Several people have replicated my work. I'll list here the new attacks and why they all fail to explain the data. I also show the evidence there wasn't any brand bias. People couldn't choose.
Steve finally got his debate. Its a great process to make sure something easy wasn't missed. The fact they've all run away confirms this is all the counter-arguments they can come up with. Pfizer = placebo. Moderna = "the shot". The elevated mortality rate outcome matches with "more spikes = more deaths." They call that a dose-response relationship, right?
And of course that "gold standard" pfizer trial wasn't particularly positive, was it? Especially after all the updates were processed.
Thank you, Steve. Amazing work and tenacity. I hope with all my heart you recover from the eye injury you never should have had.
We are surrounded by illness and premature death.
How can the injected part of the human race (or any of us) bear or survive all this complex, insidious, never-ending destruction? It’s like watching a lump hammer being flung by malevolent thugs into an exquisitely calibrated system evolved over millions of years; with no respect, no reverence, and in awe only of their own hubristic selves.
Can I e-mail you somewhere you can get this /my email at super_sally888@protonmail.com. I have ph vaccine doses delivered by month and aefi by month from the Philippines pharmacovilamce system.
I also have VAERS events and deaths for the 3 products, which allows me to standardize deaths reported per doses delivered. There is also the issue that reporting of SAE and AEFI dropped sharply over time. Likely due to discouragement for reporting anything negative in the face of the mass publicity campaign.
https://bioelecmed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42234-023-00104-7 This clean link might be of interest and help to anyone with COVID-19 Long-Hauler Syndrome. Dr. Frank Shallenberger's July 2024 Second Opinion newsletter, to which I subscribe, has an article about this research. Dr. Shallenberger contacted the author, Dr. Leitzke in Germany, who has not yet published new research, but Dr. Leitzke sees the same results using nicotine in patients suffering from the the mRNA injections.
30% is actually quite low compared to other studies that claimed to show that Moderna is several times more toxic than what Steve Kirsch calls “Pfizer”, which is in fact BioNTech. And given that other studies show that Moderna is roughly 2x more effective (i.e. in preventing symptomatic “Covid”, whatever that is), this would mean that the risk/benefit of Moderna is in fact superior.
On the other hand, if one thinks that neither have any real efficacy, then the entire discussion is pointless. Then no level of risk is acceptable. Who cares if one is more likely to kill you than the other?
I don’t understand why this discussion is even taking place. The Czech data might have some interest. But I would have thought the main interest is whether it replicates the findings of the Danish batch variability study. If it does, then this would be further proof that BioNTech adulterated its own product. The least toxic batches would be “placebos”, in the sense of not containing the active drug substance, i.e. the mRNA. This would represent an incredible act of corporate malfeasance and it will have occurred with the complicity of the German regulator. See here for an explanation: https://dailysceptic.org/2024/01/24/did-pfizer-biontech-placebo-vaccine-doses-contain-empty-lipids-without-mrna/
Shouldn’t we be looking at this issue rather than whether arsenic is “better” than cyanide?
In both the Czech batch study the number of doses per batch was the number of doses that had been released by the State Institute for Drug Control of the Czech Republic (SUKL), and in Schmeling et al.'s paper it was the number of doses "shipped from the Danish Serum Institute to all the Danish vaccination centers".
So it might partially explain why in the Czech study and Danish study newer batches tended to get a lower rate of deaths per dose than older batches, since newer batches had a lower percentage of doses administered out of doses shipped. (Even though there might of course also be older batches where all shipped doses didn't end up being administered, if for example the vials expired, or if the vaccination clinics switched from original vaccines to Omicron vaccines or from BA.1 vaccines to XBB.1.5 vaccines.)
I also downloaded the Czech batch safety data from the GitHub account of Palacký University, and I compared the ratio of deaths per doses shipped against an age-normalized excess mortality percentage for each batch in the record-level data. My correlation was about -0.01, so it was very close to zero.
