Tag: causes of death

After 4 Years of Censorship: Mainstream Media Now Confirms that “COVID Jabs May be to Blame for Increase in Excess Deaths”

“Covid Jabs May be to Blame for Increase in Excess Deaths”

If this report by The Telegraph had been published in early 2021, several million lives would have been saved.

But in 2021, censorship was imposed. Honest journalism was silenced. The media was supportive of the fear campaign.

The Telegraph report by Science Editor Sara Knapton, 5 June 2024 pertains to:

Researchers from The Netherlands analysed data from 47 Western countries and discovered there had been more than three million excess deaths since 2020, with the trend continuing despite the rollout of vaccines and containment measures.

They said the “unprecedented” figures “raised serious concerns” and called on governments to fully investigate the underlying causes, including possible vaccine harms.

Writing in the BMJ Public Health, the authors from Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, said: “Although Covid-19 vaccines were provided to guard civilians from suffering morbidity and mortality by the Covid-19 virus, suspected adverse events have been documented as well.

“Both medical professionals and citizens have reported serious injuries and deaths following vaccination to various official databases in the Western World.”

Click here to read the full article on The Telegraph.

Keep reading

Are Excess Deaths Being Statistically Covered Up?

Great news! All those reports you’ve heard about people dying—your family, your friends, and the increased obituaries in the papers—apparently, they’re all a figment of your imagination. The UK is even reporting a 14% drop in excess deaths. Isn’t that incredible?

If you aren’t comfortable with some level of skepticism or critical thinking, I’d suggest stopping here. But I can’t help but share my thoughts on what seems like a massive contradiction in the numbers we’re seeing.

Before I delve into the data, let me bring up an interesting story. One of the most vocal figures in the UK regarding excess deaths was Andrew Bridgen, a Member of Parliament. He recently lost his seat, despite having held it since 2010. He saw his vote count drop from 63% to just 3.2%. After the election, many people told him they voted for him—so what happened? It makes you wonder: Was he asking too many difficult questions? Perhaps his stance on excess deaths didn’t sit well with the political class.

Keep reading

How many US VAERS deaths were due to COVID19?

Summary:

  • Daniel (Truth_in_number) on Twitter posted a long thread on VAERS in mid-2023, seemingly based on this comical premise – unlike him, no one else had looked at VAERS extensively1
    • While Daniel did read 120 reports, he hasn’t yet posted the VAERS IDs for them (to the best of my knowledge), so the people who already agree with him are just taking his word in terms of final analysis
  • I refuted most of his central points anyway using large scale text analysis of VAERS reports (for example there are hundreds of reports of sudden death in VAERS, while Daniel claims he did not find any “true” sudden death reports)
  • The one major point he made2 – that 61% of the deaths he read were caused by COVID19 – was much harder to refute till now because it required large scale text analysis of 16000+ reports which did not follow any well defined text pattern
  • I used a recent feature provided by GPT4 to automate this process3, and found that only 39% of 16K deaths even tested positive for COVID19. In other words, less than 39% of US VAERS deaths could actually be due to COVID19, leaving the other 60%+ as potential vaccine induced deaths.

In a previous article I mentioned that LLMs can be used to extract cause of death from a VAERS report.

Keep reading

We Were Wrong To Panic About Secondhand Smoke

In 2003, UCLA epidemiologist James Enstrom and I published a study of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS)—also called “secondhand smoke” or “passive smoking”—in the British Medical Journal (BMJ). Using data from the American Cancer Society’s prospective study of 1 million adults, we concluded that ETS exposure was not associated with increased mortality.

Since that conclusion flew in the face of the conventional wisdom that had long driven state and local bans on smoking in public places, our study understandably sparked a controversy in the public health community. But the intensity of the attack on us in the pages of a medical journal—by critics who were certain that our study had to be wrong but typically failed to provide specific evidence of fatal errors—vividly illustrates what can happen when policy preferences that have taken on the status of doctrine override rational scientific debate.

A recent study by American Cancer Society (ACS) researchers underscores that point by showing that, contrary to what our critics asserted, the cancer risk posed by ETS is likely negligible. The authors present that striking result without remarking on it, which may reflect their reluctance to revisit a debate that anti-smoking activists and public health officials wrongly view as long settled.

Exposure to ETS is known to cause eye and throat irritation and to exacerbate preexisting respiratory conditions. In addition, it is simply disagreeable to many people (including me). But assessing the claim that ETS is potentially deadly requires dispassionate examination of the available scientific evidence.

That is not what Enstrom and I encountered when we published our BMJ paper. Critics were outraged by the article and demanded its retraction. But they were never able to satisfactorily explain why such an extreme step was justified.

