Think we got it wrong?
Here's a handy checklist for how you can put us on the right path.
I received an email today from a former Stanford doctor who wrote:
“Steve, I respect you and all you have accomplished. I looked carefully at the articles you sent and I saw nothing. I'm not going to engage with you on this any further. As I said before, I hope that you will find an alternative use for your time, talent and treasure--the world needs it.”
I’m happy to find an alternative use for my time if someone would spend a few minutes explaining to me and my colleagues how we got it wrong. But so far, there have been no takers. They won’t engage.
I’m even willing to pay someone for their time to convince us. But they all quickly give up when I ask them to explain all the anomalies that we’ve observed such as the list below.
So I wanted to make it clear how we got stuck on the wrong path and what a Good Samaritan can do to help set us back up on the right path.
How to convince us we’re wrong: a handy checklist
The key problems we have are:
All the data we can find is negative.
Nobody wants to go on camera and show us how we got it wrong using data.
Their arguments are all based on appeal to authority rather than solid data that they are willing to defend.
The medical journals censor articles they don’t like and keep articles that are flawed. The common theme: does it agree with the mainstream thinking.
Here is a checklist of things that bother us:
Nobody in public health anywhere in the world is calling for autopsies of people who die within 30 days after vaccination (using the proper staining techniques to detect the spike protein). Why wouldn’t health authorities want to know the truth and prove we are wrong? If the vaccines are safe, this would exonerate the vaccines, expose us all as misinformation spreaders, and reduce vaccine hesitancy. In our view, the only reason for not wanting to know the truth is if you knew that this would reveal that the vaccines are dangerous. So if that’s not the reason, what is?
The sheer number of young doctor deaths in Canada post vaccine are really troubling. Clearly, we’ve all got it wrong and the vaccines didn’t kill them at all. Can you tell us what did? The rate of young doctor deaths in Canada is 23X normal in the two weeks after the 2nd booster was given. How do you know for certain none of these docs died from the vaccine? Asking us to “trust the authorities” isn’t going to work very well to convince us.
The official data and studies that governments rely on to make their claims are unreliable. Did we get it wrong? Let’s chat. These studies include:
The Pfizer trial data. See this article documenting the fraud.
The Rosenblum study which failed to adequately explain the high death rates reported in VAERS. It wasn’t doctors reporting more which is their hand waving argument backed by zero data in the paper. That doesn’t pass muster. When we tried to talk to the authors for clarification, the CDC ignored our requests. This is not the way to inspire confidence. This paper also relies on a nonsensical VSD paper (the “fountain of youth” paper) which the CDC refuses to defend as well.
The UK ONS data. See this article.
There aren’t any reliable post-market prospective observational studies showing the vaccines are justified. If there are, just give us the URLs. We must have missed them.
We have troubling anecdotes that are inconsistent with “safe and effective.” Even if we take the two anecdotes (wedding and podiatrist) from one celebrity (e.g., Wayne Root), nobody can explain these.
Where are the “proper” studies showing the vaccines are “safe and effective”? We haven’t seen these for any vaccine. The studies we do have show the opposite (see this article). Where are the opposite studies?
All the real-world anecdotes comparing injury/death rates between the two groups (vax vs. unvaxxed) that we’ve seen show a very consistent picture that the vaccines are causing more harm than benefit. My Substack is full of these articles. For example, read the healthcare worker stories here. How do you explain these if the vaccines are so safe? See also Mathew Crawford’s San Diego study showing vaccines are more likely to land you in the hospital or dead, contrary to what we are being told. If these are wrong, explain why they are wrong and tell us where to find the “everything is fine in our hospital” articles and we’d love to check out the data there. So far, nobody at any hospital wants to show us the data for some reason. It’s frustrating for us.
There is a lack of pro-vaccine anecdotes where the vaccinated group did significantly better in mortality and morbidity than the unvaccinated group.
Here’s what happened when I asked for these: I got nothing. See this Gab survey, for example:
I’m not claiming pro-vax stories don’t exist; I’m just claiming I haven’t found any in any of the surveys I’ve done (including surveys done by unbiased third parties
We think the COVID vaccines have killed hundreds of thousands of Americans and injured millions more. There are many independent methods people have used to validate this. Fox News and Media Matters questioned the numbers but refused to investigate the data. Why? The evidence is here. Dr. Naomi Wolf independently verified the numbers using her own sources. Nobody else was interested in fact checking me or anyone else who holds similar views.
