Thanks Dr. Craig! I have been following Steve Kirsch, but because I am not able to really understand the data very well (I had Biostatistics in the School of Public Health at UCLA 47 years ago 😂😩)I have been waiting for someone highly credentialed to weigh in. I also enjoy your conversations and insights on Dr. Campbell’s You Tube channel. I do hope other highly credentialed scientists offer their opinions as well.
My own analysis is ongoing and I haven't decided which position I'll take on this topic; but I would be interested in exchanging with you on the subject ; but don't want to disturb if you're busy. If you have time, I would appreciate if you could DM me (here or on X - Canceledmouse).
As a patholgist, I urge you to read Frances Leader's article on those white fibrous clots being found. There is a link to a video which is now restricted. Frances added some screen shots of the video which shows what it is, what it's doing and how they already knew this would happen as several studies prior to 2020 showed this. francesleader.substack.com/p/white-fibrous-clots Thankyou.
I actually object to this characterisation because their dataset uses one of the nastiest sleight-of-hand tricks I regularly see: dividing the deaths of the vaccinated over a number of products rather than totalling them all together.
Saying 'the unvaccinated have a higher mortality' when you've divided the vaccinated deaths by 4 (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen/J&J) is an invalid comparative basis.
Their dataset needs to compare all vaccinated versus all unvaccinated to come any sort of conclusions on mortality.
I know this trick because I've already seen that spike in data before and refuted their sleight-of-hand division-by-brand historically (ironically also involving the refuting of a Moderna shill). You can see the comparison here:
The mortality rates for each product here are calculated by the number of people who took that product.
The real slight of hand is the fact that the unvaccinated are not a homogenous bunch in anyway and included a disproportionate number of people who were expecting to die soon. This has a double whammy effect of a higher mortality rate in the unvaccinated and a lower one in the vaccinated - even if everything was placebo.
Is their chart also possibly plagued with the 'less than 21 days after the shot = unvaccinated' type fallacies or any of the other usual sleight-of-hands (E.G. counting less than X number of shots as 'not fully vaccinated' and making people think those outside of this group are unvaccinated)?
Were the raw numbers published anywhere by any chance? There nearly always is some sort of statistical manipulation. I remember when I caught the CDC's fudged ".07" of a person in their population dataset.
Thanks Dr Craig. I think it takes some effort to understand all of this and because it is nuanced and a bit complicated to get your head around, generally, people are going to go with a basic interpretation, ie. Look, high spike here, low spike here equals misunderstanding.
Thank You so much for Your efforts!!! The real story here are still the batches. There are only 474 batches associated with some deaths. It will be possible to plot the deaths for each significant batch over time since the vaccination. That in my opinion is the real story. The most deaths are with EJ6797, which is known from Britain as well. https://substack.com/home/post/p-146952729
Why is the focus always on the side effects of mRNA vaccines? It looks like the DNA ones cause even more harm (Janssen and AZ on your graph). Why do you worry about new mRNA vaccine development, but not about DNA ones? Apart from the delivery method, they cause the same harm to the cell. Is the spread more systemic throughout the body with mRNA? Why worry so much more about mRNA? I don’t get why mRNA get all the attention.
You wrote that "over the course of the year the vaccinated groups had 40-60% of the expected mortality".
But in this plot my excess mortality for vaccinated people was only about -22% in 2021 and -12% in 2022: sars2.net/czech.html#Monthly_CMR_by_age_group_relative_to_baseline_CMR_during_the_same_month_of_the_year_in_2015_2019. I derived the baseline by calculating the total mortality rate of each 5-year age group in the Czech Republic in 2015-2019 for each 12 months of the year, and then I got the expected number of deaths for each age group and month in the record-level data by multiplying their person-days with the baseline for the corresponding combination age group and month, and I added together the expected deaths for all age groups and months to get the total expected deaths. So my baseline was adjusted for both age and seasonal variation in mortality.
So is the classification of 'unvaccinated' given to those who had jabs but died before the 2 or 3 week purdah period finished? i.e, when they died in purdah they were classified as unvaccinated?
We know this happened and clearly puts a serious bias in there.
