UNTIL now in our regular MHRA adverse effects reports we’ve focused quite heavily on myocarditis and acute cardiac disorders, not least for the dramatically increased risk of the vaccine for younger age groups, young men in particular. In terms of numbers recorded, however, these are eclipsed by what the MHRA classifies as nervous system disorders and about which we hear little.
Adverse events for this ‘category’ now stand at an astonishing 282,041, which is possibly less than 10 per cent of the real figure, 182,251 of them associated with the AstraZeneca vaccine. Nor does the overall figure include the further 12,769 ‘tremor’ events. Eugyppius, written about elsewhere in these pages today, has been recording his readers’ reports of their adverse vaccine reactions. He recently reported the response, commenting on the ‘many letters describing shingles and Bell’s Palsy following vaccination; and of more puzzling and potentially more serious neurological problems, from vertigo to muscular tremors to seizures’.
We hope to be able to report on a breakdown of the nervous disorder data in weeks to come.
We are in the dark as to how many unrecognised cases of paralysis and disability there are. Would, for example, Tony Shingler’s severe vaccine reaction and final diagnosis of Guillain-Barré syndrome ever been known about but for the tenacity of his wife Nicola?
It’s high time the NHS, the MHRA and individual doctors came clean about what they have seen. We need to know about ALL the ‘coincidences’.
Here is the latest Yellow Card summary, a little late from us this week. Once again, overall deaths are up and overall reactions are heading for the half million mark. If this is only 10 per of the real numbers (as the MHRA itself suggests) I leave you to do the maths.
MHRA Yellow Card reporting summary up to February 23, 2022 (published March 3)
Adult – Primary & Booster/Third Dose, Child Administration
Primary doses
* Pfizer – 26million people – Yellow Card reporting rate – 1 in 156 people impacted
* AstraZeneca – 24.9m people – reporting rate – 1 in 102 people impacted
* Moderna – 1.6m people – reporting rate – 1 in 44 people impacted
Overall 1 in 117 people injected experiences a Yellow Card Adverse Event.
Total doses including boosters administered – 78.4m (Pfizer) + 49.15m (AZ) + 12m (Moderna) = 139,648,374 million doses
Adult Booster or 3rd Doses given = 38,112,342 people
Booster Yellow Card Reports – 29,609 (Pfizer) + 487 (AZ) + 16,195 (Moderna) + 163 (Unknown) = 46,454
Reactions – 477,632 (Pfizer) + 863,696 (AZ) + 120,124 (Moderna) + 4,739 (Unknown) = 1,466,191
Reports – 166,225 (Pfizer) + 243,903 (AZ) + 36,113 (Moderna) + 1,554 (Unknown) = 447,795 people impacted
Fatal – 726 (Pfizer) + 1,235 (AZ) + 40 (Moderna) + 39 (Unknown) = 2040
Blood Disorders – 16,850 (Pfizer) + 7,806 (AZ) + 2,449 (Moderna) + 62 (Unknown) = 27,167
Pulmonary Embolism & Deep Vein Thrombosis – 881 (Pfizer) + 3,042 (AZ) + 112 (Moderna) + 26 (Unknown) = 4,061
Anaphylaxis – 653 (Pfizer) + 873 (AZ) + 87 (Moderna) + 2 (Unknown) = 1,615
Acute Cardiac – 12,575 (Pfizer) + 11,239 (AZ) + 3,096 (Moderna) + 95 (Unknown) = 27,005
Eye Disorders – 7,864 (Pfizer) + 14,817 (AZ) + 1,481 (Moderna) + 84 (Unknown) = 24,246
Blindness – 156 (Pfizer) + 318 (AZ) + 32 (Moderna) + 4 (Unknown) = 510
Deafness – 292 (Pfizer) + 425 (AZ) + 50 (Moderna) + 5 (Unknown) = 772
Spontaneous Abortions – 478 + 1 premature baby death / 14 stillbirth/foetal deaths (13 recorded as fatal) (Pfizer) + 230 + 5 stillbirth (AZ) + 62 + 1 stillbirth (Moderna) + 6 (Unknown) = 776 miscarriages
Nervous System Disorders – 79,478 (Pfizer) + 182,251 (AZ) + 19,467 (Moderna) + 845 (Unknown) = 282,041
Vomiting – 5,172 (Pfizer) + 11,633 (AZ) + 1,740 (Moderna) + 59 (Unknown) = 18,604
Strokes and CNS haemorrhages – 768 (Pfizer) + 2,319 (AZ) + 52 (Moderna) + 16 (Unknown) = 3,155
Seizures – 1,073 (Pfizer) + 2,058 (AZ) + 255 (Moderna) + 17 (Unknown) = 3,403
Paralysis – 499 (Pfizer) + 875 (AZ) + 100 (Moderna) + 9 (Unknown) = 1,483
Gastrointestinal Disorders – 41,753 (Pfizer) + 80,845 (AZ) + 10,485 (Moderna) + 385 (Unknown) = 133,468
Infections – 11,791 (Pfizer) + 20,177 (AZ) + 2,211 (Moderna) + 153 (Unknown) = 34,332
Herpes – 2,180 (Pfizer) + 2,682 (AZ) + 243 (Moderna) + 23 (Unknown) = 5128
Immune System Disorders – 2,398 (Pfizer) + 3,284 (AZ) + 596 (Moderna) + 21 (Unknown) = 6,299
BCG Scar Reactivation – 67 (Pfizer) + 38 (AZ) + 51 (Moderna) = 156
Skin Disorders – 33,395 (Pfizer) + 53,230 (AZ) + 12,771 (Moderna) + 335 (Unknown) = 99,731
Respiratory Disorders – 21,232 (Pfizer) + 29,661 (AZ) + 4,115 (Moderna) + 202 (Unknown) = 55,210
Psychiatric Disorders – 9,983 (Pfizer) + 18,330 (AZ) + 2,378 (Moderna) + 109 (Unknown) = 30,800
Reproductive/Breast Disorders – 30,704 (Pfizer) + 20,719 (AZ) + 5,037 (Moderna) + 213 (Unknown) = 56,673
Epistaxis (nosebleeds) – 1,068 (Pfizer) + 2,302 (AZ) + 190 (Moderna) + 11 (Unknown) = 3,571
Tremor – 2,134 (Pfizer) + 9,934 (AZ) + 651 (Moderna) + 50 (Unknown) = 12,769
Children and young people special report
Suspected side effects reported in individuals under 18 years old
* Pfizer – 3,200,000 children (1st doses) plus 1,700,000 second doses resulting in 3,186 Yellow Cards (up 75 since last week)
* AZ – 12,400 children (1st doses) plus 9,200 second doses resulting in 256 Yellow Cards – Reporting rate 1 in 48
* Moderna – 2,100 children (1st doses) and 1,400 second doses resulting in 24 Yellow cards
* Brand Unspecified – 21 Yellow Cards
Total = 3,214,500 children injected
Total Yellow Cards under-18s = 3,487
For full reports including 348 pages of specific reaction listings see here.
March 15, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, UK |
Leave a comment
Dr. Peter A. McCullough joins Del in studio for a dive into the science of vaccinating for Covid, vaccinating your children for Covid, and the risks and benefits. Is the risk worth the benefit? Are we doing more harm than good?
March 15, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Video | COVID-19 Vaccine, United States |
Leave a comment
Pfizer’s Bourla says we need a 4th shot. Pfizer sold $36.8 billion dollars’ worth of COVID vaccines in 2021, making its vaccine the top-selling pharmaceutical product in history. Pfizer has estimated its COVID vaccine sales for 2022 at $32 billion.
Albert Bourla says we need a 4th dose of his magic money-making elixir, but his company is also working on a universal coronavirus vaccine (a 2nd magic elixir), which we will only need once a year.
Albert Bourla, PhD, CEO of Pfizer, said a second booster shot of the COVID-19 vaccine is necessary for protection against infection, according to a March 13 interview with CBS News.
Dr. Bourla said the third dose of the COVID-19 vaccine provides protection from hospitalization and death, but “it’s not that good against infections” and the protection is relatively short-lived. Pfizer is preparing data for the FDA about the need for a fourth dose.