It seems to us that the healthcare system is being perversely incentivized to promote the vaccine, follow government protocols, and maximize the number of people that can be counted as a COVID death. They are not being rewarded for being creative and saving lives. This is documented in many places. If we rewarded hospitals for saving lives, the pandemic would be over instantly. But our government clearly doesn’t want to do that. They are incentivizing the results they want: massive numbers of COVID deaths. Are we wrong?
The number of COVID deaths seems to us to have been exaggerated by more than a factor of 5. We got this from the New Mexico data where one of my contacts went through every death record and found that 5 of 6 COVID deaths had ICD10 codes inconsistent with a COVID death. See this article for details on New Mexico. Did we get it wrong? Can we see your analysis of the same data?
Advice from the CDC is not based on rigorous science, e.g., masking, lockdowns, you can’t get the latest combo vaccine if you haven’t had the primary series, etc. For example, the latest study shows a statistically significant correlation between countries with high mask compliance and higher mortality. Dr. Scott Atlas has a great presentation on all of this nonsense. Is he wrong? Can we talk about it?
There seems to be a correlation between booster uptake and deaths. It seems the more boosters, the more deaths. Wasn’t it supposed to be the other way around?
More people have died due to the treatment that they received in the hospital for COVID than due to the virus itself. The evidence of this is that I get hammered every time I do a survey asking people how many people died from COVID vs. the COVID vaccine. They say, “My relative died from the treatment protocols for COVID, not from COVID.” This is borne out in surveys such as this one showing the pandemic is being caused by hospitals and not the virus. So if it is the virus that is killing people, why are so many people believing it is the hospital protocols?
No government officials will agree to have an open discussion about any of this with qualified scientists who disagree. Instead, these scientists are censored, deplatformed, and intimidated. Here’s an example of what happened when 3 Canadian top scientists challenged anyone in the government: the government was a no show. Are they too busy to defend their position? Did we pick an inconvenient day when nobody was available? We don’t understand why they don’t respond to the invitation at all.
Doctors who want to speak out about what they are seeing are being threatened with having their licenses or credentials revoked including Paul Marik, Peter McCullough, Pierre Kory, and others. We don’t understand why doctors who speak out about what they observe should be silenced. This seems counter to science.
Doctors with viable treatments for COVID have been ignored such as the FLCCC and Fareed and Tyson. We are simply mystified why they would do this since we thought they wanted to save lives. Since this appears not to be the goal, can you explain what the goal is?
The CDC isn’t interested in discovering any safety signals (they didn’t look at the VAERS data until April 2021), nor will they tell medical examiners to do the proper tests to discover whether or not the vaccines have killed people. In our view, anyone who dies within 30 days of these vaccines should have the proper tests done to assess whether the vaccine was involved in the death and the results should be publicly disclosed. We think they don’t do this because they know what will happen. So if that’s not the reason, what’s the real reason?
The White House, Surgeon General, CDC, FDA, and President Obama have stated that misinformation is a serious problem and has cost lives. We agree. We want to stop the misinformation too. We just disagree on who is responsible, that’s all. To that end, we have offered our heads on a silver platter to the CDC to debunk us. They have refused our offer. Our offer was simple: we want to talk about 20 topics which we’ll give them in advance and vice versa. It’s a livestream recorded call since it is of interest to the public. We’ll bring 10 experts to cover all the topics. The CDC can bring as many experts as they need. The CDC sets the rules, time and date. We were flabbergasted that there was no interest. Why would they not want to make it clear to the American public that we are on the wrong side of history? Since they claim to have the facts on their side, it should be an easy victory. Please tell us how to get this debate going?
Bobby Kennedy also has been trying to get a debate on vax safety for all vaccines for the past 20 years. Can you please tell us why nobody will debate him? He’s obviously an expert judging from his book. What do we have to do to get a debate?
Do you agree with this op-ed from UCSF Professor Vinay Prasad? If not, why not? We are confused because when we ask scientists from other fields about this op-ed, they say without any hesitation that Professor Prasad is absolutely right. But when it comes to COVID, all debates are off the table. We don’t understand what in science makes this a non-starter when the topic is vaccines.