Keep reading

New paper shows COVID boosters increased mortality in nursing home residents. The effect was highly statistically significant after 4 weeks.

A new paper by Girma and Paton showed by using machine learning a small but dubious (and short lived) benefit for nursing home residents in 2 of 3 metrics. In other words, they couldn’t find a definitive benefit for the primary series and they found NO benefit for additional shots.

In fact, for the boosters, they found a highly statistically significant INCREASE in COVID mortality after the boosters were administered.

We should only be giving these shots if there is a clear and significant benefit, not “we aren’t sure” or “there is no benefit.” But when there is a highly statistically significant harm, alarm bells should go off!

The paper says, “Indeed, in the later period, we find some evidence that higher vaccination rates are associated with higher Covid mortality.” A safe and effective vaccine shouldn’t be even close to causing a conclusion like that.

Additionally, vaccinating the nursing home staff also appeared to have a negative impact on residents. There, the impact on both COVID deaths and all-cause deaths was 100% consistent in all 7 time periods and for each vaccine dose: it always made things worse, and for the primary series where every single one of the 14 measures were highly statistically significant (99% confident).

This is yet another paper showing continuation of COVID vaccination is nonsensical. But the data doesn’t seem to matter and nobody wants to talk about it.

As usual, expect the mainstream media to ignore this paper as they do for any paper that shows that the health interventions were detrimental.

Keep reading

‘Should Not Be Used in Any Infants’: Higher Death Risk in Beyfortus RSV Shot Clinical Trials

Infants treated for RSV with the monoclonal antibody nirsevimab have significantly higher mortality rates than those treated with a different monoclonal antibody or with a placebo, according to an analysis by the Japanese journal Med Check of three major randomized control trials.

The report reanalyzed clinical trial data showing that nirsevimab — marketed by Sanofi and AstraZeneca as Beyfortus — reduced RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection and hospitalizations in both high-risk and healthy infants.

However, babies treated with the drug had a higher mortality rate likely linked to adverse effects — including thrombosis (blood clotting) — from the drug itself, the study found.

“Due to the increased mortality, nirsevimab should not be used in any infants,” the study concluded. “Do not use nirsevimab for universal immunization.”

Shortly after its approval by the European Medicines Association in October 2022, and fast-track approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in July 2023, the U.S., France, Spain and Luxembourg launched universal Beyfortus infant immunization campaigns for the 2023-24 RSV season.

Med Check published its appraisal of the clinical trials shortly after France’s National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM) published its first pharmacovigilance data on the drug, compiled during the 2023-24 season.

The ANSM report tracked adverse events related to Beyfortus in France between Sept. 11, 2023, and April 30, 2024. Of 244,495 doses delivered, 198 adverse events were reported to the pharmacovigilance system, of which 153 were considered serious.

The report identified safety signals for stroke, respiratory conditions and hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes — when an infant suddenly loses muscle strength and becomes “floppy.” Hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes also are associated with the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, or Tdap, vaccine and other vaccines.

There were also three reports of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), although researchers said at least one of them was likely not linked to the drug.

The ANSM said each of the signals would be closely monitored in the future, but that a causal link between Beyfortus and those adverse events had not yet been established. The agency concluded the results confirm that the benefits of using the drug to treat bronchiolitis, an RSV infection, outweigh the risks.

The ANSM continues to recommend all newborn babies receive the Beyfortus shot this RSV season.

Keep reading

Whistleblower: Remdesivir linked to 601 military deaths

A military whistleblower has released documents, known as “The Remdesivir Papers,” revealing that 601 military service members died after being treated with the controversial antiviral drug remdesivir for suspected COVID-19 cases. The documents claim the drug was administered months before it was approved by the FDA, with serious concerns about data manipulation and lack of informed consent in the trials.

The whistleblower, using the pseudonym Daniel LeMay, shared the documents with investigative journalist J.M. Phelps, exposing that many trial results were kept secret and highlighting remdesivir’s potential role in hundreds of untimely deaths. According to LeMay, the Department of Defense’s Joint Trauma System manipulated trial data to favor remdesivir, and participants were often not informed about the risks involved.

Advocacy groups and former victims of COVID-19 hospital protocols, including those involving remdesivir, have expressed outrage, calling for greater accountability. Gail Seiler, a survivor of remdesivir treatment, stated that the papers “only scratch the surface” of the harm caused by the drug in both military and civilian hospitals.

Keep reading

Whistleblower Serves Connecticut Officials Notice of Covid Vaccine Deaths

On August 21, 2024, John Beaudoin, Sr., President and CEO of Summa Logica LLC, filed a whistleblower complaint with the Auditors of Public Accounts of Connecticut. The allegations pertain to forgery of death records under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-139 (2023). More than 100 Connecticut death records list “Covid” as a cause of death though the deaths are certified as “accidental” and involve blunt force trauma or fentanyl overdose. Other records were found to be Covid vaccine deaths, but the vaccine is fraudulently omitted from the death records.