“Many variants are coming,” Dr. Bourla told CBS. “And omicron was the first one that was able to evade in a skillful way the immune protection that we were giving. But also, in all that the duration of the protection, it doesn’t last very long.”
… In February, the CDC published a study showing the efficacy of booster shots of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines waned after about four months, but still provided significant protection from hospitalizations during the omicron surge.
Dr. Bourla also told CNBC that Pfizer is developing a vaccine that will protect against all COVID-19 variants, including omicron, for at least a year. He expects to review data from trials on the long-term vaccine by the end of the month.
But Dr. Marco Cavaleri, a top regulator at Europe’s FDA, called the European Medicines’ Agency (EMA), says this may weaken the immune response. According to Reuters :
The European Union’s drug regulator on Tuesday expressed doubts about the need for a fourth booster dose of COVID-19 vaccine and said there is currently no data to support this approach as it seeks more data on the fast-spreading Omicron variant.
“While use of additional boosters can be part of contingency plans, repeated vaccinations within short intervals would not represent a sustainable long-term strategy,” the European Medicines Agency’s Head of Vaccines Strategy, Marco Cavaleri, told a media briefing.
The EMA official raised concerns that a strategy of giving boosters every four months hypothetically poses the risk of overloading people’s immune systems and leading to fatigue in the population.
Cavaleri also said more data on the impact of the new variant on vaccines and a better understanding of the evolution of the current wave were needed to decide whether an Omicron-specific vaccine was needed.
“It is important that there is a good discussion around the choice of the composition of the vaccine to make sure that we have a strategy that is not just reactive … and try to come up with an approach that will be suitable in order to prevent a future variant,” he said.
The EMA said it was currently in conversation with vaccine developers in case there is a need for an updated vaccine but added that any such change would need to be coordinated globally.
March 14, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, Pfizer |
Leave a comment
Overview
Medical journals and textbooks are clear that the only way to accurately determine the life-or-death impacts of medical treatments is by measuring “all-cause mortality” in “randomized controlled trials.” Clinical lingo aside, this is simply the number of deaths in studies where people are randomly assigned to receive or not receive a certain treatment.
Though widely ignored in media coverage of Covid-19 vaccines, medical journals describe all-cause mortality in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) as:
Beyond the fact that death is the most severe and clearest health outcome, the reason why this measure is more vital than any other is because RCTs control for every possible confounding factor, including those that are not obvious. Thus, a clinical research methods guide states that RCTs are the “gold standard” for research because they provide “a rigorous tool to examine cause–effect,” which “is not possible with any other study design.”
Combined with the use of a placebo so that people don’t alter their mindsets or behaviors as a result of knowing they received the treatment, quality RCTs ensure that any significant difference in the total number of deaths among the people who receive and don’t receive a treatment is, in fact, caused by the treatment. This eliminates subjective judgments about the root causes of death, which is a major point of contention with C-19 vaccines.
Unlike other data which can be easily manipulated through statistical tampering, all-cause mortality in RCTs is straightforward and solid. If an RCT is large enough and properly conducted, a simple tally of all deaths among people who receive and don’t receive a treatment proves whether the treatment saves more lives than it takes.
Underscoring all of the above facts, medical textbooks and journals explain that:
- RCTs are “the pinnacle in clinical design.”
- RCTs are “the best way to study the safety and efficacy of new treatments.”
- “the act of randomisation in a large” RCT “balances participant characteristics (both observed and unobserved) between the groups, allowing attribution of any differences in outcome to the intervention.”
In this case, the “intervention” is FDA-approved Covid vaccines, and the “outcome” is death. That vital data was gathered in RCTs involving 72,663 adults and older children for the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. However, the FDA presented these results in a place and manner likely to be overlooked, and no major media outlet has covered them.
The results reveal that 70 people died during the Moderna and Pfizer trials, including 37 who received Covid vaccines and 33 who did not. Combined with the fact that half of the study participants were given vaccinations and the other half were given placebos, these crucial results provide no indication that the vaccines save more lives than they take.
Accounting for sampling margins of error—as is common for medical journals and uncommon for the media—the results demonstrate with 95% confidence that:
- neither of the vaccines decreased or increased the absolute risk of death by any more than 0.08% over the course of the trials.
- the vaccines could prevent up to two deaths or cause up to three deaths per year among every 1,000 people.
Importantly, those results:
- apply to adults and older children averaged as a group, and the vaccines’ benefits and risks can vary considerably for each individual.
- don’t apply beyond the timeframes of the studies, which were limited to several months.
- don’t apply to people who were excluded from the studies, including those who are severely ill, previously had Covid-19, or have an immune disorder like HIV.
- don’t apply to the currently dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant (Omicron).
Just Facts asked four Ph.D. scholars with contrasting views about Covid vaccines and who specialize in the disciplines addressed in this research to critically review it. Among those who did so, they assessed it as follows:
- Jessica Rose, Ph.D. in Computational Biology, Postdoctorate in Molecular Biology, Postdoctorate in Biochemistry: “I rarely have nothing to say when I read something with regard to corrections, but this is accurate and well written.”
- Rodney Sturdivant, Ph.D. in Biostatistics, Director of the Statistical Consulting Center at Baylor University: “The facts, so well laid out in this article, are a call for a very careful review and more study before future shots are recommended. All statisticians and scientists should be demanding better from the FDA.”
The FDA’s Diversion
Despite the import of all-cause mortality, the FDA completely ignored this measure in its press releases announcing approvals of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Moreover, the FDA presented the all-cause mortality figures 20+ pages into technical documents alongside the following statements that distract from their implications:
- Pfizer: “From Dose 1 through the March 13, 2021 data cutoff date, there were a total of 38 deaths, 21 in the Comirnaty [vaccine] group and 17 in the placebo group. None of the deaths were considered related to vaccination.” (Emphasis added.)
- Moderna: “There were 32 deaths during the blinded phase of the study: 16 deaths in the vaccine group, and 16 in the placebo group. None of the unsolicited AEs [adverse events] leading to death were considered vaccine-related.” (Emphasis added.)
Those statements are highly subjective and divert naive readers from the fact that only the total number of deaths in each group can determine whether the vaccines save more lives than they take. This is precisely why medical journals call all-cause mortality the most “objective,” “relevant,” “significant,” and “important” outcome—not deaths considered related to the treatment.
Again, RCTs eliminate the need for subjective judgments like the FDA made in those statements. This is especially important for vaccines since there are untold ways in which they can alter the risk of death beyond direct effects like preventing Covid-19 or causing cardiac events, embolisms, fevers, and seizures.
For example, many fatal car accidents are triggered by fatigue, and the Pfizer and Moderna RCTs found that 70–72% of subjects under the age of 55 reported “fatigue” after receiving the vaccine. There is no objective way to account for all such risks and benefits except by measuring all-cause mortality in RCTs.
Even with direct connections, determining whether a vaccine contributed to a death is often inconclusive. As explained in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research, “when diseases and deaths occur shortly after vaccination with an mRNA vaccine, it can never be definitively determined, even with a full investigation, that the vaccine reaction was not a proximal cause.”
Likewise, the British Medical Journal reported in January 2021 that the Norwegian Medicines Agency investigated the deaths of 13 “very frail elderly patients” which occurred “shortly after receiving” the Pfizer C-19 vaccine and “concluded that common adverse reactions of mRNA vaccines, such as fever, nausea, and diarrhea, may have contributed to fatal outcomes in some of the frail patients.” Yet, the medical director of the agency stated, “There is no certain connection between these deaths and the vaccine.”
Measuring all-cause mortality in RCTs removes that uncertainty, which makes the FDA’s diversion and the media’s failure to report these results all-the-more troublesome.
Inferior Studies
While downplaying and ignoring the most objective data, media outlets, government agencies, and large corporations have touted studies that are rife with assumptions and plagued by fatal flaws. For a prime example, more than 100 such entities publicized the results of a study from the Commonwealth Fund which estimated that C-19 vaccinations prevented about 279,000 deaths and 1.25 million hospitalizations in the U.S. by the end of June 2021.