School mandates. We are baffled by these. Why do kids need to be vaccinated? Vaccination doesn’t prevent the spread of COVID and in fact the data shows it makes people more likely to be infected, hospitalized, or die. Even the CDC now agrees there is no reason to treat vaxxed people any differently than unvaxxed people. So why are there still vaccine mandates at schools? When students ask for the scientific rationale, nobody in the administration wants to supply it. Are schools being paid money from the government for compliance? Why not just admit that schools are requiring kids to take something that could kill them because they get paid a lot of money to do this? Kim Iversen can’t figure this out either. Watch this episode with No College Mandates Joni McGary. Joni says the colleges basically don’t respond when asked for a scientific justification other than to defer to the CDC which is nonsensical since the CDC now says vaxxed = unvaxxed. So why are schools and universities mandating COVID vaccines?
There are well over 100,000 people who know someone who died suddenly shortly after getting the COVID vaccine. That number is independently verifiable. Isn’t that a lot of sudden death after a safe and effective vaccine which doesn’t kill anyone and where the clinical trial treatment group reported fewer serious adverse events than the placebo group? Explain how that is possible. 100,000+ people isn’t just “bad luck” or “coincidence.”
Embalmers all over the world are seeing odd blood clots in people who die suddenly. They were all vaccinated. If these aren’t caused by the vaccine, what the heck is causing them and how come nobody is investigating them?
Professor Jeff Sachs, the leader of the independent panel tasked with finding the origins of SARS-CoV-2 determined that the virus was likely man-made using technology from US bio-labs. Read this article which has a link to the 1 minute video clip that went viral. That agrees with everything we’ve seen. When that came out, all of a sudden nobody wanted to know anything more. Why the sudden loss of interest in the origin? Why aren’t US labs and the Wuhan Institute of Virology cooperating with investigators if they have nothing to hide? Can we have a public discussion about this? Also, how come Moderna never explained how their 19-nt sequence found its way into SARS-CoV-2? And how did Professor Kristian Andersen determine the virus came from nature just a few days after saying it was man made with NO ADDITIONAL DATA? And why did he delete all his tweets right after Chris Martenson called him out on this? We’re still baffled by all this. We’re sure there is an innocent explanation but Professor Andersen doesn’t want to talk to us about it. It seems he’s camera shy all of a sudden. Why?
We all had good jobs prior to the COVID vaccines and none of us were known as “misinformation spreaders.” Why did we all take a pay cut to become misinformation spreaders on the same topic at the same time? Who is coordinating all this?
It is puzzling to us why Jessica Rose’s myocarditis paper was retracted by the journal for no reason. Also, the medical community seems OK with that. Is that how science works that if the publisher of the journal doesn’t like a paper they just remove it and nobody says a word?
Similarly, when a paper is shown to be fraudulent, such as the Bangladesh mask study, how is it possible that both the journal and the author of the paper ignored repeated requests from prominent British mathematician Professor Norman Fenton to have the paper either corrected or retracted? This is a key paper relied on by health authorities all over the world and it is clearly defective; even the author couldn’t defend it. Is this how science is supposed to work that the mainstream narrative is immune from attack by ignoring any issues with the paper?
And finally, what about Maddie de Garay? She’s paralyzed in less than 24 hours after her Pfizer shot. She’s still paralyzed. The FDA promised to investigate. Please explain to us: 1) why this was never reported in the clinical trials, 2) why nobody on the FDA and CDC committees knew about this, and 3) why the FDA and CDC never called her. This is clinical trial fraud, Janet Woodcock knew about it, but they did nothing other than promise to investigate which they didn’t do. Tell me how I got it wrong.
Mainstream medical doctors are trained to only pay attention to what the authorities say (including practice guidelines), what is in the Phase 3 randomized trials and peer-reviewed medical literature, and ignore everything else. This is a huge mistake.
Real scientists use all the available evidence to determine which hypothesis is the correct one. There is only one truth here and we shouldn’t be ignoring the abundance of evidence in front of us.
There was a great article about this written by Norman Doidge entitled “Medicine’s Fundamentalists” which talks about the “all-available-evidence approach.” It should be read by every doctor in America. This is how science works.
When we look at all the available evidence, a very consistent story emerges for us: the vaccines are a disaster.
How can over 30 different data sources all say the same thing?
Here is a list of some of the data sources we considered in forming our position. All these sources are consistent with each other in showing the vaccines should be stopped. How can that happen if the vaccines are safe?