However the batch data at GitHub didn't have information about the age of people who were reported to have died, so I wasn't able to adjust the rate of deaths per dose for age. And I also used doses shipped and not doses administered as my denominator. (Even though now that I think of it, I would be able to use the record-level data to calculate the number of doses from each batch that had been administered up to a given date. So maybe I'll have to redo my analysis.)
As usual, an awesome job, Steve. One of the things I find most important is if the “vaccines” were so beneficial and safe, then we would clearly see a vast benefit in outcomes from people who were jabbed versus those of us weren’t. That’s never been seen and never been shown.
The anecdotal data is also very telling. They just can’t explain away the large number of unrelated and uncorrelated people who have seen so many more family and friends “die suddenly” after taking the injections versus those of us who didn’t. This is the greatest evidence, in my opinion, because it can’t be explained, and it can’t be ignored.
Once again, this must be resolved in a court of law. The planners, propagators and perpetrators of this crime against humanity must be forced to defend themselves, to account for their actions and for what they’ve done, and do so in front of a candid world.
Those who are found guilty of crimes against humanity, in a court of law, must be publicly executed.
Thank you so very much for all your work and all your explanations! From myself, personally, thank you for the link leading to your explanation of the Unvaccinated line in Henjin's chart. I found it confounding yesterday, but with your link, I now understand what it's implication truly are. The implications are no where close to saying that those gene therapies were safer than not getting them!
Now, go take care of your eye and yourself! :-) <3
Here we sit, engaging in debate over which of these products is more deadly, meanwhile thousands are dead, many more are irreversibly injured, and the general public has been gaslit into faith in science.
What’s the issue? Why isn’t this data compelling enough to cause outrage?
They simply have no idea what is being discussed. They don’t understand statistics, p-values, confidence intervals, or anything of the like.
Beyond that, and perhaps most relevant, they don’t understand HOW the jabs work. They do not live in a world where it is plausible that the jabs can cause injury. These products are a black box, believed to “reduce the risk of hospitalization and death” somehow. Does anyone know how they do it?
Mainstream experts do, but it’s too complicated to explain and they don’t have time. They are “safe and effective” and that’s all we need to now.
So what’s is your average person supposed to do with this data? It’s expert opinion vs expert opinion, and they do not have the tools to discern who is telling the truth. Safe and effective? Or useless and deadly?
The truth becomes obvious when the mechanism of action is understood.
Whether the product is modified RNA or DNA, the end result is that the cells of the jabbed individual produce spike protein and express that spike protein in their surface. The consequence?
The immune system of the jabbed now identifies previously healthy cells, now mounted with spike protein, as intruders and destroys them.
What if this occurs in the heart? The immune system attacks the cells of the heart, resulting in myocarditis or pericarditis.
Play this out in any part of the body, and it’s easy to understand how and why there are such a wide range of injuries. Couple this with the fact that the lipid nanoparticles can and do travel all throughout the body, even through the blood brain barrier, and it is blatantly obvious.
This is the message that needs to be communicated to the general public. The picture of plausibility needs to be painted before any of the data can be believed.
They need to understand HOW the wide range of injuries and the large number of deaths are possible. Explain how the products work and what they do in the body and the truth becomes undeniable.
This should be the focus moving forward. There is more than enough data to evidence the dangers of these products, but we’ve put the cart before the horse, and left the public in the dark. There is a general feeling that “something isn’t right” but the average person can’t see inside the black box in order to validate that feeling.
Explain the mechanism, through graphics and translation into lay terms, and the data driven evidence quickly becomes compelling to the masses.
World law enforcement agencies must .... Arrest Walensky, Birx, Fauci, Daszak and all DOD, CIA, CDC, NIH, WHO, FDA, HHS and big pharma and big tech. executives involved.
Fraud and homicide are ...not included in the total immunity from legal liability agreement under the PREP Act for the big Pharma criminals!
Nuremberg Code and RICO laws apply now! The DOJ better wake the Fk Up and get busy!
