Media Skews Virus Numbers

Media Skewing the Numbers

By Mark Anderson

It’s clear that nearly every mainstream media outlet is consistently presenting an overly simplistic and hysteria-inducing “cases-and-deaths” narrative without qualifying the data and certainly without reporting the high number of recoveries. Recoveries are astronomically greater than the death toll.

For example, on March 30, the worldwide coronavirus recoveries number climbed 4,387, or .027% from 160,243 at mid-day to 164,630 by late afternoon, whereas 36,938 coronavirus deaths were reported at noon, increasing by 190 to 37,128 at 4:00—only .005%.

Around 4 p.m. that day, there were 776,179 “cases” worldwide (a case is typically not clearly defined), and of that number, 574,421 were listed as “currently infected.” Of those, 95% were rated as “mild condition” and just 5% were listed as “serious or critical condition.”

Thus, the recoveries tend to be five to six times greater than deaths, and the vast majority of the infected experience only mild symptoms. This is in no way an attempt to trivialize the death toll but to show that the media are skewing numbers rather than offering a balanced presentation of data.

The data here come from the website “Worldometers” and align quite well with other mainstream online sources. It’s notable that the widely publicized CDC web address, “,” provides no such recovery numbers or “condition” data.

13 Pieces of Jigsaw, Perloff book

Meanwhile, there are questions about the accuracy of the testing and whether each reported death is certifiably from the coronavirus. It’s possible to test positive for coronavirus yet not get sick and die from it.

The regular flu kills approximately the same number of people each year in the U.S. alone as have died of the coronavirus so far worldwide. Hospital infections (e.g., staph infections etc.) kill about 90,000 a year in the U.S. alone, and medical malpractice kills about 200,000 annually in the U.S. Those deaths should be preventable, but no one shuts down society to stop those or many of the other causes of death that far outstrip coronavirus.

America's next big bankruptcy, StansberryInterestingly, the CDC’s star doctor working for the White House, Dr. Anthony Fauci, co-wrote a piece published Feb. 28 in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). As Scott Tips of the highly respected alternative health organization National Health Federation points out, the NEJM editorial notes: “If one assumes that the number of asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times as high as the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%. This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9%-10% and 36%, respectively.”

That belies Fauci’s projection of up to “240,000” deaths in the U.S. alone. It appears a worst-case scenario claim by Fauci was peddled as virtual fact by a news media that’s not giving us complete numbers and is ironically inducing society to suspend First Amendment guarantees of speech, assembly, and worship—the very amendment that the corporate media claims to protect and exercise.

Media Preps You for Post-Virus NOW

You are being conditioned right now for planned expansion of the New World Order.

By Mark Anderson

The Atlantic’s Ed Yong, in a piece called “How the Pandemic Will End,” wrote, “Like World War II or the 9/11 attacks, this pandemic has already imprinted itself upon the nation’s psyche.” Fancying himself as a prophet of sorts, Yong added that, in 2018, he wrote another story for The Atlantic, “arguing that America was not ready for the pandemic that would eventually come.” Yong also mentioned that two to three months before the coronavirus outbreak reportedly erupted in China, “the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security war-gamed what might happen if a new coronavirus swept the globe. And then one did. Hypotheticals became reality.”

That’s a reference to a suspicious gathering called Event 201, during which the pro-vaccine Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on Oct. 18, 2019 joined forces in New York City with the Bilderberg-connected World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Center for Health Security to carry out a simulated response regarding the very same kind of “novel” (meaning “new”), “zoonotic” (transferred from animals to humans) coronavirus that is now said to be on the brink of dooming the world.

My Stretch of Texas Ground movie

Either the people in these three groups are prophetic beyond measure, or the Covid-19 “outbreak” may be something approaching a “planned-demic,” given the grotesque profits to be made by fudging Covid-19 data and developing and selling drugs and vaccines, along with the quantum advancement the one-world government planners among the WEF and other groups can make by telling humanity that a germ is cause enough to drop any pretense of constitutional liberty or nationalism.

