Episode_007_Pandemic or PLANdemic_

The Toe Talks Podcast discusses pandemics throughout history, such as the Spanish Flu and Black Plague, highlighting the COVID pandemic's impact. It questions if the pandemic was planned, referencing Event 201 held by Johns Hopkins, the World Economic Forum, and the Gates Foundation in 2019, simulating a coronavirus outbreak mirroring aspects of COVID. The podcast delves into the simulation's accuracy and implications, raising concerns about misinformation and governmental responses. The episode prompts listeners to consider pandemic preparedness and global collaboration for future crises. You're listening to the Toe Talks Podcast. Pandemic, a type of epidemic that affects an entire nation or the entire world. History tells us pandemics like COVID happen every hundred years or maybe once in a lifetime. The Spanish Flu of 1918 took 40 to 50 million people's lives. Smallpox of 1520, taking 56 million people. And the worst of them all, the Black Plague, Bubonic Plague, took 200 million people. How many people died during COVID? Well, they stopped counting in April of 2024. And it's ranked 7th deadliest in history with taking approximately 7 million people. Or was it really the 7th deadliest in history? Pandemic or plannedemic? That's the question. Today we look into the past and try to answer this question. Hang around. You're not going to want to miss it. We are the rugged, authentic, savvy, and you're in the right place. Live free, pursue health, powerful living starts in 3, 2, 1. Welcome to Episode 7 of the Toe Talks Podcast. And I'm your host, Dr. Toe. Alright, to the question at hand. Pandemic or plannedemic? Where do you land with answering this question? Let me know in the comments below. First question. Was the pandemic planned? Now, if you don't know about this, then you're going to find what I'm about to say very interesting. And if you do know about this, then you're probably going to find it still interesting because I've uncovered some things that I did not know about it. I found out about this event that happened in New York on October 18th, 2019. Soon after, probably about 5 months after or 5 months into the COVID pandemic. And it's called Event 201. And yes, you can go look it up online to find out a whole bunch of information on it. And I'm going to go through it today and talk about exactly who hosted this event, what it was about, and how it affects our discussion today. So who hosted this event? Now, you've got to remember, this happened October 18th, so mid-October 2019, just a few short months prior to the introduction of COVID. So nobody knew it existed or really, you know, unless you're in the medical community, you know COVID in general, the virus has been around for a very long time. Okay. Most people didn't know what the word COVID was. So who hosted this event? These are a few of the big players. Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Yes, I know. Surprising, isn't it? Now, you might be thinking, well, I recognize the last two, but what's the big deal about the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security? Well, if you know anything about Johns Hopkins, they have been working on a vaccine that would be spread from person to person through shedding. Go look it up. It's there. They've been working on it for a long time, even before 2020. All right. So what was this event all about? What was it? Well, it was a high-level simulation exercise for pandemic preparedness and response. So I'm going to read you the scenario that they were working off of, pretending as if this is actually happening in the world, and how they would respond to this event, or how the event would unfold. Hence the reason they called it Event 201. Now, when I read this, I want you to pay close attention to certain details that align with exactly what happened during the pandemic. Event 201 simulates an outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people, and eventually becoming sufficiently transmissionable from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic. The pathogen and the disease it causes are modeled largely on SARS, but it is more transmissionable in a community setting by people with mild symptoms. The disease started in pig farms in Brazil, quietly and slowly at first, but then it starts to spread more rapidly in healthcare settings. When it starts to spread efficiently from person to person in low-income, densely-packed neighborhoods of some of the megacities in South America, the epidemic explodes. It is first exported by air travel to Portugal, the United States, and China, and then to many other countries. Although at first some countries are able to control it, it continues to spread and be reintroduced, and eventually no country can maintain control. There is no possibility for a vaccine being available in the first year. There is a fictional antiviral drug that can help the sick, but not significantly limit spread of disease. Since the whole human population is susceptible during the initial months of the pandemic, the cumulative number of cases increases exponentially, doubling every week. And as the cases and deaths accumulate, the economic and societal consequences become increasingly severe. The scenario ends at the 18-month point, with 65 