Those figures were calculated by comparing “observed” Covid-19 trends to a “model,” a type of study design that “rests upon a host of simplifying assumptions” and “cannot be fully” representative of the real world, as admitted by a medical journal that published a similar study.
Another class of subpar study results uncritically parroted by the media comes from “observational studies.” These are studies which observe the outcomes of people “in the wild” who have not been randomly assigned a certain treatment. As a medical journal explains, such studies can “rarely” determine the effects of a treatment because a host of other factors are at play.
For instance, observing the death rates of people who are vaccinated and unvaccinated against C-19 cannot prove whether the vaccines are more helpful than harmful because the odds of death are impacted by numerous factors like these:
- People who are deathly ill or even temporarily ill tend not to get vaccinated, a phenomenon described in medical journals as “healthy vaccinee bias.”
- Older people—who are more likely to die than younger people—have much higher C-19 vaccination rates than younger people.
- Immunocompromised people—who have conditions like cancer and HIV that increase their risk of death—are “plausibly more likely to be offered and seek vaccination” because they are very vulnerable to C-19.
Researchers commonly use statistical techniques to “control” for such variables, but these methods cannot rule out the possibility that other factors are at play. Also, the techniques used to perform such analyses are prone to pitfalls.
The root weakness of observational studies is that they can only measure associations, and association does not prove causation. Although commonly taught in high school math, this vital fact of medical and social science is routinely ignored by commentators, journalists, Ph.D.’s, and government agencies like the CDC.
Highlighting the necessity of measuring all-cause mortality and the fact that observational studies cannot match the reliability of RCTs:
- a 2013 article in JAMA Internal Medicine documents that 80% of “traditional RCTs” measure “mortality, a hard and important end point.”
- a 2018 paper in the European Heart Journal compares RCT and non-RCT studies on drugs to prevent heart failure and finds that:
- the observational studies routinely conflict with the RCTs.
- “it is not possible to make reliable therapeutic inferences from observational associations.”
- RCTs “clearly remain the best guide to the treatment of patients.”
- a 2005 paper in JAMA Internal Medicine presents a “systematic review of randomized controlled trials” on treatments for people hospitalized with uncommon types of pneumonia and reports, “Although mortality is the most significant outcome in a potentially lethal infection, all studies chose clinical failure as their primary outcome. This end point is subjective and should be studied with care. Our review clearly demonstrates its potential for bias.”
- the medical book Principles and Practice of Clinical Research documents that:
- “while consistency in the findings of a large number of observational studies can lead to the belief that the associations are causal, this belief is a fallacy.”
- “a well-designed” RCT “overcomes the major weaknesses of all other types of study designs….”
- a commentary published by the British Medical Journal in October 2020 explains:
- “Sixty years after influenza vaccination became routinely recommended for people aged 65 or older in the US, we still don’t know if vaccination lowers mortality” because “randomised trials with this outcome have never been done.”
- “Observational studies with results in both directions can be cited, and without definitive randomised evidence the debate will go on.”
- “Unless we act now, we risk repeating this sorry state of affairs with Covid-19 vaccines.”
None of this means that models and observational studies are clinically useless. They can illuminate paths for additional research, and in rare cases where their results are mathematically and logically overwhelming, they can estimate the effects of a treatment. However, their results should be taken with a grain of salt, especially if there are RCTs to the contrary.
Underpowered?
Some may argue that the Moderna and Pfizer RCTs were “underpowered,” a medical term for clinical trials that don’t enroll enough participants to detect an effect. However, Moderna enrolled more than 30,000 people in its RCT, Pfizer enrolled more than 40,000, and an additional 10 deaths in the Pfizer vaccine group—or only 0.05% of the vaccinees—would have shown with 95% confidence that the vaccine costs lives on net.
Moderna and Pfizer could have made their RCTs larger, leaving little doubt as to whether the vaccines save more lives than they take, but the companies chose not to do this. In September 2020 after months of people “campaigning for greater openness,” Covid vaccine manufacturers released important information about the designs of their RCTs. Summarizing these plans, the British Medical Journal reported that the studies were not designed to “determine whether they can interrupt transmission of the virus” or “detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths.”
Explaining why Moderna chose to construct a study that couldn’t determine if its vaccine saves lives, Tal Zaks, the company’s chief medical officer claimed that “too many would die waiting for the results before we ever knew” if the vaccine “prevents mortality.” He also declared that it would cost $5–10 billion dollars to conduct a trial big enough to measure the impact on death and said:
I think the public purse and operational capabilities and capacities we have are rightly spent not betting the farm on one vaccine, but, as Operation Warp is trying to do, making sure that we’re funding several vaccines in parallel.
The first of those excuses is transparently false, as Moderna could have included more participants in the study at the same time. It is also self-contradicting, as Zaks can’t know if “too many would die waiting” if he doesn’t know that the vaccine “prevents mortality.” Furthermore, C-19 vaccine study results are reviewed on a rolling basis, allowing people to act on the available data without waiting for the final results.
Zak’s second excuse is belied by the fact that the U.S. government has enacted six “Covid relief” laws with a total cost of about $5.3 trillion, or 530 times Zaks’ upper-end estimate. Including the money spent by other nations, a handful of $10 billion studies is a relative drop in the bucket.
Larger studies would have narrowed the sampling margins of error and provided more resolution about whether the vaccines save more lives than they cost, but even the current studies are large enough to show with 95% confidence that the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines did not decrease or increase the absolute risk of death by any more than 0.08% over the course of the trials.
Longer-Term Effects
All studies have their limitations, and a major one of the Moderna and Pfizer RCTs is that most of the participants were enrolled for only several months after their second dose of the vaccine. For Moderna, this period was a median of four months, and for Pfizer, it was an average of 3.3 months.
Here again, this weakness of the studies is a direct result of choices made by the vaccine manufacturers. That’s because Pfizer and Moderna began removing people from their RCTs through a process called “unblinding” as they became eligible to receive the vaccines under “local recommendations.”
Those decisions were made in defiance of guidance issued by a global association of 24 healthcare regulatory agencies called the International Coalition of Medicines Regulatory Authorities. This group includes the FDA and its counterparts in Canada, Australia, China, France, Germany, Mexico, Japan, Nigeria, India, and other nations.
In a statement released in November 2020, this international coalition of government agencies made the following points (and others) about why longer-term RCTs are necessary for C-19 vaccines:
- “To determine that the benefit of a vaccine outweighs its potential risk, regulators need robust and convincing evidence of the safety and efficacy that is obtained from well-designed randomised and controlled trials.”
- “Thus, continued evaluation of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated” participants “for as long as feasible will provide invaluable information.”
- Such information includes but is not limited to “additional and more precise information on longer-term safety,” “potential risks of vaccine-induced enhanced disease,” and “whether protection against Covid-19 disease wanes over time.”
- “Therefore, unless maintaining participants in their randomised treatment groups (vaccinated or control) after a vaccine is approved is clearly infeasible, we recommend that clinical trials should proceed as initially planned with a follow-up of at least one year or more from completion of assigned doses.”
Pfizer and Moderna flouted that guidance, and the journal BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine reported in July 2021 that “placebo controlled follow-up, originally planned for 2 years in many trials, was eliminated after a few months, when manufacturers began offering vaccine to placebo recipients within weeks of receiving emergency use authorisations.”
Decisions to hastily end the RCTs also:
- hindered their ability to detect any effects of herd immunity as the broader society became vaccinated.
- prevent everyone from knowing with certainty how the vaccines protect against recent SARS-CoV-2 variants because the trials ended before Delta became common and before Omicron emerged.
- have proven to be ill-advised given that a wide range of studies are finding that the immunity conferred by the current C-19 vaccines wanes over time, such as:
Since all of those are observational studies, they don’t have the surety of RCTs and are therefore tentative. This is precisely why Dr. Doran Fink, Deputy Director of the FDA’s Division of Vaccines and Related Products Applications, warned at an FDA committee meeting in October 2020:
Once a decision is made to unblind an ongoing placebo-controlled trial, that decision cannot be walked back. And that controlled follow up is lost forever.
