Two hours and forty-five minutes to expose all the lies related to the Covid-19 pandemic and what they hide.
This is the promise made by the documentary "Hold-up - Back to Chaos", released this Wednesday and which already fascinates tens of thousands of Internet users.
On Thursday, a version which had accumulated more than 50,000 views was also removed from the Dailymotion platform.
Produced by a former journalist, Pierre Barnérias, as well as two producers and directors, Nicolas Réoutsky and Christophe Cossé, the documentary was financed through a crowdfunding campaign with impressive results: as Checknews points out, on Ulule and Tipeee, the team raised more than 200,000 euros while it was only asking for… 20,000 euros.
If he was able to raise so much money, it is because the fundraising campaign, launched at the end of August, was promoted by influential personalities on social networks, such as the yellow vest Maxime Nicolle or the editorialist André Bercoff .
Today, it is even stars who promote the final result on their platforms, such as Sophie Marceau and Juliette Binoche on Instagram.
The pitch: in the cacophony caused by the "contradictory exchanges" between politicians, specialists and the media, the feature film aims "to bring an objective and constructive light which will highlight all these revelations".
"Lies" from the authorities, chloroquine, masks, big pharma, laboratories… All the major themes of the epidemic are discussed in interviews with experts - often controversial -, a few documents, as well as television extracts.
It all comes down to six big arguments, which we summarize and check below.
Authorities would post false or biased figures
Less than ten minutes after the start of the film, the mortality curves for all causes in France, produced by INSEE, appear on the screen.
We see that the peak in 2020 was reached on April 1, two weeks after the start of confinement.
This is of course explained by the deaths directly due to Covid, but other factors indirectly linked to the coronavirus and to confinement have also impacted this number of deaths, all causes combined.
This could have played on the rise (if other diseases were less well treated, for example) or on the decrease (due to a lower number of road accidents, in particular).
The period when mortality appears higher than those of the two previous years (2018 and 2019) goes from March 21 to the very end of April, which covers a good part of the period of confinement (from March 17 to May 11 ).
The documentary deduces that "the virus was particularly rife from March 15 to April 15, a period when we were all confined thanks to a historic measure supposed to not show this curve".
However, many doctors agree that the confinement has made it possible to limit contamination, therefore hospitalizations, and finally deaths.
Patients who died from Covid-19 at the very end of March, for example, were largely infected before the start of containment, the average time between contamination and death being estimated at around 3 or 4 weeks. .
According to a study conducted by researchers from the École des Hautes Etudes en Santé Publique (EHESP), published on April 23, the containment measures prevented more than 61,000 deaths in hospitals in mainland France between March 19 and April 19.
With the Parisian, the mathematician at the CNRS Jean-Stéphane Dhersin, specialist in the modeling of epidemics, had judged this study serious and of quality although having limits “related to the lack of data”.
READ ALSO>
These 60,000 deaths and this "health cataclysm" avoided by confinement
Newsletter - Most of the news
Every morning, the news seen by Le Parisien
I'm registering
Your email address is collected by Le Parisien to enable you to receive our news and commercial offers.
Learn more
Still on the subject of deaths, the “Hold-Up” argument also consists in minimizing the severity of Covid-19, by comparing its lethality with that of other diseases.
One graph shows that Covid kills 1.1 million per year, compared to more than 17 million each year from cardiovascular disease.
Screenshot / "Hold-Up"
The milestone of one million deaths from Covid-19 officially recorded worldwide was reached on September 28.
By comparison, in the whole of 2019, tuberculosis caused the death of 1.4 million people, according to the WHO.
She noted that "among the diseases caused by a single infectious agent, tuberculosis is the cause of the greatest number of deaths".
"Eight months after the epidemic, this virus will therefore have caused a little more than a million deaths in the world, that is to say much less than the tuberculosis which concerns no one", describes the voice-over of the film, deeming disproportionate the attention paid to Covid-19.
However, this weighs heavily on hospital services in different countries, forced to take strong measures to avoid an uncontrollable influx of patients.
