jump to the conclusion that she "has SARS," since she was treating a "SARS patient?" By that vague standard, I could show you hundreds of cases of medical workers "with SARS." Remember, there is no blood test, no diagnostic test at all for SARS. No one has come vaguely close to proving that a virus is on the loose here. So there is nothing to test for. I have no doubt that people with recognized forms of pneumonia or TB (which regularly kill huge numbers of people around the world) have already been pinned with the SARS label. There are more questions and more answers, but I'll stop here for now. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com MORE ON SARS AND DELUSION AND MASS FEAR April 3, 2003. Another aspect: airports can use this pretext to come down harder on travelers and question them more closely about all sorts of matters. Where were you? Whom did you see? What did they say? Why were you there? Now, on to more research matters. There is much material about SARS and what it may be circulating on the Internet. I want to bring up a few points that are not being discussed. For example, how you decide that a germ, any germ, may be related to illness. There is a thing called titer. It refers to the numbers of germs present in the body. Let's say we have an ill person, and somebody finds germ X in his system. The next natural question is, how many germ Xs are there? One? Two? Six thousand? Fifty thousand? Why is that question important? Because it is generally known that a lot of germs have to be present to do anything significant. If only six germ Xs are there, you have nothing to talk about. In the case of SARS, where no probable germ cause has been found, there is absolutely nothing to say about titer. "Let's try to figure out how many SARS germs he has in his body even though we don't have a SARS germ." Doesn't work. Not in this universe. Now, a lot of pure speculations are offered when a new germ may have been discovered. You can always count on that. "We think that even twelve germ Xs can cause great damage in the body, because we believe they turn inside out and whistle Dixie at a certain frequency that obliterates the liver." Yes, we think so. We imagine so. We fantasize. But we know nothing. In the case of HIV, which was never proved to cause anything, all sorts of weird and baseless scenarios were posited. HIV started a cascade of reactions in the body that resulted in the body attacking itself. HIV was hiding in the macrophages (certain immune system cells) and covertly destroying them like a stealth bomber. HIV was hiding in the spinal fluid and floating into the brain and wreaking havoc. Compelling science fiction. People resonated with these ideas. But nothing was ever proved. It was on the order of saying, "The light from planet Lufoo is melting neural connections." All these scenarios were floated because no one could actually find many HIVs in the body, and that was disturbing. How could HIV be causing lethal damage if there were so few of them? In the case of SARS, we are nowhere near that stage of lying. We are still in the stage of lying about having a possible germ to look at. We are still in the stage of lying about SARS being one unique disease condition at all. And yet people are taking off and flying with the premise that SARS IS, in fact, a unique disease condition, and it is caused by a germ somebody designed in a lab. Wow. Now, I understand that the designer germ works if you see that SARS is very useful for keeping people in a state of fear and repression. You think, "Since this is a political OP, we must have a germ designed to achieve that effect." But, as I've been writing since 1987, such an OP is better launched and controlled BY NOT HAVING ANY GERM AT ALL. That's right. All you do is roll together lots of DIVERSE and DIFFERENT illness in many people, you call it SARS or AIDS or CFIDS or OOBLADEE, you get that name plastered on, and then everybody stands up and salutes and says VOILA, we have a new disease and it's horrible and we need a DRUG to treat the one killer germ. The drug always turns out to be highly toxic, and causes some of the very symptoms you're trying to cure. It's magic. I hope you get this, because some of you are sending me articles about SARS and saying, "See, this is exactly what you're talking about. SARS is a bio-attack launched by a germ invented in a lab." Hello? That's not what I'm saying. Let me continue to build my point. If you are in the business of launching terror through epidemics, and if you are sophisticated, you know that a trillion or ten trillion germs spread out into the environment will produce an unknown effect. It's very iffy. AND THE IDEA THAT YOU REALLY HOLD A SECRET ANTIDOTE IN YOUR HAND AND SAVE IT FOR THE FAVORED FEW---that is a joke. It doesn't work that way. Antibiotics are a good example. These drugs sometimes knock out bacteria one two three, and sometimes they don't. Sometimes the germs just continue on their merry way. Sometimes the antibiotics cause very bad adverse effects. Gross overuse of these drugs always causes nasty adverse effects, including severe immune suppression and death. And sometimes, although the drugs do knock out the bacteria, they leave the patient in a weakened state. So the assumption that