Over the past decade, many of you have witnessed my predictions come true – from a Trump presidency to the most recent V-shaped stock market rebound.
And no matter how obscure these predictions were, time eventually proved them correct.
I proved this to you last week in a recent post, COVID-19 Predictions for the Stock Market: Were We Right?
In fact, if you would have listened back in March – when the world was falling apart – you would likely be in a solid financial position.
Does that make me a psychic? No.
Does that make me a lucky guesser? Perhaps a little.
But what’s most important when it comes to these predictions is research – more importantly, unbiased research.
You see, many people get too caught up in one view that they are unwilling to see another side; others get too caught up in the fact that what seems abnormal is a conspiracy theory.
The U.S. election is the perfect example.
It doesn’t matter if voter fraud evidence is abundant; those who hate Trump will dismiss all of it.
The next perfect example is COVID-19 (COVID).
It doesn’t matter how much evidence shows that the current testing methods for COVID-19 are highly inaccurate – as Musk recently tweeted through personal experience himself – governments around the world will force a lockdown.
Today, I am going to end this letter with one of my boldest predictions ever. I urge you to honestly read this letter in its entirety – whether you agree with me or not. This may be the most important letter you will read in 2020.
Most importantly, I will walk you through how I came up with this prediction – so that you, too, can do the same in the future.
The Biggest Test in the World
COVID cases are skyrocketing all around the world. But what does that really mean?
To answer that, we need to start from the beginning: the COVID test.
There are two types of COVID tests: diagnostic and antibodies.
Since a diagnostic test is what confirms if you have an active coronavirus infection, that’s what we’ll focus on.
So how does it work?
Via the FDA:
“Currently there are two types of diagnostic tests– molecular tests, such as RT-PCR tests, that detect the virus’s genetic material, and antigen tests that detect specific proteins from the virus.”
In other words, there are two major forms of COVID diagnostic tests: RT-PCR and Antigen.
The Gold Standard
In Canada, and the U.S., the RT-PCR tests are the gold standard for diagnosing COVID – so that is what we’ll focus on.
“To date, testing has relied on RT-PCR testing performed on a nasopharyngeal sample (N.P.) or alternate respiratory sample collected by a health care professional. This testing method will remain the gold standard for detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canada.”
RT-PCR stands for Real Time-Polymerase Chain Reaction.
Now, I can go into many details about what this type of test actually is, but I’d rather refer you to the many sources out there – since I am not a scientist.
But let me simplify it as best as I can.
Viruses are complicated assemblies of molecules, essentially packets of information (DNA or RNA) forming a genome.
The RT-PCR test attempts to highlight specific parts of the virus sequence. However, because these molecules are hard to detect, the DNA/RNA must be amplified or multiplied a number of times before it can be highlighted.
When it comes to COVID-19, the RT-PCR test is looking for the sequence SARS-CoV-2, an RNA virus.
RNA viruses are very well-known, ranging from influenza and measles to EBOLA and ZIKA.
The RT-PCR test does not identify the whole virus but sequences of its viral genome.
In other words, the test itself doesn’t prove there is a virus, only that specific gene sequences of the virus exist.
That means it can lead to many false positives.
The virus doesn’t have to exist in its complete form for the test to show a positive result; all it has to do is find a small part of the gene sequence.
The great thing about the RT-PCR test is that it has the ability to find something, no matter how small, by merely amplifying it as much as necessary to find it.
We call this the amplification cycle or cycle threshold (Ct).
A Ct of 40 means that the lab has exponentially amplified the cycle 40 times. In other words, it’s 2 to the power of 40. So 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 x 2…40 times over.
This is extremely important.
Via NY Times:
“The PCR test amplifies genetic matter from the virus in cycles; the fewer cycles required, the greater the amount of virus, or viral load, in the sample. The greater the viral load, the more likely the patient is to be contagious.
This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients, although it could tell them how infectious the patients are.”
In other words, the higher the Ct, the lower the viral load and the harder it is to culture a virus from the sample.
“We observed a strong relationship between Ct value and ability to recover infectious virus. The estimated OR of recovering infectious virus decreased by 0.67 for each unit increase in Ct value (95% CI: 0.58–0.77) (Figure 2). Virus propagation was successful from five of 60 samples with Ct > 35; all five were from symptomatic cases and none had severe illness. The estimated probability of recovery of virus from samples with Ct > 35 was 8.3% (95% CI: 2.8%–18.4%).”
Take a look:
Their study shows that using a Ct value of 35, the probability of recovering a virus from a sample is just 8%. Anything above 40 is improbable.
This leads us to viral load – a great indicator of how contagious or how sick someone is, based on how much of the virus they have in their body.
This is the same rationale for wearing a mask.