In addition, the figure of one million deaths is certainly underestimated due to the fact that many deaths are probably not taken into account, especially as all countries do not necessarily count them in the same way.
Most often only hospital deaths and sometimes those in nursing homes are taken into account.
This then excludes individuals who died at home and who could not benefit from hospital care, in particular.
“When you count, you can't count perfectly,” said Mike Ryan, WHO's director of emergency situations, on September 28.
After the deaths, the film looks at new cases, which have increased sharply in France and in many European countries since the end of the summer.
Michael Yeadon, presented as a former director of research within the Pfizer group, indicates that there are "an unknown but probably quite high number of tests which are false."
"I know from a reliable source that the false positive rate is 20 times higher," he adds.
According to him, in Great Britain, "95% of the samples" are false positives.
But at no time does it specify what its source is and where it gets this data, which seems misleading or, at least, overestimated.
A New York Times article published on August 29 said that, according to estimates by several doctors, "90% of people who test positive carried virtually no viruses."
This does not mean that they are strictly speaking false positive.
In fact, they have been contaminated, but their body contains only a small amount of viral material.
However, the PCR test is sensitive enough to detect it.
What is true is that these less infected people are arguably less contagious than others.
Hydroxychloroquine would be "a huge scandal"
Unsurprisingly, part of the documentary focuses on hydroxychloroquine, this antimalarial drug used for several decades in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.
Pr Didier Raoult, director of the IHU Mediterranean Infection in Marseille, has been fighting since the start of 2020 to demonstrate the effectiveness of this molecule, associated with azithromycin, on patients with Covid-19.
This earned him criticism from a large number of doctors and scientists, while the Order of Physicians has just launched proceedings against him, accusing him of flouting the code of ethics on certain points: violation of the brotherhood, erroneous information of the public, exposure to unjustified risk, etc.
"Hydroxychloroquine is a huge scandal for me", asserts in the film Christian Perronne, head of the infectious diseases department at the Raymond-Poincaré hospital in Garches (Hauts-de-Seine).
“I feel the duty at least to test Professor Raoult's protocol.
I test it, I attack on Monday;
on Friday, I realize that there is indeed an efficiency.
[…] My fellow resuscitators say that there is much less passage in intensive care, there is no death, ”adds cardiologist Gonzague Retournay.
In fact, for the moment, no comprehensive study has established a positive effect of hydroxychloroquine on patients infected with the coronavirus.
“To date, the available data, which are very heterogeneous and uneven, do not allow us to predict a benefit from hydroxychloroquine, alone or in combination, for the treatment or prevention of Covid-19 disease”, indicated the National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM) on October 23.
The agency had just refused to authorize this drug more widely against Covid-19.
"In this context and in view of the available safety data showing increased risks, in particular cardiovascular risks, a favorable benefit / risk ratio cannot be assumed for hydroxychloroquine whatever its context of use", she added, drawing on the scientific literature.
Several meta-analyzes, including one published on August 27 in the journal Clinical Microbiology and Infection, have concluded that hydroxychloroquine, whether or not associated with azithromycin, had, at best, no impact on the mortality in hospitalized patients.
According to the former Minister of Health Philippe Douste-Blazy, this is a "gruesome debate" and "we are the only country in the world to have had it".
If this molecule regularly made the headlines in France especially before the summer, it is undoubtedly due to the fact that it was a Frenchman living in Marseille, Professor Raoult, who popularized it.
But the situation was very different for several of our neighbors.
“It is not at all a debate in Germany for the simple reason that all scientists, all doctors immediately expressed their skepticism.
[…] That cut short the debate, very quickly ”, testified April 9 the correspondent of Radio France in Berlin, Ludovic Piedtenu, in a video of the media Loopsider.
“It's something that strangely has not crossed the Channel,” said Eric Albert, the correspondent of Le Monde in London.
Chloroquine, shortage of masks, deconfinement, morale of the population ...
We asked for news from our European neighbors.
