142 Comments

The vaxx enterprise will continue to argue that the shots still reduce the risk of severe illness, hospitalization, and long COVID. So even if the CFR didn't decline, the Pharma "experts" and trolls will point to "evidence" that the number of people experiencing debilitating, long-term symptoms or severe cases requiring intensive care would likely be lower due to the injections. They will cite lots of observational studies to support this premise -- all of which are fundamentally flawed in terms of methodology and often execution as well, viz Fenton & Neil's new book FIGHTING GOLIATH.

Expand full comment

Important comparisons, I would sat the most important comparisons are between the unvaccinated who were able to take full advantage of Real covid 19 prophylaxis and Real early treatments for covid, as these became known via existing and unfolding research, compared with both the unvaccinated and the "vaccinated" who were not allowed to know of this research or have access to use Real covid 19 prophylaxis and Real early treatments for covid.

These comparisons clearly show the best path to deal with and stop a pandemic as early as possible.

As to the last bit of "vaccinated" illusion - that it reduces disease severity - 2 points

1) Immune systems "vaccinated" to respond with IgG4 antibodies that tell the immune systems to tolerate this virus or that emerging cancer. OK to IgG4 tolerate some pollen or something else that is not too harmful. NOT OK TO TOLERATE THAT WHICH IS DANGEROUSLY HARMFUL TO THE BODY.

2) All Cause Mortality

Expand full comment

FYI that new book you mention is included in the VSRF Misinformation Superspreader Library Raffle!

https://givebutter.com/superspreaderlibrary

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

Please don't spam the comment section. https://imgur.com/Z1rN4dp.jpg

Expand full comment

"Would likely be lower" that is a non-quantifiable statement, it will save lives, that is a non-quantifiable statement, there is no way to prove any of it, those statements are simply designed to "sucker you in" all BS

Expand full comment

All risk no benefit indeed. Examine Chile which is one of the few countries on Ourwoldindata showing covid-19 deaths by vaccine status:

Here is the graph for 60-70 year olds. The death rate for vaxxed is twice unvaxxed at the peak in Feb/2022:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/chile-covid-19-mortality-rate-by-vaccination-status?country=~61-70

The look at excess deaths by age (again Chile shows better data and age breakout than most countries)

The NATURE article linked at the bottom of this post says they rolled out their second booster in Feb/2022. Look at the huge spike in deaths that immediately followed in these two age groups 75-84 and 85+. See graphs by age group at this link:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-average-baseline-by-age?country=~CHL

Nature article:

Effectiveness of the second COVID-19 booster against Omicron: a large-scale cohort study in Chile

The Chilean Ministry of Health launched the second booster campaign on February 14, 2022, based on a standard dose of Pfizer-BioNTech’s BNT162b2 or Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccines. All adults were eligible for a second booster dose, although priority was given to older people, front-line health workers, immunocompromised individuals, and persons with underlying conditions associated with the risk of severe COVID-19.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-41942-y

Expand full comment

The Declaration of Independence Quotes Showing 1-15 of 15

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.🙏

Expand full comment

Important comparisons, I would sat the most important comparisons are between the unvaccinated who were able to take full advantage of Real covid 19 prophylaxis and Real early treatments for covid, as these became known via existing and unfolding research, compared with both the unvaccinated and the "vaccinated" who were not allowed to know of this research or have access to use Real covid 19 prophylaxis and Real early treatments for covid.

These comparisons clearly show the best path to deal with and stop a pandemic as early as possible.

As to the last bit of "vaccinated" illusion - that it reduces disease severity - 2 points

1) Immune systems "vaccinated" to respond with IgG4 antibodies that tell the immune systems to tolerate this virus or that emerging cancer. OK to IgG4 tolerate some pollen or something else that is not too harmful. NOT OK TO TOLERATE THAT WHICH IS DANGEROUSLY HARMFUL TO THE BODY.

2) All Cause Mortality

Expand full comment

Thanks, Steve, for keeping us informed

Expand full comment

The Czech data actually shows benefit of vaccination. I made analysis of it and vaccinated death rate allways much lower than unvaccinated death rate in all age group. Actually this database is so perfectly displays vaccination benefits that it cannot be beleived. So I think it is a manipulated fake database. We need to find holes in it to show that it is compromized. One possibility is this Pfizer Moderna death-rate difference but it was easily answered that more vulnerable people with co-morbidalities got the Moderna shot. Best option would be to find vaccinated dead people where vaccination date is known to see if they are in the database. Unfortunatelly I do not know such data, maybe Czech people can have such relatives. What I found that in the Czech database we have more than 110 years individual who are claimed vaccinated while according to internet (https://gerontology.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_Czech_supercentenarians) we did not have such persons. For example in the database we have a Male who was born in 1912 and got his first shot in 2023.11.29! There is no data on Czech male who lived 111 years recently or ever.