Medical ethics require that RCTs be barred or ended if they would undoubtedly harm people. Thus, some allege that the RCTs should have been shortened based on their findings that the vaccines have large and statistically significant effects on reducing the risk of severe Covid-19. The Pfizer RCT, for example, found that the vaccine decreases the incidence of severe Covid-19 among people aged 16 and older by 70.9% to 100.0% (with 95% confidence).
However, those results don’t account for any side effects of the vaccines or whether their benefits wane over time. Moreover, the all-cause mortality data provided no indication that the vaccines were saving more lives than they cost.
What the RCTs Can’t Reveal
One of the most dangerous errors in medicine is interpreting the results of studies more broadly than the evidence warrants. This is called “overgeneralizing,” and academic works on applied statistics warn that “researchers in the behavioral and social sciences almost always want to make inferences beyond their samples,” but this practice “is always risky,” especially when the study subjects are “drastically different” from the people to whom the results are applied.
Media outlets often foster such deadly misinterpretations by failing to report the limits and caveats of studies. A prime example is the main Pfizer and Moderna RCTs that yielded the all-cause mortality data and the widely trumpeted results that the vaccines are more than 90% effective in preventing Covid-19. Beyond the fact that the RCTs were limited to several months, both of them excluded people:
- who are very vulnerable to C-19, like those who are severely ill or have certain immune disorders.
- who are highly resistant to Covid-19 because they previously had the disease and now have natural acquired immunity to it.
Thus, it is extremely important to realize that even though the Covid vaccines did not decrease or increase the absolute risk of death by any more than 0.08% over the course of the RCTs, this only applies to the pre-Omicron era and generally healthy adults who don’t yet have naturally acquired immunity.
Moreover, that result is merely an average, and the benefits and risks of the vaccines could vary widely depending upon factors like weight, age, sex, and a host of other variables. For instance, the risk of being harmed by Covid-19 greatly declines at younger ages, while the major known risks of the vaccine increase.
Summary
On February 5, 2022, President Biden tweeted, “Here’s the deal: Unvaccinated individuals are 97 times more likely to die compared to those who are boosted.” This claim—which Biden did not support but seems to be a gross distortion of a bogus statistic from CDC director Rochelle Walensky—clashes with the most objective, relevant, and important evidence on this matter.
That evidence consists of two large RCTs for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, which were the FDA’s main basis for approving them. These studies involved 72,663 generally healthy adults and older children in the pre-Delta/Omicron era who didn’t yet have naturally acquired immunity to C-19. After half of the subjects were randomly given a vaccine and the other half a placebo, 37 people died who received a vaccine, and 33 died who received a placebo.
On a superficial basis, these figures suggest that the vaccines increased the relative risk of death by 13%. However, the death rate in both groups was so small (0.1%) that the difference between them is statistically insignificant. More specifically, the results demonstrate with 95% confidence that:
- neither of the vaccines decreased or increased the absolute risk of death by any more than 0.08%.
- the vaccines could prevent up to two deaths or cause up to three deaths per year among every 1,000 people.
In short, the strongest available evidence shows no indication that the mRNA Covid vaccines save more lives than they take. However, the benefits and risks of the vaccines can vary greatly for each individual.
March 14, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine |
Leave a comment
Some disturbing findings hidden in the reluctantly released data
After a Texan court ordered the FDA to release the documents used to approve the covid vaccine the first 150 documents have now been published. These include the medical notes for a selection of patients at five different trial sites. Sonia Elijah has carried out part 1 of a forensic analysis of the patient notes and noted some disturbing findings, for a number of patients.
The story of patient 11281009 is just one example. Patient 11281009 was a white male who would have turned 66 years of age in 2020. By piecing together the entries in the system and the audit log querying errors in those entries it is possible to recreate a timeline of events (see below).
In summary, after two doses of either vaccine or placebo by 9th August, he presented to the emergency room with cough and shortness of breath. This presentation was recorded as suspected covid. He had a myocardial infarction and developed a pneumonia during his stay. No details of covid testing were recorded but the family reported a single negative test taken during his hospital stay. He was discharged home where he died sometime between the end of October and beginning of February. No explanation was given for why hospital treatment was abandoned; remember you had to be “healthy” to enroll in the trial. The death certificate was said to have recorded the cause of death as “pneumonia”.
His last contact with the trial site was 16th September 2020. The trial protocol included participants having an app on their device to enter any covid-like symptoms but there is no entry of this in trial medical record. His family phoned the site on or around 8th December and relayed the details of his last weeks. These were entered in a “potential covid 19 form” by the site. However, the date of this entry was after death. For this reason all the details of the clinician’s concerns around him having had covid were expunged retrospectively from his records in the trial.
To reiterate, this patient had a cough, shortness of breath and presented to hospital with suspected covid, developed pneumonia, died of it and all records of this presentation except hospitalisation then death from “due to infection” were removed from the trial.
The inability to ensure accurate records are kept and to test people with suspected covid raises real concerns about the accuracy of the trial data. Even after 6 months, up to March 2021, only 2.2% of people enrolled in the trial were said to have had covid. However, there were 3410 cases of “suspected covid” (7.3% of the vaccine arm and 8.4% of the placebo arm). For comparison, Public Health England estimated that 15% of the population had had covid over the year up to end of March 2021, based on antibody testing which may underestimate the total. Why enroll 44,000 people into a trial and then fail to diagnose the disease of interest? How much bias was introduced by failure to test?
We recommend you read the timeline of events below. It tells a disquieting story and as yet, we do not know how many other details of the trial might ultimately be seen as ‘troubling’ at best. With billions of dollars at stake, involving the company who once paid a fine of $2.3 billion, $1.3 billion of which was a criminal fine, let us not be naive enough to think that ‘health and well-being of the nations’ was Pfizer’s primary goal in their rushed product roll-out.
TIMELINE
27th July 2020: Pfizer selects molecule for testing.
31st July 2020: He was screened, consented, enrolled, randomized, swabbed and injected with a first dose. This may have been placebo or vaccine. Something odd happened with his consent which was described as “unknown or N/A” (see pg 352) but marked a “obtained” eventually.
19th August 2020: He had a further nasal swab and received a second dose.
Nothing is then entered in the record until 8th December. When this entry appears:
27th October 2020: He had a Myocardial Infarction and was hospitalized. This was recorded as a serious adverse event. In response to the question “Is this event related to treatment?” was the response “Not related. Due to – other – failed cardiac stent.”
28th October 2020: The following day he remained in hospital with life threatening pneumonia. In response to “Is this event related to treatment?” was the response “Not related. Due to – other – infection.”
At some point between the end of October and 9th December 2020 the patient died at home (pg 333). The entry saying he died at home is still in the audit trail but the form where this information was uploaded is not present in the patient record. The cause of death was entered on 13th January 2021 as “pneumonia”. There is no record of the length of hospital stay or why he was discharged before death.
18th Nov 2020: Pfizer published a press release claiming over 94% efficacy of the vaccine.
2nd December 2020: MHRA authorises vaccine for emergency supply.
8th December 2020: Four issues were raised.
- That the adverse event had been recorded as “fatal” but no death form was recorded (pg 349).
- No serious adverse event number had been entered for either the myocardial infarction or the pneumonia (pg 345)
- It was suggested that the myocardial infarction entry should be changed from a serious adverse event to a “worsening adverse event” on the basis that he had had a previous myocardial infarction in 2017 (pg 337).
- It was noted that the serious adverse event had been marked as “recovered or resolved” in the safety database despite the death of the patient (pg 341).
9th December 2020: The file is marked as “discontinued”.
13th December 2020: The gentleman’s relatives telephone the centre to tell them about the lead up to his death (pg 301 to 303). It seems someone is unsure how to enter this information and is advised:
“Potential COVID-19 related PNEUMONIA should have please triggered a COVID Illness Visit irrespective of perceived etiology or clinical significance. Please complete the COVID-19 CRF forms. Please complete the potential COVID-19 Illness Visit CRF forms with all information available. Should be captured only on the SOD CRF form and a NASAL SWAB will not be collected. Please the data should still be captured on the appropriate CRF pages (as for any late data, we will still capture it and not ignore it) but a swab will not be required” (pg 345-6)
14th December 2020: The person wanting to record this information opens up a “potential covid 19 visit form”. The audit trail then spits out a complaint that no swab was taken, no sign or symptom form was completed and this form was dated after the file had been discontinued. Someone patiently filled out the explanation that the patient was deceased and these were not possible for each of these entries.