It all looks pretty convincing from a high altitude. One thing bothers me though. When dealing with the Henjin argument, you say there's no such phenomenon leading to higher mortality closer to the vaccination date. But, I seem to recall your using that exact argument to support your conclusions about other data (Medicaid or VA?). You showed a mortality rate that reduced as days-after-shot increased, and you said that was evidence of vaxx caused death. Do I have this wrong?
First things first. I hope and pray you are starting to get blood and O2 in your retina.
After reading so many of Steves great articles showing the clear and objective connection between the still experimental killer mRNA GMO treatments, it is just as clear that the killers and their cohorts can ALWAYS come up with enough nonsensical other alternatives for mortality. Remember, our goal here should be criminal not just civil trials. The problem with getting guilty verdicts on the criminal side is that even an objective Judge and Jury could not convict to the standard of beyond shadow of a doubt with all the obfuscating lies they will present to make us question any level of intent. That could change if some genius way over my pay grade finds an unimpeachable link to the involuntary shots. I think that should be focus and using Steve's data as supportive. to the cause. I know a bit about products liability (trained Underwriters) but not specialist in criminal negligence in medical realm. Any attorneys out there that can help? Of course you might lose your license, controlled by the maniacs in Govt that want us dead so they keep jobs and lucrative pensions. It will be difficult as long as American MSM survives anti trust and racketterring laws.
The handwaving long-term mortality signals is ridiculous. And here is a counter-example:
https://researchrebel.substack.com/p/new-study-validates-cdc-vaers-safety
This study shows risk of retinal vascular occlusion takes A FULL YEAR to return to baseline risk after vaccination.
THE ABOVE IS A VERY TRUE RESULT PROVEN WITH NO COVID STILL DEATHS FROM THE JAB. IT IS A JAB NOT A VACCINE AND NONE EVER ONE AS PROVEN.
Steve finally got his debate. Its a great process to make sure something easy wasn't missed. The fact they've all run away confirms this is all the counter-arguments they can come up with. Pfizer = placebo. Moderna = "the shot". The elevated mortality rate outcome matches with "more spikes = more deaths." They call that a dose-response relationship, right?
And of course that "gold standard" pfizer trial wasn't particularly positive, was it? Especially after all the updates were processed.
Thank you, Steve. Amazing work and tenacity. I hope with all my heart you recover from the eye injury you never should have had.
We are surrounded by illness and premature death.
How can the injected part of the human race (or any of us) bear or survive all this complex, insidious, never-ending destruction? It’s like watching a lump hammer being flung by malevolent thugs into an exquisitely calibrated system evolved over millions of years; with no respect, no reverence, and in awe only of their own hubristic selves.
Can I e-mail you somewhere you can get this /my email at super_sally888@protonmail.com. I have ph vaccine doses delivered by month and aefi by month from the Philippines pharmacovilamce system.
I also have VAERS events and deaths for the 3 products, which allows me to standardize deaths reported per doses delivered. There is also the issue that reporting of SAE and AEFI dropped sharply over time. Likely due to discouragement for reporting anything negative in the face of the mass publicity campaign.
Option 1 has many sub-options: https://kirschsubstack.com/p/how-to-contact-me
https://bioelecmed.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42234-023-00104-7 This clean link might be of interest and help to anyone with COVID-19 Long-Hauler Syndrome. Dr. Frank Shallenberger's July 2024 Second Opinion newsletter, to which I subscribe, has an article about this research. Dr. Shallenberger contacted the author, Dr. Leitzke in Germany, who has not yet published new research, but Dr. Leitzke sees the same results using nicotine in patients suffering from the the mRNA injections.
30% is actually quite low compared to other studies that claimed to show that Moderna is several times more toxic than what Steve Kirsch calls “Pfizer”, which is in fact BioNTech. And given that other studies show that Moderna is roughly 2x more effective (i.e. in preventing symptomatic “Covid”, whatever that is), this would mean that the risk/benefit of Moderna is in fact superior.
