The Massive Funeral Reported Earlier Today Makes the Papers – Covid-19 and Superspreading at a Satmar Funeral

brooklyn-funeral
Maskless funeral goers in Williamsburg from the New York Post

NYC synagogue foiled over giant wedding succeeds in holding jam-packed funeral

A Brooklyn synagogue that was stopped by the state before it could host a massive wedding in October finally succeeded on Monday in pulling off another potential super-spreader event — a jam-packed funeral.

The Congregation Yetev Lev D’Satmar went coronavirus rogue for the funeral of 94-year-old former chief Satmar judge Rabbi Yisroel Chaim Menashe Friedman — with up to an estimated 5,000 people cramming the house of worship at 152 Rodney St. in Williamsburg.

Bodies were pressed in on all sides and spilled out onto the sidewalk as just a fraction of the Hasidic crowd was seen wearing masks.

Five NYPD officers were seen standing nearby outside the house of worship — where a crowd of men and boys failed to socially distance, many also maskless or with their masks down around their necks.

“Normally, we would avoid having such a crowd unless it was for something very, very important. This was one of those times,’’ said an attendee whose first name is Lipa.

“This man was a giant,’’ he said of Friedman. “He was there from the beginning, when the community was rebuilding after the war. A very, very holy man. For someone like him, you couldn’t keep people from coming even if you wanted to.”

To continue reading click here.

6 thoughts on “The Massive Funeral Reported Earlier Today Makes the Papers – Covid-19 and Superspreading at a Satmar Funeral

  1. “CORONA, FALSE ALARM? FACTS & FIGURES

    Are We Being Told The Truth About COVID-19?
    Professor Sucharit Bhakdi
    December 7, 2020
    By
    Arjun Walia

    IN BRIEF
    • The Facts:
    Below is an interview with renowned scientist Dr.Sucharit Bhakdi discussing the COVID-19 pandemic. He’s one of many scientists who believe measures being taken to combat the virus are completely unnecessary and very harmful in many ways.
    • Reflect On:
    Why are so many doctors and scientists who oppose the mainstream narrative being censored by social media platforms, ridiculed, and labelled “conspiracy theorists?” What’s going on here?

    What Happened: Below is an interview with Dr.Sucharit Bhakdi, who received his MD in 1970. He was a post-doctoral researcher at the Max Planck Institute of Immunobiology and Epigenetics in Freiburg from 1972 to 1976, and at The Protein Laboratory in Copenhagen from 1976 to 1977. He joined the Institute of Medical Microbiology at Giessen University in 1977 and was appointed associate professor in 1982. He was named chair of Medical Microbiology at the University of Mainz in 1990, where he remained until his retirement in 2012. Dr. Bhakdi has published over three hundred articles in the fields of immunology, bacteriology, virology, and parasitology, for which he has received numerous awards and the Order of Merit of Rhineland-Palatinate. He’s one of the most cited scientists in German history.

    Himself and Karina Reiss Ph.D have published a book titled “Corona, False Alarm? Facts & Figures.“

    Many people, including world renowned scientists from around the globe, are asking and have been asking since the beginning of the pandemic if we are being told the truth about COVID-19 from the mainstream media and government affiliated scientists and doctors. Many people are confused right now and don’t know what to believe, some have an open mind and are able to entertain different perspectives, and others are completely polarized in their belief of what’s happening and completely refuse to even consider another perspective.

    When it comes to the scientific community, we’ve seen doctors and scientists gather in the tens of thousands opposing lockdown measures that’ve been put in place by multiple governments throughout this pandemic. For example, approximately 50,000 doctors and scientists have now signed The Great Barrington Declaration, strongly opposing lockdown measures. One of the initiators of that declaration, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD, from the Stanford University School of Medicine, recently explained that COVID-19 has a 99.95 survival rate for people under the age of 70, and that the flu is more dangerous than COVID-19 for children. Other gatherings of doctors and scientists, among others, include the World Doctors Alliance, and the Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee.

    The information above comes despite Facebook fact-checkers constantly emphasizing that the virus is as dangerous as it’s being made out to be.
    Why This Is Important: There are concerns that in some parts of the world mental health issues are taking more lives than COVID-19. Peer-reviewed papers have been published hypothesizing that lockdown measures have, in some parts of the world, killed more people than COVID-19. Here’s one of multiple examples published in the British Medical Journal.

    Concerns when it comes to the truth are many, for example, Kamran Abbas, executive editor of the British Medical Journal, and the editor of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization recently published an article about COVID-19, the suppression of science and the politicization of medicine.

    Numerous scientists and doctors have raised concerns about PCR tests and the high potential for false positives being upwards of 50 to 90 percent. This idea gained even more traction when 22 researchers recently put out a paper explaining why, according to them, it’s quite clear that the PCR test is not effective in identifying COVID-19 cases.

