Are the stats people responsible for tabling statistical information inept or directed to cook the books so to speak? I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that pharma provides the statisticians in this area too. What are the reasons for not providing the data upon request? Have they been forthcoming in the past so this is a total departure from the norm?
"There is very little indication that terminally or critically ill patients in the UK were less likely to be vaccinated. In fact, it was policy that almost everyone should be vaccinated, with the critically ill being prioritised."
Yes, the most frail, defenseless, and unprotected were most vulnerable to the wiles of sinister, money-grubbing, ideological hustlers whose only purpose was power over those they controlled whilst lying in their hospital beds, unavailable to family or loved ones.
If only somewhere, anywhere had done a proper monitoring and assessment trial, outside of the the early manufacturer controlled ones, and using the actual mass manufacturing doses rolled out to the billions.
It was clear many cohorts were are near zero risk, and near zero benefit, so there should not have been any risk or ethical issues.
Did nobody ever do it once they started dishing out to kids then toddlers?
Never forget the mortality results in the Pfizer and Moderna gold-standard randomized clinical trials (the ONLY truly unbiased mortality data comparing the effect of vaccination vs. no vaccination):
COVID deaths: 2 vaccine vs. 5 placebo (-60%)
non-COVID deaths: 29 vaccine vs. 25 placebo (+16%)
cardiovascular-related deaths: 16 vaccine vs. 11 placebo (+45%)
Overall: 4 excess non-COVID deaths for every 3 less COVID deaths (i.e. 4 KILLED FOR EVERY 3 SAVED)
And regardless of any convenient cop-out regarding the lack of "statistical significance", a 16% increase in non-COVID mortality and a net result of "4 killed for every 3 saved" absolutely do have PRACTICAL significance in the context of these vaccines given to many millions of people. Full stop.
What sticks out to me in your article is this "We found out that the datasets published by the Institute of Health Information and Statistics (IHIS) are retroactively changed " I have been looking through emails between public health officials that were released through freedom of information requests. I find there are a lot of emails where they speak about doing this here in NS. When discussing vaccine injuries or deaths after vaccination, they say things like "we are ruling out possible other causes of death/injury" but they never seemed to do that when someone died with a positive COVID test. Later on the numbers of deaths and injuries are reduced.
Here in Nova Scotia they were saying that the unvaccinated were 3 times more likely to be hospitalized than the people vaccinated 3 or more times. This was a statement that came out in 2022. But in their calculation they compare only the people who were vaccinated 3 times or more to the unvaccinated, and they left the twice vaccinated group out of the calculation entirely. Shelly Hipson posted a video on her Facebook on the topic and I have posted the video on my Substack here. I was just wondering what your thoughts are on that.
Doesn’t this mean that the Covid vax works on everything? Who knew? It not only prevents Covid, it’s good for the flu, pneumonia, cancer, just everything. It’s a miracle. It prevents all causes of mortality. Praise the Lord for Pfizer.
I heard the argument that the abnormally high All cause mortality is due to demographics changing and a lot of large older generations are dying off.
Which made me think: Those would also be the people most likely to die from adverse effects from the vaccine - and least likely to have an actual detailed autopsy.
Are there no proxy datasets that can be used to make estimates of the missing official data you mention here? That is, morbidities, unvaccinated population number, etc.
Great work! You gents probably didn't see this, but Mathew Crawford who writes the "Rounding the Earth Newsletter" on Substack stated his hypothesis at least as far back as Feb 8th 2023 that the Healthy User Bias was largely responsible for any correlation between C19 vaccine uptake and any apparent decreases in C19 mortality/severity (aside from statistical shenanigans) for the vaccinated population.
