This article was originally published by Rhoda Wilson at The Daily Exposé under the title: The COVID-19 Pandemic Was An Illusion; Those In Power Deliberately Ignored Science To Impose Their Will On Populations to Dominate and Control Them

“There’s no way that they cared about people. There’s no way that they wanted to apply methods to minimize harm. It’s the opposite. They wanted to apply methods to oppress and be dominant and impose their will on entire populations. That was the goal,” Denis Rancourt said in a recent interview about the COVID-19 “pandemic.”

Rancourt argues that the science behind the pandemic was manipulated and the results were published in top journals controlled by those in power, with 99% of medical trials being false and funded by the industry. His research focuses on the idea of “biological stress-induced transmissionless spontaneous bacterial pneumonia,” a self-infection caused by environmental stress, as a primary aspect of the pandemic.

He offers a new perspective on the germ-terrain theory dynamic and its implications for our understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Table of contents

Analysis of All-Cause Mortality Rates and the Absence of a Spreading Pathogen

Rancourt emphasized that his conclusions are based on hard data, specifically all-cause mortality rates, which have been collected by nations for over a century and are considered reliable.

According to the data, there was excess mortality before the vaccines were rolled out, contradicting the claim that mortality only started with the vaccine rollout.  However, after analyzing the temporal and spatial dependence of all-cause mortality Rancourt found that there was no spread of a pathogen, as the mortality rates did not increase in neighboring regions following hotspots of death.

The first paper Rancourt published was on 2 June 2020; it concluded that there was no spread of a pathogen.  The data showed that mortality rates were often limited within jurisdictional borders, such as county or country borders, suggesting that local government policies and hospital environments played a significant role in determining deaths.

“This is institutions and governments killing people by the measures that they’re applying, mostly in hospitals and so on. I was very clear. I spelled that out in that publication right away and showed the data that demonstrated that” he said.

Rancourt identified northern Italy, specifically the Milan region, and New York City as areas where the use of mechanical ventilators was particularly heavy and likely contributed to the high mortality rates.

“In Milan, they actually told people, don’t just stay at home, come straight into the hospital, we’ll save you,” he said.  “And they developed an improvement, they considered, where they could put two people on one ventilator. And they were just putting everybody on ventilators.”

“The ventilators are accompanied with sedation.  Sedation makes your breathing even worse. And the ventilators are known to be strongly associated with developing pneumonia. And at the same time,  there was a hesitancy to treat pneumonias because everyone was saying, ‘Oh, it’s viral, it’s viral. You’re being irresponsible as a [medical doctor] or a hospital if you’re over-treating with antibiotics’. So, there was withdrawal of antibiotics and these very dangerous techniques and sedation and so on. And there were also some experimental drugs that were being used that were shown to be very, very deadly.”

In contrast, Germany did not adopt these treatment methods and did not experience excess deaths at the beginning of 2020.

There were many different causes of excess death during the COVID era, not everyone was doing the same thing, Rancourt said.  One of the important causes of death is severe treatment of elderly and frail people including isolation, disruption of their routine, and removal of their usual care.

“Isolating them is extremely deadly. And removing their usual routine, their usual way that you give them nourishment and also hydrate them, and the care that they normally would have. All of that was disrupted tremendously and they were isolated and treated as a danger to themselves, between themselves, and so on. So that certainly would have contributed enormously to deaths [of] the frail people,” he said.

Adding, “What was done in care homes and hospitals to elderly and sick people was absolutely horrendous. It was a death machine, basically.”

Rancourt believes that the actions taken in care homes and hospitals were not just malfeasance but a deliberate decision to roll out a “military campaign” to implement vaccines, regardless of the science or consequences.

Motivations Behind the Covid-19 Pandemic Response and the Pursuit of Control

Rancourt discussed the motivations behind the covid-19 pandemic response.  The primary goal was not to prevent the spread of the virus but rather to impose control over the population, he said.

The primary goal of the covid pandemic response was to inject everyone with a vaccine.  Rancourt believes that the ability to inject something into everyone’s bodies, whether it be a vaccine or another substance, is a powerful tool for dominance and control, allowing governments to impose surveillance and exert complete control over the population.

It wasn’t only the vaccines that were used for this purpose.  The ability to force populations to wear masks and isolate is also a form of control that allows governments to exert complete surveillance over populations.  The science behind the pandemic response was irrelevant as the true motives were to oppress and dominate, rather than to minimise harm or protect public health, he said.

He explained that the effects of social isolation, stress, and lack of social interaction on respiratory infections were well-known but ignored in favor of policies that would increase control over the population.

Rancourt acknowledges that some elites believe that a smaller population is better for their interests but he doesn’t think that depopulation was the primary motivation behind the covid pandemic response.

