631 Comments

Even without adjusting for health status and age, it's statistical malfeasance to treat people within 5 weeks of getting their first shot as "unvaccinated" - especially when the majority of issues occur within the first couple of weeks of getting jabbed.

Even if both numbers were 90% in vaccinated and unvaccinated, by treating the vaccinated in a certain timeframe as unvaccinated - it will always skew the numbers to make it look like the vaccine works.

Expand full comment
author

Yes, also true

Expand full comment

This aberration is a double distortion. Two 5 and 5 baseball teams play each other one game. The winner is guaranteed to go to 6 and 5, the loser to 5 and 6. Now yes, when infections are up to three times as likely to occur in that period, this double shift of calling the vaccine caused increased likelihood of infection, a unvaccinated infection, is very very large. Also, in many areas the pure percentage of infected, hospitalized and dead, per 100 k vaccinated to per 100k unvaccinated, demonstrates that the vaccines are making it wore, not better, and not just worse for the first five weeks post jab one, but worse continuously except for a very small window of time no more then two months long

and only in a few age categories

and only if you ignore the incorrect adjustment for the first five weeks post vaccine one

and only if you ignore all cause morbidity and mortality.

and only if you ignore demographic factors

Sp Juan, Alex does not have a thick head, and please look deeper.

Expand full comment

Thank you for this reply I was going to spell it out but could not do better! Actually I find it hard to believe that the last paragraph of the initial critique could be made in this context. Thanks

Expand full comment

Not to mention the health bias of the vaccinated. Effectively all of those that are at risk but unvaxxed are unvaxxed for a reason at this point. It is why vax rate falls off among >80 cohort.

Expand full comment

Hopefully, my stubbornness is not also a risk factor LOL.

Expand full comment
Feb 2, 2022·edited Feb 2, 2022

I think it is important you spend the time to articulate this better. I have had the same thought as Juan. My rationale has been: 1 vax'd extremely healthy 40 year old vs. 1 unvax'd extremely healthy 40 year old... I do not believe the net benefit to being vax'd is worth the punitive government action to compel such action.

Expand full comment

Not worth the risk of terrible side effects either. Just in my own small circle of family, friends and neighbors I have seen deaths and life threatening illnesses happen to healthy people who took the shots. Of maybe 8 such, only one reported to VAERS so I'm thinking Steve Kirsch is right about the actual risk being much greater than claimed.

Expand full comment

I've seen 2 die within 5 days. And whose kidneys and mind failed first, and took a little longer. A month or so.

Expand full comment

Were they given the Very Toxic Remdesivir brand name Veklury? it destroys organs. http://mauiindependent.org/remdesivir-doesnt-save-lives-why-did-the-fda-approve-it-as-covid-treatment/

Expand full comment

China actuall did a DOUBLE BLIND STUDY, FAUCI DIDN'T, CHANGED PROTOCALS MID TEST VERY UNETHICAL!

Expand full comment

How can I contact you?

Thanks for all the great work

Expand full comment
RemovedFeb 1, 2022·edited Feb 1, 2022
Comment removed
Expand full comment

#stfu you ignorant whore

Expand full comment

So, is this how your earn money....by posting this in discussions totally unrelated to your pitch??? And you think that this is effective?? Come on guys, take this down.

Expand full comment

Spammers on Substack, fercrissakes? 😡

Expand full comment
Feb 2, 2022·edited Feb 2, 2022

Hi Alex, can you verify or debunk this claim of Bayesian Datacrime (or how to make vaccines more efficient through mathematical tricks:)

https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/bayesian-datacrime-defining-vaccine?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web

If the above is true, I would consider it a smoking gun.

From at paying subscriber in Scandinavia

Expand full comment

If Pharma has a new expensive drug to sell they get the FDA to change the 'numbers' to show you now have High Blood Pressure, your obese, your BS is to high. They changed the obese numbers under Obama, by measuring the neck size of 6'5'' body builders, truckers with big bodies/bones, it forced many truckers into weight loss surgery they didn't need at 200-250 lbs. Which is a normal weight before the number's change. Now my BIL is 6'4" weighed 400 lbs larged boned, was put on a big box of pills, finally had a slow weght loss surgery, now down to 210, has large bones, but looks fantastic, and Pharma lost a customer. It didn't come without side effects either. He has a hard time eating/digesting food. It makes a 5 ft gal like me Obese at 130 lbs. and sick all the time at 110 lbs.

Expand full comment

I don’t always follow the reasoning not because it’s unreasonable but my tiny brain begins to spin and well, then comes nausea again something I can’t handle. Even so if my level of reasoning is correct then if 90% of the population is “vaxed” and 75% of those people die, I think the argument is more along the line of.....didn’t after the jab proved ineffective at preventing COVID-19 it was supposed to, and when that was proven false it was sold as preventative to serious illness and hospitalization....again false. Then at least it will prevent death but these numbers show once again false. Isn’t this the meat and potatoes individual’s line?

Expand full comment

This months job report shows some of Covid's effect, but condidering the Left Wing source some Economist needs to look into it. These were laid off workers returning to work #1, many chose the Jab. No mention of Blue State/county reports. If I'm going by my grocery store's empty shelves, 2 checkers instead of 6 Fri-Sunday, 1 Full Time stocker, the checkers were working in stock, the mean age of the Shop for you, people were 18-21. And add in my Eldest soon to be 51 report on the No Workers, can't pass drug screens, that had him working 92 hrs Christmas week, the now shorter hours as closure time is now 6 pm, same for Walmart. It impacts how you read the Jobs report. MARKET REPORT/COVID/MONKEY BUSINESS SLATE IS A LEFT WING NEWS. Needs more info.https://slate.com/business/2022/02/jobs-report-2021-economy-wrong-explained.html

Expand full comment

This cannot be overstated. It feels like the key to the biggest piece of misinformation. Also the short and long term risks we “don’t know”.