If hospitals were paid to “diagnose” Covid patients with useless pcr tests , if they were paid to put people on ventilators , if they were paid extra large sums for every admission just imagine how much the filthy Rockefeller infested depopulation demons paid to publish bogus “scientific” studies ! And this trend goes for every vaccine out there not just the obvious death jab . The dumbing down of population is complete - the sheep are killing themselves whilst the elites laugh
Let’s not forget that Trump signed the CARES Act which gave governors the unprecedented ability to shut down their individual State economies indefinitely and at will, but more importantly his National Emergency declaration in conjunction with the CARES Act gives FEMA and the CDC federal executive authority over the federal government.
-The combination of the CMS override and the CARES Act incentives enabled and coerced hospitals to make a COVID-19 diagnosis and follow a (lethal) federally mandated COVID-19 protocol or else be forced to pay back the funding. As a result, hospitals from coast to coast received payments such as:
• A “free” required PCR test in the Emergency Room or upon admission for every patient, with a government-paid fee to the hospital.
• Added bonus payment for each positive COVID-19 diagnosis.
• Another bonus for a COVID-19 admission to the hospital.
• A 20 percent “boost” bonus payment from Medicare on the entire hospital bill for use of Remdesivir instead of medicines such as Ivermectin.
• Another and larger bonus payment to the hospital if a COVID-19 patient is mechanically ventilated.
• More money to the hospital if the cause of death is listed as COVID-19, even if the patient did not die directly of COVID-19.
• A COVID-19 diagnosis also provides extra payments to coroners.
Are the stats people responsible for tabling statistical information inept or directed to cook the books so to speak? I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that pharma provides the statisticians in this area too. What are the reasons for not providing the data upon request? Have they been forthcoming in the past so this is a total departure from the norm?
"There is very little indication that terminally or critically ill patients in the UK were less likely to be vaccinated. In fact, it was policy that almost everyone should be vaccinated, with the critically ill being prioritised."
Yes, the most frail, defenseless, and unprotected were most vulnerable to the wiles of sinister, money-grubbing, ideological hustlers whose only purpose was power over those they controlled whilst lying in their hospital beds, unavailable to family or loved ones.
If only somewhere, anywhere had done a proper monitoring and assessment trial, outside of the the early manufacturer controlled ones, and using the actual mass manufacturing doses rolled out to the billions.
It was clear many cohorts were are near zero risk, and near zero benefit, so there should not have been any risk or ethical issues.
Did nobody ever do it once they started dishing out to kids then toddlers?
Good to see that your Cheap Trick warning has alerted others around the world to look and find out their own national Government tricks. 👍
Never forget the mortality results in the Pfizer and Moderna gold-standard randomized clinical trials (the ONLY truly unbiased mortality data comparing the effect of vaccination vs. no vaccination):
COVID deaths: 2 vaccine vs. 5 placebo (-60%)
non-COVID deaths: 29 vaccine vs. 25 placebo (+16%)
cardiovascular-related deaths: 16 vaccine vs. 11 placebo (+45%)
Overall: 4 excess non-COVID deaths for every 3 less COVID deaths (i.e. 4 KILLED FOR EVERY 3 SAVED)
Pfizer: https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345/suppl_file/nejmoa2110345_appendix.pdf – Table S4
Moderna: https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2113017/suppl_file/nejmoa2113017_appendix.pdf – Table S26
Layperson's summary here: https://dailysceptic.org/2022/04/09/covid-vaccines-increase-risk-of-heart-related-deaths-by-up-to-50-lancet-analysis-of-trial-data-finds/ (their facts are correct, though some may not care for their slightly sensationalist writing style)
And regardless of any convenient cop-out regarding the lack of "statistical significance", a 16% increase in non-COVID mortality and a net result of "4 killed for every 3 saved" absolutely do have PRACTICAL significance in the context of these vaccines given to many millions of people. Full stop.
"Safe & effective" was nothing more than a marketing slogan to promote a new (novel) product.
Covid was a scam.
Hi,
What sticks out to me in your article is this "We found out that the datasets published by the Institute of Health Information and Statistics (IHIS) are retroactively changed " I have been looking through emails between public health officials that were released through freedom of information requests. I find there are a lot of emails where they speak about doing this here in NS. When discussing vaccine injuries or deaths after vaccination, they say things like "we are ruling out possible other causes of death/injury" but they never seemed to do that when someone died with a positive COVID test. Later on the numbers of deaths and injuries are reduced.
