The Czech Republic dataset provides amazing insights into COVID vaccine safety and efficacy. Here are the key charts showing it was all risk and no benefit.

In this article, I'll summarize the 5 most important points I learned over the past year.

Executive summary

1. The benefits of the COVID vaccine were illusory. It was caused by a mix of healthy vaccinee effect (HVE) and non-proportional hazards (NPH). People who decided not to take the vaccine have a much higher mortality rate than people who choose to opt to take the vaccine (e.g., the “Mirror of Erised” paper showed it can be 5 times higher). This is known as the static healthy vaccinee effect.

   

   Selection bias alone can create an 80% vaccine efficacy against death.

   But COVID is also a non-proportional hazard (NPH) where your risk of dying from COVID is hyper-proportional to your mortality risk. See Fig 3 in Assessing the age specificity of infection fatality rates for COVID-19: systematic review, meta-analysis, and public policy implications where the curve is steeper than normal mortality.
   
   So this adds another 2x on top of 5x, so now you are at a 90% vaccine efficacy with a placebo vaccine. This is why when Arbel reported a 90% vaccine efficacy, Hoeg pointed out, “well, the unvaccinated were dying at 10x the rate of the vaccinated during NON-COVID.” Arbel refused to address the accusation and instead said, “But our models show the vaccine is effective.”

Using the Czech data, we can show that if you have two cohorts with the same mortality rate, but one is vaccinated and the other is unvaccinated, their all cause mortality (ACM) during COVID waves was the same!!!

It wasn’t the vaccine. It was their underlying mortality rate differences that caused the apparent benefit.

Here are two different examples (one with all ages, the other with people with 1 or more comorbidities):

Match the mortality rate and the vaccine “benefit” goes away!

If you match mortality rate pre-COVID, guess what happens during a COVID wave? You track there too!! It was all about your mortality rate, not the vaccine.

3. Your mortality increased over 6 months then plateaued. If you got vaccinated, your mortality rate increased to a new level over time. If you were unvaccinated, there was no mortality increase. You can see that from the charts above. The mortalities track until after peak COVID. The mortality rate of the unvaccinated return to baseline. The mortality rate of the vaccinated remains elevated. They were matched before and now they are suddenly not matched because the vaccine separated their mortalities. The Levi study done using Florida data confirms the vaccines were not safe, increasing NCACM by 36%. It was a differential study, but COVID vaccines do NOT reduce your non-COVID all-cause mortality. So even if Moderna was 100% safe, Pfizer is a death shot.

4. It wasn’t caused by an extended HVE effect. People like Professor Jeffrey Morris try to dismiss the vaccine harm claiming this is dynamic HVE which means vaccinated people see a rise in deaths because their deaths were artificially lowered because people who were about to die didn’t get vaccinated. This is super easy to falsify. If you look at the boosters, people who got Dose 3 had a mortality increase that was NOT offset by a commensurate decrease in mortality in the Dose 2 cohort; it was flat! We see the same for the booster shots. This was vaccine harm and it is dose dependent.

   

   You get the booster, your mortality rises with respect to the unvaccinated.

   

   This was NOT dynamic HVE. The dose 2 vs 0 was FLAT. If it was dynamic HVE, this would be a mirror image of the curve above. This is clear harm caused by the shot.

5. The harm was proportional to dose. This is a key indicator of causality. For the primary series one shot created a 5% increase in mortality. Two shots was 18%. If the shots were safe and effective, the harm should have gone down.
   
   It went the wrong way with increasing shots.
   
   This tells you everything you need to know: more shots, higher death rates, not lower death rates. They lied to us.

   

   The harms from 1 shot were minor.

   

   2 shots were more harmful than 1 shot. It should have gone the other way if the vaccines were safe and effective.

The effect wasn’t due to different people opting for Dose 2. Here we track a fixed cohort at t=0. See how the vaccinated cohort diverges up when the shots roll out. The shots are always supposed to reduce population mortality, never increase it.

Death matched cohorts tracked over time. They SUDDENLY DIVERGE right after the booster shots with the vaxxed dying more. It was supposed to be the other way around.

More confirmation

The Palinkas study in Hungary accidentally revealed in Fig 1 and Fig 2 that the unvaccinated did equally well as the vaccinated during COVID and non-COVID periods.

The Xie study published in JAMA, accidentally revealed that the COVID vaccine provided zero protection against hospitalization since the % boosted who were hospitalized was actually higher than the % boosted in the VA system. It showed vaccinated people died less of COVID, but the benefit was smaller than the typical HVE differences between cohorts. In other words, the shots likely made you more likely to be hospitalized and die.

NOBODY is taking KCOR and the Czech data and trying to spin it as KCOR shows the opposite that the vaccines are safe. I ran GLM and DS-CMRR analysis (all in my Github) and they showed nearly identical mortality curves. It was dose dependent harm; not a safe vaccine.

And there were no knees in the cumulative curves for COVID deaths or all-cause deaths anywhere when the vaccine rolled out. You cannot roll out a 10X death benefit vaccine and not see a knee. Claiming that the vaccine exactly counterbalanced the dead growth curve of the virus in all countries is absurd.

KCOR is publicly available. Any health department in the world could run it on their data. No health department will ever do that because they would find out the truth that they killed people. It’s career suicide. But if the vaccines were safe, they’d have nothing to fear by making the data public.

How much more obvious does it have to get?

Summary

1. There was no vaccine benefit. It was a statistical mirage created by HVE and NPH.

2. The vaccine increased your mortality. It wasn’t dynamic HVE causing this. The booster data (comparing dose 3 to 0 and dose 2 to 0) make this clear.

3. The more shots, the more harm. A safe and effective vaccine would show the opposite. In fact, if we track the two dose cohort over time, we can see the divergence when the boosters roll out. This is not because sicker people got the shots because it is the SAME cohort we are tracking!! If you give a population an intervention to save lives, their mortality should always go down. For the COVID shots, it goes up. Check out my Japan data article showing every single shot causes a mortality discontinuity upwards (from shot 1 to shot #6, it happens every time).

4. If the shots were safe, epidemiologists would be publishing paper after paper showing how the Czech data proves they were right. No papers. Silence. And after I put out my KCOR analysis, there are ZERO people showing how I got it wrong and the “corrected” analysis shows the opposite. Zero. And NOBODY on their side is calling for data transparency in other countries. Why are they so afraid of data transparency if the shots are so safe?

This was the greatest preventable human tragedy of my lifetime. And today, people are still clueless.

The KCOR method enabled me to precisely measure what happened and it confirms in spades everything I wrote above. Everything is consistent. I’ve invited anyone to challenge me on the KCOR method in a public forum. No takers. It seems nobody wants to talk about the method or the Czech data for some reason including the fact checkers who all avoid me like the plague.