I'm still struggling with whether my instincts are right or not about what I suspect is happening. You can imagine the level of overconfidence or incompetence one must have to so openly and consistently spread untruths like our health "authorities" do, that even a seasoned skeptic like myself needs re-assurance that I'm not hallucinating.
Your work helps tremendously in that respect as it's increasingly difficult to believe that these people were unaware or that we are making some obvious error in judgement.
I signaled in an earlier comment to your post from a few days ago that I had intentions to press UKHSA for specific figures, and while I was practicing some calorie restrictions for the past week to check how quickly I might fail in my resolve before these ghouls become more transparent, I discovered that I could probably nail them to the cross if they admit just one thing - the "asymptomatic transmission" study they are touting from SIREN (2020) when combined with some of the results from this post, early hospitalization (all Gloucestershire) and Prof. Neil/team's recent unhealthy vaccinee effect probably shows that the hospital infections started as soon as they switched from vaccinating seniors to vaccinating hospital workers. Either that, or AstraZeneca was extra industrial grade thrombosis agent leading to so many ICU visits after January when it was introduced. There is also the possibility that Pfizer shots simply killed the seniors before they could make it to the ICU. It's a terrible sad situation that we literally no information to work with and all the information we have is clever disinformation or hard fought to extract (like your work and Prof. Fenton and Dr. Clare Craig).
In any case, I wanted to say that this work is invaluable. As Margaret was saying about replication across media, they use this kind of information to guilt people into believing that their inaction lead to increases in pressure on healthcare when the opposite was true, and was likely always true. Their policies put everyone under pressure and now we have to deal with it. Healthcare workers who are being forced to vaccinate while that might paradoxically hurt their ability to care for their patients without transmitting and getting infected themselves.
The work has to be done and the truth will out. It always does. There is plenty of data becoming available out the public channels now. Stuff they can't censor or manipulate. Eventually MSM will pick up on it too.
Man I wish I had your optimism. It seems abundantly clear to me, by the data, that there is no remaining scientific basis for vaccine passports, yet almost every country in the West still has them. These people only use "the science" that conforms to their presuppositions.
I assume 'MSM' will publish if it gives an *overall* competitive advantage or the proprietor thereby gets a grudge off his/her chest.
The Telegraph, Mail and Spectator have published most sceptic stories. But 1&2 get govt pandemic advertising, and 1 gets Gates money - many do - so their activity is less than it might otherwise be. GB News is tiny but counts as 'MSM' and had interviews with Dr Aseem Malhotra, Dr Mike Yeadon, et al. I heard too that there've been useful stories in France-Soir.
Surely some info. will very slowly leak across even to Guardian readers/BBC viewers ... or their French equiv.
Joel, I just asked this at Dr. Malone’s Stack, but he has a tad bit on his plate, and you may be in a better position to answer given your extensive data analysis.
She pointed to a statistic that the board of health cited saying “more than ten times as many unvaccinated as vaccinated people are hospitalized for covid.”
I traced this stat to a CDC early release (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7037e1.htm) and find it has been replicated across the MSM. Since this talking point is being cited by the propagandists and those they are scripting, it would be helpful to understand how that statistic is being calculated and how it may be in error.
As I told the commenter, we already know they play fast and loose with the categorizations of unvaxxed vs. vaxxed (e.g., counting people who’ve been injected as “unvaxxed” for the first 14 days after injection; counting people who’ve only had one injection as “unvaxxed”; counting anyone who doesn’t have their vaxx status documented in their records (e.g., people who got injected at a drugstore don’t show up as vaxxed in the Asante system); redefining “vaxxed” to exclude those who haven’t had the booster, etc.), so any breakdown of vaxxed vs. unvaxxed hospitalizations is next to worthless given how manipulated and manipulable the data is (much like the COVID case counts from fraudulent PCR tests, deaths “with” vs. “from” COVID, etc.).
