My campaign fully supports this scientific research and goes one step further saying that not only will the assets of all the companies who developed these bioweapons be seized but so also the assets of the media conglomerates who pushed this psychological operation, the assets of the private intelligence firms who ran the operation, and the assets of the multinational investment banks and private equity who planned the whole thing behind the scenes. We will not allow the bogus truth tellers to corral us into a “blame the government” deadend that demands that at best the government should compensate us for these crimes. Having the government pay us is the same as having us pay us. That is our money, taxes or debt (and debt is just another form of tax either through money paid to the banks or inflation that destroys the value of our money). pastreich2028.com
Thank you for staying free and not putting up a pay wall. After all the grassroots work so many of us did to back up the people in relevant fields that spoke up, it was a huge gut shot to be systematically toss out of the conversation from the people I was fighting for! Many of us lost everything, most of us are not trying to regain it from like minded people who had the courage to stand strong against the fake narrative from the top of 'concensus'. Even worse, how we were treated and stomped on by so many people who we had always respected and shown respect, even when we didn't agree with them! I've been waiting for you to slow down so I could attempt to ask you for a few minutes of your time over zoom or email. Real lasting change can only come from people within communities. There's plenty of intelligent, moral people willing to do the work. A little time with them to clear whatever we questions you could answer up would go a long way because we know that one mistake could easily discredit 10 truths by confirmation bias alone! Maybe one day! Bhouleconstruction@hotmail.com
I did that with the Medicare data from Connecticut, which Kirsch received from the same source at the HHS who gave him the data for the number of deaths by days since vaccination. I got lower than expected mortality for vaccinated people when adjusted for either age alone, or for age and observation month: https://sars2.net/connecticut.html#Deaths_by_weeks_since_vaccination.
In Barry Young's data from New Zealand, the Czech datasets, and the Japanese FOI data, there's similarly a very low number of deaths in the first weeks after vaccination, but afterwards the number of deaths reaches a plateau below the expected level: https://sars2.net/statistic2.html#Deaths_by_days_since_vaccination_in_Japan.
Kirsch has been posting these plots for deaths by time since vaccination since 2023, and I have asked him many times over the years to add an age-adjusted baseline to his plots, but he has repeatedly refused (because the baseline either wouldn't give him the result he wants to see, or perhaps calculating the baseline is above his skill level, even though I have taught him many times how to calculate the baseline).
I agree Steve, this indeed may be one of your most important posts. Not because it is making the point that you claim it makes, but rather because it demonstrates your ineptitude when it comes to using data and analytics to draw valid conclusions about healthcare data. Although your poor reasoning is on full display here, I'll limit my comments to focus on the major atrocities seen.
First, the old “whistleblower" claim. Are you saying that this chart was produced by the whistleblower and that giving it to you is "blowing the whistle”? That's not whistleblowing. Is this all that you got? Maybe it was a trap set for you, knowing that you would take the bait? Do share more info please.
Your chart has no meaning and to paraphrase Shakespeare, it’s a “tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”. Sorry to be so blunt, but if the shoe fits … Why do I say this? Your analysis is based on the Gompertz mortality model but this model is a starting point, not an ending point. When applying certain formulas and rules, you have to often include the ceteris paribus clause, which basically translates as "all else being equal”. There are so many moving pieces involved in vaccine roll-out and the associated impact on mortality that, to provide this single chart and shout "Eureka!” is simply ludicrous.
To expand upon point #2, how about going beyond an 1825 model and consider what actuaries have done to account for the impact of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination on mortality. Companies like Gen Re have created models to help them price life insurance given a huge degree of uncertainty. You'll notice that higher vaccine uptake is a factor associated with decreased mortality in the models. Other factors such as virulence and transmissibility of predominant COVID-19 strains and public health initiatives also influence the model. Do you think you may have forgotten a few things?
The chart itself fails in many other ways. It is basically a bastardized Kaplan-Meier plot lacking the concept of a denominator. Why don't you look at the real thing that many others have produced? Compare % surviving over time for a vaccinated cohort and an appropriately matched unvaccinated cohort. Wow! Look at the survival advantage in the vaccinated cohort! That lets the wind out of your sails doesn't it?