Expand full comment

It is the "we don't know" that prevents me from exiting the "control group".

Expand full comment

I like that self-characterization. I am in the Control Group.

Expand full comment

Me too

Expand full comment

Same here

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Praying for all of you! Including several in-law children of mine -- spouses of my unvaxxed children.

Expand full comment

Control here as well as well as ALL of my immediate family approx 10 of us including grandparents!! All have had covid and got over it using proper protocol!! Ivermectin Vit D Vit C and Zinc and quercetin and NAC.

Expand full comment

Plus the gene therapy (called a vaccine) does nothing good in the short run, setting aside the long run for the moment.

Expand full comment

Me too. I’m hearing rumors the Red Cross won’t accept vaccinated blood. I need to check if that’s true.

Expand full comment

This is an example of a claim that is "trivially true." If you look at this cite:

https://www.redcrossblood.org/faq.html#eligibility-medications

You will see that in general, you would wait two weeks or more after receiving most vaccinations -- including the non-mRNA Covid-19 jabs. So technically, if you are in the < 14 days window, you are not supposed to donate.

Expand full comment

That’s a scary thought to receive mRNA blood😳

Expand full comment

The blood probably doesn’t have mRNA, but probably has lipid nano particles, and spike proteins.

Expand full comment

Blood tested at blood banks earlier on in pandemic showed evidence of Covid dating to august 2019 unknowingly. I read it somewhere back in Spring of 2020

Expand full comment

Line up unvaxxed family to donate to you, if need be.

Expand full comment

Good reason to bank your own!!!

Expand full comment

Because extensive research indicates that blood returns to pre vax normal after 14 days. Nothing potentially harmful floating around, right? I mean, 14 days is science based, right? Right?

Expand full comment

Vicknaird, is this true? Everything clears after 2 weeks? What are these claims based on-- are there any studies, or is this what you "heard"?

Expand full comment

Someone locally told me he donated and was asked no questions about vax status. I am “pure” and happily donating this Friday. Lots of places in desperate need for blood! My sister’s

Hospital in Cali ran out of blood the other night.

Expand full comment

they should mandate blood donations - no blood no job - wonder how people would take that

Expand full comment

What does a 4 profit hospital charge for your blood if a Tylenol is $ 60?

Expand full comment

In Italy unvaccinated blood donors are exempt from greenpass rules to give blood, blood supply is running low and there have been coagulation problems with vaxed blood

Expand full comment

Oh that will go over well.

Expand full comment

In Canada they are accepting blood donations from vaccinated individuals

Expand full comment

In Canada they accept a moron Communist whose mom was a tramp and dad was buddies with Castro as their PM.

Expand full comment

Ahhh but have you watched the videos coming out of Canada? I’m not very good with Reposting Twitter (newbie there) feeds but the truckers voices and horns are being heard. I feel for the poor downtown Ottawans who can’t sleep but this is bigger than that. It’s pretty amazing.

Expand full comment

Careful! We have worse with Biden admin who STOLE the election but still plenty of Americans who actually voted for the idiot.

Expand full comment

If you look closely, you will see why we refer to him as Justin Castro.

Expand full comment

And whose dad was Fidel himself. He's the vivid image of him.

Expand full comment
Feb 2, 2022·edited Feb 2, 2022

how would they NOT? There aren't enough unvaxxed people left there to fill the blood banks, are there?

Expand full comment

Let us know what you find out.

Expand full comment

And I'm very reluctant to have my cells hijacked to create the very spike that kills people in the first place. I mean what the ...?

Expand full comment

It's the lack of CV risk that keeps me from vaxxing.

Expand full comment

That, plus they criminally blocked viable treatments to get the vax on the street.

Expand full comment

After the mRNA injections went through their fake trials, the drug companies gave them a 95% success or efficacy rating. We now see the true rating, the ARR or absolute risk reduction rating which was about 1% coming into reality time and time again.

Expand full comment

When I saw "95% efficacy" I knew right then something was off. Now we know for sure.

Expand full comment

Question: Was that whopping 1% reduction in contracting the virus or getting hospitalized/dying from it?

Expand full comment

And the vaccine group had greater overall mortality, but they don't advertise that fact.

Expand full comment
Feb 2, 2022·edited Feb 2, 2022

It was in developing any symptoms with a positive test. Nobody died during the trials of/with covid, there were a few hospitalizations. A subject had to report to his trial doctor if they developed any symptoms. After this the doctor decided IF they take a swab test. No routine swab tests were performed, no serological test before or after. You can find a lot of details on BMJ or in the original papers, quite easy to read.

Expand full comment

Problem is the numbers in the trials were so small, that the results are barely statistically significant. But more people did die in the treatment group and the difference was getting larger from 2 months to 6 months, but was not statistically significant. If you did a linear regression and the pattern stayed the same, it would have been significant by the 3 year mark when the trials were supposed to end. Even more damning, there were 4 more cardiac related deaths in the treatment group.

Expand full comment

actually it was 0.1%, if that.. it was something like 15/15000 from the vaccinated group got sick and 150/15000 from the control group. They used RR as 15 is around 5% of 150 or so(my numbers arent exact but they were close to this). Yet ARR is insanely small, because they purposefully selected least likely to get severe reactions from the jabs on purpose! Zero people died in the control group too

Expand full comment

Zero died in the control group yes, but in the jabbed group a few died. ( cant remember the number) just not from Corvid. I think it was cardio issues, and we all just know that the vaccines don't affect the heart or vascular health at all right?