Masks can prevent large particles from entering your system, but not all of them. The idea is that if someone infected with COVID sneezes on you while you’re wearing a mask, the less likely you are to get sick because only a small amount of the virus may have entered your body – perhaps not enough to make you sick.
Simply put, the more virus you get into your body, the sicker you might become.
In other words, an RT-PCR test doesn’t tell you if you have a virus or even that you’re sick or contagious, it just tells you some sequence of a virus exists.
Furthermore, the test cannot distinguish between inactive and reproductive matter.
That means a positive result may happen simply because the test found a fragment of a molecule, for example, a fragment of a molecule from a person who won a battle with a benign cold coronavirus in the past.
But therein lies the biggest problem.
Do you know what Ct count most labs use?
Forty. Four Zero. 40.
Recall that it’s highly unlikely that a lab can even culture a virus at all using a Ct value of 40.
What does that mean?
“Most tests set the limit at 40, a few at 37. This means that you are positive for the coronavirus if the test process required up to 40 cycles, or 37, to detect the virus.
Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left, Dr. Mina said.
Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said.
A more reasonable cutoff would be 30 to 35, she added. Dr. Mina said he would set the figure at 30, or even less. Those changes would mean the amount of genetic material in a patient’s sample would have to be 100-fold to 1,000-fold that of the current standard for the test to return a positive result — at least, one worth acting on.”
If a Ct of 40 is too high, why are labs around the world using it? Why does the WHO recommend a Ct as high as 45?
I’ll get to that in just a bit.
The Truth About Ct
Let’s take a look at what happens when we start to use a more realistic Ct.
Via NYT, continued:
“In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds (Ct), compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.
On Thursday, the United States recorded 45,604 new coronavirus cases, according to a database maintained by The Times.
If the rates of contagiousness in Massachusetts and New York were to apply nationwide, then perhaps only 4,500 of those people may actually need to isolate and submit to contact tracing.”
In other words, the data suggests that only 10% of those who tested positive for COVID may actually be infectious and need to isolate, if they’re even sick or contagious at all.
So why are we locking down entire populations?!?
But wait, it gets worse.
“Officials at the Wadsworth Center, New York’s state lab, have access to C.T. values from tests they have processed, and analyzed their numbers at The Times’s request. In July, the lab identified 872 positive tests, based on a threshold of 40 cycles.
With a cutoff of 35, about 43 percent of those tests would no longer qualify as positive. About 63 percent would no longer be judged positive if the cycles were limited to 30.
In Massachusetts, from 85 to 90 percent of people who tested positive in July with a cycle threshold of 40 would have been deemed negative if the threshold were 30 cycles, Dr. Mina said. “I would say that none of those people should be contact-traced, not one,” he said.
Other experts informed of these numbers were stunned.
“I’m really shocked that it could be that high — the proportion of people with high C.T. value results,” said Dr. Ashish Jha, director of the Harvard Global Health Institute. “Boy, does it really change the way we need to be thinking about testing.”
But wait, it gets worse…again.
“…Several scientists working with harmless genetic material have discovered that their research may have contaminated their coronavirus tests.
… Experts noted that these incidents had exposed troubling weaknesses in testing and isolation strategies, and should serve as a powerful reminder of both the promise and perils of coronavirus diagnostics, which continue to be rolled out at breakneck speed.
The contamination events played out similarly at several institutions. The Church lab, where five people have tested positive, was among the earliest. Nine scientists in three separate research groups at the neighboring Wyss Institute were soon to follow, as well as two members of a lab at M.I.T. run by the Crispr scientist Feng Zhang. Some 50 miles south, 10 people at Brown University suffered a similar experience shortly after the campus reopened for fall term. Six more such cases have been identified at Cornell.
… After the spate of positive test results this summer, researchers at the Wyss Institute and the Church lab, led by the virologist Lindsey Robinson-McCarthy, started to survey their surroundings for genetic residue. Wayward bits of DNA, they found, had made their way onto equipment, sinks, door handles, backpacks and clothing. A few fragments even hitchhiked home with one researcher, contaminating a doormat that then deposited the molecules onto the shoe of an unwitting family member.
“It was everywhere,” said Gabriel Filsinger, a member of the Church lab who has been working with coronavirus genetic material and tested positive in June. “It went further than we would ever imagine. My backpack has been continuously positive this entire time.”
Not everyone who came into contact with the DNA ended up with a positive result. But many of the tests that were taken required people to swab their own noses; genetic material could have drifted in atop an unwashed hand, or via a nostril teeming with fragments of inhaled DNA.”
In other words, there is a possibility that many who tested positive for COVID may have been misdiagnosed – especially when you consider that many of these testers are volunteers who have received very little training.
Combine that with an RT-PCR tests that amplify at a staggering rate of 2 to the 40th power, and you have a recipe for false positives.
I know this sounds crazy, but this is fact – I challenge any doctor or scientist to dispute what I have just shown you.