Spoiler: it's not necessarily better elsewhere.
pic.twitter.com/VRgdSAEoZ0
- Loopsider (@Loopsidernews) April 9, 2020
The "big pharma" would take advantage of the epidemic to enrich themselves
Didier Raoult be the victim of the big pharmaceutical companies, which would do everything to discredit the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, a cheap drug, to promote much more expensive treatments, and therefore potentially much more profitable?
This is one of the theories explored by the documentary.
A clarification must be made from the outset: it is obvious that pharmaceutical companies, like any company, seek profitability.
For laboratories, it is even an imponderable, as the amounts devoted to the development of potential treatments and even more vaccines are astronomical.
The stock exchange regularly reacts to announcements from these labs.
Gilead stock had jumped 20% in March when the drug trials for remdesivir were announced.
A drug that brought him $ 900 million in the third quarter.
The world stock markets have panicked in recent days after the announcement by the Pfizer laboratory of a vaccine deemed "90% effective" in phase 3. It is perfectly possible to criticize or deplore this economic model, but it remains a reality.
The largest laboratories in the world are now engaged in a vaccine race.
This race will make winners, but also (above all?) Losers.
Those who will have committed colossal amounts for a vaccine that will ultimately not be exploited.
“To believe that we can create new living organisms like that and believe that for a commercial interest such or such a laboratory would do it, it is simply not to realize the colossal losses that these laboratories will make, explained last April to from France Culture Hervé Chneiweiss, neurobiologist and president of the Inserm ethics committee.
Because if one of them maybe sells the drug that will treat us, the majority of them see their sales collapse.
It would be so counterproductive for everyone that it takes a twisted imagination to think of such a thing.
"
Screenshot / "Hold-Up"
There remains the question of "specialists" questioned by the media to comment on Covid news.
The documentary particularly targets Karine Lacombe, infectious disease specialist and head of department at Saint-Antoine hospital.
The documentary accuses him of his links with laboratories manufacturing other drugs tested against Covid-19.
In its declaration of public interest, it indicates having received 15,000 euros from Gilead laboratory and 3,000 from AbbVie over five years.
The National Council of the Order of Physicians prohibits health professionals from receiving illicit benefits from industrialists in the health sector.
Three exemptions are however provided for, including "remuneration, compensation and defrayal of research activities".
A framework that the professor says perfectly respects, on the basis of work carried out on hepatitis C and HIV to treat Covid.
Similar accusations are brought against Martin Blachier, epidemiologist and public health specialist, through his company.
"I do not receive any personal remuneration from laboratories or others, but my company works with both public and private actors," he explained to FranceInfo last August.
But I am not one of the people for whom there is a risk of conflicts of interest, because I am not a doctor prescribing molecules.
"
The mask would not be effective, even dangerous
Shortly after, a dermatologist, Claude Veres, appears in the image, showing several photos of patients with their faces eaten away by red and purulent patches due to friction with the mask.
"These people are forced to fall back on cotton masks, we know that they are less protective, already than surgical masks, it is not very protective, it is even marked on the box", explains the doctor, pointing out that many people wear the mask poorly and have to take it off to eat, smoke or kiss their spouses.
After testimonies captured in the street, geneticist Alexandra Henrion-Claude (former Inserm, who dissociated herself from her remarks), assures her that the masks promote the proliferation of bacteria, fungi, and cause headaches and breathing problems.
Screenshot / "Hold-Up"
These assertions, in fact, extrapolate from a few phenomena.
Yes, people do suffer from problems related to friction of the skin and masks, as has been pointed out by numerous press articles which have dubbed this phenomenon the “mascne”.
On the other hand, the masks remain a protection.
The warning provided on the box only states that the mask "does not eliminate the risk of contracting any disease or any infection," according to the speech of the Ministry of Health.
In short: the mask reduces the risk but does not make it disappear 100%, which is why the health authorities claim that the mask constitutes "additional protection" to the application of barrier gestures such as hand washing and distancing social.
As for the bacteria coming from our mouth, they are well captured by the masks, but are not dangerous.
“Under the recommended conditions of use, there is no way for fungi to develop inside a mask,” explains Françoise Dromer, head of the Molecular Mycology unit and the National Reference Center for Invasive mycoses and antifungals from the Institut Pasteur, to Courrier Picard.
