Jan 19Liked by Rav Arora, Tracy Beth Høeg, MD, PhD
I restacked it this this note:
I appreciate this detailed and objective critique of our work. I wish it could have been a recorded discussion, so that each statement can be clarified and responded to as we go.
Virtually all the criticisms raised are addressed in the paper itself, and the limits of the 17M estimation are spelled out and shown by the graphical results.
Nonetheless, I plan to respond more fully, when time permits. I thank the authors for their preliminary reactions to our work.
To clarify I was the only author on this but it sounds like Rav will be able to moderate our "debate". Discussions are always good for getting into nuances that are more difficult and time consuming to get into with the written word.
- Their main source of power apart from sin-empowered demons? NOT a coincidence that the USA left dollar convertibility to gold in 1971, precisely triggering the exponential government deficit coupled with the trade deficit and inflation.
This is the Achilles’ heel of all nations: masonic and satanic secret societies counterfeit paper money and launder trillions with which they buy Banks, seats in the Federal Reserve (the only private run Central Bank in the world), political careers and parties, puppeticians, listed corporations, media, healthcare corporations and organizations, universities, foundations, judges, etc.:
Confessions of illuminati, David Rockefeller (finest quotes):
1. Create an easy system for real money: private currencies/warrants based on real assets, goods, services, etc. (gold, corn, oil, distance/volume/weight transportation, labor human hour/minute, etc.)
2. Ban legal tender. Let the free markets decide which real-currencies/valuables/warrants they prefer to trade with
3. Ban paper-backed currencies (unlike real-backed ones of point 1.)
4. Enforce a Legal Banking Reserve of 100% of deposits (so banks don't create money based on air) and therefore there's no excuse for a Central Bank, because there would be no risk of bank-runs since all their loans are fully backed with deposits
Plllllease, on my knees, don’t believe me, just do your own homework by searching the following in yandex.com, mojeek.com (includes crawl date filter and substack search), gigablast.com, startpage.com, duckduckgo.com (not Google, Bing, Yahoo censors). The key terms to test them? Child Satanic Ritual Abuse, Child Satanic Ritual Murder.
President John Quincy Adams: “Masonry ought forever to be abolished. It is wrong - essentially wrong - a seed of evil, which can never produce any good.”
If you are a mason or know a mason, ask him to ask his 33° master to put in writing and sign it, who is "the great architect" and that he is not Lucifer. If he refuses, then he’ll know who he is really serving, Satan: tell him to get out of masonry NOW. Sooner or later he’ll be required to trample on a cross to get to a higher degree.
Confessions of a former mason (Serge Abad-Gallardo):
Denis Rancourt et al published their work so it was available to the public. It was therefore open to critique and many have done so in writing. Written critique of published scientific analyses is of course entirely appropriate. Glad this particular critique will result in a conversation!
LOL! You do realize that ChatGPT has high degree of pro-pharma and vaccine bias? One only need ask it anything about the risks of mRNA vaccines to see this clearly demonstrated!
Dr. Rancourt, one of the important points missed in your paper on India (with an estimate of 3.7 million deaths in 2021) is that India had a very unsafe manufacturing process for Covid vaccines. With little or no prior experience of manufacturing vaccines, two Indian companies ramped up their production literally overnight from zero to millions of doses per week. The Indian medical regulators were told to look the other way because the government needed hundreds of millions of domestically manufactured vaccine doses in a very short time.
Brazil had signed to purchase millions of doses of the Indian vaccine Covaxin but canceled their order after their regulatory body (ANVISA) inspected a Covaxin factory in March 2021 and found substandard manufacturing practices. Among other things, they found that i) the live coronavirus was not fully deactivated, ii) the vaccine was contaminated with other microbes (because of poor sterilization procedures), and iii) the vaccine potency varied greatly.
The other vaccine manufactured and used in India (Covishield) probably had similar quality issues, but I am not aware of any inspection of their factories by a foreign agency.
"i) the live coronavirus was not fully deactivated"
Do you know their methodology for making this determination? Or do they simply have a protocol, and if it is not followed as given, then they say "not dactivated?.
Since the "coronavirus" is an amorphous artificial entity (as are all "viruses" by the definition, including the amazing hijacking of cell replication, never proven experimentally) I wonder how you can tell if a fantasy entity is activated or deactivated! :)
Any help appreciated.
Thanks!
(And I realize you may not agree about virus fantasy.)
btw, it is sad to see that the new leftie regime in Brazil are jab-pushing.
Hi Steven, Covaxin is a traditional killed (deactivated) virus vaccine with an adjuvant. The manufacturers treat the live virus with a chemical to kill the virus. However, they want to deactivate the virus (so it can't give you Covid) without destroying it completely (so that it can still offer immunity). So they have to use just the right amount of chemicals for the right duration. ANVISA tested some vaccine samples from the production line and found that the virus was not sufficiently deactivated and, thus, could cause Covid. I don't know exactly how they tested and what they found. Maybe there is a detailed ANVISA report somewhere.
Incidentally, WHO did another factory inspection a year later in 2022 and still found some quality issues. They recommended that other countries not import Covaxin from India. But WHO is a highly politicized body, so I don't trust them as much. I assume that over time the manufacturing quality issues would have been resolved. It is just that in March 2021, there was a mad rush to produce tens of millions of doses per week . And when you introduce a new porduct into manufacturing, there are always some quality issues in the beginning (even if you are not making millions of doses).
The Rancourt paper wasn't designed to delve into each country's nuanced circumstances. The ACM calculated was not intended to address causality and certainly not poor (or missing, like the US) application of CGMPs. Bottom line: the excess deaths in India are what they are--regardless of India's safe or unsafe product. You make a very good point for delving into India's special circumstances, Vijay. Keep pressing for more study.
My response to Dr. Høeg: Thank you for your very honest and important article! I think we all know how critical it is to be accurate and objective. But... I have a few questions for you- 1. Are you aware that overwhelming evidence shows that different formulations of mrna vaccines have been given in different places and times? Thus, your comparing Denmark's data to other countries could be easily explained by Denmark receiving different/safer vaccines. 2. Are you aware that oncologists are reporting surging cancer rates in recently vaccinated people? How are you counting cancer deaths related to the vaccines? 3. Are you considering cognitive and psychological decline leading to suicides after the vaccines? That is also absolutely happening.. 4. Are you counting the skyrocketing rates of miscarriages being reported worldwide? Those must be considered as vaccine- caused deaths, too. Thanks again for your work and I hope that an open debate will commence. Either way, the obvious truth that the vaccines are harming/killing huge numbers is clear.
I have yet to get through the entire three-hour debated but the early returns are in: Denis kicked tail and was successful in underscoring what is now becoming more and more evident--and I quote you: "Either way, the obvious truth that the vaccines are harming/killing huge numbers is clear."
Thank you, Denis, for the very careful scientific analysis you do. Dr. Hoeg's work is waaaaayyyyyy tooooo behind-the-times in my opinion! "Major studies" that confirm what has already been widely observed and reported (e.g. myocarditis in adolescent males or that a booster is too much risk for college students) is "very safe" but not very significant science in my opinion, and definitely didn't help any of those adolescent males or college students, let alone all of the young people dealing with SADS or strokes or fertility issues or stillbirths. It's quite likely that the data that NO (state or national) govt will release that could readily be used to calculate excess deaths for vaccinated vs unvaccinated people would corroborate that your very careful analysis is correct. And Dr. Hoeg should have addressed the details in your work in this piece.
Tracy would have benefitted from a conversation with Denis prior to blasting out this critique. I think that is glaringly apparent by now. The three-hour debate supports this assertion.
Thank you Dr. Rancourt you saved me a great deal of time and work because her response is full of holes! Your continued hard work and diligence are greatly appreciated! I realize that it would take an incredible amount of time to record a video counter to TBH's criticism but it would be tremendously beneficial to those of us fighting for TRUE science to be restored. The number of holes in her response and "critique" are evident early on and only become more glaring as the "critique" goes on. Even a novice can see them. Just as an example, the title of the study clearly states "southern hemisphere" so to extrapolate outside the Southern Hemisphere would be inappropriate or need to be quantified. Pretty basic. Thank you again Doctor Rancourt! God Bless you, your family, and your co-authors.
Dr. Rancourt, One thing you've said which I highly doubt, though I'm not an expert, is that the 1918 pandemic was not caused by a respiratory virus - because people over the age of 50 were less seriously affected than people under 50. That is usually explained by the hypothesis that the older people had some natural immunity from a prior pandemic which they lived through, perhaps the one which is thought to have occurred I believe in 1889. Why do you not accept that explanation?
Its actually been documented thoroughly in many historically written non fiction books : the govt , under Rockefellers INJECTED tens of thousands of military men with an experimental bacterial pneumonia vaccine. Those soldiers spread a version of what they were injected with. Thats what the 1918 Pandemic was. A Bioweapon. Im sure others can link you to these books. Good luck
To elaborate, even if you're 100% correct that there was no excess death among 50+ year olds between 1918 and 1920, I don't think that justifies jumping to the somewhat radical conclusion that no respiratory pathogen was responsible for the excess deaths of people under 50 between 1918 and 1920 (whether or not cytokine storms and/or secondary bacterial infections were what actually killed people after they first developed viral pneumonia), and I think that conclusion is perhaps motivated by the tendency of many in the medical-freedom community to discount the reality of pandemics and the need to be prepared for them - as best we can without panicking, which is always counterproductive - because oligarchs who run governments tend to use crises of all kinds to justify measures which increase their power and control, as happened and continues to happen during this Covid-19 pandemic.