Clare -- Moderna recipients were 2x more likely to have chronic health conditions than Pfizer recipients.
Thus, individuals were not "distributed randomly" between Moderna and Pfizer, and as I've repeatedly emphasized you CANNOT presume any difference in death rates between the two is from causal vaccine effects.
This looks to be a false claim. As many theorized the difference was health/population based.
Turns out that those Czechs who received a dose of Moderna in 2021 were twice as likely to have a pre-existing chronic condition as those who had Pfizer with AZ higher still.
What definition are you using for "unvaccinated"? Last I read, this term referred to anyone who had not been vaccinated, but included people who had had one, two, three, even four shots. So this data indicates nothing. You are comparing apples and oranges. In some of the oranges are apples. There were not more deaths among the unvaccinated. I don't know anyone who was not vaccinated who died. I know at least half a dozen people were had at least one shot who died, and even more who had strokes, horrendous fibrous growths in their blood vessels, noticeable changes in their cognitive functioning. I don't know anyone who was not vaccinated who suffered any of these effects.
FYI, Kirsch was advocating everyone to vote for Ron Johnson, total right-winger. The only thing I could agree with him on is the dangers of the vaccines. But the world is a big place and there are a lot of issues, like butchering all Palestinians, that I do not agree with either of them at all. What is the difference between someone who is willing to kill with 2000-pound bombs and someone who is willing to kill with a shot?
Definitions are clear here. This data tells you who was vaccinated on which day with which substance and from which batch, when they were born and if they died, on which day. Unvaccinated are also recorded. If I assume correctly, the entire Czech population is recorded. 11 million rows correspond to the Czech people.
My point is it depends on definitions. In the U.S. if you are not up-to-date with god knows how many boosters, you are classified as "unvaccinated". In fact, you are not unvaccinated. Many of these "unvaccinated" had been vaccinated four times with this genetic modification substance. I don't know what the Czech definitions are. But in the U.S. the unvaccinated did not die at a higher rate than the vaccinated. Once they had COVID, they were pretty much immune. But the vaccinated were more likely to have it again and again and again because the shots destroyed their immune system.
Maybe. Sorry. I live in the U.S. I've been watching the official numbers in the UK and Israel as well pretty closely since fall of 2019 when I got COVID and it was not a big deal. Maybe Czech accounting is perfect. But from what I've seen the unvaxxed did not die in increased numbers from normal and the vaxxed most definitely did and continue to. Three people within my circle of friends and extended family are currently fighting turbo cancer. I don't go to funerals anymore because the number of funerals and travel expenses makes it too much financially. Haven't had any unvaxxed funerals to go to. But a lot of turbo cancer in the vaxxed. I do not believe the conclusions of the Czech vax program. It makes no sense for it to be one thing in all these other countries and for the vaccination program to work there, especially since it was so easy to recover from in my experience. Vitamin C, garlic, and colloidal silver. No doctors, no drugs, no vaccination.
Maybe the magic juice was the hot and sour soup? :-) The excuse to stay in bed a few days was utterly delicious. Were the people who died in the hospital? Maybe they should look at that. Honestly, I'm so over COVID. It existed but it was used as a method of genetic manipulation and killing a lot of people who did not need to die when they did. It also relieved a little pressure for the financial industry from the inevitable crash that's coming. In the US they are really trying to destroy small farms and self-sufficiency with the bird flu B.S.
Thanks Dr. Craig! I have been following Steve Kirsch, but because I am not able to really understand the data very well (I had Biostatistics in the School of Public Health at UCLA 47 years ago 😂😩)I have been waiting for someone highly credentialed to weigh in. I also enjoy your conversations and insights on Dr. Campbell’s You Tube channel. I do hope other highly credentialed scientists offer their opinions as well.
Hi Clare,
Speaking about "All the other evidence" ; it's worth mentioning that this data has been produced for https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/eci.14271 - about the variability of AEs by lots - which is easily explained by the facts we documented re processs 2 being tested on only 252 subjects (points 82 & following) : https://openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbiontech-c4591001-trial-audit
My own analysis is ongoing and I haven't decided which position I'll take on this topic; but I would be interested in exchanging with you on the subject ; but don't want to disturb if you're busy. If you have time, I would appreciate if you could DM me (here or on X - Canceledmouse).