I found a “British Medical Journal” article (https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o5) fact-checking hospitalization stats about the unvaxxed that found the claims are exaggerated, but a takedown of this specific CDC report would be particularly helpful.
CDC published blatant untruths is what I can surmise. I made a rough draft with the data from 65+ vaccinated. They are simply liars. I won't publish it because it needs work but I wanted to share it in this thread in case people need to see the cheating.
First off thank you for that amazing letter, it's unbelievable what these people are doing even while all the contradictory information is right in their faces.
In addition to the points Joel made-
Have you seen @tlowdon on twitter had posted statistics from Dallas county hospitals in August.
If you want I can look that up. But basically I think the strategy to take down something is to have large scale and small scale data agree. I think Dallas county data showed no difference in case fatality rates even after "with and from" covid distinctions.
But the real clincher in my view from the US was the project SALUS report released in September and October of all seniors admitted to hospital and who made a medicare or medicaid claim.
That showed beyond reasonable doubt that even with the "adjustments", the vaccinated were disproportionally dominating the cases in winter and hospitalizations too.
I can try to find the links or upload my copy of the ppt, since they took it down. Virginia also showed "partially vaccinated" getting sicker and dying earlier on in the pandemic. If you want, I will find all those links.
Aww, thanks so much, AlmostWrong! It is terrifying how the authoritarians are blazing full-speed ahead on totalitarianism even as the scientific evidence demonstrating the lunacy of these policies snowballs into a narrative-smothering avalanche.
I don’t spend any time on Twitter so hadn’t seen that—thanks for the tip as well as the additional recommendations!
If it isn’t too much trouble to hunt down those links, the SALUS report sounds particularly informative.
Hey no problem at all. You are doing amazing work that's giving energy to everyone! Least I can do is find links. This is the snapshot of the Humetrix (Project Salus DOD) website that was taken down when theExpose.co.uk reported on it. I knew it would be taken down when others found it, so I'd saved a copy of their presentation before just in case.
Supplementary Notes: (I've tried to dump some of my thoughts which is not clear but you will find many of the links there. Can you tell me if you can see the unpublished link?)
Wow, this is awesome, AW—thanks so much! I will let the original commenter who asked about this know about this page so she can review the various responses.
This link returned a 404, as you suspected it might:
Thanks! Looks like sharing drafts work. Glad we can build a repository of lies that they must pay for later!
And yes, the censorship is predictable which is sad for two reasons:
1) They'd rather hide the truth than try to explain why what we see doesn't match what we were made to believe.
2) The fact that they actually post this stuff at all makes it clear they are not only liars but also incompetent liars-- They can't see the bigger picture and that's scarier because it means nobody is really in control and we are simply left to luck.
Jan 17, 2022·edited Jan 17, 2022Liked by Joel Smalley
I think another big way they manipulate these jabbed vs unjabbed comparisons is via ONLY ever giving us “rates”, which are easily gameable. How? Chiefly by accidentally-on-purpose underestimating the number of unjabbed, thereby lowballing the denominator in the hospitalizations or deaths per 100K or whatever. Obviously they know how many people are jabbed (the chicanery you mention above notwithstanding), but how do they know how many are unjabbed? By subtracting the number of jabbed from the overall population. But what is that population based upon? Old, outdated, often wildly inaccurate census figures? Something ain’t adding up. There was an interesting recent thread exploring some of this: https://mobile.twitter.com/Hold2LLC/status/1482760598370885635
So yes, Mr Meta, I would LOVE it if you could do a deep dive into this.
Great point. Three levers exist in the hospital administrations hands though not equally accessible to all and across countries and jurisdictions -
1) The lever to misclassify exposure ("Unsee vaccination status/Delay update of the system to match the patients prior exposure before admission")
Depending on the defaults in the system, this can mean subtracting from one and adding to the other, or subtracting from one only, but never adding to vaccinated, addition always happens to unvaccinated unlike the old times where grafting marks were left on people who were inoculated
2) The lever to shrink denominator - since unvaccinated is a "calculated" as opposed to observed measure. It's sensitive to whatever the hell the local population statisticians dreamt up the population ought to be at a given time minus the vaccinations on the books. Again, rigged against unvaccinated because rates will show shrinking denominator as population is vaccinated that artificially feels like rising prevalence.