Yong continued: “Years of isolationist rhetoric had consequences, too. Citizens who saw China as a distant, different place, where bats are edible and authoritarianism is acceptable, failed to consider that they would be next or that they would not be ready. ‘People believed the rhetoric that containment would work,’ says Wendy Parmet, who studies law and public health at Northeastern University. ‘We keep them out, and we’ll be okay. When you have a body politic that buys into these ideas of isolationism and ethno-nationalism, you’re especially vulnerable when a pandemic hits.’ ”

In other words, if only Americans would stop their “wrong-think” about nationalism and independence, then the world could drastically reduce pandemics and other intractable problems—although Yong (and Ms. Parmet) evidently refuse to see that America’s prerogative to more aggressively defend its borders and prevent illegal, potentially disease-carrying immigrants from entering the nation most assuredly will help control the spread of pathogens.

Drowning in IRS debt? The MacPherson Group could be a lifesaver!

The same applies to sufficiently limiting legal immigration. Notice that Americans are expected to obey stay-in-place orders and almost unheard-of curfews without question. But the one-world planners who want to recklessly merge cultures and economies to form larger blocs for completing the infrastructure of world government are just fine with unchecked immigration.

Not to be outdone, another dystopianist, Gordon Lichfield, editor-in-chief of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology journal Technology Review, warns:

[O]ne can imagine a world in which, to get on a flight, perhaps you’ll have to be signed up to a service that tracks your movements via your phone. . . . There would be temperature scanners everywhere, and your workplace might demand you wear a monitor that tracks your temperature or other vital signs. Where nightclubs ask for proof of age, in the future they might ask for proof of immunity—an identity card or some kind of digital verification via your phone, showing you’ve already recovered from or been vaccinated against the latest virus strains.

In that scenario, one can feel the cadences of total government control, especially the relentlessly professed need to create the conditions for requiring universal vaccinations and seamless surveillance. Lichfield also cites basic psychological conditioning as the means toward his Orwellian ends: “We’ll adapt to and accept such measures, much as we’ve adapted to increasingly stringent airport security screenings in the wake of terrorist attacks. The intrusive surveillance will be considered a small price to pay for the basic freedom to be with other people.”

Days of Chaos Subscription Offer

The Huffington Post’s Melissa Jeltsen argues that, amid the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S., “another disaster looms on the horizon: the erosion of reproductive rights.”

Ms. Jeltsen actually tries to make the case that despite the mass media cartel’s insistence that we’re at war with the worst virus villain ever, we still must allow abortions to continue unabated.

Nourishing Diets, Morell
New at the AFP Store, by the author of Nourishing Fats

“States hostile to abortion are now taking advantage of the pandemic to eliminate access, arguing that abortions are not essential procedures and should be postponed. Republican governors in Ohio, Texas, and Mississippi have told healthcare facilities to stop all elective surgeries and procedures, abortion included. Kentucky is also taking steps to follow suit,” Ms. Jeltsen whines.

What else would Ms. Jeltsen expect at a time when the very media outlet she writes for is among those telling us that we must “fight the virus,” no matter how many lifestyle adjustments we must make, shortages we must face, or freedoms we must surrender? The mass media cartel’s calls for continuing abortions, for renewing attacks on nationalism, and for instituting permanent tyrannical measures to constantly monitor the human population and reduce it to total serfdom is a clear indication that the mass media cartel, in a real sense, is itself a pathogen.

Former UK Prime Minister Wants ‘Temporary’ World Government

By Mark Anderson

Former UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown wants a world federation to rise out of the Covid-19 scare and, accordingly, he has called on national leaders to form a “temporary” world government in order to confront what the press is calling an extraordinarily serious health crisis. No one knows, however, how long this “temporary” world government would last.

Brown stated that “a global taskforce of leaders, health experts, and leaders of international organizations with executive powers was needed,” according to several overseas news outlets that seem clueless to the implications.