Expand full comment

hah, yeah it's insane how corrupt our medical system is.. the companies get to analyze their own data and manipulate it to lie about people getting hurt from their own product.. if anything this country needs to demand breaking up the conflict of interest of the fda/cdc and big pharma, there should be no money involved /passed between them

Expand full comment

This is a great piece that goes through the shortcuts and shortcomings of the Pfizer clinical trials. No one who saw this would trust the shots:

https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/media-resources/the-pfizer-inoculations-for-covid-19-more-harm-than-good-2/

Expand full comment

exactly. when you see the real numbers from the trials. and see how they calculated that 95% it's wildly misleading. the BMJ (Doshi?) did a great article on all this very early. very very early. what a dependent media fail. 0 press from what i recall.

Expand full comment

No. The true rating against infection is clearly negative. ARR or no ARR, these vaccines have a negative efficiency rating against infection. The exact thing the fake trials pretended to be at 95%. If negative efficiency against death can still be debated, negative efficiency against infection is clearly visible based on official data from multiple countries. The trials were a joke.

Expand full comment

I believe you are correct. I don't have a cite, but I believe I've seen that claim that most severe reactions/deaths with vaccines (not just the mRNA jabs) happen within two weeks, in fact most happen soon after the injection and incidence drops off quickly.

Relevant to the mRNA abominations, though: Counting a person as not considered "vaccinated" until two weeks after the SECOND dos (?) is just another of the inexcusable sleights of hand of the current regime. I can understand this terminology for claims of efficacy. It is utter deviousness to claim someone sick or dead after two shots but < 14 days afterwards was "unvaccinated." As such, the vaccines could not possibly have been a cause, using their acid-trip reasoning!

Expand full comment

Actually, no one is vaccinated. No matter when you had the shot, which shot, how many shots, and how long you have waited - NO ONE IS VACCINATED because it ain't a vaccine!!!

Expand full comment

I always hear that claim but if some gets sick 1 month, 2 months, 5 months after the vaccine how would that event ever be recorded? Would any doctor say your health condition was correlated with a vaccine taken 3 months ago? Not in this system it wouldn't. Who is doing large scale disease/vaccine correlation studies? The same people who got rid of the control groups after the original trials? I think unless you keel over quickly an adverse event won't ever be recorded. (until you get into overall higher death rates much later) That is why the shortest term events get picked up and the claim that "most severe reactions happen in the first two weeks" is made. Seek and ye shall find.....Don't seek and the vaccines are friggin awesome!!

Expand full comment

"Who is doing large scale disease/vaccine correlation studies?"

Exactly! By now...

we should have exact and known causes of ALL common VAERS reports, via autopsies and studies.

we should have EXACT numbers and percentages of all cause mortality and morbidity for EVERY kind of illness, vaccinated verse unvaccinated, numbering in the 10s of millions.

we should have this broken down perfectly in to common demographics.

we should have lots of people in jail for life, as a minimum.

Expand full comment

totally~ but that would be REAL science, and we can't have that, can we?

Expand full comment

As with Watergate: follow the money. As Goldman Sachs pointed out in an investment research note to their top clients, selling a drug that makes people well is not a very good business model, there are trillions of dollars at stake ensuring that people get more and more unwell. This is as plain as day: why would "government health people" not go full bore telling people to exercise and lose weight? Given the 1:1 relationship between Covid mortality and obesity?

Expand full comment

always! I remember when it went from prevention/cure conditions to "management".. for life.. taking a drug every day. Criminal.

Expand full comment

in many ways like the many years it took to firmly establish that tobacco use is related to increased cancer. it was DECADES that the industry was able, in court, to claim there was no clear evidence of a causal relationship. it will be the same with the shots.

Expand full comment

Also what they did to people telling them fat made you fat. Then everyone turned to sugar and chemicals. There are so many things like this and obviously scientists were out there that knew the truth. But no real journalism happened. Just the mainstream narrative. So infuriating!

Expand full comment

trrue that!

Expand full comment

I’m amazed at how so many don’t even consider the jab as a cause of death or sickness!

Expand full comment

That’s likely what is responsible for the 2021 massive spikes of excess deaths reported in country after country. However it’s not getting mainstream press, so we can guess how the government will characterize it once it spills into the news.

Expand full comment

true that!

Expand full comment

I keep thinking this is two weeks after the shot. But it’s really after the second shot and there is a pause in between. That’s even worse. Wow. So obviously criminal.

Expand full comment

I dont know where you saw the claim but the data not opinion from Denmark, UK, Scotland, Israel and now the US clearly indicates that the jab causes your current issues to fast forward as you would expect from a damaged immune system. It doesnt go away after 2 weeks! Hence the rise in all cause mortality and recently raised in a senate hearing in US as 40% over there! This refers to mRNA not proper vaccines!!

Expand full comment

The two week rule is only used for evaluating efficacy. It is not used for evaluating safety. If you have a serious adverse event one day after vaccination, then the vaccine is certainly a possible cause, and nothing about the CDCs methodology in evaluating safety rules that out

Expand full comment

A play on a famous quote.......

"I consider it completely unimportant who in the country will be vaccinated, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this—who will count the Shots, and how."

Pandemic of Numbers Manipulation.

Expand full comment

Exactly, the effect of this on the statistics is huge, because it inflates the "unvaccinated in hospital" figure with people that belong in the "in hospital from the vaccine" figure, the latter being ridiculously understated in any event due to the unwillingness to report to VAERS for fear of offending the Pharmaceutical industry. So it has a double whammy effect which I would think must be even bigger than the failure to take into account the health status of elderly unvaccinated.