Best regards.
Will do.
Actually I was wrong and the record-level dataset was not published as part of that study, but the dataset from that study just contained spreadsheets for 14,386 adverse event reports: https://github.com/PalackyUniversity/batch-dependent-safety. I bought access to the paper and posted screenshots of it here: sars2.net/i/czech-batch-study.jpg.
As a patholgist, I urge you to read Frances Leader's article on those white fibrous clots being found. There is a link to a video which is now restricted. Frances added some screen shots of the video which shows what it is, what it's doing and how they already knew this would happen as several studies prior to 2020 showed this. francesleader.substack.com/p/white-fibrous-clots Thankyou.
"The unvaccinated died more
Yes, this is true. "
I actually object to this characterisation because their dataset uses one of the nastiest sleight-of-hand tricks I regularly see: dividing the deaths of the vaccinated over a number of products rather than totalling them all together.
Saying 'the unvaccinated have a higher mortality' when you've divided the vaccinated deaths by 4 (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen/J&J) is an invalid comparative basis.
Their dataset needs to compare all vaccinated versus all unvaccinated to come any sort of conclusions on mortality.
I know this trick because I've already seen that spike in data before and refuted their sleight-of-hand division-by-brand historically (ironically also involving the refuting of a Moderna shill). You can see the comparison here:
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/p/moderna-shill-accidentally-confirms
The mortality rates for each product here are calculated by the number of people who took that product.
The real slight of hand is the fact that the unvaccinated are not a homogenous bunch in anyway and included a disproportionate number of people who were expecting to die soon. This has a double whammy effect of a higher mortality rate in the unvaccinated and a lower one in the vaccinated - even if everything was placebo.
But it seems to me, that for some batches toxicity is the real issue. They were so toxic, that no HVE can be found there anymore.
Is their chart also possibly plagued with the 'less than 21 days after the shot = unvaccinated' type fallacies or any of the other usual sleight-of-hands (E.G. counting less than X number of shots as 'not fully vaccinated' and making people think those outside of this group are unvaccinated)?
Were the raw numbers published anywhere by any chance? There nearly always is some sort of statistical manipulation. I remember when I caught the CDC's fudged ".07" of a person in their population dataset.
But it doesn't explain all the difference in every replicated worldwide study. HVE is real but it can't be used to claim any difference is HVE.
Thanks Dr Craig. I think it takes some effort to understand all of this and because it is nuanced and a bit complicated to get your head around, generally, people are going to go with a basic interpretation, ie. Look, high spike here, low spike here equals misunderstanding.
Thank You so much for Your efforts!!! The real story here are still the batches. There are only 474 batches associated with some deaths. It will be possible to plot the deaths for each significant batch over time since the vaccination. That in my opinion is the real story. The most deaths are with EJ6797, which is known from Britain as well. https://substack.com/home/post/p-146952729
Why is the focus always on the side effects of mRNA vaccines? It looks like the DNA ones cause even more harm (Janssen and AZ on your graph). Why do you worry about new mRNA vaccine development, but not about DNA ones? Apart from the delivery method, they cause the same harm to the cell. Is the spread more systemic throughout the body with mRNA? Why worry so much more about mRNA? I don’t get why mRNA get all the attention.
Am I the only one that does not understand the graph under argument one. It does look like the unvaccinated have been dying more. Thank You
You wrote that "over the course of the year the vaccinated groups had 40-60% of the expected mortality".
But in this plot my excess mortality for vaccinated people was only about -22% in 2021 and -12% in 2022: sars2.net/czech.html#Monthly_CMR_by_age_group_relative_to_baseline_CMR_during_the_same_month_of_the_year_in_2015_2019. I derived the baseline by calculating the total mortality rate of each 5-year age group in the Czech Republic in 2015-2019 for each 12 months of the year, and then I got the expected number of deaths for each age group and month in the record-level data by multiplying their person-days with the baseline for the corresponding combination age group and month, and I added together the expected deaths for all age groups and months to get the total expected deaths. So my baseline was adjusted for both age and seasonal variation in mortality.