Here in Nova Scotia they were saying that the unvaccinated were 3 times more likely to be hospitalized than the people vaccinated 3 or more times. This was a statement that came out in 2022. But in their calculation they compare only the people who were vaccinated 3 times or more to the unvaccinated, and they left the twice vaccinated group out of the calculation entirely. Shelly Hipson posted a video on her Facebook on the topic and I have posted the video on my Substack here. I was just wondering what your thoughts are on that.
Thanks!
https://open.substack.com/pub/xnumber11x/p/a-question-for-the-statisticians?r=paf6o&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Evidence of healthy user bias in US county level data is strong... https://open.substack.com/pub/inumero/p/we-dont-know-if-covid-vaccinations?r=tv61s&utm_medium=ios
Doesn’t this mean that the Covid vax works on everything? Who knew? It not only prevents Covid, it’s good for the flu, pneumonia, cancer, just everything. It’s a miracle. It prevents all causes of mortality. Praise the Lord for Pfizer.
I heard the argument that the abnormally high All cause mortality is due to demographics changing and a lot of large older generations are dying off.
Which made me think: Those would also be the people most likely to die from adverse effects from the vaccine - and least likely to have an actual detailed autopsy.
The 1.5m prize fund is still available for the isolation and purification of COVID-19 https://x.com/tucksbro/status/1757291279266791703?s=46
Is it not possible that getting Covid makes you vulnerable to other conditions in subsequent months, and the worse the Covid, the worse the risk?
Are there no proxy datasets that can be used to make estimates of the missing official data you mention here? That is, morbidities, unvaccinated population number, etc.
Great work! You gents probably didn't see this, but Mathew Crawford who writes the "Rounding the Earth Newsletter" on Substack stated his hypothesis at least as far back as Feb 8th 2023 that the Healthy User Bias was largely responsible for any correlation between C19 vaccine uptake and any apparent decreases in C19 mortality/severity (aside from statistical shenanigans) for the vaccinated population.
https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/the-healthy-user-bias-dismantles
If hospitals were paid to “diagnose” Covid patients with useless pcr tests , if they were paid to put people on ventilators , if they were paid extra large sums for every admission just imagine how much the filthy Rockefeller infested depopulation demons paid to publish bogus “scientific” studies ! And this trend goes for every vaccine out there not just the obvious death jab . The dumbing down of population is complete - the sheep are killing themselves whilst the elites laugh
Let’s not forget that Trump signed the CARES Act which gave governors the unprecedented ability to shut down their individual State economies indefinitely and at will, but more importantly his National Emergency declaration in conjunction with the CARES Act gives FEMA and the CDC federal executive authority over the federal government.
-The combination of the CMS override and the CARES Act incentives enabled and coerced hospitals to make a COVID-19 diagnosis and follow a (lethal) federally mandated COVID-19 protocol or else be forced to pay back the funding. As a result, hospitals from coast to coast received payments such as:
• A “free” required PCR test in the Emergency Room or upon admission for every patient, with a government-paid fee to the hospital.
• Added bonus payment for each positive COVID-19 diagnosis.
• Another bonus for a COVID-19 admission to the hospital.
• A 20 percent “boost” bonus payment from Medicare on the entire hospital bill for use of Remdesivir instead of medicines such as Ivermectin.
• Another and larger bonus payment to the hospital if a COVID-19 patient is mechanically ventilated.
• More money to the hospital if the cause of death is listed as COVID-19, even if the patient did not die directly of COVID-19.
• A COVID-19 diagnosis also provides extra payments to coroners.
Do either of the profs have an opinion on the paper referenced here: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-17/covid-vaccine-campaign-research/103729522 ?
Seems rather selective in the cohort and the definition of vaccinated.