Expand full comment

In germany it is first and second shot plus 14 days waiting time. This is the fraud. Same was done in the trials.

Expand full comment

Really, in the trials? If they became infected in the five week period were they counted as unvaccinated infections, of just dropped from the study?

Expand full comment

Juan I feel your love but do you have a response to lymond ?

Expand full comment

i liked the good old days when the vaccine stopped infection, stopped transmission, stopped you from dying and getting real sick. it was 95% effective at that! or most of that. or some of that. and now look what all this real world data and exposes have done to that 95% effective vaccine. it's a shame.

if this was the boy who cried wolf the boy would be on his 10th round of fooling the villagers. when a source lies this many times you stop listening to them. sorry CDC, Fauci, Gates, you blew it. i hope the wolf doesn't eat you.

Expand full comment

If you dig deeper, you'll find that what we believe about traditional vaccines isn't true either. Dr. Suzanne Humprhies administered thousands of vaccines, then 3 of her ill patients took a sharp turn for the worse after a flu vaccine, and THEN she began to research vaccines. Dissolving Illusions is the result:

https://dissolvingillusions.com/

Forrest Maready's work is also worth looking into: http://forrestmaready.com/

Expand full comment

You shouldn't adjust by both health status and age. Only health status with the understanding that whatever adjustment made will not account for idiosyncratic differences. Adjusting for age as well will bias the measurement

Expand full comment

No it won't the more you vaccinate younger healthy people the smaller the percentage of short term deaths.

Expand full comment

Yea prob the 15% variance is they died while still in the “ unvaccinated waiting period”

Expand full comment

Yes, especially when the depression of immunity for 2 weeks post first jab results in greater infection and deaths that are shifted to unvaccinated.

Expand full comment

It's 5 weeks now? I thought it was 2 weeks after vax...

Expand full comment

two weeks after second jab. That is always how they did it.

Expand full comment

After the second one. So there can be a few weeks in between. Longer if it’s “put off”. (I kept thinking two weeks too.)

Expand full comment

I think it's indisputable. Most are within a few days. Scroll down to the second chart... https://openvaers.com/covid-data

Expand full comment

Agree, but 5 weeks? I thought it was 2 weeks?

Expand full comment

2 weeks after the 2nd shot - or 5 weeks after the 1st shot.

Expand full comment

I did not know this. So for vaxx vs. unvaxxed measurements they are counting a person 5+ weeks out from their first jab of Pfizer or Moderna as vaccinated? I thought you had to be 2 weeks out of being double jabbed to be considered vaccinated. For J&J I thought it was 2 weeks out from the single shot regimen.

Expand full comment

No, you're right. I was generalizing for the Pfizer (3 weeks) and Moderna (3-4 weeks) time span between the 1st and 2nd shot. From the 2nd shot, 2 weeks.

Expand full comment

OK, gotcha. I think you have to be 2 weeks out from your first jab to be considered partially vaccinated for the sources that track that as a category.

Expand full comment

Alex, I am doctor living in NSW. Many have expressed doubts about the total number of vaccinated in New South Wales. The real figure is probably 70-80%.

From the start, the ICU doctors I speak with have said the Covid affects the the vaccinated and unvaccinated equally.

Expand full comment
author

Would love to talk to you - or those physicians. Alexberensonauthor at protonmail is most secure.

Expand full comment

I'm no doctor but I can tell you that here in New Zealand where it is officially touted that vax rates are up over 90 percent, our regional health boards are on record as saying that this percentage estimate is derived from anyone who has interacted with the health system in the last 12 months. Ridiculously problematic. That means all the people that are relatively healthy and don't go for checkups annually are not factored into our national vax percentages. One might presume this 'unseen' part of the population may have a high non vax rate as they will be healthier generally and see less benefit in the vax. This could drastically alter the true percentage of vaxed in our country. Chicanery everywhere you look!

Expand full comment

Wow - Nick. I'm not sure that this is also happening in Australia. But I havn't consulted a physician in almost 3 years and am unvaccinated - so would be amongst those actually uncounted, if that was the criterion. Husband and I have followed the FLCCC prophylactic protocol for the last year.

Expand full comment

Yup. They claim its now rich data cause info on age race etc is there. But what good is that if its unreliable when you claim you need this magical 90 percent mark. It's crazy you can get at a drive thru and so there's no simple record taken down and collated nationally. Here's a very interesting vid on the vax in nz. Please share...https://www.bitchute.com/video/dASUoQ92PTbD/

Expand full comment

Hi Vicki - May I ask what you're taking and how much? I have some IVM and HCQ here but have hesitated to take it as a prophylactic.

Expand full comment

Hi metejt, Go to the FLCCC website - they have prophylactic list for their recommendations. Note when treating a virus, it is never with just one item - always multi factoral. All the best.

Expand full comment
founding

We know it’s the shots causing problems not anything else in healthy people.

Expand full comment

'Affects the vaccinated and unvaccinated equally' logical conclusion: the vaccines are ineffective, correct?

Expand full comment

By his logic nothing - against COVID. Obviously God knows what on cardiac muscle. Now the monsters want to squirt this glop into 6 month old bodies!?

Expand full comment

While several countries have stopped jabbing under 30, some have stopped completely, most won't vaxx the children because they are not at risk, the US and a few others keep on running the line. Now 600 million useless masks are being bought by taxpayer money, and quick tests that would have been excellent 2 years ago, they were ready in April or May of 2020. But then the government wanted the PCR kit, which is no test.

Expand full comment

All about making the Fauci's richer and richer.

Expand full comment

Today I visited with another needlle happy friend. To my surprise Kennedy's book lay on the bench, with a marker about half way... everyone will know soon now. See if anyone can get that man unthroned.

