75 Comments
Jan 9Liked by Martin Neil, Norman Fenton

The cynic in me says the vaccine was rolled out from late December 2020 in the knowledge that, whether it worked or not, seasonality meant it could be claimed a success.

Expand full comment

Yup - “effect” enhanced by recording the vaccinated as unvaccinated for 14 days. Pity for them they couldn’t eradicate the control group - stubborn “selfish” people who continue to expose the lie. Sadly I wasn’t one of them - took the jab to travel and very much regret it. Should have stayed home.

Expand full comment

It was 21 days in some areas. There are a strange hump of the unvaccinated dying though, just after their jab. My kids were coerced into taking the jab, the pressure was immense.

Expand full comment
Jan 9Liked by Martin Neil

One hardly needs to be a cynic to think this. In December 2020, after reading the phase 3 clinical trials for both Pfizer and Moderna, I was forced to conclude that 1) the shots were not a vaccine, 2) the VE was at most 1%, not 95%, and 3) adverse events were worse than covid. In consequence, I predicted they would delay rollout of the shots until the seasonality factor of coronaviruses kicked in. When they began the rollout in early Jan 2021 I was a little surprised. But then the manufacturers of the shots claimed supply issues and shut down the rollout just long enough for the seasonality factor to make it look like the shots were working.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/covid-19-vaccine-update-feb-18-1.5918175

Right on schedule, and exactly as I predicted.

Expand full comment
Jan 9·edited Jan 9

The historian in me says the same about most "vaccine rollouts. They have an uncanny way of jumping on the wave just as it's about to gently roll up on shore. And then they claim victory. Remarkable how long fraud can be sustained when virology, infectious disease and public health team up. Throw in some FIN-Tech Bro's, Wall St. and Military Support and boy or boy, you got a Banger on your hands!

Expand full comment

Similar with lockdowns: the Swiss government had the tendency to impose lockdowns just when the daily infection numbers appeared to be topping or even already starting to decrease. Success guaranteed...

Expand full comment

I wrote a story showing that "Covid deaths" in the military more than doubled in a few months in late 2020/early 2021. How could this happen if the vast majority of military had already been vaccinated by September 2020? The vaccines must not have been too effective at preventing "severe cases" (like those that lead to death).

And then we have the puzzling data of all-cause deaths in some big cities (like New York) exploding in ... April 2020. What other respiratory virus in history has created massive deaths in the ... spring?

Expand full comment
Jan 9·edited Jan 9Liked by Martin Neil

They claimed success by not testing those that were vaccinated - purely fudging the numbers of PCR positive cases whilst in the background people were actually becoming physically sick and as statistics show deaths peaked. But it wasn’t ‘Covid’ - nudge nudge wink wink, as the vaccine hadn’t taken effect yet.

I would argue they rolled it out in winter so that people would knowingly be aware of more sick people due to seasonal illness and therefore be more inclined to take an injection as they normally do with the flu shot.

They just needed to get this injection out as quick as possible so that they could then claim the ‘virus’ caused all the adverse effects that we know are as a result of the vaccine and so that people would blur their memories as to what illness was prior to the injection.

Expand full comment

Far, far, far more likely than not.

Expand full comment

The cynic in me says they started the vaccine rollout at the beginning of 2021 so they could work out just how successful the depopulation plan was going.

Expand full comment
Jan 10·edited Jan 10

Yet the majority of deaths from the virus/vaxx were over the age of 60....way outside the breeding age..not much of a depopulation plan..and the list of companies that require less customers for services or products...is 0..so it must be govts then right?...but most western govts are all for unlimited immigration...so thats out as well..so if its not govt/companies etc...(who control the $+narrative)...who is this secret cabal that is going against the govt/companies ideals..and trying to "depopulate" the world...using products that dont actually kill the majority of people under the age of 60..?...

Expand full comment

Well let's see who rolls up at Davos next week, or even better find out who attends the Bildeberg meeting, attendees or minutes from the meeting are secret. I didn't see one football player over 60 dying during a match. The excess deaths in the over 80s is 4%, it's the 18 - 49 age group who have been bumping up the excess death stats raising it to 10%. It has been estimated 13 million have been killed by the vaccines thus far.