Moving onto VAERS … all those reports of events after COVID-19 vaccination must be a smoking gun, right? Let's think about it …
… an anxious population that has been locked down by a novel virus associated with high mortality
… vaccines that have received emergency authorization and utilize a new technology
… pressure to be vaccinated including those who have avoided recommended vaccines
… much of the vaccination occurring outside of the usual healthcare setting including “drive thru" vaccinations administered by strangers
Given these and many other factors, what is the expected number of VAERS reports? Are you just going to ignore the work done to validate VAERS signals? How convenient.
The confirmed cumulative deaths per million chart doesn't help your case either. You say the vaccine was supposed to "flatten the curve”. However, there was always uncertainty about what the future would bring. Virtually all trained researchers believe that the vaccines had a major impact in ending the pandemic. There are clearly 4 distinct lines that can be fit to this plot. Early 2022 to 2023 shows a marked decline in the rate of cumulative mortality before a flattening in 2023. Once again, many moving parts, there was no pre-written story.
Analysis of healthcare data is best left to those trained and experienced in it, not armchair quarterbacks. One day you're reducing a problem to an absurdly simplified view, the next you're twisting yourself into a pretzel to try to arrive at the explanation you want to peddle. Neither approach works.
Hi, asked chatgpt, how would 65 olds mortality curve look like after new year's fireworks. We start with seasonal high +10 % of the mean, head for seasonal low -10% of the mean, and back to year's end high. This is parabole or cosine curve, first going down, then up. if you extent the year to 65+, the curve maintains the form but becomes bigger. This is norm year.
If there a distruption or an intervention, and the is only showing rise, something is wrong. So I replaced fireworks with roll-out, since time timing was close enough, and the typical nitpicking begins. However, after several rounds, there was some sense with ArtInt reasoning. Will follow up when Kirsch writes his next post.
The reason why the short-term HVE seems to only last about 3 weeks in Kirsch's plot is that a lot of people got the first dose in January or February 2021, so over the next few months there was a declining trend in background mortality, because the COVID wave in the winter of 2020 to 2021 was passing by, and winter was turning to summer.
So after about 3 weeks, the increasing trend in deaths caused by the short-term HVE waning out is countered by the decreasing trend in background mortality, and the two curves roughly cancel each other out.
After adjusting for background mortality, the period with reduced deaths would last much more than 3 weeks after vaccination.
So this chart shows 1,376,000 deaths following the covid vax injection starting day 21 post injection. Medicare is complicit in all these deaths! Like I said, we knew this was happening at the time.
We knew this was happening at the time but we were censored, shutdown, banned, locked out, cancelled; nevertheless we knew this was happening at the time.
Not that it matters, but I really doubt Fuellmich is guilty of anything other than shining a light on a mass murder operation.
Reiner Fuellmich: "The VACCINE was not brought in for COVID. COVID was brought in for the VACCINE. Once you realize that, everything else makes sense."
> On April 24, 2025, the Göttingen Regional Court sentenced Fuellmich to three years and nine months in prison for 18 counts of commercial breach of trust. The court found he had diverted approximately €700,000 in donations from the Stiftung Corona-Ausschuss for personal use, including a home renovation. The Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice) rejected his appeal in August 2026, making the sentence final. He is currently detained at the JVA Bremervörde prison. <
Well your point is very different than the actual HVE, which simply does not apply to Steve's article. It aso does not refute what Steve stated as far as I can determine. But I think we agree Steve's chart would be more convincing if it had the demnominator for those 365 days, right?
Truth
My campaign fully supports this scientific research and goes one step further saying that not only will the assets of all the companies who developed these bioweapons be seized but so also the assets of the media conglomerates who pushed this psychological operation, the assets of the private intelligence firms who ran the operation, and the assets of the multinational investment banks and private equity who planned the whole thing behind the scenes. We will not allow the bogus truth tellers to corral us into a “blame the government” deadend that demands that at best the government should compensate us for these crimes. Having the government pay us is the same as having us pay us. That is our money, taxes or debt (and debt is just another form of tax either through money paid to the banks or inflation that destroys the value of our money). pastreich2028.com
Thank you for staying free and not putting up a pay wall. After all the grassroots work so many of us did to back up the people in relevant fields that spoke up, it was a huge gut shot to be systematically toss out of the conversation from the people I was fighting for! Many of us lost everything, most of us are not trying to regain it from like minded people who had the courage to stand strong against the fake narrative from the top of 'concensus'. Even worse, how we were treated and stomped on by so many people who we had always respected and shown respect, even when we didn't agree with them! I've been waiting for you to slow down so I could attempt to ask you for a few minutes of your time over zoom or email. Real lasting change can only come from people within communities. There's plenty of intelligent, moral people willing to do the work. A little time with them to clear whatever we questions you could answer up would go a long way because we know that one mistake could easily discredit 10 truths by confirmation bias alone! Maybe one day! Bhouleconstruction@hotmail.com
Well that sounds familiar!!