3) The lever to misclassify outcome - As you may know from English mortality data, vaccinated appear to take longer to die after a positive SARS-COV-2 test. This could be for all kinds of reasons including the scary possibility that whatever treatments we currently offer for covid might paradoxically end people faster than if they weren't diagnosed for covid. For example, fully vaccinated "rates" appear to show that within 60 days a lot of "catch up dying" happens in the vaccinated while it happens within 28 days for unvaccinated. It could also be something worse like the fully vaccinated that are dying now are "ahead" of the death curve- meaning the unhealthiest of the people die first in the vaccinated category and the corresponding people in unvaccinated die later on in natural epidemic curves. This could mean that the deaths we are seeing in unvaccinated are always like a "review" of the deaths that've already happened in the vaccinated as the mass vaccinated group from covid or non-covid causes.
The basic point being, the denominator, the outcome classification, the exposure classification are all in their hands. This is so perverse because you have to do very little to get the result you wish- delay, misclassify, improperly estimate.
Yes, when you consider that 25% of the VAERS death reports occur within the first 48 hours (even larger if you count the entirety of the first 14 days) and those deaths are likely being tallied as “unvaccinated,” we are looking at some massive manipulations of data to obscure the fact that people are dying from the injection while simultaneously pushing those stats into the “unvaxxed” column.
NSW Chief Health Officer Kerry Chant has given some more information about the 36 people who died from COVID-19 in the latest daily reporting period.
Of the 22 men and 14 women, 33 were vaccinated and three were not. Those who were vaccinated had “generally” not received a booster shot, Dr Chant said.
Three people who died were aged under 65 – including one person in their 40s – and two of these people were not vaccinated. All three had “underlying serious health conditions”, the Chief Health Officer added.
Further clarification is needed regarding how many of those "unvaccinated" admissions were people who received a COVID vaccine less than 14 days ago. I have a feeling that would further expose just how terrible these vaccines are.
All the real skeptical statistical analyses I am seeing are from people using UK data. Why is this? Did I just accidentally wander into the wrong set of Substack authors (I am in the USA)?. Or is it because similar data simply isn't available for the USA? It's gonna look weird if I start writing about UK stats to a USA audience.
Yes, the UK has good data. Other countries do too. I work in a group of UK and Israeli scientists. We routinely get contacted by others around the world with the same patterns in their data but most of it is incomplete or manipulated. The Canadian provinces are obviously sharing more valuable data than they thought. I have someone who has done more work on Alberta than me who I'll collaborate with. At some point I'll write this up on Ontario too. https://twitter.com/mdccclxx/status/1482816731945000962?t=--j46T9BDjVd828SnjzVgQ&s=19
It's the latter. The US is hiding this data from all of us. Occasionally, you will find a single city or county that actually releases it, but any big look at vaxxed vs. unvaxxed outcomes here is in a deep cave somewhere. As I have pointed out to all my pro-vax friends, why? Why hide the data if it was even remotely positive for the vax? The answer, obviously, is because it is not.
I am struggling with different issue. What is the number of unvaccinated that is being used on rates they give us. Also there is never total rate of deaths or hospitalization when you have vaccination status shown since then it would be easy to get to those number. What are your thoughts about this?