Regarding immigration, I think they are trying to break down national identities, did you know 30% of births in 2022 were to non-UK-born mothers, up from 28.8 per cent the previous year. By the time those kids start school it's going to be a very different UK. Birth rate is down 3%. They also stopped doing the census in 2021, so they are trying to hide it, but Exeter and Taunton has an awful lot of black faces all of a sudden.

Expand full comment

I live in wellington👍

Agree with what you say, there has been alot of interesting videos coming out of Ireland .

I think that there is an intentional destruction of western society on all levels.

Wellington has changed dramatically over the last few years and I no longer recognise the town I was born in.

They talk about going green whilst covering every piece of land in houses.

The M5 has 5G masts every quarter of a mile but no NHS dentists I could go on for along time.Werr the new Victorians, the wealthy will have access to health care, travel and heated houses whilst the peasants sit in cold homes and those in power meet there green energy targets🚀👍

Expand full comment

Exactly, so unless we wake enough people up we've had it.

Expand full comment

Most people don't want to wake due to years of indoctrination.

If it weren't for family commitments I would buy a plane ticket to somewhere with a good climate, low population density, and good self sufficiency skills.

At present the west is completely screwed and the UK for a whole multitude of reasons is about the worst place to be.The fact were run by a oligarchy of privately educated school boys does not bode well for us.Andrew Bridgen MP speach is worth a listen and some MPs did attend, there are some positives out there👍🤝

Expand full comment

Your new to this subject matter I see..

Davos/Bilbergs..is just pointless hand waving and has nothing to do with the problems I pointed out with "depopulation" ideas that you could not explain...

That's why you never corrected anything I wrote about why govt/big pharma etc would want less customers/humans etc...

You could have conceded that point but instead you ducked it and so it's pointless continuing this dialogue since you are not interested in Facts/science/data/history/logic ....

Sigh..Most 60 years are not playing soccer hence not dying during soccer matches...

"..The excess deaths in the over 80s is 4%, it's the 18 - 49 age group who have been bumping up the excess death stats raising it to 10%."

No link of course...

Globally, the numbers show the opposite of what you're possibly trying to claim.

There may be some countries that are outliers..but we are talking general trends not outliers..

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline-by-age

I did look up the UK...

"For middle-aged adults (50–64) in this 13-month period, the relative excess for almost all causes of death examined was higher than that seen for all ages..."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(23)00221-1/fulltext

Once again..these links do not support anything your trying to claim about depopulation....

There is zero evidence the clot shots have killed 13 million hence no reference for that insane claim either.

You did not have to be coy about the "source" though..

You're making the mistake of using Steve Kirsch's BS maths mistakes...after he mis-understood NZ data that did not show what he thought it did.

Go and read (more likely you will not) Norman Fentons Substack to see how real (covid sceptic) mathematicians looked at the same data..or don't..

"Yet preliminary estimates suggest the total number of global deaths attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 is at least 3 million, "

https://www.who.int/data/stories/the-true-death-toll-of-covid-19-estimating-global-excess-mortality

Kirsch's mistakes means there should be 10 times the death rate than the virus itself...hilarious..

I agree with you about immigration :)

Expand full comment

"Your new to this subject matter I see.." LOL. We have different views, let's wait 6 years and see what the world looks like. I get my stats from ONS, Norman Fenton is my hero and I had noticed how bad at maths Kirsch is. "Go and read (more likely you will not) Norman Fentons Substack" - This is Norman Fenton's substack - LOL.

Expand full comment

Calibrated quite well to kill the elderly AND dampen the fertility of the younger plus plenty of damage to all via dysregulation of mitochondrial repair ie turbo cancers.

Oh and its no secret. Its Public Policy.

https://barneyrubble.substack.com/p/are-discussions-about-depopulation

Expand full comment

Even worse: they could and should have taken a placebo and would have achieved the same impression. The fact they didn't argues for bad intent, aka Mike Yeadin's thesis.

Expand full comment

It took Prof Puri and I nearly three years to get the following study published. It forecasts COVID deaths remarkably accurately for many counties but UK and US deaths exceed the forecast. End-of-life care? Cook MJ, Puri BK. A Novel and Accurate Method for Estimating Deaths and Cases During Outbreaks of Infectious Diseases Including COVID-19. Int J Gen Med 2023;16:4705–18. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S435975

Expand full comment

More by deliberate, incorrect treatment I might suggest and of course pre ordained seasonality (although that’s marginally more difficult to roll out in 🇺🇸 than 🇬🇧

Expand full comment

The peak deaths in England occurred between April and June and correlated with midazolam use so agreed that "treatment" based on NICE and NHS advice was a cause of deaths. The deaths occurred outside the the normal seasonal winter deaths from cold and flu.

