Analysis of the Important Czech COVID "Vaccine" Mortality Data
Corroboration of the general conclusion of proof that these "vaccines" are not safe, they are deadly.
As usual, the indomitable Steve Kirsch kicked this one off:
Clare Craig was swift to confirm his conclusions:
A little later, Jessica Rose added her corroboration:
Much like Jess, I like to do things my own way in my own time, which is rather limited at present. Nevertheless, I have had a shake at this tree now as well.
I chose to look at those aged 70 to 79 in 2020, simply because there were too many rows for my Excel spreadsheet and this seemed like a good age range with plenty of mortality to work with, and probably less confounding than the very elderly in terms of the so-called “(un)healthy vaccinee effect”.
My conclusion is the same as the others. Using Pfizer as a “placebo” (effectively assuming that it is safe), then all other “vaccines” are harmful - deadly in fact. Now, if you believe that Pfizer is, therefore, the only one that is not deadly, unfortunately, you have failed to grasp the implication of this. What it actually means is that they are all deadly, just some are more deadly than others.
It is trivial for anyone with basic analytical skills, a spreadsheet and the data, to reproduce the mortality rates for the various “vaccine” brands:
As we can see above, at all times, i.e. regardless of the presence or absence of the alleged deadly virus, every brand exhibits significantly higher mortality rates than Pfizer. In other words, the anomaly is not due to difference in efficacy, they are all unsafe, relative to Pfizer.
In spite of this preliminary finding, I was concerned about the quality of the data. As has been noted by everyone else, the unvaccinated mortality rate was even more significantly higher than all the vaccinated rates:
As above, given that there are lengthy periods where the alleged “COVID” is absent, this is simply unfeasible. It signifies that deaths are missing or misclassified (vaccinated deaths recorded as unvaccinated). We have seen this many times before, especially in the UK ONS data1.
Since the total deaths are consistent with other sources, let’s assume that we are simply dealing with misclassification, e.g. deaths of vaccinated occurring before their records can be updated. We can fix this by shifting deaths from the unvaccinated to the vaccinated to harmonise the two mortality rates2:
My concern would be that if, in the unlikely event, all of this misclassification occurred only with Pfizer “vaccines”, this might nullify the conclusion. So, to test this extreme hypothesis, I added all the misclassified deaths to Pfizer and compared the new results to Moderna as before:
As we can see, if we had stopped looking at March 2022, we might have had an issue because the new Pfizer mortality rate is consistently higher than Moderna. This would obviously invalidate our conclusion that Moderna (and the other brands) were systematically more deadly than Pfizer.
However, after March 2022, when the misclassification has all but disappeared, the elevated Moderna mortality rate remains significantly apparent. The conclusion holds.
N.B. Up to one-third of all deaths appear to be misclassified. I don’t know if this is an indication of the poor state of administration in the Czech system or the result of so many people dying so shortly after being jabbed that their records weren’t updated. I mean, no-one wants a record that they delivered the fatal jab after all, do they?
Many of us can do this analysis. You and others have done a great job. But somehow, the public health officials cannot. They are clearly both incompetent and corrupt. Only a corrupt person would try to do such a thing and only an incompetent would think that they wouldn’t be caught.
Can't put lipstick on this Pfizer pig of death.