This needs to be plotted against the expected survival curve. Use an actuarial approach and have AI build a life table
I did that with the Medicare data from Connecticut, which Kirsch received from the same source at the HHS who gave him the data for the number of deaths by days since vaccination. I got lower than expected mortality for vaccinated people when adjusted for either age alone, or for age and observation month: https://sars2.net/connecticut.html#Deaths_by_weeks_since_vaccination.
In Barry Young's data from New Zealand, the Czech datasets, and the Japanese FOI data, there's similarly a very low number of deaths in the first weeks after vaccination, but afterwards the number of deaths reaches a plateau below the expected level: https://sars2.net/statistic2.html#Deaths_by_days_since_vaccination_in_Japan.
If you plot a ratio of actual to expected deaths by time since vaccination, the curve typically looks like a constant minus an exponential decay, where the curve takes around three months to flatten out, and the asymptote is below 1: https://sars2.net/rootclaim5.html#Kirsch_fooled_himself_with_his_dose_3_vs_dose_2_plot. And a curve that looks like a constant minus an exponential decay is not consistent with vaccines causing more deaths over time, but rather with a selection effect like the HVE: https://sars2.net/rootclaim5.html#Mortality_that_follows_a_constant_minus_an_exponential_decay_is_consistent_with_a_selection_effect.
Kirsch has been posting these plots for deaths by time since vaccination since 2023, and I have asked him many times over the years to add an age-adjusted baseline to his plots, but he has repeatedly refused (because the baseline either wouldn't give him the result he wants to see, or perhaps calculating the baseline is above his skill level, even though I have taught him many times how to calculate the baseline).
I agree Steve, this indeed may be one of your most important posts. Not because it is making the point that you claim it makes, but rather because it demonstrates your ineptitude when it comes to using data and analytics to draw valid conclusions about healthcare data. Although your poor reasoning is on full display here, I'll limit my comments to focus on the major atrocities seen.
First, the old “whistleblower" claim. Are you saying that this chart was produced by the whistleblower and that giving it to you is "blowing the whistle”? That's not whistleblowing. Is this all that you got? Maybe it was a trap set for you, knowing that you would take the bait? Do share more info please.
Your chart has no meaning and to paraphrase Shakespeare, it’s a “tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”. Sorry to be so blunt, but if the shoe fits … Why do I say this? Your analysis is based on the Gompertz mortality model but this model is a starting point, not an ending point. When applying certain formulas and rules, you have to often include the ceteris paribus clause, which basically translates as "all else being equal”. There are so many moving pieces involved in vaccine roll-out and the associated impact on mortality that, to provide this single chart and shout "Eureka!” is simply ludicrous.
To expand upon point #2, how about going beyond an 1825 model and consider what actuaries have done to account for the impact of COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination on mortality. Companies like Gen Re have created models to help them price life insurance given a huge degree of uncertainty. You'll notice that higher vaccine uptake is a factor associated with decreased mortality in the models. Other factors such as virulence and transmissibility of predominant COVID-19 strains and public health initiatives also influence the model. Do you think you may have forgotten a few things?
The chart itself fails in many other ways. It is basically a bastardized Kaplan-Meier plot lacking the concept of a denominator. Why don't you look at the real thing that many others have produced? Compare % surviving over time for a vaccinated cohort and an appropriately matched unvaccinated cohort. Wow! Look at the survival advantage in the vaccinated cohort! That lets the wind out of your sails doesn't it?
Moving onto VAERS … all those reports of events after COVID-19 vaccination must be a smoking gun, right? Let's think about it …
… an anxious population that has been locked down by a novel virus associated with high mortality
… vaccines that have received emergency authorization and utilize a new technology
… pressure to be vaccinated including those who have avoided recommended vaccines
… much of the vaccination occurring outside of the usual healthcare setting including “drive thru" vaccinations administered by strangers
Given these and many other factors, what is the expected number of VAERS reports? Are you just going to ignore the work done to validate VAERS signals? How convenient.