Many testimonials from people who suffered from headaches and breathing problems were indeed collected, as in one of our articles.
This may be due to the quality of the masks themselves, the "breathability" of which varies between manufacturers, as we reported in our recent survey on the subject.
The masks where you breathe less well are also considered not to meet the standards established by the health authorities.
The virus was allegedly made in a laboratory
The coronavirus has been shaking our lives for months, and scientists around the world continue to research its origin.
The documentary, to support the thesis according to which the virus would have come from a laboratory, and which explicitly cites the P4 laboratory in Wuhan in China, begins by quoting a work by Alexandre Adler, published in 2005. A passage from this book mentions with astounding precision the dangers of the arrival of the pandemic on a global scale.
Its report detailed the risks of seeing the appearance of "a new virulent, extremely contagious human respiratory disease", with "travelers showing little or no symptoms" who "could carry the virus to other continents".
READ ALSO> From the
French origins of the P4 laboratory in Wuhan
What arouse some fantasies.
In recent months, the author has looked back on his fifteen year old writings.
In an interview granted for example to Public Senate, he justifies this degree of precision by the fact that this scenario has already presented itself to us, on a lesser scale.
With the Ebola virus in particular.
“
Corona
is a coded term that was used by epidemiologists in America to name what they considered to be the ultimate pandemic,” he continues.
From pandemic to pandemic, we were going to have a pandemic that was going to truly spread to the whole Earth.
Why?
Well, because globalization had reached a very advanced stage.
The CIA was warning, and I tend to agree.
"
Other references to the theory that the virus came from a laboratory all call into question the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2.
They are described by a "soldier", a former legionary and who would work in intelligence, as a possible bacteriological weapon with an obscure purpose.
Anonymously, the man claims to have exchanged with "some of his contacts" who gave him access to a note from the Nuclear Safety Agency - whose existence has never been proven - which would record the fact that the virus would not be not of natural origin.
Another proof is put forward by Professor Jean-Bernard Fourtillan, who in the past designed and tested patches on patients with Parkinson's or Alzheimer's disease, without prior authorization from the National Medicines Safety Agency and health products (ANSM).
He told him that a patent for a Covid-19 screening test was filed in 2015. Pure fake news, since the reference to the virus was added last September, as AFP recently reported.
Screenshot / "Hold-Up"
What do we know about this topic?
For the moment, many questions remain.
Studies show that the virus initially comes from bats.
Very quickly, scientists set off in search of a host animal, which would have served as an intermediary in the chain of transmission to humans.
For a long time, the pangolin was considered the ideal candidate.
A theory which is however challenged today by several scientists, including Étienne Decroly, virologist at the CNRS.
“Bats and pangolins evolve in different ecosystems and we wonder when their viruses could have recombined.
And above all, we note that the identity rate between the SARS-CoV-2 sequences and those from pangolin only reaches 90.3%, which is much lower than the rates usually observed between strains infecting humans. and those infecting the intermediate host ”, he revealed in an interview published on the CNRS website.
In the absence of discovery of this intermediary, he believes that the hypothesis of a virus accidentally released from a laboratory should not be neglected.
Asked on November 8 by Le Parisien, he explained as follows: "In this hypothesis, SARS-CoV-2 would descend from a bat virus isolated by scientists during sample collections.
It could have been cultivated in the laboratory on cells or animals in order to understand how this virus is able to cross the species barrier.
However, the virology laboratory in Wuhan, the city where the epidemic broke out, has techniques to work on this subject.
It would not be about building a biological weapon but research aimed at better understanding how this virus works.
Scientists around the world are working on viruses to try to understand how they can be transmitted to humans.
Research that is not the subject of internationally established standards, a point on which reflection should be conducted, according to several specialists.
At this point, genetic manipulation has by no means been scientifically proven.
The authorities and / or a coalition of billionaires and scientists would organize a regime of fear to better control populations and annihilate them
This is the main thesis of this documentary, which is revealed only after two hours of presentation.