So there could have been an H1N1 pandemic in 1850, which became the seasonal flu between 1852 and 1870, then an H2N2 pandemic in 1870, which replaced the H1N1 virus so that H2N2 virus was the seasonal flu between 1870 and 1890, and then maybe an H9N3 pandemic in 1890, which replaced the H2N2 virus so that H9N3 was the seasonal flu between 1892 and 1918 - when there was another H1N1 pandemic which people over 50 had some immunity to from the 1850-1870 H1N1, with people over 68, who actually lived through the 1850 pandemic, perhaps having the greatest immunity among those people. That's just speculation, but I think it's a more reasonable hypothesis than jumping, again, to what I think is the somewhat radical conclusion that no respiratory pathogen was involved, even if it can be conclusively proved that there were no excess deaths of people over 50.
I think at this time when we have telemedicine that it's good medical procedure that people have on hand, in advance of new respiratory pathogen breaking out, agents which doctors they trust recommend as probably being the most useful to have in that event. Then they can consult with their doctor about possible prophylactic use, when a outbreak is reported, and if they start to get sick the doctor can hopefully advise them to use what they have without their having to going to a doctor's office - which can both make them sicker, due to the stress involved, and infect people in the office - to see if that obviates the need for an in-person visit. I think that approach, which I believe The Wellness Company is taking, is very advisable now, when we may soon see the new Covid variant which Dr. Vanden Bossche is predicting and/or the current H5N1 clade, which is killing not only birds but mammals, jumping to humans. Protecting ourselves from the authoritarian overreach of politicians and oligarchs is a separate problem, which we also need to deal with, imo.
Thanks for responding but even if that's true, that there were no excess deaths for 50+ year olds in 1918-1920, the reason for that could be that 50+ year olds had a good deal of natural immunity to the H1N1 virus from exposure, in a previous pandemic, to a virus with a somewhat similar structure - maybe two pandemics before, which older virus had been replaced by the virus causing next flu pandemic, which then became the seasonal flu so that people under 50 were never exposed to the virus two pandemics before. That seems like a plausible explanation to me, at least one that can't be ruled out just because people 50+ did not have excess deaths in 1918-20 if that's the case. No?
Did Dr Hoeg consider contacting and discussing with Denis and Bret prior to writing her piece... maybe for a little clarification and context... for journalism's sake?
Dennis: i have followed you since 2022. Im just a retired hospice / chronic care provider, mom of 2 out of 3 vaxx injured kids ( DPT and DTAP) whose mother was i hured and killed by Moderna shots.i can read highly detailed medical literature sufficiently. One need only read VAERS and the Insurance company numbers to know 17 million dead from these shots is a CONSERVATIVE #. I look forward to your response to Rav’s substack
Thanks for this objective analysis. You noted a correlation between excess deaths and poverty in the USA. However, I first heard of significant excess deaths in a shareholder presentation by an insurance company CEO. He said the excess deaths of the insured were "off the charts," i.e., unprecedented. However, the cohort was working people between 18 and 65. These were not poor people by any stretch. Several independent insurance company analysts (not medical experts) tied the excess deaths to the vaccine. Do you have any comments on this apparent anomaly?
I don't doubt there is excess mortality among vaccinated and unvaccinated in the US. As you can see from Ioannidis' study, the USA's excess mortality is off the charts right now. I just have not seen excess mortality broken down by vaccination status in the US. Have you?
If the real, unadulterated mortality data "broken down by vaccination status" looked even remotely favorable for the vaccine and even remotely exonerated the vaccine in terms of safety (let alone effectiveness), then "they" would have shared it loudly and proudly long ago. In fact, they would have brought their beautiful, indisputable pro-vaccine mortality data to the rescue as soon as booster uptake went down the drain back in 2022. Their beautiful data would have been all over the news and internet, etc. But of course we didn't see their beautiful data back then, and we still haven't over a year later. Their silence speaks for itself.
Either they are thinking long and hard about what are the least obscene and most innocuous ways to manipulate and obfuscate the data to minimize the overall fallout whenever they do eventually release it, OR they have come to the conclusion that it is best to avoid releasing any such data unless/until they are legally forced to, since there is far more to lose by releasing it than hiding it. Or most likely, both.
Great points. In my "early spread" research, I put great weight on all the investigations (antibody tests, interviews, etc.) that could and should have happened .... but didn't.
There's quite a fascinating piece by Jessica Rose, PhD and three Canadian colleagues that is preprinted in her Substack blog "Unacceptable Jessica" and presently under submission to peer review. The four Canadians obtained vaccination data at various medical facilities around Ontario, and establish a dose/response curve, correlating severity of mRNA vaccine side effects to the concentration of DNA fragment concentration. 90-odd law firms within 4 days of publication began seeking clients for a potential class action. A month later a whistleblower emerged, admitting that the DNA fragments came from E coli. Both Pfizer and Moderna had demonstrated safety and efficacy of their mRNA vaccine products, using vaccine cultured on a human embryonic cell line, but then switched to an E coli culture medium because it was much cheaper to scale, and because some people might object on religious grounds to being injected with a product grown on human tissue. Apparently neither pharma firm disclosed the culture medium change to FDA regulators, which is mandatory.
The State of Texas immediately brought civil suit against both companies alleging Medicaid fraud (on a theory that the deception added to treatment costs because no one knew to consider a reaction to E coli DNA and/or proteins and treat people for that). The Pfizer company moved to have the case tried in federal court rather than a Texas state court. The advantage of trying the case in federal court is that if other US states want to sue, they will be joined to the Texas case, rather than potentially 50 trials held in every State. The disadvantage of the move is that people who join a class action for death or personal may wind up in the same case and it could be a treasury buster. I recall the Times Beach, Missouri PCB contamination case, in which cleanup costs exceeded the defendant company's net worth and it was liquidated, with taxpayers covering the unpaid balance of cleanup costs.
If indeed the excess deaths are principally due to vaccine contamination during manufacture, conceivably entire countries that were slow to receive their first shipments of vaccine, may have gotten vaccine from which the contaminants had been properly separated.
All in all, thanks to all for your efforts at solving this puzzle. Varying contamination levels give results akin to Russian roulette rather than allergy to the mRNA itself
Excess mortality is not really off the charts! The population is still increasing. In England and Wales even the 'covid' spike in 'excess deaths' in 2020 still only resulted in a 0.128% increase in the death rate compared to 2019. 2015-19 were extremely low years. When age and population adjusted there were more deaths in 2008 and every year before that than in 2020 (the height of recent excess deaths in E&W) https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/deaths-england-and-wales-2020-2022
Ontario's not a big enough place for physicians not to know each other and gossip. Also the Canadian government had sown a healthy distrust of US corporate propaganda in the pre-NAFTA past. It struck some informed Canadians as bizarre that their Therapeutic Goods Administration performed no tests whatsoever on these mRNA vaccine products but deferred to the US FDA's Emergency Use Authorization. So when multiple adverse reactions appeared at one Vaccination Centre but folks vaccinated at neighbouring Centres did very well, some medical folks suspected contamination and preserved the vaccine vials they had gotten. The study authors learned of it and obtained the vaccine vials to investigate them by standard methods of analytical chemistry, demonstrating that some lots had higher contaminant loads than did others.
What was unique about these public-spirited actions was that everyone else who saw anecdotal results in their communities either concluded that all of the vaccine distributed, was helping people, or that all of the vaccine was harming people. Considering the possibility that the mass-produced vaccines varied in quality from batch to batch, is something none of the armchair theorists considered. But suspension of the most basic TGA and FDA Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) procedures is what had opened the door for manufacturing problems to go undetected. The safety procedures used to ensure consistent quality of every other drug or vaccine used in Canada and the US, had been turned off for these particular vaccines.
There are lessons to be learned from this.
Not every bad action that happens in society, is done with hostile intent.
There were no graphene microchips embedded in the vaccine, as some US conspiracy theorists had gossiped.
Lipid nanoparticles exist in nature.
But there was a surplus of hubris at the CDC and officials there liked having the emergency powers they had. They wanted undue credit so they hastened to make the story about themselves saving the world. And now we've come full circle at a cost of trillions of dollars in new debt, learning that their efforts to control the narrative, caused harm. CDC needs fewer emergency powers, particularly not the power to deregulate drug safety.
Even the CDC (which I have very little trust in) admits:
"The age-adjusted death rate increased by 5.3% from 835.4 deaths per 100,000
standard population in 2020 to 879.7 in 2021. Age-specific death rates increased from 2020 to 2021 for each age group 1 year and over."
"Nine of the 10 leading causes of death in 2021 remained the same as in 2020.
Heart disease, cancer, and COVID-19 remained the top 3 leading causes."
Plus, the overall data from other countries almost entirely refutes the "lockdowns caused the deaths" claim, and point more towards the vaccine as the culprit than anything else (besides COVID itself):
I don’t know how many died from the vaccine. No one does. But that is because our supposed “healthcare” institutions such as the CDC and hospital systems have done everything possible to hide and obfuscate data. One nurse I saw interviewed said her hospital system had a drop down menu for admitted Covid patients which only permitted you to pick either “unvaccinated” or “unknown” for vaccine status. So a nurse at that hospital system could not even record a patient sick enough to die from covid as vaccinated. The unvaccinated are dying!!!! When this much blatant deception is afoot who really knows what is going on. That is deliberate.
I was coming to the comments to suggest a discussion/debate with Rancourt. I see it is already underway! Honest people are willing to have these discussions.
THIS is science.
Anecdotally, I know of one person who died from Covid (or possibly from the hospital protocols?). But I know two people who definitely died from the vaccine, and about 6 or 7 people who I’m almost certain they died from the vaccine and I’ve met people who say their relative has died from it. I know many people injured from it. I am inclined to think that the number is going to be high.
What we all should be doing is pressuring the public health authorities to release the record level data so that we can all stop guessing and just see what the numbers are.
Exactly, which is why the public health officials should make public data accessible for all interested experts to analyze. It’s our data. We pay for it. We should benefit from it. That should be the *very* purpose and endpoint of collecting this data.
The fact that they have lied to us since the beginning about many things regarding the vaccine, and they refuse to release the data, to me is a clear sign of what the truth is. It clearly doesn’t support the safe and effective narrative. We have seen signs of this as they constantly change the messaging around the “vaccines”.