I went on to this website can any Doctors or nurses anyone answer and explain how many covid shots are in a batch? I just had a client her grandson checked out the website it said 20 died from the batch number. I am not understanding about the batch. Please explain?
mRNA "Vaccines" Are Gene Therapy. May cause Undesirable Side Effects That Could Delay Or Prevent Their Regulatory Approval According To BioNTech SEC Filing The Truth About "Safe and Effective" mRNA "Vaccines" Hidden In Plain Sight
The Truth About Safety of mRNA Vaccines Found in The European Medicines Agency's Document Titled "Comirnaty (COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine) Risk Management Plan"
It's time to listen carefully to the representatives of the luciferian elites when they are actually telling the truth about the real goals of the satanic end game: "No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. (David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations)
I don't have access to that data but John certainly seems to and is revealing it nicely. Indeed, it is a point I made in April 2020 that COVID is not just serious for the frail but predominantly nosocomial too so even if NPIs had controlled community spread, it still would not have made much difference to overall disease burden and death.
Dear Joel,
I'm still struggling with whether my instincts are right or not about what I suspect is happening. You can imagine the level of overconfidence or incompetence one must have to so openly and consistently spread untruths like our health "authorities" do, that even a seasoned skeptic like myself needs re-assurance that I'm not hallucinating.
Your work helps tremendously in that respect as it's increasingly difficult to believe that these people were unaware or that we are making some obvious error in judgement.
I signaled in an earlier comment to your post from a few days ago that I had intentions to press UKHSA for specific figures, and while I was practicing some calorie restrictions for the past week to check how quickly I might fail in my resolve before these ghouls become more transparent, I discovered that I could probably nail them to the cross if they admit just one thing - the "asymptomatic transmission" study they are touting from SIREN (2020) when combined with some of the results from this post, early hospitalization (all Gloucestershire) and Prof. Neil/team's recent unhealthy vaccinee effect probably shows that the hospital infections started as soon as they switched from vaccinating seniors to vaccinating hospital workers. Either that, or AstraZeneca was extra industrial grade thrombosis agent leading to so many ICU visits after January when it was introduced. There is also the possibility that Pfizer shots simply killed the seniors before they could make it to the ICU. It's a terrible sad situation that we literally no information to work with and all the information we have is clever disinformation or hard fought to extract (like your work and Prof. Fenton and Dr. Clare Craig).
In any case, I wanted to say that this work is invaluable. As Margaret was saying about replication across media, they use this kind of information to guilt people into believing that their inaction lead to increases in pressure on healthcare when the opposite was true, and was likely always true. Their policies put everyone under pressure and now we have to deal with it. Healthcare workers who are being forced to vaccinate while that might paradoxically hurt their ability to care for their patients without transmitting and getting infected themselves.
The work has to be done and the truth will out. It always does. There is plenty of data becoming available out the public channels now. Stuff they can't censor or manipulate. Eventually MSM will pick up on it too.
Man I wish I had your optimism. It seems abundantly clear to me, by the data, that there is no remaining scientific basis for vaccine passports, yet almost every country in the West still has them. These people only use "the science" that conforms to their presuppositions.
What if the digital ID was the goal?
I assume 'MSM' will publish if it gives an *overall* competitive advantage or the proprietor thereby gets a grudge off his/her chest.
The Telegraph, Mail and Spectator have published most sceptic stories. But 1&2 get govt pandemic advertising, and 1 gets Gates money - many do - so their activity is less than it might otherwise be. GB News is tiny but counts as 'MSM' and had interviews with Dr Aseem Malhotra, Dr Mike Yeadon, et al. I heard too that there've been useful stories in France-Soir.
Surely some info. will very slowly leak across even to Guardian readers/BBC viewers ... or their French equiv.
I wish someone would investigate the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
Spin, spin, spin and Canadians worship the CBC.
Joel, I just asked this at Dr. Malone’s Stack, but he has a tad bit on his plate, and you may be in a better position to answer given your extensive data analysis.
Someone asked a question about hospitalization in the comments at my “Letter to the Washington State Board of Health” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/letter-to-the-washington-state-board), and I am wondering if you might be able to weigh in.
She pointed to a statistic that the board of health cited saying “more than ten times as many unvaccinated as vaccinated people are hospitalized for covid.”
I traced this stat to a CDC early release (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7037e1.htm) and find it has been replicated across the MSM. Since this talking point is being cited by the propagandists and those they are scripting, it would be helpful to understand how that statistic is being calculated and how it may be in error.