The audit trail shows that the data entered on this date included that the patient had a cough, shortness of breath but no loss of smell or taste, diarrhoea or vomiting, (pg 308) and had been seen in the emergency room (pg 324) for a “potential covid 19 illness” (pg 329).
31st Dec 2020: Pfizer released their NEJM paper of the trial results. No covid deaths were reported to have taken place.
19th January 2021: Query raised that the covid illness form was dated 14th December 2020 after the subjects death. The site responded to this saying,
“The symptoms were reported to site after subject’s death via subject’s family, per medical monitor, this data is to be entered.”
22nd January 2021: He was due to be unblinded in the trial and offered a vaccination if he had been in the placebo arm.
26th January 2021: The site were told:
“There cannot be a date later than the date of death. Please remove data from the COVID Illness visit and add COUGH and SHORTNESS OF BREATH as AEs… COVID_A visit should then be marked as ERRONEOUS.”
28th and 29th January 2021: Attendances for nasal swab and antibody testing were marked up individually as “not applicable” and then an entry stated that he had “withdrawn consent” presumably to prevent these repeated requests for more data.
15th February 2021: The site were told:
“For correct attribution of Pneumonia; please update AE term to COVID Pneumonia or Pneumonia secondary to COVID-19 else clarify as per guidance from Clinical Monitor” (pg 344)
And
“We need to remove the COVID Illness visit which was originally requested. Please mark Erroneous and remove the data from within the visit using FORM Level comments of NOT APPLICABLE.” (pg 299)
27th February 2021: The site responded:
“SITE HAS NOT BEEN MADE AWARE THIS EVENT WAS COVID PNEUMONIA. PER PI PNEUMONIA WAS RELATED TO INFECTION, HOWEVER SITE HAS NO RECORDS THAT STATE COVID, THEREFORE TERM CANNOT BE UPDATED TO SUCH.” (pg 344)
2nd March 2021: “Site has not received MR (medical record) and cannot confirm a COVID test was done, however per family of subject, there was a negative COVID done, sometime during hospital stay, not sure which day or which test.” (pg 316)
March 13, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | COVID-19 Vaccine, FDA, United States |
Leave a comment
This is normalized, monetized, and usually publicly-funded
Let’s talk about the big picture of Pharma’s war against humanity. It is happening throughout the developed world but for the purposes of this article I will focus on data from the U.S.
🚩 FDA-approved drugs, when used as directed, kill about 100,000 Americans every year. (Gøtzsche, 2013, p. 259).
🚩 Hospital errors kill another 100,000 to 150,000 Americans every year. (Makary & Daniel, 2016).
🚩 Opioid overdoses killed 75,693 Americans last year (CDC, 2021).
🚩 Coronavirus shots killed an estimated 150,000 Americans in 2021 (Kirsch, Rose, and Crawford, 2021).
🚩 A gain-of-function virus created in a bioweapons lab in Wuhan, China funded by Tony Fauci killed 350,831 Americans in 2020 and another 615,387 Americans since the introduction of Covid-19 shots in Dec. 2020. About 90% of those fatalities could have been prevented with early treatment. But the regulatory agencies and the medical establishment blocked access to early treatment in order to create the market for deadly Covid-19 shots.
To put this in perspective — in World War II, the Nazis, the Royal Italian Army, and the Imperial Japanese Army killed 405,399 Americans in the space of four years.
In the last two years, Pharma, the corrupt medical establishment, and the captured regulatory agencies are killing about twice that many Americans each year.
That’s what we are up against.
So the problem is not a few bad actors (although there are plenty of those). The problem is that the entire system is rotten:
🚩 The pharmaceutical industry makes terrible products. Political capture is more profitable than innovation, so that’s what they do. The captured regulatory agencies — FDA, CDC, NIAID, NIH — engage in data laundering to make pharmaceutical products appear better than they are. Iatrogenic fatalities are just the tip of the iceberg. Pharmaceutical products also cause cancer, disability, and chronic illness.
🚩 Profit-driven hospitals with their military hierarchy and cult-like work practices are dangerous places.
🚩 The pharmaceutical industry is committing genocide via opioids in economically depressed towns throughout the rust-belt and Appalachia — because it is profitable to do so and because they see poor people as undesirable and expendable.
🚩 The pharmaceutical industry has engaged in genocide via the childhood vaccination schedule since they received liability protection in 1986 — because creating chronic illness in kids is their core business model.
🚩 Under the guise of Covid, the pharmaceutical industry has expanded the genocide to all Americans and people throughout the developed world — by blocking access to effective treatments and injecting people with dangerous genetically modified substances.
🚩 All of bourgeois society — academia, the media, the medical and scientific establishment, government, and Wall Street — conspire to cover up these crimes that now impact nearly every American family in some way.
When we take power we must dismantle this system, prosecute those who created it, and build a decentralized alternative based on actual health.
March 13, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | CDC, Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, FDA, NIAID, NIH, United States |
Leave a comment
Drug harm reporting systems, like the MHRA’s yellow card system, are designed to alert the regulator to a potential issue. They are not designed to measure the size of the problem. If an issue is highlighted then the regulator has a responsibility to carry out an audit and see whether the incidence of the condition of concern has been higher than historical levels in the population who were vaccinated.
The Government appears to be treating the yellow card reports as if they are a record of every occurrence of a condition in the country, comparing the number of reports with background levels in the whole population. It is well known that reporting systems only capture a fraction of cases and it is very odd that the Government is treating this data as comprehensive.
As an example, let’s take Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) which is a rare condition where the immune system attacks the nervous system. It is usually caused by a viral infection but has been attributed to vaccination adverse reactions in the past. There are 1,300 cases every year and 608 cases have been reported on the yellow card system.
A study by Hanson et al in the USA of 10 million patients showed that in the first 21 days after the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine the rates of GBS were 15 times higher than expected levels. Extrapolating from this figure we would expect 500 AZ vaccine related cases in the UK. There have been a total of 488 reported in the yellow card system but it is not clear whether these were within 3 weeks of vaccination.
In a three week period we would expect 29 background cases to have occurred co-incidentally. Based on the Hanson data of 500 cases after 24.9 million doses, the cause of someone having GBS within 3 weeks of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine would be the vaccine 95% of the time and coincidental 5% of the time. The morally right thing to do for these people, is to accept that they have been vaccine injured and be wrong 5% of the time rather than claim these were coincidental and be wrong 95% of the time.
The Government appears to want to claim coincidence. A few of these patients have filed claims with the Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme. None of the claimants have been helped, even patients whose deaths have been investigated at inquest and where a coroner has determined the vaccine as the cause of death. When rolling out a £12bn vaccine programme it is naive not to set aside a budget for vaccine injury. The current claims system requires proof of “60% disability”, a ‘proof of cause’ and does not compensate for lost earnings or costs of care. Maria Caulfield, the minister for patient safety and primary care, said that they were employing people to look through the claimant’s medical records for a “causal link” as if vaccines write confession notes. Surely, this is the real waste of public funds and seems to point to a reluctance to compensate deserving victims.
March 13, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, Human rights, UK |
Leave a comment
As I described in my last article, the California Democratic Party and the Democratic National Committee have embraced the Pan Doctrine that is junk-science-eugenic-fascism with the added twist that they want everyone to be chronically ill in order to enrich their largest donors. This particular political machine works right up until the point at which the entire society collapses — which is fast approaching.
So what’s the alternative to the Pan Doctrine?
Actual Science.
What are the elements of actual science in connection with our current debate? These are the principles that came to mind for me but I imagine you’ll be able to add many more:
1. Nullius in verba which means “take nobody’s word for it.” Secondary sources are not a valid epistemology. One must read original source documents. Examine data and evidence. Draw your own conclusions. Think for yourself. Escape information bubbles and transcend dogma. Morality and ethics are vital. Skepticism, disinterestedness, transparency, and rigorous debate are the hallmarks of good science. Reductionism, censorship, and conflicts of interest are fatal to good science.