I just want to add, because I think it’s extremely relevant, if Covid caused the death of three people that you know, that is still not a compelling reason to release an experimental mRNA gene based therapy, deemed a vaccine, on every single person living on the planet and then force them to take it. There was no informed consent. Still to this day, there is no ingredients list and no extensive list of possible side effects. The government is not acknowledging really any harms or significance, which is mind staggering. Add to that that people were not educated on the risk stratification for age groups, comorbitities etc.
Bottom line, a dangerous disease (this is debatable for sure) does not give license to the pharmaceutical industrial complex to join together with government to wreak havoc on the public through forced lockdowns, economic destruction, and risky medical procedures. Exactly how risky is yet to be determined but it definitely was never “safe”.
Per antibody studies of crew members of the USS Roosevelt air craft carrier, French aircraft carrier The Charles deGaulle and the USS Kidd, approximately 4,200 (of about 7,200 crew members) had antibody evidence of prior infections (with extrapolations from the too-small Roosevelt study). Only one sailor, 41, reportedly died from Covid (and this "Covid death" may or may not not be true). IMO the death rate of 1-in-4,200 in the worst possible spread environment should have told the world the real mortality risk to healthy young and middle-aged people.
Similarly, I've looked at the cohort of high school, college and pro athletes over the last 3+ years and can find only a couple reports of athletes who reportedly died from Covid (all high school athletes, none really confirmed to my satisfaction). Still, 3 or so deaths from a sample size of more than 5 million athletes aged 14 to 38 gives us an IFR of not 0.4 percent, not 0.1 percent (the flu IFR), not 0.02 percent, but 0.000 percent.
I think the IFR from these three ships and this huge group of athletes gives us an accurate IFR for healthy people 14 to 39 (the U.S. median age).
These microscopic IFR percentages are what I think we had in the "cold and flu" months of November 2019 through February 2020 (pre-official Covid). But I think tens of millions of people had already been infected with this virus by the end of February.
My substack is full of stories with more details on these findings and my "early spread" hypothesis, which I believe has not received nearly the attention this theory warrants.
I appreciate this site and this discussion today. - Bill Rice, Jr.
My mother died after being moved (unnecessarily) to hospice just to be seen by her family. They sedated her to such a degree that she never gained consciousness, and also died essentially alone, surrounded by strangers with masks.
You are right to point out there are many different factors at play here, remdesivir, midazolam and morphine with no antibiotics killed thousands early on. Myocarditis, strokes and autoimmune problems and immune suppression by IgG4, not to mention DNA and endotoxin contamination being transported into every organ. Oh and did I mention frame shifting and modRNA integrity!
You may be looking at the wrong end of the question -- many of the extremely frail and unhealthy around here, in Sweden, did not get vaccinated, or further vaccinated on their doctor's orders because it was thought that even a very minor reaction to the shot -- fever, aches and pains -- would kill them. Or because we already knew that their immune system was non-functional and cannot produce a response. (We measured the response in pretty much all of the old people.) It is completely expected that these people will get very sick and probably die, of pretty much anything, including covid if they were unfortunate enough to catch it. But I do not know how well this observation generalises tp other countries.
This reply may offend some of my US brothers and sisters. In my travels across the world it was quite noticeable that the majority of people outside the US walk alot more, are more active, eat fresher less processed food and are generally more ‘fit’ than the average American. I could spot the Americans everywhere. Not because they all wore athletic shoes everywhere but the size difference was quite noticeable. Statistics on obesity in this country correlate to the observations. I don’t consider obesity to be in the ‘healthy’ category even though these people’s bodies can produce an immune response.
In the US, insurance data and total deaths per annum will tell us something. The fact the FAA had to change acceptable EKG for pilots because no pilot has a normal EKG now should also tell us something.
The statement that the old and frail also applied to some degree in the US. They did pass these jabs out at nursing homes to everyone who wasn’t on death’s doorstep already.
While this critique is thorough, well-written, and important, it is crucial to remember that just because there may be significant shortcomings and exaggerations in a given analysis estimating "17 million deaths from vaccination", this does not at all invalidate the highly likely link between vaccination and a very large (though not as large as "17 million") number of deaths.
First of all, randomized controlled trials are the gold-standard of evidence and the only truly unbiased data on the mortality impact of mRNA vaccination. Therefore, the unfavorable mortality results in the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials cannot be conveniently dismissed using the "it's not statistically significant" card. The lack of traditional "statistical significance" simply means that there is more than a trivial amount of uncertainty in the results (the results are not ideally robust to reach the "magic" threshold of 97.5% confidence); however, "not statistically significant" is absolutely NOT a license to entirely dismiss unfavorable clinical trial mortality results- see this piece on common misuses of the flawed concept of "statistical significance" written by Dr. Sander Greenland, one of the most respected voices in statistics and epidemiology: https://www.jvsmedicscorner.com/Statistics_files/Retire%20statistical%20significance.pdf. The fact is that the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials BOTH had 15-17% excess non-COVID deaths (and 40-50% excess cardiovascular deaths) with vaccination compared to placebo, which entirely canceled out the COVID death reductions with vaccination in BOTH trials, even at the height of the pandemic and at peak vaccine effectiveness. The overall clinical trial results of a 16% increase in non-COVID mortality and a 45% increase in cardiovascular-related mortality (and a net effect of "4 killed for every 3 saved") for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines combined absolutely do have PRACTICAL significance in the context of these vaccines given to billions of people. Full stop. https://dailysceptic.org/2022/04/09/covid-vaccines-increase-risk-of-heart-related-deaths-by-up-to-50-lancet-analysis-of-trial-data-finds/
Secondly, real-world mortality data is problematic not only due to severe scientific flaws such as "healthy vaccine user bias", but also because different sources of real-world mortality data are often NOT CONSISTENT with each other, which proves that there is no guarantee that these data are COMPLETELY valid (e.g. not doctored to hide or attenuate potential deadly effects of the vaccines). For instance, in contrast to the data presented in this critique, the following data show that the vast majority of highly mRNA vaccinated major countries experienced a mortality increase after their vaccination rollouts: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-deaths-per-million-covid?tab=chart&time=2020-01-25..2022-12-31&country=AUS~CAN~USA~JPN~GBR~DEU~ITA~NZL~KOR.
The unreliability of such "official" data is why grass-roots level evidence, such as polls of the general population (although not "scientifically rigorous"), is actually very important. Rasmussen polls of ~1000 people found that a) 28% of American adults and 33% of Democrats polled personally know someone whom they believe died due to the COVID vaccine and b) similar numbers of poll respondents report personally knowing of an apparent COVID vaccine death versus a COVID virus death.
The bottom line is that the totality of evidence very strongly points to mRNA vaccines being the cause of very large numbers of excess deaths, and no TRULY CREDIBLE alternative explanations exist.
But the vaccine trials only used healthy people. The real world had millions of old and unhealthy people who were more vulnerable to vaccine side effects such as myocarditis.
Exactly correct, and this along with the issues stemming from "sponsorship bias" indicate that the profoundly unfavorable clinical trial mortality results cited above are likely to be essentially a best-case scenario. The real mortality effects of the vaccines are most likely WORSE than the clinical trial results show. In fact, your point is precisely supported by both clinical trials and also VAERS: the net mortality effect of mRNA vaccination (even counting any COVID "benefit") is actually WORSE for older people than younger people.
In the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials combined, among the older age groups, there were 21 deaths in the vaccine groups versus 16 deaths in the placebo groups. 31% HIGHER all-cause mortality with the "lifesaving" vaccine than the placebo, in the OLDER age groups. (The important take-home from these results is not the exact "31%" figure, but rather the fact that it is extremely likely that the "lifesaving" vaccine actually INCREASES all-cause mortality in older people by SOME amount).
Among the older age group (>55) in the Pfizer RCT, there were 12 deaths in the vaccine group versus 10 deaths in the placebo group. https://www.fda.gov/media/152256/download - see page 57, BOTTOM of Table 25
And finally, the same age-related trend appears in VAERS as well: over 70% of unexpected post-vaccine deaths with known ages were in people aged >65 (and about 90% with known ages were in people over age 50). https://openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality
Explains (at least to me) why there was so much undo pressure to inject children. Their risk was almost nil, but their inclusion in wide data harvesting, would insure a much more “safe & effective” result... Angers me.. ie Use the kids to make the whole mess look better.
Yes, and needless to say, there are so many reasons NOT to risk the vaccine in kids and younger folks, EVEN IF the 6-month mortality effect is mildly favorable for them, considering that it's ALREADY unfavorable for the older folks by 6 months. It's entirely expected that any vulnerabilities of older folks will manifest much, much sooner (especially when the outcome is MORTALITY) than any potential vulnerabilities of younger folks.
I believe the numbers in insurance company data will give the best objective answer to the increased deaths for the period of eua shots taken and since then. I also don’t think assigning increased death to poverty, particularly in the US where public assistance has been expanded throughout the country over this same period is a reasonable point in increased deaths btw. This forum is rather constrained for lengthier posits but perhaps if pharma companies, such as Pfizer, would release unredacted information on the eua shots without court orders to do so would go much further to explain what has been going on. Truth will out eventually.
Just take a few minutes to look at the data, paying attention to the temporal trends. Sure, lockdowns are horrible, but no matter how "uncool" or unpopular it is to admit, the vast majority of places with heavy "lockdowns" or heavy restrictions actually did rather well mortality-wise pre-vaccine, and then their all-cause mortality went UP after the vaccine rollout.