The confirmed cumulative deaths per million chart doesn't help your case either. You say the vaccine was supposed to "flatten the curve”. However, there was always uncertainty about what the future would bring. Virtually all trained researchers believe that the vaccines had a major impact in ending the pandemic. There are clearly 4 distinct lines that can be fit to this plot. Early 2022 to 2023 shows a marked decline in the rate of cumulative mortality before a flattening in 2023. Once again, many moving parts, there was no pre-written story.
Analysis of healthcare data is best left to those trained and experienced in it, not armchair quarterbacks. One day you're reducing a problem to an absurdly simplified view, the next you're twisting yourself into a pretzel to try to arrive at the explanation you want to peddle. Neither approach works.
Steve apologizes...
Governments LIED to the masses and Steve apologizes. Go figure...
Hi, asked chatgpt, how would 65 olds mortality curve look like after new year's fireworks. We start with seasonal high +10 % of the mean, head for seasonal low -10% of the mean, and back to year's end high. This is parabole or cosine curve, first going down, then up. if you extent the year to 65+, the curve maintains the form but becomes bigger. This is norm year.
If there a distruption or an intervention, and the is only showing rise, something is wrong. So I replaced fireworks with roll-out, since time timing was close enough, and the typical nitpicking begins. However, after several rounds, there was some sense with ArtInt reasoning. Will follow up when Kirsch writes his next post.
JR
The short-term/dynamic/time-varying/temporal healthy vaccinee effect causes the number of deaths to be reduced for several months after vaccination: https://sars2.net/connecticut.html#Deaths_by_weeks_since_vaccination, https://sars2.net/rootclaim5.html#Does_short_term_HVE_last_for_3_weeks_in_the_Czech_FOI_data, https://sars2.net/rootclaim5.html#Duration_of_short_term_HVE_in_light_of_Japanese_Koganei_data, https://sars2.net/czech.html#Deaths_by_weeks_after_first_dose.
The reason why the short-term HVE seems to only last about 3 weeks in Kirsch's plot is that a lot of people got the first dose in January or February 2021, so over the next few months there was a declining trend in background mortality, because the COVID wave in the winter of 2020 to 2021 was passing by, and winter was turning to summer.
So after about 3 weeks, the increasing trend in deaths caused by the short-term HVE waning out is countered by the decreasing trend in background mortality, and the two curves roughly cancel each other out.
After adjusting for background mortality, the period with reduced deaths would last much more than 3 weeks after vaccination.
So this chart shows 1,376,000 deaths following the covid vax injection starting day 21 post injection. Medicare is complicit in all these deaths! Like I said, we knew this was happening at the time.
these are all deaths, not excess deaths. people die. it's the slope of deaths/day over time that is pathological.
It's all hideous & those shots are still in use, thank you for your work
We knew this was happening at the time but we were censored, shutdown, banned, locked out, cancelled; nevertheless we knew this was happening at the time.
Incredible... Thank you Steve for continuing to show the world how we were manipulated. The data tells the story.
Though it cost me about $100k, I refused the shot and retired early (thank God I had the option to retire).
Keep it up!
I'm not very good at reading graphs, especially so small. What is the bottom line, here?
the slope goes the wrong way. :)
Not that it matters, but I really doubt Fuellmich is guilty of anything other than shining a light on a mass murder operation.
Reiner Fuellmich: "The VACCINE was not brought in for COVID. COVID was brought in for the VACCINE. Once you realize that, everything else makes sense."
> On April 24, 2025, the Göttingen Regional Court sentenced Fuellmich to three years and nine months in prison for 18 counts of commercial breach of trust. The court found he had diverted approximately €700,000 in donations from the Stiftung Corona-Ausschuss for personal use, including a home renovation. The Bundesgerichtshof (Federal Court of Justice) rejected his appeal in August 2026, making the sentence final. He is currently detained at the JVA Bremervörde prison. <
Whenever a retraction or correction is reported, I'm genuinely curious who is the person in charge of the decision.
Typical un named replies begin with nebulous indescript nouns such as :
"The journal...."
"The Times...."
"Officials...."
"Experts...."
etc etc. we have absolutely no one to ask any followup questions to.
Of course we also have no one to blame or fault.
Well your point is very different than the actual HVE, which simply does not apply to Steve's article. It aso does not refute what Steve stated as far as I can determine. But I think we agree Steve's chart would be more convincing if it had the demnominator for those 365 days, right?
A safe vaccine would have a flat slope based on the underlying death rate. the slope should not change over time