Expand full comment

It’s possible if we tell our more educated friends to “prove RFK jr wrong” more might read it. Pride thing.

Expand full comment

N95 masks are only good for 2 hours of use inside and 30 minutes outside.

Expand full comment

Masks are completely unnecessary outdoors unless for first responders or another person who will be up close and personal with strangers. The only exception being if a person is in an extremely crowded situation. But the N95 masks are the only masks that are even reasonably effective indoors. Ultimately, masks are severely limited in their efficacy.

Expand full comment

Yes, that's what I understood from that comment too. For people sick enough to be in ICU with Covid it doesn't matter whether they were vaccinated or not, the vaccines are not making any difference.

Expand full comment

All the Fake clinical trials by Pfizer and Moderna,et al, had Absolute effectiveness of 1.2% or less. So given the large populations vaccinated vs the small clinical trials,the end effect of vaccination to prevent covid approaches Zero. The "vaccines " have had Zero effect on the trajectory of this Virus. Only dangerous Side Effects in the Jabbed.

Expand full comment

This level of effect of the shots has varied according to which variant is being considered. Omicron seems to exhibit the highest percentage of breakthrough infection so far. Whether that is surpassed by BA.2 or some future variant remains to be seen.

Expand full comment

A doctor in a large hospital in Belgium said on local TV in October, that all the covid patients in the hospital were vaccinated. None unvaccinated. That means something. It is not statistically right, but Belgium was at that time somewhere between 75 and 80% vaccinated.

Expand full comment

If I am not mistaken the UK data shows a similar trend. I suspect the differences we are seeing in the data between western countries has more to do with how efficient their respective 'roll outs' were and timing of same, and the accuracy of their data collection.

Expand full comment

Israel as well.

Expand full comment

they pressure people to get this vaxxx - if you want to get a surgery, or any other hospitalization etc. need to be vaxxed against covid first

Expand full comment

So, the injected chemicals do... what?

Expand full comment

Obviously something very important to our ruling class of tin pot dictators, as they want this substance in every body worldwide. Clearly it has nothing to do with improving health, freedom or quality of life.

Expand full comment

That is the million-dollar question. Is it a simple control issue, or is there something else behind it? Because it obviously has nothing to do with altruism. That is never forced.

Expand full comment

Sorry, can you be more specific in your question? Are you being rhetorical or asking a question? Just want to make sure. If rhetorical, right. If question, Dr Malone’s substack has great answers. And of all the articles I’ve ever read on this whole mess scientifically I think this is one of the best:

https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/stabilising-the-code

Expand full comment

It is not rhetorical, but as many issues facing us now, the answers are not clear and are not being provided by the opaque politicians attempting to force a myriad of bad ideas upon us, or by their elitist backers who hold the true power behind the curtain. Interesting article, but that is just a piece of evidence leading toward the confusion culminating in the original question. A follow-up question, how does forcing everyone to get this shot fit into the goals of the Great Reset? Some have postulated the idea it is to cull the numbers of humanity. While I do not fully endorse this theory, neither would I argue against it. Has it saved more lives than it has taken? And if so, will that still be true five or ten years from now?

Expand full comment

I think that’s easy. The whole thing was orchestrated. Planned. Watch Event, what is it called Event 201 from end of 2019. Check out twitter comments from our opposers. They’ve brainwashed the masses. I don’t think it’s as many as they want us to think it is but they still got a huge number to believe AND to PROPAGATE the lies. Some may be shills, trolls. But many actually believe the lies and try to spread them like evangelists.

I’m in the appt desk of a Drs ofc, I had a lady tell me it was the unvaxxed causing the variants. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m realistic, I don’t 100 percent disagree with her just maybe 75 percent. Flu can mutate in a year or less , why can’t c19? and flu vax uptake is not as much as c19 in some countries. Viruses, if real ....

(To the virus deniers: yeah yeah, I’m not getting into that “no virus / germ vs terrain theory” dialogue in this comment people, it’s a bridge too far for me, at least right now, your side comments make you sound like ? History buffs at best. I’m willing to entertain the theory. I think Luc Montagnier May actual be a proponent?).

Ok, so, if SarsCoV2 is even a real virus, viruses can mutate without the enormous pressure we’re putting on them but we are putting evolutionary pressure on them in the midst of a pandemic. So what’s driving the RAPID mutations is probably the shots. On the other hand the variants seem to be following natural progression from more deadly and less contagious to less deadly and more contagious. The prevalent strains are following normal evolutionary timelines except maybe for excessive speed.

Man I’m sorry people I am on a side track I really just meant to comment on the “believe the lies” . But the lady I was talking to believed totally that it was ONLY the unvaxxed causing the variants. And I wanted to comment that while I think she is wrong, it’s more complex than that.

Expand full comment

And even if it doesn't, we do not observe the counterfactual. Claiming that the vaccine made something less severe is unknowable given the data available. And doesn't make sense to report it the way it is reported even if it were true. Either the vaccine is 90% effective against infection or hospitalization, not BOTH together, otherwise the hospitalization numbers make 0 sense. This discrepancy is why so many think the vaccine prevents hospitalization at a high clip even as thr vaccine has become negatively effective against infection

Expand full comment

Great point. Hard to claim the vaxx made the symptoms less severe for any given individual when per the BMJ, 80-90% of unvaxxed get mild or no symptoms anyway.

Expand full comment

absolutely agree.

Are you allowed to share this information publicly or would you be punished/silenced?