There is also considerable other evidence specifically pointing to the mRNA vaccines as the culprit:
I live a very secluded life and have a very small number of acquaintances. One evening last year I took a call from my husband’s friend who was enquiring about the status of their Club’s president. I told him Harry had died the previous week. He then told me his wife had died two weeks previously. My husband was unable to talk to him because he was unable to lift the phone. He continued to get weaker and weaker, and almost died six months later from a rare and often deadly form of anemia. The community nurse who subsequently attended him at home commented on a rash of three pound babies being born. We had one on our street, which has only five houses. My sister’s friend’s husband died in his sleep, as did others I heard of. And so on. Say what you will. I am 75 years old, and rarely hear of one death a year.
As a thought experiment, let’s say the 17m estimate is overstating vaccine deaths by a factor of 2, making actual deaths ONLY 8.5m. Is anyone comfortable with that number?! Show me one other vaccine that caused that many deaths in a 3 year period. Let’s say it overstated it by a factor of 4, now we’re at 4.25m deaths; same questions. There will never be complete and accurate data to examine because two of the most populous countries in the world aren’t available. China will never provide it, the US didn’t track it appropriately (and wouldn’t give negative data over if they have it).
Curious as to why this was not discussed between the two parties BEFORE this critique was published?
Also, without attributing causes to extra d(not excess) eaths in the US, does Tracey Beth have her own reconciliation of the pattern of deaths over the last 4 years detailed here?
in the US up to September 2023 – no chatter about the 2.27 MILLION EXTRA DEATHS since the scamdemic started
Would be very interested to here her views on whether the 16-17% increase in the death rate is permanent and also what her views are on how illegal immigration of 6-10 million people over the C19 period should be taken into account.
Could you provide a set of studies that supports this conclusion? I agree with it but haven't found the "kill shot" study outside of some articles found on the Brownstone Institute site.
Silly question, whatever I can browse on the web you can.
The cure was worse than the disease.
Sweden didn't mandate/lockdown and it's Sweden that has the lowest excess deaths than ALL western countries, NZ and Australia included, all the while Sweden is one of the most vaccinated countries in the world, WITHOUT MANDATES.
Sweden is the only country that did right.
Those focused on vaccines missed the boat. The principles for resistance were these:
1-Civil liberties
2-no mandates
3-no lockdowns
Vaccine obsession is downstream of these, and cost us the resistance, cuz all the anti-vx crowd arrived WAY too late.
I am a physician who does 100% clinical work and zero research. I have neither the time nor skills to pore through all of the conflicting analyses about this vaccine As such I GREATLY appreciate work like this. For that reason I just upgraded to a founding member. Keep up the good work.
This shows clearly that Denmark had relatively few 'bad batches' which caused serious side effects, and to the best of my knowledge these were given out first, ie to nursing homes and the very elderly.
-Denmark used, almost exclusively, Pfizer which has 3 times fewer genetic molecules than Moderna.
- Denmark (afaik) never jabbed the <12 yo's, and effectively stopped all genetic injections a good while ago.
-Denmark had a healthier population at baseline.
-Excess deaths are hidden due to delayed autopsies. I don't know if Denmark did this, but other countries have (UK). Autopsies tend to be done on younger unexpected deaths, which are the deaths they are the most desparate to hide.
- 3 years is not very long for the expected morbidities to become mortalities. Dr. Hoffe pointed out that over 60% of his Moderna 'vaccinated' patients had high D-dimer levels. HIs concern was that the resulting microclotting in the lungs will cause PAH which takes over 5 years to kill. And that is just one disease.
- from a biological perspective, putting 12/40 (Pfizer/Mod) trillion LNP wrapped mRNA molecules into bodies consisting of only 4 trillion nucleated cells can only lead to disaster. What other outcome could be expected? (https://evolutionaryhealthplan.info/#_Ref83404023)
- there is an easy way to figure this out that does not rely on interpreting Data. Do staining autopsies on all unexpected deaths to find out if the organs are filled with 'natural' spike, mRNA spike or no spike.
But Denmark, as well as every Western country will not do that. Why not, if you are so sure the sudden deaths are not from the 'vaccine'?
Outstanding information here. And yes, I have been screaming about that staining test myself. Since it can’t possibly be the vaccines, why not test away and release the results? We need to restore trust, correct???
In general, I appreciate your critique. Science works best through discussion and refinement and clarification and answering additional questions. But I wonder, did you read the Rancourt study? It very clearly explained the reason for selecting only Southern Hemisphere countries. The math is easier and more convincing. In the Northern Hemisphere the vaccine rollouts happened in the winter (January especially) when the are normally excess deaths and the math to separate the additional excess from the normal excess is more complicated and less convincing. In the Southern hemisphere, the rollouts happened in the summer months (especially January) when there is a normal trough. The excesses shown on the graphs for each country during the times when there is normally a trough are undoubtedly impressive.
Was there selection bias in these 17 countries? Do they perfectly represent the average for every country on earth combined? That is beyond ability to answer, but my guess is that estimate will be off. Choosing 17 at random is better than nothing but never it is perfect representation. Why were these 17 countries chosen? The reason stated is the quality and availability of the data. I do know if that is a partial or complete explanation. Not exactly random, but not indicative of predicting other countries accurately. Selection bias is likely and significant, but probably not very large. More data will help to analyze the extent.
Rancourt also included in the report an evaluation of whether or not COVID-19 caused these effects. Again, this section of the report should be examined and debated. It was early attempt and may need significant revisions.
Nevertheless, I think we should compare this report to known data and critique it.
We are still missing the best data. But I hope some record-level data about vaccination status of the deceased 2020 with vaccination data appears soon.
Thanks for this comment. I'm a little confused because the vaccination rollout was mainly April-August 2021 in Europe (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2412) which is not typically a time of excess mortality. So this would have been a good population to look at by that rationale.
I’m confused too. I was just repeating Rancourt’s words from a video. I didn’t compare his words to anything. I only read small sections of his actual study. I remember the first vaccine rollout starting in December of 2020 in the USA for doctors and first responders and for the elderly in January and February of 2021 so it made sense to me. I was not aware of the timing in Europe.
I restacked it this this note:
I appreciate this detailed and objective critique of our work. I wish it could have been a recorded discussion, so that each statement can be clarified and responded to as we go.
Mostly this is a critique of the 17M value (its prima facie plausibility, and whether it can actually be valid for the entire world), and of the causality claim (without specifying the nature and method of the actual claim), not of the extensive underlying work: https://correlation-canada.org/covid-19-vaccine-associated-mortality-in-the-southern-hemisphere/
Virtually all the criticisms raised are addressed in the paper itself, and the limits of the 17M estimation are spelled out and shown by the graphical results.
Nonetheless, I plan to respond more fully, when time permits. I thank the authors for their preliminary reactions to our work.
Would you like to come on the podcast to debate Dr. Hoeg?
Yes: debate, discuss, agree...
Great I look forward to discussing this with you!
To clarify I was the only author on this but it sounds like Rav will be able to moderate our "debate". Discussions are always good for getting into nuances that are more difficult and time consuming to get into with the written word.
In the analysis, make sure to take the motive into account. Proof of criminal intent: howbad.info
Depopulation or EXTERMINATION? (finest quotes):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/depopulation-or-extermination
COVID was designed as a primer for even more lethal COVID haccines:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-real-covid-timeline
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/not-vaccine-not-gene-therapy-just
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/what-do-bioweapons-have-to-do-with
Weaponization of vaccines:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/vaxxed-v-unvaxxed/
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/depop-vaccines-no-myth
- Their main source of power apart from sin-empowered demons? NOT a coincidence that the USA left dollar convertibility to gold in 1971, precisely triggering the exponential government deficit coupled with the trade deficit and inflation.
This is the Achilles’ heel of all nations: masonic and satanic secret societies counterfeit paper money and launder trillions with which they buy Banks, seats in the Federal Reserve (the only private run Central Bank in the world), political careers and parties, puppeticians, listed corporations, media, healthcare corporations and organizations, universities, foundations, judges, etc.:
Confessions of illuminati, David Rockefeller (finest quotes):
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/david-rockefeller-illuminati
Confessions of ex-illuminati Ronald Bernard (all lodges obey the same master, Satan):
http://youtu.be/JAhnCdXqPww
The way out of this mess:
1. Create an easy system for real money: private currencies/warrants based on real assets, goods, services, etc. (gold, corn, oil, distance/volume/weight transportation, labor human hour/minute, etc.)
2. Ban legal tender. Let the free markets decide which real-currencies/valuables/warrants they prefer to trade with
3. Ban paper-backed currencies (unlike real-backed ones of point 1.)
4. Enforce a Legal Banking Reserve of 100% of deposits (so banks don't create money based on air) and therefore there's no excuse for a Central Bank, because there would be no risk of bank-runs since all their loans are fully backed with deposits
Anything else you might think of?
Now, are you really ready for this?:
The full PLAN exposed:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
16 laws we need to exit Prison Planet
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/laws-to-exit-planet-prison
Plllllease, on my knees, don’t believe me, just do your own homework by searching the following in yandex.com, mojeek.com (includes crawl date filter and substack search), gigablast.com, startpage.com, duckduckgo.com (not Google, Bing, Yahoo censors). The key terms to test them? Child Satanic Ritual Abuse, Child Satanic Ritual Murder.
President John Quincy Adams: “Masonry ought forever to be abolished. It is wrong - essentially wrong - a seed of evil, which can never produce any good.”
If you are a mason or know a mason, ask him to ask his 33° master to put in writing and sign it, who is "the great architect" and that he is not Lucifer. If he refuses, then he’ll know who he is really serving, Satan: tell him to get out of masonry NOW. Sooner or later he’ll be required to trample on a cross to get to a higher degree.
