I would say it's a red flag for any scientific study to not make the data they use readily available. If the data clearly back up what is concluded in the study then they would surely paste it front and center of the study
Covid and the "vaccines" have had the world eyes on them and good people like yourself Professor Fenton who have the brain power to take apart their fraudulent ways. But I suspect that the pharmaceutical industry and certain "scientists" have been up to exactly the same shenanigans for many years with their so called vaccines but have got away with it because no one really paid attention. You have been relentless in uncovering their duplicitous practices, thank you!
Not Schwaz, but not far off... Spent a week in Leutasch in January in the same area of the Tyrol. Purely "anecdotal", as they say, but happened to run into several ordinary people, including the taxi drivers who took me to and from my hotel, who not only were not vaccinated but remained unintimidated by the Austrian Government's rampant covidism, which they recognised for what it was and remains: fascism. The region relies greatly on tourism, which was naturally greatly disrupted by lockdowns. I also have the impression that the independent-minded "mountain people" of the smaller Alpine precincts generally resent and have resisted in as far as possible the restrictions on their freedom and vaccine blackmail by their governments. Thanks to these and other personal encounters elsewhere in the world, I've come to believe that far fewer people have been vaccinated against "covid" than is reported or reputed. Hence the need to fudge the figures.
Whether that area had 70% 'vaccination' rate or a 100% rate, surely it makes little difference since the injections don't stop infection or transmission? They may reduce infection severity (for a while) but not prevent it, and subsequent studies like the one from Cleveland suggest the jabs actively encourage infections (at least according the + PCR results).
So how could anything ever be stopped with the "help" of such flawed countermeasures?
A paper relying upon inaccessible data doesn't deserve the time of day, unless that time is used to focus upon those who rely upon it to further their agendas.
Regarding myocarditis, even in a small country like New Zealand, we had a coroner rule a cause of death was a c19 vax-induced myocarditis, but do you think our overlords warned the public, suspended the jab rollout or even warned those administering it? Heck no, there was money to be made and more control and power to grab in the background during the crisis.
When the fatal jab, some time after that aforementioned coroners ruling, found the arm of one Rory Nairn, a 26year old 'tradie' here, his fate was sealed. Our overlords knew of the risks but sacrificed his life to protect the narrative. He left behind his fiancée, young child, new house and mortgage, and family and friends that had no idea of the myocarditis risks.
Unbeknown to many, even to this very day, amongst all the chaos the govt had known of the risks but remained silent, changed the law to remove the obligation to obtain informed consent, signed our sovereignty over to the WHO when the latter declares the next plandemic, amongst many other nefarious slights of hand.
Have similar concerns and debunking made of the CDC papers that myocardital damage is rare and not associated with the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated? It would make a great post to look at their top 5 or 10 reports/studies.
You wrote: "Data from Schwaz has been used retrospectively to claim that the vaccine almost immediately and miraculously stopped the deadly virus in its tracks." Maybe the data does this because the data was generated with an epidemiological model on a computer and not with empirical data from tests and labs. If the model assumed the shots worked, and if you found access to the data, it would appear to correctly prove what is claimed.
Incidentally, there is evidence that some places, at least, were using models to generate their data.
Fiddling the books always leads to data hesitancy. The idea is to keep it strung out as long as feasibly possible until you're literally forced to hand it over. At which point you just say the cat ate it.
I would say it's a red flag for any scientific study to not make the data they use readily available. If the data clearly back up what is concluded in the study then they would surely paste it front and center of the study
Covid and the "vaccines" have had the world eyes on them and good people like yourself Professor Fenton who have the brain power to take apart their fraudulent ways. But I suspect that the pharmaceutical industry and certain "scientists" have been up to exactly the same shenanigans for many years with their so called vaccines but have got away with it because no one really paid attention. You have been relentless in uncovering their duplicitous practices, thank you!
