Imagine living in a town of 10,000 people.

According to national averages, 75 people in your town will die annually from all causes — cancers, accidents, Alzheimer’s, strokes, pneumonias, heart attacks*. Each death is sad, but this is our reality since time immemorial.

Those over 65 comprise 21% or 16 of the 75 deaths. But every age group sees death, even infants. Seven of your town’s 15-24- year-olds will die, mostly from accidents.

One year a novel virus runs through your town. Perhaps 3,500 (35%*) catch the virus and of those, 99.75%* survive. While most get mild or no symptoms at all, by year’s end, nine of your elderly townsfolk succumb, dying either “from” or “with” the virus; eight were already ill with two or three chronic disease conditions*.

Oddly, fewer citizens are officially dying from heart disease, influenza, cancer, strokes, and other typical causes. You wonder why some other countries count deaths differently, attributing fewer to the virus.

By December you note that around the same number of townsfolk died this year as previously, 77 in all, and significantly fewer elderly than feared. Children under 20 in particular were hardly affected at all, certainly much less than by the seasonal flu. In fact, only one person died directly as a result of the virus (6% of all COVID-19 deaths*).

So, to avoid nine potential annual deaths of those averaging near 80 and already quite ill — perhaps just a couple more than typical — you want to vaccinate all 10,000 townsfolk? You want to inject minimally tested, zero-liability vaccines, already shown to be harmful, into EVERY SINGLE PERSON? Vaccines that, according to the British Medical Journal, aren’t even designed to reduce hospitalizations, deaths or viral transmission, but only reduce mild symptoms?

Without adequate context, all we get are these irrational, harmful policy responses. We get:

• faulty PCR tests inflating case counts and stoking needless fear

• never-ending unscientific mandates like lockdowns (disfavored even by the WHO) and mask-wearing that the elites themselves refuse to follow

• forced business closures and unemployment, harming millions with losing their income, health insurance, and life savings

• elders dying in isolation

• rising desperation, overdoses and suicides

• traumatized children, losing friendships and educational opportunities

• 140 million likely to die from starvation (WHO)

All of this social and economic devastation — plus government and medical tyranny — for a 0.25% infection fatality rate?

Is this the best humanity can do?

*(according to


10 Foster St.