The whistleblower complaint was accompanied by THE CONNECTICUT MEMORANDA SERIES Volume II (CT Memo Vol. II) comprising nearly 250 pages of factual allegations gleaned from Connecticut’s official vital records database of death records.

Four death records expressly state that a Covid vaccine was involved in the deaths. One boy 16 years old died due to “Stress Cardiomyopathy Following Second Dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech.” Dalcie, 73 years old, died from Guillain Barre Syndrome. Her record also states, “second Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine 28 days before start of symptoms.” Juana, 39 years old, died from “Sudden Cardiac Death,” “Probable … myocarditis.” Juana’s record states that myocarditis resulted from Covid. This is odd because her record also states she was vaccinated for Covid. Myocarditis is known to occur from Covid vaccines, but not from Covid. Lorraine was 85 years old and died from congestive heart failure only two days after vaccination. Only the boy’s record lists “Y59.0,” which means, “Viral vaccines.” The other three records omit any code related to vaccines even though the records clearly state that a Covid vaccine was a cause or contributing condition of death.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) uses software that reads the English words in the causes of death on the records and then automatically outputs the ICD-10 codes, which are international symptom diagnostic codes. “Y59.0” is an ICD-10 code. If “vaccination” or “vaccine” are on the death record and “Y59.0” is missing after the software executes, it is highly likely that someone deleted “Y59.0,” else someone manually added “Y59.0” for the boy and did not add “Y.59.0” for the other three.

Keep reading

‘Should Not Be Used in Any Infants’: Higher Death Risk in Beyfortus RSV Shot Clinical Trials

Infants treated for RSV with the monoclonal antibody nirsevimab have significantly higher mortality rates than those treated with a different monoclonal antibody or with a placebo, according to an analysis by the Japanese journal Med Check of three major randomized control trials.

The report reanalyzed clinical trial data showing that nirsevimab — marketed by Sanofi and AstraZeneca as Beyfortus — reduced RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection and hospitalizations in both high-risk and healthy infants.

However, babies treated with the drug had a higher mortality rate likely linked to adverse effects — including thrombosis (blood clotting) — from the drug itself, the study found.

“Due to the increased mortality, nirsevimab should not be used in any infants,” the study concluded. “Do not use nirsevimab for universal immunization.”

Shortly after its approval by the European Medicines Association in October 2022, and fast-track approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in July 2023, the U.S., France, Spain and Luxembourg launched universal Beyfortus infant immunization campaigns for the 2023-24 RSV season.

Med Check published its appraisal of the clinical trials shortly after France’s National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products (ANSM) published its first pharmacovigilance data on the drug, compiled during the 2023-24 season.

The ANSM report tracked adverse events related to Beyfortus in France between Sept. 11, 2023, and April 30, 2024. Of 244,495 doses delivered, 198 adverse events were reported to the pharmacovigilance system, of which 153 were considered serious.

The report identified safety signals for stroke, respiratory conditions and hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes — when an infant suddenly loses muscle strength and becomes “floppy.” Hypotonic-hyporesponsive episodes also are associated with the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, or Tdap, vaccine and other vaccines.

There were also three reports of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), although researchers said at least one of them was likely not linked to the drug.

The ANSM said each of the signals would be closely monitored in the future, but that a causal link between Beyfortus and those adverse events had not yet been established. The agency concluded the results confirm that the benefits of using the drug to treat bronchiolitis, an RSV infection, outweigh the risks.

The ANSM continues to recommend all newborn babies receive the Beyfortus shot this RSV season.

Keep reading

Children who received mRNA Covid shots died SIX TIMES as often as unjabbed kids in a very large database

The study about Covid and asthma in American kids and teens has gone mostly unnoticed. It hasn’t been cited once since it was published in June.

Which may be why no one has raised an alarm over the stunning figures buried in its appendix about deaths among mRNA Covid-vaccinated kids.

They show that 354 of the 64,000 children and teenagers who received a Covid mRNA shot died within a year after vaccination – a death rate of almost six kids per 1,000.

In contrast, only 309 out of 320,000 unvaccinated kids died, fewer than one per 1,000.

Both the difference and the absolute death rates reported in the study are shockingly high.1 (Covid infections did not cause more deaths, the data show.)

Part, and possibly all, of the gap comes from the fact that jabbed kids were notably sicker than the unvaccinated when the study began. They had higher rates of diabetes, psychiatric disorders, and other conditions.

Keep reading