million deaths. The pandemic is beginning to slow due to the decreasing number of susceptible people. The pandemic will continue at some rate until there is an effective vaccine, or until 80 to 90 percent of the global population has been exposed. From that point on, it is likely to be an epidemic childhood disease. It's uncanny to me how spot on they were on many details. Coincidence, you say? Let's continue on. So this event, 201, also put out a video, and all the people that I am about to list off are represented in it. Johnson & Johnson, U.N. Foundation, UPS Foundation, former U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor Avril Haines, ANZ Bank Group, formerly World Bank Group, U.S. CDC Stephan Redd, China CDC Marriott International. Let's have a little listen in, shall we? The first person you'll hear speak is our very own U.S. CDC Stephan Redd. Let's see what he has to say, and by the way, he is a military man. Governments need to be willing to do things that are out of their historical perspective. For the most part, it's really a war footing that we need to be on. We shouldn't underestimate the power of entrepreneurship. We need to escalate that, whether it's through governments helping with tax breaks or subsidies of that nature to increase manufacturing of those types of products. It can happen quickly. A Marshall-type plan, a company may say that exactly, but a Marshall plan, it can go into effect and stimulate change very quickly. Countries are reacting in different ways as to how best to manage the overwhelming amounts of dis- and misinformation circulating over the Internet. In some cases, limited Internet shutdowns are being implemented to quell panic. How much control of information should there be, and by whom, and how can false information be effectively challenged? And what if that false information is coming from companies or from governments? I think it's very important that we make sure that there is concise communication with all healthcare facilities where these patients are being treated so that there isn't mass panic. We're at a moment where the social media platforms have to step forward and recognize the moment to assert that they're a technology platform and not a broadcaster. It is over. They, in fact, have to be a participant in broadcasting accurate information and partnering with the scientific and health communities to counterweight, if not flood the zone, of accurate information. Because to try to put the genie back in the bottle of the misinformation and disinformation is nigh impossible. One thing we haven't spoken about, and I'm wondering whether it's time to talk about this, is a step up on the part of the government on enforcement actions against fake news. I personally do not believe that trying to shut things down in terms of information is either practical or desirable. And we do have, I think, a couple of strategies that are available to us, one of which is the flood strategy, second of which is relying and informing and equipping trusted sources of information with the facts so they can then pass that on. But we also need to actually think about a technological answer to this. The outcome of the C.A.P.S. pandemic in event 201 was catastrophic. 65 million people died in the first 18 months. The outbreak was small at first and initially seemed controllable, but then it started spreading in densely crowded and impoverished neighborhoods of megacities. From that point on, the spread of the disease was explosive. Within six months, cases were occurring in nearly every country. The global economy was in a free fall, the GDP down 11 percent. Stock markets around the world plummeted between 20 and 40 percent and headed into a downward cycle of fear and low expectation. Businesses were not borrowing, banks were not lending. Everyone was just hoping to hunker down and weather the storm. Economists say the economic turmoil caused by such a pandemic will last for years, perhaps a decade. The societal impacts, the loss of faith in government, distrust of news, and the breakdown of social cohesion could last even longer. We have to ask, did this need to be so bad? Are there things we could have done in the five to ten years leading up to the pandemic that would have lessened the catastrophic consequences? We believe the answer is yes. So, are we as a global community now finally ready to do the hard work needed to prepare for the next pandemic? Ooh, the scary music at the end. They successfully painted a picture of the future with great and uncanny accuracy. Let's just revisit some of the things that they mentioned. They mentioned a Marshall-type plan from the government. And I quote, How can false information be effectively challenged? Fake news? Social media platforms are technology platforms and not a broadcaster. The accuracy alone of their details in predicting the future is astounding to me. Remember, this is October of 2019. Let's move on. How is the pandemic measured? We don't know the answer to that question. It was measured by the number of COVID cases and deaths. But the next question you should be asking yourself is, how exactly were these things tracked? Well, they were tracked through, supposedly, through testing of positive cases and death certificates issued by doctors. Next question. Was