2. Civil engineers, not vaccines, produced the large gains in life expectancy over the 20th century. About 90% of the decline in infectious disease mortality among U.S. children occurred before the introduction of mass vaccination campaigns (Guyer et al. 2000). The large gains in life expectancy over the twentieth century were mostly the result of the construction of water and sewer systems, improvements in food safety, hand washing, improvements in housing, and reduced overcrowding in U.S. cities.
3. The best vaccine safety data set in the world shows that all vaccines on the U.S. childhood schedule produce more harms than benefits. The data show that only a few live attenuated vaccines produce more benefits than harms (oral polio, measles by itself, and tuberculosis) in regions where these viruses are endemic. None of those vaccines are available in the U.S. However, all live virus vaccines eventually revert to virulence and cause outbreaks of the disease that they are trying to protect against. The harms from coronavirus shots far exceed any benefits.
4. The human immune system is wondrous, more sophisticated than any man-made product, and not well understood by so-called “experts”. When our bodies need extra support, nature has given us a wide array of tools for treating disease. Community, a sense of connection, and meaning are key to health too. Allopathic medicine has a role to play in emergency treatment but over the long run the largest gains in health often come from lifestyle changes. Toxicants play a huge role in disease but they are poorly studied because government is captured by industry.
5. Science, technology, class, health, sex, wealth, and power are interwoven. From medieval witch trials through today, the wisest healers are often persecuted and the most effective treatments are often suppressed. Pure objectivity is impossible because the observer is always part of the world that is being observed. Science is always changing. Institutions exist to reproduce themselves. The purpose of the pharmaceutical industry is to enrich shareholders. It is essential to take personal responsibility for one’s own health.
Those are my initial thoughts.
March 13, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine, Human rights |
Leave a comment
This past week saw two high-profile Australians – cricketer Shane Warne and Labour senator Kimberley Kitching – both die of sudden heart attacks aged 52.
As such, heart disease is back in the headlines. Again.
We predicted in our new-years post that explaining heart attacks would be a big part of 2022’s news cycle, and only three months in it has been a torrent.
It actually started in December of 2021, with medical doctors theorising that the stress and anxiety of dealing with Covid was going to cause a huge spike in heart problems due to “post-pandemic stress disorder”.
Before the end of January, the media were reporting that aortic stenosis was actually massively under-diagnosed and we could see up to 300,000 new cases of heart disease or damage in the near future.
At the beginning of February, a new reason was added to the list. As energy prices began to spike – do remember, that happened before the war – we were told the increased cold and stress could also cause heart disease.
Then, in mid-February scientific papers appeared claiming that “even a mild case of COVID” causes your “heart attack risk to soar”.
In short, and for many reasons, you’re much more likely to have a heart attack this year than you were last year.
Well, now the Sydney Morning Herald has joined in, with this article headlined “‘This is our biggest killer’: Shock deaths put spotlight on heart disease”, which warns:
The shock deaths of cricketer Shane Warne and Senator Kimberley Kitching should serve as a wake-up call to Australians about the prevalence of heart disease, doctors say, as a study shows COVID-19 may increase the risk for what was already one of the nation’s biggest killers.
Yes, having had covid – even if you just tested positive and had no symptoms – makes it more likely you’ll have a heart attack.
On top of that, warn the doctors quoted in the article, thousands of people will have missed their heart screenings due to lockdown, or have been sedantry and gained weight, not to mention the anxiety and stress.
All in all, Australians can expect a “rise in preventable heart disease deaths over the next five years”, according to health modellers.
But don’t worry, none of that is anything to do with the untested vaccines they’ve injected into literally millions of people.
Yes, all the major Covid vaccines are known to have “rare” side effects that impact the heart, such as blood clots and myocarditis, but clearly, that’s just a coincidence.
After all, the Sydney Morning Herald article doesn’t even use the word “vaccine”, not one single time. And they wouldn’t ignore anything that important, would they?
March 12, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | COVID-19 Vaccine |
Leave a comment
During 24 harsh months of lockdowns, masking, mandates and segregation, the establishment media are trying to spin as “unintended” the serious and often life-threatening fallout from those policies — whether vaccine injuries, economic devastation, spiking child suicidality or the increase in babies and toddlers in need of speech therapy.
The most strenuous form of critique the media seem able to muster is to tell policymakers to apologize for “getting COVID wrong.”
Early on, Children’s Health Defense and other independent voices forcefully called out the government’s sub-rosa agenda as a deliberate, multisectoral effort spearheaded by central bankers and billionaire technocrats to ensnare the world in a global control grid — in other words, modern-day digital slavery.
Viewed from this angle, the “separate mind-boggling events” of the past two years “line up as sequential moves on a worldwide chessboard.”
Restrictive COVID policies and strange central bank maneuvers were no accident but rather the tools of a planned economic takedown of the most vibrant and independent segments of the economy, notably the small “retail, arts and entertainment, personal services, food services and hospitality businesses” that, together with other small business sectors, have “pretty much driven most economic activity throughout our known history.”
The takedown, amounting to what organizations such as Oxfam called “economic violence,” permitted the “biggest asset transfer ever.”
Even before this purposeful economic havoc, the developed world’s richest denizens were living at least 10 to 15 years longer than the world’s poorest.
When experimental injections were added in December 2020 to the mix of COVID interventions, the takedown began taking on even more gruesome dimensions.
Discussing far-reaching vaccine fraud allegedly perpetrated by Pfizer, acting in cahoots with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, former BlackRock investor Edward Dowd has said:
“I think this is the greatest crime ever committed because most of the frauds I’ve been involved with are financial frauds where money’s lost; This has killed and maimed people.”
On March 1, shortly after a board member of German insurance company BKK ProVita expressed public alarm at the widespread killing and maiming — noting that Germany’s federal health agency was underreporting COVID vaccine injuries by a factor of 10 — the executive was summarily fired.
Prominent physician Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, who blazed a hopeful trail with his inexpensive and successful COVID treatment protocol, bluntly characterized the toxic jabs as instruments of “premeditated first-degree murder and genocide.”
Empty words and gestures
Of late, policymakers seem to have decided it’s time for some crocodile tears — and also time to make a show of putting a few COVID restrictions on hold.
For example, consider the recent remarks by Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Walensky said health officials “had perhaps too little caution and too much optimism” about the COVID shots.
For those paying attention, there can be little doubt these words and gestures are less about a policy one-eighty than about window dressing and distraction — as well as perhaps a clever move to “undercut” the momentum of the People’s Convoy currently demanding an end to all emergency measures.
As Jon Rappoport warned, “Although some governments … are lifting COVID restrictions and mandates, we should remember they still hold the power to re-impose those measures at the drop of a hat — for any reason they cook up.”
The key takeaway of the last two years, Rappoport clarified, is that governments’ COVID actions were expedient political decisions — designed to “advance tyranny” — and had “nothing to do with science or morality.”
New York City’s recent actions exemplify the duplicity of the policy rollbacks and the steady behind-the-scenes march of the control agenda. Remember — officials there willingly spent two years gutting the city’s famed restaurants, other small businesses and cultural institutions.
Now, while announcing an easing up of restrictions out of one side of his mouth, the new mayor fired almost 1,500 unvaccinated municipal workers, is insisting on continuing to mask 3- and 4-year-olds (defying widespread parental objections) and is advising businesses they “can still choose to require proof of vaccination.”
Maryland is another jurisdiction that has been indifferent to the distress caused by its policies, ignoring, for example, a leading trade group’s warning that politicians’ capricious on-again, off-again restrictions — promoted as protecting “well-being” — would permanently close four in 10 of the state’s restaurants.
In the state’s largest city, the Baltimore government is suddenly reopening some government services and lifting masking edicts. Yet at the same time, the prominent Baltimore Sun is beating the drum for joint COVID and influenza vaccine mandates.
In thinly veiled praise for coercion and segregation, the Sun argued, “employers and municipalities can certainly require flu vaccinations in order to engage in certain activities.”