On the other hand, if one thinks that neither have any real efficacy, then the entire discussion is pointless. Then no level of risk is acceptable. Who cares if one is more likely to kill you than the other?
I don’t understand why this discussion is even taking place. The Czech data might have some interest. But I would have thought the main interest is whether it replicates the findings of the Danish batch variability study. If it does, then this would be further proof that BioNTech adulterated its own product. The least toxic batches would be “placebos”, in the sense of not containing the active drug substance, i.e. the mRNA. This would represent an incredible act of corporate malfeasance and it will have occurred with the complicity of the German regulator. See here for an explanation: https://dailysceptic.org/2024/01/24/did-pfizer-biontech-placebo-vaccine-doses-contain-empty-lipids-without-mrna/
Shouldn’t we be looking at this issue rather than whether arsenic is “better” than cyanide?
Even though this is a machine translation, it might still be able to address your query:
https://smis--lab-cz.translate.goog/2024/07/03/znepokojujici-rozdily-mezi-sarzemi-covidovych-vakcin/?_x_tr_sl=cs&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=cs&_x_tr_pto=wapp
I bought access to the Czech batch safety paper and posted screenshots of it here: sars2.net/czech3.html#Batch_safety_study_by_authors_from_Palack_University.
In both the Czech batch study the number of doses per batch was the number of doses that had been released by the State Institute for Drug Control of the Czech Republic (SUKL), and in Schmeling et al.'s paper it was the number of doses "shipped from the Danish Serum Institute to all the Danish vaccination centers".
So it might partially explain why in the Czech study and Danish study newer batches tended to get a lower rate of deaths per dose than older batches, since newer batches had a lower percentage of doses administered out of doses shipped. (Even though there might of course also be older batches where all shipped doses didn't end up being administered, if for example the vials expired, or if the vaccination clinics switched from original vaccines to Omicron vaccines or from BA.1 vaccines to XBB.1.5 vaccines.)
I also downloaded the Czech batch safety data from the GitHub account of Palacký University, and I compared the ratio of deaths per doses shipped against an age-normalized excess mortality percentage for each batch in the record-level data. My correlation was about -0.01, so it was very close to zero.
However the batch data at GitHub didn't have information about the age of people who were reported to have died, so I wasn't able to adjust the rate of deaths per dose for age. And I also used doses shipped and not doses administered as my denominator. (Even though now that I think of it, I would be able to use the record-level data to calculate the number of doses from each batch that had been administered up to a given date. So maybe I'll have to redo my analysis.)
As usual, an awesome job, Steve. One of the things I find most important is if the “vaccines” were so beneficial and safe, then we would clearly see a vast benefit in outcomes from people who were jabbed versus those of us weren’t. That’s never been seen and never been shown.
The anecdotal data is also very telling. They just can’t explain away the large number of unrelated and uncorrelated people who have seen so many more family and friends “die suddenly” after taking the injections versus those of us who didn’t. This is the greatest evidence, in my opinion, because it can’t be explained, and it can’t be ignored.
Once again, this must be resolved in a court of law. The planners, propagators and perpetrators of this crime against humanity must be forced to defend themselves, to account for their actions and for what they’ve done, and do so in front of a candid world.
Those who are found guilty of crimes against humanity, in a court of law, must be publicly executed.
Thank you so very much for all your work and all your explanations! From myself, personally, thank you for the link leading to your explanation of the Unvaccinated line in Henjin's chart. I found it confounding yesterday, but with your link, I now understand what it's implication truly are. The implications are no where close to saying that those gene therapies were safer than not getting them!
Now, go take care of your eye and yourself! :-) <3
Fuck this data. Save your fucking eye man. Get some fucking serious rest.
Here we sit, engaging in debate over which of these products is more deadly, meanwhile thousands are dead, many more are irreversibly injured, and the general public has been gaslit into faith in science.