The VAERS data
Data from governments worldwide (see Crawford’s study)
My follower polls
Live audience polls
Direct doctor outreach stats
Insurance co excess deaths, especially for younger Americans (Ed Dowd has been championing this)
Dramatic order increases for child-size coffin after the vaccines rolled out for kids
Athlete, celebrity, pilot deaths or incidents. These are “in public view” deaths reported in the media.
The lack of interest in doing autopsies on anyone who dies “unexpectedly” within 60 days of a COVID vaccination/booster doing the proper assays to determine whether the vaccine might have caused the death.
The huge increase in Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (SADS) rates after vaccine rollout.
The fact that over 20,000 people a day are now (Sep 2022) joining a sudden death interest group. Why the sudden interest in sudden death?
The fact that sudden death reports are happening to younger and younger people after the vaccines rolled out to those age groups.
The number of people dropping dead in plain sight in front of cameras (we’ve never seen that before)
The number of young doctors who die in Canada proximate to a vaccine dose (never before in Canadian history have they ever seen anything like 30 deaths post-vax in young doctors).
The lack of positive anecdotes, e.g., where are the Wayne Root stories where it is the unvaxxed who suffer injuries and deaths? I know ZERO of these.
The lack of debates: nobody who supports the mainstream narrative will agree on camera to debate ANYONE on our side of the narrative. This includes the CDC, FDA, and the drug companies.
Respected doctors and nurses at top hospitals have obtained fake vax cards. This is particularly telling because they are risking a 10 year prison term rather than get a “safe and effective” vaccine. Why would they do that?
There are key papers with very serious flaws such as the Rosenblum study published in Lancet and the CDC won’t let anyone talk to the authors to question them on the paper.
The CDC isn’t disclosing the VAERS URF. They know how to calculate it but they never do. They never even bring it up at the ACIP meetings. This is clear corruption.
There were more deaths in the vaccinated group than the unvaccinated group in the Pfizer trial. So how do we know none of the people who died in the vaccine group didn’t die from the vaccine? We don’t because they never made the proper tests to make that assessment. We are simply supposed to trust them.
There are no prospective studies following 1,000 or matched people in vax vs. unvaxxed groups to track morality and morbidity for any vaccine where there are no exclusions (unlike the vaccine trials). Why not? If it’s so safe, the CDC should be showing us the data.
Hospitals appear to be not accurately recording vaccination status of patients that are admitted. This makes it easy to claim this is a “pandemic of the unvaccinated.”
You are not considered “vaccinated” until two weeks after your second shot. I’m not sure what is for boosters. But if you die within 2 weeks after your second shot, all those deaths are counted as “unvaccinated” deaths which is very misleading.
Hospitals are being rewarded for killing people rather than saving people. Why would any advanced society do this? Why don’t any Washington lawmakers have a problem with this?
The irregularities in the Pfizer trial such as those documented here.
The huge rates of adverse events to people who have been vaccinated
Hospitals are keeping their aggregate stats secret. So when strokes go up by 5X post-vax rollout, the public never hears about it. When we try to get this data from hospitals, they don’t respond.
The CDC was never able to explain the child deaths in VAERS. These deaths were not consistent with background death stats. The CDC analysis just said here is what they died from and then pretended this wasn’t unusual and changed the topic. Wow. Nobody in the mainstream medical community or mainstream press questioned them on it. It was like the CDC said, “Nothing to see here folks… move along.”
Doing analysis on government data shows troubling results (see for example Mathew Crawford’s San Diego study)
The government authorities are using invalid data to justify their programs, e.g., see this article.
These 32 examples are examples of what I mean by all the available evidence. All of these 32 sources would be ignored by the mainstream medical community. That’s not how science is supposed to work.
Science encourages us to use all pieces of evidence.
If you have the right hypothesis, all that evidence should be consistent with your hypothesis.
We find it impressive that all 32 sources are consistent with the “the vaccines are too unsafe to use” hypothesis.
So-called “misinformation spreaders” such as myself and my friends are all data-driven.
The way you can convince us we are wrong is to show us that your hypothesis better explains the data than our hypothesis including all 32 datapoints.
Appeals to authority will not work.
To date, nobody from the mainstream medical community or press wants to engage us in a discussion of the data fit.
The world should find that very troubling.