Policy hypocrisy is also alive and well internationally. While the World Health Organization (WHO) issues parameters for “carefully relaxing the rules” — parameters so narrow as to be meaningless — Italy and China (the two countries that set the global precedent for lockdowns) are fining individuals who decline mandated interventions or denying them entry to workplaces, restaurants, stores, banks and post offices.
Vaccine passports and digital identities — full speed ahead
As Off-Guardian’s Kit Knightly noted on March 1, “Covid might be dying, but vaccine passports are still very much alive.”
In late February, Knightly also pointed out that the WHO, ominously, is working on an “international treaty on pandemic prevention and preparedness” that would invest the global health organization with the authority to preempt national sovereignty in the management of future pandemics and health challenges.
In a five-part series, Corey Lynn of Corey’s Digs outlined many disturbing implications of the push for vaccine passports. Falsely marketed as a “convenience,” the “passports” eventually will encompass far more than just vaccination records:
“From education to health records, finances, accounts, travel, contact info, and more, will all be linked to your QR code, along with biometrics and fingerprints, then stored on the Blockchain.”
The longer-term aim, said Lynn, is to achieve “full power and control,” down to the individual level, of spending, taxation, education, transportation, food, communications and healthcare, among other domains.
As writer Cherie Zaslawsky sees it, globalists “seek to enslave humanity worldwide in their long-dreamed-of totalitarian utopia. That’s utopia for them — as the ruling class that owns the world and everything in it — and dystopia for We the People.”
Knightly’s March 1 commentary drew readers’ attention to SMART Health Cards — “a covert federal vaccine passport” — rolled out in roughly half the country thus far, including in red states that previously had paid lip service to banning vaccine passports.
Overseen by the Vaccine Credential Initiative (VCI), SMART Health Cards are intended to “issue, share, and validate vaccination records bound to an individual identity” as well as store “other vital medical data.”
A late February article in Forbes boasted that more than 200 million Americans can already “download, print or store their vaccination records as a QR code.”
VCI was created by the federally funded MITRE Corporation (an MIT spin-off), which receives an estimated $2 billion a year from U.S. taxpayers to develop advanced surveillance technology, among other dubious national security pursuits.
MITRE received a $16.3 million CDC contract “to help construct an efficient game plan for the country during the health crisis,” and also spearheaded U.S. Department of Homeland Security efforts to “coordinate” responses among the nation’s mayors and governors.
Members of VCI’s public-private coalition include Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, Oracle, Salesforce, the Mayo Clinic, and the California and New York state governments, as well as “other health and tech heavyweights.” Additional organizations are contributing to the initiative as “data aggregators” and “health IT vendors.”
As an inner-circle member of VCI, New York State has been in the vanguard in building out a digital identity infrastructure intended to be interoperable (able to exchange or assemble data) “throughout the United States and abroad.”
New York’s “Digital Identity” policy, conveniently updated in July 2020, stipulates that citizens, businesses and government employees who conduct online business with the state must go through an “identity vetting” process that could involve authentication via “smart card” or “biometrics.”
Refuse totalitarian tyranny
Almost immediately after the COVID shots began being rolled out, Dr. Mike Yeadon, at one time a chief scientist and vice president at Pfizer, began protesting the push to inject children.
Yeadon also denounced vaccine passports, describing the apps as a sly vehicle for implementing “illegal, medical apartheid” and totalitarian tyranny.
In a more recent talk, Yeadon emphasized that the QR codes’ global interoperability will translate into 24/7 tracking of every person “in that moment, in that spot, down to the individual level.”
To impress upon the public the dangers of allowing a vaccine passport system to take hold, Yeadon described what it would mean to become an “out-person:”
“One example: Your VaxPass pings, instructing you to attend for your 3rd or 4th or 5th booster or variant vaccine. If you don’t, your VaxPass will expire & you’ll become an out-person, unable to access your own life.”
Fortunately, the globalists’ stark vision is becoming increasingly apparent to many members of the public, who are coming to understand, as Ron Paul said, that “authoritarian politicians will always lie to the people to protect and increase their own power.”
Mainstream media outlets also have begun openly worrying that “parents have a long memory when it comes to how their children have been treated.”
And, although it may not seem like it, governmental decisions “ARE affected by what citizens do or don’t do,” said Rappoport, arguing that it’s no time to “let up on pressure.”
The bottom line at this critical juncture is simple — rather than be lulled into complacency (or distraction) by the latest propaganda, just say no and don’t comply.
Don’t wear a mask. Don’t get tested. Don’t accept toxic jabs. And don’t download any QR codes or any other tools (no matter how “convenient”) that allow the build-out of digital tyranny.
© 2022 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.
March 11, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Covid-19, COVID-19 Vaccine, Human rights, United States, WHO |
Leave a comment
According to a speech made by Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi on March 9th, Ukrainian refugees arriving in Italy will be forced to “either agree to have a swab every 48 hours or agree to be vaccinated“ against the coronavirus. A transcript of the speech has been published by the Italian daily Il Tempo. Some Italians have complained that Italian citizens have not been given the swab option, saying that the country’s citizens either get vaccinated or are suspended from work without a salary.
In Iceland, where all Covid-related restrictions have been abandoned, both internally and at the border, the refugees are still required to be tested for COVID-19 infection, according to the General Manager of the Primary Care of the Capital Area. As other travellers are not subject to this requirement, this is clear discrimination against Ukrainian refugees. While no plans of forced vaccination have yet been confirmed nor denied, according to the General Manager, “an emphasis is put on vaccinating them”.
As it has already become clear the vaccination does not protect against the Omicron variant now prevalent, and that the protection against infection may even be negative, there is no medical justification for forcing refugees to get vaccinated, as in Italy, or for cajoling them into it, as seems to be the intention in Iceland.
Only 35% of the Ukrainian population are vaccinated against COVID-19. Scepticism towards the vaccines is high in Ukraine and in August 2021, 56% of the population said they would not get vaccinated against the disease. Being forced to leave your war-torn homeland is bad enough. Being forced or pushed to accept a useless medication you do not trust when you finally arrive at your destination could hardly be described as kind hospitality, or free consent.
Thorsteinn Siglaugsson is an economist who lives in Iceland. Find him on his blog.
March 11, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | COVID-19 Vaccine, European Union, Human rights, Italy |
Leave a comment
Overview
On March 5, “A Midwestern Doctor” (who I will abbreviate as “AMD”) published a long Substack article that meticulously chronicled his/her observations of adverse events (AEs) associated with the COVID vaccine. This is very rare as most doctors are too busy to do such an analysis. Based on the observation of this one doctor alone, the critical event rates are high enough to justify that the vaccines should be immediately halted based on safety concerns.
Background
AMD has to hide his/her identity or he/she will be fired. That’s how the medical system is designed: if you speak against the system, you lose your job. Period.
So to make things easier, I’ll assume AMD is a man.
The AEs documented by AMD were partly from his own patients, but mostly related by people who AMD directly knows. So no more than one step removed: a direct friend of a direct friend.
The results of his analysis (from the Conclusion section of the article):
- Critical Injuries: 41
- Severe Injuries: 39
- Significant Reactions: 32
In AMD’s history, there were no critical injuries for all other vaccines combined. Zero.
But the important part was this statement:
Typically when a drug has between 10-100 critical injuries reported to the FDA, they strongly look at pulling it from the market or giving it a blackbox warning. I thus feel these vaccines are not being held to the adverse reporting standard we expect.
In other words, based on just the data AMD directly collected, the vaccine exceeds the stopping condition.
The numerator and denominator
AMD used more than his own patients: he also used friends of his friends.
AMD’s cases were split: 60% reached out to him with stories and 40% was due to his outreach.
How confident is he that every single case was vaccine related? For half of these cases, there was an extremely strong time correlation or other factors, so he’s extremely confident of a causality link. For the other half of the cases, the causality is extremely likely.
Because his sample includes only the direct friends of his friends, he estimates that the “denominator” in his case is less than 100,000 to be conservative (the average person has around 150 to 250 friends so this is quite conservative). There will be fewer than this due to overlap, but again, we aren’t trying to get to an exact number, just a rough engineering estimate.
