COVID-19 was a 'scamdemic' and the pandemic response was based on fake science.

Rob Schneider (comedian)

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>In a recent episode of the Triggernometry podcast, comedian Rob Schneider made several claims about the COVID-19 pandemic, referring to it as a 'scamdemic'. This article will review these claims and provide a fact-based analysis.</p>
<h2>Claim: COVID-19 Death Rate Similar to Flu</h2>
<p>Schneider asserted that the COVID-19 death rate was similar to that of a typical flu virus. However, this claim is not supported by scientific data. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the mortality rate for COVID-19 is significantly higher than that of the seasonal flu. A study published in the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(20)30243-7/fulltext">Lancet Infectious Diseases</a> by Hauser et al. (2020) found that the case fatality rate for COVID-19 was much higher than that of the flu.</p>
<h2>Claim: Masks Don't Work</h2>
<p>Schneider also claimed that masks do not work in preventing the spread of COVID-19. This claim is contradicted by numerous scientific studies. A meta-analysis published in the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext">Lancet</a> by Chu et al. (2020) found that face masks significantly reduce the risk of infection. The CDC also recommends the use of masks as an effective measure to slow the spread of the virus.</p>
<h2>Claim: Six-Foot Social Distancing Based on Fake Science</h2>
<p>Schneider argued that the six-foot social distancing policy was based on fake science. However, this policy is grounded in scientific research. A study published in the <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349049698_Social_distancing_decreases_an_individual's_likelihood_of_contracting_COVID-19">Nature</a> &nbsp;by Jones et al. (2020) supports the effectiveness of social distancing in reducing the transmission of COVID-19.</p>
<h2>Claim: Lockdowns More Detrimental to Children</h2>
<p>Schneider stated that locking down schools was more detrimental to children than the virus itself. While it is true that school closures have had significant impacts on children's mental health and education, the decision to close schools was based on the need to control the spread of the virus. A study published in the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-46422030095-X/fulltext">Lancet Child &amp; Adolescent Health</a> &nbsp;by Viner et al. (2020) discusses the complex trade-offs involved in school closures.</p>
<h2>Claim: Vaccines Not Safe and Effective</h2>
<p>Schneider questioned the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines. This claim is not supported by the overwhelming body of scientific evidence. Clinical trials and real-world data have shown that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. A study published in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577">New England Journal of Medicine</a> by Polack et al. (2020) demonstrates the efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>Rob Schneider's claims about COVID-19 being a 'scamdemic' are largely unfounded. The evidence shows that COVID-19 is a serious health threat, and the measures taken were based on scientific evidence. It is crucial to rely on credible sources and scientific data when evaluating claims about public health issues.</p>

Claim Review: Rob Schneider's Assertions About COVID-19 Being a 'Scamdemic'

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that Australia's future pandemic response will focus on targeted, individualised surveillance, quarantines, and mandates rather than large-scale lockdowns has been circulating. This article aims to review this claim, providing a thorough analysis based on available evidence and reliable sources.</p>
<h2>Background</h2>
<p>The claim originates from an article published on The Expose, which discusses a report funded by philanthropic foundations outlining future pandemic responses in Australia. The report suggests a shift towards targeted surveillance and compliance orders, leveraging technology such as digital IDs.</p>
<h2>Analysis of the Claim</h2>
<h3>Targeted Surveillance and Quarantines</h3>
<p>The idea of targeted surveillance and quarantines is not new and has been discussed in various contexts. For instance, the World Health Organization (WHO) has emphasized the importance of targeted measures to control outbreaks. A study published in <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293850/">The Lancet</a> discusses the effectiveness of targeted interventions in managing pandemics.</p>
<h3>Digital IDs and Data Sharing</h3>
<p>The use of digital IDs and data sharing for pandemic management is a contentious issue. While proponents argue that it can enhance efficiency and coordination, critics raise concerns about privacy and civil liberties. A report by the <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2020/05/19/necessary-and-proportionate/ensuring-human-rights-covid-19-response">Human Rights Watch</a> highlights the potential risks associated with digital surveillance during pandemics.</p>
<h3>ESG Scoring and Social Impact Investing</h3>
<p>The claim also mentions the role of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) scoring and Social Impact Investing in shaping pandemic responses. ESG criteria are increasingly being used by investors to evaluate companies' sustainability and social impact. However, the extent to which ESG scoring influences pandemic management policies is not well-documented.</p>
<h2>Evidence and Sources</h2>
<p>To evaluate the claim, we reviewed several sources, including:</p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293850/">The Lancet</a> - Study on targeted interventions for pandemic management.</li>
  <li><a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2020/05/19/necessary-and-proportionate/ensuring-human-rights-covid-19-response">Human Rights Watch</a> - Report on digital surveillance and human rights.</li>
  <li><a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/coronavirus-disease-(covid-19)-similarities-and-differences-with-influenza">World Health Organization</a> - Guidelines on pandemic management.</li>
</ul>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that Australia's future pandemic response will focus on targeted surveillance and mandates rather than large-scale lockdowns is partially true. While targeted measures can be effective, the implementation of digital IDs and data sharing raises significant concerns about privacy and civil liberties. The role of ESG scoring and Social Impact Investing in shaping pandemic policies is less clear and requires further investigation.</p>
<p>Overall, the claim warrants a rating of 3 out of 5, indicating that it contains elements of truth but requires context and further scrutiny.</p>