COVID testing accurate? Okay, sidebar before I answer that question. I want you to know something if you don't already. The COVID tests that they swab with your nose are still under EUA. They are still considered experimental. What is that? You should be asking yourself. It's just a cotton swab that they put up your nose. You know, we use cotton swabs ourselves all the time. Why would that be experimental? Well, the only thing I can come up with is how they sterilize these cotton swabs. They sterilize them with something called ethylene oxide, otherwise known as EO. And if you look on the cotton swab packaging before you open it, you'll see it'll say sterilized with EO. So that is the only thing that touches your mucous membranes. And I'll tell you, EO is cancerous to humans in any form. By the time you use these so-called swabs, there should be no trace of the EO on the swab. But if there's not enough time of airing, meaning it airs out and it disintegrates and deteriorates and goes away, you don't give it enough air time, the EO remains, and then when the cotton swab is used, there is a good chance that it will be transferred to the person that it's being used on. Here's the next thing that you should know about those little home kits that they were giving us. The fluid that you put that cotton swab in is highly cancerous. And not only that, it probably shouldn't be thrown away in the trash. And how many millions of them were thrown away into our trash heaps only to poison our soils? And probably groundwater. Yeah, I know. That's a whole other rabbit trail, right? Let's move back to the question. Were the COVID tests accurate? And it's a resounding no. And as a result, it gave the impression that this COVID virus was spreading quickly. Nothing in these testing kits or tests diagnoses anything. It basically just tells you how much you have of what you have. It doesn't diagnose a stinking single thing. In my mind, this is medical fraud. If you are asymptomatic, you have no viral symptoms, and they want to swab your nose to see if you have COVID, it's fraudulent to do that because now you're making the insurance companies pay for a test that is medically unnecessary. If you don't have symptoms, you don't have the virus. And this test does not tell you what you have. It tells you how much you have of something. The creator of this test, unfortunately, died just before the pandemic. But if you look up old videos of him on YouTube, you'll see him discussing how this test, this type of PCR testing, was never meant to diagnose a single solitary thing, ever. And here's how they pumped up the numbers of people getting sick. They ran the test at high rates. When you do that, 100%, you are going to get what is called false positives. So you can just keep running the test, keep running the test, keep running the test. Now it's negative, negative, negative. And then finally, you get a positive result. And this is what they were doing. So in other words, I could test a pineapple, the road, the inside of my freezer, and I would run those tests at high rates. It would come back positive for COVID. Very convenient, wouldn't you say? I would say so. All right. So another sidebar. Raise your hand in radio land out there. What was your experience with COVID? Was it extremely contagious? This was not my experience at all. And I was in the healthcare industry working in a hospital when the pandemic hit. Personally, my family did not get it when one person got it. My husband got it. My daughter got it. And then there's three other people in the house. We didn't quarantine her. We didn't do anything different because I knew better. And none of us got it from her. And then about four weeks later, the rest of the household got it. And I knew friends and family that were eating lunch with people who got it. And some people didn't get it who were at the same table right next to each other. I worked at a military college where students eat, sleep, work shoulder to shoulder 24-7. On a daily basis, I would stand right next to these individuals teaching lectures and labs. And never once did I ever get it. Now, you might be saying, oh, well, Dr. Tobey, you're probably wearing a mask. To which I tell you, masks do not prevent viral transmission. Nope, they certainly don't. No matter what kind of mask you're wearing, it's like throwing sand at a chain link fence. So now, here's the other thing about me wearing masks during that time. I was a rebel. I pretty much did not wear a mask whenever I could 100% get away with it. I was the crazy lady walking around the grocery stores and malls and doctor's offices and not wearing a mask. My mom, who is in her 90s, had several operations during COVID. And I walked around the hospital without a mask on, and nobody stopped me. Now, I had a method to my madness, and this is how I got away with it. But you can imagine all the looks that I got. But I tell you, I did not wear a mask because I knew what the research said. Masks are a health hazard, and you're more likely to get sick by wearing them. Facts about COVID that you probably don't know as well. Sunlight, wind, and chlorine kill it instantly. No one ever got COVID outside in the history of the world. And no one, and I do mean no one, ever got COVID from someone who was asymptomatic. In