Expand full comment

I don’t agree with Norman that there was a pandemic at all (and perhaps he doesn’t think that anyway) but I am happy that he’s reading the literature than I’m missing.

That lockdowns did anything but harm & always will became clear to me quickly.

It’s more than irritating that few people of influence will say so & ideally say why this is.

In brief, for lockdowns to “work”, you have to believe a number of untrue things.

One in particular is that asymptomatic transmission is an important driver of epidemic spreading.

Even if you’re in Narrative #2020, you know it doesn’t.

Sick people involuntarily go into “lockdown”.

You don’t need to order sick people to do that.

I no longer accept the viral model of acute respiratory illnesses.

Pretend I do, for a moment.

In order to be a good source of infection, you’d need to be carrying a lot of the pathogen.

If you were so carrying, you would have symptoms. It’s attacking you & you’re fighting back.

The other end of the scale also applies. If you’re well, you cannot be a good source of infection.

With asymptomatic transmission dismissed, logically, the only additional people forced to remain out of circulation by lockdowns are those who are completely well.

Those ordering politicians to enforce lockdowns know that perfectly well.

Their objective was nothing to do with “public health” (itself a nonsense idea that’s relatively new).

Best wishes

Mike

Expand full comment
author

Mike: as I said I was only one of several Co-authors and to get the paper published at all it had to be ‘toned down’ in numerous ways. I was always against lockdowns not just because it was clear that they would cause more harm than good but on moral grounds. I was one of few in the ‘freedom movement’ who refused to sign the Great Barrington Declaration because a) I already believed then that the covid threat was minimal (I.e. no pandemic) and b) I was disgusted that it was still pushing for ‘targeted protection’ I.e. lockdown of the elderly.

Expand full comment
Jan 10Liked by Martin Neil, Norman Fenton

Thank you, Norman. I’m so pleased to hear that. Very good discernment. I don’t think I was so sharp, then.

I hold you in very high regard.

Best wishes

Mike

Expand full comment
Jan 10·edited Jan 10Liked by Martin Neil, Norman Fenton

I do think that the authors of the GBD were a bit more nuanced. It made sense to consider shielding of more vulnerable people, but this should always remain a personal decision. Some elderly people preferred to just live life and were quite happy to take a risk. Some elderly people vehemently objected to the fact that the younger generation was being targeted with all these NPIs for the so-called benefit for the elderly.

Overall a huge mess.....

Expand full comment

The shielding of the elderly was a form of abuse, in my opinion. My aunt was an ambulatory social woman living in a residential living facility. To “protect them” they were forced to take meals in their rooms, no activities and no socialization ( except for family visits if held outside). I used to work in LTC ( left b/c of flu shot mandates) and I would put my money on that the residents would rather take their chances with the virus in order to see their families and leave their rooms. The most important thing to them was seeing their families and touch was extremely important- hand holding, hugs…it was all they had left in life and they took it away from them.

Expand full comment

Same story for some of my relatives. It was beyond appalling what happened in the assisted living homes.

Expand full comment

I think in essence the government's actions were evil , I don't use that word likely and alot of meetings behind closed doors must of been held,this didn't just happen.The use of the military to shape public opinion and the forming of the "health and SECURITY agency" says so much.

Expand full comment
Jan 9Liked by Martin Neil

I agree there was no pandemic in the true meaning of the word but of course the WHO changed the definition and not for the first time, to scare people and to justify the lockdowns and injections. Not only did that slow down the economy it also opened up a lot of information gathering channels and data is the new gold.

https://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/02/who-changed-definition-influenza-pandemic.

What ever "they" released in 2019 was not much of a danger to anybody but this is a battle for minds.

Those of us who spoke up at the time against the need for either lockdowns or injections are still banging our heads against a brick wall with many as beliefs are hard to change. It is teeth grinding to see relatives and neighbours go down with strokes, cancer and of course "Covid" . To this very day, even suggesting a link to their injections and boosters is like skating on thin ice. But it has to be done.