I am in Northern Virginia and a patient of a rather conservative medical practice. The doctors are treating patients with covid. From the beginning this pandemic was really kind of a sloppy scheme. I am an RNMS and well, there are a lot of people that believe anything the government tells them. Shame on the governments. I am completely insulted by all governments taking over the role of one's own doctor, ... most of us do have our own trusted medical professionals. What happened? What is happening and why would our government "authorities" some how believe that they are the one and only power and managers in our lives! No thanks

Expand full comment

Dear Rosemary, because they are the best and the brightest and they all vote the "proper" way. That is why bureaucrats not only believe but know in their hearts that they know best and ought to have the power to rule you best. You seem surprised by this. Read some history.

Expand full comment

What are you doing about getting the true message out?

Expand full comment

Interesting, JS. I also live in NSW - a PhD but not a medical doctor. But my experience supports your hypothesis about the vax figures - really cant see that it can be in the high 90s percent.

Expand full comment

I suspect that perhaps this tactic of reporting extremely high vaccination rates is being used to make the remaining unvaccinated who happen to also be isolated feel as if they are in an extreme minority that has no support or chance of resisting?

Expand full comment

100% the case. I am in QLD and you only need to look at how empty cafes etc are to realise more than just 10% of people are unvaxed.

Expand full comment

How do they keep making these commercials that say otherwise? And how do they get doctors to comply, do they really believe the lies? Just trying to figure out the psychology here.

Expand full comment

I am an ER doctor. I spoke to our nursing supervisor who is in charge of giving statistics of admitted Covid patients and deaths. She said that they never ask for the number of these cases who were vaccinated.

Expand full comment
Feb 2, 2022·edited Feb 2, 2022

Seriously wondering about these questions. Much appreciated if you could find out..

1. Like so many other countries, do Aussie doctors count patients as "unvaccinated", if < 2 weeks post 2nd injection?

2. Do Aussie doctors push Remdesivir following admission? 3. Can doctors administer Ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine following admission? 4. Are the ICU admissions WITH covid or is the admission BECUSE of covid 5. What Cycle Thresh hold are they running the PCRs?

Expand full comment
Feb 2, 2022·edited Feb 2, 2022

Does that mean that the ICU doctors know the vaccination rates, and have observed the same rate among ICU patients? Or are the 'Covid' ICU patients split 50/50 vaxxed/unvaxxed?

Expand full comment

I live in Sydney. I also question the stats. Why else would the push to be vaxxed be so utterly relentless every hour of the day, on every msm outlet? And given that it appears about 75% of the thirty odd deaths a day in nsw are vaccinated the real “risk” of remaining unvaccinated is being overstated.

Expand full comment

Exactly. Population based statistics are only valid if the populations are statistically equal. If the un-vaxxed population is unhealthy 90+ and the vaxxed population is healthy under 60s, it makes a big difference.

This is why you have double blind clinical trials of an appropriate length. Not truncated trials with non-statistically groups to the overall population.

Expand full comment
Feb 1, 2022·edited Feb 1, 2022

Also, population level health information is useless in making a personal medical decision. Consider that about 5% of the population will get prostate cancer in their lifetime. If you're a woman, do you care? Not really. And if you're a man, it's about 11%, but not for everyone. You're 3X more likely to have it if your father and other males in your family have had it. So the question isn't what's the percentage of the population that gets prostate cancer; it should be what's the chance I get prostate cancer?!

Expand full comment

That is the right way to look at things. And even than it is only statistics. Even if all your ancestors had it you might not. It is like these beautiful young women who have their breasts removed because 2 or 3 women in their family had breast cancer. I just read that, even if the breast is removed, you can get the cancer. In the meanwhile you have yourself mutated. I think life is a chance game, and we have bodies that can cope with a lot. For myself I prefer natural methods for healing, and only go to the doctor if they fail. They seldom do. I go to the doc maybe 3 times in 10 years. Luckily my doc has other patients.

Expand full comment

Applied to COVID, the question should be is the vaccine right for me? It's a valid question.

Those that achieve "COVID death" status have an average of 3 co-morbidities. Think about that for a second. That's already one foot in the grave. If you have that many co-morbidities prior to infection, you might want to try and increase your protection level, whatever it is, as a matter of personal choice.

By contrast, if you have zero co-morbidities, the need for vaccination (which is demonstrably non-sterilizing -- i.e., no social benefit to vaccinating the healthy) is practically zero, yet the possibility of adverse reaction is not zero. The vaccine is probably not right for you.

On a societal scale, the math of COVID vaccine mandates, therefore, is likely a net negative. Like the black out on natural immunity, however, this issue is never discussed as a matter of politics, not science.

Expand full comment

If you already have three co-morbidities, then getting Covid vaxxed will mean that your co-morbidity collection will have risen to four.

Expand full comment

and there are none

Expand full comment

I agree with you and Alex and also with the far more relevant distortion because of the 14 day miscategorization.

But my hunch is that the number and effect of the 'too ill to be vaxxed in nursing homes' might have been significant in the beginning but not anymore.

Expand full comment

Your comment is the first time it clicked for me. Thanks.

Expand full comment

This is all bullshit.

Just based on the fact of how it was promoted to us.... Was supposed to provide complete protection. The goalposts have been moved MULTIPLE times.

Whomever took it was not supposed to be able to be infected, not supposed to be able to harbor and transmit. This last bullshit about hospitalizations and death is just another goalpost they will be forced to move in the near future.

Expand full comment

And the majority of people will continue to believe - the truth is too much for them to handle. "There are none so blind as those who will not see"

Expand full comment

"At the end of every hard-earned day, people find some reason to believe" said Bruce Springsteen in a folky song recounting a litany of reasons to NOT believe.

https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/brucespringsteen/reasontobelieve.html

Expand full comment

This has been big pharma's game plan for most of their drugs and vaccines since the 1950's. Few have been paying attention.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I am hopeful either HB1772 or SB5099 will gain momentum and help strip away Inslee's emergency powers.

