"Is it safe?"

The only world government that is anywhere close to answering that question for any vaccine is the UK. I'll explain why I believe this. I think you'll agree with me.

The famous scene in Marathon Man where Dustin Hoffman is asked repeatedly “Is it safe?” This is what we should be asking of our health agencies. We shouldn’t stop asking until they give us the data.

New version

See “Is it safe?” (part II) for my latest offer.

Executive summary

The question you should be asking before you get any vaccine is “Is it safe?”

The standard of safety used for vaccines is fewer than 1 death per 1M doses (see this Paul Offit quote).

Double-blind randomized trials are never powered with millions of people so the only way we can learn this information is by collecting the data in the post-marketing phase by looking at the vaccine records of people who died and doing the analysis on that data.

As far as I know, nobody in the world has ever exposed the underlying anonymized data or exposed accurate summary analysis template that would allow us to learn the truth.

In short, for the last 220 years, doctors have all been basing their recommendations that the vaccines are safe on trust, not reliable data.

Shouldn’t we get started so we can finally answer the question: “Is it safe?”

I’m offering $10,000 for the first person to prove I’m wrong as of the time I made the statement

See this article. Studies after June 10, 2023 don’t qualify since I can’t predict the future.

Data collection steps

Here are the 4 steps you need to do to figure out if a vaccine is safe:

1. Get access to the public health records as described in my data transparency article. Do a join between the death records and vaccine records so you have the vaccination data on the same row as the death data. So a row looks like: Age range, gender, date of death and dates and types for each vaccination

2. You will also need access to the vaccination data by date, age range, and sex by week (similar to the California data here).

3. Once you have this underlying data, you are able to create a summary analysis spreadsheet that looks something like this (note that clicking on the link will instantly download the spreadsheet and then refresh the page so it will look like nothing happened).

4. If you need help on the time-series analysis or the visualization tools, please feel free to reach out to me and I can assist you. Use the Contact Me form.

5. Through examination of that spreadsheet, it should be immediately be obvious if the vaccine is safe or not: people in the various vaccinated cohorts should be dying at rate comparable to the unvaccinated.

6. Other analysis methods include plotting the number of days died after dose vs. # of people who died. If the vaccine is given out evenly throughout the year, this will be a flat line.

7. Note that this is a study that is difficult to do reliably. For example, in the UK, the Office of National Statistics admitted they undercounted the unvaccinated and that their analyses were not fit for purpose. See The ONS data on vaccine mortality is not fit for purpose. Today, the best data to show this would be state data. The CDC lacks record-level vaccination data for any state so it has never been able to do such a study (Congress never gave them the authority to get the data from the states).

A note on the numbers

One person speculated this is impossible to safety because a signal this small (fewer than 1 in 1M doses) would normally not detectable in the "noise" of the background deaths of a standard population which are roughly 10,000X times higher.

So if you have 100M doses over a year in a standard population, you’d see around 1M background deaths (mostly in the elderly), and a borderline vaccine would generate just 100 deaths. The statistical “noise” (in this case around 1,000 people is simply much greater than the death signal of 100 people). But the death signal is often not evenly spread out over the year making it MUCH easier to detect. So if most of the deaths are in 1 day, we’re looking at a signal of 36:1 for the deaths which is very easy to see if we have a 1 day bucket.

So if there is no detectable signal with >100M doses given to a standard population using the analysis buckets I defined in my post, I will declare the vaccine to be “safe” for the purposes of my offer.

For example, this is from Medicare and as you can see, we have a safety problem manifesting itself on Day 0 (the dot at 475). This will pop right out in the bucket analysis. The flu shot would fail the safety analysis.

Has anyone done this?

Here’s the question: Have you ever seen a spreadsheet like what I’m proposing for any vaccine?

The answer is no, not for any vaccine data collected in the US population.

That is the “big surprise,” i.e., the whole “vaccines are safe” narrative is built on an assumption of safety that nobody in the US actual ever measured ever. So for over 200 years, we’ve been living a lie. And to make things worse: nobody ever pointed that out.

So when I ask people to “show me the data” to prove me wrong, they all fail 100% of the time. Because the studies were never done most likely because they knew the vaccines would fail.

Check out this tweet:

People hate that tweet because:

1. Nobody can meet my challenge

2. It shows no vaccine has the data to prove it is safe

3. It shows that the whole “vaccines are safe” story is built on the belief of safety rather than the data

The closest effort I’m aware of is the data from the UK, but the data in the spreadsheet they provide is simply not accurate and not credible because they under count the unvaccinated. This is instantly obvious to anyone with a trained eye because the unvaxxed are instantly dying at twice the rate that they did moments before the vaccine rolled out:

Professor Norman Fenton, Martin Neil, Dr. Clare Craig, and others found the same deficiencies in the UK data before I ever set eyes on the data.

Furthermore, the summary is not fit for purpose because it isn’t granular enough to really see what is going on (there is nothing magical about 21 days; you want to see what is going on in all periods). If you compare my spreadsheet with theirs, you’ll see what I mean.

So here’s my question:

Have you ever seen the spreadsheet template in Step #3 for any vaccine ever from anywhere in the world containing reliable data?

The answer, as far as I know, is “No.” The closest I’ve seen is the UK data. Hats off to them. They got the overall approach exactly right, but their data is flawed and they continue to make flimsy excuses for not making the public health data public (I showed them how to do this without violating privacy and then they stopped responding to me).

Which means:

1. For the past 200+ years, we’ve been assuming vaccines are safe because nobody has bothered to check it properly

2. Nobody in the mainstream medical community in the US, as far as I know, has been demanding to see this analysis.

Why am I calling for this?

I’m calling for data transparency and doing it right so we will finally know whether vaccines are safe or not.

Two reasons:

1. It needs to be done

2. Nobody else is doing it

What is going on now is frightening

Here is Chelsea Clinton calling vaccine hesitancy and rejection of vaccines as “unfortunate”:

WTF?!?! I think it’s just the opposite.

People should be very vaccine hesitant because the health authorities have simply never delivered on the data showing the vaccines are safe.

And there’s a reason for that of course. We all know what it is. They aren’t delivering the data on the safety of the vaccine because they know it is not safe.

This is why all the world government agencies I’ve asked refuse to provide the data, even if I offer to pay all the costs. They just stop talking to me.

I totally disagree with Chelsea Clinton on health authorities power.

The health authorities should be stripped of their emergency powers because they misused them by requiring lockdowns, masking, and vaccination. It was a disaster. There were no checks on their power.

Did you ever hear of any health authorities saying “We’re not doing vaccinations until we make the data public for everyone to see”? I never saw this. Did I miss it?

Summary

The CDC needs to show us the data before we can answer the question “Is it safe?”

This is best done by publicly providing, for the first time in history, the individual death-vax records and vaccination records. This will then enable any member of the public to construct a summary template similar to the template described in this article. Using that template, it will be immediately obvious to everyone what is going on.

At that point, everyone will know the truth.

Wouldn’t that be nice for a change?

Until then, you should just say “No” or “Show me the data.”

And in the meantime, do everything you can to strip these “health authorities” of their emergency power. They should persuade people by the data, not by coercion.