Monkeypox – a smokescreen for a global health powergrab?

Share this:

ANH founder Rob Verkerk PhD poses facts and speculates as to possible outcomes and what we should do

The current World Health Organization (WHO) suspected case definition of monkeypox is broad enough to include anyone with covid or a common cold, who also have a shingles rash. As it happens, there are a large number of people out there who have suffered immune suppression from covid-19 injections, who also sport a shingles rash.

Should we be worried? We think so, but not about monkeypox itself.

Much more about what the WHO and collaborating institutions, governments and corporations are up to. A lot of ‘truth seekers’ will have already found out about the WHO tabletop exercise in 2021and it is without doubt interesting that the 15 May 2022 date is given as the ‘attack’ date of the monkeypox outbreak. But let’s look beyond that.

Let me explain.

On May 24th, BBC News reported the following on the monkeypox outbreak:

“More than 100 cases of the virus – which causes a rash and a fever – have been confirmed in Europe, the Americas and Australia….The virus has now been detected in 16 countries outside Africa….. a top EU health official has warned that some groups of people may be more at risk than others…..Dr Ammon suggested that countries should review the availability of the smallpox vaccine which is also effective against monkeypox.”

Has the BBC reverted to its past reputation as a balanced reporter of news? That would seem unlikely in the present circumstances.

Especially when the BBC is partially funded by the Gates Foundation and it opts to use a Getty Images photo of an unconfirmed monkeypox case that may actually be smallpox (which you’ll get to see as you read on, in Fig. 5 below).

The BBC News piece contained a powerful image of the arm and leg of a pox-covered child (Fig. 1).

Driven by concerns that this looks very much like smallpox (check out the UK Health Security Agency images [shown also in Fig 5B] which is closely associated with the Hospital for Tropical Diseases and you’ll get a more representative view of the clinical features of human monkeypox ), I was keen to dig deeper.

The Getty Images caption tells us:

“BONDUA, LIBERIA – UNDATED: In this 1971 Center For Disease Control handout photo, monkeypox-like lesions are shown on the arm and leg of a female child in Bondua, Liberia. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said June 7 the viral disease monkeypox, thought to be spread by prairie dogs, has been detected in the Americas for the first time with about 20 cases reported in Wisconsin, Illinois, and Indiana. (Photo Courtesy of the CDC/Getty Images)”

We’ve been unable to find a place called Bondua in Liberia. There is however a Bondua in Sierra Leone. Is that what the CDC means? Isn’t it a bit like saying the case was reported from London in France – leaving everyone confused about place and country? Not quite, actually, as there is a London in France, just no Bondua in Liberia

You might think I’m splitting hairs. But such details are actually critically important when they’re being communicated to a worldwide audience that’s waiting with bated breath to understand the implications of yet another infectious disease outbreak.

Sierra Leone did in fact boast the highest incidence of smallpox in the world between 1967 and 1968 and we’ve unearthed some genuine red flags as to the origin of this CDC/Getty Images photo. By 1971, it appears smallpox had disappeared from Sierra Leone. And, as an add-on, contrary to what the vaccine PR machine likes to suggest, the historical record does not provide evidence that it was mass vaccination as part of the WHO’s Smallpox Eradication Program that caused infections to decline then disappear from Sierra Leone. More on that later.

So we dug deeper again.

Bingo – we found the case reports of the 20 known monkeypox cases between 1970 and 1975 – published in none other than the peer reviewed Bulletin of the World Health Organization back in 1976.

We were surprised to find no reported case of a young girl from either Sierra Leone or Liberia in 1971, the date given by the CDC. There were however two cases reported in Liberia the year before (Fig. 2).

If the pustulated girl was aged 6, the case wasn’t confirmed. If she was 4, the case was confirmed by electron microscopy and it was isolated (Fig 2). But this 4-year-old girl was also positive for smallpox. So did the CDC get the country wrong – and the date? Or are we looking at a smallpox case somewhere in…

Continue reading the full story [icon name=”arrow-right” prefix=”fas”] Monkeypox – a smokescreen for a global health powergrab? | Principia Scientific Intl.


Share this:
Scroll to Top