Expand full comment

Good luck. It got done in PA (Wolf's emergency powers ended via vote in May) and in NJ, the close call for Murphy has - so far - prevented much of a return to lockdowns/mask mandates (he reinstated some things on the eve of expiration). But there's a bill afoot, and beginning to get some D support - in deep blue NJ.

NJ, home of the "other nursing home slaughter". It seemed like Cuomo got all the press in that regard, Murphy was, I think, even more "effective".

Expand full comment

So many people are speaking out, but the dictator will never relinquish his crown, he's only getting started.

Expand full comment

That's why we need momentum. But agree, he's been a dictator.

Expand full comment

Did you see the discussions about limiting Inslee's "Emergency Powers" and all of the public input? The legislature could act, but they won't, they are too scared of him and the Dem party. Absurd and terrifying.

Expand full comment

Reading on the topic now. Like Phil, I plan to move out of Washington State as soon as my son graduates from high school. Watching the decline of Seattle has been utterly frustrating and obscene. And today, it was just announced that because city jails are overflowing and conditions are so 'poor' for inmates, there will be no more bookings in King County for certain crimes....."The proposal would largely prevent the booking of people accused of, but not yet charged with, offenses like burglary, car theft and drug dealing" (Seattle Times). From the governor who oversteps and operates like a dictator devastating the economic lives of citizens to City of Seattle and King County officials ensuring the rights of drug addicts and criminals over the rights and safety of its citizens who fund them all, Western Washington is no longer a place for building a future.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Ah, smart.

Expand full comment

Excellent! And, Brandon's "give me 100 days of wearing a mask, just 100 days", said in a pathetic whisper.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Well it has turned for the vaccine injured, just no one is listening to them, not those who injected them, their doctors, their governments…this is a crime of the biggest scale and it shocks me to the core when people don’t see it.

Expand full comment

Yep, Maddie, the girl who's life was destroyed by the Pfiz#r Vax while IN the trials has not been able to get a dollar of assistance from the manufacturer or ANY of the notorious govt vax injury funds. Her parents are destitute and headed for bankruptcy. Imagine the hell others are experiencing!

Expand full comment

This is a huge point. Who exactly can be held liable here? Anybody at all?

--------

THIS IS NOT ABOUT KEEPING YOU HEALTHY. This is about overriding your personal preferences with that of unaccountable ‘experts’. This is about you giving up your autonomy for the collective. And if you happen to be one of the eggs who gets broken, perhaps via vaccine injury or your child regressing in school, the collective will shrug and say you’re simply the cost of making the omelet.

https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/the-proper-role-of-science

Expand full comment

wait be patient-- it will happen

Expand full comment

Tangential to this: interviews with Aaron Siri, the attorney who successfully fought mandates and to get the FDA to release Pifzer clinical trial data in 1 year rather than the 75 years they wanted to take:

https://sharylattkisson.com/2021/12/after-hours-covid-19-vaccine-mandates-in-court-podcast/

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/fighting-the-govt-for-pfizer-biontech-covid-19/id1478351211?i=1000545979101

Expand full comment

Assuming they are still alive.

Expand full comment

I would love to see all cause mortality tracked between vaxxed and unvaxxed. That alone would be interesting. But if we could further stratify by age and health/comorbidity…wow! That would speak volumes.

Expand full comment

There is 1 reason they are not running a Vaxed vs unvaxed morbidity…because it will not support the vaxed narrative. Question…what happens if you take steroids for a long period of time? Your body quits producing testosterone. What do you think your Immune system does when you get Jabs every 6 months…soon to be 3 months. Your immune System atrophies and your body relies on those jabs. Now enter health issues from the jab… #EndGame Start bolstering your immune system and stay away from the jab.

Expand full comment

Yes, we have an explosion of Acquired Immune Deficiency underway that will become horrifyingly obvious as dormant cancers rear up unopposed killing people in just weeks, not years anymore. This is genocide

Expand full comment

ditto. but we will never see it-the narrative is: "the shots don't work but will keep you from getting really sick or die" - no proof but we are from govt & here to help

Expand full comment

Those data points were tracked in the Pfizer clinical trials, and in fact there was slightly more mortality in the vaxxed - on the order of 50 IIRC out of 10k participants, although please verify this if you're interested. Now consider that this would have been during the more dangerous alpha/delta era for covid itself, and whilst fewer people in the population had natural immunity, and yet "some other cause" was balancing out and adding 50 to that purported reduction of COVID deaths in the vaxxed vs the unvaxxed. Hmm.. well, since this was a Gold Standard[tm] clinical trial (randomized, double blind, placebo controlled yadda yadda) I think we can officially conclude that the vaxxes have critical problems. But oh wait, that data was not originally made public, after all, it did not relate to the "primary endpoint" (reduction of deaths FROM COVID.) As if you care, arbitrarily, about dying FROM COVID more than dying per se.

Edit: PS those real-world data are available from Public Health England in the UK and Norman Fenton crunches the numbers. Again, what we see is not reassuring for the vaccines, but you will never get statisticians to agree on how to adjust the data.

Expand full comment

People like Juan are, and have been, a big part of the problem.

There's absolutely no humility, at all, and full measures of inappropriate condescension.

Worst of all, a bizarre compulsion to carry water for big pharma and big government propaganda.

Expand full comment

Self-righteous shits is what they are. Double down lest you be proven wrong and when you ARE proven wrong you change your tone “That’s what I was TRYING to say, you Nazis just take everything the wrong waayyyy”

Expand full comment

Exactly my thought!