According to its authors and a good part of its speakers, the supposed manufacture of the virus in the laboratory - or its escape - would be orchestrated by the greatest of this world (billionaires like Bill Gates or the Rockefeller family), instrumentalizing scientists (like Anthony Fauci, Donald Trump's epidemic advisor) to create fear, control populations, then wipe them out and replace them with robots.
The logic is built in several stages.
According to Valérie Bugault (a private law specialist close to the far right, follower of theories on world governance and the "deep state") and Olivier Vuillemin (a Swiss presented as "expert in scientific fraud" of which we find no book or online publication), the containment first favored the installation of 5G antennas that facilitate the circulation of cryptocurrencies.
These could circulate through humans (via nanoparticles inserted with the help of vaccines, all patented by Bill Gates) and objects.
This would make it possible to "trace bodily activities" and assign a monetary value to humans according to their movements and activities which would be monitored and recorded, she said.
READ ALSO>
Covid-19 and 5G, the explosive mixture deployed by the conspirators
This conspiracy theory has already been circulating for several months and, according to AFP, is an extrapolation drawn from two discoveries.
The first is a patent filed in March by Microsoft (the former company of Bill Gates) which schematizes a system for producing cryptocurrency via “body data”, without mentioning 5G, the vaccine or the coronavirus.
The second is a discovery by researchers dating from 2019 who wish to “encode” the medical history of a patient under his skin via nanoparticles, in order to facilitate the monitoring of his vaccinations, and not to trace his movements.
According to the documentary, the control of the individual would then be operated by the powerful of this world who organize the "Great Reset" (in French, the "Great Reinitialization"), a real initiative of the Davos Economic Forum aiming to rethink relations and the international economy in the wake of the health crisis, and recreating a “social contract that honors the dignity of every human being”.
But in the mouths of documentary filmmakers, the project has become a disastrous operation designed by elites (Bill Gates, Jack Dorsey of Twitter, Elon Musk or Jacques Attali) wanting to destroy the poorest populations on the planet.
Finally so that you can judge for yourself of the toxic delirium of this documentary, this extract of Monique Pinçon Charlot which leaves in lollipop.
Godwin point alert.
pic.twitter.com/wIErEPhRei
- Tristan Mendès France (@tristanmf) November 11, 2020
Since they no longer need these "mouths to feed" that they exploit to survive, it would be more useful for these elites to kill them to replace them by robots and to live in harmony in a superstate conceptualized by the Berggruen Institute (a true
think tank
composed of influential personalities who want to rethink state governance in the light of the 21st century).
"It is a class war that the rich are waging against the poorest on the planet", we hear from the sociologist Monique Pinçon-Charlot, who compares this phenomenon to the Holocaust.
At the end of the documentary, Pierre Barnérias also mentions a letter sent by a former Vatican ambassador to Donald Trump proving, according to him, the conclusions of his investigation.
She addresses this famous "Great Reset" and calls Donald Trump for help.
The American leader, on the departure, is then seen as the only savior in the face of a globalist elite which holds the reins of the media, politics and scientists.
A rhetoric not unlike that of the QAnon movement, which believes in the existence of a "deep state" seeking to achieve world domination and has to exploit the most fragile elements of our society, such as children.
🔷🔹 Call for great vigilance 🔹🔷
Hold Up, a monument of disinformation?
👉 In recent days, social networks have been invaded by teasers preparing the release of a “shock” documentary, Hold Up.
This film (2h40 long!) Claims to reveal a real scandal in the pic.twitter.com/cKUpuesD91
- Covid19 Federation (@ C19Federation) November 11, 2020
Faced with these remarks, several specialists in conspiracy and the Covid-19 epidemic were alarmed.
A collective called Covid19 Federation has also embarked on a minute-by-minute fact-checking operation of the documentary.
And the official criticisms are already falling: the former minister Philippe Douste-Blazy, who intervenes in the documentary, has already expressed regret on Twitter.
"I have not seen this film and if there is the slightest conspiratorial character, I want to say as clearly as possible that I dissociate myself from it," he reacted.
“The health crisis we are going through is serious enough not to add confusion to the painful times we are living.
"