As I told the commenter, we already know they play fast and loose with the categorizations of unvaxxed vs. vaxxed (e.g., counting people who’ve been injected as “unvaxxed” for the first 14 days after injection; counting people who’ve only had one injection as “unvaxxed”; counting anyone who doesn’t have their vaxx status documented in their records (e.g., people who got injected at a drugstore don’t show up as vaxxed in the Asante system); redefining “vaxxed” to exclude those who haven’t had the booster, etc.), so any breakdown of vaxxed vs. unvaxxed hospitalizations is next to worthless given how manipulated and manipulable the data is (much like the COVID case counts from fraudulent PCR tests, deaths “with” vs. “from” COVID, etc.).
I found a “British Medical Journal” article (https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o5) fact-checking hospitalization stats about the unvaxxed that found the claims are exaggerated, but a takedown of this specific CDC report would be particularly helpful.
The only way to "take down" the report is if they also produce non-COVID data against which we can sense-check the categorizations and populations like they did in the UK - https://metatron.substack.com/p/cooking-the-books-ons-style. If not, you have to get unadulterated raw data under an FOI like this my original post - https://metatron.substack.com/p/hospitalisations-by-covid-19-vaccination
CDC published blatant untruths is what I can surmise. I made a rough draft with the data from 65+ vaccinated. They are simply liars. I won't publish it because it needs work but I wanted to share it in this thread in case people need to see the cheating.
https://almostwrong.substack.com/p/27638177-f5dc-41d6-91c7-c717d37e960d
Yeah, that’s pretty much what I suspected :-)
I didn’t realize you could share a link to a Substack draft—cool!
Great point, Joel, and thanks for the link!
Hey Margaret,
First off thank you for that amazing letter, it's unbelievable what these people are doing even while all the contradictory information is right in their faces.
In addition to the points Joel made-
Have you seen @tlowdon on twitter had posted statistics from Dallas county hospitals in August.
If you want I can look that up. But basically I think the strategy to take down something is to have large scale and small scale data agree. I think Dallas county data showed no difference in case fatality rates even after "with and from" covid distinctions.
But the real clincher in my view from the US was the project SALUS report released in September and October of all seniors admitted to hospital and who made a medicare or medicaid claim.
That showed beyond reasonable doubt that even with the "adjustments", the vaccinated were disproportionally dominating the cases in winter and hospitalizations too.
I can try to find the links or upload my copy of the ppt, since they took it down. Virginia also showed "partially vaccinated" getting sicker and dying earlier on in the pandemic. If you want, I will find all those links.
Aww, thanks so much, AlmostWrong! It is terrifying how the authoritarians are blazing full-speed ahead on totalitarianism even as the scientific evidence demonstrating the lunacy of these policies snowballs into a narrative-smothering avalanche.
I don’t spend any time on Twitter so hadn’t seen that—thanks for the tip as well as the additional recommendations!
If it isn’t too much trouble to hunt down those links, the SALUS report sounds particularly informative.
Hey no problem at all. You are doing amazing work that's giving energy to everyone! Least I can do is find links. This is the snapshot of the Humetrix (Project Salus DOD) website that was taken down when theExpose.co.uk reported on it. I knew it would be taken down when others found it, so I'd saved a copy of their presentation before just in case.
Supplementary Notes: (I've tried to dump some of my thoughts which is not clear but you will find many of the links there. Can you tell me if you can see the unpublished link?)
https://almostwrong.substack.com/p/27638177-f5dc-41d6-91c7-c717d37e960d
https://www.slideshare.net/ArtFriesz/vaccine-salushumetrix20210922v2
Wow, this is awesome, AW—thanks so much! I will let the original commenter who asked about this know about this page so she can review the various responses.
This link returned a 404, as you suspected it might:
https://www.humetrix.com/powerpoint-vaccine.html
Thanks! Looks like sharing drafts work. Glad we can build a repository of lies that they must pay for later!