Brown, who served as a Labour Party Member of Parliament from 2007 to 2010, believes the UN Security Council should be included in the world government that he envisions. “This is not something that can be dealt with in one country. There has to be a coordinated global response,” he said. “This is first and foremost a medical emergency and there has to be joint action to deal with that. But the more you intervene to deal with the medical emergency, the more you put economies at risk.”

So, Brown wants to involve the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in a broad effort that would pursue a vaccine and organize its production while supposedly avoiding profiteering. Brown suggested that both entities increase their financial power in order to confront the impact of the Covid-19 crisis in low- and middle-income countries.

Notably, during the 2008 financial crisis, Brown hosted a meeting of the G20 in London, which drummed up a $1.1 trillion rescue package—after he persuaded other global leaders that there was a solemn need to bail out the banks. The next G-20 meeting is scheduled for Saudi Arabia in November, and is sure to include a discussion of how the elite can profit and/or protect assets from any future pandemics.

America's next big bankruptcy, Stansberry“Brown said there had been resistance in 2008 to using the G20 as a vehicle for tackling the financial crisis, but that it [now] should be clear to world leaders that there was no possibility of a go-it-alone approach working,” the internationalist-oriented UK Guardian noted, adding, “Despite Donald Trump’s ‘America-first’ policy, [Brown] said it was still possible to get support for an emergency body with executive powers.”

Several countries—including the U.S. and its $2.2 trillion stimulus package signed into law March 27—have announced emergency economic packages. Meanwhile, Brown said his proposed task force could coordinate the efforts of central banks, prevent the anticipated record flight of capital from emerging market economies, and agree to a joint approach for utilizing government spending to boost growth.

However, that last item at least suggests the planned formation of a fiscal union of nations whereby foreigners, rather than the duly elected and appointed officials within individual nations, would help decide how each nation’s tax dollars are spent. That could set several precedents to potentially weaken the sovereignty of nations whose economic decision-making might be farmed out to unaccountable organizations. Yet the ultimate wisdom and effectiveness of Brown’s brainstorm remain to be seen.


All of the foregoing is just an impressive array of deceptive declarations that are propagated by the mass media cartel and premised on the notion that the majority of people don’t realize that the building blocks of world government—including the very institutions Brown mentions—are already in place and have constituted a world government for decades.

Presstitutes, Udo Ulfkotte
Late German journalist Udo Ulfkotte: how media is corrupted by the CIA

Brown is among “the few and the proud” UK prime ministers who, before or during their tenure as PM, attended the super-secretive Bilderberg Meetings. Tony Blair attended in 1993 and was prime minister from 1997 to 2007. Gordon Brown attended in 1991 and was prime minister from 2007 to 2010. Edward Heath attended in the early 1970s and was prime minister from 1970 to 1974. Alec Douglas-Home attended from 1977 to 1980, was a Bilderberg group chairman, and was prime minister from 1963 to 1964. Margaret Thatcher attended meetings in 1975, 1977, and 1986 at the very least and was prime minister from 1979 to 1990. David Cameron attended in 2013 and was prime minister from 2010 to 2016.

Bilderberg is an unofficial congress of think tanks, current and former leaders, bankers, treasury ministers, select royalty, military brass, NATO chiefs, media executives and editors who attend but don’t report, high-tech gurus and other well-connected people whose collusion at Bilderberg since 1954 constitutes easily verifiable proof that elites aren’t adverse to revealing the basic existence of their world-governance meetings and policy planning. Yet while they brazenly meet within public eyeshot and turn each town they visit annually into a virtual police state, they still evade real transparency by keeping the details of their meetings classified—despite their “press releases” that provide only the most general alleged “topics” as they try to deflect criticism and ward off deeper probes into these secretive meetings.

Mark Anderson is AFP’s roving editor. He invites your thoughtful comments and story ideas at [email protected].