Not Schwaz, but not far off... Spent a week in Leutasch in January in the same area of the Tyrol. Purely "anecdotal", as they say, but happened to run into several ordinary people, including the taxi drivers who took me to and from my hotel, who not only were not vaccinated but remained unintimidated by the Austrian Government's rampant covidism, which they recognised for what it was and remains: fascism. The region relies greatly on tourism, which was naturally greatly disrupted by lockdowns. I also have the impression that the independent-minded "mountain people" of the smaller Alpine precincts generally resent and have resisted in as far as possible the restrictions on their freedom and vaccine blackmail by their governments. Thanks to these and other personal encounters elsewhere in the world, I've come to believe that far fewer people have been vaccinated against "covid" than is reported or reputed. Hence the need to fudge the figures.
Whether that area had 70% 'vaccination' rate or a 100% rate, surely it makes little difference since the injections don't stop infection or transmission? They may reduce infection severity (for a while) but not prevent it, and subsequent studies like the one from Cleveland suggest the jabs actively encourage infections (at least according the + PCR results).
So how could anything ever be stopped with the "help" of such flawed countermeasures?
A paper relying upon inaccessible data doesn't deserve the time of day, unless that time is used to focus upon those who rely upon it to further their agendas.
Regarding myocarditis, even in a small country like New Zealand, we had a coroner rule a cause of death was a c19 vax-induced myocarditis, but do you think our overlords warned the public, suspended the jab rollout or even warned those administering it? Heck no, there was money to be made and more control and power to grab in the background during the crisis.
When the fatal jab, some time after that aforementioned coroners ruling, found the arm of one Rory Nairn, a 26year old 'tradie' here, his fate was sealed. Our overlords knew of the risks but sacrificed his life to protect the narrative. He left behind his fiancée, young child, new house and mortgage, and family and friends that had no idea of the myocarditis risks.
Unbeknown to many, even to this very day, amongst all the chaos the govt had known of the risks but remained silent, changed the law to remove the obligation to obtain informed consent, signed our sovereignty over to the WHO when the latter declares the next plandemic, amongst many other nefarious slights of hand.
The evil needed to pull this off is terrifying.
Prof Fenton, thank you for consistently exposing all the smoke & mirrors.
Austrian data seems to be included here:
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/C19dNUTS/index.html
The documentation cites the file you are looking for.
Here are the numbers: https://interestofjustice.substack.com/api/v1/file/f52e8eaa-0f43-4f6f-9f5b-b8f82729c31b.pdf You will see it was a fake Pandemic organized by WHO and guess who else?
Find original person who made lie
As Dr Rodger Hodgkinson has been saying from 2020, its all one big lie, the vaccines, the "pandemic" everything.
All BS to bring in digital ID and they hoped biometric vaccine/health passports. For now they (just) failed but they will be back with more BS.
Prof Norman, I have managed to download the first csv. A good trick/hack to remember is to use the wayback machine. This allows you to go back in time and download from the wayback snapshots. I can send you the csv if you give me the appropriate email to send, else you can use this link for the wayback machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/https://covid19-dashboard.ages.at/data/CovidFaelle_Timeline.csv
FOIA…..or equivalent
Have similar concerns and debunking made of the CDC papers that myocardital damage is rare and not associated with the vaccinated vs. unvaccinated? It would make a great post to look at their top 5 or 10 reports/studies.
You wrote: "Data from Schwaz has been used retrospectively to claim that the vaccine almost immediately and miraculously stopped the deadly virus in its tracks." Maybe the data does this because the data was generated with an epidemiological model on a computer and not with empirical data from tests and labs. If the model assumed the shots worked, and if you found access to the data, it would appear to correctly prove what is claimed.
Incidentally, there is evidence that some places, at least, were using models to generate their data.
Austrian COVID-19 Open Data Information Site - loads of data in English: https://www.data.gv.at/katalog/en/dataset/9723b0c6-48f4-418a-b301-e717b6d98c92
I would appreciate a deeper analysis very much
Fiddling the books always leads to data hesitancy. The idea is to keep it strung out as long as feasibly possible until you're literally forced to hand it over. At which point you just say the cat ate it.