Make that 13, plus one city, New York.
The reference here is a stunning May 23 article by John Pospichal, “Questions for lockdown apologists,” posted at medium.com.
(This is part-4 in the series, “Killing Old People”. For part-3, click here.)
Pospichal examined overall mortality numbers for Austria, Belgium, Denmark, England and Wales, France, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ecuador, and New York City.
Supported by charts, here are excerpts from his article:
“We now have mortality data for the first few months of 2020 for many countries, and, as you might expect, there were steep increases associated with the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in each one.”
“Surprisingly, however, these increases did not begin before the lockdowns were imposed, but after. Moreover, in almost every case, they began immediately after. Often, mortality numbers were on a downward trend before suddenly reversing course after lockdowns were decreed.”
“This is an astonishing finding…”
“You will notice that only after each country (or city) was locked down did the increases begin. Moreover, they began immediately, and in nearly every case, precipitously.”
“All this leads us to the following questions, which we pose to all those who continue to defend the use of lockdowns as an effective means to prevent excess deaths.”
“Q: Why was there no significant increase in overall mortality, in any country we have good data for, before the start of lockdowns?”
“Q: Why does a precise and exact correlation exist between the start of lockdowns and significant rises in overall mortality?”
“Q: How is it that governments in every country imposed lockdowns at precisely the same time relative to the future precipitous rise in their populations’ overall mortality rate?”
“Q: How is it, moreover, that this moment in time [i.e., the imposition of lockdowns] happened to fall immediately before that precipitous rise?”
“Q: If health authorities vastly underestimated the prevalence of the virus at the beginning of the pandemic, why did the virus nevertheless wait until lockdowns were imposed to suddenly start killing at levels which exceeded normal deaths?”
—To that last question, I would respond: No virus would wait. We’re not talking about a virus at all. We’re talking about the sudden effects of the lockdowns.
And those sudden death-effects would come crashing down, first, and immediately, on the most vulnerable people in these countries:
The elderly, who were already ill for years.
THE LOCKDOWNS FORCED THE PREMATURE DEATHS OF OLD PEOPLE.
PEOPLE WHO HAD BEEN SUFFERING FROM MULTIPLE HEALTH CONDITIONS FOR YEARS, WHO HAD BEEN TREATED WITH TOXIC MEDICAL DRUGS, WHOSE IMMUNE SYSTEMS WERE ALREADY SEVERELY COMPROMISED…
AND WHO ARE SUDDENLY TERRIFIED BY TWO MORE FACTORS—THE POSSIBILITY OF A COVID-19 DIAGNOSIS, AND ISOLATION FROM FRIENDS AND FAMILY. THESE TWO FACTORS PUSH THEM OVER THE EDGE AND THEY DIE.
Especially in nursing homes; but also in hospitals, and in their homes.
This is the true face of “COVID.”
This is how the case numbers and the death numbers are being propped up all over the world, to yield the impression of a virus on the loose.
Without those huge numbers, the whole vicious charade of a pandemic would be exposed and rejected at once.
The lockdowns are a method of killing.
The governors and mayors and presidents and prime ministers who imposed the lockdowns—and behind them, the planners of “COVID”— have been killing old people.