the world, asymptomatic spread of a virus is bogus. There is zero research about COVID being spread asymptomatically. Now, there was something that was spread around that was a case report on two individuals that is pre-research and was found to be completely bogus. Meaning the research was neither valid nor reliable. Yeah, about that. All right, let's move on. Number of deaths. Did 7 million people really die of COVID? Well, let's talk about who certified death certificates during COVID. It was doctors in hospitals and healthcare facilities, such as nursing homes and skilled nursing facilities. Doctors were the ones who were signing death certificates. Now, you have to put this hand in hand in the right picture because these doctors were being paid by these facilities. And these facilities were financially incentivized to kill people by our own government if they were receiving Medicare or Medicaid funds. These facilities were paid large amounts of money when people tested positive for COVID, treated for COVID, and then died from COVID. Anyone who has tested positive for COVID and died was issued the cause of death as COVID, regardless of what they really died from. For instance, if they tested positive, but they had congestive heart failure, cancer, heart attack, stroke, motor vehicle accident, or gunshot wounds, and they succumbed to these for these reasons, their death certificate read they died from COVID. This is how they artificially boosted the numbers of deaths. Here's the other thing. The flu disappeared. The flu has been around since 1580. It was first observed through history in Asia. Yet, it seemed to almost disappear in 2020 with less than 2,000 cases and a death rate that was so low that the CDC could not, and I quote, generate stable estimates, end quote. When the year before in 2019, the United States alone had 22,000 deaths. Do you find this curious at all? I do. I think they simply stopped counting flu cases and grouped them into COVID cases. It was awfully nice of the flu to disappear for the first time in its history in order to make way for COVID's debut. Here's another curious note. In 2020, clinical laboratories took in over 800,000 respiratory specimens. Out of those specimens, less than 2,000 tested positive for the flu, and I can assume that the remaining respiratory specimens were COVID tests. That's a lot of testing. Let's do a quick review of what we already know. Event 201 seemed to magically and very specifically predict what was about to happen. The way the pandemic was measured through testing and deaths was seemingly artificially boosted. Next question. How deadly was COVID? Let's talk about the fatality rate in 2020. Stanford peer-reviewed paper that came out in January 2023 analyzed government data. So this is coming from our government. This is not me making it up or anybody else, and they reviewed it. It gives the median fatality rate for people in 2020 for 38 countries before, and I'm going to stress this, before the vaccine or the injection came out and during the pandemic. The people who had the lowest survival rate, so they are most likely to die from COVID, were aged 60 to 69 years old. The people who had the lowest survival rate, I'm going to actually give you their survival rate. So their chances of surviving were 99.49%. So the most vulnerable people in our society had a 99.49% chance of survival. That means anybody below those ages had an even better chance of survival than 99%. They locked down to protect 6% of the population when they had a 99.49% survival rate. Now let's look at people who were in the age bracket from 0 to 69, so basically everyone else. What was their survival rate, Dr. Doe, in comparison? It was 99.91% in 2020. That's a 0.5% separation between the two survival rates of 99.91% for everyone below the age of 69 and 99.49% for our most vulnerable population between 60 and 69 years old. Now just for kicks, let's compare that to the survival rate for the flu the year before for 2019, just before COVID hit. Across all age groups, the survival rate for the flu was 99.999. And for the flu, 50 years old and up, in 2019, the survival rate was 99.998. I don't know about you, but I'd take those odds to Vegas, wouldn't you? So this begs the question, did we need to wear masks, lock down, and later on, roll up our sleeves? Dare I say no? No, we did not. Because if you notice, all of those percentages for COVID in 2020, before the jab even came out, were 99 plus percent across all age categories. And COVID survival rate, when compared to the flu survival rate, the flu was only slightly better. You know, the first piece of evidence that masks didn't work in the prevention of viral spread was actually the Spanish flu. That's another one you can go look up. So now you must be thinking, well, let's add all of this up. Where did they get the 7 million deaths from COVID number? Who died if the testing was faulty, fatality rate was extremely low, and the falsification of death certificates by physicians, which in turn inflated death counts artificially? See, Dr. To, come on, people died, right? And I have to say to you, yes, yes, they did. People did die. Make no mistake about it, but I do not think it was 7 million at the hands of the COVID virus. But people dying during that time period