Confessions of a former mason (Serge Abad-Gallardo):
https://www.ncregister.com/interview/confessions-of-a-former-freemason-officer-converted-to-catholicism
Confession of 33rd degree master mason - Masons worship deities/demons
https://rumble.com/v294ksc-words-from-33rd-degree-master-mason-rare-video-masons-worship-all-sorts-of-.html
Masonry's Satanic Connection
https://odysee.com/@HiddenTruths:c/Masonry's-Satanic-Connection:4
Masonry's Satanic Doctrine | From Their Own Books
https://rumble.com/v2wg24a-masonrys-satanic-doctrine-from-their-own-books.html
Do Freemasons Worship Lucifer？ Evidence They Don't Want You To See
https://odysee.com/@John_4-14:a/Do-Freemasons-Worship-Lucifer%EF%BC%9F-Evidence-They-Don't-Want-You-To-See-%EF%BD%9C-Hidden-Agendas---Walter-Veith:0
Satanic Ritual Abuse and Secret Societies [1995] [VHS]
https://odysee.com/@thisworldworks:1/satanic-ritual-abuse-and-secret-societies-1995:3
Satanic Pedophilia Torture and Blood - Dark Satanic Secrets Revealed
https://odysee.com/@Gmail.com:52/822821884_Satanic-Pedophilia-Torture-and-Blood---Dark-Satanic-Secrets-Revealed:4
UNITED NATIONS LUCIFER AND THE LUCIFER TRUST
https://odysee.com/@dynosarus:c/UNITED-NATIONS-LUCIFER-AND-THE-LUCIFER-TRUST:4
Freemasonry: 100% incompatible with Christ
https://rumble.com/vs9mxb-heres-why-christianity-is-totally-incapatable-with-freemasonry.html
They are putting ;-.M-R~/N-A in f=0-0/d-': watch this.,.,',.,., t.co/8QMCslXWkt
Might have been appropriate to have the "discussions" prior to writing your piece.
Denis Rancourt et al published their work so it was available to the public. It was therefore open to critique and many have done so in writing. Written critique of published scientific analyses is of course entirely appropriate. Glad this particular critique will result in a conversation!
And this, to date, is the very best response to your criticism: https://denisrancourt.ca/entries.php?id=136
Conversation could have occurred prior that probably would result in a more thorough, fair critique.
I look forward to hearing the podcast!
I hope you scan the comments before hand since I think I made some valid points that weren't addressed in either your post or Denis.
Thank you for questioning the claims. It is very important to stick strongly to what we know and can prove.
Are u free Saturday 4:30 PST or after? Send me ur email if so. Dr. Hoeg is free then
Yes, please send me an email: denis.rancourt@gmail.com
Hope you do not mind, but I asked chat GTP to analyze your methodology. I do that when people smarter than me confuse me.
The bot was supportive, while recognizing some limitations you spoke to in your paper..
LOL! You do realize that ChatGPT has high degree of pro-pharma and vaccine bias? One only need ask it anything about the risks of mRNA vaccines to see this clearly demonstrated!
Please save everyone time and have people like dr Jessica Rose, Dr David Martin, Dr Michael Yeadon and Ed Dowd, Dr Kelly on.
Great work everyone, this is how it's done. Looking forward to the discussion!
Dr. Rancourt, one of the important points missed in your paper on India (with an estimate of 3.7 million deaths in 2021) is that India had a very unsafe manufacturing process for Covid vaccines. With little or no prior experience of manufacturing vaccines, two Indian companies ramped up their production literally overnight from zero to millions of doses per week. The Indian medical regulators were told to look the other way because the government needed hundreds of millions of domestically manufactured vaccine doses in a very short time.
Brazil had signed to purchase millions of doses of the Indian vaccine Covaxin but canceled their order after their regulatory body (ANVISA) inspected a Covaxin factory in March 2021 and found substandard manufacturing practices. Among other things, they found that i) the live coronavirus was not fully deactivated, ii) the vaccine was contaminated with other microbes (because of poor sterilization procedures), and iii) the vaccine potency varied greatly.
The other vaccine manufactured and used in India (Covishield) probably had similar quality issues, but I am not aware of any inspection of their factories by a foreign agency.
Hi Vijay.
"i) the live coronavirus was not fully deactivated"
Do you know their methodology for making this determination? Or do they simply have a protocol, and if it is not followed as given, then they say "not dactivated?.
Since the "coronavirus" is an amorphous artificial entity (as are all "viruses" by the definition, including the amazing hijacking of cell replication, never proven experimentally) I wonder how you can tell if a fantasy entity is activated or deactivated! :)
Any help appreciated.
Thanks!
(And I realize you may not agree about virus fantasy.)
btw, it is sad to see that the new leftie regime in Brazil are jab-pushing.
Steven
https://linktr.ee/stevenavery
Hi Steven, Covaxin is a traditional killed (deactivated) virus vaccine with an adjuvant. The manufacturers treat the live virus with a chemical to kill the virus. However, they want to deactivate the virus (so it can't give you Covid) without destroying it completely (so that it can still offer immunity). So they have to use just the right amount of chemicals for the right duration. ANVISA tested some vaccine samples from the production line and found that the virus was not sufficiently deactivated and, thus, could cause Covid. I don't know exactly how they tested and what they found. Maybe there is a detailed ANVISA report somewhere.
Incidentally, WHO did another factory inspection a year later in 2022 and still found some quality issues. They recommended that other countries not import Covaxin from India. But WHO is a highly politicized body, so I don't trust them as much. I assume that over time the manufacturing quality issues would have been resolved. It is just that in March 2021, there was a mad rush to produce tens of millions of doses per week . And when you introduce a new porduct into manufacturing, there are always some quality issues in the beginning (even if you are not making millions of doses).
WHO will attempt to make anything other then Pfizer/Moderna look bad
"WHO did another factory inspection a year later in 2022 and still found some quality issues." And this from the WHO!
The manufacturing of Pfizer and Moderna jabs are not investigable. See Sasha Latypova’s work
The Rancourt paper wasn't designed to delve into each country's nuanced circumstances. The ACM calculated was not intended to address causality and certainly not poor (or missing, like the US) application of CGMPs. Bottom line: the excess deaths in India are what they are--regardless of India's safe or unsafe product. You make a very good point for delving into India's special circumstances, Vijay. Keep pressing for more study.
My response to Dr. Høeg: Thank you for your very honest and important article! I think we all know how critical it is to be accurate and objective. But... I have a few questions for you- 1. Are you aware that overwhelming evidence shows that different formulations of mrna vaccines have been given in different places and times? Thus, your comparing Denmark's data to other countries could be easily explained by Denmark receiving different/safer vaccines. 2. Are you aware that oncologists are reporting surging cancer rates in recently vaccinated people? How are you counting cancer deaths related to the vaccines? 3. Are you considering cognitive and psychological decline leading to suicides after the vaccines? That is also absolutely happening.. 4. Are you counting the skyrocketing rates of miscarriages being reported worldwide? Those must be considered as vaccine- caused deaths, too. Thanks again for your work and I hope that an open debate will commence. Either way, the obvious truth that the vaccines are harming/killing huge numbers is clear.
Here is Denis's takedown of Tracy's attempt at the same.: https://denisrancourt.ca/entries.php?id=136
I have yet to get through the entire three-hour debated but the early returns are in: Denis kicked tail and was successful in underscoring what is now becoming more and more evident--and I quote you: "Either way, the obvious truth that the vaccines are harming/killing huge numbers is clear."
Thank you, Denis, for the very careful scientific analysis you do. Dr. Hoeg's work is waaaaayyyyyy tooooo behind-the-times in my opinion! "Major studies" that confirm what has already been widely observed and reported (e.g. myocarditis in adolescent males or that a booster is too much risk for college students) is "very safe" but not very significant science in my opinion, and definitely didn't help any of those adolescent males or college students, let alone all of the young people dealing with SADS or strokes or fertility issues or stillbirths. It's quite likely that the data that NO (state or national) govt will release that could readily be used to calculate excess deaths for vaccinated vs unvaccinated people would corroborate that your very careful analysis is correct. And Dr. Hoeg should have addressed the details in your work in this piece.
Tracy would have benefitted from a conversation with Denis prior to blasting out this critique. I think that is glaringly apparent by now. The three-hour debate supports this assertion.
Thank you Dr. Rancourt you saved me a great deal of time and work because her response is full of holes! Your continued hard work and diligence are greatly appreciated! I realize that it would take an incredible amount of time to record a video counter to TBH's criticism but it would be tremendously beneficial to those of us fighting for TRUE science to be restored. The number of holes in her response and "critique" are evident early on and only become more glaring as the "critique" goes on. Even a novice can see them. Just as an example, the title of the study clearly states "southern hemisphere" so to extrapolate outside the Southern Hemisphere would be inappropriate or need to be quantified. Pretty basic. Thank you again Doctor Rancourt! God Bless you, your family, and your co-authors.
Actually, we do extrapolate from those 17 countries to the world, and we discuss the justification for providing this estimate.
Thank you Dr. Rancourt for your rapid clarification!!! Keep up the good work!! My best regards always! Dale
In case you (or readers of this comment thread) haven't seen it:
https://denisrancourt.ca/entries.php?id=136
Dr. Rancourt, One thing you've said which I highly doubt, though I'm not an expert, is that the 1918 pandemic was not caused by a respiratory virus - because people over the age of 50 were less seriously affected than people under 50. That is usually explained by the hypothesis that the older people had some natural immunity from a prior pandemic which they lived through, perhaps the one which is thought to have occurred I believe in 1889. Why do you not accept that explanation?
Its actually been documented thoroughly in many historically written non fiction books : the govt , under Rockefellers INJECTED tens of thousands of military men with an experimental bacterial pneumonia vaccine. Those soldiers spread a version of what they were injected with. Thats what the 1918 Pandemic was. A Bioweapon. Im sure others can link you to these books. Good luck
I can prove that there were no excess deaths for 50+ year olds. You prove your thing. Good luck. :)
To elaborate, even if you're 100% correct that there was no excess death among 50+ year olds between 1918 and 1920, I don't think that justifies jumping to the somewhat radical conclusion that no respiratory pathogen was responsible for the excess deaths of people under 50 between 1918 and 1920 (whether or not cytokine storms and/or secondary bacterial infections were what actually killed people after they first developed viral pneumonia), and I think that conclusion is perhaps motivated by the tendency of many in the medical-freedom community to discount the reality of pandemics and the need to be prepared for them - as best we can without panicking, which is always counterproductive - because oligarchs who run governments tend to use crises of all kinds to justify measures which increase their power and control, as happened and continues to happen during this Covid-19 pandemic.