Claim Review: Australia's Future Pandemic Plan

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that Dr. Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, and Moderna are responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic has been circulating widely. This claim is based on the discovery of a contract awarded by the U.S. Department of Defense (D.O.D) for COVID-19 research in November 2019, three months before the virus was officially recognized. Additionally, it is alleged that Fauci and Moderna had a vaccine ready in December 2019. This article aims to review these claims and provide a factual analysis.</p>
<h2>The Claim</h2>
<p>The claim suggests that the U.S. government, specifically the D.O.D, had prior knowledge of the COVID-19 virus and may have been involved in its creation. It also implies that Dr. Fauci and Moderna had a vaccine ready before the virus was officially named, indicating potential foreknowledge or involvement.</p>
<h2>Analysis of the Claim</h2>
<h3>Contract for COVID-19 Research</h3>
<p>The contract mentioned in the claim was part of a broader project for a 'Biological threat reduction program in Ukraine.' The specific transaction for 'COVID-19 Research' was awarded to Labyrinth Global Health INC in November 2019. However, it is important to note that the term 'COVID-19' was not officially used until February 2020. The contract likely pertained to general coronavirus research, which is a broad category of viruses that includes SARS and MERS.</p>
<p>Research into coronaviruses has been ongoing for decades due to their potential to cause outbreaks. The timing of the contract does not necessarily imply foreknowledge of the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>
<h3>Vaccine Development</h3>
<p>The claim that Moderna and Dr. Fauci had a vaccine ready in December 2019 is based on a confidentiality agreement for an mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidate. However, vaccine development is a lengthy process that typically takes years. The agreement likely pertained to ongoing research into coronavirus vaccines, not specifically COVID-19.</p>
<p>Moderna had been working on mRNA vaccine technology for several years before the COVID-19 pandemic. The rapid development of the COVID-19 vaccine was possible due to this pre-existing research and the urgent need created by the pandemic.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>The origin of the COVID-19 virus is still a subject of ongoing research. While some theories suggest a natural origin, others propose a lab leak. However, there is no credible evidence to support the claim that the virus was deliberately created or that the U.S. government, Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates, or Moderna were involved in its creation.</p>
<p>A study published in <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9">Nature Medicine</a> concluded that the COVID-19 virus is likely of natural origin. The study analyzed the genetic sequence of the virus and found no evidence of manipulation.</p>
<p>Another study published in <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abf8890">Science</a> reviewed the evidence for a lab leak and concluded that while it cannot be ruled out, there is currently no conclusive evidence to support it.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that Fauci, Gates, and Moderna are responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic is largely unfounded. The contract for COVID-19 research and the vaccine development agreement are part of ongoing research into coronaviruses, not evidence of foreknowledge or involvement in the pandemic. The scientific evidence currently available does not support the claim that the virus was deliberately created or that the mentioned parties were involved in its creation.</p>

Claim Review: Fauci, Gates & Moderna Responsible for COVID Pandemic

<p>The article by Frank Wright on LifeSiteNews presents a claim by Dr. David A. Hughes that the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent lockdowns were part of a deliberate act of total war on civilization, aimed at establishing worldwide totalitarianism. This claim is part of a broader narrative that Hughes refers to as the 'omniwar.'</p>
<p>To evaluate this claim, it is essential to examine the evidence and the broader context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic has undoubtedly had profound impacts on societies worldwide, including economic disruptions, social isolation, and mental health issues. However, the assertion that these impacts were part of a deliberate act of war to establish totalitarianism is largely unfounded.</p>
<p>Firstly, the COVID-19 pandemic is a global health crisis caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The virus has been extensively studied by scientists worldwide, and its origins and spread have been well-documented. The World Health Organization (WHO) and numerous scientific studies have confirmed that the virus is of natural origin and not a result of deliberate human intervention (WHO Report on the Origins of the Virus).</p>
<p>Secondly, the measures taken to control the spread of the virus, such as lockdowns and vaccination campaigns, were implemented by governments based on scientific advice and public health guidelines. While these measures have been controversial and have had significant impacts on civil liberties, they were not part of a coordinated global conspiracy to establish totalitarianism. Instead, they were responses to an unprecedented public health crisis.</p>
<p>Hughes also claims that the COVID-19 measures changed his mind about the system that governs us and opened his eyes to the fact that the war is not only temporal but spiritual. While personal beliefs and interpretations are valid, it is important to distinguish between subjective experiences and objective evidence. The claim that the pandemic is part of a spiritual war lacks empirical support and is not backed by scientific or historical evidence.</p>
<p>Furthermore, Hughes' assertion that the ruling elites are using psychological warfare to traumatize the population and condition them into accepting a technocratic control system is not supported by credible evidence. While it is true that the pandemic has had psychological impacts and has exacerbated social divisions, these are consequences of the crisis rather than deliberate acts of war.</p>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns were part of a deliberate act of total war on civilization aimed at establishing worldwide totalitarianism is largely unfounded. While the pandemic has had significant impacts, there is no credible evidence to support the idea of a coordinated global conspiracy. It is essential to rely on scientific evidence and public health guidelines to understand and respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>
<p><strong>References:</strong></p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/the-origins-of-the-virus-scientific-insight">WHO Report on the Origins of the Virus</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9">Nature: The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext">The Lancet: COVID-19 is not a laboratory construct</a></li>
</ul>

Claim Review: COVID-19 as a Deliberate Act of Total War on Civilization

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "COVID-19 was a 'scamdemic' and the pandemic response was based on fake science." is False

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: