From Feb. 2024! So many writers these days are hyperlinking their articles rather than using bibliographies that it makes our resolve to not hyperlink to other sites to avoid any further malware attacks difficult.
The alternative is to eliminate the links but that eliminates your ability to access the evidence. Still pondering the situation. Thanks to Ruth.
99 million patient records and they concluded that the benefits outweigh the risks!?!? We respectfully disagree.
A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) cohort study of 99 million vaccinated individuals concludes that the benefits of COVID outweigh the risks. My colleagues and I disagree.
Executive summary
A new study of over 99 million vaccinated people has been highly promoted in the press with headlines like “Covid Vaccines Linked To Small Increase In Heart And Brain Disorders, Study Finds—But Risk From Infection Is Far Higher.”
I’m going to convince you that this is bullshit.
You can also read this excellent take-down by James Lyons-Weiller of the 99M patient study. The tl;dr is that the study is untrustworthy.
Results at a glance
Quick summary of what the article would like you to believe
- They looked at the medical records of 99,068,901 vaccinated individuals.
- They compared observed vs. expected (“OE”) rates of “13 selected adverse events of special interest (AESI) across neurological, haematological, and cardiac outcomes.”
- They only looked for 42 days after the shots since everyone knows you can’t get adverse events after 42 days (I’m being sarcastic).
- They didn’t evaluate mortality due to the shot since everyone knows the vaccines are safe and didn’t kill anyone (I’m being sarcastic).
- They found clearly increased risk of the various AESI, but the end conclusion is that the risks after COVID infection are far higher, so people should take the shots. This is unbelievable. I don’t know a single cardiologist whose business dropped after the COVID vaccines rolled out. Do you?
- As usual, they aren’t allowed to share the data so you have to take their word for it.
The benefits of the COVID vaccine
There aren’t any I’m aware of.
A JAMA paper inadvertently revealed that the flu vaccine and COVID vaccine don’t work at all.
Nobody has been able to explain away that result. Nobody. Ever. They just don’t want to talk about it.
Why take a vaccine if the benefit is not measurable? That VA study was the perfect proving ground. The signal should have been large. There was no signal for either the COVID or flu vaccine. It was a stunning paper.
I always love it when a paper inadvertently blows the whole narrative out of the water and the medical community is completely clueless as to its significance.
The risks of the vaccine
The paper selected just 13 AESIs to evaluate.
But did you know that the CDC has determined that there are over 500 AESIs that were more serious than myocarditis? They simply forgot to tell people that!
Here are the actual numbers from this excellent article by Josh Guetzkow:
After dropping the new COVID-era AEs, there are 503 AEs with PRRs larger than myocarditis (PRR=3.09) and 552 with PRRs larger than pericarditis (PRR=2.82).5 This means that 66.4% of the AEs had a bigger safety signal than myocarditis and 77.3% were larger than pericarditis. You can see what those were by using this Excel file provided by the CDC and sorting the 18+ tab by the 12/14-07/29 PRR column (Column E). Then just look at which AEs have PRRs larger than the ones for pericarditis and myocarditis.
I have a question.
At a minimum, they should have warned people about myocarditis and everything more serious than that. So you should have been handed a long list of serious adverse events before you got the shot.
If you got the shot, please let me know if they warned you:
They claim that risks for GBS, etc. are higher from the virus than from the vaccine
But even if that was true (which it isn’t), it doesn’t matter because, as I mentioned earlier, the vaccine doesn’t prevent you from getting COVID, so the vaccine is simply adding to the risk.
The reality that I see shows that the vaccine is way more dangerous than the virus ever was
I have huge difficulty believing that the virus is more dangerous than the vaccine. If that were true and the vaccine resulted in a net benefit, we’d be seeing cases of myocarditis DROP after the vaccines rolled out.
Where is the evidence for that?
I can’t find a single cardiologist whose myocarditis rates in kids went DOWN after the vaccines rolled out. Can you?
In a survey of 1,000 randomly selected Americans that was done by a professional market research firm, nearly half the deaths reported in the survey were ascribed to the vaccine, not to the virus. That’s a very serious safety signal. How could this study have missed it? Of course, no health authority is willing to run their own survey. They don’t really want to learn the truth.
Here’s what people actually observed in real-life, but these are just anecdotes of course:
As you can see, there is a huge disconnect here. Someone is lying to you. Big time.
Unfortunately, no pro-vax person will try to replicate this survey. They just don’t want to know for some reason.
The myocarditis risk is all over the place in the peer-reviewed literature
According to the peer-reviewed literature (Patone), myocarditis risk is elevated by 1.5 to 1.7X after a Pfizer shot, but if you got the virus, your risk of myocarditis is 11X higher if you are unvaxxed and 5X higher if you are vaxxed. So the claim in the literature is that the virus is more dangerous which is clearly at odds with the surveys above.
That same paper admitted if you are male <40, your risk of myocarditis is over 6X higher than after the virus for the 2nd dose of the Moderna shot. So if you are a male <40, vaccination makes no sense, especially since it’s all downside. But the CDC will never tell you that and the paper doesn’t make any distinction at all for different ages.
Let’s look at a paper authored by scientists at the New Zealand Ministry of Health entitled “Adverse Events Following the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) in Aotearoa New Zealand.” They found that the COVID vaccines are indistinguishable from placebo (no statistically significant results in 11 of the 12 AESIs studied), except that there was a safety signal for myo/pericarditis which was 25.6X higher than expected in the 5-19 age group after Dose 2.
A 25.6X higher rate of myocarditis in kids is an insane safety signal. What does our CDC do about it? They recommend everyone get the shot. And top universities like Harvard require the COVID shots if you want to attend classes there as a student (faculty and staff are exempted because that’s how “science” works).
Here are the rates of myocarditis from the literature.
- Faksova (99 million study): 10 per M doses (vaccine); 40 per M infections (virus)
- Patone study: Up to 35 excess events per M doses which was same as virus on unvaccinated person; claims 23 cases per M infections for virus on vaccinated person.
- Walton (NZ study): Up to an additional 50 cases per M doses caused by the vaccine (a 25.6X increase over expected for 5-19 year olds)
- Mansanguan (Thailand): 1 in 301 13-18 year olds had confirmed myocarditis post vaccine. But more important was “Cardiovascular manifestations were found in 29.24% of patients, ranging from tachycardia or palpitation to myopericarditis.” So now we are at 3,322 cases per M doses which is 66X higher than the NZ study.
- Mueller (Switzerland): 22 out of 777 had myocardial injury after the booster shot in this study by Professor Christian Mueller in Switzerland. That’s a 2.8% rate of myocardial injury for the general population which is 800X higher than that observed from passive measurement systems.
Bottom line: Nearly 3 in 100 people experience measurable cardiac injury after the shots.
A cardiologist who I talked to who keeps a low-profile and wants to keep it that way told me, “There were no increase in cases during COVID. We started seeing an uptick in April-May 2021.” He estimated a myocarditis rate of 1 in 5,000 in 15-17 year olds whereas before the vaccine it would be unmeasurable (less than 1 in 100,000). So that’s a 20X increase which is less than what the Walton study found.
In short, the risks >> non-existent benefits.
It doesn’t add up
How can there be 770 adverse events that are generating CDC safety signals and these studies are claiming that the vaccines are safe?
The New Zealand study is stunning… they only found myo/pericarditis was elevated by 25.6X; the other 11 events studied were insignificant.
They can’t both be right because they are saying different things.
Yet from Josh’s article:
- The CDC analysis shows that the number of serious adverse events reported in less than two years for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is 5.5 times larger than all serious reports for vaccines given to adults in the US since 2009 (~73,000 vs. ~13,000).
It’s a federal crime to make a false VAERS report. There is no benefit to the reporter to make a false VAERS report. And it’s not like the CDC did any kind of VAERS awareness campaign either.
So if the vaccine is as safe as a placebo, how do they explain all the AEs?
Confused? Watch “THE UNSEEN CRISIS” and decide for yourself whether the vaccine is “safe”
This movie is superb. Many of my friends are in it. I’m in it too!
If you are an Epoch Times subscriber, you get to watch the movie for no extra charge. Just go to this link. If you aren’t logged in, you can see the 2 minute preview… I’m featured at the end with a great quote. Use the two buttons in the upper right to login (if you already have an account) or subscribe.
You can also check out the movie’s website:
Try to get your family to watch it.
Someone is lying to you about the safety of the COVID vaccines. This movie can help you decide whether the 99 million patient study is telling you the truth or not.
This movie should be required watching for anyone thinking of getting the COVID vaccine. If you are going to have mandates (which are a bad idea in general), they should mandate people watch the film.
I don’t think anyone can watch the movie and then opt to get the COVID shot.
Summary
Read the paper. Watch the movie. Decide for yourself who is telling you the truth.
And remember: the data used in the study is NOT available to the public.
All my attempts at data transparency have been rejected. The health authorities have determined that you get better public health outcomes if you keep the public in the dark. So all my calls for data transparency fall on deaf ears.
The best “ground truth” data we have is from the New Zealand data leak…and it clearly shows that the vaccine increases mortality. The critics acknowledge I’m right, but say that “it must be due to a confounder.” More on that coming up tomorrow.