    Deaths being counted as COVID deaths when they are really not a result of COVID has also been a common theme throughout this pandemic.
    And again, of course, the true severity of this virus seems to be the biggest issue that is being called into question.
    How can tens of thousands of doctors, scientists, and some of the leading experts in infectious diseases, along with what appears to be millions upon millions of people who disagree with lockdown measures, mask mandates and potential vaccine mandates be crazy “conspiracy theorists?” Why are those who go against the mainstream narrative always ridiculed and labelled as such? Why are they constantly censored by social media platforms and why are experts in the field who oppose government measures never really given any air-time on mainstream media? Why aren’t we exploring everything, all evidence, and a wide range of opinions with regards to this pandemic and having a discussion? What’s going on here? Why have alternative therapies that have shown success been completely ignored and products that benefit big corporations, like vaccines, being made out to be our only option?

    If you believe those who oppose lockdowns, mask mandates and vaccine mandates are are crazy conspiracy theorists, you’re a big part of the problem. If you believe those who support these measures are stupid people who don’t know how read, research and look into things, you’re also part of the problem. Can we, even for a minute, take on a perspective and examine evidence that completely contradicts and challenges our belief systems surrounding this pandemic? The more people that do this, the clearer the picture becomes as to what’s really going on.

    Can we continue to rely on mainstream media to provide us with accurate and balanced information? How much of our perspective has been influenced by watching television? How much of our perspective has been influenced by actually doing our own research?

    Do we really want to live in a world and create a human experience where we are constantly listening and taking orders from governments that clearly don’t represent the will of all people? Why have we given them so much power to enforce whatever measures they please on the population? Why do we live this way and simply accept this? Why is there so much resistance against those who oppose these measures? Is this really the kind of world we want to live in and create for ourselves, or do we have the potential do create something better?

    Dive Deeper
    These days, it’s not just knowing information and facts that will create change, it’s changing ourselves, how we go about communicating, and re-assessing the underlying stories, ideas and beliefs that form our world. We have to practice these things if we truly want to change. At Collective Evolution and CETV, this is a big part of our mission.
    Amongst 100’s of hours of exclusive content, we have recently completed two short courses to help you become an effective changemaker, one called Profound Realization and the other called How To Do An Effective Media Detox.

    OPEN LETTER TO CHANCELLOR MERKEL
    Mar 31, 2020
    365
    Open Letter from Prof Sucharit Bhakdi to Chancellor Merkel
    Translated from the German by Swiss Propaganda Research
    An Open Letter from Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi, Professor Emeritus of Medical Microbiology at the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, to the German Chancellor Dr. Angela Merkel. Professor Bhakdi calls for an urgent reassessment of the response to Covid-19 and asks the Chancellor five crucial questions. The let¬ter is dated March 26. This is an unofficial translation.

    Dear Chancellor,
    As Emeritus of the Johannes-Gutenberg-University in Mainz and longtime director of the Institute for Medical Microbiology, I feel obliged to critically question the far-reaching restrictions on public life that we are currently taking on ourselves in order to reduce the spread of the COVID-19 virus.

    It is expressly not my intention to play down the dangers of the virus or to spread a political message. However, I feel it is my duty to make a scientific contribution to putting the current data and facts into perspective – and, in addition, to ask questions that are in danger of being lost in the heated debate.

    The reason for my concern lies above all in the truly unforeseeable socio-economic consequences of the drastic containment measures which are currently being applied in large parts of Europe and which are also already being practiced on a large scale in Germany.

    My wish is to discuss critically – and with the necessary foresight – the advantages and disadvantages of restricting public life and the resulting long-term effects.

    To this end, I am confronted with five questions which have not been answered sufficiently so far, but which are indispensable for a balanced analysis.
    I would like to ask you to comment quickly and, at the same time, appeal to the Federal Government to develop strategies that effectively protect risk groups without restricting public life across the board and sow the seeds for an even more intensive polarization of society than is already taking place.

    With the utmost respect,

    Prof. em. Dr. med. Sucharit Bhakdi

    STATISTICS
    In infectiology – founded by Robert Koch himself – a traditional distinction is made between infection and disease. An illness requires a clinical manifestation. [1] Therefore, only patients with symptoms such as fever or cough should be included in the statistics as new cases.

    In other words, a new infection – as measured by the COVID-19 test – does not necessarily mean that we are dealing with a newly ill patient who needs a hospital bed. However, it is currently assumed that five percent of all infected people become seriously ill and require ventilation. Projections based on this estimate suggest that the healthcare system could be overburdened.

    My question: Did the projections make a distinction between symptom-free infected people and actual, sick patients – i.e. people who develop symptoms?

    DANGEROUSNESS
    A number of coronaviruses have been circulating for a long time – largely unnoticed by the media. [2] If it should turn out that the COVID-19 virus should not be ascribed a significantly higher risk potential than the already circulating corona viruses, all countermeasures would obviously become unnecessary.

