Joel Smalley: The COVID truth teller no one has been able to challenge
I chatted with Joel Smalley of the HART Group today. He's written a ton of great statistical analyses on his Substack. I asked if anyone has challenged his work. Nope.
Executive summary
Joel Smalley, Quantitative Data Analyst at the HART Group, has written a lot of statistical analyses that have never been challenged. His conclusion: “The cure is worse than the disease.”
If the vaccines are so safe, how come nobody has been able to challenge his work?
Introduction
Joel Smalley is a member of the HART Group and the author of the Dead Man Talking substack. His specialty is statistical analysis.
I asked him today, “Has anyone ever challenged anything you wrote?”
He wrote back, “Nothing but hit pieces. Never a robust challenge of my analyses.”
The cure is worse than the disease
Recently, he wrote a whole series of articles (ending Jun 5, 2022) looking at excess deaths in various places.
His conclusion: “It's the same whichever country, state or province you choose. The cure is worse than the disease.”
He also wrote this article on the UK showing how the expected death rates and the actual death rates are vastly different, “Mortality data & COVID-19”and read the section "Mortality data during the vaccine roll-out period."
This graphic, showing unexplained deaths after the vaccine rollout, is stunning:
In particular, it says:
Broken down by the separate vaccination cohort (by age group, and then taking care homes as a separate unit), the correlation between vaccination and COVID-19 deaths is even more apparent and this time the model is able to accommodate the data with significantly more ease.
This relationship is not limited to England. It is apparent in many countries around the world, regardless of location, season, interventions and extent of prior COVID-19 activity.
Uruguay is a perfect example, as analyzed by Mathew Crawford.
Summary
How can we explain all this data which shows the vaccines are correlated with increasing deaths if the vaccines are safe and effective?
The COVID variants are less deadly, nearly everyone is vaccinated, and the most susceptible are already dead. Excess mortality should be going down, not up.
Well, nobody can answer that question.
This could be why nobody wants to debate us.
One of the major problems with medicine is that the entire system (ie. the legal penalities) have all been designed so that you are liable for anything bad that happens if a medical intervention is not given, but you are never liable for the adverse events of an intervention given.
So for example, if vaccinating 1 million people saves one life (because the vaccine works) and the vaccine also directly kills 500 people, the fact that you failed to save that one life is the only thing that will be trumpeted and had a big deal made about it whereas the 500 deaths will be ignored or described as harmful misinformation that creates hesitancy that prevents that one life from being saved.
You find this pattern with a lot of different pharmaceutical drugs or surgeries and there is a very strong bias to prosecute physicians who do not give therapies they feel are too dangerous (in fact the way medical malpractice is set up, you can only be convicted if you deviated from the established standard of care, so, once again, only failing to give a FDA sanctioned drug can result in legal consequences).
When the lockdowns happened, it also highlighted this problem, because it was obvious the lockdowns would cause much more harm than lives that were saved (and were based on highly innaccurate simplistic models that were admitted to have ignored the adverse consequences of those policies)...but any time they were challenged, the focus was simply on the people who could die if you did not lock down.
Thus, we get absurd graphs like this and no willingness to challenge the clear absurdity of them.
Someone made a good point about Paxlovid. This anti-viral (cost: $530) is prescribed to people in order to prevent "severe" symptoms or death. But isn't this an admission that the vaccines don't work? If nothing else, we've been told over and over that the vaccines prevent "severe" cases. Well, apparently they don't because if they did millions of people wouldn't need Paxlovid.
Here's today's real message: The vaccines don't prevent infection, nor spread and they really don't prevent severe cases either ... which is why you need all your vaccines and must take Paxlovid once you test positive (which you will, multiple times) ... So Pfizer has made $80 billion on vaccines that don't work and now they are making billions more on some pills that are prescribed because their vaccine didn't work. And the government pays for all this and does all your advertising and makes sure you can't be sued. It's a good business to be in, I guess. The more your products fail, the more money your company makes.