Documenting my current position on the COVID shot, including on the question of whether the COVID Shot is a driver of excess mortality, with content adapted from a June 2024 thread on X, plus a few personal notes.
Well said and I think an accurate assessment. This paper https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09246479241292008 describes the mrna "vax" as not a vaccine but a synthetic virus injection, which I think is fair. So in isolation from whether it "worked" or there was anything to "work" against, one should have considered whether they felt comfortable with injecting such a thing, with no idea of titer or distribution within the body. It certainly caused significant harms, but I agree not to the degree espoused by some. Doesn't matter - as you say there was never a legitimate reason to mandate it and coerce acceptance. No one was informed. Many of us suspected much of what we now know to be true and avoided it thankfully. But It's a horrible stain on the already extremely sketchy and wrongly-incented medical industry. It does serve as a convenient distraction from the main crime - the wholesale fraudulent creation of a pandemic with its "rapidly spreading novel deadly virus" and all the attendant authoritarian trespasses associated therewith. Even this morning the WSJ published a limited hangout piece of trash article on the false dichotomy of lab leak vs bat origin. It is so clearly meant to be a distraction from any examination of the aforementioned master crime(s) as to be laughable. While babbling about various "sources" and stupid non-significant events, it deftly maintains that the deadly virus killed millions and was still "raging" in 2021.
I purposely said 'shot' and "injection' because I don't want to wrangle with people about what the "right" term is. It's both of those things, no matter what! :)
The stain on the medical industry is perhaps an "upside" of the events of the past 5 years. Too much faith and latitude had been afforded.
It's probably the case that ALL "vaccines" are risk-additive. So more power to anyone who feels compelled to focus on that. My observation is that MANY of those who do focus on the COVID shot are also convinced a pandemic occurred, etc. - and do not want alternate possibilities debated or discussed. Like I said, COVID shot criticism is "allowed" (since late 2022/early 2023) and very much encouraged. Even if my ideas about WHY that's the case are wrong, it's hard to deny the anti-COVID shot/pro-Next Pandemic view is a privileged and elevated one. There simply aren't many who fight the COVID shot mandates and harms AND question the early events.
Those who lead with "No Virus!!!" tend to be very aggressive and do not engage well around questions of what actually happened (i.e., in NYC, Bergamo) -- and/or suggest 5G, anthrax, etc. but aren't able to apply those ideas to the time series datasets.
Whether what transpired turns out to have been a social or biological experiment. I'm fairly confident it was (as they always are) a distraction on many levels, from some of the questions or topics we should all be talking about.
People can talk about whatever they want to talk about. :-)
That's the blessing (and curse) of social media, right? Curate your topics and interests and (if you're so-motivated), write to persuade and convince others to pay attention to what you're interested in and think is important.
In the end, there will end up being very few people who will stick with the study of the COVID Event in the long term. The same has been true of every historical event. I'm grateful for those who will stick with it in the years to come, regardless of whether that turns out to include me.
After reading this, I had to become a supporting subscriber. I really appreciate that you don't say something without substantial research backing up your assertions. Thank you.
I was so sure the COVID shot caused problems - because I know many people who had "side effects from the vaccine" (which means it's "working") and also two people I know developed serious inflammatory diseases shortly after the vaccine.
What I did not appreciate at the time - or for almost 2 years - is the sheer number of drugs people are on. People are constantly getting flu shots, boosters (for pneumococcal or otherwise), statins, SSRIs, "Ozempic and friends" (recently) or dietary pills, and so on, and so on. Trying to find out the complete set of antagonistic drug interactions from all these pharmaceutical interventions population-wide - on people who take 2, 3, 5, 10 drugs per year - would seem hopelessly confounding: the combinatorics are just too huge. If you want to get more conspiratorial, you can add in the "West Nile Virus / mosquito" spraying campaigns, "supplements", THC/CBD vapes (regular weed is so passe it's gotta be chemically "isolated") and so on.
As I think you have proved (and J. Engler and others RE: Bergamo), it's pretty clear that "mortality" is highly manipulated. What other "health" data is manipulated? Can we really be sure that subscription or "administration" drug data is even accurate at all? Seems like any statistical analysis would be subject to the law of GIGO (garbage-in-garbage-out).
I'm still pretty sure the COVID jabs are bad ............ but how could you really know? A *LOT* of people take a *LOT* of drugs every year.
Like you, it wasn't until more recently that I realized how many drugs people take and use (medications, legalized recreational, and illicit), in addition to injections received.
Is it any wonder the U.S. government and Pharma are fine with letting the COVID shot take the blame/be the focus?
Good point about multiplicity of pharma treatment and unpredictable interactions. I am the only person of my age (60 in a month) that I know who isn't on some long-term treatment of some sort.
Recently, someone I know was looking into becoming a nurse, but it turns out every nursing program in her state requires the mRNA shots. This despite the fact that the shot does not prevent a person from getting or spreading COVID. It makes no logical sense.
Like you, I am not convinced that the covid shot has contributed significantly to excess mortality. Usually, we base our opinions on available "official" data, but with covid, I do not trust any of the published data, one way or another... since everything is based on flawed PCR test reports. Therefore, I have to form an opinion based on inmediate personal observations. During 2020, in the middle of the "pandemic", maybe 2-3 persons I knew were diagnosed with "covid", which is much less than I would expect, since everyone was having PCR tests done in order to do anything (go to work, go to a doctor's office, attend any social activity...). Since 2021, after 98% of people I know became "vaccinated", roughly 1/3 of people I know have been diagnosed with "covid" - either with flu symptoms or asymptomatic. Different from your experience, I have seen an unexpectedly high percentage of people around me (many more than in the past) with strokes, cardiac problems, cancers, shingles, and many other medical problems. Therefore, I tend to think that the covid shot has caused significant harm. Like you, I have not attended more funerals after 2021 than I did before.
I did lose my job of 35 years for refusing to take the shot.
Right - being data-dependent in this mess is a challenge and we've seen precisely why. That said, maybe it's ALWAYS been a problem and we just didn't see it. I could certainly make the case for "flu" and have had some things to say elsewhere about the association between Alzheimer's and the flu shot.
Because I believe the flu shot and other ILI treatments are aggravators of ILI (the former via immunosuppression if nothing else), I have to concur with knowing vaccinated people who seem to keep getting ILI. I think that should be considered an adverse effect - BECAUSE I think it's an adverse effect of the flu shot (one of many) and should've always been recorded as such (vs considered "shot not working for strain - oh well!" But I'm not prepared to call it one if people aren't going to admit it's the same for the flu shot.
You are older (and wiser!) than I, yes? Goes without saying, but s people age, they experience more health problems - and know more people with more health problems. There are so many others stresses and potential medications people could be on that it's still really hard to do.
Losing a job for refusing a shot is horrifying and happened to so many. :( I'm sorry.
They don't need to admit anything - no one and no thing is compelling them to confess to any sins or disclose any truth whatsoever.
As I posed to a friend yesterday, where has the 2-year emphasis on COVID shot harms gotten us? Anywhere? That's not to dismiss the importance of researching and disclosing the harms - or to excuse the perpetrators from lying about the necessarily, safety, and efficacy of the shot. I just don't see that U.S. officials, at least, are worried.
And why should they be? The operation was a success.
Regarding your addendum on covid shots and whether or not they were the driver of excess deaths, I have a few thoughts:
1. Establishing what, if anything in particular, is driving excess is no easy task, and may be nearly impossible.
2. Multiple researchers have looked at the same data and concluded wildly different drivers: covid, covid shot, nocebo, pneumonia, iatrogenic causes, etc.
3. In my humble opinion, no author I've read has proven what has been driving the recent excess. Its mostly bias and hand waving.
4. There were multiple monumental changes around the globe between 2020 and 2023. It's highly unlikely that one thing was the driver.
5. Despite governments and their intense record keeping, it is difficult to impossible to track deaths from pharmaceutical interventions, let alone determine how a new product introduced into the mix might cause excess deaths.
A simple example to amplify the last point is useful:
Suppose a country has a population of 1 million and that the life expectancy is 100 years. In that case, 10k people die every year. Now suppose that 1,000 people (0.1% of population) die every year from the normal flu shot. And suppose further that nobody has made this connection. Now, in such a case, if the covid shot kills 0.1% of the population, and the flu shot was withdrawn during the rollout, then 10% of all deaths in the country in a given year were from the covid shot, and yet properly speaking it did not contribute even one death to the excess category, since normal flu shot deaths were simply replaced with covid shot deaths.
Incidentally, I used the 0.1% figure on purpose- since that was my estimate (that I made already in Dec 2020 after reading the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trial results) of fatalities that would occur during the rollout of the covid shot. And in my town (population 3k), exactly as I expected, 3 people that I knew died within days of getting the shot: 2 that I had talked to just prior to their shot, and they were both in great health. (The one and only funeral director argues that the fatality rate is higher, since deaths doubled after the shot was rolled out here). It (0.1%) is also the fatality rate that I settled on as the minimum rate after much further research. See my article: https://pandata.org/did-side-effects-from-the-covid-shots-cause-any-excess-mortality/
In summary, the covid shot may have killed many millions of people without causing one "excess death."
Regarding your followup piece: I understand your point about potentially exaggerating the covid shot harms. There clearly have been many deaths and injuries as a result, VAERS has a field for detailed description, one is below. There are many others, and they are not easy to read.
But I think it is just as harmful to the truth to say every sudden death or injury is due to the vaccines as it is to say they are safe and effective.
Unfortunately there is no way to know if an adverse reaction is due to the vaccine or is part of the base rate. I’m an example, I’ve had two pulmonary emboli that most definitely was not vaccine related, but if I had taken the vaccine I would have suspected it.
I think my rationale for being cautious about vaccine harms is slightly different than yours - the vaccine approvals and mandates were morally wrong to begin with. That would be true whether the vaccines caused as much harm as they have, or if they had not caused any at all. Coercing competent adults to receive an unwanted invasive procedure is a Nuremberg violation that our medical establishment, government, and employers were all in on. This wasn’t just a few monsters, it was millions of people in the US and many other countries.
Details for VAERS ID: 0921768-1:
"Vaccine received at about 0900 on 01/04/2021 at her place of work, Medical Center, where she was employed as a housekeeper. About one hour after receiving the vaccine she experienced a hot flash, nausea, and feeling like she was going to pass out after she had bent down. Later at about 1500 hours she appeared tired and lethargic, then a short time later, at about 1600 hours, upon arrival to a friends home she complained of feeling hot and having difficulty breathing. She then collapsed, then when medics arrived, she was still breathing slowly then went into cardiac arrest and was unable to be revived."
No, I believe they were morally wrong to begin with, regardless of efficacy and even if they were saline - and fought them (and masks and the March 20220 closures) from the beginning.
But the democidal fraud events masquerading as a disease spread emergency are what made mandates, coercion, etc. possible on a large scale.
People can be anti-mandate and believe there was a pandemic. Indeed, that's MANY, if not most COVID dissidents.
I have not observed that emphasis getting us anywhere except to say that "Next Pandemic" there shouldn't be mandates and closures, etc.
The government lies about death, to its advantage. Calling the bluff on the vaccines without calling the bluff on spring 2020 is a doom loop.
I think I understand your position - that any action for something that wasn’t a problem in the first place is the core issue. Vaccine immorality is downstream of that original wrong.
I think I differ with you in believing the conventional wisdom that there was in fact a novel virus, but the practical effect is the same. The CFR of covid was known with a high level of certainty to be about 0.3% in March 2020, based on the Diamond Princess data, which is about what seasonal flu is every year.
But our leaders turned the world upside down to ‘protect’ us and did nothing but harm. If there had not been a hysterical media, we would have just heard about nursing home patients being taken a few months too soon.
And I may also differ whether this happened out of malice or stupidity. My default assumption is always stupidity but it is plausible there was malicious intent, as with the New York mass casualty event.
But the lesson is the same either way - the people who allowed this to happen, and that includes our neighbors and friends, not just the ones at top - must never be allowed to do this again, for any reason.
We couldn't be further apart in our orientation, but I appreciate you articulating your views because it's helping me prove my point. This will be my last reply in this thread.
I've already addressed the DP claims elsewhere. It was a staged event and John Ioannidis' errors in assumption and calculation provided an IFR for something that was never demonstrated to be causal of illness, let alone unique or additive to risk of death.
Leaders were not trying to protect us; they were protecting themselves and acting in a "coordinated response" to an activated plan. Furthermore, it is NOT their JOB to protect us. Their role and authority is extremely limited. Numerous laws were broken, all three branches of govt failed, "media" abandoned their posts and allowed govt and intelligence agencies to issue them scripts (effectively).
We the People did NOT instantly abandon reason for madness (a la Denethor in LOTR per Gandalf). We abandoned reason for COMFORT and PRETENDED there was a pandemic. Big difference.
You're saying we must not allow the govt to respond in a certain way to a threat.
I'm saying we must not allow them to pretend there's a threat where none exists.
I appreciate your willingness to ask what appear to be crazy questions - how did a novel virus happened to be discovered when one old guy died after a cruise? And of course, why did so many people die in NYC but nowhere else in the US?
I believe more debate is good, and asking these question is important.
My understanding of the covid shots is similar to yours. It would have been unethical to have coerced people to have gotten the shot even if it was just salt water, let alone some substance that had never been successfully used on humans before.
It’s also unlikely that vaccines account for much excess mortality. VAERS shows over 19,000 deaths related to the covid vaccines; some of the reports are coincidences but many others are never reported. The total includes about four years of data, and about 2.5 million people die in the US each year, or about 10 million in four years. Each vaccine death is a tragedy, but only a very small part of the excess deaths since 2020.
Using the Human Mortality Database (https://mpidr.shinyapps.io/stmortality/) I get 1.3 million excess deaths from 2021-2024 YTD relative to 2019. Taking the VAERS deaths at face value, they would account for only 1.4% of the excess.
What I cannot begin to understand is why so many otherwise good people, both in medicine and elsewhere, became enthusiastic Nuremberg criminals. Why was it so important to them that I get injected that they wanted to keep me from work or travel or shopping if I didn’t?
It obviously wasn’t about health, mine or theirs. My only hypothesis is that there is more than a little Dr Mengele in some of us.
You've captured a key point I'm making, which is a statistical one - regarding the COVID shot being a primary DRIVER of EXCESS.
I have not delved into VAERS but I do have concerns about the effect of various social-psychological forces on the propensity to attributed adverse effects and deaths to the COVID shot, i.e., a nocebo effect. As you say, even taking it at face value, we are talking a low proportion. On the stats front, there's no way of knowing how many of those people were 'scheduled'/likely to die regardless (which is NOT to dismiss or deny the harms or role of the shot).
Regarding why it was important to others that you get injected, I would still chalk it up to fear and anxiety largely induced by govt/public health/media messaging. People believed that unvaccinated people "transmitted" the virus AND that higher vaccination rates would lead to their officials giving the "all clear" and restoring normal life.
As to our fallen human nature, Jeremiah said it best: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?" (Jer 17:9)
I’ve heard others say the same about why we all needed to get vaccinated - “to get back to normal” - and while that is their stated belief, I see their ‘reasoning’ as much darker. I believe covid was an excuse to form ‘us’ vs ‘them’ groups, where the group wearing masks and getting vaccinated was ‘good’ and the ones who didn’t were ‘bad’.
And the ‘bad’ group was very bad, and needed to be excluded from society.
I don’t want to break Godwin’s law and evoke the Holocaust, but treating one group of people as unclean and diseased is how it got started. This is very, very dangerous territory.
As for VAERS, I’d never heard of it until a few years ago, and I suspect few others did either. I taught myself how to query the database and have some understanding of its strengths and weaknesses, but I believe the key point is completely non-technical: In 30 years, about 2000 deaths were reported for ALL vaccines in the US. There were that many deaths after FOUR MONTHS for the covid shots.
So what should have been a massive safety signal was entirely ignored by the FDA, which kept calling the shots ’safe and effective’.
I'm recalling the zeitgeist and how many people around me were thinking of it - including people who were anti-mandate and not necessarily Covidians - especially Moms who did it because they thought it would get normal back for their kids. So I do NOT think a majority necessarily adopted an "Us" v "Them"
That said, such thinking was absolutely in the messaging and was adopted by media and the Left in particular. Smattering of examples:
--"Pandemic of the Unvaccinated"
--Biden's winter of severe illness and death announcement
I agree that, no matter what, the COVID shot didn't "perform" as promised or claimed, which was clear from the trials.
Safety signals as reported in VAERS were absolutely ignored and minimized. I would add that decades of vaccine harms have been very likely UNDERREPORTED and should be kept in mind when citing historic comparisons. Related to that and to my hypothesis about the flu shot:
Yes, I think it is fair to say that hatred of the unvaccinated was not a majority opinion and that most people sincerely believed that doing so would make the world normal again.
I can’t say if politicians like Biden, Pritzker, etc themselves despised the unvaccinated - I suspect they did, but can’t prove it - or if they were just in their own authoritarian way trying to ‘help’.
I’m not forgiving the ‘get back to normal’ people, however. They engaged in sloppy, magical thinking, and confused ‘rights’ and ‘freedom’ with permission. The unvaccinated did not force their children to stay home or wear masks, the politicians and bureaucrats did.
As before, Jessica, I agree almost 100% with your position. I reached the same conclusion by observing the available information with common sense, and applying long-standing principles used for decades in the field of medicine and public health. Your arguments are stronger than mine, because you have put a lot of work into checking these data in great detail.
A personal note related to the second bullet on your Personal Notes. As you say, our objection to all these mandates is religious. It does not require that we belong to any organized church. It has to do with who has authority.
Correct re: religious arguments - no church/hour of worship membership or affiliated required. I could also make the case with the Old Testament (Hebrew bible) alone.
I believe we are designed by God and born free with unalienable rights, derived from His ultimate authority over Creation. We are stewards of our own bodies with very limited authority over the bodies of others. Scripture is not unclear about that, so it is deeply troubling that many religious leads and institutions completely missed, ignored, or rejected the critical underlying questions facing them in March 2020.
The arguments to be made regarding authority over the body can also be made without explicit reference to Scripture and based on fundamental rights that Humanists can embrace.
Dear Ms. Hockett, Thank you for telling me what you think. I've read your posts for years now, i know alot about what you think. But yesterday's post hit me differently: by the end of the post, you really DID tell me what you think and how you come to think it. This may sound weird, but I was at a loss for words to comment. WOW you have alot of Input to process, and you obviously keep track AND follow-up (something that is woefully missing today). Every point you mentioned was like an individual strand when all taken together form a braided rope (visual).
You made me realized that you have a tremendous amount of information to process, and you do so while keeping your objectivity. That became apparent when you said how can you trust the covid vax "number of deaths" when you can't trust the number of Covid deaths? (Paraphrased). So true. By titling your piece yesterday, "What do I think..." you disarmed the reader who likes to argue, who can argue with an OPINION? (yes, many make their living..) Thanks again for this "Behind the Scenes" edition.
Now that I have processed your thoughts, you have made ME think about what you think. And methinks that the covid op is still On. Where are the Names and Dates of death? This should be so simple. Thanks again, and keep up your great work.
Regarding your point #1 (you distrust ACM data), a recent study looked at all 4.64 million people in Norway (over age 18) to evaluate excess deaths during the rollout of the covid shots. The study can be found here:
1. "There was a higher proportion of individuals with a risk condition among those vaccinated compared to those left unvaccinated through the study period."
2. "Vaccinated individuals were on average older than unvaccinated individuals."
3. "In all age groups, the rate of death was lowest among those that were fully vaccinated and highest among those that were unvaccinated."
The "risk conditions" include: kidney disease, liver disease, diabetes, obesity, chronic lung disease, blood cancer, immunodeficiency, cardiovascular disease, stroke, dementia, and other cancers.
The study assets that during the study period (2021 - 2023) only 6,015 Norwegians died of covid. That's a small percentage of all deaths (132,963).
In other words, the study found that the younger, healthier Norwegians that refused the covid shot had a higher chance of dying (of any cause) than the older, sicker people that took the shot.
Put more bluntly, the authors are suggesting that despite covid killing almost nobody, the mRNA shots saves almost everyone from normal deaths, but those that refuse this miracle drug are now causing all the excess deaths on account of their increased likelihood of dying, despite being generally younger and healthier.
As it is both impossible and implausible for a shot supposedly designed to prevent deaths from covid to miraculously prevent deaths from things such as cancer and diabetes, and since covid was killing so few (by their own admission), and since covid was not killing anyone under 45, it follows that either:
1. The ACM data is corrupt, (and so the study meaningless), or
2. Some very dark and undisclosed factor has been killing off the unvaxxed in Norway at alarming rates.
Sadly, the authors of this study missed this glaringly obvious conclusion, and so failed to call for an immediate and urgent inquiry into why younger, healthier Norwegians are dying at such alarming rates. Even more sadly, they instead concluded the covid shots were safe and effective.
Thanks. I had not seen this study or Ben's analysis. Great example of the "hot mess" these studies usually are.
I believe ACM is unreliable and corrupted in many places worldwide, and I have also said I believe contaminated/super-charged illegal drug supplies are responsible for poisoning deaths among younger adults, so my reaction to your propositions is "why not both?" :)
The outcome was all-cause death but I don't see that the authors excluded those who died from external causes (homicide, accidents of any kind, drug/alcohol poisoning), do you? My guess is that the younger group excess is comprised largely of external causes. Failing to disaggregate or remove those deaths is an error.
The authors say two things that may be relevant to younger adults in particular:
"Apart from those subject to erroneous reporting, the only vaccines not captured are vaccines received abroad and not reported to Norwegian health care personnel."
"It is probably more likely that some people in the unvaccinated group are misclassified as not belonging to a risk group, due to causes for low healthcare seeking behavior such as a refugee background or low socioeconomic status."
I wonder what % of the younger adult deaths were newer arrivals to Norway. Is it possible there were more younger adults who were vaccinated but are classified as unvaccinated?
Finally, researchers and public officials failing to call for inquiry into younger deaths is par for the "pandemic" course. To date, very few people seem bothered by the nearly 200% increase in working-adult deaths in NYC, most of which were blamed on COVID-19. https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/timeline-the-young-and-healthy-are
(I know you know this having been lead on this paper - just stating for audience.) :)
As you correctly point out, "both" is certainly an option.
In hindsight, a 3rd option would be that the ACM data is correct, but the vaxx data is corrupt.
It seems fairly certain that the authors included deaths from external causes in their analysis.
I had noticed their claim about refugees and low socioeconomic status, but dismissed it. Here in Canada, every recent immigrant that I've met (which is a substantial number - 50% of current Canadians were born outside of this country) is doing well financially. I'd be surprised if a place like Norway was much different.
All that said, it's also possible that the ACM data, and the vaxx data are both correct, in which case the study has inadvertently uncovered some ethnically or culturally related life-expectancy ratio that is reflected in (but not dependent on) vaccination choices.
Either way, it's a disgrace that these authors didn't call for an inquiry into the issue. But, as you say, that's par for the covid course.
Very well said overall. The point of disagreement I have is with the number of injuries and deaths that occurred from the shots. Of course this will never be fully known with all the machinations of the medical/corporate/censorship industrial complex, but from looking at this daily since summer of 2021, I have seen many people who were seriously harmed or died in proximity to getting the shot, and lots of people with serious health issues who got the shots.
One can read "Cause Unknown" by Ed Dowd or the Pfizer papers book by Naomi Wolff or the work of Dr. James Thorp, or the recently taken down "Real but Rare".
I had plenty of time on my hands for two years while I was excluded by shot apartheid from working, and there were a massive number of reports on telegram channels like "mRNA death toll" and the unfortunately deleted covidblog.com (seems overwhelmingly likely he, Brian Wilkins, was offed for doing this work), and others. The shots seemed to be particularly lethal in 2021 and 2022; maybe they have reduced the toxicity a bit. At this point a lot of the slow-kill reactions seem highly likely with a lot of heart ablations, turbo cancers, sudden deaths, a lot of people with dementia and shaking disorders, etc, that I have observed personally and seen reports of.
In any event, I stand firm that we don't have to prove the shots caused this or that harm, they have to prove the shots did NOT cause these harms and this they can't do.
First things first: Governments around the world should have to substantiate their ACM curves.
I actually DON'T think they have to prove the shots did not cause those harms. As I said, it is impossible to detangle alongside other factors and cannot be disentangled.
The government has to prove a threat existed and a shot was needed. They can't do it. Everything that followed is necessarily criminal and I can rest my case.
Finally, you said "the number of injuries and deaths that occurred from the shots" is a point of disagreement. I did not give a precise number. I intentionally said "millions" - which could be 1,000,000 to 999,999,999
1) Fake pandemic fake virus fake jabs. With all the psyop fakery, they measuring voodoo effects. And Milgram Experiments for the social engineers to learn from.
2) No such thing as "RNA injections". Basically, all the talk about "RNA jabs" and "spike proteins" is an IQ test. It's all psyops.
3) A major objective of CovidHoax was the global genome harvest, thieving all the DNA sequences from the people, right under their noses -
"During COVID19 and other viral pandemics, rapid generation of host and pathogen genomic data is critical to tracking infection and informing therapies. There is an urgent need for efficient approaches to this data generation at scale. We have developed a scalable, high throughput approach to generate high fidelity low pass whole genome and HLA sequencing, viral genomes, and representation of human transcriptome from single nasopharyngeal swabs of COVID19 patients."
High-throughput SARS-CoV-2 and host genome sequencing from single nasopharyngeal swabs
4) All your personal data - digital online, offline behaviors, vocations & social connections, facial physiognomies & other biometrics - all gets fed to the Ai Machine to be crunched together with the personal genome sequences pilfered via the CovidHoax nose swabbings, among other sources. All The Nations are in on the scam. Maybe to improve humanity (while making Silicon Valley even more powerful). Even the wars today are mostly fake.
5) CovidHoax teaches the people that doctors are weirder than they thought. People taking more initiative to preserve their health.
6) Aliens flying around over New Jersey has NOTHING to do with CovidHoax.
5) There's weirdness in every profession. Some professions - doctors among them - are especially well-suited to certain kinds of conditioning because it's comprised of many individuals who are good rule-followers and have been rewarded for doing what they are told to do.
6) NJ - from Hamilton the Musical
[HAMILTON] Where is this happening?
[PHILIP] Across the river, in Jersey
[HAMILTON & PHILIP] Everything is legal in New Jersey
Well said and I think an accurate assessment. This paper https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/09246479241292008 describes the mrna "vax" as not a vaccine but a synthetic virus injection, which I think is fair. So in isolation from whether it "worked" or there was anything to "work" against, one should have considered whether they felt comfortable with injecting such a thing, with no idea of titer or distribution within the body. It certainly caused significant harms, but I agree not to the degree espoused by some. Doesn't matter - as you say there was never a legitimate reason to mandate it and coerce acceptance. No one was informed. Many of us suspected much of what we now know to be true and avoided it thankfully. But It's a horrible stain on the already extremely sketchy and wrongly-incented medical industry. It does serve as a convenient distraction from the main crime - the wholesale fraudulent creation of a pandemic with its "rapidly spreading novel deadly virus" and all the attendant authoritarian trespasses associated therewith. Even this morning the WSJ published a limited hangout piece of trash article on the false dichotomy of lab leak vs bat origin. It is so clearly meant to be a distraction from any examination of the aforementioned master crime(s) as to be laughable. While babbling about various "sources" and stupid non-significant events, it deftly maintains that the deadly virus killed millions and was still "raging" in 2021.
That paper looks good. Will read, thanks.
I purposely said 'shot' and "injection' because I don't want to wrangle with people about what the "right" term is. It's both of those things, no matter what! :)
The stain on the medical industry is perhaps an "upside" of the events of the past 5 years. Too much faith and latitude had been afforded.
It's probably the case that ALL "vaccines" are risk-additive. So more power to anyone who feels compelled to focus on that. My observation is that MANY of those who do focus on the COVID shot are also convinced a pandemic occurred, etc. - and do not want alternate possibilities debated or discussed. Like I said, COVID shot criticism is "allowed" (since late 2022/early 2023) and very much encouraged. Even if my ideas about WHY that's the case are wrong, it's hard to deny the anti-COVID shot/pro-Next Pandemic view is a privileged and elevated one. There simply aren't many who fight the COVID shot mandates and harms AND question the early events.
Those who lead with "No Virus!!!" tend to be very aggressive and do not engage well around questions of what actually happened (i.e., in NYC, Bergamo) -- and/or suggest 5G, anthrax, etc. but aren't able to apply those ideas to the time series datasets.
Yes, I saw the WSJ piece and posted a related thread: https://x.com/JAHockett76/status/1872341092873449724
Whether what transpired turns out to have been a social or biological experiment. I'm fairly confident it was (as they always are) a distraction on many levels, from some of the questions or topics we should all be talking about.
People can talk about whatever they want to talk about. :-)
That's the blessing (and curse) of social media, right? Curate your topics and interests and (if you're so-motivated), write to persuade and convince others to pay attention to what you're interested in and think is important.
In the end, there will end up being very few people who will stick with the study of the COVID Event in the long term. The same has been true of every historical event. I'm grateful for those who will stick with it in the years to come, regardless of whether that turns out to include me.
After reading this, I had to become a supporting subscriber. I really appreciate that you don't say something without substantial research backing up your assertions. Thank you.
That's very kind, thank you and you're welcome
I was so sure the COVID shot caused problems - because I know many people who had "side effects from the vaccine" (which means it's "working") and also two people I know developed serious inflammatory diseases shortly after the vaccine.
What I did not appreciate at the time - or for almost 2 years - is the sheer number of drugs people are on. People are constantly getting flu shots, boosters (for pneumococcal or otherwise), statins, SSRIs, "Ozempic and friends" (recently) or dietary pills, and so on, and so on. Trying to find out the complete set of antagonistic drug interactions from all these pharmaceutical interventions population-wide - on people who take 2, 3, 5, 10 drugs per year - would seem hopelessly confounding: the combinatorics are just too huge. If you want to get more conspiratorial, you can add in the "West Nile Virus / mosquito" spraying campaigns, "supplements", THC/CBD vapes (regular weed is so passe it's gotta be chemically "isolated") and so on.
As I think you have proved (and J. Engler and others RE: Bergamo), it's pretty clear that "mortality" is highly manipulated. What other "health" data is manipulated? Can we really be sure that subscription or "administration" drug data is even accurate at all? Seems like any statistical analysis would be subject to the law of GIGO (garbage-in-garbage-out).
I'm still pretty sure the COVID jabs are bad ............ but how could you really know? A *LOT* of people take a *LOT* of drugs every year.
Like you, it wasn't until more recently that I realized how many drugs people take and use (medications, legalized recreational, and illicit), in addition to injections received.
Is it any wonder the U.S. government and Pharma are fine with letting the COVID shot take the blame/be the focus?
Good point about multiplicity of pharma treatment and unpredictable interactions. I am the only person of my age (60 in a month) that I know who isn't on some long-term treatment of some sort.
I did touch on this here......
https://sanityunleashed.substack.com/p/the-economist-a-marketing-arm-of
Recently, someone I know was looking into becoming a nurse, but it turns out every nursing program in her state requires the mRNA shots. This despite the fact that the shot does not prevent a person from getting or spreading COVID. It makes no logical sense.
Flu shot probably too https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/how-many-americans-are-mandated-to
Like you, I am not convinced that the covid shot has contributed significantly to excess mortality. Usually, we base our opinions on available "official" data, but with covid, I do not trust any of the published data, one way or another... since everything is based on flawed PCR test reports. Therefore, I have to form an opinion based on inmediate personal observations. During 2020, in the middle of the "pandemic", maybe 2-3 persons I knew were diagnosed with "covid", which is much less than I would expect, since everyone was having PCR tests done in order to do anything (go to work, go to a doctor's office, attend any social activity...). Since 2021, after 98% of people I know became "vaccinated", roughly 1/3 of people I know have been diagnosed with "covid" - either with flu symptoms or asymptomatic. Different from your experience, I have seen an unexpectedly high percentage of people around me (many more than in the past) with strokes, cardiac problems, cancers, shingles, and many other medical problems. Therefore, I tend to think that the covid shot has caused significant harm. Like you, I have not attended more funerals after 2021 than I did before.
I did lose my job of 35 years for refusing to take the shot.
Right - being data-dependent in this mess is a challenge and we've seen precisely why. That said, maybe it's ALWAYS been a problem and we just didn't see it. I could certainly make the case for "flu" and have had some things to say elsewhere about the association between Alzheimer's and the flu shot.
Because I believe the flu shot and other ILI treatments are aggravators of ILI (the former via immunosuppression if nothing else), I have to concur with knowing vaccinated people who seem to keep getting ILI. I think that should be considered an adverse effect - BECAUSE I think it's an adverse effect of the flu shot (one of many) and should've always been recorded as such (vs considered "shot not working for strain - oh well!" But I'm not prepared to call it one if people aren't going to admit it's the same for the flu shot.
You are older (and wiser!) than I, yes? Goes without saying, but s people age, they experience more health problems - and know more people with more health problems. There are so many others stresses and potential medications people could be on that it's still really hard to do.
Losing a job for refusing a shot is horrifying and happened to so many. :( I'm sorry.
Excellent as usual. I'm pretty sure no one will ever admit anything, especially related to the so-called vaccine.
Thank you!
They don't need to admit anything - no one and no thing is compelling them to confess to any sins or disclose any truth whatsoever.
As I posed to a friend yesterday, where has the 2-year emphasis on COVID shot harms gotten us? Anywhere? That's not to dismiss the importance of researching and disclosing the harms - or to excuse the perpetrators from lying about the necessarily, safety, and efficacy of the shot. I just don't see that U.S. officials, at least, are worried.
And why should they be? The operation was a success.
Regarding your addendum on covid shots and whether or not they were the driver of excess deaths, I have a few thoughts:
1. Establishing what, if anything in particular, is driving excess is no easy task, and may be nearly impossible.
2. Multiple researchers have looked at the same data and concluded wildly different drivers: covid, covid shot, nocebo, pneumonia, iatrogenic causes, etc.
3. In my humble opinion, no author I've read has proven what has been driving the recent excess. Its mostly bias and hand waving.
4. There were multiple monumental changes around the globe between 2020 and 2023. It's highly unlikely that one thing was the driver.
5. Despite governments and their intense record keeping, it is difficult to impossible to track deaths from pharmaceutical interventions, let alone determine how a new product introduced into the mix might cause excess deaths.
A simple example to amplify the last point is useful:
Suppose a country has a population of 1 million and that the life expectancy is 100 years. In that case, 10k people die every year. Now suppose that 1,000 people (0.1% of population) die every year from the normal flu shot. And suppose further that nobody has made this connection. Now, in such a case, if the covid shot kills 0.1% of the population, and the flu shot was withdrawn during the rollout, then 10% of all deaths in the country in a given year were from the covid shot, and yet properly speaking it did not contribute even one death to the excess category, since normal flu shot deaths were simply replaced with covid shot deaths.
Incidentally, I used the 0.1% figure on purpose- since that was my estimate (that I made already in Dec 2020 after reading the Pfizer and Moderna clinical trial results) of fatalities that would occur during the rollout of the covid shot. And in my town (population 3k), exactly as I expected, 3 people that I knew died within days of getting the shot: 2 that I had talked to just prior to their shot, and they were both in great health. (The one and only funeral director argues that the fatality rate is higher, since deaths doubled after the shot was rolled out here). It (0.1%) is also the fatality rate that I settled on as the minimum rate after much further research. See my article: https://pandata.org/did-side-effects-from-the-covid-shots-cause-any-excess-mortality/
In summary, the covid shot may have killed many millions of people without causing one "excess death."
1. It's impossible - if not foolish - to do on global scale and should really only be done on a local level.
2. Yes. Their different conclusions are attributable to a) their methods and b) their hurbris
3. "The recent excess" where? See point 1. Fool's errand. Must be local.
4. Correct. Each wave in each place could also have different drivers. See point 1. Spring 2020 is the purest timeframe to analyze.
5. Assumptions about government record-keeping in the past and digital age should be re-examined. Agreed about pharma interventions.
Your example is illustrative of (what I call) displacement.
Summary statement is precisely my bigger point. Well-captured, thank you.
Regarding your followup piece: I understand your point about potentially exaggerating the covid shot harms. There clearly have been many deaths and injuries as a result, VAERS has a field for detailed description, one is below. There are many others, and they are not easy to read.
But I think it is just as harmful to the truth to say every sudden death or injury is due to the vaccines as it is to say they are safe and effective.
Unfortunately there is no way to know if an adverse reaction is due to the vaccine or is part of the base rate. I’m an example, I’ve had two pulmonary emboli that most definitely was not vaccine related, but if I had taken the vaccine I would have suspected it.
I think my rationale for being cautious about vaccine harms is slightly different than yours - the vaccine approvals and mandates were morally wrong to begin with. That would be true whether the vaccines caused as much harm as they have, or if they had not caused any at all. Coercing competent adults to receive an unwanted invasive procedure is a Nuremberg violation that our medical establishment, government, and employers were all in on. This wasn’t just a few monsters, it was millions of people in the US and many other countries.
Details for VAERS ID: 0921768-1:
"Vaccine received at about 0900 on 01/04/2021 at her place of work, Medical Center, where she was employed as a housekeeper. About one hour after receiving the vaccine she experienced a hot flash, nausea, and feeling like she was going to pass out after she had bent down. Later at about 1500 hours she appeared tired and lethargic, then a short time later, at about 1600 hours, upon arrival to a friends home she complained of feeling hot and having difficulty breathing. She then collapsed, then when medics arrived, she was still breathing slowly then went into cardiac arrest and was unable to be revived."
No, I believe they were morally wrong to begin with, regardless of efficacy and even if they were saline - and fought them (and masks and the March 20220 closures) from the beginning.
But the democidal fraud events masquerading as a disease spread emergency are what made mandates, coercion, etc. possible on a large scale.
People can be anti-mandate and believe there was a pandemic. Indeed, that's MANY, if not most COVID dissidents.
I have not observed that emphasis getting us anywhere except to say that "Next Pandemic" there shouldn't be mandates and closures, etc.
The government lies about death, to its advantage. Calling the bluff on the vaccines without calling the bluff on spring 2020 is a doom loop.
I think I understand your position - that any action for something that wasn’t a problem in the first place is the core issue. Vaccine immorality is downstream of that original wrong.
I think I differ with you in believing the conventional wisdom that there was in fact a novel virus, but the practical effect is the same. The CFR of covid was known with a high level of certainty to be about 0.3% in March 2020, based on the Diamond Princess data, which is about what seasonal flu is every year.
But our leaders turned the world upside down to ‘protect’ us and did nothing but harm. If there had not been a hysterical media, we would have just heard about nursing home patients being taken a few months too soon.
And I may also differ whether this happened out of malice or stupidity. My default assumption is always stupidity but it is plausible there was malicious intent, as with the New York mass casualty event.
But the lesson is the same either way - the people who allowed this to happen, and that includes our neighbors and friends, not just the ones at top - must never be allowed to do this again, for any reason.
We couldn't be further apart in our orientation, but I appreciate you articulating your views because it's helping me prove my point. This will be my last reply in this thread.
What you call "conventional wisdom" I call "the core lie" that needs to be confronted by "the most basic question." https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/the-most-basic-question. There either was or was not a threat presented by a spreading coronavirus. No middle ground there. This is why the origin DOES matter and those who say it does not are misguided. https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/do-the-origins-of-sars-cov-2-matter
I've already addressed the DP claims elsewhere. It was a staged event and John Ioannidis' errors in assumption and calculation provided an IFR for something that was never demonstrated to be causal of illness, let alone unique or additive to risk of death.
Leaders were not trying to protect us; they were protecting themselves and acting in a "coordinated response" to an activated plan. Furthermore, it is NOT their JOB to protect us. Their role and authority is extremely limited. Numerous laws were broken, all three branches of govt failed, "media" abandoned their posts and allowed govt and intelligence agencies to issue them scripts (effectively).
We the People did NOT instantly abandon reason for madness (a la Denethor in LOTR per Gandalf). We abandoned reason for COMFORT and PRETENDED there was a pandemic. Big difference.
You're saying we must not allow the govt to respond in a certain way to a threat.
I'm saying we must not allow them to pretend there's a threat where none exists.
I appreciate your willingness to ask what appear to be crazy questions - how did a novel virus happened to be discovered when one old guy died after a cruise? And of course, why did so many people die in NYC but nowhere else in the US?
I believe more debate is good, and asking these question is important.
My understanding of the covid shots is similar to yours. It would have been unethical to have coerced people to have gotten the shot even if it was just salt water, let alone some substance that had never been successfully used on humans before.
It’s also unlikely that vaccines account for much excess mortality. VAERS shows over 19,000 deaths related to the covid vaccines; some of the reports are coincidences but many others are never reported. The total includes about four years of data, and about 2.5 million people die in the US each year, or about 10 million in four years. Each vaccine death is a tragedy, but only a very small part of the excess deaths since 2020.
Using the Human Mortality Database (https://mpidr.shinyapps.io/stmortality/) I get 1.3 million excess deaths from 2021-2024 YTD relative to 2019. Taking the VAERS deaths at face value, they would account for only 1.4% of the excess.
What I cannot begin to understand is why so many otherwise good people, both in medicine and elsewhere, became enthusiastic Nuremberg criminals. Why was it so important to them that I get injected that they wanted to keep me from work or travel or shopping if I didn’t?
It obviously wasn’t about health, mine or theirs. My only hypothesis is that there is more than a little Dr Mengele in some of us.
You've captured a key point I'm making, which is a statistical one - regarding the COVID shot being a primary DRIVER of EXCESS.
I have not delved into VAERS but I do have concerns about the effect of various social-psychological forces on the propensity to attributed adverse effects and deaths to the COVID shot, i.e., a nocebo effect. As you say, even taking it at face value, we are talking a low proportion. On the stats front, there's no way of knowing how many of those people were 'scheduled'/likely to die regardless (which is NOT to dismiss or deny the harms or role of the shot).
Regarding why it was important to others that you get injected, I would still chalk it up to fear and anxiety largely induced by govt/public health/media messaging. People believed that unvaccinated people "transmitted" the virus AND that higher vaccination rates would lead to their officials giving the "all clear" and restoring normal life.
As to our fallen human nature, Jeremiah said it best: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?" (Jer 17:9)
I’ve heard others say the same about why we all needed to get vaccinated - “to get back to normal” - and while that is their stated belief, I see their ‘reasoning’ as much darker. I believe covid was an excuse to form ‘us’ vs ‘them’ groups, where the group wearing masks and getting vaccinated was ‘good’ and the ones who didn’t were ‘bad’.
And the ‘bad’ group was very bad, and needed to be excluded from society.
I don’t want to break Godwin’s law and evoke the Holocaust, but treating one group of people as unclean and diseased is how it got started. This is very, very dangerous territory.
As for VAERS, I’d never heard of it until a few years ago, and I suspect few others did either. I taught myself how to query the database and have some understanding of its strengths and weaknesses, but I believe the key point is completely non-technical: In 30 years, about 2000 deaths were reported for ALL vaccines in the US. There were that many deaths after FOUR MONTHS for the covid shots.
So what should have been a massive safety signal was entirely ignored by the FDA, which kept calling the shots ’safe and effective’.
I'm recalling the zeitgeist and how many people around me were thinking of it - including people who were anti-mandate and not necessarily Covidians - especially Moms who did it because they thought it would get normal back for their kids. So I do NOT think a majority necessarily adopted an "Us" v "Them"
That said, such thinking was absolutely in the messaging and was adopted by media and the Left in particular. Smattering of examples:
--"Pandemic of the Unvaccinated"
--Biden's winter of severe illness and death announcement
--JB Pritzker's "the enemy is you" with non-maskers https://x.com/GovPritzker/status/1286013170033872899?s=20&t=7_6fsZNViPMMOH4Rm0vLAA
--Lori Lightfoot's "inconvenient by design" https://x.com/ITGuy1959/status/1564079094744088583
Agreed that the Unclean/Clean was the genesis of the Holocaust (and many other atrocities across time and place). See related Note and link. Strongly recommend the book: https://substack.com/@jessicahockett/note/c-77678612?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=jjay2
I agree that, no matter what, the COVID shot didn't "perform" as promised or claimed, which was clear from the trials.
Safety signals as reported in VAERS were absolutely ignored and minimized. I would add that decades of vaccine harms have been very likely UNDERREPORTED and should be kept in mind when citing historic comparisons. Related to that and to my hypothesis about the flu shot:
https://x.com/DrGooglybean/status/1856895771611644095
https://x.com/DrGooglybean/status/1839758984124793184
Yes, I think it is fair to say that hatred of the unvaccinated was not a majority opinion and that most people sincerely believed that doing so would make the world normal again.
I can’t say if politicians like Biden, Pritzker, etc themselves despised the unvaccinated - I suspect they did, but can’t prove it - or if they were just in their own authoritarian way trying to ‘help’.
I’m not forgiving the ‘get back to normal’ people, however. They engaged in sloppy, magical thinking, and confused ‘rights’ and ‘freedom’ with permission. The unvaccinated did not force their children to stay home or wear masks, the politicians and bureaucrats did.
As before, Jessica, I agree almost 100% with your position. I reached the same conclusion by observing the available information with common sense, and applying long-standing principles used for decades in the field of medicine and public health. Your arguments are stronger than mine, because you have put a lot of work into checking these data in great detail.
A personal note related to the second bullet on your Personal Notes. As you say, our objection to all these mandates is religious. It does not require that we belong to any organized church. It has to do with who has authority.
Correct re: religious arguments - no church/hour of worship membership or affiliated required. I could also make the case with the Old Testament (Hebrew bible) alone.
I believe we are designed by God and born free with unalienable rights, derived from His ultimate authority over Creation. We are stewards of our own bodies with very limited authority over the bodies of others. Scripture is not unclear about that, so it is deeply troubling that many religious leads and institutions completely missed, ignored, or rejected the critical underlying questions facing them in March 2020.
The arguments to be made regarding authority over the body can also be made without explicit reference to Scripture and based on fundamental rights that Humanists can embrace.
Dear Ms. Hockett, Thank you for telling me what you think. I've read your posts for years now, i know alot about what you think. But yesterday's post hit me differently: by the end of the post, you really DID tell me what you think and how you come to think it. This may sound weird, but I was at a loss for words to comment. WOW you have alot of Input to process, and you obviously keep track AND follow-up (something that is woefully missing today). Every point you mentioned was like an individual strand when all taken together form a braided rope (visual).
You made me realized that you have a tremendous amount of information to process, and you do so while keeping your objectivity. That became apparent when you said how can you trust the covid vax "number of deaths" when you can't trust the number of Covid deaths? (Paraphrased). So true. By titling your piece yesterday, "What do I think..." you disarmed the reader who likes to argue, who can argue with an OPINION? (yes, many make their living..) Thanks again for this "Behind the Scenes" edition.
Now that I have processed your thoughts, you have made ME think about what you think. And methinks that the covid op is still On. Where are the Names and Dates of death? This should be so simple. Thanks again, and keep up your great work.
Regarding your point #1 (you distrust ACM data), a recent study looked at all 4.64 million people in Norway (over age 18) to evaluate excess deaths during the rollout of the covid shots. The study can be found here:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.12.15.24319058v1.full-text
The study was brought to my attention by Ben:
https://www.usmortality.com/p/norwegian-all-cause-vaccination-study
The study claims to have found the following:
1. "There was a higher proportion of individuals with a risk condition among those vaccinated compared to those left unvaccinated through the study period."
2. "Vaccinated individuals were on average older than unvaccinated individuals."
3. "In all age groups, the rate of death was lowest among those that were fully vaccinated and highest among those that were unvaccinated."
The "risk conditions" include: kidney disease, liver disease, diabetes, obesity, chronic lung disease, blood cancer, immunodeficiency, cardiovascular disease, stroke, dementia, and other cancers.
The study assets that during the study period (2021 - 2023) only 6,015 Norwegians died of covid. That's a small percentage of all deaths (132,963).