Now, what if we were to extrapolate the Ct count for everyone who died from COVID?
We already know that many who died from COVID not only had underlying conditions but were mostly of old age. Could COVID have sped their demise?
But shouldn’t we learn more by extrapolating their Ct data from the RT-PCR tests?
But why don’t we?
Herein lies the most significant question.
While I can’t give you an exact answer, let’s look at what’s happening around the world to determine that.
Hold onto your hats because you WILL change the way you view the world after this.
The Global Reset
I have written about the next great economic reset many times; for example, here and here, and in 2017, when I wrote via my letter, “These Six Events Will Determine Our Future:”
“When we reach the near extremities of modern civilization, the ultimate consequence is a complete reset of the financial system – a complete reset of government.”
At first, I thought the reset would be caused by a massive financial meltdown – or even war.
But given how deep the world is in debt and how intertwined our global economies have become, the bubble would have to keep going.
For example, if the U.S. prints money to stave off a financial crisis, every country ends up doing the same – and the cycle repeats.
War, on the other hand, only pushes citizens away from its government and rulers.
So, what’s the next big solution?
How do you reset the entire world and have every country synchronized to do it?
How about a global lockdown that forces the entire global economy to suffer at the same time?
How about a global pandemic that forces every government to pour debt onto its citizens?
Now, I know this sounds crazy, but what if I told you that the biggest players in the world have already planned this out?
What if I told you they already have the blueprint for the world’s reset?
What if I told you that they even call this plan “The Great Reset?”
Don’t believe me?
Just ask the world leaders who are part of the World Economic Forum (WEF).
The Three Components of the Great Reset
“The Great Reset agenda would have three main components.
The first would steer the market toward fairer outcomes.
To this end, governments should improve coordination (for example, in tax, regulatory, and fiscal policy), upgrade trade arrangements, and create the conditions for a “stakeholder economy.” At a time of diminishing tax bases and soaring public debt, governments have a powerful incentive to pursue such action.
Moreover, governments should implement long-overdue reforms that promote more equitable outcomes. Depending on the country, these may include changes to wealth taxes, the withdrawal of fossil-fuel subsidies, and new rules governing intellectual property, trade, and competition.“
In other words, it’s a global coordinated effort to raise taxes, get rid of fossil fuels, and share intellectual property.
Continued via WEF…
“The second component of a Great Reset agenda would ensure that investments advance shared goals, such as equality and sustainability.
Here, the large-scale spending programs that many governments are implementing represent a major opportunity for progress. The European Commission, for one, has unveiled plans for a €750 billion ($826 billion) recovery fund. The U.S., China, and Japan also have ambitious economic-stimulus plans.
Rather than using these funds, as well as investments from private entities and pension funds, to fill cracks in the old system, we should use them to create a new one that is more resilient, equitable, and sustainable in the long run.
This means, for example, building “green” urban infrastructure and creating incentives for industries to improve their track record on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics.”
In short, the Great Reset will include massive government spending via higher taxes to usher in a new wave of “building green urban infrastructure.”
Continued via WEF…
“The third and final priority of a Great Reset agenda is to harness the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to support the public good, especially by addressing health and social challenges. During the COVID-19 crisis, companies, universities, and others have joined forces to develop diagnostics, therapeutics, and possible vaccines; establish testing centers; create mechanisms for tracing infections; and deliver telemedicine. Imagine what could be possible if similar concerted efforts were made in every sector.”
One can immediately think of a coordinated effort to track everyone by tracing infections and vaccine records.
After reading the WEF’s Great Reset agenda, you may be thinking, “How come that sounds so familiar?”
“Who has been talking about a wealth tax?”
“Who has been talking about massive green infrastructure programs?”
Let me tell you.
JB and JT: Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau.
Biden has long talked about increasing taxes and the inclusion of a wealth tax.
Trudeau and the Liberals have done the same – most recently in Trudeau’s throne speech.
And when it comes to green infrastructure?
Yup, they are committed to those as well.
Here’s Biden’s: https://joebiden.com/clean-energy/
And Trudeau? He has already begun this process since he’s been in power, with billions upon billions already committed and more to come.
It’s no secret that Trudeau and Biden are big supporters of the WEF and its players.
If you’re not familiar with WEF, you may be familiar with Davos – the invitation-only event comprised of world leaders and billionaires. Davos is the WEF’s annual conference, where no one is allowed except billionaires and world leaders.
I am sure by now your head is spinning. But we’re not done.
Last week, I made a post about my COVID-19 predictions.
In that post, I recalled one of my predictions: COVID-19 will come back for a second wave.
And it won’t come back simply because people aren’t wearing masks or following social distancing – it will come back because the weather will get cold. And with cold weather comes colds, flus, and COVID-19.