So there could have been an H1N1 pandemic in 1850, which became the seasonal flu between 1852 and 1870, then an H2N2 pandemic in 1870, which replaced the H1N1 virus so that H2N2 virus was the seasonal flu between 1870 and 1890, and then maybe an H9N3 pandemic in 1890, which replaced the H2N2 virus so that H9N3 was the seasonal flu between 1892 and 1918 - when there was another H1N1 pandemic which people over 50 had some immunity to from the 1850-1870 H1N1, with people over 68, who actually lived through the 1850 pandemic, perhaps having the greatest immunity among those people. That's just speculation, but I think it's a more reasonable hypothesis than jumping, again, to what I think is the somewhat radical conclusion that no respiratory pathogen was involved, even if it can be conclusively proved that there were no excess deaths of people over 50.
I think at this time when we have telemedicine that it's good medical procedure that people have on hand, in advance of new respiratory pathogen breaking out, agents which doctors they trust recommend as probably being the most useful to have in that event. Then they can consult with their doctor about possible prophylactic use, when a outbreak is reported, and if they start to get sick the doctor can hopefully advise them to use what they have without their having to going to a doctor's office - which can both make them sicker, due to the stress involved, and infect people in the office - to see if that obviates the need for an in-person visit. I think that approach, which I believe The Wellness Company is taking, is very advisable now, when we may soon see the new Covid variant which Dr. Vanden Bossche is predicting and/or the current H5N1 clade, which is killing not only birds but mammals, jumping to humans. Protecting ourselves from the authoritarian overreach of politicians and oligarchs is a separate problem, which we also need to deal with, imo.
Thanks for responding but even if that's true, that there were no excess deaths for 50+ year olds in 1918-1920, the reason for that could be that 50+ year olds had a good deal of natural immunity to the H1N1 virus from exposure, in a previous pandemic, to a virus with a somewhat similar structure - maybe two pandemics before, which older virus had been replaced by the virus causing next flu pandemic, which then became the seasonal flu so that people under 50 were never exposed to the virus two pandemics before. That seems like a plausible explanation to me, at least one that can't be ruled out just because people 50+ did not have excess deaths in 1918-20 if that's the case. No?
Did Dr Hoeg consider contacting and discussing with Denis and Bret prior to writing her piece... maybe for a little clarification and context... for journalism's sake?
Readers might enjoy this video anchor to our work and interviews:
https://denisrancourt.substack.com/p/must-watch-new-100-second-video-truth
And this resource re our videos about covid:
https://denisrancourt.ca/page.php?id=12&name=videos
Dennis: i have followed you since 2022. Im just a retired hospice / chronic care provider, mom of 2 out of 3 vaxx injured kids ( DPT and DTAP) whose mother was i hured and killed by Moderna shots.i can read highly detailed medical literature sufficiently. One need only read VAERS and the Insurance company numbers to know 17 million dead from these shots is a CONSERVATIVE #. I look forward to your response to Rav’s substack
Thanks for this objective analysis. You noted a correlation between excess deaths and poverty in the USA. However, I first heard of significant excess deaths in a shareholder presentation by an insurance company CEO. He said the excess deaths of the insured were "off the charts," i.e., unprecedented. However, the cohort was working people between 18 and 65. These were not poor people by any stretch. Several independent insurance company analysts (not medical experts) tied the excess deaths to the vaccine. Do you have any comments on this apparent anomaly?
I don't doubt there is excess mortality among vaccinated and unvaccinated in the US. As you can see from Ioannidis' study, the USA's excess mortality is off the charts right now. I just have not seen excess mortality broken down by vaccination status in the US. Have you?
If the real, unadulterated mortality data "broken down by vaccination status" looked even remotely favorable for the vaccine and even remotely exonerated the vaccine in terms of safety (let alone effectiveness), then "they" would have shared it loudly and proudly long ago. In fact, they would have brought their beautiful, indisputable pro-vaccine mortality data to the rescue as soon as booster uptake went down the drain back in 2022. Their beautiful data would have been all over the news and internet, etc. But of course we didn't see their beautiful data back then, and we still haven't over a year later. Their silence speaks for itself.
Either they are thinking long and hard about what are the least obscene and most innocuous ways to manipulate and obfuscate the data to minimize the overall fallout whenever they do eventually release it, OR they have come to the conclusion that it is best to avoid releasing any such data unless/until they are legally forced to, since there is far more to lose by releasing it than hiding it. Or most likely, both.
Great points. In my "early spread" research, I put great weight on all the investigations (antibody tests, interviews, etc.) that could and should have happened .... but didn't.
There's quite a fascinating piece by Jessica Rose, PhD and three Canadian colleagues that is preprinted in her Substack blog "Unacceptable Jessica" and presently under submission to peer review. The four Canadians obtained vaccination data at various medical facilities around Ontario, and establish a dose/response curve, correlating severity of mRNA vaccine side effects to the concentration of DNA fragment concentration. 90-odd law firms within 4 days of publication began seeking clients for a potential class action. A month later a whistleblower emerged, admitting that the DNA fragments came from E coli. Both Pfizer and Moderna had demonstrated safety and efficacy of their mRNA vaccine products, using vaccine cultured on a human embryonic cell line, but then switched to an E coli culture medium because it was much cheaper to scale, and because some people might object on religious grounds to being injected with a product grown on human tissue. Apparently neither pharma firm disclosed the culture medium change to FDA regulators, which is mandatory.
The State of Texas immediately brought civil suit against both companies alleging Medicaid fraud (on a theory that the deception added to treatment costs because no one knew to consider a reaction to E coli DNA and/or proteins and treat people for that). The Pfizer company moved to have the case tried in federal court rather than a Texas state court. The advantage of trying the case in federal court is that if other US states want to sue, they will be joined to the Texas case, rather than potentially 50 trials held in every State. The disadvantage of the move is that people who join a class action for death or personal may wind up in the same case and it could be a treasury buster. I recall the Times Beach, Missouri PCB contamination case, in which cleanup costs exceeded the defendant company's net worth and it was liquidated, with taxpayers covering the unpaid balance of cleanup costs.
If indeed the excess deaths are principally due to vaccine contamination during manufacture, conceivably entire countries that were slow to receive their first shipments of vaccine, may have gotten vaccine from which the contaminants had been properly separated.
All in all, thanks to all for your efforts at solving this puzzle. Varying contamination levels give results akin to Russian roulette rather than allergy to the mRNA itself
Excess mortality is not really off the charts! The population is still increasing. In England and Wales even the 'covid' spike in 'excess deaths' in 2020 still only resulted in a 0.128% increase in the death rate compared to 2019. 2015-19 were extremely low years. When age and population adjusted there were more deaths in 2008 and every year before that than in 2020 (the height of recent excess deaths in E&W) https://georgiedonny.substack.com/p/deaths-england-and-wales-2020-2022
No, I haven't seen that breakdown. I don't immediately see how one would get that data, or even design such a study, but I am not a statistician.
Ontario's not a big enough place for physicians not to know each other and gossip. Also the Canadian government had sown a healthy distrust of US corporate propaganda in the pre-NAFTA past. It struck some informed Canadians as bizarre that their Therapeutic Goods Administration performed no tests whatsoever on these mRNA vaccine products but deferred to the US FDA's Emergency Use Authorization. So when multiple adverse reactions appeared at one Vaccination Centre but folks vaccinated at neighbouring Centres did very well, some medical folks suspected contamination and preserved the vaccine vials they had gotten. The study authors learned of it and obtained the vaccine vials to investigate them by standard methods of analytical chemistry, demonstrating that some lots had higher contaminant loads than did others.
What was unique about these public-spirited actions was that everyone else who saw anecdotal results in their communities either concluded that all of the vaccine distributed, was helping people, or that all of the vaccine was harming people. Considering the possibility that the mass-produced vaccines varied in quality from batch to batch, is something none of the armchair theorists considered. But suspension of the most basic TGA and FDA Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) procedures is what had opened the door for manufacturing problems to go undetected. The safety procedures used to ensure consistent quality of every other drug or vaccine used in Canada and the US, had been turned off for these particular vaccines.
There are lessons to be learned from this.
Not every bad action that happens in society, is done with hostile intent.
There were no graphene microchips embedded in the vaccine, as some US conspiracy theorists had gossiped.
Lipid nanoparticles exist in nature.
But there was a surplus of hubris at the CDC and officials there liked having the emergency powers they had. They wanted undue credit so they hastened to make the story about themselves saving the world. And now we've come full circle at a cost of trillions of dollars in new debt, learning that their efforts to control the narrative, caused harm. CDC needs fewer emergency powers, particularly not the power to deregulate drug safety.
That is simply not true: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db456.pdf
Even the CDC (which I have very little trust in) admits:
"The age-adjusted death rate increased by 5.3% from 835.4 deaths per 100,000
standard population in 2020 to 879.7 in 2021. Age-specific death rates increased from 2020 to 2021 for each age group 1 year and over."
"Nine of the 10 leading causes of death in 2021 remained the same as in 2020.
Heart disease, cancer, and COVID-19 remained the top 3 leading causes."
Plus, the overall data from other countries almost entirely refutes the "lockdowns caused the deaths" claim, and point more towards the vaccine as the culprit than anything else (besides COVID itself):
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-deaths-per-million-covid?tab=chart&time=2020-01-25..2022-12-31&country=AUS~CAN~USA~JPN~GBR~DEU~ITA~NZL~KOR
I don’t know how many died from the vaccine. No one does. But that is because our supposed “healthcare” institutions such as the CDC and hospital systems have done everything possible to hide and obfuscate data. One nurse I saw interviewed said her hospital system had a drop down menu for admitted Covid patients which only permitted you to pick either “unvaccinated” or “unknown” for vaccine status. So a nurse at that hospital system could not even record a patient sick enough to die from covid as vaccinated. The unvaccinated are dying!!!! When this much blatant deception is afoot who really knows what is going on. That is deliberate.