a magic bullet antidote to a magic bullet designer germ is reliable---that is pure fluff. No, if you are creating a medical OP, you want to create a new disease LABEL which draws in, like a propaganda magnet, all sorts of diverse and UNRELATED illness conditions. Then you want to sell a drug treatment that will eat the liver and the kidneys. You want to obscure the fact that most of the UNRELATED illnesses were stemming from immune-system weakness, which in turn was brought on by factors like street drugs, medical drugs, vaccines, hunger, junk diets, starvation, protein-calorie malnutrition, contaminated water supplies, intestinal parasites, toxic pesticides, stress, war, grinding poverty, hopelessness, nutritional deficiencies, excess refined sugar, and so on. By preying on those who are already ill, by renaming their illnesses, by failing to deal with what really caused them to become ill, by treating them with toxic drugs, you can kill them and scare a whole population back into their homes. You can impose travel bans and quarantines, you can pass new laws, you can forward the medical/police state. And if SARS is called a bio-terror attack, you can work that fear angle as well. You can invent and accuse perpetrators and bomb their cities. If SARS is never called a bio-terror attack, maybe the next GBC or YDR or FGU or RSO or ZXY or ABC will be. In which case, SARS will have been a test run of sorts. "Let's see how they react. Let's see how much fear and how many travel bans we can make them swallow. Let's test out our global surveillance and security and suppression cops." WITHOUT EVER FINDING A GERM. WITH NO GERM. NONE. POOF. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com SARS: THE DISEASE NOW TIED TO ECONOMIC DOWNSWING April 3, 2003. Hong Kong and Singapore are watching their economies slump. Hong Kong trading market sources say business is dropping off. Hotel business, travel business, tourist business. Typical comment: "The health effect of SARS is only slightly worse than its effect on business. Haven't seen such trouble since the stock market meltdown of 1998..." Well, it's working. People are staying home. Staying indoors. 2200 cases worldwide. 82 deaths. That's what they're saying. Wonder how many automobile-related deaths occurred yesterday. Okay. Here is what they're NOT saying: They have not established that SARS is one condition, as opposed to illness arising from various causes in various people. The "virus" has not been established as the common root cause. In fact, they are guessing about several viruses. They don't have a virus. They have no reason to suspect a virus. No profiles on those diagnosed with SARS are being released, and chances are none are being done. By profile I mean prior medical history. Why is that important? Because it would show why these people might be ill, at least some of them. We assume that all these people were completely healthy before they contacted "SARS." That assumption is created by the fact that no medical histories have been offered, and none will be. For example, a medical history on traveler A could show that he has had ten infections in the last year, that the drugs he was prescribed were immunosuppressive, and so on. When you really zero in on medical histories you find out all sorts of interesting and important things. Traveler B was taking chemo recently for cancer, and his immune system is shot. Things like that. Saying that SARS is one disease is like saying that 400 gunshot wounds inflicted in 20 countries over a six-week span were all inflicted by the same gunman. If you're going to say that, you better have some real evidence. Further, no one has announced that there is a very careful analysis of AIRPLANE-CABIN AIR QUALITY underway. Any sensible person would start there. That air carries all sorts of stuff. No one has done a comparative survey of traveler illness over a six-week period for, say, 1995. How many people, worldwide, ended up in hospitals? How many deaths were recorded? What were the symptoms? Such a comparative probe might prove very illuminating. It might turn out that, during that 1995 time period, 2000 people got sick and 70 died---OF VARIOUS CAUSES, none of which was a mystery virus. In other words, this is like a crime-scene investigation. Are you going to do a very detailed job, or are you going to jump to unwarranted conclusions and scare everybody out of their shirts? Claiming that there are obvious connections between these currently ill people---person C traveled on the same plane as person D---well, that is very thin proof. It sounds compelling on the surface, but it leaves out many possibilities. As I wrote recently, passenger C may be suffering from a piece of slightly tainted fish he ate, while D is ill from eating produce that was heavily sprayed with a pesticide or covered with e coli. And the symptoms of SARS---shortness of breath, cough, fatigue, respiratory complications---these are sufficiently vague to bring lots of people into the net. I've known travelers who developed shortness of breath just from BEING ON A PLANE. Cases of pneumonia in Asia are now being linked to cases in America that have not developed pneumonia. Highly suspect. The CDC could easily have framed SARS as flu. But they haven't. They