That also means more people will be scared and rush out to get tested. As this happens, the positive test numbers will undoubtedly climb in all of the countries around the world that are entering their coldest months.
In my last post, I showed you how many countries had COVID cases spike around the same time and in lockstep; it was so coordinated that it was almost as if it was planned. Could all of these nations and the people within them somehow stopped social distancing and wearing masks at the same time?
I doubt it.
But regardless, cases will only climb from here. As such, to combat the spread of COVID, the government of many of these countries will once again force or threaten some sort of lockdown on its citizens.
Is it a surprise that Trudeau has already told Canadians that Christmas is at risk?
It won’t matter that most RT-PCR tests are false positives – the tests will increase, just as in the U.K., where the U.K. Ministry of Defence has called in the British Army to assist in the nationwide Covid-19 testing programme.
Cases will rise. Businesses will shutter.
In the U.S. alone, the travel industry directly employs 9 million people and indirectly, 15.8 million.
I can all but guarantee that most of us won’t be flying out of the country anytime soon.
This is one of those letters that I fear will come true. It’s one of those where I truly hope I am wrong.
But based on what I just told you, my conclusion is rather simple.
The COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions will be used once again for the purpose of this Great Reset.
The billionaires associated with this Great Reset will end up owning everything in the aftermath. They will be the only ones left with enough money to pick up the broken pieces of the economy.
Moreover, they will end up owning entire sectors of the economy (think the travel industry) by buying bankrupt corporations (think retail outlets, hotels, and airlines) – and even bankrupt countries.
The government will also step in and buy the broken pieces of these assets and turn them into low-income housing, to further support their initiative and sustain their grasp on voters. The Canadian Liberals are already doing this.
This will be the biggest generational wealth transfer in history.
It’s no wonder Biden’s tax plan calls for an incredible increase on the effective tax rate on estates, equal to a whopping 67.3%!
Take a look:
Good luck leaving anything to your children when you pass.
What about work?
Without a doubt, unemployment will climb – and even moreso as AI takes over. This will force governments to establish some sort of universal basic income (I already predicted this in my letter from 2016, The Secret Government Experiments). Much of this will be paid for by the hard-working and risk-taking entrepreneurs, as the wealth tax forces them to become less-wealthy and thus less challenging to the elite.
Those with homes and mortgage payments who have lost their jobs will be able to remain in their homes but will have to hand over their property through some type of reverse-mortgage-style payment. Those who remain solvent will see their property taxes increase to level the playing field.
Think this is far-fetched?
Just take a look at the WEF’s prediction for what the world will be like in 2030:
That’s right. One of the first predictions from the experts and world leaders at WEF is that “You’ll own nothing. And You’ll be happy.”
But guess what? Someone will own it all – it just won’t be you.
And it will all happen in the name of “saving” you – not the drastic lockdown measures based on a test that has a 10% accuracy rate.
Now, if you think this sounds too crazy, watch Trudeau’s speech from September 29, 2020 below:
He even said this pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset! Did you ask for a reset prior to COVID?
Hmm, sounds awfully like the WEF’s Great Reset Plan…
Via WEF’s Now is the Time for a Great Reset:
“The COVID-19 crisis is affecting every facet of people’s lives in every corner of the world. But tragedy need not be its only legacy. On the contrary, the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.”
And if you’re not familiar with what Trudeau is referring to when he speaks of SDG’s, it’s the WEF’s Sustainable Development Goals that are to be achieved by 2030 – yup, the same year where the WEF predicts, “You’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy.”
Oh, the irony: WEF leaders have a plan to achieve their goals by 2030, but also predict that in the same year, you won’t own anything.
Could their plan be the reason behind their prediction?
Now, I am not saying the WEF orchestrated the COVID pandemic by any means, but they certainly are using it to move ahead with their initiatives.
When COVID first hit, very little was known about it. But over the last 6 months, we have learned a great deal including the fact that it really is not as deadly as we once thought.
Furthermore, we have always known that a high Ct is unreliable. So why on earth are we still using such a high Ct value when it comes to COVID testing?
You tell me by clicking the link below.
It’s crazy to think that the entire world is willing and accepting of lockdowns based on the results of a COVID-test that is so highly inaccurate. This is fact and cannot be disputed.
Am I saying COVID isn’t something we should worry about? Certainly not.
But I am saying the numbers don’t add up to these severe economic and social global lockdowns being deployed.
Sweden didn’t lockdown, and Britain did – yet, the two nations have comparable disease and mortality statistics. The U.S. states are no different.
I hope after reading this letter, you see the bigger picture.
More importantly, I hope this newfound knowledge will help you make better investment decisions moving forward.
Because the only way to survive this is to either make more money, or convince the majority to fight back on how COVID is tested – hard to do when the media thrives off negativity.
Prepare for another lockdown.