In Rancourt’s view, the illness and death caused by the pandemic response were side effects, rather than the primary goal, which was to establish a dominance hierarchy and exert control over the population, drawing parallels to historical patterns of dominance hierarchies.

“I think that the main thing here was to oppress and to inject – and that everything else including death and illness is a side effect of that – that was the main driving force.  That is the way that dominance hierarchies always function, throughout history and in social groups of animals or people. You dominate, you oppress, and that makes the oppressed, the people, the underlings, if you like, more unhealthy and it makes them die sooner and it makes them die often,” he said.

“That is just a rule of nature, if you like, that if you’re going to have a dominance hierarchy and if it’s particularly aggressive, depending on the broader environment, or depending on its own internal dynamics, when it becomes particularly violent, then there’s gonna be more death, there’s gonna be more illness of the people who are the underlings, if you like, who are being more controlled. That’s a general historic feature. So that aspect of it is not new,” he added.

The Impact of Censorship and Dominance Hierarchies on Societal Health and the Rise of Authoritarianism

Rancourt emphasized that when institutions are captured and censored, it leads to a loss of democracy, rights, and ultimately, the oppression and sickness of people.

“Whenever they censor or capture institutions to their benefit – to be able to more control, reduce democracy, take away your rights – whenever they do these things, they’re killing you. They’re making you more oppressed and more sick, more often,” he said.

He explained that the main mechanism of ill health in people is the stress caused by the dominance hierarchy. The concept of a dominance hierarchy, where those in power control and oppress others, is a natural phenomenon that can lead to increased death, illness, and stress among the “underlings.”  It can also lead to instabilities and then a slide towards fascism or totalitarian states.

Rancourt mentioned that there are theoretical papers that discuss how internally, societies can slide into totalitarian states and how to reset and move away from this trajectory.

As Rancourt explained, the threat of an outside enemy or pathogen can be used as an instrument to control populations and drive them towards authoritarianism and this can be seen in the way that governments and institutions respond to perceived threats.  He mentioned a study by the US government which found that the threat of a pathogen, whether real or perceived, can drive populations to accept authoritarian governments.

He also mentioned his own medical hypothesis paper, in which he argues that there has never been a pandemic in the sense of the spread of a pathogen but rather, many pandemics in history have been correlated with huge collapses within society, such as wars, famines and financial meltdowns, often caused by self-styled elites’ greed and overexploitation.

He noted that forensic analyses of skeletons and other studies have shown that large pandemics are often linked to environmental factors, such as droughts and volcanic eruptions, which can lead to societal collapse and increased mortality rates.

“Sometimes it’s environmental in the sense that there can be a drought, a very very long [drought] … years of drought. Sometimes these droughts are brought on by huge volcanic explosions that simply diminish the amount of sunlight that strikes the Earth and gives you [ ]  a mini ice age and that kind of thing.  So, there are correlations between the large pandemics and large volcano eruptions. There are many observations that suggest that if you really disrupt society at large in an important way, then a lot of people will die just from the stress of it; the biological stress and they’re not getting the nourishment they need, they’re being harassed, they’re being pushed out of resources and they die,” he said.

The Impact of Societal Disruption on Human Health and Mortality Rates, with a Focus on the Covid-19 Pandemic

Rancourt discussed the impact of societal disruption on human health, suggesting that significant disruptions can lead to increased mortality rates due to stress, lack of nourishment, and harassment.

He referred to the Black Death, citing scientific studies that found the majority of those who died were extremely undernourished, underdeveloped, and had poor physical health, indicating that the poorest members of society were disproportionately affected. “The wealthy did not die in the Black Plague,” he said.

He noted that this trend is consistent across pandemics, including the recent COVID-19 pandemic, where the strongest correlation with excess mortality was found to be poverty, which is also correlated with obesity, diabetes, and increased antibiotic prescriptions.

Poorer people were more likely to die during the COVID-19 pandemic due to various mechanisms, including the denial of antibiotics, which are often prescribed to treat respiratory diseases that are more prevalent among low-income populations.

We are familiar with ivermectin for its anti-parasitic, an-viral and anti-cancer properties.  But what’s interesting is Rancourt highlighted ivermectin’s anti-bacterial properties.

“One of the points I make in my articles is that ivermectin is an extremely efficient antibiotic in the sense that it’s really good at fighting bacterial infections of the lungs. Extremely good. There are scientific papers about this,” he said.

He said that antibiotics, such as ivermectin, would have been an effective treatment for bacterial infections, such as pneumonia, which may have been misdiagnosed as viral infections, and could have saved lives.  Some medical professionals may have mistakenly treated bacterial infections as viral infections, highlighting the potential benefits of using antibiotics like ivermectin to combat bacterial infections in the lungs.

The above was covered in the first 25 minutes of Rancourt’s interview with The Last American Vagabond.  We have embedded the full interview below.