are hot to trot on a new disease. New diseases are very good for research funding. Work on new diseases brings accolades and prizes and job promotions. It's every researcher's dream to discover or get in on the ground floor of a new disease. A great deal of time is spent trying to assert that various cases of illness are connected, and almost no time is spent trying to assert that these cases are dissimilar. That's a prejudice from the get-go. In a story I wrote about a week ago, I unearthed a completely ignored remark from a mainstream medical investigator, who said that a strong immune system was really the best and only protection against "SARS." That should give you an idea about the cure side, the solution, not only to "SARS," but to most diseases. Of course, this is not stressed in the press reports. And yet, a realistic inquiry on those who are now being diagnosed with SARS should jump on that right away. In what shape were the immune systems of those people? Looking in all the wrong places, coming up with all the wrong answers. Since I've been writing about SARS, I have received correspondence from people suggesting a number of immune-system enhancers. I appreciate this. At the same time, I would point out that one magic bullet does not work for everyone. A combination of nutrients is often a better approach. There is a human tendency to accept propaganda about the one evil thing coming from the one root cause. Therefore, when researchers and reporters inform people that one new disease with one cause has been found, that bandwagon gets full right away. It "feels right." We have to work against that tendency. We have to think like a really good investigator would think. We have to step back and examine the conclusions that are being stated in an entirely premature way. Years ago, a federal medical researcher, Harry Haverkos, told me that medical researchers can be divided into two types. He called them the GROUPERS and the SPLITTERS. The groupers jump at the chance to connect instances of illness under one label. The splitters go the other way and look for differences. Harry told me we needed a lot more splitters. He was absolutely right. The fact that Hong Kong and Singapore are seeing their economies take a hit is judged as further proof that SARS is really a dangerous health threat. As if public hysteria were part and parcel of the evidence needed to confirm the existence of a new disease. How idiotic. But how effective. If enough people run from a perceived danger, MORE people will assume that danger is real and specific and singular. The one evil cause of the one evil thing. It's workable mind control. And of course, these days, the idea of making people stay at home and pull in their antennae and take all their information from television is perfect. It makes people even more vulnerable to official pronouncements. It makes people even less likely to question authorities. SARS may even be promoted soon to cut down on numbers of people at war demonstrations. To accomplish this, you don't need a germ designed in a lab. You don't need people trying to combine three viruses into one. You don't need nerve gas in a subway---although that would work too. You just need to say that a whole lot of illness in a number of people is all the same thing. That does it. That works. That puts people in a trance, a trance of fear. Every time I see a SARS come along, I go up on the roof and yell PROVE IT. SARS, until I see something real, stands for: Saying Anything Regarding Sickness. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com SARS CHIEFS TAKE NEW STEPS March 28, 2003. An MSNBC/Reuters/AP piece spells it out. WHO has ordered any airline with international flights out of Toronto, Hong Kong, Singapore, Hanoi, Taiwan, and Guangdong Province in China to screen boarding passengers for SARS. Since no one knows the cause of the disease or if SARS is one disease, and since there are no blood tests done at airports, how is the screening to be accomplished? Airport employees will ask passengers if they have flu-like symptoms, or if they've been in contact with someone who has SARS. If the answer is yes to either question, the passenger is not allowed to board a plane. To say this is a cosmetic procedure is an understatement. Governments have the option of following the new WHO guidelines or not. The other development: Dr. Jim Hughes, head of the CDC infectious disease unit, states that, even though SARS has been described as a pneumonia, many US cases do not have pneumonia. Here we go. This is the disease-definition expanding phase, in which more and more people are taken into the net. The same thing happened with AIDS. New symptoms added. This is SOP. First it's only pneumonia, then it's any lung problem, then it's high fever plus a cough, then it's fatigue, then it's headache plus fever, then it's a splinter in the foot, then it's anyone with a cup of coffee in his hand. The definition-expansion is justified on the grounds that health authorities are really constructing a surveillance definition. They're trying to scoop up everybody who MIGHT have SARS, to prevent the spread of the whatever-it-is. But, as the days and weeks and months go by, somehow these add-on symptoms are never really expelled from the new