is very, very real. But they didn't die because of COVID directly. COVID was the scapegoat they blamed for their deaths. It was a cover-up. It was an excuse they used to kill people. What killed people? Poor things. And listen very closely. A lack of early treatment, denial of ivermectin and HCQ, hospital protocols, and the COVID injection itself. People lost their minds in the healthcare world. They forgot how to treat sick people. And I think they did because they started listening to people who had no medical degrees but held their job in a noose. Because never in the history of the world did we ever wait to treat a virus and say, oh, we'll come back when you can't breathe. A lack of early treatment led to a bunch of deaths. Make no mistake. More people will also die in the future. But they won't die because of COVID. They'll die as a result of the death jabs that we were given during COVID that were supposed to help us stay healthier, get less sick, stay out of the hospital, and incur less death. But you have to take all that and inverse it because this is what the death jabs or the injections are doing to people and will do to people in the future, unfortunately. But I do believe that there is hope. There are things that are already being discovered to reverse some of the damage that was done by these injections. How do I know a lot of people have already died from these injections? Actually, more people have died from these injections than COVID itself. Well, if you look at the VAERS system, so the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which a lot of people say is not exactly accurate, which is true, and I'm going to get to that in a second. But they stopped inputting data in the VAERS system on November 18, 2022. So the number I'm about to talk to you about is actually lower than what the actual number is today as I record this podcast. So as of November 18, 2022, the current deaths as a result, the direct result of the vaccines, which their gene therapy, is 38,264. But here's what you need to do. You need to times that by 10. Because yes, it is inaccurate, the system. It's underreported by a factor of 10, meaning the number I just gave you is 10 times higher. That's more than all deaths combined, which have been caused by vaccines in the past. More people have died from the single injection of COVID than combining all deaths from vaccines in the past. Now let's look at something. Let's look at the historical use of the VAERS system. It's used as a red flag warning, right? When you start seeing people dying as a direct result of taking a vaccine, you pull it. You stop it. You destroy the campaign immediately. So Cutter polio vaccine in the 1950s was pulled after five deaths and 51 cases of paralysis. Swine flu in 1976 was pulled after 25 deaths linked to Guillain-Barre syndrome. RotaShield vaccine 1999 pulled after 15 cases of bowel obstruction in infants. But with over 38,000 deaths and over 2 million injured Americans, a vaccine that increases a person's chance of getting the very virus it's supposed to prevent is still on the market. You should be asking yourself why. So was the pandemic a pandemic or a plannedemic and a scannedemic? Let's say you. I say yes. Yes, it was. The evidence is stacked up enough for me that I cannot say it is a coincidence. You see, to me, this pandemic was more about employing draconian measures, fear-mongering from media, governments, healthcare leaders, and kabuki theater to create the appearance of a pandemic. This brings us to our question, so what? This is the so what. That you and I must fiercely defend our health, our lives, our families, our communities, and our country from this evil, and it must never ever happen again. But you see, they are still going to try. So you and I must keep our guard up. You must keep your filter tight. You must research and be educated. And you must, above all, keep your eyes on Jesus Christ. Jesus is chance, and he is the one that is going to reveal all that you need to know in order to safeguard yourself and your family. No weapon forged against us shall prevail, and we shall refute every single time that it accuses us. Well, that's a wrap. If you like what you heard, please share. Want to hear more? Please subscribe. And if you are a faithful listener, thank you for all your love and support, because without you, I would not be here. I'm glad you're here alone on this journey with me. We have each other, and we are not alone. Pursue health, live free, and breathe deep. This is Dr. To signing off. Important disclaimer. This podcast is presented solely for educational and entertainment purposes. I am not a medical doctor, and I do not diagnose, advise, or treat. This podcast is not intended for the substitute of advice from a personal physician, professional coach, psychotherapist, or other qualified professional. It is not intended to be used or relied upon for any diagnostic or treatment purposes or to be used as a substitute for professional diagnosis, treatment, or conventional medical therapy. None of the statements made in this podcast have been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. Please consult your health care provider before making any health care decisions or for guidance about specific medical conditions. Listen responsibly.