Other observation from me that we have the deaths in the database only till 2022 while vaccination data is present even from 2024?

Expand full comment

The lawsuit recently won which challenged the EPA's Fluoride maximum was brought under the 2016 Chemical Safety Act I'm told. The law gives The People the right to challenge the EPA's rules and there should be a similar drug law if there isn't already. If there were, then we would have the opportunity to present our best evidence in court that the jabs are injurious. The court then would evaluate the science instead of a bunch of corrupt bureaucrats. Of course, the opposition to such a move would be orders of magnitude higher than the fluoride fights due to the money involved and the threat it would pose to the bio-security industrial complex's agenda. What would be our best evidence? Surely nothing that depended upon assigning cause of death since that's such an arbitrary and easily manipulated designation, right?

Expand full comment

We need more clear communication of risk benefit by age group. Here is a start. Please point out any flaws so this can be improved. Thanks.

Covid-19 Vaccine Risk-Benefit Analysis for Adolescents Aged 12-17

Below is critical information to be used in the informed consent discussions with patients and their families:

1. Benefit of the Vaccine:

o Reduced risk of going to the ICU or dying: 0.6 per 100,000 vaccinated adolescents.

2. Risk of the Vaccine

o Serious Adverse Event (defined officially as hospitalization, disability, or death): 42 per 100,000. This is an increase for the fall 2023 Covid-19 vaccine over the baseline of 8 per 100,000 after the first two doses of the original Covid-19 vaccine.

o For perspective a rotovirus vaccine (RotaShield® by Wyeth) was pulled from market in 1998 for serious adverse events of 10 per 100,000 in vaccinated babies.

3. Risk-Benefit Ratio:

o Calculated as the risk divided by the benefit: 42/0.6 = 70.

o A ratio of 70 indicates that the risk exceeds the benefit by 70 times.

4. Level of Adverse Events relative to traditional flu vaccines:

o Traditional flu vaccine incidence of serious adverse events (SAE) is 0.1 per 100,000 per 2018 Ontario Vaccine Safety report.

o Ratio of of Covid-19 serious adverse events to flu shot SAEs is: 42/0.1 = 420 times more risk.

Source of Benefit Data & Details of Calculation: According to Bonnie Henry’s BC Situation Report published in January 2021 (before kids were vaccinated), only 3 out of 528,000 kids in the 10-19 age range experienced going to the ICU, and there were no deaths due to Covid-19 infection. Therefore, the maximum benefit of taking the vaccine is 0.6 per 100,000 in terms of avoiding ICU and death.

Source of Risk Data: The risk data for the fall 2023 Covid-19 vaccine in Q3 and Q4 2023 can be found on the Canadian government website called “Reported side effects following COVID-19 vaccination in Canada.” Data on serious adverse events is reported in Figure 1 if one selects “Quarterly Rate” and looks in the table underneath the graph since the graph ends prematurely at Q2.

Expand full comment

Steve, you've mentioned several times now how the Czech data show Moderna was more dangerous than Pfizer. But when writing about the Connecticut data, you said it showed Pfizer was more dangerous. Was that a little brain fart, i.e. you meant to say Moderna? Or is there some explanation like different manufacturing plants for different countries or what have you? Sans an explanation, I find myself skeptical of the whole thing.

Expand full comment

I don't have a comment about the Connecticut data. But I remember listening to the presentation from moderna to the FDA advisory group to try and authorize the booster I think. But it was definitely some form of moderna covid vaccine. I could not believe it because it seemed like I listen for at least 90 minutes of moderna presenting data that it was approximately 30% more dangerous or deadly than pfizers. Two memory that meeting was literally just them going over endless amounts of statistics that all showed the same thing that it was more dangerous than the Pfizer. It was crazy to hear all of that and think of them authorizing that instead of taking it down to just the Pfizer. Not that I'm a fan of either but that advisory committee their brains are nothing but sock puppets

Expand full comment

The DNC/FBI/SEWER is a criminal organization that should be prosecuted under the RICO statute. They forced hundreds of millions of people to get Vaxxed, and many died or became injured for life.

