This stunning brand comparison study shows the Pfizer shots increased your risk of death by at least 36%. Vaccines are NEVER supposed to INCREASE your risk of death.
He surely has the courage needed to be in the position of Surgeon General. Yet he also has immense courage in taking this study on and speaking out!! I am thoroughly impressed by his courage and strength of character!!
Yes many people died from the Covid vaccine but we need more information about what it has done to the people who have lived. There are many people who have health conditions that they would have never had if they didn’t get vaccine.
Grok does not appear to be consistent. Here’s what it “thought” 10 minutes ago.
the question- “In the light of the Levi study should I believe the Pfizer COVID vaccine is safe and effective ?”
It’s summary
### Recommendation
Don’t let the Levi study alone sway your view—it’s an outlier with significant limitations. Consider the broader evidence: RCTs, real-world studies, and global safety monitoring all affirm the Pfizer vaccine’s safety and effectiveness for most people. However, individual health conditions matter. Consult a healthcare provider to weigh personal risks (e.g., history of allergic reactions or heart issues) against benefits, especially given rare side effects like myocarditis in young males.
AI analysis of this and many other articles promoted by SK states - Steve Kirsch’s claims that COVID-19 vaccines have caused millions of deaths, specifically using New Zealand data, are widely debunked by independent experts and fact-checkers. His analysis is classified as misinformation-false or misleading information shared without intent to deceive-because it relies on flawed statistical methods, incorrect assumptions, and misinterpretation of mortality data. There is no credible evidence supporting his assertion that vaccines have killed one in a thousand people; official New Zealand statistics show no such excess mortality after vaccination, and published studies consistently find no increased risk of death from COVID-19 vaccines.
Breakdown of content categories in Kirsch’s claims:
Misinformation: ~100% (his analysis is factually incorrect, but there is no direct evidence he intends to deceive).
Disinformation: ~0% (no proof of deliberate intent to mislead).
Malinformation/Fraudulent: ~0% (not based on true information weaponized for harm or clear fraudulent intent).
Why can a seemingly qualified person spread such claims?
Kirsch’s background in technology, not epidemiology, gives him public credibility but not subject-matter expertise.
Social media and alternative platforms amplify controversial claims rapidly, outpacing fact-checking and regulatory responses.
Regulatory and medical authorities have limited power to police non-professional speech, especially when framed as opinion or “independent analysis”.
In summary, Kirsch’s viral claims about vaccine deaths are almost entirely misinformation, enabled by public misunderstanding of expertise, rapid online dissemination, and regulatory gaps.
Steve: you are jumping the gun on this paper aren't you? It is a preprint and hasn't been peer reviewed. Do you think that this study is so definitive that it shouldn't go thru the peer review process?
Old Clone, Steve is making here a 'Peer Review' as stated,
"My Opinion as Grok:
Based on the Levi-Ladapo paper’s findings, my peer review (no rejection-worthy flaws), and the Hungary study’s confirmation of Moderna’s neutral NCACM, I opine that regulators should withdraw Pfizer’s vaccine from the market until the causes of the 36% NCACM increase are fully explained."
Grok agrees: Levi/Ladapo paper justifies pulling the Pfizer shots
Why is Pfizer silent on this study showing their COVID vaccines are killing people? Why isn't the mainstream media asking them to comment on this study?
Steve is making a Peer-Review using commonly available statistics & Artificial Intelligence tools such as Chat GPT, Grok etc. Part of Steve's Modus operandum is following established statistical techniques to put forward 'reasonable' assessments or reviews which can be considered by the public at large in our own lives as members & participants in our Health Systems. So Steve's technique is to educate the whole population in Peer Review techniques so we can contrast & compare our own experiences & statistics measurable according to these standards.
Part of the problem of Peer Review has been the dearth of responsible Peer Review & the $$ capture of certain Peer Review standards such as the now misleading 'Cochrane Review', which has neglected its role to enable a full range of interdisciplinary professional Peer Review professionals to provide their data & experiences. Cochrane has become a Pharma-funded & prejudiced Gate-Keeper, out-of-synch with medical experiences in the population.
STANDARDS OF ANALYSIS Personally I follow a Gandhian 'My experiments with Truth' lifestyle, so look at my engagement with life & community as a commitment to solidarity & compassion. Since 1979, I live with a Vow-of-Solidarity with all humanity, the spirit, life & love which unites us all. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/c-relational-economy/6-solidarity I extend my standards to include all life in the food I eat & my relations with community & the biosphere.
Why do you continue to call the EUA shot a vaccine? You spoke then truth in math and statistics. It's time to call the shot what it really is.
They should give several shots to the people involved in making the vaccine.
Ah yes, Mr Pro Virus.
And the rest!!!!
That’s a lot of murders
Vaccines are created with the death of monkeys and fetuses.
When we injected death into us, we get death.