We must be wary of not keeping an eye on the overall goal of using technology to create a centralised control centre with local arms. If the local smart city mayor suggests an effective tablet to help with the latest health issue, it looks like you will eagerly comply..or else risk having your liberty removed while the neighbours clap.

Expand full comment

"or else risk having your liberty removed while the neighbors clap."

Well said. Accurate and terrifying. An vivid description of the past 3.5 years.

Expand full comment

I am so very appreciative, Dr Yeadon, that you have read this post and relieved you thought it necessary to comment on it. I have considered myself honoured and privileged have had the opportunity to follow the scientific wisdom both of you and Professor Fenton for the past four years. However, in that time we have observed a shift from what was offered as a medical problem to a more sinister military aspect underpinned by planned, clever and malevolent adjustments of the legal code with discovery of legal statutes introduced over the past 50 years to control the masses acceptance of the respective government narrative. Of this there can be little doubt if the merits of the untiring work of at least two, a scientist Latypova and a paralegal Watts is to be considered. But having academia’s blinkered heads turned to allow them to graze on the richness of their offerings seems to have become impossible.

Expand full comment

Dr Yeadon, it’s my considered opinion that you will eventually take your rightful place amongst the greats of medical science. This will be after you have been forced to endure the ignominy of those peers who would seek refuge in the secure tenure of the commercial swamp. Professor Fenton whilst your post which may be technically correct within the framework of accepted medical science I feel is unnecessary if the bigger picture of ensuring that the insults that have transgressed medical science these past four years will never again happen and the profession tidies itself up. Consider this; a published study has shown that possibly 75% or more of peer reviewed studies in scientific journals are fraudulent. The old paradigms are unsustainable if we are to survive as a species. And personally I think that is more important than debating the origins of a snotty nose. I wait in terrified anticipation that the spectre of WHO/WEF domination will claim my children and grandchildren.

Expand full comment

I was dismayed that you did not see fit to endorse or even acknowledge Dr Yeadon contribution. You might consider he has much to offer!

Expand full comment

He did reply above.

Expand full comment

By the way, you can edit your posts after the fact. To the right of Like, Reply, Share, you will see the 3 dots. Click on that and you find an edit option.

Expand full comment

Great, thanks very much. In my panic I couldn’t find one!

Expand full comment
Jan 9Liked by Norman Fenton

.

At This Point

Telling Someone

That The Vaccine Is Safe And Effective

Is Like Telling A Cancer Victim

That They Look Good In Short Hair.

.

Expand full comment
Jan 10Liked by Martin Neil, Norman Fenton

Just read the paper now.

A few things jumped out at me in the abstract, Norman:

"However, these results are correlations and not causations."

Incredible! I have never read that in any of the pro lockdown studies. I've never read in the abstract of any horseshit modelling study any disclaimers like "these results derive from assumptions many of which we know will be wrong".

I've never read in any masking study that "this observational data should be treated with caution as when we change the period of observation the supposed effect of masking completely disappears".

"Caution should be exercised when extrapolating these findings."

I don't remember that ever being said about all the "data" coming from China at the start of the covid debacle. Here in New Zealand our first lockdown began "working" pretty much from day one (nicely shown in chart here https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2667(20)30225-5/fulltext). I've never heard a singe "expert" or "public health" official here state "as it takes two weeks for lockdowns to start having an effect, we should be cautious in attributing the disappearance of covid to the lockdown intervention" And the two week lag is according to the pro lockdowners "science" not mine as shown here https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/27-03-2020/siouxsie-wiles-toby-morris-why-are-we-locked-down-for-so-long-blame-the-lag).

I've been pointing this out to anyone who will listen for two and a half years yet pretty much everyone in New Zealand believes the first lockdown saved us from covid. I'm sure everyone reading this will understand the puzzled, slightly sheepish looks I have received for those years.

I suspect we closed the borders in time preventing it getting properly introduced and as it was the end of a warm, sunny summer here everyone probably had pretty good vitamin d levels.

This (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.28.20248936v1) is one of the best real world studies of lockdowns I read, it's hugely damming and has sat on preprint for three years.

Even after all I've seen since 2020, I'm still gobsmacked at what has happened to science and how weak minded the majority of western society is.

And it seems to get worse not better.

We can't go on lying like this can we?

Expand full comment
Jan 9Liked by Martin Neil, Norman Fenton

Thank you,as always, to Professor Fenton: the truth will out ,slowly but surely,despite denials, obfuscation and vested interests.