I was coming to the comments to suggest a discussion/debate with Rancourt. I see it is already underway! Honest people are willing to have these discussions.
THIS is science.
Anecdotally, I know of one person who died from Covid (or possibly from the hospital protocols?). But I know two people who definitely died from the vaccine, and about 6 or 7 people who I’m almost certain they died from the vaccine and I’ve met people who say their relative has died from it. I know many people injured from it. I am inclined to think that the number is going to be high.
What we all should be doing is pressuring the public health authorities to release the record level data so that we can all stop guessing and just see what the numbers are.
I knew three people personally who died of COVID, not with COVID.
I don't know anyone who died from the vaccine.
The problem with both of our observations is that they are anecdotal.
Exactly, which is why the public health officials should make public data accessible for all interested experts to analyze. It’s our data. We pay for it. We should benefit from it. That should be the *very* purpose and endpoint of collecting this data.
The fact that they have lied to us since the beginning about many things regarding the vaccine, and they refuse to release the data, to me is a clear sign of what the truth is. It clearly doesn’t support the safe and effective narrative. We have seen signs of this as they constantly change the messaging around the “vaccines”.
I just want to add, because I think it’s extremely relevant, if Covid caused the death of three people that you know, that is still not a compelling reason to release an experimental mRNA gene based therapy, deemed a vaccine, on every single person living on the planet and then force them to take it. There was no informed consent. Still to this day, there is no ingredients list and no extensive list of possible side effects. The government is not acknowledging really any harms or significance, which is mind staggering. Add to that that people were not educated on the risk stratification for age groups, comorbitities etc.
Bottom line, a dangerous disease (this is debatable for sure) does not give license to the pharmaceutical industrial complex to join together with government to wreak havoc on the public through forced lockdowns, economic destruction, and risky medical procedures. Exactly how risky is yet to be determined but it definitely was never “safe”.
Per antibody studies of crew members of the USS Roosevelt air craft carrier, French aircraft carrier The Charles deGaulle and the USS Kidd, approximately 4,200 (of about 7,200 crew members) had antibody evidence of prior infections (with extrapolations from the too-small Roosevelt study). Only one sailor, 41, reportedly died from Covid (and this "Covid death" may or may not not be true). IMO the death rate of 1-in-4,200 in the worst possible spread environment should have told the world the real mortality risk to healthy young and middle-aged people.
Similarly, I've looked at the cohort of high school, college and pro athletes over the last 3+ years and can find only a couple reports of athletes who reportedly died from Covid (all high school athletes, none really confirmed to my satisfaction). Still, 3 or so deaths from a sample size of more than 5 million athletes aged 14 to 38 gives us an IFR of not 0.4 percent, not 0.1 percent (the flu IFR), not 0.02 percent, but 0.000 percent.
I think the IFR from these three ships and this huge group of athletes gives us an accurate IFR for healthy people 14 to 39 (the U.S. median age).
These microscopic IFR percentages are what I think we had in the "cold and flu" months of November 2019 through February 2020 (pre-official Covid). But I think tens of millions of people had already been infected with this virus by the end of February.
My substack is full of stories with more details on these findings and my "early spread" hypothesis, which I believe has not received nearly the attention this theory warrants.
I appreciate this site and this discussion today. - Bill Rice, Jr.
In the hospital? Early on?
My mother-in-law died in the hospital in January 2021. Without any of her family.
Another friend died in February 2021. And another died in June 2022.
My mother died after being moved (unnecessarily) to hospice just to be seen by her family. They sedated her to such a degree that she never gained consciousness, and also died essentially alone, surrounded by strangers with masks.
Sorry for your loss.
You are right to point out there are many different factors at play here, remdesivir, midazolam and morphine with no antibiotics killed thousands early on. Myocarditis, strokes and autoimmune problems and immune suppression by IgG4, not to mention DNA and endotoxin contamination being transported into every organ. Oh and did I mention frame shifting and modRNA integrity!
And who could forget the classic SV40 sequence cancer promoter!
Struggling with the statement that people that got the vaccine are healthier. Not in the US. My healthy friends and I said ‘no’
In Canada, people obsessed with annual flu shots tend to be the germophobic "healthy" people. This absolutely carried over to who got the mRNA shots.
Those who don't get annual flu shots, like me, are the "fuk off with your endless medical interventions, I'm healthy ENOUGH".
You may be looking at the wrong end of the question -- many of the extremely frail and unhealthy around here, in Sweden, did not get vaccinated, or further vaccinated on their doctor's orders because it was thought that even a very minor reaction to the shot -- fever, aches and pains -- would kill them. Or because we already knew that their immune system was non-functional and cannot produce a response. (We measured the response in pretty much all of the old people.) It is completely expected that these people will get very sick and probably die, of pretty much anything, including covid if they were unfortunate enough to catch it. But I do not know how well this observation generalises tp other countries.
Good point. This and many other factors are constant considerations in our interpretations of the data.
This reply may offend some of my US brothers and sisters. In my travels across the world it was quite noticeable that the majority of people outside the US walk alot more, are more active, eat fresher less processed food and are generally more ‘fit’ than the average American. I could spot the Americans everywhere. Not because they all wore athletic shoes everywhere but the size difference was quite noticeable. Statistics on obesity in this country correlate to the observations. I don’t consider obesity to be in the ‘healthy’ category even though these people’s bodies can produce an immune response.
In the US, insurance data and total deaths per annum will tell us something. The fact the FAA had to change acceptable EKG for pilots because no pilot has a normal EKG now should also tell us something.
The statement that the old and frail also applied to some degree in the US. They did pass these jabs out at nursing homes to everyone who wasn’t on death’s doorstep already.
Do you have a link re: the FAA criteria change for EKGs? Thank you!
Any chance we could get Bret to respond to this critique as well?
While this critique is thorough, well-written, and important, it is crucial to remember that just because there may be significant shortcomings and exaggerations in a given analysis estimating "17 million deaths from vaccination", this does not at all invalidate the highly likely link between vaccination and a very large (though not as large as "17 million") number of deaths.
First of all, randomized controlled trials are the gold-standard of evidence and the only truly unbiased data on the mortality impact of mRNA vaccination. Therefore, the unfavorable mortality results in the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials cannot be conveniently dismissed using the "it's not statistically significant" card. The lack of traditional "statistical significance" simply means that there is more than a trivial amount of uncertainty in the results (the results are not ideally robust to reach the "magic" threshold of 97.5% confidence); however, "not statistically significant" is absolutely NOT a license to entirely dismiss unfavorable clinical trial mortality results- see this piece on common misuses of the flawed concept of "statistical significance" written by Dr. Sander Greenland, one of the most respected voices in statistics and epidemiology: https://www.jvsmedicscorner.com/Statistics_files/Retire%20statistical%20significance.pdf. The fact is that the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials BOTH had 15-17% excess non-COVID deaths (and 40-50% excess cardiovascular deaths) with vaccination compared to placebo, which entirely canceled out the COVID death reductions with vaccination in BOTH trials, even at the height of the pandemic and at peak vaccine effectiveness. The overall clinical trial results of a 16% increase in non-COVID mortality and a 45% increase in cardiovascular-related mortality (and a net effect of "4 killed for every 3 saved") for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines combined absolutely do have PRACTICAL significance in the context of these vaccines given to billions of people. Full stop. https://dailysceptic.org/2022/04/09/covid-vaccines-increase-risk-of-heart-related-deaths-by-up-to-50-lancet-analysis-of-trial-data-finds/
Secondly, real-world mortality data is problematic not only due to severe scientific flaws such as "healthy vaccine user bias", but also because different sources of real-world mortality data are often NOT CONSISTENT with each other, which proves that there is no guarantee that these data are COMPLETELY valid (e.g. not doctored to hide or attenuate potential deadly effects of the vaccines). For instance, in contrast to the data presented in this critique, the following data show that the vast majority of highly mRNA vaccinated major countries experienced a mortality increase after their vaccination rollouts: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-deaths-per-million-covid?tab=chart&time=2020-01-25..2022-12-31&country=AUS~CAN~USA~JPN~GBR~DEU~ITA~NZL~KOR.
The unreliability of such "official" data is why grass-roots level evidence, such as polls of the general population (although not "scientifically rigorous"), is actually very important. Rasmussen polls of ~1000 people found that a) 28% of American adults and 33% of Democrats polled personally know someone whom they believe died due to the COVID vaccine and b) similar numbers of poll respondents report personally knowing of an apparent COVID vaccine death versus a COVID virus death.
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/public_surveys/covid_19_virus_deaths_vs_vaccine_deaths
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/public_surveys/died_suddenly_more_than_1_in_4_think_someone_they_know_died_from_covid_19_vaccines
The bottom line is that the totality of evidence very strongly points to mRNA vaccines being the cause of very large numbers of excess deaths, and no TRULY CREDIBLE alternative explanations exist.
But the vaccine trials only used healthy people. The real world had millions of old and unhealthy people who were more vulnerable to vaccine side effects such as myocarditis.
Exactly correct, and this along with the issues stemming from "sponsorship bias" indicate that the profoundly unfavorable clinical trial mortality results cited above are likely to be essentially a best-case scenario. The real mortality effects of the vaccines are most likely WORSE than the clinical trial results show. In fact, your point is precisely supported by both clinical trials and also VAERS: the net mortality effect of mRNA vaccination (even counting any COVID "benefit") is actually WORSE for older people than younger people.