And yes, the censorship is predictable which is sad for two reasons:
1) They'd rather hide the truth than try to explain why what we see doesn't match what we were made to believe.
2) The fact that they actually post this stuff at all makes it clear they are not only liars but also incompetent liars-- They can't see the bigger picture and that's scarier because it means nobody is really in control and we are simply left to luck.
💯
I think another big way they manipulate these jabbed vs unjabbed comparisons is via ONLY ever giving us “rates”, which are easily gameable. How? Chiefly by accidentally-on-purpose underestimating the number of unjabbed, thereby lowballing the denominator in the hospitalizations or deaths per 100K or whatever. Obviously they know how many people are jabbed (the chicanery you mention above notwithstanding), but how do they know how many are unjabbed? By subtracting the number of jabbed from the overall population. But what is that population based upon? Old, outdated, often wildly inaccurate census figures? Something ain’t adding up. There was an interesting recent thread exploring some of this: https://mobile.twitter.com/Hold2LLC/status/1482760598370885635
So yes, Mr Meta, I would LOVE it if you could do a deep dive into this.
Many thanks.
Great point. Three levers exist in the hospital administrations hands though not equally accessible to all and across countries and jurisdictions -
1) The lever to misclassify exposure ("Unsee vaccination status/Delay update of the system to match the patients prior exposure before admission")
Depending on the defaults in the system, this can mean subtracting from one and adding to the other, or subtracting from one only, but never adding to vaccinated, addition always happens to unvaccinated unlike the old times where grafting marks were left on people who were inoculated
2) The lever to shrink denominator - since unvaccinated is a "calculated" as opposed to observed measure. It's sensitive to whatever the hell the local population statisticians dreamt up the population ought to be at a given time minus the vaccinations on the books. Again, rigged against unvaccinated because rates will show shrinking denominator as population is vaccinated that artificially feels like rising prevalence.
3) The lever to misclassify outcome - As you may know from English mortality data, vaccinated appear to take longer to die after a positive SARS-COV-2 test. This could be for all kinds of reasons including the scary possibility that whatever treatments we currently offer for covid might paradoxically end people faster than if they weren't diagnosed for covid. For example, fully vaccinated "rates" appear to show that within 60 days a lot of "catch up dying" happens in the vaccinated while it happens within 28 days for unvaccinated. It could also be something worse like the fully vaccinated that are dying now are "ahead" of the death curve- meaning the unhealthiest of the people die first in the vaccinated category and the corresponding people in unvaccinated die later on in natural epidemic curves. This could mean that the deaths we are seeing in unvaccinated are always like a "review" of the deaths that've already happened in the vaccinated as the mass vaccinated group from covid or non-covid causes.
The basic point being, the denominator, the outcome classification, the exposure classification are all in their hands. This is so perverse because you have to do very little to get the result you wish- delay, misclassify, improperly estimate.
Yes, when you consider that 25% of the VAERS death reports occur within the first 48 hours (even larger if you count the entirety of the first 14 days) and those deaths are likely being tallied as “unvaccinated,” we are looking at some massive manipulations of data to obscure the fact that people are dying from the injection while simultaneously pushing those stats into the “unvaxxed” column.
Excellent points, Ronald!
vaccine failure
NSW Chief Health Officer Kerry Chant has given some more information about the 36 people who died from COVID-19 in the latest daily reporting period.
Of the 22 men and 14 women, 33 were vaccinated and three were not. Those who were vaccinated had “generally” not received a booster shot, Dr Chant said.
Three people who died were aged under 65 – including one person in their 40s – and two of these people were not vaccinated. All three had “underlying serious health conditions”, the Chief Health Officer added.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/australia-news-live-covid-19-cases-continue-to-grow-across-nation-day-two-of-2022-australian-open-continues-in-melbourne-20220117-p59owf.html
Further clarification is needed regarding how many of those "unvaccinated" admissions were people who received a COVID vaccine less than 14 days ago. I have a feeling that would further expose just how terrible these vaccines are.