AMD’s extended friend pool consists of a mix of vaxxed and unvaxxed people in our calculation. Since he’s a doctor, his mix of vaxxed patients will be higher than others so this may skew our extrapolation to be on the high side, but we are just trying to do a ballpark estimate of what the national rates might look like.
Let’s extrapolate that out to a population of 200M people who are over 18 years old and vax eligible. We’d have to multiply his numbers by 2,000 to get a lower bound on the number of events expected. This isn’t strictly accurate since AMD’s friend base is older and the AEs in the older group would not occur at the same rate as the younger group. So again, not trying to get a a super precise estimate since it isn’t needed as we’ll soon see.
So we have 41*2000 = a minimum of 82,000 estimated critical events caused by the vaccine in our crude estimate.
This is within a factor of 2 of the minimum of 150,000 deaths I’ve previously estimated for the vaccine (using over a dozen different methods). So it appears we were right in that our estimate was conservative. And our crude extrapolation also is well within numbers previously determined so it serves as a crude sanity check that the numbers reported by AMD were “reasonable.”
Comparing with our 10 to 100 critical event stopping condition, we find:
82,000 >> 10 to 100
The stopping condition for the vaccine is met not only from AMD’s direct observations alone (even adjusting a factor of 2 for causality doubts), but also for our conservative (and very crude) estimate of the total number of critical events in the US. QED.
Finally, let’s be clear: I am not claiming that we can extrapolate a single anecdote to an entire population to get an accurate rate estimate. I am only claiming that AMD’s observations alone justify halting the vaccines and that any extrapolation of that number to the entire population based on any reasonable assumptions shows that the stopping condition is exceeded by a large margin.
What other doctors are seeing
AMD polled his colleagues to see if they were seeing the same thing.
- 30% confirmed they were
- 70% said they either saw nothing at all and/or didn’t want to talk about it
He attributes the 70% seeing nothing as them not being aware of the possibility that the vaccines could be unsafe so any adverse reactions are immediately discounted and discarded; they don’t register.
Therefore, even if we further discount our calculation of 82,000 by 70% in the belief that these rates seen by AMD are inflated, the number critically harmed (24,600) is still way over our stopping threshold and that’s really the only thing I wanted to show.
The Pfizer Phase 3 clinical trial
AMD noted that when the shots were administered, people quickly discovered a high rate of anaphylaxis.
He asked, “How could the clinical trial not have found that?”
Indeed. Anaphylaxis wasn’t mentioned at all in the Phase 3 trial report despite the fact that it is life threatening.
It wasn’t mentioned in the 6 month follow up study either. That study would have included reactions of the placebo cohort who got the vaccine.
Anaphylaxis occurs at 2.47 events per 10,000 doses so there should have been around 10 events observed for the full-vaccinated treatment group (44,000 doses) and a similar number of events when the placebo group was vaccinated.
So we should have seen 21 anaphylaxis events on average yet there were none reported. This is extremely unlikely to happen by chance.
How does Pfizer explain that? This is, of course, a rhetorical question as nobody is going to ask them that question and they don’t have to answer it. That’s just the way it works in medicine. You are not allowed to ask questions like this. It’s “science.” We are teaching our kids to believe whatever the drug companies tell them and not ask questions.
One other “highlight”
This comment at the very end of AMD’s article deserves special mention:
Or as another commenter here wrote: I was a Midwestern nurse last year after the gene therapy roll out. Was a case mgr did discharge planning. Saw 10-12 side effects Daily. Everything you shared and more. 2 cases of amnesia ( one was a healthy anesthesiologist). 1 girl in her twenties with blood in her tears. Had to leave that job.
A girl with blood in her tears?!?! When was the last time you saw that?
Notes
In his writeup, AMD made the case write ups deliberately vague in order to protect patient confidentiality.
Reader feedback
Check out this comment on what is happening in Melbourne, Australia mirrors what was described in this article. She explains “doctors are very worried about what they’re seeing from the jabs but keeping quiet to save their jobs.” Makes perfect sense. A doctor’s first duty is to his/her family. I see this all the time. This is why the doctors I talk to stay quiet. I don’t blame them.
Another reader wrote this:
Steve,
I love your work. The physician in the Midwest is right. I am a practicing ophthalmologist in the southeast and have come across multiple catastrophic side effects from the shots. I have been sounding the alarm to my friends and colleagues for over a year. Most of these think I am crazy.
It started last year in roughly March when I walked into a patient’s preposition room to have a mom sign a consent. She apologises to me that she had trouble writing for she had just recently had a stroke. I told her I was glad she was here then asked if she knew what the cause was. “It was that shot” she said. She was in the hospital that night. I then went to the OR and told my CRNA the story. She proceeded to tell me her friends daughter died (39) died with a pulmonary embolus 1 month after getting one. I told this to one of my partners who said his friend was in the hospital with myocarditis after having a shot.
I also know of a physician in a nearby practice dropping dead at 52 with a heart attack. He had recently been vaccinated according to his front desk.
I also know of 3 breast cancer diagnosis after vaccinations as well as a transverse myelitis and a brain stem glioma. All of these had been vaccinated but I cannot say that these were caused by the shots.
One of my parent’s good friend’s son in law died suddenly from a heart attack at 39. He was also recently vaccinated.
In my own practice, I have 3 patients with side effects. 1 with increased intracranial pressure . Almost immediately after the second Pfizer dose the patient started experiencing headaches. I saw the child about a week after and she had swollen optic nerves.
A second had uveitis roughly 2 weeks after the first dose.
A third patient had a “spontaneous “ vitreous hemorrhage within 2 weeks of a dose.
There are some others I know of too…
If I mention these to most doctors, they just look at me with blank stares. I have been ridiculed, reprimanded and threatened for just telling physicians my observations.
These need to be stopped yesterday.
Summary
Based on the number of just this one physician’s observations, the vaccines should be immediately halted.
AMD is not an isolated data point. He discovered that 30% of his colleagues are seeing similar things.
I can also personally confirm that speaking confidentially with other physicians (who fear retribution such as loss of medical licenses if they speak out), that AMD is hardly alone. The doctors I know have never before needed to report an event to VAERS in the past and this year have had 20 and 1,000 case reports to make. They won’t talk to the FDA about what they see because they don’t want to have their licenses revoked.
As AMD’s case shows, the medical community makes it impossible for these doctors to speak freely and tell what they know. Doctors are forced to hide in the shadows to tell their story or simply remain silent.
The days of colleagues having open friendly discussions to resolve conflicts are gone. The medical community now uses fear and intimidation techniques to silence any scientific dissent. For example, in Canada, an entire university ganged up on Dr. Byram Bridle to discredit him for speaking out. Would any of the University of Guelph faculty debate him? Of course not! No chance. Some faculty members even signed the joint faculty letter denigrating him without even reading the document he wrote. In their mind, Professor Bridle was wrong and they didn’t even have to bother to take the time to understand his position.
In California today, the legislature is seeking to further empower the medical boards to remove the license of any physician who speaks out against the vaccines. It is a top down dictatorship with the Medical Boards holding all the cards. They are not accountable to anyone. They will not be questioned. In many cases, the doctors who are having their license revoked don’t even know who is examining them and are not allowed to question the authorities on the record. So the boards cannot be held accountable for their actions.
Even though the evidence is clear that these vaccines are harmful and should be stopped, we, as a society, are doing the opposite today with vaccine mandates requiring people to be boosted or be fired. We are requiring doctors like AMD to keep their mouths shut.
There is even a US government form now so you can turn in any doctor who challenges the official narrative. Basically, the government is asking us to be spies to help them eliminate people who disagree with the narrative.
Someone isn’t telling you the truth here, and it isn’t A Midwestern Doctor.
You should be upset. Very upset. This is unconscionable.
Unfortunately, no public health official in America wants to talk about it, and the mainstream press isn’t going to cover it either.
March 11, 2022
Posted by aletho |
Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | Canada, COVID-19 Vaccine, United States |
Leave a comment
If you regard the United States as perhaps flawed but overall a force for good in the world . . .
Aletho News
Aletho News 