What’s the issue? Why isn’t this data compelling enough to cause outrage?
They simply have no idea what is being discussed. They don’t understand statistics, p-values, confidence intervals, or anything of the like.
Beyond that, and perhaps most relevant, they don’t understand HOW the jabs work. They do not live in a world where it is plausible that the jabs can cause injury. These products are a black box, believed to “reduce the risk of hospitalization and death” somehow. Does anyone know how they do it?
Mainstream experts do, but it’s too complicated to explain and they don’t have time. They are “safe and effective” and that’s all we need to now.
So what’s is your average person supposed to do with this data? It’s expert opinion vs expert opinion, and they do not have the tools to discern who is telling the truth. Safe and effective? Or useless and deadly?
The truth becomes obvious when the mechanism of action is understood.
Whether the product is modified RNA or DNA, the end result is that the cells of the jabbed individual produce spike protein and express that spike protein in their surface. The consequence?
The immune system of the jabbed now identifies previously healthy cells, now mounted with spike protein, as intruders and destroys them.
What if this occurs in the heart? The immune system attacks the cells of the heart, resulting in myocarditis or pericarditis.
Play this out in any part of the body, and it’s easy to understand how and why there are such a wide range of injuries. Couple this with the fact that the lipid nanoparticles can and do travel all throughout the body, even through the blood brain barrier, and it is blatantly obvious.
This is the message that needs to be communicated to the general public. The picture of plausibility needs to be painted before any of the data can be believed.
They need to understand HOW the wide range of injuries and the large number of deaths are possible. Explain how the products work and what they do in the body and the truth becomes undeniable.
This should be the focus moving forward. There is more than enough data to evidence the dangers of these products, but we’ve put the cart before the horse, and left the public in the dark. There is a general feeling that “something isn’t right” but the average person can’t see inside the black box in order to validate that feeling.
Explain the mechanism, through graphics and translation into lay terms, and the data driven evidence quickly becomes compelling to the masses.
I am still waiting for information on one person who died from Covid, that is, had an autopsy, was not denied early treatment.
Why "attacks"?
How about "counterclaims" or "opposing views" or "critiques" or "arguments against" or "pushback"?
World law enforcement agencies must .... Arrest Walensky, Birx, Fauci, Daszak and all DOD, CIA, CDC, NIH, WHO, FDA, HHS and big pharma and big tech. executives involved.
Fraud and homicide are ...not included in the total immunity from legal liability agreement under the PREP Act for the big Pharma criminals!
Nuremberg Code and RICO laws apply now! The DOJ better wake the Fk Up and get busy!
It all looks pretty convincing from a high altitude. One thing bothers me though. When dealing with the Henjin argument, you say there's no such phenomenon leading to higher mortality closer to the vaccination date. But, I seem to recall your using that exact argument to support your conclusions about other data (Medicaid or VA?). You showed a mortality rate that reduced as days-after-shot increased, and you said that was evidence of vaxx caused death. Do I have this wrong?
First things first. I hope and pray you are starting to get blood and O2 in your retina.
After reading so many of Steves great articles showing the clear and objective connection between the still experimental killer mRNA GMO treatments, it is just as clear that the killers and their cohorts can ALWAYS come up with enough nonsensical other alternatives for mortality. Remember, our goal here should be criminal not just civil trials. The problem with getting guilty verdicts on the criminal side is that even an objective Judge and Jury could not convict to the standard of beyond shadow of a doubt with all the obfuscating lies they will present to make us question any level of intent. That could change if some genius way over my pay grade finds an unimpeachable link to the involuntary shots. I think that should be focus and using Steve's data as supportive. to the cause. I know a bit about products liability (trained Underwriters) but not specialist in criminal negligence in medical realm. Any attorneys out there that can help? Of course you might lose your license, controlled by the maniacs in Govt that want us dead so they keep jobs and lucrative pensions. It will be difficult as long as American MSM survives anti trust and racketterring laws.