All the real skeptical statistical analyses I am seeing are from people using UK data. Why is this? Did I just accidentally wander into the wrong set of Substack authors (I am in the USA)?. Or is it because similar data simply isn't available for the USA? It's gonna look weird if I start writing about UK stats to a USA audience.
Yes, the UK has good data. Other countries do too. I work in a group of UK and Israeli scientists. We routinely get contacted by others around the world with the same patterns in their data but most of it is incomplete or manipulated. The Canadian provinces are obviously sharing more valuable data than they thought. I have someone who has done more work on Alberta than me who I'll collaborate with. At some point I'll write this up on Ontario too. https://twitter.com/mdccclxx/status/1482816731945000962?t=--j46T9BDjVd828SnjzVgQ&s=19
It's the latter. The US is hiding this data from all of us. Occasionally, you will find a single city or county that actually releases it, but any big look at vaxxed vs. unvaxxed outcomes here is in a deep cave somewhere. As I have pointed out to all my pro-vax friends, why? Why hide the data if it was even remotely positive for the vax? The answer, obviously, is because it is not.
I am struggling with different issue. What is the number of unvaccinated that is being used on rates they give us. Also there is never total rate of deaths or hospitalization when you have vaccination status shown since then it would be easy to get to those number. What are your thoughts about this?
Do you have a presence on Twitter?
Thank you for doing this analysis and presenting it here.
Why do you think it returned in June?
On a separate note. Only 6,183 people died solely of COVID-19 in England & Wales
And only 833 under 60s.
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/only-6183-people-died-solely-of-covid
I went on to this website can any Doctors or nurses anyone answer and explain how many covid shots are in a batch? I just had a client her grandson checked out the website it said 20 died from the batch number. I am not understanding about the batch. Please explain?
https://www.howbadismybatch.com/index.html
Wow!! Amazing analysis. Simple and clear.
The bioweapon vax is working as intended:
mRNA "Vaccines" Are Gene Therapy. May cause Undesirable Side Effects That Could Delay Or Prevent Their Regulatory Approval According To BioNTech SEC Filing The Truth About "Safe and Effective" mRNA "Vaccines" Hidden In Plain Sight
https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/mrna-vaccines-are-gene-therapy-may
The Truth About Safety of mRNA Vaccines Found in The European Medicines Agency's Document Titled "Comirnaty (COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine) Risk Management Plan"
Welcome to the Medical Inquisition
https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/the-truth-about-safety-of-mrna-vaccines
Pay attention to the predictive programming: Get Ready For The Next One. The Next Plandemic: Smallpox, Marburg, or both?
https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/get-ready-for-the-next-one
They've told us the truth years in advance. We are the Virus they are trying to eliminate The Olympics Rituals of 1992/2012 "Predicted" The Corona Operation: https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/the-corona-end-game-addendum
It's time to listen carefully to the representatives of the luciferian elites when they are actually telling the truth about the real goals of the satanic end game: "No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. (David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations)
https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/the-occult-is-the-spiritual-foundation
Good analysis (as ever) JS.
Have you hooked up with Mr Dee yet I wonder?
That aside; if your data at your large Trust allows, can you xref with NHS Covid activity data (monthly which includes the sitrep database) to
ascertain, of covid admissions:
* how many went through the door for treatment for covid from the community (cf carehomes)
* how many were in hospital already for non covid treatment
2 years in this basic data is necessary to properly understand relative risk of covid in the community.
It is also critical to educate many that NPIs in the community will not improve hospital cases or hospital deaths from covid.
I don't have access to that data but John certainly seems to and is revealing it nicely. Indeed, it is a point I made in April 2020 that COVID is not just serious for the frail but predominantly nosocomial too so even if NPIs had controlled community spread, it still would not have made much difference to overall disease burden and death.
Prescient "predominantly nosocomial".