Death in Europe, All Ages and Children - 2017 to 2022
A familiar tale of exaggerated COVID mortality in spring 2020, downplayed mortality associated with the mRNA experiment and the catastrophe that now befalls the children.
There is nothing new here.
You can peruse my previous articles, replete with analysis and references, demonstrating that COVID was no worse than a bad flu when it first emerged and no interventions had any benefit.
A brief analysis of deaths of all ages in Europe, courtesy of Euromomo, corroborates this.
As we can clearly see in the chart and data above, for Europe, in terms of all-cause mortality, season 2019-20(which incorporated epidemic COVID of spring 2020) was only 29% worse than 2017-18. This is on the back of a very soft 2018-19 (down 64% on 2017-18) so these extra deaths were largely to be expected anyway. Moreover, we cannot even be sure that these deaths were due to the virus and not the various governmental responses.
However, season 2020-21 is actually almost twice as bad as 2017-18 in terms of average weekly excess mortality. This is evidently much worse than 2019-20.
Before we jump to the conclusion about the mRNA experiment being responsible, we should at least address the fact that COVID hit eastern Europe in the early part of autumn 2020, having largely spared it during the original spring emergence - physical geography was the factor, not human intervention, you ignorant, arrogant politicians and media sluts!
To correctly take this into consideration, we would do better to compare the entire COVID/mRNA era pre- and post- experiment. In these terms, the post-mRNA experiment era results in almost 7,000 weekly excess deaths, almost 13% higher than the pre-experiment COVID era.
Still, not exactly a ringing endorsement of the Safe and Effective™?!
So far, so bad. Can it get any worse?
Alas, if we drill down into the children age group (0 to 14 year olds), things do indeed appear to be worse.
Season 2019-20is pretty much bang in line with 2017-18, after a higher 2018-19. Again, this comes as absolutely no surprise since we have known from the very, very beginning that COVID per se is a non-event for young people.
Curiously, season 2020-21 actually runs at a significant deficit to prior years. Maybe something in the changes of activity or behaviour related to COVID interventions did have a benefit in terms of paediatric mortality even though it clearly could not have been a direct impact on the risk of COVID itself?
But then, in season 2021-22, starting week ending 13-Jun-21 (as marked on the chart), this is all undone and then some. To use the term, hackneyed by Matt Hancock, we witness excess death on an “unprecedented” scale in this period for this age group. Almost 1,600 excess deaths is seven times higher than 2017-18 and more than double 2018-19 (which was a “bad” year).
Since 2020-21 was such a low year, it would seem rather unlikely that the catastrophic outcome in 2021-22 could be the delayed effect of interventions that has been promoted as likely cause by the likes of Burn-Murdoch at the Financial Times, and his cheerleader, David Spiegelhalter.
But, can we pin it on the mRNA experiment?
Fortunately, only 8.3% of all children under 15 in Europe have received at least one jab of the mRNA toxin. As can be seen in the chart above, this abuse started in earnest in the week ending 13-Jun-21. Well, there’s just another one of those weird coincidences, isn’t there? Seven months after death in the older age groups ramps up, concomitant with the roll out of the jab for those age groups, the exact same thing happens with the children.
Who could have foreseen such a thing? Certainly not those whose responsibility it was to do so, the public health authorities and the main stream media. Oh no, they weren’t even looking. Instead, they were too busy deriding the armchair epidemiologists asking for a proper investigation, weren’t they, Tom?!
When you plot mRNA doses administered and excess deaths on the same chart, as above, it is a bit difficult to not see the correlation?
I don’t know about other data analysts, but with three children of my own under the age of 14, I can’t help but cry when I do these analyses.
Three experts (significantly better qualified than me and allegedly on the side of truth) have got it completely wrong in my opinion:
They find lots of reasons for the increase in children’s deaths that simply do not fit the pattern and wilfully ignore the most obvious cause. Shame.
I’ll leave it to you to determine whose analysis has a truer ring? Please let me know in the comments.
I’d love to comment directly on theirs but they only allow comments from people who pay them. That will never be the case on my Substack.
I have chosen the seasons to run from September to May to coincide with seasonal mortality patterns.
I have chosen September to August for this age group since there is no apparent seasonality in the mortality data.
Im an md in private practice in northern NJ USA. I never got that vax. The RRR made no sense for me. My two teen sons never got it. Thank you for your dedication
PLEASE check out the two detailed examinations of the filings made by Pfizer & Moderna.
They are the two items ending Dr Malone’s article.
I know Dr Latypova personally & vouch for her credentials.
Basically the companies avoided finding bad things by the expedient of not doing the studies required. The regulators then rubber stamped these hopelessly inadequate filings.
Dr Mike Yeadon
Ps: another colleague, Hedley Rees, shows how impossible it ever was that they could possibly have done what they claim. He also publishes on Substack. Certain things take elapsed time & cannot much be shortened by adding resource. As my former head of medicinal chemistry once said, “You can’t make a baby in one month using nine women”.