Expand full comment
founding

The entire concept of vaccination is senseless:

For hundreds of thousands of years, humans have developed their finely-tuned immune systems to up-regulate and down-regulate dynamically in response to highly-varying concentrations of foreign pathogens in their local environments.

Medical-Industrial Complex MO:

Bypass the crucial external portion of this finely-tuned immune system, and inject an arbitrary amount of foreign material directly into a human‘s bloodstream. If either nothing happens, or the human immediately becomes ill and recovers quickly, declare success. And if they become ill shortly after (but not immediately after) injection, declare either an insufficient dose, or insufficient time for the dose to work. All of this knowing that the hypodermic needle was only first used to systematically deliver substances to the human body about 200 years ago. So, that’s the maximum length of time for testing the safety and efficacy of *any* injection - in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of years humans have had honing their immune response to the external environment. (And this safety and efficacy testing includes not just the injected material, but the delivery mechanism (i.e. the needle) itself. And adverse events due simply to the needle are non-trivial. For example, if people were periodically injected just with inert saline, a small fraction of these people would develop infections due to just exposing the broken skin to the environment. And declaring that proper injection technique wasn’t used doesn’t eliminate this statistic.)

It’s a con game that ran for over 90 years, until Leicester, UK, protested smallpox vaccinations in 1885. Then, the medical-industrial complex started up again for other diseases - because smallpox and every other “infectious” disease over 200 years (1740-1940) was almost completely eradicated due to significant improvements in sanitation (flush toilets, indoor and outdoor plumbing, and garbage removal), clean drinking water, food quality, air quality, refrigeration (for food preservation), housing (structural quality, space, heating and cooling), working conditions, and electricity (used to power machines, which reduced the average citizen’s manual labour by 95% over 200 years). All of this is well-documented in the book “Dissolving Illusions”. It charts the clear historical record of many well-known diseases which were reduced by at least 95% over this period - with no mass injections. And the book “Turtles All The Way Down” shows the clearly inadequate safety testing of many vaccines. (Inadequate due to lack of proper random control testing, because the control used by industry is almost always just an older version of a vaccine, which itself includes bioactive material which was never random-control tested. A proper control would be a known inert material, such as saline.)

Expand full comment

Monday, a young firefighter comes in he is afraid to die because three guys just died at his station in the past six months with turbo cancer. Thursday, a firefighter comes in from a station an hour away two cities over and he is afraid to die because two guys at his station died suddenly in the past several months.

Expand full comment

Did they support democrats as they crushed all opposition to the vaccine?

Expand full comment

Doubtful but no matter. This is not red vs blue, this is far far beyond the UNIparty, this is DOD democide vs we, the little ppl.

Expand full comment

I found a reference to the study that the hearts of jabbed work 47 percent harder:

https://rumble.com/v4bxk9r-bombshell-study-we-now-have-100-scientific-proof-why-the-jabbed-are-dying-s.html

Expand full comment

yes! Noticed it right away in 21, the heartbeats harder and louder. The heart tones are pumping hard, so many with tachy or ectopy and escalated blood pressure, I wrote about this first published in 22 retitled in 23 and sold in 15 nations because we know it is worldwide.

Expand full comment

And this could shorten people's life spans too just because the heart is working harder even without myocarditis or pericarditis.

Expand full comment

Just playing Devils advocate here. Could anything else have contributed to the rise in CFR after rollout? Rancourt et al pegged the stress of govt interventions as one of the three main contributors to excess mortality. Could stress be behind the rise in CFR? If we start from a more stress induced, run-down state, or oldies don't handle stress as well, in general, could it influence the CFR? Just a thought. Not claiming it's a good one.

Along a similar line, has anyone determined why the massive variance in IFR/CFR between countries? I mean, compare USA with Singapore for example? Age, health, treatments (another of Rancourt's three causes of global excess deaths), other govt interventions like lockdowns and mandates, something else? There may be something in the CFR differences between countries that could apply to the observed rise in CFR after vaccine rollouts. Was the rise universal amongst all countries and if not, why not?

Expand full comment

Well this is concerning, I have a patient that is a PSW, her company can't get her enough work now because there is a "lack of old people". Mission accomplished!

Expand full comment