definitions. They stay on board. We'll see how far SARS goes. Remember, they have found no root cause. They have no test. They have no assurance that SARS was one thing to begin with, as opposed to a grab-bag of unrelated cases.. The group at the US CDC which always appoints itself in charge of these "emerging diseases" is EIS. Epidemic Intelligence Service. The doctors who are drafted for projects at EIS are all trained to go out into the field and FIND THE ONE CAUSE OF THE ONE DISEASE. That's their orientation and their predisposition. They never take the attitude that the "outbreak" may well involve a mistake from the beginning. They never start with the idea that all the reports of cases from various far-flung areas may well be WELDING TOGETHER instances which are really not connected. In the early 1980s at UCLA, researchers investigated many possible causes for AIDS: overuse of antibiotics, recreational drugs, contaminated drugs, cytomegalovirus, intestinal parasites, and so on. Each potential root cause was eliminated because NOT ALL CASES OF SO-CALLED AIDS SHARED ANY ONE CAUSE. Why was this a completely wrong way to proceed? Because it was based on the unproven idea that AIDS was one disease condition. Whereas, since immune-system suppression was the common denominator in all cases, any sane person would realize that hundreds of different causes in various cases could bring about immune suppression. This obvious idea was ignored. The researchers were trained to assume, from the get-go, that every case was an example of the same disease condition. The basic flaw. One disease, one germ, one basic drug to kill the one germ. Researchers will tell you that epidemiology is their ace in the hole. They mean: "We have tracked SARS from person to person so we know it's one disease caused by one germ." Joe got on a plane in Singapore. He was already suffering from flu-like symptoms. Sid, a guy sitting three rows away from Joe, later developed the same symptoms. That kind of thing. This sounds very convincing, but it really isn't, for various reasons. For example, there are a number of solid studies which show that people with HIV do not pass it on to those they live with. And of course, Joe and Sid may be flu-like for different reasons. Joe ate fish that was a little bit tainted, and Sid was recently walking through a pesticide-laden field of rice. But no one asks Sid and Joe the right questions, because the hunt is for a germ. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com THE FAKE SARS TEST AND THE FAKE SCIENCE http://www.nomorefakenews.com/archives/archiveview.php?key=97 March 24, 2003. The hysteria that has been created by reports of the mysterious global pneumonia (SARS) now claims new victims: media and scientists. See, the media are reporting that a test has been found to detect the virus that is causing SARS. Of course, if you read far enough into these stories (MSNBC today, for example), you find out that the new test is dubious, at best. First of all, here is the way the test is done. A person suspected of having SARS gives a little bit of blood to a doctor. The doc sends this to a lab, where they also have blood from SARS people who have recovered. To that "victorious blood" they add the virus just found in the patient in question. If the victorious blood kills the virus, then the patient in question does have SARS. This is science like Dan Rather is an astronaut. Because they haven't found a virus that causes SARS. They may hope they have, but they haven't. So how can they add this virus to the victorious blood, if they don't have it, if they haven't isolated it? Oh, they may have isolated SOME virus or another, but they don't know that it is causing SARS. Get it? Who knows how many irrelevant viruses are floating around in the human body all the time? And if they haven't found the true causative virus, they absolutely can't say all these so-called cases of SARS are actually connected in any way. They could very well be various kinds of flu and pneumonia and infections that are unrelated. Diseases have been invented on the basis of taking unrelated illness and tying it together under one name. AIDS is one example. Travelers around the world get sick and die all the time. Most recover. But all of a sudden we have SARS, and medical teams are claiming that cases in China are related to cases in Nome. To have any hope of finding a germ that actually causes an illness, you have to establish a few things. The germ is present in all cases. It is the same germ. It is present in large numbers at locatable sites in the body. The germ is actually doing something. It is attacking cells, it is registering some kind of destructive biological activity. In the case of so-called SARS, they have NONE of that. And even when the germ in question passes all the above tests, you still have the overriding factor: how healthy is the PERSON? Is the person able to throw off the germ easily? Are most people with good immune systems able to throw off the germ? You see, when you get down in the dirt and really look, you don't get hysteria, you get information or lack of same, and you can move on with confidence, not fear. But fear is what drives the medical cartel. JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com