So is the classification of 'unvaccinated' given to those who had jabs but died before the 2 or 3 week purdah period finished? i.e, when they died in purdah they were classified as unvaccinated?
We know this happened and clearly puts a serious bias in there.
Clare -- Moderna recipients were 2x more likely to have chronic health conditions than Pfizer recipients.
Thus, individuals were not "distributed randomly" between Moderna and Pfizer, and as I've repeatedly emphasized you CANNOT presume any difference in death rates between the two is from causal vaccine effects.
Confounding.
You can't wish it away.
This looks to be a false claim. As many theorized the difference was health/population based.
Turns out that those Czechs who received a dose of Moderna in 2021 were twice as likely to have a pre-existing chronic condition as those who had Pfizer with AZ higher still.
https://x.com/UncleJo46902375/status/1814375808062112215
What definition are you using for "unvaccinated"? Last I read, this term referred to anyone who had not been vaccinated, but included people who had had one, two, three, even four shots. So this data indicates nothing. You are comparing apples and oranges. In some of the oranges are apples. There were not more deaths among the unvaccinated. I don't know anyone who was not vaccinated who died. I know at least half a dozen people were had at least one shot who died, and even more who had strokes, horrendous fibrous growths in their blood vessels, noticeable changes in their cognitive functioning. I don't know anyone who was not vaccinated who suffered any of these effects.
FYI, Kirsch was advocating everyone to vote for Ron Johnson, total right-winger. The only thing I could agree with him on is the dangers of the vaccines. But the world is a big place and there are a lot of issues, like butchering all Palestinians, that I do not agree with either of them at all. What is the difference between someone who is willing to kill with 2000-pound bombs and someone who is willing to kill with a shot?
Definitions are clear here. This data tells you who was vaccinated on which day with which substance and from which batch, when they were born and if they died, on which day. Unvaccinated are also recorded. If I assume correctly, the entire Czech population is recorded. 11 million rows correspond to the Czech people.
My point is it depends on definitions. In the U.S. if you are not up-to-date with god knows how many boosters, you are classified as "unvaccinated". In fact, you are not unvaccinated. Many of these "unvaccinated" had been vaccinated four times with this genetic modification substance. I don't know what the Czech definitions are. But in the U.S. the unvaccinated did not die at a higher rate than the vaccinated. Once they had COVID, they were pretty much immune. But the vaccinated were more likely to have it again and again and again because the shots destroyed their immune system.
Again: The data provide the day, when a jab is taken. Therefore, the vaccinated and the unvaccinated can be identified precisely.
Maybe. Sorry. I live in the U.S. I've been watching the official numbers in the UK and Israel as well pretty closely since fall of 2019 when I got COVID and it was not a big deal. Maybe Czech accounting is perfect. But from what I've seen the unvaxxed did not die in increased numbers from normal and the vaxxed most definitely did and continue to. Three people within my circle of friends and extended family are currently fighting turbo cancer. I don't go to funerals anymore because the number of funerals and travel expenses makes it too much financially. Haven't had any unvaxxed funerals to go to. But a lot of turbo cancer in the vaxxed. I do not believe the conclusions of the Czech vax program. It makes no sense for it to be one thing in all these other countries and for the vaccination program to work there, especially since it was so easy to recover from in my experience. Vitamin C, garlic, and colloidal silver. No doctors, no drugs, no vaccination.
Maybe the magic juice was the hot and sour soup? :-) The excuse to stay in bed a few days was utterly delicious. Were the people who died in the hospital? Maybe they should look at that. Honestly, I'm so over COVID. It existed but it was used as a method of genetic manipulation and killing a lot of people who did not need to die when they did. It also relieved a little pressure for the financial industry from the inevitable crash that's coming. In the US they are really trying to destroy small farms and self-sufficiency with the bird flu B.S.
Steve is right
The former CDC director basically now admitting what's going down... https://eccentrik.substack.com/p/former-cdc-director-admits-jabs-never?utm_source=activity_item