Never again!

Expand full comment

Recently I watched Chernobyl again and was struck by a comment made by Professor Legasov in one of the final scenes:'Every lie told owes a debt to the truth'.

Expand full comment

Remove ANY data generated from the fraudulent and meaningless PCR tests and you have NOTHING.

Go back to old WHO's pandemic criteria of excess mortality instead of excess cases and you have NOTHING either!! #WHOsponsoredGENOCIDE

Expand full comment
Jan 9Liked by Norman Fenton

Norman, the way you wrote this brief article, you partially obscured that you were one of the authors of this study!

I hope that when you and your co-authors used the word "pandemic" (which you did throughout the paper), you solely mean the period of time during which the WHO had said there was a pandemic, not that there actually was a pandemic.

I liked your statement in the conclusion portion of the study, "we suggest that it is time for the epidemic modelling community to revisit current modelling techniques to explicitly account for seasonal influence."

It was obvious by June 2020 that covid was following seasonal patterns, at least in the main. The neglect of modelers to take this into account was glaring from very early on.

Expand full comment
author

Re 'Pandemic', see my reply to Mike Yeadon

Expand full comment

Congrats on getting an against WHO / CDC / NHS tyranny paper published in a mainstream journal. Albeit with ‘required’ caveats and neutrality. Many lost their jobs for expressing the views empirically evidenced in your paper. And indeed NPIs were not neutral in outcomes but highly negative for costs and benefits as a whole since they increased poverty and unemployment, suicides, mental illness, inflation and business failures. Most nations have still not recovered economically from this self-imposed disaster and the results will show up in reduced longevity, as did the austerity regime that followed the Global Financial Crisis in 2008. White Brits and N Americans show lost life years from 2010 resulting from government measures to balance the books after bailing out speculators, banks and Wall Street.

Expand full comment
Jan 10Liked by Martin Neil

Thank you Norman, the study is outstanding IMO, and very valuable to have it in a peer-reviewed journal. Well done all.

Regarding your additional points, isn't the point of your study that the cause of the patterns of deaths (and hospitalisations etc) was most likely a seasonal virus, and not interventions? The fact that the deaths follow the coronavirus seasonal pattern indicates that they are more likely to be connected with the virus rather than the interventions, no? The study seems to me to be clear evidence in support of the virus theory rather than the iatrogenic or NPI theory. I suppose you could argue that the virus deaths were greater than they should have been owing to faulty treatment protocols, and I'm sure that is true to some extent. However, it would still mean the virus was responsible for the deaths – in line with the findings of your study, no?

(Of course I agree that the virus is nowhere near deadly enough to warrant lockdowns and NPIs, even if they worked, which they don't.)

Expand full comment
Jan 9Liked by Norman Fenton

Willie Soon refers to his Covid paper in this interview with Tucker Carlson

https://open.substack.com/pub/vigilantfox/p/astrophysicist-drops-a-nuclear-bomb?r=peo1w&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post

Expand full comment

Not in that part of the interview...

Expand full comment

You have to listen to the full 48 min interview on Twitter. There is a link in the Substack article. I don’t use the Twitter app so I can’t post the link.

Expand full comment

OK thanks, yes the full interview is here (no problem to post the link with Firefox):

https://twitter.com/i/status/1744777758507504061

Expand full comment

Given that the PCR test is a completely fraudulent diagnostic method and that CONVID cases are declared based on this fraud, or on less, the CONVID case and death numbers are of course equally fraudulent.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Dr. Fenton.

Expand full comment

.

It Comes Down To Self-Esteem.

Not Intelligence.

The More Self-Esteem You Have The Less Likely You Were To Take The Vaccine.

If Your Esteem Is Derived From Clinging To A Group And To The Consensus Of Those Held In “Higher Esteem” Then By Necessity You Followed The Dictates.

If Your Self-Esteem Is Independent Of What Others Think, Or Think Of You, You Didn’t.

.

Expand full comment

Interesting.

I hadn’t thought of it that way before.

But what you say feels correct.

Expand full comment

Big red flag: Why is Steven Hatfill on this paper?

Expand full comment

"I was disgusted that the Declaration was still pushing for ‘targeted protection’ - i.e. lockdown - of the elderly." Amen, brother! That too was a vicious and absolutely unjustifiable human rights violation.

Expand full comment