ALL those involved must be put in prison for life, or face the death penalty.
He surely has the courage needed to be in the position of Surgeon General. Yet he also has immense courage in taking this study on and speaking out!! I am thoroughly impressed by his courage and strength of character!!
They need to remove ALL Covid vaccines in the US and world! NOW
very true—-but that is NOT the first BIG FAT lie.——that killed many people…..https://open.substack.com/pub/hrabmv/p/what-makes-us-warm-in-not-the-co2
Yes many people died from the Covid vaccine but we need more information about what it has done to the people who have lived. There are many people who have health conditions that they would have never had if they didn’t get vaccine.
Grok does not appear to be consistent. Here’s what it “thought” 10 minutes ago.
the question- “In the light of the Levi study should I believe the Pfizer COVID vaccine is safe and effective ?”
It’s summary
### Recommendation
Don’t let the Levi study alone sway your view—it’s an outlier with significant limitations. Consider the broader evidence: RCTs, real-world studies, and global safety monitoring all affirm the Pfizer vaccine’s safety and effectiveness for most people. However, individual health conditions matter. Consult a healthcare provider to weigh personal risks (e.g., history of allergic reactions or heart issues) against benefits, especially given rare side effects like myocarditis in young males.
Nice to see a honest appraisal, great study.
Those officials who pushed this drug should be in jail for mass murder.
Safe and effective?
Such hokum it’s hard to know where to even start. So let’s just leave it.
AI analysis of this and many other articles promoted by SK states - Steve Kirsch’s claims that COVID-19 vaccines have caused millions of deaths, specifically using New Zealand data, are widely debunked by independent experts and fact-checkers. His analysis is classified as misinformation-false or misleading information shared without intent to deceive-because it relies on flawed statistical methods, incorrect assumptions, and misinterpretation of mortality data. There is no credible evidence supporting his assertion that vaccines have killed one in a thousand people; official New Zealand statistics show no such excess mortality after vaccination, and published studies consistently find no increased risk of death from COVID-19 vaccines.
Breakdown of content categories in Kirsch’s claims:
Misinformation: ~100% (his analysis is factually incorrect, but there is no direct evidence he intends to deceive).
Disinformation: ~0% (no proof of deliberate intent to mislead).
Malinformation/Fraudulent: ~0% (not based on true information weaponized for harm or clear fraudulent intent).
Why can a seemingly qualified person spread such claims?
Kirsch’s background in technology, not epidemiology, gives him public credibility but not subject-matter expertise.
Social media and alternative platforms amplify controversial claims rapidly, outpacing fact-checking and regulatory responses.
Regulatory and medical authorities have limited power to police non-professional speech, especially when framed as opinion or “independent analysis”.
In summary, Kirsch’s viral claims about vaccine deaths are almost entirely misinformation, enabled by public misunderstanding of expertise, rapid online dissemination, and regulatory gaps.
Steve: you are jumping the gun on this paper aren't you? It is a preprint and hasn't been peer reviewed. Do you think that this study is so definitive that it shouldn't go thru the peer review process?
Old Clone, Steve is making here a 'Peer Review' as stated,
"My Opinion as Grok:
Based on the Levi-Ladapo paper’s findings, my peer review (no rejection-worthy flaws), and the Hungary study’s confirmation of Moderna’s neutral NCACM, I opine that regulators should withdraw Pfizer’s vaccine from the market until the causes of the 36% NCACM increase are fully explained."
Grok agrees: Levi/Ladapo paper justifies pulling the Pfizer shots
Why is Pfizer silent on this study showing their COVID vaccines are killing people? Why isn't the mainstream media asking them to comment on this study?
Steve is making a Peer-Review using commonly available statistics & Artificial Intelligence tools such as Chat GPT, Grok etc. Part of Steve's Modus operandum is following established statistical techniques to put forward 'reasonable' assessments or reviews which can be considered by the public at large in our own lives as members & participants in our Health Systems. So Steve's technique is to educate the whole population in Peer Review techniques so we can contrast & compare our own experiences & statistics measurable according to these standards.
Part of the problem of Peer Review has been the dearth of responsible Peer Review & the $$ capture of certain Peer Review standards such as the now misleading 'Cochrane Review', which has neglected its role to enable a full range of interdisciplinary professional Peer Review professionals to provide their data & experiences. Cochrane has become a Pharma-funded & prejudiced Gate-Keeper, out-of-synch with medical experiences in the population.
STANDARDS OF ANALYSIS Personally I follow a Gandhian 'My experiments with Truth' lifestyle, so look at my engagement with life & community as a commitment to solidarity & compassion. Since 1979, I live with a Vow-of-Solidarity with all humanity, the spirit, life & love which unites us all. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/c-relational-economy/6-solidarity I extend my standards to include all life in the food I eat & my relations with community & the biosphere.
https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/b-ecological-design/2-responsible-compassionate-health