In other words, the study found that the younger, healthier Norwegians that refused the covid shot had a higher chance of dying (of any cause) than the older, sicker people that took the shot.
Put more bluntly, the authors are suggesting that despite covid killing almost nobody, the mRNA shots saves almost everyone from normal deaths, but those that refuse this miracle drug are now causing all the excess deaths on account of their increased likelihood of dying, despite being generally younger and healthier.
As it is both impossible and implausible for a shot supposedly designed to prevent deaths from covid to miraculously prevent deaths from things such as cancer and diabetes, and since covid was killing so few (by their own admission), and since covid was not killing anyone under 45, it follows that either:
1. The ACM data is corrupt, (and so the study meaningless), or
2. Some very dark and undisclosed factor has been killing off the unvaxxed in Norway at alarming rates.
Sadly, the authors of this study missed this glaringly obvious conclusion, and so failed to call for an immediate and urgent inquiry into why younger, healthier Norwegians are dying at such alarming rates. Even more sadly, they instead concluded the covid shots were safe and effective.
Thanks. I had not seen this study or Ben's analysis. Great example of the "hot mess" these studies usually are.
I believe ACM is unreliable and corrupted in many places worldwide, and I have also said I believe contaminated/super-charged illegal drug supplies are responsible for poisoning deaths among younger adults, so my reaction to your propositions is "why not both?" :)
The outcome was all-cause death but I don't see that the authors excluded those who died from external causes (homicide, accidents of any kind, drug/alcohol poisoning), do you? My guess is that the younger group excess is comprised largely of external causes. Failing to disaggregate or remove those deaths is an error.
The authors say two things that may be relevant to younger adults in particular:
"Apart from those subject to erroneous reporting, the only vaccines not captured are vaccines received abroad and not reported to Norwegian health care personnel."
"It is probably more likely that some people in the unvaccinated group are misclassified as not belonging to a risk group, due to causes for low healthcare seeking behavior such as a refugee background or low socioeconomic status."
I wonder what % of the younger adult deaths were newer arrivals to Norway. Is it possible there were more younger adults who were vaccinated but are classified as unvaccinated?
Finally, researchers and public officials failing to call for inquiry into younger deaths is par for the "pandemic" course. To date, very few people seem bothered by the nearly 200% increase in working-adult deaths in NYC, most of which were blamed on COVID-19. https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/timeline-the-young-and-healthy-are
(I know you know this having been lead on this paper - just stating for audience.) :)
https://pandata.org/does-new-york-city-2020-make-any-sense/
As you correctly point out, "both" is certainly an option.
In hindsight, a 3rd option would be that the ACM data is correct, but the vaxx data is corrupt.
It seems fairly certain that the authors included deaths from external causes in their analysis.
I had noticed their claim about refugees and low socioeconomic status, but dismissed it. Here in Canada, every recent immigrant that I've met (which is a substantial number - 50% of current Canadians were born outside of this country) is doing well financially. I'd be surprised if a place like Norway was much different.
All that said, it's also possible that the ACM data, and the vaxx data are both correct, in which case the study has inadvertently uncovered some ethnically or culturally related life-expectancy ratio that is reflected in (but not dependent on) vaccination choices.
Either way, it's a disgrace that these authors didn't call for an inquiry into the issue. But, as you say, that's par for the covid course.
Very well said overall. The point of disagreement I have is with the number of injuries and deaths that occurred from the shots. Of course this will never be fully known with all the machinations of the medical/corporate/censorship industrial complex, but from looking at this daily since summer of 2021, I have seen many people who were seriously harmed or died in proximity to getting the shot, and lots of people with serious health issues who got the shots.
One can read "Cause Unknown" by Ed Dowd or the Pfizer papers book by Naomi Wolff or the work of Dr. James Thorp, or the recently taken down "Real but Rare".
I had plenty of time on my hands for two years while I was excluded by shot apartheid from working, and there were a massive number of reports on telegram channels like "mRNA death toll" and the unfortunately deleted covidblog.com (seems overwhelmingly likely he, Brian Wilkins, was offed for doing this work), and others. The shots seemed to be particularly lethal in 2021 and 2022; maybe they have reduced the toxicity a bit. At this point a lot of the slow-kill reactions seem highly likely with a lot of heart ablations, turbo cancers, sudden deaths, a lot of people with dementia and shaking disorders, etc, that I have observed personally and seen reports of.
In any event, I stand firm that we don't have to prove the shots caused this or that harm, they have to prove the shots did NOT cause these harms and this they can't do.
First things first: Governments around the world should have to substantiate their ACM curves.
I actually DON'T think they have to prove the shots did not cause those harms. As I said, it is impossible to detangle alongside other factors and cannot be disentangled.
The government has to prove a threat existed and a shot was needed. They can't do it. Everything that followed is necessarily criminal and I can rest my case.
Finally, you said "the number of injuries and deaths that occurred from the shots" is a point of disagreement. I did not give a precise number. I intentionally said "millions" - which could be 1,000,000 to 999,999,999
1) Fake pandemic fake virus fake jabs. With all the psyop fakery, they measuring voodoo effects. And Milgram Experiments for the social engineers to learn from.
2) No such thing as "RNA injections". Basically, all the talk about "RNA jabs" and "spike proteins" is an IQ test. It's all psyops.
3) A major objective of CovidHoax was the global genome harvest, thieving all the DNA sequences from the people, right under their noses -
"During COVID19 and other viral pandemics, rapid generation of host and pathogen genomic data is critical to tracking infection and informing therapies. There is an urgent need for efficient approaches to this data generation at scale. We have developed a scalable, high throughput approach to generate high fidelity low pass whole genome and HLA sequencing, viral genomes, and representation of human transcriptome from single nasopharyngeal swabs of COVID19 patients."
High-throughput SARS-CoV-2 and host genome sequencing from single nasopharyngeal swabs
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.27.20163147v3.full-text
4) All your personal data - digital online, offline behaviors, vocations & social connections, facial physiognomies & other biometrics - all gets fed to the Ai Machine to be crunched together with the personal genome sequences pilfered via the CovidHoax nose swabbings, among other sources. All The Nations are in on the scam. Maybe to improve humanity (while making Silicon Valley even more powerful). Even the wars today are mostly fake.
5) CovidHoax teaches the people that doctors are weirder than they thought. People taking more initiative to preserve their health.
6) Aliens flying around over New Jersey has NOTHING to do with CovidHoax.
1) Speaking of Milgram/grim: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1826398754959684028.html
2) No idea. Not my wheelhouse.
3) Agreed - that falls under bio-surveillance goals, which I mentioned. University of Illinois admitted as much: https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/transcript-u-of-i-president-tim-killeens
4) Agreed
5) There's weirdness in every profession. Some professions - doctors among them - are especially well-suited to certain kinds of conditioning because it's comprised of many individuals who are good rule-followers and have been rewarded for doing what they are told to do.
6) NJ - from Hamilton the Musical
[HAMILTON] Where is this happening?
[PHILIP] Across the river, in Jersey
[HAMILTON & PHILIP] Everything is legal in New Jersey