    The internationally recognized International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents will soon publish a paper that addresses exactly this question. Preliminary results of the study can already be seen today and lead to the conclusion that the new virus is NOT different from traditional corona viruses in terms of dangerousness. The authors express this in the title of their paper “SARS-CoV-2: Fear versus Data.” [3]

    My question: How does the current workload of intensive care units with patients with diagnosed COVID-19 compare to other coronavirus infections, and to what extent will this data be taken into account in further decision-making by the federal government? In addition: Has the above study been taken into account in the planning so far? Here too, of course, „diagnosed“ means that the virus plays a decisive role in the patient’s state of illness, and not that previous illnesses play a greater role.

    DISSEMINATION
    According to a report in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, not even the much-cited Robert Koch Institute knows exactly how much is tested for COVID-19. It is a fact, however, that a rapid increase in the number of cases has recently been observed in Germany as the volume of tests increases. [4]

    It is therefore reasonable to suspect that the virus has already spread unnoticed in the healthy population. This would have two consequences: firstly, it would mean that the official death rate – on 26 March 2020, for example, there were 206 deaths from around 37,300 infections, or 0.55 percent [5] – is too high; and secondly, it would mean that it would hardly be possible to prevent the virus from spreading in the healthy population.
    My question: Has there already been a random sample of the healthy general population to validate the real spread of the virus, or is this planned in the near future?

    MORTALITY
    The fear of a rise in the death rate in Germany (currently 0.55 percent) is currently the subject of particularly intense media attention. Many people are worried that it could shoot up like in Italy (10 percent) and Spain (7 percent) if action is not taken in time.

    At the same time, the mistake is being made worldwide to report virus-related deaths as soon as it is established that the virus was present at the time of death – regardless of other factors. This violates a basic principle of infectiology: only when it is certain that an agent has played a significant role in the disease or death may a diagnosis be made. The Association of the Scientific Medical Societies of Germany expressly writes in its guidelines: „In addition to the cause of death, a causal chain must be stated, with the corresponding underlying disease in third place on the death certificate. Occasionally, four-linked causal chains must also be stated.“ [6]

    At present there is no official information on whether, at least in retrospect, more critical analyses of medical records have been undertaken to determine how many deaths were actually caused by the virus.
    My question: Has Germany simply followed this trend of a COVID-19 general suspicion? And: is it intended to continue this categorisation uncritically as in other countries? How, then, is a distinction to be made between genuine corona-related deaths and accidental virus presence at the time of death?

    COMPARABILITY
    The appalling situation in Italy is repeatedly used as a reference scenario. However, the true role of the virus in that country is completely unclear for many reasons – not only because points 3 and 4 above also apply here, but also because exceptional external factors exist which make these regions particularly vulnerable.

    One of these factors is the increased air pollution in the north of Italy. According to WHO estimates, this situation, even without the virus, led to over 8,000 additional deaths per year in 2006 in the 13 largest cities in Italy alone. [7] The situation has not changed significantly since then. [8] Finally, it has also been shown that air pollution greatly increases the risk of viral lung diseases in very young and elderly people. [9]

    Moreover, 27.4 percent of the particularly vulnerable population in this country live with young people, and in Spain as many as 33.5 percent. In Germany, the figure is only seven percent [10]. In addition, according to Prof. Dr. Reinhard Busse, head of the Department of Management in Health Care at the TU Berlin, Germany is significantly better equipped than Italy in terms of intensive care units – by a factor of about 2.5 [11].
    My question: What efforts are being made to make the population aware of these elementary differences and to make people understand that scenarios like those in Italy or Spain are not realistic here?

    References:
    [1] Fachwörterbuch Infektionsschutz und Infektionsepidemiologie. Fachwörter – Definitionen – Interpretationen. Robert Koch-Institut, Berlin 2015. (abgerufen am 26.3.2020)
    [2] Killerby et al., Human Coronavirus Circulation in the United States 2014–2017. J Clin Virol. 2018, 101, 52-56
    [3] Roussel et al. SARS-CoV-2: Fear Versus Data. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2020, 105947
    [4] Charisius, H. Covid-19: Wie gut testet Deutschland? Süddeutsche Zeitung. (abgerufen am 27.3.2020)
    [5] Johns Hopkins University, Coronavirus Resource Center. 2020. (abgerufen am 26.3.2020)
    [6] S1-Leitlinie 054-001, Regeln zur Durchführung der ärztlichen Leichenschau. AWMF Online (abgerufen am 26.3.2020)
    [7] Martuzzi et al. Health Impact of PM10 and Ozone in 13 Italian Cities. World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe. WHOLIS number E88700 2006
    [8] European Environment Agency, Air Pollution Country Fact Sheets 2019, (abgerufen am 26.3.2020)
    [9] Croft et al. The Association between Respiratory Infection and Air Pollution in the Setting of Air Quality Policy and Economic Change. Ann. Am. Thorac. Soc. 2019, 16, 321–330.
    [10] United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. Living Arrange¬ments of Older Persons: A Report on an Expanded International Dataset (ST/ESA/SER.A/407). 2017
    [11] Deutsches Ärzteblatt, Überlastung deutscher Krankenhäuser durch COVID-19 laut Experten unwahrscheinlich, (abgerufen am 26.3.2020)

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.