Expand full comment

"If 90% of a population is "vaccinated" and 75% of that SAME population is dying from COVID, then the "vaccine" is STATISTICALLY HAVING AN EFFECT."

ONLY IF YOU ASSUME 100% OF THE POPULATION HAS BEEN EXPOSED!

What it really shows is that NOBODY is "vaccinated" against COVID!!! Full stop.

NOBODY'S VACCINATED!

Expand full comment

And even if 100% of the population is exposed some will still not contract Covid, whether it be from natural immunity from having the virus or due to a healthy immune system.

Expand full comment

Or it's a weapon.

Expand full comment

25 people died during the h1n1 trials and they shut it down. There is absolutely no benign explanation why this has not only continued but has progressed to forcing people to take something that 100% doesn't stop infection or transmission and 100% carries with it serious life threatening side effects.

Expand full comment

You might be talking about 1976, yes? The reason it was shut down so quickly then is because vaccine makers were still financially liable. That went away in 1986 for childhood vaccines, and the PREP act covers liablity for these experimental shots. So, no matter how bad things get, they won't have to pay. There's only an up$ide for them.

Expand full comment

Can we just simplify this already? The IFR is very low overall, and almost nothing at all for the young and healthy. The IFR decreased between July and Dec of last year. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.08.21260210v2

This is just not something to worry about. All the debates stem from statism and leftist, cult "safetyism" that created the panic.

The immune compromised and elderly are most at risk for ANY virus, bacteria or other complication. That's life. Bad flus and other viruses come and go and kill people. Deal with it. We are mere mortals. The amount of time, money and resources thrown at covid was obviously a huge mistake. Fear reigned over pragmatism. It was over a long time ago. Alex has done good work, but until we dismantle the industrial medical complex (in other words, the massive subsidized cartel) and regulatory-captured entities, nothing will change. Dissent is the only way to fight this. Stop wearing masks and stop taking the vax at the individual level. Let others do what they want and take their chances. As for the mandates, freedom is expensive. Quit your job and do something else. Time to live. Vote with your own individual action. Debating inexperienced, biased number crunchers doesn't seem like the right path to me. It just goes in endless circles.

Expand full comment

Ughhh this 1000 times over.

Expand full comment
Feb 1, 2022·edited Feb 1, 2022

Thanks for the reminder, Alex. And, as Dr. Kory implied last Monday, there is a high likelihood that many of the people labeled as "unvaccinated" in the data sets were actually entered as "unknown vaccination status" in the hospital system codes (he said the only two options in some of the hospital codes are "vaccinated" or "status unknown") because for whatever reason, their status was unknown, thus, there is a high likelihood that any stats that identify "unvaccinated" probably actually include "vaccinated" people as well

Expand full comment

Good point. Also, the authorities have the advantage of using the slipperiest definitions for these terms. Unvacinated can simply mean there were only 2 shots administered and the patient did not get "boosted" and therefore was not fully vaxxed. Of course, they use timing such as 2 weeks for the vax to take effect. In the meantime they are "unvaxed."

Always a racket. Anything to cook the books and only in one direction.

Expand full comment

He added - the question should always be- were they given early treatment or not? He said that is a much more important question to ask than the vaccination status.

Expand full comment

Excellent point, as our healthcare system hangs on "coding".

Expand full comment

We're an innumerate society and the powers they be know this and take great advantage of it.

Expand full comment

Exactly!! Most Americans do not even know the population of their country. OR how many people die each year. So the propagandists have an easy job.

Expand full comment

This! Too easy!

Expand full comment
deletedFeb 1, 2022·edited Feb 1, 2022
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

I feel like I am losing my mind. My daughter lives in NYC and she is lost to the cult.

Expand full comment

Good job! Yes approx 330 million. Approx 2.5 million deaths each year. If they ever put that on CNN the interest in all of the Covid narrative would wane. We have 800,000 deaths so far, which is 400,000 per year with flu disappeared, of course. Which is a completely expected death event if flu were not 'deleted'

Expand full comment

40 years of Re-Education Camps, aka, Public Schools have destroyed Critical Thinking.

Expand full comment

Common Core Math.

Expand full comment

Albert Bourla admitted on January 10th that the current Pfizer vax does not work against Omicron. Pfizer is apparently coming out with a new Omicron specific shot. So why are people still getting vaccinated?? I’m NOT vaxed (and never will be) but let’s say I wanted to start now. I wouldn’t be “fully vaxed” until the END OF JULY! We will be two more variants away from omicron my then. By the way, I had Omicron and immediately took Ivermectin. All I had was a sore throat for 3 days. My husband was the same. It works!

Expand full comment

exactly. The other obvious question is how did they create a new shot so quickly? Tested even less than the original? Or not tested at all, most likely. SCAM.

Expand full comment

It's all a scam. They created the virus for the vaccine. They knew the flu wouldn't be enough to scare people into modifying their genes with untested nano-lipid technology, so they created a plandemic.

Expand full comment

I don't think there is anything remarkable about rapid mRNA "vaccine" development. I've seen no claims of extensive testing, why should they, if they can get away with "testing lite" as with earlier efforts? The newer jab might be good against a newer variant -- for a while. But since it's based on the same mRNA technology, I would expect it to fade as rapidly and have the same highly risky side effects. I agree it's all a scam, one to make money, and perhaps, for more insidious ends.

Expand full comment

Because it's not about a virus.

Expand full comment

Wow, that's an amazing statistical inference your reader makes. COVID hysteria is the failure of the public education system writ large.

Expand full comment

Yeah, seriously, Juan acts like he stumbled on some deep mathematical truth Alex would have missed.

Expand full comment

Yeah, but unfortunately for him he was using the "new math".

Expand full comment