In the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials combined, among the older age groups, there were 21 deaths in the vaccine groups versus 16 deaths in the placebo groups. 31% HIGHER all-cause mortality with the "lifesaving" vaccine than the placebo, in the OLDER age groups. (The important take-home from these results is not the exact "31%" figure, but rather the fact that it is extremely likely that the "lifesaving" vaccine actually INCREASES all-cause mortality in older people by SOME amount).
Among the older age group (>65) in the Moderna RCT, there were 9 deaths in the vaccine group versus 6 deaths in the placebo group. https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2113017/suppl_file/nejmoa2113017_appendix.pdf - see Table S19 on page 53/54
Among the older age group (>55) in the Pfizer RCT, there were 12 deaths in the vaccine group versus 10 deaths in the placebo group. https://www.fda.gov/media/152256/download - see page 57, BOTTOM of Table 25
And finally, the same age-related trend appears in VAERS as well: over 70% of unexpected post-vaccine deaths with known ages were in people aged >65 (and about 90% with known ages were in people over age 50). https://openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality
Explains (at least to me) why there was so much undo pressure to inject children. Their risk was almost nil, but their inclusion in wide data harvesting, would insure a much more “safe & effective” result... Angers me.. ie Use the kids to make the whole mess look better.
Yes, and needless to say, there are so many reasons NOT to risk the vaccine in kids and younger folks, EVEN IF the 6-month mortality effect is mildly favorable for them, considering that it's ALREADY unfavorable for the older folks by 6 months. It's entirely expected that any vulnerabilities of older folks will manifest much, much sooner (especially when the outcome is MORTALITY) than any potential vulnerabilities of younger folks.
Thank you for a careful, nuanced and detailed analysis!
I believe the numbers in insurance company data will give the best objective answer to the increased deaths for the period of eua shots taken and since then. I also don’t think assigning increased death to poverty, particularly in the US where public assistance has been expanded throughout the country over this same period is a reasonable point in increased deaths btw. This forum is rather constrained for lengthier posits but perhaps if pharma companies, such as Pfizer, would release unredacted information on the eua shots without court orders to do so would go much further to explain what has been going on. Truth will out eventually.
It don't matter, the numbers can't differentiate between "vx" and social meltdown due to tv-generated hysteria mandates/lockdowns.
It's way more likely to the the latter.
The feel-good claim that "lockdowns" or restrictions were a major cause of deaths since 2020 is often made by pro-vaccine anti-NPI individuals, but it is almost certainly false: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-deaths-per-million-covid?tab=chart&time=2020-01-25..2022-12-31&country=AUS~CAN~USA~JPN~GBR~DEU~ITA~NZL~KOR.
Just take a few minutes to look at the data, paying attention to the temporal trends. Sure, lockdowns are horrible, but no matter how "uncool" or unpopular it is to admit, the vast majority of places with heavy "lockdowns" or heavy restrictions actually did rather well mortality-wise pre-vaccine, and then their all-cause mortality went UP after the vaccine rollout.
There is also considerable other evidence specifically pointing to the mRNA vaccines as the culprit:
https://dailysceptic.org/2022/04/09/covid-vaccines-increase-risk-of-heart-related-deaths-by-up-to-50-lancet-analysis-of-trial-data-finds/
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/public_surveys/covid_19_virus_deaths_vs_vaccine_deaths
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/public_surveys/died_suddenly_more_than_1_in_4_think_someone_they_know_died_from_covid_19_vaccines
I live a very secluded life and have a very small number of acquaintances. One evening last year I took a call from my husband’s friend who was enquiring about the status of their Club’s president. I told him Harry had died the previous week. He then told me his wife had died two weeks previously. My husband was unable to talk to him because he was unable to lift the phone. He continued to get weaker and weaker, and almost died six months later from a rare and often deadly form of anemia. The community nurse who subsequently attended him at home commented on a rash of three pound babies being born. We had one on our street, which has only five houses. My sister’s friend’s husband died in his sleep, as did others I heard of. And so on. Say what you will. I am 75 years old, and rarely hear of one death a year.
As a thought experiment, let’s say the 17m estimate is overstating vaccine deaths by a factor of 2, making actual deaths ONLY 8.5m. Is anyone comfortable with that number?! Show me one other vaccine that caused that many deaths in a 3 year period. Let’s say it overstated it by a factor of 4, now we’re at 4.25m deaths; same questions. There will never be complete and accurate data to examine because two of the most populous countries in the world aren’t available. China will never provide it, the US didn’t track it appropriately (and wouldn’t give negative data over if they have it).
I had the same thought
Curious as to why this was not discussed between the two parties BEFORE this critique was published?
Also, without attributing causes to extra d(not excess) eaths in the US, does Tracey Beth have her own reconciliation of the pattern of deaths over the last 4 years detailed here?
https://peterhalligan.substack.com/p/lots-of-chatter-about-150000-excess
in the US up to September 2023 – no chatter about the 2.27 MILLION EXTRA DEATHS since the scamdemic started
Would be very interested to here her views on whether the 16-17% increase in the death rate is permanent and also what her views are on how illegal immigration of 6-10 million people over the C19 period should be taken into account.
The social meltdown due to stress/anxiety and mandates/lockdowns are much more likely cause of excess death.
Could you provide a set of studies that supports this conclusion? I agree with it but haven't found the "kill shot" study outside of some articles found on the Brownstone Institute site.
Silly question, whatever I can browse on the web you can.
The cure was worse than the disease.
Sweden didn't mandate/lockdown and it's Sweden that has the lowest excess deaths than ALL western countries, NZ and Australia included, all the while Sweden is one of the most vaccinated countries in the world, WITHOUT MANDATES.
Sweden is the only country that did right.
Those focused on vaccines missed the boat. The principles for resistance were these:
1-Civil liberties
2-no mandates
3-no lockdowns
Vaccine obsession is downstream of these, and cost us the resistance, cuz all the anti-vx crowd arrived WAY too late.
I am a physician who does 100% clinical work and zero research. I have neither the time nor skills to pore through all of the conflicting analyses about this vaccine As such I GREATLY appreciate work like this. For that reason I just upgraded to a founding member. Keep up the good work.
Here's some additional work that won't take you long to review (as opposed to listenint to the three-hour debate):
https://denisrancourt.ca/entries.php?id=136
Your patients will benefit from your understanding as to where Denis was going with his analysis.
I too have been baffled by the apparent differences here in Denmark vs. UK, US, CAN etc.
-Batch-dependent safety of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine
Max Schmeling, Vibeke Manniche, Peter Riis Hansen (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13998)
This shows clearly that Denmark had relatively few 'bad batches' which caused serious side effects, and to the best of my knowledge these were given out first, ie to nursing homes and the very elderly.
-Denmark used, almost exclusively, Pfizer which has 3 times fewer genetic molecules than Moderna.
- Denmark (afaik) never jabbed the <12 yo's, and effectively stopped all genetic injections a good while ago.
-Denmark had a healthier population at baseline.
-Excess deaths are hidden due to delayed autopsies. I don't know if Denmark did this, but other countries have (UK). Autopsies tend to be done on younger unexpected deaths, which are the deaths they are the most desparate to hide.
- 3 years is not very long for the expected morbidities to become mortalities. Dr. Hoffe pointed out that over 60% of his Moderna 'vaccinated' patients had high D-dimer levels. HIs concern was that the resulting microclotting in the lungs will cause PAH which takes over 5 years to kill. And that is just one disease.
- from a biological perspective, putting 12/40 (Pfizer/Mod) trillion LNP wrapped mRNA molecules into bodies consisting of only 4 trillion nucleated cells can only lead to disaster. What other outcome could be expected? (https://evolutionaryhealthplan.info/#_Ref83404023)
- there is an easy way to figure this out that does not rely on interpreting Data. Do staining autopsies on all unexpected deaths to find out if the organs are filled with 'natural' spike, mRNA spike or no spike.
But Denmark, as well as every Western country will not do that. Why not, if you are so sure the sudden deaths are not from the 'vaccine'?
Outstanding information here. And yes, I have been screaming about that staining test myself. Since it can’t possibly be the vaccines, why not test away and release the results? We need to restore trust, correct???
Another Amen!!
In general, I appreciate your critique. Science works best through discussion and refinement and clarification and answering additional questions. But I wonder, did you read the Rancourt study? It very clearly explained the reason for selecting only Southern Hemisphere countries. The math is easier and more convincing. In the Northern Hemisphere the vaccine rollouts happened in the winter (January especially) when the are normally excess deaths and the math to separate the additional excess from the normal excess is more complicated and less convincing. In the Southern hemisphere, the rollouts happened in the summer months (especially January) when there is a normal trough. The excesses shown on the graphs for each country during the times when there is normally a trough are undoubtedly impressive.
Was there selection bias in these 17 countries? Do they perfectly represent the average for every country on earth combined? That is beyond ability to answer, but my guess is that estimate will be off. Choosing 17 at random is better than nothing but never it is perfect representation. Why were these 17 countries chosen? The reason stated is the quality and availability of the data. I do know if that is a partial or complete explanation. Not exactly random, but not indicative of predicting other countries accurately. Selection bias is likely and significant, but probably not very large. More data will help to analyze the extent.
Rancourt also included in the report an evaluation of whether or not COVID-19 caused these effects. Again, this section of the report should be examined and debated. It was early attempt and may need significant revisions.
Nevertheless, I think we should compare this report to known data and critique it.
We are still missing the best data. But I hope some record-level data about vaccination status of the deceased 2020 with vaccination data appears soon.
Thanks for this comment. I'm a little confused because the vaccination rollout was mainly April-August 2021 in Europe (https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2412) which is not typically a time of excess mortality. So this would have been a good population to look at by that rationale.
I’m confused too. I was just repeating Rancourt’s words from a video. I didn’t compare his words to anything. I only read small sections of his actual study. I remember the first vaccine rollout starting in December of 2020 in the USA for doctors and first responders and for the elderly in January and February of 2021 so it made sense to me. I was not aware of the timing in Europe.